A pint please!

http://geektyrant.com/news/2012/12/11/a ... aland.html

ashmire13 wrote:

Badmike wrote:
Don't worry, your government will protect you in case of crime, violence or rioting.  Just like they did in 2011.

Mike B.

Yes there are issues here, but following the latest news just breaking in Conneticut, we don't have regular gun attacks on schools :'(

You're already disarmed. We're not. No need.

SimperingToad wrote:

ashmire13 wrote:
Yes there are issues here, but following the latest news just breaking in Conneticut, we don't have regular gun attacks on schools :'(

You're already disarmed. We're not. No need.

Do you think these attacks would continue to happen if gun laws were different?

Not arguing a point, just curious.

ashmire13 wrote:

SimperingToad wrote:You're already disarmed. We're not. No need.

Do you think these attacks would continue to happen if gun laws were different?

Not arguing a point, just curious.

I don't know what you can do differently.  I don't know that gun laws could have prevented a shooting like this.  A determined sociopathic lunatic can always find a way to mass murder.  Look at Breivik, he killed 77 in a country that doesn't have these sort of things happen normally, with a legally owned weapon.  And Tim McVeigh killed a lot more people with a van full of fertilizer.  People like this will always find a ways and mean to kill, even if all guns in the world magically disappeared from the face of the earth tomorrow.

Mike B.

All valid points, good to see it from that side. Guess it's just such a tragedy when it's a school and so young. It's probably not as often as it seems, but it's huge news here when it happens.

You're right though, nutters will find a way, gun or not. I think maybe, because guns are more readily available, it's easier. We have more knife crime than guns. More individuals than mass killings. Doesn't make it any less right

Crazy world eh?

You have to remember the population on the u.s. is 350 mil plus so you are bound to have insane people do insane things. This simply a massive tragedy that can't be avoided even though it maddens us to think it can somehow be avoided or stopped. This is not a gun thing but an insanity thing. No amount of legislation will stop these things. That is a truth that we all hate to believe, but there it is.

Right, there are lots of factors going on here.  Univariate solutions for multivariate problems rarely work.

For what it's worth, here's gun ownership and deaths data:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... yTnc#gid=0

Also, the number of people killed by mass murders are but a tiny fraction of the overall murder rate in the US.  If we're going to tackle the problem of murder, I'd suggest we focus primarily on homicides first.

Finally, gun sales are going to likely rise as people fear this right will be restricted.  Gun sales soared during Obama's first term, and I don't see any reason why that trend won't continue.  

ashmire13 wrote:

SimperingToad wrote:You're already disarmed. We're not. No need.

Do you think these attacks would continue to happen if gun laws were different?

Not arguing a point, just curious.

Pass any gun laws you want. Criminals ignore them.

There was a big push in the media on Obama and gun control lately, even as the numbers coming in were showing an explosion of purchases made when the (s)election was over. Now, we're seeing once again the demonization increase after the event. The convenient and well-timed event.

I'm waiting on the reports to come in, but it always seems to happen in such cases that the perp in question is revealed (quietly) to have been on drugs like Ritalin, such as at Columbine, which are known to have such psychotic side-effects. Lanza has been described as having 'personality disorders', so is a likely candidate. We'll see how this plays out.

What else am I watching for? Was the accused perp under psychiatric care or immersed in studying mind control or neuroscience studies like Mr. Holmes? Did he have a sudden change in personality? Did the school have recent drills of this nature? Is the story ever-changing? Did the responding police wait outside for orders to enter like at Columbine? Are there reports of a second or third shooter? Early reports indicate another perp. Now he's disappeared from the press ala OKC and the Holmes incident. A lot of unanswered questions at this point. It's 'wait and see' time.

I caught an interview some years ago with one of the cops who bagged the Texas Tower shooter. One thing stuck with me since then, even after I had forgotten most of what was discussed: he gave full credit to the civilians who kept peppering the perp with suppressing fire long enough to get the two, count 'em, two, cops in the door.

The presstitutes must hate that part.  

I wish I could kick the shit out of parents letting their 8-10 year olds talk about the massacre with media and reporters. Disgusting.  I'd also like to save a few licks for the brainless douchebag reporters who are sticking the microphone in the faces of small children and asking them to relive the horror.

SimperingToad wrote:
I caught an interview some years ago with one of the cops who bagged the Texas Tower shooter. One thing stuck with me since then, even after I had forgotten most of what was discussed: he gave full credit to the civilians who kept peppering the perp with suppressing fire long enough to get the two, count 'em, two, cops in the door.
:

That was actually pretty interesting. Back then, even more than now, many hunters ran around with their rifles hanging in the back of their truck cab, most  of them loaded. When Whitman began shooting people, hunters and other armed civilians countered by pulling their rifles off the racks and firing back at him.  Apparently at one point he was dodging so many shots from the ground he was the one was was cowering behind the tower walls, greatly limiting his firing range and allowing McCoy and Martinez to enter the building and eventually kill him.

Mike B.