# The latest mass shooting



## rgp (Jun 2, 2019)

Notice, we have had so many lately....we no longer even mention them.......

RIP & condolences to those effected.

Thank you to the police the ended the attack.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 2, 2019)

There seems to be no word, yet, as to what might have set this latest shooter off.  It seems that more and more people are "losing" it, and turning to gun violence to justify whatever is bothering them.  Combinations of Stress and Mental issues, etc., seem to be the root causes of why these people decide to attack others as a means of satisfying their own problems.  I see no easy solutions to prevent these events in the future.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Jun 2, 2019)

Another mass shooting. How does this go again? Oh, yeah, something about "our thought and prayers".  Then there something about "brave... running into danger". Now, all we have to do is wait  few hours and we can do this all over again. It's obvious that for well over 20 years, we are quite comfortable having mass shootings with our morning coffee. We don't really do anything about it. And it's about America's love of an inanimate hunk of plastic and metal,  which allows the deranged to pick us off any time, any place.


----------



## chic (Jun 2, 2019)

It bothers me because it could happen to any of us anywhere. This is deeply concerning. There are some deterrents that could be implemented.


----------



## Pink Biz (Jun 2, 2019)

Imho, the Second Amendment has been misinterpreted by the Supreme Court in Washington DC v. Heller, thanks to the NRA and Antonin Scalia. Unless and until the Constitution is amended to offset this travesty, mass shootings will continue unabated.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/john-paul-stevens-court-failed-gun-control/587272/


----------



## DaveA (Jun 2, 2019)

According to most comments from the NRA and their soldiers, it's all a case of mental health and we're all safer if we carry weapons with high capacity magazines (as most aren't skilled killers, the high capacity magazines are needed). Of course it does help that weapons such as these are fairly pricey and profitable for the sellers.

But back to the mental health epidemic that is sweeping the country, similar to the measles outbreak.  if we could take all of these mentally challenged folks and ship them to, say, Australia, I'm sure that almost overnight their problems would clear up.  It must be the climate as people from that country, compared to the U.S., suffer almost no mental problems that cause them  to go on killing rampages.  

And, please, no talk about a lack of firearms among their population. We've been told emphatically, by the NRA and some political leaders that access to firearms is NOT even part of the problem.


----------



## win231 (Jun 2, 2019)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Another mass shooting. How does this go again? Oh, yeah, something about "our thought and prayers".  Then there something about "brave... running into danger". Now, all we have to do is wait  few hours and we can do this all over again. It's obvious that for well over 20 years, we are quite comfortable having mass shootings with our morning coffee. We don't really do anything about it. And it's about America's love of an inanimate hunk of plastic and metal,  which allows the deranged to pick us off any time, any place.



What stopped the attack?  An inanimate hunk of plastic and metal.  (the only thing that could)


----------



## Falcon (Jun 2, 2019)

Waterboard  them   every  day  for  a few days.  Give  'em  something  to think a bout.

What  do  you think  of  "Waterboarding"  as a means  of getting to the truth ?


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Jun 2, 2019)

Using the same logic: What started the attack?
An inanimate hunk of plastic and metal  (the only thing that could)


----------



## 911 (Jun 2, 2019)

Most everything that I have read and continue to read is that it’s too late to disarm America. Having better gun registration enforcement, especially on transfers, is another glitch in the system that would probably be a waste of time. 

I certainly don’t have the answer on how to prevent these catastrophic events from happening, but I wish some genius would come up with a great idea or two.

Until then, I don’t plan on leaving home without protection.


----------



## win231 (Jun 2, 2019)

911 said:


> Most everything that I have read and continue to read is that it’s too late to disarm America. Having better gun registration enforcement, especially on transfers, is another glitch in the system that would probably be a waste of time.
> 
> I certainly don’t have the answer on how to prevent these catastrophic events for happening, but I wish some genius would come up with a great idea or two.
> 
> Until then, I don’t plan on leaving home without protection.



That sums it up.  The reality is, there will always be evil in the human species.  Once that is acknowledged the only concern is how to minimize it.  It's sorta amusing how the same people who say, "Thank God for the police officers who stopped the attack" are frequently the ones who say "Guns are to blame."  They are living in a fantasy world of their own making.
Uh....I hate to break it to them, but police stopped the attack _with their guns._


----------



## Trade (Jun 2, 2019)

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. 

Yeah, I know. It's a cliche. But it's also true. 

And that's just what you had here. The shooting occurred in a Municipal building which I have no doubt was a "gun free zone". Insuring that everyone in that building was a sitting duck for the shooter. 

When I first went to work for the Florida Department of Transportation is was no big deal to bring a gun to work. If someone got a new gun, they brought it in to show it to their co-workers. Or if you had one for sale you just put an ad up on the bulletin board and if anyone was interested you just brought it in so they could look at it. No big deal. I'll bet well over half the vehicles in the employee parking lot had guns in them. 

Then along came the post office shootings in the 80's and 90's and before you knew it we had to have "Violence in the workplace" training and bringing a gun to work became a firing offense. (no pun intended). Then, after 0/11 they hired this armed Wackenhut guard named Wally to sit in the lobby with his .38 revolver. You should have seen this dude. He was older than dirt and reminded me of some of that character Tim Conway played on the Carol Burnett show. He was supposed to protect us. 

<font size="3">





They even told us that we couldn't have a gun in our vehicle out in the parking lot. Well to Hell with that. I always had a gun in my vehicle. So did many of my co-workers. But we didn't advertise the fact. We used to refer to it as our "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.


----------



## Shalimar (Jun 2, 2019)

Torture is an unreliable method of ascertaining the truth, Falcon.  People will say anything to get the pain to stop. As for the morality of it, there is none.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 2, 2019)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Using the same logic: What started the attack?
> An inanimate hunk of plastic and metal  (the only thing that could)



Nope. sorry. It wasn't the inanimate hunk of plastic and metal that started the attack... It was an obviously unstable person who started the attack.


----------



## Keesha (Jun 2, 2019)

squatting dog said:


> Nope. sorry. It wasn't the inanimate hunk of plastic and metal that started the attack... It was an obviously unstable person who started the attack.


If this is the logic then in reality it would also conclude that the United States has more unstable people with mental disorders who have free access to guns. 

If this IS the case then wouldn’t restricting access to these guns be a solution?

Other countries have mentally ill people but have stricter gun laws. Is it mere coincidence that mass shootings are far less?

Of course not. What I don’t understand is that the rest of the world seems to clearly understand this except for the people living in the United States. For some reason they aggressively disbelief this obvious conclusion. 

Plus the second amendment was written back when muskets were used with gun powder. Even if a person decided they were going to shoot someone they had far more time to think it through. Gun power had to be packed etc.

Now there are automatic weapons where hundreds of rounds of bullets can be shot in a fraction of the time it once took to load a musket. 

There is plenty of documentation and polls proving this to be true. The only people who don’t believe it are the people living in the United States. It’s extremely sad.


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 2, 2019)

Has anyone ever worked with a person they felt "uneasy" about? I did many decdes ago. I always worried he was going to explode at any second.


----------



## rgp (Jun 2, 2019)

squatting dog said:


> Nope. sorry. It wasn't the inanimate hunk of plastic and metal that started the attack... It was an obviously unstable person who started the attack.




   Exactly !


----------



## rgp (Jun 2, 2019)

win231 said:


> That sums it up.  The reality is, there will always be evil in the human species.  Once that is acknowledged the only concern is how to minimize it.  It's sorta amusing how the same people who say, "Thank God for the police officers who stopped the attack" are frequently the ones who say "Guns are to blame."  They are living in a fantasy world of their own making.
> Uh....I hate to break it to them, but police stopped the attack _with their guns._




  Exactly, again....as i agree here.


----------



## Butterfly (Jun 2, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> Has anyone ever worked with a person they felt "uneasy" about? I did many decdes ago. I always worried he was going to explode at any second.



I have.  But in this case, reportedly nobody who worked with  him saw anything amiss or saw any conflicts or problems.  He had just resigned from the job "for personal reasons," but there was no indication of hard feelings.  

I just do not understand why, when people snap nowdays they decide to kill.  In the "olden days" you just went out and got really drunk and maybe got in a barfight or something.

I can even sort of understand (but not condone, of course) somebody getting so angry at a particular person  that they wanted to kill that person -- but everybody in sight?  I just don't get it.  

Is it the increasing isolation and loss of feelings of community that some of us feel, or the lack of traditional support systems like extended family to talk someone off the ledge, or loss of socioeconomic safety nets?  Or sitting on the internet reading stuff that inflames hatred or anger or feelings of desperation?


----------



## Sunny (Jun 2, 2019)

> Most everything that I have read and continue to read is that it’s too  late to disarm America. Having better gun registration enforcement,  especially on transfers, is another glitch in the system that would  probably be a waste of time.



So, what do we do?  Just throw in the towel and allow the U.S. to continue as the only (supposedly) civilized country in the world where anybody can legally buy a semi-automatic weapon, for any reason, or without any reason at all except that he's nuts. and go into a crowded place and start shooting randomly?

It's never "too late" to put an end to this ridiculous death hold the NRA has on this country.  It is too late to bring back all the innocent souls who have died, but at least we can prevent more of these mass shootings. Or at least, cut out some of them. 

The NRA cannot win this; too much is at stake.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Jun 2, 2019)

Other than killing, what other purpose is a gun used? It is a killing machine. Period. It's asinine to allow guns into the hands of people, who should not be given the power of life/death. It also asinine to allow a fixation on weapons to out weigh the rights of all citizens to be free from gun violence.


----------



## win231 (Jun 2, 2019)

Keesha said:


> If this is the logic then in reality it would also conclude that the United States has more unstable people with mental disorders who have free access to guns.
> 
> If this IS the case then wouldn’t restricting access to these guns be a solution?
> 
> ...



Yes, there are mentally-unstable people who have access to guns.  There are also criminals who have access to guns.  There are (obviously) terrorists who have access to guns & explosives.  And our own Tim McVeigh learned (in our military) how to make a bomb out of diesel fuel & fertilizer & he killed 185 people in less than one second - more than any firearm could ever do.

That's the reality (as you noted).  Anyone who wants something they're not legally allowed to have, can get it illegally.  A Black Market develops for anything that is illegal - like alcohol during prohibition & cocaine & meth today.  Guns & drugs are sold on the street - NO waiting period, NO I.D., No registration & NO background check (like the ones I paid for & passed for every gun I own).  Making something illegal doesn't prevent someone from getting it; it just means they can't walk into a store & get it legally (like I can).  Gang members who do drive-by shootings can't legally own guns due to their criminal records.  Does that prevent them from getting guns?
Drunk driving is illegal.  That didn't save Princess Dianna or Ted Kennedy's 19-year-old mistress.

Personally, I'm not concerned with the Second Amendment.  I'm concerned with my safety & the safety of my loved ones.  The fact that what you say is true, is exactly why I own guns; I know that people who shouldn't have guns have access to guns & I choose not to be defenseless.  I didn't create our screwed-up world, but I do have to live in it.


----------



## treeguy64 (Jun 2, 2019)

All of the horrible things that are happening, these days, were predicted by the Rat Cage experiments of the late 50's, early 60's: Our species has bred, unconscionably, all over this planet, and we are now reaping what we have sowed. Things will only get worse, in the future, guaranteed. Think about that, the next time you get ready to congratulate somebody who boasts about his/her 8th (to infinity) grandchild. That person (and/or his/her immediate offspring) is, very much, part of the problem.


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 2, 2019)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Other than killing, what other purpose is a gun used? It is a killing machine. Period. It's asinine to allow guns into the hands of people, who should not be given the power of life/death. It also asinine to allow a fixation on weapons to out weigh the rights of all citizens to be free from gun violence.


Really? Why call the cops when a psycho breaks in to our home? We call the cops because they have guns. But they take too long to get there so we shoot the psycho ourselves. Why not look up how many illegal firearms enter this country every year?


----------



## chic (Jun 3, 2019)

Butterfly said:


> I have.  But in this case, reportedly nobody who worked with  him saw anything amiss or saw any conflicts or problems.  He had just resigned from the job "for personal reasons," but there was no indication of hard feelings.
> 
> I just do not understand why, when people snap nowdays they decide to kill.  In the "olden days" you just went out and got really drunk and maybe got in a barfight or something.
> 
> ...



Yes. People feel disenfranchised these days.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Other than killing, what other purpose is a gun used? It is a killing machine. Period. It's asinine to allow guns into the hands of people, who should not be given the power of life/death. It also asinine to allow a fixation on weapons to out weigh the rights of all citizens to be free from gun violence.



I agree with you 100%.  A gun's main purpose IS killing.  If it wasn't, it would be useless for self defense & I wouldn't bother learning how to use one or owning one.  What else can put an elderly person on par with a young thug who intends to hurt or kill them?  And what else can enable anyone to defend themselves again an armed attacker?  Why do you suppose police officers have such "Killing machines?"  

When you need help, the first person you call is a police officer - a person who has a gun.....a "killing machine."  I doubt you would say, "I need police here now, but I don't want any killing machines in my home, so don't bring your guns."


----------



## Keesha (Jun 3, 2019)

There’s no shock there win. Your attitude isn’t much different than the attitude of every other American which is why I made my post in the first place. Somehow you have the ability to justify and rationalize why it’s not the gun laws or the legal guns that are the problem. 


According to statistical facts,  this isn’t the case. Countries that have stricter gun law have fewer gun related deaths. Even states within your own country that have stricter gun laws have fewer gun related deaths. 


https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.vox...399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts


You are absolutely right. Mentally unstable people, criminals and terrorists can get access to guns. You are also right in saying that even if something’s illegal, if someone wants it bad enough, they will get it one way or another. Absolutely. That’s just human nature but since we know and understand this why make it easy to access guns so they are readily available for when the killing mood strikes?
Why make these instant killing weapons as common as sliced bread?


What does the black market, alcohol and drugs have to do with this conversation?
Most every area in the world has a black market but if what you are seeking is legal why even resort to the black market? If owning a gun is as common and accepted as a morning cup of coffee then it shouldn’t be shocking that this is happening. 


In conclusion, you are most certainly right, making something illegal doesn’t prevent someone from getting it BUT it does make it more difficult and slows them down a whole lot. In this fast paced world of instant convenience, some things shouldn’t be so and guns are one of them. 


The second amendment should concern you. 
If everyone has the same attitude as you and guns are as convenient and accepted as morning coffee, it’s no wonder that this is a bigger problem 




win231 said:


> Yes, there are mentally-unstable people who have access to guns.  There are also criminals who have access to guns.  There are (obviously) terrorists who have access to guns & explosives.  And our own Tim McVeigh learned (in our military) how to make a bomb out of diesel fuel & fertilizer & he killed 185 people in less than one second - more than any firearm could ever do.
> 
> That's the reality (as you noted).  Anyone who wants something they're not legally allowed to have, can get it illegally.  A Black Market develops for anything that is illegal - like alcohol during prohibition & cocaine & meth today.  Guns & drugs are sold on the street - NO waiting period, NO I.D., No registration & NO background check (like the ones I paid for & passed for every gun I own).  Making something illegal doesn't prevent someone from getting it; it just means they can't walk into a store & get it legally (like I can).  Gang members who do drive-by shootings can't legally own guns due to their criminal records.  Does that prevent them from getting guns?
> Drunk driving is illegal.  That didn't save Princess Dianna or Ted Kennedy's 19-year-old mistress.
> ...


----------



## Keesha (Jun 3, 2019)

Speaking of apologies, I’d like to apologize for stereotyping all Americans in my above post. 
I understand that you don’t all feel this way. It was an oversight. My post doesn’t reflect the compassion I feel towards our neighbouring country.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 3, 2019)

Keesha... "Plus the second amendment was written back when muskets were used with gun powder. Even if a person decided they were going to shoot someone they had far more time to think it through. Gun power had to be packed etc."
Any time I hear a talking point used in a conversation, I tend to tune out the speaker. When the second amendment was written, a musket was the state of the art weapon. Using that thought, one would assume that it would be alright to own fully automatic weapons, tanks, bomber aircraft, etc.
 I can still remember in history class, (wonder if they even teach that today) that we the people had just overthrown an oppressive govt. thus the 2nd amendment was there to protect We the People.
Any time I hear people wanting to eliminate the 2nd amendment, I'm reminded of this picture which is definitely worth a thousand words.


----------



## Trade (Jun 3, 2019)

Keesha said:


> According to statistical facts,  this isn’t the case. Countries that have stricter gun law have fewer gun related deaths.



I believe it has less to do with gun laws and more to do with politics and economics. 

Here in the US we have dog eat dog, every man for himself, jungle capitalism that creates an immense amount of stress and an us vs. them mentality where large numbers of people are marginalized. It's a small wonder that we don't have more mental illness than we do.    

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/08/income-inequality-murder-homicide-rates





> A 17-year-old boy shoots a 15-year-old stranger to death, apparently believing that the victim had given him a dirty look. A Chicago man stabs his stepfather  in a fight over whether his entry into his parents’ house without  knocking was disrespectful. A San Francisco UPS employee guns down three  of his co-workers, then turns his weapon on himself, seemingly as a response to minor slights.





> These killings may seem unrelated – but they are only a few recent  examples of the kind of crime that demonstrates a surprising link  between homicide and inequality.
> 
> While on the surface, the disputes that triggered these deaths seem  trivial – each involved apparently small disagreements and a sense of  being seen as inferior and unworthy of respect – research suggests that  inequality raises the stakes of fights for status among men.
> The connection is so strong  that, according to the World Bank, a simple measure of inequality  predicts about half of the variance in murder rates between American  states and between countries around the world. When inequality is high  and strips large numbers of men of the usual markers of status – like a  good job and the ability to support a family – matters of respect and  disrespect loom disproportionately.
> ...


----------



## Aunt Bea (Jun 3, 2019)

Butterfly said:


> I have.  But in this case, reportedly nobody who worked with  him saw anything amiss or saw any conflicts or problems.  He had just resigned from the job "for personal reasons," but there was no indication of hard feelings.
> 
> I just do not understand why, when people snap nowdays they decide to kill.  In the "olden days" you just went out and got really drunk and maybe got in a barfight or something.
> 
> ...



IMO this has a lot to do with it.

I think that we need to continue looking for the triggers to this type of behavior, tighten the gun laws where appropriate and teach people how best to protect themselves in these situations.

I also think that we need to stop sensationalizing this type of crime.  I read a statistic recently that said 40,000 people died from gun violence last year and that 250,000 died from medical mistakes while seeking treatment.  

We are a big country with many big problems that need our attention and gun violence is only one of those very serious and tragic problems with no single solution.


----------



## treeguy64 (Jun 3, 2019)

_Aunt Bea wrote: "I think that we need to continue looking for the triggers to this type of behavior ........" 
_
Perhaps a poor choice of words? (or pun intended?)


----------



## 911 (Jun 3, 2019)

I have watched people on YouTube with extended clips. One fellow even put together a 600 round clip, which us completely ridiculous. However, can you imagine a psycho with a 200 round clip in a large mall at Christmas? 

If that should ever happen, they would need a moving van to carry the bodies to the morgue. My point here is that what always worried me when facing a shooter was, “What his the shooter’s weapon and what type of arsenal is the shooter possessing?” The shooter isn’t about to send you a note advising you of his arsenal. This is something that you will learn as time passes. 

Fully automatic weapons and semi automatics with extended clips are the worse of the worse. And, when you add in other types of arsenal that a fellow like McVeigh used, Oh Boy! Let the body count begin.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jun 3, 2019)

*prior behavior issues*

The killer apparently was showing signs of behavioral issues and had an altercation with a city employee last week.

https://nypost.com/2019/06/02/dewayne-craddock-had-been-getting-violent-with-co-workers-before-virginia-beach-shooting-report/


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Keesha said:


> There’s no shock there win. Your attitude isn’t much different than the attitude of every other American which is why I made my post in the first place. Somehow you have the ability to justify and rationalize why it’s not the gun laws or the legal guns that are the problem.
> 
> 
> According to statistical facts,  this isn’t the case. Countries that have stricter gun law have fewer gun related deaths. Even states within your own country that have stricter gun laws have fewer gun related deaths.
> ...




   "According to statistical facts, this isn’t the case. Countries that have stricter gun law have fewer gun related deaths. Even states within your own country that have stricter gun laws have fewer gun related deaths."

   Sorry!...Illinois /Chicago have some of the most restrictive guns law in the nation. And yet they have one of the highest gun-death rates as well. Matter of fact I believe Chicago is known as the deadliest city.

https://www.axios.com/chicago-gun-violence-murder-rate-statistics-4addeeec-d8d8-4ce7-a26b-81d428c14836.html


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Do not know why that link, did not post , as a link?


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

The 75th anniversary of the D-day/Normandy landing is coming up this Thursday........Using the logic of some here....I guess our guys & our allies should have stormed those beaches without weapons???

Perhaps some nice words would have gotten the job done?

IMO it doesn't matter if it is thousands of whacko's with guns........or just one.......they should be approached in the same manner.

Nor does it matter if it is an enemy on the battlefield , or a criminal in your church or in ones own home.

I hate to be cliche but....don't forget....when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

WhatInThe said:


> The killer apparently was showing signs of behavioral issues and had an altercation with a city employee last week.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2019/06/02/dewayne-craddock-had-been-getting-violent-with-co-workers-before-virginia-beach-shooting-report/



Whenever a workplace shooting happens, managers & employees (under threat of being fired) are instructed NOT to give any information to the media about how the employee was treated or what his motivation may have been.  That's probably because they don't want people blaming THEM for the tragedy.  I noted that after the post office shooting in Oklahoma.  Media reports said "He just flipped," which was complete B.S.  A couple of co-workers said he was tormented relentlessly - ridiculed about his appearance (overweight, bald) & his work was constantly sabotaged by other employees - rearranging mail in his mail bag so he couldn't get his work done, then being reprimanded.  Managers & supervisors participated in this.  His victims ONLY included his tormentors - he told others to just leave (like this employee recently).

Please use common sense.  A normal 15-year employee who never committed a crime does not wake up one morning & say, "I think I'll kill a bunch of people today for no reason."

I have worked in a couple of places like that & have successfully sued one employer who was forced to learn an expensive lesson.  I remember very well the anger & stress it caused.  When you torment someone, you run the risk of not knowing how they'll react or when they will snap....everyone has a breaking point.  Treating people with decency & respect goes a long way.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_post_office_shooting


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 3, 2019)

Pink Biz said:


> Imho, the Second Amendment has been misinterpreted by the Supreme Court in Washington DC v. Heller, thanks to the NRA and Antonin Scalia. Unless and until the Constitution is amended to offset this travesty, mass shootings will continue unabated.
> 
> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/john-paul-stevens-court-failed-gun-control/587272/



The Second Amendment and the rights are more important than human lives.
Same old story.
We have to do something about this.
Next year rolls around same thing.
I'm on a political forum and it's brutal.


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

"Please use common sense. A normal 15-year employee who never committed a crime does not wake up one morning & say, "I think I'll kill a bunch of people today for no reason."


 Well that has actually been known to happen....rare but it has. I do agree that many other factors may push someone over the top. But some folks do just go nuts.

No violence but.....years back we had a guy that just drove off the job.....ran out of gas & was found by the police in that area . He had no idea why? At first did not know where he was , and again no idea why he was there. The police confirmed his [out-of-it] behavior / demeanor.
He received psychiatric treatment......no reason was ever explained , his psychiatric health was deemed normal?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jun 3, 2019)

win231 said:


> Whenever a workplace shooting happens, managers & employees (under threat of being fired) are instructed NOT to give any information to the media about how the employee was treated or what his motivation may have been.  That's probably because they don't want people blaming THEM for the tragedy.  I noted that after the post office shooting in Oklahoma.  Media reports said "He just flipped," which was complete B.S.  A couple of co-workers said he was tormented relentlessly - ridiculed about his appearance (overweight, bald) & his work was constantly sabotaged by other employees - rearranging mail in his mail bag so he couldn't get his work done, then being reprimanded.  Managers & supervisors participated in this.  His victims ONLY included his tormentors - he told others to just leave (like this employee recently).
> 
> Please use common sense.  A normal 15-year employee who never committed a crime does not wake up one morning & say, "I think I'll kill a bunch of people today for no reason."
> 
> ...



Oh I wouldn't doubt there are workplace issues. But other websites said he had some manifesto like ramblings on social media. Now maybe he went to social media as a vent for his anger.

I've seen management-employee confrontations happen daily and after one both should've been fired. I've also had temper tantrum throwing bosses when calm didn't seem to give two hoots why they screamed or turned 50 shades of red. Screamers frequently don't document which many employees like/tolerate. And others constantly trying to spy on, test and/or micro management others. Union or not a lot don't believe in reporting pos employees or management. Also I've seen new management and policy upset many an employee. Clock punchers hate it when their routine is messed up even if it's ignoring official company practice and procedure.

I've heard reports he knew he was going to be fired or suspended. Or perhaps they didn't believe his side of the story involving one of those altercations or confrontations.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

rgp said:


> "Please use common sense. A normal 15-year employee who never committed a crime does not wake up one morning & say, "I think I'll kill a bunch of people today for no reason."
> 
> 
> Well that has actually been known to happen....rare but it has. I do agree that many other factors may push someone over the top. But some folks do just go nuts.
> ...



Quite different (as you noted).  Anyone can be "out of it"...minor stroke, brain not working right, etc.  I doubt that would cause mass murder.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

Sunny said:


> So, what do we do?  Just throw in the towel and allow the U.S. to continue as the only (supposedly) civilized country in the world where anybody can legally buy a semi-automatic weapon, for any reason, or without any reason at all except that he's nuts. and go into a crowded place and start shooting randomly?
> 
> It's never "too late" to put an end to this ridiculous death hold the NRA has on this country.  It is too late to bring back all the innocent souls who have died, but at least we can prevent more of these mass shootings. Or at least, cut out some of them.
> 
> The NRA cannot win this; too much is at stake.



You are misinformed when you say "anybody can _legally _buy a semiautomatic weapon."  You are mistakenly using the term "Legally."
Some facts:
To buy a gun legally (in my state of CA), you walk into a gun store, present a valid I.D. pass a written gun-safety test, obtain a "Firearms Certificate," fill out forms, & wait 10 days before the store will release the gun to you.  During those 10 days, a detailed background check from the Dept. of Justice & Police Dept. is performed.  If there are convictions for any felonies, or misdemeanor domestic violence incidents, the gun is not released.  And, if the purchaser has a restraining order pending, it is also not released.  And it is a crime for any convicted felon or prohibited person to even walk into a gun store or be in possession of any firearm or even a single bullet.

Now, you may have a clear understanding of why more gun restrictions don't work.  Someone with a criminal record knows he can't legally buy a gun; that's why he buys them illegally on the street - where restrictions & laws don't matter....the same way illegal drugs are purchased.   It's got nothing to do with the NRA.


----------



## johndoe (Jun 3, 2019)

People have been killing each other since the dawn of time. Cain killed Able. David killed Goliath. Lets ban sling shots.The gun genie in the US has been out a long time and can't be put back in the bottle and shouldn't be. Self protection is a must  

The core trigger of gun killing in my mind is stress. Some people handle it better than others. The US population has more than doubled in the US in my lifetime. Interstates were just highways back in the day. Now they are a mess leading to road rage.

I saw a documentary on PBS where they did an experiment to see what effect overcrowding had on rats. They put a half dozen pairs of rats in an enclosure and let them just do their ratty thing. They had offspring. Their offspring had offspring, and on it went. Overcrowding took over. There was fighting, murder and ****** deviancy among them now.

Another contributor to our stressful society is the news media. Every day the sky is falling. 

Social media also makes us way TOO connected. We can't get away from each other. We snipe at each other anonymously. There is a reason politics is not allowed here.

The solution? Probably none. Just try to keep away from it.


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

"Another contributor to our stressful society is the news media. Every day the sky is falling. "

  Wow, do I ever agree with that one !

 "The solution? Probably none. Just try to keep away from it."

   Might be a-bit "head-in-sand" but ? I'm guilty of it as well.


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 3, 2019)

rgp said:


> "According to statistical facts, this isn’t the case. Countries that have stricter gun law have fewer gun related deaths. Even states within your own country that have stricter gun laws have fewer gun related deaths."
> 
> Sorry!...Illinois /Chicago have some of the most restrictive guns law in the nation. And yet they have one of the highest gun-death rates as well. Matter of fact I believe Chicago is known as the deadliest city.
> 
> https://www.axios.com/chicago-gun-violence-murder-rate-statistics-4addeeec-d8d8-4ce7-a26b-81d428c14836.html


Chicago is a city no a country or a state.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> Has anyone ever worked with a person they felt "uneasy" about? I did many decdes ago. I always worried he was going to explode at any second.



To avoid being there when an employee goes ballistic, I have quit jobs after a couple of weeks when I observed a lack of respect & belittling of employees - usually from "supervisors" & managers.  I have heard co-workers say, "One day I'm going to blow his fool head off."  And, after seeing how a supervisor treated him, I believe it.  Many companies don't care who they make a supervisor.  Been there.


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> Chicago is a city no a country or a state.



 Well aware of that, my reply was in regard to inhabited areas , governed by law. 

    And......since we're noting mistakes & or nuances of wording....it's "not" a country or state.....[not] no a country or state.


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 3, 2019)

rgp said:


> The 75th anniversary of the D-day/Normandy landing is coming up this Thursday........Using the logic of some here....I guess our guys & our allies should have stormed those beaches without weapons???
> 
> Perhaps some nice words would have gotten the job done?



You are talking about wartime? Of course you use weapons.  But in peacetime?



IMO it doesn't matter if it is thousands of whacko's with guns........or just one.......they should be approached in the same manner.



> Nor does it matter if it is an enemy on the battlefield , or a criminal in your church or in ones own home.



Of course it matters in wartime you can kill without getting prosecuted for murder.  It's different in peacetime. 



> I hate to be cliche but....don't forget....when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.



Where have I heard that one before.  Guns will never be outlawed.  It's part of the culture in the United States.

I'll give you another one that is always repeated after a mass murder.

"We have to do something about this".   :sleeping:


----------



## treeguy64 (Jun 3, 2019)

johndoe said:


> People have been killing each other since the dawn of time. Cain killed Able. David killed Goliath. Lets ban sling shots.The gun genie in the US has been out a long time and can't be put back in the bottle and shouldn't be. Self protection is a must
> 
> The core trigger of gun killing in my mind is stress. Some people handle it better than others. The US population has more than doubled in the US in my lifetime. Interstates were just highways back in the day. Now they are a mess leading to road rage.
> 
> ...



Would be nice if everyone actually read the posts in a given thread before posting their own.


----------



## Trade (Jun 3, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> Has anyone ever worked with a person they felt "uneasy" about? I did many decdes ago. I always worried he was going to explode at any second.



There are some people on this forum that I wouldn't feel warm and fuzzy about sitting in a room with my back to them.


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

Another reason we will have mass shootings in the future:  Here is a mass shooting that would have happened if his mother didn't call police:
_"Rose was sentenced to two years and three months in the Orange County Jail, one year in a residential mental health treatment program and five years’ probation with GPS monitoring. He also is required to stay 500 yards away from his victims and cooperate in his mental health treatment._

Hmmm, he already committed a felony by illegally carrying & being in possession of a gun that wasn't registered to him.  That, alone has a 5-year maximum sentence...WITHOUT even considering the murder plot, for which there is ample evidence.
In addition he already plotted mass murders at churches  & synagogues.  Does anyone with half a brain think his "Treatment & counseling" will change his mind?  His mental health treatment amounts to drugs - the same drugs that every mass shooter is on at the time.  That's why there is a warning with these drugs:  "_This drug has been known to cause suicidal and homicidal tendencies."
_
For those who aren't familiar with sentencing guidelines, a two-year sentence means he might serve 6 months at best.  Remember, O.J. Simpson's 33-year sentence for armed robbery & kidnapping?  He was released after 9 years.  (after he got away with two murders). 
"Early release due to costs & prison overcrowding, a mental health "professional" will declare him no longer a threat & he will be released (like John Hinckley, the Manson killers & countless other violent criminals).  Then, he will be in the news as another mass shooter.  Gee, what a surprise.
You can blame guns all you want - which will change nothing.  Or, you can think about a light sentence for someone who is already in possession of an illegal gun & is plotting mass murder being free to carry out his plan in a few months.  It's our pathetic justice system that allows & encourages it.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/an...of-worship-oc-man-admits/ar-AACkHOL?ocid=iehp


----------



## win231 (Jun 3, 2019)

Trade said:


> There are some people on this forum that I wouldn't feel warm and fuzzy about sitting in a room with my back to them.



:hug:


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> You are talking about wartime? Of course you use weapons.  But in peacetime?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





   "You are talking about wartime? Of course you use weapons. But in peacetime?"

 If someone is approaching you/threatening you with a gun......there is no peacetime...there will be no peace, till he is dead.


----------



## johndoe (Jun 3, 2019)

treeguy64 said:


> Would be nice if everyone actually read the posts in a given thread before posting their own.


I assume you are talking about your earlier post on the rat experiment. I did read it, and simply elaborated on it from my perspective along with other things . If you feel like I "stole your thunder", I apologize sir.


----------



## Warrigal (Jun 3, 2019)

rgp said:


> The 75th anniversary of the D-day/Normandy landing is coming up this Thursday........Using the logic of some here....I guess our guys & our allies should have stormed those beaches without weapons???
> 
> Perhaps some nice words would have gotten the job done?
> 
> ...



Your post lacks logic.
First, weapons of war should be restricted to the military to be used as intended. It is a nonsense to suggest that withholding such weapons from civilians is  the same as taking them away from the army or the police, coast guard etc. 

There is a very big difference between an enemy on the battlefield and a criminal but in both cases there are rules, laws and conventions that apply and only those trained in such matters should be given the power of using lethal force on other human beings.

Second, it is not necessary to outlaw gun ownership to provide a safer community for innocent people in their place of work, schools, homes etc. Sensible limits on the categories of firearms that are legal and restrictions on the number and amount of bullets would go a long way but only if a national system of licencing, background checks and registration of all firearms is set up. You can be pretty sure that the military and police force keep detailed records of where all of their weapons are at all times and that when not in use, they are properly secured.

Cliches sound good but rarely hold up against the facts. An apple a day does not keep the doctor away and introducing some sensible firearms regulations does not open the way for mayhem everywhere. That horse, to use another turn of phrase, has already bolted when people are being massacred at work, in church and in the elementary school.


----------



## Sassycakes (Jun 3, 2019)

I don't have any answer for this terrible situation this world is in today. I understand some people feel the need to have a gun for protection. I also think that if an unstable person wants a gun they can get one anyway possible. It really makes me sick for the danger people are in no matter where they go. The movies,schools workplaces etc. I wish someone could come up with a way to protect the people.


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 3, 2019)

rgp said:


> Well aware of that, my reply was in regard to inhabited areas , governed by law.
> 
> And......since we're noting mistakes & or nuances of wording....it's "not" a country or state.....[not] no a country or state.



Forgive us our trespasses. I have often seen Chicago quoted as being a bad city while having strict gun laws. But Chicago is not the worst in the U.S. 

That at doesn't prove anything. If only it was that simple.


----------



## Gary O' (Jun 3, 2019)

Warrigal said:


> .....it is not necessary to outlaw gun ownership to provide a safer community for innocent people in their place of work, schools, homes etc. Sensible limits on the categories of firearms that are legal and restrictions on the number and amount of bullets would go a long way but only if a national system of licencing, background checks and registration of all firearms is set up. You can be pretty sure that the military and police force keep detailed records of where all of their weapons are at all times and that when not in use, they are properly secured.
> 
> Cliches sound good but rarely hold up against the facts. An apple a day does not keep the doctor away and introducing some sensible firearms regulations does not open the way for mayhem everywhere. That horse, to use another turn of phrase, has already bolted when people are being massacred at work, in church and in the elementary school.




I like this train of thought 
It seems a direction folks need to go

Out where I live, one must be armed…to survive

There’s as many renegades here as there are normal folks, maybe more
Somewhat wild west like, but with greater fire power

Thing is, even if yer aiming a single shot, it slows folks down, causes some to consider 

…especially if it’s a 12 gauge


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Warrigal said:


> Your post lacks logic.
> First, weapons of war should be restricted to the military to be used as intended. It is a nonsense to suggest that withholding such weapons from civilians is  the same as taking them away from the army or the police, coast guard etc.
> 
> There is a very big difference between an enemy on the battlefield and a criminal but in both cases there are rules, laws and conventions that apply and only those trained in such matters should be given the power of using lethal force on other human beings.
> ...





 "Your post lacks logic.
First, weapons of war should be restricted to the military to be used as intended. It is a nonsense to suggest that withholding such weapons from civilians is the same as taking them away from the army or the police, coast guard etc."  

You lack logic......I never specified [a] weapon, any particular type.

"There is a very big difference between an enemy on the battlefield and a criminal but in both cases there are rules, laws and conventions that apply and only those trained in such matters should be given the power of using lethal force on other human beings."

 Again, try applying logic , any criminal is your enemy . 

..."in both cases there are rules, laws and conventions that apply and only those trained in such matters should be given the power of using lethal force on other human beings."

 Just plain wrong....if someone is trying to kill me ?....with all the power that is in me....I will do my level best to kill them.

 And as for that last one.....you can talk apples all you want but......it is a fact that if guns are indeed outlawed , and all those that apply logic [or lack of] such as you seem to promote....Then only the outlaws will have guns.


----------



## rgp (Jun 3, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> Forgive us our trespasses. I have often seen Chicago quoted as being a bad city while having strict gun laws. But Chicago is not the worst in the U.S.
> 
> That at doesn't prove anything. If only it was that simple.



 I never said Chicago was the worst...I said it had one of the highest gun death rates. And some do consider it the deadliest? 

 BTW...what does "That at doesn't prove anything.?.....Mean exactly.


----------



## Sunny (Jun 4, 2019)

> Your post lacks logic.
> First, weapons of war should be restricted to the military to be used as  intended. It is a nonsense to suggest that withholding such weapons  from civilians is  the same as taking them away from the army or the  police, coast guard etc.
> 
> There is a very big difference between an enemy on the battlefield and a  criminal but in both cases there are rules, laws and conventions that  apply and only those trained in such matters should be given the power  of using lethal force on other human beings.
> ...



Amen to all of the above, sister!  Well put, Warrigal!


----------



## Warrigal (Jun 4, 2019)

Sadly, Australia has just has a mass shooting of our own. A 45 yr old white man armed with a sawn off pump action shot gun entered a hotel in Darwin and went around deliberately shooting people. The reason for this has not been reported yet. Four people are dead and two are in hospital with wounds but are in a stable condition. The gunman has been arrested so I expect we will hear more in the coming days.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...ths-in-darwin-shooting-one-arrested/?cs=14231

https://www.smh.com.au/national/darwin-mass-shooting-what-we-know-so-far-20190604-p51ujo.html

 Darwin is the capital city of the Northern Territory which is a large and mostly sparsely populated area that has not yet risen to full statehood. They drink a lot in the NT.


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 4, 2019)

rgp said:


> I never said Chicago was the worst...I said it had one of the highest gun death rates. And some do consider it the deadliest?
> 
> BTW...what does "That at doesn't prove anything.?.....Mean exactly.



I left the typo in deliberately.  What does it mean exactly?

Well refer to the post:
_Sorry!...Illinois /Chicago have some of the most restrictive guns law in the nation. And yet they have one of the highest gun-death rates as well. Matter of fact I believe Chicago is known as the deadliest city.I'
 
_ Knowing Chicago and the gang related deaths, that proves nothing.  One robin doesn't make a whole summer.

What you are trying to prove with your post is that restrictive gun laws don't work.  And yet states with the most restrictive gun laws have less gun crime than those with less restrictive gun laws.


----------



## rgp (Jun 4, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> I left the typo in deliberately.  What does it mean exactly?
> 
> Well refer to the post:
> _Sorry!...Illinois /Chicago have some of the most restrictive guns law in the nation. And yet they have one of the highest gun-death rates as well. Matter of fact I believe Chicago is known as the deadliest city.I'
> ...




   That's all bull....you don't even live here. You keep saying I'm not proving my point....prove yours.

   Second thought...don't bother, this is all opinion anyway....and your opinion does not matter.


----------



## win231 (Jun 5, 2019)

Having been in this woman's situation, when I hear people criticize gun owners, I always chuckle.  This guy is lucky to be alive.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/mom...13-minutes-until-police-arrive-220537761.html


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 5, 2019)

squatting dog said:


> Nope. sorry. It wasn't the inanimate hunk of plastic and metal that started the attack... It was an obviously unstable person who started the attack.



I hear that so often and it really bothers me.

Without the 'inanimate hunk of plastic and metal' there would be no attack.  You see the tendency now is to blame it all on the shooter and disregard the gun.

The gun is part of the equation. Sure the person might be unstable, but there are all kinds of unstable people in this world.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have a gun to defend yourself or hunting or target practice or whatever.

But there are more guns than people in the U.S.  To me it just doesn't seem 'normal'.


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 5, 2019)

rgp said:


> That's all bull....you don't even live here. You keep saying I'm not proving my point....prove yours.
> 
> Second thought...don't bother, this is all opinion anyway....and your opinion does not matter.



I did prove my point.  Statistics prove it.  My family lives there.  I have a dog in the hunt so to speak.  If you don't want a reply, don't bother posting.  This is an international forum by the way.


----------



## rgp (Jun 5, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> I did prove my point.  Statistics prove it.  My family lives there.  I have a dog in the hunt so to speak.  If you don't want a reply, don't bother posting.  This is an international forum by the way.




   I didn't say I didn't want a reply....I said your opinion does not matter....YOU do not live here, and as such YOU do not see/hear our news every day. 

 Back to what i said....some of the areas,...cities,states....with the most gun restrictive laws  , have some of the highest gun death rates.....that is a fact.


----------



## Warrigal (Jun 5, 2019)

> Back to what i said....some of the areas,...cities,states....with the most gun restrictive laws  , have some of the highest gun death rates.....that is a fact.



Out of curiosity, can you point to some of the areas, … cities, states... with the least restrictive laws that have some of the lowest gun death rates?
That would seal your point. Make sure the data is about rates, not raw numbers for a valid comparison.

I am in earnest about wanting to be in formed in this matter.


----------



## rgp (Jun 5, 2019)

Warrigal said:


> Out of curiosity, can you point to some of the areas, … cities, states... with the least restrictive laws that have some of the lowest gun death rates?
> That would seal your point. Make sure the data is about rates, not raw numbers for a valid comparison.
> 
> I am in earnest about wanting to be in formed in this matter.




 Frankly no........those do not make the news, are not discussed, why would they be? The news is crime...not the lack there of. I wish it were the reverse , but it is not.

 You don't live here either, and again you do not hear the day-to-day news.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 5, 2019)

I've been following this thread with some interest.  It seems that every time there is a mass shooting, the subject of gun control becomes the priority.  While it is probably true that we need stronger gun control regulations to prevent guns from falling into the hands of the "unbalanced", there are other statistics that are seldom publicized which show where the Majority of the gun violence occurs.  These Mass shootings capture the media attention for days/weeks, but the Real number of gun deaths is seldom reported.  Here goes.......

In the U.S., African Americans comprise about 13% of the total population, and gun deaths in that ethnicity are twice as high as gun deaths among Caucasians...which comprise about 64% of the population.  Math quickly shows that Blacks are almost 9 times more likely to be killed by guns than Whites.  However, the vast majority of those gun deaths are committed by the drug and street gangs, against their fellow "opposition"....and are so common that it hardly seems worthy of any Media attention.  

https://www.newsweek.com/gun-deaths-us-twice-high-among-african-americans-caucasians-273071

The problem with "gun control" is that there are already so many guns in the U.S....well over 350 million....most of which are Not registered, that any attempt to reduce that number substantially is probably wishful thinking.  Even if something like the Australian effort to reduce the number of guns were initiated, only the most law abiding gun owners would tend to participate in any gun "buy back" program...the thugs and criminals would ignore any such laws, and little reduction in gun deaths would occur.  

Gun Control rhetoric peaks every time there is one of these mass shootings, and is largely a "knee jerk" reaction among the public that bears little relation to the root causes of the problem....and fades quickly once the public becomes "saturated" by the media coverage....Until the next one occurs.


----------



## win231 (Jun 5, 2019)

I guess he didn't care about the gun ban or that he wasn't allowed to own a gun because he was a convicted felon:



https://redirect.viglink.com/?forma...thaboutguns.com/2019/06/staff-writer/paroled/


----------



## Camper6 (Jun 5, 2019)

rgp said:


> I didn't say I didn't want a reply....I said your opinion does not matter....YOU do not live here, and as such YOU do not see/hear our news every day.
> 
> Back to what i said....some of the areas,...cities,states....with the most gun restrictive laws  , have some of the highest gun death rates.....that is a fact.



Well I live in Canada only a half hour from the U.S. and I have visited frequently.  What you may not know is that Canadians get all kinds of news from the U.S. every day.  On our television cable we get all the major U.S. networks, CBS, NBC, ABC and in addition PBS .  I follow U.S. news closely.  My sister in law and her family live in Chicago.  My son lives in New England with his family.  

Back to what you said.  I'm not going to argue the point anymore with you.  I just wanted to point out that just because I don't live there that I don't know what is going on.  I also belong to a politics forum and I'll keep all my arguing there.

What you say is correct and it depends on the state.  It's tough to generalize and come to a definite conclusion.

Whether you think my opinion does not matter or not I'm allowed to present it.


----------



## Warrigal (Jun 6, 2019)

rgp said:


> Frankly no........those do not make the news, are not discussed, why would they be? The news is crime...not the lack there of. I wish it were the reverse , but it is not.
> 
> You don't live here either, and again you do not hear the day-to-day news.



I don't live on another planet either and you would be very surprised how much US news is available to people in countries all over the world. 
We can hear radio programs from NPR, BBC, Radio Netherlands and Deutsche Welle to name a few. They are all broadcast over our own ABC NEWS 24 station and we also have US news on our local TV stations, not to mention on the internet.

If you were curious about Australia you could follow our news too.

All of the above is irrelevant to my question about whether loose gun laws correlate with  low death rates in some states or cities. Given that we often hear that people would be safer if there were more guns in civilian hands, I thought that maybe you might be able to find an example to share. I often hear the Chicago has strong gun legislation but high a death rate of gun related homicide. I have seen the argument that one reason for this is the much laxer laws in neighbouring states where obtaining a gun is easy. Bringing them in over the state line is no problem. 

I thought you might have been able to counter this argument by showing that there are at least some states or cities where looser laws and low death rates go hand in hand.


----------



## Dudewho (Jun 6, 2019)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Other than killing, what other purpose is a gun used? It is a killing machine. Period. It's asinine to allow guns into the hands of people, who should not be given the power of life/death. It also asinine to allow a fixation on weapons to out weigh the rights of all citizens to be free from gun violence.




Weekly innocent Americans protect their families and property with legally purchased weapons, you just never hear about it because it doesn’t fit the media pushed narrative.
If someone is breaking into your home what will you do? Make a call, hide in a closet? Beg for mercy? Fight back or call your family to say goodbye, hopefully you can get them all in before the closet door opens… 

The choice is yours, be a sheep or a wolf. 


https://www.foxcarolina.com/anderso...deo_c16c8485-1d8a-5296-b378-3dd5a87afc44.html


----------



## rgp (Jun 6, 2019)

Camper6 said:


> Well I live in Canada only a half hour from the U.S. and I have visited frequently.  What you may not know is that Canadians get all kinds of news from the U.S. every day.  On our television cable we get all the major U.S. networks, CBS, NBC, ABC and in addition PBS .  I follow U.S. news closely.  My sister in law and her family live in Chicago.  My son lives in New England with his family.
> 
> Back to what you said.  I'm not going to argue the point anymore with you.  I just wanted to point out that just because I don't live there that I don't know what is going on.  I also belong to a politics forum and I'll keep all my arguing there.
> 
> ...





 "it depends on the state. It's tough to generalize and come to a definite conclusion."

   Why didn't you just say that , in the beginning ?

  My remark was smart-a$$ed...I apologize .


----------



## Sunny (Jun 6, 2019)

Dudewho, these tales of protection against intruders are enormously hyped-up accounts of events that are very rare. I have lived in many parts of this country, and have never experienced anyone trying to break into my home. Neither has anyone in my family, or my friends, to my knowledge. It just doesn't happen often enough to warrant all the risks of keeping a gun, "just in case." 

From all I have read on this subject, the thieves are pretty savvy about timing their break-ins when no one is home. If they have studied your home and your likelihood of being away, that's when they break in. That's why it's a good idea to stop newspaper deliveries when you are going on vacation; you don't want anything piled up outside your door. Local high school graduation nights are a popular time for break-ins. It is easy for thieves to get lists of students about to graduate, and look up the addresses of some of them. Burglaries spike during graduation nights.  They know the family will not be home. So, itchy as your trigger finger might be, you are not likely to be home when the thieves will be breaking in. Probably a good alarm system is a much better idea, if you are so worried about break-ins. (But not as much fun as your fantasies about being a "wolf.")

It is much more likely that the overzealous gunslinger living in the house will shoot a neighbor, a confused or drunk person, a kid, or someone's pet.  This country is not the wild west, as much as the gun lobby would have us believe it is.

The real danger to us is not the _very _improbable likelihood that someone will try to break in to our homes. It is our likelihood of being shot as part of a crowd in a public place. Get with the 21st century, Dude!  Read the paper, on any given day.


----------



## rgp (Jun 6, 2019)

Warrigal said:


> I don't live on another planet either and you would be very surprised how much US news is available to people in countries all over the world.
> We can hear radio programs from NPR, BBC, Radio Netherlands and Deutsche Welle to name a few. They are all broadcast over our own ABC NEWS 24 station and we also have US news on our local TV stations, not to mention on the internet.
> 
> If you were curious about Australia you could follow our news too.
> ...




   "I have seen the argument that one reason for this is the much laxer laws in neighbouring states where obtaining a gun is easy. Bringing them in over the state line is no problem. "

   From what I hear , from the news...that is correct. And a huge part of the problem...I live near Cincinnati,Ohio...we are lax, so it is said that many in the more stringent states come here.

  "I thought that maybe you might be able to find an example to share."

  Keep in mind . I'm no computer genius    But I'll see what I can find.

 "If you were curious about Australia you could follow our news too."

  To be perfectly honest......I never gave it a thought. Sure if you folks have a "big story" it is on our national broadcast , but day-to-day? No. Perhaps i will look [on line] now & again.


----------



## rgp (Jun 6, 2019)

Sunny said:


> Dudewho, these tales of protection against intruders are enormously hyped-up accounts of events that are very rare. I have lived in many parts of this country, and have never experienced anyone trying to break into my home. Neither has anyone in my family, or my friends, to my knowledge. It just doesn't happen often enough to warrant all the risks of keeping a gun, "just in case."
> 
> From all I have read on this subject, the thieves are pretty savvy about timing their break-ins when no one is home. If they have studied your home and your likelihood of being away, that's when they break in. That's why it's a good idea to stop newspaper deliveries when you are going on vacation; you don't want anything piled up outside your door. Local high school graduation nights are a popular time for break-ins. It is easy for thieves to get lists of students about to graduate, and look up the addresses of some of them. Burglaries spike during graduation nights.  They know the family will not be home. So, itchy as your trigger finger might be, you are not likely to be home when the thieves will be breaking in. Probably a good alarm system is a much better idea, if you are so worried about break-ins. (But not as much fun as your fantasies about being a "wolf.")
> 
> ...





  " It just doesn't happen often enough to warrant all the risks of keeping a gun, "just in case." 

   Risk? to keeping a gun.......Ya keep it, "just in case".......... if some one breaks in ? ya shoot'em.

 "It is our likelihood of being shot as part of a crowd in a public place."

   Exactly why one should carry......shoot back!


"Get with the 21st century, Dude! Read the paper"

 Was the remark really necessary?


----------



## win231 (Jun 6, 2019)

Sunny said:


> Dudewho, these tales of protection against intruders are enormously hyped-up accounts of events that are very rare. I have lived in many parts of this country, and have never experienced anyone trying to break into my home. Neither has anyone in my family, or my friends, to my knowledge. It just doesn't happen often enough to warrant all the risks of keeping a gun, "just in case."
> 
> From all I have read on this subject, the thieves are pretty savvy about timing their break-ins when no one is home. If they have studied your home and your likelihood of being away, that's when they break in. That's why it's a good idea to stop newspaper deliveries when you are going on vacation; you don't want anything piled up outside your door. Local high school graduation nights are a popular time for break-ins. It is easy for thieves to get lists of students about to graduate, and look up the addresses of some of them. Burglaries spike during graduation nights.  They know the family will not be home. So, itchy as your trigger finger might be, you are not likely to be home when the thieves will be breaking in. Probably a good alarm system is a much better idea, if you are so worried about break-ins. (But not as much fun as your fantasies about being a "wolf.")
> 
> ...



_
"From all I have read on this subject, the thieves are pretty savvy about timing their break-ins when no one is home."   _That's known as "wishful thinking."Well, home invasion robberies are a frequent news item.  In that scenario, thieves target people who ARE home.  I'm fortunate enough to live in a nice neighborhood - several celebrities as neighbors.  I had one (attempted) home invasion robbery 20 years ago.  The house was being remodeled & he could certainly see the TV on at the time.  There were 3 cars in the driveway.  When I pointed a gun at him, he ran off.  He was arrested later that same night after he broke into another home - also with the occupants at home.
 More recently, the elderly couple next door were also home when two thieves broke in & severely beat both of them.  
There are people who aren't satisfied with just stealing things; they enjoy hurting people.  Owning a gun is a big responsibility & there is nothing wrong with choosing NOT to.  It's not for everyone.  There IS, however something wrong with telling others what they should do.


----------



## Trade (Jun 6, 2019)

Gary O' said:


> …especially if it’s a 12 gauge



For home defense you can't beat a shotgun IMO.


----------



## johndoe (Jun 6, 2019)

Sunny said:


> Dudewho, these tales of protection against intruders are enormously hyped-up accounts of events that are very rare. I have lived in many parts of this country, and have never experienced anyone trying to break into my home. Neither has anyone in my family, or my friends, to my knowledge. It just doesn't happen often enough to warrant all the risks of keeping a gun, "just in case."


I have have homeowners insurance "just in case." I have car insurance "just in case." Never used it before but it's there if needed.


----------



## Olivia (Jun 6, 2019)

We'll always have guns. We all know that, for good or for bad. But have to ask, how often have we heard about mass knifings?


----------



## Sunny (Jun 6, 2019)

Yes, Johndoe, and how often do we hear of anyone being killed by their homeowners insurance, or their car insurance? :lol1:


----------

