DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Assailant with bow and arrows kills 5 people in Norway

https://apnews.com/article/oslo-norway-b...p;utm_medium=AP

We need to ban assault bows right now!

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) — A man armed with a bow fired arrows at shoppers in a small Norwegian town Wednesday, killing five people before he was arrested, authorities said.

The police chief in the community of Kongsberg, near the capital of Oslo, said there was “a confrontation” between officers and the assailant, but he did not elaborate. Two other people were wounded and hospitalized in intensive care, including an officer who was off duty and inside the shop where the attack took place, police said.

“The man who carried out the act has been arrested by the police, and there is no active search for more people. Based on the information we have, there is one person behind this,” Police Chief Oeyving Aas said.

Acting Prime Minister Erna Solberg described the attack as “gruesome” and said it was too early to speculate on a motive. The prime minister-designate, Jonas Gahr Stoere, who is expected to take office Thursday, called the assault “a cruel and brutal act” in comments to Norwegian news agency NTB.

Police were alerted to the attack around 6:15 p.m. and arrested the suspect about 30 minutes later. The community of some 26,000 inhabitants is about 66 kilometers (41 miles) southwest of Oslo.

According to police, the suspect walked around downtown Kongsberg shooting arrows. Aas declined to comment on reports that the man used a crossbow, saying only there were “several crime scenes.”

The man has not been questioned yet, Aas said.

Norway’s domestic security agency PST was informed of the assault.

Town officials invited people who were affected by the attack and their relatives to gather for support at a local hotel.

Mass killings are rare in Norway. The country’s worst peacetime slaughter was on July 22, 2011, when right-wing extremist Anders Breivik set off a bomb in the capital of Oslo, killing eight people. Then he headed to tiny Utoya Island, where he stalked the mostly teen members of the Labor Party’s youth wing and killed another 69 victims.

Breivik was sentenced to 21 years in prison, the maximum under Norwegian law, but his term can be extended as long as he’s considered a danger to society.

Oh for crying out loud. How many people are killed in a mass shooting using a Bow and Arrow? Comparing them is just silly.

Besides, most of us don't want to ban all weapons.. we simply want to make sure those that have issues don't get them.

You're completely missing, or deliberately ignoring, the point that those that have issues don't care what the weapon is, they're going to do what they're going to do.

Comparing them is NOT silly. It's an entirely valid point and comparison; just because people don't do it as often is immaterial. Why? Because if we look at rates of how often something happens, then you MUST look at rates of legal gun owners committing mass shootings.

So, people don't often get killed in a mass shooting by a bow?
Well, comparatively, based on number of guns owned, people get killed just as infrequently in a mass shooting by any sort of gun, much less a legally owned one.

It's the same as Great Britain with knives... take the guns, and you're not getting rid of anything but people legally owning guns. The murders will continue because PEOPLE are the problem, not the tool they choose.

That sounds fine and well in theory. And I'm not some anti gun nut. All one has to do is compare America to any nation that does have strict gun laws and compare the murder rate.

America rates fourth in the entire world in per capita murders. What guns do is make killing less personal, easier. Trying to claim that it's the tool not the murders do not line up with the numbers.

People are the problem, yes, but the issue is also that guns enable to kill many more people, and much more quickly. I am not for banning all guns or anything of the sorts. I grew up around guns, hunted when I was younger, and was taught the right way to handle them. I think there needs to more strict check and applications to get certain guns.

Just a question:

What do you think would happen with people with murder in their hearts if all the guns were taken away? Would they just stop? Or .... would they find another way to commit the murder, or robbery, or whatever, with a different weapon?

People will kill each other. Been that way since there have been people. What I am saying is, guns make it much easier, and much more efficient, for ANYBODY to kill someone. You don't need special training to kill someone with a gun, especially in a situation when the majority has a reasonable expectation of safety, such a schools, movie theaters, etc. that have been prominent in shootings. Training helps, but with enough rounds and a plan, most people could take out quite a few people. Knives, and even bows, CAN kill people for sure, it is just much less time efficient, and more "personal", which can sometimes make it harder for someone to go through with it. It is also much easier for an unarmed person to stop someone with a knife or bow.

99.9% of gun owners are perfectly fine, and should be allowed to own what they have. But I do think having limits and/or better checks in place would help as well.

this is more of the point.

murders murder
suicide bombers use bombs

speaking of which... suicide with a gun is counted as a "gun death" with about 60% of all gun deaths in the USA. If we remove them there are around 12-13000 murders with a gun per year.

a gun is a tools nothing less, nothing more.
people will find alternate tools to complete their goal if a gun is not available as the 5,000 other murderers did.

Some tools are far more efficient than others. Name another "tool" to murder that you can potentially kill 30 people in ten seconds, reload in 5 seconds and then kill another 30 people in ten seconds? Rinse and repeat.... Trying to claim "murderers murder" is true to some extent. But body counts matter. And then there's the fact that it is much easier to pull a trigger than it is to walk up to someone and stab them. Less personal and easier.

More unlocked vehicles get things stolen from them than unlocked vehicles and thieves are still thieves.

Explosives.

By the way, what is the largest, deadliest attack on America? No guns used there. Those lunatics used box cutters to murder a few on the flight, at first, then a total of almost 3000 overall. Why? Because they had dedicated their lives to their cause. Does anyone think that they wouldn't have used something different if they wanted to do the same today? It is easier to be a lunatic murderer than a rational person. Guns are a tool, but only one among many if a person is committed to murder others.

How many people are killed annually by explosives compared to guns? Most murderers aren't "dedicated to a cause".

These are the TOTAL deaths due to explosions in the United States by year...

In 2016 the total was 7

In 2017 it was 16

In 2018 it was 15

In 2019 it was 13

https://www.statista.com/statistics...xplosion-incidents-in-the-united-states/

Death by guns?

Between 2009 and 2018 we have had between close to 11,000 and almost 15,000 homicides by guns.

http://efsgv.org/wp-content/uploads...lysis-of-2018-CDC-Data_February-2020.pdf

Here's the problem with your theory. Often times a murder happens in the moment. In the heat of anger or passion. They aren't some well thought out plot or committed by some raving lunatic. Guns are easy to get and efficient at killing. Other than target practice and a few models of pistols made with long barrels for hunting, can you name any other practical reason for their existence than to kill other people? It seems as though people rarely ever take the time to use explosives in some plot to murder people. But you do you.

this is beyond opinionated. The vast majority of murders happen between people that know each other. If we remove guns, these same people will still know each other and will just use other tools to kill the people they know. Instead of guns, they will use things like poison, cutting brake lines, knives, box cutters, assaut bows, or various blunt force objects or bombs.


If you blame guns... you may as well say that we need to start giving all men hormone therapy to turn them into women because women only commit only 8.4% of all murders.

I agree with you, sort of. We have a violence/crime problem in America that transcends the choice of weapon and it starts with unaddressed hate, rage, neglect, mental illness, poverty, etc.... and we absolutely need to figure out a way to fix it and so far, we are failing miserably at that. From what little bit I know, gun laws in Norway aren't all that different than they are here, except that I believe all guns have to be registered... and Norway, as a country, is very big on hunting and sport shooting so gun ownership (long guns, semi-autos, shot guns, and sport pistols) is fairly common (full auto are illegal). Yet their murder rate is 10x lower than the United States... So it can't all be about the guns... but that's not to say there aren't things we could do to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals in this country that could have a very positive impact...

norway has a population of 5.39 million

North Dakota and Wyoming have the lowest murder rate in the country with 0 (lower than Norway)

same with New Hampshire
Vermont

close to Norway:
Hawaii
Iowa
Maine

It was not opinionated. If what you were saying is true, you would have people that kill people they know using knives to kill each other as they do guns. But you don't. The vast majority of them use guns. There are knives in every kitchen in America. It's because you don't have to get close to someone to kill them with a gun. It's a much less personal way to kill someone. It makes it easier. You don't have to touch them to kill them with a gun. Here's what it boils down to. If what you said was true, the murder rates would be just as high in countries with strict gun control. They're not. If you would have the same murder rates without guns, why is it other nations with strict gun control laws have a much lower murder rate than we do? The numbers do not support your theory.

This is something I learned from Clem and I had never thought about this before. A price is paid for the right to bear arms. We see it in our murder rates verses nations with strict gun control laws. It adds up to a lot of corpses. If that's a price you're willing to pay for your gun rights, so be it. If it's not you'll have to rethink your stance on our gun laws. But make no mistake, either way it's a choice you're making. The numbers don't lie.

So you don't connect that in any way to population density? You put enough distance between people and they don't have any reason to be killing each other.

Where are you getting your figures from? Zero murders in Wyoming? In 2019 there were 14.

In 2020 there were 17.

the effective murder rate was lower than Norway for North Dakota, Wyoming, New Hampshire, and Vermont

but, a few hours ago you said that the reason people kill each other is that

"Here's the problem with your theory. Often times a murder happens in the moment. In the heat of anger or passion." -direct quote from you


you also just said...

"You put enough distance between people and they don't have any reason to be killing each other." - direct quote from you


so, which one is it?

My point is that we don't so much have a gun problem .... we have a hatred, brutality, and violence problem. Too many see other people as unimportant. Too often, violence is seen as a rational, acceptable answer. Until this changes, guns or no guns, we will continue to have a major problem in our society.

Agreed. Plus, the drug/gang problem. Take out gang shootings, take out suicides, then tell me the "murder rate by guns" in the U.S.

that's what I have been trying to get it.

Ironically, the top 5-7 states I listed off, also have or are heavily noted for being some of the most respectful people to their peers/neighbors.

gun deaths and murder rates by guns are different stats.

murder rate by guns in the usa is 4.4 per 100,000 all homicides are 5.8

Population density can certainly be considered a contributing factor, however a country like Japan, has 10x the population density of the United States and still has 15x fewer murders per 100,000 citizens.. so obviously it's not the only contributing factor. As my original post was meant to convey, it's a complex problem with a variety of contributing factors, quantity and access to guns, types of guns available, etc. are only one of those contributing factors.

Even within the murder rate, you can break that down by murder by guns.. but the stat I find more interesting is that the vast majority of murders are personal, people murder people they know for a reason... (that's why most white people are killed by other white people and black people are killed by other black people)... then you have the random killings or "mass killings" where somebody just goes on a killing spree, killing as many people as they can in a short period of time, not really caring who the victims are... and I'm pretty sure the US has far more of those types of killings than the rest of the world..

Why do you have trouble seeing that it's both? You can't murder someone over the phone if they live a long distance away. If you live where the population is sparse, close contact and personal interaction decreases. This isn't complicated. And I'm sure you understand what per capita means. Trying to cherry pick the lowest states with gun murder rates does nothing to detract from the reality. I'm sure if someone broke down any nation they could paint the picture they wanted to paint based on isolated areas. However, that's not an accurate picture of gun deaths in America.

So there are no drugs or gangs in Europe? No suicides either? You see, these exact same factors are counted in with every nation, not just us.

j/c

And just for the record. I support the right to bear arms and gun ownership. There are enough guns in this country for every man, woman and child in America. Our society is so gun centric that our streets are flooded with them. The cat is too far out of the bag for us to ever contain the problem at this point. And it has been that way for quite some time. I see the need for people to own a gun, or in many cases including my own, multiple guns.

The main difference I see between myself and some other posters is I'm not trying to fool myself into believing that the vast amount of guns in our society does not lead to more murders. The statistics are so convincing that I refuse to be in denial about it. Many nations have high suicide rates, gangs, drug problems just like we do in America, yet we rank much higher per capita in gun deaths. It's simply the price that we pay for a gun culture. So while some try and point to our lowest gun death states as some kind of example, that does not reflect the reality of our nation. While some try to blame our social ills, those same social ills plague other nations.

It is what it is. The best argument for gun ownership is factual. Sad but factual. There are so many guns in our society that there is a need to have at least one. It's true you can minimize your risks of being a victim of gun violence by making wise choices of where you decide to go. Going in areas of high crime rates certainly increase your odds of facing gun violence. But people travel and guns travel with them.

So we should make vehicles illegal too because people could drive to other people to kill them?

Population density/sparsity has nothing to do with it... in the top 8 least dense states: murder rates are Alaska has a 5.2 Wisconsin is 4.3 New Mexico is a 7.9 Idaho is a 3.2 Montana is a 3.2 and Nevada is a 3.9

*wyoming/north dakota are on the outside of that.


The vast majority of murders are between two people who know each other. It has never changed and I doublt it ever will.

Vehicles were not created to kill people. As with many foolish comparisons we don't have some huge outbreak of vehicles being used to intentionally murder other Americans. Most all pistols and military style weapons were designed with killing people as their main purpose. Once again you cherry pick which states suit your agenda while ignoring the nation as a whole. Anyone can do that. It's not representative of the actual facts when comparing nations. Since murders are usually between two people, why is our murder rate involving guns, and murder rate in general is so much higher compared to other countries? Aren't murders around the globe usually between two people who know each other? There's only one difference. We have guns everywhere. Guns make murder easier and less personal. You don't have to be up close and look them right in the eye. You don't have to have their actual blood on your hands. This isn't that complicated no matter what depths you stoop to to try and make it so.

Drugs, and gangs. Period.

Just like a lot of other countries. Only our murder rate is much higher. You can make excuses all you like but drugs are a global issue and so are gangs. Actually in many countries gangs are a bigger issue than here in the U.S. You seem to be trying to say that America is some special circumstance here but it's not. The only difference is we have a lot more guns.

jc

wanna know why this is international news? because things like this in Nordic countries are like airplane crashes - it rarely happens.

the fact that anybody is trying to make this about a pro/anti-gun argument is dumb. Switzerland also has a high rate of gun ownership, yet their murder rates aren't anything close to ours, like Norway.

why? one, its because nobody gets to just walk around with their weapon in public like they're trying to be heroes.

two, its because poverty rates are stupidly low in those countries. so you get one offs like this that make international headlines because it just. doesn't. happen.

anybody on this anti/pro gun nonsense: if we implemented the same gun laws from Norway and Switzerland here in America, boy oh boy a lot of you guys would be SCREAMING about socialist commies coming to take your 'rights' away. just stop it already.

Clem said something years ago on this board that stuck with me til this day:

what price are we willing to pay for our freedoms? freedom isn't free, after all.

and i really understand that now. if you're ok with around 20k deaths per year due to anything, from poverty, gang related, or crimes of passion as the price to keep your right to wave your gun around in chipotle and walmart, fine. it goes up another 10k if we include suicides or suicide by cop.

if you're not, well we got two european countries that have a high rate of gun ownership and a low rate of gun deaths to look to as an example.

pick one.