nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Another Shooting in the U.S..

willmunny1990

http://news.sky.com/story/1040544/teenage-gunman-shoots-five-people-dead-in-us

More to follow...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Killer Wench

Killer Wench wrote: »

I think it is a huge disservice to lump this shooting together with the Sandy Hook tragedy; there may have been multiple victims, but this particular incident most likely involves a teenager killing his own family.

I'll quote myself. Again, a huge disservice to compare this shooting with the Sandy Hook tragedy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/21/nehemiah-griego-teen-shoots-parents-3-children_n_2519359.html?ref=topbar

MadsL

The teen said he reloaded the guns so "he could drive to a populated area to murder more people," according to the statement.

His plan, the statement said, was to "shoot people at random and eventually be killed while exchanging gunfire with law enforcement."

Now where did he get that idea?

Maybe, just maybe, if we stop giving these teenagers all this publicity when they kill someone, we could stop this?

1. Stop putting their faces in the news reports
2. Stop describing the body count in terms of the "worst" since X body count
3. Stop reporting it like an epidemic and get a sense of proportion
4. Stop making it National News (eight people die in a RTA and it barely makes local news)
5. Stop interviewing survivours on TV
6. Even slowly, put a news blackout on such events such as Ireland operates with suicides.

Witcher

mark renton wrote: »

Complete ban is the only solution, get rid of all the gun coveting loons.

Nobody actually needs a gun in this world for anything productive... Get rid of em all I say. And stick those who dont abide into jail.

If we could keep the thread focused on realistic proposals that would be great. Outright bans on things don't work.

mark renton

Blay wrote: »

If we could keep the thread focused on realistic proposals that would be great. Outright bans on things don't work.

Tis a realistic propsal, and it was proposed in order to cut down on the numbers of innocent people killed, not eradicate the problem altogether.

All those people who dont want a complete ban seem to hide behind "but they could still get their hands on a gun", and are oblivious to reduction in deaths this would bring about.

Manic Moran

one interesting car technology is little microdots that are scattered through luxury cars, so you can trace stolen parts. you can also get custom made DNA. yes it's technically possible to trace guns and even bullets

The technology with regards to firearms is called "microstamping" and generally involves imprinting a mark onto the shell casing by way of the firing pin or chamber interior. California actually passed a law a few years ago requiring that it be implemented by 2010 if practicable. Unsurprisingly, after investigation, the DA admitted that it wasn't practicable for a number of reasons so the law was nullified.

Firstly, it requires that a casing be left at the scene. Easily avoided if shooter uses a shell catcher or revolver. More likely, though, they simply tweak the weapon. Firing pins and barrels are both customer replaceable units. Replacing or defacing the microstamping mark is a piece of cake for anyone who can clean their weapon.

A related system currently in use in two States is aballisticdatabase. Every handgun sold must be fired and a recovered round and casing sent to the State. The theory being that every weapon sold will have an entry on file to make tracing the weapon used easier.

Right. The State of California (which doesn't have aballistic database) believes I own a SIG P2340 in .40 cal S&W. Problem is that by the simple expedient of changing the barrel (which takes less than 60 seconds) I actually keep a SIG P2340 in .357 SIG. Again, barrels on most handguns are customer replaceable units.

Indeed, when California did try looking at a ballistics database, they concluded that it was of limited utility as the failure rate of identifying a match was about 60%. (They testedit on a few hundred police sidearms). Apparently barrels and pins wear out over time. Who knew? (Other than the manufacturers who made the parts easy to replace). Differing manufacturers of ammunution resulting in differing imprints didn't help.

NY and MD have both spent millions of dollars on their databases since 2002. MD has used it to solve one crime, unsure about NY. MD state police_asked that the database be abandoned as a waste of resources.

Which brings us to our last problem. Such expense and effort, even if in the unlikely event that it actually performs as advertised, does nothing to stop a killing. It just makes it easier for the police to find out who did it, which hasn't really been a problem in the high profile shooting so far.

So long story short, nice optimistic idea, won't work.

Witcher

mark renton wrote: »

Tis a realistic propsal, and it was proposed in order to cut down on the numbers of innocent people killed, not eradicate the problem altogether.

All those people who dont want a complete ban seem to hide behind "but they could still get their hands on a gun", and are oblivious to reduction in deaths this would bring about.

It's idiotic. Bans on things do not work.

How many lives would it save in Ireland?

0.

mark renton

Blay wrote: »

It's idiotic. Bans on things do not work.

How many lives would it save in Ireland?

0.

"Dismissal is the only consideration for idiocy" - mark renton 2013

MadsL

mark renton wrote: »

Tis a realistic propsal, and it was proposed in order to cut down on the numbers of innocent people killed, not eradicate the problem altogether.

All those people who dont want a complete ban seem to hide behind "but they could still get their hands on a gun", and are oblivious to reduction in deaths this would bring about.

Tell you what, you tell me how many it would save and I'd be interested in seeing how many it would cost in the years after such a ban.

Given 250 million+ guns in the US - all a ban would do is create a massive blackmarket and take guns out of the hands of the lawabiding. That's a recipe for disaster.

Want an example - it is illegal to own a gun in Mexico, even for ex-cops, yet we are approaching 100k+ drug executions in Mexico, the vast majority with firearms.

MadsL

mark renton wrote: »

"Dismissal is the only consideration for idiocy" - mark renton 2013

"We cannot mistake absolutism for principle"
Barrack Obama

Your absolutism is unworkable.

mark renton

I dont expect you to get it Madsl... You obviously have your position and "arent for turning" - maggie t

MadsL

mark renton wrote: »

I dont expect you to get it Madsl... You obviously have your position and "arent for turning" - maggie t

Get what? You haven't proposed anything except "Ban Guns". Tell me how would that works, describe A. The process of removing the 2nd Amendment from the US Constitution, and State Constitution, then B. The process of disarming America.

If you like you could predict the level of casualties and deaths from the inevitable Civil War if you propose disarming the US by force.

Genius. Tell me how democracy works again?

mark renton

MadsL wrote: »

Get what? You haven't proposed anything except "Ban Guns". Tell me how would that works, describe A. The process of removing the 2nd Amendment from the US Constitution, and State Constitution, then B. The process of disarming America.

If you like you could predict the level of casualties and deaths from the inevitable Civil War if you propose disarming the US by force.

Genius. Tell me how democracy works again?

You cant graft a new idea in a closed mind.

Slan.

MadsL

mark renton wrote: »

You cant graft a new idea in a closed mind.

Slan.

Oh I see. When the going gets tough, Mr Renton gets gone. If you can't be bothered to actually think how you achieve your outcome then don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

Hope your knee stops jerking soon...

pabloh999

mark renton wrote: »

You cant graft a new idea in a closed mind.

Slan.

you are wasting your time.
Gun lovers cannot see the connection between GUNS and GUN deaths.
They are blind, nothing anyone can say will change that.

MadsL

pabloh999 wrote: »

you are wasting your time.
Gun lovers cannot see the connection between GUNS and GUN deaths.
They are blind, nothing anyone can say will change that.

And if you are in favour of banning guns, please tell us how that will be achieved, I'm all ears. Until you tell us how to do it, it is a useful as saying ban crime.

As for "gun lovers" please, do check yourself, that makes no sense as a description if you really think about it.

Overheal

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

So ban all knives?

Or just ban neither.

mark renton wrote: »

Complete ban is the only solution, get rid of all the gun coveting loons.

Nobody actually needs a gun in this world for anything productive... Get rid of em all I say. And stick those who dont abide into jail.

Stick them in how? Assume they resist.

Overheal

pabloh999 wrote: »

you are wasting your time.
Gun lovers cannot see the connection between GUNS and GUN deaths.
They are blind, nothing anyone can say will change that.

Christ, by that logic Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Hammond have a lot of blood on their hands

Capt'n Midnight

Manic Moran wrote: »

Which brings us to our last problem. Such expense and effort, even if in the unlikely event that it actually performs as advertised, does nothing to stop a killing. It just makes it easier for the police to find out who did it, which hasn't really been a problem in the high profile shooting so far.

The UK use this to justify CCTV and is now rolling out High Definition cameras

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19812385

The HDCCTV Alliance has predicted that number would rise to over 3.7 million by 2016.
...
"It's the ability to pick out your face in a crowd from a camera which is probably half a mile away."
...
By contrast Avigilon's top-of-the-range camera only takes two images per second at full resolution but produces 29MP photos.

MadsL

mark renton wrote: »

Nobody actually needs a gun in this world for anything productive... .

That's the most absurd statement I have read in a long time on boards.

1. Soldiers
2. Police
3. Hunters
4. Bodyguards
5. Olympic Sports competitors
6. Farmers
7. Remote workers in wilderness areas
8. Security Guards
9. Gunsmiths
10. Hikers

That's ten right there off the top of my head.

MadsL

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The UK use this to justify CCTV and is now rolling out High Definition cameras

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19812385

UK police are utterly out of control with regard to CCTV. 129,000 cameras is one High Def camera for every 465 people.

donvito99

MadsL wrote: »

9. Gunsmiths

Conflict of bloody interest there my friend!

10. Hikers

The boy scouts do not need to be armed.

That's teneight right there off the top of my head.

FYP

donvito99

So I assume the most recent shooting in Texas has been mentioned already. I've heard that it was between two people? I cannot confirm this of course.

[wild speculation]

Could this have perhaps been an encounter between two open carriers that went wrong, and put others lives at risk?

[/wild speculation]

Overheal

donvito99 wrote: »

[Hikers] do not need to be armed.

Evidently you don't believe in bears or mountain lions or wolves or boars. In North America, they do all exist, and they don't necessarily all respond to "I mean you no harm"

MadsL

donvito99 wrote: »

Conflict of bloody interest there my friend!
The boy scouts do not need to be armed.

If you arm the police who fixes their guns? You do know what a gunsmith does, right?

Overheal has responded to the 'boy scouts' - you know they also carry knives, right?.

donvito99 wrote: »

Conflict of bloody interest there my friend!
The boy scouts do not need to be armed.

FYP

FYP

Rabies

what about rappers?

MadsL

donvito99 wrote: »

[wild speculation]

Could this have perhaps been an encounter between two open carriers that went wrong, and put others lives at risk?

[/wild speculation]

Unlikely. Most likely the Campus was a gun free zone. By the way Open Carry means cowboy style -on the hip, very few people do it. I live in the Southwest and I have seen maybe 4 people open carrying in a year.

brendansmith

America has to go through some kind of radical change

FatherTed

Wimpish gun owners like to hide behind the archaic 2nd amendment. As I mentioned before, the 2nd amendment was written in a different time when the country was new and had just gained independance. Its as stupid as the 3rd amendment written at the same time. Look up what that one is all about.

But don't worry the politicians wont ever budge on the 2nd amendment. They might bring in some laws about semi automatic assault weapons and tighten the gun shows but it wont make a bit of difference. Too many guns and nutjobs already.

briany

I can definitely get behind a media blackout on these kinds of killings. It'll never happen unless some monumental change comes about because these stories just make way too good copy. What would be nice would be to be able to ask those reporting the news why these particular shootings get so much attention over all the other gun related deaths and all the other violent deaths, carrying an equally tragic personal cost, and watch them struggle for an answer that doesn't sound money grubbing, class based, cynical or racist.

Cookie_Monster

briany wrote: »

I can definitely get behind a media blackout on these kinds of killings. It'll never happen unless some monumental change comes about because these stories just make way too good copy. What would be nice would be to be able to ask those reporting the news why these particular shootings get so much attention over all the other gun related deaths and all the other violent deaths, carrying an equally tragic personal cost, and watch them struggle for an answer that doesn't sound money grubbing, class based, cynical or racist.

same reason the ridiculous car chases get so much attention, it's glamour news. Shock is easy to sell.