another gun free zone massacre...

[moralist]

http://nypost.com/2015/10/01/oregon-gunman-singled-out-christians-during-rampage/

When will the weak feminized victim worshipping leftists ever learn that they've created "sitting duck zones"?

And why are they witholding releasing the identity of the mass murderer? Who are they trying to protect?


Greg

[Brant Gaede]

They know it. Caring is not part of their gestalt. People are only digits to them--unless they have guns. If you're a bad guy with a gun, you're a good guy to them. The more you kill they happier they are for there's more propaganda for their anti-gun gunnery. Americans must be de-individualized and put into groups. All groups controlled by the elite who, BTW, like to go about with bodyguards.

--Brant

evil is as evil does and talking is doing too

[moralist]

It's being announced on the liberally biased news that under state law the college is not a gun free zone...

...however, under the official college campus rules, any student found with firearms is to be expelled, and any teacher fired.

The liberal news is also reporting that the murderer was a "Conservative Republican Christian". And yet when asked and a student said they were a Christian, they were shot in the head.

Greg

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

And yet when asked and a student said they were a Christian, they were shot in the head.

Greg,

Did they get what they deserved?

I'm not playing gotcha.

I'm interested to see what your reasoning will be.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

There is no reason in his reasoning. You should know that by now.

--Brant

[moralist]

Michael writes:

Greg,

Did they get what they deserved?

I'm not playing gotcha.

I'm interested to see what your reasoning will be.

Michael

That's a perfectly valid question, Michael.

And I'm happy to answer it.

Not the children... but rather their parents.

It's the IDIOT feminized liberal parents who exposed their own children to the potential of becoming collateral damage from mass murderers because of the feminized liberal politically correct government policy of gun free school zones.

At the latest mass slaughter, the gun free zone school had only one unarmed "guard" because that is feminized liberal governmental public policy. As far as I'm concerned the blood of the massacred students is totally on their parents' hands because parents are personally responsible for the lives of their children. There is only secondary responsibility on the feminized liberal government, because the IDIOT feminized liberal parents CREATED the government in their own IDIOTIC image.

Feminized liberals worship victimhood so much... they'll even sacrifice their own children on its altar.

They're fucking lunatics.

Have I made myself perfectly clear?

Greg

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I basically agree with this:

James Alan Fox: Umpqua shooting - a tragedy, not a trend
Another mass shooting sears deep into our collective consciousness, but it is hype and hysteria on the rise, not violence.
by James Alan Fox
October 2, 2015
USA Today

From the article:

The Oregon shooting had countless news outlets flooding the airwaves and the Internet with questionable statistics on the incidence of mass shootings along with sidebar listings of the deadliest shooting sprees in U.S. history. In the usual rush to offer up some breaking information, news reports were embellished with unconfirmed details about the massacre and the assailant that did little but fuel a contagion of fear.

For context, media folks reminded us of the unforgettable, high profile shootings that have taken place over the past few months, hinting of a problem that has grown out of control.

. . .

One can take virtually any period of months or years during the past few decades and find a series of shootings that seemed at the time to signal a new epidemic. The ‘80s were marked by a flurry of deadly postal shootings, which gave rise to the term “going postal.” The ‘90s witnessed a string of mass shootings in middle and high schools carried out by alienated adolescents with access to borrowed guns, prompting the venerable Dan Rather to declare an epidemic of school violence.

. . .

I certainly don't mean to minimize the suffering of the Oregon victims and their families, but the shooting spree is not a reflection of more deadly times. Consider the facts.

According to a careful analysis of data on mass shootings (using the widely accepted definition of at least four killed), the Congressional Research Service found that there are, on average, just over 20 incidents annually. More important, the increase in cases, if there was one at all, is negligible. Indeed, the only genuine increase is in hype and hysteria.

The thing about the Internet plus cable TV plus other media is that it allows us to get bombarded with close-ups of these tragedies. That makes them appear to be more frequent than they are.

It's a cognitive bias taken to the national level. The scientific term for it is availability heuristic.

Michael

[moralist]

I agree that mass murders are much more of a rarity here, and that the media magnifies them. We don't watch any television because it is both inane and blatantly manipulative.

And although parents are ultimately responsible for the lives of their children, I don't mean to take any responsibility away from mass murderers. One characteristic they all share is that they are angry blamers... people who unjustly blame others for the consequences of their own actions. In my opinion this is the cause of every evil act in this world. Another characteristic is that all of them are either on prescription pharmaceutical psychotropic drugs, or illegal drugs. They're like rubber bands that stretch evil people tighter and tighter trying to contain their evil...

...and then one day, they snap releasing all their pent up angry blame at one go.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

I agree that mass murders are much more of a rarity here, and that the media magnifies them. We don't watch any television because it is both inane and blatantly manipulative.

And although parents are ultimately responsible for the lives of their children, I don't mean to take any responsibility away from mass murderers. One characteristic they all share is that they are angry blamers... people who unjustly blame others for the consequences of their own actions. In my opinion this is the cause of every evil act in this world. Another characteristic is that all of them are either on prescription pharmaceutical psychotropic drugs, or illegal drugs. They're like rubber bands that stretch evil people tighter and tighter trying to contain their evil...

...and then one day, they snap releasing all their pent up angry blame at one go.

Greg

I can get nuanced on this without really contradicting you, but there's not enough reason to bother. Let me just say I take some, but not much, exception to your use of "every." I can do this on one or two other items too.

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

I basically agree with this:

James Alan Fox: Umpqua shooting - a tragedy, not a trend

Another mass shooting sears deep into our collective consciousness, but it is hype and hysteria on the rise, not violence.

by James Alan Fox

October 2, 2015

USA Today

From the article:

The Oregon shooting had countless news outlets flooding the airwaves and the Internet with questionable statistics on the incidence of mass shootings along with sidebar listings of the deadliest shooting sprees in U.S. history. In the usual rush to offer up some breaking information, news reports were embellished with unconfirmed details about the massacre and the assailant that did little but fuel a contagion of fear.

For context, media folks reminded us of the unforgettable, high profile shootings that have taken place over the past few months, hinting of a problem that has grown out of control.

. . .

One can take virtually any period of months or years during the past few decades and find a series of shootings that seemed at the time to signal a new epidemic. The ‘80s were marked by a flurry of deadly postal shootings, which gave rise to the term “going postal.” The ‘90s witnessed a string of mass shootings in middle and high schools carried out by alienated adolescents with access to borrowed guns, prompting the venerable Dan Rather to declare an epidemic of school violence.

. . .

I certainly don't mean to minimize the suffering of the Oregon victims and their families, but the shooting spree is not a reflection of more deadly times. Consider the facts.

According to a careful analysis of data on mass shootings (using the widely accepted definition of at least four killed), the Congressional Research Service found that there are, on average, just over 20 incidents annually. More important, the increase in cases, if there was one at all, is negligible. Indeed, the only genuine increase is in hype and hysteria.

The thing about the Internet plus cable TV plus other media is that it allows us to get bombarded with close-ups of these tragedies. That makes them appear to be more frequent than they are.

It's a cognitive bias taken to the national level. The scientific term for it is availability heuristic.

Michael

They are not frequent. They are becoming more frequent. On campuses and elsewhere concealed legal carry should be allowed and those people should have good and proper instruction.

--Brant

no soft targets

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

They are becoming more frequent.

Brant,

Where did you get that information? The point of the story was they are not becoming more frequent. Reports on them are becoming more frequent and more hyped.

Perception is not reality, especially guided perception (generally to sell ad space on media or promote an agenda).

Michael

[Selene]

I basically agree with this:

James Alan Fox: Umpqua shooting - a tragedy, not a trend

Another mass shooting sears deep into our collective consciousness, but it is hype and hysteria on the rise, not violence.

by James Alan Fox

October 2, 2015

USA Today

From the article:

The Oregon shooting had countless news outlets flooding the airwaves and the Internet with questionable statistics on the incidence of mass shootings along with sidebar listings of the deadliest shooting sprees in U.S. history. In the usual rush to offer up some breaking information, news reports were embellished with unconfirmed details about the massacre and the assailant that did little but fuel a contagion of fear.

For context, media folks reminded us of the unforgettable, high profile shootings that have taken place over the past few months, hinting of a problem that has grown out of control.

. . .

One can take virtually any period of months or years during the past few decades and find a series of shootings that seemed at the time to signal a new epidemic. The ‘80s were marked by a flurry of deadly postal shootings, which gave rise to the term “going postal.” The ‘90s witnessed a string of mass shootings in middle and high schools carried out by alienated adolescents with access to borrowed guns, prompting the venerable Dan Rather to declare an epidemic of school violence.

. . .

I certainly don't mean to minimize the suffering of the Oregon victims and their families, but the shooting spree is not a reflection of more deadly times. Consider the facts.

According to a careful analysis of data on mass shootings (using the widely accepted definition of at least four killed), the Congressional Research Service found that there are, on average, just over 20 incidents annually. More important, the increase in cases, if there was one at all, is negligible. Indeed, the only genuine increase is in hype and hysteria.

The thing about the Internet plus cable TV plus other media is that it allows us to get bombarded with close-ups of these tragedies. That makes them appear to be more frequent than they are.

It's a cognitive bias taken to the national level. The scientific term for it is availability heuristic.

Michael

They are not frequent. They are becoming more frequent. On campuses and elsewhere concealed legal carry should be allowed and those people should have good and proper instruction.

--Brant

no soft targets

Correct.

Other wise you put this vet in an untenable position which almost cost him his life, on his son's birthday!

The problem with a fictional action hero in a movie or in a TV show is that they are the protagonist. You know they can’t really get hurt. They are also always super effective. In fact, whether it is Jason Bourne or Denzel Washington as “the Equalizer” or any of the others, they constantly encourage the myth that a person can be so trained and so skilled that he can fight people with guns and know that he is going to win (the Equalizer was especially unrealistic in that way).

In my opinion, these shows actually train men to be cowardly and passive because, the moment you are in a real situation, you are confronted with fears and risks that you never took seriously when you watched the action hero on the screen.

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/10/umpqua-gave-us-a-real-life-action-hero/#2Kott8V0E1KHbHIT.99

Disgusts me that the fundamental right to defend yourself, your family, your neighbors and your community is denied. It is, frankly, insane and suicidal for America.

As a gunman went from classroom to classroom opening fire on students at Oregon's Umpqua Community College Thursday, Chris Mintz knew he had to do something.

When the gunman, Chris Harper Mercer, tried to enter the army veteran's class, Mintz, 30, told the students in his classroom to get to a safe place and said, "you're not getting by me."

"At that point, the shooter shot (Mintz) five times and the shooter moved on and apparently didn't go in to that classroom," Pastor Dennis Kreiss told People. "I applaud the guy's heroism. He may have saved the people in that classroom."

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/10/umpqua-gave-us-a-real-life-action-hero/#2Kott8V0E1KHbHIT.99

I cannot even imagine how much courage this took...

"At that point, the shooter shot (Mintz) five times and the shooter moved on and apparently didn't go in to that classroom," Pastor Dennis Kreiss told People. "I applaud the guy's heroism. He may have saved the people in that classroom."

Seven other people were injured when a gunman – identified as Chris Harper Mercer—opened fire at Oregon's Umpqua Community College in Roseburg.

Mintz spent most of Thursday in surgery after receiving seven gunshots during the attack. Family members said Mintz was able to talk to loved ones before going into surgery, according to WGHP.

“Tries to block the door to keep the gunman from coming in, gets shot three times, hits the floor, looks up at gunman and says its my son's birthday today, gets shot two more times,” Chris' aunt, Wanda Mintz, told KCPQ.

Mintz told family members he heard gunshots in another classroom and tried to keep the gunman from entering his classroom.

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/10/umpqua-gave-us-a-real-life-action-hero/#2Kott8V0E1KHbHIT.99

Then the author mulls over what some folks would think about what this man did:

Someone might think that Mintz was stupid, since he was confronting an armed shooter with nothing but his own strength. But Mintz would have died anyway if the shooter had entered the building. What is amazing about Mintz is that he confronted that choice and didn’t allow fear to prevent him from acting. It is one thing to know intellectually that there is nothing to lose in confronting an armed killer. It is entirely different to actually do it. In fact, even though I think Mintz’s actions were rational, I doubt he ever stopped to calculate anything. Who has time to think in such circumstances? He took action as an impulse guided by love of and loyalty to his fellow humans around him.

Concluding with a passionate paragraph, the author:

The only thing that is stupid is that Mintz lives in a culture that continuously extols as normal the habit of being unarmed. In fact, the school itself made disarmament mandatory—making it a happy hunting ground for any sociopath with the itch to kill. As a military veteran, Mintz would have had no problem stopping the shooter. But, being a civilized man, he has a natural tendency to follow rules and cultural expectations.

He is now going to have to learn to walk again due to those rules and expectation, since both his legs were broken by bullets. Mintz is a hero but those rules and expectations are villainous.

I hope I never face the situation that Mintz did. But if I do, I hope I remember to ask myself, “What would Chris Mintz do.”

I sure hope I do not have to face that choice either, or, anyone of my fellow citizens.

Thank you for your enduring service Chris...

A...

[Selene]

They are becoming more frequent.

Brant,

Where did you get that information? The point of the story was they are not becoming more frequent. Reports on them are becoming more frequent and more hyped.

Perception is not reality, especially guided perception (generally to sell ad space on media or promote an agenda).

Michael

Michael:

I agree.

However, I do not know the numbers.

I have seen some bizarre numbers in articles reporting on the aftermath of the Oregan shooting by a legal immigrant.

Here is a link in one of the articles that reported that this was the 45 mass school shooting this year! ???

http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Main_Page

I have not had a chance to look into it yet.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

Brant,

Where did you get that information? The point of the story was they are not becoming more frequent. Reports on them are becoming more frequent and more hyped.

Perception is not reality, especially guided perception (generally to sell ad space on media or promote an agenda).

Michael

Having bad computer problem--just subjective impression going back to Columbine HS massacre.

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

Michael writes:

Greg,

Did they get what they deserved?

I'm not playing gotcha.

I'm interested to see what your reasoning will be.

Michael

That's a perfectly valid question, Michael.

And I'm happy to answer it.

Not the children... but rather their parents.

It's the IDIOT feminized liberal parents who exposed their own children to the potential of becoming collateral damage from mass murderers because of the feminized liberal politically correct government policy of gun free school zones.

At the latest mass slaughter, the gun free zone school had only one unarmed "guard" because that is feminized liberal governmental public policy. As far as I'm concerned the blood of the massacred students is totally on their parents' hands because parents are personally responsible for the lives of their children. There is only secondary responsibility on the feminized liberal government, because the IDIOT feminized liberal parents CREATED the government in their own IDIOTIC image.

Feminized liberals worship victimhood so much... they'll even sacrifice their own children on its altar.

They're fucking lunatics.

Have I made myself perfectly clear?

Greg

Average age of the student body is 38.

--Brant

[moralist]

Brant writes:

Average age of the student body is 38.

Any adults there are of course personally responsible for exposing themselves to the potential risks of a feminized liberal gun free zone.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

If I were a student at that school I would not have been armed that day. Now I'm thinking ankle holster with a .38 Special and never mind the school rule. I am not a student at any school, however, so I can't say for sure what I would have done prior. If I had been a teacher I would have had a gun. The reason is year after year vulnerability cutting down on my personal odds. I'm about to go concealed carry in Tucson. Even in Tucson open carry might result in some female nut job calling the cops on me no matter if I'm legal.

If a lady is a packer or endorses it, my romantic-sexual interest makes it to first base if reciprocated. I love a woman who packs a gun.

--Brant

[Selene]

If I were a student at that school I would not have been armed that day. Now I'm thinking ankle holster with a .38 Special and never mind the school rule. I am not a student at any school, however, so I can't say for sure what I would have done prior. If I had been a teacher I would have had a gun. The reason is year after year vulnerability cutting down on my personal odds. I'm about to go concealed carry in Tucson. Even in Tucson open carry might result in some female nut job calling the cops on me no matter if I'm legal.

If a lady is a packer or endorses it, my romantic-sexual interest makes it to first base if reciprocated. I love a woman who packs a gun.

--Brant

Amen to this post...physical skills deplete - wisdom and a reliable weapon are good replacements. Never saw a revolver jam.

[moralist]

Brant writes:

Let me just say I take some, but not much, exception to your use of "every."

I'll even double down on "every" by stating that every person who does an evil act believes they are a victim of a perceived injustice. This is a classic secular liberal religious article of faith. And that lie forms the basis of their angry false accusation of others for the consequences of their own actions.

Greg

.

[Selene]

This is their definition of a "mass shooting" which is any event where 4 or more persons are shot...it is not dependent on how many were killed which of course makes sense.

Looking at their "expand" section, I have not heard about most of these.

http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Main_Page

[Brant Gaede]

If I were a student at that school I would not have been armed that day. Now I'm thinking ankle holster with a .38 Special and never mind the school rule. I am not a student at any school, however, so I can't say for sure what I would have done prior. If I had been a teacher I would have had a gun. The reason is year after year vulnerability cutting down on my personal odds. I'm about to go concealed carry in Tucson. Even in Tucson open carry might result in some female nut job calling the cops on me no matter if I'm legal.

If a lady is a packer or endorses it, my romantic-sexual interest makes it to first base if reciprocated. I love a woman who packs a gun.

--Brant

Amen to this post...physical skills deplete - wisdom and a reliable weapon are good replacements. Never saw a revolver jam.

And no fiddling with the stupid safety.

--Brant

[Selene]

If I were a student at that school I would not have been armed that day. Now I'm thinking ankle holster with a .38 Special and never mind the school rule.

--Brant

Amen to this post...physical skills deplete - wisdom and a reliable weapon are good replacements. Never saw a revolver jam.

And no fiddling with the stupid safety.

--Brant

My thoughts exactly.

The less working parts required in a "killing" situation, the better.

Additionally, you have the option of leaving the chamber covered by the hammer empty so there are absolutely no "oopses"...

Accuracy of that first round is critical.

A...

Sorry to cut a pistol packin gal...

[Brant Gaede]

With a double action revolver you can load all cylinders.

[Selene]

With a double action revolver you can load all cylinders.

Thanks, did not know that...

[Brant Gaede]

With a double action revolver you can load all cylinders.

Thanks, did not know that...

This references a quality American made gun. I dropped one in Vietnam. When it hit I was looking right down the barrel. It did not discharge. There is a safety built into the hammer mechanism. Now with a single action Rugar I have no idea. With the double the hammar cannot proceed down without the hammer going back first. You also cannot "fan" a double action revolver as far as I know. G. Gordon Liidy as an FBI agent--and his fellow agents--modified their .357 revolvers so they needed only a touch of pull for the hammer to go back and fall. No five or seven pound trigger pull and no reason to cock. A 9mm auto you are thoroughly familiar with is the best for home defense. Why? Rate of fire and no distortion of aim caused by the heavy trigger pull of an uncocked revolver. One shot into the bad guy and he will likely live. Two shots and he will likely die. Give him seven. If he's still standing keep shooting. You will not knock him on his ass. Not even a .44 mag. will do that. He will just collapse.

--Brant