Jump to content
Patticus

Gun Crime in the USA ~ Shootings and Killings

Recommended Posts

Unsurprisingly, the police investigators think the Sandy Hook shooter was a "deranged gamer".

 

The Sandy Hook shooter, who killed 20 children and six adults during a schoolhouse massacre in Connecticut three months ago, was a "deranged" gamer who specifically targeted the elementary school so as to "outscore" past mass murderers. The report claims the shooter had a spreadsheet detailing the names and number of people killed and the weapons--including their make and model--used in past attacks.

"They don't believe this was just a spreadsheet. They believe it was a score sheet,” the source said. "This was the work of a video gamer, and that it was his intent to put his own name at the very top of that list. They believe that he picked an elementary school because he felt it was a point of least resistance, where he could rack up the greatest number of kills. That’s what (the Connecticut police) believe."

The source further noted that the shooter killed himself during the attack so as not to give away these "points."

"They believe that (the shooter) believed that it was the way to pick up the easiest points. It's why he didn’t want to be killed by law enforcement. In the code of a gamer, even a deranged gamer like this little bastard, if somebody else kills you, they get your points. They believe that's why he killed himself."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"They don't believe this was just a spreadsheet. They believe it was a score sheet,” the source said. "This was the work of a video gamer, and that it was his intent to put his own name at the very top of that list. They believe that he picked an elementary school because he felt it was a point of least resistance, where he could rack up the greatest number of kills. That’s what (the Connecticut police) believe."

 

The source further noted that the shooter killed himself during the attack so as not to give away these "points."

"They believe that (the shooter) believed that it was the way to pick up the easiest points. It's why he didn’t want to be killed by law enforcement. In the code of a gamer, even a deranged gamer like this little bastard, if somebody else kills you, they get your points. They believe that's why he killed himself."

 

The source further noted that the shooter killed himself during the attack so as not to give away these "points."

 

"They believe that (the shooter) believed that it was the way to pick up the easiest points. It's why he didn’t want to be killed by law enforcement. In the code of a gamer, even a deranged gamer like this little bastard, if somebody else kills you, they get your points. They believe that's why he killed himself."

Did they ask the shooter this before he did himself in?

 

Or is it the typical "talk out your ass for a headline" type reporting we get with every damn story of this type. God. Such bullshit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teachers should all have masters degrees in their chosen subjects, subsidized by the government, not be required to hold firearms licences just to teach kids.

 

If they must have firearms in class, then they should be made to receive the very best training to be granted a licence to carry on school grounds.

 

Really it's a case of sad but true; my college recently requested all students take basic active shooter training. Until we get to the root of crime it's increasingly viewed that more precautions might be a better idea.

 

Hopefully it never comes to teachers having to carry sidearms. That just seems... well, scary. Schools already are looking more like prisons with their giant chain link fences and reinforced walls, do we need every teacher to be a policeman as well?

 

I think a much better compromise would be security guards being armed, and thus actually being useful in the event of a serious crisis. Of course we'll need to raise standards; my grandmother found a job as one.

 

 

Oh dear god this again.

 

There are statistics that show the more violent games have become, the lower youth crime has dropped. Kids are spending more time venting their frustration at fictional people than real people, and in my opinion that's a victory for crime control.

 

Fortunately the view video games cause violence is steadily declining; Jack Thompson's complete and utter humiliation is testament enough that even the legal profession's getting tired of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to double post but why the hell do people do this?sleep.png

 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/grandmother-guilty-murdering-teen-grandson-205133098.html#Mt97e3q

 

When having a argument pulling out a gun isn't going to help the person listening to you it just makes things worse and in this case you might kill the one you love.  

Edited by BW199148

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, that's tragic.

 

Now onto the core of the matter:

 

Getting hit ISN'T grounds to shoot someone to death legally. You are only authorised to use force proportional to the threat. People hit eachother all the time. Doesn't make a difference if it's in your home or not; I strongly disbelieve that he had any intention to seriously harm her. And the fact she continued to shoot him even after he was calling emergency services for help, it's overkill.

 

She's deserving of life imprisonment. Doesn't matter if she feels bad, she blatantly violated the law and went from self-defense to flat out brutality. Soldiers get tried for insurance shots, so she has nothing in her favor.

 

As to the political and legal aspects of this: this shows why we really need to make sure people know how self-defense laws work. If you're outside your home you're not permitted to go in and shoot someone who's stealing from it. You're not able to shoot someone for throwing a punch either (and I don't think he punched her, so much as likely gave her a shove; rude on his part yes but not really harmful). Finally, force is only used until the threat has been neutralised; a single gunshot would have done the job. I think he got the picture and was willing to leave her alone, yet she shot him like a dog anyway. There are some very easy to follow ground rules, but apparently they're poorly communicated.

 

This highlights the need to tighten who can get firearms, not the type of firearms available. Yet when Obama issues orders to his various departments to tighten background checks, it's some horrible conspiracy to take away all the guns.

Edited by Ogilvie Maurice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This highlights the need to tighten who can get firearms, not the type of firearms available. Yet when Obama issues orders to his various departments to tighten background checks, it's some horrible conspiracy to take away all the guns.

 

I don't agree Obama knows getting rid and banning guns outright would be a very unpopular move. Of course that would probably never happen anyway the Weapons Industry is huge in America and too many guns are already in circulation that removing them would be an impossible task in itself.

 

Looks like Semi-Automatics aren't getting banned after all probably meaning the AR-15 will remain the mass murders weapon of choice for years to come: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/assault-weapons-ban-dropped-us-gun-bill-220332833.html

 

Despite the futility of this doesn't mean I have to like the US's paranoid culture with guns which I will continue to criticize.dry.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree Obama knows getting rid and banning guns outright would be a very unpopular move. Of course that would probably never happen anyway the Weapons Industry is huge in America and too many guns are already in circulation that removing them would be an impossible task in itself.

 

Reread what I said. I said that Obama was planning to tighten who can get a gun, but the NRA and its associates paint this as some grandiose move to confiscate and ban firearms completely (often with references to how the Nazis confiscated Germany's guns). It's a brilliant spin and it's no surprise it works; when Obama proposed a government insurance agency it was spun as him trying to nationalise all the hospitals, kill people with death panels and limiting the pay of doctors.

 

Looks like Semi-Automatics aren't getting banned after all probably meaning the AR-15 will remain the mass murders weapon of choice for years to come: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/assault-weapons-ban-dropped-us-gun-bill-220332833.html

 

Despite the futility of this doesn't mean I have to like the US's paranoid culture with guns which I will continue to criticize.dry.png

 

Guns are addressing the symptom and not the problem. We need a better psychiatric system, better education on gun safety, and less incentive to commit gun crime overall.

 

If you lock your gun up so you don't have to worry about your bullied child getting ahold of it, if you more harshly punish people who decide bullying is the cool thing to do, if you eliminate the despair that the poorest segments of society have to face, and if you make it hard for someone with clear anger or paranoia issues to get a firearm, you will do FAR more to put a dent in crime than any gun ban.

 

Instead of making it harder for people to be dangerous, make it so they aren't dangerous at all. A person whose family is starving won't care if you have a gun ban; he'll just use a knife (as the UK now knows first hand) to steal from somebody and likely leave that person with intimidation-related psychological problems for a while to come. A guy might not be able to smuggle a gun into his school but he'll try it with a knife or explosive instead; sure it'll cause less deaths but isn't our system built on the ideal that one life lost is still too many?

Edited by Ogilvie Maurice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. One dollar lost is too many.

 

This really is a sad reflection of our society; the moment we see any large startup costs we immediately forsake any long-term gains. We will happily buy clothes from people who are being worked as slaves overseas, so it's logical we're not going to take many steps to try and correct issues at home.

 

The culture of vengeance is what has really scared me. We always view a person who went on a shooting rampage as having been some Satanic demon, rather than accepting they may have had some serious mental health issues that society chose to ignore; yes, what they did is wrong, absolutely, but I think it's incorrect to assume the result is 100% their fault and not partially society's.

 

We prefer reactive justice to proactive justice, by far; the government's more concerned with imprisonment and executions than trying to prevent criminal activities in the first place. For a society that values individuality our healthcare system treats every person as if they were the same in this regard: if you go crazy it's entirely your own fault and not the fault of the system not giving you the care you needed.

 

Really, the focus on the effects of crime rather than the causes of crime is a road to perdition, I think. Do we really care more about deficits than human lives? The University of Texas shooter KNEW there was something wrong with him, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the other mass murderers did as well. We really should look into the underlying sources of such violent behavior, rather than waiting for tragedies to happen over and over.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1414751/table/T1/

 

We have one of the world's highest teen suicide rates. It is obvious our kids are under a LOT of stress. And since we take minimal effort to help, it just means there's a good chance that others will also crack, but take our their frustration on people around them instead.

Edited by Ogilvie Maurice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Semi-Automatics aren't getting banned after all probably meaning the AR-15 will remain the mass murders weapon of choice for years to come: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/assault-weapons-ban-dropped-us-gun-bill-220332833.html

 

How many times does it needed to be pointed out just how meaningless the original assault weapons ban was before it takes in this thread? Which, incidentally, tends to happen when you make up a term to scare people and then define it to suit your own needs; and in that respect the new one was almost identical to the original in concept.

 

 

A rifle isn't any less dangerous when it has a full stock than it is when it has a pistol grip, and acting like it is and you've done some great service to the public for treating them differently only makes it so you don't actually have to do anything of actual importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A rifle isn't any less dangerous when it has a full stock than it is when it has a pistol grip, and acting like it is and you've done some great service to the public for treating them differently only makes it so you don't actually have to do anything of actual importance.

 

Hear, hear. It's good for politicians though, they can claim they're doing something about the problem while merely changing the exact pieces that are on the board. The UK now has an abundance of knife crime due to all its firearm regulations; a lot of good they did to control crime. Sure, the number of actual murders might drop some but let's be honest, if you become so utilitarian as to say losing ten lives is better than a hundred, you're beginning the slippery slope. You become more focused on cutting the number lost rather than eliminating it entirely.

 

Criminal motivation should be addressed, not how a person goes about acting on such urges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 13 month old? Seriously? I keep hoping that eventually all these psychos will eventually just kill themselves (as is the norm for these mass shooters to finish themselves) and die out but they just keep coming all the damn time from whatever rat hole they crawl out of...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make matters worse, the shooters were just a couple of kids. They haven't been caught yet, but it's estimated that they were roughly 11 to 15 years old. And half the comments on CNN are blaming the baby's mother for somehow setting it all up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make matters worse, the shooters were just a couple of kids. They haven't been caught yet, but it's estimated that they were roughly 11 to 15 years old. And half the comments on CNN are blaming the baby's mother for somehow setting it all up.

 

Yeah why whenever something tragic happens in America it is automatically a conspiracy? Why can't some Americans accept that bad shit happens and there is no elaborate sinister evil plot but a senseless crime done by two kids? sleep.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad part is these tragedies happen all the time, it's just they've only gotten media attention in the last few months. Just as eventually stopped hearing about the Arab Spring, we'll eventually stop hearing about this as well. This is the main downside to the media being sensationalist.

 

Nonetheless it's really showing some serious problems with our culture and society that even the youngest of people are getting their hands on firearms and committing crimes with them. It's just ludicrous and I really wish the government actually did something about the vast swath of issues that are causing all this instead of twiddling their thumbs and talking about a slightly tighter regulation here or there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cracked decides to explore some rather interesting things about guns and gun culture in the US.

 

tl;dr: gun ads are completely fucknuts, there's no 'standard' profile for shooters, suicides using guns are far, far more common and are surprisingly split-second decisions for many people (and making it difficult for them to actually off themselves makes them decide not to do it a good deal of the time), Americans are obsessed with the idea of guns but not the reality of using them, and gun crime is... Going down, overall?

 

Huh. Make of that what you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

suicides using guns are far, far more common and are surprisingly split-second decisions for many people (and making it difficult for them to actually off themselves makes them decide not to do it a good deal of the time), 

 

I remember this statistic from my Health class in high school.

 

Basically, it said that women were 3x more likely to attempt suicide than men, but men were far more successful because women generally make use of drugs, whereas men make use of firearms.

 

Though I think it'd be better to do an analysis of what drives one to suicide and go from there. It's already enigmatic what can drive a person to kill another human being, but themselves? Guns may be more useful in spur of the moment suicidal decisions, but why not try and eliminate the suicidal thoughts entirely?

 

As for no standard profile... that is DEFINITELY surprising. There's not one factor that needs to be looked into, but a multitude; it's no wonder we've tried to discover the exact origin of sociopathy in the past. Really it shows the importance for finding ways to eliminate aggressive intentions entirely rather than their means.

 

It raises a good point with how much adding a little inconvenience really can deter people. Let's be honest here, people have a fetish for convenience... so when you make it more convenient to play violent games than go and actually hurt someone, it's no surprise we actually see a drop in violent crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/jim-carrey-backlash-over-gun-law-attack-114442755.html

 

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0433b30576/cold-dead-hand-with-jim-carrey

 

Apparently a 'Funny Or Die' sketch starring Jim Carrey has upset and outraged the NRA and gun owners as well as Fox News. In the sketch Jim Carry performs a song that pocks fun or the deceased Charlton Heston and gun owners where performs a country song with lyrics mocking Charlton Hudson and gun owners. When performing the song Carry is accompanied with his band that feature famous people that were assassinated by guns such as John Lennon, Abraham Lincoln and Mahatma Gandhi.

 

I thought it was pretty funny and I praise Jim and cast for having the balls to do the sketch. 

 

What do you guys think?smile.png

Edited by BW199148

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another case of the far right having absolutely no sense of humor, or ability to laugh at themselves. I thought that it was very funny, and it's about time Heston (not Hudson, or Henson; would you mind sorting your grammar out please, BW?) got more fun poked at him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another case of the far right having absolutely no sense of humor, or ability to laugh at themselves. I thought that it was very funny, and it's about time Heston (not Hudson, or Henson; would you mind sorting your grammar out please, BW?) got more fun poked at him.

 

Fixed. Sorry I spelled it right before I had to type it all out again because I accidentally closed my browser and had to retype it doesn't help that I easily get words mixed up.sleep.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.