BREAKING: Mass school shooting multiple victims

[ChrisL]

I think about Hollywood slasher flicks and how I don't like them. I tell people, I don't really enjoy those kinds of movies where people are torturing and murdering other people. People look at me like I'M crazy for not liking watching people being cut up and mutilated and tortured and listening to the screaming. I think to myself, no, actually, you are probably the crazy one for liking this stuff, and that's what I'm talking about. Since when is THAT enjoyable? A way to spend an enjoyable evening? Even though I know it's fake, it's still disturbing.

What do you suggest be done? Most people don't want to carry guns. The idea of armed citizens stopping these things is mostly a myth.

Of course it is NOT a myth. Unless you want only criminals and police to be armed and want to be sitting duck, that's on you. You have no right to force the rest of us to do that. Also, your claims have been proven false time and time again on this board by many studies, for one Obama's OWN 10 million study conducted by the CDC.

Ok how many mass shootings have been stopped?

We've already been through this many times, as you know. Why do you want me to have to post the information again. If you cannot remember the details and the statistics, then google Obama's 10 million dollar CDC gun study. I'm not going to do that for you on every thread.

 

[Asclepias]

True but thoughtless.

Consider:

1. Put aside the Second Amendment for a moment.
2. License anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a firearm.
3. Require everyone of those guns to be registered.
4. Allow those who choose not to apply for a license and own guns to surrender them to local LE.
5. Require gun safes and /or trigger locks on all guns in the home or business unless actually under the custody and control of a licensed person.

It can be done, but there is no will to do so. The NRA and many gun owners care only about their right not be infringed, and have a who cares attitude for those who lost their lives yesterday, and their family and friends.

I'd bet some of them would support 2 & 3 in a moment if it would save the life of one of their children; the rest probably wouldn't since it's all about them.

And how would that have stopped this shooting?

That's a rhetorical question, because we know for a fact it would not.

California Virgin in Isla Vista bought 3 guns in California, a state that has ALL of those A handgun certification, registration, waiting period, universal background checks, mandatory gun locks...and he still committed mass murder with both knives, guns and his car as weapons.

Gun law experts have said that there was nothing in his known history that prevented him from making legal gun purchases.[5]

2014 Isla Vista killings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Who said it would stop a shooting? i could walk out my house right now and shoot someone.

 

[HenryBHough]

Take comfort in knowing that government properties are as securely gun-free as all those protected zones of which we've been reading.

 

[Brain357]

I think about Hollywood slasher flicks and how I don't like them. I tell people, I don't really enjoy those kinds of movies where people are torturing and murdering other people. People look at me like I'M crazy for not liking watching people being cut up and mutilated and tortured and listening to the screaming. I think to myself, no, actually, you are probably the crazy one for liking this stuff, and that's what I'm talking about. Since when is THAT enjoyable? A way to spend an enjoyable evening? Even though I know it's fake, it's still disturbing.

What do you suggest be done? Most people don't want to carry guns. The idea of armed citizens stopping these things is mostly a myth.

Of course it is NOT a myth. Unless you want only criminals and police to be armed and want to be sitting duck, that's on you. You have no right to force the rest of us to do that. Also, your claims have been proven false time and time again on this board by many studies, for one Obama's OWN 10 million study conducted by the CDC.

Ok how many mass shootings have been stopped?

We've already been through this many times, as you know. Why do you want me to have to post the information again. If you cannot remember the details and the statistics, then google Obama's 10 million dollar CDC gun study. I'm not going to do that for you on every thread.

So none?

 

[Iceweasel]

Australia had a mass shooting, got rid of the guns and hasn't had one since.

The bottom line is, here in America most of us are willing to put up with these occasional tragedies, but we're not willing to give up our 2nd Amendment rights.
There will be more and more laws and restrictions, but a roundup is off the table.

Glad you have made that decision for everyone. The dead have no constituency.

Said it once, said it a hundred times; what has to happen is that a powerful rightwing lawmaker, unfortunately, will have to lose a child in one of these senseless acts to awaken the rest of the nation to the needless slaughter.

And then what ? Again, you can have all the restrictions for new purchases you want, but that won't put a dent in the hundreds of millions of guns already out among the general population.

True but thoughtless.

Consider:

1. Put aside the Second Amendment for a moment.
2. License anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a firearm.
3. Require everyone of those guns to be registered.
4. Allow those who choose not to apply for a license and own guns to surrender them to local LE.
5. Require gun safes and /or trigger locks on all guns in the home or business unless actually under the custody and control of a licensed person.

It can be done, but there is no will to do so. The NRA and many gun owners care only about their right not be infringed, and have a who cares attitude for those who lost their lives yesterday, and their family and friends.

I'd bet some of them would support 2 & 3 in a moment if it would save the life of one of their children; the rest probably wouldn't since it's all about them.

What does the NRA have to do with this? They didn't write the Constitution. Prove that gun owners don't care, disagreement with you isn't good enough. We don't want to lose our ability to protect ourselves AND we want to keep the government in check. Armed people are free people, something you disdain.

 

[Missourian]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

UPDATE OCT 1, 2015 8:09 PM

The conservative site Breitbart and others assert that guns were banned at UCC. This is not true. The student code of conduct bans guns "without written authorization." Under Oregon law, the university could not ban people with a valid concealed carry license from bringing their weapons on campus. (They could ban gun from various buildings and facilities.) Conservative writer Dana Loesch, who initially claimed the campus was a "gun free zone," updated her article to clarify that individuals with concealed carry permits were allowed to bring guns on campus.

There was, in fact, someone on campus with a concealed carry weapon at the time of the massacre. A local reporter explained to CNN that it was legal for him to have such a weapon on campus.


UCC Was Not A ‘Gun Free Zone’ Because Public Colleges In Oregon Can’t Ban Guns

It was a Gun Free Zone...that's a fact. Gun Free Zones are mandated by federal law, not state.

There was an exemption, if you were over 21 and a resident of Oregon with an Oregon CCW holder (no reciprocity) you were allowed to conceal carry.

But this is not publicized, and 90% of the student population would assume that a gun free zone would preclude CCW.

Faculty was not allowed to conceal carry under employment guidelines.

Hopefully the widespread knowledge that CCW is legal on Oregon public college campuses will promote more student CCW and perhaps these tragedies can be reduced in the future.

We are working to remedy this situation in Missouri under our newly election-revised Article 23 of Section 1 of the Missouri Constitution.

Article I, Missouri Constitution - Ballotpedia

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

I don't recall saying it was.
Now tell me:
How or why do you believe that making someplace a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there.

 

[Brain357]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

UPDATE OCT 1, 2015 8:09 PM

The conservative site Breitbart and others assert that guns were banned at UCC. This is not true. The student code of conduct bans guns "without written authorization." Under Oregon law, the university could not ban people with a valid concealed carry license from bringing their weapons on campus. (They could ban gun from various buildings and facilities.) Conservative writer Dana Loesch, who initially claimed the campus was a "gun free zone," updated her article to clarify that individuals with concealed carry permits were allowed to bring guns on campus.

There was, in fact, someone on campus with a concealed carry weapon at the time of the massacre. A local reporter explained to CNN that it was legal for him to have such a weapon on campus.


UCC Was Not A ‘Gun Free Zone’ Because Public Colleges In Oregon Can’t Ban Guns

It was a Gun Free Zone...that's a fact. Gun Free Zones are mandated by federal law, not state.

There was an exemption, if you were over 21 and a resident of Oregon with an Oregon (no reciprocity) you were allowed to conceal carry.

But this is not publicized, and 90% of the student population would assume that a gun free zone would preclude CCW.

Faculty was not allowed to conceal carry under employment guidelines.

Hopefully the widespread knowledge that CCW is legal on Oregon public college campuses will promote more student CCW and perhaps these tragedies can be reduced in the future.

We are working to remedy this situation in Missouri under our newly election-revised Article 23 of Section 1 of the Missouri Constitution.

View attachment 51285

Article I, Missouri Constitution - Ballotpedia

Most people don't want to carry. You shouldn't have to carry to feel safe in a civilized country.

 

[Missourian]

True but thoughtless.

Consider:

1. Put aside the Second Amendment for a moment.
2. License anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a firearm.
3. Require everyone of those guns to be registered.
4. Allow those who choose not to apply for a license and own guns to surrender them to local LE.
5. Require gun safes and /or trigger locks on all guns in the home or business unless actually under the custody and control of a licensed person.

It can be done, but there is no will to do so. The NRA and many gun owners care only about their right not be infringed, and have a who cares attitude for those who lost their lives yesterday, and their family and friends.

I'd bet some of them would support 2 & 3 in a moment if it would save the life of one of their children; the rest probably wouldn't since it's all about them.

And how would that have stopped this shooting?

That's a rhetorical question, because we know for a fact it would not.

California Virgin in Isla Vista bought 3 guns in California, a state that has ALL of those A handgun certification, registration, waiting period, universal background checks, mandatory gun locks...and he still committed mass murder with both knives, guns and his car as weapons.

Gun law experts have said that there was nothing in his known history that prevented him from making legal gun purchases.[5]

2014 Isla Vista killings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Who said it would stop a shooting? i could walk out my house right now and shoot someone.

My point exactly. If it won't prevent these shootings, what exactly is the point?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

UPDATE OCT 1, 2015 8:09 PM

The conservative site Breitbart and others assert that guns were banned at UCC. This is not true. The student code of conduct bans guns "without written authorization." Under Oregon law, the university could not ban people with a valid concealed carry license from bringing their weapons on campus. (They could ban gun from various buildings and facilities.) Conservative writer Dana Loesch, who initially claimed the campus was a "gun free zone," updated her article to clarify that individuals with concealed carry permits were allowed to bring guns on campus.

There was, in fact, someone on campus with a concealed carry weapon at the time of the massacre. A local reporter explained to CNN that it was legal for him to have such a weapon on campus.


UCC Was Not A ‘Gun Free Zone’ Because Public Colleges In Oregon Can’t Ban Guns

Stinkprogress is lying - they were exposed yesterday.

Try and keep up.

 

[Asclepias]

True but thoughtless.

Consider:

1. Put aside the Second Amendment for a moment.
2. License anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a firearm.
3. Require everyone of those guns to be registered.
4. Allow those who choose not to apply for a license and own guns to surrender them to local LE.
5. Require gun safes and /or trigger locks on all guns in the home or business unless actually under the custody and control of a licensed person.

It can be done, but there is no will to do so. The NRA and many gun owners care only about their right not be infringed, and have a who cares attitude for those who lost their lives yesterday, and their family and friends.

I'd bet some of them would support 2 & 3 in a moment if it would save the life of one of their children; the rest probably wouldn't since it's all about them.

And how would that have stopped this shooting?

That's a rhetorical question, because we know for a fact it would not.

California Virgin in Isla Vista bought 3 guns in California, a state that has ALL of those A handgun certification, registration, waiting period, universal background checks, mandatory gun locks...and he still committed mass murder with both knives, guns and his car as weapons.

Gun law experts have said that there was nothing in his known history that prevented him from making legal gun purchases.[5]

2014 Isla Vista killings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Who said it would stop a shooting? i could walk out my house right now and shoot someone.

My point exactly. If it won't prevent these shootings, what exactly is the point?

Instill a culture that gradually takes hold and punish those that break the law in the meanwhile.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

I don't recall saying it was.
Now tell me:
How or why do you believe that making someplace a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there.

Who told you making a place a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there?

 

[Brain357]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

I don't recall saying it was.
Now tell me:
How or why do you believe that making someplace a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there.

Who told you making a place a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there?

It does seem to eliminate accidental shootings.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Missourian]

Most people don't want to carry. You shouldn't have to carry to feel safe in a civilized country.

I'm not sure if that is true. Anti-gunners frighten people about guns.

Twenty seven years I've owned guns, I hunt almost every morning that it's legal to do so, I spend hours at the range...in fact, I'm going today. And I've never had an accidental discharge, neither been injured by a gun nor injured another person with a gun.

But anti-gunners make guns out to be evil mythical machines with a mind of their own, endowed with the ability to go off by themselves or discharging at the slightest touch.

While in truth, they are not like that at all.

For example, my M1911 has three separate operation that must be preformed before it will fire. My 9mm has two. Eighty percent of my hunting rifles have manual hammers...they cannot fire without the hammer being manually thumbed into the firing position. I can look at all of them from 20 yards away and tell instantly that they are in a safe configuration.

I choose these firearms for a reason. Safety is my highest concern.

If people took the time to learn about firearms, they would want to carry.

As for civilization, have you been to the city lately?

Not much recognizable civilization left there.
=======================

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not against measures such as metal detectors. Now that is just good common sense! Declaring to the world that "this is a gun free zone" is stupid as all get out.

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

I don't recall saying it was.
Now tell me:
How or why do you believe that making someplace a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there.

Who told you making a place a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there?

It does seem to eliminate accidental shootings.

Reduce or eliminate?

Victim of accidental school shooting mourned

 

[Brain357]

Most people don't want to carry. You shouldn't have to carry to feel safe in a civilized country.

I'm not sure if that is true. Anti-gunners frighten people about guns.

Twenty seven years I've owned guns, I hunt almost every morning that it's legal to do so, I spend hours at the range...in fact, I'm going today. And I've never had an accidental discharge, neither been injured by a gun nor injured another person with a gun.

But anti-gunners make guns out to be evil mythical machines with a mind of their own, endowed with the ability to go off by themselves or discharging at the slightest touch.

While in truth, they are not like that at all.

For example, my M1911 has three separate operation that must be preformed before it will fire. My 9mm has two. Eighty percent of my hunting rifles have manual hammers...they cannot fire without the hammer being manually thumbed into the firing position. I can look at all of them from 20 yards away and tell instantly that they are in a safe configuration.

I choose these firearms for a reason. Safety is my highest concern.

If people took the time to learn about firearms, they would want to carry.

As for civilization, have you been to the city lately?

Not much recognizable civilization left there.
=======================

While I agree with what you are saying I don't think it changes people's minds. I own many, but have no interest in carrying. I avoid cities...

 

[Brain357]

Anti-gun loons cheer gun free zones and then express shock when a shooting takes place in one.
One cannot understand how or why they believe that shootings will not take place in such areas.

This wasn't a gun free zone.

I don't recall saying it was.
Now tell me:
How or why do you believe that making someplace a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there.

Who told you making a place a "gun free zone" means shootings will not take place there?

It does seem to eliminate accidental shootings.

Reduce or eliminate?

Victim of accidental school shooting mourned

Greatly reduce I suppose.

 

[M14 Shooter]

True but thoughtless.

Consider:

1. Put aside the Second Amendment for a moment.
2. License anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a firearm.
3. Require everyone of those guns to be registered.
4. Allow those who choose not to apply for a license and own guns to surrender them to local LE.
5. Require gun safes and /or trigger locks on all guns in the home or business unless actually under the custody and control of a licensed person.

It can be done, but there is no will to do so. The NRA and many gun owners care only about their right not be infringed, and have a who cares attitude for those who lost their lives yesterday, and their family and friends.

I'd bet some of them would support 2 & 3 in a moment if it would save the life of one of their children; the rest probably wouldn't since it's all about them.

And how would that have stopped this shooting?

That's a rhetorical question, because we know for a fact it would not.

California Virgin in Isla Vista bought 3 guns in California, a state that has ALL of those A handgun certification, registration, waiting period, universal background checks, mandatory gun locks...and he still committed mass murder with both knives, guns and his car as weapons.

Gun law experts have said that there was nothing in his known history that prevented him from making legal gun purchases.[5]

2014 Isla Vista killings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Who said it would stop a shooting? i could walk out my house right now and shoot someone.

My point exactly. If it won't prevent these shootings, what exactly is the point?

There is none, except to facilitate the deaths of the innocent.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Flooding our Society with guns is a criminal act ...No one should be surprised that mass shooting are becoming normal and routine...like rain storms..
Gun Nuts are enemies
Pro-Gun Oregon Sheriff Tied To Fringey ‘Constitutional’ Group Before Massacre


By Catherine Thompson Muckraker