Another shooting in America thread.

MagicMarker

CNN

-- School spokesman: 3 people die in shooting at the University of Alabama in Huntsville; female suspect is in custody.

Alright, who had the 12th?

bonerm

3? Who cares. Only noteworthy these days if it hits double figures.

Hank_Jones

I find the fact that the word yay is almost immediately followed by the word shooting quite disturbing.

Sicko. :cool:

brummytom

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

MagicMarker

bonerm wrote: »

3? Who cares. Only noteworthy these days if it hits double figures.

Well it was a female shooter so her aim probably let her down. :cool:

ibarelycare

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

Indeed. And they seem to be starting earlier and earlier.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

It's beyond reason at this stage.
Can't even bring myself to have a conversation on it.

Gun totin' hicks

Mayoegian

From your title, including the word 'yay,' it seems you're celebrating in some way, OP.

Can you please explain why you're excited that 3 people have died?

MagicMarker

MaighEoGoDeo wrote: »

From your title, including the word 'yay,' it seems you're celebrating in some way, OP.

Can you please explain why you're excited that 3 people have died?

YAY!!!

L.Jenkins

I'm not going to debate the use of guns and the mentality of the yanks. It's funny though, how some story rears it's ugly head within the US and there's a bandwagon discussing the yanks and there never ending ability to amaze and remind people of there stupidity!

Stephen

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

Because they're great fun? And they are constitutionally guaranteed?

:pac:

Dartz

Shock....

Rain is Wet.

Cookie_Monster

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

because it means there's less of them

L.Jenkins

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

because it means there's less of them

Good thinking, it's almost like natural selection and survival of the fitest. Only this time someone goes bat**** insane and caps a few innocents without warning!

Guns don't kill people, Americans do :cool:

CrazyRabbit

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

How can people continue to condone the use of kitchen knives, baseball bats, crowbars, hammers, bricks, fists & feet?

Bet she was ugly.

Manic Moran

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

1) By law, the police are not responsible for the defence and protection of you, the individual citizen. Only you are. However, I, the individual, am not responsible for the standards of adherence to the law by others. Guess where my emphasis is going to be?
2) Even if they did have such a duty, practical realities dictate that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Particularly in the country. (Even more particularly when you're camping and a large bear with sharp claws decides to take a dislike to you). In effect, their job is to draw a white line around your corpse, then find out who dun it. Fine for society, not quite so fine for you.
3) A firearm is far and away the most effective tool for your protection, particularly if you're disabled or old. Nothing else comes close.
4) Practical realities dictate that even if firearms were declared illegal tomorrow, they would not be removed from the streets. Ban firearms, and only criminals will have firearms. They already have enough of an advantage, why give them more of one? Case in point: I'll lay money that the shooter was prohibited by law or policy from being armed on the university campus. Very few universities and States allow it (Utah and a couple in Virginia being some of the few). Indeed, most of these mass shooting incidents tend to take place where the victims are known to be unarmed unless they're breaking the laws and policies themselves. (Virginia Tech, Trolley Square Mall, Fort Bliss etc). Instances such as University of the Appalachians, or the New Life Church of Colorado Springs are stopped by the legal, unexpected presence of a firearm. After all, most people wouldn't expect a church congregation to be armed. Easy pickings, no?
5) Statistics have shown that persons licensed to carry a concealed firearm are more law-abidng than police.

Any questions?

NTM

cafecolour

The shooter being a female is new. 'Harvard-trained prof' in Biology. Shot other folks in the biology dept.

Alabama is a pretty gun heavy state. I'm surprised it didn't turn into a firefight between her and some of her intended victims.

Mark200

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of kitchen knives, baseball bats, crowbars, hammers, bricks, fists & feet?

All those things you've listed have practical uses - the only use guns have is to kill.

minidazzler

Mark200 wrote: »

All those things you've listed have practical uses - the only use guns have is to kill.

Not true....guns can also maim.

It is impossible to get rid of guns, they are out there.

It's not nice that 3 innocent people were just murdered, but that doesn't mean guns can, will or should be banned!

Biggins

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Bet she was ugly.

O' aye, because female killers are never this good looking!



She had to be ugly of course. :rolleyes:

MagicMarker

Manic Moran wrote: »

1) By law, the police are not responsible for the defence and protection of you, the individual citizen. Only you are. However, I, the individual, am not responsible for the standards of adherence to the law by others. Guess where my emphasis is going to be?
2) Even if they did have such a duty, practical realities dictate that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Particularly in the country. (Even more particularly when you're camping and a large bear with sharp claws decides to take a dislike to you). In effect, their job is to draw a white line around your corpse, then find out who dun it. Fine for society, not quite so fine for you.
3) A firearm is far and away the most effective tool for your protection, particularly if you're disabled or old. Nothing else comes close.
4) Practical realities dictate that even if firearms were declared illegal tomorrow, they would not be removed from the streets. Ban firearms, and only criminals will have firearms. They already have enough of an advantage, why give them more of one? Case in point: I'll lay money that the shooter was prohibited by law or policy from being armed on the university campus. Very few universities and States allow it (Utah and a couple in Virginia being some of the few). Indeed, most of these mass shooting incidents tend to take place where the victims are known to be unarmed unless they're breaking the laws and policies themselves. (Virginia Tech, Trolley Square Mall, Fort Bliss etc). Instances such as University of the Appalachians, or the New Life Church of Colorado Springs are stopped by the legal, unexpected presence of a firearm. After all, most people wouldn't expect a church congregation to be armed. Easy pickings, no?
5) Statistics have shown that persons licensed to carry a concealed firearm are more law-abidng than police.

Any questions?

NTM

It's still pretty fúcking retarded though.

citizen_p

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

its not a thing to ban guns about....if anything they should reduce the legal age, if those kids had guns they could defend themselves.

but most of the time the people wh have guns are law abiding..only gangs (illegal firearms anyway) and a select few ever go loco

Biggins

Biggins wrote: »

O' aye, because female killers are never this good looking!



She had to be ugly of course. :rolleyes:

Yeah cause she's the definition of...plain?

Cookie_Monster

Manic Moran wrote: »

5) Statistics have shown that persons licensed to carry a concealed firearm are more law-abidng than police.
NTM

Thats quite interesting

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Yeah cause she's the definition of...plain?

Yeah, plain downright fuckable!

Biggins

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Yeah cause she's the definition of...plain?

If she was innocent (in crime terms) I'd like to have her hold my hand any day than the likes of a Jordan bimbo lookalike in a month of Sunday's.
...but we digress.

hugoline

Biggins wrote: »

She had to be ugly of course. :rolleyes:

Well... I wouldn't

Busi_Girl08

This whole thread is fúcked up.

CrazyRabbit

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of kitchen knives, baseball bats, crowbars, hammers, bricks, fists & feet?

Mark200 wrote: »

All those things you've listed have practical uses - the only use guns have is to kill.

Guns have practical legitimate uses as well. Hunting, shooting ranges, self defense, etc.

It just annoys me when people blame inanimate objects for the actions of people. The gun didn't do anything. Pretty much any object can be used as a weapon if it is wielded as one. The only difference is that guns are generally more lethal compared to many other potential weapons.

Let me remind you...there are millions of guns in the US, yet there are only a relatively small number of firearm deaths. 111.66 firearm deaths per 100,000 people (0.11166% of the population die from firearms), with ~25% of that from suicide and accidents.

Odysseus

brummytom wrote: »

How can people continue to condone the use of guns in America?

As others have noted guns have many applications. I don't have the reference to hand here, but in the UK gun crime has continued to grow on a yearly basis. It is a number of years since the UK banned the ownership of handguns; so reducing access to legally held fioearms has done little. People are entitled to own legally held guns, reducing ownership many stop the rare case of some who owns a legallly held firearm going "postal", but it will do nothing to reduce most of the gun crime, as criminals don't go through the vetting procedures that sport shooters and hunters have to.

Jesus Juice

Jesus chirst how fcuked up is American society?

I mean its like ''I've got a problem, thats it I'm gonna shoot everyone and myself that'll learn em''

Overheal

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's still pretty fúcking retarded though.

Not as retarded as Irish logic: "I have no gun. That scumbag has a gun. That Other Scumbag has a gun. Therefore, they will only kill eachother, and not me."

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

because it means there's less of them

Im sure you thought you were very clever writing that. You're not.

The sheer level of Pat ignorance in this thread is astounding.

InKonspikuou2

A gun is solely a weapon. Any other potential weapons have other primary functions. You go to the shooting range to improve accuracy. If you use a gun as self defense chances are you are prepared to fire it. And you don't hunt with hanguns and automatic rifles and machine guns. Other than other hunting rifles most guns are used to injure, maim and kill whether it be offensive or defensive actions. All aspects of using these non hunting guns are associated with the potential intent of using it on another human being.

I'm not flat out against guns as i own a gun and there have always been guns in my house when i lived in the US. But i believe that guns give some people power that they otherwise would not have. It's a lot easier to squeeze a trigger than it is to plunge a knife into someone or beat someone over the head with a baseball bat. I have had friends that were gun nuts and at times i felt uneasy around them when they would get their parents gun. Holding it changed them a bit.

It's gone too far where a ban on guns other than hunting rifles would work as there are too many of them out there. But if it had of been a lot of years ago it may have worked. The only guns i have problems with are the concealed ones. Would be a lot harder to shoot up a school, invade a home or rob a store when you gotta carry a gun almost the length of your body.

ColmDawson

Wikipedia wrote:

Some areas in the US are experimenting with the idea of armed classrooms to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[50][51] In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[52]

...

*shakes head*

dollybird09

I find this chilling, how long will it be until this happens in an Irish university or school....

Obviously Irish kids don't have the same access to guns as their US peers, but I think it's only a matter of time...

InKonspikuou2

Overheal wrote: »

Not as retarded as Irish logic: "I have no gun. That scumbag has a gun. That Other Scumbag has a gun. Therefore, they will only kill eachother, and not me."

Retarded or not Ireland must have one of the lowest firearm homicide rates in which innocents are injured or killed in the world per capita.

brummytom

Manic Moran wrote: »

1) By law, the police are not responsible for the defence and protection of you, the individual citizen. Only you are. However, I, the individual, am not responsible for the standards of adherence to the law by others. Guess where my emphasis is going to be?
2) Even if they did have such a duty, practical realities dictate that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Particularly in the country. (Even more particularly when you're camping and a large bear with sharp claws decides to take a dislike to you). In effect, their job is to draw a white line around your corpse, then find out who dun it. Fine for society, not quite so fine for you.
3) A firearm is far and away the most effective tool for your protection, particularly if you're disabled or old. Nothing else comes close.
4) Practical realities dictate that even if firearms were declared illegal tomorrow, they would not be removed from the streets. Ban firearms, and only criminals will have firearms. They already have enough of an advantage, why give them more of one? Case in point: I'll lay money that the shooter was prohibited by law or policy from being armed on the university campus. Very few universities and States allow it (Utah and a couple in Virginia being some of the few). Indeed, most of these mass shooting incidents tend to take place where the victims are known to be unarmed unless they're breaking the laws and policies themselves. (Virginia Tech, Trolley Square Mall, Fort Bliss etc). Instances such as University of the Appalachians, or the New Life Church of Colorado Springs are stopped by the legal, unexpected presence of a firearm. After all, most people wouldn't expect a church congregation to be armed. Easy pickings, no?
5) Statistics have shown that persons licensed to carry a concealed firearm are more law-abidng than police.

Any questions?

NTM

Nope, that's very interesting. Thanks

It wasn't me!

dollybird09 wrote: »

I find this chilling, how long will it be until this happens in an Irish university or school....

Obviously Irish kids don't have the same access to guns as their US peers, but I think it's only a matter of time...

Any particular reason? There's absolutely no logical route to that conclusion apart from some sort of "infinite monkeys with typewriters" suggestion.

Overheal

InKonspikuou2 wrote: »

Retarded or not Ireland must have one of the lowest firearm homicide rates in which innocents are injured or killed in the world per capita.

And how your Mugging rate been eh?

InKonspikuou2

Overheal wrote: »

And how your Mugging rate been eh?

Well i'd rather be mugged than shot.

Overheal

InKonspikuou2 wrote: »

Well i'd rather be mugged than shot.

Or raped or stabbed. Its easy for a Scumbag on the streets of dublin isnt it? Flash a pistol and you're basically at his mercy.

Gards arent everywhere and you're left with no mace, no pepper spray, no gun, no knife, no anything to defend yourself with.

minidazzler

InKonspikuou2 wrote: »

Well i'd rather be mugged than shot.

And if you get stabbed while being mugged? or Hit with a dirty needle?

I'd rather have a concealed pistol than get mugged. But I'm not allowed!

ColmDawson

Overheal wrote: »

Or raped or stabbed. Its easy for a Scumbag on the streets of dublin isnt it? Flash a pistol and you're basically at his mercy.

I'm struggling to see what your point is.

I don't think "more guns" is ever the answer to a gun problem.

minidazzler

Colm Dawson wrote: »

I'm struggling to see what your point is.

I don't think "more guns" is ever the answer to a gun problem.

The thing you are struggling with is you think anyone with a gun is inherently evil.

But if citizens are armed and you don't know who is packing you are less likely to mug someone!

I can't remember the last time I heard of a legally obtained firearm being used in the commission of a crime in Ireland.

My name is URL

What are the figures for muggings etc in the US per capita per year as opposed to Ireland?

Lax gun laws don't mean less crime, it's stupid to say they do. 1 in 100 people in the US are in prison ffs

If having a gun makes you feel safe that's fine, but don't try to say it means that less crime takes place

Overheal

Colm Dawson wrote: »

I'm struggling to see what your point is.

I don't think "more guns" is ever the answer to a gun problem.

To be perfectly fair yes it is.

Ive been struggling in the last half hour to recall which university where a Homocidal man with a gun was preparing to go on a rampage when blam - shot dead by a student, who was holding a licensed firearm and a concealed weapons permit.

I mean if you go back in time to Columbine, wouldnt it have been better that instead of being a teacher huddling in a supply closet waiting to die with your students you were crouched in a closet with a loaded gun ready to fire on one of the bastards when they tried to find you?

You can argue that others with guns will not deter someone who is crazy and homocidal enough for attempting to kill everyone in sight, but you have to admit that it would be pretty hard to get a killing spree going if youre stopped dead after 30 seconds.

MaybeLogic

What makes me laugh is that America enforces a policy against other nations of not having certain weapons because they might use them and kill people but never consider applying the same logic on their own populace.

Overheal

MaybeLogic wrote: »

What makes me laugh is that America enforces a policy against other nations of not having certain weapons because they might use them and kill people but never consider using the same logic on their own populace.

When im allowed to store explosives ill give you a call.

Odysseus

Colm Dawson wrote: »

I don't think "more guns" is ever the answer to a gun problem.

I think your correct, however, reducing access to sporting firearms is not the answer to gun crime. When something like this happens there seems to be a strong view that not allowing people to own sporting firearms will stop gun criome.

Our own government used this logic recently in banning people from owning certain handguns from sporting reasons, i.e. target shooting. This will do nothing in reducing gun crime in Ireland. Nobody is issued a licence in Ireland for self-defence purposes, so carrying a concealed firarm is not an issue over here.

MaybeLogic

Overheal wrote: »

When im allowed to store explosives ill give you a call.

Explosives don't kill people. Detonators do.