DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Oregon shooting: Gunman dead after college rampage

Apology accepted.

Not surprisingly, almost everyone is missing the boat.

Sad.

It's mostly it is a picture-sharing site. You can also get cool wallpaper (aka desktop) pictures for your computer on it.

No, sorry, it's a sewer from which internet trolls are born. I don't know if I would admit posting on that site if I were you.

He really is a hero. I know if I was shot that many times I'd probably be a goner.

How do you troll a site just getting pictures? I don't think I've ever posted a message on that website to anyone - ever. It's a great website for pictures. I have a cool picture of various foods on my desktop now from there. I'd post it but I don't want to make everyone hungry!

jc

I hate that when I think about these mass shootings that the names and faces of the killers are remembered more readily than the names and faces of the victims. I wish the media would focus on remembering the victims and ignore the killers. Stop giving them the attention they desired.

The names of the victims in Oregon shooting have been released. Lets remember them and not the scumbag that did this.

Link

If you believe that someone who denied their faith in a moment of fear and frustration isn't going to go to heaven, but otherwise believes, then I'm not sure what Christian faith you follow. Do you follow Arminianism?

Actually, I'm not forgetting this. It's the whole crux of my point as to what exactly would be the point of doubting your faith. If you believe that anyone who denies their faith to others will be denied access to heaven, then well heaven is going to have a short list of people. I witnessed dozens of classmates and older people in my congregation growing up who preached Jesus in church but then denied being a Christian to their secular friends. But if that is YOUR belief, then I will agree with you that you shouldn't deny your faith.

If, on the other hand, you believe that denying your faith is forgivable, then why are we saying that someone, who in a moment of fear and doubt, is not a brave person because they told the gunman no? If the concern is disappointing God, then well, you'd know we do that every day according to the Bible... Proclaiming people `brave` in this way does far more to glorify death than it does life. Peter himself denied Christ 3 times, and we tend to remember him pretty dang well. So if he got 3 chances, why can't the folks dealing with a crazed gunman get at least one??

Frankly I don't think the people in that instance would be denying their faith but rather thinking of their loved ones and wanting to come home to them. I think Jesus would want you to use the brain he gave you.

We read the second amendment but ignore the Constitution. If you read that, you'll find that the founding fathers did not trust standing armies, and that Congress isn't even supposed to fund an army for more than two years, although we tend to stick to a single year rule. When soldiers like Swish lost money in the gov't shutdown, it wasn't Democrats playing against Republicans. It was because the founding fathers knew a standing army was dangerous and required congress to "re-up" its use every two years. We've just gotten used to it.

I bring this up because our own boys in the military are the biggest threat to we the people for gun control, not data collection. There are enough army boys to go door to door and confiscate all the weapons they see fit, and even if they don't catch all of them, are YOU going to risk prison time by carrying a 1911 around? Even if you used it in self defense they'd just throw you in jail with the perp (assuming you didn't kill him).

I have 2 handguns chambered in big boy rounds (45ACP + 40) and 2 12 Gauge Shotguns with hundreds of shells and rounds. To gun control advocates I'm a danger and to NRA members I'm a filthy casual I had to do a background check in the great state of Texas and wait 5 minutes to get 3 of the weapons. The fourth was handed down by my great grand pappy. If the army/police came by and confiscated my guns, I'm not even sure I'd want to RISK smuggling the hand me down in case they decided to come back later and double check (warrant or not...)

Perhaps you believe that death is something to be feared? For me, death is a final reward. It's not something I strive for, but when it happens, it won't be something I'm scared of. I am promised eternal life. For those that don't believe in Jesus Christ - I can see how death is the "end".

Kingcob posted a story about Chris Mintz, the Vet who was shot 7 times trying to save people.

This guy is no doubt a hero, as I'm sure there were others that day.

How many lives could he have saved if the law allowed him to carry his own firearm on campus?

People like Mintz are indeed rare, but there are still a lot more of them than these nut jobs who do these shootings. So why do people want to pass more laws that a) won't actually ever prevent a mass shooting and b) prevent good people like Mintz from being able to stop one?

Except it was legal and someone on the campus had a gun.

"The 36-year-old Air Force veteran became the human face of the concealed carry debate by giving numerous network interviews Thursday in which he said that he had his handgun with him on campus that morning but was not in a position to use it — he was locked down in the school's veterans center several hundred yards away from the science hall where the shooting took place."

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/oregon-...hooting-n437966

lol get a new meme for retort other than allowing kids to bring a firearm to their colleges.

So if absolutely nothing happens with guns is there any chance to ban murder?

My post had nothing to do with standing armies, it was about the armed citizen which the Founders supported over having a standing army.
Focus on History and the Constitution and stop twisting what was said into something completely unrelated.

I can't understand this glory of death you speak of. I have family members who won't see loved ones because "they will see them eventually in heaven." It's not rewarding, it's sad. They better hope this one religion out of the 5000 on this earth are right, because otherwise they lost an opportunity.

You can't throw nonbelief in Jesus my way either because I accepted him in my heart at a young age and unless Arminian apostasy is real in Christianity, it doesn't matter what I do or say. I'm going to "your" heaven But after witnessing the cruel mistreatment and abuse of the "Christian" faith, you can have it. I'm not going to sit around and judge people and wait for my reward of death. I'll make this life the best I can and not settle thank you very much

We in America learn, at the very beginning of Human life that killing is an answer and solution to Economic and Social problems we face in our lives.

Blaming Guns for our woes is like blaming abortion doctors for abortion. Eliminating the doctors will not eliminate societies willingness to kill its own.
We live in a Culture of Death.

Did you read anything past that or were you too hurried to go NUH UH that you ignored my post and hit Reply? My next SENTENCE after your quote of me was:



Now I'll help you out here. When someone says "I bring this up," it's to tie in a prior seemingly unrelated statement to the conversation at hand. According to freedictionary.com, It's a phrasal verb meaning "To introduce into discussion; mention." I then illustrated that due to the police/military state we have, the Government already has the power to confiscate weapons from almost all law abiding americans. That was all. If you've bought a gun outside of a private sale there is already a paper trail on you.

So, now that you know that, perhaps you'll not jump the gun next time (no pun intended.) Thank you

I value your input on matters, DevilDawg, and look forward to hearing it, but in this instance, the answer to your question is "whatever actually happened". Mintz was freely allowed to pack that day. The school he was at, and the state he was in, did not restrict him from carrying a firearm. The campus was not a gun free zone.

Precisely. Without even getting into the fear mongering peddled by news organizations, just peruse the list of America's most watched scripted television. Law & Order, CSI, NCIS, etc. Watch the next USA network marathon of those shows and tell me you don't come away with an icky feeling that you're a victim, the world is a terrible place filled with monsters, and you need to arm yourself and proactively fight the good fight. And that's without including the divisiveness of biased news sources "Us v. Them" reporting. We're an extremely paranoid culture, and it's not by accident.

Yeah, I was finally able to check out the link that CHS posted... I humbly take back my ASSumption

I will re-iterate (even though it doesn't fit this particular scenario, it does fit many others) my premise that many of these laws actually restrict good, capable people from having the means to end these kinds of situations.

It's a pretty good idea in theory, but it rarely works. I remember a few years ago when the example of 'the more guns means there was less gun crime comparatively' argument was the wild west. However, as it turns out, the wild west had some of the strictest gun control in the United States. As a result these comparisons died.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/23...r-then-than-now

Honestly, this is where pro-gun control groups have the argument. They're just right. However, it's still slightly missing the point. The founding fathers knew that guns were dangerous obviously. However, they knew the need for guns against the government. That is why we have the second amendment. That's why we need to preserve the second amendment.

And in the current atmosphere, Congress yesterday extended the ban prohibiting the CDC from studying the health effects of gun violence......

Good work - it would be scary if we had data when we attempted to confront difficult problems like this...

Well, the Wild West argument was often used to paint a picture that bullets would be slinging everywhere all the time. I've even seen the argument that people shouldn't be able to carry in a movie theater because IF some guy starts shooting up the place, they would "at least know which way to duck".

Plus, the Wild West was just stricter period! People hung for stealing horses!

My concern is that so often people try to create as big a "gun free zone" as possible. Gun free zones don't actually do anything to protect you, they just give the illusion of security. Its the same with a school posting its a "drug free zone"... kids are still smoking a doobie behind the bleachers.

Now admittedly, my view on carrying all sorts of places is going to be biased. As a cop there are many more places that I am legally allowed to carry off duty than the citizen with a CCW. I don't think its necessarily fair, but I won't restrict myself out of solidarity.

Simplifying the situation to a blaming guns statement is sort of like simplifying abortion with a total redefinition of viability as the moment of conception.

To pretend a concern for life when you're unwilling to consider all aspects of these situations means you have no real concern for actual, walk around the earth children who have parents, family, friends and a goal for a future.

Under no definition does this behavior show a pro-life conviction.

If you are refusing to consider guns as an element of shooting sprees then you willingly have the blood of thousands of murdered children on your hands.

Sounds like a waste of money to me. It's pretty obvious gun violence is extremely adverse to your health.

To Vers comment that many posters are missing the point-this is true. In this instance, this was a heart problem. This person had no character and took out his frustrations on innocent people.

I didn't post that. I posted this...

Quote:
We in America learn, at the very beginning of Human life that killing is an answer and solution to Economic and Social problems we face in our lives.

Blaming Guns for our woes is like blaming abortion doctors for abortion. Eliminating the doctors will not eliminate societies willingness to kill its own.
We live in a Culture of Death.

As do you weiner...

Only when you refuse to accept a lack of viability Ted.

You and yours will grasp that straw to happily punish women while simultaneously refusing to even consider guns in a shooting spree.

I'm happy with my hands Ted.

Are you happy with yours?

That's because you view "gun free zones" as a finality, when it's more of a stop gap. Gun free zones work. Europe can be considered a gigantic gun free zone.

An interesting study would be to consider how many homicides occur within gun free zones opposed to places where guns are allowed. I'm sure with just the selectivity of where they operate their rate would be naturally lower than the rate of gun violence where guns are not restricted. Still would be interesting.

Very much so. Guns don't use themselves. I have no problem with requiring background checks that keep guns out of the hands of truly mentally ill people. If you're on medicine (or should be but aren't taking it) that helps you with your grasp of reality, it needs to be on record and illegal for you to obtain a firearm and illegal for a gun shop to sell one to you.
How exactly is asking for responsible behavior 'punishment'?
You and yours have done nothing but keep the lower classes in your pockets since the 60's.
Your party has done nothing I can point to to create genuine opportunity for anyone.
You and yours have promoted a culture of no responsibility/consequence with your culture of death since the 70's.
It's been people who think like you and yours that have created the nanny state-soccer mom-my kid gets a trophy for showing up rather than achieving something that led to a low class wimp like this not having the conviction to look himself in the face and change what he saw rather than do what he did.
Dr. Frankenstein would be horrified by what is going on today.

I'm not trying to be purposefully antagonistic when I ask this, so I apologize if it has that tone... but would you mind explaining why/how in your opinion gun free zones work? For example: if I go to a school or the movies and I see a posted sign that says "Gun Free Zone" why should I feel safer in there than I did, in say the parking lot across the street?

Currently in my state, when I'm off duty, there are some gun free zones that I can still carry in, like a school. If I go to see my kid's school play, and I carry, how does this mean that the other parents and kids are now at a risk of being a victim?

As for studies... I haven't had a chance to really look to verify this, but I've seen this pop up more than a few times in a variety of places: per capita the U.S. ranks near the top in the world for incidents of gun violence... but if you take out the top 3 or 4 U.S. cities with the highest rates of gun violence (and strictest gun control), the rest of the country actually comes in near the bottom.

Again, I don't know how true this is, but I think the premise has some merit.

I ain't gonna get in to the abortion stuff (at least on this thread), but I wold like to comment on the "conservative culture of death" as it pertains to guns.

When people talk about gun culture, typically those who are anti-gun/pro-gun more gun control, they overlook the fact there is no one singular "culture". I'd put forth that there are at least 2 distinct gun cultures in America.

The first would include groups such as the NRA. You and I may differ on our beliefs as to what defines "responsible", but the NRA has historically promoted responsible gun ownership, referencing the history of our country and through promotion of firearms safety, hunting, etc This also includes people who choose to carry a firearm with them "just in case". Whether its going to the movies or standing guard against a tyrannical gov't, this group believes that a firearm is a reactionary/defensive means to an ends.

the second group is virtually the opposite, and are the ones who are primarily responsible for the bulk of the gun related violence. This includes mass shooters, sane and insane. It includes gang (black, hispanic, motorcycle, etc) and intercity violence, shootings, robberies, etc as well as the homicide that isn't related to anything outside of the people directly involved. This group actively uses a firearm to achieve their ends.


These are 2 strikingly distinct, and diametrically opposed groups.

I read something a little while back that talked about there being about 500 homicides in I think it was Chicago back in 2012 or 2013. Like 99.99% of the victims were killed with a gun. What floored me about the article was that it also stated in the same time period, nearly 2,000 people had been shot and lived.

There's no way of knowing, but I'd say its reasonable to believe that only a tiny fraction of those shootings were done where the trigger was pulled in self defense i.e. you're breaking in to my house. The majority that were done with ill intent? How many of those criminals would fall under the first culture I outlined? How many the second?

as stated earlier in this thread, I've never been against private ownership of guns by responsible individuals. Not all gun owners are. Just like not all drivers are responsible.

I do feel I should question the need for automatic weapons or weapons that can be converted easily to automatic but hey, I put a bunch of stuff on my sports car that wasn't needed also so who am I to question it really.

Better background checks are important. Not sure that's a for sure "FIX". But it's better than doing nothing until someone comes up with a reasonable better solution.

But that's the dangerous line of reasoning right here. If you believe that background checks can and should be more thorough, I think that is a fair and reasonable discussion that can be had. But it has to be a very specific and well thought out discussion.

-What kind of information should be included?
-How much privacy are people expected to give up?
-What kind of protections do I have from someone's subjective belief I shouldn't have a gun vs. an objective conclusion?
-Millions of people deal with some form of "mental illness" daily, and manage it successfully. Should they still be denied a basic Right?
-Let's say I have a family member pass and as a result I experience a low level of depression (not suicidal). Should I not be allowed to have a gun? If not, and you take it away, is there a reasonable process for me to get it back?

I'm not asking these questions directly to you... I'm just posting them as examples of what are some things that would have to be discussed.

Sometimes in life, the reality is that there isn't always something you can do, or that could have been done to prevent a tragedy.

I understand what you're saying DevilDawg and I think all of what you is valid and needs to be discussed when considering this issue, but even with both of your groups there is still an issue with availability, and like you, I'm not against gun ownership. The number of guns does concern me.

My debate with Ted was in response to those who believe a discussion is settled by accusing someone is promoting a culture of death because of their point of view on an extremely controversial issue. The problem is not seeing all aspects of what could be considered a culture of death.

I think your points are level headed and avoid simplicity.

Like the Ball player who tries to make an easy catch look hard, once again you talk down on simple solutions and try to make everything difficult.
If you would have listened to me years ago and placed an armed guard at each school entrance, most of these shootings would not have been successful.
Trouble is you are against guns so wisely adding more guns in the hands of the right people just ruffles your feathers.

I am a Christian, and basically a moderate Arminian. No, I don't think this would be an unpardonable sin, but I think one of the problems with much of what is called Christianity today is that think too much along the lines of "would a person be forgiven for doing this"? Of course God forgives sins freely, but the thought should be that we love God so much that we could not imagine denying Him, either in word or deed.

This coming from a man who knows that when I volitionally act in a way inconsistent with what I believe (ie sin willfully), I am basically denying God in action already...

If Christians denying their faith was the norm, Christianity would have never survived. Yet Jesus said "upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

If we are founded upon the ROCK (which is Christ, not a church, denomination, or a doctrine), we will not only be ready to die for Christ but we will also be ready to LIVE for Him.

May God grant grace, strength, and comfort to the families of the ones who were tragically killed and healing for the wounded.

So........it's still all about gun control and religion? No consideration of the ingrained hate and what we are teaching our troubled youths by not holding them accountable?

Is there anyone out there..........