[WideRight05]

Another sicko went on to a college campus in Oregon (Umpqua College) and shot several people. Ten people were killed and several more injured from what I have read.

The shooter has been shot and killed by police. Prior to shooting the people, he asked them what religion they were. He shot anybody who answered "Christian."

[Stardust]

Law enforcement officials identified the gunman Thursday night as Chris Harper Mercer, and said he had three weapons, at least one of them a long gun and the other ones handguns. It was not clear whether he fired them all. The officials said the man lived in the Roseburg area.

They said one witness had told them that Mr. Mercer had asked about people’s religions before he began firing. “He appears to be an angry young man who was very filled with hate,” one law enforcement official said. Investigators are poring over what one official described as “hateful” writings by Mr. Mercer. The F.B.I. has dispatched dozens of agents to assist in the investigation.

Sheriff Hanlin said at a news conference that he would not speak the gunman’s name.

“Let me be very clear, I will not name the shooter,” he said. “I will not give him the credit he probably sought prior to this horrific and cowardly act.”

He also encouraged reporters “not to glorify and create sensationalism for him. He in no way deserves it.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/us/ore....html?_r=0

[AnotherPirateTD]

Always sad to hear of this type of nonsense. I lean more toward arming every citizen oven the age of 18. Thier would be a lot less of this. Guns are illegal in Chicago and yet there has been over 2300 shootings in Chicago since Jan 1 2015. Proven fact that bad people doesn't follow the laws.

[WideRight05]

Always sad to hear of this type of nonsense. I lean more toward arming every citizen oven the age of 18. Thier would be a lot less of this. Guns are illegal in Chicago and yet there has been over 2300 shootings in Chicago since Jan 1 2015. Proven fact that bad people doesn't follow the laws.

Glad to have you on the political forum! Interesting that you mention the shootings in Chicago and you make a good point. I believe there were 50 deaths there last weekend due to violence.

[64SUR]

I don't know the answer to all of these killings...I think we need prayers back in the schools and ten Commandments. We got to do something. :please:

[TheRealThing]

I don't know the answer to all of these killings...I think we need prayers back in the schools and ten Commandments. We got to do something. :please:

Very astute 64. :Clap::Clap:Obama was big on likening himself to a bus driver a while back, so we can use that scenario to analogize the present problem concerning gun violence. Say you wanted to take a bus tour all the way to California, heaven forbid LOL. You get out to I-64 and you notice that the bus driver has turned east bound.

It is obvious to everybody on the bus that they will never see California by traveling eastward. None the less, the driver is adamant that he is right and refuses to listen to the irate passengers. The truth is of course, that the bus is going in the wrong direction, and the bus driver apparently doesn't know what he's doing. That's the thing about self delusion, one can rationalize away all facts and all evidence no matter how overwhelming they might be. Take for instance a statement I heard only yesterday when the President insisted that the states with the strictest gun laws see far less incidents of gun violence. O'Reilly took the President to task on that remark reminding him that his home city of Chicago, which has the strictest gun laws in the country, none the less leads the nation with over 6,000 incidents of gun violence in just the past several years. But, suffice it to say, the United States left the route years ago with the absurd adaptation of 'the separation of Church and state' and have been going in the wrong direction ever since. I mean, what's to scratch our heads about?

When we did that, we abdicated the authority to govern and police ourselves. Which is why our prisons are filled, and our legal system is a mere ghost of it's former self. Nothing is really right or wrong anymore, it is about which lawyer can come up with the most clever argument. As I have said, Rome fell (or declined more accurately) in exactly the same manner. Debate is a poor substitute for the inerrant Word of God if you ask me. We are so rudderless in fact, I wonder if there is so much as one world leader, who could not eat this administration's lunch during negotiations for anything. Added to America's list of social ills, would be the destruction of the foundation of American life, that foundation being the family. It is no coincidence then that Church attendance is way down and infidelity rates are way up. We have become so confused as a society, that one of our political parties makes a living off of ensuring Joe Blow that he and his, will continue to be guaranteed abortion on demand and gay marriage rights. All that to say you're exactly right. When America turned her back on God, she lost her way and her mojo. It is so obvious and so plain to see, no wonder we're watching our society unravel before our eyes.

So, what can we do? Well, how about getting back on the right route and begin to honor the God Who had to but speak this universe into existence?

[ronald reagan]

What is the answer? Its not more guns. Its not less guns. Its not less violence in movies. Its not better trained police. Concealed carry. Gun safety classes. Background checks. etc.

I don't know what the answer is. But I know what its not. Its not more of everything we've tried thus far.

Ronald Reagan said, "All great change in America... starts at the dinner table." The answer may lie behind a plate of momma's mash potatoes, beans, and cornbread. The answer may be in obedience to your parents. And parents who raise their kids to be outstanding citizens.

[AnotherPirateTD]

I agree with the last part of your statement. Get back to mommy's dinners and raising our children with respect for themselves as well as others. Sadly the gov has taken a lot of that ability away from us. As in time out doesn't work for every kid. ( I don't know the answer myself ) but I do know if a person wanting to do something as stupid as shooting people any where for any reason he/she would be so gunho if they knew the odds were that he/she wasn't the only one packing. So as for myself the answer is to be prepared to fire back.

[AnotherPirateTD]

Wouldn't be

[ronald reagan]

I disagree with the idea that someone with a concealed weapon would possibly stop a criminal on a killing spree. There's too many examples to cite, disproving this theory. But the basic idea is that, if a guy wants to kill 20 people, he almost always kills himself, or is killed in a shootout with police. This alone, shows that his goal isn't to stay alive, and would have little fear of Plumber Joe and his .40 concealed weapon. Why would someone who is suicidal/homicidal/effin-crazy --- fear a very remote chance of a random guy with a pistol?

My experience with shooting at and being shot back at includes combat in the streets of Fallujah, Taji, Tarimyah, and Mushada Iraq. I can say with absolute certainty that homicidal maniacs care very little about the weapons that someone else has. We had .50 caliber remote weapons systems on top of each Stryker. 2 - 240B 7.62mm fully automatic weapons, 1 249 5.56mm fully automatic machine gun, 4 m4 semiauto assault rifles, 2 m9 pistols, 2 203 grenade launchers, one mark 19 grenade launcher, 1 shotgun, a few thousand rounds of ammo, 12 frag grenades, 24 automatic smoke/teargas grenade launchers.... and then multiply all of that by 3 (the number of strykers per patrol)... and then add the weapons and systems of about 10 soldiers sitting inside each stryker ready for dismount. Literally, we had the firepower to take over the streets of lexington and kill every person in floyd county. Yet, still.... on a daily basis, men of Islam would attempt to challenge our weaponry. This wasn't concealed weapons. It was big, loud, powerful, deadly, fully automatic, bang bangs....

I don't fear a citizen with a concealed weapon anymore than i fear a criminal with one. I highly doubt that anyone else would either.


Read this please. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...aws-213222 Its called "The Myth of the Good Guy with a Gun". It debunks the myth that having a concealed carry is the answer to stopping these occurances. Oregon's shooting is used as an example. Veterans there had concealed weapons, and knew how to use them. Yet decided not to, out of fear of being targeted by both the gunmen, and police.

Having a gun isn't enough to stop a madman. Using it, is the only thing that will.

[SKINNYPIG]

All good points RR.

Scenario...If the coward in Oregon had been planning this shooting in his area and there were two schools (2miles apart) to choose from, one was a gun free zone which did not allow conceal carry and did not have armed security of any kind and the other was a school that did have armed security and was known to have students and teachers that did carry concealed weapons, which school would he have chosen to get the most out of his cowardly attack?

My bet is that he would do like most predators...take the path of least resistance to his prey. Common sense, right?

[ronald reagan]

I think I just answered that question very clearly. But to expand it further... there is nothing coward about a man with a gun, intent on killing as many people as possible and then killing himself. just as theres nothing coward about a terrorists with an ak47, engaging the patrol I pointed out above. Stupid? Yes. Loser? Absolutely. Coward? Thats dependent upon your definition. He owned 13 guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition. The "gun free zone" school you mentioned likely wasn't picked because it was gun free... it was HIS SCHOOL. The english class he did 99% of his damage, was HIS english class. We will never know why he picked the school and classroom he did, but its fairly safe to say that it didn't influence him that it was a gunfree zone. As the article pointed out, if you read it, multiple military vets and students had guns that day. They just chose not to use them.

I had this conversation the other day with my girlfriend. Having a gun, and using it.. 2 very different things. Using a gun, and using it effectively... even more different. She wants a gun for protection. Yet, she stops in the road to escort turtles across, and cries when she sees a baby deer without its mom nearby. She has never been in a fight. Never fired a gun. And when asked, didn't know what "safety", clips, rounds, or holsters were. Give her a gun, and she's likely a bigger threat than the gunmen was.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't have concealed weapons. I think we should.
I'm not saying that we don't need armed guards. We should.
I'm not even saying that teachers shouldn't be armed. They should if they choose to be.

I'm just saying, more concealed weapons and less gunfree zone schools will not stop this kind of action. Listen, this guy was booted out of the military in 5 weeks of basic training for "failing to conform". He had attempted suicide. Better Mental healthcare and an asylum would have accomplished what the concealed carry's on campus could have if they would have acted. Both could have stopped it.

The rule of thumb is ---- to never point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot. And never shoot at something you don't intend to kill. The vast majority of American's aren't ready or properly equipped mentally to do either. The legal system isn't properly configured to defend those who defend others either.

There is a solution. But yours... isn't it.

[SKINNYPIG]

I think I just answered that question very clearly. But to expand it further... there is nothing coward about a man with a gun, intent on killing as many people as possible and then killing himself. just as theres nothing coward about a terrorists with an ak47, engaging the patrol I pointed out above. Stupid? Yes. Loser? Absolutely. Coward? Thats dependent upon your definition. He owned 13 guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition. The "gun free zone" school you mentioned likely wasn't picked because it was gun free... it was HIS SCHOOL. The english class he did 99% of his damage, was HIS english class. We will never know why he picked the school and classroom he did, but its fairly safe to say that it didn't influence him that it was a gunfree zone. As the article pointed out, if you read it, multiple military vets and students had guns that day. They just chose not to use them.

I had this conversation the other day with my girlfriend. Having a gun, and using it.. 2 very different things. Using a gun, and using it effectively... even more different. She wants a gun for protection. Yet, she stops in the road to escort turtles across, and cries when she sees a baby deer without its mom nearby. She has never been in a fight. Never fired a gun. And when asked, didn't know what "safety", clips, rounds, or holsters were. Give her a gun, and she's likely a bigger threat than the gunmen was.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't have concealed weapons. I think we should.
I'm not saying that we don't need armed guards. We should.
I'm not even saying that teachers shouldn't be armed. They should if they choose to be.

I'm just saying, more concealed weapons and less gunfree zone schools will not stop this kind of action. Listen, this guy was booted out of the military in 5 weeks of basic training for "failing to conform". He had attempted suicide. Better Mental healthcare and an asylum would have accomplished what the concealed carry's on campus could have if they would have acted. Both could have stopped it.

The rule of thumb is ---- to never point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot. And never shoot at something you don't intend to kill. The vast majority of American's aren't ready or properly equipped mentally to do either. The legal system isn't properly configured to defend those who defend others either.

There is a solution. But yours... isn't it.

Didn't realize I offered a solution. My "point" was that predators usually take the path of least resistance. The Oregon killer may not have, but I'm almost certain that if most of these guys wanted some crappie, they'd prefer to shoot them in a barrel than to buy a boat and go fishing.

Nothing will stop this kind of action. Psychiatric evaluations for all won't, Just as every citizen packing heat wouldn't. Some of both "might" save a life or two.

We must be very careful when agreeing to some kind of evaluation determining whether or not our second amendment right is stripped. Who can we trust to do that?

I disagree on the cowardice of these individuals. I believe anyone that shoots defenseless people and then takes his own life to avoid the consequences (on earth) is a coward. Just my opinion.