John Hopkins Shooting

[MichaelHarris]

"Reports from the Baltimore Sun say that Pardus (The gunman) has a concealed carry permit for a handgun in Virginia"

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212323491.shtml?rssfeed

[Pavulon]

1. So fucking what. I can legally drink. When I get shit hammered and drive my car into

you at a stop sign you can blame the booze.

[friendly_iconoclast]

4. Naaah, it would be North Carolina's fault for giving you a drivers' license

And all other licensed drivers should be given a guilt trip about your fuckup. Because (by some mysterious

mechanism which is never explained), they're responsible as well.

That's how the schtick goes.

[friendly_iconoclast]

2. Ban Virginia. If it saves even one life... n/t

[virginia mountainman]

10. Hey now!?!!!! LOL NT

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. Now you've done it.

:popcorn:

[MichaelHarris]

6. Well

it looks like concealed weapon permit holder stopped his own mass shooting by killing himself.

[TheCowsCameHome]

31. That's one way to look at it.

:rofl:

[petersjo02]

5. Does that mean that shooting the doctor was actually

legal?

[proteus_lives]

7. Ban doctors. It's the only way we'll be safe.

[Euromutt]

8. Last time I looked, Maryland isn't Virginia

And a Virginia CCW permit isn't valid in Maryland, a fact of which I assume the late, not particularly lamented Mr. Pardus was well aware.

So this proves... what?

By the way, that piece is really sloppily written. Doesn't the Post Chronicle have copy editors?

[spin]

9. Newspapers have fallen on hard times ...

The Post Chronicle probably outsourced the copy writer's job to Pakistan.

[virginia mountainman]

11. One more law err??

LOL You do realize John Hopkins is a "Gun Free Zone"...


All I see is another failure of a gun free zone to work...

[MichaelHarris]

13. are you

suggesting a law abiding, concealed weapon permit holder actually broke a law by taking a weapon into a gun free zone? One of your own actually broke a law? A CWP holder would never break a law would they?

[virginia mountainman]

19. You fail to realize..

That when someone decides that they have nothing to loose, NO LAW will stop them..

It is folly to have so many "gun free zones" They have proven to be nothing but "free fire zones"

[MichaelHarris]

22. so are you saying

a concealed weapon permit holder had nothing to loose and easy access to a gun at a critical moment committed a crime? I didn't think they were supposed to do that. Society has deemed them fit to carry a weapon right? I mean someone gave him a card saying he was an OK guy right?

So did a concealed weapon permit holder break the law by walking into a gun free zone with a weapon?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[rrneck]

34. And that's just because there's no "half space bar". nt

[Glassunion]

46. +1... LOL

[MichaelHarris]

45. LOL

with that anger do you also carry a gun?

[PavePusher]

47. And now you insinuate that people who own guns....

aren't allowed to get angry.

Because no-one with guns can control anger, or what?

[rrneck]

48. With your juvenile

desire to provoke people you own one?

Do you always try to start fights so you can finish them with a gun?

[SteveM]

50. Punking: It's what's for dinner.

[shadowrider]

52. I sincerely, sincerely doubt he owns one. n/t

[Euromutt]

21. When has anyone ever said on this forum that "a CWP holder would never break the law"?

Except as part of some bullshit straw man, that is. It's been repeatedly pointed out that CWP holders are statistically less likely to commit an offense than the general population, particularly a violent offense, but "less likely" does not mean there is 0% chance. It would aid your credibility no end if you'd stop claiming others said things they never said.

[Callisto32]

26. Ohhhh NOW it makes sense.

This is TRIBAL to you..... Well, guess what. It ISN'T tribal to us. There are members in ALL groups, including CCW holders, that are asshats of all varieties from the mundane to the frighteningly dangerous. That doesn't change the FACT that CCW holders are, on the whole, a far more law-abiding than most any other group drawn from the general population, including police officers.

[Remmah2]

30. Yes, cops never break laws either.

Licensed drivers never drive under the influence.

"One of your own"? One of our own what? So nice to be stereotyped and classified.

[cleanhippie]

37. I know it would make you happy if anyone ever ACTUALLY SAID THAT

but you go ahead and keep up that wishful thinking.

[lawodevolution]

12. I don't see the value of this post

Sure there are examples of violent crime. If we cut the crime rate to one percent of what it is today these stories will still show up. Nigeria has the lowest gun ownership rate on earth at 1 per 100 people and the most radical form of gun control (a total ban) and yet violence levels are very high and there are many individual stories like this over there. Try posting up a better argument for you side of the debate so we can have a real discussion.

[MichaelHarris]

14. sure you do

you just don't want to acknowledge it. I will make it simpler for you though. If this man had not had a carry permit and a handgun when he received the bad news from the doctor would he have:

A. cried a little, felt sad, maybe cheated at the potential loss of his mother, you know, just like the majority?

B. gone to the store,buy a gun,return to the hospital, and shoot the doctor?

C. Drove all the way home, grabbed his rod, returned to the hospital and shot the doctor?

What item strapped to his hip made his reaction much easier?

[pneutin]

15. Concealed permit had nothing to do with it

He would have brought his handgun whether he had a permit or not...the permit did not enable him to do what he did.

As for "rod/gun", you could replace that word with any other weapon, and he more than likely still would have done what he did.

[MichaelHarris]

17. so without the gun

you're saying he still would have hurt the doctor, maybe with a tongue depressor?

[Euromutt]

24. So without the gun...

... you're saying that Pardus wouldn't have tried to punch or strangle the doctor? Those only require bare hands.

[Callisto32]

28. Or a fucking scalpel...

or a hypodermic, or the chord of a medical monitor, or a bone saw, or a hemostat or a....

[TheWraith]

16. The idea that one incident is actionable is the worst kind of thinking.

I'm sure that somewhere, at some point, someone murdered another person while high on marijuana. By the logic you're employing, that one freak instance justifies preventing everyone else in the country from smoking pot. Now apply the same thinking to alcohol. Or to cars.

I can pull up examples of people getting killed by vending machines--that doesn't vending machines are too dangerous to be legal. One incident, or three, or ten, is not statistically significant in a country of three hundred million people.

[MichaelHarris]

18. unfortunately

we're talking about a man with easy access to a gun at the precise moment he became distraught. Nice try changing the entire situation.

[Callisto32]

29. Yes, a man had easy access to a gun when he became distraught.

So what, exactly, does this prove? That EVERYONE should be disarmed? Tell you what, let's start with the cops, because on-duty police officers would be the easiest to determine if they are armed or not.

[rrneck]

35. You own guns. Should we trust you? Prove we can. nt

[PavePusher]

39. Do you have a complete list of all weapons he had "easy access" to?

Focusing on the gun is rather missing the forest because someone left this damn tree in the way....

[TheWraith]

42. And yet, you're not able to actually provide a counter argument.

Primarily because the situation isn't magically worse because he had a gun. Any effort to make the world 100% safe will fail. One guy acting criminally with a gun is about as much evidence that everyone should be disarmed as one drunk driver is evidence that no one should be allowed to have a car.

[Euromutt]

49. IS that what we're talking about?

Because it seems to me, as I and others have already pointed out in this thread, that we could just as easily (probably more so, in fact) be talking about a guy who didn't "just happen" to have the gun on him, but had brought it to the hospital with the premeditated intention of shooting the doctor, his mother and himself.

[SteveM]

51. Still fighting a culture war? Picking a fight in an empty bar room?

[Euromutt]

20. But the guy didn't have a valid carry permit

That is, one valid in the state of Maryland. And because there's been some confusion in the past, it is made abundantly clear to recipients of a Virginia permit that said permit does not permit them to carry in Maryland. So what we have here is a guy carrying illegally, and he was using an alias, which is odd. I think the guy didn't just happen to have the gun on him, nor do I buy that this was a spur of the moment killing. I think he'd decided beforehand that if the prognosis was bad, he was going to shoot the doctor, his mother and himself, and he brought along the gun for that purpose.

[Euromutt]

23. You missed option D.

To wit, that the guy feared the prognosis would not be to his liking, and brought the firearm from his home in Arlington, VA with premeditated intent to kill the doctor (and perhaps some other "targets of opportunity"), his mother, and himself.

The article in the Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-shooting-hopkins-20100916,0,1885569.story) says the guy had been "a fixture in the room since last week, after his 84-year-old mother, Jean Davis, was brought there for surgery related to cancer treatment." So he already knew his mother's condition was serious, and he'd probably been informed of the risks of the surgery beforehand. The bad news (reportedly that the surgery had resulted in her becoming paralyzed) almost certainly did not come unexpectedly.

As has been pointed out repeatedly on this forum, the idea that people "just snap" and commit homicides with a firearm they "happened" to have readily available, which, absent the firearm, they would not have, is bullshit. Every gun owner knows firearms are lethal weapons; how is it even remotely plausible that a person who, sans firearm, would merely rant, swear, perhaps punch a wall or throw some object across the room, but not attempt to inflict injury on the other person, would, in possession of a firearm, suddenly go from 0 to 60 and immediately carry out a homicidal assault? If the loss of control is that bad, you'd at least expect the distraught party to physically assault the other with his bare hands, if nothing else.

The very fact that you didn't even think to include an option in which Pardus attempted to beat, throttle or otherwise physically assault the doctor before being restrained by some nurses, orderlies and/or hospital security is an indication that you subscribe to this magical thinking; namely, that a firearm exerts powers of mind control over its bearer that not merely cause him to escalate the level of violence, but actually create the violent response.

[Remmah2]

32. The point of your post is to infur punishment and restriction on ALL for the actions of one.

Punish all firearms owners for the actions of one.

Punish all doctors for the malpractice of one.

Punish an enthic group for the actions of one.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[lawodevolution]

43. You can't make those assumptions...

The only thing a sob story shows is that violent acts do occur. We already have crime rate data from the FBI. Violent crime rates are above 0 and therefore events such as this will occur.
You failed to explain the relevance of this situation. Did you include stats on the rate of violent crime among concealed permit holders? no. Worthless thread.

You don't know what he would have done in a different situation, you only know what he did. A,B and C are made up by you.

[Glassunion]

44. Let me get this straight...

"What item strapped to his hip made his reaction much easier?"

Are you blaming the gun or the person?

In this particular case, this individual's carry permit had absolutly nothing to do with the crime. His permit was not valid in the state and his possesion of a firearm was also illegal. So what you have is an individual, who broke the law, before breaking the law.

To me this seems a bit pre-meditated. This individual, crossed into another state where his carrying of a firearm was illegal, to commit a terrible act. From just that, it would seem (again to me) that this person had premeditated this murder. I do believe that if this individual had not had a firearm, they would have found a way to commit the same exact crime, however the means would have been different. The end result... The same.

You post is pure speculation and holds no muster what so ever... Again, the permit in this situation had nothing to do with it as the permit was a worthless piece of paper in the state the hospital was in... Also the gun was illegal for him to possess in that state. So your possible scenarios mean nothing. It's just you making stuff up that does not follow what actually happened.

[Callisto32]

25. UH. Isn't it JohnS Hopkins.

Even if the rest of the article is right, it's hard to get past a blatant mistake like that....

[jeepnstein]

33. He was distraught.

Probably more than a bit unstable. It's a shame his mother's last breaths were under these circumstances. I'm not sure I would have negotiated for two hours with a gunman in that setting.

Most major hospitals clearly post that firearms are prohibited. If you're carrying concealed it's easy enough to secure your weapon before entering the facility. One hospital I frequent actually has lock boxes in the security office. That's really thoughtful of them, and I mean that.

Mr. Pardus had issues. I won't pretend to be a therapist and examine them. That doesn't mean I should lose my rights over his crime. Yes, he committed several crimes before he shot the doctor.

[cleanhippie]

36. And your point is.........?

Oh, right, you don't have one.

[oneshooter]

40. He needs to find a hat that fits, the one he has is a little tight. n/t

[slackmaster]

41. Unrec for irrelevant comment about concealed carry permit

He didn't have a permit that is valid where the shooting occurred.