guns , or firearms if you prefer, were invented way before there was ever such a thing as a police force. by their very nature they are offensive weapons. anyone who thinks they were originally invented as protection or perhaps even a deterrent is either a fool or without the knowledge required to be objective.
who cares about the guns beginning of time story ... so irrelevant :fp:
Yours was no challenge you assumed ridiculous things ... challenge ... my arse!
cause...
Make (something) happen
excuse...
Attempt to lessen the blame attaching to (a fault or offense); seek to defend or justify.
No not the same thing :fp:
what makes you think I am excusing his behavior good lord it is empathy not condoning
nor excusing.
empathy...
the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
You didn't answer my questions about mental illness ...
Have you ever known anyone close to you with schizophrenia?
Have you seen results from the disease?
Have you seen trauma caused by the disease?
If this was a war vet would you accept his insanity better?
why?
you are saying you have the ability to understand & share the feelings of this guy with this fucking scumbag?
please tell me you are just bullshitting all of us out of some sorta, "look at me go 10c members, look at me go after all the attention"
i fully believe your comments are out to lunch & might should call for a swift sidelining as if a little girl was sent to the corner for acting up
What is out to lunch is not seeing or wanting to see mental illness ...
do we think our officers carry guns to kill? This their sole purpose
no ...
they carry guns to protect this is the simple fact and why most people own guns.
By saying someone owns one because they want to kill another person is
more than ridiculous :fp:
no Pandora,guns shoot to kill,guns arent for carry them around for a walk in the park..
guns take bullets that kill people...officers trained to use the guns,not buy donuts with them...
guns kill...even the empty guns are dangerous..is the first thing i learn when i join airforce 21 years ago...
guns,even the empty ones kill...blood,death,pain,tears..is only things u get from guns..
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
guns , or firearms if you prefer, were invented way before there was ever such a thing as a police force. by their very nature they are offensive weapons. anyone who thinks they were originally invented as protection or perhaps even a deterrent is either a fool or without the knowledge required to be objective.
who cares about the guns beginning of time story ... so irrelevant :fp:
not really, pand. it means you and whomever else has had guns/firearms ingrained into your skull for better or worse
who says this freakshow is mentally ill? where's the report?
why can't he just be a stone cold killer? why can't he just be the guy who burst into a packed movie theater with full on intent to make his act a blood bath unlike any other seen before?
he knew exactly what he was doing. he set bombs in his apartment building where many other innocent folks dwell because it is their home too.
no he aint fucking mentally ill. he is smart as shit working on a ph.d in science. he is as crafty as they come. he is the farthest thing from mentally insane.
who says this freakshow is mentally ill? where's the report?
why can't he just be a stone cold killer? why can't he just be the guy who burst into a packed movie theater with full on intent to make his act a blood bath unlike any other seen before?
he knew exactly what he was doing. he set bombs in his apartment building where many other innocent folks dwell because it is their home too.
no he aint fucking mentally ill. he is smart as shit working on a ph.d in science. he is as crafty as they come. he is the farthest thing from mentally insane.
you know chad ive no doubt there are killers who have suffered from mental illness but i do not believe that ALL killers suffer from mental illness. i also know that there are killers who can operate at a high degree of functionality. and so it should never be assumed all killer are nutjobs... but it would also be dangerous to think that some do not suffer from such an affliction.
Post edited by catefrances on
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It concerns me that people are jumping to the conclusion that he has a diagnosable mental illness, let alone specifically schizophrenia. I haven't heard all the reports, but thus far I haven't heard anything that confirms this. It's quite possible he committed this horror and does not have an Axis I disorder at all, or at least not a psychotic disorder. Jumping to this conclusion just adds to the stigma of those who do carry such diagnoses. He needs to have a current psych eval and any prior mental health records need to be reviewed before a diagnosis can be used in helping us have better understanding of him.
In my opinion which everyone is doing here
he is a victim of mental illness, but we are a blood thirsty society and putting him
to death for this is what many people will want. I want mental health help for him
and that he be punished, incarcerated, for what he did.
My point is his own mother knew, people know and they have no resources to get help
for their loved ones. Now he can get help after the fact, after killing and wounding.
What I'm saying is that we should be cautious about casting our opinions as fact when we have limited information at this point. It's dangerous because it adds to the stigma and it can damage the investigation and prosecution. We don't know if he was a victim of mental illness. We also don't know what the mother knew. We've heard trickles of information that people are extrapolating from, but there's been nothing concrete. I absolutely agree with you that if he is in fact mentally ill he should have access to mental health treatment and punishment for his actions. I'm not debating that. Of course I'm an advocate of better access to mental health treatment! It's sort of my livelihood I know it's astonishing, but most people who commit these acts are not psychotic. There is often some depression, but we know that doesn't spur this kind of violence. Often the biggest factor is a highly narcissistic person who suffers some sort of narcissistic wound (i.e. a romantic rejection, firing from a job, etc) who is devoid of empathy and wants to exact revenge. Sometimes that may be combined with a mental health diagnosis, but the mental illness is usually the lesser factor. Even though Seung-Hui Cho had some diagnosable mental illness, a narcissistic injury also seemed to be the triggering factor for him, even leaving a note stating "You made me do it." I've heard some info that points to that in this case, but I would definitely want to hear some more information before coming to any conclusion.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
guns , or firearms if you prefer, were invented way before there was ever such a thing as a police force. by their very nature they are offensive weapons. anyone who thinks they were originally invented as protection or perhaps even a deterrent is either a fool or without the knowledge required to be objective.
who cares about the guns beginning of time story ... so irrelevant :fp:
not really, pand. it means you and whomever else has had guns/firearms ingrained into your skull for better or worse
I don't own a gun or have guns anywhere in my history I just see clearly that
limiting guns to law abiding responsible people who have a right to protect themselves
does not change crazy people's actions.
If we want to do that make mental health readily available.
And yes why a gun was invented has nothing to do with present time.
Guns protect.
Here in Atl story after story now of people empowered, taking back their lives,
fighting back against crime, when they would have been just another victim of
a criminal. A criminal with a very long rap sheet left to prey on society.
An off-duty US police officer accidentally shot dead his son in what appears to be a case of mistaken identity.
Michael Leach, 59, called 911 just after midnight on July 21 and told operators he had just shot someone he thought was an intruder at the Clark Beach Motel, in New York State.
When police arrived at the motel they discovered the man Mr Leach had shot was his 37-year-old son, Matthew Leach, local online news service Syracuse.com reports.
The police said Mr Leach had used his department-issued handgun in the shooting.
He was taken to a local hospital after the incident for a "medical issue".
The shooting is being investigated
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It concerns me that people are jumping to the conclusion that he has a diagnosable mental illness, let alone specifically schizophrenia. I haven't heard all the reports, but thus far I haven't heard anything that confirms this. It's quite possible he committed this horror and does not have an Axis I disorder at all, or at least not a psychotic disorder. Jumping to this conclusion just adds to the stigma of those who do carry such diagnoses. He needs to have a current psych eval and any prior mental health records need to be reviewed before a diagnosis can be used in helping us have better understanding of him.
In my opinion which everyone is doing here
he is a victim of mental illness, but we are a blood thirsty society and putting him
to death for this is what many people will want. I want mental health help for him
and that he be punished, incarcerated, for what he did.
My point is his own mother knew, people know and they have no resources to get help
for their loved ones. Now he can get help after the fact, after killing and wounding.
What I'm saying is that we should be cautious about casting our opinions as fact when we have limited information at this point. It's dangerous because it adds to the stigma and it can damage the investigation and prosecution. We don't know if he was a victim of mental illness. We also don't know what the mother knew. We've heard trickles of information that people are extrapolating from, but there's been nothing concrete. I absolutely agree with you that if he is in fact mentally ill he should have access to mental health treatment and punishment for his actions. I'm not debating that. Of course I'm an advocate of better access to mental health treatment! It's sort of my livelihood I know it's astonishing, but most people who commit these acts are not psychotic. There is often some depression, but we know that doesn't spur this kind of violence. Often the biggest factor is a highly narcissistic person who suffers some sort of narcissistic wound (i.e. a romantic rejection, firing from a job, etc) who is devoid of empathy and wants to exact revenge. Sometimes that may be combined with a mental health diagnosis, but the mental illness is usually the lesser factor. Even though Seung-Hui Cho had some diagnosable mental illness, a narcissistic injury also seemed to be the triggering factor for him, even leaving a note stating "You made me do it." I've heard some info that points to that in this case, but I would definitely want to hear some more information before coming to any conclusion.
Did you have this stance with Loughner too?
My opinion is mental illness ...
just like I thought with him. He is now a diagnosed schizophrenic under forced treatment.
who says this freakshow is mentally ill? where's the report?
why can't he just be a stone cold killer? why can't he just be the guy who burst into a packed movie theater with full on intent to make his act a blood bath unlike any other seen before?
he knew exactly what he was doing. he set bombs in his apartment building where many other innocent folks dwell because it is their home too.
no he aint fucking mentally ill. he is smart as shit working on a ph.d in science. he is as crafty as they come. he is the farthest thing from mentally insane.
What I'm saying is that we should be cautious about casting our opinions as fact when we have limited information at this point. It's dangerous because it adds to the stigma and it can damage the investigation and prosecution. We don't know if he was a victim of mental illness. We also don't know what the mother knew. We've heard trickles of information that people are extrapolating from, but there's been nothing concrete. I absolutely agree with you that if he is in fact mentally ill he should have access to mental health treatment and punishment for his actions. I'm not debating that. Of course I'm an advocate of better access to mental health treatment! It's sort of my livelihood I know it's astonishing, but most people who commit these acts are not psychotic. There is often some depression, but we know that doesn't spur this kind of violence. Often the biggest factor is a highly narcissistic person who suffers some sort of narcissistic wound (i.e. a romantic rejection, firing from a job, etc) who is devoid of empathy and wants to exact revenge. Sometimes that may be combined with a mental health diagnosis, but the mental illness is usually the lesser factor. Even though Seung-Hui Cho had some diagnosable mental illness, a narcissistic injury also seemed to be the triggering factor for him, even leaving a note stating "You made me do it." I've heard some info that points to that in this case, but I would definitely want to hear some more information before coming to any conclusion.
Did you have this stance with Loughner too?
My opinion is mental illness ...
just like I thought with him. He is now a diagnosed schizophrenic under forced treatment.
Yes - I waited until he had a psych eval completed before jumping to any conclusions about his mental health status. It would have been irresponsible of me professionally and personally to proclaim him as mentally ill before a thorough assessment was completed. I'm glad he received a proper diagnosis and is undergoing treatment. That, however, is a rarity in these cases.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
how about we make it harder for these shooters to fire so rapidly. can we not restrict the large magazines?
if those were more difficult to get, the shooter would have to reload more often. forcing him to reload stops the rapid fire and makes the shooter vulnerable to be taken down and restrained for those several seconds.
i am just thinking out loud here.
I understand what you are saying, but this guy was an amateur. I can fire my rifle and reload a new mag in less than 2 seconds, and I am in no way a professional. I target practice with friends, nothing more. \
Don't get hung up on the 100 rd mags, they are not the issue. I have one, but I have never even opened it because they really are not practical. They are pretty known for jamming and aren't the easiest things to lug around when they are fully loaded.
What you can do has absolutely no bearing on this. If we're going to make comparisons, wasnt it true that the Giffords AZ shooter was only subdued while he was attempting to reload? yup. And there was quite a bit of debate surrounding the fact that he got off over 30 rounds, and was then subdued. Not too long before that shooting, the magazine limits by law were much smaller, but were increased to 15 or 17 I think. Smaller magazine limits almost definitely would have saved lives in the AZ shooting, and quite possibly in the Colorado shooting as well.
I've always said, I dont want to ban guns, but there is no way we cant say that we dont have a gun problem in the USA. And i'm 100% confident that laws and/or restrictions need to be reworked.
Roll your eyes because you can't argue against facts, I'm good with that. If someone were willing to reveal that they had carried in don't you think they would have tried to stop this person?
None of the carriers at the Giffords shooting did anything. Everybody is tough until the shit goes down and you are faced with putting your life on the line or getting the fuck out of there.
I'd be shocked if nobody had a gun.
regarding the AZ shooting of Giffords and the other folks, I remember hearing a story about a guy who was armed, but was in a nearby store. He heard the shooting and came out, but was unable to identify who was shooting, so he made a decision to not fire at anyone, but I think he saw the shooter, but was unclear. This made it more evident to me that in a shooting scenario, the majority of the time, a person who is armed is not going to know how to handle the situation,a nd their target many times will be unlcear. These things happen so fast and are a major shock. Most wont be trained or prepared for this. And, I cant even fathom what a person might have done if they were armed in the theater at this Batman premier, trying to shoot despite the tear gas, chaos, and a high powered rifle fire, at a man clad in body armor from head to toe.
It's fun to hear people say, "oh, I'd stand up and aim for his head, or that tiny crack in his body armor between his neck and head! Oh yeah, no problem!" :eh:
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
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.
In my opinion which everyone is doing here
he is a victim of mental illness, but we are a blood thirsty society and putting him
to death for this is what many people will want. I want mental health help for him
and that he be punished, incarcerated, for what he did.
My point is his own mother knew, people know and they have no resources to get help
for their loved ones. Now he can get help after the fact, after killing and wounding.
What I'm saying is that we should be cautious about casting our opinions as fact when we have limited information at this point. It's dangerous because it adds to the stigma and it can damage the investigation and prosecution. We don't know if he was a victim of mental illness. We also don't know what the mother knew. We've heard trickles of information that people are extrapolating from, but there's been nothing concrete. I absolutely agree with you that if he is in fact mentally ill he should have access to mental health treatment and punishment for his actions. I'm not debating that. Of course I'm an advocate of better access to mental health treatment! It's sort of my livelihood I know it's astonishing, but most people who commit these acts are not psychotic. There is often some depression, but we know that doesn't spur this kind of violence. Often the biggest factor is a highly narcissistic person who suffers some sort of narcissistic wound (i.e. a romantic rejection, firing from a job, etc) who is devoid of empathy and wants to exact revenge. Sometimes that may be combined with a mental health diagnosis, but the mental illness is usually the lesser factor. Even though Seung-Hui Cho had some diagnosable mental illness, a narcissistic injury also seemed to be the triggering factor for him, even leaving a note stating "You made me do it." I've heard some info that points to that in this case, but I would definitely want to hear some more information before coming to any conclusion.
Did you have this stance with Loughner too?
My opinion is mental illness ...
just like I thought with him. He is now a diagnosed schizophrenic under forced treatment.
Sounds like comebackgirl has SCIENCE and EXPERTISE to back her up Pandora, not opinion. I think you may be out of your element in this argument. Lets see what the professionals have to say after evaluation before we judge this mans state of mind.
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.
My opinion is mental illness ...
just like I thought with him. He is now a diagnosed schizophrenic under forced treatment.
Yes - I waited until he had a psych eval completed before jumping to any conclusions about his mental health status. It would have been irresponsible of me professionally and personally to proclaim him as mentally ill before a thorough assessment was completed. I'm glad he received a proper diagnosis and is undergoing treatment. That, however, is a rarity in these cases.
I just wanted to add the Loughner, like Seung-Hui Cho also came to the attention of the university counseling center several times and showed a decompensation of mental status over a period of time. I haven't heard anything about that with regard to Holmes, aside from his withdrawal from the Ph.D. program. That could have been a sign of decompensation, or it could have been his narcissistic injury. If the counseling center did have contact with him, they're not revealing that information at this time. If the school had concerns or noted a change in his behavior it's likely that the counseling center would have conducted an outreach to him at some point. Most schools have behavior intervention teams that focus on identifying any potential behavioral concerns, so if there had been a significant change in his behavior, he would have likely been on the radar. There's just not enough information being released at this point to come to any clear conclusions.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
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.
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.
I re-read my posts... and I have not found anything in them that looks like a personal attack on you as a person (other than a reference to one of your posts where you make a veiled attempt at dignifying yourself as 'slightly more enlightened' than those of us who do not share the same level of compassion for the offender).
I referred to your timing, your position, and made a small tongue-in-cheek comment about your formatting (you made a similar comment earlier with your 'big letters' comment to Jose... so I had assumed comments such as these would be fair for all. No?).
Excuse- Cause... It's the same thing. Don't get stuck on semantics. A pre-meditated murder on a large scale would obviously suggest that there's something wrong with this guy... but who cares what underlying cause it might be- this act is flat out inexcusable. Not worthy of pity.
"So far off target?" No. No, I think I'm bang on here, but I won't pat myself on the back. It's pretty easy to be on target with this sad case. Regardless, as I said in my previous post... you're welcome to feel any way you want- it's your right; however, if you make an opinon public on this forum and others like it... you should be prepared to be challenged on some of the things you say.
Yours was no challenge you assumed ridiculous things ... challenge ... my arse!
cause...
Make (something) happen
excuse...
Attempt to lessen the blame attaching to (a fault or offense); seek to defend or justify.
No not the same thing :fp:
what makes you think I am excusing his behavior good lord it is empathy not condoning
nor excusing.
empathy...
the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
You didn't answer my questions about mental illness ...
Have you ever known anyone close to you with schizophrenia?
Have you seen results from the disease?
Have you seen trauma caused by the disease?
If this was a war vet would you accept his insanity better?
why?
Because I see how you operate. You're over on the Trayvon Martin thread doing the same thing- championing for the criminal... making them out to be the victim.
I've already said my piece in this discussion and anytime I add something to it... you go back and speak of something I've clarified for you (ie. 'semantics' with cause and excuse). I get the feeling you like to do a lot of talking and not a lot of listening.
By the way... great use of the head slapping emoticon. Again, a veiled method to hoist yourself above people without actually coming out and saying, "Oh dear. Tsk. Why do I even bother with you simple people?"
Shit, too bad all of you weren't born back in the Wild West days, you could really get your kicks.
there was no rout 66 back in the wild west
that was from a comment I had made earlier in this thread that politions don't want any of this gun control mess right now with the election coming up, there are more Americans in favor of gun ownership and the 2nd ammendment then those aginst it, I would think even obama can see that.....maybe
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.
Yeah, the guy with the armor had an upper hand, but you are proving the point that he had even more of an upper hand than a person who has zero armor and no gun. If someone actually had a gun, in their pocket with the safety on, while enjoying the movie in the dark, that person would still have more of a chance than the person next to him who just had their hands in their empty pockets.
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.
Yeah, the guy with the armor had an upper hand, but you are proving the point that he had even more of an upper hand than a person who has zero armor and no gun. If someone actually had a gun, in their pocket with the safety on, while enjoying the movie in the dark, that person would still have more of a chance than the person next to him who just had their hands in their empty pockets.
Perhaps. Then again, that innocent person who draws their weapon becomes more of a target for the psycho with four guns and armor. So, I'll just disagree because they are drawing attention to themselves and they are severely out-gunned. So, more of a chance than the unarmed person sitting next to them...maybe, maybe not.
"We're different than other cultures," said Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, which advocates for firearms owners' rights. "We do allow Americans to possess the accoutrements that our military generally has."
:fp:
He didn't see anything unusual about many of Holmes' alleged purchases.
"If I only had 6,000 rounds for my AR-15s, I'd literally feel naked," Brown said. Then he totaled up Holmes' firearms purchases: "Two handguns, a shotgun and a rifle. That's the average male in Colorado."
But some involved in the trade are troubled by how easily Holmes stocked up for his alleged rampage.
Comments
guns take bullets that kill people...officers trained to use the guns,not buy donuts with them...
guns kill...even the empty guns are dangerous..is the first thing i learn when i join airforce 21 years ago...
guns,even the empty ones kill...blood,death,pain,tears..is only things u get from guns..
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
I think when the Gifford shooting happened you were of the same opinion,
now that killer is a diagnosed Schizophrenic on medicine have you changed your
mind?
why can't he just be a stone cold killer? why can't he just be the guy who burst into a packed movie theater with full on intent to make his act a blood bath unlike any other seen before?
he knew exactly what he was doing. he set bombs in his apartment building where many other innocent folks dwell because it is their home too.
no he aint fucking mentally ill. he is smart as shit working on a ph.d in science. he is as crafty as they come. he is the farthest thing from mentally insane.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
you know chad ive no doubt there are killers who have suffered from mental illness but i do not believe that ALL killers suffer from mental illness. i also know that there are killers who can operate at a high degree of functionality. and so it should never be assumed all killer are nutjobs... but it would also be dangerous to think that some do not suffer from such an affliction.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
limiting guns to law abiding responsible people who have a right to protect themselves
does not change crazy people's actions.
If we want to do that make mental health readily available.
And yes why a gun was invented has nothing to do with present time.
Guns protect.
Here in Atl story after story now of people empowered, taking back their lives,
fighting back against crime, when they would have been just another victim of
a criminal. A criminal with a very long rap sheet left to prey on society.
Some people just won't take it anymore.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/850372 ... shoots-son
An off-duty US police officer accidentally shot dead his son in what appears to be a case of mistaken identity.
Michael Leach, 59, called 911 just after midnight on July 21 and told operators he had just shot someone he thought was an intruder at the Clark Beach Motel, in New York State.
When police arrived at the motel they discovered the man Mr Leach had shot was his 37-year-old son, Matthew Leach, local online news service Syracuse.com reports.
The police said Mr Leach had used his department-issued handgun in the shooting.
He was taken to a local hospital after the incident for a "medical issue".
The shooting is being investigated
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
My opinion is mental illness ...
just like I thought with him. He is now a diagnosed schizophrenic under forced treatment.
and this too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
What you can do has absolutely no bearing on this. If we're going to make comparisons, wasnt it true that the Giffords AZ shooter was only subdued while he was attempting to reload? yup. And there was quite a bit of debate surrounding the fact that he got off over 30 rounds, and was then subdued. Not too long before that shooting, the magazine limits by law were much smaller, but were increased to 15 or 17 I think. Smaller magazine limits almost definitely would have saved lives in the AZ shooting, and quite possibly in the Colorado shooting as well.
I've always said, I dont want to ban guns, but there is no way we cant say that we dont have a gun problem in the USA. And i'm 100% confident that laws and/or restrictions need to be reworked.
regarding the AZ shooting of Giffords and the other folks, I remember hearing a story about a guy who was armed, but was in a nearby store. He heard the shooting and came out, but was unable to identify who was shooting, so he made a decision to not fire at anyone, but I think he saw the shooter, but was unclear. This made it more evident to me that in a shooting scenario, the majority of the time, a person who is armed is not going to know how to handle the situation,a nd their target many times will be unlcear. These things happen so fast and are a major shock. Most wont be trained or prepared for this. And, I cant even fathom what a person might have done if they were armed in the theater at this Batman premier, trying to shoot despite the tear gas, chaos, and a high powered rifle fire, at a man clad in body armor from head to toe.
It's fun to hear people say, "oh, I'd stand up and aim for his head, or that tiny crack in his body armor between his neck and head! Oh yeah, no problem!"
Godfather.
Godfather.
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.
Sounds like comebackgirl has SCIENCE and EXPERTISE to back her up Pandora, not opinion. I think you may be out of your element in this argument. Lets see what the professionals have to say after evaluation before we judge this mans state of mind.
great post !
Godfather.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
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.
What, you want a free for all?
Shit, too bad all of you weren't born back in the Wild West days, you could really get your kicks.
Judging by this post alone America has a huge gun problem. Your post reminded me of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqh6Ap9ldTs
Because I see how you operate. You're over on the Trayvon Martin thread doing the same thing- championing for the criminal... making them out to be the victim.
I've already said my piece in this discussion and anytime I add something to it... you go back and speak of something I've clarified for you (ie. 'semantics' with cause and excuse). I get the feeling you like to do a lot of talking and not a lot of listening.
By the way... great use of the head slapping emoticon. Again, a veiled method to hoist yourself above people without actually coming out and saying, "Oh dear. Tsk. Why do I even bother with you simple people?"
there was no rout 66 back in the wild west
that was from a comment I had made earlier in this thread that politions don't want any of this gun control mess right now with the election coming up, there are more Americans in favor of gun ownership and the 2nd ammendment then those aginst it, I would think even obama can see that.....maybe
Godfather.
Yeah, the guy with the armor had an upper hand, but you are proving the point that he had even more of an upper hand than a person who has zero armor and no gun. If someone actually had a gun, in their pocket with the safety on, while enjoying the movie in the dark, that person would still have more of a chance than the person next to him who just had their hands in their empty pockets.
Perhaps. Then again, that innocent person who draws their weapon becomes more of a target for the psycho with four guns and armor. So, I'll just disagree because they are drawing attention to themselves and they are severely out-gunned. So, more of a chance than the unarmed person sitting next to them...maybe, maybe not.
:fp:
He didn't see anything unusual about many of Holmes' alleged purchases.
"If I only had 6,000 rounds for my AR-15s, I'd literally feel naked," Brown said. Then he totaled up Holmes' firearms purchases: "Two handguns, a shotgun and a rifle. That's the average male in Colorado."
But some involved in the trade are troubled by how easily Holmes stocked up for his alleged rampage.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/ap/ap/crim ... nal/nP2Gc/