An entire kindergarten class apparently shot and killed

Discussion in 'What's On Your Mind?' started by Doober, Dec 14, 2012.

  1. Doober

    Doober Original Member

  2. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    We don't know. :( Really, we don't.

    more at link
    Why are mass shootings becoming more common?

    The news Friday is horrific. A man shot and killed at least 27 people, including 20 children, in an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. on Friday morning.

    Yet these sorts of headlines are also becoming gut-wrenchingly familiar. Of the 12 deadliest shootings in U.S. history, six have taken place since 2007. (The Newton school shooting will likely rank second on that list.) Around the world, mass killings appear to be on the upswing — even as other types of homicides and violent crimes are becoming less frequent.
     
  3. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    weird things happening, Justin Bieber being stalked by someone wanting to castrate him at $2500 per testicle, people being sprayed with flammable liquids seemingly at random and set afire, and these shootings... the society is unravelling. Economic pressures increasing, decades of moral relativism taking their toll, who knows?

    Not surprising that shootings happen at schools since federal laws preclude carrying firearms there. Unless there's a cop present, the shooter knows nobody will be armed. The aftermath of a similar massacre in Texas, where about 30 restaurant patrons were gunned down, was that gun permits became much easier to get, on the theory that if any of the patrons had been armed, the massacre would have been stopped quickly.
     
  4. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Texas schools are gun free zones regardless.
     
  5. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    We've always had bad people. Some do their killing en masse, others bide their time and take a few days or years rack up their body counts, e.g. Charles Starkweather, Ted Bundy. And don't forget people like Thomas Doty (CO 11 in 1962, 45 dead), William Taylor & Robert Spears (National 967, 1959, 42 dead), Jack Graham (UA 629, 1955, 44 dead).

    There were plenty of atrocities on both sides in the WW II. We snubbed Bomber Harris in the European Theater but didn't blink when it came to firebombing Japan. And don't forget the Indian Wars, and slavery.

    A lot of it today is probably facilitated by conditioning through watching violent media, which incidentally is the same way (video games, simulations) the army gets a much higher percentage of their recruits to pull the trigger today than they did in earlier conflicts.

    I guess the difference is mainly cultural -- people emulate the methods that they're "familiar" with, but they're the same bad people that have existed in every era.
     
  6. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Yep. Like the Bath School Disaster, where the board treasurer didn't shoot up the school - he blew it up.

    The saddest part of this latest today is the children. The second saddest is that it will be used to further the "Anything For Security" agenda.
     
    KrazyKat likes this.
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    yes, I believe that's a federal law.
     
  8. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    the calls are clamoring for more gun control, yet that is not the answer. The recent mass shootings in Norway took the lives of 77 young people and Norway strictly controls fireams. Germany, which has had 3 of the top 5 bloodiest school shootings, strictly regulates guns as well. People seem unable to grasp the concept that just because something is illegal, it doesn't mean it is eliminated from society. Take drugs, for example, which are highly illegal, yet are everywhere. Gun violence is awful and growing in certain parts of London, and yet guns have been totally outlawed in Britain for decades. Making guns illegal here means that criminals continue to use their illegal weapons without fear that the law abiding citizens have firearms to counter and defend themselves.
     
    DeafBlonde likes this.
  9. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Bloomberg is already slobbering all over himself.

    'cept for the full auto that every Norwegian reservist keeps at home. :D
     
  10. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    I know it's venturing very deeply into black helicopter land, but we know that the FBI nurtures and instigates certain feeble minded or mentally ill types to commit terrorist actions, then arrests them before they actually do it reaping warm applause from all and sundry. We've speculated in the past that if it suited them, they could allow the perp to actually complete his act. Would it be beyond the realm of possibility that a budding nutcase would be nurtured and aided to do a massacre like this? I'd imagine there are people in power that would greatly desire the disarming of the American public. That would be highly desirable before the economic collapse starts to accelerate. There would need to be a number of these incidents to swing public opinion...
     
  11. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    wrt Bloomberg, I refer you back to your public mastersbating thread, as anything Bloombergian belongs there.
     
  12. TravelnMedic

    TravelnMedic Original Member

    The anti-gun nuts have already started. One on my "friends" list (most likely will end up getting the Ban Hammer) on FB went off the deep end with "Guns kill people" rant and ended badly and got smoked with close to 300 comments and none supporting there point of view. Then got smoked again when there rant was shared to the NRA and NAGR and other 2nd amendment news feeds.

    Some people never learn. Tragedy yes, but its not the guns fault it cant kill without someone pulling the trigger.
     
  13. [​IMG]
    Joseph Grenny

    We all have different ways of responding to mass shootings, most which do nothing to ease the pain of the victims’ families or curtail future tragedies, but the fact that we’re able to express these sentiments is a reminder of the First Amendment protections that we have in this country.
    We blame both sides of the gun control issue, whether the tragedy could have been prevented by allowing more guns or by allowing less guns.
    And we blame both sides of the mental health issue, whether the tragedy could have been prevented by providing more medication or by providing less medication.
    But the most outlandish accusations are the ones towards the media, tweeting nonsense that police should arrest reporters for attempting to interview witnesses or families of the victims.
    Even more outlandish is a self-described best-selling author and consultant, who believes we need to create a law to prevent the media from reporting on such tragedies.
    Writing for Forbes, Joseph Grenny stated the following in the wake of today’s mass shooting in Connecticut where a man named Adam Lanza used his mother’s gun to kill her along with 26 people, including 20 children, which followed another mass shooting in Oregon earlier this week in which a man killed two people in a shopping mall:
    This week, I watched in horror with most of America, as yet another person unleashed a furry of bullets in a busy Portland, Oregon, mall killing two and injuring others. But my horror was twofold. The first misery came as I heard the names and numbers of victims and thought about the pain they and their families will endure for the rest of their lives. The second dose came as I held my breath, hoping and praying the media wouldn’t amplify the violence.
    But they did.
    They did exactly what they needed to do to influence the next perpetrator to lock and load.
    1. They named the shooter.
    2. They described his characteristics.
    3. They detailed the crime.
    4. They numbered the victims.
    5. They ranked him against other “successful” attackers.
    He goes on to say the following:
    We need to discuss the merits and morality of a law. I don’t suggest a broad one – but one that matches responsibility with influence. It’s already illegal to use free speech to incite others to criminal acts. So if we know a particular kind of speech is inciting violence, how can we appropriately limit it? Is there a way to do so without creating a slippery slope that limits all speech that tenuously connects to some kind of mischief? And if a law is the wrong device, what can we do to make Stephen King’s response the norm rather than the exception?
    For example, we know naming a shooter amplifies his or her influence. We know that when his or her race, gender and other personal characteristics are detailed, those who see themselves as similar are far more likely to feel a sense of permission to follow suit. We know details of the crime act as a virtual workshop for would-be acolytes. And for heaven’s sake, when body counts are not only reported but even compared to previous perpetrators, you incite a hideous competition.
    It’s time our media leaders wake up to the fact that they are not just reporting these crimes. Depending on how they report them, they are accomplices in them.
    It is also time our legislators consider taking up the task the media appears unwilling to assume. We need to match responsibility with influence.​
    Grenny has every right to express his views, which he obviously enjoys doing, but he doesn’t realize such a law would eventually creep upon his own right to free speech.
    There are already limits to free speech under the time, place and manner restrictions, some that make sense, some that don’t make sense.
    A restriction that forbids the media from identifying the shooter and numbering the victims in the belief that it would curtail copycat shootings would eventually lead to a media blackout on these incidents where they don’t even get reported.
    We can see happened when the government imposed restrictions on war reporting, leaving many of us clueless that we are even fighting a war.
    And while that might make Grenny happy, it does nothing to prevent the actual shootings.

    Continue reading...
     
  14. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    There are things to know about interviewing children--anyone--after a trauma. Not reporting is idiotic.

    I cringe when crimes happen that are 1/20th as devastating, for the stereotype of scary mentally unsound people who could pick up a gun and--fire off so many rounds into innocents. Wrong-headed responses are certain.
    NAMI Families who have ill adult offspring have few to no options. The health aspect of this deserves a lot more attention (obviously) as a place to start.
    It is offensive to me when such illness is used as an excuse for pre-meditated, sociopathic crimes. Even someone whacked-out largely knows the difference between right and wrong. Most people with mental illness are harmless.

    Not far from where I went to kindergarten. Impossibly sad--these kids and families will never be the same. :(
     
    Rugape likes this.
  15. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Excellent comments Krazy.

    This is a profoundly disturbing event, none of these families will ever be the same, and the responders on scene will never be the same. The incredible despair that many of the responders will suffer from over the aftermath is something that needs to be addressed. The absolute destruction that this will wreak on the families is also something to be addressed. The continuing nightmare that life will be for those that survived needs to be addressed. Finding better and more workable ways to help people that have mental illnesses should be addressed as well. Sadly for all involved, I think that the main focus of the media from this point forward will be the senseless act itself, and the person that perpetrated it. Speaking as someone that has been involved as a responder in a large scale shooting (in Haiti while I was in the Army) that had more than one child dead, this is a heavy burden for these folks to carry moving forward, and some of them will never be able to move forward. I am incredibly sad for all involved.
     
    KrazyKat likes this.
  16. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Roger Ebert's take on "mass murder."

    http://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-press-r.html

     
    KrazyKat likes this.
  17. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    According to today's news, Nancy Lanza was a "Doomsday Prepper" who was stockpiling guns & good to prepare for the end of the world.

    So I guess they need not only to round up all our guns but also put all the Preppers in camps. Hmm, a few years ago there were some conspiracy theories that thought that was the real purpose of FEMA.
     
  18. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Homeschoolers, too! According to her sister-in-law, she removed Adam Lanza from the public school system some time around the 10th grade and home-schooled him.
     
  19. RB

    RB Founding Member

    http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure

    There is no way to know if lack of school security funding would have made a difference but one has to wonder. We spend 8 billion dollars or more each year to be terrorized by TSA but can't find a few dollars in the federal budget for schools.
     
    KrazyKat likes this.
  20. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Just another way to suck on the federal teat. Thanks to the feds we've already made schools a gun-free "no-shootback" zone for maniacal killers. We need to get the federal government OUT of our everyday business and leave to the states as our Constitution intended. Manna (and more laws) from Washington is now our answer.
     

Share This Page