Reporter/camera man murdered.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

People are overlooking the primary lesson from incidents such as this. The primary lesson is that while you can make all kinds of plans for your future you will very lucky to make it through the day without getting whacked upside the head by some kind of disaster. In this incident three people got up early this morning and went to work as usual. They did their jobs as always and thought normal everyday thoughts about what they would do for the remainder of the day. They thought about their lovers and about their futures. They probably thought about what they would have for their next meals and about their bills. And then, just like that, two of them were shot dead and one was severely wounded. The perp fled and eventually shot himself.

The perp knew that he himself was going to die today, He filmed his last video doing the shooting so he was never the "alleged" suspect.

People may want to know why he did what he did. If you believe in evil then you can say that he did it because he was an evil person. If you want to blame his access to guns then go for it. His victims were two specific people that he blamed for his troubles. So he plotted how to kill them at the same time and took the necessary steps to do it. It's interesting that he didn't attack the person who actually fired him but he did kill the two people he blamed for getting him fired. And he shot an innocent bystander in the process.

So, maybe the lesson to be learned is this: Don't piss people off because they might be crazy enough to blow you away for no reason whatsover or because you did them a real wrong. And sometimes bad shit happens to good people, like it did to the woman who got shot just because she was there.

Here's hoping that we can make it through the day in one piece. If we do then it was a very good day indeed.

[brewer]

You are not offering up any solutions, you are merely protecting an object as if it were a human with rights.

You know what?

I fucking agree with Brian wholeheartedly here.

Can we please stop with this bullshit 'guns don't kill people' argument? Yeah, we know already. People kill people. People with fucking guns kill people.

I'd have thought it blatantly fucking obvious.

Ofcourse not all gun owners are nutjob lunatics who go out shooting everyone. Nobody is even faintly suggesting that all gun owners are people without compassion. But it's time to wake up and smell the coffee. Hell, it's long since past that time.

As a society we have to run the place around those dickhead 1% of people who fuck things up for everyone else.

Whenever I see people say shit like "oh we should look into why people kill each other" or "we need to sort out mental health before implementing more gun control" blah blah fucking blah... It's nothing more than a deflection from the fact that the main fucking problem in all these discussions are guns, and the relatively easy access people have to them.

Why is it every time gun control gets brought up, the people who want to defend gun rights do everything they can to deflect attention away from the common denominator, the obvious elephant in the room?

The mind boggles me. What sane person actually has a reason to oppose better gun legislation besides "hurr durr I like guns".

By all means, I'm sure you do, but if even a small section of society abuses them at the rate they so clearly do, maybe it's time people really just grew up and got over the fact that guns are not conducive or necessary for a safe society.

I said I'm for limitation and control. I'm willing to consider other ideas that I may not have thought of. Waiting period extension, fine. Background check strengthened, fine. No person to person sales (either individual or at gun shows) only sales through registered dealers, fine. Limiting types of guns sold, fine. Mandatory registration and a check system, fine. Re-evaluation of ownership qualification periodically, fine. The idea of banning all guns will never work so lets consider something at least constructive.

I didn't use the "guns don't kill people" argument. I didn't try to deflect. I didn't express any opposition to better gun legislation. Thanks for insinuating that I did.

So, are either of you willing to discuss solutions other than ban them all?

[The Valkyrie]

This is the first news item I heard on the radio when I got up this morning.

Insane person with gun = tragedy.

[Napoléon]

The idea of banning all guns will never work so lets consider something at least constructive.

Why? Is it something to do with the fact that you have 5% of the world's population but 50% of all the guns? Is it your country's blatant obsession with guns?

What exactly is the reason you think an outright ban wouldn't work? It works in many other civilised countries across the globe. I'd have that with all the resources that America has, it would be quite doable.

I didn't use the "guns don't kill people" argument. I didn't try to deflect. I didn't express any opposition to better gun legislation. Thanks for insinuating that I did.

My guns (and there are many) have never caused a human gun death or human gun injury. Not even a human gun close call. 

Mmmk.

Why would you bring this up if not to deflect or otherwise insinuate there isn't a problem.

Like I said, people like to bring up "oh I'm a responsible gun owner". Well no shit, responsible gun owners aren't the problem and responsible gun owners aren't the reason we are even having this argument.

It's a nothing statement besides a distraction from what the actual point is.

So, are either of you willing to discuss solutions other than ban them all?

I'm sure Brian will indulge you, personally I just wanted to express my agreement with his one point. You say you're willing to discuss solutions but I'm yet to see you actually come up with any. Apparently getting rid of guns completely is unrealistic but you haven't mentioned why.

[AFTT47]

Here's a suggestion for those who wan't reasonable gun regulation in the USA: think practical!

1. The 2nd Amendment is reality. SCOTUS has weighed in on it and ruled that it does indeed grant individual Americans the right to bear arms. Repealing the 2nd Amendment is pure fantasy now or in the foreseeable future. So whatever you do, you have to work within the 2nd Amendment.

2. Remember how we settled for Don't Ask, Don't Tell when we really wanted true equality for military gays? We settled for that because that's what we could realistically get at the time. We settled for the Affordable Healthcare Act because a single payer system was just not in the cards. Any kind of gun legislation will need to be similarly realistic. Don't pursue shit that you have no chance of getting.

3. "The more you tighten your grip, Tarken, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." Remember that line from Star Wars? It's applicable here. The more you threaten 2nd Amendment rights, the more you'll spook the people who feel it is important - and they will donate more to the NRA, get more politically active and buy more and more guns. The gun manufacturers love Obama because gun sales skyrocketed when he was elected. Look up the numbers! This is not a battle which can be won by force. The harder you push, the harder they push back - and the numbers are not on your side.

4. The love of guns is very largely a cultural thing. The culture will have to change before a gun-free society is even remotely possible. I honestly think Christianity will be a minority belief here before that happens. To MANY Americans, guns = freedom and self-sufficiency. It's a fierce belief that will only go away when the people trust the government. Good luck on that.

5. If you really want some reasonable gun legislation, you should do some research on the "gun nuts" and try to understand what makes them tick. Like it or not, you'll have work WITH them if you're to succeed. If you fight against them, you'll lose. Oh, you'll win a few battles - like during times like this when emotions are raw. It won't last, though. To win anything meaningful, you'll need to come up with practical suggestions which will seem reasonable and acceptable to the gun lovers. You'll probably have to swallow some pride and give up a lot more than you would like but you're not going to beat the 2nd Amendment, 200+ years of culture and a lot of paranoia with a sledgehammer. They have a bigger one. You'll need velvet gloves.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I'm not a supporter of any kind of gun law. Every citizen should be able to own, possess, and carry guns without exception. I'm sure that most, if not all, of my neighbors have guns in their houses. I've never been concerned about any of them in any city I've ever been in shooting up the place.

[Napoléon]

People are overlooking the primary lesson from incidents such as this. 

The only people overlooking the primary lesson are people who insinuate this happened for anything other than the fact the perp had access to guns. 

This shit would not, and does not, happen in the UK. It is certainly a much rarer occurrence than the US. Why's that I wonder? Must be a coincidence.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

People are overlooking the primary lesson from incidents such as this. 

The only people overlooking the primary lesson are people who insinuate this happened for anything other than the fact the perp had access to guns. 

This shit would not, and does not, happen in the UK. It is certainly a much rarer occurrence than the US. Why's that I wonder? Must be a coincidence.

Brits are sheep who are OK with being oppressed. 

Historically, Americans have short fuses when it comes to putting up with assholes and are willing to blow them away even if it costs them their own lives.  

As H.L. Mencken said in 1926:  "The great masses of men, though theoretically free, are seen to submit supinely to oppression and exploitation of a hundred abhorrent sorts. Have they no means of resistance? Obviously they have. The worst tyrant, even under democratic plutocracy, has but one throat to slit. The moment the majority decided to overthrow him he would be overthrown. But the majority lacks the resolution; it cannot imagine taking the risks."

 

[brewer]

The idea of banning all guns will never work so lets consider something at least constructive.

Why? Is it something to do with the fact that you have 5% of the world's population but 50% of all the guns? Is it your country's blatant obsession with guns?

What exactly is the reason you think an outright ban wouldn't work? It works in many other civilised countries across the globe. I'd have that with all the resources that America has, it would be quite doable.

I didn't use the "guns don't kill people" argument. I didn't try to deflect. I didn't express any opposition to better gun legislation. Thanks for insinuating that I did.

My guns (and there are many) have never caused a human gun death or human gun injury. Not even a human gun close call. 

Mmmk.

Why would you bring this up if not to deflect or otherwise insinuate there isn't a problem.

Like I said, people like to bring up "oh I'm a responsible gun owner". Well no shit, responsible gun owners aren't the problem and responsible gun owners aren't the reason we are even having this argument.

It's a nothing statement besides a distraction from what the actual point is.

So, are either of you willing to discuss solutions other than ban them all?

I'm sure Brian will indulge you, personally I just wanted to express my agreement with his one point. You say you're willing to discuss solutions but I'm yet to see you actually come up with any. Apparently getting rid of guns completely is unrealistic but you haven't mentioned why.

Cool, you can read my thoughts. Responsible gun ownership is not a deflection, that's who I am.

We've got a ban on drugs, how's that working for us? Oh, wait, drugs don't kill or effect crime. We tried to ban alcohol, how well did that work for us? What's the irresponsible alcohol related death tole? 

I gave many potential solutions. Here they are again: [Waiting period extension, fine. Background check strengthened, fine. No person to person sales (either individual or at gun shows) only sales through registered dealers, fine. Limiting types of guns sold, fine. Mandatory registration and a check system, fine. Re-evaluation of ownership qualification periodically, fine.] It seems that you only see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The only people overlooking the primary lesson are people who insinuate this happened for anything other than the fact the perp had access to guns. 

This shit would not, and does not, happen in the UK. It is certainly a much rarer occurrence than the US. Why's that I wonder? Must be a coincidence.

Brits are sheep who are OK with being oppressed. 

Historically, Americans have short fuses when it comes to putting up with assholes and are willing to blow them away even if it costs them their own lives.  

As H.L. Mencken said in 1926:  "The great masses of men, though theoretically free, are seen to submit supinely to oppression and exploitation of a hundred abhorrent sorts. Have they no means of resistance? Obviously they have. The worst tyrant, even under democratic plutocracy, has but one throat to slit. The moment the majority decided to overthrow him he would be overthrown. But the majority lacks the resolution; it cannot imagine taking the risks."

 

Sure the guy shooting up those reporters felt liberated, and I'm equally sure those being murdered were glad that at least they were senselessly murdered for the right reasons.

Please can you post serious retorts instead of silly things like insinuating just because there is very strict regulations on firearms An entire population is therefore 'oppressed', and indeed the solution to fighting oppression is automatically firearms? It's not conducive to good debate.