School shooting in CT

[GaBoy25]

Originally Posted by irocnroll

You are only proving the point more that the survival rate is higher from knife and cleaver attacks vs a gun attack. Sure people will still die but the casualties will be fewer.

The death rate isn't the point it's the intent. Saying one has a higher causality rate than the other is like saying the bath school massacre in 1927 was more efficient because 38 children were blown up by high explosives instead of weapons. It's actually easier to make explosives than legally obtain a firearm.



The real thing I'm curious to see is if the media/government try to push an assault rifle ban when the actual crime was committed with 2 legally owned but illegally taken pistols

[GaBoy25]

Originally Posted by SleepWarz

RE: The Media
CC: The shootings


People are going to do this because of the fame that they receive upon checkout, and because of the ease of use to get a deadly weapon in the states. 10k + deaths to firearms in the states last year, 58 in canada.

Guns are safe. *cough* FWIW stopping a nutcase with a knife is a bit easier than a nutcase with a gun.

But.....there are 7 million registered firearms in Canada. It just seems they have a bit more sense

[jd10013]

Originally Posted by irocnroll

It's not naive at all. Take a looks at the UK they have strict gun laws and one of the lowest gun homocide rate in the world. There is clearly a corrolation between strict laws and homocides.

your missing some facts though. yes, Brittan has a lower homicide rate than the US does. however, they have always had a lower homicide rate than the US. there was a time when they did not have strict gun control laws, and their homicide rate was still lower than ours. in fact, the adoption of strict gun control laws did not change the homicide rate at all in Brittan. in the decades after, I believe it went up.

this is a common ploy gun control advocates use. your comparing our crime rate to the crime rate in other countries with strict controls on guns. but you ignore the data from before those laws were enacted in both the case of their own crime rates and their crime rates relative to ours. When the UK had much more liberal gun laws their crime rate was not comparable to our............it was much lower. your whole premise is based on the false conclusion that at one time the crime rate in the UK was the same as ours, they adopted strict gun laws, and then it went down. this never happened.

as the saying goes, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. but the bottom line is, people who want to kill are going to kill. Timothy McVeigh killed hundreds with fertilizer. terrorists killed thousands with planes and box cutter. and the Nazis killed millions with gas.

[rhunley14]

Prayers to all the families who lost someone. Just heartbreaking..

[Xello]

Wouldn't it be nice if when people point out statistics or supposed facts about gun laws or lack thereof in this country and others, that they site where they get their information? There is so much BS being spewed both from the pro gun control side and the guns for everyone side in this forum and in the general public as a whole.

It would be great if we could put politics, emotions and yes, even the 2nd amendment aside for a bit to have a true discussion on gun ownership rights and gun control and figure out what is the best solution for this country.

There is a solution out there but I'm afraid it won't be realized in my lifetime because just like most things nowadays there seems to be only two vocalized sides to this issue and neither is right.

[steel insane]

Originally Posted by GaBoy25

The death rate isn't the point it's the intent. Saying one has a higher causality rate than the other is like saying the bath school massacre in 1927 was more efficient because 38 children were blown up by high explosives instead of weapons. It's actually easier to make explosives than legally obtain a firearm.



The real thing I'm curious to see is if the media/government try to push an assault rifle ban when the actual crime was committed with 2 legally owned but illegally taken pistols

Not pistols... .223 bushmaster was used to kill these kids. They never stood a chance...

[PQ]

I refuse to watch any further coverage of any more mass shootings. I think it's the sensationalization of these shootings that give deranged people the idea to go do it. You want to get a lot of attention? Get a gun walk into a building and start shooting people.

We need to 'tell the story' my ass I hope all of the sponsors are making tons of money off of this.

If all of the victims had to die I wish the shooter would have lived.

I'm normally pretty detached but this one is killing me.

[monstertodd]

Originally Posted by GotGame55

This is the worst year ever. There's been so many shootings this year. Its stupid.

Actually, there really haven't been any more than usual. It just seems like it because of the sensationalism of modern network tv journalism.

It's a tragedy for sure. For me personally, it feels particularly more heart wrenching than usual because most of the victims were precious children. I've spent a lot of time thinking about it, and this is definitely a hard pill to swallow. I just don't understand how someone could be such a cold hearted killer. What kind of coward goes out and shoots children? In a school no less? What kind of coward shoots children, and then shoots himself so that he doesn't have to answer for his crimes? The Taliban do things like this to children. This person, I don't even want to call him a person because that would put him on the same level as other human beings who actually have emotions. This slime ball, this walking organ sack, this pitiful excuse of a human being, has enshrined himself in history among folks like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao, Saddam Huessein and the Taliban.

I do hope though, that everyone sees right through the sensational journalism that is being crammed down your throat every night on network news about this and other similar events.

[Jessika]

Todd, that was awesome.

I am glad the killer did not live. Although, I wish someone else was able to end his life. CT is a no death penalty state, so he would of lived the rest of his life without having to truly pay for his crimes. That is about the only thing that would of made this situation worse, the Bastard living.

sent from my Note2 using Tapatalk

[RenegadeSS]

Check this out.
Morgan Freeman's statement about these random shootings....

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem.

[dolt45]

Originally Posted by RenegadeSS

Check this out.
Morgan Freeman's statement about these random shootings....

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem.

I've read a few places that say that Mr. Freeman didn't actually say that and that someone just used his name to push their own opinions.
Too bad. I agree with most of it.

[dolt45]

Originally Posted by irocnroll

It's not naive at all. Take a looks at the UK they have strict gun laws and one of the lowest gun homocide rate in the world. There is clearly a corrolation between strict laws and homocides.

The strict gun laws in Great Britain were largely a reaction to the killings in Hungerford, Berkshire, England on August 19th 1987 when a lone gunman killed sixteen people and wounded another 15.

Long after the stricter laws were put on the books people still manage to acquire guns and put them to use in terrible ways.

Dunblane Scotland March 13th 1996 a lone gunman enters a school and kills 16 kids and a teacher.

Cumbria England: June 2nd 2010 a lone gunman shoots 23 people (eleven of them survived).

I'm not saying that stricter laws didn't help there. I'm just saying that it isn't a perfect solution.
How many of you could, within 10 minutes, acquire something illegal and dangerous? Schedule 1 drugs for example. I know I could. Easily. Making something illegal does not make it scarce or difficult to find.

Having said all of that, if you find a better answer, I'm listening. Absolutely.

[The Horseman]

Making gun laws more strict will prevent people who abide laws from having them, not the badguys. Violent criminals don't obey the law. If there were no guns available shoestring strangulations would rise and then someone would demand we all get Velcro shoes. Self-control is needed. Not control on our freedoms. Crazy aholes are dangerous. Guns are merely tools. Unfortunately so are some people.


A horse is a horse, of course,
of course.

[Stingray]

If that killer lived, the public would have stoned him to death. Then again it's probably a good thing he didn't live, since the gubmint would have protected him so he can partake in the judicial court/trial system. That sick lunatic doesn't deserve to live... what a coward too, killing innocent children and teachers is a pure cowardly act.