Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, June 10, 2014

A gunman dressed in tactical gear entered Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Oregon, Tuesday morning and fatally shot one student. Reports on other injuries are not known. The shooter has been killed. Students are saying a teacher may have been hurt. One student told a parent the shooting began in the school's gymnasium. Live video from an Oregon TV channel.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Most likely addicted to shoot em up Video games.

.

#2 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2014-06-10 12:13 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

#1 That will be the very first thing on the lefts agenda.

.

#3 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2014-06-10 12:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not easy putting your kid on a bus to school when the news is on saying another local school is under lockdown.
News just said shooter is dead!

#4 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2014-06-10 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

-gunshots have reportedly been fired

Knives are quieter and just as deadly in a mass killing.

And don't get me started on second-hand smoke and sticks.

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-10 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

So eager we are, to sacrifice others on our personal altars

#6 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-06-10 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Since it is a school, my guess is a tormented kid is the shooter without a political motive.

The political question is how to make it more difficult for tormented kids to get access to guns.

#7 | Posted by bored at 2014-06-10 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Text exchange between boy at that school and his worried sister.

Sister: Are you Okay?

Brother: No, I'm dead

Sister: I heard there's an active shooter

Brother: Wait, we're on lockdown?

twitter.com

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 12:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's going to be a student who was angry at a specific teacher. But I'm cheating a little. Students on Twitter are naming a teacher as a shooting victim.

#9 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 12:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

They say the shooter is dead.

#10 | Posted by boaz at 2014-06-10 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

From Twitter: "POLICE SOURCE: Shooter dressed in all black w AR-15 and vest and helmet. Cornered in bathroom by officers."

#11 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Quick! Pass another round of protect-our-2nd-amendment-
rights laws before the libruls try and confascate um!

#12 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Oregonian: "Police are reporting there were 3 shooters; 2 fled the scene. One of the shooters was caught at a church across the street."

#13 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag:


Oh please let there be a tea party connection this time.
signed the DR left.

#1 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-10 12:11 PM

Another one?

#14 | Posted by DRJIMMIES at 2014-06-10 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Oh please let there be a tea party connection this time."

This statements speaks volumes about you --- not so much those you attempt to disparage

#15 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-10 12:33 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

Assault rifles: legal and widely available because a poorly-written amendment on a 240 year old document is used by a massive lobbying group to convince sexually insecure midget dicks that they need big guns to really be a big man.

But that has nothing to do with these school shootings, of course.

#16 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 6

Eric Holder must be a little more than concerned when things like this happen.
More than likely he has the serial number of the weapon involved by now and is busy cross checking the number against the Fast and Furious list.

#17 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2014-06-10 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

SWAT teams descended on an Oregon high school Tuesday after a gunman opened fire with a semiautomatic weapon, and the gunman has died, police said.

www.usatoday.com

#19 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-10 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wonder if it was evil cops or good cops that killed him?

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-10 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Seems that more and more sick people in this country are taking to acting out in unacceptable ways. Sine of the X.

#21 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-06-10 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

The SWAT team was delayed because they were conducting a no-knock raid on a senior citizen suspected of having too many cats.

#22 | Posted by visitor_ at 2014-06-10 12:41 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

#16 | POSTED BY APPARATCHIK

Please check your definition of "assault rifle" before shedding crocodile tears.

Anyone who can afford a legal full auto rifle or pistol is not the type that is gonna shoot up a random building. If guns are so scary that you stay up at night, I recommend Juarez Mexico, or Capetown South Africa. No guns allowed.

#23 | Posted by aescal at 2014-06-10 12:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

#23 | POSTED BY AESCAL

Ah... the same old line of BS... "definition of assault rifle... blah blah blah... move to another country... etc."

Every shooting is another nail in the coffin for you loonies with guns. It will be fun to watch idiots like you turn in your guns when the amnesty buy-backs occur. Its coming, unless you have a better way to keep nutbags from mowing down people.

#24 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 6

Did they kill the "alledged" --- shooter before he killed anyone?

#25 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2014-06-10 12:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Every shooting is another nail in the coffin for you loonies with guns. It will be fun to watch idiots like you turn in your guns when the amnesty buy-backs occur. Its coming.

Yes it is coming I do believe and this is why every shooting is the gun haters [...].

#26 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2014-06-10 12:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

#26 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

... gun haters [...]...

Yes, we want to ban your guns just for the sake of banning your guns. And we salivate after every shooting at the prospect of achieving that goal! That's it!

It has nothing to do with, um, I dunno -- how many god---ned shootings have we had in the last ---- WEEK?

#27 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 01:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Is this realy about guns now afterall? Let's stop limiting this to tools...it is getting nowhere but the usual impasse....

#28 | Posted by mutant at 2014-06-10 01:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Its easier and more effective to keep the sharp, pointy scissors, the matches, and the household chemicals out of the reach of children than to alter their predilections to hurt themselves with them.

The same is true of guns and nutbags, as is evidenced countless times.

But this concept is too tough for some to grasp, I guess.

#29 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, we want to ban your guns just for the sake of banning your guns. And we salivate after every shooting at the prospect of achieving that goal! That's it!

Thank you.
People like you think that defending our right as honest law abiding citizens to own guns is somehow a cheer for the filthy pukes that use them to shoot innocent people down. Me, the NRA and millions of good people in the US hate these shootings. Taking my guns away will not stop a thing because the next scroungy ba****d that wants to shoot um up will simple steal one.
How can he steal one if every gun is confiscated you ask..
Ans: because total confiscation is not possible.

#30 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2014-06-10 01:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

#28 Let's stop limiting this to tools...

Because there are so many mass killings where tractors, frying pans, or slide rules were used.

#31 | Posted by 88120rob at 2014-06-10 01:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

#27 | POSTED BY APPARATCHIK

Either you

A: are genuinely concerned about gun violence in America and all the lives it effects, not just upper middle class white america

B. only come to out against guns when non minorities are victims, thus showing that you are a true racist who cares nothing about the 30+ African Americans that die everyweekend in Chicago, and use the gravestones of white gun homicide victims as a pulpit.

Im gonna call you out and say that you fall in line with B, 95% of the antigun movement in the States. Your chances of dying in mass shooting are less than winning the powerball and having a menage a tois with stars of American Idol on the same night. And if you avoid being a drug dealer, gangbanger, or living in a crackhouse, they are practically nill. These roots of mass shooting lies not in access to guns, but mental health and the lack of treatment Stateside. Government solution is to issue crazy checks instead of offer real solutions in the form of therapy and supervision and or counseling. Your gun ban idol Diane Fienstein herself applied for a CCW, and yet us plebians are not worthy of defending our own lives?

#32 | Posted by aescal at 2014-06-10 01:16 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Me, the NRA and millions of good people in the US hate these shootings.

If you really hated these shootings, you would accept reasonable concessions on gun rights like universal background checks and laws restricting the mentally ill from obtaining guns. Those things would not affect your ability to own guns in the slightest. You would raise hell with the NRA for opposing these reasonable measures.

#33 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 3

Every shooting is another nail in the coffin for you loonies with guns. It will be fun to watch idiots like you turn in your guns when the amnesty buy-backs occur. Its coming, unless you have a better way to keep nutbags from mowing down people.

#24 | POSTED BY APPARATCHIK

A good start would be to stop sensationalizing this kind of thing and making it an attractive outlet for some whackjob to make his/her name known.

Unfortunately for the media, the body count was barely worthy of a blip and CNN is so bored with it already they're lead story on the webpage is a 20 year old rehash of the OJ Simpson slow speed car chase and the sublead is a picture gallery.

#34 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-06-10 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

It can't be about confiscating and creating more laws about gun rights. There are too many millions of guns and ammunition to do anything about it. The genie is out of the bottle.

This is all about undisciplined youth.

This is about mentally deficient young men with access to deadly force and no empathy for fellow human beings. They haven't been raised right.

The American family has been obliterated, not by liberals and conservatives, but by lawyers and lobbyists that seek to make a profit by making marriage too easily broken up. These young men need fathers. They need someone to help them see right and wrong. Most mothers aren't capable of helping their sons that way without the love and discipline of the father.

The law enforcement and prison lobbyists are also to blame. If it wasn't for the low educated, they wouldn't have jobs.

#35 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-06-10 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The NICS FBI background check has been in place for many years...On the forms to buy a gun it specifically asks about mental issues. Can people lie about that? Sure. So why don't we "get tough" with the psychiatrists? Because they are bound not to reveal patient information.
Also if the millions of mentally ill people knew that their information was going to get shared, many would refuse to even see a psychiatrist.
"If I really hated these shootings" You seriously think I don't?
Cmon arcade.

#36 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2014-06-10 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

A good start would be to stop sensationalizing this kind of thing and making it an attractive outlet for some whackjob to make his/her name known.

As a practical matter, that is impossible. If you convinced the mainstream media to censor itself even in limited ways -- such as not naming or running photos of the shooters -- fly-by-night operators on the Internet would make a fortune providing that information.

#37 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I say we step up LEO in the schools..And not with some Barny Fife either.
Around here the outside doors of all schools are locked and noone gets in without camera scrutiny.

#38 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2014-06-10 01:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

#37 | POSTED BY RCADE

The MSM already censors it self. Politics and distribution are more important than the core values of journalism. 3 mass shooting in Chicago 3 weekends ago, didnt make a splash at all. The knockout game, aka polar bear hunting, has been around for years (go to worldstarhiphop and check the dates of user uploaded videos) but didnt make headlines until an older jewish person was attacked in NY. Some newspapers up north will not release the race of attackers or rapists in alerts as to not offend a certian group. MSM always refers to "gun deaths" lumping in suicides when giving statistics. And then point to Japans gun death rate ommiting suicides (which is 50% higher than the US). We cant expect to learn anything from MSM except what they want to sell us.

#39 | Posted by aescal at 2014-06-10 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#33 | POSTED BY RCADE

Define mentally ill & define the cure, ie, how long before your rights were restored or will they never be?

I support universal background checks, but I'm leary about defining mental illness because with the exception of obvious situations (hearing voices, dementia etc) it's not a very cut and dry topic.

In those obvious cases absolutely restrict ownership, even access to and handling them. Unfortunately simple depression is considered a mental illness and if that's enough of a factor for some to consider that they should be banned, keep in mind that there are millions of people who suffer from it and never bother anyone and firearm owners are not immune from it.

To an extent, I'm OK with a bit of rework in the regulations in a manner that makes sense. Unfortunately, much of what I've seen argued amounts to feel good palliatives that will likely do jack squat.

I don't like it because it deals with stripping a right from someone for what they "might" do and that should scare the crap out of people.

______________________________
__

As a practical matter, that is impossible. If you convinced the mainstream media to censor itself even in limited ways -- such as not naming or running photos of the shooters -- fly-by-night operators on the Internet would make a fortune providing that information.

#37 | POSTED BY RCADE

Your answer is literally "there is money on the table that someone else may get, so we may as well take it first"?

What does that say about the integrity of your profession?

#40 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-06-10 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Define mentally ill ...

There are plenty of ways this could be done in a narrow, civil liberties-respecting manner. It could be some form of court declaration that a person is mentally ill, a court issued gun restraining order or confinement in a mental institution the preceding X number of years.

#41 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 01:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your answer is literally "there is money on the table that someone else may get, so we may as well take it first"? What does that say about the integrity of your profession?

That's not what I said. I wouldn't take that money. But I know there are countless sleazy web publishers who would. That's the nature of the online news business these days.

I operate on standards close to the mainstream media, because I am a journalism school graduate and I was a newspaper reporter for a decade. I try to do what I see the major papers doing. If all of them started obscuring details on mass shooters, I would follow their lead.

#42 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 01:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

...thus showing that you are a true racist...

Breathtaking stupidity. Just... Wow.

#43 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#41 | POSTED BY RCADE

Plenty of ways to predict actions of those who are not obviously insane? Again, like how? It's a fuzzy topic to begin with, people are not easily predictable if at all.

Will it be all past history or just current? Would the 4th amendment need to be altered to allow for the search and seizure of any weapons that the person in question may own. Would there be random searches of the home to insure compliance and what happens if they have a roommate? Does this roomates rights get restricted because they happen to live in the same home or do we use the honor system and ask politely that they turn over all weapons voluntarily?

Etc, etc, etc and that's just what comes to mind after about 7 minutes of thought.

#44 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-06-10 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Plenty of ways to predict actions of those who are not obviously insane?

If it was much more difficult for the mentally ill to obtain firearms, I think we'd catch many of them prior to any massacre taking place. Why is that not a worthy goal? It helps society and helps the mentally ill people who are contemplating mass murder.

If the cops who did a mental welfare check on Elliot Rodger had known he was amassing guns, they could have gotten him into mental health treatment. It could have saved his life and that of the people he killed last month. The guy's manifesto showed that he was intelligent, and he had family who loved and supported him. He could have gotten to the other side of mental illness with treatment and medication.

#45 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 02:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's not what I said. I wouldn't take that money. But I know there are countless sleazy web publishers who would. That's the nature of the online news business these days.
I operate on standards close to the mainstream media, because I am a journalism school graduate and I was a newspaper reporter for a decade. I try to do what I see the major papers doing. If all of them started obscuring details on mass shooters, I would follow their lead.

#42 | POSTED BY RCADE

"That's not what I said. I wouldn't take that money. "

So you're not making more banner ad money by the added attraction and 500+ postings on the site for these kinds of topics? My bad, could have sworn these kinds of things boosted your revenue.

"I operate on standards close to the mainstream media, because I am a journalism school graduate and I was a newspaper reporter for a decade. I try to do what I see the major papers doing"

Ahh, Monkey See, Monkey do then?

My mom used to have a saying when I did similar things, "if your friend jumped off a bridge would you follow them?"

You make your own path in life or you follow blindly along the path of others.

"shrug" Comes down to agree to disagree I guess.

#46 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-06-10 02:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the cops who did a mental welfare check on Elliot Rodger had known he was amassing guns, they could have gotten him into mental health treatment. It could have saved his life and that of the people he killed last month.
#45 | POSTED BY RCADE

How would that work? Just the fact that someone has a large assortment of weapons suggests he's indignant or mentally deranged?

#47 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-10 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Around here the outside doors of all schools are locked and noone gets in without camera scrutiny.

#38 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE AT 2014-06-10 01:32 PM | FLAG:

That did squat in Sandy Hook.

#48 | Posted by 726 at 2014-06-10 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

How would that work? Just the fact that someone has a large assortment of weapons suggests he's indignant or mentally deranged?
#47 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

When the cops went to visit him over the video, they didn't check for weapons using the system. Which is one of its purposes. Anyhow, they would have asked to see the weapons, and question him about them in a non-threatening way.

They might have ascertained his motive perhaps indirectly, perhaps more worried about him committing suicide.

#49 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-10 02:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

It could be some form of court declaration that a person is mentally ill, a court issued gun restraining order or confinement in a mental institution the preceding X number of years.

#41 | POSTED BY RCADE

But this exists in Cali, known as a 5150.
en.wikipedia.org(involuntary_psychiatric_hold)

#50 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-10 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

They might have ascertained his motive perhaps indirectly, perhaps more worried about him committing suicide.
#49 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

I can see that. But do mental health check ups on gun owners (those who own many guns; "amassing") tend to conclude in mental health treatment?

#51 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-10 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

We need random sanity check points around the schools. Police should stop cars at and ask the occupants if they still have all their marbles. Check people on foot too. Have them submit to a field sanity test.

#52 | Posted by visitor_ at 2014-06-10 02:25 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

When everyone is told they're special, and everyone gets a trophy, then they lose the ability to face adversities. That's my theory on why there seem to be more of these shootings.
Sounds more plausible than violent movies.

These guys are seeking their 15 minutes, but the odd part is they don't start until they're already dead.

#53 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-10 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

How would that work? Just the fact that someone has a large assortment of weapons suggests he's indignant or mentally deranged?

As Andrea suggested, if the cops knew Rodger had a bunch of guns and ammo in his apartment, they would have questioned him about it. In his manifesto, he indicates that this would likely have been the end of his plot. He was extremely worried they would find the guns.

It was a lot easier for Rodger to convince the cops he was no threat when they didn't know about his guns.

#54 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 02:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was a lot easier for Rodger to convince the cops he was no threat when they didn't know about his guns.
#54 | POSTED BY RCADE

Thank you for the clarification.

#55 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-10 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

So you're not making more banner ad money by the added attraction and 500+ postings on the site for these kinds of topics? My bad, could have sworn these kinds of things boosted your revenue.

Stories that get more attention make more revenue, but I think you can tell I'm not going for the lowest common denominator. I gave these mass shootings the play I did because they seemed like the biggest news of the day within the areas the site's users care about the most.

You make your own path in life or you follow blindly along the path of others.

I don't think that adopting the standards of a profession amounts to "blindly" following the path of others.

#56 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 02:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

You think LaPierre cringes every time this happens or immediately starts working on a new "Good guy with a gun" speech?

#57 | Posted by drewl at 2014-06-10 03:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

A modest proposal I've been mulling about in my head, since no one ever seems to want to put one up (including constitutional amendment to finally clarify the universal right to carry under reasonable conditions, no militia nonsense):

* Civilian ban of any semi-automatic rifle or shotgun
* Civilian ban of any automatic pistol

Permissible firearms include and are limited to:

* Pump-action, break-open -style shotguns with up to a 5 shot capacity (up to 10 gauge)
* Up to 6-shot revolver-style handguns (up to .45 calibre)
* Bolt-action rifles (up to .50 calibre, reasonable grain limit, shot type)
* Black-powder rifles (no limits)
* No limit on number of weapons

Possession of any permissible firearm requires an annually renewed, state-administered certified firearm operator permit which allows for

* Unloaded transport in motor vehicles to and from places of operation (ranges, hunting grounds, etc.)
* Unloaded storage in a primary domicile
* Purchase of any permissible weapon, up to 2 per month, without background check (this is done annually anyway)
* Annual renewal is the financial responsibility of the firearm owner, including any applicable background check fees or as proscribed by state or local law

A class "B" certified firearm operator permit will additionally allow for loaded concealed carry at permissible locations as established by local and state law or as law defined by regulations while on federal property

Class B requires same checks as class A with the addition of a certified self-defense firearm training course with annual renewal and a 5 year psychiatric evaluation, at operator's expense

Class C is a permit for minors that allows for supervised possession of an allowed firearm in the presence of a certified firearm operator (class A or B) at a place of operation. This should be made trivial to obtain for the parents of a class A or B holder

A & B & C Permits are universally accepted and honored in all 50 states. Age 21 and up for A & B. Age 10 for C.

Does this really sound so bad?

#58 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 03:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who did you steal that proposal from? It's obvious it was lifted and amended.

#59 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-10 03:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Does this really sound so bad?"

A lot of those are similar to current Canadian law. At least as far as unloaded transport and storage and mag limits. Semi-auto pistols are still allowed if they are over .32 Cal.

No concealed carry though. Or annual renewal.

#60 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-06-10 03:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

What is the reasoning behind the .32 cal floor? Saturday night specials? Seems like there would have to be some reasoning to choose that caliber.

#61 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-10 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

"* Civilian ban of any semi-automatic rifle or shotgun"

So take away some of the most popular sporting rifles. But why? so some people that have been fooled into thinking they are more deadly can sleep better at night?

"* Civilian ban of any automatic pistol"

Take away the most popular self defense and sporting handguns. And why? Revolvers can shoot just as fast. The can reload pretty much as fast. They are not less deadly. But, no shell casings are left hindering police investigation. Most stock revolvers are difficult for smaller or weaker hands prohibiting use for women and elderly.

"* Unloaded transport in motor vehicles to and from places of operation (ranges, hunting grounds, etc.)"
Pointless unless you require prior acknowledgment of planned outing.

"* Unloaded storage in a primary domicile"
Again hindering use for protection.

"Purchase of any permissible weapon, up to 2 per month, without background check (this is done annually anyway)"

Then even if you were to buy into the background check crap it would be negated.

" Annual renewal is the financial responsibility of the firearm owner, including any applicable background check fees or as proscribed by state or local law"

additional cost and hassle hindering many from ownership, would necessitate what is practically a firearms registry. Gives the state one more way to increase revenue by additional fees which will constantly grow.

Yup sound pretty bad and that is just a few quick reasons. Want more?

#62 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-06-10 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What is the reasoning behind the .32 cal floor?"

I think it was to get rid of those tiny little pocket pistols that are not much use anyway. You can still have .22 autos for targets though, so it might be based on barrel length as well.

#63 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-06-10 04:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hey RCADE - why don't we starts a CLOCK on the front page: DAYS SINCE LAST PUBLIC SHOOTING. Today you could've just dialed it back from 4 to 0.

It'd be a lot easier than keeping up with all these NRA sponsored tragedies.

#64 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-10 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

#59 the burden of proof on that is on you, 101. My words. Guaranteed.

#65 | Posted by apparatchik at 2014-06-10 04:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many $$$$$ do events like this make those i.e. Zuckerberg, media, TV, and other branches of the Consolidated mainstReam misinformAtion media Propaganda machine……"CRAP" for short.

Advertising depends upon BS and eyeballs. It produces nothing tangible such as jobs or wealth creation for most Americans, because it benefits mostly a few advertising publicists and media execs on either coast (Hollywood and NYC) and China manufacturing.

How many killed in the ghettos of Chicago, NY, LA, etc because they've been doped up and dumbed down by the MSM? That mostly goes unreported because it takes away from propaganda.

#66 | Posted by Robson at 2014-06-10 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was a lot easier for Rodger to convince the cops he was no threat when they didn't know about his guns.

#54 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2014-06-10 02:28 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Which begs the question, how and why did the state's DOJ Automated Firearms System, their automatic state registry, fail in a state where all firearms transactions must go through a licensed dealer?

#67 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-06-10 04:49 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

If you really hated these shootings, you would accept reasonable concessions on gun rights like universal background checks and laws restricting the mentally ill from obtaining guns. Those things would not affect your ability to own guns in the slightest. You would raise hell with the NRA for opposing these reasonable measures.

#33 | POSTED BY RCADE

MAN! I thought I cleared you up on this earlier today. You are flat out wrong, man. How long are you going to cling to the foolish notion that those policies would do one ounce of good?

Look up the word infringed. Anyone with a basic understanding of the Constitution, and the fact that it is an assertion of rights, but by no means intended to be a comprehensive list of rights, understands that the word infringed was used to make it clear.. You don't trust the government to protect your core rights and interests. The responsibility rests with you/us. The gov't will always take power from the people at any opportunity.

Have some humility, and realize you are not even in the same intellectual league as the founding fathers, that they phrased the 2nd precisely as they intended to, to protect our right to defend ourselves as individuals from ANY threat, for all time, including the government.

And yes, I hate these shootings, and given the opportunity, I would be happy to flip the switch on any of these perps.

#68 | Posted by TuffLuv at 2014-06-10 05:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Does anybody think there might be a connection to all these shootings and the crapy economy?

#69 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-10 05:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Does anybody think there might be a connection to all these shootings and the crapy economy?

#69 | Posted by Sniper

Does anybody think there might be a connection to the crappy economy and 30 years of non-trickle-down reaganomics?

#70 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-10 05:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nope. It's all due to the Swords of Scorn dividing the society. It is all they focus on. Division equals big dollars in the media moguls pockets. They have just short of half the population completely brainwashed with this type of propaganda. Race relations, class relations, gender relations, people/politician relations, have not been worse in this country since the civil war. It's sad, because just about every "major" issue we argue about on a daily basis is really just petty crap. But we all take the bait again and again. Play right into their hands.

#71 | Posted by TuffLuv at 2014-06-10 05:27 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

MAN! I thought I cleared you up on this earlier today.

We don't need to hear gasbaggery about how you think you're right. It goes without saying that you think you're right, as does everybody else in this discussion.

Look up the word infringed.

Read the Heller decision. It affirms that everything I've suggested in this discussion is constitutional.

And while we're on the subject, telling people to "realize you are not even in the same intellectual league as the founding fathers" is a cheap appeal to authority. You don't get to gravy train on their intelligence to bolster your arguments, and it's silly to claim that no one today is their intellectual equal.

#72 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 05:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Does anybody think there might be a connection to all these shootings and the crapy economy?

The economy has gotten better each year since the 2008 crash bottomed out in mid-2009. I don't see why we'd have more incidents today than six years ago, if the economy was the primary impetus.

Besides, which of these mass shooters lately had any job woes that were cited as a reason they lashed out?

#73 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 05:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

The economy has gotten better each year since the 2008 crash bottomed out in mid-2009. I don't see why we'd have more incidents today than six years ago, if the economy was the primary impetus.

This 'recovery' has been almost non-existent. We are now talking 6 years of economic malaise with chronically high unemployment.

Regardless, it seems like every one of these shooters has been seriously f-ed up in the head. I don't think the bad economy is what's driving this.

#74 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-10 06:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

The victim in today's freedoming was Emilio Hoffman, 15. This is Emilio photographed with youth soccer players he was coaching:

twitter.com

#75 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 06:12 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

What's with all the copycat maniacs?

#76 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-06-10 06:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Regardless, it seems like every one of these shooters has been seriously f-ed up in the head. I don't think the bad economy is what's driving this.

#74 | Posted by JeffJ

Hopeless people do crazy things. We do have more hopeless people than we did a couple decades ago. This economy used to function for much more of the population. Now it functions only for the winners, who have awesome lives, and leaves more people struggling to survive. Winner-take-all systems naturally result in more viciousness and madness between the non-winners as they realize they are excluded from prosperity.

#77 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-10 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Not saying that's causing all of these killings, but it is part of the cause of the undercurrent of anger and frustration in america.

#78 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-10 06:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Speaks,

You had me for a little bit, but the economically "hopeless" people aren't doing the shooting.

To put an ideological spin on it at this juncture is premature.

#79 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-10 06:43 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

IMO, it would be the hopelessly entitled, or emotionally hopeless, the ones that have a preconceived notion of what they deserve and the world isn't giving it to them.

#80 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-10 06:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

The NRA opened a new branch office just east of Portland today, we should start holding the NRA responsible for their crazy member's actions.

#81 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2014-06-10 08:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rcade - The economy has gotten better each year since the 2008 crash bottomed out in mid-2009. I don't see why we'd have more incidents today than six years ago, if the economy was the primary impetus.

For many it is fine. It you are an investor in Wall St you're doing fine, thanks to a Federal Reserve that is in cahoots and that forces average schmucks to gamble instead of save. For others they work 2 or 3 jobs all paying about .0000001% of what the robber barons have been making at American dollar and taxpayer expense.

#82 | Posted by Robson at 2014-06-10 08:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

If you really hated these shootings, you would accept reasonable concessions on gun rights like universal background checks and laws restricting the mentally ill from obtaining guns. Those things would not affect your ability to own guns in the slightest. You would raise hell with the NRA for opposing these reasonable measures.

#33 | Posted by rcade

Don't look now rca but all thoes things are in effect already.

Go to your local gun store and read the form that a purchaser has to fill out prior to a background check by the FBI.

Seems to me that you don't have a clue about existing gun laws.

#84 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-10 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

It really seems that way. It really genuinely does. It seems like it's psychosexual with a lot of you. You tapdance on corpses of people that no law could ever have protected as a "reason" to implement more laws criminals and the insane will ignore.

#83 | Posted by soheifox

You realize we have LOOSER gun regulations now that we did 2 years ago right? The NRA is the one capitalizing on these shootings by scaring their moron members into thinking they're coming for your guns and terrifying elected officials into being even more PRO gun than they were before.

#85 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-10 08:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't look now rca but all thoes things are in effect already.

We're not even close to universal background checks for gun purchases -- which would include gun shows -- as you can see from this map:

www.governing.com

Seems to me that you don't have a clue about existing gun laws.

#86 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-10 09:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gun violence is actually down but school "copycats" reign supreme at this time.

#87 | Posted by matsop at 2014-06-10 09:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just more proof that NOTHING good comes from guns ...NOTHING

This is the 77th school shooting since New Town Connecticut

#88 | Posted by SammyAZ_RI at 2014-06-10 09:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Little o admires Australia for the confiscation of guns. Of course, Australia isn't invading the privacy of their citizens, loading up homeland security and police departments with unusual arsenals, and through selective fascism targeting certain individual's incomes through the IRS.

#89 | Posted by matsop at 2014-06-10 09:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

We're not even close to universal background checks for gun purchases -- which would include gun shows...

So, when you use the term "universal background checks" should I assume you mean those should include "private sales?"

Does that include the rifle I inherited from my grandfather? What about me selling a pistol I've owned for 40 years to a friend I've known for the same amount of time? How about giving that pistol to my son?

Granted, a better definition of "private sale" may be in order but where do you draw the lines?

#91 | Posted by et_al at 2014-06-10 10:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, when you use the term "universal background checks" should I assume you mean those should include "private sales?"

Let's start with gun shows. People in the business of selling guns on a full- or part-time basis should all play by the same rules.

But personally, I think anyone who sells a gun for anything of value should be required to obtain a background check from the purchaser before delivering the firearm. That would not cover an inheritance or a family gift, but it would cover your sale to a friend.

That's a hassle, but it can be put on the buyers. And if they're not willing to do that, then they must not need the gun very much.

#92 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-11 12:23 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

most minorities are killed with handguns.. ban them first.

#93 | Posted by klifferd at 2014-06-11 08:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

^ that is where the gun nuts are insisting when they pretend to not be racists and call others.

well yes then.. ban hand guns.

#94 | Posted by klifferd at 2014-06-11 08:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

#72 | POSTED BY RCADE

Ok, man.. This time I'll have a little humility and concede, I did some posturing there. An earnest argument stands on it's own merits.

We can agree to disagree on this stuff.

#95 | Posted by TuffLuv at 2014-06-11 09:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ok, man.. This time I'll have a little humility and concede, I did some posturing there. An earnest argument stands on it's own merits.

That's far too gracious. I shouldn't have jumped on you for that. Sorry.

Let's hug this out.

Is that a legally concealed handgun in your pants or are you happy to see me?

#96 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-11 10:04 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 3

You think LaPierre cringes every time this happens or immediately starts working on a new "Good guy with a gun" speech?

#57 | POSTED BY DREWL AT 2014-06-10 03:36 PM | FLAG:

He has that speech saved as a template in word. Just insert name, city, date and print.

#97 | Posted by 726 at 2014-06-11 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

that they phrased the 2nd precisely as they intended to,

Baloney. The 2nd Amendment was debated, compromised and re-written numerous times.

#98 | Posted by 726 at 2014-06-11 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Baloney. The 2nd Amendment was debated, compromised and re-written numerous times.

Nice job of proving my point. Like I said, written exactly as intended.

#99 | Posted by TuffLuv at 2014-06-11 04:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Your gun ban idol Diane Fienstein herself applied for a CCW, and yet us plebians are not worthy of defending our own lives?"

If the people have guns, they have a way of defeating the ability of the Feinstein's to control them. If you're her, you may have good reason to fear the people. All politicians should.

The desire for totalitarian control of society extends beyond progressives, but it is progressives you are most likely to see support for a strong central government to which all are subordinate. Just so long as that totalitarianism is progressive in nature. And every good progressive knows that, without that sort of authority, progressivism won't survive. It requires coercion.

#100 | Posted by madbomber at 2014-06-11 10:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But personally, I think anyone who sells a gun for anything of value should be required to obtain a background check from the purchaser before delivering the firearm. That would not cover an inheritance or a family gift, but it would cover your sale to a friend."

What if I am a rancher who has previously been convicted of a violent crime, or expressed anti-government sentiments. My job requires me to have a gun. I have a verifiable need for a gun. Yet, will this be taken into account in a background check-my need for a gun.

#101 | Posted by madbomber at 2014-06-11 10:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

#39 | Posted by aescal

The most NW post on this blog and no one even saw it..

#102 | Posted by boaz at 2014-06-12 12:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort