Another campus shooting
 

WTF is wrong with people? Why can't these losers just take a walk in the woods and put the barrel in their mouths and do the rest of us a favor? I don't believe in a literal hell however I do hope there is one for these f#%$ing morons.

RT

It pisses me off too. This crap happens all the time in this country. I think it's the equivalent of suicide bombing. Death does not deter these people. The only real solution is to ban guns nationwide with draconian enforcement and anyone found to possess a gun is instantly tortured to death by the authorities. The next best solution is to require each and every person over the age of 12 of clean background to own a gun and be proficient at using it and to carry it at all times, otherwise he or she will be subject to instant torture to death by the authorities. This will not completely deter the "suicide bombers" but it might help minimize the casualties during shootouts like this. But guess what, nothing like this will ever happen and this crap will continue as long as we have these rotten minds in our society. Anyone else have another solution?

Unfortunately I think you are correct. The only stopgap I can see that MAY help is to simply allow people with CCW permits to carry on campuses. There is resistance to this however if a person can legally carry concealed in that state, they have passed all the requirements which are usually training, a background check, documenting, etc. then why not? There is a CHANCE, admittedly a small one, that a person in that classroom may have ended this pretty quickly. Whackjobs like this may not consider that their victims may be armed however when they may find it difficult to continue if the victims are returning fire. Other than that, I don't have any solutions. RT

Maybe he was Catholic, and figured since he was going to go to hell for killing himself, he might as well make sure he goes to hell (in case you can get out of it), by killing innocent people.

Should his suicide have been stopped? Absolutely!
He should have been executed on live TV as an example to the other a-holes that have such an atrocity in mind.

Do speeding laws keep people from speeding? Do shoplifting laws stop people from shoplifting? Do fireworks laws stop people from using fireworks? Etc.?

No law is going to stop an insane person from doing something insane.

There is nothing that can be done to prevent these things from happening. We have 300+ million people in this country and bad ***** is gonna happen at times. It might happen at school, a mall, on main street, at home, or wherever.

Ban guns? It's to late for that. Ten's of millions in of guns in every corner of this country. If a person wants to get one bad enough, they will. If not a gun then something equally effective can be substituted.

Want to turn this country into a police state and search everyone everywhere they go? No me, I'd rather have a couple hundred people a year get massacred by some loony tune than turn this country into a semi-secured prison.

It's a sad situation when bad things happen, but bad things will always happen no matter what we do. It has always been that way and it always will be that way. Get use to it. The odds of being involved in something like these shootings is millions to one.

When it's your time it's your time, no matter what the means. Some call it Gods will, some call it being at the wrong place at the wrong time. For me, unless it effects me personally, I just basically ignore it and move on.

It's too scary, too close to home. At first I thought it was Southern Illinois Univ because I only heard a short snippet on the news, then I realized I waswrong , it's bad

I think you guys covered all the points.

The only one that is left out is when these types of crimes are actually thwarted by students on campus or at the work place who retrieved their guns from their vehicles or their person to stop the bad guy, the media does all they can to avoid making it into a pro gun story in most cases.

Put an emergency switch in the classroom that releases disabling gas.

Or faster yet, tazer the whole room.

This is deeply distrubing and its happening more and more. Unfortuantely I don't think gun control will stop anything. You want a gun your gonna get a gun. DC has a ban on gun ownership, yet they have the highest murder rate by gun shootings in the country so gun control aint the answer.

We definitely need to quit creating and get rid of existing "gun-free" zones. Gun free zones only disarm the law abiding while criminals or mentally defectives ignore the laws. History has shown that the vast majority of random multiple shootings occur in gun free zones where law abiding citizens are not allowed to defend them selves. Criminals and Mental defectives like their victims to be unarmed and defenseless as it allows them more time commit their dastardly deeds. That being said, as a realist, I believe that getting rid of the gun free zones will not stop these things from occurring period, but it may cause enough pause in someone thinking about these types of things from following through with their plans. At the very least, it would allow law abiding citizens, a chance to defend them selves and possibly mitigate the carnage cause by the would-be assailant.

Keep in mind that case law has proven that the police are under no obligation to protect you from harm even if they are in a position to protect you. In reality, when seconds count in a life and death situation, the police are usually minutes away. Our security and protection is our own personal responsibility and we should be afforded every opportunity and tool we can to take on that responsibility.

As a CHL holder, I hold my 2nd Amendments rights very dear and exercise those rights when ever and where ever law allows me to.

These shootings are terrible, but the solutions are not easy "sound-bite" answers. Unfortunaltely, those are the ones that our lawmakers prefer. They play better on TV.

I am for allowing CCW on campuses..When I am old enough I plan on getting my CCW permit and take all neccessary classes for it.

I just don't get it. What is the point of going out like that? You shot a bunch of innocent people and then yourself? The looney that shot up that mall recently left a note that he wanted to be famous. How does this make him famous? Now hes on a long list of copycats that can't think of a more memorable way to self-expire? There should be a national campaign promoting "just shoot yourself" day. Seriously these losers just need to step into the woods and pull the trigger. Maybe if we had public recognition of their "good deed" and a plaque or monument or something. It'd be a helluva lot better than the other option. RT

[QUOTE=pt145ss;1764684]We definitely need to quit creating and get rid of existing "gun-free" zones. Gun free zones only disarm the law abiding while criminals or mentally defectives ignore the laws.

Damm right. Nothing more stupid than telling the whackjob, "the fish in the barrel are that way"

Actually. The whole idea of CCW is inherently unconstitutinonal and frankly stupid. If a bunch of folks in a class had guns carried openly and some whackjob walked in I don't believe he'd even attempt to open fire.
- Peter.

These localized "gun-free" zones are the worst option in my opinion. What's the point of banning guns in DC or Chicago, when you can drive a few miles and easily purchase a gun there? For gun control to be effective it needs to be nationwide with no exceptions and strictly enforced with severe penalties. I truly believe this would drastically reduce the murder rate but it might increase burglaries and other less serious crimes. I don't know if allowing everyone to carry a concealed gun everywhere would reduce murder-suicides like these. You have to realize that these perpetrators want to die and take a few people with them. Armed citizens would not be a big deterrent to these people. I understand the intention and advantages of the second amendment, but it certainly comes with a big cost in its current form. I still say strict nationwide gun ban or at least getting rid of all gun-free zones. The localized gun-free zones and the easy availability of guns is a very dangerous mix.

if the guy wants to pop off a few people before him self he could be stopped sooner if someone with a concealed weapon took him out before the attacker takes out 10-20 innocents.

Its still a flying joke some terrorist took over a bunch of planes with.. box cutters... I carry one of those at work and no one gives me their money...

They don't have to be a deterrent. Just kill them whenever they surface.

- Peter.

Sadly even arming everyone is probably a bad idea. Look at the wild west, look at someone the wrong way and they would start shooting.

Considering the average person is a moron I would be scared giving them guns.:eek::D

I don't think their is a solution to this, other then trying to ID these people before they snap.

I like the idea of everyone (who is qualified to carry) having the choice to open carry or conceal carry, however, given the choice to open carry or conceal, I would personally choose to conceal. I think that open carry in some situations gives away tactical advantage and/or could cause one to be targeted first.

If you have a room full of people, and only one person is open carrying, as the bad guy, who would you shoot first? I think the guy who is open carrying will be the first target. If everyone conceals, the BG does not know who is armed and who is not. It keeps them guessing. Keeping the BG guessing is advantageous for everyone because the BG might look at someone and say to them selves that a particular person looks like an easy target, but who knows for sure if they are packing. This sort of helps those who decide not to carry.

As for it being unconstitutional, I would agree in the fact that a right (not a privilege) is being taxed or costing money to exercise. In TX it cost $150 every four years to exercise my right. It does not cost money to exercise our First amendment, why should it cost us to exercise the second.

No feel good measure is gonna stop criminals from getting guns.

It's been proven time after time that an armed society is a polite society as cliche as it sounds.

Every major city, metropolitan area, and country that has widespread gun bans for legal purchase and posession suddenly has skyrocketing violent crime rates with firearms because the criminals then have easy pickins on the innocent.

Sorry, it does not work and numerous studies, including FBI internal investigations have proved that gun bans DO NOT reduce firearms related crimes.

These wild west stories you keep hearing are no different than what happens on our streets daily as a result of criminal activity.
Instead of stage coaches we have armored trucks, we still have bank robberies, and we stil have shootouts in the streets.

Great britain now criminalizes homeowners that use firearms and any other weapon for that matter for injuring criminals that break into their homes wether or not their lives were threatened in the process or not.

Contrary to popular belief, ccw holders have to go through background checks before they get their ccw permit, then that information is destroyed so the government can't review the list and go door to door should they get a little too big for their britches, thanks to the NRA fighting for our rights of privacy.
These legal ccw holders actually act more inconspicuous in public while carrying to avoid conflic and confrontation and do not like braggin about their guns and drawing attention to themselves. hence, (concealed) carry.

Granted, you may get a hot headed idiot from time to time, but that's what jails are for, and laws are on the books for.

There are many instances where all the criminal needs to do is see someone pointing a gun at them and they are outta there, and not many people who carry are just itching to blow someone away.

I carry, but to save lives, not to take lives if at all possible.

that is a big misconception brought out by Hollywood.

its very convenient I am doing a paper on this subject as we speak( gun control)




so.. you support Real ID... brave of you

Gum control: Using both hands

Gun control does not work. For that matter prohibition does not work for anything. I am very pro 2A as you might have guessed, however, I do see a need for smart legislature that targets the criminal, not the law abiding citizen. What is unfortunate is that we really have more gun control laws than we really need. What we should do is provide enough funding and incentive to support the laws already in place. Make the states pay if they do not list an individual who is a mental defective to the FBI in a timely manner. Make criminals that commit violent crimes with a gun pay dearly for their activity.

My big problem in those states the have strict handgun bands is that what the government is really saying is that: We the government do not trust you the citizen with a handgun to protect your self and do the right thing and even though we are not going to allow you to protect your self…you the citizen…can not hold us the government responsible for your injuries as a victim.

For gun control to be effective it needs to be nationwide with no exceptions and strictly enforced with severe penalties.

Severe penalties? You mean like our "unconstitutional" lethal injections, or our unconstitutional electric chair, or our unconstitutional death penalty?
Yeah, try to get judges to sentence anyone to a "severe penalty" without the ACLU calling it cruel and unusual.:D

Great, nationwide. No exceptions? How about the police/parole officers? FBI/CIA/NSA (other gov't agencies)?

Surely, they will have guns. What happens when one of them go "postal" (see gov't workers go crazy despite their great screening psych tests)

Nationwide?

Are you telling me that if the U.S. has a federal law banning X, that said X will prevented from coming in to the country?

If so, I direct you to look directly south and see if you can find anybody or anything crossing our borders without "permission" in spite of a nationwide ban.

So maybe your solution is a world-wide ban on guns and other explosive or dangerous materials?

Have fun finding a gun big enough to enforce that ban.

No, I think the government should just keep disarming all of the law-abiding citizens, and have these great government workers come in and take a nice report about how many more law-abiding citizens have been massacred.

Remember, the university had a "plan in place" to deal with just such a scenario.

Glad if was implemented with such great success.

As far as "well it might only decrease how many people are killed" theory if we allow people to have ccw's, there were a hundred students in the auditorioum, I am sure that someone would have shot him before he killed as many as he did. I would guess it would be less than five seconds for someone to have capped him NOT 30 MINUTES like it took the government workers to arrive and take a nice police report.

And NO I am not attacking the police, but they are not omnipresent no omnipotent.

I think the “wild west” notion is a crock and largely a TV myth. Truth be told, during that period of history there were less murders per capita then since the time we enacted our first gun control laws. This is the same line the anti’s used when Florida allowed their citizens to conceal carry. The antis cried it will be the “wild west”, people shooting each other over parking spots at the mall and etc. The same was said when Texas enacted carry laws. The anti’s were wrong, it did not become the wild west. We do not have CHL holders shooting people over parking spots and stuff.

I can tell you that it does serve a greater good. Look at the mega church shooting a few weeks back in Colorado. A mental defective walked into the church (containing several thousand parishioners) armed to do major damage. A person in the congregation who had a concealed handgun license, took action and only four people were killed. And of those four people, they were not inside the church (in the parking lot I think). Once the shooter got inside, he was confronted and shot by the alert law abiding citizen. Can you image the carnage this mental defective could have caused? The fact that people were allowed to carry in the church did not discourage the shooter (I give you that), but the quick reaction of the citizen definitely mitigated the damage caused by the shooter. Imagine what would have happened if there were not armed-law abiding citizens, willing to do the right thing, and the parishioners had to wait until law enforcement showed up.

I agree. I used to carry a concealed 9mm when I lived back in South Africa. There was no distinction between concealed and unconcealed. If you managed to get a license in the first place you could carry the weapon however you liked. I'm merely pointing out that the distinction between concealed and unconcealed is a pointless one. It's up to the individual to decide how they wish to carry and permits should have nothing to do with it.

Of course the mere existence of permits to begin with is unconstitutional and thus a crime on the part of the government.

- Peter.

I agree....

One nice thing about Texas that I failed to mention is that One can legally carry a loaded concealed handgun in their vehicle without a license (given the person in not a crimial and not a member of a gang). The only time a license is rquired is if you wish to carry on your person when outside your home or vehicle.

One nice thing about California's gun laws is....oh...nevermind.:(:mad:

I for one will never move to commyforna....sorry.

How do you make a dead criminal pay dearly for his or her activity?

So by your logic ALL laws are a waste of time and should therefore be abolished.:confused:


The laws, with PUNISHMENT and enforcement of them, help sometimes.

Quote: Of course the mere existence of permits to begin with is unconstitutional and thus a crime on the part of the government.

Peter,
Coming from a South African,
That comment deserves a sticky, and another Amen.

You're allright man.

As far as the guy who asked "How do you make a dead criminal pay dearly?"

Well, to be respectful to him, I won't even go there.

It's a valid question. Why not go there? I think one thing that we can all agree on is that there are no easy answers to these murder-suicides. One answer is to arm everyone but people better watch out who they're arguing with because the place could instantly erupt into a war zone. :eek:

Exactly, it gives people an excuse to be polite to one another.;)

That is exactly what the anti-gun movement has said every time a state enacts a "shall issue" CCW permit law. That is, a law where if a citizen can pass the requirements of CCW the permit is issued, no politics, local CLEO review etc. Heres the interesting thing: It doesn't happen! Most people, 99.9% of them, are law abiding level headed folks and carrying a weapon doesn't make them any more likely to shoot somebody. I believe 33 states now have shall issue and some others have permits with local/state CLEO review. There are far, far more people packing than anyone realizes. The problem is that they leave the gun at home when entering a school, govt building, etc.

I've been a gun owner for years and used to have CCW in CT when I lived there. RT

Sorry, Rob, got to disagree with you on that one. Drive around NY for a bit. You'll find that men are arrogant, testosterone crazed a'holes. I'd really be fearful if they were permitted to have a full carry.

In Texas...of all the convictions in 2005...only .3% were CHL holders.

Texas is required by law to provide these reports...it can be found at the following address.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/ConvictionRatesReport2005.pdf

Paging Dr Feelgood. Please report to the gun free zones. That is what it is for.

How so? People have been murdering others since the begining of time. What? You think that without a gun, murderers would be stymied and go home and cry in their pillows?

You are right about the perps. However, if someone had a gun there, they might be able to help him achieve the suicide part of the murder-suicide objective a little sooner.

They criminalize having C4 too but it didn't stop the IRA.

You can't if they are dead but not all of them do us the courtesy and off themselves, right? Make the living ones pay.

And they might have helped him with the murder part too.

If that were true, we'd have way more murders than we have now.

That makes no sense, as we don't have armed students now. If you want to arm students to shoot it out with the crazy guy, it's obvious that someone besides the crazy guy can get hit.


Arming students is a terrible idea.

So you'd rather take your chances that he is a poor shot and he runs out of ammo before you get hit?

I realize people have been murdering each other since the beginning of time, but you have to admit guns are much more efficient killing tools than say a knife or a sword. It's much easier to subdue a knife-wielding crazie than a gunman. Gun control in theory make sense. What doesn't make sense is the current implementation: poor enforcement, localized gun-free zones surrounded by gun-infested areas, and the ease of getting a gun in the first place (almost as easy as getting a hamburger). Since we can't realistically get rid of all guns and most people probably don't want to, I say let people carry guns everywhere unless they have to pass through a metal detector (like in airports or courts).

Depends. I'd rather kill someone with a knife seeing as how it attracts less attention if I could do it.

That didn't quite pan out in 09/11/01. The issue is that few people, unless they think that they are going to die immediately will want to rush the knife guy.

On that we can agree

Texas permit holder
 

Close but I think the Texas law requires the loaded weapon in your car to be visible (laying on the seat - not under the seat or in the glove box)

As opposed to taking my chances I get gunned down by a half dozen would be heroes shooting up the classroom? Either way I'm dead, and being dead I doubt I'd care that I got killed by a misaimed well-intentioned shot instead of a purposely aimed malicious shot.


Maybe there's some merit in arming the professor, though that makes them targets, but roomfuls of binge drinking know-it-all college students armed is a bad, bad idea. There might also be merit in not allowing citizens prescribed medication for mental health be allowed to purchase guns.


As for the knife v gun, it take a lot more time and energy to stab 18 people than it does to shoot them. I don't have a problem with gun ownership, but there is no doubt you can inflict less harm with a knife in the same time span as you could with a gun.