Only One Fact in Arizona: Loughner Got a Gun...

[OY]

I think that pretty much sums it up.

More on this Huffington Post blog: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_806823.html

**

For those of you who cannot read more than one sentence - read the header again and think about it.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Let the Loughner smear campaign rage on!

[munki]

I find it the article misleading and heavily biased. Of course the tragedy happened because the shooter was able to get a gun. If guns had been illegal where he was, would there not be a black market readily available to service his needs? Look at what the drug was did for narcotics potency, availability, and price structure.

Perhaps if people weren't so wrapped up in the hype of bias media, there would have been a few more people wielding weaponry in the crowd and far less lives would have been lost after a well placed shot through the assailant.

[solopimps]

Maybe after reading the article you should have continued on to the comments. As numerous people point out, anyone that was as "mentally unstable" as this guy would have carried out the crime regardless of the weapon, gun laws, etc etc. Like what is this article trying to imply here? That if the US had a no gun policy this never would have happened? Gimme a break. Just like we have laws against Heroin, Crack, and other drugs and people don't do them because they are illegal right? WRONG. People like this, drug users, idiots, are going to do whatever the fuck they want regardless of the consequences. People are going to be dumb everywhere regardless of the laws their government has.

[OY]

Originally Posted by solopimps

Maybe after reading the article you should have continued on to the comments. As numerous people point out, anyone that was as "mentally unstable" as this guy would have carried out the crime regardless of the weapon, gun laws, etc etc. Like what is this article trying to imply here? That if the US had a no gun policy this never would have happened? Gimme a break. Just like we have laws against Heroin, Crack, and other drugs and people don't do them because they are illegal right? WRONG. People like this, drug users, idiots, are going to do whatever the fuck they want regardless of the consequences. People are going to be dumb everywhere regardless of the laws their government has.

I do not disagree with you - but with a MUCH TOUGHER gun law in the US we could AVOID A LOT of these mentally ill people from getting to this point. Then again, he could just go purchase a sword in a toystore....

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Originally Posted by Oystein

I do not disagree with you - but with a MUCH TOUGHER gun law in the US we could AVOID A LOT of these mentally ill people from getting to this point. Then again, he could just go purchase a sword in a toystore....

Or build a pipe bomb with household supplies, which probably would have been way easier than the gun buying process in the first place. Probably could have killed way more people with one too if he used his head. I'm sure your average Iraqi teenager would have done much better. Thank your lucky stars the kids are dumb in America...

[munki]

Originally Posted by Oystein

I do not disagree with you - but with a MUCH TOUGHER gun law in the US we could AVOID A LOT of these mentally ill people from getting to this point. Then again, he could just go purchase a sword in a toystore....

I don't think tougher gun laws would stop anything...

Case in point... If I wanted to purchase a new gun at this very moment, for whatever nefarious, or sane reasons. This is what I would have to go through both legal or illegal routes.

LEGAL

1. Wait for store to open at 10 am tomorrow.
2. Select firearm
3. Fill out paperwork
4. Have ID and background check completed.
5. Pay out purchase at retail pricing
6. Leave store
7. Return a few days later when paperwork is cleared.
8. Receive newly purchased weapon.

ILLEGAL

1. Call local 'hook-up'
2. Call local 'hook-up' (he was asleep first call, but shit's going down, I need a piece now)
3. Drive to meet hook-up
4. Select Weapon
5. Pay far less then retail.
6. Wait for print wipe, and new tape on handle. ( hook-up was kind enough to pre shave serials)
7. Shoot and throw operation ready.

[tony286]

You are assuming this crazy person would know how to and someone would be willing to sell him a gun illegally. Thats assuming alot.also If the nra didnt fight so hard to make sure the assault weapan ban expired he wouldnt of had such a huge magazine. They were illegal before 2004.

[OY]

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

* U.S.A. 14.24
* Brazil 12.95
* Mexico 12.69
* Estonia 12.26
* Argentina 8.93
* Northern Ireland 6.63
* Finland 6.46 - Tough gunlaw
* Switzerland 5.31 - Tough gunlaw
* France 5.15 - Tough gunlaw
* Canada 4.31 - Tough gunlaw
* Norway 3.82 - Tough gunlaw
* Austria 3.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Portugal 3.20 - Tough gunlaw
* Israel 2.91
* Belgium 2.90 - Tough gunlaw
* Australia 2.65
* Slovenia 2.60
* Italy 2.44 - Tough gunlaw
* New Zealand 2.38
* Denmark 2.09 - Tough gunlaw
* Sweden 1.92 - Tough gunlaw
* Kuwait 1.84
* Greece 1.29
* Germany 1.24 - Tough gunlaw
* Hungary 1.11
* Ireland 0.97
* Spain 0.78
* Netherlands 0.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Scotland 0.54
* England and Wales 0.41 - Tough gunlaw
* Taiwan 0.37
* Singapore 0.21 - Tough gunlaw
* Mauritius 0.19
* Hong Kong 0.14 - Tough gunlaw
* South Korea 0.12 - Tough gunlaw
* Japan 0.05 - Tough gunlaw

***

Can someone find a newer date for this type of report? I would like to see how it is these days, and it would also be good to do a reference per country on who has tough gun laws.

I have filled in the ones I KNOW have tough gun control laws. Feel free to update list - then continue to think for yourself.

[brassmonkey]

Originally Posted by Oystein

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

* U.S.A. 14.24
* Brazil 12.95
* Mexico 12.69
* Estonia 12.26
* Argentina 8.93
* Northern Ireland 6.63
* Finland 6.46 - Tough gunlaw
* Switzerland 5.31 - Tough gunlaw
* France 5.15 - Tough gunlaw
* Canada 4.31 - Tough gunlaw
* Norway 3.82 - Tough gunlaw
* Austria 3.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Portugal 3.20 - Tough gunlaw
* Israel 2.91
* Belgium 2.90 - Tough gunlaw
* Australia 2.65
* Slovenia 2.60
* Italy 2.44 - Tough gunlaw
* New Zealand 2.38
* Denmark 2.09 - Tough gunlaw
* Sweden 1.92 - Tough gunlaw
* Kuwait 1.84
* Greece 1.29
* Germany 1.24 - Tough gunlaw
* Hungary 1.11
* Ireland 0.97
* Spain 0.78
* Netherlands 0.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Scotland 0.54
* England and Wales 0.41 - Tough gunlaw
* Taiwan 0.37
* Singapore 0.21 - Tough gunlaw
* Mauritius 0.19
* Hong Kong 0.14 - Tough gunlaw
* South Korea 0.12 - Tough gunlaw
* Japan 0.05 - Tough gunlaw

***

Can someone find a newer date for this type of report? I would like to see how it is these days, and it would also be good to do a reference per country on who has tough gun laws.

I have filled in the ones I KNOW have tough gun control laws. Feel free to update list - then continue to think for yourself.

are you trying to say take away gun rights?? im not giving up my guns!

[AtlantisCash]

Originally Posted by munki

I find it the article misleading and heavily biased. Of course the tragedy happened because the shooter was able to get a gun. If guns had been illegal where he was, would there not be a black market readily available to service his needs? Look at what the drug was did for narcotics potency, availability, and price structure.

Perhaps if people weren't so wrapped up in the hype of bias media, there would have been a few more people wielding weaponry in the crowd and far less lives would have been lost after a well placed shot through the assailant.

Very well said, i don't get why some people make an excuse to ignore law abiding citizens rights based on a few idiots mistakes.

[kane]

Originally Posted by munki

I don't think tougher gun laws would stop anything...

Case in point... If I wanted to purchase a new gun at this very moment, for whatever nefarious, or sane reasons. This is what I would have to go through both legal or illegal routes.

LEGAL

1. Wait for store to open at 10 am tomorrow.
2. Select firearm
3. Fill out paperwork
4. Have ID and background check completed.
5. Pay out purchase at retail pricing
6. Leave store
7. Return a few days later when paperwork is cleared.
8. Receive newly purchased weapon.

Or

9. Look in the paper for a local gun show. There is one just about every weekend in just about every major city.
10. Pay admission to show.
11. Select a gun from any number of the sellers.
12. Pay for gun.
13. Leave and do with it as you please.

Last I checked Arizona does not require background checks for guns sold at gun shows. Some states do and other states have limited version of checks, but Arizona is not one of them.

ILLEGAL

1. Call local 'hook-up'
2. Call local 'hook-up' (he was asleep first call, but shit's going down, I need a piece now)
3. Drive to meet hook-up
4. Select Weapon
5. Pay far less then retail.
6. Wait for print wipe, and new tape on handle. ( hook-up was kind enough to pre shave serials)
7. Shoot and throw operation ready.

I would venture to guess that most normal, average, everyday people don't have a "hook-up" that can get them access to an illegal gun. If I needed an illegal gun tomorrow I would have no idea where to go or how to go abouts getting one.

I'm in no way saying that they should outlaw guns, but I don't have a problem with doing whatever we can to make sure someone who is unstable doesn't get one in their hands. All that said, there is no way of knowing if all the gun laws in the world would have stopped this guy.

[AtlantisCash]

Conservatives world wide are more dangerous then guns itself, i must say, just my 2cents.

[Caligari]

Bad move to make this about guns, this is not a gun issue.

If the story is true and this kid acted alone, he was living with his parents and obviously disturbed. The parents did little to nothing about this so in fact the parents should be tried as well. Although he is not a minor he was living in their house. Through their negligence he was able to operate the way he did.

Bringing his parents to trial will send a clear message- Control your offspring while they are in your domain or you will suffer severe consequences.

Instead of gun control how about fucking parental control?

[12clicks]

Here in America, we have the second amendment. We have it for a reason and some would argue it's one of the things that make us great.
You don't outlaw a tool because someone missuses it.
Especially when political correctness kept action from being taken against this spycho long ago.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by munki

I don't think tougher gun laws would stop anything...

Case in point... If I wanted to purchase a new gun at this very moment, for whatever nefarious, or sane reasons. This is what I would have to go through both legal or illegal routes.

LEGAL

1. Wait for store to open at 10 am tomorrow.
2. Select firearm
3. Fill out paperwork
4. Have ID and background check completed.
5. Pay out purchase at retail pricing
6. Leave store
7. Return a few days later when paperwork is cleared.
8. Receive newly purchased weapon.

ILLEGAL

1. Call local 'hook-up'
2. Call local 'hook-up' (he was asleep first call, but shit's going down, I need a piece now)
3. Drive to meet hook-up
4. Select Weapon
5. Pay far less then retail.
6. Wait for print wipe, and new tape on handle. ( hook-up was kind enough to pre shave serials)
7. Shoot and throw operation ready.

if you know illegal hook ups for guns, you might want to take a look at the people and places you associate yourself with in life...some people don't even know where to get weed let alone a gun. i think those with previous assault charges and any previous incidents of mental instability should not be able to get guns. i don't know if this is already the case but it doesn't appear to be so.

i still think its horribly sad/ironic that everyone feels they need guns to protect them from others with guns. how many guns bought for self defense have been used in a moment of rage? how many kids died trying to be a big boy playing with daddy's gun? how many people wouldd still be here today, if not for some loser who wants to take out as many people as he can before he does himself in? the thing about guns is that it takes no real forethough. even building a bomb takes time, requires materials not always so easy to get, etc. if you have a gun, you just need to pick it up, load and shoot.

also more people being armed most likely would of done nothing. how many times has a gunman been taken out who is shooting in a crowd of people? while im sure there have been, i can't think of a single one. people are thinking more about their own survival rather than being the hero, especially if you don't even know who is doing the shooting, if its being done from a distance, point blank, if the guy is right next to you or what..

if guns have absolutely nothing to do with it, america should start looking at itself because its breeding a helluva lot of killers.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by AtlantisCash

Conservatives world wide are more dangerous then guns itself, i must say, just my 2cents.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

Bad move to make this about guns, this is not a gun issue.

If the story is true and this kid acted alone, he was living with his parents and obviously disturbed. The parents did little to nothing about this so in fact the parents should be tried as well. Although he is not a minor he was living in their house. Through their negligence he was able to operate the way he did.

Bringing his parents to trial will send a clear message- Control your offspring while they are in your domain or you will suffer severe consequences.

Instead of gun control how about fucking parental control?

everyone keeps saying he was obviously disturbed..if it was so obvious how did he make it his 23 years without a single psych eval or anything? he couldn't of acted that crazy. his parents most likely thought he was just a troubled loner who has a hard time making/keeping friends. how often do parents think something like that would turn into a shooting rampage? even if the kid told their parents things like people should be shot, ect do you think every parent that hears this should be calling the police or something?

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

everyone keeps saying he was obviously disturbed..if it was so obvious how did he make it his 23 years without a single psych eval or anything?

precisely. why didn't his parents have him tested? that would be because his parents either never saw the obvious warning signs or simply ignored them. either way it comes down to bad parenting and since he was always living with them the case is made for extreme negligence.

edit - note you used the key phrase "troubled loner"

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

precisely. why didn't his parents have him tested? that would be because his parents either never saw the obvious warning signs or simply ignored them. either way it comes down to bad parenting and since he was always living with them the case is made for extreme negligence.

edit - note you used the key phrase "troubled loner"

you assume there were warning signs. there aren't always. the kid might not of even been 'crazy' and could of passed tests if he wanted. who knows. you make a lot of assumptions as do most people when something like this happened. troubled loner is just a generic term. should all parents call the police on their children because they thought they may be capable of possibly doing something at some point in the future? ha. the police would be overwhelmed and not even care.

[Caligari]

really interesting write up on the virginia tech massacre-
http://www.mail-archive.com/mythfolk.../msg01122.html

heres part of it-

Youth is torturous, to be sure, but the school shooters who selfishly
impose their pain and anger onto others--often randomly--bring to light
new horrors that we never thought possible. And Cho, however sick he
was, knew the story of Columbine--and maybe also the Amish schoolhouse,
or Paducah, or Red Lake, or Jonesboro. Cho's raving manifesto mentions
his reverence for Harris and Klebold, the specters of whom are like dark
martyrs to those whose hate consumes them. But Cho is not a copy-cat; he
knew that a mass shooting is a disturbingly real, potent, and viable
option. The troubled loner looking for vengeance on a pitiless world may
just consider it; the idea suddenly and irretrievably exists.

As we sift through the sound-bitten detritus of the tragedy at Virginia
Tech, I wonder about all the kids of this generation. Undergraduates at
Tech would have been teens, as Cho was, during Columbine. Were they
scared to go to high school after that? Perhaps the kids of that
generation thought they'd escaped when they graduated--only to find that
the gunman they'd eluded as an adolescent was back as an English major.
A grisly college sequel. What does the world look like to a generation
who has grown up with the frightful knowledge that killers can lurk in
classrooms? I doubt their first concern is gun control.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

you assume there were warning signs. there aren't always. the kid might not of even been 'crazy' and could of passed tests if he wanted. who knows. you make a lot of assumptions as do most people when something like this happened. troubled loner is just a generic term. should all parents call the police on their children because they thought they may be capable of possibly doing something at some point in the future? ha. the police would be overwhelmed and not even care.

big difference between Loner and Troubled Loner. look at the things they found in this guy's room...hard to believe that none of this was spilling out into the parents' world.

they all lived in the same house for 23 years.

you are assuming he could have passed tests if he wanted to...what makes you so sure?
the core of this is that he never was tested, the parents never took the time or thought their child's actions were that suspect.

of course "it couldn't be my child, he was always such a nice boy" man that is a load of crap sentiment that has been flung around since day one about murderers and psychos.

whether it was denial or neglect, since this guy was still living with his parents they should be held responsible for never having his mental status evaluated.

blaming gun control or the lack thereof is a deflection.

[munki]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

if you know illegal hook ups for guns, you might want to take a look at the people and places you associate yourself with in life...some people don't even know where to get weed let alone a gun. i think those with previous assault charges and any previous incidents of mental instability should not be able to get guns. i don't know if this is already the case but it doesn't appear to be so.

i still think its horribly sad/ironic that everyone feels they need guns to protect them from others with guns. how many guns bought for self defense have been used in a moment of rage? how many kids died trying to be a big boy playing with daddy's gun? how many people wouldd still be here today, if not for some loser who wants to take out as many people as he can before he does himself in? the thing about guns is that it takes no real forethough. even building a bomb takes time, requires materials not always so easy to get, etc. if you have a gun, you just need to pick it up, load and shoot.

also more people being armed most likely would of done nothing. how many times has a gunman been taken out who is shooting in a crowd of people? while im sure there have been, i can't think of a single one. people are thinking more about their own survival rather than being the hero, especially if you don't even know who is doing the shooting, if its being done from a distance, point blank, if the guy is right next to you or what..

if guns have absolutely nothing to do with it, america should start looking at itself because its breeding a helluva lot of killers.

lol where I grew up even the good kids new where to get all the toys... It's easier to get guns and drugs then a bottle of liquor in the ghetto. That being said... I'd be willing to bet site unseen I could walk into any city in the country and find a piece within 24-48 hours. The "skills of a mispent youth" I guess.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

big difference between Loner and Troubled Loner. look at the things they found in this guy's room...hard to believe that none of this was spilling out into the parents' world.

they all lived in the same house for 23 years.

you are assuming he could have passed tests if he wanted to...what makes you so sure?
the core of this is that he never was tested, the parents never took the time or thought their child's actions were that suspect.

of course "it couldn't be my child, he was always such a nice boy" man that is a load of crap sentiment that has been flung around since day one about murderers and psychos.

whether it was denial or neglect, since this guy was still living with his parents they should be held responsible for never having his mental status evaluated.

blaming gun control or the lack thereof is a deflection.

i didn't assume he would pass tests. i said he might and who knows because i don't know. take a look at russel williams case here in canada 40 some year old passed multiple psych tests in the army then raped and killed women and stole panties from some 80 odd homes. this guy was high up in rank and well respected, nothing of a 'troubled loner'.

regardless, what you are saying the parents should of done, probably 60-70% of all parents should do according to you, ruining their future when 99.5% go on to lead normal lives. lets go one step further, lets say he was tested and the tests day say he has mental instablities...then what? would that stop him from being able to get a gun? should he be locked up? sorry to say that if he has not commited any harm towards himself or others he would not be. you can't lock up everyone who has some kind of mental problem. insitutions don't have the funding or availibity to do so, and even if they did, i would not recommend it as most can live normally on their own and not bother anyone. you'd only be infringing on their rights, which you feel are important for gun ownership but not important as to who is free and who is not.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by munki

lol where I grew up even the good kids new where to get all the toys... It's easier to get guns and drugs then a bottle of liquor in the ghetto. That being said... I'd be willing to bet site unseen I could walk into any city in the country and find a piece within 24-48 hours. The "skills of a mispent youth" I guess.

according to caligari you sound like a troubled youth who's parents should be responsible for any actions you take and if you show any signs of being 'troubled', should have a psych eval forced on you. thats freedom.

[V_RocKs]

Originally Posted by Oystein

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

* U.S.A. 14.24
* Brazil 12.95
* Mexico 12.69
* Estonia 12.26
* Argentina 8.93
* Northern Ireland 6.63
* Finland 6.46 - Tough gunlaw
* Switzerland 5.31 - Tough gunlaw
* France 5.15 - Tough gunlaw
* Canada 4.31 - Tough gunlaw
* Norway 3.82 - Tough gunlaw
* Austria 3.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Portugal 3.20 - Tough gunlaw
* Israel 2.91
* Belgium 2.90 - Tough gunlaw
* Australia 2.65
* Slovenia 2.60
* Italy 2.44 - Tough gunlaw
* New Zealand 2.38
* Denmark 2.09 - Tough gunlaw
* Sweden 1.92 - Tough gunlaw
* Kuwait 1.84
* Greece 1.29
* Germany 1.24 - Tough gunlaw
* Hungary 1.11
* Ireland 0.97
* Spain 0.78
* Netherlands 0.70 - Tough gunlaw
* Scotland 0.54
* England and Wales 0.41 - Tough gunlaw
* Taiwan 0.37
* Singapore 0.21 - Tough gunlaw
* Mauritius 0.19
* Hong Kong 0.14 - Tough gunlaw
* South Korea 0.12 - Tough gunlaw
* Japan 0.05 - Tough gunlaw

***

Can someone find a newer date for this type of report? I would like to see how it is these days, and it would also be good to do a reference per country on who has tough gun laws.

I have filled in the ones I KNOW have tough gun control laws. Feel free to update list - then continue to think for yourself.

Your report is missing one key factor. The percentage of people living below the poverty limit and another big factor, minorities!

The US has more underprivileged minorities than all of the other countries. If you removed gang on gang violence you would end up with us being at par with tougher law countries. Then remove the gang on non-gang and you'd be closer to some of those nations where their standard of living is way beyond our own.

[DEA - banned for life]

Originally Posted by munki

I don't think tougher gun laws would stop anything...

Case in point... If I wanted to purchase a new gun at this very moment, for whatever nefarious, or sane reasons. This is what I would have to go through both legal or illegal routes.

LEGAL

1. Wait for store to open at 10 am tomorrow.
2. Select firearm
3. Fill out paperwork
4. Have ID and background check completed.
5. Pay out purchase at retail pricing
6. Leave store
7. Return a few days later when paperwork is cleared.
8. Receive newly purchased weapon.

.

In South Carolina we get to skip numbers 7 & 8 because at number 6 we leave the store with the gun in our hands.
We also are allowed to have a LOADED handgun in the center console or glove box of our vehicle no permit needed.

My "bug out" bag ...everything you see fits in the camelback backpack and all magazines fit both the the 40 glock and the 40 kel-tec carbine rifle wich folds in half

[V_RocKs]

Originally Posted by munki

lol where I grew up even the good kids new where to get all the toys... It's easier to get guns and drugs then a bottle of liquor in the ghetto. That being said... I'd be willing to bet site unseen I could walk into any city in the country and find a piece within 24-48 hours. The "skills of a mispent youth" I guess.

If you want an untraceable gun, just sit on a white, rich, republican and wait for him to leave his home. All of the guns you could ever want and none of them can be traced back to you. And free I might add.

[V_RocKs]

Originally Posted by DEA

In South Carolina we get to skip numbers 7 & 8 because at number 6 we leave the store with the gun in our hands.
We also are allowed to have a LOADED handgun in the center console or glove box of our vehicle no permit needed.

My "bug out" bag ...everything you see fits in the camelback backpack and all magazines fit both the the 40 glock and the 40 kel-tec carbine rifle wich folds in half

I have a new found respect for you now.

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

everyone keeps saying he was obviously disturbed..if it was so obvious how did he make it his 23 years without a single psych eval or anything? he couldn't of acted that crazy. his parents most likely thought he was just a troubled loner who has a hard time making/keeping friends. how often do parents think something like that would turn into a shooting rampage? even if the kid told their parents things like people should be shot, ect do you think every parent that hears this should be calling the police or something?

That is what we need, tougher CRAZY laws, if you look or act crazy off to the ward for an eval.

Yep, the reason he didnt get one is

It is not illegal to be crazy.
Nothing is done, until something bad happens.
No one wants to pay for the test.
the list goes on.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

i didn't assume he would pass tests. i said he might and who knows because i don't know. take a look at russel williams case here in canada 40 some year old passed multiple psych tests in the army then raped and killed women and stole panties from some 80 odd homes. this guy was high up in rank and well respected, nothing of a 'troubled loner'.

regardless, what you are saying the parents should of done, probably 60-70% of all parents should do according to you, ruining their future when 99.5% go on to lead normal lives. lets go one step further, lets say he was tested and the tests day say he has mental instablities...then what? would that stop him from being able to get a gun? should he be locked up? sorry to say that if he has not commited any harm towards himself or others he would not be. you can't lock up everyone who has some kind of mental problem. insitutions don't have the funding or availibity to do so, and even if they did, i would not recommend it as most can live normally on their own and not bother anyone. you'd only be infringing on their rights, which you feel are important for gun ownership but not important as to who is free and who is not.

you're getting off the reality track here.

1)he was living with his parents at the time of the murders
2)he was always living with his parents
3)if you are a parent and your children are still living with you (regardless of what age) you have the responsibility to make sure that your brood is mentally stable.
4)this guy went out and massacred 6 people and tried to take out many more, what more do you want for warning signs? do you think he just "snapped" one day? obviously not, his behaviour prior to the incident shows clear, dangerous tendencies. the parents ignored these tendencies and in doing so are culpable.

bottom line is parents have the responsibility to ask the tough questions without rose colored glasses.
parents are responsible for their offspring if their offspring are living in the same house with them.

another article on huffpost "the parents are devastated" no shit! they're always devastated wtf! they're always shocked that their darling boy is in fact a mass murderer because the problem with being a parent is that its quite easy...you just need to fuck and pop out a baby, nevermind having actual parental skills...

bottom line is that its easier to blame a gun than to get to the more complicated mess of getting to the psychological root

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by munki

I find it the article misleading and heavily biased. Of course the tragedy happened because the shooter was able to get a gun. If guns had been illegal where he was, would there not be a black market readily available to service his needs? Look at what the drug was did for narcotics potency, availability, and price structure.

Perhaps if people weren't so wrapped up in the hype of bias media, there would have been a few more people wielding weaponry in the crowd and far less lives would have been lost after a well placed shot through the assailant.

yep, and he could have done just as much damage with a large vehical ramming into the crowed filled wiith burning gas etc... not about guns at all

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Caligari

you're getting off the reality track here.

1)he was living with his parents at the time of the murders
2)he was always living with his parents
3)if you are a parent and your children are still living with you (regardless of what age) you have the responsibility to make sure that your brood is mentally stable.
4)this guy went out and massacred 6 people and tried to take out many more, what more do you want for warning signs? do you think he just "snapped" one day? obviously not, his behaviour prior to the incident shows clear, dangerous tendencies. the parents ignored these tendencies and in doing so are culpable.

bottom line is parents have the responsibility to ask the tough questions without rose colored glasses.
parents are responsible for their offspring if their offspring are living in the same house with them.

another article on huffpost "the parents are devastated" no shit! they're always devastated wtf! they're always shocked that their darling boy is in fact a mass murderer because the problem with being a parent is that its quite easy...you just need to fuck and pop out a baby, nevermind having actual parental skills...

bottom line is that its easier to blame a gun than to get to the more complicated mess of getting to the psychological root

well so far they haven't really been able to arrest parents for the kids bullshit.... thank g_d for that or almost the entire urban population would be in jail

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

you assume there were warning signs. there aren't always. the kid might not of even been 'crazy' and could of passed tests if he wanted. who knows. you make a lot of assumptions as do most people when something like this happened. troubled loner is just a generic term. should all parents call the police on their children because they thought they may be capable of possibly doing something at some point in the future? ha. the police would be overwhelmed and not even care.

incorrect. you shouldn't post about things you don't know about.
There were tons of warning signs and they've all been reported.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

you're getting off the reality track here.

1)he was living with his parents at the time of the murders
2)he was always living with his parents
3)if you are a parent and your children are still living with you (regardless of what age) you have the responsibility to make sure that your brood is mentally stable.
4)this guy went out and massacred 6 people and tried to take out many more, what more do you want for warning signs? do you think he just "snapped" one day? obviously not, his behaviour prior to the incident shows clear, dangerous tendencies. the parents ignored these tendencies and in doing so are culpable.

bottom line is parents have the responsibility to ask the tough questions without rose colored glasses.
parents are responsible for their offspring if their offspring are living in the same house with them.

another article on huffpost "the parents are devastated" no shit! they're always devastated wtf! they're always shocked that their darling boy is in fact a mass murderer because the problem with being a parent is that its quite easy...you just need to fuck and pop out a baby, nevermind having actual parental skills...

bottom line is that its easier to blame a gun than to get to the more complicated mess of getting to the psychological root

where did you read about his behavoir prior to the incident? parents can only do so much. i did some bad shit when i was younger but my parents were not in any way to blame. they were my actions, not theirs.

like i said before, even if it were found out that he was mentally unstable, would the current laws stopped him from getting a gun? because he wouldn't of been locked up, having not previously caused himself or others any harm.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Oystein

I think that pretty much sums it up.

More on this Huffington Post blog: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_806823.html

**

For those of you who cannot read more than one sentence - read the header again and think about it.

so if a guy killed you with a big fucking knife instead of a gun you'd feel better about yourself as you bleed out?

[DEA - banned for life]

cant belive the debate going on in here.

BOTTOM LINE :
there are crazy people out there that do crazy things and trying to keep track and report everyone YOU may think has an issue is just an idiotic idea to say the least.

Example : 911 ...the biggest attack against american citizens inside the confines of the continental USA was achieved with box cutters .

Some things cant be stopped no matter how many laws you make or how many people you got looking over there shoulder.

[munki]

Originally Posted by DEA

In South Carolina we get to skip numbers 7 & 8 because at number 6 we leave the store with the gun in our hands.
We also are allowed to have a LOADED handgun in the center console or glove box of our vehicle no permit needed.

My "bug out" bag ...everything you see fits in the camelback backpack and all magazines fit both the the 40 glock and the 40 kel-tec carbine rifle wich folds in half

Nice compact collection... I should adopt... the AR15 is a bit conspicuous in a backpack situation.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

where did you read about his behavoir prior to the incident? parents can only do so much. i did some bad shit when i was younger but my parents were not in any way to blame. they were my actions, not theirs.

like i said before, even if it were found out that he was mentally unstable, would the current laws stopped him from getting a gun? because he wouldn't of been locked up, having not previously caused himself or others any harm.

i will leave you with this.

if the parents saw something potentially violent in their kid and they had tests run, and one of those tests showed mental instability or tendency toward violent behavior...

would we be having this conversation right now?

we know one thing- he probably wouldn't have been able to purchase the weapon legally when the red flags went off in the system.

[munki]

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

If you want an untraceable gun, just sit on a white, rich, republican and wait for him to leave his home. All of the guns you could ever want and none of them can be traced back to you. And free I might add.

Much easier to pay a small "finder's fee"

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

incorrect. you shouldn't post about things you don't know about.
There were tons of warning signs and they've all been reported.

ok, so i've only read a couple articles about it but im looking at more now and these so called warning signs seem like a vain attempt to paint an average loser as a crazy psycho. i've seen others do much worse in their 20's and go on to be normal people with families. so lets see..

dropped out of school ..who cares?

pothead.. so are a lot of other kids and adults across the globe

rejected from army.. again, who cares?

made crazy youtube video...have you been around youtube much? his video is nothing compared to so many out there. maybe we need a thought police who will arrest those who think something bad.

said weird things in college, wrote 'mayhem best' on paper...ok then. what about the anarchists, the white power kids, the 'goths'... i guess all of these people are threats and should be kicked out of school and locked up?

i really don't see any real warning signs. maybe the parents saw something actually real but it hasn't been reported yet.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

i will leave you with this.

if the parents saw something potentially violent in their kid and they had tests run, and one of those tests showed mental instability or tendency toward violent behavior...

would we be having this conversation right now?

we know one thing- he probably wouldn't have been able to purchase the weapon legally when the red flags went off in the system.

and if every parent did this, how many lives would be forever ruined because of a phase they might be going through at the time? once you get a psych eval there is no going back. they aren't totally accurate one way or another.

and you say he probably wouldn't of been able to purchase the weapon but i bet you he would of. arizona apparently has some of the most relaxed gun laws in the country. i don't know what they are specifically but what kind of background checks to do they do? if its only criminal then nothing would show. i don't think there is a psych database readily available to search against even if they wanted to.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

ok, so i've only read a couple articles about it but im looking at more now and these so called warning signs seem like a vain attempt to paint an average loser as a crazy psycho. i've seen others do much worse in their 20's and go on to be normal people with families. so lets see..

dropped out of school ..who cares?

pothead.. so are a lot of other kids and adults across the globe

rejected from army.. again, who cares?

made crazy youtube video...have you been around youtube much? his video is nothing compared to so many out there. maybe we need a thought police who will arrest those who think something bad.

said weird things in college, wrote 'mayhem best' on paper...ok then. what about the anarchists, the white power kids, the 'goths'... i guess all of these people are threats and should be kicked out of school and locked up?

i really don't see any real warning signs. maybe the parents saw something actually real but it hasn't been reported yet.

you're simply incorrect.
multiple students and teachers feared him. do a search.
or, continue to argue a false theory.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

and if every parent did this, how many lives would be forever ruined because of a phase they might be going through at the time? once you get a psych eval there is no going back. they aren't totally accurate one way or another.

and you say he probably wouldn't of been able to purchase the weapon but i bet you he would of. arizona apparently has some of the most relaxed gun laws in the country. i don't know what they are specifically but what kind of background checks to do they do? if its only criminal then nothing would show. i don't think there is a psych database readily available to search against even if they wanted to.

and how many lives would be saved?

and what do you mean by "lives forever ruined" because of a psych evaluation? are you actually saying that they shouldn't be performed because there's a chance that some kids will be tested and declared to be mentally unstable and potentially violent? wow too bad their lives are ruined so they can't go out and buy a gun to shoot 6 people to death?

any psychological references should red flag when someone is buying a weapon. if that's not part of the law in AZ it should absolutely be part of the law.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Caligari

and how many lives would be saved?

and what do you mean by "lives forever ruined" because of a psych evaluation? are you actually saying that they shouldn't be performed because there's a chance that some kids will be tested and declared to be mentally unstable and potentially violent? wow too bad their lives are ruined so they can't go out and buy a gun to shoot 6 people to death?

any psychological references should red flag when someone is buying a weapon. if that's not part of the law in AZ it should absolutely be part of the law.

psych tests aren't totally accurate. crazy people can pass and sane people can fail. and by lives ruined forever i mean because johnny is going some kind of goth phase where he is fasinated with death and fails a psych eval, which doesn't mean he is crazy or a threat..) the career choices he makes later in life will be much more limited, among other things. as far as i know to be denied a gun you would have to do something criminally violent, not just have a psych eval that says you may be mentally unstable and could or could not have violent tendencies. why don't we just start arresting people for possible crimes that might happen in the future. it seems you'd be willing to strip people of many freedoms to keep guns which is kind of ironic.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

you're simply incorrect.
multiple students and teachers feared him. do a search.
or, continue to argue a false theory.

sure they feared him and of course have a much more chilling recall now than they did then. because oh, they just knew he was going to snap. of course they did. people always say this when something like that happens, it makes them feel important. maybe he was crazy. i am not saying he wasn't. just saying the so called warning signs that have been reported are farily typical and happen every day and the percentage that go on to kill might be .03%.

[Agent 488]

Originally Posted by Angry Jew Cat

Or build a pipe bomb with household supplies, which probably would have been way easier than the gun buying process in the first place. Probably could have killed way more people with one too if he used his head. I'm sure your average Iraqi teenager would have done much better. Thank your lucky stars the kids are dumb in America...

he is tied to bombs attacks now, but since he was a retard all it ended up being was a little poof and a singed hand.

[Vendzilla]

* Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime

Just 8% had a gun

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

sure they feared him and of course have a much more chilling recall now than they did then. because oh, they just knew he was going to snap. of course they did. people always say this when something like that happens, it makes them feel important. maybe he was crazy. i am not saying he wasn't. just saying the so called warning signs that have been reported are farily typical and happen every day and the percentage that go on to kill might be .03%.

sorry clown.
there are emails and a 911 call.
but please, continue with your false argument.

[bronco67]

So we should stop giving out driving licenses because someone might get run over? Many more people die by getting run over by a sane person, than being shot by an insane person.

--and if he really needed a gun, he would get one regardless of the system.