Connecticut school shooting

[Atlanta Dan]

Originally Posted by Killer

they change the story every 20 min on this

I quit, I'm ignoring everything anyone says for a week

Agreed it has been total chaos

The stories of the heroic teachers are one thing I definitely believe - when hell broke loose the proincipal ran in the direction of rather than away from the shooting and another teacher apparently was shot to death while trying to shield her first graders

[tony hipchest]

Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan

There is evil in the world

And also grace - the father of one of the children (Emily Parker) who was murdered is on CNN expressing his condolences to the family of the shooter - and then takes questions - I cannot conceive of having the faith and strength to do that

i was just sitting here at the comp watching this as i help my 9 year old girl touch up her make-up for her ballet recital in an hour.

as a dad you never want your kid to see you with tears in your eyes, but at this point i dont think it even matters.

[mikegrimey]

Originally Posted by NEPatriots

The story makes me ill. My eyes watered up watching some of the scenes unfold earlier today. It's a sickening story. One can't even fathom how even the most mentally deranged in society could inflict that sort of horror on little children. I don't think many people would have flinched were he taken alive and sentenced to death by burning.

But with that said, and prayers and condolences offered to the families and the communities, the true way to start preventing this from happening in the future is in rebuilding our families, rebuilding our communities, and rebuilding our societies. It isn't in sweeping gun control laws that trash our 2nd amendment and make victims and prey of law abiding citizens all across the country.

I blame the media, honestly. I was a teenager in the 90's and our parents had no idea just how destructive the music and the youth culture that arose from it and much of our `entertainment` created. But we were also alive in the 80's and so we could understand when we aged and got a little wiser that it was a fad and not a way to actually live or conduct ourselves. It was just a teenage fashion.


People ten years younger than I, I feel, have no such perspective. They've been born into a wildly degenerate society and that is all they know. Vile music, degenerates praised as "artists" and `entertainment` that is trashy and culturally worthless at best and destructive to society at worst.

I don't think it is a coincidence that so mauny of these maniacs were born after 1990.

Everyone is to blame. We have turned a blind eye to the direction the media-barons have been leading this nation and pretended our children will be forever isolated by it, even if they have responsible parents, or won't be affected by it.

And now we're soon going to have a conversation thrusted on us about fire-arms where Americans will be expected to give up more liberty in the name of security and real problems of our society will continue on as usual.

That's a silly excuse. Saying people 10 years younger than you feel your generation is degenerate... What else is new? I run into people of every age group who feel the younger generation is softer, more prone to moral turpitude, lacking discipline etc. I'm site the Neanderthals probably had an expression for "kids these days." There have been trashy artists and immoral people in every generation. Blaming music, books movies etc? That's an easy cop out and a perpetually embarrassing argument that rears its head everytime there is a fresh tragedy

[Vis]

Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan

Sorry I pissed you off (I sincerely mean that)

I am fucking tired of having this constantly happen and being told it is God's will or that shit happens or that if hanguns are banned only crimninals will have handguns

The way this is ever going to change is "politics"

As far as the kids being armed, several posters on this board seriously suggested that The Joker taking out miviegoers last summer might have been stopped if they had been packing - so as far as "politicizing" tragedies, those with views opposed to mine have been doing so for a long fucking time and I am fucking tired of innocent people having to be sacrificed on the altar of the Second Amendment

The idea that something apparently cannot be done about this saddens me for the latest innocent victims and their families (Jesus - a mass shooting of K-4 students?)and those that you can bet we will read about in the coming months

If you want to ban me go ahead - I promise never to post again on anything to do with mass shootings

Dan, I have two children, so I can certainly understand the emotions behind your post. It's really hard to understand senseless tragedies like this, but I do understand why they always trigger (pun intended) gun-control talk. I get it; I really do. But Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and more control still wouldn't have prevented this tragedy. The only thing that might have prevented it would be a complete ban on all guns. But even then, who's to say he wouldn't have done something like this?

Knife-wielding man injures 22 children in China

BEIJING (Reuters) - A knife-wielding man slashed 22 children and an adult at an elementary school in central China on Friday, state media reported, the latest in a series of attacks on schoolchildren in the country.

...

In 2010, a man slashed 28 children, two teachers and a security guard in a kindergarten in eastern China.

http://www.courant.com/sns-rt-us-chi...,5592318.story

Yeah, I know a gun can cause a lot more harm than a knife, but if someone wants to kill people, they're going to find a way to do it. And they might not be able to take out as many with a knife (or other weapon), but that doesn't make the loss of life any less painful. Just imagine what Adam Lanza could have done if he had entered the school room with a sword, machete, or a knife and locked the door. What would a teacher and those young children have been able to do against him? It would have taken longer for him to kill them all, and maybe police would have gotten there in time before he had time to finish his evil act, but children still would have died.

I keep hearing a lot of people calling for more gun control. But like I said earlier, no amount of gun control would have prevented this tragedy since Lanza's mother was legally able to own weapons. Like I said, only a complete ban might have prevented it. But with a complete ban, what would have happened to Kendra, a 12-year-old girl in Oklahoma?

Girl Shoots Intruder While Home Alone

A teen girl from Oklahoma had to defend herself and her home this past Wednesday when an intruder burst into her home along the state’s border with Texas. The girl, Kendra, was home alone when the suspect rang the doorbell. She did not answer the door, causing the suspect to go to the back of the house and kick in the back door.

The girl called her mother, Debra St. Clair, who told the girl to grab the gun in the house, hide in a closet and call 911. St. Clair then stopped what she was doing and raced to get home as quickly as possible to her daughter.

According to Ken Golden, the Bryan County Under Sheriff, “He had worked his way all the way through the house and into the bathroom. And from what we understand, he was turning the doorknob when she fired through the door.”

The suspect has been identified as Stacy Jones, from Texarkana. Jones was flown to a hospital in Plano, Texas and is expected to survive.

http://www.jdjournal.com/2012/10/22/...le-home-alone/

If Kendra's mother didn't have a gun in the house, she could have been kidnapped, raped, and possibly even killed. That gun likely saved her life. And this isn't an isolated story ... there are countless others, but they don't get the same kind of attention as this shooting in Connecticut. Every time a tragedy like this happens and everyone starts talking about the need for more gun control or the total ban of guns, they don't mention all the lives that have been saved by guns.

There's no doubt that gun violence is a problem. But the problem isn't the guns. There are millions of Americans who own guns and don't go around shooting people. The problem is with the people who don't see anything wrong with killing another human being. THAT'S the issue we need to start paying more attention to.

It's really no different than the problem we have with drunken driving and automobile accidents in general. Last year alone, more than 32,000 people were killed in automobile accidents. Many of those killed were children. But every time I see people get killed by a drunk driver, I don't see people crying out that we should ban cars. When there are bad accidents, rather than talking about more car control or an outright ban on cars, we talk about how to improve safety, and how to keep drunks from getting behind the wheel. And that's how the gun discussion should be framed ... how do we improve safety, and how do we keep those with mental problems from getting their hands on guns?

Perhaps we can start by trying to change the culture of violence we live in. Is it wise to allow young children to play video games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto? When people, especially from a young age, become desensitized to death, should we be at all surprised by what we're seeing?

[Atlanta Dan]

Originally Posted by Wallace108

Dan, I have two children, so I can certainly understand the emotions behind your post. It's really hard to understand senseless tragedies like this, but I do understand why they always trigger (pun intended) gun-control talk. I get it; I really do. But Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and more control still wouldn't have prevented this tragedy. The only thing that might have prevented it would be a complete ban on all guns. But even then, who's to say he wouldn't have done something like this?



Yeah, I know a gun can cause a lot more harm than a knife, but if someone wants to kill people, they're going to find a way to do it. And they might not be able to take out as many with a knife (or other weapon), but that doesn't make the loss of life any less painful. Just imagine what Adam Lanza could have done if he had entered the school room with a sword, machete, or a knife and locked the door. What would a teacher and those young children have been able to do against him? It would have taken longer for him to kill them all, and maybe police would have gotten there in time before he had time to finish his evil act, but children still would have died.

I keep hearing a lot of people calling for more gun control. But like I said earlier, no amount of gun control would have prevented this tragedy since Lanza's mother was legally able to own weapons. Like I said, only a complete ban might have prevented it. But with a complete ban, what would have happened to Kendra, a 12-year-old girl in Oklahoma?



If Kendra's mother didn't have a gun in the house, she could have been kidnapped, raped, and possibly even killed. That gun likely saved her life. And this isn't an isolated story ... there are countless others, but they don't get the same kind of attention as this shooting in Connecticut. Every time a tragedy like this happens and everyone starts talking about the need for more gun control or the total ban of guns, they don't mention all the lives that have been saved by guns.

There's no doubt that gun violence is a problem. But the problem isn't the guns. There are millions of Americans who own guns and don't go around shooting people. The problem is with the people who don't see anything wrong with killing another human being. THAT'S the issue we need to start paying more attention to.

It's really no different than the problem we have with drunken driving and automobile accidents in general. Last year alone, more than 32,000 people were killed in automobile accidents. Many of those killed were children. But every time I see people get killed by a drunken driver, I don't see people crying out that we should ban cars. When there are bad accidents, rather than talking about more car control or an outright ban on cars, we talk about how to improve safety, and how to keep drunks from getting behind the wheel. And that's how the gun discussion should be framed ... how do we improve safety, and how do we keep those with mental problems from getting their hands on guns?

Perhaps we can start by trying to change the culture of violence we live in. Is it wise to allow young children to play video games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto? When people, especially from a young age, become desensitized to death, should we be at all surprised by what we're seeing?

Evil will always be with us and I agree the current level of treatment of the mentally ill in a culture drenched with violence is another obvious part of the problem.

But while someone who is batshit crazy can always do harm before he is stopped, it is possible to regulate the amount of damage they can do without unconstitutionally infringing upon the right to bear arms. All lives have value but I assume you agree the pain of 20 young lives being snuffed has a greater cumulative effect upon the families directly impacted than the loss of 5. The cumulative impact of conduct is the cost-benefit rationale that supports regulations of the auto industry that you cite as an appropriate regulatory model.

[O]ne pattern holds true: The faster the weapon, the higher the body count. It’s not politics. It’s logistics. If you stick a knife in your first victim, it takes time to move on to your second. You might need two stabs or more to finish off the first kid. By then, the other kids have begun to flee. Soon, the cops will be here. How much time do you have? At some point, it’s time to off yourself. And all you managed to kill were two lousy kids because the only weapon you had was a kitchen knife....

Guns do more damage. Look down the list and you’ll see gun after gun after gun. But not all guns are equal. I’ve gone through the 25 worst massacres on the chart, and nearly every shooter had a semi-automatic weapon. The one exception was a guy who had speedloaders and a bandolier so he could keep firing. High-capacity magazines are another common factor. All these patterns converge on a common lesson: Speed kills. Madness pulls the trigger, but the rate of fire drives the body count.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...igh_speed.html

I agree that under current laws any of us probably could buy the weapons and ammo used by the killer. The killer's mother legally owned the weapons he used - screening sales to the mentally ill would not have prevented him gaining access to these weapons. And a mother deciding to purchase an array of weapons and then apparently deciding nothing could possibly go wrong if she took her deranged son to the range to learn how to use those weapons efficiently also was not illegal.

Police said that they found “dozens and dozens” of shell casings from .223 high-velocity rounds inside the school, the type of spent casings that come from bullets used in the Bushmaster rifle.

The lightweight .223 bullets travel at a velocity of about 3,000 feet per second, and after they enter their target, they explode throughout the tissue. As the medical examiner H. Wayne Carver II put it at a news conference Saturday, the bullets’ “energy stays in the body.”

A similar high-powered, semiautomatic Bushmaster rifle was the weapon used by the Washington snipers John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, who terrorized the metropolitan area in 2002, killing 10 people and critically wounding three.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...1d6_story.html

I would respectfully submit the benefits of limiting the sale of those types of munitions would have a great net public benefit without unconstitutionally infringing upon the right to bear arms.

[mikegrimey]

Originally Posted by Wallace108

Dan, I have two children, so I can certainly understand the emotions behind your post. It's really hard to understand senseless tragedies like this, but I do understand why they always trigger (pun intended) gun-control talk. I get it; I really do. But Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and more control still wouldn't have prevented this tragedy. The only thing that might have prevented it would be a complete ban on all guns. But even then, who's to say he wouldn't have done something like this?



Yeah, I know a gun can cause a lot more harm than a knife, but if someone wants to kill people, they're going to find a way to do it. And they might not be able to take out as many with a knife (or other weapon), but that doesn't make the loss of life any less painful. Just imagine what Adam Lanza could have done if he had entered the school room with a sword, machete, or a knife and locked the door. What would a teacher and those young children have been able to do against him? It would have taken longer for him to kill them all, and maybe police would have gotten there in time before he had time to finish his evil act, but children still would have died.

I keep hearing a lot of people calling for more gun control. But like I said earlier, no amount of gun control would have prevented this tragedy since Lanza's mother was legally able to own weapons. Like I said, only a complete ban might have prevented it. But with a complete ban, what would have happened to Kendra, a 12-year-old girl in Oklahoma?



If Kendra's mother didn't have a gun in the house, she could have been kidnapped, raped, and possibly even killed. That gun likely saved her life. And this isn't an isolated story ... there are countless others, but they don't get the same kind of attention as this shooting in Connecticut. Every time a tragedy like this happens and everyone starts talking about the need for more gun control or the total ban of guns, they don't mention all the lives that have been saved by guns.

There's no doubt that gun violence is a problem. But the problem isn't the guns. There are millions of Americans who own guns and don't go around shooting people. The problem is with the people who don't see anything wrong with killing another human being. THAT'S the issue we need to start paying more attention to.

It's really no different than the problem we have with drunken driving and automobile accidents in general. Last year alone, more than 32,000 people were killed in automobile accidents. Many of those killed were children. But every time I see people get killed by a drunk driver, I don't see people crying out that we should ban cars. When there are bad accidents, rather than talking about more car control or an outright ban on cars, we talk about how to improve safety, and how to keep drunks from getting behind the wheel. And that's how the gun discussion should be framed ... how do we improve safety, and how do we keep those with mental problems from getting their hands on guns?

Perhaps we can start by trying to change the culture of violence we live in. Is it wise to allow young children to play video games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto? When people, especially from a young age, become desensitized to death, should we be at all surprised by what we're seeing?

In regards to your last paragraph I feel you're way off the mark in blaming video games. Violence has always been a part of human culture, and in fact, the western world experiences far higher levels of peacefulness than our ancestors ever did.

Video games weren't around 500 years ago when you could have your asshole impailed on a spike (judas cradle) for criticizing authority, practicing witchcraft or offending the upper class elite... Blaming them for the violence we have now isn't the answer. Canadians play the same games is Americans do and have lower levels of violent crimes, the "why" involves a lot more than video games or violent movies, the real answer is probably tied more to violent nature, our evolutionary past and biological make up. Certain people simply lack empathy or compassion or temperance, there have always been violent criminals, it's not a novelty of our age

[MasterOfPuppets]

Originally Posted by mikegrimey

That's a silly excuse. Saying people 10 years younger than you feel your generation is degenerate... What else is new? I run into people of every age group who feel the younger generation is softer, more prone to moral turpitude, lacking discipline etc. I'm site the Neanderthals probably had an expression for "kids these days." There have been trashy artists and immoral people in every generation. Blaming music, books movies etc? That's an easy cop out and a perpetually embarrassing argument that rears its head everytime there is a fresh tragedy

20 years ago i never locked my house or car doors . now i won't even leave a first floor window unlocked before i go to bed or leave the house.
before i could leave such things like a bicycle or anything really on my front porch without fear of it "disappearing" , now i make arrangements to have delivered packages left by ups secured as quickly as possible , because there's a good chance it may not still be there by the time i get home from work.
things have definitely changed for the worst in my little town. and yes i blame the little punks wearing the baggy pants and the sideways baseball caps.

[MACH1]

Liberals blame the guns, I blame the criminals,

So Dan, should .223's be banned whether their painted black or wrapped in a walnut stock, because they both shoot the same. If so where do you stop, .222, .243, .308, 30-06 where?

As far as .233's go their far from being a "high powered" rifle.

[mikegrimey]

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets

20 years ago i never locked my house or car doors . now i won't even leave a first floor window unlocked before i go to bed or leave the house.
before i could leave such things like a bicycle or anything really on my front porch without fear of it "disappearing" , now i make arrangements to have delivered packages left by ups secured as quickly as possible , because there's a good chance it may not still be there by the time i get home from work.
things have definitely changed for the worst in my little town. and yes i blame the little punks wearing the baggy pants and the sideways baseball caps.

I can't speak for your personal experience and wouldn't even want to. What town do you live in?