[QUOTE=xilman;473945]The law was very firm, it
Took away his permit,
The worst punishment he ever endured.
It turned out there was a reason,
Cows were out of season,
And one of the hunters wasn’t insured.[/QUOTE]
Ah, yes, a favorite of my youth! My parents had a record called "Songs by Tom Lehrer," which I listened to many times. One of its offerings is [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyoSLOlglw]The Hunting Song[/url].

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43063729[/url]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43066226[/url]

In the [url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/14/us/nikolas-cruz-florida-shooting-suspect/index.html]Florida school shooting[/url], it seems Our Hero was an ex-student who had been expelled. Gee, and he seemed such a promising young man:

[quote]Cruz appeared to have been involved in the high school's Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) program, as his name was listed under several awards in 2016, including academic achievement for maintaining an A grade in JROTC and B in remaining academic subjects, consistently presenting an outstanding appearance and outstanding conduct throughout school.[/quote]

Hmm, is being an avid JROTC participant an [i]indicator?[/i]

:stirpot:

Or, perhaps, it's just another example of the NRA's motto

:devil:

[b]When life hands you a lemon, pull out a gun and start shooting[/b]

So we will see the tolerance level that USA is prepared to withstand before they change things. My guess is that we are nowhere near such a point yet. Because right now it seems the rhetoric is still "more guns to defend ourselves from people like Cruz". But that really means more guns in the hands of people like Cruz.

It seems that Cruz wasn't a Muslim, so that is okay then, just a normal shooting. Yay for the 2nd. But if Cruz was a Muslim the backlash would've been much more pronounced. It would have been labelled as a terrorist attack, and Muslim leaders would be called upon to apologise, and POTUS would be calling for the expulsion of all Muslims. Etc. So thankfully it was just some ordinary messed-up kid with an acceptable-religion, so nothing wrong here, everyone go out and buy more guns.

[QUOTE=retina;480111]So we will see the tolerance level that USA is prepared to withstand before they change things. My guess is that we are nowhere near such a point yet. Because right now it seems the rhetoric is still "more guns to defend ourselves from people like Cruz". But that really means more guns in the hands of people like Cruz.[/QUOTE]

But even that line doesn't work in this instance, because there were literally armed police officers on campus when the shooter started. And he still killed 17 people.

Here's how it'll go: 1) "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control." 2) Some token "concession" that quietly dies in the GOP-controlled Congress. 3) Repeat.

[QUOTE=wombatman;480113]But even that line doesn't work in this instance, because there were literally armed police officers on campus when the shooter started. And he still killed 17 people.[/QUOTE]Yeah, so not enough guns were there. [i]Everyone[/i] should have a gun, of course. And if there is ever a time when everyone [i]does[/i] have a gun, then it will be everyone must have two guns. Etc. etc. etc.

[QUOTE=retina;480111]So we will see the tolerance level that USA is prepared to withstand before they change things. My guess is that we are nowhere near such a point yet. Because right now it seems the rhetoric is still "more guns to defend ourselves from people like Cruz". But that really means more guns in the hands of people like Cruz.[/QUOTE]
The US is light years away from sanity on guns. Roll out some more "Thoughts and Prayers®". Those seem to be Workin' Real Good.

[QUOTE=kladner;480124]The US is light years away from sanity on guns. Roll out some more "Thoughts and Prayers®". Those seem to be Workin' Real Good.[/QUOTE]

I've already seen people (like, non-politicians or spokespeople) rolling out "thoughts and prayers", "how could this happen", "it's mental illness, not the guns", "now's not the time for gun control / gun control wouldn't have stopped this", among others. It's pathetic.

And, of course, it's just now coming out that the shooter had ties to, wait for it, white supremacists! SURPRISE! But because it's not an Islamic group, that won't matter.

[QUOTE=wombatman;480131]And, of course, it's just now coming out that the shooter had ties to, wait for it, white supremacists! SURPRISE! But because it's not an Islamic group, that won't matter.[/QUOTE]

Interesting affiliation, given that he's a Latino.

So, in week 7 of 2018, that's already the 18th school shooting here in the exceptional US of A. Frightening how normalized/ritualized the whole shoot-up-a-school/media-frenzy/politicians-virtue-signal-about-needing-a-national-conversation process has become. At the same time, opioid-mediated deaths of despair have far surpassed the height of the AIDS crisis in terms of numbers, but hey, it's mostly Deplorables dying, so no national quilt nor unprecedented public-health-emergency mobilization as there was with AIDS anywhere in sight. The almighty Free Markets™ have decided that both of the above epidemics are desirable outcomes!

[QUOTE=ewmayer;480178]Interesting affiliation, given that he's a Latino.

So, in week 7 of 2018, that's already the 18th school shooting here in the exceptional US of A. Frightening how normalized/ritualized the whole shoot-up-a-school/media-frenzy/politicians-virtue-signal-about-needing-a-national-conversation process has become. At the same time, opioid-mediated deaths of despair have far surpassed the height of the AIDS crisis in terms of numbers, but hey, it's mostly Deplorables dying, so no national quilt nor unprecedented public-health-emergency mobilization as there was with AIDS anywhere in sight. The almighty Free Markets™ have decided that both of the above epidemics are desirable outcomes![/QUOTE]
It took quite a while to get that HIV-Aids ball rolling. After all, it was only queers at first, and then queers and mainliners, and then prostitutes. Saint Ronnie didn't even mention it for a [U]long[/U] time. There were reasons that groups like Act Up! appeared.
Where are the opioid disrupters and civil-disobeyers?

So now we know why people in USA are resorting to using guns. Because the only way they can have their say and make people listen is to have a weapon in their hands.

[url]https://thinkprogress.org/easier-to-buy-gun-than-vote-095a34c11e02/[/url] [quote]The truth is that in most states, it is easier to purchase a gun than it is to vote.[/quote]

[QUOTE=retina;480192]So now we know why people in USA are resorting to using guns. Because the only way they can have their say and make people listen is to have a weapon in their hands.[/QUOTE]

That's why the NRA's motto is, [b]When life hands you a lemon, pull out a gun and start shooting[/b]

Oh, and speaking of gun myths...

In [u]Beyond This Horizon[/u], one of Robert Heinlein's characters utters the immortal phrase, "An armed society is a polite society." Surely this explains why we USA-ers are known the world over for our good manners

:missingteeth:

I have read a lot of Heinlein since I was 10 or 11. I was a bit older when I started to realize what a misogynistic, militaristic, and, in later years, sex-addled a**hole he was. I will credit him that he started to try late in life to work around the homophobia he expressed in Stranger in a Strange Land. He couldn't really shake it, though. I think he identified too much with Hemingway, among other flaws.

"I’m not sure what the current definition of a “failed state” is, but levels of violence so extreme that you have to arm schoolteachers should certainly be one of the qualifying criteria." --- seen on Twitter.

[QUOTE=xilman;480567]"I’m not sure what the current definition of a “failed state” is, but levels of violence so extreme that you have to arm schoolteachers should certainly be one of the qualifying criteria." --- seen on Twitter.[/QUOTE]
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWnQ_FuW4AYNtVF.jpg[/img]

Oh, image linking doesn't work here, so here is the image as attached.

[QUOTE=retina;480626][img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWnQ_FuW4AYNtVF.jpg[/img]

Oh, image linking doesn't work here, so here is the image as attached.[/QUOTE]

Excellent illustration. And if I remember right, none those armed men fired their guns- I believe they tackled and restrained the assailant.

Norm

.

Another problem with "good guys with guns" stopping bad guys with guns was illustrated by the [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Empire_State_Building_shooting]2012 Empire State Building shooting[/url]. The bad guy with a gun was named Jeffrey T. Johnson, the very model of a disgruntled ex-employee.
[quote]When confronted by the two officers, Johnson raised his weapon, but did not fire. The officers fired a total of 16 rounds, killing Johnson and injuring nine bystanders, none of whom suffered life-threatening wounds. Three of the bystanders were directly hit by police gunfire, while the rest of the injuries were caused by fragments of ricocheting bullets, or by debris from other objects hit by police.[/quote]

And that was with trained professionals, who are supposed to be proficient in the use of firearms. Imagine what might happen in a crowded place if a gunman started shooting, and a whole bunch of armed citizens drew their weapons and started blazing away!

:goodposting: But the words "trained professionals" must be put in the scare quotes.
[QUOTE]who are who are [STRIKE]supposed to be proficient[/STRIKE] supposedly/allegedly proficient in the use of firearms[/QUOTE]These guys were sh**ting bricks, and "Fearing For Their Lives®", and so, were justified in sh**ting up their entire vicinity.

Criminally negligent on many counts, incompetent, undisciplined, untrained, pants-wetting cowards. :rant:
one or two rounds should have been adequate for incapacitation. These are Tamir Rice-grade cops.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;480716]Another problem with "good guys with guns" stopping bad guys with guns...[/QUOTE]
Exactly my thinking. I was one of the best in handling different types of guns in the army, but that was about 30 years ago, and in all this time I never touched a gun. I was not interested in them, and unless you were policeman, or something, you could not own one, or wear one, in my country. Moreover, my reflexes are not the same anymore (my eyes, however, were same bad at that time as they are now, I was wearing the same number for the glasses, it didn't change much in all these years). Assume I would be teaching in a class, and have a gun in the holster (I won't take one with me, but say I would be forced by the law to have one, or scared by the environment, whatever). Assume a student came in the class with a gun and points it to someone (me included). Would I fire at him/her? I am freaking sure I wont. I may not have enough time, or I may freeze with fear, or I may try to talk him out of it. Maybe having a gun would help me to say "see, I have a gun too, but I am not pointing to the people". But that is all. I am sure I will not fire at him/her. Think about how this can result in a lot of abuses from the good guys with guns. Think that I fire at him and kill him. Would they give me a medal or put me in the jail? What the hack, they will say, who was the adult there? Just thinking about it... this idea to let the teachers wear guns in schools is a complete idiocy. On the funny side, think to that guy who shot himself in the balls by accident... haha... well... it is funny... but it is not funny.. if you know what I mean...

And say I am a guy "trained" with the guns...

I don't know if this [URL="https://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/02/shoppers-pulled-weapons-walmart-shooting/"]story[/URL] was posted in the thread yet, but back in November there was a shooting in a Walmart in Colorado. Apparently there were "good guys with guns" in the store in this case, so many in fact that after local law enforcement entered the store it took them 5 hours to review the video to find out exactly who the actual shooter was since they had to backtrack all the citizens who had their firearms* drawn and make sure they weren't the shooter.

One person who was in the store, upon hearing there were armed citizens on the premises, asked why wouldn't they draw and shoot him? I don't know, maybe because when they drew and started running around they could not locate the shooter or something silly like that?

When I read this story my first reaction was that there were however many very, very lucky people in the store that day. What would have happened if one of those armed folks had been shot by the police or worse yet shot at someone, the shooter or otherwise, and injured or killed them? Some lawyers would be running up some billable hours in those cases. Of course, the police would have a greater probability to escape prosecution than the citizens. But the citizens would also face the possibility of civil suits from victims/families.

I also assume that people who think they would go after an active shooter with their gun blazing are a lot more proficient in their own mind than they actually would be under stress.

*I have heard several pro 2nd Amendment people say that they don't carry "weapons", they carry "firearms"; the real difference escapes me: somehow a weapon is only used to kill people but a firearm is used for self-defense?

Particle blasters don't kill sentients.....
 

.

[QUOTE=kladner;480773].[/QUOTE]:tu: +1

[QUOTE=Brian-E;330809]I know that I will now come across as pretty arrogant, as well as foolish, to express an opinion over United States culture when I am a complete outsider, but I'm still going to.:smile:
The culture change which needs to sweep the USA in order to be able to modify the Constitution may, in my opinion, be just around the corner - say 5 years away or thereabouts. During recent years I have been astonished at how fast attitudes on a completely different issue - same sex marriage coupled with acceptance of same sex relationships in general - have swung around in many parts of the democratic world. I think the issue of free gun ownership could be facing a similar about-turn in the attitudes of US citizens. There may be some "tipping point" which has to be crossed, perhaps best seen as a moment when a significant proportion of the population suddenly stops being "in denial" about the reality of a situation, and when that happens public opinion can transform very quickly.[/QUOTE]
It's precisely 5 years ago that I made the above prediction of a culture change "just around the corner - say 5 years away or thereabouts". I'm now hoping that I may have fortuitously got the timing dead on and that recent developments really are turning the tide. Maybe a constitutional change removing the right to bear arms completely is too much to ask and was too optimistic, but we do seem to be finally now seeing the necessary change of attitude in the USA.

I strongly support the 2nd amendment.
Everyone should be able to bear the same arms as George Washington.

Most of the original 10 amendments say we can not do things the
British tried to do to us before the revolution. And not all of them
have aged well with evolving technology.

[QUOTE=bgbeuning;480785]I strongly support the 2nd amendment.
Everyone should be able to bear [B]the same arms[/B] as George Washington.
[/QUOTE]
+1!
Except I've never seen George depicted with a gun. Guns were for the rank and file. But running around with large cutlery (swords) in public would probably get you busted or dead in today's USA. (Certainly dead if you are other than lily white.)

[QUOTE=schickel;480746]I don't know if this [URL="https://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/02/shoppers-pulled-weapons-walmart-shooting/"]story[/URL] was posted in the thread yet, but back in November there was a shooting in a Walmart in Colorado. [snip!][/QUOTE]

Yessirree! Post #369 to this thread, right [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=471108&postcount=369]here[/url].

[QUOTE=kladner;480740] But the words "trained professionals" must be put in the scare quotes.
These guys were sh**ting bricks, and "Fearing For Their Lives®", and so, were justified in sh**ting up their entire vicinity.

Criminally negligent on many counts, incompetent, undisciplined, untrained, pants-wetting cowards. :rant:
one or two rounds should have been adequate for incapacitation. These are Tamir Rice-grade cops.[/QUOTE]
Yes, the cops were obviously nervous. I suppose having a guy raise a .45 pistol at you might have that effect. And the multiple shots were from multiple cops, independently making the same decision that this guy had to be taken out. I don't know whether to attribute the inaccurate shooting to inadequate training, or the cops being decent enough folks to have qualms about killing a total stranger. (More on this later.)

But police are [i]not[/i] supposed to fire "warning shots" or try to "incapacitate" a suspect. They are only supposed to fire their weapons when they or someone else is in imminent danger of death or serious injury. And, when they do shoot, they are supposed to [i][b]shoot to kill[/b][/i].

I know, "person contacted was black" isn't actually in the legal definition of self-defense or police policy guidelines, though it does seem to be enough to sway a jury considering a case, where, say, a policeman shoots a fleeing man eight times in the back when he's 20 feet away. But hey, at least he got the "shoot to kill" part right!

But the admonition "shoot to kill" (rather than to incapacitate) is also based on the principle of protecting the innocent. If you shoot to kill, you aim at places where the bullets you fire will either stop or their momentum will be greatly reduced, thereby reducing the chances of injuring an innocent party. Aiming at a vital spot also reduces the chances of missing altogether. The consequences of [i]not[/i] hitting a thick part of the body, or of missing altogether, are illustrated by the 2012 incident. It is fortunate that none of the bystanders were seriously injured.

Another aspect of the admonition is, it underscores the seriousness of making the decision to fire. You are likely going to kill [i]someone[/i].

Now, as promised, more on the topic of having qualms about shooting a total stranger. Once upon a time, long long ago, I was listening to a policeman being interviewed on the radio. He was talking about a woman who had asked about buying a gun to protect her family. He said he had asked the woman, if she had a gun and encountered an intruder in her home, would she warn him she was armed? Being a decent person, she had said, of course she would. And he had told her, "You'd be dead." Because the intruder would likely start shooting upon the realization of being detected.

The upshot is, if you decide to keep a firearm to protect your home, you have to be prepared -- literally -- to shoot first and ask questions later. This can result in tragedy -- there are cases in which parents have mistakenly shot their own children dead, thinking they were intruders. But such tragedies are usually not deemed crimes.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;480833]... a firearm to protect ...[/QUOTE]Guns, [b]firearms[/b], weapons, whatever you call them, [b]don't protect anything[/b]. They are [i]offensive[/i] devices, not defensive devices. The rhetoric about defence is deliberate misdirection.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;480833]Yes, the cops were obviously nervous. I suppose having a guy raise a .45 pistol at you might have that effect. And the multiple shots were from multiple cops, independently making the same decision that this guy had to be taken out. .....[/QUOTE]
Two officers are mentioned. 16 rounds between them? Did it take until the last few to hit their intended target?

[QUOTE]
Faith Consultant
‏ @jndevereux
20h20 hours ago

If owning a gun was an effective means of self-defense, your insurance rates would go down when you bought one. But they go up, because actuaries have proven that you’re far, far more likely to shoot yourself or a family member than someone attacking you.
658 replies 31,439 retweets 105,222 likes
[/QUOTE]

Anyone from the US who can provide evidence which supports this claim?

From Esurance:

[QUOTE]Many home insurance companies (like Esurance) don't increase premiums for gun ownership. In fact, they may not even require homeowners to disclose whether they own a firearm or plan on owning one in the future. The only way coverage would increase is if you select the aforementioned insurance rider for your collection.

Remember, homeowners premiums are determined in part by evaluating the risk of insuring your property. That includes determining the replacement cost of the home and personal belongings, in addition to incurred expenses if you're held responsible for an accident or injury.

Other home insurance companies (that aren't Esurance) may feel that having a firearm in the home is too much of a risk. Rates may be adjusted accordingly, or your insurer could decide not to extend coverage. For this reason, it's good measure to shop around for homeowners insurance and ask if gun ownership will impact policy rates or insurability.[/QUOTE]

Second source: [url]https://budgeting.thenest.com/owning-gun-affect-insurance-rates-32630.html[/url]

The quick view consensus seems to be that your insurance provider will decide whether to increase your rates based primarily on whether they feel like liability for damage is likely to be increased, not for the cost of the gun itself (unless it's a rare, more expensive one). Given the increased chance of gun violence (whether self-defense, intra-family violence, or what have you), I'd be stunned if most premiums didn't increase in some form.

[QUOTE=wombatman;480863]Given the increased chance of gun violence (whether self-defense, intra-family violence, or what have you), I'd be stunned if most premiums didn't increase in some form.[/QUOTE]

Yeah.

Statistically, the chance of dying because of a gunshot wound increases if one carries a gun, or has them in their home. Interestingly, if one is "carrying" but is not ready to shoot an assailant without hesitation they are likely to die because the assailant grabs their gun, and then shoots them.

Secondly, it is well known in the physical security fields that it is almost impossible to protect an individual if the attackers are willing to trade their lives for the target's.

[QUOTE=kladner;480839]Two officers are mentioned. 16 rounds between them? Did it take until the last few to hit their intended target?[/QUOTE]
I should read the stuff I link to more thoroughly before posting. The article I gave the link to refers to a New York Daily News article, [url=http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/victims-gunfight-skyscraper-feel-pain-years-article-1.3427874]Victims of police gunfight outside Empire State Building feel trauma as five-year anniversary of shooting nears[/url]. Pretty damning stuff.

[quote]Five of the victims filed a joint Manhattan Supreme Court lawsuit against the city and the officers four years ago, charging the cops ignored the NYPD patrol guide and their tactical training.[/quote]

[snip]

[quote]Five years later, the NYPD has done little to change its tactics when confronting armed combatants at populated locations, experts said.

“Better training could minimize injuries to bystanders, but the changes to training would need to be systemic and the NYPD has never exhibited any meaningful inclination to inaugurate fundamental changes,” said Daniel Modell, a retired NYPD lieutenant who used to work in the department’s firearms and tactics section. “In fact, except around the periphery, firearms training for law enforcement hasn’t changed in over a century.’

On average, about two bystanders are hit by police gunfire a year, according to a review of NYPD firearm discharge reports between 2012 and 2015. The 2016 report has yet to be published.

Between 2013 and 2015, six bystanders were wounded by police gunfire. Two additional bystanders were killed — including, in one case, the victim of a violent assault police were trying to stop in 2014, records show.

A year after the Empire State building turned into the O.K. Corral, NYPD cops opened fire on a mentally ill man in Times Square when he pretended to point a gun at them — but the officers instead struck a pair of innocent bystanders.

The NYPD did not immediately return a request for comment on the Empire State Building shooting or subsequent changes in training.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;480934]I should read the stuff I link to more thoroughly before posting. The article I gave the link to refers to a New York Daily News article, [url=http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/victims-gunfight-skyscraper-feel-pain-years-article-1.3427874]Victims of police gunfight outside Empire State Building feel trauma as five-year anniversary of shooting nears[/url]. Pretty damning stuff.[/QUOTE]Wow, so people who [B]spend their lives training for carrying a weapon[/B] don't always hit what they aim at? Who'da thunk it? Well at least the teachers that carry CWs will be better than that; if not at least they'll be able to four foot putt on the gold course later, amiright?

Strangely enough there was an active shooter incident on the same day as the Parkland shooting that I had not heard about until just today. Down in Amarillo, TX, there was a gunman who entered a chruch and was holding the attendees at gun-point. Luckily it ended well when the police arrived and shot the gunman......oh, wait a minute, it looks like what actually happened is that people in the church wrestled the gunman to the ground, someone grabbed the gun from him and was holding it when the police entered. When ordered to drop the gun he tried to place it gently on the ground rather than throw it down; since he didn't comply "fast enough", he was shot twice by the police.

Looking at the accompanying [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/02/man-disarms-would-be-church-shooter-gets-shot-by-police.html"]photo[/URL], it's lucky he's still around to tell the story. Unfortunately it looks like he might have to fight with the city about having the resulting medical bills covered. Though I guess it's his own fault that he didn't have comprehensive enough insurance.

Guns are pretty. But you can make anything good with it.
 

At Europe, nordic countries are full of hunting guns.
And very few criminal actions.
Can be because nordic forest is full of game.
Can be because nordic society is one step ahead.

JM

Here's a story I heard a while back about the Parkland shooting. It appears that the building's construction may have saved many lives.

[url=http://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/hurricane-windows-saved-lives-during-parkland-shooting/67-524487637]Hurricane windows saved lives during Parkland shooting[/url]
[quote]If it hadn't been for hurricane-proof windows, more students could be dead. Windows meant to protect a building from Mother Nature saved students from a sniper-style killer.

Investigators believe Nikolas Cruz went up to the third floor of the freshman building attempting to create a sniper's nest. Investigators say Cruz shot 16 rounds into a window in hopes of shooting down onto students fleeing the building in the courtyard.

That hurricane window, however, would not break. According to CBS News, investigators believe Cruz attempted to reload his gun but it got jammed.[/quote]

If Our Hero had learned to reload his weapon properly, his mission would have been much more successful. Also, if he had done more research, he would have discovered how sturdy the windows were. This illustrates the need for proper planning in the use of firearms. I'm sure the NRA would agree!

Clearly having more guns would have prevented this from happening :loco:

[url]http://time.com/5187570/boy-shoots-sister-ohio/[/url] [quote]A prosecutor says an 8-year-old Ohio boy loaded a rifle, repeatedly shot his 4-year-old sister at home and then informed their mother, who left work to check the girl’s injuries, cleaned up a bloody bed cover and then returned to work, leaving the children alone again.[/quote]

[QUOTE=retina;481832]Clearly having more guns would have prevented this from happening :loco:

[url]http://time.com/5187570/boy-shoots-sister-ohio/[/url][quote]A prosecutor says an 8-year-old Ohio boy loaded a rifle, repeatedly shot his 4-year-old sister at home and then informed their mother, who left work to check the girl’s injuries, cleaned up a bloody bed cover and then returned to work, leaving the children alone again.[/quote][/QUOTE]
Reminds me of an old Charles Addams cartoon. There's a lady at the counter in a gun store. She's handling one of their pistols. She's asking the clerk, "But why do I need a license? It's only for use around the house."

Clearly having more guns would have prevented this from happening also :loco:

[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43455550[/url] [quote]A 13-year-old girl in Mississippi has died after allegedly being shot by her nine-year-old brother over a video game, police say.

They said the boy grabbed a gun on Saturday afternoon after his sister would not give up the controller.

He allegedly shot her from behind, and the bullet entered her brain.[/quote]At least now he won't have to share the controller with her. So it is all good, right? :loco::loco:

[QUOTE=retina;482788]Clearly having more guns would have prevented this from happening also :loco:

[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43455550[/url] [quote]A 13-year-old girl in Mississippi has died after allegedly being shot by her nine-year-old brother over a video game, police say.

They said the boy grabbed a gun on Saturday afternoon after his sister would not give up the controller.

He allegedly shot her from behind, and the bullet entered her brain.[/quote][/QUOTE]

Obviously, they needed an armed babysitter!

[QUOTE]At least now he won't have to share the controller with her. So it is all good, right? :loco::loco:[/QUOTE]
Hmm. A nine-year-old is too young to be tried as an adult. So he'll have to be set at liberty by age 21, assuming he isn't declared insane. And, if he's incarcerated rather than institutionalized, assuming he doesn't wind up on the wrong end of a fatal dispute while he's confined.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;482842]Hmm. A nine-year-old is too young to be tried as an adult. So he'll have to be set at liberty by age 21, assuming he isn't declared insane. And, if he's incarcerated rather than institutionalized, assuming he doesn't wind up on the wrong end of a fatal dispute while he's confined.[/QUOTE]So how about a [url=http://www.newsweek.com/texas-4-year-old-shoots-7-month-old-baby-apparent-accident-858155]four-year-old[/url] instead?

But that is not the reason I came here to post. [url=https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/]This is a work of fiction[/url], unfortunately, but quite insightful IMO.[quote=https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/]It’s worth asking: What would a world look like where “pro-life” activists were as rabidly committed to protecting schoolchildren as they are to defending blastocysts?[/quote]

[QUOTE=retina;483327]So how about a [URL="http://www.newsweek.com/texas-4-year-old-shoots-7-month-old-baby-apparent-accident-858155"]four-year-old[/URL] instead?

But that is not the reason I came here to post. [B][URL="https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/"]This is a work of fiction[/URL], unfortunately, but quite insightful IMO.[/B][/QUOTE]
Indeed it is, Your Evility. Thanks for sharing!

[quote=retina;483327][Quote=Dr Sardonicus;482842]Hmm. A nine-year-old is too young to be tried as an adult. So he'll have to be set at liberty by age 21, assuming he isn't declared insane. And, if he's incarcerated rather than institutionalized, assuming he doesn't wind up on the wrong end of a fatal dispute while he's confined.[/quote]
So how about a [url=http://www.newsweek.com/texas-4-year-old-shoots-7-month-old-baby-apparent-accident-858155]four-year-old[/url] instead?[/quote]

That Texas story has some real gems in it:

[quote]KWTX-TV reported that there was a sign outside the home in Temple that warned people of weapons inside. The sign reads: “The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes. The response time of a .357 is 14 hundred feet per second.”[/quote]

Setting aside for the moment that "14 hundred feet per second" is not a time, the story doesn't give the 911 response time in this instance. Apparently, though, it didn't take very long for the gun to [i]create[/i] an emergency.

But, to "how about a four-year-old?"

[quote]Neighbor Adrian Martinez said he did not blame the family for what occurred.

"I'm not there to judge them, but in my family, it happened once with my cousin," Martinez told KXXV. "My cousin killed accidentally my other cousin. It happens. Accidents happen."[/quote]

"Accidents happen?" Allowing a 4-year-old access to a loaded gun is on a par with handing an adult who's falling-down drunk the keys to a Ferrari and saying, "See how fast you can make it go."

It's not the four-year-old here (or the nine-year-old in the Mississippi case) who should be tried. It's the [i]adults[/i] who so recklessly allowed young kids to get their hands on loaded guns.

[quote=retina;483327]But that is not the reason I came here to post. [url=https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/]This is a work of fiction[/url], unfortunately, but quite insightful IMO.
[Quote=https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/]
It’s worth asking: What would a world look like where “pro-life” activists were as rabidly committed to protecting schoolchildren as they are to defending blastocysts?[/quote][/quote]

That'll be the day...

Reminds me of a political cartoon many years ago, possibly one of "Feiffer's Fables." The character is saying in one frame, [i]The pre-born are innocent and deserve our love.[/i] And, in the next, [i]The post-born are guilty and deserve what they get.[/i]

Wrong "solution" to the problem
 

[url]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/31/shooter-drills-high-school-shooting-new-normal[/url] [quote=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/31/shooter-drills-high-school-shooting-new-normal]Aikman teaches English, social justice and college readiness at a large public high school. “This is a very heavy time to be an American school teacher,” she said.

Staff and students are jumpy. “Whatever classroom I’m in I’m looking at how to exit in an emergency. That’s how we’re thinking now as teachers. What I could use to break a window, what I would use to barricade a door, how I would keep people quiet.”[/quote]Don't they know that having drills, and being taught to be scared an fearful are not solutions? Everyone knows the proper solution is to arm the school children and the teachers. More guns, moor guns, moar guns. Nothing could possibly go wrong. :loco:

Nonsense. The solution is to turn schools into windowless reinforced concrete boxes, preferably underground. All persons entering are strip-searched and whole-body xrayed by armed guards in Bomb Squad full body armor. If the armor can look like Darth Vader, so much the better. Every entry candidate has already run a gauntlet of aggressive questioning by armed and armored persons who were discharged from ICE for excessive violence.

Fortunately, for the harried security staff, these procedures are only needed once a week, as everyone is put in 6x10 foot solitary "safety cells" after class. They are let out on Fridays, provided there have been no disciplinary incidents; in which case, the remains are incinerated with the rest of the garbage.

[QUOTE=retina;483990][url]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/31/shooter-drills-high-school-shooting-new-normal[/url] Don't they know that having drills, and being taught to be scared an fearful are not solutions? Everyone knows the proper solution is to arm the school children and the teachers. More guns, moor guns, moar guns. Nothing could possibly go wrong. :loco:[/QUOTE]
The closest I could find to this idea was a recent [url=http://wnep.com/2018/03/22/superintendent-says-students-are-armed-with-rocks-in-case-of-a-school-shooting/]March 22 KNEP-TV local news story[/url] out of Pennsylvania:
[quote]SCHUYLKILL COUNTY, Pa. -- There’s a rocky controversy when it comes to school safety in Schuylkill County.

The superintendent of the Blue Mountain School District is in the spotlight after telling lawmakers in Harrisburg his students protect themselves against potential school shooters with rocks.

“Every classroom has been equipped with a five-gallon bucket of river stone. If an armed intruder attempts to gain entrance into any of our classrooms, they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned,” said Dr. David Helsel.[/quote]

In other recent Pennsylvania-related news, former US Senator Rick "Sanctus" Santorum, R-PA, suggested that students should learn CPR to deal with classroom shootings.

IMO, the buckets of river stones is a more practical idea.

But to the idea of actually arming students, I believe it would indeed solve the problem of classroom shootings:

[wavy lines, fade in to generic school board meeting]Next item on the agenda: All teachers willing to face a class room full of armed students, please raise your hands. Hmm, nobody? OK then. [wavy lines, fade out]

[Alice Cooper music]School's out, forever! ..."[/Alice Cooper music]

Problem solved!

:tu::goodposting:
[QUOTE]...they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned.....[/QUOTE]Stoned like Superintendent Helsel must have [edit] [U]been[/U] when he came up this security solution.

[QUOTE=kladner;484044]Stoned like Superintendent Helsel must have when he came up this security solution.[/QUOTE]However in parts of the USA there is a history of people throwing stones for good causes.

[QUOTE=https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/2ba45eec]The Deans fashioned their baseballs out of yarn or socks wound around a rock, or tape around an apple core, and used an old broom or hoe handle for a bat. Not able to afford shoes, they played barefooted most of the time. They strengthened their arms and sharpened their aim by throwing at squirrels while working in the fields.[/QUOTE]The way I had been told, they hunted the squirrels for food.
[QUOTE=http://www.thetimesnews.com/article/20120921/Business/309219871]There is a story that Hall of Fame pitcher Dizzy Dean honed his accuracy throwing rocks at squirrels. He threw left-handed, the natural righty said, because, “I throw so hard with my right hand that I squash them squirrels somethin’ terrible and they ain’t fit eatin’ then.”[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;484044]:tu::goodposting:
[quote=Dr Sardonicus;484043]...they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned.....[/quote]
Stoned like Superintendent Helsel must have [edit] [U]been[/U] when he came up this security solution.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the good Superintendent was stoned, or that his wits were otherwise addled. What I think he may have been was perhaps a bit fearful, and, perhaps more, desperate to come up with a plan of action to show his charges that there was at least [i]something[/i] they could do, with what was readily available, to at least [i]try[/i] to ward off a gunman bent on mass slaughter. He obviously isn't dumb enough to try to tell his charges that "it can't happen here." And he isn't dumb enough to let his charges think there isn't anything they can do except wait to be killed.

There isn't much a local school superintendent can do to [i]prevent[/i] such an attack (other than, hopefully, encourage students and teachers to be vigilant for someone who seems apt to blow a gasket). There are many fearful things that [i]can[/i] happen, which we have no way of preventing. The only reassurance we can draw when facing the prospect of a calamity, is that we have prepared for it as best we can. He has fulfilled his duty in providing that assurance.

And who knows? A hail of good-sized stones from a classroom of kids might actually help in stopping a gunman. A rock doesn't have to knock him out, or knock the weapon from his hand. It might be enough to stop him from shooting long enough for an adult to tackle him.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;484070]

And who knows? A hail of good-sized stones from a classroom of kids might actually help in stopping a gunman. A rock doesn't have to knock him out, or knock the weapon from his hand. It might be enough to stop him from shooting long enough for an adult to tackle him.[/QUOTE]
The problem then is the rock won't knock down a 750 grain bullet at 2252 fps

[QUOTE]I don't think the good Superintendent was stoned, or that his wits were otherwise addled.[/QUOTE]I apologize for my post. It unjustly maligned innocent stoners. :razz:
EDIT: It has been suggested that this [I]might [/I]be a 04/01 kind of post. :confused2: :confused:

Oh the irony
 

[url=https://www.dallasnews.com/news/dallas/2018/04/24/vice-president-mike-pence-will-speak-nra-convention-dallas]NRA bans guns at convention where Pence and Trump will speak[/url].

I thought the guns were to protect everyone. So why don't they want to protect POTUS? :confused:

[QUOTE=retina;486785][url=https://www.dallasnews.com/news/dallas/2018/04/24/vice-president-mike-pence-will-speak-nra-convention-dallas]NRA bans guns at convention where Pence and Trump will speak[/url].

I thought the guns were to protect everyone. So why don't they want to protect POTUS? :confused:[/QUOTE]

[quote]Nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.[/quote] -- [i]Il Duce[/i] on August 10, 2016

I can't see how anything could possibly go wrong.

[img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/12D00/production/_101565077_img_20180510_153624_516.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=retina;487665]I can't see how anything could possibly go wrong.

[img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/12D00/production/_101565077_img_20180510_153624_516.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
WTF?!? Did they get Daley Plaza confused with Dealey Plaza?

[QUOTE=retina;487665]I can't see how anything could possibly go wrong.

[img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/12D00/production/_101565077_img_20180510_153624_516.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]

Good one- However, the laughter is dampened a little by the close proximity to reality. I'm sure there are people who feel this is an honestly good idea.

Norm

[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44173954"]Latest in from texas[/URL]:

[QUOTE]
Shortly after the shooting began in the town of about 13,000 residents, a man carrying an American flag, wearing a Trump hat, and carrying a pistol on his hip approached news cameras.

The man, who did not give his name, said his goal was to "get to the school. Make America great again."[/QUOTE]

Thoughts and prayers…

:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=xilman;487944][URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44173954"]Latest in from texas[/URL]:[quote]Shortly after the shooting began in the town of about 13,000 residents, a man carrying an American flag, wearing a Trump hat, and carrying a pistol on his hip approached news cameras.

The man, who did not give his name, said his goal was to "get to the school. Make America great again."[/quote][/QUOTE]
This fellow obviously deserves an honorary certification, an honor I have bestowed upon [i]Il Duce[/i] and many of his supporters in D.C. He can send his application to

Dr Sardonicus, Chief of Client Placement Services
Frederick Charles Krueger Institution for the Criminally Insane
666 Elm Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20001

[QUOTE=xilman;487944][URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44173954"]Latest in from texas[/URL]:[/QUOTE]

I think the capper on that particular quote is the follow-up (at least in the video I saw) of another man calling the pistol-holder a moron (correct!) while also saying that we do not need guns right now (correct!) but prayers (wait, what?).

Insane people need guns, too!
 

According to this article in [url=https://www.thetrace.org/2018/03/red-flag-laws-pending-bills-tracker-nra/]The Trace[/url], the legislatures of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Tennessee, and Utah deserve a shout-out for killing "red-flag bills." Such bills, if made law, would allow the issuance of a court order to, at least temporarily, take guns away from people legally determined to be a "danger to themselves or others."

All but one of the descriptions of the descriptions describes the bill's demise as ""Did not advance to floor vote." This usually means "died in committee," generally without a vote. In a few cases, bills actually advanced out of committee, but weren't scheduled for a vote.

Alabama gets a Dishonorable Mention. The committee scheduled to consider the bill could not meet, because all the Republicans on the committee stayed away, thus killing the meeting for lack of a quorum.

The Strait-jacket Award, though, goes to Colorado. In Colorado, the bill was actually voted down in committee on a party-line vote. How party-line? Well, as described in [url=https://www.denverpost.com/2018/05/01/colorado-red-flag-gun-bill/]this article[/url] in the Denver Post, hyperpartisan hacks brought a motion to relieve the assistant majority leader, Cole Wist, of his position, because he was one of the bill's sponsors. Wist has also been receiving threats via social media, and has referred them to law enforcement.

Keep guns out the hands of madmen? Only traitors could think such a thing!

[QUOTE=science_man_88;484075]The problem then is the rock won't knock down a 750 grain bullet at 2252 fps[/QUOTE]

Yikes, 750 grains, that's just over 1.7 ounces, sounds like a 50BMG, and indicated velocity implies at range >500 yards. That's a rather rare and expensive arm, also expensive to operate at $3.50/round in bulk. Cumbersome at 23 pounds and 48 inches. School mass shooters tend to be not only murderous and mad and cowardly, but also pathetic losers who can't possibly afford a $10,000 luxury weapon.

The reason AR-15's are popular with that pathological group may be because they're inexpensive. It's not that they're lethal; they and their little ~55-grain projectiles are marginal or below minimum requirements (regulations) for deer hunting, more appropriate for coyote sized game. Typical projectiles for deer are ~165 grain (AR-10 or similar).

[QUOTE=kriesel;488204]The reason AR-15's are popular with that pathological group may be because they're inexpensive.[/QUOTE]And they are everywhere.

:sad:

What bothers me is the sheer number of idiots who get a cactus needle in their butt and think it is an excuse to shoot a bunch of people. Are we becoming more insane?

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;488364]Are we becoming more insane?[/QUOTE]It sure looks that way.

The insanity continues ...
 

Who'd thunk that using a oven would be the best place to store your gun and ammunition. :loco:

[url]http://www.vindy.com/news/2018/may/21/warren-man-suffers-gunshot-wounds-oven-did-it/[/url]

[url]http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/st-petersburg-woman-injured-after-bullet-left-inside-oven-explodes/1275754[/url]

Good plan guys. Keep up the good work. :tu:

:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=retina;488371]Who'd thunk that using a oven would be the best place to store your gun and ammunition. :loco:

[URL]http://www.vindy.com/news/2018/may/21/warren-man-suffers-gunshot-wounds-oven-did-it/[/URL]

[URL]http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/st-petersburg-woman-injured-after-bullet-left-inside-oven-explodes/1275754[/URL]

Good plan guys. Keep up the good work. :tu:

:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Multiple technical issues in those articles. Modern ammunition is an assembly of case, primer, propellant, and bulllet. Bullets don't explode, they fragment on impact, being made typically of inert metal. What happens I think is the primer is set off by differential thermal expansion, igniting the propellant, and bursting the (usually brass) cartridge case if it's in a magazine or loose rather than in a firearm's chamber that's designed to contain the tens of thousands of pounds of pressure produced. (Brass expands thermally more than steel. Or maybe the primer or propellant just becomes unstable from the heat.)

One such incident occurred in the oven of a former Madison WI chief of police. He was in the habit of putting his service weapon a different place in his residence each day upon return home. That evening he chose the oven. Later he got hungry and started the oven on preheat and somewhat later got reminded of his weapon's location when one round went off. The policy about reporting every round discharged was followed, so the city council was notified, and the media got hold of it too.

I would bet on the heat setting off the primer. The primer has to be more sensitive than the propellant. It is normally set off by percussion energy, but enough heat should do the trick, too.
:gah: @Madison police chief, 'accidentally' toasting his weapon. It is no accident with someone that dense.

Easy-bake ammo and exploding billiard balls
 

[QUOTE=kladner;488394]I would bet on the heat setting off the primer. The primer has to be more sensitive than the propellant. It is normally set off by percussion energy, but enough heat should do the trick, too.
:gah: @Madison police chief, 'accidentally' toasting his weapon. It is no accident with someone that dense.[/QUOTE]

Re primers, I had thought so too. But [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooking_off[/URL] seems to say otherwise. (What better place to "cook off" a round than an oven?)

Re the Madison police chief, that was a couple of chiefs ago, and has not reoccurred. UW-Madison hasn't taken any chances though, and followed one female chief of ~26 years tenure with another (with zero cook-offs).

Holy exploding billiard balls: [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrocellulose#Other_uses[/URL]

[QUOTE=kriesel;488413]Re primers, I had thought so too. But [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooking_off[/URL] seems to say otherwise. (What better place to "cook off" a round than an oven?)

Re the Madison police chief, that was a couple of chiefs ago, and has not reoccurred. UW-Madison hasn't taken any chances though, and followed one female chief of ~26 years tenure with another (with zero cook-offs).

Holy exploding billiard balls: [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrocellulose#Other_uses[/URL][/QUOTE]
Thanks for the information. Intuition doesn't always follow the correct path.

The above-cited Wiki page says that

[quote]Nitrocellulose, the primary component of modern smokeless powder, has a relatively low autoignition temperature of around 160–170 °C (320–338 °F)[/quote]

At the Quora thread [url=https://www.quora.com/How-hot-do-I-need-to-make-a-primer-for-it-to-detonate]How hot do I need to make a primer for it to detonate?[/url], we find that a common primer, fulminate of mercury, has an autoignition temperature of 338F. Incidentally, at this temp, the stuff is liquid!

So "smokeless powder" is likely to detonate at a lower temp than fulminate of mercury.

[quote]In his book "Gunshot Wounds" Vincent Di Maio describes various experiments where ammunition was heated in ovens. He says that .22 long rifle cartridges detonate at an average of 275F, .38 Special at 290F and 12 gauge shotgun shells at 387F. The interesting thing about these furnace experiments was that in all instances the cartridge cases ruptured, but the primers did not detonate. In fact the primers were removed from some of the ruptured cases, reloaded into other brass and fired.[/quote]

BTW one of the crewmen in [i]Mister Roberts[/i] chose fulminate of mercury to make a Fourth of July firecracker, with spectacular results.

Another primer of note is [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead(II)_azide]Lead(II) azide[/url]. Its autoignition temperature is higher, 350C or 662F. It came up in long-ago news reports that came to mind upon seeing the subject of primers.
[quote]Lead azide was a component of the six .22 caliber Devastator rounds fired from a Röhm RG-14 revolver by John Hinckley, Jr. in his assassination attempt on U.S. President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. The rounds consisted of lead azide centers with lacquer-sealed aluminum tips designed to explode upon impact.[/quote]

It seems that yet another primer, lead styphnate, has an autoignition temperature of 330 C or 626 F.

Another quora page informs us that the autoignition temperature of gunpowder (black powder) is much higher than any of these -- around 464 C or 867 F.

Curiously, the MSDS's I looked up for a couple of primers from Winchester do not provide autoignition temperatures for them...

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;488450]The above-cited Wiki page says that

At the Quora thread [URL="https://www.quora.com/How-hot-do-I-need-to-make-a-primer-for-it-to-detonate"]How hot do I need to make a primer for it to detonate?[/URL], we find that a common primer, fulminate of mercury, has an autoignition temperature of 338F. Incidentally, at this temp, the stuff is liquid!

So "smokeless powder" is likely to detonate at a lower temp than fulminate of mercury.

BTW one of the crewmen in [I]Mister Roberts[/I] chose fulminate of mercury to make a Fourth of July firecracker, with spectacular results.

Another primer of note is [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead(II)_azide"]Lead(II) azide[/URL]. Its autoignition temperature is higher, 350C or 662F. It came up in long-ago news reports that came to mind upon seeing the subject of primers.

It seems that yet another primer, lead styphnate, has an autoignition temperature of 330 C or 626 F.

Another quora page informs us that the autoignition temperature of gunpowder (black powder) is much higher than any of these -- around 464 C or 867 F.

Curiously, the MSDS's I looked up for a couple of primers from Winchester do not provide autoignition temperatures for them...[/QUOTE]

So, as long as the primer is removed, a black powder muzzle loader is oven-safe except for the self-clean cycle, ~500C, at least in regard to unintended firing by autoignition. Not so good for the wood or plastic grips, stocks, or fore-ends though, with substantial weight loss or melting occurring. [url]http://www.ufrgs.br/lapol/thermal_decomposition_of.pdf[/url] (Police chiefs, take note.)

Thanks much Dr. Sardonicus for your informative post.

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;488364]What bothers me is the sheer number of idiots who get a cactus needle in their butt[/QUOTE]
You guys are wonderful, I have to remember this expression! Sorry to make a joke in a not quite a suitable moment... This reminds me of a doctor in our country who used to give to everybody who came for a consultation some treatment for intestinal worms... If someone stepped in his clinic room complaining about some pain, headache, stomach ache, belly pain, whatever, then the patient got the same preaching: "you have [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascariasis"]ascariasis[/URL], take this medicine", and he handled a bottle of some liquid... Nobody knew if the medicine was indeed for lumbricoides or it was the right medicine the patient needed for his disease, or just placebo, but the fact stays... "you have lumbricoides, take this!". Many say that the treatments always work, and that the bottles or pills were different from a patient to another, and the doctor was only talking like that, but he in fact was administering the right treatment, but this nobody knows for sure... Once, a guy with a broken arm walked in... "Oh, you have ascariasis!" said the doctor. The guy was in pain and he didn't take the joke well "Are you crazy? I climbed the tree and fell down and broke my arm, I have no worms"... "Well...", replied the doctor "what do you think was itching you in the ass to climb the tree?"...

Guns don't kill students, video games do...
 

Just thought I'd mention Education Secretary Betsy DeVos's testimony at the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 5. She was put in charge of [i]Il Duce[/i]'s "school safety commission" formed after the Parkland school shootings. Asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy whether the commission would study how school safety is affected by guns and gun violence, she said,
[quote]That is not part of the commission’s charge, per se.[/quote]

It seems she's more interested in arming teachers, and blaming violent video games.

After her testimony, the Department issued a "clarification." Part of the commission's charge [i]is[/i] to look at age restrictions for certain firearms purchases...

Mental Illness Serves as Easy Scapegoat in Mass Murder Accounts
 

-Olivia Riggio
[URL]https://fair.org/home/mental-illness-serves-as-easy-scapegoat-in-mass-murder-accounts/[/URL]
Focusing on the mental health of domestic terrorists lets the media cover up the role it plays in encouraging more of the same.
[QUOTE]The media’s fixations with Pagourtzis’ trenchcoat and withdrawn personality come from common fallacies about the Columbine High School massacre of 1999.

The perpetrators of that crime were [URL="http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/20/columbine.myths/"]falsely reported[/URL] to be part of the “Trenchcoat Mafia,” a clique of gamers and outcasts at the school who were not affiliated with the shooters. Social awkwardness and duster coats have been associated with mass shootings ever since.

What the Columbine shooters, Pagourtzis and other mass killers most importantly have in common, though, is a desire for notoriety. According to an affidavit ([B]AP,[/B] [URL="https://www.apnews.com/2aa445e284244dee8616c12a7bb54d81"]5/19/18[/URL]), Pagourtzis told investigators he spared the lives of students he liked so they could “tell his story.”
[/QUOTE]June 14, 2016
[U]When Media Learned Killer’s Ethnicity, Then They Knew to Call It ‘Terrorism[/U]’
-Eoin Higgins
[URL]https://fair.org/home/when-media-learned-killers-ethnicity-then-they-knew-to-call-it-terrorism/[/URL]
Ain't it funny how white guys don't commit terrorism. They are just deranged losers. (See above story.)
[QUOTE]In the early hours of June 12, as reports poured in about a shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, news outlets were reluctant to characterize the incident beyond calling it an act of violence.

With little information beyond “a shooting has left a number of people of dead in a nightclub,” the [B]Twitter[/B] accounts of major media outlets used the contextually neutral language of “shooting” to describe the situation:
[/QUOTE][QUOTE]Once the shooter was identified as Omar Mateen, a US citizen of Afghan descent, the narrative changed. After this South Asian ethnicity was revealed, news media began calling the attack an act of terror. At 9:01 AM, [B]CBS News[/B] [URL="https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/741978609901002752"]tweeted[/URL]: “JUST IN: Orlando nightclub shooter ID’d as Omar S. Mateen, law enforcement sources tell[URL="https://twitter.com/CBSNews"] @[B]CBSNews[/B][/URL].” Just ten minutes later, the way [B]CBS[/B] was discussing the crime had [URL="https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/741978609901002752"]changed[/URL]: “Authorities ‘leaning towards [B]Islamic terrorism[/B]’ as motive,[URL="https://twitter.com/CBSNews"] @[B]CBSNews[/B][/URL]‘ Pat Milton reports:”[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]This manipulation of language by news media has shown quite clearly that [U] the term “terrorism” refers not to the acts themselves, but rather to the ethnicity and specifically defined ideology of the perpetrators of the attacks.[/U][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;491742]-Olivia Riggio
[URL]https://fair.org/home/mental-illness-serves-as-easy-scapegoat-in-mass-murder-accounts/[/URL]
Focusing on the mental health of domestic terrorists lets the media cover up the role it plays in encouraging more of the same.
June 14, 2016
[U]When Media Learned Killer’s Ethnicity, Then They Knew to Call It ‘Terrorism[/U]’
-Eoin Higgins
[URL]https://fair.org/home/when-media-learned-killers-ethnicity-then-they-knew-to-call-it-terrorism/[/URL]
Ain't it funny how white guys don't commit terrorism. They are just deranged losers. (See above story.)[/QUOTE]
The Columbine chuckleheads didn't hold a candle to [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Kehoe]Andrew_Kehoe[/url], who perpetrated the [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster]Bath School disaster[/url]. Of course, when he did his thing in 1927, the term "terrorism" hadn't been invented yet. But talk about a sore loser...

And then there's [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik]Anders Behring Breivik[/url], who killed 75 and injured 241 on July 22, 2011. He's contemporary, and as white as they get. [quote]At the same time, Breivik said both during his trial and in his manifesto to have been inspired by jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda, and stated his willingness to work with groups like al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab and Iran in order to conduct attacks with weapons of mass destruction against Western targets.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;491796]The Columbine chuckleheads didn't hold a candle to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Kehoe"]Andrew_Kehoe[/URL], who perpetrated the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster"]Bath School disaster[/URL]. Of course, when he did his thing in 1927, the term "terrorism" hadn't been invented yet. But talk about a sore loser...

And then there's [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik"]Anders Behring Breivik[/URL], who killed 75 and injured 241 on July 22, 2011. He's contemporary, and as white as they get.[/QUOTE]
The Bath school board member was an exception at age 57.

Mass killers tend to be male, under 30, and losers. Race is less selective. The notoriety it produces seems to appeal to them. I've been saying for years, their names and biographies should be completely suppressed. Just identify them as murderous asshole loser #n, mal#n for short, where the numerical value n is a sequence number.

While they are quite disturbed by normal measures, they are not completely irrational. They tend to pick places that offer little chance of effective resistance. For example, Holmes bypassed closer theaters to do his shooting at an Aurora Colorado theater that required even off-duty police to be unarmed. Breivik did most of his killing on an island used for a camp for unarmed youth, and his first order of business was shooting the security guard there. The Fort Hood shooting by Nidal Hassan was in an area he, as a member of the military, knew was an established on-base gun-free zone. As I recall, a female civilian police officer was the first other armed person on scene.

[QUOTE=kriesel;492917]I've been saying for years, their names and biographies should be completely suppressed. Just identify them as murderous asshole loser #n, mal#n for short, where the numerical value n is a sequence number.[/QUOTE]But that wouldn't attract the click-bait news articles. So the mainstream [strike]propaganda[/strike] "news" machine wouldn't go for it.

[QUOTE=kriesel;492917]Just identify them as murderous asshole loser #n[/QUOTE]
I suspect part of the problem is their being insulted in this fashion long before they commit murder.

[URL="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45315970"]No further comment[/URL]

[QUOTE=xilman;494727][URL="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45315970"]No further comment[/URL][/QUOTE]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

I have never understood the love of guns by the "Great" United States of America.

Trump recently said that people "away" like to use knives to kill because "it hurts more".

I would argue that while knives can be deadly and are readily available, they are by definition "close quarters combat". No one who is not really skilled can kill with a knife from a distance.

Even an amateur can kill many people from a distance with a firearm.

[QUOTE=xilman;494727][URL="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45315970"]No further comment[/URL][/QUOTE]
Another mentally disturbed person who is referred by some media as 'Gaming mogul', a 'youtuber' etc, [URL="https://people.com/crime/youtuber-mcskillet-car-crash-wrong-way-highway/"]killed two innocent people in an apparent vehicular suicide[/URL] a couple days ago, yards away from my usual evening commute.
No further comment either on the effect of gaming culture on what's happening IRL.

[SPOILER]I was about to take that same 805 N off exit that he took (only in the wrong direction), while I was lucky to be 10-15 minutes behind, so it only wrecked my commute. I could have been in the position of the victim's car.[/SPOILER]

[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR]

[URL="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46002549"]A solution[/URL] which is very far from final.

[QUOTE=xilman;498907][URL="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46002549"]A solution[/URL] which is very far from final.[/QUOTE]
[i]Il Duce[/i] said, "If they had protection inside, maybe it could have been a different situation."

So -- now you need to hire your own armed security in order to avail yourself of your First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion?

Later, [i]Il Duce[/i] recited a condemnation of anti-Semitism.

I'll say one thing. [i]Someone[/i] has convinced [i]Il Duce[/i] of the need to mouth the right sentiments regarding political violence and religious persecution -- however much his own sentiments lead to statements encouraging such things.

[QUOTE=xilman;498907][URL="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46002549"]A solution[/URL] which is very far from final.[/QUOTE]The ADL's audit of Anti-Semitic incidents in the USA has compiled the following numbers of incidents over a 3-year period:

2015 -- 942
2016 -- 1267
2017 -- 1986

I can think of one political figure whose rise has accompanied this ominous trend. [W.C. Fields voice][i]It must be a coincidence...[/i][/W.C. Fields voice]

Chilling article on the Thousand Oaks shooter, in the context of the broader backdrop of US permawars, rampant economic inequality and the overall and ongoing debasement of society and loss of civic institutions and social support networks which used to form part of that long-lost thing, "community":

[url=https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/09/thou-n09.html]Afghanistan war veteran kills 12 at a southern California dance club[/url] - World Socialist Web Site
[quote]The connection between the eruption of US militarism in every corner of the globe and the epidemic of anti-social violence and mayhem at home could hardly be clearer.

American imperialism recruits young men and women, often “economic conscripts,” to do its dirty work in the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa and elsewhere, forcing them to commit horrendous crimes and undergo brutal, psyche-destroying experiences. When the Pentagon has done with them, it releases them to their families and into the general public. In too many cases, these veterans are walking time-bombs.

Hugh Gusterson, professor of anthropology and international affairs at George Washington University, argued in 2015 that while veterans accounted for 13 percent of the adult population, “more than a third of the adult perpetrators of the 43 worst mass killings since 1984 had been in the United States military.” He added, “It is clear that, in the etiology of mass killings, military service is an important risk factor.”
...
More generally, the spree of mass killings has its deeper roots in the toxic soil of American capitalism. Gun Violence Archive estimates that the 307 shootings involving four or more victims this year alone have claimed 1,328 lives and injured another 1,251. The website calculates that there have been 49,000 gun violence incidents so far in 2018 in the US, leading to more than 12,000 deaths. Some 45,000 Americans took their own lives in 2016, while drug overdoses killed more than 72,000 in the US in 2017.

No remotely healthy society could generate such appalling statistics. America, as we have previously noted, is a nation at war with itself.[/quote]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;499994]Chilling article on the Thousand Oaks shooter, in the context of the broader backdrop of US permawars, rampant economic inequality and the overall and ongoing debasement of society and loss of civic institutions and social support networks which used to form part of that long-lost thing, "community":

[url=https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/09/thou-n09.html]Afghanistan war veteran kills 12 at a southern California dance club[/url] - World Socialist Web Site[/QUOTE]In the list at [url=https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings]Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) - Country Ranking[/url], Russia is #33 with 11.3 (in 2015), while the USA is #83, with 4.9 (also in 2015).

Homicide statistics may give some insight into the actual reasons people have been trying to walk to the USA from Central America. Countries of origin of these migrants (besides the Middle East, of course) include Nicaragua, #31 with a rate of 11.50 (in 2012), Guatemala at #10 with a rate of 31.20, Honduras at #3 with a rate of 63.80, and El Salvador, #1 with a rate of 108.60.

WRT Nicaragua, it may be worth noting that in recent times, that arch-capitalist Daniel Ortega's government has, with the aid of volunteer paramilitary thugs, been suppressing demonstrations of popular discontent with great brutality, highlighted by an arson attack that killed six members of a family, including an infant. [i]Il Duce[/i] would be proud!

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;500001]In the list at [url=https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings]Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) - Country Ranking[/url], Russia is #33 with 11.3 (in 2015), while the USA is #83, with 4.9 (also in 2015).[/QUOTE]So still a long way to go to be in among the other four eyes AU, NZ, CA and UK.

[QUOTE=retina;500007]So still a long way to go to be in among the other four eyes AU, NZ, CA and UK.[/QUOTE]Yup. (sigh)

Gee, maybe there's something about country music venues... I note that at least one person was at, and survived, [i]both[/i] the Las Vegas [i]and[/i] the Thousand Oaks mass shootings. Also, at least one person was at, and survived the Las Vegas mass shooting, but was killed at the Thousand Oaks mass shooting.

Also, at the Thousand Oaks shooting, a Sheriff's deputy responding to the "active shooter" call -- Sgt. Ron Helus, about a year from retirement after 30 years -- was among the victims. The gunman, as is often the case with mass shooters, killed himself. So much for "It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun." It usually takes the bad guy with the gun stopping [i]himself[/i]. If only they did that [i]first[/i] -- preferably with no shots fired...

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;500028] It usually takes the bad guy with the gun stopping [I]himself[/I]. If only they did that [I]first[/I] -- preferably with no shots fired...[/QUOTE]
The oft quoted statistic of 33,000 gun homicides in the US annually includes over 20,000 people who did just that; killed themselves with firearms apparently intentionally. The great majority of them did not go after others first. Were no firearms to be available to the ordinary civilians, by some herculean roundup of all the hundreds of millions already available, many of those 20,000 plus would substitute other methods to similar ghastly effect.
A common denominator in mass shootings is the murderer selects locations where firearms for self defense have been prohibited, so his prospects (usually it's a male), when violating multiple laws, of a large body count are higher. Average count per instance where self defense is prohibited is over 14; where allowed, 2 and a fraction. Sandy Hook was a gun-prohibited school with a locked door; Adam Lanza killed his mother in her bed, stole her guns, blasted his way into the school with them through locked doors, and faced no effective opposition from the unfortunate unarmed staff, 6 of whom died along with 20 children. Holmes bypassed certain theaters in Aurora, to shoot up one which prohibited arms, even by off duty police there to see the movie with their families. The country music concert in Las Vegas banned arms for off duty police also, and even squirt gun toys, and failed to provide an adequate security substitute, for a concert attendance of tens of thousands, including off duty police who were wounded or killed. Going disarmed was a condition of entry to the special event.

We don't ban fire extinguishers under the pretense it will discourage arsonists. For good reason; it wouldn't work. Unilateral disarmament does not work to prevent mass shootings; see much of central and South America and the elevated murder rates in the gun-restricted legal regimes there. Even in the highly restrictive environment of prisons, people build and use shivs, zip guns, etc. on each other, or get stuff smuggled in, or take it from those in charge. I much prefer people have enough self respect and respect for others to not harm each other. However, in the last resort, when evil is already afoot, armed response is no magical guarantee of zero harm, but in the right hands ALREADY ON SCENE it routinely saves lives.

Another factor that often gets ignored is the emptying of mental hospitals and budget support for them that happened decades ago. People that then would have been under close supervision are now on their own. Some of them get shot by police after being difficult or presenting a perceived threat in public.

[QUOTE=kriesel;500166]The oft quoted statistic of 33,000 gun homicides in the US annually includes over 20,000 people who did just that; killed themselves with firearms apparently intentionally. <snip>[/quote]

I don't know who quotes that as a statistic. The fact is, homicide and suicide are legally separate, being two of four possible "manners" of death (the other two are accident and natural causes).

I also don't count all people who suicide by gun as "bad guys with guns." But, whether they be would-be mass shooters or not, I would rather they stop themselves, as I said, preferably with no shots fired.

Two of your three examples are amazingly poor -- the Aurora, CO theater shooting and the Las Vegas massacre.

[quote]Holmes bypassed certain theaters in Aurora, to shoot up one which prohibited arms, even by off duty police there to see the movie with their families. <snip>[/quote]More pertinent IMO is that he attacked a theater which disregarded fire exits being propped open. Theaters used to have the ushers monitor them during movies (and many today have alarms on these doors) in order to prevent ticket holders from letting their friends in for free. Holmes actually left the theater by a fire exit to "gear up," and prevented the door from closing by itself. If someone had simply shut that door before he tried to re-enter, the attack wouldn't have happened at all. I also wonder whether the body count would have been much higher if other people with guns started firing in the darkened theater. The potential for "friendly fire" casualties in a dark, crowded room shouldn't be dismissed lightly.

[quote]The country music concert in Las Vegas banned arms for off duty police also, and even squirt gun toys, and failed to provide an adequate security substitute, for a concert attendance of tens of thousands, including off duty police who were wounded or killed. Going disarmed was a condition of entry to the special event. <snip>[/quote]The attacker didn't enter the venue. He blazed away at an automatic-weapons rate of fire, from a 32[sup]nd[/sup] floor window. For anyone in the venue to hit the attacker -- especially with a pistol -- would have been a phenomenal shot.

Perhaps a better example of "good guys with guns" almost certainly saving lives was the shooting on Capitol Hill in July 1998. (This incident also plays into your next point.) A paranoid schizophrenic named Russell Weston stole a gun from his father, drove cross-country, and went, armed, to Capitol Hill. A Capitol Hiill police officer saw him go around a metal detector, and asked him to go through it. Weston shot him dead, and headed in. He made it to the office of Tom DeLay, then Majority Whip, and shot a detective who, though mortally wounded, shot Weston and wounded him sufficiently to stop the attack. Two other people were wounded. Weston is still considered incompetent to stand trial, and the criminal charges against him are in abeyance. His lawyers fought (unsuccessfully) against his being involunarily medicated. They were concerned that, if he became fit for trial, he could be convicted and sentenced to death, despite having been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic. As we know, the man who shot President Reagan was found "Not Guilty by reason of insanity." Apparently laws were changed after that, making it nearly impossible to mount a successful insanity defense in cases of shooting federal officials or employees.

[quote]Another factor that often gets ignored is the emptying of mental hospitals and budget support for them that happened decades ago. People that then would have been under close supervision are now on their own. Some of them get shot by police after being difficult or presenting a perceived threat in public.[/quote]Yes, "de-institutionalization" has not been a roaring success. I'm not sure how much of a factor it is in mass shootings, but it certainly [i]is[/i] a factor in the problem of deranged people committing crimes (including shootings); and the nuisances, health risks, and criminal behavior of homeless people, of whom, I have read, about a third are suffering from chronic mental problems. One result has been, an awful lot of mentally ill people wind up in jails and prisons, which are generally not suited to treating them.

[QUOTE=kriesel;500166] Were no firearms to be available to the ordinary civilians, by some herculean roundup of all the hundreds of millions already available, many of those 20,000 plus would substitute other methods to similar ghastly effect.[/QUOTE]
Lack of availability of firearms does reduce the rate of suicide.
Start at page 10 or so [URL="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zxw7jAHsOnh-NytP7R3yg8RA57zF7H2m_u7fRnvgrk0/edit"]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zxw7jAHsOnh-NytP7R3yg8RA57zF7H2m_u7fRnvgrk0/edit[/URL]

And page 5: [URL="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Keith_Hawton/publication/265747919_Restriction_of_access_to_methods_of_suicide_as_a_means_of_suicide_prevention/links/551d541a0cf29a69c99b29a9/Restriction-of-access-to-methods-of-suicide-as-a-means-of-suicide-prevention.pdf"]https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Keith_Hawton/publication/265747919_Restriction_of_access_to_methods_of_suicide_as_a_means_of_suicide_prevention/links/551d541a0cf29a69c99b29a9/Restriction-of-access-to-methods-of-suicide-as-a-means-of-suicide-prevention.pdf[/URL]

So the problem boils down to the belief of the "guns for protection" nonsense. Guns are an offensive[sup]1[/sup] weapon, not a defensive shield/barrier.

So often in the USA I've seen the first response of the police is to point their weapon at someone. And in every other civilised country the action of threatening with a weapon is the last response of the police. Many countries don't even have armed police, except for some very specialised squads.

[1] In more than one sense of the word.

And while we're on the topic of "good guys with guns", let's remember that when the police roll up, they have to decide which of the people with guns are the ones that should be able to have them. If they choose rashly or incorrectly, this happens:

[URL="https://wgntv.com/2018/11/12/officer-responds-to-gunfire-fatally-shoots-security-guard-at-robbins-bar/"]https://wgntv.com/2018/11/12/officer-responds-to-gunfire-fatally-shoots-security-guard-at-robbins-bar/[/URL]

The idea that we need more guns around is laughable on its face and fails when put up against any reasonable data set.