• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Can you remember the last week we had these sort of headlines?

I believe in the Binghamton case that the gunman's two pistols were legally registered to him.

Not like NY needs anymore gun laws. I can't even get a pistol for range use.
 
It's just the times. Seems like quite a few are related to the economy (people losing their jobs, and for some crazy reason thinking it's a good idea to take out themselves and anybody else they can because of it).
 
Even with events that are perfectly randomly distributed, you'll get clumps. If we start getting stuff like this every week for a few months, then it's time to start worrying.
 
The shooter in Pittsburg was Dishonorably Discharged from the Marines, and you are not legally able to own firearms with a Dishonorable Discharge....

Deepest condolences to all the victims... truly a sad series of events.

 
Originally posted by: BuckNaked
The shooter in Pittsburg was Dishonorably Discharged from the Marines, and you are not legally able to own firearms with a Dishonorable Discharge....

Deepest condolences to all the victims... truly a sad series of events.

I think that is only true if he was convicted of a felony.
 
Humans: The only species to mass kill each other on a daily basis, while simultaneously trying to find ways to stay alive longer. 😛
 
Originally posted by: zoiks
What I'd like to know whether the guns used in these crimes were acquired legally or not.

and how many of the shooters were on shrink drugs. For those mentioned and years gone by.
 
Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Originally posted by: zoiks
What I'd like to know whether the guns used in these crimes were acquired legally or not.

Odds are, no, not for the majority.

Some of the "I lost my job and shamed my family, now I have to kill them" types most likely had the gun legally for home protection before they went off the deep end.
 
I sometimes wonder if the the media just covers these events more when the economy goes bad or if the bad events increase in frequency as I can't reminder a time when all of these shootings have occurred so close together.

Whether the guns were owned legally or not doesn't really matter. Barring new gun control legislation that goes to ridiculous lengths like banning guns for those without jobs, for people who can't speak English well or for people with kids, these crimes are not likely to have been prevented. Even banning the guns people used would not have stopped many of these deaths since people would have used other means, particularly in murder-suicides.
 
Originally posted by: KB
I sometimes wonder if the the media just covers these events more when the economy goes bad or if the bad events increase in frequency as I can't reminder a time when all of these shootings have occurred so close together.

Whether the guns were owned legally or not doesn't really matter. Barring new gun control legislation that goes to ridiculous lengths like banning guns for those without jobs, for people who can't speak English well or for people with kids, these crimes are not likely to have been prevented. Even banning the guns people used would not have stopped many of these deaths since people would have used other means, particularly in murder-suicides.

According to the article I linked to the trend is to loosen up gun laws even further..
 
Back
Top