Shooting at Oregon community college.

[mojo84]

You have not offered one thing that will help prevent these things from happening but you advocate we have to do something. You also said you aren't advocating for more laws. So, how do you accomplish your goals of eliminating or mitigating these events?

To be fair, you suggested that I was advocating for more (and stricter) laws and basically said that I was behaving like an idiot, correct?

I'm having trouble now that you're challenging me on the exact opposite of that, although it's absolutely in line with what I did say. I'll be a good sport and run with it. But that's what I'm trying to discuss - as I'm not smart enough to solve it on my own and mine isn't the only political perspective to consider. The politics play a big role in any perspective change.

To answer: If you look at my point post above, I did come up with a suggestion. You'll see that one thing that crossed my mind is a system for "red/green" light screening for private party gun purchases. I'd use it. It wouldn't be oppressive and doesn't involve any new laws. You don't have to use it, but you might be held responsible if you sold a firearm to someone on the "red" list. Just a little lookup by DL # and it spits back red or green. No details provided. On the back end it's a combination of felony check, citizenship check, and maybe possible adjudicated (only adjudicated) mental health status.

That's a suggestion for risk reduction. It's certainly not a solution. It makes one hole in the dam a little smaller.

Do you think it's better to change nothing because there are too many holes to plug? It seems like that's what you've suggested. If so, why?

To be HONEST, I said focusing on the system and tool is idiocy. That is what the president and all the other antigun liberals are doing. You seem to be focusing on the same. That does not equate to me calling you an idiot.

Your idea to plug a hole does nothing but cause more water to run through the others. It doesn't accomplish your goal. You are falling I to the trap of we have to do something even if it doesn't help. Your red and green light idea only effects those that will abide by it. Someone wanting to commit mass murder isn't one of those folks.

Do You even know if there was anything in this guys past that would trip the red light IF your system was used?

[cb1000rider]

You can read pages 2 and 4 of this thread for starters. In addition to the president, just about every other anti-gun liberal progressive out there. There are many saying we got to do something to prevent people certain people from getting guns. There is no practical constitutional way of doing that.

I thought you were pointing to people on this forum too. To be clear, that's NOT what you're saying?

And again, I'm not worried about the fringe "liberal-progressives" - I'm worried about the centrist that are getting fed up. That means conservative centrists too. They are the ones that can really shift the politics.

I agree that the state reporting for people adjudicated to be disqualified from owning guns are reported to NICS. However, that's not going to stop this. If they can't buy a gun from a dealer, they'll find another way to get one.

That's a suggestion! I like it... It might not stop it, but it's making it a bit harder if we start using the data we already have for private party sales.

[mojo84]

You can read pages 2 and 4 of this thread for starters. In addition to the president, just about every other anti-gun liberal progressive out there. There are many saying we got to do something to prevent people certain people from getting guns. There is no practical constitutional way of doing that.

I thought you were pointing to people on this forum too. To be clear, that's NOT what you're saying?

And again, I'm not worried about the fringe "liberal-progressives" - I'm worried about the centrist that are getting fed up. That means conservative centrists too. They are the ones that can really shift the politics.

I agree that the state reporting for people adjudicated to be disqualified from owning guns are reported to NICS. However, that's not going to stop this. If they can't buy a gun from a dealer, they'll find another way to get one.

That's a suggestion! I like it... It might not stop it, but it's making it a bit harder if we start using the data we already have for private party sales.

Are you for universal background checks?
Are you for all medical records to be searched and any condition that may be called a mental illness being a disqualifier?
Do you want all docs reporting anyone that is taking any med that may alter one's mental state, mood or decision making to the state or feds?
Do you want your neighbor to be able to report you to the state or feds that you may have anger problems because he heard you yelling at your wife?
Do you think registration of all guns is ok?
My point is, where on the slippery slope do you stop?
Again, how does any of this prevent someone from obtaining a gun so they can do persecute Christians execution style?

[cb1000rider]

Mojo, I've heard the slippery slope argument before. I'm going to assume that such is your counter-point to me asking why you are advocating doing nothing? Let me know if I've got it wrong. And I think the other questions are really a list of fears.. Perhaps very valid fears since that's a list of stuff that has been tried.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I think clinging to the slippery slope argument when there is so much low hanging fruit is irrational.
This is just my opinion: We can't do nothing. If we do nothing, we don't get to decide. That's what I'm afraid of much more than a slippery slope.

[Jago668]

The number of murders each year in the USA with guns is about the same as the number of people killed by drunk drivers. 11,208 for gun homicides, 10,076 for drunk drivers. All automotive deaths are more than 3 times that of of gun murders. So lets just ban all cars and require public transportation. It's for your safety, plus it isn't even a constitutional right. Plus you can still walk or ride a bicycle. Go look at the CDC documentation on what kills people. Why aren't these people that are so concerned with our "safety" going after larger causes of death? Gun homicides are 0.4% of the deaths in this country. It is because it isn't about safety, it is about power and control.

The slippery slope argument is used because it is valid. When you try to eat a hamburger you don't put the entire thing in your mouth and try to swallow it. You eat it one bite at a time, making sure to chew each bite. That is how you take rights away from people as well. You don't take it away all at once. You take a bit here and let them get used to it. Then you take a bit there, and repeat. Then you end up going, "What happened? Where did my right to bear arms go?"

You want to do something, anything. It is just a salve to make you feel better though. Gun registration, and universal background checks are not going to stop criminals. If you could stop something by simply passing a law making it illegal then we wouldn't have murders to begin with, or theft. Look at how prohibition worked out, look at how the war on drugs is working out. If the people want something, they will get it. A government cannot wage a war on its citizenry and win.

[philip964]

Normally I would link to more news articles, however many show is picture and give his name. I'm never going to mention his name or link to his photograph.

What I have learned:

26 year old mixed race male, shaved head, shy, you know the profile, couldn't meet girls.
Had three pistols and a long rifle. Photos of him with the rifle.
Admired the IRA. Used a German medal and 45 as a username.
Don't know about a job or if he attended the community college. I think lived with his mom who is a nurse near the college.
Wrote about the former reporter who killed on live TV, seemed to feel this was a great way to get well known. He felt the more you killed the more famous you could become.
Although he killed Christians in his slaughter, he says he is not religious, but spiritual.
He previously lived in Torrence CA.
Oregon has better than most states with restrictive gun laws. No gun show loophole. After Sandy Hook Oregon voted in more restrictive gun laws.

My anti gun Facebook friends are reposting Obama and his angry speech today. They are loving it and doing the "if you don't like this you should unfriend me attitude".

[rbwhatever1]

If we were a Society in control of it's own destination this would be a very easy issue to address with common sense. Unfortunately we have no common sense and we've lost control.

Society should teach it's children to avoid being educated in gun free killing zones created by the State and arm them. Society should teach their children that evil exists and that it must be "stopped in it's tracks" like Mojo stated. Evil needs to be confronted instantly and consequences of "back drops" and "gunfights" and "innocent people" caught up in the cross fire be damned. Let's give all our children the tools needed for a fair chance at surviving in an evil world, no matter where they may be.

Gun Free Zones were created by the State. Seems to me if we destroy that State the problem would be solved. Look at us now debating on how to stop Evil Humans with Law. This is preposterous. We should be debating 35 States needed to abolish Washington DC.

[Beiruty]

Requiring licensing to own and medical background clearance as it the case in Canada would not stop such incidents too. Cause, no one can stop the intent of a determined criminal mind from committing mass murder.

More restrictive laws would not stop such incidents. Most likely all his firearms passed the current restricted laws.

Parenting would do.
Social integration and mentoring would do. i.e. detecting some anti-social behavior statements and trying to intervene.
Mental care would do.

[Cowboyhockey14]

He lined them up and ask if they were Christians. There is a war right now against Christians, in the world and in our own country. Our country was founded on Christian beliefs and The Bible. The Bible warned that these days would come. It is times like this that we as Christians have to stick together, pray and have faith.

As for all the talk of stricter guns laws......These only hurt law abiding citizens. Criminals and Crazy people will still find a way to do harm.

[Beiruty]

Normally I would link to more news articles, however many show is picture and give his name. I'm never going to mention his name or link to his photograph.

What I have learned:

26 year old mixed race male, shaved head, shy, you know the profile, couldn't meet girls.
Had three pistols and a long rifle. Photos of him with the rifle.
Admired the IRA. Used a German medal and 45 as a username.
Don't know about a job or if he attended the community college. I think lived with his mom who is a nurse near the college.
Wrote about the former reporter who killed on live TV, seemed to feel this was a great way to get well known. He felt the more you killed the more famous you could become.
Although he killed Christians in his slaughter, he says he is not religious, but spiritual.
He previously lived in Tarzana CA.
Oregon has better than most states with restrictive gun laws. No gun show loophole. After Sandy Hook Oregon voted in more restrictive gun laws.

My anti gun Facebook friends are reposting Obama and his angry speech today. They are loving it and doing the "if you don't like this you should unfriend me attitude".

He is being revealed to be a "domestic" Terrorist with anti-organized Christian views.

[NotRPB]

Fort Hood shooting survivor reacts to college shooting
http://kxan.com/2015/10/01/fort-hood-sh ... -shooting/ #gunfreezoneskillpeople

Oregon Shooting: 'Heroic' Veteran Chris Mintz Was Shot 7 Times
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/oregon ... es-n437291

EXCLUSIVE: Former Security Guard at Oregon College: Lockdown Procedures Were a “Deathtrap” http://www.infowars.com/former-security ... deathtrap/
though I'm not an "InfoWars" guy I always thought it odd that Cho at Virginia Tech took chains & Locks to lock everyone in... and schools thought "Hey, that's a good idea"

Concealed Carrying Air Force Vet Held Back From Stopping Attack By UCC Staff
http://bearingarms.com/concealed-carryi ... force-vet/

[bmwrdr]

Requiring licensing to own and medical background clearance as it the case in Canada would not stop such incidents too. Cause, no one can stop the intent of a determined criminal mind from committing mass murder.

More restrictive laws would not stop such incidents. Most likely all his firearms passed the current restricted laws.

Parenting would do.
Social integration and mentoring would do. i.e. detecting some anti-social behavior statements and trying to intervene.
Mental care would do.

Good point, I would also suggest to mention substance abuse as a potential factor for causing mental illness and strange behavior.

[Beiruty]

Drugs (whether hard core pain-killers Rx or street drugs) is the door to self-destruction and death. I call it frying-oneself to ashes.

[VMI77]

I read a story that said he had all the students lay on the floor, then asked them to stand up, one at a time, and declare their religion. If they were Christian, he shot them in the head. If they weren't or wouldn't say, he shot them in the leg. Here's what I don't understand. There's 35 students in the room. After the first two or three are shot, why didn't anybody rush the guy? Sure, you might get shot, but you're going to get shot sooner or later anyway. This passive, sheep mentality baffles me. I don't understand it. I would grab a chair and rush him, yelling at the top of my lungs to startle him, and do everything in my power to knock him down. I'm sure not going to lay there and wait for a bullet.

Unfortunately most humans seem to be psychologically disposed to be passive. Solzhenitsyn talked about how the Soviets could round up 100 people and march them off to their deaths with just one soldier. Most Jews in Hitler's Germany went passively to their deaths. There have been many many incidents where people have been lined up in the course of a robbery and executed without anyone resisting.

Added to that natural disposition is decades of media, government, and public school indoctrination in passivity....don't do anything for yourself, hire a "professional," wait for the authorities to arrive, follow orders because they're for your own good and the authorities know better than you do, you don't have the proper training, etc.....not learn to do it, get training, take action. In the public school system you get suspended if you're attacked and you defend yourself. Added to natural inclinations is a lot of trained passivity.

Note that those who did take action, or tried to, were ex-military, as is often the case. Just like the guys on the train in France. People who have been trained to unlearn that passivity or are naturally inclined to act without direction.

[TXBO]

He lined them up and ask if they were Christians. There is a war right now against Christians, in the world and in our own country. Our country was founded on Christian beliefs and The Bible. The Bible warned that these days would come. It is times like this that we as Christians have to stick together, pray and have faith.

As for all the talk of stricter guns laws......These only hurt law abiding citizens. Criminals and Crazy people will still find a way to do harm.

"But now if you have a purse, take it,and also a bag: and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." Luke 22:36