When is enough enough? How many have to die before we stop this madness?

[AndyA]

— March 29, 2009: Robert Stewart, 45, shot and killed eight people at Pinelake Health and Rehab in Carthage, N.C. before a police officer shot him and ended the rampage.

— March 29, 2009: Devan Kalathat, 42, shot and killed his two children and three other relatives, then killed himself in an upscale neighborhood of Santa Clara, Calif. Kalathat's wife was critically injured.

— March 10, 2009: Michael McLendon, 28, killed 10 people — including his mother, four other relatives, and the wife and child of a local sheriff's deputy — across two rural Alabama counties. He then killed himself.

— Feb. 14, 2008: Former student Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, fatally shooting five students and wounding 18 others before committing suicide.

— Dec. 5, 2007: Robert A. Hawkins, 19, opened fire with a rifle at a Von Maur store in an Omaha, Neb., mall, killing eight people before taking his own life. Five more people were wounded, two critically.

— April 16, 2007: Seung-Hui Cho, 23, fatally shot 32 people in a dorm and a classroom at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, then killed himself in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

— Oct. 2, 2006: Charles Carl Roberts IV, 32, shot to death five girls at West Nickel Mines Amish School in Pennsylvania, then killed himself.

— March 21, 2005: Student Jeffrey Weise, 16, killed nine people, including his grandfather and his grandfather's companion at home. Also included were five fellow students, a teacher and a security guard at Red Lake High School in Red Lake, Minn. He then killed himself. Seven students were wounded.

— March 12, 2005: Terry Ratzmann, 44, gunned down members of his congregation as they worshipped at the Brookfield Sheraton in Brookfield, Wisconsin, slaying seven and wounding four before killing himself.

— March 5, 2001: Charles "Andy" Williams, 15, killed two fellow students and wounded 13 others at Santana High School in Santee, Calif.

— Nov. 2, 1999: Copier repairman Byran Uyesugi, 40, fatally shoots seven people at Xerox Corp. in Honolulu. He is convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

— July 29, 1999: Former day trader Mark Barton, 44, killed nine people in shootings at two Atlanta brokerage offices, then killed himself.

— April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before killing themselves in the school's library.

— May 21, 1998: Two teenagers were killed and more than 20 people hurt when Kip Kinkel, 17, opened fire at a high school in Springfield, Ore., after killing his parents.

— March 24, 1998: Andrew Golden, 11, and Mitchell Johnson, 13, killed four girls and a teacher at a Jonesboro, Ark., middle school. Ten others were wounded in the shooting.

— Oct. 16, 1991: A deadly shooting rampage took place in Killeen, Texas, as George Hennard opened fire at a Luby's Cafeteria, killing 23 people before taking his own life. 20 others were wounded in the attack.

— June 18, 1990: James Edward Pough shoots people at random in a General Motors Acceptance Corp. office in Jacksonville, Fla., killing 10 and wounding four, before killing himself.

— July 12, 1976: Edward Charles Allaway, a custodian in the library of California State University, Fullerton, fatally shot seven fellow employees and wounded two others.

— Aug. 20, 1986: Pat Sherrill, 44, a postal worker who was about to be fired, shoots 14 people at a post office in Edmond, Okla. He then kills himself.

— July 18, 1984: James Oliver Huberty, an out-of-work security guard, kills 21 people in a McDonald's restaurant in San Ysidro, Calif. A police sharpshooter kills Huberty.

— May 4, 1970: Four Kent State University students were killed by Ohio National Guard troops during a campus protest of the invasion of Cambodia. Nine people were wounded.

— Aug. 1, 1966: Charles Whitman opened fire from the clock tower at the University of Texas at Austin, killing 16 people and wounding 31.

[derby378]

1. What are you suggesting? (nt)

[951-Riverside]

2. Forced lobotomies of course n/t

:sarcasm:

[timeforpeace]

36. Ever wondered why humans are the preminent predators? Not the biggest, or strongest, or fastest,just

the meanest species, the one that kills just to kill. You realize that, right? And no, you can't change human nature.

[DonP]

51. Actually, other species do "kill for the sake of killing"

I'm gonna get flamed ... but several other species, including domestic cats are known for killing other animals for other reasons than food or territory, but most cat owners (we have 3 of them), attribute it to "playing" with mice, birds etc.

Most human hunters eat what they shoot.

[GreenStormCloud]

58. Other species have been observed killing for the sake of killing.

Lions kill hyeanas. Some dogs kill cats. Cats will kill a mouse or rat and then not eat it.

[X_Digger]

69. Chimps and Orangutans even murder their own species. n/t

[TheWraith]

120. So do dolphins, and many other species.

In fact, humans killing each other for reasons other than survival is not at ALL unusual among living creatures.

[phasma ex machina]

146. Mean dawgs shake creatures to death then throw them up. nt.

[phasma ex machina]

147. Some cats kill creatures just to drag them home as a trophy to garner praise. nt

[cliffordu]

3. Hundreds, if not thousands of homeless die in the streets a DAY, and yet

here you are, with pornographic detail, reciting the killers' names in spectacular gun crimes.


Of course, it's harder to stroke up a self righteous anger chubby over nameless faces of people who died because of YOUR neglect.

[anonymous171]

4. BUT GUNZ ARE SCARY!!!!1!

[AndyA]

7. Have we met? Do you know me? Do you know of an instance where I've neglected someone?

If not, you have ZERO CREDIBILITY.

[cliffordu]

43. Ride along with the meat wagon some night and help pick up the dead on the streets

Then come on down and stroke your indignation and 'concern' here....

[bluestateguy]

5. What would you like to have happen?

You don't make that very clear.

[AndyA]

9. I'm not sure. Obviously, SOMETHING needs to be done.

Ignoring it doesn't seem to be doing any good.

[AtheistCrusader]

68. Passing single payer so everyone has access to mental healthcare isn't 'ignoring it'.

Or perhaps you were suggesting something else...

[Hoopla Phil]

77. And that is how do nothing feel good laws get past. Because someone says "do something

anything" and we loose more freedom as a result. I would suggest that the exact opposite of what you would consider reasonable would actually have the affect you desire. Allow CHLs on Federal reserves like what is about to happen in the national forests.

[SteveM]

127. You must have an idea; you posted here. (nt)

[slackmaster]

6. The only known way to stop madness is to provide mental health care

It should be available for no out-of-pocket cost to everyone.

[SammyWinstonJack]

8. +1 nt

[anonymous171]

10. But they don't want to help them.

They just want to make sure that the "undesirables" can't shoot anyone, especially them.

[AndyA]

12. That's a good idea, and sometimes the mental health people need

some love as well. (As we now know, unfortunately.)

[Hoopla Phil]

78. Is psychotherapy not already a requirement of psychiatrists?

I'd say the system failed if that is the case.

[havocmom]

13. BINGO; and we need to remind some that Cain v Able did not involve gunplay

It's the violence (mental health, aggression) not the tool. Always has been. ;)

[phasma ex machina]

145. Guns are illegal in Guatemala so they use machetes instead. nt

[redqueen]

16. +1... but even that won't stop all of it.

But hopefully it cut down on it significantly.

[TheWraith]

85. Amen. And we need to be more active about looking at people around us.

It's usually the people who are alone and isolated who are driven far enough to act, but there still may be those who are close enough to them to see the warning signs.

However, we also have to get used to the idea that we can't universally fix the situation. Sometimes, people are going to slip through the cracks.

[friendly_iconoclast]

103. Dammit, stop being reasonable!

n/t

[TwilightGardener]

11. It will never stop, as long as there are emotionally or mentally ill people who have access to guns.

That's not a statement on gun control or on the mentally ill, it's just an observation.

[havocmom]

15. there were murders before guns

Just a reminder.

[TwilightGardener]

18. Yes. But it's hard to think of other weapons in common usage

that can kill or wound 43 people in a matter of minutes. It's the level of carnage, not the method of delivery, that's so threatening to society.

[havocmom]

44. Thinkin toxins in air, water, food probably kill on large scale

but we don't see so much constant protest about those. Honestly, if one is serious about making the nation safer, one might consider it is impossible if the DEMS don't get elected often. Sure fire way to make GOP the constant majority is to focus on gun control at the expense of things that will really save lives. Hate to tell ya, but the criminal element will always have guns, therefore, guns will be available, 'control' or no.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

47. Timothy McVeigh found a way to kill 168 people in seconds.

[AtheistCrusader]

70. Bullshit. Explosives can kill far more.

Not to mention knives. There was a knife attack not too long ago in Times Square, 7 or 8 people seriously wounded.

It doesn't take a gun to be a savage, and some things have leveled entire federal buildings. You will not modify human behavior by simply taking away firearms.

[one-eyed fat man]

150. how about a bucks worth of gasoline...........

and a matchbook?

You can fry a whole nightclub 'cause you saw "your girl" dancing with someone else.

Happy Land Social Club, Bronx, NY

[aquart]

14. You're asking this about human beings? Please.

[AndyA]

19. Yeah, my bad to think that people would actually have respect for others.

How dare I!

:sarcasm:

[Spoonman]

64. How so, when you have no respect for my rights? n/t

[Junkdrawer]

17. It's against DU rules to speak ill of guns...

See you in the gungeon.

[CountAllVotes]

21. it is difficult to care about such "rules"

having known 4 people that are now dead because they were murdered by someone with a gun; one dead due to an accident with a shotgun and another that was a suicide. Makes me just love 'dem gunz. :puke:

[Junkdrawer]

24. I learned the hard way...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6943444&mesg_id=6943444

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6941827&mesg_id=6941827

[CountAllVotes]

26. hmph!

disgusting! :argh:

[eqfan592]

48. Yep, because it was the guns that pulled their own triggers...

...oh, wait a minute.

Look, I'm sorry you had to go through all that, but pandering to pleas of emotion is not the way to set good public policy. That's the reality.

[PavePusher]

54. I have known a bunch of people killed by cars.

I guess we're gonna ban those any minute now, right?

Since they kill more people than guns every year... Right?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

45. What makes you think it's against the rules?

[Echo In Light]

20. Uniquely American

[Jennicut]

22. The best point made from your list is that this incident at FT. Hood had less to

do with a Muslim being angry about American wars and not wanting to fight in them and more to do with the mentally ill and their use of guns to kill innocent people.

[timeforpeace]

35. Actually the lunatic's testimony in court will prove it was indeed a Muslim's religious-inspired

hate that was behind his actions. Now some won't believe him either, probably say "see, he IS mentally ill, not a jihadist" and make him a victim also. Brilliant.

[Jennicut]

41. This "jihadist" probably IS mentally ill.

The thing is, some want him to be a terrorist. I doubt he is. I dealt with mentally ill people, having a background in psychology. The man was unstable and all the signs were there. Mental illness is overlooked as a huge problem in the U.S. The VA tech shooter probably had political beliefs too but he was still crazy.

[SteveM]

128. And a competent woman with a gun who put an end to it (nt)

[HipChick]

23. What happened when they took away people's guns in Australia?

[Caliman73]

25. Gun crimes went down for a bit...

Other violent crimes went up.

[jgraz]

28. Gun deaths per 100k in US: 14.24; Gun deaths per 100k in AUS: 2.65.

Maybe we should try Australia's policies and see what happens.

[X_Digger]

55. And it was lower _before_ the ban, too..

Was the Apple an Orange before gun control? No? Your comparison of existing rates (not changes, per the question) makes about as much sense.

[PavePusher]

56. Maybe you should try to take my guns...

and see what happens.

Except you probably wouldn't have the stones to do the work yourself.

[SteveM]

129. You're welcome to try repealing the Second Amendment (nt)

[slackmaster]

29. The murder rate stayed about the same

The use of firearms has been replaced by murders with edged weapons and blunt objects.

[Hoopla Phil]

79. Murder rate hardly changed but the tools of the murder changed.

[quiet.american]

27. It is time to stop pretending that guns are good.

They're not. They kill. Period.

[anonymous171]

30. It is time to stop pretending that free speech is good

It is not. It kills. Period.

[quiet.american]

32. Yadda, yadda. I haven't seen anyone dropping dead from a stray word. nt

[anonymous171]

34. Words don't kill people. People use those words to kill people.

Like during the Rwandan genocide.

[quiet.american]

39. Even so-called "free speech" has had boundaries applied to it.

We can get into lengthy back-and-forths about rights, etc.

Do I think the right to bear arms should be repealed. No.

However, the free-wheeling "can't say nuthin' bad 'bout guns" place we find ourselves in has long defied common sense.

If we don't acknowledge that this country has a serious problem with gun violence, nothing can ever be done to address it.

[eqfan592]

50. This country has a serious problem with violence period, guns be damned.

THATS the real problem. People like yourself are distracting from the real issues behind the violence, instead choosing to go after the easily replaceable instrument used during the violence. Get rid of guns (which you can't do, due to illegal gun trades, but hypothetically speaking)? Something else will take it's place.

The guns do NOT create the violence. There are far deeper socioeconomic issues at play here that need to be resolved.

No, I'm afraid you are the only one here that's not acknowledging the serious problems, and are instead making the lives of us that are more difficult.

[quiet.american]

53. Can't figure out how my saying something should be done about guns makes your life difficult.

And the conclusion you come to is not mutually exclusive to what I think. In fact, I completely agree. But all the gun-loving in this society is getting old.

Personally I'm tired of it. And it may be heresy to say out loud that the love of guns in this society is sickening, but I'll say it again -- the love of guns in this society is sickening. Any attempt to approach the issue with common sense brings out the gun lovers and apologists, and somebody else loses their loved one. But the guns are safe, thank God! Just tired of it.

[PavePusher]

59. Again you blame the tool, not the wielder. Fail. n/t

[quiet.american]

62. Again you fail to understand. But that's alright.

I know the argument, guns don't kill people! People kill people! And I agree that this society has underlying issues of violence that cause people to use guns.

When people go on rampages, though, they use guns. I can't remember the last time I saw a headline "27 Stabbed!" "32 Bludgeoned!"

What can I say, I'm pro-gun control and pro-"let's address the underlying issues." One can be both.

[X_Digger]

71. Free clue..

Our non-gun violence rate is higher than other countries gun violence rate.

Imagine all those guns go away tomorrow. We'd still have a higher rate of violence.

[quiet.american]

90. Yes, so, free guns for everyone in that case! See you at the OK Corral!

C'mon, give me a break.

In the civilian situations listed in the OP, if all the "guns had gone away tomorrow," those people would have had a better chance of not having been murdered by a gunman.

[eqfan592]

100. Yep, and they would also have had a better chance...

...of being murdered by some other object. This is, of course, assuming that there was no illegal gun trade that played against "all the guns going away."

What I don't get is that you've stated you understand that guns, by themselves, are not the real problem behind the violence in this country, yet you continue on this totally useless tangent anyway. You continue to prove my point about how people like you make the job of solving the real issues more difficult, because people like you add fuel to the fire of the frepers who stand in our way of making real change in this nation. Sure, some fuel is going to get added no matter what. That's part of the business, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your way to do it, and that's exactly what you and your ilk are doing.

[quiet.american]

102. The "people like you" thing is not very persuasive.

It's the same old arguments, the same old stuff -- and "the people like you" meme.

What really gets me about these conversations is that I never hear a word of remorse or compassion for the victims of gun violence, but much rallying and hue and cry for the continued good life of the guns.

[eqfan592]

105. Ahhh, I see, so we're without compassion now, is that it?

Cute. Care to try and dehumanize us anymore?

And it's not about the "continued good life of the guns" but rather the endurance of our civil liberties, and if you can't see the distinction, then that's a pretty serious problem on your part that you should have corrected.

[quiet.american]

106. Conclusions here, conclusions there. (And not a word of it anything I said.)

Simply stating the lack of what I've seen in the responses is now an attempt to "dehumanize."

No.

[eqfan592]

108. Actually, it was, even though you're attempting to backpeddle as quickly as your feet will let you.

Your tactics seem to be right out of the republican party's playbook. Imply something, but don't actually come out and say it directly, and when you get called out on it, back peddle and claim that you never said any such thing!

EDIT: I think we've drawn this out about long enough. Feel free to make whatever last comments you like. I'm done with you now.

[quiet.american]

110. Well, in that case, in what respect Charlie? What I stated was facts.

In my responses, I've not called anyone out for being compassionless. I've just stated that not one word has been said about the victims, but much has been said in defense of the guns.

[Erebus67]

140. You complain about the "people like you" meme

And then in not so many words immediately use it to condemn all those that defend the right.

[rl6214]

142. Grow up...

When or where did anyone say anything about free guns for everyone.

[X_Digger]

116. self-correction.. Our non-gun violence rate is higher than other countries ALL violence rate. n/t

[Euromutt]

126. Mass killers use what's available

If there's a reason you haven't seen news reports of mass murders committed with blades, it's not because they don't happen, it's because you aren't paying attention to them. They tend to happen more in east Asia. For example:
"Nonhyeon-dong massacre," Seoul, South Korea, October 20th 2008; Jeong Sang-jin sets fire to a lodging house and then goes on the rampage with a sashimi knife. Six dead, seven wounded.
Zhabei police station attack, Shanghai, China, July 1st 2008; Yang Jia sets off eight petrol bombs outside a police station, then enters the buildings and starts stabbing cops. Six dead, four wounded.
"Akihabara massacre," Tokyo, Japan, June 8th 2008; Tomohiro Katō drives a truck onto a crowded sidewalk, ten jumps out and starts stabbing people. Seven dead, ten wounded.
Dendermonde nursery attack, Dendermonde, Belgium, January 23rd 2008; Kim de Gelder enters a day care center and starts stabbing children and staff. Three dead (including two infants), twelve wounded.

And, of course, the term "amok" is borrowed from Malaysian, where some guy going on the rampage with a kris and killing and injuring a bunch of people until he was killed by others (or less frequently) killed himself, was such a common occurrence they created a special word for it.

[phasma ex machina]

148. Kenya Machete Massacre Leaves 29 Dead 04/21/09

link

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

61. Can't figure out how my saying that current gun laws are adequate makes your life difficult

Also can't figure out how that opinions makes anyone a gun lover.

[quiet.american]

63. I don't recall saying you were making my life difficult -- that's not the case.

Okay, I'll withdraw "gun lover." Fair enough.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

81. So being sick and tired don't make your life difficult.

[quiet.american]

89. Are you kiddin'! That's life! nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

97. MMMmkay.

[rl6214]

141. Why all the hate?

It seems that all you have is hatred towards anyone that does not agree with your point of view as seen by your usage of "gun-loving" and "love of guns" and "gun lovers". Make your point without trying to be insulting.

[SteveM]

130. You have a poor outlook & bad terms...

The expression -- yours -- "can't say nuthin' bad 'bout guns" is senseless. These threads have "bad" stuff about guns all the time. What frustrates you and others is that you cannot bring to bear good arguments that support your "common sense." Out of frustration, that brings on a LOT OF SMEAR language from gun-controllers (just yesterday, one poster said he hated a Second Amendment advocate, even though no insults were issued).

"Gun violence" is an attempt to slap onto the problem of violent crime a veneer-thin label; in this case, "gun." The only practical reason for this is to try to drag the old machinery of prohibitionism into play, and it never works. Please note that even "common sense" proposals are often prohibitionist.

[eqfan592]

49. Yep, words have never been used to do harm onto others....

...except, of course, every major genocide that has ever occurred in the history of man kind. Nice try, pumpkin.

[quiet.american]

52. Yadda, yadda, yadda -- nice diversion.

Can you kill someone with a word. No. Words + guns, now you're talking!

[eqfan592]

74. Diversion?

Is reality a diversion for you? And your logic implies that nobody was killed before guns. Try Words + killing implement of choice. You can change the implement to whatever you like, but it doesn't change the fact that the killing is done.

Like I said earlier, this sort of stuff distracts from the main issues. We already DO have "sane" gun control laws on the books (as well as some useless, non-sane ones). The issue isn't the guns, it's the people using them and what drives them to that.

[quiet.american]

91. Speaking of reality.

Who had the advantage in the examples listed by the OP -- the gunman, or the unarmed people that were killed?

Yes, I didn't think I'd have to spell it out, but words + weapons (weapon of choice) equal violence.

And why is it also thought that those who are pro-gun control are only interested in "taking away the guns." I'm also interested in having the underlying issues that lead people to take up weapons in order to get attention addressed.

[eqfan592]

95. Wow, thank you for that amazingly non-sensical post....

....I'm sure there was a point in there somewhere, but I'll be damned if I could find it (outside of your comment about pro-gun control).

The reason why those who are pro-gun control are only interested in "taking away the guns" is because typically, that IS what they are interested in, even if they don't admit it, deep down they want disarmament of some sort. This is born out by the type of legislation that they usually support. But if you want to try and buck the trend, be my guest.

There's around 20,000 laws controlling the sale and possession of firearms on the books. Please suggest a new one that would have prevented this tragedy, while still not "taking away the guns."

[quiet.american]

99. Why bother since you've decided you can't understand? nt

[eqfan592]

101. I never "decided" that I can't understand something...

...I was stating that your point was lost. That's two different things entirely.

And you are yet to mention, as far as I can tell, a single piece of legislation that you think would work to prevent these crimes without "grabbin' the guns" as so many of your ilk would like to do.

Nice try at dodging though. 1 point for effort.

[quiet.american]

104. I'm not in the habit of crafting legislation and I don't know why you would think I am.

So why would you ask me that?

I know I would support legislation that strengthens gun control.

[eqfan592]

107. Thank you very much for proving my point.

You don't care WHAT the control is, you just want more of it. Nor do you have any idea what that control should even be, you just know it would automatically have to be the right thing.

And somehow you wonder why people think your trying to "grab the guns"? Honestly, I find blase attitude most disturbing, especially for somebody on this particular forum. Though I shouldn't be shocked. Liberals are just as capable of contracting "drooling mouth syndrome" as the frepers are.

[quiet.american]

109. As I've already said:

I'm not for overthrow of "the right to bear arms."

I'm not for gun repeal.

I would like to see stronger gun control.

I would like to stop seeing so many "lone gunmen" and gun-related violence news stories.

That's the essence of what I'm saying.

[eqfan592]

111. Yet you cannot even come up with a single way of going about doing this, using only gun control.

And that's why you fail so hard. You want to stop seeing lone gunmen? The answer isn't in gun control. It's in addressing the myriad of issues that lead to violence in the first place. We already have 20,000 pieces of gun control, which have done little to stem the tide of violence. It's time we stop wasting our time and political capital on this issue and addressing the real issues.

Also, please see above.

[quiet.american]

113. How do you expect to persuade by these methods?

Why should I have to come up with a "single way of doing this."

I want affordable health insurance, too -- that doesn't mean I'm supposed to come up "with a single way" of doing it. But I can surely support legislation that moves that forward.

[friendly_iconoclast]

117. -1 to your attempt at forced teaming. "We" don't need to persuade

We have facts and political momentum at hand.

[SteveM]

131. You want "stronger gun control" to stop the violence you see...

Then what are your proposals and how do you link them to the problem?

[TheWraith]

86. Tell that to the Klan rallies.

Tell it to the radio fearmongers who gin up hatred for gay people.

Tell it to the people who use words to incite violence against those who are different.

[quiet.american]

92. View my comment in context, please. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

119. Stray? No. But language can kill.

Just ask Dr. Tiller.

His murderer didn't develop the idea in a vacumm

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

46. None of my guns have ever killed anyone.

[quiet.american]

65. I'm sure victims of gun violence will be very relieved to hear that. nt

[eqfan592]

75. Pointless post much? I think so. (nt)

[quiet.american]

93. Physician, heal thyself. nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

80. I certainly hope so.

[PavePusher]

57. Then mine must be deffective.

Can you tell me what I'm doing wrong?

[quiet.american]

67. Okay, I'll play. When you use the gun, whatever it's for, there is an effect, is there not?

My washing machine doesn't wash clothes by itself either. But people don't say, "Washing machines don't wash clothes! People wash clothes!"

[X_Digger]

73. Guns propel projectiles. Nothing more. n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

83. Holes in paper, cans or golf balls.

[AtheistCrusader]

72. They can save lives too. Case in point, the police officer that stopped this attack.

She didn't do it with a feather duster.

[quiet.american]

96. I'm surprised it took so long for that response. I was expecting it sooner.

I'm for gun control, not silly season "all-gun repeal." First responders, military, et al. are not the people I'm talking about.

I'm making my remarks in the context of the examples the OP presents.

[AtheistCrusader]

118. The person who committed this despicable crime WAS military.

I think it's relevant.

I'm a private citizen, and I assure you, I am a first responder. I carry.

[ManiacJoe]

82. Objects do not possess the ability to be good or bad.

That attribute belongs only to the user of the object.

[quiet.american]

98. And in the context of the OP, guns in the hands of these gun owners are decidedly bad. nt

[Tejas]

122. Okay, I'll play. In the context of the OP, cars in the hands of drunk drivers are decidedly bad.

[Piwi2009]

88. No, not "simply kill. Period."

Some people appreciate them as marvelous machines, and target practice in the backyard, hoping to improve their marksmanship. What's evil about that?

[quiet.american]

94. Yes, but those marvelous moments don't end up as front-page news, do they?

That's what I'm addressing.

[Euromutt]

137. Which is why front-page news does not provide a unbiased perspective

For people who aren't interested in guns, what they see, hear and read in the news media forms most, possibly all, of what they hear about guns, and criteria of newsworthiness being what they are, most of what they will hear is stuff that will incline towards the point of view that private ownership of firearms is overwhelmingly a social liability. But this is a severely skewed perspective.

[Xenotime]

151. THANK YOU!!! SUPPORT 10000%

[tuckessee]

31. Why stop the list at 1966?

Why include Kent State 1970 when it was not a mass/spree killing of the type that occurred yeserday & today?

I'll tell you why - because such senseless mass killings were very, very, very rare before the 1980's. Before that, they were as rare as solar eclipses. Now they're as common as half moons.

There were plenty of firearms around back then. In the 1930's a Thompson SMG could be easily had. Automatic handguns similar to those used at Ft. Hood have been a dime a dozen since the twenties.

So what is wrong with modern people? Why are they so prone to commtting massacres when their ancestors were not?

[anonymous171]

33. The War on drugs. nt

[PavePusher]

60. A large part of it is that in the Electronic Age...

we simply hear about it more easily, immediately and frequently.

Mass shootings are still rare, but we know about them instantaneously. "If it bleeds, it leads."

[TheWraith]

87. Some of that is true, but it's not the whole story.

There's also the fact that today's mass-media encourages such events by creating a kind of allure for the disaffected loner--go berzerk, and you too can be famous. Be on the news. Get your revenge against all the people who wronged you, and let the world know how you feel.

[Euromutt]

125. Coincidentally, CNN launched in 1980

Actually, I mean "not coincidentally."

[Erebus67]

143. Thank the press and having to fill 24 hour news cycles.

The murderers are all infamous, while the victims are just numbers. Perhaps if we had more focus on the lives of the victims and less infamy for the murderers it wouldn't be so appealing to those with psychological problems.

[SteveM]

133. In fact, the violent crime rate has been going down over the last several years...

...while the number of guns in civilian hands has gone from 190,000,000 to over 300,000,000.

[friendly_iconoclast]

112. Oh, there were PLENTY of massacres in the past. The US is relatively safe these days.

Just research some words and phrases, and read your history:

Mongols
Huns
Romans
Punic Wars
Dark Ages
Thirty Year's War
Wars of The Roses
Witch hunt
Pogrom
Crusade
Holy war
Manifest Destiny
Conquistador
Srebenica
Rwanda
Khmer Rouge
Final Solution

and on
and on
and on...

Modern life in the US is the calm, peaceful exception to most of history.

[SteveM]

132. Makes sense. Good observations (nt)

[opihimoimoi]

37. The GOP shares a large portion of the blame....period

they carry a message of FORCE...conflict.....

[anonymous171]

38. Which, incidentally , is also why they always win.

[opihimoimoi]

40. "Always win"??? Don't think so...we lost wars a few along the way.......

[proteus_lives]

42. And let me guess.

You're frightened and you think taking away the 2nd Amendment is the solution.

Sorry, stripping Americans of their rights because of the criminal actions of others is not the answer.

[GreenStormCloud]

66. May 18, 1927, Bath, Michigan, Andrew Kehoe dynamited school, 45 killed, 58 injured.

Most of the casualties were children.

[eqfan592]

76. The answer is clear

No dynamite should be owned by any civilians AT ALL! After all, the job of the government is to protect us from ourselves! :P

I don't know about you, but some of the "liberals" around here are awful Orwellian for my taste.

[Piwi2009]

84. How do you propose we keep guns away from people on a MILITARY BASE?

[Tejas]

114. Ban alcohol, it

contributes not only to gunfights but knifefights, fistfights, clubbings.......

[Tejas]

115. Ban drugs too,

oh. wait.

[depakid]

121. It will take more than that for Americans to finally get fed up

Kind of like health care.

[Tejas]

123. Death penalty, life sentences, hard time.....public hangings might help.

[depakid]

152. Except that states with the death penalty and draconian punishments also have the highest crime rate

[Euromutt]

124. There's a development that parallels the trend in mass shootings

Namely, the increase in mass shootings has kept pace with the proliferation of 24-hour cable news channels, and the concomitant intensive rolling coverage of mass shootings. Mass shooters, and assassins, all too often decide that if they can't get love, or respect, or fame, they'll settle for terror and infamy, and infamy is exactly what the news media are all too ready to fall over themselves to give these people.

To illustrate: we all know the name of the Virginia Tech shooter. But who knows--without looking it up--who won the Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine in 2008, and what they were awarded the prize for? Murdering a bunch of people is the fast track to having your name and face splattered on every television channel and newspaper in the developed world. And with improved global communications, news media reports of mass shootings can cause a knock-on effect on other continents. And we're seeing that, even in countries like Germany, where privately owned firearms are tightly restricted, there have to date been three mass school shootings.

[SteveM]

134. There are two over-riding values in our culture...

Accumulating stuff, and acquiring celebrity. I think a lot of Americans (and now others around the world) have disabused themselves of the notion of having enough money and credit to get much more stuff. So millions turn to celebrity. A few get it any way they can.

[Euromutt]

138. And our OP is perpetuating it

Every list like this sustains the infamy of the shooters, by reminding us of their names and holding them up as people who inspired fear; exactly what they wanted.

Honestly, if we could take Park Dietz' advice, and get the news media to give detailed reports on mass shootings only to the affected community, and make the story as boring as possible everywhere else, we might get a handle on this. Denying mass killers celebrity anti-hero status would go a long way to curbing this shit.

[gorfle]

135. I would think 15% might be enough.

When is enough enough? How many have to die before we stop this madness?

Right now, less than 2% of all firearm owners are involved in violent crime every year.

I think if we ever got up to, say, 15% it might be time to do something.

Otherwise, most of us are obeying the law.

[krispos42]

136. Jeez, you'd think things were getting worse instead of better

[spin]

139. Have you considered that firearms often save lives...

my daughter for example stopped a man breaking into our home by forcing the sliding glass door open. He was halfway in when she pointed a large caliber revolver at him. He left. No one was hurt. Hard to say what he would have done if he had entered our home, but there was nothing of any significant value to steal in any of the homes in our neighborhood.

Statistics on the number of times that firearms are used to prevent crime are hard to come by as many of the incidents are not entered into any database. The stats that are available indicate that the use of firearms for good purposes is very common. Of course, they are disputed by the anti-gun groups.

[aikoaiko]

144. A lot of people have been working to reduce gun violence for a long time....

but some are trying to do so without stomping on the 2nd Amendment rights of individuals.

[phasma ex machina]

149. Nazi Weapons Law of 1938

Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons
11 November 1938

With a basis in § 31 of the Weapons Law of 18 March 1928
(Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 265), Article III of the Law on the Reunification
of Austria with Germany of 13 March 1938 (Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 237),
and § 9 of the Fuhrer and Chancellor's decree on the administration of the
Sudeten- German districts of 1 October 1928 (Reichsgesetzblatt 1, p. 1331
) are the following ordered:

§ 1

Jews (§ 5 of the First Regulations of the German Citizenship Law of 14
November 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt 1, p. 1332) are prohibited from
acquiring. Possessing, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as
truncheons or stabbing weapons. Those now possessing weapons and
ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority.