10 dead in Oregon Community College shooting

[Cotton]

Huh? The topic was about high school students carrying, and if they could legally. He first said that 18 year olds couldn't legally own. Then that they couldn't have a concealed carry permit until they were 21. After you said to phil that you were ok with students carrying if they were 18.

Two different topics. Should they be allowed to carry, and if they are allowed to carry does it affect whether that changes this situation. Phil asked if they should be allowed to carry on campus. I said they should be allowed if they are legal. Clay said they can't. We went over that, and then I stated it wouldn't matter regardless because a lunatic intent on causing harm wouldn't give a flying shit about what whether they can legally carry or not. This fool had 6 fucking guns on him, so you decide whether he gave a damn about carry laws.

 

[NoDak]

Two different topics. Should they be allowed to carry, and if they are allowed to carry does it affect whether that changes this situation. Phil asked if they should be allowed to carry on campus. I said they should be allowed if they are legal. Clay said they can't. We went over that, and then I stated it wouldn't matter regardless because a lunatic intent on causing harm wouldn't give a flying shit about what whether they can legally carry or not. This fool had 6 fucking guns on him, so you decide whether he gave a damn about carry laws.

I thought the whole point was whether or not students, plane passengers, or whatever should be able to legally carry in order to protect themselves. I'd think it's pretty obvious that if a person is about to start killing people, they're not going to be worried if THEY are legally carrying or not. Was just a bit confusing when you to switched gears on the topic while replying to something clay said about the legality of the students carrying.

 

[Cotton]

I thought the whole point was whether or not students, plane passengers, or whatever should be able to legally carry in order to protect themselves. I'd think it's pretty obvious that if a person is about to start killing people, they're not going to be worried if THEY are legally carrying or not. Was just a bit confusing when you to switched gears on the topic while replying to something clay said about the legality of the students carrying.

Yeah, I probably confused that with my agenda.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Understood, but, shit, so's a movie theater or shopping mall or classroom.

still crowded, but not as much and more importantly, there is plenty of places for people to get down on the ground, which is what people usually do if they aren't headed for exits.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Understood, but, shit, so's a movie theater, office, shopping mall or classroom where the mass shootings occur.

Can't have a shooting spree in a barn out in the boonies.

Unless there is a big square dance underway.

 

[Genghis Khan]

FWIW, the deadliest school massacre in US history happened way back in 1927, and was committed, I believe, without guns. So there's that.

As a matter of fact, murder and violent crimes generally have seen a sharp decline in the past couple of decades. Could it be that these sorts of things are sensationalized and not nearly the problem they are made out to be?

Given the fact that violent crime rates are at their lowest in about 40 years, it seems to me that the status quo is just fine.

 

[Clay_Allison]

FWIW, the deadliest school massacre in US history happened way back in 1927, and was committed, I believe, without guns. So there's that.

As a matter of fact, murder and violent crimes generally have seen a sharp decline in the past couple of decades. Could it be that these sorts of things are sensationalized and not nearly the problem they are made out to be?

Given the fact that violent crime rates are at their lowest in about 40 years, it seems to me that the status quo is just fine.

That is true, it was in Arkansas and with dynamite.

 

[Jiggyfly]

FWIW, the deadliest school massacre in US history happened way back in 1927, and was committed, I believe, without guns. So there's that.

As a matter of fact, murder and violent crimes generally have seen a sharp decline in the past couple of decades. Could it be that these sorts of things are sensationalized and not nearly the problem they are made out to be?

Given the fact that violent crime rates are at their lowest in about 40 years, it seems to me that the status quo is just fine.

The actual number of shootings has doubled since 2000 but the numbers killed have not spiked.

I think the numbers killed can be attributed to faster response times and better training of what to do in these events.

http://www.worldmag.com/2015/10/are_mass_shootings_really_becoming_routine

A September 2014 FBI report indicated the frequency of mass shootings has doubled since 2000. (The report tracked 160 shooting incidents; nearly half occurred at businesses and malls, and a quarter occurred at schools and colleges.)

But the Crime Prevention Research Center countered the FBI report with data showing the death rate from mass shootings since 1977 has increased by less than 1 percent per year, taking population growth into account. (Homicides overall have decreased in the United States since 2000.)

So the U.S. mass-shooting rate is trending upward, but perhaps at a milder speed than nonstop media coverage might suggest.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Man carjacked, witness opens fire at gas station in NE Houston
Author: Cassidy Estrada, Associate Producer
Published On: Sep 27 2015 07:35:30 AM CDT


HOUSTON -
Police are searching for the men who carjacked and attacked a man in northeast Houston.

Houston police said around 11:15 p.m. Saturday, two men attacked another man who was parked in the Valero parking lot near Jensen Drive and Caplin Street.

When the assailants attempted to take his truck, a witness parked at the gas pump started shooting at the men, according to authorities.


Police said he accidentally shot the victim in the head.

He was taken to the hospital listed in stable condition.

Police found the victim's truck a few blocks away and the assailants are still on the loose.

=================================================================

Yeah everybody should be packing.

 

[Genghis Khan]

The actual number of shootings has doubled since 2000 but the numbers killed have not spiked.

I think the numbers killed can be attributed to faster response times and better training of what to do in these events.

http://www.worldmag.com/2015/10/are_mass_shootings_really_becoming_routine

I'm talking about overall violent crimes and murder specifically. Not just mass shootings.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Yeah everybody should be packing.

The problem is how to you weed out this one retard without also taking guns away from many law abiding citizens who aren't this dumb?

 

[Rev]

Yeah everybody should be packing.

Where would you go?

 

[townsend]

[MENTION=63]Jiggyfly[/MENTION] I feel like you're better than leaning on a single anecdote. I could just as easily pull up a dozen prevented mass shootings by armed citizens. I think the important thing to look at statistically is crimes prevented by guns vs accidental shootings.

Thanks to some especially rabid lobbies on either side the numbers are difficult to nail down. But I can say 64,000 (This is the conservative estimate, Guns Rights activists quote a number around 2.5 million) crimes in the US are prevented by guns and about 600 deaths are accidentally caused by them, that's a significant gap that at the very least proves it's better to have guns than not to have guns.

Now there should absolutely be better training required for licensed gun owners. Frankly I think we should have a trade off of 40 mandatory hours of annual firearms training for every license, at owners expense, including a simple psych evaluation as part of the test. In return we get rid of all gun free zones, apart from maybe courthouses and important government buildings where assassinations could be a concern.

 

[Jiggyfly]

The problem is how to you weed out this one retard without also taking guns away from many law abiding citizens who aren't this dumb?

I don't believe in taking away guns I just don't believe in everybody packing and ready to shoot at the 1st time of trouble.

Especially teachers having guns like many are advocating.

 

[Jiggyfly]

[MENTION=63]Jiggyfly[/MENTION] I feel like you're better than leaning on a single anecdote. I could just as easily pull up a dozen prevented mass shootings by armed citizens. I think the important thing to look at statistically is crimes prevented by guns vs accidental shootings.

Thanks to some especially rabid lobbies on either side the numbers are difficult to nail down. But I can say 64,000 (This is the conservative estimate, Guns Rights activists quote a number around 2.5 million) crimes in the US are prevented by guns and about 600 deaths are accidentally caused by them, that's a significant gap that at the very least proves it's better to have guns than not to have guns.

Now there should absolutely be better training required for licensed gun owners. Frankly I think we should have a trade off of 40 mandatory hours of annual firearms training for every license, at owners expense, including a simple psych evaluation as part of the test. In return we get rid of all gun free zones, apart from maybe courthouses and important government buildings where assassinations could be a concern.

I would like to see these mass shootings averted by citizens numbers.

I was not leaning on this one thing just showing there are consequences I have no issue with what you have said here, I am not for draconian gun laws just do not believe in this mentality that if everybody is packing they will be responsible users.

 

[townsend]

I would like to see these mass shootings averted by citizens numbers.

I was not leaning on this one thing just showing there are consequences I have no issue with what you have said here, I am not for draconian gun laws just do not believe in this mentality that if everybody is packing they will be responsible users.

The numbers are minuscule, since there have only been a few hundred mass shootings. Here's an article describing ten or so known instances where an armed bystander likely saved lives in a shooter type scenario.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/

As far as fun control goes, I'm not completely against it, but I'm against any legislation pushed through by tragedy. It's a ghoulish way for politicians to leverage emotion into a cudgel. Any act not worth considering in the light of day is especially not worth considering when we're grieving.

This is how we get talked into Iraq, this is how we intern our own citizens. Hell the national income tax was added in the wake of anti-German sentiment because of the First World War. (It was the only way to outlaw beer ,which constitutes a huge portion of the Fed's income.)

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I don't believe in taking away guns I just don't believe in everybody packing and ready to shoot at the 1st time of trouble.

Especially teachers having guns like many are advocating.

I don't have any problem with a teacher who is comfortable carrying a gun having a gun. I absolutely think they should. However I don't think every teacher should be forced to carry either. Then you would end up with a bunch of teachers who aren't comfortable carrying a gun trying to use one for safety which can only end badly. I personally don't carry a gun or have one in my car. Just don't see any likelihood that I'd ever need it for good and it isn't worth the risk to me that something bad could happen as a result of having it. I don't have a problem with people who do though. Especially people who live in a city like St. Louis.

 

[Clay_Allison]

I don't have any problem with a teacher who is comfortable carrying a gun having a gun. I absolutely think they should. However I don't think every teacher should be forced to carry either. Then you would end up with a bunch of teachers who aren't comfortable carrying a gun trying to use one for safety which can only end badly. I personally don't carry a gun or have one in my car. Just don't see any likelihood that I'd ever need it for good and it isn't worth the risk to me that something bad could happen as a result of having it. I don't have a problem with people who do though. Especially people who live in a city like St. Louis.

I think SOME, like a few, teachers should carry guns but it should be a thing where they spend their summers training on stopping school shootings, like a national guard type of thing. In Texas we could combine a program like that with the existing State Guard and get real military instructors providing rock solid training.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think SOME, like a few, teachers should carry guns but it should be a thing where they spend their summers training on stopping school shootings, like a national guard type of thing. In Texas we could combine a program like that with the existing State Guard and get real military instructors providing rock solid training.

Well I think that's actually a great idea. The best way to maximize response rates is to just have more trained and armed people where the shootings are happening. Short of an out right ban on guns in America I don't think regulation will help much. Otherwise if people have fire arms there will be an easy way to get ahold of one.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Well I think that's actually a great idea. The best way to maximize response rates is to just have more trained and armed people where the shootings are happening. Short of an out right ban on guns in America I don't think regulation will help much. Otherwise if people have fire arms there will be an easy way to get ahold of one.

there's already so many guns in the US, it would take 100 years to get rid of enough of them to make a difference even with a ban.