Edited: easier to buy guns than vegetables?

[Nodack]

"Dad just bought me a new .45 for my birthday. I think I will go shoot black people in a church."

[Dan H]

Ah, the passive aggressive pseudo-classiness that is Nodack.

God bless the families of the victims. May He bring them comfort.

Considering the shooter looks to have been a felon for possession of meth, cocaine, and LSD, his father is likely to be charged with making a straw purchase.

[Ghost]

So this time, we are going with the "he's a druggie and let's blame dad" line? Maybe with some mental health issues too, those always seem to make it easier to accept than if we were actually forced to sit back and consider that we are the only first world nation where these shootings happen on a regular basis, and any sane person would look at the trend of "random" violence in the US and be forced to conclude that it isn't random at all, but a by-product of a system that is fundamentally broken. But which will never be fixed, since the core of the problem is the right-wing's sacred cow.

Sorry, I started to ramble. I just wanted to make sure I knew which issue besides gun control we should blame it on this time. Drugs and dad it is. Terrible tragedy, how could it happen, shocking, nothing anyone could do.

[LazarusLong]

Dillweeds like this anus blossom don't win any points for the NRA ...

"...Eight of his church members who might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church are dead. Innocent people died because of his position on a political issue."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... es-really/

[Dan H]

So this time, we are going with the "he's a druggie and let's blame dad" line? Maybe with some mental health issues too, those always seem to make it easier to accept than if we were actually forced to sit back and consider that we are the only first world nation where these shootings happen on a regular basis, and any sane person would look at the trend of "random" violence in the US and be forced to conclude that it isn't random at all, but a by-product of a system that is fundamentally broken. But which will never be fixed, since the core of the problem is the right-wing's sacred cow.

Sorry, I started to ramble. I just wanted to make sure I knew which issue besides gun control we should blame it on this time. Drugs and dad it is. Terrible tragedy, how could it happen, shocking, nothing anyone could do.

We're not even in the top five, boss.

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197- ... him-wrong/

http://www.securitymagazine.com/article ... e-to-climb

The point of my post was not to deflect blame but to point out that they were already run afoul twice over of existing gun laws. What's your solution?

The vast, vast majority of gun fatalities in our nation occur in places like Chicago and Baltimore. Why isn't our President on the news talking about the fact that Chicago, with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, has had over 1,100 shootings and 200 homicides just this year?

Oh, that's right, it's just gang violence so it doesn't fit the narrative he's going for, that the average middle American who likes to hunt and target shoot can't be trusted with a firearm because the evil gun might make them snap at any moment.

Maybe we should try and do something about gang violence in the inner cities before we decide to just arbitrarily confiscate everyone else's legally owned firearms?

[Ghost]

We might be the sixth worst per capita, but that is nothing to brag about. I was clearly referring to the frequency of incidents, where we rule.

I have spelled out how I think his should be regulated several times. If you need me to do it again, I will, but I would prefer you look back in the thread where it's already been laid out and discussed.

I am FAR MORE interested in hearing your solution. Because the pro-gun lobby does not seem to have one. And I'm getting to where I think your side doesn't want one. The 2nd Amendment group always writes these events off as something else. But there is exactly one thing that all mass shootings have in common, and it seems like addressing the problem would involve starting with that common thread. You do know what that thread is, yes?

And please, stop changing the subject every time you are on the losing side of an argument. Gang violence certainly needs to be addressed. Was this event related to gangs? No. Are we incapable of addressing two separate and unrelated issues at the same time? Only in the minds of those so attached to the idea of unrestricted access to firearms that everything else pales in comparison.

So again, what is your solution? Better parenting? Yeah, that's actionable and totally enforceable. More Jesus?

Well, God blinked in Charleston, so I don't really trust him very much.

[Indy]

Read this, Dan. Twice.

[Indy]

Dan, we have twice as many as the others on that list, combined. I have no idea how you can claim that as a victory.

[Mori Chu]

Guns kill people. But gun nuts think they are toys and ought to be treated and regulated like toys. Your right to a hobby of shooting death bullets at things is not worth making it easy for psychos to murder innocent people. Guns are bad. It should be really, really hard to get a gun. If it were less easy to get a gun, fewer people would be able to easily do horrible things with guns. It's just that simple. I don't know why some people think playing around with a murder weapon is so fun and exciting and is a fundamental human right to be protected.

[Dan H]

We might be the sixth worst per capita, but that is nothing to brag about. I was clearly referring to the frequency of incidents, where we rule.

I have spelled out how I think his should be regulated several times. If you need me to do it again, I will, but I would prefer you look back in the thread where it's already been laid out and discussed.

I am FAR MORE interested in hearing your solution. Because the pro-gun lobby does not seem to have one. And I'm getting to where I think your side doesn't want one. The 2nd Amendment group always writes these events off as something else. But there is exactly one thing that all mass shootings have in common, and it seems like addressing the problem would involve starting with that common thread. You do know what that thread is, yes?

And please, stop changing the subject every time you are on the losing side of an argument. Gang violence certainly needs to be addressed. Was this event related to gangs? No. Are we incapable of addressing two separate and unrelated issues at the same time? Only in the minds of those so attached to the idea of unrestricted access to firearms that everything else pales in comparison.

So again, what is your solution? Better parenting? Yeah, that's actionable and totally enforceable. More Jesus?

Well, God blinked in Charleston, so I don't really trust him very much.

With the exception of the Gabby Giffords shooting, every mass casualty shooting in the US since 1950 has occurred somewhere where guns aren't allowed. In South Carolina it's illegal to carry a gun in a church. Those who wish to do others harm simply don't care.

Maybe, just maybe, we allow people the choice to defend themselves. Gun-free zones are hunting preserves for whack jobs.

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.” There is no evidence that private holders of concealed-carry permits (which are either easy to obtain or not even required in more than 40 states) are any more irresponsible with firearms than the police. According to a 2005 to 2007 study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Bowling Green State University, police nationwide were convicted of firearms violations at least at a 0.002 percent annual rate. That’s about the same rate as holders of carry permits in the states with “shall issue” laws.


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... -john-fund

And at this point it's pretty obvious that you're going to discount my ideas out of hand. As far as your ideas, they've been tried, have failed, and keep failing. Chicago is the prime example. Last I checked it's been run by Democrat machine politicians for 80 years. Surely nearly a century is long enough for a gun-free utopia to be built right? Maybe not. They've been successful enough disarming the law-abiding citizens, to be sure, but, and I repeat myself, criminals don't care.

[Dan H]

Guns kill people. But gun nuts think they are toys and ought to be treated and regulated like toys. Your right to a hobby of shooting death bullets at things is not worth making it easy for psychos to murder innocent people. Guns are bad. It should be really, really hard to get a gun. If it were less easy to get a gun, fewer people would be able to easily do horrible things with guns. It's just that simple. I don't know why some people think playing around with a murder weapon is so fun and exciting and is a fundamental human right to be protected.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/peop ... e-1.211272

On Monday, as the news of the Virginia Tech shootings was unfolding, I went into my advanced constitutional law seminar to find one of my students upset. My student, Tara Wyllie, has a permit to carry a gun in Tennessee, but she isn't allowed to have a weapon on campus. That left her feeling unsafe. "Why couldn't we meet off campus today?" she asked.

Virginia Tech graduate student Bradford Wiles also has a permit to carry a gun, in Virginia. But on the day of the shootings, he would have been unarmed for the same reason: Like the University of Tennessee, where I teach, Virginia Tech bans guns on campus.

Crazy gun nut Bradford Wiles followed the law. The guy who shot up the school did not.

[Dan H]

Dan, we have twice as many as the others on that list, combined. I have no idea how you can claim that as a victory.

We also have a population larger than every nation above us on the list, combined. You can't use raw data to do an apples to apples comparison, you have to adjust in some way for population differences. Per capita is widely accepted as a statistically reasonable way to do that. If you throw in violent crime per capita . . . knives, blunt instruments, etc., we are far safer than many nations in Europe. If you break it down by geography the vast majority of our violent crime is either gang-related or in the large urban areas. In both aspects most likely related to drug abuse.

I think ending the "war on drugs" would be a good first step in trying to reduce violent crime in the cities. Instead of buying the police armored personnel carriers and tacticool equipment, we could invest the money in public health treatment programs, or alternative treatments like methadone. Legalization would lower prices and reduce the need to commit crimes to fund habits. Maybe we should still have some level of controls on the hard stuff, but I think marijuana legalization is a foregone conclusion at this point. Crime rates have continued to decline in Colorado, for example, so it's certainly not harming things.

[Indy]

Dan, we have twice as many as the others on that list, combined. I have no idea how you can claim that as a victory.

We also have a population larger than every nation above us on the list, combined. You can't use raw data to do an apples to apples comparison, you have to adjust in some way for population differences. Per capita is widely accepted as a statistically reasonable way to do that. If you throw in violent crime per capita . . . knives, blunt instruments, etc., we are far safer than many nations in Europe. If you break it down by geography the vast majority of our violent crime is either gang-related or in the large urban areas. In both aspects most likely related to drug abuse.

I think ending the "war on drugs" would be a good first step in trying to reduce violent crime in the cities. Instead of buying the police armored personnel carriers and tacticool equipment, we could invest the money in public health treatment programs, or alternative treatments like methadone. Legalization would lower prices and reduce the need to commit crimes to fund habits. Maybe we should still have some level of controls on the hard stuff, but I think marijuana legalization is a foregone conclusion at this point. Crime rates have continued to decline in Colorado, for example, so it's certainly not harming things.

Conflation. Again. Please stop doing this.

[Mori Chu]

Guns kill innocent people far more than they protect/save lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ?tid=sm_fb

[Dan H]

Guns kill innocent people far more than they protect/save lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ?tid=sm_fb

The problem with their study is they only "count it" as a defensive gun use if the bad guy is shot. It's far more likely that just seeing that a victim is able to defend themselves will defuse the situation.

My father-in-law walked out one morning a few months back and found a tweaker trying to steal his truck. Said tweaker charged at him. Father-in-law drew his 1911 out and said, "Don't think so." Tweaker decided discretion was the better part of valor and ran off. Was that not a defensive gun use?

Tons of examples here. These don't count, though. Common Core math, I guess.

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/

Would-be Portland robber wields knife, but victim pulls gun
Police are looking for the man who threatened and demanded money from a woman on Gilman Street.
http://www.pressherald.com/2015/06/08/p ... y-attempt/

Pizza delivery man packs heat, stops attempted robbery
http://www.walb.com/story/28741917/doug ... -be-robber

Suspects arrested, Holladay homeowner fires shot at accused burglars
http://fox13now.com/2015/04/27/suspects ... -burglars/

Woman shoots at assailant in Billings
http://www.krtv.com/story/29058235/woma ... n-billings

84-Year-Old Man Sends Tulsa Robber Running In Fear
http://www.newson6.com/story/28557994/8 ... ng-in-fear

[Nodack]

Ah, the passive aggressive pseudo-classiness that is Nodack.

God bless the families of the victims. May He bring them comfort.

Considering the shooter looks to have been a felon for possession of meth, cocaine, and LSD, his father is likely to be charged with making a straw purchase.

Thanks Dan. There is nothing I could say that would bring any of those families comfort. The passive aggressive pseudo-classiness that is Nodack doesn't like reading stories like that. I try to always look at things from all sides without regard to politics before coming to a conclusion believe it or not and even then come out somewhere in the middle of things usually especially in this topic. We can outlaw all guns and my logical side thinks it would lower crime and murders in this country by a certain %, but never eliminate it. My paranoid redneck side thinks the government should fear that it's population is armed because power and money corrupts.

Mass killings like this that happen are a result of a lot of things adding up and not just one thing we can outlaw like guns. This kid was raised like what? Was his father a racist? Was he an abused kid? Was he or somebody in his family attacked by somebody black and they developed a hatred of all blacks? I was reading his manifesto that he wrote and he goes off for awhile and says some crazy things, but people do think like this guy does. Guys like this read the internet and you can take any side in any topic on the internet and find several sites that cater to your particular paranoid topic and meet people who think and promote that view.

I think you are right Dan that the guy was taking those drugs. I heard to weed you off some drugs they give you other drugs like Suboxone.

Dylann Roof, who is suspected of killing nine people during a bible study meeting at a South Carolina church, was taking a drug linked to sudden outbursts of violence, it has emerged.

Suboxone is used to treat addiction of opiods, including painkillers and heroin, but the drug is highly-addictive itself and has been linked to sudden outbursts of anger and violence, according to stories shared by users and their partners online.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3deFwieYH


Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and its not the weapons used.

The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039752_mass_ ... z3deHk6hON

Those guys probably already had those thoughts in their head without the prescription drugs, but it seems like some drugs set off their violent side and they act on those thoughts. Maybe this is all BS or maybe we are creating killers by trying to cure drug addicts with other drugs that possibly make them violent. Yes doing his drug use was bad, but he might not have tried to kill anybody if they didn't try to cure him.

Just another perspective I read on the internets that are never wrong. Don't know for sure if he did drugs or if he was taking these anti drug drugs.

[Nodack]

His manifest if you want to see what he was thinking.
http://gawker.com/here-is-what-appears- ... 1712767241

[Ghost]

No, my ideas have not been tried. People who do not secure their guns are not currently investigated for being partially complicit in the murders committed with those guns.

As for me dismissing your ideas our of hand, that is incredibly unfair. Until today, today, I don't recall you having any ideas aside from "MORE GUNS." which is absurd; imagine the death toll in Aurora had everyone been armed in a pitch black theater and started shooting. The confusion would have been so extreme we might have had ten times the casualties.

[Ghost]

Your idea about stopping the war on drugs is good, though. But it does not address the specific issue of random shootings.

[Ghost]

Nodack , that article you posted from Natural News is sheer trash. That site is full to the breaking point with awful science and conspiracy theories. I skimmed it anyway and was not disappointed, as it describes a full-fledged conspiracy of murdering anyone "they" consider a threat. I know you make a point of trying to consider all sides in an argument, but the lunatic fringe does not deserve equal time.