DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Xavier_Onassis on July 24, 2015, 11:53:52 AM
-
Louisiana has the record for gun nut deaths, and seems to be likely to keep the unfortunate title.
Once more, the legendary "good man with a gun" came too late to stop the traditional "bad man with a gun".
If only there had been more guns in that theater. Perhaps the guy who runs the popcorn machine should be required to also be armed and waiting in the projection booth. Sure, that would do the trick.
CNN)As moviegoers settled in for the comedy "Trainwreck," John Russell Houser stood up and unloaded at least 13 shots. Then, as people rushed from the theater, the 59-year-old man joined them and headed outside, apparently toward his blue 1995 Lincoln Continental.
Then Houser noticed the sirens from police converging on the Lafayette, Louisiana, theater. So he went back inside and took his own life.
By that point Thursday night, 21-year-old Mayci Breaux of Franklin, Louisiana, was dead. Ten others were wounded, including 33-year-old Lafayette resident Jillian Johnson, who would die at a nearby hospital.
And a city, state and country were searching for answers.
"Why did he come here? Why did he do (this)?" Col. Michael Edmonson of the Louisiana State Police said Friday morning. "We don't know that."
Police: 'He could have come out and done additional harm'
Houser was a drifter who'd become estranged from his family back home in Louisiana and arrived in Lafayette, a city of about 120,000 people about 60 miles west of Baton Rouge, in early July. He was staying at a Motel 6, about 4 miles north of his eventual target, the Grand 16 theater.
Why he'd gone there is a mystery. Lafayette Police Chief Jim Craft said Houser once had an uncle who lived in the city, but he'd died about 35 years ago. Authorities gave no indication that he knew anyone else there.
EXPAND IMAGE
But they have some clues suggesting this wasn't a spontaneous act. Houser's hotel room had wigs, glasses and other apparent disguises. And he'd swapped out the license plates on his Lincoln Continental, parking it right outside an exit door to the Grand 16.
Yet, while he paused his barrage of bullets to head toward the exits, he never made it to the car.
Two police officers who happened to be at the theater made their way toward where "Trainwreck" was playing, as patrons rushed away from the carnage and their law enforcement colleagues on the outside rushed to get there.
"They heard a shot," Craft said. "And upon entering the theater, the suspect was found deceased from a self-inflicted gunshot wound."
Edmonson said that the gunman got outside, saw police coming, and then returned to kill himself.
"He could have come out and done additional harm," the state police colonel said. "... It was an ordinary moment, an ordinary night, and it turned into an extraordinary situation."
Pops, muzzle flashes and panic
The shooting victims are in area hospitals, except for two who have been released. One of the ones still hospitalized was in critical condition Friday morning, Craft said.
As they recover, others are thankful they're not hurt physically even as they try to make sense of why someone would fire at least 13 bullets into a movie theater packed with about 100 people, none of whom he apparently knew.
Randall Mann, an executive at Acadian Ambulance, which responded within 6 minutes, said his 21-year-old daughter -- who was watching "Trainwreck" from the second-to-last row, the same one as Houser -- is "very traumatized" but unharmed.
"She made a comment that she was just thankful that the shooter did not pick one of the theaters that had some children's movies in it because she would have hated for the children to have witnessed that," he told CNN. "I took that as a great first step of her eventually coping with this."
Horror in a movie theater, instead of on a screen
He said that when his daughter heard the first pops, she thought they could have been firecrackers or part of the movie. But she "knew something was happening" when she saw muzzle flashes, Mann said. She hit the floor then ran for her life, joining a swarm of panicked but controlled, helpful crowd.
Another man in the theater told Keifer Sanders, who was watching another movie, that "there was no argument, nothing going on at all. And a guy just stood up and started opening fire."
"The guy was just kind of at ease, just standing there, just shooting," Sanders said.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal recounted the story of two teachers, enjoying the last few days of summer break, caught up in the melee. One jumped over the other, a move that the friend said prevented a bullet from hitting her in the head, according to the governor. It struck her in the leg instead.
This all unfolded around 7:30 p.m. (8:30 p.m. ET), about 20 minutes into a film that Houser had bought a ticket for just like everyone else. Afterward, the movie's star Amy Schumer tweeted, "My heart is broken and all my thoughts and prayers are with everyone in Louisiana."
-
.........and once again, ocurred in a supposed "gun free zone". Boy, those zones are sure great......for shooters who know that none of the vicitms will be able to defend themselves
-
If only there had been more guns in that theater.
NOW you're getting it. Kind of hard for that to happen when law abiding are forbidden to, while the gun nut has no intention of following any law
-
I really doubt that anyone in Louisiana pays any attention to "gun free zone" signs.
You say that "guns do not kill people", but now you are saying that signs do.
O Please.
The more guns there are, the more people will get shot.
-
I really doubt that anyone in Louisiana pays any attention to "gun free zone" signs.
The law abiding do. That's what makes them law abiding
You say that "guns do not kill people", but now you are saying that signs do.
Professor literal, strikes again. :o
The more guns there are, the more people will get shot.
And the more guns in law abiding citizens hands, the more lives saved than taken using a gun. Sorry, my lives saved, trumps your lives lost
-
Of course, this only applies in the US, because we are so "exceptional".
One of the exceptions is the excess number of guns.
Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!Guns! Guns! Guns!
-
And the more of those Guns! in law abiding hands means more lives saved than taken by one
-
That is bullshit, of course.
No matter how much you spew this nonsense, you are not convincing me.
-
Of course I'm not going to convince you. You've drunk the coolaide. Doesn't matter however, facts are facts regardless of how ignorant you wish to remain
-
The facts are these:
In the UK an citizen is 40 times less likely to be shot.
In Spain, 37 times less likely to be shot.
In Denmark, 8 times less likely to be shot.
In Switzerland, 3.6 times less likely to be shot.
In Japan 177 times times less likely to be shot.
But we are better off than Swaziland, South Africa, and Honduras.
More guns do not make people safer. The more there are, the more people will be shot.
-
And IN THE UNITED STATES, a minimum of 7 times more lives are saved using a gun, to the 1 life taken by some thug. That means for the 2 lives that the Louisiana shooter took, 14+ lives were saved using a gun elsewhere in the country.
You're right, more guns don't make us safer....simply more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens do
Hope the coolaide is tasty
-
If the guns were simply NOT THERE we would be safer, wand the more guns there ware., the less safe we are.
Cut it with the bullshit, sirs. You ware a pitiful brainwashed sap.
Consider this. How hard would it be for someone to find a drivable Studebaker?
The last one was produced around 1963.
The fact it, it is very hard to find one. You probably can find one or two on eBay, and they would be expensive: not because they were great cars, but because they are rare. It is pretty easy to find a good Chevrolet, Ford or Plymouth, because they made many, many more of them than Studebakers. Years ago, people junked Studebakers at a greater rate due to the difficulty of finding parts and mechanics who wanted to work on them. It has never been illegal to own a Studebaker.
There were hundreds of thousands of Fords, Chevvies and Plymouths produced, and it is really easy to find one.
The same is true of guns: the more guns there are, the easier it is to find one, and the less you will have to pay for one.
Guns, like cars, do not die when their owners die.
The heirs might or might not be responsible, They might need $600 more than they need a Beretta and most would sell it to someone they knew without bothering with any paperwork.
So the more guns there are, the greater the chances guns will be cheap and readily available to anyone who wants them. More guns to be stolen, misused wand "borrowed" bu nutty friends and relatives.
More guns do NOT make anyone safer, The more of the goddamned things there ware, the more people are going to get shot.
-
If the guns were simply NOT THERE we would be safer, wand the more guns there ware., the less safe we are.
......................................
Consider this. How hard would it be for someone to find a drivable Studebaker?
The last one was produced around 1963.
....................
.................. the more guns there are, the easier it is to find one, and the less you will have to pay for one.
......................
More guns do NOT make anyone safer, The more of the goddamned things there ware, the more people are going to get shot.
More guns do not make people safer. The more there are, the more people will be shot.
What highly impractical and onerous measure are you suggesting?
That if the entire production of guns were shut down they would be scarce in fifty years?
It is not hard to make a firearm last fifty years, I have a perfectly serviceable octogenarian here.
They also are not any harder to smuggle than is pot, if they were as scarce as classic cars the incentive to smuggle them would rise in proportion to the value.
The USA is about the middle of the series in terms of the prevalence of violence, about half the world has it worse about half the world has it better. This seems natural for a nation whose people are drawn from all the world, we are probably better off than we deserve to be.
If you want to make a comparison that demonstrates how effective gun law can be , you will have to find some way of comparing the oranges to oranges . England had a lower murder rate than ours back when their gun restrictions were as light as ours.
The mass killing rate of Europe depends a lot on what you want to include , if you exclude the regular European Wars they look a lot better than we do , if you include the wars that Europeans engage in on a regular basis they catch right up.
Also is Moldova European?
If you get to leave Moldova out , I get to leave Illinois out, if you don't include Bosnia I won't include Louisiana. This seems fair to me.
-
This is a country, NOT a continent. This country is NOT having a civil war, or some secessionist movement, like Transdniestria or the former pieces of Yugoslavia that are still outside the EU.
If you were to compare it to Europe, the European Union Countries, NOT all those warring ex-Soviet Republics would be the group to use, since they have roughly equivalent gun regulations.
-
This is a country, NOT a continent. This country is NOT having a civil war, or some secessionist movement, like Transdniestria or the former pieces of Yugoslavia that are still outside the EU.
If you were to compare it to Europe, the European Union Countries, NOT all those warring ex-Soviet Republics would be the group to use, since they have roughly equivalent gun regulations.
Shall we compare the USA to France or to Denmark? France is a bit bigger than Texas and Denmark compares to Massachusetts. We have just as many states that go years between these attacks as Europe does.
The US is most of a continent , especially we are most of the population of this continent.
But If you want to compare the US to Monaco, go on .
-
Compare the US to the EU, as I said.
More guns in the US is one of the reasons more people get shot in the US.
-
And more guns in the hands of law abiding, means more lives saved using a gun than those taken, here in the USA
-
Compare the US to the EU, as I said.
More guns in the US is one of the reasons more people get shot in the US.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Crime_statistics
That does not make it an easy comparison. This site has a few interesting tables , but the text warns repeatedly that the accuracy is dependent on the different reporting that the different countries do.
In general the US is better off than South America, Africa and Asia, Europe is better off than we are.
I doubt that the prevalence of guns is an important factor.
South America has much less guns , but per capata much more likely hood for getting shot.
Europe looks better in part because they are not fully at war right now, but they are due, how many fifty year periods have passed Europe without major war?
If you are willing to include the wars , Europe is the worst ,hands down.
-
We are not talking about countries at war. This is about laws for peaceful countries that are not at war.
I am NOT willing to include wars, because this is about gun registration and keeping guns out of the hands of crazy civilians.
More guns in circulation means more guns are more available. More guns available means more guns available to crazy people and demented gun nuts.
-
And more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens means more lives saved than taken by a gun. At least in this country
-
We are not talking about countries at war. This is about laws for peaceful countries that are not at war.
I am NOT willing to include wars, because this is about gun registration and keeping guns out of the hands of crazy civilians.
More guns in circulation means more guns are more available. More guns available means more guns available to crazy people and demented gun nuts.
There is a reason I want to include war.
I think a well armed population is an impediment to a conqueror.
European habits may make the peace more peaceful and also make the wars more frequent.
It isn't two situations , if you step back and look at it all.
-
We are not talking about countries at war. This is about laws for peaceful countries that are not at war.
I am NOT willing to include wars, because this is about gun registration and keeping guns out of the hands of crazy civilians.
More guns in circulation means more guns are more available. More guns available means more guns available to crazy people and demented gun nuts.
There is a reason I want to include war.
I think a well armed population is an impediment to a conqueror.
European habits may make the peace more peaceful and also make the wars more frequent.
It isn't two situations , if you step back and look at it all.
Look at Switzerland, and why Hitler left them alone, and why they have managed to remain neutral. Hint: it has something to do with 'a well armed militia' and having to fight virtually every armed Swiss citizen to invade the country. How are their statistics?
-
Excellent insight, H
-
Hitler chose not to invade Switzerland for several reasons.
Switzerland is small and mountainous, and of course the Swiss Army being well trained and armed as well was a factor. But Switzerland also provided a way to launder money and artworks. Hitler had declared modern art decadent, but it was also valuable, and rather than destroy it, it was sold through Swiss dealers.
The gun violence rate in the US is 3.6 greater than the rate in Switzerland. The Swiss tend to focus more on rifles and shotguns, while Americans concentrate more on pistols.
Guns are registered in Switzerland, but not in the US.
-
And you have yet to demonstrate how registering a firearm prevents even one person from being shot
-
...
Guns are registered in Switzerland, but not in the US.
They're not?!?!?!
There are laws on the books requiring them to be registered. In fact, last I checked, there are over 20,000 gun laws on the books. What we need is not more useless gun laws, but adequate enforcement of the ones we have.
-
And you have yet to demonstrate how registering a firearm prevents even one person from being shot
It doesn't, not when anyone can go out on the streets with cash in hand and buy an illegal firearm in 20 minutes or less. And that is the point, unless you enforce the laws to keep illegal firearms off the street, you can't prevent people from getting their hands on them.
-
By registered, I mean a national gun registry.
A cop can type in an auto license plate number YUW2T4 or whatever from any state and find out to whom the car is registered as fast as you can locate products on the Internet. When I go through customs, the immigration guy swipes my passport and my picture, address and all sorts of info come up automatically.
This is not possible with the serial numbers of guns. I believe that in Switzerland it is.
The Swiss are generally very peaceful people. They have not fought a war since way before 1800. Despite speaking four languages and practicing several religions, they do not have the social conflicts that we have in the US. Nor do they have the grinding poverty that exists in the US, both urban and rural. The Swiss generally do not regard their police as enemies, nor do the police treat the citizens as we have seen lately in the US.
-
By registered, I mean a national gun registry.
A cop can type in an auto license plate number YUW2T4 or whatever from any state and find out to whom the car is registered as fast as you can locate products on the Internet. When I go through customs, the immigration guy swipes my passport and my picture, address and all sorts of info come up automatically.
This is not possible with the serial numbers of guns. I believe that in Switzerland it is.
The Swiss are generally very peaceful people. They have not fought a war since way before 1800. Despite speaking four languages and practicing several religions, they do not have the social conflicts that we have in the US. Nor do they have the grinding poverty that exists in the US, both urban and rural. The Swiss generally do not regard their police as enemies, nor do the police treat the citizens as we have seen lately in the US.
Wrong. A database search of any handgun serial number will turn up the last legal owner. However, if the handgun was stolen, or sold, traded or given away in a private transaction, or inherited, or changed possession in any of a number of other ways, finding the last legal owner is only the first step in tracing it.
-
And you have yet to demonstrate how registering a firearm prevents even one person from being shot
It doesn't, not when anyone can go out on the streets with cash in hand and buy an illegal firearm in 20 minutes or less. And that is the point, unless you enforce the laws to keep illegal firearms off the street, you can't prevent people from getting their hands on them.
BINGO. Which begs the question, why does the left push this Federalized goal, any and every time a publisized shooting takes places.....as if that's the panacea to keeping people from getting murdered
-
The reason guns are so easily obtained is that there are soooo many of the damned things.
Try finding a gun in Tokyo or Madrid as easily. Or even Zurich.
-
#of guns is moot. Nor do Japan, Spain, or Germany have a version of the 2nd amendment.
Acquiring them illegally is the point being made
-
If they do not have the second amendment, then they are fortunate. And far less likely to be shot.
The Second Amendment needs to go. It should have been gone long ago. That is my point.
-
And there is the mechanism to do exactly that.....WITHIN THE LAW. Good luck with that
-
I prefer a highly regulated gun ownership. Meaning training as a requirement to get a gun and background check. But at a extremely voluntary level to the point culturally no one can criticize people who do not own guns
-
The follow-up question would be regulated by whom, and how so?
-
I prefer a highly regulated gun ownership. Meaning training as a requirement to get a gun and background check. But at a extremely voluntary level to the point culturally no one can criticize people who do not own guns
Background checks are already required. Hunting safety courses are required to get hunting licenses. Safety courses are required for concealed carry permits. The NRA has for years offered gun safety, self defense and concealed carry classes. It would be nice if those were mandatory, but even then, the criminals running around with illegally obtained firearms aren't likely to worry about skipping a class.
-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lafayette-shooter-able-to-buy-gun-because-he-was-never-involuntarily-committed/ar-AAdyzXu
In this article the author calls the legal purchase a "loophole".
He is wrong.
If the law had been enforced as written , this buyer would have poped up on the list of people forbidden to buy a gun.
This is not a loophole , it is a symptom of a very difficult to enforce and administer law.
Why pass a new law, if the ones on the books are not being used?
-
Bingo
-
I'm with Kimba here.
-
...Why pass a new law, if the ones on the books are not being used?
My point perzactly.
-
Yes H , you and I are very close in agreement on this issue.
I shall mark a calendar.
-
I have always said that, Plane. There are, last time I looked, over 20,000 gun laws on the books. We don't need more unenforceable or downright unenforced laws, we need to pare them down to a few effective, enforceable ones, then make sure they are enforced. Stiffen penalties for lawbreakers, work harder to get illegal firearms off the streets and stop straw buyers and others from buying guns legally, then passing them on to criminals. Sure, even piss off the NRA - I'm sure they'll howl about some of the measures. Got to wonder, who needs a 30 round magazine for hunting or target shooting? You can't legally own a full auto without a special license, why not do the same for high capacity magazines? Whatever they do, they need to enforce it.
That said, I do believe in private ownership, and its place in "a well regulated militia" - the key to me is "well regulated."
-
Nothing i stated is against gun ownership. My focus is more on right for people to decide to have or have not. Due to examples of towns and counties that has mandatory not voluntarily gun ownership
-
Mandatory gun ownership is insanity.
-
Outside of Plane, I don't think you'll come across any of us good gun nuts, who are pushing for mandatory gun ownershp.....much like the Swiss. Nor does the NRA. It's all about freedom. ... freedom to chose to own or not to own. To carry or not to carry. The problem comes in when those who chose not to, advocate every endeavor to inhibit, if not prevent others their freedom to own or carry
-
Mandatory gun ownership is insanity.
So you would be uncomfortable in Switzerland or Kennesaw, safe, but uncomfortable.
-
The Swiss do not require gun ownership. They require some reserve soldiers to have rifles in their homes.
I assume that Kennesaw, wherever that is, is a place of much insanity, or perhaps you just made it up.
It does not matter: compulsory gun ownership is insanity.
And I fail to see how it would make me safer than I am now.
-
The Swiss do not require gun ownership. They require some reserve soldiers to have rifles in their homes.
LOL....which is the same as mandating gun ownership
It does not matter: compulsory gun ownership is insanity.
And yet you push that we adopt a Swiss like model for owning guns. I sure wish you'd make up your mind
-
All Swiss are NOT members of the military. Women are not, males that have not served in the military are not, men who are no longer in the reserve are not.
The Swiss do NOT require gun ownership for even a majority of its citizens.
They are also required to account for all ammunition used.
It is not that I need to "make up my mind": it is that you are incapable of using your own.
-
Not only can you not make up your mind, you're borderline schizophrenic. You literally start a thread about how we need to adopt the swiss mode of gun control, and then literally shoot down every aspect of it, that would likely lead to less people being shot. The ONLY thing you cling to, with every fingernail of irrationality left however, is some massive federalized registration system, that you have yet to explain how it would stop even one person from getting shot :o
-
All Swiss are NOT members of the military. Women are not, males that have not served in the military are not, men who are no longer in the reserve are not.
The Swiss do NOT require gun ownership for even a majority of its citizens.
They are also required to account for all ammunition used.
It is not that I need to "make up my mind": it is that you are incapable of using your own.
The Swiss situation has tightened up in recent years, you are describing how it is now.
After centuries of having very easy accessibility and plenty of ammunition and a low crime rate.
Now there is a registration , and still a low crime rate, and there is less accessibility , not a lot less, but less , and still a low crime rate.
Having the gun does not make the owner shoot people , registering the gun does not prevent the gun from misuse.
Crediting the present Swiss situation on recent Swiss law ignores their long history of being generally well armed and well behaved.
-
I do think the cat is out of the bag, in that the insistance on nothing more than a massive federal registration system, has about 1% to do with preventing people from getting shot (since not once, has even 1 explanation been given on the how it accoplishes that part), and 99% to do with the 1st step in confisication of firearms from law abiding citizens. Keep in mind, folks like xo, are on record as wanting to abolish the 2nd amendment. To them, law abiding folks like myself, Cu4, & Hnumph, should have no such right. It wouldn't be an immediate process, as the left has learned to turn up the heat slowly. It'd be a continuation in the process of systematically banning this, then a ban of that, but you can keep x, y, & z......until of course they need to ban x.......then y........then of course, z
There is no other reason for a massive Federal database, given how easily the Fed, in particular the Executive branch, will supercede its Constitutional limitations & authority to simply institute that which they believe just has to be done. Registration does nothing to prevent anyone from getting shot. That's been clearly established. And just because other countries do it, doesn't take into account that those other countries don't have a version of a 2nd amendment, as we do. So until a clearly worded explanation can be provided as to how a Federal Registration of guns prevents thugs & murderers from shooting people, such shrill support of such is moot
And no, not "Well.....the Swiss register their guns", isn't credible to how such an action prevents criminal shootings either
-
The Swiss have a significantly higher number of gun crimes than other Western European countries.
-
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point being made, but thank you for playing
-
................................nothing more than a massive federal registration system,.......................... and 99% to do with the 1st step in confisication of firearms from law abiding citizens. ..............................
Yes , this seems like a reasonable suspicion.
Considering the history we have of gun laws being pushed as if every restriction of any kind would be a good idea.
Then enforcement being kept lax , as if to make another rule seem like a good idea.
To me the key thought is how politically useful the issue is , there my be a layer of the party that is not motivated twards solution.
-
Hit the nail on the head Plane.....a concerted effort by fhe branch responsible to enforce existing laws, fo be laxed in doing so, there by giving themselves a platform to claim more laws & restrictions needed