Breaking News: Gunman Reported Shooting on Northern Illinois Campus

[Jersey Devil]

Source: MSNBC

BREAKING NEWS
NBC News and news services
updated 8 minutes ago

DEKALB, Ill. - Northern Illinois University officials say there has been a report of a gunman on campus.

WBBM in Chicago reported that a man with a shotgun began shooting in a lecture hall during a geology class.

Police reported there were at least three victims.

The (DeKalb) Daily Chronicle reported that police heard over a scanner said the man had a shotgun and a pistol.

The campus issued an alert telling students to get to a safe area and remain there.

This breaking story will be updated.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23171567/

[zanne]

1. Psychopaths with guns. Goddamnit!

When will people realize this has to end?!

[Konza]

4. Damn....every semester I have to talk to my students about this

We run through our procedures, etc.
And every semester more kids are gunned down.

[gorfle]

13. When will people realize

When will people realize that Universities are target rich environments full of defenseless people?

I wonder if any disarmed Concealed Carry Weapons permit holders died today in Illinois as they did at Virginia Tech?

Damn I wish these lunatics would just off themselves instead of killing defenseless people.

I think next week I'm going to go apply for a CCW permit myself. And though my University also prohibits carrying firearms on campus, I think I'm going to violate the rules. Hell if I'm going to sit in a classroom waiting for the next lunatic seeking easy pickings.

[kanrok]

19. There is no CCW in Illinois

One of two states that doesn't have a provision for CCW. Wisconsin is the other, I believe.

[LSK]

22. when has a concealed carry person EVER stopped a shooting???

When?

[gorfle]

24. It happens hundreds of times a year

The last one I remember recently was the church shooting where the guy killed two people in the parking lot but was confronted by an armed parishoner inside the church.

[dogfacedboy]

27. How did that stop the killing of the two in the parking lot?!?! n/t

[Irreverend IX]

32. It didn't.

It did stop him from shooting any of the dozens of people inside, the church, however. He had hundreds of rounds of ammo ready to go, but the volunteer guard brought his rampage to a premature close.

[uppityperson]

51. "He was ready to go"=stop the shooting? No. It didn't. Poor example.

the guard did.

[gorfle]

134. It didn't

How did that stop the killing of the two in the parking lot?!?! n/t

It didn't - because no one was there who could resist. Once the shooter encountered someone armed and able to resist, the shooting was stopped.

This is not to say being armed is a guarantee to being able to resist against an armed attacker. It just gives you a chance.

[smoogatz]

53. Wasn't the "armed parishioner" a uniformed security guard?

[benEzra]

82. No, she was a church member with gun experience and a carry license...

who volunteered to provide some armed security, as a licensed CHL holder, not a licensed security guard. The church had no paid/uniformed security, as I understand it, but if they did, she wasn't one of them. FWIW, I don't believe that a licensed security guard in Colorado would have been allowed to carry the gun she used (a 9mm pistol).

At about 1 p.m. MST (20:00 UTC), 30 minutes after the 11 a.m. service had ended at New Life Church, Murray opened fire in the church parking lot shooting the Works family and Judy Purcell, 40. Murray then entered the building's main foyer where he shot Larry Bourbonnais, 59, hitting him in the forearm. At this point, Jeanne Assam, a church member volunteering as a church security guard, opened fire on Murray with her personally owned concealed weapon. After suffering multiple hits from Assam's gun, Murray fatally shot himself.

In many states, she would not have been allowed to be armed inside a church, since she was not police or official church security, just a CHL holder.

[Critters2]

209. She was there as a security guard, and brought the gun for that purpose.

She wasn't just some church lady with a gun, as you're trying to portray her.

[benEzra]

221. She was not official security; had she been, her Beretta would have been ILLEGAL in that setting

She was not official security; had she been, her Beretta would have been illegal in that setting under city ordinance and possibly Colorado law, since she used a Beretta 9mm semiautomatic (her personally owned defensive pistol), whereas actual security guards were limited by law to .38 caliber revolvers. But the church considered hired security to be "mercenaries," and instead allowed church members with CHLs and personally owned guns to carry in church, with permission of the pastor, to provide informal security (and hence she was legal to carry a Beretta instead of a revolver). In retrospect, that was a good thing, as the hired security at the no-CHL-allowed Westboro mall froze up when a gunman appeared, but Ms. Assam (parishioner with a CHL and the pastor's permission to carry) did not--and had she been a formal security guard, she would have run out of ammunition before the gunman went down, since she fired ten shots and security-guard-mandated revolvers generally hold six.

She was a church member with a gun and CHL who volunteered to provide informal security. She already owned the gun, and had the CHL, well before the incident that prompted her suggestion of increased armed presence at the church.

CHL holders do that a lot for their churches/workplaces in states where they are allowed to do so, and had she not had a personal CHL and a personally owned gun, she would have been unarmed. A lot of states prohibit anyone but hired security from carrying in church, even those with CHL's, but fortunately Colorado was not one of them.

[Critters2]

228. If my church maed arrangements for a gun-toting parishioner to be on the grounds,

I'd resign in a heartbeat. It's a pretty sick nation that thinks guns in churches are a good idea.

[benEzra]

230. Some synagogues have been doing this for a while, with good reason.

And at least in the one incident at the church in Colorado Springs, allowing CHL's to be armed definitely saved lives, although thankfully such incidents are incredibly rare.

If a church does choose to have armed individuals present, I'm personally more comfortable with them being members with extensive gun experience (often in law enforcement or competitive shooting) rather than someone with a GED who has fired a gun only half a dozen times in his whole life, being paid seven or nine dollars an hour to sit there and scrutinize/intimidate people. But I know others might disagree, which is why I think it's good to leave it to the individual church.

[Critters2]

238. Or , a church could try to take seriously the teachings of Jesus. nt

[benEzra]

239. ...who said, if someone slaps you, turn the other cheek,

Or , a church could try to take seriously the teachings of Jesus. nt

...who said, if someone slaps you, turn the other cheek, and if someone sues you to take your coat, give him your cloak too. He never said that if someone comes to kill you, let him kill your family and friends also. There are circumstances in which martyrdom is allowed (even praised), but it is generally not presented as something the victim chooses.

There have been sects of Christianity that have endorsed pacifism (the Society of Friends comes to mind), and I respect that, but all major branches of Christianity throughout the last two millenia have positively affirmed the right to defense of self and family.

For example, from the catechism of the Catholic church:

Legitimate defense

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor.... The one is intended, the other is not."<65>

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful.... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.<65>

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.<66>

...which is rather similar to the teachings of the Talmud, as I recall. FWIW, I am a Christian myself, and do not see defense against someone intending to kill you or your family to be inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus. I respect the views of those (Christian or not) who see it differently, and they are free to make that choice for themselves. I do not grant them the power to make that choice for me, though.

[Critters2]

240. the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a source of my theology.

Self-defense is clearly, literally against the teachings of Jesus. No amount of rationalizing can change what Jesus taught. And no white guy in Rome has the authority to try.

[Virginia Dare]

157. That's correct, big difference...n/t

[benEzra]

226. No, she wasn't uniformed security. She was a church member with a carry license...

and a personally owned Beretta 9mm, who volunteered along with other CHL holders to provide an armed presence in the church, with the approval of the pastor. It would have been illegal for an offical security guard to carry the gun she was carrying, as security guards are restricted to .38 revolvers only in that jurisdiction (whether that is Colorado Springs law or Federal law, I'm not sure).

She had been volunteering in that capacity for a while, as I understand it, but they had more CHL holders there that day than usual because of the shootings the day before.

[smoogatz]

56. Got a link?

Lots of assertions being made here without any links.

[villager]

109. "hundreds of times a year?" According to....?

oh that's right: according to all the gun fetishizers gathered 'round the bar...

[Virginia Dare]

156. That was a private security guard, not just some citizen ambling along..n/t

[benEzra]

227. No, she wasn't a "private security guard," at least not for the church...

She was a church member with a carry license and a personally owned Beretta 9mm, who volunteered along with other CHL holders to provide an armed presence in the church, with the approval of the pastor. It would have been illegal for an official security guard to carry the gun she was carrying, as security guards are restricted to .38 revolvers only in that jurisdiction (whether that is Colorado Springs ordinance or Federal law, I'm not sure, but she was not violating it as she was not an official security guard, just an ordinary citizen with a CHL).

Her church had previously considered hiring private security, but rejected the concept of having "mercenaries" (as they termed them) in the church, and decided to allow parishioners with CHL's to carry instead, with the approval of the pastor.

[pipoman]

26. Another question

when has one of these shootings not happened at a location where nobody is allowed to have a defensive firearm legally. They always seem to happen in "gun free zones". When is the last shooting which didn't occur in one of these gun free zones? The last one I recall was at the Colorado church. What about before that? When? I honestly don't recall an incident which hasn't occurred in a "gun free zone".

[LSK]

34. 2 weeks ago at a store in Chicagoland

[pipoman]

44. The whole state of IL and Chitown metro area in particular is a gun free zone

[smoogatz]

57. The state of IL is a gun free zone?

News to me.

[pipoman]

63. Law abiding people in IL do not have a right to possess a defensive

firearm in public. One of only IIRC 4 states which does not have a 'shall issue' for concealed carry, therefore yes, IL is a gun free zone. A 'gun free zone' doesn't mean people can't own firearms, it mens that they are disarmed even though there is no safeguards in place to be sure everyone complies. I have no problem with gun free zones such as gov facilities, airports, etc. with security and metal detectors. I have a problem with gun free zones which have criminal penalties for anyone carrying a defensive firearm on their person. The only ones who have firearms then are those who are not law abiding.

[smoogatz]

65. Oh, okay.

That's a pretty warped definition of "gun-free" from my perspective, but whatever. I gotta say, I live about four hours north of Dekalb in Wisconsin—also without concealed carry, IIRC—and I teach at a state university. I'm thinking we need to talk to our state legislators about either installing metal detectors on my building and hiring armed guards, or else letting the faculty carry guns. If they can't keep the guns away from the nut-cases, then damn right I want to be armed. I resent the hell out of the whole situation, but I'd prefer not to be a victim. It's funny—I'd be one of at least ten on my department faculty that would be packing heat. Lots of deer hunters up here in the northwoods.

[pipoman]

71. I don't think we totally disagree

in fact I think we agree. I suppose if we could twitch our nose and have ALL guns disappear that would be preferable but being a realist I prefer to carry if and when I feel I or my family may be in danger. You said "That's a pretty warped definition of "gun-free" from my perspective", how so? I think the term 'gun free' came from schools and other falsely secure environments during the zero tolerance era. Then since the sweeping passing of concealed carry shall issue laws across the country most states have a provision allowing public places to proclaim themselves 'gun free zones' by placing signs on entry points. I contend that nut cases looking to take as many as possible with them consciously choose places with these signs...in IL no signs are needed because the whole state is off limits for law abiding citizens to defend themselves with equal force.

[benEzra]

225. Wisconsin and Illinois are the only two states that do not issue CHL's...

well, Vermont doesn't either, but that's only because Vermont does not require a license at all to carry a weapon for lawful purposes.

Many (perhaps most) of those states do not allow licensees to carry on a campus, though, even if the licensee is faculty or staff.

[villager]

111. it's a nice fantasia -- everyone drawing on each other, only the bad guys getting shot

But it doesn't work that way. A student of mine lost her cousin --a young teenager - to gunfire last month. In Chicago.

Shot in the face.

If he was "carrying," it wouldn't have mattered -- he was, by the accounts I've read, someone who wanted to get away from the violence, the streets, and couldn't. In time.

I'm interested in what the pro-gun folk can come up with, in terms of reducing out-of-control gun violence, other than, "uh, everyone carry more guns!"

[pipoman]

125. Gun control hasn't worked at all

where it has been tried. Not one bit. And enough of the comparisons ot European countries and Canada, it has been demonstrated time and again that All of those countries had far lower murder rates in general before they enacted bans on firearms and their murder rates and violence rates have remained almost unchanged. Further the US has had over 10 years of declining murder and gun violence rates even though the numbers of firearms has increased every year. I (and others here) have stated over and over that the answer to the violence problems in the US are largely socio economic. That doesn't satisfy many because it would be so much easier to blame inanimate objects than to face the really tough problems which are the causes of these problems.

Nobody has ever said "arm everyone", "having a CCW will always save your life" or any such thing that I am aware of. This is the interpretation (usually feigned) by those who would like a quick fix (which wouldn't work).

Additionally all of the silly assertions made about shootouts because of road rage, cross fire scenarios, "everyone drawing on each other" (your quote), and wild west gun fights simply have not happened. Why not direct me to where these things have happened aside from your head? You can't because they are not reality. Every day there are MILLIONS of CCW holders in 46 states walking the streets, going about their business...no OK coral situations yet. Gun control hasn't worked, gun free zones hasn't worked in areas where it has been the policy or law. Why not try my way? What are you really afraid of? Success?

[villager]

158. you people want to arm everyone -- and yes, the "silly scenarios" actually do happen

if you people would bother to read the news, instead of NRA-approved websites

[pipoman]

181. Any links? Any at all? I didn't think so.

And I or no one else who supports a persons right to self defense has ever said, "arm everyone" ...ever, again direct me to a thread.

[pipoman]

208. Still waitin on the links to the silly scenarios regarding CCW holders

If they are in the news as you say there should be at least a couple that you can link us up to, no?

[smoogatz]

166. What's your answer to the mass shooting phenomenon?

Guy walks into a mall or onto a college campus and opens fire, killing ten or twenty, injuring two or three dozen. Should we all carry guns to the mall? Should I keep a gun in my desk drawer at the state U where I teach, and another in a shoulder holster under my jacket? Should my students (the non-crazy ones, at least) arm themselves too?

[pipoman]

184. There isn't any easy answer.

You work in an atmosphere of young adults. You know some of the problems which lead these people to do bad things. None of them are related to a proliferation of guns. I can't think of one of these mass shootings where the gun was anything more than a vehicle/tool. If it wasn't a gun it would be a bomb. We need to end the war on drugs and direct that money to treatment of addiction and mental illness. It seems most of these people could benefit from some easily accessible treatment which may uncover their plot before it is executed...there is no easy access to mental health services in this country without committing a crime. I live 1 mile from a large state funded in patient mental health facility, if a person walks in and requests help they don't get it for months. If the police deliver them they get help immediately.

And yes, any adult who has a clean criminal record and no mental health issues should be allowed to carry a defensive firearm if they want to and they complete a reasonable certification process. This doesn't say "arm everyone" which is so often the meme here, in the states which allow ccw most run between 3%-7% IIRC of eligible citizens ccw. It isn't always going to prematurely end one of these shooting incidents, but how often does it have to save some lives for it to be worth while.

[smoogatz]

189. I don't buy the "if it wasn't a gun it'd be a bomb or a butterknife" argument.

The guy who shot those kids at NIU went off his meds, bought a Glock and a semi-auto shotgun and a few days later shot up a lecture hall full of students, killing five. It's easy to kill people with guns: the learning curve is zero. That's why nutcases are so attracted to them. My question is, why is a guy who's being treated for what was apparently a severe mental illness able to legally buy these extremely deadly weapons? How are we a more free society as a result?

[pipoman]

196. Access to guns in this country can't easily be curtailed

it can't even difficultly be curtailed. But assuming prohibition worked (which I believe there is proof to the contrary), you still have a homicidal individual without access to guns, what will he use? Again I do believe the UK is now trying to outlaw knives because their violent crime rate is virtually unchanged since their prohibition on guns.

I have a unique background having done some fairly extensive criminal defense work in the Federal Prison system. Guess what? There are in fact drugs, alcohol, knives, gambling in real dollars, cigarettes and occasional firearms within these institutions....all strictly prohibited. I will never forget going to a pro-visitation with a client who had been in solitary confinement for 2 months in one of the most famous Federal Prisons in the country. Because of the work product privilege between us there was no monitoring of our meeting. He hadn't been in the room 5 minutes before he was smoking a cigarette and I didn't give it to him. The point is, do you want to live in a country which gun violence is impossible because of a prohibition on guns? What infringements on your freedom would be necessary to enforce such a ban? What will we do when we find that there are still homicidal maniacs who can read the internets and find other ways to kill large amounts of people. Freedom is not cheap, nor is it safe IMHO.

[Critters2]

210. And who decides who's "non-crazy"? nt

[gorfle]

136. You do realize

That civilian defensive gunfire is frequently more accurate than that of the police, right?

Myth: Innocent bystanders are often killed by guns
Fact: Less than 1% of all gun homicides involve innocent bystanders.193

Myth: Citizens are too incompetent to use guns for protection
Fact: About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens
kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than
1 in 26,000.194 And that is with citizens using guns to prevent crimes almost 2,500,000 times every year.
Fact: Most firearm accidents are caused by people with other forms of poor self-control. These
include alcoholics, people with previous criminal records, multiple driving accidents, and other risky behaviors.195

The numbers 193,194, and 195 refer to citations in footnotes.


GunFacts 4.2 in pdf format can be downloaded here:
http://gunfacts.info

The myth/facts that I quoted start on page 34 of the printed document or page 41 of 96 of GunFacts4-2-Print.pdf.

[villager]

159. ah, a citation from "Gunfacts!"

Well, that settles it then! More weapons all around -- clearly, that will mean fewer and fewer shootings.

As we have seen.

[gorfle]

163. Are you going to refute the citation?

Are you going to refute the data in the citation, or just dismiss it with a wave of your hand?

[villager]

167. It's a pro-gun "study" that mostly references othe pro-gun "studies"

for a hall of mirrors effect.

What gets dismissed by a wave of hands -- by you and others -- is the body count on the streets.

[gorfle]

168. Do you have....

Do you have any other studies that refute the studies I have presented?

[villager]

169. do you have... any empathy for any of the victims of gun violence? Do you know any?

n/t

[gorfle]

171. Yes I do. Are you going to answer my question now?

do you have... any empathy for any of the victims of gun violence? Do you know any?

Yes and yes.

Now, are you going to answer my question? Do you have any citations to refute the citations I provided for you?

[villager]

175. I know some gun victims, too. None of them would've been "saved" by more guns

none was in a position to "draw first"

[gorfle]

176. Very true.

As I've always said, having the means to defend oneself is no guarantee that you will be able to do so. But not having the means is a guarantee you won't be able to do so.

I'd prefer to be armed rather than not. I'd prefer to have a chance to resist rather than no chance.

I'm going to get my CCW permit this week.

[villager]

177. I'm sure you are. May you be in position to take down the next mass shooter.

n/t

[gorfle]

178. I hope I would have the courage.

I hope if I am ever in the situation I will have the courage to act.

[villager]

179. *not* acting would defeat the entire rationale for gun proliferation...

...and walking around strapped, yes?

[gorfle]

183. Yes...

But no one can predict if they will act with courage or flee when faced with an actual armed confrontation. I like to think that my training would pay off but who can say until it really happens?

[villager]

198. well --your hidden gun makes you safer

as you folks insist, over and over. So: act accordingly.

And be safe.

[gorfle]

200. Like I said before...

I hope I have the courage to do so. I will have the means, I hope I will also have the will.

[villager]

229. Given that *their* means was made much easier to get, by you folks, I hope you do, too.

n/t

[gorfle]

135. Yeah really!

You never see these bastards barge into a police station and try this shit. Wonder why they pick schools? Oh yeah - easy pickings.

[pegleg]

241. At the church in Colorado

[dbackjon]

30. So you can be like the COP in Missouri who was killed by a lunatic

The lunatic then took the COP's gun and killed several people during a council meeting.


If an armed, trained cop couldn't solve a situation, what makes you think anyone else could help?

[Critters2]

211. Yeah, that turned out well. If only everyone had guns!

:banghead:

[superconnected]

35. as opposed to armed concealed weapons holders that have died

recently anyway in mass shootings?

[Irreverend IX]

40. Which concealed weapons holders were those? nt

[pipoman]

47. IIRC there were 2 who were disarmed at VT

[bossy22]

74. there were

i never knew that...where did you find that out from (im not being sarcastic- im generally curious)

[smoogatz]

54. Who were the "disarmed ccw" people killed at VT?

Got a link?

[zanne]

132. You'd fit right in at the Gun Forum.

Now that's a forum where they show their true colors. It can make you nauseous.

[Ellen Forradalom]

137. A generation ago this shit was UNTHINKABLE.

This is a recent phenomenon. CCW is NOT going to solve it.

[AllyCat]

180. My husband and I were talking about this last night.

I don't know where the blame lies and it certainly is a multi-faceted problem. The ready availability of guns does not help, but they were available when we were kids and this kind of crap didn't happen. (I'm not a gun nut and think there should be more regulation of guns). We just thought that one could have guns just as easily then and we rarely heard of this stuff.

We also didn't have such violent images on television, in music, and those stupid shoot 'em up video games that make killing people just so much "fun" and point-driven.

I'm not saying this is the sole problem, but we feel it is part of it. People are desensitized to violence. God forbid we should see Janet Jackson's breast on TV for a brief second, but it's just a-okay to show people torturing and killing each other on nightly TV (during prime time).

Add to that the problems with mental health care in this country (which also existed in our "day") and we get a formula for disaster. I think more people are more disturbed and our lack of community is partially to blame. Now there is no counseling OR community.

This guy went off his meds, walked into a gun shop, and bought guns. He waited out the "waiting period" and then walked into his alma mater and killed a bunch of people. But he was a model student. Jeez.

And having armed students in the classroom is not going to help!!!

[Ellen Forradalom]

202. Yes, I agree it's a multi-faceted problem.

Unfortunately, another aspect is that this has simply become part of our culture. What do you do when you suffer a sense of grievance? You shoot a bunch of people up, that's what you do. :-(

[harun]

216. It is a cultural problem, not a "everyone needs to be armed" problem

People need to look at the big picture. There are reasons why this is happening here NOW.

[pegleg]

242. One huge reason is that the mental health system

has completely crumbled in many areas of the country because of severe budget cuts.

[Archae]

2. Crap, you were one minute ahead of me!

:-)

[Jersey Devil]

3. Updated

DEKALB, Ill. - A gunman opened fire in a lecture hall on the campus of Northern Illinois University, and more than a dozen people were reported injured.

More: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23171567/

[RedEarth]

5. What the hell is wrong with people

[Bake]

6. CNN reporting up to 15 wounded.

No details yet, but that's the banner on cnn.com.

Bake

[halobeam]

8. CNN reporting 18 shot

[gorfle]

14. Now saying only 2...gunman dead

Thank God, only 2 shot. Gunman is dead.

[ncteechur]

7. A Valentine's present from NRA and GOP? Gee, thanks!

Just what I didn't want--a misguided interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

[zanne]

11. Yup. This cartoon tells a tale...

[Pavulon]

58. Lets discuss Roe V Wade, and defense spending

I mean this thread looks like a great place. EVERY shooting we rehash this topic. 5 people die in a shooting. 5000 die today from something else. 300 in their cars at the hands of others.

If 300 people were killed on the job in fork lifts we would be freaking out. Lets ban fork lifts.

These vulture posts are lame.

No one ever has reasonable and realistic solutions. EVER.

This is an AMERICAN phenom. Why? Other countries are ARMED as well.

[BB1]

126. It still is an US-American problem

Other countries have arms too, that's right. But non have as many as the US-Americans. The States have over 10 times as many violent deaths (shootings et al) then, for instance, Germany. And only five times the people. The US is second to none. Be proud, y'all.

Ban handguns, semi-automatics and all that other crap you don't need to shoot a deer with. That would be a solution.

[gorfle]

138. What about shotguns?

I mean mass killers never use those, right?

[BB1]

151. why need guns in the first place?

I never could get round to that. None of the people I know owns guns- therefor: if one of them has, say, a nervous breakdown, he wouldn't come at me blazing his gun(s).


Shotguns. Now there's a nasty piece of work. Although you'd be hard pressed to find any of my fellow countrymen to be able to point out the difference between a shotgun and a semi-automatic. They just don't know nor care. Just let's get rid of them.

[gorfle]

164. Why we need firearms

There is, in fact, a reason why the founding fathers wanted the State, via the People, to be armed, and for the Federal government to not be armed. That reason was so that the Federal government could not impose a tyranny upon the people through force of arms.

The primary need for guns is the defense of person, property, and liberty. They are presently the best tool suited for resisting aggression on the personal level.

[MarkInLA]

186. The founding fathers also believed that slavery was a good thing. We evolve - well, most of us do.

[Pavulon]

204. Just like dope, heroin, and every other ban

does not work..The motive is the issue.

[AllyCat]

182. Shotguns do have some other legitimate purpose.

Handguns are meant to kill people. I live in deerhunting crazy WI and I've never heard of anyone going hunting with a handgun.

[benEzra]

231. Depends on the handgun.

Shotguns do have some other legitimate purpose.

Handguns are meant to kill people. I live in deerhunting crazy WI and I've never heard of anyone going hunting with a handgun.

Depends on the handgun. Small- and intermediate-caliber handguns are primarily defensive and target weapons, but large-caliber handguns (.44 magnum and up) are primarily intended for hunting. The father of my best friend growing up is a hunter who hunts whitetail deer with both rifle and revolver.

Here's a Smith & Wesson model 500 (X-frame) hunting revolver:



Power is comparable to a .30-06 deer rifle, which is astounding (that's seven times the power of a 9mm).

FWIW, pretty much every adult in my extended family (including my wife, my mother, and my sister who is a professional engineer) own handguns, and I compete in IPSC/USPSA. None of us has every shot anybody, and almost certainly never will; my dad had a "save" with a handgun in the early 1970's, when I was a child, but didn't have to fire a shot (they saw his gun, looked at each other, told him to have a good night, and left). None of us owns anything bigger than a 9mm (.36), FWIW.

Since 40 million Americans lawfully and responsibly own handguns and collectively shoot around 1 billion (with a "b") rounds of handgun ammunition annually, it's pretty obvious that the overwhelming majority of handguns are used for purposes other than killing. There were 7,795 murders using handguns in 2006, the majority by people who could not legally own them.

[bossy22]

68. thankgod you are here

to guide us to the enlightened path

[boilinmad]

131. Time for my favorite phrase....

.....GUNS FUCKING SUCK.

[Archae]

9. Gunman reported shooting on Illinois campus

Source: MSNBC

Northern Illinois University officials say there has been a report of a gunman on campus.

WBBM in Chicago reported that a man with a shotgun began shooting in a lecture hall during a geology class.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23171567/

---

Again? :eyes:

[madrchsod]

10. delete

[madrchsod]

12. local news crews just arriving according to the local rockford il

stations. i live about 40 miles from there go over there at least twice a month...this really is a blow to the community and the school. they had racist writings in a couple of dorms not that long ago...

[bdamomma]

15. what is wrong with these people??

unbelievable now do campuses have to be in lock down, and have security all over the place.

[Redstone]

16. Jesus, this is what? Every other day for a WEEK now? Do we have enough fucking GUNS

in this country?

Redstone

[subsuelo]

117. hey I have the answer! Let's have MORE guns!

arent I so smart

[Seen the light]

17. These are so common now that this is getting hardly any coverage on TV

"In other news....18 people were shot on the campus of Northern Illinois University. But anyway, back to our top story: Britney Spears was back in the hospital today!"

So freaking sad.

[halobeam]

18. I know. I can't believe the world we live in anymore.

Is it possible to unlearn everything I've learned and live like the rest of my happy family, ignorant and burying my head in the sand? They really are happier. They will forget about this by the time dinner is over. I will cry in bed tonight.

[PeaceNikki]

20. They are not that common. Hopefully they're learning not to sensationalize these stories.

It encourages copycats. Which of the recent shooters told his friends/family to watch the news?

[MarkInLA]

45. It'll probably get more coverage on TV news OUTSIDE of the U.S. than inside

Wouldn't want to risk offending the gun activists, you know.

And besides, isn't this just the price we pay for living in a "free country" where anyone has a right to buy as many guns as he or she wants? :sarcasm:

[gorfle]

139. That is exactly correct.

And besides, isn't this just the price we pay for living in a "free country" where anyone has a right to buy as many guns as he or she wants?

Having free and available access to the tools of liberty means there will always be those who will use them for nefarious purposes.

This does not mean we should not continue to have free and available access to the tools of liberty.

[MarkInLA]

185. Yes, please buy guns for all of the children of America, too. That should solve lots of problems.

[Tesha]

21. Just your average day in gun-crazy America -- learn to "live" with it. (NT)

[lebkuchen]

120. If much of Europe can live to learn with smoking bans in public places

as it is doing, if Germany can lower the speed limit on portions of its autobahns, there's hope that the US can adopt European/Australian/Asian-like gun restrictions.

[Tesha]

127. I'm glad you're still hopeful, but I'm starting to give up hope; America is a mortally-sick society.

I'm glad you're still hopeful, but I'm starting to give
up hope; America is a mortally-sick society and this
shift of violence from fists and knives to guns is
just another small step down the road to the complete
collapse of American civilization.

And not one of our politicians dares do anything meaningful
about any of this.

Tesha

[lebkuchen]

190. Yeah,

just the complete lack of post-discussion about how to tackle the problem of gun massacres that take place in the US regularly is a sign that the U.S. considers this abuse against itself "normal." Basically, Americans suffer from self-abuse, of their society's insane gun laws.

[harun]

217. People can only hear the propaganda from their government for

so long that the only way to fix problems is to "go it alone" and use violence before they start to do the same.

Not to say the people who do this are right or even sane but insane vulnerable people in other countries who aren't subjected to the violence culture we have here react in a less "shocking" way.

[Mojorabbit]

170. If we ban guns we will have this problem

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1790029,00.html
"Things have got worse for them. Last year, the murder rate for under-16s rose by a quarter: stabbing was the biggest cause."

"This time, though, something is going on. Almost every criminologist believes that stranger-stabbing is increasing, despite a woeful lack of data. The British Crime Survey, which recorded almost 2.5 million violent assaults last year, does not include young people, the group most likely to go armed. Of the third of London schoolchildren who say they carry knives, some may just be sounding tough. But the government smells trouble. It is panicking accordingly."

and this
Stabbings are the most common form of murder in Britain, where firearms — except certain shotguns and sporting rifles — are outlawed.

Of the 839 homicides in England and Wales in 2005, 29% involved sharp instruments including knives, blades and swords. Firearms account for just 9% of murders in Britain. The murder rate in Britain is 15 per million people.

The US murder rate is 55 per million, according to the FBI. Of those, 70% of murders were committed with firearms; just 14% involved knives or cutting instruments.

In London alone, there were 12,589 knife-related crimes last year. Police say the most likely people to carry knives are males ages 15 to 18. Blogs about knife crime are being setting up to try to make society safer, e.g. http://knifecrime.blogspot.com
from
http://www.answers.com/topic/stabbing-1?cat=health

There needs to be a way to help youngsters with conflict resolution or to catch early those who are having trouble coping. You ban one weapon, and another is used. It does not get to the heart of the problem.

[lebkuchen]

191. I don't live in the US

If you're comfortable living in that sort of environment, it's yours. I have no plans to live in the US again, ever. I don't even want to visit it.

[Critters2]

212. You seriously think this guy could've stabbed 18 people in one room? nt

[Mojorabbit]

218. I don't know how crazed he was

I have seen film of people with machetes in Haiti taking out people one after another. He could have driven his car into a crowd, he could have made a homemade explosive. The point is he obviously needed help and did not get it.

I have in the past worked as a nurse with people who went psychotic on the ward and were so out of it they were as strong as ten people. You would be surprised at how much damage one person can do when they are in an adrenaline state. I had broken ribs once as a souvenier and a good part of the staff were not in much better shape.

This kid needed help. People said his mood had changed and he was acting erratically. He did not get help in time. There are waiting lists a mile long for inpatient treatment. The state of our mental health care system is in tatters.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gorfle]

25. Because they are easy targets.

My take on these lunatics lately, like the guy who shot up the mall, the guy who shot up the church, and the guy who shot up Virginia Tech, is that they are looking to kill themselves, and kill a bunch of innocent, defenseless people before they go. As soon as they meet resistance, they kill themselves.

The common thread in all of these shootings is the shooter goes to places where he knows the people will be defenseless and unable to resist.

That is why it happens in schools.

[cornermouse]

28. Yeah. See if everyone would just carry a gun

People could defend themselves, there'd be bullets coming from more than one direction to duck and dodge from, people would be caught in crossfire and we could have a real bloodbath. :sarcasm:

[gorfle]

142. This is a myth.

Myth: Innocent bystanders are often killed by guns
Fact: Less than 1% of all gun homicides involve innocent bystanders.193

Myth: Citizens are too incompetent to use guns for protection
Fact: About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens
kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than
1 in 26,000.194 And that is with citizens using guns to prevent crimes almost 2,500,000 times every year.
Fact: Most firearm accidents are caused by people with other forms of poor self-control. These
include alcoholics, people with previous criminal records, multiple driving accidents, and other risky behaviors.195

The numbers 193,194, and 195 refer to citations in footnotes.


GunFacts 4.2 in pdf format can be downloaded here:
http://gunfacts.info

The myth/facts that I quoted start on page 34 of the printed document or page 41 of 96 of GunFacts4-2-Print.pdf.

[superconnected]

37. Highly unlikely.

Theres usually an emotional element to the places these people go and shoot up. Not always, but in the Church there definately was, and I belive in VA tech there was too.

Why do these people show up at *their* school and *their church* and *their workplace* if any place would do where innocents aren't likely to be armed.

[gorfle]

143. I don't know but...

I don't know but I've never heard of anyone walking down to their local police station for some good-time mass-murdering.

[AlertLurker]

38. Sigh. You are undoubtedly correct...and that's just so sad.

[slackmaster]

29. On K Street they are a lot more likely to encounter someone carrying a gun for self-defense

In schools, not so likely.

[Irreverend IX]

33. K Street in Washington, D.C.?

I dunno about that... then again, lobbyists never were big on obeying laws. And they could probably buy their way out of any legal trouble they'd get into for carrying.

[slackmaster]

41. There are plenty of crooks of all stripes on K Street to be sure

That's a fact!

[Mike Daniels]

94. yet the crooks that kill people in DC are the ones carrying weapons that are supposedly outlawed

Gun free zone, my ass.

[bronxiteforever]

31. "Let there be blood"-the New American slogan-a violent country filled with violent men

What the hell is wrong here?-red white and blood red should be the new flag

Prayers and best wishes for the poor victims

[superconnected]

36. I guess he was going for a Valentines day massacre.

[DuaneBidoux]

39. If every single student had been armed he wouldn't have got nearly that far.

PS: this is sarcasm of the most distastful nature.

[gorfle]

144. It's also true.

You may have meant sarcasm, but I suspect it's true. It would be especially true if the shooter knew everyone there was armed. You don't see these freaks going down to shoot up the local police station, do you?

[DuaneBidoux]

199. What else is true however is that if everyone was armed on campus there are at least a half

dozen fist fights that would have descended into armed conflict.

We had a situation in Texas after the conceiled weapons law was passed where two women who had just started carrying guns had a fender bender and one lost her temper, flipped the other off, and it quickly descended into a homocide.

With human nature being what it is, putting 500 people in close proximity with 500 guns protects nobody and endangers everyone.

People always say that guns don't kill people people kill people. Well hell then, bazookas don't kill people people kill people, let everyone have a bazooka. Hell, nuclear bombs don't kill people people kill people, I guess we don't have to worry about people having nuclear bombs.

The problem with modern guns is their incredible killing efficacy.

[flamingyouth]

42. The Chicago Tribune is reporting five are dead.

Horrible :(

[Wcross]

43. I think it is more of a mental health issue than a gun issue.

What makes an individual decide that he/she wants to end their own life? Once that decision is made, what makes them feel that they should take as many people with them as they can? How long will it be before we have "suicide bombers" here in America? Explosives are basically chemistry in action, would it be difficult for a college student to make a bomb? The majority of these cases end up in the shooter killing himself, how long til they figure out they could be more efficient with a bomb?

[Bluebear]

46. Why is this such an overwhelmingly American problem then?

Yes, it has occured in other nations, but not at the epidemic level seen in the US of A.

[Wcross]

72. Lack of affordable mental health care?

Maybe its all the drugs we are feeding the kids so they can "learn"? Thirty years ago did we have mass shootings like we have now? It certainly is not because guns have become "more available", they have always been in our society. I had one hanging on my wall as a kid, unlocked & the ammo in my desk drawer at the tender age of 12 y/o. My parents had no problem with that. My friends all had their own guns & we would go shooting after school. None of us ever considered pointing the weapon at anyone else. Of course we didn't have ritalin back then. We had parents & teachers who were able to do their jobs without pharmaceutical assistance.

[bossy22]

75. mental healthcare

in this country is horrible

[Wcross]

79. Almost non-existent.

I have a hard time believing that the crimes are committed just because people have access to guns. Guns have always been accessible but only recently have they been used in mass school shootings. Maybe its time to stop giving kids drugs for behavior problems?

[AllyCat]

172. And it seems that in this case, you are right: dude was "off his meds"

Of course, if we relied less on chemicals and more on counseling and therapy, maybe this kind of crap wouldn't happen so often. Got a problem? Take a pill! That's the insurance company way of treating mental health. They have no problem dropping tens of thousands of dollars on heart surgery, but ask for one visit a week to your psychiatrist, psychologist, or other counselor and they suddenly start meting out the visits one gets.

Really, really sad. This is just tragic on so many fronts.

[smoogatz]

48. Gunman kills 4, self at N. Illinois U.

Source: Yahoo News

DEKALB, Ill. - Authorities say a man dressed in black opened fire from a stage of a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University, killing four people and himself.

Campus Police Chief Donald Grady confirmed the deaths following a news conference. He says the gunman was not a student at the school and police had no apparent motive.

The university president says witnesses in the geology class saw someone dressed in black came out from behind a screen in front of the classroom and opened fire with a shotgun.

All classes were canceled Thursday night and the 25,000-student campus was closed on Friday.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/niu_shooting

---

Because guns don't kill people. Crazy motherfuckers with guns kill people.

[Bicoastal]

49. From the stage of a LECTURE HALL?!

:scared:

[smoogatz]

50. Just wait.

It won't be long before every homicidal lunatic in the country decides a college campus is a great place to go out in a blaze of glory. We're about three years from having armed guards and metal detectors on every campus in the country. Thanks, gun lobby!

[tritsofme]

55. What a load of shit.

Illinois has very sensible gun control policies, the kind NRA types despise.

And it still happened.

Lunatics don't seem to care much if the anti-gun nuts tell them something is illegal.

[smoogatz]

59. So why do we persist in arming the sons of bitches?

200,000,000 guns in the U.S., most of them only good for killing people. Very few restrictions on who can buy them. What the fuck did you think was going to happen?

[Pavulon]

64. No restrictions on Diesel fuel

and the other part of anfo. Better ban it all.

This is an AMERICAN problem. Other armed nations dont seem to have this issue.

Why?

[bossy22]

67. 300 million btw

and a gun is a gun is a gun. Grandpa's deer rifle is probably excellent for sniping people at 300 yards, its a dumb arguement to make that some guns are only "good for killing people". all guns are capable of being used to kill. A 12 gauge shotgun may not be good at sniping people but hell, its quite effective if you want to go off into a shooting spree in a crowd of people.

[primavera]

86. For once I agree

It is ridiculous to say that some guns are only good for killing, since no gun serves any other purpose.

[smoogatz]

95. Not true.

I own a 28-gauge over-under shotgun that's perfect for shooting clay pigeons and small game birds but practically useless for killing people (note that my post above specified people as opposed to upland game birds). Lots of guns are perfectly well suited for hunting and target shooting and are not intended to kill people. Most handguns, though, are crappy for hunting and are extremely efficient people-killers.

[primavera]

99. My post doesn't distinguish

Killing birds, killing people, even blowing up clay pigeons, they're all varying degrees of death and destruction to someone or something - no object, animate or otherwise, ever benefited from being blown to bits by guns. Guns are incapable of serving a constructive purpose, their only capacity is destructive.

[smoogatz]

100. Again, I have to disagree.

A friend of ours out in SE Ohio had a big TV shoot every year on his farm. He'd run a bunch of extension cords out to the field and plug those suckers in, then we'd blast away with large caliber handguns. Shooting improves a television a great deal, IMO.

[gorfle]

145. Sometimes you have to do some destruction before construction

Sometimes you have to do some destructive work before the constructive work can begin.

That is how this nation was founded, and guns were the tool that made it happen.

[karlrschneider]

102. You used to be reasonably sane. What the hell happened?

:wtf:

[smoogatz]

105. You must have me confused with someone else.

I've always been like this.

[karlrschneider]

106. I find that hard to believe - nobody is born nuts.

:shrug:

[Pavulon]

62. Thanks household chemicals...TATP

thanks basic chemistry. The crap under your sink will not just form intent and become high explosives. You have to put in some effort. Just like the shooter. He DECIDED to kill people. He could have gone in for free mental health. It may be shitty but a 3 day eval is better than nothing.

He could have just blown his brains out..

Some guy at nc state decided to run over people in the pit with a SUV.. Lets ban SUVs. In reality 10 times more people die in them a year than by gunshot of any type.

People need to own up and put the blame where it belongs. The jerk behind the act.

[smoogatz]

66. You're kidding, right?

Gun homicides in the U.S. far outnumber homicides by all other means combined. It takes intent, sure, but you don't get these kinds of mass killings with knives. People run away. People can disarm the guy with the knife. That's obvious, right?

[bossy22]

69. you overestimate

and ease at which you can hit a moving target with a bullet....and remember this name Timothy Mcveigh...just look what he did with a ryder truck and household chemicals

[smoogatz]

73. I shoot sporting clays.

I'm a pretty good shot. It's not that hard. Truck bombings are a rarity in this country. Mass shootings are increasingly common. The fact that it's possible to kill people with fertilizer and ammonia doesn't mean we shouldn't address the obvious problem of mass shootings—most of which are committed with legally obtained weapons. I'd really prefer not to have to carry a gun to class every day of my life, but that's apparently not okay with the NRA. Now that they've armed every nut-job in the country, the rest of us have to carry weapons, too. It's the NRA wet-dream: a fully armed society. Frankly, I think it stinks.

[bossy22]

76. ive tried sporting clays before

only hit a 43 out of 100....i felt lost. I still think there is no need to carry a gun to class- as a college student i feel safe on my university-hell i feel safe in most parts of my hometown. I still think that our streets and schools are relatively safe. these events this year are happening way too much

[smoogatz]

92. It's all about timing.

Once you get a rhythm going, it starts to feel pretty natural. A lot more interesting than shooting at a flat target, IMO. Plus, there's something very gratifying about a good over-under.

[Pavulon]

81. To catch a media streak..

if you looked at averages for gun death in the us you would probably find a pretty flat trend. Just like pedophile convictions.

However media attention for each of these shootings, like aircraft incidents, leads people to form false senses of threat.

You will not be shot in a public place, you will not die on an airplane, unless of course it if from heart disease. You may die on the way to catch a flight in your car, or from any number of things that statistically kill significant numbers of americans.

I would be interested in seeing true murder numbers. Numbers that back out drug shootings. Even then there are cultural problems at work.

This issue is ELECTION YEAR HYPE.

[smoogatz]

93. You are totally wrong.

The phenomenon of mass shootings on college campuses is new. It affects me directly. It's likely to get worse before it gets better. You think this is somehow a media creation? Bullshit. Election year hype? Double bullshit. Crazy people are now walking onto college campuses and shooting large numbers of people. This is a direct threat to me and my family that did not exist two years ago.

[index555]

96. Is it really that new?

Wasn't there some guy in texas in the 1960s that killed about 20 people or so with a rifle?

[smoogatz]

97. Three in the last year equals a trend.

That's the part that's new.

[index555]

101. which shows the problem with the media

Several people decried the airing of the VA tech assholes "manifesto".
They argued that if this idiots deranged ramblings about "this is all your fault" were aired, then other deranged assholes would look at it as an enabler.
Seems like the experts were right this time.
note, I don't always respect so-called expert opinions, but they sometimes get it right.

[smoogatz]

104. You can't blame the media for reporting these incidents.

But sure, there's a specific type of nutball that wants to be "famous" for killing a bunch of innocent people, so the copycat thing is pretty much inevitable.

[benEzra]

232. I wish they wouldn't publish their names and photos...

You can't blame the media for reporting these incidents.

But sure, there's a specific type of nutball that wants to be "famous" for killing a bunch of innocent people, so the copycat thing is pretty much inevitable.

I wish they wouldn't publish their names and photos, but I ESPECIALLY wish they wouldn't make them out to be antiheroes. The way the MSM treated the Virginia Tech shooter, it was like they were trying to make him look like Neo from The Matrix or something, showing him dressed in black, posing dual-wielding handguns on the front page of the paper above the fold, etc. They made him out to be sort of misunderstood dark hero, when in fact people who murder the innocent just to be noticed are the ultimate losers.

The Westboro mall shooter wrote in his suicide note, "Now I'll be famous." I suspect that's why these incidents tend to happen in waves, and that if the promise of media fame and antihero status weren't there, some of these people would just shoot themselves or jump off a bridge instead of murdering a bunch of other people first.

And if mental health care weren't so stigmatized and underfunded in this country...but that's the topic of another thread, I guess...

[Paladin]

234. If You're Going To Bash The Media....

...why don't you take it over to Free Republic where it will be appreciated?

Blaming the media for an incident such as this is strictly bush league, right wing stuff. This is the wrong place for it.....

[Pavulon]

235. why you hatin?

lets see stories about the 300 who die in there cars today, tomorrow, and the next day.

The story is real but the "gun scare" is a joke. Morons who think they are going to die on commercial flights fall for this.

You will die in your car, of heart disease, or some other normal cause of death.

You will not win the lottery.

This is a political dog, get over it.

[Paladin]

236. Political Dog, My Ass

It was a bloodbath on a college campus, caused by yet another unbalanced individual having ridiculously easy access to as many and as varied a selection of firearms as his heart desired. How many campuses were shot up in the last few days in London, New Delhi, Johannesburg or Osaka? Or the rest of the fucking world, for that matter?

If you're going to try to direct attention away from the gun problem in this country, you'd better do a lot better job than cars, planes, or heart disease. If you need assistance, just look around---your fellow DU gun nuts have plenty of go-bys for you to use. Get over that, why don't you....

[Pavulon]

237. Geneva. Great city

been plenty drunk with thousands of euros. Never been robbed. They have real SCURRY machine guns. 20% of homes. Not replicas, but the real thing.

Johannesburg is dangerous, more so than the us.

How many shooters take home more than 75 grand? So just ban the poor from 2nd amendment rights.

Your next president will support the party position. Freedom of personal ownership.

Your vote will support this, period.

[ehrnst]

129. I taught classes at Cole Hall as a grad student in the late '80's

You can get on to the stage from a door outside the classroom. If it was unlocked, he could have just appeared from behind the projection screen.

Otherwise could have just walked down the side aisle like he was going to exit out the door by the stage, and gone up the stairs to the stage.

[bluestateguy]

52. reply

Maybe someone should have told the killer (before he started shooting) that he was breaking university rules by having a gun on campus.

Bystander: "Excuse me sir, this is a no guns campus. You're going to have to go somewhere else with that."

Killer: "Oh, pardon me. I do apologize. I'll just leave right now."

[smoogatz]

61. Maybe we should stop arming crazy people.

No?

:shrug:

[bossy22]

70. we should def stop arming crazy people

[fascisthunter]

60. Gun Violence Happens Way too Often

[Paladin]

77. I Don't Want To Hear It, Gun Nuts

I don't want to hear the preposterous claim that shootings like this are a rarity---not after the last couple of weeks we've had.

I don't want to hear that we ought to concentrate on the root causes of this violence, but let everybody keep being armed to the teeth without anything remotely like effective gun controls. Those root causes need to be dealt with, but meanwhile the ability of sociopaths to get guns and cause tragedies like today's is completely unacceptable. How many campuses in other countries had a slaughter like this today?

I don't want to hear the standard huffing that if there had been an armed individual among those students, this wouldn't have happened. Contrary to what you believe, there are some places where guns shouldn't be allowed, and school campuses are one of them. If enhanced security is needed to prevent these incidents, so be it; raise tuitions and get it done.

I don't want to hear the usual cars vs. guns comparison, a transparent effort to direct attention away from the atrocious level of deaths involving firearms. Yeah, lots of people die in cars, but guess what? The ratio of active use of automobiles vs. active use of guns in this country has got to be around 10,000,000:1, so of course there are more deaths.

I don't want to hear the ridiculous statement that a bloodbath like this could have been caused by someone wielding a baseball bat or a hunting knife, instead of a gun. What horse shit.

I don't want the usual whining about the media not describing the murder weapon is excruciating, perfect detail. This is yet another deceptive maneuver, zeroing in on the gun rather than the violence it was involved in.

I don't want you telling all of us that this kind of thing is inevitable, that Bad Guys will always get guns, that we're powerless to do do anything about it, that the only response is to arm up---and then cop an attitude when you're accused of having a Guns For Everybody outlook. That's exactly what you have.

And I don't ever want to hear a college campus referred to again as a "target rich environment." Think of how a statement like this makes you look.

[bossy22]

78. simple solution

then dont look at these types of discussions

[smoogatz]

80. Well said.

I'm going to bookmark this response. Thank you.

[villager]

112. well said indeed, Paladin!

n/t

[bluestateguy]

83. Fair enough. Please propose some solutions

AND how those solutions would be actually implemented.

[Pavulon]

84. Well when you have a meaningful post, check in

I am tired of vultures exploiting every thread to push their pet agenda. Every time a pregnant woman is murdered people come out looking to add a law that targets legal abortion. Protecting the fetus... Not a shred of difference.

Reality is you WILL die of heart disease, in your car, or of cancer.

You WILL NOT die on a 777 crash. You will not be shot. You will not die from a terrorist attack.

So when you have a realistic solution check in. Until then you are ranting.

The guy used a SHOTGUN a simple common weapon you can make. How are you going to address that. Ban pipe?

Maybe we can look at why there is no (repeat NO) armed robbery in Geneva.

[primavera]

85. Bravo!

:applause: Standing ovation!

[Pavulon]

87. Ok ban ownership for anyone earning under..

$75000 gross. Or allow only those who have $100,000 in assets to use that amendment. I would bet that the majority of shootings are committed by individuals who make less than that. Right?

You could exempt deer rifles only. Bolt action (even though the model 70 was used by one guy to kill hundreds in vietnam), no semi, no pump.

That works. I mean that would stop the crimes. Drive by shootings, gang members, and the occasional mid 20's nut dont generally pull that kind of coin.

How does that work for you?


There are real issues at play here. But allowing only those with something to loose access to ownership you "fix" the problem.

Easier than looking at root cause.

[bluestateguy]

88. No, no, no. We have to go farther than that.

Only property owning white men, with spotless criminal records and no history of mential issues can own a gun.

The first gun laws in America were those that banned gun ownership by slaves and free blacks.

[Pavulon]

91. Hey this is easier than looking at the problem

why are people shooting. Lets ignore socio economic trends and mental health issues. It is much easier to just allow "responsible" people to have that privilege.

While we are interpreting constitutional issues...

[index555]

103. see my other posts.

[ellisonz]

89. Thank you.

:thumbsup:

[index555]

98. The problem is our society

It lies in schools that try very hard to promote "self esteem" (i'm so special) for everybody,while never teaching anything about responsibility.
result? , a bunch of self possessed hedonists.
It lies in the media, which glorifies revenge.
It lies in many more places too, but it all comes down to the fact that our culture is becoming corrupt and decadent.
The "last days of the Roman empire" are upon us.

[nebula]

113. This society is too materialistic

People often seem to value material things, including money,
more than we value human life, or just as importantly, the
well-being of human life.

[lebkuchen]

119. Do you think ego has anything to do with it?

If you can't be famous, be infamous?

[nebula]

122. Yes, ego has a lot to do with it.

Society teaches us to revere fame and fortune. If you aren't rich and famous, you're a nobody (e.g. think of the extreme popularity of American Idol). And so you have too many who will try to achieve it at all costs, one way or the other.

[lebkuchen]

192. American culture seems to be one of isolation

whereas in Europe, with the dense populations and tight social structures, people are more a part of their society. Last weekend was sunny, everyone was out, either walking, biking, roller blading, pushing baby carriages, greetings neighbors from villages a few km away...there is little opportunity for isolation when nearly everyone is outdoors, taking advantage of the sun's rays, and enjoying the beauty and safety of the area.

In the US it's rare to see children out playing, let alone adults pushing baby carriages just to go for walks rather than headed on an errand. Stateside, R & R is an indoor "sport" generally appreciated in front of the tube or computer screen.

[nebula]

201. Good point

Europeans enjoy the social benefits of extensive modern public transportation, thoughtful urban planning, while Americans are isolated from each other in their private vehicles and suffer from sterile urban planning that is more centered and designed solely for the needs of commercial interests instead of the the needs of people. Social interaction is limited and the extent we interact with one another is often limited to formal environments such as the workplace. I have lived in the UK, Montreal, currently living in Toronto for the last 10 years. I wouldn't move back to the States for all the money in the world. Even when I was very young, poor and struggling in the UK, I felt 10 times happier than when I was materially well-off as a member of the dog-eat-dog, high-stress work-til you drop world of corporate America. Thanks, but hell NO!

[lebkuchen]

220. so right

Also, while Americans are working on how not to become targets, Europeans (and Canadians?) are out in society, sharing tables and meeting one another. I am constantly meeting Germans as we eat/drink at the same table and talk either in German or English, sharing travel experiences, getting family or medical advice, learning of other good restaurants and wein gebiets, learning each other's language, and so forth. That's how I've learned German.

Last weekend I sat at a Turkish imbiss, chatting with the owner, and then a woman in a wheelchair and her boyfriend joined me at the table, and we talked. Then another woman, and her child, joined, and we had a nice long chat. Now we're all friends, and during that time it didn't cross my mind once that any of these people were going to shoot me, nor vice versa.

I'd thought then, where could this happen in the US?

[benEzra]

222. You are exactly right...and Bush and company have accelerated that fractionalization.

And not only in the realm of individual relationships, but in the relationship between the government and its people. The law enforcement model in the late 1990's was community policing, in which officers tried to get to know those they served and earn their trust. This was replaced post-9/11 by the Homeland Security model of policing, in which officers are trained/encouraged to view citizens as potential terrorists to be kept in line and watched for suspicious activity. The result has been a disaster, and IMHO the recent uptick in violent crime is a result of that breach of trust.

[apocalypsehow]

107. Excellent post, Paladin. Right on point and irrefutable. But I've noticed

in my short time here that the nastiest, most inane posters at DU are inevitably the pro-gun "Democrats" (I put that in quotation marks for good, and what seems to me obvious, reasons).

They appear to swarm to every article even remotely associated with guns or gun control, and, of course, they show up in threads reporting tragedies like this to insist that the answer - when so many dozens of their fellow citizens have again been slaughtered by a maniac with a gun - is not less guns, but more of them. Their arrogance is simply breathtaking. Imagine a posted story about a drunk driver who killed five people, and a group of posters showed up as a routine clamoring that the solution to such tragedies was simple: more alcohol, and higher BAT limits.

It simply boggles the decent, civilized mind.

[villager]

114. it's not only their arrogance, but their absolute cold-bloodedness

They have, at last, no decency. They do indeed swarm threads after these numerous mass-shootings are reported, hardly caring less about the victims or the heartbreak, instead enraged that someone might be connecting the proliferation of guns... to gun crimes....

[benEzra]

223. OK, what would you suggest those of us who disagree with your approach do in threads like this?

After every incident like this, it's usually not even an hour after the story hits that ten or fifteen people (usually the same ones) start threads or subthreads bashing those who are pro-choice on gun ownership, usually accompanied by a lot of pretty vicious namecalling and guilt-by-association smearing. There are also a predictable number of posts calling for laws to be enacted that already exist, proposals to outlaw the most popular lawfully owned guns, etc.

Your contention is that attacking lawful and responsible ownership will reduce gun misuse. I believe that contention is wrong; it is not that I don't care about tragedies like this, but rather that I do not believe that attacking lawful and responsible gun owners, or the culture of responsible gun ownership, will anything at all about such tragedies and could actually exacerbate them. I also believe that the result of such ill-advised attacks would be that Dems lose the House and Senate over the issue again, thereby ensuring that the real underlying issues here (lack of mental health care and the fact that our social and economic infrastructure is collapsing around us) will continue to go unaddressed. The ready availability of guns has not increased over the last twenty years; it has decreased, primarily due to the institution of the NICS background check system and to the sharp reduction in the number of FFL's.

But given that half or so of DU'ers disagree with the "ban more guns" approach, what do YOU suggest we do when someone posts a gun-owner-bashing opportunist thread? Stay quiet, and let the haters create the illusion of consensus, like we did in 1994 (and hurt the party badly by doing so), or speak up? If we speak up, how would you suggest we respond, given that the gun-owner-haters don't seem interested in finding common ground on misuse without attacking lawful and responsible ownership?

Look at the first response to this thread, and a lot of the subthreads. A lot of those are by gun-owner-haters looking to take advantage of this tragedy to drum up support for new restrictions on lawful and responsible ownership. There may be a few threads and subthreads started by pro-gun-owner types pointing out that Illinois' strict gun licensing, registration, and CHL ban didn't do squat here, but I think the majority are started by the ban-more crowd.

Personally, I don't usually start threads on topics like this, because I am not sure that doing so would be very respectful of those affected by the tragedy. But it is hardly any more respectful to launch a gun-owner-bashing thread to wallow in the victims' blood any more than it would be respectful to start a pro-CHL thread in the same time frame, particularly considering the fact that some of the responsible gun owners you're bashing may be among the dead as well.

[Paladin]

224. Oh, Come On, Ben

You know better to lay all the blame for inflamatory gun threads at the door of gun control advocates. Whoever starts such threads, you guys from the Gun Dungeon are up here in the Real World threads in a nanosecond, giving just as much---and many times more---abuse as you're facing.

This idea that you gun militants have it tough here at DU is ludicrous. I've been posting here almost since the site's inception, and I can promise you that restrictions on gun advocates used to be a hell of a lot tougher than they are now. If you guys are going to storm in here, repeating the same old NRA-friendly, right-wing talking points, you can expect those of us advocating the Democratic Party's traditional stance on firearms to respond vigorously. And as far as blood-wallowing and sympathy for the victims, I would just point out that my side of the argument wants to do something about the problem of gun violence in this country; your side is the one saying that slaughters like this one are inevitable and un-stoppable, and the only solution is to turn this country into an armed camp, i.e., the Guns For Everybody attitude that you people get so pissed off about when it's used to describe your obvious outlook. You can surrender to a cynical, hopeless position like that; I'm not ready to at this point.....

[Paladin]

140. After You've Been Here A While.....

....you'll also notice that groups of new gun militants show up here all at once, spouting exactly the same NRA-vetted talking points. The first half-dozen or so times this happened, I thought it might be coincidental, but I don't think that anymore. And I should also point out that there's a poll down in the Guns forum, wherein 48% of the respondents publicly announce that they are ready to vote Republican on guns this time around. Suspicions confirmed.

Welcome to DU, by the way. Your enabled drunk driver comparison is spot on....

[gorfle]

148. More guns

they show up in threads reporting tragedies like this to insist that the answer - when so many dozens of their fellow citizens have again been slaughtered by a maniac with a gun - is not less guns, but more of them.

I don't know what the answer is, but I can tell you this: I am getting my concealed carry permit, and I am going to carry it with me to school. I don't care what the damn rules are, I for one am not going to be sitting in the next classroom when a lunatic bursts in and just sit there and die without a chance.

There is a reason why these lunatics pick places for their murder where there are the least guns.

Their arrogance is simply breathtaking. Imagine a posted story about a drunk driver who killed five people, and a group of posters showed up as a routine clamoring that the solution to such tragedies was simple: more alcohol, and higher BAT limits.

No one makes such claims because there is now way that more alcohol or higher BAT limits would help the situation.

If more people had the ability to fight back that could, and probably would help the situation.

[Pavulon]

205. Read the post order

I have posted here for years. The first political post is ALWAYS a ban comment or gun control supporter.

No one ever has a solution, EVER. Stricter policy, bans, all skip root cause.

[lebkuchen]

116. I don't want to live my retirement years in the US of A

The older one is, the more predation, taking out the easy targets of the sick and wounded, though the US gun culture cuts that theory an even wider swath...into America's youth, which only proves my point: if America's healthy are such frequent random targets, what chance do the pensioners have?

[gorfle]

149. The answer:

Refuse to be an easy target.

[lebkuchen]

194. or not be a target at all

which is why I don't nor won't live in the US ever again. I last lived there in 1990. Won't go back even if offered a free mansion within a gated compound complete with armed guards and free-range rottweilers.

I wonder what the US tourist stats look like these days. I know a lot of Germans who don't want to bother with the extra paperwork for visas, the money required to pay for the paperwork, and, most importantly, the expanding criminal element that has become a big part of the US' identity. Eventually, tourist dollars will be the biggest factor in changing gun laws in the U.S., not the safety of Americans themselves.

[-..__...]

121. God bless the NRA and GOA then.

(sarcastically speaking since I'm an atheist).

It's precisely because of people like you that I will do whatever I can to defeat and eliminate some of this gun control nonsense.

There will be no compromise... there will be no "common sense" or "reasonable restrictions" (as defined by gun-grabbing worry warts and
sob sisters).

Take your European "role models" and shove it.

That will never fly as long as myself and a few million other gun owners have anything to say about it.

There is only us and you... weep all you want.

Care to place a bet on which side will win?

[Junkdrawer]

130. WOW...

:wow:

[Paladin]

146. Your Side Is Going Down In Flames On This Issue

Once we have a couple of hundred more mass shootings like this one, with one or two political assassinations thrown in (and don't tell me that all that isn't bound to happen in the next few years), the public outcry for common-sense, reasonable restrictions on guns will outmatch the influence of the NRA or the GOA---or whatever other organization fills in for God, as far as you're concerned.

Have a nice day, and stay the fuck out of my neighborhood.....

[Critters2]

214. The side that threatens people with guns?

Yeah, that's civilized.

[gorfle]

147. Then don't read this post...

But the fact is, they are rare.

I don't want to hear that we ought to concentrate on the root causes of this violence, but let everybody keep being armed to the teeth without anything remotely like effective gun controls. Those root causes need to be dealt with, but meanwhile the ability of sociopaths to get guns and cause tragedies like today's is completely unacceptable. How many campuses in other countries had a slaughter like this today?

I think you will find that everyone would like to keep guns out of the hands of sociopaths. Find a way to do it without affecting everyone else and we'll be all ears.

I don't want to hear the standard huffing that if there had been an armed individual among those students, this wouldn't have happened. Contrary to what you believe, there are some places where guns shouldn't be allowed, and school campuses are one of them. If enhanced security is needed to prevent these incidents, so be it; raise tuitions and get it done.

No one claims that if there had been an armed individual present at shootings like this they wouldn't have happened. We claim that at least the victims would have had a chance. Just like the church shooting not so long ago. As soon as the shooter encountered armed resistance, the show was over, and a much bigger tragedy avoided. Guns don't guarantee the ability to resist. They simply provide the means.

I don't want to hear the usual cars vs. guns comparison, a transparent effort to direct attention away from the atrocious level of deaths involving firearms. Yeah, lots of people die in cars, but guess what? The ratio of active use of automobiles vs. active use of guns in this country has got to be around 10,000,000:1, so of course there are more deaths.

But the fact is, more people still die from cars. I bet you anything it is also true that the ratio of number of times of use vs. number of injuries/deaths is still far lower for firearms. Most firearms are probably used without any injuries or deaths. Why? Because most firearm users are extraordinarily careful when using firearms.

I don't want to hear the ridiculous statement that a bloodbath like this could have been caused by someone wielding a baseball bat or a hunting knife, instead of a gun. What horse shit.

You're probably right. These people are bent on mass-killing, and a gun was the most convenient device to do that. It is not, however, the only way. Ask Timothy McVeigh.

I don't want the usual whining about the media not describing the murder weapon is excruciating, perfect detail. This is yet another deceptive maneuver, zeroing in on the gun rather than the violence it was involved in.

We probably would not do that except that the anti-gun crowd is constantly using the details of particular firearms as an excuse to ban them. Consequently we've been conditioned to be very attentive to the details.

I don't want you telling all of us that this kind of thing is inevitable, that Bad Guys will always get guns, that we're powerless to do do anything about it, that the only response is to arm up---and then cop an attitude when you're accused of having a Guns For Everybody outlook. That's exactly what you have.

This kind of thing is inevitable. Bad guys will always get guns. But you are not powerless to do anything about it - you have the power to take personal responsibility for your own safety and arm yourself.

I don't think any of us have a "Guns For Everybody" outlook. None of us want lunatics or criminals to have firearms. But I'm not going to sacrifice my freedoms for the sake of lunatics or criminals. If you can't find a way to restrict only their right to bear arms, then you are going to just have to accept that sometimes they are going to get their hands on them.

And I don't ever want to hear a college campus referred to again as a "target rich environment." Think of how a statement like this makes you look.

That's exactly what schools are - target rich environments. Think about how it looked to the murders. You don't see them running down to shoot up the local police station, do you? I wonder why? Could it be because of the easy pool of defenseless people to shoot at? I think it might be.

[Paladin]

155. Nice try.

Completely unpersuasive, but nice try.

Tell you what you ought to do: Send a letter to the editor of the NIU campus paper next week, after all the funerals. Express your viewpoint that what happened there was inevitable, and that the only solution is turning the school into an armed camp. See how your proposal for more guns in the hands of college students (and I'm sure that NIU students, God love them, are every bit as juvenile, hormone-addled, grade-stressed, and prone to over-consumption of alchohol and recreational drugs as any other college students in America) pans out. Don't forget to include your real name, address and phone number. Have fun.....

[gorfle]

165. I just may do it.

But my proposal won't involve "turning the school into an armed camp."

It will involve allowing CCW permit holders, who have been demonstrated to be among the safest, most law-abiding people in the country, the ability to carry firearms in nearly all facilities open to the general public, like Universities.

I am for sure going to advocate this position to my school.

[AllyCat]

173. And this guy completely planned this attack. He bought the guns in advance,

sat out the "waiting period" and opened fire. Great, just great.

[Critters2]

213. Thank you. nt

[ellisonz]

90. Goddammit.

[nebula]

108. Why have have school campuses become such magnets for shootings sprees?

In the 80s and early 90s, it was much more common for these shooting rampages to take place at a workplace and carried out by disgruntled ex-employees. But in the last decade or so, college campuses have suddenly replaced, by far, the workplace as the most popular targets of mass shootings. I can't even remember the last time a mass workplace shooting took place. I can conceive of how one might snap and go on a rampage against 'bad' bosses or coworkers, but college students? Why would anyone want to shoot down a bunch of random college students that never did anything to you? Anyone have an idea? It makes no sense at all.

[gorfle]

150. Easy pickings.

Why have have school campuses become such magnets for shootings sprees?

Well, you certainly don't have to worry about anyone fighting back.

[slackmaster]

154. A couple of reasons I believe

School campuses are the focus of frustration for young people who are still learning to cope with big adult things like sexuality and what they are going to do with their lives. Add the inherent general emotional unstability of many young adults, some prescription drugs, alcohol, and other substances, and you have a volatile sitation looking for a place to happen.

Doing something violent at a school carries a much stronger emotional component than the same crime would at other locations, because we all want to think of schools as safe places. And usually they are safe, because people are there either to teach or to learn.

The lax security many schools enjoy, important for academic freedom, also makes it too easy for someone to bring a dangerous weapon into places where a lot of defenseless people are gathered.

[lebkuchen]

110. Somebody had the winter blahs and decided to take it out on others

Wait till the spring hormone season kicks in. That's when it's really time to "duck and cover" in the US of A.

[nebula]

115. Perhaps the shooter was on anti-depressants for those winter blahs?

I read a report somewhere that linked common prescription
anti-depressants to these random acts of violence.

[lebkuchen]

118. There's a lot to be depressed about in the US these days

I count myself as one of the lucky few who isn't on anti-depressants as a result of the Bush administration. I know many who are on these drugs, and they don't seem to be helping. There's a lot of simmering anger out there.

[nebula]

123. Related article

Medical Errors - A Leading Cause of Death

The JOURNAL of the AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (JAMA) Vol 284, No 4, July 26th 2000 article written by Dr Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, shows that medical errors may be the third leading cause of death in the United States.

The report apparently shows there are 2,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery; 7000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals; 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals; 80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals; 106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medications - these total up to 225,000 deaths per year in the US from iatrogenic causes which ranks these deaths as the # 3 killer. Iatrogenic is a term used when a patient dies as a direct result of treatments by a physician, whether it is from misdiagnosis of the ailment or from adverse drug reactions used to treat the illness. (drug reactions are the most common cause).

www.cancure.org/medical_errors.htm

[lebkuchen]

193. Do you think these medical errors are more pronounced in the states

than in the rest of the world, therefore explaining the US's gun violence? I think drugs may play a part, but they don't explain away the level of gun violence the US has. The number of guns per capita does, among other societal issues.

[spoony]

128. Except that when you look at these individuals after the fact

there is really nothing random about it. They didn't wake up one day and decide to kill people.

[daleo]

197. I wonder about that too

SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibators) have been linked with increased suicide rates (good evidence), and increased violent behavior (not sure about the quality of the evidence). Lots of people take these (prozac, paxil, zoloft, etc).

[slackmaster]

206. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence about SSRIs increasing violent behavior

Especially when mixed with other drugs.

Try going to an AA meeting some time, and saying something like "My ex used to get violent when mixing Prozac and alcohol." You'll get a whole lot of nods, grunts, and groans.

[daleo]

207. I don't doubt it

I was thinking about clinical evidence, but I don't dismiss anecdotal evidence. A nephew (early 20's) committed suicide not long ago, while taking medications like this. It made no sense until I started reading up on the tie-in of these drugs to suicide.

[Norrin Radd]

124. Please, oh, please, homicidal/suicidal people,

please consider the suicide, first.

[MiniMe]

133. 7 have now died. Damn it.

[Pale Blue Dot]

141. These incidents are rising because of the ECONOMY.

We're in a recession and it's hitting people on the fringe first. Expect these kinds of incidents to increase exponentially in the future.

[AngryAmish]

153. Proof?

[Pale Blue Dot]

160. Honestly, right now I have only a correlation

and the historic truth that when poverty rises in America, so does violence.

It's a testable theory: If I'm right, we should see a major increase in these types of incidents very shortly.

BTW, if you think my post is somehow trying to excuse the role that guns play in this type of incident, then you're reading it wrong.

[AngryAmish]

161. I don't think these type of things are related to poverty

Now as a rule as times get harder the crime rate does go up. Poor people tend to be the violent criminals in our society. My look at the data (not professional) is demographics plays a big part (lots of young poor men creates lots of crime).

In the shooting sprees I remember tend to be troubled people not necessarily poor people. Off the top of my head Columbine, Texas Tower, VA Tech, Jonesboro all were not done because of poverty. So I don't buy your thesis and want to see some data.

Also, I didn't think about the gun laws one way or the other by your post. I'm ignoring that issue right now.

Cheers.

[benEzra]

233. Perhaps in part, but I think our increasing social alienation/factionalization may be a bigger part

of incidents like this one. Street crime and overall homicide rate is tightly correlated with poverty, the rich-poor gap, and (especially) drug prohibition, but loser-killing-people-in-order-to-be-famous seems to be a mostly middle class phenomenon.

That fractionalization has been accelerated by Bush and company, not only in the realm of individual relationships but in the relationship between the government and the people. The dominant law enforcement paradigm in the late 1990's was community policing, in which officers tried to get to know those they served and earn their trust. This seems to have been mostly discarded post-9/11 by the Homeland Security model of policing, in which officers are trained/encouraged to view citizens as potential terrorists to be kept in line and watched for suspicious activity. The result has been a disaster, and IMHO the recent uptick in violent crime is in part a result of that breach of trust.

Fostering the realization that we're all in this together, ditching the Homeland Security model of law enforcement in favor of community policing, better mental health care, and ending the War on Non-Approved Herbs would go a long way toward reversing some of these trends, I think.

With regard to the overall crime rate, though, I am afraid we may yet see crime rates climb back to early '90s rates if the economy continues to tank, for precisely the reasons you describe.

[Jennicut]

152. Its our history and the way we view dealing with our "problems"

The U.S. was built on violence. Look at the "wild west". Guns have always been popular here in a way they have not been in Europe. Its because of the way we view ourselves and our society here. We don't deal with our problems here, we blame other people. Lost your girlfriend, got a bad grade, don't fit in with the other students or neighbors? Just shoot some people than kill yourself. Its a different perspective here. I went to a state college in the mid-90's where I got my B.A. in psychology. No one on campus was afraid or thought about being shot. We had an incident one time where one student whipped out a gun on another student on a weekend but no one thought about another student going a killing rampage. I would honestly be frightened to be there now. I do attend a small local community college (getting a certificate to teach Early Childhood Education)and it does make me nervous just to be there at times. I think for a period there in the early to mid 90's there were less freak shootings like this but ever since Columbine I think some people just figure that barrier has been crossed and we can go back to violently shooting people when things don't go our way. Having worked in the mental health field I can honestly say it sucks and we have a terrible healthcare system in this country. If you use up your mental health benefits by staying at a mental health care facility they will just release you back into society if you have no other way to pay. The way we our in the U.S. there is still a stigmatism to getting help and I have seen many people afraid to get help because of how they will be viewed by others. I'm not sure what the answer is to stop people like this. I would feel safer with increased security at college campuses. Not everyone who can carry a concealed weapon would be there to stop a crazy madman even if the law allowed it. If guns are allowed on campus than the problem of other students attacking each other for different reasons could be increased. Problems with mental healthcare need to be addressed. I got out of the field because it was run terribly. Also, there is no way to help people who obviously are mentally deranged like the VT shooter as the mental health laws have been changed so much that they are more to protect the deranged person from being "locked up" and abused as people were once. The laws need to fit the times. I really don't have any answers but I do know that arguing about guns laws misses the point. We can outlaw guns all we want, we can allow guns everywhere. That won't change anything unless we start realizing that those who are likely to go "off" on others should be stopped before hand and many are missing the warning signs or are stopped by arcane laws and rules from stopping these people.

[raccoon]

162. I wish these SOB's would just kill themselves and get it over with,

and not take out these innocent people.

[LanternWaste]

174. So unless Mel Brooks finally writes Part II of History of the World...

Sometimes I wonder with honesty how a history book written in 2208 giving a thumbnail history of our culture would read.

I'm currently reading 'To Rule the Waves', a history of the British Navy and how it
"changed the world". Atrocities, pirates, abuses, tyrants, et. al. are referred to with objectivity, and with only enough passion to entertain and dramatize for the reader. The author finds a trail of evidence and with a conscious attempt to quell his own emotional and cultural biases, he takes us step by step-- from the "beginning" of a problem, to its "end".

What, I wonder will the history books in two hundred years say about these mass killings we are unfortunately growing accustomed to? Will they be a mere footnote? Will chapters be devoted to the American 'psyche' which cause the events? Will causal relations be found? Is this a serious problem in and of itself, or is it merely an effect of a greater underlying societal fracture?

I suppose that we ourselves will not arrive at the definitive answer-- that the best we can do is muck around a stagnant pool of despair, anger and frustration, doing our best not to fall in.

So unless Mel Brooks finally writes Part II of History of the World, we're going to be in the dark for a while longer. However, I do hope that we can conclude and accept our ignorance without too much anger between us, that we can all agree there is not yet any one definitive answer or magic pill, and that we're all just as stupid about this stuff as everyone else is... regardless of how may statistics we can recite or how many contemporary magazines we subscribe to.

[primavera]

187. Thanks, I just got this mental image of Cheney as Torquemada...

... banging in time to music with the butt of a shotgun on the knees of bearded prisoners in locks! "The Inquisition, what a show, the Inquisition, here we go..." Thanks, I was sorely in need of a chuckle. :hi:

[LanternWaste]

188. My favorite vignette from the film...

My favorite vignette from the film. Probably one of my favorite vignettes of all time.

:evilgrin:

[lebkuchen]

195. BBC just wondered whether Americans were concerned about gun violence

considering all the recent massacres.

The reporter said his impression was that Americans were resigned to this type of lifestyle (!), and that a predominant view was that students should be allowed to carry guns to school.

Gun violence....just one of those things that's as American as Girl Scout Cookie sales!

[Paladin]

203. Who The Hell Did The BBC Talk To: Ted Fucking Nugent? (n/t)

[Critters2]

215. Spent a few minutes in the gundgeon. nt

[lebkuchen]

219. It took one massacre in Australia, on Tasmania, to incite Aussies to change

The PM asked for a volunteer buy-out of guns, and nearly the entire country complied. The end.

I think over 30 people were killed in Tasmania. Is it number of deaths in a single shooting that will finally trigger a similar reaction in the U.S.? We know it isn't number of massacres.

[depakid]

243. As can be seen in this thread, most Americans are UTTERLY irrational when it comes to guns

and every Aussie that I've spoken with about the issue thinks, quite frankly, that they're insane, particularly when they read things like what's repeatedly posted in these threads.

The bottom line is that most of the gun proponents here (those who think even more guns are a "solution") are typically dishonest with respect to how other cuntries have dealt with gun violence and mass shootings.

Moreover, their rationalizations for conceal and carry often border on the delusional; paranoid fantasies about "stopping a shooter" -which depsite a few anecdotes to the contrary- rarely ever happens- or would happen under the circumstances where these tragedies occur.

Even so, they're right about one thing: the US will not only refuse to change its ways, its policies and culture assure that matters will continues to get worse and worse over time. A rather sad legacy- and uniquely American.

[evanlong]

244. Columbine Attack Government Document Library

Links to 30K+ pages of government documents related to the April 20, 1999 attack on Columbine High School have been posted to the internet.

http://www.xmail.net/evanlong/tcc/Columbine_Attack_Government_Document_Library.html

I've also created a video on the documents called "The Columbine Cause".

http://www.xmail.net/evanlong/tcc/

Sincerely,
Evan Long