Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Gunman Opens Fire in NJ Mall


49 posts in this topic

Posted

People get shot in Chicago every day, why isn't that being reported and being posted all over the forum??

I think most people have just about given up on Chicago and Detroit.  By the time I got to Iraq, Baghdad looked cleaner and less hostile than some of these pictures I see coming out of Detroit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People get shot in Chicago every day, why isn't that being reported and being posted all over the forum??

 

What a good-looking question.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This, or something like it, needs to be re-instated.

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

 

None of our "news" stations are worth a crap any more, including Fox News.  They all have their own political agenda.  I mean if you flip on CNN, watch it for a day, then watch Fox the next day, they are the exact same thing on opposite ends of the political spectrum.  They play to the tune played by their viewers and their financiers.  NBC, ABC and CBS are not excluded from this, I just like to pick on Fox and CNN cause' they stand out more.  Gone are the days of Dan Rather saying, "This is your evening news" in that deep voice.  Now the popular thing to do is to get somebody on your channel who disagrees with one of your iconic figures, like Nancy Grace, and pretend to entertain the other side for a minute before unleashing your particular icon in what will end up as an un-intelligible screaming match between two people who haven't the slightest idea how to have an intellectual debate.

 

That's why I bounce around between so many of them.  I figure if I check them all out, then maybe I'll find an ounce of truth somewhere in all the noise.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This, or something like it, needs to be re-instated.

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

 

None of our "news" stations are worth a crap any more, including Fox News.  They all have their own political agenda.  I mean if you flip on CNN, watch it for a day, then watch Fox the next day, they are the exact same thing on opposite ends of the political spectrum.  They play to the tune played by their viewers and their financiers.  NBC, ABC and CBS are not excluded from this, I just like to pick on Fox and CNN cause' they stand out more.  Gone are the days of Dan Rather saying, "This is your evening news" in that deep voice.  Now the popular thing to do is to get somebody on your channel who disagrees with one of your iconic figures, like Nancy Grace, and pretend to entertain the other side for a minute before unleashing your particular icon in what will end up as an un-intelligible screaming match between two people who haven't the slightest idea how to have an intellectual debate.

 

That's why I bounce around between so many of them.  I figure if I check them all out, then maybe I'll find an ounce of truth somewhere in all the noise.

The news use to be unbiased now they have like a dozen different news stations, just pick your flavor of political bias and enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

No one was killed or injured, the gunman isn't in the mall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This, or something like it, needs to be re-instated.

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

 

None of our "news" stations are worth a crap any more, including Fox News.  They all have their own political agenda.  I mean if you flip on CNN, watch it for a day, then watch Fox the next day, they are the exact same thing on opposite ends of the political spectrum.  They play to the tune played by their viewers and their financiers.  NBC, ABC and CBS are not excluded from this, I just like to pick on Fox and CNN cause' they stand out more.  Gone are the days of Dan Rather saying, "This is your evening news" in that deep voice.  Now the popular thing to do is to get somebody on your channel who disagrees with one of your iconic figures, like Nancy Grace, and pretend to entertain the other side for a minute before unleashing your particular icon in what will end up as an un-intelligible screaming match between two people who haven't the slightest idea how to have an intellectual debate.

 

That's why I bounce around between so many of them.  I figure if I check them all out, then maybe I'll find an ounce of truth somewhere in all the noise.

 

Not sure why you're concentrating so much on the news orgs.  Fact is someone opened fire in a mall.  Doesn't really matter if he killed anyone or not, or if he was using an assault rifle or a pistol - fact is we have a gun issue in America and we're doing nothing about it because the small minority of gun owners (most of which are law abiding) think that changing some policies using common sense legislation means that they aren't going to be able to get their guns and/or keep their guns.  That's only true if you live in lala land with Fox News and Karl Rove, et al.  In the meantime we're going to continue to hear stories like these.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not sure why you're concentrating so much on the news orgs.  Fact is someone opened fire in a mall.  Doesn't really matter if he killed anyone or not, or if he was using an assault rifle or a pistol - fact is we have a gun issue in America and we're doing nothing about it because the small minority of gun owners (most of which are law abiding) think that changing some policies using common sense legislation means that they aren't going to be able to get their guns and/or keep their guns.  That's only true if you live in lala land with Fox News and Karl Rove, et al.  In the meantime we're going to continue to hear stories like these.

I've got no problem with common sense policies that would actually stop things like this.  I wouldn't even mind improving the background checks so they catch people like the Navy gunman.  The problem is I haven't heard any common sense things that would work.  I've heard things like, "No pistol grips!",  "No magazines bigger than 10 rounds!", "No barrel shrouds!", "Nobody needs to use a 5.56mm round!", "No collapse-able butt-stocks!"

 

1) A 5.56mm round is technically "medium power", it's basically a .22 lr travelling at 3,000 fps and starts to break up as soon as it impacts a target.  There are tons of cartridges that are much more powerful.  I've got an old wooden bolt action that fires a projectile 3x the weight of a 5.56mm at the same velocity, and would go completely through the engine block of a car and still be able to kill when it came out the other side.  People just like to demonize that caliber because it's the most commonly used one in AR-15 platform rifles.

2) Pistol grips are just a cosmetic/comfort feature.  Anybody who has ever actually touched a gun knows that it has no impact on how fast you can fire.  Your finger moves no faster when your hand is wrapped around a pistol grip.

3) Magazine size limitations are just silly.  Any redneck knows how to tape two 10 rounders together to make switching mags faster.

4) Barrel shrouds don't "do" anything as far as functionality.  On an AR-15 they protect the gas tube from getting bent when you're carrying it, and protect your hands from getting burned if the barrel gets hot.  If they're talking about "foregrips", I bought and tried to use one on my AR-15 and found it to be more awkward than useful, and took it back off, so I don't understand what about having a foregrip makes the weapon more or less deadly.

5) Collapse-able butt-stocks are a comfort feature.  For example if my wife wants to fire my rifle, she can collapse the stock so she can actually reach the pistol grip.  There are already laws in place regulating how short your barrel can be, how short the over-all weapon can be and more.  If you want a barrel less than 16" and you're not military, and you want to keep a stock on it, you have to fill out a bunch of paperwork with the ATF, pay a couple hundred dollars for a tax stamp, hope you get approved, etc.  If people choose to ignore these laws by taking a hacksaw to the barrel and calling it a day, do you really think they're going to pay attention to any new laws?

 

Things I'd like to see that I think might actually work.

 

- Send a SWAT team into some of the crime ridden areas of places like Detroit and Chicago and exterminate gangsters on sight.  Black, white, asian, hispanic, I don't care if they're blue, if they are known gang members, taze their ass, arrest them and keep them in prison for life; if they shoot at you for no reason, waste em'.  They think they own all the "hood" areas, and I think it's time some cops or soldiers with a pair of testicles went in there and cleaned those places out so the hard-working people who used to make things and earn money and build bright futures can move back in and have a normal life.

- Require reporting of violent tendencies or unusual levels of paranoia to appropriate authorities.  For example, if you go into your shrink and tell her you think the government is using microwaves to control your mind, she should be required by law to report that so you can't buy a gun from a licensed dealer.  At least make you go find some billy gangsta badass who has one that might jam up on you because it hasn't been taken care of.

- Streamline the communication process between various agencies.  It doesn't matter if the FBI doesn't directly respond to you shooting out somebody's tires, they should be notified.  The ball shouldn't get dropped because somebody didn't think it was a big deal.

- Require some reasonable method of securing your weapons in your home.  If you leave your house, your rifle shouldn't be stood up in your closet.  I'm not saying drop $500 or more on a safe that would break down the back of my pickup truck, but there should be some kind of locking mechanism between home invaders and your guns if you aren't home.  Not saying that will stop them, I mean they already broke into your house, but it might slow them down and it just might stop one or two people from dying at the hands of a stolen weapon.

- Require firearms training, or at least a demonstration of competence, upon purchase of first gun.  There are too many people who, although not criminal, shoot themselves or somebody else on accident out of negligence because they weren't properly trained.  When you buy your first gun, you should be legally required to at least demonstrate a certain level of competence.  Dis-assemble the weapon you bought, re-assemble it, fire it at a target at 20 feet to make sure you can hit the broad side of a barn, and memorize some basic rules of gun safety like, "Be sure of your target and what is beyond", etc.

 

I could go on and on, but I've camped here for too long, so I'm gonna get some sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Here's something about corporate news sites that kills me. CBS's article on it says,

If it can't be confirmed then don't report it! The first thing that's going to happen is people will start making assumptions and getting into arguments. If he was using an AK-47 or an AR-15, then I'm not going to be insulted just because I own one, but when you post something like that and write "could not be confirmed" as an afterthought, you've already given subliminal political fuel to people like Diane Feinstein who would make it illegal to carry pocket knives if she could. A perfect example was the Navy shooter. Everybody was yellin' about how he used an AR-15 then they came back and said, "Scratch that, it was a shotgun."

Frankly I don't care what it was, the bullets from the AR-15 that missed my nephews head by only a foot or so in the clackamas mall shooting would of killed him fired from a SIG platform or an ar-15. What I care about is keeping guns away from people with psychological issues and criminals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Because it's a pattern I've noticed, and if you're so sick and god damned tired of hearing about it, then turn off the news, stick your fingers in your ears and unplug your internet cable, because it's going go happen.  I'm willing to have an open discussion with just about anybody, but I don't appreciate being insulted because I mention a certain person's name as a reference to the time-frame in which I've noticed something.

 

It's more frequent yes, but it's got little to do with whoever's in the White House and more to do with the increasing desperation of people as they're finding themselves less and less able to cope financially in the western world's wrecked economy.

 

I'm really curious as to what will come out as the guy's motivation, mental state, how he got the weapon, etc.

 

It just seems that there has been a VERY noticeable increase in gun violence just in the past couple years, at least relative to what it was before.

 

As the guy was apparently shooting at camera's, I'd guess this particular incident is a reaction to all the NSA spying reports etc that have been coming out lately.  As for his mental state and how he got a gun? Eh.. 'Murica!  ;)  (That bit was a joke :p )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

*chop*

 

May I present a slightly more realistic solution?

 

Do what the DC police have done: more patrols in crime-ridden areas and systems like ShotSpotter to get the cops to the crime faster. Also do what the NYPD and LAPD have done: more predictive policing. America won't be getting rid of it's gun problem soon (by which I mean regular gun-related crime) until someone figures out a solution palatable to everyone from left to center to right, so might as well increase the effectiveness of the band-aid, without going to ... extremes such as "exterminate" gangsters on sight. (Yes I know you're probably being slightly hyperbolic.)

 

The problem with all the psychological testing, etc is that people always fall through the cracks, and those cracks seem rather large. Get someone to work on the back-end infrastructure of gun-licencing as well, before new laws. The (current) laws are useless if you don't have the infrastructure to support them, nor actually enforce them.

 

Of course, by doing this, you'll step on all the toes of the anti-police brigade and the anti-surveillance people, but can't have it both ways I guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

This isnt a gun debate. There is a thread for that.

What is the news on this situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I keep saying that all these are set up. Its to scare people, and that way they will let the government spy on you without any issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If anybody finds anything new to contribute please share it, I usually bounce around between Fox News, CNN, CBS, NBC, Aljazeera and BBC, and I just noticed it on Fox first, so there may be more details on some other sites, I'll go check around.

 

What was unreported by the media outlets is that the gun resisted firing every bullet, and fired bullets under duress and force of action.

The gun did not want to fire and thus made the person pull the trigger a bit harder so as to force the gun to shoot bullets.

 

Similarly, the gun lacked telemetry and geospatial data which would otherwise have allowed it to select targets autonomously and therefore the human on the 'other' end was responsible for target acquisition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gunman killed himself in the mall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Going after cameras? Had about enough of the surveillance state?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Frankly I don't care what it was, the bullets from the AR-15 that missed my nephews head by only a foot or so in the clackamas mall shooting would of killed him fired from a SIG platform or an ar-15. What I care about is keeping guns away from people with psychological issues and criminals.

but... but... that infringes on idiots to bear arms as written in the 2nd A. 

 

/s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Where's the mods at to clean this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's more frequent yes, but it's got little to do with whoever's in the White House and more to do with the increasing desperation of people as they're finding themselves less and less able to cope financially in the western world's wrecked economy.

 

 

As the guy was apparently shooting at camera's, I'd guess this particular incident is a reaction to all the NSA spying reports etc that have been coming out lately.  As for his mental state and how he got a gun? Eh.. 'Murica!   ;)  (That bit was a joke :p )

So you automatically assume he got it legally? Has it ever occurred to you that people do actually acquire firearms in the U.S illegally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So you automatically assume he got it legally? Has it ever occurred to you that people do actually acquire firearms in the U.S illegally?

 

You know what they say about people who assume, right?  Exactly, so stop assuming that I'm saying something when I'm not, or you'll look like a donkey. :rofl:  

 

For the record, I make no such claims either way, I merely added a tongue in cheek insinuation that really, guns aren't exactly hard to get in the US.  What you make of that is entirely your own doing and nothing to do with me at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

This isnt a gun debate. There is a thread for that.

What is the news on this situation?

The "news" on this is obvious - this was an attempt to bring about a suicide by cop. Happens a lot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I keep saying that all these are set up. Its to scare people, and that way they will let the government spy on you without any issues.

i am spying on you right now, do you think i need an excuse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The media picks up on anything that involves a gun to further their anti gun agenda.. Convenient that they would report this around tax season when people will be out buying firearms soon.

How do you say this ###### with a straight face.

 

"Convenient that they report it around Christmas, which is gun buying season".

"Convenient that they report it around Easter, which is rabbit hunting season, the time people buy new guns".

"Convenient that they report it around the apocalypse, which is right before the zombies come and people are buying guns".

"Convenient that they report it around gun day, the day where guns are buying guns".

 

It's reported when it happened. If you want people to stop reporting gun crime, stop giving ######nuts guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You know what they say about people who assume, right?  Exactly, so stop assuming that I'm saying something when I'm not, or you'll look like a donkey. :rofl:  

 

For the record, I make no such claims either way, I merely added a tongue in cheek insinuation that really, guns aren't exactly hard to get in the US.  What you make of that is entirely your own doing and nothing to do with me at all.

You implied. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You implied. :rofl:

 

It was a trap! You fell for it! :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.