Whats going wrong with the world? More shootings

unsung

This looks like a guy who just woke up from a week long bender. "What happened?"

JonnyPistachio

After seeing this:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/ ... 4#48283194

I give up. All Americans should have and pack as many guns as they want, wherever they want. :? We have no hope. :fp:

unsung

JonnyPistachio wrote:

unsung wrote:

I'm laughing when people think that because he had body armor on that shooting him was futile. It'd still be like getting slugged in the chest full swing with a sledgehammer. Maybe not enough to kill him but rest assured he'd go down. It's not like he was bullet proof.

I own many guns, never have I remotely been inclined to use them against a person. However if someone entered my house illegally and was intent on doing harm I surely would not think twice about defending my family.

Gun-free zones don't work, they only allow someone intent on harming others the ability to go about that business without obstruction.

Well, I thought putting it into perspective of one person with head to toe body armor, tear gas, four guns, and the element of surprise CLEARLY gives him the upper hand over someone who has zero armor, has their gun in their pocket with the safety on, and is enjoying a movie in the dark. If I had to bet on one, I'd give the guy with the armor the upper hand. :?

And furthermore, there are many, many people who would agree that returning fire in this instance could be more dangerous for other by standards. I'm not saying its impossible, but you might have watched too many movies if you think the hero has a level playing field against a cold blooded, well planned psycho.

He fired a warning shot into the ceiling and just stood there with the tear gas in his hand. People were quoted saying that they thought it was part of the movie!

WHAT MOVIE HAS ANYONE GONE TO THAT THERE ARE EXTRA THEATRICS?

He could have been stopped, but the company decided that it was more important to disarm the law abiding citizens.

chadwick

Kat wrote:

g under p wrote:

Norm, what's the foe feature.....it appears I may have a few of those?

Peace everybody.

It's an Ignore List kind of thing. You can add someone's name to it if you feel their posts are ones that you just don't want to read anymore because they make you forget the Posting Guidelines. It's a good idea for the ol' BP too. I post on a board other than this one and I use it so my experience is better. It's up to the individual and if it's something that can help, it's a tool that's available.

one can also flat out block certain folk from pms, i use this feature myself. i have never used the foe feature. i suppose it's something to think about, however, who doesn't enjoy reading/trading heated messages?

chadwick

unsung wrote:

This looks like a guy who just woke up from a week long bender. "What happened?"

is that the shooter? my pharmacy's televisions were no, no volume. i saw this scene and could not read with the fast ass dialouge thingy.

pandora

chadwick wrote:

Kat wrote:

g under p wrote:

Norm, what's the foe feature.....it appears I may have a few of those?

Peace everybody.

It's an Ignore List kind of thing. You can add someone's name to it if you feel their posts are ones that you just don't want to read anymore because they make you forget the Posting Guidelines. It's a good idea for the ol' BP too. I post on a board other than this one and I use it so my experience is better. It's up to the individual and if it's something that can help, it's a tool that's available.

one can also flat out block certain folk from pms, i use this feature myself. i have never used the foe feature. i suppose it's something to think about, however, who doesn't enjoy reading/trading heated messages?

me ... I don't even open them

comebackgirl

pandora wrote:

I am a layman giving my opinion based on life experience ...
never claimed anything different. Gee ... it's what most here are doing.

Our experience as a society is telling many of us that this man has mental problems,
just heard an expert on radio news saying the exact same. I guess that woman has expertise,
science and experience enough to give an opinion other than let's wait and see.

Unless this expert assessed him directly or has read his evals, all she can do is speculate. Other experts are warning not to jump to conclusions, and point to the mistakes made with Columbine in assuming too much without any facts to support the opinions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/opini ... lings.html

dignin

unsung wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

unsung wrote:

I'm laughing when people think that because he had body armor on that shooting him was futile. It'd still be like getting slugged in the chest full swing with a sledgehammer. Maybe not enough to kill him but rest assured he'd go down. It's not like he was bullet proof.

I own many guns, never have I remotely been inclined to use them against a person. However if someone entered my house illegally and was intent on doing harm I surely would not think twice about defending my family.

Gun-free zones don't work, they only allow someone intent on harming others the ability to go about that business without obstruction.

Well, I thought putting it into perspective of one person with head to toe body armor, tear gas, four guns, and the element of surprise CLEARLY gives him the upper hand over someone who has zero armor, has their gun in their pocket with the safety on, and is enjoying a movie in the dark. If I had to bet on one, I'd give the guy with the armor the upper hand. :?

And furthermore, there are many, many people who would agree that returning fire in this instance could be more dangerous for other by standards. I'm not saying its impossible, but you might have watched too many movies if you think the hero has a level playing field against a cold blooded, well planned psycho.

He fired a warning shot into the ceiling and just stood there with the tear gas in his hand. People were quoted saying that they thought it was part of the movie!

WHAT MOVIE HAS ANYONE GONE TO THAT THERE ARE EXTRA THEATRICS?

He could have been stopped, but the company decided that it was more important to disarm the law abiding citizens.

a lot of judging of the victims from someone who wasn't there

chadwick

pandora wrote:

me ... I don't even open them

i was refering to open public messages on here....who doesn't enjoy reading/trading heated mesages? that is not about pms.

dimitrispearljam

JonnyPistachio wrote:

After seeing this:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/ ... 4#48283194

I give up. All Americans should have and pack as many guns as they want, wherever they want. :? We have no hope. :fp:

oh boy.....can shoot an helicopter down???i guess people buy it for "protection" :roll:

ComeToTX

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were both forced to speak with counselors and therapists as part of their court ordered probation.

Like I said day 1 it's not an either or situation. We can do our best to provide mental health to those who need it AND keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of civilians.

BinauralJam

chadwick wrote:

unsung wrote:

This looks like a guy who just woke up from a week long bender. "What happened?"

is that the shooter? my pharmacy's televisions were no, no volume. i saw this scene and could not read with the fast ass dialouge thingy.

Looks like Scott Weiland.

pandora

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

I am a layman giving my opinion based on life experience ...
never claimed anything different. Gee ... it's what most here are doing.

Our experience as a society is telling many of us that this man has mental problems,
just heard an expert on radio news saying the exact same. I guess that woman has expertise,
science and experience enough to give an opinion other than let's wait and see.

Unless this expert assessed him directly or has read his evals, all she can do is speculate. Other experts are warning not to jump to conclusions, and point to the mistakes made with Columbine in assuming too much without any facts to support the opinions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/opini ... lings.html

Of course its speculation ... so?

We have that everywhere and even in most of the threads here. Speculation a natural bi product
of life experiences as are our opinions. She was put on the radio to speculate. Most comments
here on this thread are judgmental speculation.

I'm certainly not alone in thinking he has a mental illness... turn the TV/ radio on,
I'm addressing the fact if help was more readily available this could have been avoided.

EmBleve

BinauralJam wrote:

Looks like Scott Weiland.

reminded me of Robert Downey Jr. after he was arrested in that alley after sleeping in that stranger's bed. :?

JonnyPistachio

BinauralJam wrote:

chadwick wrote:

unsung wrote:

This looks like a guy who just woke up from a week long bender. "What happened?"

is that the shooter? my pharmacy's televisions were no, no volume. i saw this scene and could not read with the fast ass dialouge thingy.

Looks like Scott Weiland.

or Ronald McDonald. Now that would be creepy. Or an Oompa Loompa on a shooting spree?

Hinn

JonnyPistachio wrote:

After seeing this:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/ ... 4#48283194

I give up. All Americans should have and pack as many guns as they want, wherever they want. :? We have no hope. :fp:

I'm strongly considering never to hit up shows in the States again. I knew this all already, nothing new there, but seriously...

riotgrl

dustinpardue wrote:

know1 wrote:

ComeToTX wrote:

...or maybe it's less of a gun problem and more of a problem with our society.

This is what I think.

Exactly. This idea was also the conclusion of the Bowling for Columbine documentary

I feel the same way. Maybe more of a problem of an individualistic society versus a collective society. Perhaps if we felt a sense of community and a need to support, protect and nurture each other, not just our own immediate friends and family, then perhaps we wouldn't feel the need to have to defend ourselves from each other.

EmBleve

pandora wrote:

I'm certainly not alone in thinking he has a mental illness... turn the TV/ radio on,
I'm addressing the fact if help was more readily available this could have been avoided.

Even if help was 'available', that doesn't mean that he would have fallen into the hands of a mental health professional. I'm not following it very closely at this point, but, last I heard his performance was in the top 5 of his class before he withdrew. He was in his 20s (not 6, under close scrutiny)..antisocial...very smart. Maybe some have an issue with you defending his actions as a mentally ill person when that is not verified.
(sorry...not 'defending' but 'empathizing'.)

Godfather.

he looks like a guy who knows he cracked and and is going to pay for his crimes with his life,can you all imagine having to defend this guy knowing what he did and is capable of doing it again if you get him off and into a syc ward ?

Godfather.

comebackgirl

pandora wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

I am a layman giving my opinion based on life experience ...
never claimed anything different. Gee ... it's what most here are doing.

Our experience as a society is telling many of us that this man has mental problems,
just heard an expert on radio news saying the exact same. I guess that woman has expertise,
science and experience enough to give an opinion other than let's wait and see.

Unless this expert assessed him directly or has read his evals, all she can do is speculate. Other experts are warning not to jump to conclusions, and point to the mistakes made with Columbine in assuming too much without any facts to support the opinions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/opini ... lings.html

Of course its speculation ... so?

We have that everywhere and even in most of the threads here. Speculation a natural bi product
of life experiences as are our opinions. She was put on the radio to speculate. Most comments
here on this thread are judgmental speculation.

I'm certainly not alone in thinking he has a mental illness... turn the TV/ radio on,
I'm addressing the fact if help was more readily available this could have been avoided.

Well as I said earlier there is a danger in presenting opinions as facts. Of course it makes sense to try to understand why this happened and make sense of it. That's a very human thing to do. What is dangerous is to state that someone is mentally ill when there is not any evidence to support that at this time. I'm sure help was readily available to him. He's probably one of the lucky ones in that regard. Most students can use the school counseling center free of charge. Whether or not they are willing to do it is a whole other ball game.