Another mass murder in California

[TreadNot]

Elderly man mows down dozens with automatic weapon

"An 86-year old man wielding an automatic weapon of immense destructive power murdered 9 people and wounded 45 others, 10 critically, in a deadly rampage in Santa Monica, California. The dead and injured far outnumber the totals of the infamous Columbine shootings, and represent one of the largest mass killings since the murder of 86 people in their Waco, Texas church in 1993. Police chief Police Chief James T. Butts Jr. characterized the slaughter as 'The worst I've seen' in his 30+ year career.

<...>
http://tinyurl.com/j99s

[pyro1392]

1. We really should ban those things

[havocmom]

2. ban cars? I'm all for it! (n/t)

[jody]

3. I must respectfully disagree with your sig line. Bush's lips are

that little hole beneath a dogs tail and what passes through his lips is Dog S@#$

[havocmom]

4. yeah, I know

but he is not the one with the teeth, or a clue for that matter :7

[MrBenchley]

5. Wow...

This sort of thing confirms what many sane people suspect of the RKBA crowd...their fetish obsesses them, and they seem to have some sort of spasm.

"Let's see, what's this headline: Elderly man loses control of car....AWWWWK! GUNS!"

[the_acid_one]

6. Ok, so lets see..

Cars are a dangerous machine that require responsibility.

Guns are a dangerous machine that require responsibility.

Guns kill people.

Cars kill people.


Close enough.

[Spentastic]

7. To be colloquial

Bollocks

Cars designed to transport people from one place to another.

Guns designed to hurl projectiles accurately at targets.

Utility cannot be ignored.

[the_acid_one]

8. "Utility cannot be ignored."

In someways, you're right. A gun is a weapon. Nothing will ever change that. It was born of the desire to maim and kill other human beings. It was adopted for differant purposes. Hunting, target shooting, a hobby, fun.

It's a weapon, but it isnt always used as one. What an object is designed for doesnt matter. You're just as dead whether you were ran over by a car, or shot by a gun. I,for one, seriously doubt I'd be much happier about getting run over then shot.

The point? When an object is misused, who gives a shit what the object is designed for. The person behind the trigger, the driver behind the wheel, the girl with the knife in her hand, the guy with the hammer in his fist. Thats what really matters.


If i go off in my back yard and peel off 1000 rounds through a belt fed machine gun, is anyone going to care? No, probably not.

If i decide to run my car down a crowded street and see how many people I can kill then I'll wager someone's gonna be unhappy.

In one instance, I used a weapon for fun, in the other, I used a tool for harm. Who cares what they were designed for? It's what you do with it.

[Spentastic]

12. Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks and finally bollocks

"In someways, you're right. A gun is a weapon. Nothing will ever change that. It was born of the desire to maim and kill other human beings. It was adopted for differant purposes. Hunting, target shooting, a hobby, fun."

You can't make that argument and at the same time continue to proclaim that a handgun offers the best self defence money can buy. Why does it offer that capability? Because it is designed to kill / maim an attacker?

"The point? When an object is misused, who gives a shit what the object is designed for. The person behind the trigger, the driver behind the wheel, the girl with the knife in her hand, the guy with the hammer in his fist. Thats what really matters."

More bollocks when combined with;

"If i go off in my back yard and peel off 1000 rounds through a belt fed machine gun, is anyone going to care? No, probably not."

How many people is the guy with the hammer likely to get? How many could someone who decided to go on a spree with a belt fed machine gun? How hard is it to kill someone with a car? Which of the above would be the choice of the discerning killer? Which has the greatest design to cause havoc? How many kids kill themselves with hammers? How many hammers are stolen for the express purpose of killing people? How many drive by hammerings are reported. I'd suggest that even with the massive amount of guns in the U.S there are probably more hammers. Are guns used more than hammers to commit crime?

This cars and guns thing is an insult to logic. I completely fail to see why people that wish to keep and bear arms continue to try and equate the two. Cars are designed to transport (primarily), their manufacture and use is highly regulated (not enough for my liking). They have utility in allowing people to travel relatively quickly over distances and add significantly to the efficiency of the economy. Guns allow people to fire bullets for various reasons. Why continue this charade? Are you trying to suggest that you have to ban cars if you ban guns? Are you saying that if you can be trusted with a car you should be allowed a gun? Or are you comparing two things just to justify one stance?

[ComplimentarySwine]

15. Be more afraid of the guy with the hammer

"How many people is the guy with the hammer likely to get? How many could someone who decided to go on a spree with a belt fed machine gun? How hard is it to kill someone with a car? Which of the above would be the choice of the discerning killer? Which has the greatest design to cause havoc? How many kids kill themselves with hammers? How many hammers are stolen for the express purpose of killing people? How many drive by hammerings are reported. I'd suggest that even with the massive amount of guns in the U.S there are probably more hammers. Are guns used more than hammers to commit crime?"

While I don't have statistics on hammer theft, I would speculate that it is less than gun theft for a couple of very important reasons:
1.) There are no background check when buying a hammer. Felons can buy hammers, unlike guns, which is why they choose to steal guns, and not hammers.
2.) Most hammers are much cheaper than most guns. It stands to reason that more expensive items are more likely to be stolen.
3.) Hammers are more readily available. IE, while probably not everyone on my street has a gun, I would speculate that just about all of them, if not all of them, have a hammer somewhere in their house. There is usually no need to steal and inexpensive item that you already have.

Hopefully this will help answer your question:

According to the U.S. Crime Index for the year 2001, America's weapons of choice in the commission of violent crimes were (percentage-wise) included:

Personal weapons: Hands, Fists, & Feet - used in 31.1% of violent crime

Golf clubs, Hammers and baseball bats: 27.8%

Firearms: 26.2%

By the way, the problem with banning automatic weapons is that they are relatively less likely to hurt people than scoped hunting rifles. Comparing the West Hollywood shootings of a few years back to the more recent DC murders will show you what I mean.

In West Hollywood, two gunmen armed with fully automatic weapons fired hundreds and hundreds of bullets. No one died, except for them, when the cops shot them.

In DC, something like less than 20 shots were fired and the death toll was in the teens.

While I do NOT want to be shot at, I think that I would rather be shot at by a fully automatic weapon that's inherently hard to aim and control, than a scoped hunting rifle shooting the same round.

[Spentastic]

16. Well I stand corrected

Nearly.

Firearms are 1 category whereas hammers get lumped in with baseball bats and Golf Clubs. So it is still probable that firearms are used more than hammers?

The lethality of the assault also needs to be considered. I think I'd fancy my chances vs a 7 iron more than a Colt 38.

Your point about choice of weapon is accepted. However, would you rather face a automatic than a scoped rifle in a shopping mall?

As I've said before, I live in the U.K I'm unarmed and the chances of being shot are very low. I just can't comprehend why some here think that guns make society safer.

[the_acid_one]

17. Anddddd back.

You can't make that argument and at the same time continue to proclaim that a handgun offers the best self defence money can buy. Why does it offer that capability? Because it is designed to kill / maim an attacker?

Hey, i never said a handgun was the best defense money can buy. I've never even advocated handguns to any great degree. Personally, I like long guns, Just hard to carry an ar-15 concealed i suppose.

Anyways, what argument are you talking about? I said a gun is a weapon. I said that weapon has been adopted for differant purposes.

Where the hell is the argument? i dont understand! Arg. My rifle is a weapon. Plain and simple. but I have never, and probably will never, use it as a weapon. I just dont want to do so. That means it's a weapon thats being used as something other then a weapon. Mostly target shooting, or fun.

And yes, a handgun is a good defense because it's designed to kill an attacker. Why would i refute that? or even try to?


How many people is the guy with the hammer likely to get?

At least one I reckon. Then again, warhammers racked up quite a few kills in their time. Even with early guns sharing the field


How many could someone who decided to go on a spree with a belt fed machine gun?

I dunno, are they a good shot? But, Probably quite a few, as evidenced by the m249 S.A.W.'s popularity.

How hard is it to kill someone with a car?

Not terribly.

Which of the above would be the choice of the discerning killer?

Cars, by way of bombs attached to them, as evidenced by the IRA. ;) But a machine gun would do in a pinch i suppose.

Which has the greatest design to cause havoc?

Uhm, the machine gun.

How many kids kill themselves with hammers?

How many kill themselves with belt fed machine guns? And furthermore, if someone chooses to take their own life, isnt that their decision to make?

How many hammers are stolen for the express purpose of killing people?

Hammers are cheap, why would anyone steal one? Except for lazy neighbors who never return things.

How many drive by hammerings are reported.

None, hammers are so deadly that everyone that witnessed said drive by hammering drops dead instantly. So They're vastly under reported.

I'd suggest that even with the massive amount of guns in the U.S there are probably more hammers. Are guns used more than hammers to commit crime?

I dunno, I've never seen a hammer death statistic, guess there arent any.

This cars and guns thing is an insult to logic. I completely fail to see why people that wish to keep and bear arms continue to try and equate the two. Cars are designed to transport (primarily), their manufacture and use is highly regulated (not enough for my liking). They have utility in allowing people to travel relatively quickly over distances and add significantly to the efficiency of the economy. Guns allow people to fire bullets for various reasons. Why continue this charade? Are you trying to suggest that you have to ban cars if you ban guns? Are you saying that if you can be trusted with a car you should be allowed a gun? Or are you comparing two things just to justify one stance?

*Tilts head to one side*

That was you completely missing the point. In fact. I'd say that if the point were a target and you were shooting at it, that you just hit yourself in both feet.

I, me, myself, have never said that cars are more suited for killing then guns are. Apparently you were trying to make it sound like i did, or you mis-interpreted what I said. But the fact is, both can be used to kill quite effectively.

Anyways.

My point was very simple, very concise. Intent is what matters. Thats it. Objects dont tend to kill of their own volition. Someone tends to misuse objects to make them do such.

If i choose to run through a play ground full of kids in my car, then that makes me a rotten, shitty, scummy, nasty person, and in all honesty, i deserve whatever the law throws at me.

But the car isnt evil, it's not the cars fault, it just did what I made it do.

If i choose to waltz into a crowded mall, and start shooting people as they scramble for cover, then once again, I am a rotten peice of shit.

But the gun didnt have any say in the matter, it was all me. Both times, inanimate objects of destructive potential, allowed me to harm other human beings. Inanimate things are not good or bad, right or wrong, they just are.

Evil people, make evil things happen. Sometimes things just help them along.

So..what charade are you talking about? Or did you mean the cover-up where all us gun nuts try to hide the fact that guns are always making people commit crime?

[the_acid_one]

9. "Guns designed to hurl projectiles accurately at targets."

Then explain why there are ak-47s?

laughs ;)

[demsrule4life]

10. To hit everything

but the thing you are aiming at.

[Spentastic]

11. "Designed"

I imagine it was designed to do so.

[MrBenchley]

13. Awwwk! Guns!

And they begin flopping on the floor, as their loved ones try to force something in their yaps so they don't bite their tongues off....

[Kenneth ken]

14. delete by me

oops, never mind

[happyslug]

18. Here is the FBI Stats for Murder in 2001

First in 2001 the FBI crime report, report 8719 Firearm Deaths of which 6790 were by handguns. That leave 1929 people killed by all other firearms (Including 985 people killed by “Firearm not reported” which may include additional handguns).

The same report, state that there were 1796 people killed by Knives and other edge weapons and 661 killed by “Blunt Instruments” including hammers. There were also 925 people killed by “Personal weapons” i.e. hands, feet (i.e. Punched and Kicked).


Here is the Cite for Recent Murder rates. Murder rates are used to indicate crime for Murder rates are the most accurate (You always have a body). Other crimes are subject to non-reporting and over-reporting (Often Intentional by the Police Department doing the reporting, sometime accident based on people wanting to report or not report other crimes).

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/01cius.htm