snafu
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2005
hugo said:He had two guns.
Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
hugo said:He had two guns.
Msixty said:Yep, in fact, i don't think we have a waiting period on guns either, the day i get my $1200 check from the military academy for staying drug free for a year I'm gonna go out and get myself a 30/06 rifle. But low and behold the state that requires 4 weeks between handgun purchases had a guy buy two handguns and go on a killing spree.
The nation with some of the strictest gun laws (Britain) has major gun related crime. The state within the USA with the strictest gun laws (California) has major gun related crime. And the school with the strict gun laws (VA Tech) had the worse mass school shooting in our nations history. But the nation with the over all most lax gun laws (Switzerland) bet you thought i was gonna say America huh? anyway, the swiss have next to nothing in the way of gun related crime. The state in the USA with some of the most lenient gun laws (Alaska) has VERY little gun related crime. And the the most gun-oriented school in America (West point) has in the range of zero gun related crimes. Am i the only one that sees a pattern here?
hugo said:He had two guns.
snafu said:Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?
Komrade Vostok Hazard said:It's because if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them.
cybacaT said:Dudes - I recognise that you've probably had years and years of NRA propoganda shoved down your throats since birth, but let's look at this rationally.
More guns would've stopped this shooting spree?
More guns means more gun deaths. That's a simple equation. I'm sure there's a state in the US, or some statistic about an obscure European country where this isn't true, but in 99% of cases, in the real world - more guns means more gun deaths.
Would it have been better to have several people pulling guns to shoot the guy? How many would've died in the crossfire? What if people heard shooting but were confused about who started it? Then you've got "innocent" people shooting each other. Then the police come in and shoot everyone with a gun. You've just made a really bad situation far, far worse.
Then every day on campus when a student has a relationship breakup, a bad exam result, or just a lousy day...quick and easy access to a firearm is going to help the situation??
Sorry...I love guns, I love hunting, completely understand everyone else who does. But over here in Australia I am proud and happy that we've tightened up our gun laws to avoid the sort of carnage that happens year-in, year-out in the US. You have a massive problem there, but appear unable or unwilling to see it.
This is never better expressed than when you have a gun massacre like this one...and people call for more guns!!!
Msixty said:Yeas, in fact, he reloaded inside a classroom right in front of the students.
Ok kids, I'll give you all a quick survival tip since you seem to not know ****, when the top half of the gun gets stuck in the rear position, bullet's won't come out of the front anymore, so then you can put that 20 pound math book to work and smash the Asian kids head in. Or, you can cower in a corner while he reloads and let him kill you, that works too, given that you were probably too stupid and weak to be worth anything to society in the first place. Gotta give it up to Darwin, he really had it right with that 'natural selection' thing.
Msixty said:he most likely put the .22 away then reloaded the 9MM, but like i said before, when the top HALF the gun locks back, that's when you hit the skinny **** with a desk.
hugo said:The fact is it would take at least three or four like minded individuals, unless you just happened to be within 6 feet when he started shooting. Best thing to do, otherwise, is head to the window.
daddyholland said:Let's just hope that at your young age, you will never have to confront the reality of your own words. Not everyone can be hero's....If those were people close to you, you would be singing a different tune....and definately with a lot more respect than you are showing here!
Msixty said:yes, but you are thinking self preservation, I am talking about stopping a mad man that is attempting to kill you and all your friends, it is defiantly a dangerous idea, but given that you have a better chance of getting to him before he reloads compared to the window, and you have a chance of startling him, maybe even enough for him to drop the gun, attacking him is defiantly the more reasonable option, also, if you knock him down, he will seem more human to the other students, therefore some may help you.
essentially, it all boils down to, if you go for the window, you will probably die with a bullet in your back, if you do nothing, you will probably die with a bullet in your head, if you attack him while he is reloading, well, you might have saved your live and the lives of everyone else in the room.
hugo said:Knowing the average size of college classes I am betting he killed less than 1 out of five students, probably closer to one out of ten, he encountered. Your best odds were to go for the nearest exit.
No I haven't, but I'm guessing it'd be like driving with a cell phone. Most people can't do both at the same time. I'm thinking when he's reloading probably several times to injure that many people, you'd have a chance to do something.snafu said:Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?
Ur absolutely right. It's not going to do any good to make the laws stricter than they are. This was totally premeditated and anyone could do this with no prior record.dshogan1 said:The thing that is annoying the **** out of me is the political bullshit that is stemming from this. As a start, people are calling for "stricter gun laws" this kid had no prior record, therefor no matter how strict the laws are, he still would have gotten the gun. He had it for a year, a waiting period would not matter. Gun control in this country is already rediculous, if you want a gun you can get it, and the law isnt going to stop you. The only people stricter gun laws are gunna hurt is law abiding hunters that just want to shoot deer.
Msixty said:yes, but you are thinking self preservation, I am talking about stopping a mad man that is attempting to kill you and all your friends, it is defiantly a dangerous idea, but given that you have a better chance of getting to him before he reloads compared to the window, and you have a chance of startling him, maybe even enough for him to drop the gun, attacking him is defiantly the more reasonable option, also, if you knock him down, he will seem more human to the other students, therefore some may help you.
essentially, it all boils down to, if you go for the window, you will probably die with a bullet in your back, if you do nothing, you will probably die with a bullet in your head, if you attack him while he is reloading, well, you might have saved your live and the lives of everyone else in the room.
thekid65 said:Mxs60, I hear what yer saying..but what I think you are missing is the fact that these were 18-19 yr old well-to-do college students....probably with very little street smarts, and if the dude had his 22 (which, BTW, did NOT look like a 22) in his other hand.. I can see where one would be hesitant to approach him to try and disarm him. These were kids, damnit..not adults. And even if they were adults, not too long ago, if you recall.. there was an assload of adults that didnt do anything to disarm a bunch of ****ing towel heads with box cutters.
As many others have pointed out, the 2nd Amendment reads,"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." The first part is always ignored by the gun lobby.