Their strict gun control laws didn’t work here and no gun control law or ban will ever stop a crazy madman from killing anyone. You can make up any silly gun control law you want, but if only the law abiding citizens obey them you’re still going to get killed. Criminals make up their own rules and they will do what they want no matter what society says. This isn’t the first time something like this has happened and it won’t be the last, and there’s nothing anyone can do to change this fact of life.
I wonder if we will ever know if there was of any attempt to stop the gunman by those kids. Unless he was using something like a beta magazine, I assume he had to reload. This was a camp ground…right? Surely they had knives, axes, etc. Hell, a sharp stick.
The same questions were asked after Columbine. How did two shooters….separated… manage to kill/injure so many people?
This is the mentality of sheep that I think about when the analogy comes up. What was it that some number of them didn’t realize that no amount of running would save them in and that standing their ground and fighting back, preferably in numbers, was their best option? Same goes for Columbine… I’ll never understand how a high school which should have been filled with young athletes with lots of ‘go’ in them didn’t one of them with enough courage to see the opportunity to turn a pencil in to a fighting tool.
They never thought to stand their ground. They were simply running from the wolf. I really do not mean to make light of their deaths, I’m just curious why we rarely see more willingness to fight back.
Like the analogy or not, those of us that carry, do so because we want an option if bad things come to pass.
Because we’re trained bad things always happen to other people and that the state is a god walking on earth. The state loves us and wants us regulated and disarmed for our protection. Wear a state issued costume, and you immediately become a super hero; more competent, more trustworthy, etc. When the state fails, it simply means that more freedom must be sacrificed and given to the state. Only when we give all our freedom away, will we be safe. The more boots you lick, the safer we’ll all be. History proves it over and over again. Just look at the 20th century.
Nicholas, I understand your reluctance to talk about this before the bodies are even cold in the ground. However, I think it does them no good to gloss over what happened, or use “respect for the dead” as an excuse not to examine this and see if there’s anything we can do to avoid or minimize things like this from happening in the future. Like it or not, the public’s attention span rivals that of a gnat. And for far too many people, they’ll forget about this the minute the next celeb O.D.s on fame and fortune. One more thing: supporting the right of private citizens to own guns for self-defense is NOT a political cause. It is a legal, civil rights cause. While I am a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative, there are those on the Left that believe in our 2nd Amendment rights just as I do. And it’s unfair to all of us to characterize this (not to mention trivialize it) as a “political” issue. But I’m right there with you, when it comes to sensationalizing this, or seeing someone – anyone – grandstanding and using this to promote themselves or their own agendas. We have to be able to talk about things like this, Virginia Tech, Columbine and the like, in order to learn from it.
I would have been much happier of the story went something like this: “Madman with a Gun Invades Island, Shot 92 Times Center Mass by His Potential Victims.”
Their strict gun control laws didn’t work here and no gun control law or ban will ever stop a crazy madman from killing anyone. You can make up any silly gun control law you want, but if only the law abiding citizens obey them you’re still going to get killed. Criminals make up their own rules and they will do what they want no matter what society says. This isn’t the first time something like this has happened and it won’t be the last, and there’s nothing anyone can do to change this fact of life.
Too bad there weren’t any of those old fat white guys around.
Oh, right, they didn’t live in a high crime area, so nobody needed a gun, right?
lol
I wonder if we will ever know if there was of any attempt to stop the gunman by those kids. Unless he was using something like a beta magazine, I assume he had to reload. This was a camp ground…right? Surely they had knives, axes, etc. Hell, a sharp stick.
The same questions were asked after Columbine. How did two shooters….separated… manage to kill/injure so many people?
This is the mentality of sheep that I think about when the analogy comes up. What was it that some number of them didn’t realize that no amount of running would save them in and that standing their ground and fighting back, preferably in numbers, was their best option? Same goes for Columbine… I’ll never understand how a high school which should have been filled with young athletes with lots of ‘go’ in them didn’t one of them with enough courage to see the opportunity to turn a pencil in to a fighting tool.
They never thought to stand their ground. They were simply running from the wolf. I really do not mean to make light of their deaths, I’m just curious why we rarely see more willingness to fight back.
Like the analogy or not, those of us that carry, do so because we want an option if bad things come to pass.
Because we’re trained bad things always happen to other people and that the state is a god walking on earth. The state loves us and wants us regulated and disarmed for our protection. Wear a state issued costume, and you immediately become a super hero; more competent, more trustworthy, etc. When the state fails, it simply means that more freedom must be sacrificed and given to the state. Only when we give all our freedom away, will we be safe. The more boots you lick, the safer we’ll all be. History proves it over and over again. Just look at the 20th century.
The vast majority of humans are flight dominant not fight dominant. You do have to consider that most/all of the victims were children, though.
Given the affiliation of the camp and the people attending it, I’d be surprised if they did actually fight back.
Am I the only one who finds this in bad taste? I mean, its just a little soon to use it as an example to support a political cause.
Nicholas, I understand your reluctance to talk about this before the bodies are even cold in the ground. However, I think it does them no good to gloss over what happened, or use “respect for the dead” as an excuse not to examine this and see if there’s anything we can do to avoid or minimize things like this from happening in the future. Like it or not, the public’s attention span rivals that of a gnat. And for far too many people, they’ll forget about this the minute the next celeb O.D.s on fame and fortune. One more thing: supporting the right of private citizens to own guns for self-defense is NOT a political cause. It is a legal, civil rights cause. While I am a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative, there are those on the Left that believe in our 2nd Amendment rights just as I do. And it’s unfair to all of us to characterize this (not to mention trivialize it) as a “political” issue. But I’m right there with you, when it comes to sensationalizing this, or seeing someone – anyone – grandstanding and using this to promote themselves or their own agendas. We have to be able to talk about things like this, Virginia Tech, Columbine and the like, in order to learn from it.
I would have been much happier of the story went something like this: “Madman with a Gun Invades Island, Shot 92 Times Center Mass by His Potential Victims.”