Gun Crime in the USA ~ Shootings and Killings

[-Robin-]

Apparently Corkins attended Grace Brethren Christian School, a Christian school with a very stringent anti-gay policy, so Corkins might have become an even bigger enigma than before.

There were also at least ten reported anti-Islam and anti-Sikh attacks during the month of Ramadan recently, with weapons of choice ranging from guns to spray paint cans, paintballs, acid bombs, and pig parts.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Bobbyjosh

[Blue Blood]

Another one, this time by the Empire State Building

Several people were shot Friday near the Empire State Building, one of New York's most popular tourist attractions, police said.

"There are people who were shot near the Empire State Building," a spokeswoman for the police department said.

There were no more immediate details from officials. Local NY1 television reported that three or four people suffered non-life threatening wounds and a gunman had been killed.

Several blocks around the site of the shooting were closed to vehicles, causing rush hour traffic snarls.

[Patticus]

I wonder if it's a hate attack, or simply a nutcase who decided to shoot up lots of people?

Edit: The Onion only went and published this yesterday:

NEW YORK—Cheers filled the streets and American flags waved triumphantly through the air today as the nation turned out in full force to celebrate an entire week having passed since the last time a madman opened fire on innocent civilians in some kind of fatal mass shooting. “We did it, folks! We banded together and managed to go seven whole days without killing our fellow Americans in a senseless murdering spree!” Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said in a speech to jubilant throngs gathered in Times Square. “Yes, some people were shot this week, but not in a random, highly public, viscerally disturbing way and—most importantly—not all in one place, by one psychopath. Maybe one day we can live in a society where abominable large-scale gun violence stays out of the national headlines for a whole month even!” At press time, federal authorities had issued a reminder to all Americans that a lot can happen in 24 hours, “so let’s not get too excited yet.”

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-celebrates-full-week-without-deadly-mass-sh,29293/

XD

Edited August 24, 2012 by Patticus

[Linkabel]

Well according to the AP it seemed to be a work dispute. Hope the link comes out since I'm putting it from my phone:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EMPIRE_STATE_BUILDING_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-08-24-10-26-27

[Patticus]

Meanwhile, in Chicago...

19 people shot in overnight shootings across Chicago

Nineteen people were shot across the South and West sides from Thursday evening through early Friday morning -- 13 of them wounded over a 30-minute period, authorities say.

The overnight shootings peaked between 9:15 p.m. and 9:45 p.m. That's when eight people, many of them teens, were shot at 79th Street and Essex Avenue about 9:30 p.m.

Then two men were wounded in the Ida B. Wells / Darrow Homes complex at about 9:25 p.m., police said. The men, 27 and 33, were shot in the 600 block of East 37th Street and taken to the University of Chicago Hospitals, police said. The younger man was shot in the head and the other in the right arm, Gaines said.

Around the same time, two other men were wounded in the arms in a drive-by shooting in the 2900 block of West 39th Place in the Brighton Park neighborhood.

About 15 minutes later, a 24-year-old man was shot in the leg and taken to Jackson Park Hospital from the 7200 block of South Jeffery Boulevard, Gaines said. He was treated and released. The man told police he was talking on his phone when he heard a single shot and realized he was wounded.

Earlier Thursday evening, four men were wounded in a shooting in the Little Village neighborhood about 5:20 p.m. Thursday, police said.

They were walking in the 3200 block of South Kedzie Avenue when at least one person inside a vehicle with three others opened fire, police said, hitting the group. Three 19-year-olds and a 22-year-old were wounded.

Just after midnight, a 17-year-old was shot in the back and taken to Stroger Hospital in serious condition, police said. He was walking in the 7100 block of South Vincennes Avenue in the Englewood neighborhood when someone inside a passing car opened fire, police said.

Another 17-year-old was shot after 1:30 a.m. Friday in the 3500 block of West Grenshaw Street in the Homan Square neighborhood. He's in good condition at Mount Sinai Hospital. Someone walked to him and started shooting, police said.

http://www.chicagotr...3,0,49779.story

When will it end? Something has got to give. America can't keep going like this, can it?

[blackherox]

Meanwhile, in Chicago...

http://www.chicagotr...3,0,49779.story

When will it end? Something has got to give. America can't keep going like this, can it?

To be fair, what would you have them do?

Edited August 24, 2012 by blackherox

[Patticus]

To be fair, what would you have them do?

Amend the constitution to clarify the exact and precise meaning of the 2nd Amendment to prevent its abuse, lower the legal limit on gun clip sizes nationwide, force gun owners to take out insurance like car owners, crack down on unlicensed or otherwise suspect gun sellers/owners, strengthen background checks and mental health analyses.

[Solkia]

When will it end? Something has got to give. America can't keep going like this, can it?

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

The only real thing you can do is make sure you have some form of defending yourself, or defending others. Get a description of the shooter, a license plate number, something to give police information.

Sorry to sound like a corny PSA ad, but that's really all that can be done.

Amend the constitution to clarify the exact and precise meaning of the 2nd Amendment to prevent its abuse, lower the legal limit on gun clip sizes nationwide, force gun owners to take out insurance like car owners, crack down on unlicensed or otherwise suspect gun sellers/owners, strengthen background checks and mental health analyses.

If they aren't going to follow laws in the first place, what good would making more laws do?

[Patticus]

People kill people.

And in this country, an alarmingly large number of those people killing other people are doing it with guns that were made with the sole purpose of killing and maiming others in mind, in far greater numbers than the rest of the developed world.

If they aren't going to follow laws in the first place, what good would making more laws do?

Why have any laws at all if people are going to break them anyway? We have a proper legal system and don't just rely on mob justice for a reason.

There will always be criminals seeking to break the law, and determined ones will seek to circumvent whatever laws the government will throw at them, and new gun laws alone aren't going to help at all. All of this means that other measures must be taken to protect the public. Most would-be gunmen in America seem to obtain their firearms legally (gangs, career criminals et al may not, but that's another matter), which means that strengthening legal measures like background checks, mental health analyses, or cracking down on suspect and/or unlicensed sellers etc is perfectly valid and should result in fewer people obtaining firearms who shouldn't own them.

The wording of the Second Amendment is also needlessly vague in its present form; it's better suited to the late 18th and early 19th centuries more than it is the 21st century; when the threat of European invasion is non-existent and there are no marauding Native tribes to contend with.

[Nepenthe]

Amending the Constitution is as feasible an action as one guy trying to make a 1:1 recreation of Mount Rushmore in the Grand Canyon with a pick axe. It will never happen in our lifetimes, if ever. The process has too high a threshold for amendment, relying on unrealistic super majorities in both houses and for three-fourths of our state legislatures to approve it. Considering our shitty Congress can't even pass a damn budget ceiling increase without waiting until the 11th hour and taking down our credit score in the process anyway, an amendment is not a realistic solution for anything.

Also, guns don't save people. People save people.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Nepenthe

[Patticus]

I understand that it would be impossible to amend the constitution with the way things work there, but I still see it as a necessary part of a wider series of steps designed to reduce the fanaticism surrounding American gun culture as it is today.

[Solkia]

With guns that were made with the sole purpose of killing and maiming others in mind, in far greater numbers than the rest of the developed world.

Guns are made for the purpose of killing, yes.

But the intent behind legally selling them? Guns are sold legally so that people who can't defend themselves, can.

(Or so you can mount the head of a deer on your wall, either one.)

Why have any laws at all if people are going to break them anyway? We have a proper legal system and don't just rely on mob justice for a reason.

Because having laws in place means that that sane people won't give into mild temptation? The legal system exists so that we have an incentive to not give in to temptation. I don't know about you, but giving in to my human flaws doesn't seem worth being fucking in the ass by a muscular dude in the showers.

There will always be criminals seeking to break the law, and determined ones will seek to circumvent whatever laws the government will throw at them, and new gun laws alone aren't going to help at all. All of this means that other measures must be taken to protect the public. Most would-be gunmen in America seem to obtain their firearms legally (gangs, career criminals et al may not, but that's another matter), which means that strengthening legal measures like background checks, mental health analyses, or cracking down on suspect and/or unlicensed sellers etc is perfectly valid.

Check New York gun laws. I'll just leave it at that. A couple of years ago I would have agreed with this, but not anymore.

The wording of the Second Amendment is also needlessly vague in its present form; it's better suited to the late 18th and early 19th centuries more than it is the 21st century; when the threat of European invasion is non-existent and there are no marauding Native tribes to contend with.

Guess that's why we just say "Right to bear arms" nowdays.

...

Goddammit Ion, now you've got me talking about guns too :I

Edited August 24, 2012 by Solkia-kun

[Nepenthe]

I understand that it would be impossible to amend the constitution with the way things work there, but I still see it as a necessary part of a wider series of steps designed to reduce the fanaticism surrounding American gun culture as it is today.

An amendment, I think, would have to be the ultimate end-game goal, because without consensus there's absolutely no hope for one now. There's a lot of other issues that we need to tackle directly in relation to our high gun-crime rates: things like cyclical poverty, gang activity, the illegality of marijuana, and racial profiling that keep people in crime-ridden situations and facilitate shootings, the increasing stress of middle class life due to the recession and job losses, our high wealth disparity, and ridiculous health care costs that cause otherwise decent people to go postal, paranoia caused by a natural increase of reporting on crimes due to technological advancements, despite some violent crime rates having actually fallen, along with our completely unaccountable "news" outlets who'll no sooner pray on our distrust of the government and minorities than do a simple fact check, our unique culture to other western countries in which we favor individualism, self-sustenance and "freedom" above all else, the NRA and gun lobbying, and of course laws and business practices that allow such a population a relatively easy acquisition to guns, not counting the black market built up already by this ease of acquisition over the centuries.

In short, the US is a considerable basket case in this regard, and there is no one quick fix. An amendment would be nice, mostly because I think the 2nd amendment is outdated in some respects, but we have such a shitload of other problems that facilitate gun crime that such a thing is just forced to wait.

[Patticus]

Well, now that you put it that way... I'm going to have to rethink some of my views. Thanks!

[Nepenthe]

=P No problem. Note that I'm not entirely fond of our gun culture as well. It doesn't really make me feel any safer to know that my neighbors are "ready for" the worst despite a probable lack of rigorous training in dealing with real-world situations, or that some well-meaning, over-celebratory guy may fire one off on a holiday and it comes through my house, or indeed that I'll run into some mugger who can destroy me from a distance. Yep, I think our high gun ownership speaks to a population that is extremely distrustful and on edge over everything- muggers, terrorists, the government- and it's kind of unnerving, and I've lived in America most of my life. I'd like to feasibly live without that worry in the back of my mind, but gun culture permeates to the point that even I've ironically entertained the notion of obtaining a license and pistol once I get out of the house and get on my feet. I'm a small woman- an easy target- so I'll figured I'd probably need one. But then again, isn't that mindset part of the problem?

So, I figure the solution would be to get an attack dog instead! Yes siree, an $8000, well-trained Belgian Malinois from Sweden that responds only to German commands. Now that's protection. And it's much cuter. \o/

[Shan Zhu]

Have to agree with Patticus on this one.

There are reasonable anti-gun control arguments. It's true the statistics tell us virtually nothing and that there are very smart people who feel an empowered civillian class provides greater security than a local police monopolist.

What I think these arguments ignore, however, is the endogenous effect of the law. The law is not merely a set of data delimiting the actions available to a given citizen, which are considered neutrally as such. Rather, the law is an active agent in forming culture--people's moral gut feeling and prejudices. As gay marriage legislation carries much greater symbolic meaning than mere contractual law, the gun control conflict represents a greater conflict about the role of self-defense and of violence in society.

And, frankly, I think government should be a violence monopolist; social norms should view any perpetrator of violence other than the government as an enemy of the state. As such, it would be appropriate to utilize the culture-forming aspects of the law to legitimize and entrench that view. While there is a limited role for self-defense, I would argue that it is very limited indeed. Thus, any amendment (however unrealistic that is now) to the 2nd has my full support, as do any gun control regulations that manage to get by the vague wording of that amendment.

An amendment is unlikely

Well of course it is, in the short-term. People who support gun control should talk about it anyway in an attempt to normalize the idea over time. You know that saying, "the first time you hear an idea, it's crazy; the second time, you think about it; the third time it makes sense; the fourth time, it's a platitude."

There's a lot of other issues that we need to tackle directly in relation to our high gun-crime rates: things like cyclical poverty, gang activity, the illegality of marijuana, and racial profiling that keep people in crime-ridden situations and facilitate shootings, the increasing stress of middle class life due to the recession and job losses, our high wealth disparity, and ridiculous health care costs that cause otherwise decent people to go postal, paranoia caused by a natural increase of reporting on crimes due to technological advancements, despite some violent crime rates having actually fallen, along with our completely unaccountable "news" outlets who'll no sooner pray on our distrust of the government and minorities than do a simple fact check, our unique culture to other western countries in which we favor individualism, self-sustenance and "freedom" above all else, the NRA and gun lobbying, and of course laws and business practices that allow such a population a relatively easy acquisition to guns, not counting the black market built up already by this ease of acquisition over the centuries.

Of course, there are a lot of individual political issues I disagree with here, but even if I accept your assertions as a given, I'm not sure they do much to confound the argument for focusing on gun control as an individual issue. I understand "there are other issues people and the government should focus on," but is the cost of lobbying for gun control really so great that the other issues won't be able to bear the loss?

On the other hand, if you're suggesting people should adopt a rigorous and broad political agenda instead of focusing on individual issues, that seems as unrealistic to me as passing an amendment. Democracy is such that ideologues lose because they alienate too many people; the changes that succeed are coalitions of people who disagree agenda-wise but agree on some particular issue. Gun control is one of those issues where there's a big enough coalition of people who agree on it that there could be real change if they united--why alienate everyone with all these broader integrated problems?

If you're just saying there are issues people should focus on in addition to gun control... well, what's your point?

Edited August 24, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[Tornado]

Her point was that the problems caused by gun control laws in this country are by and large exacerbated by societal issues rather than the laws themselves. Not to say that they wouldn't be there if society was perfect, because there is always an inherent crime element to society. But cracking down on the things that make people feel like an acceptable outlet for their emotions is to shoot up a Wal-Mart is more important than limiting one of the options that they have for doing it.

Edited August 25, 2012 by Gilda

[Nepenthe]

Gilda gets me; In all of the debate I've been privy to, I just don't see anymore how we can significantly curb gun violence without also addressing the underlying issues that cause it as well. The guns are already out there in ridiculous numbers and they're relatively easy to get to which significantly curbs the effectiveness of laws alredy. Certainly you can lobby for more gun control and a change to/repeal of the 2nd amendment, and I actually support these things, but realistically I don't see how far that alone will get you in the long run.

[Shan Zhu]

But cracking down on the things that make people feel like an acceptable outlet for their emotions is to shoot up a Wal-Mart is more important than limiting one of the options that they have for doing it.

Edited August 26, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[Patticus]

I'm sorry to have to report this, but there has been yet another shooting, this time in a school:

A HIGH SCHOOL student has been shot and injured on the first day of the new school year in Baltimore, Maryland.

Today is the first day back to school for public schools in the state.

Police said that the 17-year-old Perry Hall High School student was flown by helicopter to hospital for treatment, but haven’t provided any additional details on the teenager’s condition.

The school is being evacuated and students are being escorted to a nearby shopping centre for their parents to collect them and to a nearby elementary school, according to reports from CBS Baltimore.

The Baltimore Sun reports that one suspect has been taken into custody.

http://www.thejourna...574848-Aug2012/

I bet this'll scare up lots more gun sales, and the arms industry will yet again laugh its way to the bank with the corpses of the innocent strewn in its wake.

[Emmett L. Brown]

There's a reason I've been staying out of this topic in spite of my previous adamant pro gun control stance previously. I've just gotta accept that the USA is a culture so alien to my own that it might as well be a different time period entirely. I've got about as much likelihood of understanding the viewpoint of the average United States citizen as I would someone in the 19th or 22nd century.

I can't even say for certain if the availability of deadly weapons is the problem or if it's the cultural influences of the country.

[Shan Zhu]

I bet this'll scare up lots more gun sales, and the arms industry will yet again laugh its way to the bank with the corpses of the innocent strewn in its wake.

Meh. I've known a lot of people involved in the supply of guns throughout my life. I very much doubt any of them would be particularly happy if their weapons were elements of a tragedy. They simply had different ideas than myself about the role and effect of guns in the US, ideas that were in some cases fairly well thought-out.

Not all of politics is a moral melodrama :| In fact, I would guess such simple evil or benevolent caricatures are almost never accurate.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[Stacy]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/several-feared-dead-jersey-shooting-112249001.html

Another shooting in America this time at a supermarket in New Jersey.

[Patticus]

'27 dead' in Connecticut primary school shooting

 

 

As many as 27 people have been killed, including many children, in a shooting attack at a primary school in the US state of Connecticut, US media say.

 

At least a dozen children are among the dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, the Associated Press reported.

 

Earlier, the gunman was reported to have been killed and at least three people were taken to hospital.

 

A news conference is imminent and the state Governor Dannell Malloy is on his way.

 

Police arrived at the school soon after 09:40 local time (14:40 GMT), with a full search of the site carried out soon after.

 

Schools across the district were immediately on lock-down as a preventive measure, officials say.

 

Meanwhile, the three people who have been taken to hospital are in "very serious condition", Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton told CNN.

 

'Collecting facts'

 

 

There are unconfirmed reports of two shooters, according to a report in the local Hartford Courant newspaper.

 

As the situation began, police received a call reporting that a gunman was in the school's main office. One person there had "numerous gunshot wounds", the Courant added.

 

One witness speaking to CNN said that shots were heard coming from the hall. There "must have been 100 rounds" fired, she told the channel.

 

Local media have reported that firefighters instructed children to close their eyes and run past the school's office as they exited the building.

 

Other sources suggest that some of the shots were fired in a school classroom.

 

 

With the children now evacuated, aerial images of the school show several emergency vehicles still at the scene and scores of cars surrounding the area.

 

Teams of officers are on the scene, some with dogs, as a thorough search of the school continues.

 

A local NBC news channel said that a hospital in nearby Danbury had reported receiving three injured patients.

 

Several parents are reportedly at the school, standing by and waiting for more information. Officials say they are trying to unite children with their parents.

 

Sandy Hook School - described by correspondents as a highly rated school - has cancelled its kindergarten class on Friday and will not operate midday bus runs, the school's website says.

 

The public school has more than 600 students in classes from Kindergarten to 4th Grade - including students aged from five to 10.

 

On its website, Danbury Hospital said it was aware of a "situation" at the school.

 

"Please know we're collecting facts now and will be back to you as soon as possible with the most accurate information," the hospital said in a statement.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20730717

 

This is very disturbing news, made especially sad given the proximity to Christmas and that many of the dead were children

 

Targeting a Primary sSchool and school kids... Jesus, there really are some sick bastards out there. I mean, what reason could he have possibly had for going after kids like that? However, unless every single school or whatever gets armed guards, watchtowers and high barbed wire fences, just what the hell can be done to stop a person with murderous intent who shows up out of the blue at a school, with the intent to kill as many people as possible..?

 

I'd like to know how this guy got hold of firearms, too.

[Blue Wisp]

This was rather out of the blue. I mean, who in their sane judgement would expect a shooting in the middle of a bloody school for children? Who is insane enough to do that? I mean seriously.

Hope the families of the victims can get over the situation. This is not really something easy to get over with.