Another mass shooting in the U.S

Tony EH wrote: »

Heard on the news this morning that his mother had tried to get him sectioned.

Which brings me back to a point I made earlier, that as part of the background checks, the medical records of anyone wanting to own a gun should be investigated and the medical records of the immediate family too...

...and NOBODY should be allowed to build up an arsenal of weaponry.

Well aside from the privacy issues of doing that, you would have to question the sanity of the mother in not (at the very least) locking up her weapons after recognising he had mental issues.

This kid had an enormous rage to shoot his mother in the face and then go after the thing he felt she loved more than him; the kindergarten kids.

Overheal

Tony EH wrote: »

So...I'll go back to my original point...gun owners don't care about dead 6 year olds.

They just want to play with their toys.

If stricter gun control eliminated even one potential massacre, it would be worth a try.

Piliger wrote: »

They don't give one damn about them. They want to worship on the alter of their Guns.

you both have very warped views of people who own firearms.

If stricter gun control eliminated even one potential massacre, it would be worth a try.

It's a two-way street unfortunately. When someone circumvents the law and, for instance, enters a gun-free area with an illegally obtained firearm (ie. stolen from a licensed owner) then within that area they are basically free to do whatever they want, knowing that nobody there will be carrying a weapon that will oppose them. Even Ireland which has pretty strict controls as it is still has it's own gun homicide issues, fortunately enough it's still only at the point where it appears to be confined to within the criminal element and nobody is going after entirely innocent people (at least from what I hear, and I can be wrong on that). Unfortunately however it may only be a matter of time before something of similar gravity happens in Ireland also, and I won't want to participate in that thread when it does.

Either way, new legislation is more than likely going to be introduced in the federal government in light of the incident. What form the legislation will take is at this point uncertain but it will probably not be anything experimental or unconventional: requiring owners to have trigger locks as NTM was mentioning is probably a reasonable approach. I could see where it might be useful to have medical records for immediate family but that's very shaky legal ground: maybe I want nothing to do with my father yet because he wants to purchase a glock suddenly I have to agree to surrender my medical history? I don't see that getting passed at all. I also feel that any particular weapons ban wont solve the issue or remove any weapons that are already in circulation so it would prove effectively useless. Ultimately I like the sound of trigger locks as a simple approach to keeping someone from using your weapons. Sadly biometric pistol grips are still decades from being a practical workaround, but I can see where that becomes the future where the firing pin won't function unless it's in the hand of the licensed user; but even if such a thing exists today it would be far too expensive to implement.

Piliger

Overheal wrote: »

you both have very warped views of people who own firearms.

No. Accurate.

Piliger wrote: »

No. Accurate.

You really aren't interested in debate are you?

Piliger

MadsL wrote: »

You really aren't interested in debate are you?

You're just not interested in innocent people's lives are you.

Piliger wrote: »

You're just not interested in innocent people's lives are you.

Do you drink? Do you own a car?

smurgen wrote: »

can I also say that for some reason I actually feel sorry for the shooter himself? I dunno how this is going to be received, i'll probably get some back lash for it but it but the impression i'm getting of the guy is that he was just totally messed up from the start. He just looks like a weak and miserable looking fella.
I don't think his parents helped his mental situaton and i'd say they were the types who just fired money at a problem and just hoped it went away instead of actually paying attention to and listened to their kid. Also he could have had severe mental issues like psychophrenia.I'd say he basically acted without emotion for the people he was killing in an almost animal like fashion.

I therefore find it hard to have any hatred towards him and more feel anger towards the entire situation and systems that let the whole tragedy unfold. I mean if he was a normal kid do you honestly think he would have wanted to end his life in such a grim horrible situation instead of living a long life full of the enjoyment many others experience?

Don't get me wrong by the way, i had to chance to stop a guy like this I wouldn't pause to consider the above, I'd just destroy him.

He was doomed from the start. Should have been put down like a dog that they know will be too aggressive and therfore incompatible with society.

EdenHazard wrote: »

Oh I hate him but I agree. He should have been put down before, he obviously was not capable for this world. But he was doomed from the start.

Are we advocating euthanasia for the mentally ill now? Jesus Christ!

Gunowners HATE people in T-shirts aswell.

Tom-Clarke-Targets-Shooting-Paper.jpg?mw634

National Rifle Association (USA not the one in Ireland) finally opens it's gob after days and days of silence.
Even a conservative news media site reproduces an unsympathetic AP article about the NRA's Press Release.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/nra-promises-help-prevent-school-shootings

MadsL wrote: »

Are we advocating euthanasia for the mentally ill now? Jesus Christ!

People like him yeah. He was obviously incompatible with our world. What was the point of him being in it? His life would have meant 28 lifes would be still here, people who deserved to be here. Not some outcast.
He was a freak in life and a freak in death, like his classmates said they weren't that surprised to hear it was him. He wasn't some boy next door nice kid who just lost it.

How were higher ups not aware of this strange kid and that he needed help. His classmates were not surprised that he committed an act like this. Sometimes you need to typecast, and this guy fits the bill for a school shooter.

Suryavarman

EdenHazard wrote: »

People like him yeah. He was obviously incompatible with our world. What was the point of him being in it? His life would have meant 28 lifes would be still here, people who deserved to be here. Not some outcast.
He was a freak in life and a freak in death, like his classmates said they weren't that surprised to hear it was him. He wasn't some boy next door nice kid who just lost it.

How were higher ups not aware of this strange kid and that he needed help. His classmates were not surprised that he committed an act like this. Sometimes you need to typecast, and this guy fits the bill for a school shooter.

Well done, you are now no better than Adam Lanza.

Wattle

It's labeling people as 'freaks' that stop a lot of people from coming forward and getting the help they need to address their mental problems. Perhaps if he had got help he could have used that super intelligence he had for good rather than catastrophic evil. Also a lot of people who are so-called 'loners' are no harm to anybody.

But here if this kid was from some rough neighbourhood of the bronx and he just went into school and shot people, you wouldn't see people being so apologetic. because he's white and upper class its always 'mental issues'

Suryavarman wrote: »

Well done, you are now no better than Adam Lanza.

What an absolutely outrageous and complete idiotic thing to say :mad:

Sparks

LiamMc wrote: »

National Rifle Association (USA not the one in Ireland) finally opens it's gob after days and days of silence.

They say nothing citing respect for the dead and they get taunts and criticism.
They say anything and they get criticism for having no respect for the dead.
That's not a way towards a compromise, that's a way to ensure the entrenched positions are never moved beyond.

Suryavarman

EdenHazard wrote: »

What an absolutely outrageous and complete idiotic thing to say :mad:

Coming from the person that has advocated the murder of people just because they suffer from mental illness.

Sparks wrote: »

They say nothing citing respect for the dead and they get taunts and criticism.
They say anything and they get criticism for having no respect for the dead.
That's not a way towards a compromise, that's a way to ensure the entrenched positions are never moved beyond.

I see you have reinforced your own beliefs with a photo of a Man and a Gun.
Your entitlements are greater than the vast majority of users of this message Board.

The conversation with a Man with Gun will always be an imbalanced conversation for the unarmed man.

By not communicating the NRA (USA not Ireland) chose not to have any conversation.

Don't shoot nobody.

Sparks

LiamMc wrote: »

I see you have reinforced your own beliefs with a photo of a Man and a Gun.

Yeah, hi, that's me.

By not communicating the NRA (USA not Ireland) chose not to have any conversation.

Really? The US was going to completely forget about the worst school shooting in recent history in the space of four days? What's that decay rate, like five dead kids a day?

Don't shoot nobody.

Don't hit anyone with your car.

Sparks wrote: »

Yeah, hi, that's me.

Really? The US was going to completely forget about the worst school shooting in recent history in the space of four days? What's that decay rate, like five dead kids a day?

Don't hit anyone with your car.

I'm not sure why you need to chop up and only partially quote my post. It appears you only want to talk about some aspects of gun-obsession.

With your avatar, everywhere you go on Boards.ie you are aiming a gun.

Another Vile dispicable Human Target (with Bonus points):

Website:
http://members.tripod.com/~Merlin_30/T7.html

Sparks

LiamMc wrote: »

I'm not sure why you need to chop up and only partially quote my post.

Because the rest wasn't worth replying to.

Witcher

LiamMc wrote: »

Another Vile dispicable Human Target (with Bonus points):

Website:
http://members.tripod.com/~Merlin_30/T7.html

'For law enforcement'...I think it's quite important that police know where to aim for maximum effect don't you? I don't know why you're bringing this up in conversation with Sparks...you won't find those targets on any range here in Ireland.

smurgen

EdenHazard wrote: »

But here if this kid was from some rough neighbourhood of the bronx and he just went into school and shot people, you wouldn't see people being so apologetic. because he's white and upper class its always 'mental issues'

Why do you put mental issues in commas like it isn't a real thing? From what I heard of this case it sounds very much like the kid had mental issues.And stop trying to turn this into a race or social status issue. anders breivik is rich and white and I think he's just a scumbag,not mentally insane.I would never be apologetic for someone like him.

Piliger

LiamMc wrote: »

I'm not sure why you need to chop up and only partially quote my post. It appears you only want to talk about some aspects of gun-obsession.

He's an apologist for the Gun worshipping brigade and incapable of caring about innocent people, adult or toddlers. He is incapable of, and unwilling to, engage in debate except in so far as to try to hijack it, divert it or distort it. You're wasting your time :rolleyes:

BattleCorp

bajer100 wrote: »

no

I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these weapons were not available - less people would die. It really is this simple. Less weapons - less deaths.

If you think I am wrong - put your money were your mouth is and pay me money if you are right.

If you had less cars, you'd have less road deaths too.

The fact is that guns in the right hands don't go into schools and kill people.

BattleCorp

MagicSean wrote: »

All those things have a purpose other than killing. Guns do not.

I don't use my guns for killing. I use my guns for target shooting.

Run_to_da_hills

Drunk drivers and lunatics kill people with their cars, why don't they start banning cars.

Manic Moran

Wattle wrote: »

It's labeling people as 'freaks' that stop a lot of people from coming forward and getting the help they need to address their mental problems. Perhaps if he had got help he could have used that super intelligence he had for good rather than catastrophic evil. Also a lot of people who are so-called 'loners' are no harm to anybody.

It's a significant issue for the military. There are a fair percentage (No, not the majority, but enough to notice) coming back from war zones with mild traumatic disorders: Many of them are saying nothing for fear that a psychiatric issue will be placed on their record and they may become prohibited for life from owning firearms. As a result, they're not getting the help they need to undertake the total recovery to normalcy that they otherwise would have.

NTM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Drunk drivers and lunatics kill people with their cars, why don't they start banning cars.

They do.

Texas.
http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/mobilesource/vim/driveclean.html

Republic of Ireland
http://www.motorcheck.ie/blog/is-your-car-fit-for-scrap/

It's fun to shoot at Targets:

Overheal

LiamMc wrote: »

They do.

Texas.
http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/mobilesource/vim/driveclean.html

Republic of Ireland
http://www.motorcheck.ie/blog/is-your-car-fit-for-scrap/

It's fun to shoot at Targets:

Scrapping old cars that fail emission standards isn't banning the kind of weapons that drunk rugby players kill children with. It doesn't matter if it's a Hummer or a Prius: if you're going 45mph and you hit a child, they are dead.