No shock there. He was also following various "resistance" group pages (Iraqi, Syrian, etc.) on Facebook. This gentleman, as I've said before, was a ticking time bomb that nobody -- but NOBODY -- tried to defuse.
This guy does a pretty comprehensive job of dissecting some of the information being put out about the shooter.
I have steadfastly stated that Australia shows us gun control does not reduce mass killings.
A lie steadfastly stated is still a lie. You are lying.
Accurate statistics are readily available. They clearly show that in Australia gun control did reduce mass killings.
Take a look at Australian Institute of Criminology figures. Or Australian Bureau of Statistics. Look at the many studies by Australian universities. Even indulge your parochialism and just look at this Harvard University study (which also reviews other studies):
tldr: the years following gun reform in Australia saw the largest % drop in homicides in a century. "there is no evidence of substitution for suicides or homicides" "The NFA (National Firearms Agreement) seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved."
Perhaps he was mentally and he could have had ties to the great spaghetti monster under the right circumstances
#1 just reporting what I'm seeing so don't shoot the messenger, or have a hissy fit. #2 You bet your twisted panties his ties will be important in the days to come from both the left and the right.
ETA - gun control has been discussed , not enforcing existing laws has been discussed, mental health has been discussed, Australia has been discussed, etc. etc. etc. why shouldn't his affiliations be discussed?
those of us who support gun ownership DO propose solutions, or at least steps that could be taken.
i, unfortunately, reluctantly, see this is somewhat akin to auto emissions, where we need to make hard choices that impact owners of vehicles that were purchased without any sense that this purchase would be rendered useless in the future. i think that we need to sunset guns, all guns, of every type, that aren't electronically keyed to their owners. we need to tighten who can buy a gun; we need to throttle the right of gun ownership just as we do the right to vote or to travel freely; we need to sunset certain classes of guns; and we need to phase over time all currently guns that aren't keyed to their owners.
if we don't do this, or something very much like it, then, we're at, what, school shooting number 18 this year, as of feb 15? i am beyond certain that you are every bit as aghast, disgusted, saddened as i am about it. but, like the opioid thing, you can't have society pulling in one direction and industry and politics in another. we have to stop this nonsense about needing an arsenal to protect you from your own country; and we need to shine the light on politicians who stay silent regardless of the magnitude of the atrocity for fear of what happens at the ballot box or to their war chests.
when the zeitgeist on this turns, it's going to turn hard, guys like paul ryan are going to feel a whole lot like harvey weinstein feels. Dan Empfield aka Slowman
I have steadfastly stated that Australia shows us gun control does not reduce mass killings.
A lie steadfastly stated is still a lie. You are lying.
Accurate statistics are readily available. They clearly show that in Australia gun control did reduce mass killings.
Take a look at Australian Institute of Criminology figures. Or Australian Bureau of Statistics. Look at the many studies by Australian universities. Even indulge your parochialism and just look at this Harvard University study (which also reviews other studies):
tldr: the years following gun reform in Australia saw the largest % drop in homicides in a century. "there is no evidence of substitution for suicides or homicides" "The NFA (National Firearms Agreement) seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved."
I don't even know how JSA came to that conclusion..
I can't recall a single mass shooting at a school in Australia. If you look at the mass killings on Wiki, most of the recent ones are mass family murder.
Slowman wrote:
we're at, what, school shooting number 18 this year, as of feb 15?
Really ? People want to bring Australia into this and that is how many shootings you've had this year, that kind of statistic is hard to comprehend as it just doesn't happen here.
Only part way through this, but as someone said prior to your posts, stop using the shooters name and just refer to them as an anonymous being or use a derogatory term.
You sir, are giving these people the infamy they crave.
I've been slipping in and out on that one with this fellow. Sometimes, I've been calling him by his name and sometimes just "the shooter." But I absolutely agree that the one thing this guy craves is the infamy and notoriety. No more names now.
In fairness I’ve been guilty of this previously with Sandy Hook.
Ever notice when someone is giving a press conference they always have a group of people standing behind them even if their not going to talk.
And most of the time they can't comment on anything since they are under investigation. I always wondered what the point is of calling a press conference, gathering a group of people to stand behind you, get all the cameras set up and then say essentially nothing.
I have steadfastly stated that Australia shows us gun control does not reduce mass killings.
A lie steadfastly stated is still a lie. You are lying.
Accurate statistics are readily available. They clearly show that in Australia gun control did reduce mass killings.
Take a look at Australian Institute of Criminology figures. Or Australian Bureau of Statistics. Look at the many studies by Australian universities. Even indulge your parochialism and just look at this Harvard University study (which also reviews other studies):
tldr: the years following gun reform in Australia saw the largest % drop in homicides in a century. "there is no evidence of substitution for suicides or homicides" "The NFA (National Firearms Agreement) seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved."
Holy shit. You cannot actually be this stupid. If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers
It's unfortunate that on such a serious topic otherwise intelligent people let emotion cloud more rational discussion.
Just like Canadians, Australians watch from afar and just can't understand why there is so much resistance to meaningful change. What precisely is it about American culture drives so much passion? I believe it's rare that anyone's primary position is the taking up arms against a tyrannical government. I suppose it's possible but isn't what drives that side of the debate.
Is America that much more violent than other comparable western countries? Sure if one were in certain 2nd/3rd world countries you'd make that case. Sure women might feel safer carrying a firearm. Sure there are numerous examples where having a firearm has 'saved the day', but are they really needed? Perhaps they are, more than might be if living to the north. But then what does that say about the culture? Is it the glorification of violence? I wonder whether guns are more ingrained because of the number of people who have served in the military and pride in the military power America portrays. So many more people having been exposed to weapons and seeing them as an everyday part of their lives. If you are so used to being around guns then the concept of being without them must be foreign.
I don't get the need for semi-auto/auto weapons (yes there will be ignorant statements on my behalf here). I would think that as a hunter the attraction comes from the accuracy of the shot. The thrill of the one-shot kill. Likewise at a range, what would be the appeal about blasting a bit of paper to shreds in terms of testing your skills? Of course there will always be cases of crazed people needing more than one shot to be stopped, but if not on drugs the thought of just one bullet potentially hitting me would make me stop and think whether trying anything untoward was a good idea.
As an outsider it's easy to ask why people feel the need for guns, more so multiple guns of such firepower. I think much of the (lack of) understanding is from not having been exposed to guns (military training etc). I think that daily exposure is clouding judgement on the real need to own them.
There is no doubt that anything can be used for mass killings. But it's less likely that someone will be as successful or be able to do it with as little planning (explosives vs taking a family firearm). It's pointless bringing up cars because they serve a completely different purpose and in any case into the future autonomous vehicles may make its potential use as a weapon obsolete.
This whole thing is terribly sad. All the smarts in this room can't come together to say enough, let's do something real. The worst kids should have to worry about is getting punched or name called (in itself still horrible), not wondering whether today Timmy is going to come bursting through the doors spraying bullets.
those of us who support gun ownership DO propose solutions, or at least steps that could be taken.
i, unfortunately, reluctantly, see this is somewhat akin to auto emissions, where we need to make hard choices that impact owners of vehicles that were purchased without any sense that this purchase would be rendered useless in the future. i think that we need to sunset guns, all guns, of every type, that aren't electronically keyed to their owners. we need to tighten who can buy a gun; we need to throttle the right of gun ownership just as we do the right to vote or to travel freely; we need to sunset certain classes of guns; and we need to phase over time all currently guns that aren't keyed to their owners.
if we don't do this, or something very much like it, then, we're at, what, school shooting number 18 this year, as of feb 15? i am beyond certain that you are every bit as aghast, disgusted, saddened as i am about it. but, like the opioid thing, you can't have society pulling in one direction and industry and politics in another. we have to stop this nonsense about needing an arsenal to protect you from your own country; and we need to shine the light on politicians who stay silent regardless of the magnitude of the atrocity for fear of what happens at the ballot box or to their war chests.
when the zeitgeist on this turns, it's going to turn hard, guys like paul ryan are going to feel a whole lot like harvey weinstein feels.
Do you really believe that this is even possible in a country with hundreds of millions of guns that are largely unregistered? How will you get people to go through a process that will be expensive and poses significant logistical problems?
3d printers, as they improve and become increasingly common, will make all gun regulations and laws an exercise in futility long before we enact and carry out what you propose.
Why bother with an intelligent response to an unintelligent statement?
Jesus, you just said gun laws are about FEELING safe.
In the next paragraph you're talking about a 120lbs woman having a gun to equalize her disadvantage over a larger predatory male - a male who, unless she is highly trained, hyper vigilant, and lucky in how a struggle/assault occurs, could easily overpower that woman and use that gun against her.
Talk about feeling safer vs being safer.
There are definitely instances when a gun is the be all of self defense you are championing. No argument there. But there are also many (more?) Scenarios where the introduction of a gun results in less safety. A gun in a house hold is more likely to be used against a woman then to be used in her defense.
That was part of my point. Gun control laws are more likely to make you feel safe than to actually be safe. I even mentioned that having the gun made my wife feel safer. However, if Danny Rollings had successfully attacked my wife - she would have been dead. So it wouldn't matter if he killed her with his knife, or if he took her gun and killed - she would have been dead just the same. The gun would have given her some chance to hold him off with superior firepower.
JSA provided a link to a study that showed that people who used a firearm to resist assaults were more successful than those who didn't, so your second point is not entirely accurate. Yes, you can find instances where guns were turned against women or were used against them. However, the CDC report states that they are used more often for defensive uses than offensive.
Are you going to deny my wife the opportunity to defend herself from assault (rape or murder) because someone who is assaulting her *might* hurt her with a gun versus his hands, rope or knife? Do you think she would be any more dead if he killed her with her own gun versus his knife?
I don't even know how JSA came to that conclusion..
That's because he didn't come to a conclusion. He lied. Just like his hero in the White House, he can only make a stupid argument if it is untrammelled by facts.
I don't even know how JSA came to that conclusion..
That's because he didn't come to a conclusion. He lied. Just like his hero in the White House, he can only make a stupid argument if it is untrammelled by facts.
JSA was counting ALL mass homicides. That includes a couple of large arson attacks. His assumption is (I assume) that people denied guns will use other violent means to kill.
Of course if you were a statistician you could probably successfully argue that the extremely low numbers from Australia aren't statistically significant one way or the other. 76 mass homicide deaths in 20+ years...
It also sidesteps the involvement of guns in non-mass homicides, suicides, etc.
Also in UK if you do manage to get a gun licence the police can confiscate your weapons if there are any concerns about behaviour or mental health.
I can understand foreigners utter disgust at American gun laws and regulations. I get it. I don't agree with them, but I get it.
But I feel like I have just as much concern/disgust over the amount of control that people give to their government in other parts of the world. I can't imagine having my freedoms taken from me without significant due process.
I don't even know how JSA came to that conclusion..
That's because he didn't come to a conclusion. He lied. Just like his hero in the White House, he can only make a stupid argument if it is untrammelled by facts.
JSA was counting ALL mass homicides. That includes a couple of large arson attacks. His assumption is (I assume) that people denied guns will use other violent means to kill.
Of course if you were a statistician you could probably successfully argue that the extremely low numbers from Australia aren't statistically significant one way or the other. 76 mass homicide deaths in 20+ years...
It also sidesteps the involvement of guns in non-mass homicides, suicides, etc.
Have nice day!
Right, that is exactly what JSA has been arguing, and what Boner and others have failed to grasp. Gun control advocates like to focus strictly on gun homicides or suicides, and fail to address the overall homicide rate. If you look at it from only the gun homicide perspective, then one comes to the conclusion that strict gun control has an impact on homicide rates. But, that isn’t really true. One need only go to this article:
This shows that despite the gun laws put into place in 1996, there were several years after that with higher homicide rates. There has been a general decline iin Australian homicide rates since 2002, but the same holds true for the US...despite the mass shootings, overall homicide rates have been down dramatically since the 1990s here in the US, without any new gun laws.
Similarly, people like to point out that European countries passed strict gun control laws, and now have lower homicide rates than the US. But the fact is, Europe has *always* had lower homicide rates than the US, even before they adopted strict gun control policies.
People also like to make the claim that less guns will equal less deaths, but even that is not necessarily true. For example, folks like to tout gun suicides as part of the statistics to restrict gun ownership in the US, but Japan as a far higher rate of suicide than the US, despite very restrictive gun laws.
Note that I am pretty much agnostic on the notion of banning high capacity semi-auto rifles. I don’t own one, and I don’t plan on owning one, so a ban would have zero effect on me. But as JSA has stated, we could ban those and confiscate them all tomorrow, and that would have approximately zero net effect on the overall US homicide rate. ___________________________________________________ Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Ever notice when someone is giving a press conference they always have a group of people standing behind them even if their not going to talk.
And most of the time they can't comment on anything since they are under investigation. I always wondered what the point is of calling a press conference, gathering a group of people to stand behind you, get all the cameras set up and then say essentially nothing.
I agree, not just in this situation but all the time on the new when someone is talking they have a group behind them.
You claim that I, acting as a responsible gun owner, should feel shame every time I go to the range as I should? Really? Then fuck you.
But I did not claim that. Read that obscene statement again. I claimed that strong 2A supporters (not all of whom I'm sure take their responsibility as seriously as some, like yourself, do) should absolutely have the aftermath of this shooting on their minds next time they exercise their rights. With rights come responsibilities. This one being a particularly heavy responsibility, with a heavy cost, and not something to take lightly, IMO.
I think slowman nicely distilled my thoughts when he said something akin to responsible gun owners taking ownership and coming up with solutions to some of the problems that stem from the ability to easily obtain guns.
I like you, man. I have no beef with you and we see eye-to-eye on a lot (most, even) of things. But, you made this comment:
But, I do hope strong 2A advocates at least think of those 17 coffins in the ground next time they go target shooting, as the reality is their freedom is paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people.
You may have been swayed by emotion. You may have made a poor choice with your words. But, you wrote what is written above and that is an obscene statement. Those 17 innocent souls did not die defending any right. Their blood was not shed in furtherance of freedom. They were mowed down by a coward. Their senseless deaths do not, in any manner, pay for the freedom to bear arms. To suggest that responsible gun owners doing what EVERY gun owner should do should think of these senseless killings by a coward every time they go to the range is asinine and obscene.
And don't even try to pretend you were not trying to shame gun owners. You were. Just own it.
You are correct, those 17 innocent souls did not die defending your freedom, but they are absolutely the cost or fallout from you having that freedom, whether you choose to exercise that freedom or not.
I honestly did not mean to shame gun owners, but more to imply some pretty hard, sombre self reflection might be in order. Something beyond the "thoughts and prayers". Because, just maybe, some change is in order. Maybe, just maybe, gun owners can be a reasonable voice in that discussion to temper the ignorant over emotional insanity on the left and right that shout the loudest after these shootings.
I have no beef with people who own a gun. I'm not even anti-gun! I have a hunting trip planned for this summer. My uncles were both hunters, and a lot of people I know own rifles and hunt. I'm not tsk tsking at them. I'm also a big tool guy, and can appreciate them in that respect. [pink] Hell, I own 9 nail guns ;-). [/pink]. Long Chile was a silly place.
Also in UK if you do manage to get a gun licence the police can confiscate your weapons if there are any concerns about behaviour or mental health.
I can understand foreigners utter disgust at American gun laws and regulations. I get it. I don't agree with them, but I get it.
But I feel like I have just as much concern/disgust over the amount of control that people give to their government in other parts of the world. I can't imagine having my freedoms taken from me without significant due process.
I have no problem with Americans wanting a society with a lot of crime in general, and gun crime especially. No one are shocked that Americans shoot each other. I found it pathetic with all the thoughts and prayers.
Everybody knows that more mass shootings will happen. The reason is that this is what Americans want.
Americans do not think these kids have value. So why should I care.
I save my thoughts and prayers for someone that needs it.
Hopefully Trump can make it easier for people to get guns. Then we will see at lot of kids killed while free. That is cool the NRA way.
Right, that is exactly what JSA has been arguing, and what Boner and others have failed to grasp. Gun control advocates like to focus strictly on gun homicides or suicides, and fail to address the overall homicide rate. If you look at it from only the gun homicide perspective, then one comes to the conclusion that strict gun control has an impact on homicide rates. But, that isn’t really true. One need only go to this article:
Now adjust those numbers for the 25% population growth Australia has seen since 1996... And account for the fact that they didn't really ban guns and that there's likely just as many (though probably different classes) as there were in 1996. http://www.abc.net.au/...s-as-in-1996/4463150
So maybe it's been kept steadier than it would otherwise be if they just outright banned them and kept them banned?
Now, guns *do* enjoy a marginal defensive advantage over doing literally nothing to defend yourself (that I'm alive is proof that method works!), therefore we couldn't possibly reign in their use.
Also in UK if you do manage to get a gun licence the police can confiscate your weapons if there are any concerns about behaviour or mental health.
I have no problem with Americans wanting a society with a lot of crime in general, and gun crime especially. No one are shocked that Americans shoot each other. I found it pathetic with all the thoughts and prayers.
Everybody knows that more mass shootings will happen. The reason is that this is what Americans want.
Americans do not think these kids have value. So why should I care.
I save my thoughts and prayers for someone that needs it.
Hopefully Trump can make it easier for people to get guns. Then we will see at lot of kids killed while free. That is cool the NRA way.
