BREAKING: Police: 3 people shot at St. Louis factory

[TwixVoy]

Source: CNN

(CNN) -- Three people have been shot at a transformer manufacturing facility in St. Louis, Missouri, police said Thursday.
St. Louis police said they did not know the location of the shooter, who they said was armed with an assault rifle. Police said they have surrounded a nearby building.
The shooting occurred at ABB Inc., according to a spokeswoman for the company.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/07/factory.shootings/index.html

---

Just now breaking. I expect more of this to happen as people continue to lose jobs and are unable to find anything to replace them outside of minimum wage "service" sector jobs.

[stray cat]

1. This has happened for years - nothing new and no excuse to kill co-workers

because you don't have a job you like

[TwixVoy]

2. Never said it was an excuse

simply stating the obvious that these events have been increasing in frequency during the past two years.

People who keep informed are prepared for job loss and financial hardship.

There are many in the middle class who are completely clueless, live from check to check, are in massive debt to banks, and have no savings to speak of. When they lose their job it typically means losing everything rapidly. These people who had not a care in the world, never kept informed, and could tell you the status of everyone on "American Idol" simply can't mentally handle it when the real world disrupts their isolated life. A lot of these people never even saw job loss coming.

[cabluedem]

96. Another gun nut Rambo with an assault rifle!

[dflprincess]

113. Any crisis that leaves a person feeling helpless and cornered can push a person over the edge

Yesterday a Minneapolis cop was arrested for robbery. Per the article linked to, it's thought he may have been involved in 2 dozen robberies. According to some reports in the local media, he was deeply in debt and the reason for that is he has a seriously ill 4 year old and is drowning in medical bills.

No, it doesn't excuse it, but it makes you wonder how many people are being pushed to the breaking point.

http://www.startribune.com/local/80897097.html?page=1&c=y

[AlphaCentauri]

55. Yep remember the san diego MacDonald shooting and those postal workers

they didn't do it because of unemployment

[AndyA]

3. Assault rifle.

I'm sure he bought it for hunting. :eyes:

Thank goodness his right to bear arms supercedes the dead people's right to live.

If you don't trust a stranger to take your daughter to an undisclosed location, you can't trust that stranger with a gun either.

[robo50]

8. You can bag the biggest game with assault rifles, game as big as

human beings! JEEBUS CRIMINY CRICKET!!

No reason whatsoever for these things to be in the hands of ordinary citizens. NONE! IMO

[virginia mountainman]

14. I have several...

So do many people I know... Most are Democrats...

We have no interest in giving them up, and will actively work against ANYONE who does.

To try to ban these things, show a lack of understanding in basic firearms.

[AndyA]

22. So much to be proud of.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

I understand enough about basic firearms to know that once you kill someone dead with one, they don't come back. Ever. And you leave behind in the wake devastated families and friends, children who will never see their parents again.

Yes, having an assault rifle is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN LIVING. :sarcasm:

[SteveM]

51. Lots of green, there. Jealous of something? Some points:

though you use the "sarcasm" tag, your attempt at such is inadequate.

Either you believe the poster thinks an "having an assault rifle is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN LIVING" or you do not. Which is it?

As to your main statement about "once you kill someone dead with one, they don't come back," one does not need a firearm to do that. And "families and friends, children who will never see their parents again" are still in the same predicament.

So, do you favor prohibition or not? If so, how would you implement the plan and what measures would you take to see if it worked?
Please compare your prohibition model to others which have been tried (alcohol, abortion, gay sexual practices, drugs, and the new up-and-comer, tobacco), with an eye to changing the outcome.

And while you're at it, what makes a semi-auto carbine with medium power cartridges any more dangerous than a Remington 742 hunting rifle, which is semi-auto with quite powerful chamberings? These hunting rifles have been around for generations.

[Mopar151]

76. The differences between "asssault rifle"

And "deer rifle" mostly has to do with style. I'd be all for eliminating "fetish weapons" - but what is an effective definition?
Many military cartridges interchange with civilian - I've shot 7.62 NATO Armor Piercing out of a bolt-action .308, and I've got some idea of what it will drill through. Hiding behind a police car won't save you......

[SteveM]

77. The trouble with a "fetish weapons ban" is relevance to social policy...

even more so than a definition. Obviously, prohibitionists love to use terms like "fetish," "gun love," "guns to substitute for masculinity," etc. I do not wish to place the definitions in hands of (as one poster said today in another thread) someone who considers an "assault weapon" any gun which is used against another. He/she uses the term like that because it supports an ever-expanding general prohibition, the real aim of many gun-controllers. "Fetish" can be abused the same way.

I also have a problem with the impact of "fetish guns." Okay, so someone buys a gun considered by some to be a fetish (for whatever reason), how does that present a societal problem requiring government action?

We all have fetishes, some more or less private. I don't won't government to restrict a "fetish" when it is not a problem. It's like the debate the Baptist Convention had some 30-odd years ago over the issue of "oral sex" and whether or not it should be on the list of those things condemned as immoral. Finally, some clear-headed fellow said what's the harm except for someone making fun of us.

[Mopar151]

92. The trouble is

Every serious gun enthusiast I know has met a weapons fetishist. Them goobers are everywhere! A former co-worker was murdered with a replica Tommy gun. (Cites on request) One of our local rocket scientists gave himself a vasectomy+ with a .410 Deringer stuck in his waistband, on his way home from buying it at The Ammo Dump.
"Gun substitute for masculinity" ain't no joke! I'm a fairly big guy, and I remember who has HAD to tell me they had a "nine" or "foaty-fo" handy - the "real men" had to tell me about the sequence of hot-loads and cop-killers they were packin! And I'm about as threatening as an old dog, unless somebody's "short (cop) disease" is acting up.

[SteveM]

104. As long as the "fetishists" provide auto-induced vasectomies, I have no fear...

I just don't think this is a big problem, and in any case cannot be solved by banning a particular weapon which is supposed to "bring it on."

BTW, I sure would like to get a hold of an old "service" S&W .44 (not magnum) because the revolver is rather attractive -- and a good self-defense weapon.

[dmallind]

17. Surel;y you forgot the sarcasm icon?

Dollars to donuts this is not a real "assault rifle" at all but an AR/AK clone with less energy than a junior hunting rifle let alone a .303 or better.

Most people killed with bullets are killed with .22 or .38 weak handgun rounds. The power of a gun is irrelevant in the vast majority of all cases where they are used to kill people. Somebody just did something stupid with a tool that can either be used properly or improperly. If he survives he will be deservedly imprisoned for this. Might as well blame the make of car he used to get to the site.

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. Power has nothing to do with it.

Everybody knows a .30 is more powerful - the thing with assault rifles is they are combat designed, meaning it takes far less kinetic energy to turn the assault rifle on target, and then throw 30 rounds at that target in 15 or 20 seconds. They are inherently more dangerous in the hands of someone who intends harm than a hunting rifle with a 5 rd clip.

Odd, isn't it, that I've never seen on those hunting shows on TV, any of those guys spraying a buck with semi-auto fire. Sure, a weapon is just a tool, and an assault weapon is a tool designed for killing people as quickly and efficiently as possible - it is NOT designed as a hunting weapon, for stalking and getting that single clean shot.

[X_Digger]

28. You mean like this?

http://www.hcdigest.com/ArticleContent.aspx?id=447



The Remington R-25 is a camo version of the AR-10 (an AR-15 in .308).

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. So? Did she take Bambi down by emptying a 30 rd magazine at him?

I didn't say that an assault rifle cannot be used for hunting - obviously it can. It was not, however, DESIGNED for it. It was DESIGNED to put as many rounds as needed into the air between you and someone who is trying to kill you. You don't NEED a 20-30 round magazine going after deer - if you DO need that, you're more of a danger to other hunters than you are to the deer. You don't NEED a short barrel, for a quick turning radius that allows you to rapidly sight in on disparate targets - when hunting you have ONE target, and ideally need only one shot, maybe two, to bring it down.

You can hammer a nail with a heavy wrench, but that is not what it was DESIGNED for.

[X_Digger]

36. All hunting rifles are derivative of military rifles..

Dad's remington 750 is a direct descendant of the garand, except it has a detachable magazine (and they make 20 round mags for it too).

Granddad's model 700 bolt action is a direct derivative of the Springfield 1903 (or the Mauser, depending on who you ask).

A light, short rifle is useful to a hunter who will be packing it around the woods, through brush, and sometimes up a tree. You sacrifice range with a shorter barrel, but if the terrain you're likely to take a shot in only allows shorter range shots, that's an acceptable compromise (Why have an 800m rifle if all your shots are <200m.)

Most states only allow a 5 round magazine in a rifle when hunting.

[slackmaster]

95. It sounds like you are misinformed about what kinds of rifles are generally available

Do you think that rifle is fully automatic, i.e. that it fires continuously as long as one keeps the trigger pulled, until the magazine is empty?

Do you think many states allow hunting deer with 30-round magazines? (Note that no protruding magazine is visible in the photo in question. It may have a 5-rounder or it may be empty, but there is no way it has a 30-round magazine.)

Serious questions. Semiautomatic rifles are allowed for hunting everywhere during most hunting seasons.

[RaleighNCDUer]

106. Not at all. Anybody can empty a 30rd magazine in 15-20 seconds

firing semi-auto. May not hit anything much, unless you got some real skills, but you can certainly put the rounds downrange.

As i said, you can certainly use a semi-auto assault style weapon for hunting - but their primary design was not for hunting, but for military use where superior firepower makes a difference. Bambi's shooter there used an assault weapon for hunting, and she used it as a hunting weapon - she did not, I'm sure, stroll through the brush snapping shots at anything that moved. IOW, she'd have been able to use a weapon without needing it to have high magazine capacity and ease of use in close quarters - a hunting rifle - with just the same effectiveness.

OTOH, if the weapon used at the factory was limited to a 5 round hunting magazine the time the shooter takes to insert a new magazine could make the difference for someone getting out of the way. Even if his weapon is semi-auto his rate of fire is vastly reduced - not so important when shooting deer, but very important when shooting people.

[slackmaster]

107. The bottom line is you don't trust people

...OTOH, if the weapon used at the factory was limited to a 5 round hunting magazine...

You don't trust them to obey hunting regulations, and

...the time the shooter takes to insert a new magazine could make the difference for someone getting out of the way....

You don't trust them not to unlawfully shoot at people. In fact you assume that anyone with a firearm is going to do that.

[RaleighNCDUer]

108. On the contrary - I do trust hunters to obey hunting regulations.

That being the case, there is no need for them to have weapons capable of accommodating high capacity magazines.

And I do trust people who go nuts will kill innocents with the most effective weapons they can lay their hands on. We don't need to make it easy for them.

[slackmaster]

109. What does "need" have to do with anything, and who are you to judge someone else's needs?

It's called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs.

[jmowreader]

115. Short barrels are great when you hunt in heavy brush

If I get sent to Fort Lewis I'm buying an AR-15 as a deer rifle--I will finally be close enough to Idaho to hunt with my dad, and he's been using a .30-40 Krag (which is shorter than an AR-15) for deer and elk since forever. The .223 round is plenty good enough for deer, the five-round magazine you can get for these is fine, and (unlike the case with a pretty gun) I won't have to worry about scratching it up when I go through some of the wonderful places Dad likes to hunt. Dad always said, "hunt deer in brush. That's what they eat."

[SteveM]

57. Some corrections, respectfully...

"Everyone knows a .30 is more powerful." Only if the cartridge is designed as such. A .32 revolver round is peanuts compared to a .30-'06. And I would prefer a .22 hollow-point to a .32.

Most all hunting rifles were "combat designed." Where did the standard bolt-action hunting rifle, fancy walnut and metal scroll work showing "Venus at Bath," come from? The Springfield rifles of WW I and WW II fame; before that, Mauser rifles in all manner of wars.

This thing about "clips" is curious. Actually, it's magazine capacity. What is to keep someone from buying and using, say, several standard 5 or 10-round magazines (being prevented from buying one of 30 rounds)? Why, nothing at all.

The reason why people want to use these guns for hunting (and they WILL in a few years replace the old bolt-actions) is for some of the very reasons you cite: it takes "far less kinetic energy to turn (hold?) the asssault rifle <"weapon"> on target..." for follow-up rounds. They also have a hell of a lot less kick, are more comfortable to carry and aim (being short and not as likely to snag in brush).

The bolt-actions rifles and older semi-auto hunting rifles were BASED ON MILITARY WEAPONS "designed for killing people as quickly and efficiently as possible." Were they designed as hunting weapons? Who knows. But they quickly became such, and there is a lengthy history of that phenomenon. Read American Rifle by Alexander Rose (author of Washington's Spies).

BTW, while it is best to get "that single clean shot," sometimes you don't make it. Most hunters (including experts) recommend that you be at least competent enough to re-chamber, hold a fairly clear sight picture, and deliver follow-up shots; the one-shot, one-kill slogan is akin to macho boogie. Frankly, if I were younger and acquiring a deer rifle, I would opt for one of the semi-auto clones of assault rifles because of the ease of carry, quick target acquisition, and less kick. Further, their accuracy has improved to 1" groups in the last several years.

See: www.huntingmag.com This would be the May 2008 issue of Petersen's Hunting and read "Guns & Loads."

[RaleighNCDUer]

110. The discussion was about rifles, not handguns,

Clips is a perfectly reasonable mention, as the M1 used an 8 round clip, and was the premier military and hunting rifle of first half of the last century and beyond, replaced by the military in the 50s by the M14, then the M16, but still the most common hunting rifle up into the 80s.

As for assault rifles with high cap mags, which takes longer - to empty a 30 round magazine, or to fire and change 6 five-round magazines? Or even 3 ten-round magazines?

There is a reason that 100 rd drums are generally illegal, only available under severe restrictions. You could as well be asking "What is to keep someone from buying and using, say, several standard 30-round magazines (being prevented from buying one drum of 100 rounds)?

[X_Digger]

111. Err.. outside of CA/NY/NJ/MD/HI/MA..

There are no restrictions on magazine sizes. Even in those states, it's generally >10 rounds, nothing related to drum magazines.

Where'd you get the half-baked idea that drum magazines were generally restricted??

eta: Here's the full list..

CALIFORNIA
- Magazines over 10 rounds
Denver County, CO
- Centerfire Rifle/Pistol Magazines over 20 Rounds
CONNECTICUT
- Fixed Semi-Auto Shotgun Magazines over 5 rounds
HAWAII
- Magazines over 10 rounds for pistols, or guns with pistol versions
Aurora, IL
- Magazines over 15 rounds
- Semi-Auto Shotgun Magazine over 5 rounds
Cicero, IL
- Magazines over 15 rounds
Cook County, IL
- Magazines over 10 rounds
- Semi-Auto Shotgun Magazine over 5 rounds
Niles, IL
- Centerfire Magazines over 20 rounds
- Rimfire Magazines over 18 rounds
- Semi-Auto Shotgun Magazine over 6 rounds
South Bend, IN
- Magazines over 15 rounds
MARYLAND
- Magazines over 20 rounds
MASSACHUSETTS
- Magazines over 10 rounds
- Shotgun Mags over 5 rounds
NEW JERSEY
- Magazines over 15 rounds
- Semi-Auto Shotgun mag capacity over 6 rounds
NEW YORK
- Magazines over 10 rounds
- Semi-Auto Shotgun mag capacity over 5 rounds

[cabluedem]

98. Yeah, we need to make sure more bubba-gumps packing assault weapons. nt

[burrfoot]

105. What an elitist piece of crap that statement is!

Way to go, tiger. Nice job fostering legitimate discussion on the subject.

Any interest in actually learning something about the issue?


:shrug:

[cabluedem]

112. Wipe the blood off your hands you goon!!

[TwixVoy]

9. Agreed

It's completely ridiculous what we as a society value.

[virginia mountainman]

12. Well now, instead of wondering why this guy snapped..

Your more worried about what he used...

Simple minds, always look for the apparently easier route, instead of look at the reason the worker snapped in the first place.

Which you apparently don't care about.

[AndyA]

20. And idiots fail to appreciate the value of life.

The dead people all planned on going home tonight to their families.

Families which may now lose their homes, and everything else. Just so some f*cking idiot could have his assault rifle.

You don't come back from dead. NOTHING is more important than the time we have to be with loved ones.

Sympathy, much? Human, much? Compassion, much? :eyes:

[SteveM]

58. You have made an error in logic...

"Families which may now lose their homes, and everything else. Just so some f'cking idiot could have his assault rifle."

No, that's not why this tragedy occurred. It occurred because some idiot chose to kill others. You focus on an "assault rifle" (actually, it is not), and ignore broader issues about the idiot's health and maybe his fallen status in life.

Then you attack others: "Sympathy, much? Human, much? Compassion, much?" You don't get a free ride on clear thinking by trying to out-compassion others. That is disingenuous, and is typical of those who push prohibitionist solutions.

[Mopar151]

19. Hate to break this to you, Ace

But "assault rifles" are a relatively benign (!!) method of revenge killing, and are a good deal safer for innocent bystanders than many alternatives. You want the lunatics to shift over to I.E.D's? Molotov Cocktails?

[AndyA]

21. So, I guess they might as well have assault weapons, right?

The lesser of two evils is always the best way to go because there is no other solution.

So just accept that this kind of thing will keep happening.

Try telling that to the children of the dead people. :eyes:

[nyc 4 Biden]

24. IMO, the easiest way to kill someone is with a gun.

Trying to kill someone with a Molotov Cocktail or IED takes some skill and a lot of luck.

[Mopar151]

75. Depends on whether...

The "shooter" cares about survival, and the other circumstances. Modern offices would turn into a deathtrap with a gallon of accelerant.....

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

85. 8 injured, 3 killed. Maybe it's not so easy.

[Pavulon]

88. Ohh, guess you never hit act.

fragmentation grenades, improvised explosives using 105mm HE shell. AP mines all do a better job than aimed rifle fire. The explicit purpose of a "assault rifle" is to make people hide while you move.

[X_Digger]

25. So.. what's an 'assault weapon'? n/t

[burrfoot]

37. I don't quite understand

that last sentence there. Is that a reference to something?

BTW, I love your sig line.

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. +1

[DrCory]

42. No one YOU don't know and trust personally...

shouldn't be allowed to possess a firearm?

[SteveM]

59. Ah, the alllure of prohibition: being in charge of morals (nt)

[slackmaster]

43. Maybe this chart will help

[michreject]

74. LOL. Ain't it the truth

I'm stealing it.

[SteveM]

48. Some corrections are in order...

the term "assault rifle" is incorrectly used by MSM to denote a semi-auto carbine of medium power. A true assault rifle is capable of FULL-AUTO fire. This arm-type is standard issue for virtually all military forces around the world. The semi-auto type is NOT used in the military as it is considered an inadequate weapon (not fully auto).

While most semi-auto carbines (many of them clones of the the military version assault rifles) are not used for hunting, they certainly are adaptable for hunting, after re-chambering and redesign of the cartridges; in fact, AK clones and AR 15s (the semi-auto version of M-16s) will be a few years supplant the traditional blue steel-and-walnut bolt-action hunting rifle as the weapon of choice when hunting North American big game. I don't know what the reason why the suspect bought the gun, but you may wish to inform us how you found out? BTW, semi-auto carbines are (in terms of sales) the most popular center-fire rifle in the U.S. Maybe 16,000,000 Americans own them, now.

The right to keep and bear arms as well as the implicit right to life (yes, that is the term) are both protected by the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution neither protects nor prescribes a way for one right to supersede another.

I'm not sure what you mean by a hypothetical daughter being taken to an undisclosed location has to do with gun possession. Could you explain?

Thanks for the opportunity to engage.

[krispos42]

53. Bad logic

It is of the same pattern as those that are upset that the Underwear Bomber's right to due process supercedes people's right to live.

Keeping and bearing arms does not supercede a person's right to life, nor vice versa.

[Pavulon]

86. Assault phone, assault pool, blah

and eventually your daughter is getting laid, by a stranger, hopefully in an undisclosed location (ie not on your sofa)

People die, there is no reasonable measure that will stop this.

[cabluedem]

97. EXACTLY. everyone needs an assault rifle for hunting people. nt

[sharesunited]

4. Guns settle grievances.

Thanks Second Amendment!

[proteus_lives]

62. You'd get rid of all rights.....

If someone in authority promised you that you'd be "safe".

[sharesunited]

78. The Second Amendment helped today's shooting victims Not At All.

They were unsafe precisely because guns and ammo were available.

[proteus_lives]

80. It helped someone else, somewhere.

Lets go to the guns forum and check on the self-defense threads.

You're too lazy/scared to tackle the real problems so you're willing to give up your rights (or take them from others) to relieve your fear.

Don't punish millions of Americans for the crimes of others.

[gorfle]

81. Guns defend freedom.

Thanks Second Amendment!

[sharesunited]

83. The victims today were freed of their pulse.

[gorfle]

101. Millions more are free today from tyranny because of guns.

And that is why why we tolerate the death of a few.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

82. You are welcome.

[robcon]

5. "More of this to happen" ??????????

That's just sophistry, until you know the details. Assuming that the motivation for the shooting has something to do with the economy is faux-sophistication, IMO.

Do you think the "going postal" REALLY meant that postal employees were angrier than other employees???

[TwixVoy]

6. 9 times out of 10

work place shootings are work/economy related.

[Rebubula]

30. LOL....

...OF COURSE most work place shooting are WORK related.

Good use of stats pulled of your ass

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. Actually, yes.

That's WHY the term developed - the postal system was an entrenched bureaucracy that was immune to reform, where higher level bureaucrats had an unconscionable amount of power over their underlings and, being federal employees, they were forbidden to strike. Any protests or objections very literally went on a permanent record, and became impediments to advancement.

Postal employees WERE angrier than other employees, for very good reason. Thus, "going postal".

[Don Caballero]

7. Another glaring reminder that the President must aggressively pursue stricter gun control

[Craftsman]

11. Ensuring the reps retake the house, senate , and Whitehouse

Gun control is dead.

[Don Caballero]

13. Could the President issue signing statements or Presidential Directives

or whatever that would bypass the House? I would love to see President Obama outlaw guns without having to deal with the Repugs in the House.

[virginia mountainman]

15. Yea, that pesky Bill of Rigths..keep getting in the way..

I hate to break it too you, but many of the Democrats in the house are very pro gun

[nyc 4 Biden]

23. and pro-life.

It doesn't make them right.

[SteveM]

61. Edicts to usurp one's Constitutional rights are dictatorial and wrong(nt)

[Craftsman]

16. Only if he want to be impeached in 24 hours, and an arm revolt on his hands.

The Supreme court has ruled you have the right to own guns. Deal with it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. They also gave Bush the presidency -

real astute bunch.

[X_Digger]

27. Yes, let's open that door..

.. and the next Bush-like moran will have a signing statement outlawing abortion..

*sigh* Think these things through, why doncha?

[proteus_lives]

79. Scary.

What other rights would you like disposed of?

Free speech?

Religion?

[Flaneur]

56. Gun control is dead. And so are a few thousand Americans every year...

...because of it. Quite a bargain we've made with ourselves.

[Craftsman]

73. Gun control is dead, and if the dems ever try to bring it back

they are dead, gun control got us Bush, and a rep congress. People have choosen freedon first.

[fascisthunter]

94. I'm Not Buying That for a Second

[gorfle]

102. Ask Bill Clinton.

He is directly quoted as having said the NRA cost Democratic seats.

[X_Digger]

103. I'd say the Assault Weapons Ban cost Dem seats. n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

114. And his strict adherance to the truth is so well known. nt

[Pavulon]

91. Fix root cause, no more bamboozle

drug laws and mental health care. Inner city poverty rates help too. Those things are hard to fix, stupid "fool the stupid people bill" that bans some cosmetic shit is easy.

Hence the easy approach taken by congress last time. No impact on crime and we got a republican majority.

[SteveM]

60. If you become infuential, you should charge royalty payments for that...

"In reprinting anti-gun cartoons, the gun lobby is actually paying anti-gun cartoonists royalties for penning those cartoons! This money is well spent" -- The Great American Gun Debate, Kates and Kleck, 1997.

Your statement is not a cartoon in the traditional sense, and it won't have the effect you wish, but you might make a few bucks, courtesy of the NRA.

[proteus_lives]

65. He's not going to do that.

Because he's not an idiot.

[Pavulon]

87. Good luck with that

if that any gun control passed expect a republican congress and president.

[cabluedem]

99. indeed. we need a permenant ban on assault weapons. nt

[msongs]

10. exercising his constitutional rights to own and use a gun, what's the big deal? nt

[johnfunk]

18. Now, y'see, uif the three victims had been armed and packing, this never would've happened! NOT!!!

:grr::nuke::grr::banghead::nuke::banghead::grr::nuke::grr:

[SteveM]

63. Do you have a point you wish to discuss? nt

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[burrfoot]

31. Yo, folks!

Can we wait until there's a little more detail?

We: 1) don't know if it was an assault rifle.
2) don't know if he legally owned the alleged assault rifle.

Does anybody really think that the problem here is with the tool the guy used, and not the fact that he wanted to murder people??

Even if he did used a gun which has been mis-classified as an assault rifle (i.e. an AR or AK derivative), does anybody realize that he could have done loads more damage using a shotgun?

This is not about the gun (which, dollars to donuts, is NOT an assault rifle); it's about the guy that used it.

We can not get rid of guns in America. It is too late. We need to learn how to address the root causes of the violence.

We can not get rid of guns in America.


P.S. If anyone can promise me that every gun in this country will be removed and no new guns will be smuggled in (i.e., so criminals won't have them, nor will government agents); I would, honestly, be willing to give mine up.

Until I can be assured that no one will commit a criminal act against me, my family, or anyone around me, however, I believe that I should be allowed to defend myself with a tool equivalent to the ones they are using.

I suspect some others may agree with me.

p.p.s. I'm increasingly feeling that there are only two camps here- those who agree with the sentiments that I've expressed and therefore don't need to read a post like this; and those who don't and will never approve of guns in the hands of citizens and will immediately assume that I'm a gun nut. Please prove me wrong!!!! I would love to have a civilized discussion about this!



:toast:

[M155Y_A1CH]

64. I've been thinking about buying a gun.

I abhor violence and wish that nobody ever needed a gun but that's just not the reality.
There have been so many break-ins and killings in my area of late that I spend a lot of time thinking about it. I would settle for a shotgun with light salt loads as I'm not looking to kill anyone. It's just that my fear escalates all the time lately. These house-breakers that just kick the door in are the scariest. Right now all we have for defense here is a baseball bat next to the bed. I can remember a time when that was almost always enough. Now it seems that many of the young people aspire to own a gun and shoot it whenever they can afford bullets. It has become conflict resolution for inner-city youth and I try to lay low around groups of teens whom I don't recognize. Even then there is the danger of someone noticing that we are just two old ladies alone. Last month little more than a mile from here an elderly woman was raped and beaten to death in her home by one man with a gun. Two months ago we were unable to leave our sisters Thanksgiving get together because some kids from another area of town had come through drive-by shooting at their teen rivals and a baby had been shot by a bullet coming through the wall. The police had the streets blocked off until they were done. My sister tells me that there are gunshots heard on her block almost every night. It just keeps coming and yet the evening news reports that crime is down?? I just don't know how that can be true.
Forget about hunting, I want a gun for home defense.

[burrfoot]

93. Well, that's a lot to consider....

if you really are interested, I'd suggest starting a thread in the guns forum- there are a lot of people there who have a lot experience with carrying/self defense/home defense, and you'll get a lot of support.

Conversely, if you don't want to start a whole thread about it, feel free to PM me if you have any particular questions or want to talk about what you're getting yourself into with light salt loads :)

[Randall Flagg]

34. I guess now that the shooter is a criminal he won't be able to buy guns anymore.

Why are we restricting inmates 2nd Amendment rights? :sarcasm:

[burrfoot]

35. Well,

do we know that he's not a criminal already? Either with a prior record, or by default as illegal possession of an assault weapon would make him one? (on the really off chance that it is, in fact, and assault weapon)

Do you have a suggestion for an alternative way for a law-abiding citizen to protect against/deter/respond to this type of attack, in a world where law-abiding citizens are not allowed to have guns?


(not sarcasm. let's discuss this)


:toast:

[Randall Flagg]

39. I doubt it was technically an assault rifle

But the moment he pointed it at another human being it became one.

Personally, I'd like to see a system similar to Britain's here but that ain't gonna happen. However, I believe that we could strengthen our current gun laws and strictly enforce the ones we have now. I'd like to see REAL background checks that would flag applicants for previous medical and legal experiences (IE: mental health and violent crimes), I'd like to see the gun shows gone except for display only. If a person wants to re-sell his or her firearm, let them do it through a licensed dealer.

In the "right vs. privilege" vein, we do have laws that effectively ban some from owning guns at the moment so I don't feel that it would be too much of a stretch to have prospective gun owners acquire a license that would need to be renewed every four years or so. If a person is law abiding and is not harboring ill will, I think they might endorse such a system.

This would also make it much easier for the ATF to discover groups and individuals that basically build small armories and might help avoid situations such as the Branch Davidians by raising an alarm of conspicuous arms purchases prior to a disaster.

I don't think there's any perfect answers in this as long as the American psyche maintains the violent culture that it does today. Canada's well armed but they have a minute fraction of gun violence when compared to us on a per capita basis. Therefore, because of this nation's predilection towards violence, I feel that more stringent gun laws are merited and that it should be more difficult for people to own firearms.

[burrfoot]

45. Thanks-

for the rational, non-one-liner response.

What do you mean a system similar to Britain's? No handguns for citizens (subjects, whatever they are), etc.?

I actually agree with most of your points. Though I don't believe that gun shows are a major source of guns used in crimes, and I understand the objection some have to the government regulating the sale of legally held private property among individuals; I think you're heading in the right direction. I'd suggest (I don't claim this idea as mine, but I like it) opening the NICS background check system to anyone selling a gun- this would give private individuals the same assurances as sales through an FFL have; without having to ban gun shows. (it's not actually a gun show loophole, it's a private sale loophole; if you believe that any loophole exists)

Suggestions have also been floated about an opt-out FOID scheme for those allowed to own guns, which many here support.

The mental health history issue is more tricky. Where exactly is the line? Sure, if you're a paranoid schizophrenic, you maybe shouldn't be able to buy a gun. But what if you've been medicated/treated on a long term basis? What about depression? Is it anyone's business if I had a depressive episode ten years ago (so there is, somewhere, a document connecting me with the diagnosis of depression) but went to counseling, worked some things out, and have been fine ever since? Who gets to draw the line?

Also, regardless of diagnosis, if you preemptively bar folks from buying guns who have not committed any crime or violent act, what happened to innocent until proven guilty?

I think you hit the nail on the head with your assessment of the problem with the American psyche. I'd suggest that education and employment are two of the biggest areas we as a nation could improve upon in order to address the root causes of this violence. Oh- improved mental health care as well.

My personal favorite is....crack down on illegal gun possession and use. These charges are dropped/reduced at an alarming rate. If it were up to me, illegal possession of a firearm would get you ten years, or add ten years on to your sentence, to be served consecutively and not concurrently. Use of a firearm without causing death would get you 20, and if you kill someone- intentionally or accidentally- you're in for life, period. I believe that would have a HUGE impact on the number of criminals who carried and used guns.

Anyhow, sorry for the book-length rambling post. :)

[Artie Bucco]

69. Spot on

This case is tragic no doubt, but for every high profile workplace or school shooting dozens of people in the inner city are shot and killed. Gun control won't help the inner city but programs to fight poverty and a culture of violence that are prevalent in the inner city will do much more than any form of gun control.

http://www.alternet.org/story/24796/?page=1 Mark Ames writes what I think is one of the best analysis of workplace shootings, which were born out of Reaganomics.

[Randall Flagg]

72. In response to the British system you asked about,

Yes. No handguns except by special permit. This would never happen here, and having heard the "but then only criminals would have handguns" I would postulate that in a matter of time, that would end due to attrition and the availability of handguns on the street would steadily dwindle as time passes. This would (most likely) have an impact on armed robberies as it's not that easy to conceal a long rifle.

On the question of mental health issues, I would imagine there would have to be laws written in volume to address this. I would consider recent depression a flag. Folks who have been using psychopharmaceuticals have been known to stop their medication with disasterous results.

For most, guns are a hobby and that is what they are used for. A 12 gauge shotgun makes for excellent home defense and skeet shooting, duck hunting etc. is a source of great fun and relaxation for many. I'm all for that. But in my opinion only, the penchant for exotic weaponry that so many here in the States have is of concern. Just as I would be concerned with some kid collecting marshal arts weaponry out the kazoo with only Bruce Lee films as training. (Sorry, I'm rambling)

We agree on this: The laws could stand to be harsher and enforcement should be kicked up at least a few notches.

[burrfoot]

100. We do indeed agree on a couple of things :)

I would be fine, personally, with handgun ownership requiring a training course, although I don't think it's likely.

The thing with the exotic weaponry, though, is that it functions, in almost every case, exactly like non-exotic weaponry. It is really, truly cosmetic differences and not functional ones.

The only point I can see about this argument- and I don't agree with it personally, but at least it's rational ;) - is arguing for a ban on high capacity magazines. Again, I don't think they're the problem, but at least they are a genuine, significant difference between a "hunting" rifle and a so-called "assault rifle."

FWIW, your point about the attrition of handguns on the street is valid, but the timeline is huge- guns are very, very durable. I fully expect that the guns I own will still be in perfect working order long after I shuffle off this mortal coil O8)

Also, I think it's legitimate to point out that we as a country don't have a great track record with stopping the smuggling / home production of objects that we wish to prohibit. I honestly do believe that if we took EVERY single gun out of the hands of every single person in this country, it'd be only a short time before firearms were just as profitable an import as illegal drugs are.

On that note- let's at least slam the cell door on the fuckers who are using the existing guns illegally, and see where that gets us.

[Pavulon]

89. Canada is a great comparison

access to mental health care. This story is news drama, 50% of gun death is suicide. Does not make news.

Then you have drug laws that are responsible for violence.

Random violence is pretty rare.

Root cause is your friend.

[SteveM]

66. Actually, he might be able to on the black market. Prohibition, y'know? (nt)

[onehandle]

40. Cue the Gungeon brigade to argue what an Assault Rifle is.

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[slackmaster]

44. Here you go...

[onehandle]

52. Nice try.

I'm almost positive that last one is a car.

[burrfoot]

46. Cue the insulting, content-less one liner

that makes people laugh at you rather than attempt rational dialog.


:rofl:

[SteveM]

68. And the gun-control lobby to intentionally confuse what they want to ban...

But prohibition is like that, no? What else do you want to prohibit? I'll try to be on cue to correct you there, as well.

[Pavulon]

90. Anything a moron calls it, that is why it is a bamboozle joke.

it is a fake term made up for morons for the consumption of bigger morons. The 90's are gone, so is reactive gun control. Enforce laws on books, fix system of drug laws and lack of mental health care. Root cause.

You know why this shit does not happen very often in switzerland, canada, or other similar cultures.

[Bozita]

41. Rumsfeld sat on the board of ABB for a decade. ABB sold nuclear stuff to North Korea, iirc.

[SteveM]

70. You should see how Diane Feinstein's hubby made his millions...

off of contracts in the Iraq War. All this while DiFi goes around trying to ban guns. Irony to fill a foundry.

[spinbaby]

47. Seven shot, two killed

According to CNN.

[RamboLiberal]

49. Suspect in deadly St. Louis workplace shooting was suing company over retirement losses

ST. LOUIS (AP) — The man police say opened fire at a St. Louis maker of transformers carried out the shooting while his federal lawsuit against the company over retirement losses was unfolding in Kansas City.

Fifty-one-year-old Timothy Hendron of Webster Groves has been identified as the suspect in the Thursday morning shooting an ABB plant in north St. Louis.

Authorities say three people were killed and five are wounded. Hendron's medical status is not immediately known.

Hendron and other ABB workers sued ABB in 2006, accusing the company and its pension-review committee of causing their 401(k) accounts to include investment options with "unreasonable and excessive" — and undisclosed — fees and expenses.

The trial began Tuesday in Kansas City and is expected to take at least three weeks.


http://www.fox2now.com/news/sns-ap-mo--businessshooting-lawsuit,0,1212320.story

I'm surprised we don't get more of these the way many companies have screwed over employees. And no, this is not a justification to pick up a gun and murder people.

[Bozita]

54. I doubt we'll be hearing much on this in the MSM. Trial starts on Tuesday. Shooting on Thursday.

Good find!

[RamboLiberal]

50. ABB Standoff ends with gunman's apparent suicide

Within the last hour, the assembly line worker who opened fire at ABB in north St. Louis, apparently took his own life, ending the standoff with police that began this morning with shots fired around 6:30 at the power manufacturing plant at Semple and Bircher. At least seven people were shot, three are dead. The fatalities may include the gunman. More information as it becomes available.

http://www.kmox.com/URGENT--ABB-Standoff-ends-with-gunman-s-apparent-s/6060382

[proteus_lives]

67. Tragic.

But the comments here are expected.

People blame tools when they're too lazy or scared to tackle the real problems.

[michreject]

71. Missouri should have passed a law

That didn't allow guns on company property. That would have stopped him. :sarcasm:

[Odin2005]

116. Leave it to the anti-gun nuts to use this tragady to push their authoritarian agenda.

:puke: