doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com We'll be in for it now

I heard on the Michael Savage program yesterday that this is not, in fact, the worst mass killing. His story was that in 1928, a school board member set dynamite charges over a period of weeks, in the school where he had some alleged grievance. Blew it all up, killing 45(including himself) and injured another 54. Michael Savage is conservatisms own raving lunatic, of course, and I have not way to verify this story. The important point is that in every case, the lunatic killer has shown signs of being a lunatic for some time and the signs were ignored by family and friends. Nobody just goes nuts and does these terrible things just because there was a sale on dynamite or handguns, etc.
We are unfortunately not completely safe anywhere, no matter how restrictive the country's laws are.
I also heard on the Glen Beck show that more kids are killed yearly in football(high school and college) than are killed in these awful shootings. Doesn't make this any less tragic, just some gives it some perspective. God bless their families and friends.

Jeff,
Your words are even being emulated by our politicians as we type. No one wants to use this event for their agenda. It will change as time passes. Years ago I remember reading an piece about 2 or three wemon held in a house by some armed nut. They managed to call police. The police sent a squad car to the house and didn't see anything out of the norm and drove away. Later after the event the ladies filed a court case directed at the lack of respose by the police. Eventually the higher courts found the police had fulfilled their responsibilities. The police have an obligation to protect society not the individual. This was the final finding and it pointed out to me what many don't seem to understand even today.
Best,
Ron

The only viable defense seems not to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Pray hard as this works for everything.
PS. I never eat at "fast food joints" becuase I don't want to eat .... and then die, that would truly suck!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

Jim, Here ya go! The media is being very careful with their words. The VT tragedy is the largest school "SHOOTING" in our country's history. While the body count in the Bath Township massacre was far larger, the deaths were caused by explosives that were set over a period of months, not gun related. The media, particulary the liberal media, will only want to sensationalize the gun aspect.

Lowell et al
I apologize for my tirades, I have been having a rough time lately.
If I may be welcomed into the fold again, I agree, squabbles within, but we need to stand united. I believe it was Ben Franklin who said " Gentlemen, We must all hang together, or we
will all hang separately". If I am wrong in the quote, or in the caps, I aologize.
Mike B.

Your physician may know that you are as crazy as a bed bug and not be able to report it because of HIPAA privacy rules. Probably doesn't apply if he thinks you are a menace and a danger to society but that's a tough call and he may be betting his licsense to practice on it. Health care privacy and the NICS check are in direct contradiction in many cases.

EDIT: Well.....this is incredible. The guy was apparently ruled mentally ill by a court. This should have showed up on the NICS check. Wonder what the problem is and why it hasn't been corrected. If we are going to submit to a check , it should actually mean something. See link.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=3052278

I think Bob B. is correct. However, the nut also probably lied on the 4473 form he filled out to buy the gun(s). There is at least one question about your mental competence. I'm sure Sarah Brady and Clinton will prosecute the dead violator of all the laws already in place, not to mention multiple murders, already slighty illegal.

This sort of thing is going to happen again, and it seems to me that we need to accept that it is inevitable that everytime that it does, that there will be discussions about what kind of gun laws might reduce this kind of violence. Rather than denegrating those who do not understand gun ownership and taking extreme positions like advocating that teachers and students carry weapons, we should engage in the debate in a rational manner. Do you really think it is a good idea for guns to be carried to a fraternity party, or a college basketball game? It is just plain stupid to state that most people who advocate stricter gun laws are using this just for political gain. It is just possible that most of these people are just as sincere in their beliefs as we are in ours. In my opinion, we do ourselves more harm by being afraid of these discussions, and by assuming that any sort of restriction on gun buying or the types of weapons which are restricted will automatically lead to eventual gun confiscation. I think that we all realize that gun resrictions will not prevent many murders, but it is reasonable to explore the possibility that some laws could reduce some types of violence. For instance, how many people really need 12 rounds in a clip? Could a law limiting the capacity of guns reduce the fatalities and give people a chance to get away or fight back? Would national laws be better than a patchwork of state laws? Would a waiting period for handguns in Virginia have made a difference? I don't know the answer, but we are fools if we automatically suspect the motives of everybody who asks these questions.

Springer,
Grab a helmit and flack vest. You know what is coming.
Best,
Ron

Springer,
I was with you on the part about guns in frat parties and basketball games and even allowed that there are people that just want reduced violence. But, when you start down the path of 'do we really need 12 rounds' you end up at one round eventually. Besides, I recall practicing for IPSC shooting years ago and getting so quick (2-3 secs) with a reload that 7 round mags were enough to make me comfy. I never did buy a 14-15 round gun...ever. Soon as this becomes obvious to anti's, removeable mags would be next.

If these people want to focus on a real hazard to their safety, they should put their efforts into automobile safety. Aproximately 42,000 people die each year on our highways. That's 115 a day. Those that lost loved ones are no less tramatized as a those that loose loved ones to gun violence.

The issue most of us have is not with those that ask whether or not these controls will work, but with those that demand that they be implemented because THEY say they WILL work.

It's a tough problem and obviously there has not been a solution that addresses all issues.