Just a thought on mass shootings

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
1,472
Location
NJ
Call me crazy, but I truely believe if the press would NOT name these cowards and show their pictures on TV/Newspapers there would be less of these incidents. I know this will never happen but just a thought. Does anyone agree with me?
 
Last edited:
Yes I agree. They should name the victims instead. The good news is one of the shooters is dead. That saves the tax payers a lot of money for a trial and life in prison for him.
 
You must be the first person to think of this
whistle.gif
. Just teasing you, yes I'm sure this plays a role but I think it is minuscule for most situations.
 
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.
 
Originally Posted By: raaizin
Call me crazy, but I truely believe if the press would NOT name these cowards and show their pictures on TV/Newspapers there would be less of these incidents. I know this will never happen but just a thought. Does anyone agree with me?


This would only work if it is a high school teen looking for fame, not a 34 year old holding grudges after being fired.
 
So the suggestion is curtailing the first amendment? or suggesting some don't exercise it.

BTW, its first for a reason.

The problem is the person, not the freedom works for other amendments too.
 
Last edited:
Not sure how knowing the shooters name and seeing his picture would cause more shootings. I don't think most of them do it for fame.
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.


Military.........
Military servicemen have them in their home as can we..
Tell me why we cant...

Also, AR-15 aint nothing compared to .50BMG
smile.gif

or "T-Rex"
or what have you.

Small percentage of crimes with the bullet hoses. Brings up gun debate. I see no issue; but we need responsible ownership.

This is your guy never convicted, has weapon, ends life with taking others out. It's sad.

And it is not the AR's fault, nor AK, favorite poster gun of the anti-gun.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

They should name the victims instead.


No they should not. Not until there is a positive ID *after* the victim's families are notified first.

[censored] of a way to find out your kin is killed, through the media. Especially if they got it wrong.

I do agree with one thing though. One shooter is dead. Not a bad thing.
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.


Why does the type of gun even matter?
Do not let them take your guns. If that ever comes to pass expect those FEMA camps to get filled up.
Hitler would be envious of that set up
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

They should name the victims instead.


No they should not. Not until there is a positive ID *after* the victim's families are notified first.

[censored] of a way to find out your kin is killed, through the media. Especially if they got it wrong.

I do agree with one thing though. One shooter is dead. Not a bad thing.


In before the lock.

I thought people here would have enough sense to figure that out Trajan. But you're right for those who couldn't figure it out.
smile.gif
After they are certain who did the killing, and all the families of those killed have been notified.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.
An AR-15 isn't exactly "high powered" It fires a common round used for varmint hunting.
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.


What's high powered about it? It shoots a round that is illegal for deer hunting in some states (too low powered) and that our forces in combat have found to be ineffective (hence the selection of the .308 by SOF and snipers). Further, it's not clear if the shooter had the weapon when he began, some are speculating that he got the weapon by shooting one of the security guards (you're not suggesting that we reduce the number of weapons used by security forces on military bases....are you?)

Here's a thought - how about we look at the criminal, not the means by which he commits the crime. This kid had previous firearms crimes, prior mental health issues, both of which should have been reasons to keep him away from guns and keep him off a military base.

Incidentally, personal weapons are prohibited on military bases...but that restriction didn't create a safe environment, did it? Guess psychopathy doesn't respect the same rules that law abiding citizens do...

Tim McVeigh did a lot more killing with fertilizer and diesel fuel, which remain unregulated. Should we get more restrictions on Ryder trucks, diesel fuel and fertilizer to hope that those restrictions make us safer?

Or should we finally begin to look at mental illness?
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

They should name the victims instead.


No they should not. Not until there is a positive ID *after* the victim's families are notified first.

[censored] of a way to find out your kin is killed, through the media. Especially if they got it wrong.

I do agree with one thing though. One shooter is dead. Not a bad thing.



Playing the devils advocate - you have no idea what his life was about. Maybe if he had sought help this could have been prevented. However nothing excuses him shooting other innocent people.
 
Originally Posted By: raaizin
Call me crazy, but I truely believe if the press would NOT name these cowards and show their pictures on TV/Newspapers there would be less of these incidents. I know this will never happen but just a thought. Does anyone agree with me?


The police and authorities quickly posted this guy's info on social media hoping to get clues about him and his motives....

*this is quite common now....
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: xxch4osxx
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.
An AR-15 isn't exactly "high powered" It fires a common round used for varmint hunting.


And goes through body armor, car doors, etc...
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: xxch4osxx
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.
An AR-15 isn't exactly "high powered" It fires a common round used for varmint hunting.


And goes through body armor, car doors, etc...

Car doors are thin metal, I blew holes through one with 12 ga bird shot and 135gr .40S&W. Body armor can stop a .223 round, they can stop 7.62x39 as well. Now a 6.8 SPC or a 6.5 Grendel or a .50 Beowolf, those are high powered rounds.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: xxch4osxx
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.
An AR-15 isn't exactly "high powered" It fires a common round used for varmint hunting.


And goes through body armor, car doors, etc...


Rifles are rifles. Body armor (of the soft kind that cops wear) is generally only effective against handguns. ANY rifle round will penetrate it along with car doors. Regular hunting rifles have a lot more power (mostly from bullet mass) than an AR-15. What makes the AR-15 easy to shoot is its LOW recoil, a result of LOW power in a lightweight rifle.

The USAF (and soon after, the Army) bought the M-16 (andAR-15) because it was higher capacity, lightweight and EASY to shoot...not because of the power or effectiveness of its caliber. They knew then that the .223 was far lower power than the .308 that it replaced in the M-14 but the decision was to buy a lighter, higher capacity rifle.

But the press uses words like "high power" for their sensational effect...without knowing what they mean...or caring about technical accuracy....and those terms get parroted....again without understanding...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Here's a thought - how about less of these ridiculous high powered weapons like the AR-15 used in this one floating around.


Because then they will be confiscating hunting rifles right and left.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom