rehmwa 2 #151 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuotewhich is why I think a solution like "give everyone guns" I have seen zero people propose this. In the (now locked) thread "At least 20 killed at Virginia Tech", some people came pretty close to it. I doubt it. I don't want people with criminal felonies, drug convictions, illegal residency status, mental issues, or even people that don't understand and are really, really, scared of guns to get them. Nor would I want to force someone to own a gun that doesn't want to. I suspect this is true of every single pro gun person on this site. Now, there are plenty of advocates for "taking them all away". I marvel at the contrast Quote(Zippster) When the whole story comes out(if it does) I am willing to bet that there were plenty of warning signs that were ignored that could have prevented all this. yup, nice observation ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #152 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteBut I am still waiting on the list of people afraid to leave the house without a weapon. Well, as I said I was going to leave that till I'm bored to tears at work. Give it two hours and I'll start looking. Has it been two hours, yet? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,442 #153 April 18, 2007 >Nor would I want to force someone to own a gun that doesn't want to. I >suspect this is true of every single pro gun person on this site. >Now, there are plenty of advocates for "taking them all away". >I marvel at the contrast Anti-gunners think that pro-gunners consider anyone who doesn't own a gun a "sheep", and would claim they don't want to take _everyone's_ guns away. It's all in your perspective. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #154 April 18, 2007 QuoteWhen the whole story comes out(if it does) I am willing to bet that there were plenty of warning signs that were ignored that could have prevented all this. Not likely. Just because someone acts antisocial or even psychotic doesn't mean they will go off and kill a bunch of people and as long as they don't make any threats to people there isn't much anyone can do. With out direct threats or any physical evidence of intent how can you know some one will become a threat? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #155 April 18, 2007 QuoteWhen the whole story comes out(if it does) I am willing to bet that there were plenty of warning signs that were ignored that could have prevented all this. More about how screwed up this kid was: Va. Tech gunman accused of stalking-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #156 April 18, 2007 Quote>Anti-gunners think that pro-gunners consider anyone who doesn't own a gun a "sheep", and would claim they don't want to take _everyone's_ guns away. It's all in your perspective. I'm sure that's true, I'm just talking about the posters on SC. We tend to attract a lot of absolutists for some wacky reason. anyway, marvel at the contrast ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #157 April 18, 2007 Quote>Nor would I want to force someone to own a gun that doesn't want to. I >suspect this is true of every single pro gun person on this site. >Now, there are plenty of advocates for "taking them all away". >I marvel at the contrast Anti-gunners think that pro-gunners consider anyone who doesn't own a gun a "sheep", and would claim they don't want to take _everyone's_ guns away. It's all in your perspective. No, they don't want to take EVERYONE'S away... just Joe Publics'...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #158 April 18, 2007 QuoteNo, they don't want to take EVERYONE'S away... just Joe Publics'... If you are just going to the whole left/socialist angle, then it's really "they just want to pick and choose who gets the guns - they can have them if they want, or at least their security staff, but no one else can" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #159 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteNo, they don't want to take EVERYONE'S away... just Joe Publics'... If you are just going to the whole left/socialist angle, then it's really "they just want to pick and choose who gets the guns - they can have them if they want, or at least their security staff, but no one else can" Quote"If I could have banned them all - 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' - I would have!" -Diane Feinstein, US Senator (Statement on TV program 60 Minutes, Feb 5 1995)Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #160 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuote"If I could have banned them all - 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' - I would have!" -Diane Feinstein, US Senator (Statement on TV program 60 Minutes, Feb 5 1995) yup - then only SHE would have guns. She, and anyone on her team. It's never about eliminating them all together, it's about government control of the weapons so they have even more leverage over the populace. They want final say over ALL the resources, and that control down to the tiniest details. And they truly believe it's for our own good. I'm sure they've convinced themselves of that by now. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #161 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote"If I could have banned them all - 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' - I would have!" -Diane Feinstein, US Senator (Statement on TV program 60 Minutes, Feb 5 1995) yup - then only SHE would have guns. She, and anyone on her team. It's never about eliminating them all together, it's about government control of the weapons so they have even more leverage over the populace. They want final say over ALL the resources, and that control down to the tiniest details. And they truly believe it's for our own good. I'm sure they've convinced themselves of that by now. I'm sure they have, as well.... unfortunately.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #162 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhen the whole story comes out(if it does) I am willing to bet that there were plenty of warning signs that were ignored that could have prevented all this. Not likely. Just because someone acts antisocial or even psychotic doesn't mean they will go off and kill a bunch of people and as long as they don't make any threats to people there isn't much anyone can do. With out direct threats or any physical evidence of intent how can you know some one will become a threat? Stalking is not just antisocial, it's illegal, as is lighting a dorm room on fire. Also, it appears this nutjob called in at least 2 bomb threats - also illegal. If anything, we are starting to see the importance of following-up on these crimes that seemed 'minor' until we see where they lead. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #163 April 18, 2007 Those incidents alone would not indicate a homicidal maniac. What he did could hardly be predicted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #164 April 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteI've never met anyone who's afraid to go outside without a gun. That's silly. /Quote I agree. I wasn't saying that, I was replying to that ridiculous statement. QuoteAnd what exactly are "armor piercing rounds?" Well, they're illegal, so I've never actually seen them in person, but the bullet is typically made of steel so it won't deform/fragment as easily and it has a relatively sharp point. Apparently they were a problem for a while in the 80s-90s, where they went by the name of "cop killers" because soft body-armor did essentially nothing to stop them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armor_piercing_round I was being sarcastic because some asshat was complaining about someone talking about frangible rounds that turn into a fine powder on impact, minimizing/eliminating the chance of penetrating through even thin walls. I keep my pistol loaded with frangible rounds. It's not as necessary now, but I used to live in an apartment, and I was concerned about the threat to my neighbors if I was ever forced to use it. One time, while shooting with some friends at the drop zone, I decided to see how well the frangible rounds work. I lined up three medium size pumpkins on the ground, back to back. Then I lay prone and fired a frangible round (Glaser Safety Slug) into the front pumpkin, from point blank range. The bullet penetrated both sides of the first pumpkin and went into the second pumpkin but never came out of it. Three layers of pumpkin was all it took to stop that round. That's pretty impressive. The reason I asked about armor piercing rounds is that any center-fire rifle round (any medium or large game hunting round or military round) will penetrate soft body armor. A lot of people don't grasp the difference between that and "armor piercing" ammunition. Also, a lot of people still believe the old "Teflon coated bullets" myth. "Armor piercing" bullets are actually steel core bullets that were designed to give law enforcement better penetration when shooting through car doors, windshields, and the like. They were later found to have better penetration against soft body armor. Steel core bullets were coated with Teflon, in order to prevent wear on gun barrels. Hollywood picked up on this "Teflon coated bullet" idea, and the notion of "cop killer bullets" was born. Even when steel core rounds were legal for public purchase, they were pretty rare. I don't believe there's ever been an instance of a police officer being killed by one.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zipp0 1 #165 April 18, 2007 Quote Even when steel core rounds were legal for public purchase, they were pretty rare. They are legal for rifles - I have lots of them. They are only illegal for handgun ammo. Armor piercing incendiary rounds are legal too. They look like a blast to play with, I might get some and shoot a paint can or propane tank..... BOOM! http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24_101_126&products_id=394 -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PWScottIV 0 #166 April 18, 2007 Quote The reason I asked about armor piercing rounds is that any center-fire rifle round (any medium or large game hunting round or military round) will penetrate soft body armor. Totally, I guess I should have specified that I was talking about armor piercing handgun rounds. They're what's illegal. I thought I even saw some of these "cop killer" bullets on a documentary, but I could be wrong. As I remember, the geometry seemed to be very simple and crude; just a straight taperd tip(maybe 90deg included angle) that was made from steel or a steel core. I imagine they were jacketed with somthing softer to minimize wear on the bore.Gravity Waits for No One. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #167 April 18, 2007 QuoteThose incidents alone would not indicate a homicidal maniac. What he did could hardly be predicted. However, convictions or restraining orders for those behaviors would likely have resulted in him not being allowed to take possession of the glock in March. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Enrique 0 #168 April 20, 2007 QuoteDoes the media in general need to stop glorifying guns ? Maybe the heads of the State need to stop solving all their problems with bullets... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #169 April 23, 2007 For your consideration. Oh, and please read the WHOLE post to help keep your replies in context. Mass Shootings More Common Since 1960s Email this Story Apr 21, 7:09 PM (ET) By MATT CRENSON (AP) Simon Owen-Williams, head of the Carlisle School, an independent preschool though 12th grade school... Full Image Google sponsored links Single Mom Makes It Big - Nearly Lost Home To Earning More In A Week Than Most Make In A Year. CoachYouToSuccess.com The Nostradamus Code - World War III: 2007 - 2012 The New Book by Michael Rathford NostradamusOnline.com NEW YORK (AP) - Mass public shootings have become such a part of American life in recent decades that the most dramatic of them can be evoked from the nation's collective memory in a word or two: Luby's. Jonesboro. Columbine. And now, Virginia Tech. Since Aug. 1, 1966, when Charles Whitman climbed a 27-story tower on the University of Texas campus and started picking people off, at least 100 Americans have gone on shooting sprees. And all through those years, the same questions have been asked: What is it about modern-day America that provokes such random violence? Is it the decline of traditional morals? The depiction of violence in entertainment? The ready availability of lethal firepower? (AP) Matthew Gauck, 8, of Pilot, Va. holds a rose as he walks with his mother and sister (unseen) toward... Full Image Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox blames guns, at least in part. He notes that seven of the eight deadliest mass public shootings have occurred in the past 25 years. "I know that there were high-powered guns before," he said. "But this weaponry is just so much more pervasive than it was." Australia had a spate of mass public shooting in the 1980s and '90s, culminating in 1996, when Martin Bryant opened fire at the Port Arthur Historical Site in Tasmania with an AR-15 assault rifle, killing 35 people. Within two weeks the government had enacted strict gun control laws that included a ban on semiautomatic rifles. There has not been a mass shooting in Australia since. Yet Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota State Department of Corrections, said the availability of guns was not a factor in his exhaustive statistical study of mass murder during the 20th century. Duwe found that the prevalence of mass murders, defined as the killing of four or more people in a 24-hour period, tends to mirror that of homicide generally. The increase in mass killings during the 1960s was accompanied by a doubling in the overall murder rate after the relatively peaceful 1940s and '50s. In fact, Duwe found that mass murder was just as common during the 1920s and early 1930s as it is today. The difference is that then, mass murderers tended to be failed farmers who killed their families because they could no longer provide for them, then killed themselves. Their crimes embodied the despair and hopelessness of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression, the sense that they and their families would be better off in the hereafter than in the here and now. On Dec. 29, 1929, a 56-year-old tenant farmer from Vernon, Texas, named J.H. Haggard shot his five children, aged 6 to 18, in their beds as they slept. Then he killed himself. He left a note that said only, "All died. I had ruther be ded. Look in zellar." Despondent men still kill their families today. But public shooters like Virginia Tech's Seung-Hui Cho are different. They are angrier and tend to blame society for their failures, sometimes singling out members of particular ethnic or socio-economic groups. "It's society's fault ... Society disgusts me," Kimveer Gill wrote in his blog the day before he shot six people to death and injured 19 in Montreal last year. In the videos and essays he left behind, Cho ranted about privileged students and their debauched behavior. He also mentioned the Columbine killings, referring to Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris as "martyrs." Imitation undoubtedly plays a role in mass shootings as well, said Daniel A. Cohen, a historian at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. "Certain types of crimes gain cultural resonance in certain periods," Cohen said. So many post office employees gunned down their co-workers during the 1980s and early '90s that they spawned a neologism. To "go postal," according to the Webster's New World College Dictionary, is "to become deranged or go berserk." The most recent postal shooting was in January 2006 when Jennifer San Marco, a former employee who had been fired a few years earlier because of her worsening mental state, walked into a letter sorting facility in Goleta, Calif., and killed six people with a handgun. Criminologist Fox speculates that the increasing popularity of workplace killings, and public shootings generally, may be partly due to decreasing economic security and increasing inequality. America increasingly rewards its winners with a disproportionate share of wealth and adoration, while treating its losers to a heaping helping of public shame. "We ridicule them. We vote them off the island. We laugh at them on 'American Idol,'" Fox said. But there has also been an erosion of community in America over the past half-century, and many scholars believe it has contributed to the rise in mass shootings. "One would think that there's some new component to alienation or isolation," said Jeffrey S. Adler, a professor of history and criminology at the University of Florida. People used to live in closer proximity to their families and be more involved with civic and religious institutions. They were less likely to move from one part of the country to another, finding themselves strangers in an unfamiliar environment. Even so, the small-town America of yesteryear wasn't completely immune. On March 6, 1915, businessman Monroe Phillips, who had lived in Brunswick, Ga., for 12 years, killed six people and wounded 32 before being shot dead by a local attorney. Phillips' weapon: an automatic shotgun. Remarkably, violence in today's media seems to have little to do with mass public shootings. Only a handful of them have ever cited violent video games or movies as inspiration for their crimes. Often they are so isolated and socially awkward that they are indifferent to popular culture. Ultimately, it is impossible to attribute the rise in mass shootings to any single cause. The crimes only account for a tiny fraction of homicides. And a significant fraction of those who commit them, including Cho, either kill themselves or are killed by police before they can be questioned by investigators."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 7 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Zipp0 1 #165 April 18, 2007 Quote Even when steel core rounds were legal for public purchase, they were pretty rare. They are legal for rifles - I have lots of them. They are only illegal for handgun ammo. Armor piercing incendiary rounds are legal too. They look like a blast to play with, I might get some and shoot a paint can or propane tank..... BOOM! http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24_101_126&products_id=394 -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PWScottIV 0 #166 April 18, 2007 Quote The reason I asked about armor piercing rounds is that any center-fire rifle round (any medium or large game hunting round or military round) will penetrate soft body armor. Totally, I guess I should have specified that I was talking about armor piercing handgun rounds. They're what's illegal. I thought I even saw some of these "cop killer" bullets on a documentary, but I could be wrong. As I remember, the geometry seemed to be very simple and crude; just a straight taperd tip(maybe 90deg included angle) that was made from steel or a steel core. I imagine they were jacketed with somthing softer to minimize wear on the bore.Gravity Waits for No One. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #167 April 18, 2007 QuoteThose incidents alone would not indicate a homicidal maniac. What he did could hardly be predicted. However, convictions or restraining orders for those behaviors would likely have resulted in him not being allowed to take possession of the glock in March. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enrique 0 #168 April 20, 2007 QuoteDoes the media in general need to stop glorifying guns ? Maybe the heads of the State need to stop solving all their problems with bullets... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #169 April 23, 2007 For your consideration. Oh, and please read the WHOLE post to help keep your replies in context. Mass Shootings More Common Since 1960s Email this Story Apr 21, 7:09 PM (ET) By MATT CRENSON (AP) Simon Owen-Williams, head of the Carlisle School, an independent preschool though 12th grade school... Full Image Google sponsored links Single Mom Makes It Big - Nearly Lost Home To Earning More In A Week Than Most Make In A Year. CoachYouToSuccess.com The Nostradamus Code - World War III: 2007 - 2012 The New Book by Michael Rathford NostradamusOnline.com NEW YORK (AP) - Mass public shootings have become such a part of American life in recent decades that the most dramatic of them can be evoked from the nation's collective memory in a word or two: Luby's. Jonesboro. Columbine. And now, Virginia Tech. Since Aug. 1, 1966, when Charles Whitman climbed a 27-story tower on the University of Texas campus and started picking people off, at least 100 Americans have gone on shooting sprees. And all through those years, the same questions have been asked: What is it about modern-day America that provokes such random violence? Is it the decline of traditional morals? The depiction of violence in entertainment? The ready availability of lethal firepower? (AP) Matthew Gauck, 8, of Pilot, Va. holds a rose as he walks with his mother and sister (unseen) toward... Full Image Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox blames guns, at least in part. He notes that seven of the eight deadliest mass public shootings have occurred in the past 25 years. "I know that there were high-powered guns before," he said. "But this weaponry is just so much more pervasive than it was." Australia had a spate of mass public shooting in the 1980s and '90s, culminating in 1996, when Martin Bryant opened fire at the Port Arthur Historical Site in Tasmania with an AR-15 assault rifle, killing 35 people. Within two weeks the government had enacted strict gun control laws that included a ban on semiautomatic rifles. There has not been a mass shooting in Australia since. Yet Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota State Department of Corrections, said the availability of guns was not a factor in his exhaustive statistical study of mass murder during the 20th century. Duwe found that the prevalence of mass murders, defined as the killing of four or more people in a 24-hour period, tends to mirror that of homicide generally. The increase in mass killings during the 1960s was accompanied by a doubling in the overall murder rate after the relatively peaceful 1940s and '50s. In fact, Duwe found that mass murder was just as common during the 1920s and early 1930s as it is today. The difference is that then, mass murderers tended to be failed farmers who killed their families because they could no longer provide for them, then killed themselves. Their crimes embodied the despair and hopelessness of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression, the sense that they and their families would be better off in the hereafter than in the here and now. On Dec. 29, 1929, a 56-year-old tenant farmer from Vernon, Texas, named J.H. Haggard shot his five children, aged 6 to 18, in their beds as they slept. Then he killed himself. He left a note that said only, "All died. I had ruther be ded. Look in zellar." Despondent men still kill their families today. But public shooters like Virginia Tech's Seung-Hui Cho are different. They are angrier and tend to blame society for their failures, sometimes singling out members of particular ethnic or socio-economic groups. "It's society's fault ... Society disgusts me," Kimveer Gill wrote in his blog the day before he shot six people to death and injured 19 in Montreal last year. In the videos and essays he left behind, Cho ranted about privileged students and their debauched behavior. He also mentioned the Columbine killings, referring to Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris as "martyrs." Imitation undoubtedly plays a role in mass shootings as well, said Daniel A. Cohen, a historian at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. "Certain types of crimes gain cultural resonance in certain periods," Cohen said. So many post office employees gunned down their co-workers during the 1980s and early '90s that they spawned a neologism. To "go postal," according to the Webster's New World College Dictionary, is "to become deranged or go berserk." The most recent postal shooting was in January 2006 when Jennifer San Marco, a former employee who had been fired a few years earlier because of her worsening mental state, walked into a letter sorting facility in Goleta, Calif., and killed six people with a handgun. Criminologist Fox speculates that the increasing popularity of workplace killings, and public shootings generally, may be partly due to decreasing economic security and increasing inequality. America increasingly rewards its winners with a disproportionate share of wealth and adoration, while treating its losers to a heaping helping of public shame. "We ridicule them. We vote them off the island. We laugh at them on 'American Idol,'" Fox said. But there has also been an erosion of community in America over the past half-century, and many scholars believe it has contributed to the rise in mass shootings. "One would think that there's some new component to alienation or isolation," said Jeffrey S. Adler, a professor of history and criminology at the University of Florida. People used to live in closer proximity to their families and be more involved with civic and religious institutions. They were less likely to move from one part of the country to another, finding themselves strangers in an unfamiliar environment. Even so, the small-town America of yesteryear wasn't completely immune. On March 6, 1915, businessman Monroe Phillips, who had lived in Brunswick, Ga., for 12 years, killed six people and wounded 32 before being shot dead by a local attorney. Phillips' weapon: an automatic shotgun. Remarkably, violence in today's media seems to have little to do with mass public shootings. Only a handful of them have ever cited violent video games or movies as inspiration for their crimes. Often they are so isolated and socially awkward that they are indifferent to popular culture. Ultimately, it is impossible to attribute the rise in mass shootings to any single cause. The crimes only account for a tiny fraction of homicides. And a significant fraction of those who commit them, including Cho, either kill themselves or are killed by police before they can be questioned by investigators."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
