Now It's San Bernardino

[VRBeauty]

It's beginning to sound like this is a workplace violence incident... although "incident" seems to trivialize the scope of the violence.

So one person was p*ed off at something or someone at work, and he was able to convince two others that the killing a whole bunch of people was an appropriate response...

that's incredible, and scary.

 

[Maria D]

I agree with kenny in the sense that these types of incidence are few and far between - hardly a "war zone"
Having said that, I am afraid and will try to protect myself in any ways that I can (knowing full well that I can't possibly protect myself and my family from every possible threat). I'm sure that this thread will spark the same debate on gun control as all the other threads. I wish that instead of discussing it over and over again, that moderate forms of gun control could be put into action.

I posted this on a thread on FB a little bit ago but..JD and I were watching an episode of Drugs Inc the other night and they were talking to a guy who makes 15 THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH selling illegal guns in the US. One guy. Just one. 15 thousand dollars. He's not selling those weapons to deer hunters or skeet shooters. Another guy, and I was already getting sick watching this episode, but this put me over the edge--this other guy said "and if we don't like you, we'll go to your house. We'll take your kids. I'll pull right up when your kids are outside playing, and I'll stand there and I'll look you right in the eye and look at your kid. I'm telling you I will take your kids anytime I want." Drugs and guns. They're tied. People like that *don't care*.

So go ahead and take *my* guns. I make like 11 thousand before taxes a year teaching special education preschool. Take mine. And keep your blinders on and allow the guy who makes a lot more in a month than I do in a year, to keep funneling illegal weapons onto the streets of the country, and the guy who sells guns and drugs to continue to talk about talking people's children if they try to skip paying for those illegal firearms and drugs.

Who will be the scape goat when *my* guns are gone and shit keeps happening?

Packrat, I'm genuinely confused by your last sentence. Who is the scape goat now? Do you feel that gun owners (such as yourself) are the scape goats for the gun violence tragedies in our country?

 

[AGBF]

This is beyond sad and so awful... I didn't know what to think. Was this Isis?? Was it some disturbed person...
What I want is gun control.... We are the leader of mass killings.

What's it going to take???

Three things ... all at the same time.

1. A president who's a Democrat
2. A large Majority of Democrats in both the House and the Senate
3. More liberals in the Supreme Court

I would like to revise this.

1. A president who is not beholden to the the NRA. He or she is probably a liberal Democrat, but not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
2. A large majority of members of Congress in each house that is not beholden to the NRA. Those members will probably be liberal Democrats, but certainly not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
3. New members of the Supreme Court who have been appointed by the president from #1 and approved by the Senate from #2. Each should have written many opinions in which the NRA was fined billions while s/he was on the bench previously.

Deb/AGBF

 

[AGBF]

It's beginning to sound like this is a workplace violence incident... although "incident" seems to trivialize the scope of the violence.

So one person was p*ed off at something or someone at work, and he was able to convince two others that the killing a whole bunch of people was an appropriate response...

that's incredible, and scary.

I just hope that people will stop yelling, "The Syrians Are Coming! The Syrians Are Coming!"* and face the fact that we are a scary bunch here!

Deb/AGBF







*That was the title of a movie from my day, The Cold War Days, "The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!"...and a great movie, too!

 

[VRBeauty]

I would like to revise this.

1. A president who is not beholden to the the NRA. He or she is probably a liberal Democrat, but not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
2. A large majority of members of Congress in each house that is not beholden to the NRA. Those members will probably be liberal Democrats, but certainly not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
3. New members of the Supreme Court who have been appointed by the president from #1 and approved by the Senate from #2. Each should have written many opinions in which the NRA was fined billions while s/he was on the bench previously.

Deb/AGBF

The NRA's power does not come from contributions to politicians or elected officials. It comes from its ability to scare politicians into silence, which in turn comes from its ability to corral the political power of its membership... which it has whipped into a frenzy of believing that any change to gun ownership laws - indeed, even any talk about considering changes to these laws - will inevitably lead to the government banning and seizing all guns.

 

[AGBF]

I would like to revise this.

1. A president who is not beholden to the the NRA. He or she is probably a liberal Democrat, but not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
2. A large majority of members of Congress in each house that is not beholden to the NRA. Those members will probably be liberal Democrats, but certainly not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
3. New members of the Supreme Court who have been appointed by the president from #1 and approved by the Senate from #2. Each should have written many opinions in which the NRA was fined billions while s/he was on the bench previously.

Deb/AGBF

The NRA's power does not come from contributions to politicians or elected officials. It comes from its ability to scare politicians into silence, which in turn comes from its ability to corral the political power of its membership... which it has whipped into a frenzy of believing that any change to gun ownership laws - indeed, even any talk about considering changes to these laws - will inevitably lead to the government banning and seizing all guns.

Are you saying that an NRA with no money would have power?

 

[Matata]

There have been 352 mass shootings in the US so far in 2015.

 

[kenny]

There have been 352 mass shootings in the US so far in 2015.

But we have almost 320 million people.

So it's only just over 1 per 1 million people.

Driving in a car is what we should really be fearful of!
I am way way more likely to be killed in a car accident than in a mass shooting.

 

[VRBeauty]

I would like to revise this.

1. A president who is not beholden to the the NRA. He or she is probably a liberal Democrat, but not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
2. A large majority of members of Congress in each house that is not beholden to the NRA. Those members will probably be liberal Democrats, but certainly not all liberal Democrats will qualify.
3. New members of the Supreme Court who have been appointed by the president from #1 and approved by the Senate from #2. Each should have written many opinions in which the NRA was fined billions while s/he was on the bench previously.

Deb/AGBF

The NRA's power does not come from contributions to politicians or elected officials. It comes from its ability to scare politicians into silence, which in turn comes from its ability to corral the political power of its membership... which it has whipped into a frenzy of believing that any change to gun ownership laws - indeed, even any talk about considering changes to these laws - will inevitably lead to the government banning and seizing all guns.

Are you saying that an NRA with no money would have power?

Not at all. The term "beholden to the NRS" suggests that the NRA gets its way by throwing money at politicians. It actually spends relatively little on contributions to politicians. It spends a lot on lobbying - which includes convincing politicians that it would be politically disastrous for them to consider legislation that would in any way restricts gun rights. And it spends a lot of money on PACs that oppose politicians who dare oppose them, and has supported successful recall campaigns against politicians who dare discuss the possibility of changing gun rights laws. The NRA has many loyal members who are influenced by NRA "scorecards." The NRA has and uses lots of money, but it doesn't get it's power by lining politicians' pockets.

 

[JaneSmith]

13 gun massacres causing over 100 deaths in the 18 years before Aussie gun control, and no gun massacres since.






Good article going over the reasons for high gun violence in the US: http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america

 

[JaneSmith]

There have been 352 mass shootings in the US so far in 2015.

But we have almost 320 million people.

So it's only just over 1 per 1 million people.

Driving in a car is what we should really be fearful of!
I am way way more likely to be killed in a car accident than in a mass shooting.

I think you're comparing apples to oranges. There are far more cars than guns, and many more car rides per day than guns. Also, cars are not designed to be deadly weapons as their primary function. You are mathing wrong.

 

[kenny]

We are way way more likely to be killed in car accidents than in mass shootings.

There.
No math.

 

[Dancing Fire]

This is terrorism no doubt about it.

 

[tuffyluvr]

I agree with kenny in the sense that these types of incidence are few and far between - hardly a "war zone"
Having said that, I am afraid and will try to protect myself in any ways that I can (knowing full well that I can't possibly protect myself and my family from every possible threat). I'm sure that this thread will spark the same debate on gun control as all the other threads. I wish that instead of discussing it over and over again, that moderate forms of gun control could be put into action.

I posted this on a thread on FB a little bit ago but..JD and I were watching an episode of Drugs Inc the other night and they were talking to a guy who makes 15 THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH selling illegal guns in the US. One guy. Just one. 15 thousand dollars. He's not selling those weapons to deer hunters or skeet shooters. Another guy, and I was already getting sick watching this episode, but this put me over the edge--this other guy said "and if we don't like you, we'll go to your house. We'll take your kids. I'll pull right up when your kids are outside playing, and I'll stand there and I'll look you right in the eye and look at your kid. I'm telling you I will take your kids anytime I want." Drugs and guns. They're tied. People like that *don't care*.

So go ahead and take *my* guns. I make like 11 thousand before taxes a year teaching special education preschool. Take mine. And keep your blinders on and allow the guy who makes a lot more in a month than I do in a year, to keep funneling illegal weapons onto the streets of the country, and the guy who sells guns and drugs to continue to talk about talking people's children if they try to skip paying for those illegal firearms and drugs.

Who will be the scape goat when *my* guns are gone and shit keeps happening?

It's so terrible... There is a fair amount of gang violence in the city I live. There are million dollar homes less than a mile from gang-infested projects. Many of the crimes are committed with illegal guns, and the gang members would rather go to jail than lose an illegal gun because the punishment from the gang is much worse than jail.

 

[kenny]

This is terrorism no doubt about it.

Did the FBI announce this or is it DF's reasoning?

You may turn out to be correct, but I'm in no hurry to jump to conclusions.
I'll wait for the authorities to determine the motivation for the attack.

After all, he reportedly worked for San Bernardino County for five years.
The target was not randomly chosen.
He was attending an San Bernardino County office event there, left angry, then returned 20 minutes later with his wife and their arsenal ... apparently to kill coworkers.

To me this means there's some chance he's an unstable disgruntled worker who was armed to the teeth, like many others here in this nutty country in love with weapons.
So, at this stage I'd say it's to early to say, "This is terrorism no doubt about it.".

BBC is reporting their assault rifles were purchased legally.
Take that NRA and Congress!

 

[Dancing Fire]

This is terrorism no doubt about it.

Did the FBI announce this or is it DF's reasoning?

You may turn out to be correct, but I'm in no hurry to jump to conclusions.
I'll wait for the authorities to determine the motivation for the attack.

After all, he did work there for five years.
He was attending a party there, left angry, then returned 20 minutes later with his wife and their arsenal.

There's some chance he's an unstable disgruntled worker who was armed to the teeth, like many others here in this nutty country in love with weapons.

News is reporting their two primary weapons were purchased legally.
Take that NRA!

Kenny
Use some common sense here. A co worker pisses him off then he goes home and make a few pipe bombs (in 30mins ???, no way!) pick up his wife whom is also heavily armed,then goes back to his work place and started shooting innocent peoples, so yes, IMO 99.99% it is a terrorist act.

 

[kenny]

This is terrorism no doubt about it.

Did the FBI announce this or is it DF's reasoning?

You may turn out to be correct, but I'm in no hurry to jump to conclusions.
I'll wait for the authorities to determine the motivation for the attack.

After all, he did work there for five years.
He was attending a party there, left angry, then returned 20 minutes later with his wife and their arsenal.

There's some chance he's an unstable disgruntled worker who was armed to the teeth, like many others here in this nutty country in love with weapons.

News is reporting their two primary weapons were purchased legally.
Take that NRA!

Kenny
Use some common sense here. A co worker pisses him off then he goes home and make a few pipe bombs (in 30mins ???, no way!) pick up his wife whom is also heavily armed,then goes back to his work place and started shooting innocent peoples, so yes, IMO 99.99% it is a terrorist act.

Oh, so it is DF reasoning, not an FBI announcement you heard.
Okay.

Like I said, you may be right and I'll wait for the authorities.
I'm in no hurry.

 

[Dancing Fire]

[quote="kenny|

Oh, so it is DF reasoning, not an FBI announcement you heard.
Okay.

Like I said, you may be right and I'll wait for the authorities.
I'm in no hurry.[/quote]


Just common senses. The pipe bombs were made well ahead of time and ready to be use when they decide to carry out this terrorist act.

 

[the_mother_thing]

There have been 352 mass shootings in the US so far in 2015.

But we have almost 320 million people.

So it's only just over 1 per 1 million people.

Driving in a car is what we should really be fearful of!
I am way way more likely to be killed in a car accident than in a mass shooting.

As someone who has been in 11 car accidents (not one of which has been my fault) yet not one mass shooting, I agree with Kenny.

It's rather disgusting that - like a few of the presidential candidates - people want to politicize this incident BEFORE all the facts are known by again jumping on the "ban guns, blame the nra" bandwagon. Let no good tragedy go to waste ...

 

[AGBF]

There have been 352 mass shootings in the US so far in 2015.

But we have almost 320 million people.

So it's only just over 1 per 1 million people.

Driving in a car is what we should really be fearful of!
I am way way more likely to be killed in a car accident than in a mass shooting.

As someone who has been in 11 car accidents (not one of which has been my fault) yet not one mass shooting, I agree with Kenny.

It's rather disgusting that - like a few of the presidential candidates - people want to politicize this incident BEFORE all the facts are known by again jumping on the "ban guns, blame the nra" bandwagon. Let no good tragedy go to waste ...

I, for one, had one or two opinions before this tragedy. And I made them known. I believe I heard a few opinions from you, too. What's wrong with airing them when the tension gets high? Incidents like this are upsetting for all of us in the Pricescope community and, indeed, most of us in the United States. One confirmed fact (says the "LA Times") is that all of the guns were bought legally. Do we want them to be that available?

 

[the_mother_thing]

It's also noted that - like Paris (another gun-free zone) - the shooters were of a particular religious following. Where is the outrage and calls for banning those in the U.S.?

I am not going to get into another battle of beliefs over being pro vs anti-gun. People who are anti-gun will always blame the gun vs addressing the source of hate in the person pulling the trigger. I prefer to blame the source of the murder's hatred.

 

[momhappy]

^Yes. Paris had strict gun control laws (so strict that even some law enforcement don't carry firearms).

If people really want to tackle the issue of gun violence, then they're going to have to dig deeper than a simple dialogue about gun control. I'm not opposed to sensible gun control, but it certainly won't solve the problem. The main problem is keeping the guns out of the hands of those who's sole purpose is to hurt & kill and unfortunately, the bad guys will always find a way to do that (with or without guns).

 

[JaneSmith]

It's also noted that - like Paris (another gun-free zone) - the shooters were of a particular religious following. Where is the outrage and calls for banning those in the U.S.?

I think you need to clarify this statement, because at first glance it seems like you are calling for banning Muslims. Although, the Planned Parenthood shooter (terrorist) was Christian, and so are many other US domestic terrorists, so perhaps you are calling for banning Christians?

 

[chrono]

The US protects the freedom to practice or not practice a religion, so that's never going to happen. In any case, one bad Muslim or one bad Christian doesn't mean the other Muslims or Christians are also bad. One bad apple doesn't mean all the apples in the basket are also rotten.

 

[the_mother_thing]

@JaneSmith - I don't feel the need to clarify what was simply and clearly a comparison argument to the current situation, albeit a likely unpopular one.

@Chrono - I agree 100%! And 2A rights are also protected, and all/responsible gun owners should not be punished for the acts of a couple bad apples.

And with that, I am bowing out of this discussion, as I believe it is impossible to fully and fairly discuss this incident and all factual aspects of it given the restrictions on certain topics in this forum.

 

[AGBF]

It's also noted that - like Paris (another gun-free zone) - the shooters were of a particular religious following. Where is the outrage and calls for banning those in the U.S.?

I am not going to get into another battle of beliefs over being pro vs anti-gun. People who are anti-gun will always blame the gun vs addressing the source of hate in the person pulling the trigger. I prefer to blame the source of the murder's hatred.

Well, I live near Sandy Hook. A young, white Caucasian male-probably a WASP-shot kindergarteners at his old school. Maybe we should ban schools. Maybe children resent going to school. The characters in Mark Twain's books surely did. And he was the prototypical
American. I mean Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn were.

Deb/AGBF

 

[momhappy]

The US protects the freedom to practice or not practice a religion, so that's never going to happen. In any case, one bad Muslim or one bad Christian doesn't mean the other Muslims or Christians are also bad. One bad apple doesn't mean all the apples in the basket are also rotten.

I agree and I wish that the same argument applied to guns/gun ownership - a few bad apples does not imply that all guns and/or gun owners are bad.

 

[chrono]

The US protects the freedom to practice or not practice a religion, so that's never going to happen. In any case, one bad Muslim or one bad Christian doesn't mean the other Muslims or Christians are also bad. One bad apple doesn't mean all the apples in the basket are also rotten.

I agree and I wish that the same argument applied to guns/gun ownership - a few bad apples does not imply that all guns and/or gun owners are bad.

That said, are automatic and military grade weapons really necessary for regular lay folks? Because both religion and gun rights are protected, I expect these types of killing to continue unchecked because no action will be taken and nothing will change.

 

[momhappy]

More pistols are used in shootings than any other firearms, so banning certain types of firearms is not likely to solver the problem wither. Also, there is a fair amount of confusion associated with types of firearms, terminology, etc. (for example, semi-automatic vs. automatic).

 

[chrono]

More pistols are used in shootings than any other firearms, so banning certain types of firearms is not likely to solver the problem wither.

It may not solve it but it will lessen the amount of carnage if the killer is forced to use the smaller / less damaging causing pistol.