Skip to main content

Just when the nation is still trying to get its head around yesterday's horror in Connecticut, we find out that we narrowly avoided another tragedy early this morning--this time in Birmingham.  An unidentified gunman barged into St. Vincent's Hospital in Birmingham at around 4 am this morning and shot two hospital employees and a Birmingham police officer before being killed by police.

The situation is under control and the hospital is secure and stable," said Liz Moore, Vice President of Marketing and Communications. "There are no interruptions to any patient care services at this time."

According to Sgt. Johnny Williams, public information officer for the Birmingham Police Department, officers received a call from within the hospital at approximately 4 a.m. Two officers who patrol the South precinct responded to a gunman on the fifth floor. The officers arrived through two different corridors.

The suspect used a handgun and motive for the shooting is unclear at this time, said Williams.

"They engaged the suspect as they exited the elevator," he said. "The suspect opened fire on the officer. He wounded that officer and two other employees here at the hospital. The second responding officers returned gunfire, fatally wounding the suspect."

In other words--we're very lucky the police got there as fast as they did.  Otherwise, we could be talking about the second mass shooting in less than 24 hours.

According to WBRC-TV in Birmingham, the officer and the employees are OK.  They're at UAB Hospital with non life-threatening injuries.

The Birmingham News reports that the suspect was a disgruntled husband who had been kicked out of the hospital earlier that night after becoming belligerent about his wife's care.  He briefly took a security guard hostage before being confronted by police.

Like I said earlier, this could have gotten ugly and fast had police not arrived.

12:22 PM PT: I was in a hurry to get this off, so I forgot to mention that I saw this story via fellow Kossack Scottie Thomaston on my Facebook newsfeed.  So needless to say, this is probably hitting way too close to home for the Alabamians on here.

1:52 PM PT: Statement from Congresswoman Terri Sewell here:  

Unfortunately, just one day after the mass shooting in Connecticut, the City of Birmingham, Alabama experienced its own violent act at St. Vincent’s Hospital.  My thoughts and prayers are with the wounded officer, employees and patients that may have been affected.   I applaud the Birmingham Police Department, its officers and the hospital's security personnel for their courageous efforts to take down the suspect and prevent a catastrophic event.  Too many of these tragic events are happening across this country and I look forward to doing all that I can to prevent them from happening again.
EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (127+ / 0-)

    Romney-Ryan: America's Rollback Team

    by Christian Dem in NC on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:41:02 AM PST

  •  [ No words ] (7+ / 0-)

    I am simple, complex, generous, selfish, unattractive, beautiful, lazy, and driven. ~Barbra Streisand

    by GreenMtnState on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:45:18 AM PST

  •  violence begets violence (12+ / 0-)

    as Dr. Martin Luther King said.  prayers for all harmed by this most recent tragedy.

    Yes, we need to talk about this. Please sign the dKos Petition to start a national conversation about gun control.

    by Avila on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:46:20 AM PST

    •  Dr. King possessed an number of firearms. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maybeeso in michigan

      He also applied for a concealed carry permit, which was denied by local police, probably because he was black, not to mention a civil rights leader.

      https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/...

      Most people think King would be the last person to own a gun. Yet in the mid-1950s, as the civil rights movement heated up, King kept firearms for self-protection. In fact, he even applied for a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

      A recipient of constant death threats, King had armed supporters take turns guarding his home and family. He had good reason to fear that the Klan in Alabama was targeting him for assassination.

      William Worthy, a journalist who covered the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, reported that once, during a visit to King's parsonage, he went to sit down on an armchair in the living room and, to his surprise, almost sat on a loaded gun. Glenn Smiley, an adviser to King, described King's home as "an arsenal."

      As I found researching my new book, Gunfight, in 1956, after King's house was bombed, King applied for a concealed carry permit in Alabama. The local police had discretion to determine who was a suitable person to carry firearms. King, a clergyman whose life was threatened daily, surely met the requirements of the law, but he was rejected nevertheless. At the time, the police used any wiggle room in the law to discriminate against African Americans.

      Ironically, the concealed carry permit law in Alabama was promoted by the National Rifle Association thirty years earlier. Today, the gun rights hardliners fight to eliminate permits for concealed carry, as Arizona has done.

      Notice one other thing about the story? The shooter was stopped by an armed officer well before he could rack up a body count.

      Why? Because an armed person was there to stop him.

      This was unusual, as 2/3rds of active shooter scenarios are stopped by armed or (very lucky) unarmed citizens.

      It's rather condescending paternalistic to tell other citizens when and were the can defend themselves.

      Some would rather have a fighting chance, especially when police aren't around.

      Should we run an article every time a violent crime is stopped by armed citizens?

      •  Yes, we should. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        julifolo, Ahianne, BigOkie

        We need data, and the best way to get data is to report incidents of gunplay. We should run an article every time a gunowner stops an armed aggressor. At least then we could work with some accurate numbers.

        What is your source for the statistic that 2/3 of active shooter scenarios are stopped by armed or lucky unarmed citizens?

        How is that data gathered? Who gathers it? How is it compiled and are there categories of unsuccessful stoppage?

        I am not being argumentative, I just have never heard that before and I am interested in data.

        Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

        by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:18:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  . (0+ / 0-)
          What is your source for the statistic that 2/3 of active shooter scenarios are stopped by armed or lucky unarmed citizens?
          http://www.policeone.com/...

          http://dailyanarchist.com/...

          Feel free to pick away. It's more straight-forward than what the prohibitionists are offering.

          •  Thank you. (0+ / 0-)

            I would like to read those data points from the originators or collators of them. Much obliged, respectfully.

            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

            by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:09:09 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Mmmmmkayyy... (0+ / 0-)

              The first source, PoliceOne, seems like a credible in-house SWAT team type magazine. But the article says nothing about 2/3 of all firearms crimes being stopped. It is about this:

              The headline for the link: "Ohio trainer makes the case for single-officer entry against active killers." (One trainer in Ohio in 2008 advocated for single officers first on scene to take the offensive against mass shooters.)

              Maybe this somehow "implies" your claim in some way I cannot fathom? Or not.

              Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

              by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:16:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Second link (0+ / 0-)

                The first link is a meta study that makes an argument that rapid intervention (single entry) saves more lives in an active shooter scenario than waiting for back-up.

                In the second link the author filters out for the 50% of shooters who successfully carry out their tasks, thereby, leaving shootings that were stopped before the shooter could run up a fatality count.

                Suicide presented a tricky variable in the analysis. Roughly half of the remaining rampage shooters ended their own lives. So, I removed all incidents where the shooter killed themselves before police arrived reasoning that they had killed all they were going to kill and police had no impact in stopping them. Theoretically these incidents could have been stopped sooner by a civilian, but let’s not speculate. What I left in were incidents where shooters commit suicide after engaging the police, either during a shootout with police, or after a chase. I included, for example, Jiverly Wong, who witnesses say stopped shooting and killed himself as soon as he heard sirens but before police arrived, crediting the police’s response time with stopping the murders. But I did not include the shooters themselves in the total number of people killed.

                I also removed cases like Edward Charles Allaway who shot up a library, then fled to a nearby hotel and called police to turn himself in, and cases like Darrell Ingram who shot up a high school dance and fled the scene only to be apprehended later after a long investigation. I was only looking for incidents when intervention from police or civilian saved lives.

                What remained was 32 cases of gunmen firing indiscriminately whose rampage was cut short through the intervention of either a civilian or a police officer.

                Step Three: The List

                I divided the remaining cases into two categories, those stopped by police and those stopped by civilians. I included both armed and unarmed civilians for reasons that will become clear in the final analysis. I also removed cases like Dominick Maldonado and Charles Joseph Whitman. Moldonado went on a shooting rampage in a shopping mall in Tacoma, Washington, and ultimately surrendered to police but was confronted by two legally armed civilians who interrupted his shooting. They did not fire for fear of hitting innocent bystanders. Whitman climbed a tower at the University of Texas in Austin, Texas and began shooting at other students and faculty with a sniper rifle. The police who stopped Charles Whitman were assisted by a civilian with a more powerful rifle. I’m calling incidents like this an assist from civilians and removing them from the analysis as anomalies.

                    9/6/1949 - Howard Barton Unruh went on a shooting rampage in Camden, New Jersey with a German Luger. He shot up a barber shop, a pharmacy and a tailor’s shop killing 13 people. He finally surrendered after a shoot-out with police.
                    7/18/1984 – James Oliver Huberty shot up a McDonalds in San Ysidro, California killing 21 people before police shoot and killed him.
                    10/16/1991 - George Hennard entered Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas and began indiscriminately shooting the patrons. He killed 23 people in all. He commit suicide after being cornered and wounded in a shootout with police.
                    12/7/1993 – Colin Ferguson brought a handgun into a Long Island Rail Road car and opened fire at random. He killed 6 people before passengers Michael O’Connor, Kevin Blum and Mark McEntee tackled him while reloading.
                    11/15/1995 – Jamie Rouse used a .22-caliber semi-automatic rifle to fire indiscriminately inside Richland High School in Lynnville, Tennessee. He killed 2 people before being tackled by a football player and a coach.
                    2/2/1996 - Barry Loukaitis entered Frontier Middle School in Moses Lake, Washington with a rifle and two handguns. He killed 3 people before the Gym teacher, Jon Lane grabbed the rifle and wrestled the gunman to the ground.
                    10/1/1997 - Luke Woodham put on a trench coat to conceal a hunting rifle and entered Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi. He killed 3 students before vice principal Joel Myrick apprehended him with a Colt .45 without firing.
                    12/1/1997 - Michael Carneal brought a pistol, two rifles and two shotguns to his high school in Paducah, Kentucky and opened fire on a small prayer group killing 3 girls. His rampage was halted when he was tackled by another student.
                    4/24/1998 - Andrew Wurst attended a middle school dance in Edinboro, Pennsylvania intent on killing a bully but shot wildly into the crowd. He killed 1 student. James Strand lived next door. When he heard the shots he ran over with his 12 gauge shotgun and apprehended the gunman without firing.
                    5/21/1998 - Kipland Kinkel entered Thurston High School in Springfield, Oregon with two pistols and a semi-automatic rifle hidden under a trench coat. He opened fire killing 2 students, but while reloading a wounded student named Jacob Ryker tackled him.
                    4/20/1999 - Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were the killers behind the Columbine shooting in Littleton, Colorado. The two both commit suicide after police arrived, but what many people do not know is that the school’s armed security guard and the police all stood and waited outside the library while executions happed right inside. 15 people died, not including the shooters.
                    7/31/1999 - Mark Barton was a daytrader who went on a shooting rampage through two day trading firms in Atlanta, Georgia. He killed 12 people in all and after a police chase he was surrounded by police at a gas station where he commit suicide.
                    1/16/2002 – Peter Odighizuwa opened fire with a handgun at The Appalachian School in Grundy, Virginia. 3 people were killed before the shooter was apprehended by 3 students, Mikael Gross, Ted Besen, and Tracy Bridges with handguns without firing.
                    8/27/2003 – Salvador Tapia entered an auto parts store in Chicago, Illinois and shot and killed 6 people with a handgun. He then waged a gunbattle with police before a SWAT team fatally wounded him.
                    9/24/2003 – John Jason McLaughlin brought a .22-caliber pistol to Rocori High School in Cold Spring, Minnesota. He killed 2 people before PE teacher, Mark Johnson confronted him, disarmed him, and held him in the school office for police to arrive.
                    2/25/2005 – David Hernandez Arroyo Sr. opened fire on a public square from the steps of a courthouse in Tyler, Texas. The shooter was armed with a rifle and wearing body armor. Mark Wilson fired back with a handgun, hitting the shooter but not penetrating the armor. Mark drew the shooter’s fire, and ultimately drove him off, but was fatally wounded. Mark was the only death in this incident.
                    3/21/2005 – Jeff Weise was a student at Red Lake High School in Red Lake, Minnesota. He killed 7 people including a teacher and a security guard. When police cornered him inside the school, he shot and killed himself.
                    11/8/2005 – Kenneth Bartley, Jr. brought a .22 caliber pistol to Campbell County Comprehensive High School in Jacksboro, Tennessee and killed 1 person before being disarmed by a teacher.
                    9/29/2006 – Eric Hainstock brought a .22 caliber revolver and a 20-gauge shotgun into Weston High School in Cazenovia, Wisconson. He killed 1 person before staff and students apprehended him and held him until the police arrived.
                    4/16/2007 – Seung-Hui Cho was the shooter behind the Virgina Tech shooting in Blacksburg, Virginia. Police apprehend the wrong suspect allowing the shooter to walk across campus and open fire again in a second location. He eventually commit suicide after murdering 32 people.
                    12/9/2007 – Matthew J. Murray entered the Youth With A Mission training center in Arvada, Colorado and killed 2 people, then went to the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado killing 2 more. He was shot and injured by church member Jeanne Assam and commit suicide before police arrived.
                    9/3/2008 – Isaac Zamora went on a shooting rampage in Alger, Washington that killed 6 people, including a motorist shot during a high speed chase with police. He eventually surrendered to police.
                    3/29/2009 – Robert Stewart went on a killing rampage armed with a rifle, and a shotgun in a nursing home in Carthage, North Carolina. He killed 8 people and was apprehended after a shootout with police.
                    4/3/2009 – Jiverly Wong went on a shooting rampage at a American Civic Association immigration center in Binghamton, New York where he was enrolled in a citizenship class. 13 people were killed before the shooter killed himself. Witnesses say he turned the gun on himself as soon as he heard police sirens approaching.
                    11/5/2009 – Nidal Malik Hasan was the shooter behind the Fort Hood shooting at a military base just outside Killeen, Texas. The shooter entered the Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where personnel are disarmed, armed with a laser sighted pistol and a Smith & Wesson revolver. He killed 13 people before he was shot by a Civilian Police officer.
                    2/12/2010 – Amy Bishop went on a shooting rampage in classroom at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Alabama. She killed 3 people before the Dean of the University, Debra Moriarity pushed the her out of the room and blockaded the door. She was arrested later.
                    1/8/2011 – Jared Lee Loughner is charged with the shooting in Tucson, Arizona that killed 6 people, including Chief U.S. District Court Judge John Roll. He was stopped when he was tackled by two civilians.
                    2/27/2012 – T.J. Lane entered Chardon High School in Chardon, Ohio with a handgun and started shooting. 3 students died. The shooter was chased out of the building by a teacher and apprehended by police later.
                    4/22/2012 – Kiarron Parker opened fire in a church parking lot in Aurora, Colorado. The shooter killed 1 person before being shot and killed by a member of the congregation who was carrying concealed.
                    7/20/2012 – James Holmes went into a crowded movie theater in Aurora, Colorado and opens fire with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. 12 people were killed, before the shooter surrendered to police.
                    8/5/2012 – Wade Michael Page entered a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin and opened fire killing 6 people. He commit suicide after being shot by police.
                    12/14/12 - Adam Lanza entered Sandy Hook Elementary School with two handguns and a riffle and went room to room shooting students and staff. He killed 27 in all including 20 children, and commit suicide after police arrived.

                Step Four: Final analysis

                With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29. With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33.

                The first point I want to draw your attention to is that roughly half of shooting rampages end in suicide anyway. What that means is that police are not ever in a position to stop most of them. Only the civilians present at the time of the shooting have any opportunity to stop those shooters. That’s probably more important than the statistic itself. In a shooting rampage, counting on the police to intervene at all is a coin flip at best.

                Second, within the civilian category 11 of the 17 shootings were stopped by unarmed civilians. What’s amazing about that is that whether armed or not, when a civilian plays hero it seems to save a lot of lives. The courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas was the only incident where the heroic civilian was killed. In that incident the hero was armed with a handgun and the villain was armed with a rifle and body armor. If you compare the average of people killed in shootings stopped by armed civilians and unarmed civilians you get 1.8 and 2.6 but that’s not nearly as significant as the difference between a proactive civilian, and a cowering civilian who waits for police.

                So, given that far less people die in rampage shootings stopped by a proactive civilian, only civilians have any opportunity to stop rampage shootings in roughly half of incidents, and armed civilians do better on average than unarmed civilians, wouldn’t you want those heroic individuals who risk their lives to save others to have every tool available at their disposal?

                •  Thank you. I need to ponder Mr.... Anarchist. (0+ / 0-)

                  I caught his name when I went to your link, James, but for the life of me I cant remember it.

                  Anyway, he does some pretty interesting "back of the envelope" thinking here, and so I need time to digest and ruminate over it. If he is right and there are no confounding factors, which there almost always are in Social Science meta analysis, then I might be persuaded that "citizen shooters" are an effective deterrent, even given the small number of incidents shown here.

                  I appreciate your candor. Hope to give a response soon.

                  Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                  by OregonOak on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 04:20:24 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  this i knew about Dr. King (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        julifolo

        i'm sorry to disappoint you, but it changes nothing for me.  he is someone i have revered and admired my entire life.  and he was a person, a human being, prone to error as we all are.

        if you want to pick a fight, find someone else who's willing.  i don't have the heart for it today.  i just don't.

        Yes, we need to talk about this. Please sign the dKos Petition to start a national conversation about gun control.

        by Avila on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:37:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Are you willing to pay for armed cops (0+ / 0-)

        on every corner??? And, no, I don't want some unbalanced "armed citizen" whipping out a gun to defend me or, if it doesn't like my looks or music, shoot me . .

  •  What the hell's going on with people? (24+ / 0-)

    Did somebody declare Wild Wild West month and I missed it?

    Just wait for the Gun nuts to claim that this one is proof that more guns would've solved the problem, since there was only woundings this time.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:47:42 AM PST

    •  Pay attention (19+ / 0-)

      They declared that with Heller

      They effectively shut down any chance of reasonable debate with that decision, and I hope they can sleep at night.

      I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
      but I fear we will remain Democrats.

      by twigg on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Reasonable debate? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, James Kresnik

        In what sense did Heller shut down reasonable debate?

        █████████████████████████████████████████

        by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:22:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That decision was cited by people that the (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kestrel9000, twigg

          issue of gun rights was now settled.  I don't recall specifics and I know that you know more about this than I do, but I recall after the decision that many news orgs and politicians said that gun rights were now settled for the time being.

          Things may change now, but Heller was a big reason gun control hasn't been a political issue since it was decided.

          •  They were and they weren't. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, James Kresnik

            Heller, and the decision which followed, McDonald vs. Chicago, ruled the Second Amendment as a guarantee of the right to individual firearm ownership for self defense. Heller only applied to federal enclaves (DC, in that instance.) McDonald extended its reach to the states.
            But even in the face of tose decisions, Illinois' unique-in-the-nation near universal ban on firearms outside the home still stood, until struck down -on the basis of the Second Amendment- by the Seventh Circuit.
            So now Illinois has 180 days to craft a carry law. It could, and probably will, be the most restrictive in the nation, but the Seventh ruled carry outside the home couldn't be banned outright.

            █████████████████████████████████████████

            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:43:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Heller absolutely shut down discussion (2+ / 0-)

          because it enabled them all.

          It prompted all the raft of concealed carry laws, and gave the gun lobby a powerful message.

          When the Supremes send out a message like that it is very difficult to raise a reasonable objection.

          I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
          but I fear we will remain Democrats.

          by twigg on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:21:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Facts are facts (0+ / 0-)

      Armed and trained individuals responded to protect unarmed innocents from an armed assailant. Laws didn't stop this psychotic attacker, fighting fire with fire did.

      Armed threats require an armed response. That's simple reality.

      "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

      by DarthMeow504 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:30:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right on cue. (n/t) (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        glorificus

        I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

        by detroitmechworks on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:55:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You did ask (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlackSheep1

          And I note that there is no response to the point. Can you answer the question I raised? Is what I said not fact?

          Two incidents, both with armed assailants. One involved armed defenders to stop the assailant, the other did not. One resulted in three people shot plus the gunman, the other ten times that amount.

          How is this not accurate?

          "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

          by DarthMeow504 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:17:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The police stopped him (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ConfusedSkyes, Inland, glorificus, dwayne

            Trained, professional law enforcement people stopped him.  Not some random civilian opening fire in a hospital corridor.

          •  The armed defender (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            alba, glorificus, dwayne

            under discussion was a COP, not a random armed citizen.

            How many armed citizens have stopped the mass murders under discussion? Many of them happened in gun-friendly states.

            Let us suppose an armed citizen engaged the attacker at the hospital before the cop shows up. Is he automatically supposed to know who the bad guy is?

            •  Correct (0+ / 0-)

              However, let's parse that.

              The cops in question were trained individuals with guns. Everything else is immaterial. Law enforcement status, the existence of a government they were employed by, etc are separate issues that made no difference. The facts that matter are they were armed, trained, and --most importantly-- there on the scene.

              THAT is what is required to stop an armed assailant. A cop fifteen minutes away does nothing but pick up the pieces when it's all said and done.

              It does not matter whether an individual is working for the government in a law enforcement capacity or is on duty at the time. That makes no difference. What makes the difference between a successful assault and a foiled one is the PRESENCE of an individual who is armed, trained, and present. That can be a private citizen, armed security guard, or off-duty cop and it makes ZERO difference to the outcome.

              Off-duty police officers often act heroically to stop crimes in places they just happen to be as ordinary citizens going about their business. They are able to do so because they are armed, trained, and there when it goes down. When they're off the clock, there is no functional difference between them and a trained and armed private citizen. In fact, when not on duty a police officer IS a trained and armed private citizen.

              I'd love to see someone compile a list of cases of "off-duty cop prevents crime" vs "assailant mass-murders unarmed people" over the last two decades. I'm certain the former would far outnumber the latter.

              "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

              by DarthMeow504 on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 02:59:10 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  How about (0+ / 0-)

                instead you compile a list of 'off-duty' cop stops a mass-murderer on a shooting spree. I think that list would be pretty short.

                Also, increasing the number of people who try to 'stop' a shooter also gives the cops who show up on the scene that many more targets to neutralize. Unless you think there will be some sort of red and green lights hovering over people's heads to separate good guys from bad.

                Heck, we get enough police killing unarmed people, how do you think this would play out when those same cops now have to make a snap judgment whether the person in front of them firing their weapon is the murderer, or an armed bystander?

      •  "trained". (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dwayne

        Trained to act under fire.  No civilian is required to obtain any such training.  If we're lucky, they are trained how to store and not shoot themselves.  

        One piece of free advice to the GOP: Drop the culture wars, explicitly.

        by Inland on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:36:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Sadly, this is a Top Comment (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larsstephens

      The one I submitted yesterday was just as serious, so understand it's as much about truth as it is about humor

      -7.75, -8.10; All it takes is security in your own civil rights to make you complacent.

      by Dave in Northridge on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:38:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  She was referring to the situation at (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kestrel9000, mungley, gerrilea

      the hospital, not anything else. Let's not lash out at the innocent bystanders in our rage, okay?

      •  i'm (14+ / 0-)

        not lashing out at the woman, nor am I in a rage.

        I know what she was referring to.

        I just think she's mistaken. Both there, and in the country at large.

        •  Yes. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea

          You are lashing out in a rage.
          If the shooter was neutralized, then the situation is under control, and you know that.
          This is not the time to twist words.

          █████████████████████████████████████████

          by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:23:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm backing blueness on this one. (11+ / 0-)

            It was a perfectly valid observation/commentary on our culture of violence and insanity.

            Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

            by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:29:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Make it (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea

              without twisting somebody's words into meaning something they were not intended to.

              █████████████████████████████████████████

              by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:31:27 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Meaning and intent were clear. (8+ / 0-)

                Let's talk about gun deaths and our culture of murder now, ok?

                Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:36:26 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Can we talk about (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea, melo

                  root causes of violence and what combination of means are needed to address its reduction instead?

                  █████████████████████████████████████████

                  by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:37:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Can we talk about an absolute Federal ban (13+ / 0-)

                    on semi-automatic weapons first?

                    OK?

                    since that's quite a bit more straightforward... and could be achieved within months, rather than within generations?

                    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                    by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:41:30 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's not realistic in any sense (0+ / 0-)

                      and you know it.
                      I'll find someone else to talk to.

                      █████████████████████████████████████████

                      by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50:49 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Tragically, it's a lot more realistic NOW (8+ / 0-)

                        than it was two days ago.

                        When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                        by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:58:54 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  A federal ban (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Otteray Scribe, happy camper

                          on all semiautomatic weapons, and confiscation within months.
                          Explain to me how that is realistic, in any way achievable, or even desirable.

                          █████████████████████████████████████████

                          by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:01:55 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  How is it not desirable? (7+ / 0-)

                            These weapons are not used in hunting, target shooting, home protection. They serve no purpose other than killing a lot of people very quickly.

                            I said nothing about how long a mandatory buy-back of semi-automatic weapons might take. Certainly a reasonable time frame for that would be a few years, rather than the few months drafting and passing suitable legislation would require.

                            Still a lot faster than the few generations required to heal the violent American soul.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:15:09 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes (13+ / 0-)

                            actually, they are used in hunting, target shooting, and home protection.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:16:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This guy in Houston--a staunch defender (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            elwior

                            of the 2nd Amendment--makes the case a lot better than I can.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:21:39 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ANyone can say (10+ / 0-)

                            they're a gun owner and Second Amendment supporter, but no one who seriously understands guns and gun ownership would suggest such a massively radical step.
                            I would not support it. Very few people would.
                            I own a semiautomatic pistol for personal defense. I also own a .22 plinker which is also semiautomatic.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:24:41 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Actually, I used mine the other day. (12+ / 0-)

                             I had some copperheads outside the house while I was powerwashing. They will not be biting me or mine anymore.
                              Now, living in the woods like I do, I carry all day. Between the coyotes trying to grab my smallestl dog, the home invasions, and the fact that the police are 15 minutes away, at best, I will continue to use my handguns. Thank you very much.

                            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                            by meagert on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:23:08 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You needed a Glock semi-automatic pistol (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JoanMar, salamanderempress, alba

                            to kill a few snakes?

                            I'm no anti-gun absolutist. I believe that, as long as humans consume flesh, hunting and butchering it yourself is easily the most ethical way to do it.

                            Target shooting? Fine, a hobby like any other.

                            Home protection? I'm much iffier about that, but I can accept a limited right there too.

                            But...

                            Semi-automatic weapons? If banning them means it will take you minutes rather than seconds to rid your property of copperheads, that doesn't seem like an overly steep price to pay.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:30:48 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You really have no idea about guns. (8+ / 0-)

                            Or, for that matter, living in the country, or around venomous snakes. If I wanted to carry my shotgun around all day, while I worked, would that make you feel better?
                             Geez!

                            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                            by meagert on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:43:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I do though. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD

                            And the thought of using a semi-automatic pistol for snakes as opposed to a shotgun is ludicrous. For that matter why do you need a semi-auto, a revolver would be better (more reliable, less likely to jam).  
                            Last thought, why does a semi-automatic need 9+ shot clips, make it 6 like a revolver, any more and you start facing fines/jail/community service.

                          •  So, you'd rather torture the animal before it (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            meagert, PavePusher, wishbone, 43north

                            dies or you're a bad shot or both? Is that why you prefer a shotgun?

                            As for your second preference: Have you ever been confronted by 18-20 gang members trying to break into your home?

                            I have.

                            In your world, I'd be dead because I couldn't defend myself.  And in this nation currently, the police do not have to protect the individual.  

                            Will you protect me?

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:16:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Torture?? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, PhilJD

                            Having grown up in an area with poisonous snakes I can say a shotgun with the appropriate load/round is far more effective for hitting and killing the snake.

                            As to the 18 -20 gang members, no never been in anything vaguely like that, thank God.  I would ask how you got out of that situation?  Guns blazing and if so what type?  I would also venture that your situation is in the extreme, terrible, but rare.

                            Needless to say I am glad you survived and are here to debate/discuss issues with us.

                            Oh, and were I a neighbor to you, yes, I would do everything in my power to help.  I have been shot at and threatened for intervening in neighbors affairs (spousal & child abuse).

                          •  Yes, I've grown up where there were (5+ / 0-)

                            poisonous snakes, we didn't use a shotgun or any gun, that damn old baseball bat worked wonders...

                            ;)

                            I've shot both handguns and shot guns.  Shotguns, the pellets span out, unless you were my Dad whom cut the shell casings a bit before loading them, turning them into slugs.

                            Shotgun wounds will kill but after contracted pain and suffering of the animal.  But I guess that also depends on how close you are to it when you shoot.

                            As for that experience I referenced: I was 13, a gang of guys came pounding on our door demanding my father (whom wasn't home at the time) and when we didn't answer the door they started to break in.  Just after they broke the windows on the sides of the door I ran upstairs (with my older sister) and I loaded my Dad's 357 and handed my sister the 12 gauge.

                            When the intruders opened the door, I was waiting, they stopped. I told them if they came any further they would be shot (as I pulled the loaded firearm up and pointed directly at their leader.  He acted like he was going to take another step and my sister (whom was standing behind me on the stairs) cocked the 12 gauge...

                            They all ran.

                            We survived and it is because of that event I will not arm myself, even to this day.  I know, for me, I will use it to kill, without thought or remorse if I'm ever in a life and death situation again.  I chose not to become a killer, even if lawfully justified.  I may end up someday dying because of this choice but it's still mine to make.  No one else's, and I like it like that.  

                            The price of freedom, is having the ability to make a decision and living with the consequences.

                            As a member of the LGBT community, I've witnessed more and more violence against us and I've reconsidered my personal choice many times.  I've discussed it with friends here on DK and I may need the protection only a firearm can provide.  

                            I do like having options, but they seem to be getting smaller and smaller.  Die as a victim or live defending oneself.

                            And thank you, I would appreciate a neighbor willing to defend me, as I would defend them as best I could.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 08:51:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thank you for the reply (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD, gerrilea, BlackSheep1

                            We will have to agree to disagree re. the snakes.  We used a shotgun with .000 or Slug load, very effective, and quick as I remember.

                            As to your horrific experience... amazing courage and cool under extreme pressure.  Once again I'm very glad you are here today to engage in thoughtful debate.

                            Regarding courage, no way in hell I'm getting close enough to a Rattlesnake to kill it with a baseball bat, not gonna happen.

                          •  The privilege of getting to know you a little (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, BlackSheep1

                            better, gerrilea, is one positive to emerge from this awful week.

                            Thanks for recounting your story; an impressive display of calm courage at a very young age.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:30:24 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  wait-- (0+ / 0-)

                            Home invasions are common in your neighborhood?  Why aren't you reporting them?

                          •  'a mandatory buy-back of semi-automatic weapons' (8+ / 0-)

                            & like what kinda compliance rate would you honestly guess?

                            I'm afraid it would take someone like Blackwater going door to door...
                            & just for the record, its a lot easier to first institute mandatory registration, before the  'buy backs' begin, (cough cough- Canada)

                            Kenyan Socialism today Kenyan Socialism tomorrow Kenyan Socialism forever May his reign last 1,000 years

                            by OMwordTHRUdaFOG on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:26:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It worked in Australia, (4+ / 0-)

                            after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:36:01 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Australia did not start (5+ / 0-)

                            with 300 million guns and 170 million gun owners. Compare it with the logistics of confiscating every television.

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:49:54 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We have to try something (5+ / 0-)

                            faster and more proactive than attacking the "root causes" of American violence.

                            Now is the moment to do that, whatever "something" turns out to be.

                            Gun control has never been an issue that particularly engages me. I'm far more concerned with economic justice and civil liberty. I think it's telling that someone like me, who has been conspicuously silent in the DKos gun wars, now has no real choice but to get off the fence.

                            I think the American mood is changing.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:13:36 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Restrictions on hardware. (5+ / 0-)

                            I simply don't believe such restrictions will be either fast, or particularly effective, given the factors I have outlined--too many guns to confiscate, too many people who will object, no consensus on even what particular weapons to focus on. Hell, the vast majority of guns are not registered--we have no idea who even owns guns, in most cases.

                            I understand what you're saying, really I do, but I would rather do something that has a better chance of having positive, measurable results.

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:41:12 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Like what? (0+ / 0-)

                            Please be specific.

                            "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                            by glorificus on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 06:03:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure. (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            OMwordTHRUdaFOG, wishbone, 43north, PhilJD

                            End the drug war. Fifty percent of all gun murders are criminal on criminal violence related to gang turf wars, drug deals gone bad, etc.

                            Extend the NICS check system to cover private sales. Some people don't like the idea, but we've been doing it for years with handguns in MI.

                            Mental health care. Too many disturbed individuals are walking around untreated and undiagnosed. You'll never get 'em all, but we can do better identifying the sick people among us.

                            Education. Statistics show that more education generally equals less propensity to violent crime.

                            Jobs. Poverty is highly correlated with violent behavior and criminal activity.

                            This diary may be of interest...  http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 07:19:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ah yes, something similar to KVoimakas' list. (0+ / 0-)

                            As I've said before, add a couple of unicorns and a griffin and I'll support that one also.

                            The NiCS thing might be good, but the Michigan legislators are batshit crazy in terms of letting guns go everywhere so I'm wary of that.

                            Altho if the Rs would get off their asses and pass another stimulus bill the increased jobs that could happen pretty quickly, I think.

                            However, actually doing something that removes guns and reduces magazine sizes now from people is probably more helpful.

                            Your list is good and should definitely be put into action, but I'm not interested in the multitude of school kids that would be killed waiting for it to go into effect.

                            "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                            by glorificus on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 07:30:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  PhilJD, I've respected your opinion in many (4+ / 0-)

                            diaries I've read and if we don't go after the causes of violence, it won't matter what you ban.  The violence displayed will evolve to other grotesque forms.  People will still die and you won't stop the killings.

                            Anyone can get a gasoline container and set a building on fire in the middle of the night.  

                            We have to help one another, anything less and it won't matter.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:23:20 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Of course I don't object to going after the causes (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, glorificus, poco

                            of violence in America. With all the good will in the world though, even if--against all odds--red America and blue America work together on this...

                            we still are talking about many years, probably generations, before the problem can be solved.

                            I just don't think we have that kind of time.

                            It's impossible to escape the fact that no one died in the classroom knife attack in China.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:31:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sadly, it took us just 30 short yrs to get to this (4+ / 0-)

                            point.

                            I'm willing to try almost anything that will keep us in power and actually make a difference in the lives of our fellow Americans, making them better.

                            Banning won't fix these things:

                            Poverty and crime.  School to prison pipeline. The Prison Industrial Complex will love new laws banning things, people won't comply and they'll get their steady stream of new clientele.  

                            Our Military Industrial Complex will love it as well, they'll get more recruits that can't get training or access to firearms any other way.  

                            Our Corporate Overlords will feast on the profits they collect from the wars they get us into and the products that are manufactured by the inmates.

                            And the killings will continue.

                            http://www.theatlantic.com/...

                            The raw material of the prison-industrial complex is its inmates: the poor, the homeless, and the mentally ill; drug dealers, drug addicts, alcoholics, and a wide assortment of violent sociopaths. About 70 percent of the prison inmates in the United States are illiterate. Perhaps 200,000 of the country's inmates suffer from a serious mental illness. A generation ago such people were handled primarily by the mental-health, not the criminal-justice, system. Sixty to 80 percent of the American inmate population has a history of substance abuse. Meanwhile, the number of drug-treatment slots in American prisons has declined by more than half since 1993. Drug treatment is now available to just one in ten of the inmates who need it.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:55:36 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Are you actually advocating for... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            43north

                            door-to-door confiscation?

                            Please tell e I've misinterpreted your allusions.

                            If I haven't, are you going to volunteer for one of the teams?  Point-man or nothing.

                          •  But we have American Exceptionalism (0+ / 0-)

                            on our side!!!!

                            We can do it!!!!

                            USAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSA!!!

                            "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                            by glorificus on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 06:02:21 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, I've noticed a pattern throughout the (4+ / 0-)

                            world recently.

                            Rampage killings

                            the Hungerford massacre of 1987 and the Dunblane school massacre of 1996; each led to strong public and political demands to restrict firearm use, and tightening of laws. The result has been among the strictest firearms laws in the world.[11
                            The pattern is that there is a massacre and then citizens rights are taken away.

                            Except in places where they had no rights to begin with, those damn events still happen.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:40:20 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Personal rights & liberty is far more basic (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, glorificus, 43north

                            to my core beliefs than gun control is... but I've reached the point where doing nothing no longer feels like an option.

                            We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

                            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:52:25 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Done in Australia, Kestrel. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD, redrobin, poco

                            And their love of guns and gunplay was every bit as deeply cultural as ours is.

                            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                            by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:21:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You (0+ / 0-)

                            I have no use for, and no intterest in talking to.
                            Pound sand.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:04:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Address the point or lose the point. (0+ / 0-)

                            Those are the choices in a debate.

                            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                            by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:18:29 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not interested (0+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hidden by:
                            dnta

                            in the choices you offer.
                            I have long thought you a liar, you own no guns, and you are full of shit.
                            You are a liar.
                            I choose not to engage you, and that will not change, because I do not believe your assertions about your perspective.
                            I regard you as dishonorable and a liar, and I have no interest in your comments.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:23:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HR for unsubstantiated accusation of lying (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD

                            See how it works? This is what you do all the time.  

                            Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set... -- Gandalf

                            by dnta on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:29:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do what you want. (0+ / 0-)

                            You don't know the history, but OregonOak does.
                            I stand by it.  HR away. It does nothing but make you happy, and look like an idiot to those who know.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:32:12 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, so now you're bringing in unrelated threads? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD

                            That's another thing you've HR'd consistently for, when it suits your purpose.  You throw that rule in anyone's face and HR with glee.   Yet here, no problem, you can insult this guy and call him a liar based on nothing to do with this thread.

                            I couldn't care less about the history.  I'm in favor of civil and sensible discussion on a critical issue.  You're in favor of derailing such discussion, any time it points away from your fanatically one-dimensional opinion.  

                            And you're an utter hypocrite when it comes to HRs and The Rules.  You really never do look in your own mirror, do you?

                            Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set... -- Gandalf

                            by dnta on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:35:12 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  With that (0+ / 0-)

                            I shut down for the night.
                            You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and I'm in no position to pursue this. I have a house full of teenagers.
                            I choose to focus on that.
                            Good night.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 03:35:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Good Night. (0+ / 0-)

                            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                            by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:02:41 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sigh. Ad Hominum much? (0+ / 0-)

                            I guess this is stock in trade for Radio Talk Show Hosts, or whatever you are.

                            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                            by OregonOak on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:05:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Yes it is- (0+ / 0-)

                          "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

                          by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:01:33 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  No. (0+ / 0-)

                    Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                    by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:42:04 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Now you've got me curious. (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      mungley, kestrel9000, Mayfly, luckydog

                      Why not?

                      •  That's a red herring. (5+ / 0-)

                        The root causes of violence have nothing to do with the facility with which a person can commit mayhem with a gun.

                        Enough people are killed accidentally with gins each year, that it is still a problem of epidemic proportions.

                        Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                        by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:48:06 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If they're killed with gins (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          mungley

                          we need better distilleries.

                          The root causes of violence have nothing to do with the facility with which a person can commit mayhem with a gun.
                          But they have everything to do with WHY they do it.

                          Nothing technological prevented what happened in that Aurora theater from happenning t a 1955 showing of "Rebel Without A CAuse."

                          Why didn't these things happen then?

                          █████████████████████████████████████████

                          by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:52:31 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Sorry. I got my alcohol rant and my gun rant (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            kestrel9000

                            mixed up.

                            Nothing technological prevented what happened in that Aurora theater from happenning t a 1955 showing of "Rebel Without A CAuse."
                            1.) Did anyone have easy access to the kinds of weapons that were used in Aurora in 1955?

                            2.) Batman sucked and James Dean was awesome (snark, and I have not seen the Batman movie from this year.)

                            3.) We were probably just as violent (or more so) in 1955, just less lethal. Domestic violence was more prevalent, yet fewer people died therefrom.

                            Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                            by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:06:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Answer to #1 (0+ / 0-)

                            Yes. Weapons just as capable were as easily available, if not more so, then. Ever heard of an M-1? Or a 1911 .45 pistol?

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:20:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And full body armor? How much did the guns cost? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            glorificus, poco

                            How were they distributed?

                            What are the sales statistics for 1955 vs 2012?

                            What was the post WWII mental health system like for veterans?
                            What was it like for just plain assholes with guns?

                            The guy in aurora had protective gear that did not exist in 1955.
                            He was also not going to be stopped by another movie goer with a handgun.

                            How did one acquire an M1 in 1955?

                            Does the 1966 mass shooting at the University of Texas come close enough to your arbitrary date?

                            That guy bought a gun at Sears with the intent of committing murder.  He had faced court martial for offenses including violent threats against a fellow service member.  Selling him guns was a bad idea.

                            It is guns that are the cause of guns deaths. Gun facilitate death.

                            It's is silly to attempt to stamp out anger in order to prevent gun deaths. That's a waste of time, and a guarantee that more innocent blood will be shed because gun fetishists are too ashamed of their own failings to realize that they are destroying our society.

                            Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                            by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:59:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mungley
                            gun fetishists are too ashamed of their own failings
                            is a conversation ender.

                            Have a good evening.

                            █████████████████████████████████████████

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:03:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You too. Stay safe. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            kestrel9000

                            Take back the House in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!! (50 state strategy needed)

                            by mungley on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:32:47 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Ah, I see. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          mungley

                          I agree with you, in the main, but I was intrigued by your one word shut down.

                          I'm not so sure that a general discussion of the root causes of violence in this country wouldn't be a better way to address this issue than the "he did it first" kind of arguments we get, both in politics and on this forum.

                        •  By an awful coincidence, just yesterday in China (8+ / 0-)

                          there was also an attack in an elementary school.

                          The weapon there was a knife.

                          The number of victims was quite similar to CT, and no doubt the attacker was equally dedicated, equally deranged.

                          No one died.

                          That's a rather telling difference, wouldn't you say?

                          When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                          by PhilJD on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:56:47 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  You know what else (0+ / 0-)

                          I think is a red herring---mungley: blaming all this on the mentally ill.

                          Granted---- mentall illness DOES play a part in things like this--- but here's the rub:

                          We have always had mentally ill people---what we haven't always had----are lax permissive gun laws--and easy access to guns.

                          We willl always have mentally ill people--no matter how good diagnosis is---no matter how good treatment is---no matter how good procedure is----the mentally ill will always be with us.

                          What we need to address--- is the easy access to guns in this country.

                          It is the guns.

                          "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

                          by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:27:18 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  how about (0+ / 0-)

                    Here's one area where it would be interesting to test economic theory.

                    Lets make the manufacture, importation and sale of automatic weapons less profitable.  A lot less profitable-- a break even proposition.  And lets beef up the ATF so that we can apprehend the tax scofflaws that will be selling black market in order to make a profit.  

                    If it's about rights the industry will continue to make/import/sell arms and break even.  If it's about money-- well, you see where this is going, the right to bear arms if there is one is not necessarily a right to make money providing arms to those who want them.

          •  what words show rage in the comment...? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            blueness, poco, glorificus

            ...seems that your claim is without substance.

            Cheers.

          •  i'm sorry, (9+ / 0-)

            but among the many other things you are not, is a mindreader.

            I am not lashing out, nor am I in a rage. Sorry. ; )

            And I find it amusing that you would claim someone else is "twist[ing] words."

            Speaking of words: "neutralized"? Blecch.

            •  Fair enough. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              blueness, gerrilea

              Trying to be as clinical as possible here.
              We'll ignore sentence #3. I have no time for pissing matches.
              I have an example to set. I don't claim I'll be perfect, but I claim that I will do my best.

              █████████████████████████████████████████

              by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:36:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Set an example (13+ / 0-)

                by not jumping in and dumping on random people's innocuous comments that you can gratuitously twist to find offensive... particularly if they contain any inference of an anti-gun agenda.

                Set an example by ONCE, JUST ONCE, criticizing the knee-jerk pro-gun, anti-regulation, attitude of your comrades.

                Set an example by openly and strongly acknowledging that the outrage and anger felt by those who are calling for greater gun restrictions is justified, understandably, and reasonable.

                Set an example by proposing something specific that will reduce the proliferation of guns and gun violence: NOT "more mental health care" or similar deflections, but actual restrictions on gun access.

                Set an example by showing that you are not singularly, obsessively concerned solely with shooting down (yes, I mean the term) any and all arguments that take aim at 2nd amendment absolutism.

                Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set... -- Gandalf

                by dnta on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:44:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  that describes an admirable set of examples... (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  dnta, Hastur, lyvwyr101

                  ...for gun enthusiasts - in general - to aspire to.

                  Cheers.

                •  obviously (0+ / 0-)

                  you haven't read all of my comments within the last day and  a half.

                  ONCE, JUST ONCE, criticizing the knee-jerk pro-gun, anti-regulation, attitude of your comrades.
                  As you wish.

                  █████████████████████████████████████████

                  by kestrel9000 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:03:53 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yeah, that was some harsh criticism (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    salamanderempress, lyvwyr101
                    This had better be the last time
                    you find yourself required to [apologize]
                    Great smackdown there!  Way to stand up to your bully compatriot.  You got any other examples, besides this "one"?

                    In any event, I've seen enough of your act on this topic to know that you are one of the quickest to HR, the quickest to demonize, the most smug and self-righteous in your one-dimensional view on guns and the second amendment, the most condescending and unsympathetic towards those who are passionate about reducing gun violence.  And that you consider yourself a "victim" for the criticism you receive in response.  

                    You want your views to be taken seriously? Change.

                    Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set... -- Gandalf

                    by dnta on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:16:10 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  I think I've read quite a few, and haven't been (0+ / 0-)

                    overwhelmed with your epiphany, except in twigg's post.

                    "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                    by glorificus on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 06:10:50 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  "clinical"...? perhaps not an accurate adjective.. (0+ / 0-)

                ...considering the circumstances of its use.

                Cheers.

    •  Absolutely accurate- (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueness
      The guns are out of control. And so are the people.

      "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

      by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:59:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ho-hum (10+ / 0-)

    Us sheep have no right to safety, only the right to defend ourselves.  I can just picture myself lying in that hospital bed, grabbing my six shooter and stopping the bad guy.

    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

    by yet another liberal on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:50:13 AM PST

    •  Well who else is going to do it? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mungley, FiredUpInCA

      If you don't carry your gun on you, loaded ready to fire, how can you be protected?

      Oh, wait, I know.  No guns.

      After the Republicans burn down the world, they will prove the Democrats did it.

      by jimraff on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:03:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  NSFW I hope? (0+ / 0-)

      Seriously I'm beginning to think that gun ownership and pornography work similarly.  The porno stash doesn't get used up, but if accessed frequently, it fails to excite.  Contrast that to target shooting with a shot gun.  

      Two shots and reload. Two shots and reload.  Sooner or later, you start to wonder if an automatic will allow you to shoot faster and harder.  Or maybe the fantasy about killing the intruder becomes a threesome.  If you miss one of your two shots, you're a goner.  Better get a better gun.

      But maybe there is a better way.  Lots of video games with realistic action available.

  •  We have got to start holding ourselves (7+ / 0-)

    accountable for what we say and do: politicians, media, private citizens.

    I am gay, and I'm getting married in the Episcopal Church, just like my great-grandmother did.

    by commonmass on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:50:59 AM PST

  •  And two days before... (11+ / 0-)

    ...a man walked into a federal courthouse in Birmingham, with a gun, and killed himself.

    Procrastination: Hard work often pays off after time, but laziness always pays off now.

    by Linnaeus on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53:21 AM PST

  •  A well regulated Militia, being necessary (11+ / 0-)

    to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    The most misinterpreted Constitutional Amendment of them all.  The Founding Fathers did not want a standing army.  They thought a citizen's militia would be enough to keep the country free, thus the 2nd Amendment.  As we now have Armed Services, there is no need for a well regulated people's militia, thus there is not right to bear arms.

    You rarely find a story that says two stoners beat each other up outside of a bar.

    by jparnell on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53:46 AM PST

    •  At the end of the day (5+ / 0-)

      the 2nd is used as an argument because it means that the gun lovers get to keep their toys. Its importance as a means of insuring the success of the nation ended a very long time ago.

      The 2nd is actually a distraction and the pro gun side know it.

    •  All gun owners should be in the active (7+ / 0-)

      military.  

      After the Republicans burn down the world, they will prove the Democrats did it.

      by jimraff on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:04:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  jimraff! very funny & apt comment. nt (0+ / 0-)

        Fiscal conservative: a Republican ready to spend $5 to save a dime--especially if that dime is helping a non-donor.

        by Mayfly on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:53:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  hear hear (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sboucher, glorificus

        If you can't qualify for the National Guard because you're insane or a felon, or you aren't willing to do readiness exercises one weekend a month because you are too busy, you won't be legally toting a gun to yoga class. That's gotta cut down on the gratuitous ownership.

        Mind you, since there will be so many well trained militia types nearby, you'll have plenty of protection even if you don't qualify.

    •  Then let us "well regulate" it (11+ / 0-)

      As I said in an earlier diary, people say shit like, "Cars kill more people than guns,"  well, okay, so lets regulate guns like we regulate driving.  Lets register all the guns, lets license all the gun owners, lets make them all receive training and lets insure all the guns.  While this may not solve the problem, it would be a step in the right direction.

      "I watch Fox News for my comedy, and Comedy Central for my news." - Facebook Group

      by Sychotic1 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:11:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  To me, that is the clause (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mungley, niemann, Chi, Hastur, mamamedusa, PhilJD

        to pay attention to.  It can well be interpreted to allow pretty tight regulation of access to weaponary.

        "To recognize error, to cut losses, to alter course, is the most repugnant option in government." Historian Barbara Tuchman

        by Publius2008 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:14:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly. They were FOR regulation. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Publius2008, pgm 01, Chi, Hastur

          Our founders were for regulating weaponry -- for regulating it WELL ... i.e. strictly.

          •  The problems of the clause (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            niemann

            are clear.  There are two parts of it: (a) a well regulated militia and (b) a right to keep and bear arms.  The problem is how do these fit together?  Does the former encompass the latter, or do they stand alone?

            It could be argued that the right to keep and bear arms comes by and through the right of a well regulated militia, especially given the commas and the "shall not be infringed" encompassing both.  The Const could have said "neither shall be infringed" if it meant one or the other.  

            "To recognize error, to cut losses, to alter course, is the most repugnant option in government." Historian Barbara Tuchman

            by Publius2008 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:47:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, that's where the parsing begins ... (3+ / 0-)

              ... and the need to then look at the historical context in which it was written.

              It looks like the right to keep and bear arms is a dependent clause ...  i.e. people have a right to keep and bear arms BECAUSE a well-regulated militia is necessary.  

              That would imply that if a well-regulated militia isn't necessary, there wouldn't necessarily be a right to keep and bear arms.

              That then would lead to what was meant by a "militia."  At the time it referred to the civilian militia that every U.S. male was required to be a part of ... the only defense the U.S. had at the time.

              When we eliminated the kind of militia the framers were talking about ... when it became no longer "necessary" ... did the right to keep and bear arms go with it?

              And if people really want to parse words, we can do it as well as the gun fanatics:  as I mention below ... the amendment says absolutely nothing about the right of U.S. citizens to OWN arms;  only to "keep and bear" them.  

              Do modern soldiers OWN the weapons they use?  Or do they just "keep and bear" the property of the U.S. government while they are members of our "militia"?

              •  Think of this way (3+ / 0-)

                and I think it's right:

                how could we truly "well regulate" a militia under the 2nd amdt  if the right to keep and bear arms is as broad as many make it out to be?

                The current reading, that there is a near fundamental and unregulable right to keep and bear arms, would swallow and nullify the first provision, making a "well regulated" militia impossible.

                "To recognize error, to cut losses, to alter course, is the most repugnant option in government." Historian Barbara Tuchman

                by Publius2008 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:18:27 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  The founders weren't gods, (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Publius2008, glorificus

                  nor were they prescient, omniscient, or guaranteed to be right about everything for all time til the end of time.

                  Frankly, I think trying to figure out what they 'meant' when they wrote the 2nd amendment is far less important than what we, as a country, want to do about balancing the rights of self defense vs. the rights to not be killed due to too easy access to  weapons of such lethality.

                  Do people really think that the handful of people who wrote the bill of rights are smarter than anyone who has ever lived since? The constitution is not an inviolable religious text, it's a framework for a government that has had somewhat mixed results over the past 200 years. To enshrine it as some sort of holy word makes me doubtful it will be able to keep up with the progress, social and technological, of the next 200.

                  •  Indeed, the whole reason for militias (0+ / 0-)

                    --the founders wanted no standing army--doesn't even exist anymore.

                    Ponder if the founders had accepted the need for a standing army, whether the right to keep and bear arms would still exist and, if so, with what limitations?

                    "To recognize error, to cut losses, to alter course, is the most repugnant option in government." Historian Barbara Tuchman

                    by Publius2008 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:58:19 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  As I pointed out in another comment thread ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi, Hastur, mamamedusa

      The Constitution doesn't even mention guns, let alone the right to own them:

      “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
      It talks about the right to keep and bear arms.

      "Keeping and bearing" arms does not necessarily mean the right to own them.

      And "arms" does not just mean guns.  

      When the Second Amendment was written the law of the land was that all males in the USA between the ages of 16 and 46 were required to be members of the local militia.

      (Are all modern gun owners members of their local militia?  That's the context in which the 2nd Amendment talks about this right to "keep and bear arms".  If they're not members of a U.S. militia, then the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to them.)  

      In addition to firearms, "arms" listed as required by this law also included:  knives, tomahawks, bows and arrows, pikes and swords.  

      In that thread I pointed out that while people in many states are allowed to walk around carrying concealed guns, it is still against the law in those states to walk around carrying swords, machetes, and so on.  Swords would have been a much more familiar form of arms to the writers of the Second Amendment than modern guns.

      So ... why can't people now carry swords or machetes around in public, while gun-owners get to carry their much more dangerous weapons around?  They are all arms, and by their argument, the Constitution says we have a right to carry them.

      If it is because  swords and machetes look scary and threatening, and thus people generally feel afraid or uncomfortable having them around ... why don't the rest of us have a right not to have even more dangerous weapons all around us?

    •  Do people (0+ / 0-)

      really believe we still need a militia?

      Horseshit!

      "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

      by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:12:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Perhaps it's time for a daily blog... (14+ / 0-)

    listing all the aborted shootings, the school shootings, the workplace murders and on and on and on.

    Oklahoma teen arrested in school shooting plot
    2:01p.m. EST December 15, 2012

        On Friday, the same day as the shooting massacre in Newton, police also arrested an 18-year-old high school student in Oklahoma for allegedly plotting an attack at a school.

        An arrest affidavit says Chavez tried to convince other students to help him lure students into the auditorium, chain the doors shut and start shooting. The Tulsa World reports that authorities say Chavez threatened to kill students who didn't help.

        The Bartlesville Examiner-Enterprise reports Chavez planned to detonate bombs at the doors as police arrived.

        The school district says students were never in danger. Chavez is being held on $1 million bond.

    •  i heard someone say on TV that most (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mungley, Mayfly, Annalize5

      school shootings are like that one -- successfully stopped, b/c shooters so often tell others about their plans.

      •  condorcet, I think that's when the would-be (0+ / 0-)

        shooters are 'teens.  Teenagers can't keep a secret.

        Fiscal conservative: a Republican ready to spend $5 to save a dime--especially if that dime is helping a non-donor.

        by Mayfly on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:55:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  One stopped because he took pictures (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mayfly

          There was an "aborted junior college shooting" here that was foiled because the would-be perp took a bunch of pictures of himself in all his armor-ammo-n-guns glory and had them developed at a local drug store. The teen working the photo booth called her dad, a cop, to ask what to do and they set up a sting to arrest him when he came in to get his photos.

          He had enough guns and bombs to take out dozens and dozens of victims.

          This was 12 years ago. With the death of film developing, the odds are very small anyone would be prevented by an alert photo clerk.

    •  I would think that would be important (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PhilJD

      Perhaps the RKBA group here on Daily Kos could take the lead on that project, Annalize. Someone, perhaps the member who has posted so frequently in this thread, could start chronicling the daily killings by means of firearm, and could offer appropriate Second Amendment defenses in each case.

      How, precisely, did the ready availability of guns in each incident contribute to the security of a Free State? How, exactly, were the People involved with the "well-regulated Militia"?

      This would indeed be a fine project, quite appropriate for a Democratic blog, and I can't think of any other folks better equipped to start it than RKBA here. Any takers?

  •  There are roughly 100 gun deaths a day (8+ / 0-)

    in the U. S. So as horrific as Newtown was, there were about another 70 that went unreported that day. And so far, about 100 today.

    Tragic, but so common as to go unnoticed except when they come in massacres.

    I wonder if there is, or could be, an App for this. If we had a continual list of the toll we might begin to think differently about the way we handle guns here.

    Moderation in most things.

    by billmosby on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:33:04 PM PST

  •  If gun control extremists didn't deny (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hastur, lyvwyr101

    the rights of sick and terminally ill patients to carry an automatic weapon into their hospital room, operating rooms, or MRIs, none of this would have happened.

  •  We Know What Happened.....20 Small Children Died (10+ / 0-)

    He shot the children at close range w/ a long weapon.  That's what we need to know.  Each child was shot from 3 to 11 times according to the pathologist who did the autopsy on 7 of the small victims.  

    Tell that to your Representative & Senators.  Each small victim was pelted w/ gunshot.  The pathologist said he believes everybody was hit more than once.  They were all first graders.  

    I will not apologize for being graphic.  I will tell McMorris Rogers office that fact when I call them first thing Monday morning & Rep Adam Smith's office & Patty Murray's office & Maria Cantwell's office.  

  •  Hmmm ... (10+ / 0-)
    narrowly avoided another tragedy early this morning
    By any decent standard, someone entering a hospital and shooting two people is a tragic event.

    What we "narrowly avoided" was "another massively traumatic tragedy".

    Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

    by A Siegel on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:46:07 PM PST

  •  I Guess Today (10+ / 0-)

    Is not the time either. Tomorrow?

    "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

    by bink on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 12:46:08 PM PST

  •  Dave Brin originated the idea to not name shooters (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poco, maybeeso in michigan

    The same way we don't name rape victims, or put streakers at ball games on TV. In the first instance it serves no moral purpose, in the second it only gives them unjustified publicity.

    I think he has a valid point.

    * David Brin is the author of the Postman, Earth, and Uplift series, he is also a member of Daily Kos.

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

    by dopper0189 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 01:13:06 PM PST

  •  denmark (0+ / 0-)

    Seaills guns to the public. Average gun deaths per year, one.

    One.

    But I guess Danes aren't, bloodthirsty eastwards like Americans are.

  •  I would like to know how the man's wife is. (0+ / 0-)

    He was upset at the care his wife was getting at that hospital. What was the problem? Has the problem been fixed? How is her care? Have you always been happy with the care you or a relative received in the hospital -- what was it that drove him to feel extreme measures were needed?

    None of this is being mentioned. Everybody seems happy that the man was killed.

    This woman is now a widow, and how will this help her care further?

    •  Uh (0+ / 0-)

      "extreme measures were needed"?

      I hope she is getting excellent care, but even if not, that doesn't justify an attack.

      •  I know that. But in his mind he felt that -- (0+ / 0-)

        what would make a man feel so concerned about his wife's care that he felt that? Of course, he was wrong to go for his gun -- but what about the wife's care was troubling to him? That is what I want to know about, was/is there a real problem there and if so, what has been done to help the wife, now a widow on top of what ever put her in the hospital?

        •  Maybe the problem is his feelings. (0+ / 0-)

          Maybe he was mentally unstable. Or just the sort of person who thinks a shooting spree is the solution to every problem. In no case was he justified in behaving as he did.  

          For the record, I have direct experience with the hospital where the shooting occurred. I don't know the legalities of disclosing specific details. Let's say I was thoroughly unhappy with the care they provided for my mom (I had medical POA). So unhappy that I ultimately changed her primary doc and never used that facility again, even though the situation was ultimately resolved to my satisfaction.

          The hospital freely provided me with a folder of information -- including contact names, phone numbers and procedures for patient advocacy -- when mom was admitted. I had to go through every single step to finally get things straightened out. But the system was clearly explained, and the hospital did follow it to a tee.

          I did not use my frustration as an excuse to take a security guard hostage and shoot three people. Because I am not insane or a violent asshole. And the point was for mom to receive appropriate care, not to assuage my temper.

          If the husband in this tragedy felt differently, that is due to something within him.

          Just because you're not a drummer doesn't mean that you don't have to keep time. -- T. Monk

          by susanala on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 07:07:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Meanwhile, how is his wife doing, and is/was there (0+ / 0-)

            a serious problem with her care?

            That is being completely left out of all discussion.

            •  Because it's none of your business. (0+ / 0-)

              The wife might issue a statement when she feels up to it or appoint someone to speak on her behalf. But she is in no way obliged to do so. The information also could come out unavoidably due to the shooting investigation or a civil complaint if she files one.

              Otherwise, the wife still has HIPAA rights. If she does not grant permission, it is illegal for the hospital to give out her details to the public.

              You do not have a right to this woman's personal health information. You claim to be concerned for her welfare, but you want to add invasion of medical privacy to her troubles.

              Just because you're not a drummer doesn't mean that you don't have to keep time. -- T. Monk

              by susanala on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 12:43:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  yet another shooting today in Alabama (0+ / 0-)

    From the Anniston Star, a man who shot five people--three who died, a child who survived, a cop who survived.  It spanned two East Alabama counties, Cleburne and Calhoun.

    Take a very wild guess what was involved.

    officers reportedly exchanged gunfire with the suspect. Partridge said the suspect used an AK47 assault rifle in the gunfight, injuring a Heflin police officer. That officer was reported to be in critical condition at Regional Medical Center this afternoon, according to Partridge and authorities in Cleburne County.

    “Nice country you got here. Shame if something were to happen to it” --the GOP philosophy to governing as described by Paul Krugman

    by dwayne on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 08:02:40 PM PST

  •  So many major news outlets (0+ / 0-)

    are trying to blame all of this on mentall illness.

    I disagree.

    While mentall illness does play a part----it is not the sole culprit here---and their constant attempts to make it so---- will just delay the long road ahead of us----in this country---- to make guns less accessable to people.

    We have always had mentally ill people in this country---and we always wil:

    But what we haven't always had is such easy access to guns.

    What we haven't always had is lax gunlaws---what we haven't always had---is too damned many guns per capita.

    What we haven't always had is a ---powerful gun lobby in this country-----that absolutely own some of our legislators---- and makes no attempt to even deny it.

    Have we always had menally ill people?

    Of course.

    Will we always have mentally ill people?

    Of course.

    We need to do something about the guns.

    "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

    by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:49:49 AM PST

  •  This too- (0+ / 0-)

    "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

    by lyvwyr101 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 10:32:11 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site