Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
- Student Shooter at Umpqua Community College Dead, Sheriff Says
ABC News ^ | October 1, 2015 | Meghan Keneally
A male student killed multiple people at a shooting today at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon, authorities said. The shooter is now dead, police said. The shooter's identity has not been publicly released, though Oregon Gov. Kate Brown announced that he was 20 years old. Gov. Brown’s spokeswoman Kristen Grainger confirmed that the shooter was a student at the school. Grainger also said that the number of fatalities and injuries totaled 20 people, but would not specify how many were dead and how many were injured. Neither the sheriff's office nor the governor's office or the state police would...
What does that have to do with your post? There was violence in Chicago in 2013.link is from 2013 fool.How come you never know what you are talking about?
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/wh_now_is_the_time_actions.pdf
The ABSOLUTE Coolest thing about the use of the word "bigoted", where it is used in reference to another, is that it is a precise demonstration of 'bigotry'... which is to say that to use the word: Bigot: is to demonstrate intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
you a bigoted... .
The ABSOLUTE Coolest thing about the use of the word "bigoted", where it is used in reference to another, is that it is a precise demonstration of 'bigotry'... which is to say that to use the word: Bigot: is to demonstrate intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
I assume the shooter was a muslim because no one wants to report his identity. Media would be salivating to report his identity if they thought he was a tea party member.
Wonder if we can BAN another flag?????????
Why can't you simply respond to my posts, rather than building strawmen to knock down?
I am happy to admit that I am "bigoted" against you, Pubes.
Your thinking is short sighted. As laws are passed most of the population slowly stop breaking them. Its a marathon not a sprint.The fact that crimes still happen does not mean that no crimes have ever been stopped.
I'm curious... just where did I say that? Of course, some crimes are stopped, a majority of them aren't.
Laws are designed to make examples out of people who are caught breaking them. But then again, even when that happens, the next criminal who gets away with it will not care, he'll still commit the crime.
Right here:
But the punishment never deters the crime, hence the shooting in Oregon today, the shooting in Charleston and Columbine and Sandy Hook or Aurora...and so on. Like you said, Laws exist to punish crime, however they don't prevent crime, and it matters not one iota if someone is punished under them. The crime still happens.
You are misconstruing my statements. You can punish someone under the law as much as you want, pass as many laws as you want, but crime will exist regardless. Like you said, laws only exist to punish crime. Yet as I can see they don't serve as a very effective deterrent.
you a bigoted... .
The ABSOLUTE Coolest thing about the use of the word "bigoted", where it is used in reference to another, is that it is a precise demonstration of 'bigotry'... which is to say that to use the word: Bigot: is to demonstrate intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
I am happy to admit that I am "bigoted" against you, Pubes.
I don't believe that I've said anything close to "Gun Free Zones will deter mass shootings".
The shooter asked what religion they were before he shot them. This likely means he was a liberal democrat Muslim.Your NRA/GOP perfect world.
I am happy to admit that I am "bigoted" against you, Pubes.
I have no reason to tolerate evil. That you do is a defect in your character, not a virtue.
Yes and thus why MORE laws will not stop them.most mass shootings are done with legal guns.
actually, greater difficulty obtaining guns WOULD keep them from having weapons. so i'm not quite sure how you figure that.
Doesn't it ever occur to you guys, that someone willing to be this extreme is likely to come up with a gun no matter what the laws are ?
There are over 300 million guns in private hands in the U.S. How on earth could you possibly contain those kind of #'s ?
perhaps. but don't you think we should make it more difficult for them rather than say "go get 'em, sonny".
and for the record, I don't hate guns. my son and husband both shoot. I just think we need to be smarter in keeping them away from the nutcases and criminals. don't you?
You can create all the laws you like, but if a person wants a gun they'll be able to get one in other ways.
The rules at this college was no guns, yet a mass shooting has now occurred.
Laws do not prevent crime, crimes are punished and that is what keeps society relatively safe.
Okay. Laws do not prevent crime, ergo gun control laws do not stop gun violence from happening. Therefore gun control laws, and gun free zones are pointless. If laws are pointless, it doesn't matter how many times someone is punished.
Thanks for making my case.
By that logic, laws against murder are pointless too. After all, people still commit murder, even though it's illegal.
Yes and thus why MORE laws will not stop them.
actually, greater difficulty obtaining guns WOULD keep them from having weapons. so i'm not quite sure how you figure that.
Doesn't it ever occur to you guys, that someone willing to be this extreme is likely to come up with a gun no matter what the laws are ?
There are over 300 million guns in private hands in the U.S. How on earth could you possibly contain those kind of #'s ?
perhaps. but don't you think we should make it more difficult for them rather than say "go get 'em, sonny".
and for the record, I don't hate guns. my son and husband both shoot. I just think we need to be smarter in keeping them away from the nutcases and criminals. don't you?
You can create all the laws you like, but if a person wants a gun they'll be able to get one in other ways.
The rules at this college was no guns, yet a mass shooting has now occurred.
Society can make laws limiting speed on roadways, if a person wants to speed they'll do so;
You can put locks on all your doors and windows, they won't keep out a burglar intent on breaking and entering and stealing; rapists rape, molesters molest and drunks still drive.
Why do we have laws?
I am happy to admit that I am "bigoted" against you, Pubes.
I have no reason to tolerate evil. That you do is a defect in your character, not a virtue.
I am happy to admit that I am "bigoted" against you, Pubes.
I have no reason to tolerate evil. That you do is a defect in your character, not a virtue.
Why can't you simply respond to my posts, rather than building strawmen to knock down?
I am.
But in response I get the generic "that's a strawman" retort.
I assume since you insist on referring to my statements as "strawmen", that you have no effective rebuttal. Calling them "strawmen" is a convenient way to dismiss the argument without having to address it.
