Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Benny B on December 15, 2012, 08:12:39 PM
-
Yes, We Should Politicize the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRZg4CHywQN4bklL5bbdVBI5_qDOCmXoEcRFdmsDvY_OJSo8nObg)
In Newtown, Connecticut yesterday, the United States’ culture of violence flared up yet again in an especially tragic and gruesome way when Adam Lanza reportedly shot and killed 27 people, including 20 children and his mother, and killed himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School. According to a comprehensive report by Mother Jones magazine, this killing rampage is just the latest of more than 60 mass killings that have occurred throughout the nation since the early 1980s. And while high profile, mass killings account for only a small portion of total firearm homicides in the US, which numbered more than 11,500 in 2009.
Whenever a heinous murder spree like the one in Connecticut yesterday occurs, gun rights activists offer two responses. The first is to argue that killings like these could have been prevented if there were more guns in our society. For example, Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, responded to the Newtown tragedy by stating that:
Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun.
This view that the solution to gun violence is more guns is a common one among gun fanatics – for example, the Republican-controlled legislature in Michigan on Thursday passed a law, which Governor Rick Snyder (R-MI) is still evaluating, that would allow concealed weapons in bars, schools, child-care centers, colleges, hospitals, and places of worship. It is also a view that is flatly wrong. While it is hypothetically possible that a teacher could have stopped the shooting in Newtown if he or she had been armed, the far more likely result if multiple people in such a situation are armed is a shootout that could lead to even more deaths and mayhem. And a wide array of scientific research bears that point out, by demonstrating that the higher the number of guns in a society, the higher the number of firearm homicides.
The second major response to mass killings offered by gun rights activists is to try to squelch any discussion of guns in the wake of the killing by claiming that we should not “politicize” the situation by talking about guns at a time when families and the nation are mourning the victims of yet another shooting. But this response is utter poppycock. To “politicize” something means to make it “political” which, in turn, means simply that the issue relates to or deals with the affairs of government, politics, or the state. The death of 27 people, including 20 children, at the hands of an individual who was able to obtain weapons better suited for military or police work is already an issue that relates to or deals with affairs of government or the state. In fact, as Ezra Klein has pointed out, gun rights activists are themselves politicizing the issue by trying to prevent a discussion of gun laws in order to preserve the status quo of little regulation of gun possession. And gun control advocates can only change that status quo if they treat this as the political issue it is. If anything, using the Newtown massacre to help get stricter gun legislation passed so that schoolchildren will be less likely to be killed by a firearm would demonstrate a compassionate understanding of the situation, not an inappropriate politicization of an already political tragedy.
To the gun rights activists who offer spurious claims of politicization to argue that now is not the time to discuss our nation’s gun laws, Winning Progressive asks when is the right time to discuss these issues?
- If the firearm killing of 27 people, including 20 children, is not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and killing of six others was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of eight people in a salon in Seal Beach, California in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of five people in an IHOP in Carson City, Nevada in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of seven people at Oikos University in Oakland, California earlier this year was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the killing of twelve people and injuring of fifty-eight people in a shooting spree in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting deaths of 11,500 people nationwide in 2009 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of 33 people and injuring of 23 people at Virginia Tech in 2007 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
While gun rights fanatics may not be able to answer these questions, Winning Progressive believes that the time to discuss and strengthen our nation’s gun laws is now. Such laws should be based on the core principal that with the right to bear arms comes responsibility to make sure that guns are used safely, that they do not fall into the wrong hands, and that ownership of the most powerful weapons that are clearly meant for little else than killing people is restricted or forbidden. Consistent with that core principal, we need common sense gun legislation that reinstates the assault weapon ban, fixes the gun checks system, closes the gun show loophole, bans ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds, and makes it easier for police to trace guns that are used in a crime and to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers.
In order to get such common sense gun control legislation passed, we must all raise our voices in demanding government action gun control. You can help do that by:
- Contacting President Obama - 202-456-1111 – and urging him to show leadership on the issue of gun control
- Write a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of common sense gun control laws
- Support the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, both of which are working to establish sensible gun control laws in the US
-
Sorry Benny, no.
-
Great Great Grandpa used say the best way to politicize slavery as a viable economic interest is to buy low and sell high.
-
Unfortunately Gun Nutters couldn't give a flying FUCK about anyone else but themselves - this is the PROBLEM! Normal people make sacrifices to provide a safe and secure community, GUN NUTTERS never will!
-
Great Great Grandpa used to say that birds would fly upside down when they would fly over the slaves in the field because their wasn`t one worth shitting on. Great Great Grandpa had a way with words you could say.
-
Unfortunately Gun Nutters couldn't give a flying FUCK about anyone else but themselves - this is the PROBLEM! Normal people make sacrifices to provide a safe and secure community, GUN NUTTERS never will!
She was murdered by her own son. I don't think a gun was the thing that made that whole murder possible. ::)
Stupid pic.
-
Unfortunately Gun Nutters couldn't give a flying FUCK about anyone else but themselves - this is the PROBLEM! Normal people make sacrifices to provide a safe and secure community, GUN NUTTERS never will!
How do you know she wasn't killed trying to keep her fully legal guns away from her obviously sick son?
She could have died heroically for all we know.
-
BennyB
not surprised you
are against
guns you are
against most
rights
-
How do you know she wasn't killed trying to keep her fully legal guns away from her obviously sick son?
She could have died heroically for all we know.
Luckily for Grandpa, he was already born a hero.
-
Simple fact.. Guns are not gong away.. Even if you did the impossible the "bad guys" would still have them without a way of tracing it.. Another fact that he FBI even agrees wih in statistics is that if concealed carry would have been used by any one of the teachers it may have been a short day for the asshole.. So since guns are not going by by we need armed guards at every school period.. We also need to remember that this guy used not a assault rifle by pistols.. These are not even on the radar..
-
Luckily for Grandpa, he was already born a hero.
I'm not sure I get the reference?
-
Yes, We Should Politicize the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRZg4CHywQN4bklL5bbdVBI5_qDOCmXoEcRFdmsDvY_OJSo8nObg)
In Newtown, Connecticut yesterday, the United States’ culture of violence flared up yet again in an especially tragic and gruesome way when Adam Lanza reportedly shot and killed 27 people, including 20 children and his mother, and killed himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School. According to a comprehensive report by Mother Jones magazine, this killing rampage is just the latest of more than 60 mass killings that have occurred throughout the nation since the early 1980s. And while high profile, mass killings account for only a small portion of total firearm homicides in the US, which numbered more than 11,500 in 2009.
Whenever a heinous murder spree like the one in Connecticut yesterday occurs, gun rights activists offer two responses. The first is to argue that killings like these could have been prevented if there were more guns in our society. For example, Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, responded to the Newtown tragedy by stating that:
Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun.
This view that the solution to gun violence is more guns is a common one among gun fanatics – for example, the Republican-controlled legislature in Michigan on Thursday passed a law, which Governor Rick Snyder (R-MI) is still evaluating, that would allow concealed weapons in bars, schools, child-care centers, colleges, hospitals, and places of worship. It is also a view that is flatly wrong. While it is hypothetically possible that a teacher could have stopped the shooting in Newtown if he or she had been armed, the far more likely result if multiple people in such a situation are armed is a shootout that could lead to even more deaths and mayhem. And a wide array of scientific research bears that point out, by demonstrating that the higher the number of guns in a society, the higher the number of firearm homicides.
The second major response to mass killings offered by gun rights activists is to try to squelch any discussion of guns in the wake of the killing by claiming that we should not “politicize” the situation by talking about guns at a time when families and the nation are mourning the victims of yet another shooting. But this response is utter poppycock. To “politicize” something means to make it “political” which, in turn, means simply that the issue relates to or deals with the affairs of government, politics, or the state. The death of 27 people, including 20 children, at the hands of an individual who was able to obtain weapons better suited for military or police work is already an issue that relates to or deals with affairs of government or the state. In fact, as Ezra Klein has pointed out, gun rights activists are themselves politicizing the issue by trying to prevent a discussion of gun laws in order to preserve the status quo of little regulation of gun possession. And gun control advocates can only change that status quo if they treat this as the political issue it is. If anything, using the Newtown massacre to help get stricter gun legislation passed so that schoolchildren will be less likely to be killed by a firearm would demonstrate a compassionate understanding of the situation, not an inappropriate politicization of an already political tragedy.
To the gun rights activists who offer spurious claims of politicization to argue that now is not the time to discuss our nation’s gun laws, Winning Progressive asks when is the right time to discuss these issues?
- If the firearm killing of 27 people, including 20 children, is not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and killing of six others was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of eight people in a salon in Seal Beach, California in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of five people in an IHOP in Carson City, Nevada in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of seven people at Oikos University in Oakland, California earlier this year was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the killing of twelve people and injuring of fifty-eight people in a shooting spree in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting deaths of 11,500 people nationwide in 2009 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of 33 people and injuring of 23 people at Virginia Tech in 2007 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
While gun rights fanatics may not be able to answer these questions, Winning Progressive believes that the time to discuss and strengthen our nation’s gun laws is now. Such laws should be based on the core principal that with the right to bear arms comes responsibility to make sure that guns are used safely, that they do not fall into the wrong hands, and that ownership of the most powerful weapons that are clearly meant for little else than killing people is restricted or forbidden. Consistent with that core principal, we need common sense gun legislation that reinstates the assault weapon ban, fixes the gun checks system, closes the gun show loophole, bans ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds, and makes it easier for police to trace guns that are used in a crime and to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers.
In order to get such common sense gun control legislation passed, we must all raise our voices in demanding government action gun control. You can help do that by:
- Contacting President Obama - 202-456-1111 – and urging him to show leadership on the issue of gun control
- Write a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of common sense gun control laws
- Support the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, both of which are working to establish sensible gun control laws in the US
Dumbass liberal robot Benny, you wait until incident has calmed down when.its not a knee jerk reaction. Personally, if some of those teachers would have been armed, this might not have happend.Or at least minimize the fatalities. Yeah, dummy. Take our guns....
-
guns are a sign of weakness
-
Simple fact.. Guns are not gong away.. Even if you did the impossible the "bad guys" would still have them without a way of tracing it.. Another fact that he FBI even agrees wih in statistics is that if concealed carry would have been used by any one of the teachers it may have been a short day for the asshole.. So since guns are not going by by we need armed guards at every school period.. We also need to remember that this guy used not a assault rifle by pistols.. These are not even on the radar..
So instead of getting crazy people help, we should keep innocent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves?
Should we ban airplanes so that crazy people don't fly them into buildings anymore?
-
true.
-
guns are a sign of weakness
If someone come through my sons.bedroom window in the middle of the night and I blow hos head clean off, then call me weak.
-
If someone come through my sons.bedroom window in the middle of the night and I blow hos head clean off, then call me weak.
Grandpa got a few medals for doing just that, only they didn`t come through the window in the middle of the night. They were Japs coming over the hill at Guadalcanal. Grandpa still smiled when he told of the time he made an ascott out of a dead Japs uniform.
-
Hockey.. Of course mentally Ill people need help.. Don't know where ya got that.. But guess what? This particular nut job was not on anyone's radar.. Can't offer help if no one, even his family, thought it was not a issue.. So I am a bit confused by your response.. We are talking about guns..
-
Grandpa got a few medals for doing just that, only they didn`t come through the window in the middle of the night. They were Japs coming over the hill at Guadalcanal. Grandpa still smiled when he told of the time he made an ascott out of a dead Japs uniform.
You do what you gotta do to protect your family and country.
-
guns are a sign of weakness
WOOO
so is
alcoholism
-
Hockey.. Of course mentally Ill people need help.. Don't know where ya got that.. But guess what? This particular nut job was not on anyone's radar.. Can't offer help if no one, even his family, thought it was not a issue.. So I am a bit confused by your response.. We are talking about guns..
People killed before guns were ever invented. Guns themselves have no intention or motive. Focus on the underlying issue here, a maniac was hell bent on attacking and killing the softest target he could find.
Banning guns only makes them illegal, it does not make them impossible to get.
-
People killed before guns were ever invented. Guns themselves have no intention or motive. Focus on the underlying issue here, a maniac was hell bent on attacking and killing the softest target he could find.
Banning guns only makes them illegal, it does not make them impossible to get.
Great Great Grandpa once had to stop a runaway from the plantation with a pitchfork. Apparently he used too much force and then said, "Oh well, I will just buy another one". To this day, Pitchforks are still legal.
-
Great Great Grandpa once had to stop a runaway from the plantation with a pitchfork. Apparently he used too much force and then said, "Oh well, I will just buy another one". To this day, Pitchforks are still legal.
It would appear that you come from an exceptional family lineage.
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?
Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?
Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
???
-
Here's another shocker for you, the secret vigilante again failed to emerge. He or she is about 0 for 30 in the last shooting sprees.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Man-fires-some-50-shots-at-Calif-mall-parking-lot-4121603.php
Keep arguing for more guns, though. For every thousand dead, five are saved, so it's totally worth it.
-
Here's another shocker for you, the secret vigilante again failed to emerge. He or she is about 0 for 30 in the last shooting sprees.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Man-fires-some-50-shots-at-Calif-mall-parking-lot-4121603.php
Keep arguing for more guns, though. For every thousand dead, five are saved, so it's totally worth it.
You live in a rural area. The nearest law Enforcement is 20 miles away. Someone has just splintered your door and is coming in your house. What are you supposed to do?
-
garebear
didnt you run
away to china
because of the
acusation of
touching underage
kids
-
Here's another shocker for you, the secret vigilante again failed to emerge. He or she is about 0 for 30 in the last shooting sprees.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Man-fires-some-50-shots-at-Calif-mall-parking-lot-4121603.php
Keep arguing for more guns, though. For every thousand dead, five are saved, so it's totally worth it.
You live in a rural area. The nearest law Enforcement is 20 miles away. Someone has just splintered your door and is coming in your house. What are you supposed to do?
1. Die?
2. Krav Maga?
3. Hide in Closet?
4. try to run?
-
Here's another shocker for you, the secret vigilante again failed to emerge. He or she is about 0 for 30 in the last shooting sprees.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Man-fires-some-50-shots-at-Calif-mall-parking-lot-4121603.php
Keep arguing for more guns, though. For every thousand dead, five are saved, so it's totally worth it.
Hey genius, that happend about 10 miles from my house. Because of the dumbass liberal bureaucracy, do you realize how hard it is to get a consealed weapons permit in this God forsaken state?
-
You live in a rural area. The nearest law Enforcement is 20 miles away. Someone has just splintered your door and is coming in your house. What are you supposed to do?
1. Die?
2. Krav Maga?
3. Hide in Closet?
4. try to run?
Are you drinking?
-
Are you drinking?
Answer his question.
-
Are you drinking?
Nope. I just ate a bacon sandwich with some orange juice though. Answer the goddamn question.
-
Funny when urban crime waves occur it's always society fault, when a white does it - blame the gun.
F off ghetto slug.
Yes, We Should Politicize the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRZg4CHywQN4bklL5bbdVBI5_qDOCmXoEcRFdmsDvY_OJSo8nObg)
In Newtown, Connecticut yesterday, the United States’ culture of violence flared up yet again in an especially tragic and gruesome way when Adam Lanza reportedly shot and killed 27 people, including 20 children and his mother, and killed himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School. According to a comprehensive report by Mother Jones magazine, this killing rampage is just the latest of more than 60 mass killings that have occurred throughout the nation since the early 1980s. And while high profile, mass killings account for only a small portion of total firearm homicides in the US, which numbered more than 11,500 in 2009.
Whenever a heinous murder spree like the one in Connecticut yesterday occurs, gun rights activists offer two responses. The first is to argue that killings like these could have been prevented if there were more guns in our society. For example, Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, responded to the Newtown tragedy by stating that:
Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun.
This view that the solution to gun violence is more guns is a common one among gun fanatics – for example, the Republican-controlled legislature in Michigan on Thursday passed a law, which Governor Rick Snyder (R-MI) is still evaluating, that would allow concealed weapons in bars, schools, child-care centers, colleges, hospitals, and places of worship. It is also a view that is flatly wrong. While it is hypothetically possible that a teacher could have stopped the shooting in Newtown if he or she had been armed, the far more likely result if multiple people in such a situation are armed is a shootout that could lead to even more deaths and mayhem. And a wide array of scientific research bears that point out, by demonstrating that the higher the number of guns in a society, the higher the number of firearm homicides.
The second major response to mass killings offered by gun rights activists is to try to squelch any discussion of guns in the wake of the killing by claiming that we should not “politicize” the situation by talking about guns at a time when families and the nation are mourning the victims of yet another shooting. But this response is utter poppycock. To “politicize” something means to make it “political” which, in turn, means simply that the issue relates to or deals with the affairs of government, politics, or the state. The death of 27 people, including 20 children, at the hands of an individual who was able to obtain weapons better suited for military or police work is already an issue that relates to or deals with affairs of government or the state. In fact, as Ezra Klein has pointed out, gun rights activists are themselves politicizing the issue by trying to prevent a discussion of gun laws in order to preserve the status quo of little regulation of gun possession. And gun control advocates can only change that status quo if they treat this as the political issue it is. If anything, using the Newtown massacre to help get stricter gun legislation passed so that schoolchildren will be less likely to be killed by a firearm would demonstrate a compassionate understanding of the situation, not an inappropriate politicization of an already political tragedy.
To the gun rights activists who offer spurious claims of politicization to argue that now is not the time to discuss our nation’s gun laws, Winning Progressive asks when is the right time to discuss these issues?
- If the firearm killing of 27 people, including 20 children, is not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and killing of six others was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of eight people in a salon in Seal Beach, California in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of five people in an IHOP in Carson City, Nevada in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of seven people at Oikos University in Oakland, California earlier this year was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the killing of twelve people and injuring of fifty-eight people in a shooting spree in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the shooting deaths of 11,500 people nationwide in 2009 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of 33 people and injuring of 23 people at Virginia Tech in 2007 was not the right time to discuss gun laws, when is?
While gun rights fanatics may not be able to answer these questions, Winning Progressive believes that the time to discuss and strengthen our nation’s gun laws is now. Such laws should be based on the core principal that with the right to bear arms comes responsibility to make sure that guns are used safely, that they do not fall into the wrong hands, and that ownership of the most powerful weapons that are clearly meant for little else than killing people is restricted or forbidden. Consistent with that core principal, we need common sense gun legislation that reinstates the assault weapon ban, fixes the gun checks system, closes the gun show loophole, bans ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds, and makes it easier for police to trace guns that are used in a crime and to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers.
In order to get such common sense gun control legislation passed, we must all raise our voices in demanding government action gun control. You can help do that by:
- Contacting President Obama - 202-456-1111 – and urging him to show leadership on the issue of gun control
- Write a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of common sense gun control laws
- Support the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, both of which are working to establish sensible gun control laws in the US
-
Hey genius, that happend about 10 miles from my house. Because of the dumbass liberal bureaucracy, do you realize how hard it is to get a consealed weapons permit in this God forsaken state?
Adam Lanza's liberal upbringing caused him to become a mass murderer. We need to outlaw having children being raised by liberal teachers.
<roll eyes>
-
Times and especially guns have changed in 200 years. That should be taken into consideration for possible future legislation.
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?
Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
Wrong on so many levels.
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?
Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
Then why do police officers carry guns?
If they're not for defense, to stop a crime, or act as a deterrent, why do they have them?
-
Then why do police officers carry guns?
If they're not for defense, to stop a crime, or act as a deterrent, why do they have them?
Because they match the uniform as an accessory you silly boy!
-
http://www.examiner.com/article/after-newtown-shooting-it-s-time-to-have-that-national-conversation-on-guns
Benny - please respond to that link.
-
Because they match the uniform as an accessory you silly boy!
Uniforms are blue, Staties are brown, guns are black, that doesn't seem at all stylish. Piers Morgan will publicly display righteous indignation.
Is Sean Penn raising money for the victims yet?
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?
Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
How come these types of shootings dont happen in Texas or other states where CCW are easier to get?
-
How come these types of shootings dont happen in Texas or other states where CCW are easier to get?
Gun owners in Texas don't call 911.
-
Yeah, fuck the Constitution!
Passing more laws is a great way to solve problems. Just like when we elliminated all cocaine use by making it illegal. While we are at it we should also pass a law that makes it illegal to murder someone.
-
Guns are for PUSSIES! End of thread.
-
Yet another thread started by by Benny the Douche that he doesn't defend. Sorry libtard but you're not getting my guns. If one of those teachers had a concealed carry, alot more lives would have been saved.
-
Yet another thread started by by Benny the Douche that he doesn't defend. Sorry libtard but you're not getting my guns. If one of those teachers had a concealed carry, alot more lives would have been saved.
x2
-
Yet another thread started by by Benny the Douche that he doesn't defend. Sorry libtard but you're not getting my guns. If one of those teachers had a concealed carry, alot more lives would have been saved.
Yeah, and if the Mother of the Shooter had Guns she would also still be alive, OH WAIT! ..... :o
-
She was murdered by her own son. I don't think a gun was the thing that made that whole murder possible. ::)
Stupid pic.
fucking idiot
-
BennyB
not surprised you
are against
guns you are
against most
rights
Maddy
not surprised you
would make such
a statement
You are a complete
MORON
::)
-
Simple fact.. Guns are not gong away.. Even if you did the impossible the "bad guys" would still have them without a way of tracing it.. Another fact that he FBI even agrees wih in statistics is that if concealed carry would have been used by any one of the teachers it may have been a short day for the asshole.. So since guns are not going by by we need armed guards at every school period.. We also need to remember that this guy used not a assault rifle by pistols.. These are not even on the radar..
So...weapons training should be part of the teaching certification curriculum for elementary school teachers, and they should all have a gun holstered on their sides whilst teaching? ???
Why don't we arm the elementary school kids so that they can defend themselves if an adult is not nearby with a readily accessable firearm?
-
When are people going to give up on this childish idea that someone with the concealed weapon is going to stop these shooting sprees?Guess what - it's not happening.
I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's not happening anywhere nearly enough to be a remotely credible argument anymore. Try something else.
Quite frankly, we are dealing with a nation of dimwits.
Those of us with brains simply need to overrule these retards. Change the laws, reinstitute the assault weapons ban, and if these gun nutters don't like it, let 'em move to Colombia, South Africa, or somewhere else. Just get the fuck out of America...we can't afford these mass slaughters of innocent citizens anymore.
-
You live in a rural area. The nearest law Enforcement is 20 miles away. Someone has just splintered your door and is coming in your house. What are you supposed to do?
What's defending your home got to do with a mental case getting his hands on an assault rifle and going to the local elementary school or mall and shooting a couple dozen kids? ::)
The elf-eared Jew-boy from Bumfuck, NC once again proves what a dummy he is. ::)
No one is talking about taking away the right to keep a weapon in your home. Hell, my profile picture speaks for itself in that regard.
-
Quite frankly, we are dealing with a nation of dimwits.
Those of us with brains simply need to overrule these retards. Change the laws, reinstitute the assault weapons ban, and if these gun nutters don't like it, let 'em move to Colombia, South Africa, or somewhere else. Just get the fuck out of America...we can't afford these mass slaughters of innocent citizens anymore.
AGREED, CUE A GUN NUTTER IN 3..... 2....... 1......
-
guns are a sign of weakness
So is being Canadian. Canada..... Bwahahaha. Wait... no.... Bwahahaha.
-
fucking idiot
Right cause no one ever killed anyone w anything else you fool. Typical leftist gullible moron.
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Guns, Guns, Guns
Sultan Knish ^ | Dec 15, 2012 | Daniel Greenfield
Posted on December 16, 2012 7:32:11 AM EST by expat1000
If you're the biblically minded sort, then the trouble began when a jealous Cain clubbed Abel to death, but if you're evolutionarily minded, then it's a 'chicken and egg' question. Violence had no beginning, except perhaps in the Big Bang, it was always here, coded into the DNA. If people are just grown-up animals, more articulate versions of the creatures who eat each other's young, and sometimes their own young, there is as much use in wondering about the nature of evil as there is in trying to understand why a killer whale kills.
But debating how many devils can dance on the head of a pinhead is largely useless. We are not a particularly violent society. We are a society sheltered from violence. No one in Rwanda spends a great deal of time wondering what kind of man would murder children. They probably live next door to him. For that matter, if your neighborhood is diverse enough, you might be unfortunate enough to live next door to any number of war criminals, all the way from Eastern Europe to Asia to Africa.
The issue isn't really guns. Guns are how we misspell evil. Guns are how we avoid talking about the ugly realities of human nature while building sandcastles on the shores of utopia.
The obsession with guns, rather than machetes, stone clubs, crossbows or that impressive weapon of mass death, the longbow (just ask anyone on the French side of the Battle of Agincourt) is really the obsession with human agency. It's not about the fear of what one motivated maniac can do in a crowded place, but about the precariousness of social control that the killing sprees imply.
Mass death isn't the issue. After September 11, the same righteous folks calling for the immediate necessity of gun control were not talking about banning planes or Saudis, they were quoting statistics about how many more people die of car accidents each year than are killed by terrorists. As Stalin said, one death is a tragedy; three thousand deaths can always be minimized by comparing them to some even larger statistic.
The gun issue is the narrative. It's not about death or children; it's about control. It's about confusing object and subject. It's about guns that shoot people and people that are irrevocably tugged into pulling the trigger because society failed them, corporations programmed them and not enough kindly souls told them that they loved them.
Mostly it's about people who are sheltered from the realities of human nature trying to build a shelter big enough for everyone. A Gun Free Zone where everyone is a target and tries to live under the illusion that they aren't. A society where everyone is drawing unicorns on colored notepaper while waiting under their desks for the bomb to fall.
After every shooting there are more zero tolerance policies in schools that crack down on everything from eight-year olds making POW POW gestures with their fingers to honor students bringing Tylenol and pocket knives to school. And then another shooting happens and then another one and they wouldn't happen if we just had more zero tolerance policies for everyone and everything.
But evil just can't be controlled. Not with the sort of zero tolerance policies that confuse object with subject, which ban pocket knives and finger shootings to prevent real shootings. That brand of control isn't authority, it's authority in panic mode believing that if it imposes total zero tolerance control then there will be no more school shootings. And every time the dumb paradigm is blown to bits with another shotgun, then the rush is on to reinforce it with more total zero control tolerance.
Zero tolerance for the Second Amendment makes sense. If you ban all guns, except for those in the hands of the 708,000 police officers, the 1.5 million members of the armed forces, the countless numbers of security guards, including those who protect banks and armored cars, the bodyguards of celebrities who call for gun control, not to mention park rangers, ambulance drivers in the ghetto and any of the other people who need a gun to do their job, then you're sure to stop all shootings.
So long as none of those millions of people, or their tens of millions of kids, spouses, parents, grandchildren, girlfriends, boyfriends, roommates and anyone else who has access to them and their living spaces, carries out one of those shootings.
But this isn't really about stopping shootings; it's about controlling when they happen. It's about making sure that everyone who has a gun is in some kind of chain of command. It's about the belief that the problem isn't evil, but agency, that if we make sure that everyone who has guns is following orders, then control will be asserted and the problem will stop. Or if it doesn't stop, then at least there will be someone higher up in the chain of command to blame. Either way authority is sanctified, control or the illusion of it, maintained.
We'll never know the full number of people who were killed by Fast and Furious. We'll never know how many were killed by Obama's regime change operation in Libya, with repercussions in Mali and Syria. But everyone involved in that was following orders. There was no individual agency, just agencies. No lone gunman who just decided to go up to a school and shoot kids. There were orders to run guns to Mexico and the cartel gunmen who killed people with those guns had orders to shoot. There was nothing random or unpredictable about it. Or as the Joker put it, "Nobody panics when things go according to plan. Even if the plan is horrifying."
Gun control is the assertion that the problem is not the guns; it's the lack of a controlling authority for all those guns. It's the individual. A few million people with little sleep, taut nerves and PTSD are not a problem so long as there is someone to give them orders. A hundred million people with guns and no orders is a major problem. Historically though it's millions of people with guns who follow orders who have been more of a problem than millions of people with guns who do not.
Moral agency is individual. You can't outsource it to a government and you wouldn't want to. The bundle of impulses, the codes of character, the concepts of right and wrong, take place at the level of the individual. Organizations do not sanctify this process. They do not lift it above its fallacies, nor do they even do a very good job of keeping sociopaths and murderers from rising high enough to give orders. Organizations are the biggest guns of all, and some men and women who make Lanza look like a man of modestly murderous ambitions have had their fingers on their triggers and still do.
Gun control will not really control guns, but it will give the illusion of controlling people, and even when it fails those in authority will be able to say that they did everything that they could short of giving people the ability to defend themselves.
We live under the rule of organizers, community and otherwise, whose great faith is that the power to control men and their environment will allow them to shape their perfect state into being, and the violent acts of lone madmen are a reminder that such control is fleeting, that utopia has its tigers, and that attempting to control a problem often makes it worse by removing the natural human crowdsourced responses that would otherwise come into play.
The clamor for gun control is the cry of sheltered utopians believing that evil is a substance as finite as guns, and that getting rid of one will also get rid of the other. But evil isn't finite and guns are as finite as drugs or moonshine whiskey, which is to say that they are as finite as the human interest in having them is. And unlike whiskey or heroin, the only way to stop a man with a gun is with a gun.
People do kill people and the only way to stop people from killing people is by killing them first. To a utopian this is a moral paradox that invalidates everything, but to everyone else, it's just life in a world where evil is a reality, not just a word.
Anyone who really hankers after a world without guns would do well to try the 14th Century, the 1400 years ago or the 3400 years ago variety, which was not a nicer place for lack of guns, and the same firepower that makes it possible for one homicidal maniac to kill a dozen unarmed people, also makes it that much harder to recreate a world where one man in armor can terrify hundreds of peasants in boiled leather armed with sharp sticks.
The longbow was the first weapon to truly begin to level the playing field, putting serious firepower in the hands of a single man. In the Battle of Crecy, a few thousand English and Welsh peasants with longbows slew thousands of French knights and defeated an army of 30,000. Or as the French side described it, "It is a shame that so many French noblemen fell to men of no value." Crecy, incidentally, also saw one of the first uses of cannon.
Putting miniature cannons in the hands of every peasant made the American Revolution possible. The ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would have meant very little without an army of ordinary men armed with weapons that made them a match for the superior organization and numbers of a world power.
At the Battle of Bunker Hill, 2,400 American rebels faced down superior numbers and lost the hill, but inflicted over a 1,000 casualties, including 100 British commissioned officers killed or wounded, leading to General Clinton's observation, "A few more such victories would have shortly put an end to British dominion in America."
This was done with muskets, the weapon that gun control advocates assure us was responsible for the Second Amendment because the Founders couldn't imagine all the "truly dangerous" weapons that we have today.
And yet would Thomas Jefferson, the abiding figurehead of the Democratic Party, who famously wrote, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants", really have shuddered at the idea of peasants with assault rifles, or would he have grinned at the playing field being leveled some more?
The question is the old elemental one about government control and individual agency. And tragedies like the one that just happened take us back to the equally old question of whether individual liberty is a better defense against human evil than the entrenched organizations of government.
Do we want a society run by the flower of chivalry, who commit atrocities according to a plan for a better society, or by peasants with machine guns? The flower of chivalry can promise us a utopian world without evil, but the peasant with a machine gun promises us that we can protect ourselves from evil when it comes calling.
It isn't really guns that the gun controllers are afraid of, it's a country where individual agency is still superior to organized control, where things are unpredictable because the trains don't run on time and orders don't mean anything. But chivalry is dead. The longbow and the cannon killed it and no charge of the light brigade can bring it back. And we're better for it.
Evil may find heavy firepower appealing, but the firepower works both ways. A world where the peasants have assault rifles is a world where peasant no longer means a man without any rights. And while it may also mean the occasional brutal shooting spree, those sprees tend to happen in the outposts of utopia, the gun-free zones with zero tolerance for firearms. An occasional peasant may go on a killing spree, but a society where the peasants are all armed is also far more able to stop such a thing without waiting for the men-at-arms to be dispatched from the castle.
An armed society spends more time stopping evil than contemplating it. It is the disarmed society that is always contemplating it as a thing beyond its control. Helpless people must find something to think about while waiting for their lords to do something about the killing. Instead of doing something about it themselves, they blame the agency of the killer in being free to kill, rather than their own lack of agency for being unable to stop him.
-
An armed society spends more time stopping evil than contemplating it.
If this was TRUE, these tragedies wouldn't occur.
An armed society like USA is an incredibly violent and terrifying society, where mass murders happen on a regular basis, unlike unarmed societies.
People who believe the PRO GUN argument are seriously DELUSIONAL! NOT TO MENTION SOCIOPATHIC!
-
Right cause no one ever killed anyone w anything else you fool. Typical leftist gullible moron.
Well I would bet this kid would have never done anything like this without access to a gun. Its a lot less impersonal pulling a trigger than it is sticking a knife into someone's guts.
I would bet this nerdy little kid would have continued to be a messed up, angry at the world individual but powerless to do anything about it if he never had access to a firearm.
-
Well I would bet this kid would have never done anything like this without access to a gun. Its a lot less impersonal pulling a trigger than it is sticking a knife into someone's guts.
I would bet this nerdy little kid would have continued to be a messed up, angry at the world individual but powerless to do anything about it if he never had access to a firearm.
This nut might have rigged the place2bombs.
-
This nut might have rigged the place2bombs.
Yep, that happens all the time.
Or maybe shootings happen all the time.
Oh well, who's counting?
-
What's defending your home got to do with a mental case getting his hands on an assault rifle and going to the local elementary school or mall and shooting a couple dozen kids? ::)
The elf-eared Jew-boy from Bumfuck, NC once again proves what a dummy he is. ::)
No one is talking about taking away the right to keep a weapon in your home. Hell, my profile picture speaks for itself in that regard.
You take away our guns (ban) shoeshine, you take away our right to defend our life and property.
-
Right cause no one ever killed anyone w anything else you fool. Typical leftist gullible moron.
How many mass murders have taken place in America by a man wielding a knife or a hammer? ::)
Damn, you are fucking stupid. Typical right wing anti-intellectual idiot who ensures that things will not change until we overrule you stupid motherfuckers.
22 kids, 1 adult hurt in China school knife attack
posted: 12/15/2012
CHRISTOPHER BODEEN Associated Press
BEIJING - A knife-wielding man injured 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes Friday, police said, the latest in a series of periodic rampage attacks at Chinese schools and kindergartens.
The attack in the Henan province village of Chengping happened shortly before 8 a.m., said a police officer from Guangshan county, where the village is located.
The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.
A Guangshan county hospital administrator said the man first attacked an elderly woman, then students, before being subdued by security guards who have been posted across China following a spate of school attacks in recent years. He said there were no deaths among the nine students admitted, although two badly injured children had been transferred to better-equipped hospitals outside the county.
A doctor at Guangshan's hospital of traditional Chinese medicine said that seven students had been admitted, but that none were seriously injured.
Neither the hospital administrator nor the doctor would give his name.
It was not clear how old the injured children were, but Chinese primary school pupils are generally 6-11 years old.
A notice posted on the Guangshan county government's website confirmed the number of injured and said an emergency response team had been set up to investigate the attacks.
No motive was given for the stabbings, which echo a string of similar assaults against schoolchildren in 2010 that killed nearly 20 and wounded more than 50. The most recent such attack took place in August, when a knife-wielding man broke into a middle school in the southern city of Nanchang and stabbed two students before fleeing.
Most of the attackers have been mentally disturbed men involved in personal disputes or unable to adjust to the rapid pace of social change in China, underscoring grave weaknesses in the antiquated Chinese medical system's ability to diagnose and treat psychiatric illness.
In one of the worst incidents, a man described as an unemployed, middle-aged doctor killed eight children with a knife in March 2010 to vent his anger over a thwarted romantic relationship.
-
How many mass murders have taken place in America by a man wielding a knife or a hammer? ::)
Damn, you are fucking stupid. Typical right wing anti-intellectual idiot who ensures that things will not change until we overrule you stupid motherfuckers.
22 kids, 1 adult hurt in China school knife attack
posted: 12/15/2012
CHRISTOPHER BODEEN Associated Press
BEIJING - A knife-wielding man injured 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes Friday, police said, the latest in a series of periodic rampage attacks at Chinese schools and kindergartens.
The attack in the Henan province village of Chengping happened shortly before 8 a.m., said a police officer from Guangshan county, where the village is located.
The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.
A Guangshan county hospital administrator said the man first attacked an elderly woman, then students, before being subdued by security guards who have been posted across China following a spate of school attacks in recent years. He said there were no deaths among the nine students admitted, although two badly injured children had been transferred to better-equipped hospitals outside the county.
A doctor at Guangshan's hospital of traditional Chinese medicine said that seven students had been admitted, but that none were seriously injured.
Neither the hospital administrator nor the doctor would give his name.
It was not clear how old the injured children were, but Chinese primary school pupils are generally 6-11 years old.
A notice posted on the Guangshan county government's website confirmed the number of injured and said an emergency response team had been set up to investigate the attacks.
No motive was given for the stabbings, which echo a string of similar assaults against schoolchildren in 2010 that killed nearly 20 and wounded more than 50. The most recent such attack took place in August, when a knife-wielding man broke into a middle school in the southern city of Nanchang and stabbed two students before fleeing.
Most of the attackers have been mentally disturbed men involved in personal disputes or unable to adjust to the rapid pace of social change in China, underscoring grave weaknesses in the antiquated Chinese medical system's ability to diagnose and treat psychiatric illness.
In one of the worst incidents, a man described as an unemployed, middle-aged doctor killed eight children with a knife in March 2010 to vent his anger over a thwarted romantic relationship.
China is a shit hole.
-
China is a shit hole.
Like you've ever been to China, or anywhere else outside of Bumfuck, NC. ::) You know nothing of what you speak.
-
;)
-
;)
Lol.
-
McVeigh anyone?
How many mass murders have taken place in America by a man wielding a knife or a hammer? ::)
Damn, you are fucking stupid. Typical right wing anti-intellectual idiot who ensures that things will not change until we overrule you stupid motherfuckers.
22 kids, 1 adult hurt in China school knife attack
posted: 12/15/2012
CHRISTOPHER BODEEN Associated Press
BEIJING - A knife-wielding man injured 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes Friday, police said, the latest in a series of periodic rampage attacks at Chinese schools and kindergartens.
The attack in the Henan province village of Chengping happened shortly before 8 a.m., said a police officer from Guangshan county, where the village is located.
The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.
A Guangshan county hospital administrator said the man first attacked an elderly woman, then students, before being subdued by security guards who have been posted across China following a spate of school attacks in recent years. He said there were no deaths among the nine students admitted, although two badly injured children had been transferred to better-equipped hospitals outside the county.
A doctor at Guangshan's hospital of traditional Chinese medicine said that seven students had been admitted, but that none were seriously injured.
Neither the hospital administrator nor the doctor would give his name.
It was not clear how old the injured children were, but Chinese primary school pupils are generally 6-11 years old.
A notice posted on the Guangshan county government's website confirmed the number of injured and said an emergency response team had been set up to investigate the attacks.
No motive was given for the stabbings, which echo a string of similar assaults against schoolchildren in 2010 that killed nearly 20 and wounded more than 50. The most recent such attack took place in August, when a knife-wielding man broke into a middle school in the southern city of Nanchang and stabbed two students before fleeing.
Most of the attackers have been mentally disturbed men involved in personal disputes or unable to adjust to the rapid pace of social change in China, underscoring grave weaknesses in the antiquated Chinese medical system's ability to diagnose and treat psychiatric illness.
In one of the worst incidents, a man described as an unemployed, middle-aged doctor killed eight children with a knife in March 2010 to vent his anger over a thwarted romantic relationship.
-
;)
LOL
-
The two biggest mass murders in America have been committed by a bomb and by some box cutters and planes.
How many ppl die in alcohol related incidents every year, why are you bleeding heart morons ranting and raving about banning alcohol?
Im guessing b/c you were brought up to believe guns are scary and a bottle of alcohol is perfectly normal.
-
LOL
I need to resize it so you guys can post it elsewhere. I thought of it this morning in bed. ;D
-
The two biggest mass murders in America have been committed by a bomb and by some box cutters and planes.
How many ppl die in alcohol related incidents every year, why are you bleeding heart morons ranting and raving about banning alcohol?
Im guessing b/c you were brought up to believe guns are scary and a bottle of alcohol is perfectly normal.
if alcohol were banned i might go on a killing spree
-
You know I laugh at all the pseudo intellectual types here who don't even realize what the right to keep and bare arms was originally meant for, or why people staunchly defend it... especially the hippy go free frees... and the fucking foreign experts on the US constitution.
American citizens have the RIGHT to own a gun, not to defend against some knucklehead breaking into your house (although effective) or to be a doomsday prepper. We have the RIGHT to arms to defend against our OWN government. It was created to keep America from ever falling under dictator or despot rule you fucking morons. Why do you think the libs want to take them away? So when they oppress with all the... no eating fat... no care for the elderly (too expensive) etc. WE CAN'T FUCKING FIGHT BACK AND OVERTHROW THEIR ASSES.
That is it. Period. No other reason at all. If you don't know this go find out for yourself the original intent... and then go fuck yourself with your gun control.
-
This tragedy will fuel the debate and sway people to want to ban guns.
The arguments will be:
if the guns aren't easily accessible then the impulse will pass. Such as the Kansas City shooting.
Manufacturing and planting a bomb takes longer and is hard to pull off with out getting discovered.
Allowing schools to have guns only increases the chance of a nut job accessing them.
_____________
What we will likely see is a serious legit push for an assault gun ban
Armed security guards at schools
And prison like chain link fenses and highly controlled entry points to schools.
-
Great Great Grandpa once said the best idea would be to ban the Emancipation Proclamation, that way the animals could be put back to work.
-
I need to resize it so you guys can post it elsewhere. I thought of it this morning in bed. ;D
Yeah funny irony
-
Great Great Grandpa once said the best idea would be to ban the Emancipation Proclamation, that way the animals could be put back to work.
I think someone hacked True Assdanus' account. He's on the right side of this debate which... never... happens... ever.
-
I think someone hacked True Assdanus' account. He's on the right side of this debate which... never... happens... ever.
Not true. I am usually correct on things. I let the facts and evidence dictate for the most logical assessment and response. I am not beholden to anything but the truth.
-
You know I laugh at all the pseudo intellectual types here who don't even realize what the right to keep and bare arms was originally meant for, or why people staunchly defend it... especially the hippy go free frees... and the fucking foreign experts on the US constitution.
American citizens have the RIGHT to own a gun, not to defend against some knucklehead breaking into your house (although effective) or to be a doomsday prepper. We have the RIGHT to arms to defend against our OWN government. It was created to keep America from ever falling under dictator or despot rule you fucking morons. Why do you think the libs want to take them away? So when they oppress with all the... no eating fat... no care for the elderly (too expensive) etc. WE CAN'T FUCKING FIGHT BACK AND OVERTHROW THEIR ASSES.
That is it. Period. No other reason at all. If you don't know this go find out for yourself the original intent... and then go fuck yourself with your gun control.
Shamelessly moving this to the current page due to the importance of the knowledge possessed in this post. Fuck off.
-
You know I laugh at all the pseudo intellectual types here who don't even realize what the right to keep and bare arms was originally meant for, or why people staunchly defend it... especially the hippy go free frees... and the fucking foreign experts on the US constitution.
American citizens have the RIGHT to own a gun, not to defend against some knucklehead breaking into your house (although effective) or to be a doomsday prepper. We have the RIGHT to arms to defend against our OWN government. It was created to keep America from ever falling under dictator or despot rule you fucking morons. Why do you think the libs want to take them away? So when they oppress with all the... no eating fat... no care for the elderly (too expensive) etc. WE CAN'T FUCKING FIGHT BACK AND OVERTHROW THEIR ASSES.
That is it. Period. No other reason at all. If you don't know this go find out for yourself the original intent... and then go fuck yourself with your gun control.
Thick Nick, knocking it out of the park.
-
Not true. I am usually correct on things. I let the facts and evidence dictate for the most logical assessment and response. I am not beholden to anything but the truth.
Your support of the crack monkey in the White House would suggest otherwise. Ask granpapa how he feels about it.
-
Your support of the crack monkey in the White House would suggest otherwise. Ask granpapa how he feels about it.
The alternative was worse. :-\
-
The alternative was worse. :-\
I disagree, but honestly only very little.
-
_____________
What we will likely see is a serious legit push for an assault gun ban
I know and this pisses me off, there wasn't even an assault weapon used in this shooting. It was handguns. Shit like that irritates me.
-
Handgrenades should be alloved as well.
More damage and more death.
-
Handgrenades should be alloved as well.
More damage and more death.
I see what you did there... Go find one, pull the pin, and jump on top of it to save everyone else around. And....
Fuck off.
-
I know and this pisses me off, there wasn't even an assault weapon used in this shooting. It was handguns. Shit like that irritates me.
Assault weapons account for something like 0.05% of crimes.
-
I know and this pisses me off, there wasn't even an assault weapon used in this shooting. It was handguns. Shit like that irritates me.
Interesting HANDGUN
(http://www.wggb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/weapons-6.jpg)
-
Interesting HANDGUN
(http://www.wggb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/weapons-6.jpg)
It was reported that he used a Glock and a Sig pistol. How in the fuck is he going to sneak a rifle in the door? Hmm? Im sure everyone would rush to buzz the guy in holding a rifle in plain view. The news reports said that there was an .223 rifle in the car. .223 doesn't automatically mean AR.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57559298-504083/connecticut-school-shooting-update-two-handguns-found-at-school-one-rifle-in-suspects-car/
Connecticut School Shooting Update: Two handguns found at school, one rifle in suspect's car
a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both pistols, and a .223-caliber rifle.
Pay attention next time
-
FYI E-Kul this is also a .223 rifle.
The image you posted is an M4/AR-15 SBR (short barreled rifle) - which requires a permit to own legally.
(http://molot.biz/product-e/vepr223-pioner.jpg)
-
Assault weapons account for something like 0.05% of crimes.
but they are SCAWY LOOKING!!!!!
-
How many deaths are caused by alcohol related incidents every year?
why arent the bleeding heart libtards ranting and raving about banning alcohol???
Those big bad guns are scawy loowking I know......
-
Mexico banned assault weapons (among other things). How's that working out for them? ::)
-
Mexico banned assault weapons (among other things). How's that working out for them? ::)
Not to worry - they got them instead from Obama.
-
It was reported that he used a Glock and a Sig pistol. How in the fuck is he going to sneak a rifle in the door? Hmm? Im sure everyone would rush to buzz the guy in holding a rifle in plain view. The news reports said that there was an .223 rifle in the car. .223 doesn't automatically mean AR.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57559298-504083/connecticut-school-shooting-update-two-handguns-found-at-school-one-rifle-in-suspects-car/
Connecticut School Shooting Update: Two handguns found at school, one rifle in suspect's car
a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both pistols, and a .223-caliber rifle.
Pay attention next time
All recent reports indicate a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle was the primary Weapon - Might be time to start paying attention. Getbiggers - Geeez!
"Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza used a weapon in the Bushmaster AR-15 family to shoot all of his victims at a school in a rampage that killed 20 young children and six staff members on Friday in Newtown, Connecticut, police said."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/17/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-weapon-idUSBRE8BF0KY20121217 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/17/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-weapon-idUSBRE8BF0KY20121217)
-
All recent reports indicate a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle was the primary Weapon - Might be time to start paying attention.
Did they also say how he managed to get buzzed into the school with a 2.5 foot rifle visible?
-
Did they also say how he managed to get buzzed into the school with a 2.5 foot rifle visible?
Man, do you live in the twilight zone?, nobody buzzed him in, he shot his way in! You do know the Internet is also used for News reporting and not just a tool to post on GETBIG!
-
Man, do you live in the twilight zone?, nobody buzzed him in, he shot his way in! You do know the Internet is also used for News reporting and not just a tool to post on GETBIG!
Really? You can shoot your way past a locked metal door? Why were they reporting that someone had to buzz them through the door? And that he "defeated" their new security system involving having to be let into the school?
-
Really? You can shoot your way past a locked metal door? Why were they reporting that someone had to buzz them through the door? And that he "defeated" their new security system involving having to be let into the school?
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy said the gunman shot his way through a school door "using several rounds" before beginning to kill adults and children inside! He discharged to make an opening and then went through it, went to the first classroom ... went to the second classroom.
It appears guns don't just kill people, you can use them to gain access through locked doors.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/16/obama-to-join-mourning-connecticut-families-in-search-for-answers
State Police spokesman, Lt. J. Paul Vance told reporters at a news conference. The gunman “was not voluntarily let into the school,” Vance said. “He forced his way in.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sandy-hook-school-shooting-20121215,0,5203637.story
-
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy said the gunman shot his way through a school door "using several rounds" before beginning to kill adults and children inside! He discharged to make an opening and then went through it, went to the first classroom ... went to the second classroom.
It appears guns don't just kill people, you can use them to gain access through locked doors.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/16/obama-to-join-mourning-connecticut-families-in-search-for-answers
State Police spokesman, Lt. J. Paul Vance told reporters at a news conference. The gunman “was not voluntarily let into the school,” Vance said. “He forced his way in.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sandy-hook-school-shooting-20121215,0,5203637.story
Hmm. Well I have been wrong before. I'm still skeptical, however. Especially since they were reporting that the .223 was found in the car, and then suddenly it was used in the school. If it comes out definitively, I'll admit I was wrong.
-
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy said the gunman shot his way through a school door "using several rounds" before beginning to kill adults and children inside! He discharged to make an opening and then went through it, went to the first classroom ... went to the second classroom.
It appears guns don't just kill people, you can use them to gain access through locked doors.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/16/obama-to-join-mourning-connecticut-families-in-search-for-answers
State Police spokesman, Lt. J. Paul Vance told reporters at a news conference. The gunman “was not voluntarily let into the school,” Vance said. “He forced his way in.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sandy-hook-school-shooting-20121215,0,5203637.story
The shooter also taped together two cartridge magazines to his Bushmaster .223 calibre rifle so that he could flip between the two with speed and ease, increasing his killing efficiency - to gun Nutters this is called "jungle-taping".
are you also for banning alcohol?
that kills more ppl than guns every year....
Im guessing youre not ranting and raving ignorantly about banning that though, eh?
-
I think guns should be banned in GTA V. Do you realize how many died in Liberty City due to assault weapons?
-
The shooter also taped together two cartridge magazines to his Bushmaster .223 calibre rifle so that he could flip between the two with speed and ease, increasing his killing efficiency - to gun Nutters this is called "jungle-taping".
The bullets used in the massacre were designed specifically to penetrate deep tissue and do a "devastating" amount of damage. Weapons experts believe the killer used "frangible ammunition", which fragments on impact, inflicting wounds that are usually beyond medical help.
Gotta love GUN NUTTERS!
-
are you also for banning alcohol?
that kills more ppl than guns every year....
Im guessing youre not ranting and raving ignorantly about banning that though, eh?
gotta love alcohol nutters...
-
The shooter also taped together two cartridge magazines to his Bushmaster .223 calibre rifle so that he could flip between the two with speed and ease, increasing his killing efficiency - to gun Nutters this is called "jungle-taping".
The bullets used in the massacre were designed specifically to penetrate deep tissue and do a "devastating" amount of damage. Weapons experts believe the killer used "frangible ammunition", which fragments on impact, inflicting wounds that are usually beyond medical help.
Gotta love GUN NUTTERS!
Actually, they make clips that do that without the tape. I am sure that is what he used. Stop with the Sensationalism.
-
are you also for banning alcohol?
that kills more ppl than guns every year....
Im guessing youre not ranting and raving ignorantly about banning that though, eh?
I couldn't care less if they banned alcohol, I have NEVER been a drinker, and personally I think societies would be better off without it, if they put that on the legislative table, I would vote to get rid of it for social use, personally, anything that is responsible for more HARM than GOOD I wouldn't miss for a NANOSECOND! Also, you are comparing apples and oranges! Alcohol is not created with the SOLE intent of being a Killing Tool, Guns are. Is alcohol involved in the mass murder of children, or does it just kill the people who become addicted to it and after decades of repeated usage and is in part responsible for their demise? Can alcohol by itself be used in such a manner as to suddenly kill dozens of people in a just a few minutes? Does alcohol by itself only kill the person who CHOOSES to imbibe it, or does it have no IMPACT on those who choose not to use it? Can one choose not to use alcohol and completely negate the risk that alcohol consumption presents? To compare alcohol to GUNS is the argument of a desperate RETARD!
-
I couldn't care less if they banned alcohol, I have NEVER been a drinker, and personally I think societies would be better off without it, if they put that on the legislative table, I would vote to get rid of it for social use, personally, anything that is responsible for more HARM than GOOD I wouldn't miss for a NANOSECOND! Also, you are comparing apples and oranges! Alcohol is not created with the SOLE intent of being a Killing Tool, Guns are. Is alcohol involved in the mass murder of children, or does it just kill the people who become addicted to it and after decades of repeated usage and is in part responsible for their demise? Can alcohol by itself be used in such a manner as to suddenly kill dozens of people in a just a few minutes? Does alcohol by itself only kill the person who CHOOSES to imbibe it, or does it have no IMPACT on those who choose not to use it? Can one choose not to use alcohol and completely negate the risk that alcohol consumption presents? To compare alcohol to GUNS is the argument of a desperate RETARD!
yes alcohol effects ppl that dont drink it, the ppl that are in accidents with drunk drivers.
now you cannot negate the risks of alcohol by not drinking it, see above brain child...
Alcohol kills more ppl than guns annually by far, so why isnt your bleeding heart pissing and moaning about that every day?
Absolutely alcohol can be responsible for dozens of deaths within seconds, it happens EVERY FUKING DAY MORON!!!
There are plenty of guns that arent made to kill, if you actually knew anything about guns you would know that. Alas youve been told one thing and without thought have bought into it hook line and sinker.
Big guns are scawy right?
-
Mexico banned guns. Working out well for them. The cartels have them and the citizens have nothing. Good system.
big guns make loud noises and are scawy!!!!
-
Actually, they make clips that do that without the tape. I am sure that is what he used. Stop with the Sensationalism.
Not only that, but it's not particularly effective. The most elite military units in the world don't do that shit, that's for civilians and gear queers.
Its just as fast to simply drop the mag and grab another. But it sure sounds scary!
-
I was in Sao Paulo a few weeks ago and was told that something like 200+ police officers had been killed mainly with guns within the last 3 months.
Brazil has very very strict gun laws, can some of you gun control nutters explain this?
I was actually told to not stand next to police on the street b/c you may be hurt if they are attacked.
-
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nancy-lanza-feared-son-adam-worse-article-1.1221505
Mutant. This crazy fucker was beyond nuts and insane.
-
yes alcohol effects ppl that dont drink it, the ppl that are in accidents with drunk drivers.
now you cannot negate the risks of alcohol by not drinking it, see above brain child...
Alcohol kills more ppl than guns annually by far, so why isnt your bleeding heart pissing and moaning about that every day?
Absolutely alcohol can be responsible for dozens of deaths within seconds, it happens EVERY FUKING DAY MORON!!!
There are plenty of guns that arent made to kill, if you actually knew anything about guns you would know that. Alas youve been told one thing and without thought have bought into it hook line and sinker.
Big guns are scawy right?
Alcohol on it's own doesn't kill people in road accidents, it is the combination of the two (Alcohol and driving a vehicle) - BIG DIFFERENCE!
foetuses affected by a Mothers drinking are not yet Independent Free Thinking Humans, they don't have the ability to CHOOSE the risks they take yet - BIG DIFFERENCE!
Alcohol kills those that choose to use it, not other peoples children while they are at school - BIG DIFFERENCE!
Alcohol doesn't kill in seconds (Why DO NUTTERS always twist the TRUTH to support their LIES), it takes decades and decades of continual use for it too finally have a fatal effect! BIG DIFFERENCE!
EASY access to alcohol puts individuals at risk of alcoholism own LIFE at RISK and affects their HEALTH Only!, Easy access to GUNS puts everyone life at RISK!
-
Alcohol on it's own doesn't kill people in road accidents, it is the combination of the two (Alcohol and driving a vehicle) - BIG DIFFERENCE!
foetuses affected by a Mothers drinking are not yet Independent Free Thinking Humans, they don't have the ability to CHOOSE the risks they take yet - BIG DIFFERENCE!
Alcohol kills those that choose to use it, not other peoples children while they are at school - BIG DIFFERENCE!
Alcohol doesn't kill in seconds (Why DO NUTTERS always twist the TRUTH to support their LIES), it takes decades and decades of continual use for it too finally have a fatal effect! BIG DIFFERENCE!
EASY access to alcohol puts individuals at risk of alcoholism own LIFE at RISK and affects their HEALTH Only!, Easy access to GUNS puts everyone life at RISK!
guns on their own dont kill ppl, its a combination of guns and stupid ass ppl...Same thing as alcohol and drunk drivers...
Who said anything about fetuses?
you asked if alcohol effected those that dont drink and yes it CERTAINLY FUKING DOES MORON!!!
Every year thousands of innocent ppl are killed in accidents with drunk drivers...these ppl werent drinking they were just driving and go hit by drunk drivers...SAME SHIT MORON!!!
You mean when someone gets in an accident with a drunk driver they arent killed in an instant?
Do you not know that drunk driving is an epidemic? it kills many more ppl than guns every year.
-
You can compare apples and oranges all day, it is non nonsensical. The issue is, balancing up the HARM vs GOOD ratio, and cars, planes, trains etc all serve a greater COMMUNITY purpose, they help in the transport of necessary items like food, water, medicines and many other important day to day necessities, their is an undeniable benefit to the community, their is a certain amount of predictability to the whole thing and they can continually be made SAFER through careful design, rehulation and planning initiatives. So when fatalities occur, although unfortunate, the cost is weighed against the benefit to the larger community. Citizens owning GUNS on the other hand, serve little to NO Community function, like a lot of INDIVIDUAL liberties, they are selfish and serve an Individual at the EXPENSE of the greater community, they are something that could easily be lived without and the removal of GUNS from citizens would have a greater positive effect for communities that would overcome any negatives from the process.
I remember reading a study years ago about the cost to society from noise complaints regarding neighbours, and I remember they compared people who lived alongside a railway line with those who lived next door to noisy neighbours. You would think that they would both be equally negatively impacted by the regular intrusions into their household living, but the people who lived next to the railway line were far better off, they discovered that they rationalised the situation and weighed up the community benefit that trains provide against the general annoyance they felt when hearing the trains, and also because of the predictable nature of trains and the fact they knew that the noise was short lived, it made the situation bearable, unlike the neighbour who had rowdy neighbours, it was impossible to judge when the neighbours would cause the disturbance, nor how long it would go on for, and the noise almost always served no community benefit, it was always a selfish indulgence by the neighbour. These factors, No Community benefit and Predictability were major factors on the negative impact on individuals and to the community at large (the handling of noise complaints cost a lot of money, also sometimes people were killed over it) when handling Noise Complaints.
And this is the Issue, individuals who aren't obsessed with GUNS and don't feel the need to own one, get ZERO benefit from their neighbours owning guns and mass shooting are impossible to predict (statistically, they are INEVITABLE in America) when and where they will happen next, putting the average citizen in a fearful state (this is the state GUN NUTTERS prey on, hoping that if everyone becomes afraid enough, they will finally cave in too the GUN NUTTERS and buy a GUN for so called protection, even though STATS show you are more likely to be killed during a crime if you have a gun than if you don't). The average NORMAL citizen will weigh up the benefit of something as opposed to the risk to their health when advocating for something, and the actuarial risk of individual gun ownership for citizens has now become so great, and the benefit/loss ratio so unbalanced, that the general community is now at GREAT Risk due to a selfish individual privilege granted to citizens by the Government. Communities Interests must come first for them to be SAFE, SECURE and HEALTHY, selfish Interest will always erode any Community! Time for Individuals to grow up and put their communities first, and ironically, the Individual will also prosper.
-
You can compare apples and oranges all day, it is non nonsensical. The issue is, balancing up the HARM vs GOOD ratio, and cars, planes, trains etc all serve a greater COMMUNITY purpose, they help in the transport of necessary items like food, water, medicines and many other important day to day necessities, their is an undeniable benefit to the community, their is a certain amount of predictability to the whole thing and they can continually be made SAFER through careful design, rehulation and planning initiatives. So when fatalities occur, although unfortunate, the cost is weighed against the benefit to the larger community. Citizens owning GUNS on the other hand, serve little to NO Community function, like a lot of INDIVIDUAL liberties, they are selfish and serve an Individual at the EXPENSE of the greater community, they are something that could easily be lived without and the removal of GUNS from citizens would have a greater positive effect for communities that would overcome any negatives from the process.
I remember reading a study years ago about the cost to society from noise complaints regarding neighbours, and I remember they compared people who lived alongside a railway line with those who lived next door to noisy neighbours. You would think that they would both be equally negatively impacted by the regular intrusions into their household living, but the people who lived next to the railway line were far better off, they discovered that they rationalised the situation and weighed up the community benefit that trains provide against the general annoyance they felt when hearing the trains, and also because of the predictable nature of trains and the fact they knew that the noise was short lived, it made the situation bearable, unlike the neighbour who had rowdy neighbours, it was impossible to judge when the neighbours would cause the disturbance, nor how long it would go on for, and the noise almost always served no community benefit, it was always a selfish indulgence by the neighbour. These factors, No Community benefit and Predictability were major factors on the negative impact on individuals and to the community at large (the handling of noise complaints cost a lot of money, also sometimes people were killed over it) when handling Noise Complaints.
And this is the Issue, individuals who aren't obsessed with GUNS and don't feel the need to own one, get ZERO benefit from their neighbours owning guns and mass shooting are impossible to predict (statistically, they are INEVITABLE in America) when and where they will happen next, putting the average citizen in a fearful state (this is the state GUN NUTTERS prey on, hoping that if everyone becomes afraid enough, they will finally cave in too the GUN NUTTERS and buy a GUN for so called protection, even though STATS show you are more likely to be killed during a crime if you have a gun than if you don't). The average NORMAL citizen will weigh up the benefit of something as opposed to the risk to their health when advocating for something, and the actuarial risk of individual gun ownership for citizens has now become so great, and the benefit/loss ration so unbalanced, that the general community is now at GREAT Risk due to a selfish individual privilege granted to citizens by the Government.
TL:DR: Dont care about your shitty opinion anyway.
-
TL:DR: Dont care about your shitty opinion anyway.
You summed up the attitude of the Gun Loving Apologists just Nicely!
-
You summed up the attitude of the Gun Loving Apologists just Nicely!
TL:DR
-
FIXED!
People die. Thats life. Get over it.
-
People die. Thats life. Get over it.
People stand up TOO Murderers and their accessories and all those who enable them GET OVER IT, THAT'S LIFE!
-
People stand up TOO Murderers and their accessories and all those who enable them GET OVER IT, THAT'S LIFE!
Murderers don't tend to care about laws, therefore they're going to be the only ones with firearms. See Mexico. Standing up to murderers takes someone with the heart and the ability, and you can't stand up to a murderer armed with firearms with ideals, can you?
-
Murderers don't tend to care about laws, therefore they're going to be the only ones with firearms. See Mexico. Standing up to murderers takes someone with the heart and the ability, and you can't stand up to a murderer armed with firearms with ideals, can you?
Mexico is a shit-hole run by criminals, How sad that you compare America too it! America could have been great, it has now become a country dictated too by the mentally ill and in such decline that citizens now compare it too Mexico. WTF happened to America. The rest of the first world laughs at your Blindness and denial, not to mention your weakness in overcoming the decline. Grandpa always said You can judge a man's insecurity by how tightly he clings too his guns!
-
You only have to look at alcohol and drug prohibition to know what would happen if guns were banned.
-
You only have to look at alcohol and drug prohibition to know what would happen if guns were banned.
Actually drugs should be made legal and guns banned, this would go a long way to fixing Mexico!
-
Mexico is a shit-hole run by criminals, How sad that you compare America too it! America could have been great, it has now become a country dictated too by the mentally ill and in such decline that citizens now compare it too Mexico. WTF happened to America. The rest of the first world laughs at your Blindness and denial, not to mention your weakness in overcoming the decline. Grandpa always said You can judge a man's insecurity by how tightly he clings too his guns!
The point still stands - you take the guns out of the law abiding citizens hands, and all you have left is the criminals. There are too many firearms in this country for anything you're advocating to work. It's a simple fact.
Besides, I would never give up liberty for security. Never, ever.
-
The point still stands - you take the guns out of the law abiding citizens hands, and all you have left is the criminals. There are too many firearms in this country for anything you're advocating to work. It's a simple fact.
Besides, I would never give up liberty for security. Never, ever.
It's very difficult for a citizen to get a gun in Australia, their is no GUN Culture, and in 40 years, I have never personally known anyone who owns a gun or wanted a gun for that matter, I have never seen one, never held one, never fired one, and I feel no need too. I feel safe knowing their are very little guns in households and also that the GUN NUTTERS are a minority. And guess what, NO MASS MURDERS, No school shootings no overwhelming suffering created by a GUN Culture, and guess what, yeah the Criminals will always have weapons regardless of the LAW, yet, they stick to themselves, Career Criminals shoot each other and always avoid shooting citizens. It's not the serious criminals you have to worry about, even they have a code.
You can remain in DENIAL all you like, but strict GUN regulations work, they take the easy opportunity away from a NUTTER to do mass damage in a short period of time. I have NO DOUBT that America will never change, they have gone beyond a tipping point and are now dictated too by Self interest Groups comprised of unreasonable zealots who hold sway over politics and the masses. The average American is better off throwing their arms in the air and surrendering and just get used to children being killed in Mass Murders, they have become INEVITABLE and it is only a matter of when will the next one happen. Ironically, the more Mass Killings, the more guns are sold, the more people become afraid and buy guns and the more people support gun ownership. The Gun Lobby thrives off of mass killings, they just rub their hands together knowing this will support their cause more, they want you to be afraid, very afraid, so then they can hand you a gun and say I told you so. Guns have imprisoned your country to the point where a child isn't safe to go to school, a citizen is afraid to worship or shop and your Country is the very opposite of what being FREE means. Your citizens aren't free, they are being held hostage by Gun Toting Terrorists! Best an American citizen can do is pray they aren't NEXT! How Sad
(http://assets.motherjones.com/interactives/projects/2012/12/updated-mass-shootings/charts_illegal.png)
A Mass shooting occurs every 5 days in America
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2zAFnM8vKWo/UBOG8ZWxH7I/AAAAAAAAAjU/6X-jxykooDM/s1600/ShootingsSince2005CityState.png)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TKTfvRdm7WM/UA84K28qgSI/AAAAAAAABGo/_YYjlOfD43A/s1600/Mass+shootings.jpg)
-
Whats the proper definition of a "mass shooting"?
-
(http://assets.motherjones.com/interactives/projects/2012/12/updated-mass-shootings/charts_illegal.png)
You keep missing the point. Australia is not the US. There are already countless number of firearms in illegal hands already, more than we could ever track down. With Mexico to our south, a constant flood of firearms would re-enter the country into the hands of the criminals.
It would never work here, and the only people that would get fucked are the citizens that follow the law. Why is that so hard a concept for you to grasp?
You guys are a fucking island floating in the middle of the ocean. Pretty easy to control what enters and exits when you have no neighbors. ::) And that's not even getting into the constitutional aspect of it.
-
Mexico shows that strict gun regulations do not work. Go back to whining about how all pit bulls should be killed.
90 percent of the guns used in Mexican drug crime come from the United States. Australia is a perfect example of how strict Gun Regulations work and prevent MASS SHOOTINGS! And guess what, the Government hasn't come for the people to kill them all and take away their liberty! Americans are paranoid, scared and insecure people. I feel sorry for them, they just don't know any better. It used to be ignorance is Bliss, unless your an American that is, then Ignorance becomes a prison.
-
You keep missing the point. Australia is not the US. There are already countless number of firearms in illegal hands already, more than we could ever track down. With Mexico to our south, a constant flood of firearms would re-enter the country into the hands of the criminals.
It would never work here, and the only people that would get fucked are the citizens that follow the law. Why is that so hard a concept for you to grasp?
You guys are a fucking island floating in the middle of the ocean. Pretty easy to control what enters and exits when you have no neighbors. ::) And that's not even getting into the constitutional aspect of it.
Mexico gets it's GUNS from you guys! Studies proove that owning a gun when facing a criminal is more likely to get you killed or injured, it doesn't make you safer, it makes you a target, you are more vulnerable, not less. When are you idiots going to learn that!
-
Mexico gets it's GUNS from you guys! Studies proove that owning a gun when facing a criminal is more likely to get you killed or injured, it doesn't make you safer, it makes you a target, you are more vulnerable, not less. When are you idiots going to learn that!
::)
Yes, Mexico gets it's guns from us. Actually, from our own government in many cases.
Im 100% sure that if we banned firearms, that Mexico would simply refuse to sell their illegal firearms to Americans, just like they don't sell their illegal drugs to Americans. I mean, it makes such perfect sense. ::)
We're not Australia. We'll never be Australia, unless the US somehow just manages to detach itself from Mexico and Canada. Until that day, criminals are going to have firearms.
-
::)
Yes, Mexico gets it's guns from us. Actually, from our own government in many cases.
Im 100% sure that if we banned firearms, that Mexico would simply refuse to sell their illegal firearms to Americans, just like they don't sell their illegal drugs to Americans. I mean, it makes such perfect sense. ::)
We're not Australia. We'll never be Australia, unless the US somehow just manages to detach itself from Mexico and Canada. Until that day, criminals are going to have firearms.
You have to forget about criminals, they will always disobey the law, that is why they are criminals, and the mass shootings are often perpetrated by individuals who aren't a part of the criminal justice system, they are committed by average individuals who have SNAPPED! The system needs to make it near impossible for an ordinary individual to become a mass murdering terrorist in the span of a few minutes. That should be the goal, make it hard for them, not easy. And if some people have to give up their weekends shooting at inanimate targets (a past time that makes ZERO sense too me) then, well, so be it. Surely individuals giving up the hobby of being a casual shooter is a very moderate trade off for reducing the regular mass shootings that America experiences. That seems reasonable to me, but unfortunately, Gun Nutters are very unreasonable people whose motivations seem to be incredibly self centred and not in any way could they be considered community minded (except by themselves in some skewed parallel universe inside their own imagination). If I owned a GUN and my country experienced the unimaginable suffering that the States regularly do, I would gladly destroy it myself, personally, I don't like enabling or being a part of anything that causes more harm than good, that's just a philosophical rule I live by! Anyway, FUCK the selfish GUN NUTTERS, cue the wrath of an angry GUN NUT in 3... 2 ..... 1 .........
-
There's no gun violence issue.
Your chance of being a victim of gun violence in the United States is extremely low. I don't even know why this is being discussed. I bet no one on this forum (Americans) even know anyone that's ever been shot.
The only gun violence that generally does occur from time to time is criminals killing other criminals (majority) and citizens lawfully defending themselves against criminals (once in a great while).
-
There's no gun violence issue.
Your chance of being a victim of gun violence in the United States is extremely low. I don't even know why this is being discussed. I bet no one on this forum (Americans) even know anyone that's ever been shot.
The only gun violence that generally does occur from time to time is criminals killing other criminals (majority) and citizens lawfully defending themselves against criminals (once in a great while).
Between 2006 and 2010 47,856 people were murdered in the U.S. by firearms, more than twice as many as were killed by all other means combined.
Sounds like a problem to me!
-
I just calculated it.
In the city where I live you have a 0.003076923076923077 chance (per year) of being a shot.
-
Between 2006 and 2010 47,856 people were murdered in the U.S. by firearms, more than twice as many as were killed by all other means combined.
Sounds like a problem to me!
47,856 / 4 years = 11964 / 311,591,917 (U.S. population) = 0.003839637470441828
Minute, came out the same as my locality. You have a better chance of dying in a car wreck.
Especially considering that this number is EXTREMELY skewed by criminals killing each other.
Again, this is a non-issue.
-
47,856 / 4 years = 11964 / 311,591,917 (U.S. population) = 0.003839637470441828
Minute, came out the same as my locality. You have a better chance of dying in a car wreck.
Especially considering that this number is EXTREMELY skewed by criminals killing each other.
Again, this is a non-issue.
Go tell that to the parents who buried their kids today.
Tell us how it went.
-
Go tell that to the parents who buried their kids today.
Tell us how it went.
That's the dumbest thing you've posted to date.
Wait... no it isn't
-
47,856 / 4 years
Again, this is a non-issue.
Go tell that to the parents who buried their kids today.
Tell us how it went.
Man, WOW! is the average American in general a complete sociopath, how can anyone casually dismiss 50,000 murders over 4 years as a NON ISSUE! The utter soul-lessness of the average American is Shocking! The sad thing is, they seem completely oblivious to their own selfishness, callousness and cold heartedness. The only hope for the world is if individuals care about the suffering of other people. America seems worlds away from becoming a compassionate group of individuals.
-
There's no gun violence issue.
Your chance of being a victim of gun violence in the United States is extremely low. I don't even know why this is being discussed. I bet no one on this forum (Americans) even know anyone that's ever been shot.
The only gun violence that generally does occur from time to time is criminals killing other criminals (majority) and citizens lawfully defending themselves against criminals (once in a great while).
And how many know anyone that has ever had to use a firearm to defend themselves against a criminal?
-
That's the dumbest thing you've posted to date.
Wait... no it isn't
Yours was a stupid and callous post.
As if thousand upon thousands of deaths don't matter because it doesn't affect you personally.
Did we "only" lose four thousand troops in Iraq? Oh, well, guess it doesn't really matter. Too bad military families, it's a small price to pay for the rest of us. Guess they should just suck it up, huh? We don't need to hear the whining from insignificant portions of the population.
How about you're the next one to get killed in a shooting? Hey, that's just ONE person. No biggie, right?
-
And how many know anyone that has ever had to use a firearm to defend themselves against a criminal?
The Second amendment wasn't written with common criminals or hunting in mind.
-
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRZjjKXdS9j_MjrW_SkWyNY0ri3cxpVPAWQh22XStzqad9VxDpAkCr2eqBVMA)
Shooting victim, how it happened is anyone's guess, since George is a bit of a liar and changed his story about a dozen times
-
Yours was a stupid and callous post.
As if thousand upon thousands of deaths don't matter because it doesn't affect you personally.
Did we "only" lose four thousand troops in Iraq? Oh, well, guess it doesn't really matter. Too bad military families, it's a small price to pay for the rest of us. Guess they should just suck it up, huh? We don't need to hear the whining from insignificant portions of the population.
How about you're the next one to get killed in a shooting? Hey, that's just ONE person. No biggie, right?
I live in the United States, I'm sharing that minute risk with everyone else here. It could have just as easily been me.
We pay that price.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
-
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
When a five year old child isn't safe from being murdered at school, that country has neither liberty, nor safety.
-
I live in the United States, I'm sharing that minute risk with everyone else here. It could have just as easily been me.
We pay that price.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
The Liberty of blowing away school kids might be infringed upon, yes.
-
-
47,856 / 4 years = 11964 / 311,591,917 (U.S. population) = 0.003839637470441828
Minute, came out the same as my locality. You have a better chance of dying in a car wreck.
Especially considering that this number is EXTREMELY skewed by criminals killing each other.
Again, this is a non-issue.
I think looking at these numbers is a good way for people to get perspective on situations like mass shootings. It's much the same with terrorism. It's highly unlikely anyone here is going to be a victim of a mass shooting or terrorism. I don't think it's logical to allocate disproportionally more resources and public attention on something anomalous when people die from drunk and cancer at much higher rates.
-
http://www.examiner.com/article/libor-scandal-grows-as-the-fathers-of-two-mass-murderers-were-to-testify
-
I think looking at these numbers is a good way for people to get perspective on situations like mass shootings. It's much the same with terrorism. It's highly unlikely anyone here is going to be a victim of a mass shooting or terrorism. I don't think it's logical to allocate disproportionally more resources and public attention on something anomalous when people die from drunk and cancer at much higher rates.
But the billions and billions spent on "the war on terror" was right? as the chances of you actually becoming a victim of terrorism were/are minute...
Incidents like this shooting damage the moral of the entire nation regardless of how unlikely you are to be directly affected, we know it's not a one off , we know while guns are so easily accessible to everyone, the next one will not be too far off. What kind of society just sits back and says well f@ck it, no matter how horrendous these shooting sprees are, no matter how appalled the entire nation is , we won't bother taking any meaningful action to stop it happening, as f@ck it not too many people are actually directly involved anyway.
-
But the billions and billions spent on "the war on terror" was right? as the chances of you actually becoming a victim of terrorism were/are minute...
Incidents like this shooting damage the moral of the entire nation regardless of how unlikely you are to be directly affected, we know it's not a one off , we know while guns are so easily accessible to everyone, the next one will not be too far off. What kind of society just sits back and says well f@ck it, no matter how horrendous these shooting sprees are, no matter how appalled the entire nation is , we won't bother taking any meaningful action to stop it happening, as f@ck it not too many people are actually directly involved anyway.
Spot on.
-
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/aclu-killed-connecticut-forcible-institutionalization-law-that-might-have-prevented-killings
Let's blame the ACLU while we are at it.
-
Spot on.
So what is your solution tough guy?
Funny how liberals say it's better that people be killed so long as we don't torture people to get the info, but on the other hand want to give up 2 nd amendment rights when someone misuses a gun.
Typical liberal mentality.
-
Spot on.
do you live in America ?
During your time in service did you keep track of collateral lives lost on the other side ? Children and women ?
responsible and accurate use of firearms is an argument you may want to examine from all perspectives before chiming in with rhetoric
-
And how many know anyone that has ever had to use a firearm to defend themselves against a criminal?
I know quite a few.
My grandfather being the most prominent.
My uncle and my father had to stare down the barrel of a gun at different times in the 60's and 70's. Uncle got away in his instance, father only lived because his friend had a pistol on him.
-
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/aclu-killed-connecticut-forcible-institutionalization-law-that-might-have-prevented-killings
Let's blame the ACLU while we are at it.
Lets not. The ACLU did a good thing here as this would have been another law we do not need. Furthermore, the ACLU has done a lot to protect Gun Rights, arguably moreso than the NRA.
Check this out.
http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment
We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.
-
I think looking at these numbers is a good way for people to get perspective on situations like mass shootings. It's much the same with terrorism. It's highly unlikely anyone here is going to be a victim of a mass shooting or terrorism. I don't think it's logical to allocate disproportionally more resources and public attention on something anomalous when people die from drunk and cancer at much higher rates.
Thank you Emperor of Bodybuilding, refreshing to see people exercise common sense.
-
School shootings are horrible, and there's no question that we need to address mental health, our epidemic of horrible parents, and doctors putting kids on Psych Drugs (like 90% of these shooters).
-
But the billions and billions spent on "the war on terror" was right? as the chances of you actually becoming a victim of terrorism were/are minute...
Incidents like this shooting damage the moral of the entire nation regardless of how unlikely you are to be directly affected, we know it's not a one off , we know while guns are so easily accessible to everyone, the next one will not be too far off. What kind of society just sits back and says well f@ck it, no matter how horrendous these shooting sprees are, no matter how appalled the entire nation is , we won't bother taking any meaningful action to stop it happening, as f@ck it not too many people are actually directly involved anyway.
No one, including myself, said that nothing should be done. You are assuming many untrue sentiments. What I'm saying is in order to understand and rectify a situation you have to look at it rationally or run the risk of overreacting and doing the wrong thing. If the American public had reacted more rationally and less emotionally in regards to terrorism the United States would never have gone to Iraq, spending billions on an unnecessary war.
Incidents like the school shooting are very rare and are not the epidemic being portrayed by the media and gun control advocates. You must understand the media promote these kinds of stories not out of concern for the public's well being but because they draw ratings and ratings equal advertising revenue.
What we know from experience with prohibition is that when something is banned criminal enterprise will spring up to feed the demand. By the way, I'm a liberal AND a gun owner.
-
No one, including myself, said that nothing should be done. You are assuming many untrue sentiments. What I'm saying is in order to understand and rectify a situation you have to look at it rationally or run the risk of overreacting and doing the wrong thing. If the American public had reacted more rationally and less emotionally in regards to terrorism the United States would never have gone to Iraq, spending billions on an unnecessary war.
Incidents like the school shooting are very rare and are not the epidemic being portrayed by the media and gun control advocates. You must understand the media promote these kinds of stories not out of concern for the public's well being but because they draw ratings and ratings equal advertising revenue.
What we know from experience with prohibition is that when something is banned criminal enterprise will spring up to feed the demand. By the way, I'm a liberal AND a gun owner.
solid, rational post.
-
No one, including myself, said that nothing should be done. You are assuming many untrue sentiments. What I'm saying is in order to understand and rectify a situation you have to look at it rationally or run the risk of overreacting and doing the wrong thing. If the American public had reacted more rationally and less emotionally in regards to terrorism the United States would never have gone to Iraq, spending billions on an unnecessary war.
Incidents like the school shooting are very rare and are not the epidemic being portrayed by the media and gun control advocates. You must understand the media promote these kinds of stories not out of concern for the public's well being but because they draw ratings and ratings equal advertising revenue.
What we know from experience with prohibition is that when something is banned criminal enterprise will spring up to feed the demand. By the way, I'm a liberal AND a gun owner.
Well random shooting sprees are not really that rare are they, wasn't there a mall shooting a couple weeks ago? then the cinema shooting a few months back...
It's obvious to all but a moron that these incidents keep happening because you have so many guns in circulation. Look at the rest of the developed world, these incidents are very rare and it is solely due to stricter gun laws.
And it's not just random shooting sprees , you have horrendous gun crime stats in general compared to Europe, your figs are more comparable with countries like Jamaica and Columbia .
-
Well random shooting sprees are not really that rare are they, wasn't there a mall shooting a couple weeks ago? then the cinema shooting a few months back...
It's obvious to all but a moron that these incidents keep happening because you have so many guns in circulation. Look at the rest of the developed world, these incidents are very rare and it is solely due to stricter gun laws.
And it's not just random shooting sprees , you have horrendous gun crime stats in general compared to Europe, your figs are more comparable with countries like Jamaica and Columbia .
Yes, the number of deaths from mass shootings are minuscule in comparison to the number of deaths from other crimes or death from heart disease or cancer for that matter. There are many problem with comparing other countries and their gun laws to the United States. You are essentially comparing apples and oranges. The attitude toward guns in the United States is completely different than it is Europe or Asia.
The gun, for better or worse, is part of the American identity and culture, and that isn't going to change, no matter how many school shootings. Hell, the founding fathers specifically wrote gun ownership into our Constitution. We are never going to get guns out of circulation. History tells us over and over again, when you ban something criminals will fill the demand.
-
,
-
Yes it makes for more sense when arguing whether or not gun controls work, to point to Hitler, Castro, Amin etc rather than the current day leaders of Europe ::)
-
::)
Yes, Mexico gets it's guns from us. Actually, from our own government in many cases.
Im 100% sure that if we banned firearms, that Mexico would simply refuse to sell their illegal firearms to Americans, just like they don't sell their illegal drugs to Americans. I mean, it makes such perfect sense. ::)
We're not Australia. We'll never be Australia, unless the US somehow just manages to detach itself from Mexico and Canada. Until that day, criminals are going to have firearms.
It's not criminals that seem to be the problem though is it?
-
It's not criminals that seem to be the problem though is it?
Yes it is. Acts like in CT are very rare.
-
,
Hey Pip whats the point of this one?
-
It's not criminals that seem to be the problem though is it?
Are you implying that someone that shoots his mother in the face and steals her guns to shoot up a school full of children is not a criminal? He evidently tried to buy a firearms and was rejected, but yet he found a way to acquire them and kill anyway.
-
But the billions and billions spent on "the war on terror" was right? as the chances of you actually becoming a victim of terrorism were/are minute...
I don't know what the precise numbers are, but the money spent in the war on terror is right. We have stopped numerous terrorist attacks since 9/11. We are under a constant threat.
-
No one, including myself, said that nothing should be done. You are assuming many untrue sentiments. What I'm saying is in order to understand and rectify a situation you have to look at it rationally or run the risk of overreacting and doing the wrong thing. If the American public had reacted more rationally and less emotionally in regards to terrorism the United States would never have gone to Iraq, spending billions on an unnecessary war.
Incidents like the school shooting are very rare and are not the epidemic being portrayed by the media and gun control advocates. You must understand the media promote these kinds of stories not out of concern for the public's well being but because they draw ratings and ratings equal advertising revenue.
What we know from experience with prohibition is that when something is banned criminal enterprise will spring up to feed the demand. By the way, I'm a liberal AND a gun owner.
yep...good post
-
Between 2006 and 2010 47,856 people were murdered in the U.S. by firearms, more than twice as many as were killed by all other means combined.
Sounds like a problem to me!
ABSOLUTE HORSE SHIT!!!!
cite your source brain child...
here you go just for your information...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/ns/health-addictions/t/alcohol-linked-us-deaths-year/
"Alcohol abuse kills some 75,000 Americans each year ..."
"Another 40,933 died from car crashes and other mishaps caused by excessive alcohol use."
LMFAO get a fuking clue!!!
-
E-Kul hates Americans, yet he takes major issue when we get killed.
???
We own his mind... hahahahaha ;D
-
E-Kul hates Americans, yet he takes major issue when we get killed.
???
We own his mind... hahahahaha ;D
And pit bulls
-
For E-kunt...
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
Notice that the amount of gun deaths have been declining even though the number of guns have been increasing...
Notice how they dont categorize drunk driving deaths as murder?
Drunk driving is far and away a bigger killer of innocent ppl yet you bleeding heart libtards arent ranting and raving about that are you?
Whys that?
-
For E-kunt...
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
Notice that the amount of gun deaths have been declining even though the number of guns have been increasing...
Notice how they dont categorize drunk driving deaths as murder?
Drunk driving is far and away a bigger killer of innocent ppl yet you bleeding heart libtards arent ranting and raving about that are you?
Whys that?
That's because unlike Gun ownership, Cars serve a community benefit, everyone benefits from cars, trucks and the road transport system. Guns serve an individuals selfish drives, that's it. When considering laws citizens take into consideration the HARM VS GOOD to the Community ratio, Guns cause more harm than good, where as CARS don't. See the difference!
-
:D
-
That's because unlike Gun ownership, Cars serve a community benefit, everyone benefits from cars, trucks and the road transport system. Guns serve an individuals selfish drives, that's it. When considering laws citizens take into consideration the HARM VS GOOD to the Community ratio, Guns cause more harm than good, where as CARS don't. See the difference!
The man has a point.
-
That's because unlike Gun ownership, Cars serve a community benefit, everyone benefits from cars, trucks and the road transport system. Guns serve an individuals selfish drives, that's it. When considering laws citizens take into consideration the HARM VS GOOD to the Community ratio, Guns cause more harm than good, where as CARS don't. See the difference!
hahaha so many idiotic comments where to begin????
so your assertion is that guns only serve selfish drives eh? Well nobody else benefits from my truck, I dont benefit from anybody elses vehicle either. How is someone elses vehicle benefiting me? The roads would be there regardless as thats the job of the govt.
The job of the govt is not to take away guns, as a matter of fact it is specifically stated that the govt is not to do that...
My guns could be used to help many individuals outside of myself. My family and friends all have the ability to benefit from my guns...
And finally the biggest problem with your ignorance. Who determines whats the balance of whats good vs. harm?
The govt?????????
I deem the ability to defend myself, family and possesions a VERY VERY GOOD THING!!!
I dont think a few isolated incidents as horrible as they are reasons to take away my ability to defend myself, family and property.
Fact is taking away guns wont solve the problem b/c its not addressing the problem. Its addressing the expression of the problem. The expression will just find another form especially in instances like the school shooting.
-
Revealed: Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza created chilling 7-foot 'score sheet' documenting past mass murders
Connecticut State Police found document when searching his home
It contained Lanza's obsessive research about mass murders of the past
Lanza killed 26 people at Sandy Hook - including 20 children in 1st grade
By Leon Watson
PUBLISHED:06:37 EST, 18 March 2013| UPDATED: 08:16 EST, 18 March 2013
Comments (0)
Share
.
.
The Connecticut State Police investigation into Adam Lanza's killing spree at Sandy Hook Elementary School has revealed that he studied other mass killings from around the world intently
Adam Lanza planned his Sandy Hook massacre in meticulous detail on a chilling 7ft long spreadsheet that police believe was used to keep score of killings, it was revealed today.
Connecticut State Police found the 4ft wide document in Lanza's harddrive that was so big it required a special printer after the December 14 attack that left 26 people dead.
It contained Lanza’s obsessive research - in nine-point font - about mass murders of the past, and even attempted murders.
Among the tragedies Lanza studied were the 2006 mass shooting carried out by Charles Carl Robert IV in which he killed five Amish school girls as well as the 2011 massacre of 77 people in Norway by Anders Behring Breivik.
Investigators revealed they have found reams of articles about multiple shootings, leading them to speculate he intended to outdo them all.
Police have also discovered evidence that Lanza became extremely efficient in his mastery of his AR-15 Bushmaster assault rifle - leading them believe he had been planning his assault for a long time.
Officers outlined the findings at the International Association of Police Chiefs and Colonels mid-year meeting in New Orleans last week, a law enforcement veteran told the New York Daily News.
According to the officer: 'We were told (Lanza) had around 500 people on this sheet. Names and the number of people killed and the weapons that were used, even the precise make and model of the weapons.
'It had to have taken years. It sounded like a doctoral thesis, that was the quality of the research.
'They don't believe this was just a spreadsheet. They believe it was a score sheet,' he continued. 'This was the work of a video gamer, and that it was his intent to put his own name at the very top of that list.
More...
Colorado sheriff says he WON'T enforce the states new gun control measures despite mass shooting where 12 were killed and 58 injured in movie theater last summer
Michael Moore causes anger among Sandy Hook families by calling for images of children's bodies to be made public
'They believe that he picked an elementary school because he felt it was a point of least resistance, where he could rack up the greatest number of kills. That's what (the Connecticut police) believe.
'They believe that (Lanza) believed that it was the way to pick up the easiest points. It's why he didn't want to be killed by law enforcement.
'In the code of a gamer, even a deranged gamer like this little bastard, if somebody else kills you, they get your points. They believe that's why he killed himself.'
Victoria Soto, 27, (left) is shown in this undated handout photo was one of six adults killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School along with Principal Dawn Hochsprung (right)
Connecticut State Police lead a line of children from the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown on Friday, Dec. 14, 2012 after Adam Lanza opened fire killing 20 1st graders
Tragedy: A woman waits to hear about her sister following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in December
Lanza's killing spree lasted less than five minutes and during that time he fired 152 bullets into two classrooms in the Connecticut elementary school.
Lanza also had hundreds more rounds of ammunition on him and in the car that he drove to the school in.
Arriving at Sandy Hook Elementary School at 9.35 a.m., Lanza, 20, shot through the glass windows at the school entrance and immediately encountered Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Scherlach, who had been alerted by the gunfire.
He shot them both to death on sight. Two teachers were also injured by ricocheting bullets from that initial burst of gunfire.
One had been in the school's meeting room with Hochsprung and Scherlach and was wounded in the leg.
The other was further down the hallway outside her classroom after rushing out on hearing the shots and was hit in the foot.
Police investigating the home of Adam Lanza in Sandy Hook Connecticut have uncovered a dossier regarding every mass murder inside and outside of the United States that he had compiled
The member of staff who had been shot in the leg managed to crawl and call the police, which explains the rapid response time of law enforcement to the school.
Continuing down the corridor it was then that Lanza apparently walked by the classroom of Kaitlin Roig, who had closed her classroom door on hearing the gunfire.
The school had recently performed a practice lockdown drill and the black construction paper that had been put up on the door had been left there - leading Lanza to think the classroom was empty.
Roig and her class, sat in petrified silence while they heard Lanza continue past their door.
Lanza then walked into the classroom of substitute teacher Lauren Rousseau to find her and the terrified children huddled together at the back of the room trying to hide in a bathroom.
The deranged shooter killed Rousseau and all but one of her class.
The little girl escaped by playing dead and emerged from the school with her clothes covered in blood saying, 'Mommy, I'm okay, but all my friends are dead.'
Before he set off on his killing spree - Adam Lanza shot his mother Nancy in the face while she slept and then took the assault rifles she kept in a vault in their home
Adam Lanza studied the 2006 mass shooting carried out by Charles Carl Robert IV (left) in which he killed five Amish school girls as well as the 2011 massacre of 77 people in Norway by Anders Behring Breivik (right)
A search and rescue team boat passes by covered bodies of victims from the summer school meeting organised by the ruling Labour Party on Utoeya, on July 23, 2011 after Breiviks shooting spree
She was the only survivor from a class of 16.
When asked by her parents what she saw, the unnamed girl said she saw someone who was 'angry' and 'very mad.'
According to the unnamed source familiar with the report, Lanza then walked back towards teacher Victoria Soto's class and upon entering encountered children cowering under their desks.
He fatally shot these students along with Soto and then dramatically his assault rifle jammed - allowing six children from the class to escape out of the classroom while he reloaded.
Unknown to Lanza, Soto had placed five children in a closet before he entered and opened fire and they were found unharmed after authorities arrived.
Authorities have also dispelled the theory that Lanza was shooting at police as they arrived.
Despite bullets being fired out of the school as police rushed up the drive to the school, investigators now believe that Lanza was firing at a teacher who was standing by a window.
Realizing that police were closing in, Lanza then turned one of the two pistols he was carrying on himself less than five minutes after he began his killing spree and just as police were entering the building.
State police have periodically updated the victims' families as the investigation has unfolded. Danbury State's Attorney Stephen Sedensky has said he hopes that the final report on the massacre will be published by the end of June.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2295164/Sandy-Hook-shooter-Adam-Lanza-created-meticulous-7ft-long-spreadsheet-detailing-massacres-past-wanted-outdo.html#ixzz2NuxVDG00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
-
Yes, We Should Politicize the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting
[
Only Gabby Giffords & her husband can own AR15's !!!
-
"...the killer fed his obsession with violence by keeping meticulous records about mass murderers for years."
"The New York Daily News reports investigators discovered, 'a chilling spreadsheet 7 feet long and 4 feet wide that required a special printer, a document that contained Lanza’s obsessive, extensive research — in nine-point font — about mass murders of the past, and even attempted murders.'"
"...the giant spreadsheet was actually a "score sheet" and that Lanza, an avid video game player, hoped his attack would put his name at the top of the list of killers."
-
The man has a point.
Not really... Guns have a community benefit... Since 1776.
-
Caught lying.