Oregon Shooting, 10 Dead Umpqua Community College [Archive]

Sombeech

10-01-2015, 11:57 AM

(CNN) — Preliminary information indicates 10 people were killed and more than 20 others injured in a shooting at Oregon's Umpqua Community College on Thursday, said Oregon State Police spokesman Bill Fugate.

Douglas County Commissioner Chris Boice told CNN that the shooter is in custody. It was not immediately clear whether the shooter was injured.

Earlier, authorities told had said they were responding to reports of an active shooter at the Roseburg college campus.

Roseburg is a city of about 22,000 people located about 70 miles south of Eugene, Oregon, and some 180 miles south of Portland.

Iceaxe

10-01-2015, 03:58 PM

If only Oregon schools were inside a gun free zone.... oh wait.... never mind.

BruteForce

10-01-2015, 04:55 PM

Interesting.. story waffles from "in custody" to dead. If he's dead, who do they have in custody?

accadacca

10-01-2015, 07:48 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yca-uwxCsWg

Iceaxe

10-01-2015, 08:57 PM

The minute Obama was told about the shootings he had his dick in his hand jerking it because he was soooooo happy he would have another chance to blame guns instead of addressing the real issues and our worthless mental healthcare system.

Obama can't "give his condolences" to military persons or police officers killed, but he sure can show up for a college shooting. He is the Al Sharpton/Jessie Jackson of shootings.

Addressing mental illness issues, stop the media from sensationalizing tragedies, holding people responsible for their actions (mentally ill or not) instead of making excuses...

All a good start, but there will never be a way to completely stop it, no matter what is done these things will happen from time to time in a nation of millions.

BruteForce

10-02-2015, 04:30 AM

Our jackass POTUS didn't wait long enough to get facts before spouting off about more gun control legislation.

Sombeech

10-02-2015, 05:22 AM

So in this mass shooting, which proposed gun law would have actually stopped it?

bigred72

10-02-2015, 06:18 AM

We should ban the Internet, right?!

http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/26808/1/4chan-users-encouraged-the-oregon-school-shooter-to-kill

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Sombeech

10-02-2015, 06:20 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=69&v=mQORWp3fkRQ

Sombeech

10-02-2015, 07:15 AM

Curious.... targeting Christians. Can that be a Hate Crime? Or does it only define a very specific discrimination?

I'm still racking my brain trying to think what kind of new law would have stopped this shooting. Not getting any answers.

BruteForce

10-02-2015, 09:24 AM

I wonder why Chris Mintz, the US Army vet that tried to intervene hasn't yet received his WH visit appointment? Hmm...

Iceaxe

10-02-2015, 09:49 AM

Absolute Gravity

10-02-2015, 01:06 PM

^^^THIS^^^

The media should be reporting on the hero's from yesterday and not the POS doing the shooting.

For those that don't know:

Meet Chris Mintz, The 30-Year-Old Army Veteran Who Was Shot Five Times As He Tried To Stop The Oregon Shooter
http://www.brobible.com/life/article/chris-mintz-oregon-shooting/

:flag:

Should be? Seems like they are on top of it. Chris Mintz is one of, if not the top story everywhere. Been on my twitter feed all day long.

Iceaxe

10-02-2015, 03:05 PM

It took a while for the Mintz story to gain some legs, I agree it's rolling now....

Rob L

10-03-2015, 01:57 PM

My bit of the Western world is still amazed at the USA tolerance to school & college shootings of innocents.

It doesn't happen that often elsewhere.

But I'm grateful that my kids don't have guns, have no access to guns, and don't go to schools where guns are used.

I guess they'll die of old age, like me.

Brian in SLC

10-03-2015, 08:49 PM

So in this mass shooting, which proposed gun law would have actually stopped it?

Hmmm. Good question. I have a friend in Australia and we chat about US politics (of which he says, "a man has to have a hobby"). So I ask him...why he thought we had so many school/mass shootings. He said "because the US is a gun culture". Hmmm. Yeah, maybe so. And maybe we reap what we sow.

Speakin' of Australia...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_austr alia_s_laws_provide_a.html

I dunno. I'm a gun owner. I enjoy shooting. Used to hunt a fair bit. Would I tolerate more "gun laws"? Yeah, I probably would. Would following Australia's lead help prevent school/mass shootings? Maybe. Will the US do anything, other than talk about it? Probably not.

Sad deal.

Here's to hoping we all die of old age....

Iceaxe

10-04-2015, 10:24 AM

My bit of the Western world is still amazed at the USA tolerance to school & college shootings of innocents.

It doesn't happen that often elsewhere.

The US Constitution and Bill of Rights is about freedom and has nothing to do with safety or saving lives. Freedom has always come at a high cost in lives lost. So the question is really "how much freedom and personal responsibility are you willing to exchange for some measure of safety"? Personally I plan to exchange zero, your mileage may very.

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 10:39 AM

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_austr alia_s_laws_provide_a.html

Great post Brian in SLC

Reading articles like ^that^ are a form of torture for me. There are entire countries of forward thinking people that actually address, then actually solve, problems?? Then they provide peer-reviewed proof that the solution worked??

Oh my God!

I love the idea of a gun buyback (Australia). I also like the idea of restricting ammunition possession and sales to firing ranges (Switzerland? Norway?). Both seem like no-brainer (peer-reviewed no less!) ways to help reduce gun violence.

The sooner we stop fantasizing about Nazis invading (then smokin' them!), and thugs stealing our big screen TV's (then smokin' them too!), the better off we'll be.

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 10:54 AM

The US Constitution and Bill of Rights is about freedom and has nothing to do with safety or saving lives. Freedom has always come at a high cost in lives lost. So the question is really "how much freedom and personal responsibility are you willing to exchange for some measure of safety"? Personally I plan to exchange zero, your mileage may very.

Do you feel that your freedom is being infringed upon because citizens are restricted from owning tanks and rocket launchers? Whatcha gonna do if ISIS shows up to take the Corvette? (Is it worth getting into a gunfight over a car?)

How you gonna smoke ISIS Ice? (see what I did there?)

:lol8:

81971

Iceaxe

10-04-2015, 10:56 AM

The sooner we stop fantasizing about Nazis invading

Just for the record.... one of the main reasons the 2nd amendment exists is to provide protection from our own government.... not the zombie apocalypse.

Sombeech

10-04-2015, 10:57 AM

Even with gun buy back programs, there will still be guns. Even if guns are outright banned, there will still be guns.

There's not a single law, proposal or idea that will eliminate guns from the hands of criminals.

So instead of continuing to try to remove guns, is there any other solution that we are willing to accept that might prevent these shootings?

The sad part is, the answer is out there, but the resistance to this idea is so political that some people won't even look at the concept.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 11:03 AM

Just for the record.... one of the main reasons the 2nd amendment exists is to provide protection from our own government.... not the zombie apocalypse.

Got it. But we as a society are heavily over-armed for such a task. A tenth of the current public armament would keep the government at bay (another invasion fantasy, by the way).

It's like having a suitcase full of condoms for a girl that isn't even going to show up for dinner. The rest of the world looks at the suitcase and laughs.

Iceaxe

10-04-2015, 11:05 AM

Do you feel that your freedom is being infringed upon because citizens are restricted from owning tanks and rocket launchers?

My personal view is citizens should be armed to the same level as your local police force since you face the same dangers and criminal in your neighborhood that they do.

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 11:06 AM

There's not a single law, proposal or idea that will eliminate guns from the hands of criminals.

Correct.

I think of it like a chemical reaction. The less saturated the reactants are (people and weapons) the less likely an explosive reaction is to occur. Brian's Australian article is proof positive of this theorem.

Elimination is not the goal (impossible), but reduction of violence is.

Brian in SLC

10-04-2015, 11:56 AM

Even with gun buy back programs, there will still be guns. Even if guns are outright banned, there will still be guns.

There's not a single law, proposal or idea that will eliminate guns from the hands of criminals.

Sure...criminals will be criminals.

But, in most of these high profile mass killings, the guns were legally purchased:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0

The gun genie is so far out of the bottle...not sure we could ever stuff it back in.

Its interesting to look at the continued decline of violent crime in the US and then the increase with mass shootings. Its hard to wrap one's head around. How to prevent, or, at least slow down the trend? I dunno. Some sacrifice of privacy? Its funny...I think about all the medical privacy we have, then I look at my insurance company and there's no privacy for any procedure or medication they know about. Maybe tie insurance claims for psyche drugs to background checks?

Additional gun legislation, at least the type of major changes that would slow the trend for mass shootings, I can't imagine is in the political will of either major party especially at the national level. Ain't gonna happen.

Some sobering data here:

http://www.health.utah.gov/vipp/pdf/FactSheets/2013FirearmDeaths.pdf

Interesting the increase in firearm deaths in Utah is solidly related to suicide. Sad. The domestic violence issue is right up there too.

I can't see folks who are suffering with some mental health issues, offering to surrender their firearms if they're being treated for depression, schizophrenia, etc. So then what? The state has to remove them? How would they know if they even have them? Close the "gun show loophole"...? Or, close the private sale loophole? I'll bet most of my firearms aren't registered to me. Should they be? Helps a bunch if they get stolen. Would I care if the government knows I have them? I'm not sure. I don't have a concealed carry permit partly for that reason (why advertise?).

I'm a fairly enthusiastic firearms owner. I think I could tolerate some changes.

Absolute Gravity

10-04-2015, 12:43 PM

My personal view is citizens should be armed to the same level as your local police force since you face the same dangers and criminal in your neighborhood that they do.

Don't you live in that hell hole of death and violence that is Sandy or Draper? Even in that cauldron of misery I think a good stink eye would be good enough. Maybe a baseball bat if you are extra sissy.

Iceaxe

10-04-2015, 01:04 PM

Don't you live in that hell hole of death and violence that is Sandy or Draper? Even in that cauldron of misery I think a good stink eye would be good enough. Maybe a baseball bat if you are extra sissy.
Hey, I was just expressing my personal view. And on that level I'm probably better armed than many small nations so I'm good. It gives me a big warm fuzzy feeling to know I have the means to carry out a small war and don't have a need to relay on others.... your mileage may vary.

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 01:12 PM

My personal view is citizens should be armed to the same level as your local police force since you face the same dangers and criminal in your neighborhood that they do.

Citizens do not face the same dangers that police do. Police are called toward danger, citizens are not.

That's like saying everyone should own a firetruck because you believe that you face the same dangers that firefighters do.

*final thought about dangers of Draper deleted* - Tony beat me to it.

:nod: :haha:

Absolute Gravity

10-04-2015, 01:20 PM

Hey, I was just expressing my personal view. And on that level I'm probably better armed than many small nations so I'm good. It gives me a big warm fuzzy feeling to know I have the means to carry out a small war and don't have a need to relay on others.... your mileage may vary.

I'm with ya. When the great Hordes of the Midvale invade Sandystan they won't know what hit 'em.

Iceaxe

10-04-2015, 01:28 PM

Citizens do not face the same dangers that police do.

This conversation is obviously over if we disagree on this basic issue as I believe the average citizen faces the exact same criminals as the police do. I'll agree that LEO faces these criminals on a more constant bases, but it's still the same criminal. And a little FWIW... LEO carrys firearms to protect themselves, not to protect you.

It's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

I'm outta here...

Brian in SLC

10-04-2015, 01:33 PM

Having just got back from an international trip (Austria and Slovenia with a night in Cortina Italy), had thoughts about my safety related to travel. Went to Turkey last year and had a GREAT trip, but, with all the goings on next door...I'm kinda glad to have gone when I did.

So...quick internet search for the safest and least safe places to travel:

http://www.abcnewspoint.com/top-10-safest-countries-in-the-world-2015/

No surprise to see Austria on that list. I've traveled a fair bit to western Europe and I never felt like I couldn't leave the car with our luggage most anywhere we went. People friendly. Great spot to visit.

http://www.abcnewspoint.com/top-10-most-dangerous-countries-in-the-world-2015/

Amusing to see US on the list, between Iraq and Sudan. What was even funnier...was the guy with the AK in the photo of Sudan...with a pile of grass in the bore of his rifle! Scary stuff.

I dunno...I'd probably visit NYC before Yemen...

Absolute Gravity

10-04-2015, 01:38 PM

It's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

Come on Shane, you know this is BS. How much 'better to have' do you carry on your rack? That 10th rappel device is as useless as your 10th gun.

Slot Machine

10-04-2015, 02:20 PM

Oh, don't go Ice. I'm having so much fun learning about gun-ownership fantasies! :mrgreen:

This conversation is obviously over if we disagree on this basic issue as I believe the average citizen faces the exact same criminals as the police do.

I don't remember the last time I chased down an armed robber. Or busted a meth lab full of armed criminals. Or slowly chased a murderer on the freeway who's driving a white Ford Bronco. Or even pulled somebody over for running a stop sign.

So, citizens almost never face the same criminals.

My old man has the "better to have" fantasy, where he heroically shoots some dude in the face that is trying to steal his... well, crap, I'm not sure what my old man owns that is worth stealing. But, in his mind it's worth having a gunfight over.

Probably his 1970's waterbed. :ne_nau:

Rob L

10-04-2015, 02:30 PM

It's a good thing all you Americans aren't Germans.

The last time such numbers of deaths by bullet occurred in a so-called western civilisation was in 1939.

twotimer

10-04-2015, 06:43 PM

First responders do just that...respond.

The one thing that these guys all have in common is that they're freaks. They have no one...no nookie, no friends, no intimate or physical contact at all. Lack of that, over time, will make a man nuts. These guys are the dorks of the dorks. They don't need a stinkin' gun to carry out carnage, either. Just dive into the dark web and look up "How to cause mass casualties without a gun". The only problem I have with people and guns is that these morons are able to shoot themselves in the head.

I personally lay some of the blame on the media. Not for the coverage of these events, but in how they go on and on about how "someone has to pay" if you look in the mirror and see some kind of problem. Blame the "gun culture"? Nah...blame retards and the fact that they're eyes are glued to the T.V. and media prodding them on.

I saw the same thing when I lived in L.A. just before the Rodney King verdict came down. Those "preachers", and the news stations, had that stinking mess down there all whipped up.

Sombeech

10-04-2015, 07:19 PM

81972

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

Scott P

10-04-2015, 07:46 PM

...

double moo

10-05-2015, 06:58 PM

...

Not often we see Scott speechless...

Iceaxe

10-09-2015, 09:11 AM

It's a good thing all you Americans aren't Germans.

The last time such numbers of deaths by bullet occurred in a so-called western civilisation was in 1939.

Since you brought up Germany I assume you don't know that the atrocities happened AFTER the German people were disarmed.....

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control:

Funny how these numbers never make the evening news.

With guns, we are "citizens". Without them, we are "subjects".

:flag:

Brian in SLC

10-09-2015, 10:38 AM

With guns, we are "citizens". Without them, we are "subjects".

With the average number of "citizens" dying from firearms averaging around 40,000 per year, uhhh...my math shows 1 million American deaths by firearms in 25 years. We could also call these "citizens"...."victims".

1 million. That's kind of a lot.

Yeah, freedom isn't free.

Iceaxe

10-09-2015, 12:17 PM

With the average number of "citizens" dying from firearms averaging around 40,000 per year,.

I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but the CDC puts the number of US homicides by firearms at 11,208 per year (2013).

Maybe you are using the new school fuzzy math?

And if we continue to see the same declines in all violent crime we have experianced over the past 30 years it will take 200 years before we approach the million number mark.

Brian in SLC

10-09-2015, 12:48 PM

I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but the CDC puts the number of US homicides by firearms at 11,208 per year (2013).

Maybe you are using the new school fuzzy math?

Ooops...I read the chart wrong...closer to 30k per year average. So...only 750,000. Not just homicides, all firearms deaths, including suicide and accidental. Still seems like a big number.

http://www.gunfaq.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/gun-deaths-traffic.jpg

Interesting....the comparison of traffic fatalities v gun deaths. There's a huge push to reduce (and effectively, it seems) traffic fatalities even given increased speeds on most freeways. Mandatory seat belt laws, etc.

What would be a reasonable push to reduce gun deaths? Surely mental health is a HUGE player. Education?

Probably not driven by homicides, per se, but, gun deaths on the slight increase. I think I recall seeing that suicide by firearm on an increase.

Sorry for the fuzzy math. Actually, its fuzzy eyesight...(blurred lines...why is that song in my head...)...

BruteForce

10-09-2015, 01:09 PM

I think I recall seeing that suicide by firearm on an increase.

I wonder how the 22 military veteran suicides per day since the onset of the conflicts in 2001 is impacting these gun death totals. Sad..

Brian in SLC

10-09-2015, 01:23 PM

I wonder how the 22 military veteran suicides per day since the onset of the conflicts in 2001 is impacting these gun death totals. Sad..

Its a big impact. Really sad.

Lost a friend a couple years ago. Left us all wondering...what the hell...

At least when you gobble a bunch of pills...you might come to your senses and call the ER, or a friend. Ugh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqLal0fiBOI

Rob L

10-09-2015, 01:28 PM

Since you brought up Germany I assume you don't know that the atrocities happened AFTER the German people were disarmed.....

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control:

Funny how these numbers never make the evening news.

With guns, we are "citizens". Without them, we are "subjects".

:flag:

Iceaxe. I disagree with the sentiment behind most, if not all, of your stuff above. If all of those poor souls had their own guns, are you seriously suggesting they would not have died? And how many would they, with these guns, killed?

However, we may have to agree to disagree.

Rob

Iceaxe

10-09-2015, 01:42 PM

Ooops...I read the chart wrong...closer to 30k per year average. So...only 750,000. Not just homicides, all firearms deaths, including suicide and accidental. Still seems like a big number.

I guess you can skew the numbers any way you like.... but.... I think you need to exclude suicide by firearm. If you look at Australia you will notice the suicide rate remained steady after their gun ban and confiscation. Yes, the rate of suicide by firearm decreased, but suicide by hanging increased proportionally, and the overall rate of suicide remained unchanged. Below is more info on the subject put out by the Australian government stating one method has been substituted for another.

Trends in hanging and firearm suicide rates in Australia: substitution of method?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12882416.

Yes, suicide is a big problem and does skew the death by firearm numbers, but banning firearms will not change the number of suicides.

Iceaxe

10-10-2015, 04:40 AM

FWIW- I noticed 11,208 is the number Obama is using in his gun control campaign. He actually uses the number "over 10,000".

Iceaxe

10-14-2015, 05:47 PM

11,208 sounds like a big number until you put it in perspective.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/14/38f69a62081f87c3bf53af1a1dd65487.jpg

Brian in SLC

10-15-2015, 08:16 PM

11,208 sounds like a big number until you put it in perspective.

Take out grandpa fallin' in the shower and your death by accidental fall numbers plummet....

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

Had no idear so many people die of the flu...

Drug-induced deaths: 46,471
Alcohol-induced deaths: 29,001
Injury by firearms: 33,636

Crazy stuff...

Rob L

10-16-2015, 11:54 AM

11,208 sounds like a big number until you put it in perspective.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/14/38f69a62081f87c3bf53af1a1dd65487.jpg

So that's alright then (phew!)

Sombeech

10-16-2015, 09:01 PM

We've gotta quit lumping the gun suicides in with the gun homicide numbers. People don't decide to commit suicide because there's a gun.

When the FrontRunner train tracks were built, going through the Clearfield area just a few blocks from my house, we started seeing suicides by jumping in front of the train. If the train wasn't there, they would have chosen the gun.

But at least those train suicides didn't count towards any distorted "stats" of gun violence.

Brian in SLC

10-19-2015, 03:09 PM

We've gotta quit lumping the gun suicides in with the gun homicide numbers. People don't decide to commit suicide because there's a gun.

Well...its not like we can ask them, eh?

Its gun deaths. If you just want to address homicides, fine for whatever solution you are (or are not) proposing.

Suicide by gun is a huge number. If guns weren't available...would the number be lower? I'd guess so. Murder/suicide would probably be lower. Guns make it easy, that's for sure. Too easy? Maybe.

Accidental deaths by gun? Not a huge number but it adds to the total.