(10-09-2015 04:30 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:40 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Hopefully the next one catches one in the head by someone carrying before he can do any damage. They are succeeding is the problem and news channels are making these sick phuqs martyrs by plastering the name and face everywhere. Why do you think these all happen in gun free zones?

They don't. Oregon allows guns on campus and in fact, there were armed students on campus the day of the shooting (Read more ). People sick enough to go on a shooting rampage aren't deterred by guns because they aren't afraid to die.

So why not Times Square? Why is it always a school or a mall or theatre? Why are our children not protected by armed guards? They go to places where people are vulnerable and least likely to be armed. I still think the news should stop showing photos and releasing their names... Just report the incident.

The age, location, motive and psychology of the killer dictates their target, not the presence of guns. Schools, malls, theaters, military bases, recruiting stations, etc.... when someone is unstable enough to carry out this kind of violence they pick targets they are familiar with and sometimes because it will get attention. These types of people are not rational thinkers who think about consequences or the threat of death. That is why so many take their own lives.

Problem is that we can't even talk about any measures to try and keep guns out of their hands because popular opinion is massaged and distorted by social media and special interests. Nobody needs to talk about banning guns, that is never going to happen. Arming every doofus who wants a gun is not a great idea. Posting armed guards (you would need several at each campus) at every school or college in the nation is cost prohibitive to say the least.

Suggesting that the media not name the killer is just nonsense. The press is not going to censor themselves when their livelihood depends on clicks.

You cannot get rid of all the guns in the US. People who are qualified and stable need to be able to protect themselves without turning the Waffle House into the OK Corral. Let the CDC study gun violence and try to make guns as safe as possible. Require reasonable licensing and exclusions to prevent as many unstable people as possible from acquiring guns. Mass shootings are still very rare but domestic violence and accidental shootings of children are not.

We cannot stop this completely but that is a lame excuse for not trying to slow it down at all.

I know what isn't the answer, making it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns. I posted further down about people taking personally responsibility of their loved ones who are mentally ill. It's a whole snowball of everything, people have no value of life anymore. How many far left liberals in Hollywood want heavy gun control yet make millions upon millions of dollars making movies about people not valuing life? How many parents let their kids plays all these wild games for countless hours with a headset on shooting people? It's gonna take a cultural change. A psycho with a chainsaw and a bow and arrow could cause just as much havoc... He could steal a school bus and run it through a crowd. How many Americans are killed from drinking and driving? We gonna take cars away?

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Hopefully the next one catches one in the head by someone carrying before he can do any damage. They are succeeding is the problem and news channels are making these sick phuqs martyrs by plastering the name and face everywhere. Why do you think these all happen in gun free zones?

Texas campuses haven't been "gun free" ever, but legally are no longer "gun free" since September.

(10-09-2015 04:59 PM)CatMom Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:37 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The shooting at Northern Arizona was apparently some dude getting in over his head in a fight with a group of frats and making a bad choice to pull his weapon. Whether or not it was planned or spur of the moment, and whether he was legitimately in fear of his life or just a hot head will come out as time goes by.

But the point is that the press it treating it exactly the same as other shootings where a mentally deranged person pre-planned a massacre to go out in a blaze of glory. It doesn't look quite the same.

The Texas Southern shooting appears to be off-campus in an apartment complex where other shootings have occurred recently. Whether it was gang-related, an armed robbery, a domestic disturbance, or whatever isn't clear yet. But it also does not look like a pre-planned suicidal massacre.

I think the press may be looking for any shooting that occurs on or near a campus regardless of the motivations and piling them onto the "school shooting" pile for ratings/politics.

Regardless, it is a student housing complex. TSU is right next to UH (they share roads) in a bad section of Houston (3rd ward). It doesn't surprise me there have been shootings in the area but it is still, more or less, part of the college. Blodgett St is a border of the U Campus and that complex is actually within the boundaries of TSUs property.

Still doesn't change my point. Is every drug deal that goes bad, or drive-by, next to a campus "another school shooting" in the eyes of the press? It seems like it may be now.

I think I was agreeing with you but just pointing out it was actually an on campus complex.

In Houston, no, it's not news. They didn't broadcast the other shootings the past week or two, why this one? Because of the NAU shooting earlier in the day.

(10-09-2015 05:27 PM)CatMom Wrote:  I think I was agreeing with you but just pointing out it was actually an on campus complex.

In Houston, no, it's not news. They didn't broadcast the other shootings the past week or two, why this one? Because of the NAU shooting earlier in the day.

Yep.

Reminds me of the "shark attack" press frenzy we go through every once in a while. Once you get one that is particularly rough resulting in death then every subsequent shark attack that summer gets national news.

(10-09-2015 04:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:42 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:38 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Hopefully the next one catches one in the head by someone carrying before he can do any damage. They are succeeding is the problem and news channels are making these sick phuqs martyrs by plastering the name and face everywhere. Why do you think these all happen in gun free zones?

They don't. Oregon allows guns on campus and in fact, there were armed students on campus the day of the shooting (Read more ). People sick enough to go on a shooting rampage aren't deterred by guns because they aren't afraid to die.

So you're telling me a psycho was able to carry out that despicable act because relying on untrained kids to get in public shootouts with killers is a bad idea? Shocking...

Um the guys that were armed were military. Anyone who carries a weapon has to be trained to do so. The untrained armed kid was the one who killed everyone.

They were former military...Air Force I believe but enrolled as students at the community college. They chose not to become involved in the situation, which I don't blame them for but I'm just saying, guns don't mean these situations will stop.

I'm a USAF combat veteran and these guys did exactly as they were trained to do. They heard multiple shots in the distance and most likely chose to insure their own and the other students' safety to the best of their ability since they had ZERO idea of how many shooters they would be facing should they have gone on the offensive.

I'd have done the exact same thing under the exact same circumstance.

(10-09-2015 07:50 PM)airtroop Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:42 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:38 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  They don't. Oregon allows guns on campus and in fact, there were armed students on campus the day of the shooting (Read more ). People sick enough to go on a shooting rampage aren't deterred by guns because they aren't afraid to die.

So you're telling me a psycho was able to carry out that despicable act because relying on untrained kids to get in public shootouts with killers is a bad idea? Shocking...

Um the guys that were armed were military. Anyone who carries a weapon has to be trained to do so. The untrained armed kid was the one who killed everyone.

They were former military...Air Force I believe but enrolled as students at the community college. They chose not to become involved in the situation, which I don't blame them for but I'm just saying, guns don't mean these situations will stop.

I'm a USAF combat veteran and these guys did exactly as they were trained to do. They heard multiple shots in the distance and most likely chose to insure their own and the other students' safety to the best of their ability since they had ZERO idea of how many shooters they would be facing should they have gone on the offensive.

I'd have done the exact same thing under the exact same circumstance.

And if the active shooter would have entered their room, he wouldn't have left it was what I was getting at. Not that they become Rambo and chase the guy down. Just to clarify.

(10-09-2015 08:09 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 07:50 PM)airtroop Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:42 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:38 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  So you're telling me a psycho was able to carry out that despicable act because relying on untrained kids to get in public shootouts with killers is a bad idea? Shocking...

Um the guys that were armed were military. Anyone who carries a weapon has to be trained to do so. The untrained armed kid was the one who killed everyone.

They were former military...Air Force I believe but enrolled as students at the community college. They chose not to become involved in the situation, which I don't blame them for but I'm just saying, guns don't mean these situations will stop.

I'm a USAF combat veteran and these guys did exactly as they were trained to do. They heard multiple shots in the distance and most likely chose to insure their own and the other students' safety to the best of their ability since they had ZERO idea of how many shooters they would be facing should they have gone on the offensive.

I'd have done the exact same thing under the exact same circumstance.

And if the active shooter would have entered their room, he wouldn't have left it was what I was getting at. Not that they become Rambo and chase the guy down. Just to clarify.

(10-09-2015 04:29 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:42 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:38 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  They don't. Oregon allows guns on campus and in fact, there were armed students on campus the day of the shooting (Read more ). People sick enough to go on a shooting rampage aren't deterred by guns because they aren't afraid to die.

So you're telling me a psycho was able to carry out that despicable act because relying on untrained kids to get in public shootouts with killers is a bad idea? Shocking...

Um the guys that were armed were military. Anyone who carries a weapon has to be trained to do so. The untrained armed kid was the one who killed everyone.

They were former military...Air Force I believe but enrolled as students at the community college. They chose not to become involved in the situation, which I don't blame them for but I'm just saying, guns don't mean these situations will stop.

I know it isn't the entire answer... But you can't disarm unarmed people anymore than they already are... And that's why politicians piss me off... They see this fitting an agenda instead of really trying to help fix the problem. The guy who took 7 buckets was mitart but unarmed. Another armed forber military was In a different building and the professor would not allow anyone to leave. It's funny all of our presidents are surrounded by secret service for a square mile but we can fence in our schools and have trained guards at the gate to protect our children. Armed guards protecting best buy on Black Friday... But not our kids... It's bullsht

bull****! No professor is going to prevent me from leaving his class if I'm armed and hear gunfire. That's an excuse because the armed student is ashamed they did nothing

Unless you are trained for that situation, I really dont want you running around looking for a fight because that may put many more in danger.
Until mental illness is treated like a disease and not a crime, we will continue to have these issues. Until there is a Congress that is not beholden to the NRA, things like this will continue to happen. The NRA is so entrenched in not having ANY conversations about gun laws that it will take a major shift to get it unstuck. I'm not optimistic that anything will change. If pictures from Newtown, etc , dont start the conversation, we will never have one. And before you start in on me, I'm a longtime gun owner and I dont think that extreme measures are needed but damn, SOMETHING has to change.

(10-10-2015 03:55 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  Unless you are trained for that situation, I really dont want you running around looking for a fight because that may put many more in danger.
Until mental illness is treated like a disease and not a crime, we will continue to have these issues. Until there is a Congress that is not beholden to the NRA, things like this will continue to happen. The NRA is so entrenched in not having ANY conversations about gun laws that it will take a major shift to get it unstuck. I'm not optimistic that anything will change. If pictures from Newtown, etc , dont start the conversation, we will never have one. And before you start in on me, I'm a longtime gun owner and I dont think that extreme measures are needed but damn, SOMETHING has to change.

+1

(10-10-2015 03:33 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:29 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 04:25 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:42 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 03:38 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  So you're telling me a psycho was able to carry out that despicable act because relying on untrained kids to get in public shootouts with killers is a bad idea? Shocking...

Um the guys that were armed were military. Anyone who carries a weapon has to be trained to do so. The untrained armed kid was the one who killed everyone.

They were former military...Air Force I believe but enrolled as students at the community college. They chose not to become involved in the situation, which I don't blame them for but I'm just saying, guns don't mean these situations will stop.

I know it isn't the entire answer... But you can't disarm unarmed people anymore than they already are... And that's why politicians piss me off... They see this fitting an agenda instead of really trying to help fix the problem. The guy who took 7 buckets was mitart but unarmed. Another armed forber military was In a different building and the professor would not allow anyone to leave. It's funny all of our presidents are surrounded by secret service for a square mile but we can fence in our schools and have trained guards at the gate to protect our children. Armed guards protecting best buy on Black Friday... But not our kids... It's bullsht

bull****! No professor is going to prevent me from leaving his class if I'm armed and hear gunfire. That's an excuse because the armed student is ashamed they did nothing

I agree with the first part - no professor is going to prevent ANY armed student from leaving. As for the second part, it's not very nice to assign cowardice to the armed former AF guy(s) when they reacted the way they are trained - which I've already addressed.

While we're at it, let me add another reason to my previous post as to WHY they are trained this way. To leave the unarmed professor and students behind to go "on the hunt" for the gunman/gunmen off in the DISTANCE (remember - there was no way to know how many shooters they would be facing) could ALSO lead to these military veterans to be shot by "friendly fire" (in civilian terms: the PoPo) by ABANDONING their post. Potentially, in their minds, they potentially could be casualties themselves and leave x-number of unarmed students behind to become casualties. It's COMMON SENSE.

PLEASE quit suggesting the former Airmen did anything wrong here... you obviously have never had any military combat training, at least it is obvious to any military person or veteran.

EDIT: Sorry, yes, you have a right to suggest the armed veterans made the wrong move (you're wrong, of course) and that they acted cowardly (you're wrong, of course), but you're not making them look bad, you're making yourself look foolish.

Nothing will be done, at least not in my lifetime.
In order to detect those susceptible to having these kinds of outbursts, you would need constant psychiatric exams. And those affected most likely wouldn't consent to them. You would only be analyzing the mentally fit, safe and responsible gun owners. Even then, there would be no guarantees.

There is no cure for this. It is what it is. And our country isn't alone in this. It's been going on since Cain and Able. Oddly enough, it appears to be human nature.

(10-10-2015 04:27 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  Nothing will be done, at least not in my lifetime.
In order to detect those susceptible to having these kinds of outbursts, you would need constant psychiatric exams. And those affected most likely wouldn't consent to them. You would only be analyzing the mentally fit, safe and responsible gun owners. Even then, there would be no guarantees.

There is no cure for this. It is what it is. And our country isn't alone in this. It's been going on since Cain and Able. Oddly enough, it appears to be human nature.

The only countries that have more gun-related homicides than the US are places like Mexico, Brazil, Russia. And I'm not worried about any country but this one. This is the only one where we might do something about it. I'm not sure what that 'something' is but I think we owe our kids more than a shrug and "it happens". When we stop politicizing it and actually move to do something, it might improve. Scary sh1t

If the media were mandated to stop reporting in depth on these type events they would soon decrease in number. Of course the Democratic party will not allow that to happen. We have become a country steered by the media.

(10-10-2015 05:38 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  The only countries that have more gun-related homicides than the US are places like Mexico, Brazil, Russia. And I'm not worried about any country but this one. This is the only one where we might do something about it. I'm not sure what that 'something' is but I think we owe our kids more than a shrug and "it happens". When we stop politicizing it and actually move to do something, it might improve. Scary sh1t

The government is very restricted in what it can do, it cannot infringe on the individual right to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment is not going away no matter how much certain segments of the population want to wish it away.

When people finally get it through their heads that the 2nd Amendment is NOT going to be repealed then perhaps they can start trying to figure out how to reduce incidents within that framework rather than just screaming for something that will never...ever....happen.

(10-10-2015 07:33 PM)doberman Wrote:  If the media were mandated to stop reporting in depth on these type events they would soon decrease in number. Of course the Democratic party will not allow that to happen. We have become a country steered by the media.

Good thing Fox News is there for the fair and balanced take huh?

There is nothing anyone can do. No matter how much we want to clean up the world for our kids.

When a well educated, upstanding citizen loses it in a moment of insanity/rage....how can anyone predict that?
I know they've linked animal abuse as an indicator, but how many of those cases are identified or even witnessed, before they turn that anger towards people.

Until they can identify a defective gene, they can't even narrow it down.

(10-10-2015 07:54 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-10-2015 05:38 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  The only countries that have more gun-related homicides than the US are places like Mexico, Brazil, Russia. And I'm not worried about any country but this one. This is the only one where we might do something about it. I'm not sure what that 'something' is but I think we owe our kids more than a shrug and "it happens". When we stop politicizing it and actually move to do something, it might improve. Scary sh1t

The government is very restricted in what it can do, it cannot infringe on the individual right to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment is not going away no matter how much certain segments of the population want to wish it away.

When people finally get it through their heads that the 2nd Amendment is NOT going to be repealed then perhaps they can start trying to figure out how to reduce incidents within that framework rather than just screaming for something that will never...ever....happen.

The 2nd Amendment was meant as a protection of the people as a defense against a tyrannical government. Not so some open-carry yahoo can strut into Applebys with an AR15. Again I dont know the answer but it CANT be "oh well. more dead kids but at least I can own a semiautomatic weapon".

The 2nd amendment is a right, Yet the government is trying to turn it into a privilege.
Actually, they've already succeeded in doing so.