Another school shooting in the NW

FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
Edited Date/Time 6/25/2014 10:42pm
This time in Oregon. Reynolds High School in Troutdale. Across the Columbia river pretty much from Washougal.
http://news.yahoo.com/police-gunman-kills-student-school-shooting-17053…

Student killed at Reynolds High, shooter also dead .
http://www.kgw.com/news/Breaking-Reports-of-gunfire-at-Reynolds-High-Sc…

Live news stream right here at this link.
http://www.kgw.com/live-stream

|
newmann
Posts
24438
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
6/10/2014 11:02am
Wonder what kind of suicide/homicide inducing drugs this one was on?
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/10/2014 11:09am
newmann wrote:
Wonder what kind of suicide/homicide inducing drugs this one was on?
Who knows.....they havent said anything yet.
Just glad the shooter is dead and that there wasn't a high amount of casualties.
Crazy fuckers out there.
Mr. G
Posts
4225
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
6/10/2014 11:14am
The problems is medical records are private so it usually takes a while to find out. These drugs should be public since they are a public hazard.
thesadguy
Posts
607
Joined
6/30/2012
Location
ATL, GA, USA
6/10/2014 3:37pm
Three possible conclusions to the reason why these mass shootings seem to be on the rise. 1. They are inside jobs trying to sway public opinion and kill the liberty movement. 2. The media gives so much coverage to these shootings that the shooter knows he will be on the news if he does something like this. 3. There isn't an actual increase at all but there is just more media coverage of these events.

The Shop

Titan1
Posts
9429
Joined
2/3/2010
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
6/10/2014 4:25pm
There are more of these events because it is a by-product of the reduced morals in our society.

The solution to these shootings is in the homes of each and every American...with parents that love, and teach, and encourage their children (well adjusted, well parented children aren't doing these things).

Want to fix America? Start in the home...the home is the most basic and fundamental unit of our society...a bunch of homes make a neighborhood, a bunch of neighborhoods make a community, several communities make a city, cities make counties, counties make states, and states make our nation.

Trying to fix our nations problems at the national level is only treating the symptoms...same with the state, county and city levels...you are just treating the symptoms of the problem...to address the actual problem, you have to fix the family.
racin mason
Posts
883
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Long Beach, WA, USA
6/10/2014 4:46pm
I agree with Titan.When I was in school ,[1975 h.s. grad] there were 2 kids whose parents divorced.Now you would be hard pressed to find 2 kids who had mom and dad at home.We also got swats if we got out of line.If you had a beef with somebody, you would put the boxing gloves on in p.e.class.We learned from avery early age there were consequences for your actions,none of this time out bullshit.When disipline left the schools it seems violence has skyrocketed.We didnt have doctors throwing pills at students for all of these alphabet disorders either.
If we just had one more law this stuff would stop......
6/10/2014 5:08pm Edited Date/Time 6/10/2014 5:15pm
FastEddy wrote:
This time in Oregon. Reynolds High School in Troutdale. Across the Columbia river pretty much from Washougal. http://news.yahoo.com/police-gunman-kills-student-school-shooting-170534882.html Student killed at Reynolds High, shooter also dead...
This time in Oregon. Reynolds High School in Troutdale. Across the Columbia river pretty much from Washougal.
http://news.yahoo.com/police-gunman-kills-student-school-shooting-17053…

Student killed at Reynolds High, shooter also dead .
http://www.kgw.com/news/Breaking-Reports-of-gunfire-at-Reynolds-High-Sc…

Live news stream right here at this link.
http://www.kgw.com/live-stream

Hey Eddie, happened a couple miles from us. Several co-workers with family at the school. Should know more in the morning. Young man killed was a Freshman. For all you medical experts, the phrase " It's what you know that just ain't so" comes mind.
Rooster
Posts
4432
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton, CA
6/10/2014 6:03pm
Mr. G wrote:
The problems is medical records are private so it usually takes a while to find out. These drugs should be public since they are a public...
The problems is medical records are private so it usually takes a while to find out. These drugs should be public since they are a public hazard.
It really doesn't fucking matter.

The NRA will argue that it's everybody's right to own a gun whether they're on drugs, nuts, sane or otherwise. It's America. In some counties, even if you're known to be a complete and utter fucking loon who threatens everyone they meet, it's actually illegal for you to NOT own a gun.

And most here will support that, because they're afraid somebody will take their gun. Which any sane and reasonable person knows won't happen, but some people get very worked up about shit like that and toss reason aside because they're fearful of everything from their government to their shadow. Such is life. God bless America!
Mr. G
Posts
4225
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
6/10/2014 6:12pm
You must have never bought a gun here. It is not at all like you describe. Regardless of your quest Psych drugs are the root of the problem, it just a while to get everyone to recognize it. Who else makes a product that can force a person into becoming a murderer? None that I know of. Guns are in the hand of the beholder, psych drugs have their own power to enforce. They are Assault Meds.
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/10/2014 7:23pm Edited Date/Time 6/10/2014 7:32pm
Rooster wrote:
It really doesn't fucking matter. The NRA will argue that it's everybody's right to own a gun whether they're on drugs, nuts, sane or otherwise. It's...
It really doesn't fucking matter.

The NRA will argue that it's everybody's right to own a gun whether they're on drugs, nuts, sane or otherwise. It's America. In some counties, even if you're known to be a complete and utter fucking loon who threatens everyone they meet, it's actually illegal for you to NOT own a gun.

And most here will support that, because they're afraid somebody will take their gun. Which any sane and reasonable person knows won't happen, but some people get very worked up about shit like that and toss reason aside because they're fearful of everything from their government to their shadow. Such is life. God bless America!
The NRA and a lot of it's members really baffle me.

Here's an interesting story in regards to the NRA...that pissed me off!
I know when Brandon Webb first started to run for the NRA board that the looney tunes came out in full force.
Brandon Webb is a great guy and a smart guy.Highly knowledgeable about many weapons
and he is very well trained. In fact he trained Chris Kyle & Marcus Luttrell - he was their sniper school instructor.
They looney tunes called him a wolf in sheep's clothing ect... (you can google some of the hate stuff -google is filled with it.
The guy has probably forgotten more about cqb/assessment/self defense then most gun owners know.

Here is a read about Webb.

Brandon Webb knows a thing or two about guns. Over the course of his 13-year career in the U.S. military, Webb served as a Navy SEAL with challenging combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan under his belt. He was also a course manager for the SEAL Sniper program, where he trained special operations legends such as Chris Kyle, the most lethal sniper in U.S. history, and Marcus Luttrell, the subject of the new Hollywood blockbuster Lone Survivor.

Brandon:
"“I definitely expected healthy criticism,” Webb said. “What I didn’t expect was to have people lash out at me, my family, and to put my service to this country into question.”

From an outsider’s perspective, it would certainly seem puzzling that those whom Webb seeks to represent would become his most vocal critics. After all, Webb is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment; he supports concealed carry rights, opposes magazine capacity limits, and believes that Americans should be allowed to own any personal firearm short of WMDs given the proper training, including fully automatic weapons.

What sets Webb apart from his critics is his opinion that the NRA should take a stronger leadership position in drafting legislation, such as improving background checks(The NICS system is a mess -FE) and addressing America’s flawed mental health care system. Critics have charged that Webb’s willingness to compromise opens the way for the further erosion of gun rights, while Webb argues that failing to participate more actively in the legislative process would result in even greater erosion, especially at the state level.

“Compromise comes in many forms, and many who’ve been critical of me are automatically triggered to think that this means a Second Amendment compromise,” Webb explained. “This is not the case. What I’m talking about is engaging in a dialogue that protects our rights but leaves room to have an intelligent conversation on important issues.”"


You can read the rest here.
http://ivn.us/2013/12/26/silent-majority-navy-seal-sniper-speaks-gun-mo…

IMO
The guy is really an advocate for improving our current systems so that they work right!
Adding Mental Health shit, like records to NICS would be a good step.
He's also an advocate of a better trained society when it comes to fighting off the bad guys.
I don't see a problem with any of that.....
The training shouldn't even be an issue - it should be a given and not even have to be forced.
People should want to get the best possible training money can buy if they're going to carry or arm themselves with semi-autos,Title 2 stuff like destruction devices,machine guns ect..
There's tons of great private schools out there.
Most are ran by Veterans whom have served and come from the Special Operations community.





Rooster
Posts
4432
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton, CA
6/10/2014 9:27pm
Mr. G wrote:
You must have never bought a gun here. It is not at all like you describe. Regardless of your quest Psych drugs are the root of...
You must have never bought a gun here. It is not at all like you describe. Regardless of your quest Psych drugs are the root of the problem, it just a while to get everyone to recognize it. Who else makes a product that can force a person into becoming a murderer? None that I know of. Guns are in the hand of the beholder, psych drugs have their own power to enforce. They are Assault Meds.
So what's medicine for some, when used as directed under the care of their physician should be banned? Yet guns should be made freely available to anyone who wants them?

Me thinks you're not seeing the big picture here. I'm not some vehemently anti-gun person. I admittedly don't like them and really don't see a need for them in my society, but to each their own. However, putting dangerous weapons into the hands of some people is as dumb as selling C4 or semtex to every shithead who wants to set off some fireworks.

It's also dangerous to prescribe dangerous psych meds to people who aren't being seen regularly by their physician to monitor their progress. I think that has quite a bit to do with your crazy expensive health care system that treats symptoms with drugs and doesn't give a shit about treating the underlying problems. There's no profit in healing compared to treating the symptoms for the life of the patient.

Banning either one isn't the solution. Finding a rational middle ground that keeps dangerous things out of the hands of those that abuse them might have a better end result. That takes some effort though.
Mr. G
Posts
4225
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
6/10/2014 10:08pm
The drugs have their stated effects. The doctors can not change these effects. Some people do OK with them, some do less than OK and some go completely around the bend as you see in these massacres.
Rooster
Posts
4432
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton, CA
6/11/2014 1:26pm
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have mental health issues they were being treated for.

If they weren't being prescribed drugs and were instead under the care of a psychologist would you blame the psychologist?

You have a combination of mentally unstable people and dangerous weapons with a lack of oversight of both. You could eliminate the problem with proper care for the mentally unstable and/or removing their access to weapons that make a massacre event easy.

Blaming one without the other shows a bias in thinking that removes a viable option from the table. Of course when you're getting your medical information from a source named "ammoland" it's pretty tough to say there's no bias in your thinking.
oldAFI
Posts
754
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
6/11/2014 1:39pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 1:41pm
Mr. G wrote:
The drugs have their stated effects. The doctors can not change these effects. Some people do OK with them, some do less than OK and some...
The drugs have their stated effects. The doctors can not change these effects. Some people do OK with them, some do less than OK and some go completely around the bend as you see in these massacres.
Really? you're blaming anti-depressants now? You're America's classic myth promotor.

Here's the lowdown:
It takes a mentally ill person to commit senses slaughter, and if you are mentally ill, chances are you will be on an anti-depressent.

Here's a college mantra you might have missed:
"correlation is not causation"

edit: didnt' see Rooster's post, looks like he's got this covered.
Titan1
Posts
9429
Joined
2/3/2010
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
6/11/2014 1:40pm
Mr. G wrote:
Rooster wrote:
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have...
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have mental health issues they were being treated for.

If they weren't being prescribed drugs and were instead under the care of a psychologist would you blame the psychologist?

You have a combination of mentally unstable people and dangerous weapons with a lack of oversight of both. You could eliminate the problem with proper care for the mentally unstable and/or removing their access to weapons that make a massacre event easy.

Blaming one without the other shows a bias in thinking that removes a viable option from the table. Of course when you're getting your medical information from a source named "ammoland" it's pretty tough to say there's no bias in your thinking.
Or we could just blame the people pulling the trigger and leave inanimate objects out of it.

Taking guns away is just treating in a symptom without addressing the actual problem.

Fatigue is a common symptom of most cancers...does it make sense to just address the symptom (fatigue) and expect to solve the problem? Of course not...that's why taking away guns (or even making them more difficult to get) won't solve this problem either.


Government, and their laws, aren't the answer.
oldAFI
Posts
754
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
6/11/2014 1:45pm
Mr. G wrote:
Rooster wrote:
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have...
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have mental health issues they were being treated for.

If they weren't being prescribed drugs and were instead under the care of a psychologist would you blame the psychologist?

You have a combination of mentally unstable people and dangerous weapons with a lack of oversight of both. You could eliminate the problem with proper care for the mentally unstable and/or removing their access to weapons that make a massacre event easy.

Blaming one without the other shows a bias in thinking that removes a viable option from the table. Of course when you're getting your medical information from a source named "ammoland" it's pretty tough to say there's no bias in your thinking.
Titan1 wrote:
Or we could just blame the people pulling the trigger and leave inanimate objects out of it. Taking guns away is just treating in a symptom...
Or we could just blame the people pulling the trigger and leave inanimate objects out of it.

Taking guns away is just treating in a symptom without addressing the actual problem.

Fatigue is a common symptom of most cancers...does it make sense to just address the symptom (fatigue) and expect to solve the problem? Of course not...that's why taking away guns (or even making them more difficult to get) won't solve this problem either.


Government, and their laws, aren't the answer.
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/11/2014 2:11pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 2:34pm
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
" With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal."


Really?
Go tell your bullshit to these people & their families.
Plus the 264 victims that sought treatment at area hospitals.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/specials/boston_marathon…

If crazy fuckers want to kill/harm mass amounts of people,they'll find a way....
And just an FYI - there's plenty of other methods then "knives".
They used bombs in the Columbine massacre also.
In fact...
48 -- Carbon Dioxide bombs
27 -- Pipe bombs
11 -- 1.5 gallon propane bombs
7 -- gas or napalm bombs
2 -- 20 pound propane bombs


Racer92
Posts
17965
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Central, TX, USA
6/11/2014 2:13pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 2:16pm
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
Take away guns and mass killings cant happen? Remember that kook putting poison in Tylenol years ago? Or the idiots mailing anthrax? What if a wackjob tosses Sarin gas down a subway tunnel? Dumps cyanide in a water supply? A disgruntled taxpayer bent on getting back at the IRS in a single engine plane. Or a space-cadet who decides to drive a rental van full of fertilizer next to an Oklahoma office building and blow it up. Maybe just a few radical religious nutjobs with a box cutters decide to take down a few sky scrapers?

Yep, guns are the problem, not mentally defective humans.
thesadguy
Posts
607
Joined
6/30/2012
Location
ATL, GA, USA
6/11/2014 2:14pm
Remember the mass stabbing in China?
Titan1
Posts
9429
Joined
2/3/2010
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
6/11/2014 2:21pm
Rooster wrote:
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have...
Yes you can blame the drugs. Or you can look at that from a different perspective and say that every person involved was known to have mental health issues they were being treated for.

If they weren't being prescribed drugs and were instead under the care of a psychologist would you blame the psychologist?

You have a combination of mentally unstable people and dangerous weapons with a lack of oversight of both. You could eliminate the problem with proper care for the mentally unstable and/or removing their access to weapons that make a massacre event easy.

Blaming one without the other shows a bias in thinking that removes a viable option from the table. Of course when you're getting your medical information from a source named "ammoland" it's pretty tough to say there's no bias in your thinking.
Titan1 wrote:
Or we could just blame the people pulling the trigger and leave inanimate objects out of it. Taking guns away is just treating in a symptom...
Or we could just blame the people pulling the trigger and leave inanimate objects out of it.

Taking guns away is just treating in a symptom without addressing the actual problem.

Fatigue is a common symptom of most cancers...does it make sense to just address the symptom (fatigue) and expect to solve the problem? Of course not...that's why taking away guns (or even making them more difficult to get) won't solve this problem either.


Government, and their laws, aren't the answer.
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
But it still doesn't solve the problem...will it make the headlines less shocking? Sure (Instead of 10 dead, including the shooter...its 3 dead and 10 injured)...but there is still a psycho kid trying to kill a people with a lethal object. Why are the libs only concerned with reducing the shock value of the headlines, rather than actually solving the problem?
hillbilly
Posts
9079
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Afton, TN, USA
6/11/2014 2:26pm
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
FastEddy wrote:
[i]" With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as...
" With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal."


Really?
Go tell your bullshit to these people & their families.
Plus the 264 victims that sought treatment at area hospitals.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/specials/boston_marathon…

If crazy fuckers want to kill/harm mass amounts of people,they'll find a way....
And just an FYI - there's plenty of other methods then "knives".
They used bombs in the Columbine massacre also.
In fact...
48 -- Carbon Dioxide bombs
27 -- Pipe bombs
11 -- 1.5 gallon propane bombs
7 -- gas or napalm bombs
2 -- 20 pound propane bombs


Columbine had all that? If so i never heard it.
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/11/2014 2:27pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 2:40pm
hillbilly wrote:
Columbine had all that? If so i never heard it.
Yep.
Weapons & Gear they used.
See link.... http://acolumbinesite.com/weapon.html

Here's Dylan's car from a Car Bomb that they set off.


Here's the wiki page also.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre


Let's not forget Oklahoma City either.
In that domestic massacre,168 people were killed.



oldAFI
Posts
754
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
6/11/2014 2:40pm
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
FastEddy wrote:
[i]" With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as...
" With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal."


Really?
Go tell your bullshit to these people & their families.
Plus the 264 victims that sought treatment at area hospitals.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/specials/boston_marathon…

If crazy fuckers want to kill/harm mass amounts of people,they'll find a way....
And just an FYI - there's plenty of other methods then "knives".
They used bombs in the Columbine massacre also.
In fact...
48 -- Carbon Dioxide bombs
27 -- Pipe bombs
11 -- 1.5 gallon propane bombs
7 -- gas or napalm bombs
2 -- 20 pound propane bombs


Yet you agree bombs should be controled/illegal?

Fuck that, you can peel the bombs from my cold dead hands!
oldAFI
Posts
754
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
6/11/2014 2:43pm
oldAFI wrote:
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal...
With a gun, a person can kill many people very quickly and easily. Takes guns out of the equation and suddenly the 'massacres' aren't as fatal.

A psycho kid running around a school with a knife will need more time and effort to kill than the kid with the guns.
Racer92 wrote:
Take away guns and mass killings cant happen? Remember that kook putting poison in Tylenol years ago? Or the idiots mailing anthrax? What if a wackjob...
Take away guns and mass killings cant happen? Remember that kook putting poison in Tylenol years ago? Or the idiots mailing anthrax? What if a wackjob tosses Sarin gas down a subway tunnel? Dumps cyanide in a water supply? A disgruntled taxpayer bent on getting back at the IRS in a single engine plane. Or a space-cadet who decides to drive a rental van full of fertilizer next to an Oklahoma office building and blow it up. Maybe just a few radical religious nutjobs with a box cutters decide to take down a few sky scrapers?

Yep, guns are the problem, not mentally defective humans.
I'm not saying "mass killings can't happen", just that they're are harder and less convenient to carry out.

And it's not like people in the hood are blowing each other up, but they're shooting the shit outta each other with the very guns y'all love so much.
6/11/2014 2:43pm
Titan1 wrote:
There are more of these events because it is a by-product of the reduced morals in our society. The solution to these shootings is in the...
There are more of these events because it is a by-product of the reduced morals in our society.

The solution to these shootings is in the homes of each and every American...with parents that love, and teach, and encourage their children (well adjusted, well parented children aren't doing these things).

Want to fix America? Start in the home...the home is the most basic and fundamental unit of our society...a bunch of homes make a neighborhood, a bunch of neighborhoods make a community, several communities make a city, cities make counties, counties make states, and states make our nation.

Trying to fix our nations problems at the national level is only treating the symptoms...same with the state, county and city levels...you are just treating the symptoms of the problem...to address the actual problem, you have to fix the family.
^^^^most common sense post so far!^^^
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/11/2014 2:48pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 2:53pm
oldAFI wrote:
Yet you agree bombs should be controled/illegal?

Fuck that, you can peel the bombs from my cold dead hands!
$200 tax stamp and you can make a destruction device...here in the USA.
Without any hassle.

Hell,you can go buy stuff at a store and make them - no background check needed.
Maybe we need crock-pot control & control all the ingredients?
But let's not blame the crazy person plotting & planning the attack.
Let's blame the crock-pot & ingredients.

I took guns out of the equation.
Still many fatalities.
I blame peoples actions- not the objects.





smeg
Posts
1096
Joined
2/13/2011
Location
Washington, DC, USA
6/11/2014 3:01pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 3:07pm
Titan1 wrote:
But it still doesn't solve the problem...will it make the headlines less shocking? Sure (Instead of 10 dead, including the shooter...its 3 dead and 10 injured)...but...
But it still doesn't solve the problem...will it make the headlines less shocking? Sure (Instead of 10 dead, including the shooter...its 3 dead and 10 injured)...but there is still a psycho kid trying to kill a people with a lethal object. Why are the libs only concerned with reducing the shock value of the headlines, rather than actually solving the problem?
So then by making that post you admit that removing guns from the equation would lower the death rate in these mass killings by 70%, correct?

I saw in another post somebody quoted a number of I think it was 289 people that have been killed in these mass killings of late. So we rounded up to an even 300, and by your admission in your post instead of 300 Dead it would only be 90.

There were 20 elementary school children killed at Newtown. According to you without guns it would have only been six. While still tragic they would be 14 children alive today but they are not. They were shot dead in their school.
FastEddy
Posts
14815
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
💀, FL, USA
6/11/2014 3:05pm Edited Date/Time 6/11/2014 3:10pm
oldAFI wrote:
I'm not saying "mass killings can't happen", just that they're are harder and less convenient to carry out. And it's not like people in the hood...
I'm not saying "mass killings can't happen", just that they're are harder and less convenient to carry out.

And it's not like people in the hood are blowing each other up, but they're shooting the shit outta each other with the very guns y'all love so much.
" I'm not saying "mass killings can't happen", just that they're are harder and less convenient to carry out."

Actually....
Bombs aren't hard to make at all.
They even can work in a more convenient way to take out a lot of soft targets.


Look at Oklahoma City( the most extreme case) - it wasn't anything genius.
McVeigh killed 168 people.
There wouldn't have been nearly that many casualties - if he were to use an AK or AR.
Having to go through the building & negotiate anything in his path ect...
He wouldn't have been able to walk away either like he did.


As for the shootings in the hood.
There's lot's of other ways people get murdered also in the hood.
Again I blame the peoples actions - not the objects.

Post a reply to: Another school shooting in the NW

The Latest