Another US Campus mass shooting.
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
Ha! Always looking for excuses for the gun owners.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/texas-good-guy-wit...
Well there you go! Just proves that guns aren't that dangerous! The pick-up driver got shot in the head and the news report says he is only injured. I googled it up and another news report lists his condition as "stable". Probably only a flesh wound http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/texas-good-guy-wit...
Breadvan72 said:
Corpulent Tosser said:
Oakey said:
Article said:
A case in Texas two weeks ago highlights the risks of civilians intervening in chaotic situations. Police say that as two carjackers struggled with the owner of a car at a gas station in northeast Houston, a witness decided to take action into his own hands. He fired several shots, but missed the perpetrators and shot the owner of the car in the head. He then picked up his shell casings and fled the scene. Police are still looking for the shooter.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/texas-good-guy-wit...
London424 said:
Does that raise the charges for the car jackers from 'car jacking (whatever the legalese is for that in the US) to attempted murder (or whatever equivalent is in the commission of a crime)?
I think it doesn't because the state would need to prove collusion or aiding of the carjackers by the person who shot the car driver in the head. OK for practical purposes, shooting the car owner in the head may well have aided the carjackers but I don't think that is the intent of the law. Someone the likes of Breadvan will also have to comment on if there is a felony attempted murder rule on the Texas statutes, or just a felony murder rule. =
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
creampuff said:
I think it doesn't because the state would need to prove collusion or aiding of the carjackers by the person who shot the car driver in the head. OK for practical purposes, shooting the car owner in the head may well have aided the carjackers but I don't think that is the intent of the law. Someone the likes of Breadvan will also have to comment on if there is a felony attempted murder rule on the Texas statutes, or just a felony murder rule.
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
Again, when someone rides into a school and murders 20 kids with bicycle you'll have a point. =
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
creampuff said:
London424 said:
Does that raise the charges for the car jackers from 'car jacking (whatever the legalese is for that in the US) to attempted murder (or whatever equivalent is in the commission of a crime)?
I think it doesn't because the state would need to prove collusion or aiding of the carjackers by the person who shot the car driver in the head. OK for practical purposes, shooting the car owner in the head may well have aided the carjackers but I don't think that is the intent of the law. Someone the likes of Breadvan will also have to comment on if there is a felony attempted murder rule on the Texas statutes, or just a felony murder rule. =
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
"In 2013 in the U.S., over 900 bicyclists were killed"
Crikey, as many as that!!!!!!! By the end of the year it'll be competing with the tally of the number of under-11s shot and killed in the US.
blinkythefish said:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/bicycle/
"In 2013 in the U.S., over 900 bicyclists were killed"
Crikey, as many as that!!!!!!! By the end of the year it'll be competing with the tally of the number of under-11s shot and killed in the US.
Have you been to the US? Almost nobody uses bicycles. The number of trips made by bicycle is less than 1% of all trips. 900 people still get killed. But when you drive around, almost half the houses you see have a gun inside. There are a lot more than 900 gunshot deaths, but nowhere in proportion to the number of bicycle deaths in proportion to the sheer number of guns out there. "In 2013 in the U.S., over 900 bicyclists were killed"
Crikey, as many as that!!!!!!! By the end of the year it'll be competing with the tally of the number of under-11s shot and killed in the US.
The US needs to start to view "keenness to own a firearm" like substance addiction.
People who want to own guns exhibit very much the same patterns of denial and avoidance that alchoholics/smokers do.
Instead of "it's just a whisky to take the edge off", it's more like "A semi-automatic pistol for my sporting pursuits".
Non-users can see the denial very clearly.
People who want to own guns exhibit very much the same patterns of denial and avoidance that alchoholics/smokers do.
Instead of "it's just a whisky to take the edge off", it's more like "A semi-automatic pistol for my sporting pursuits".
Non-users can see the denial very clearly.
Breadvan72 said:
Corpulent Tosser said:
Oakey said:
Article said:
A case in Texas two weeks ago highlights the risks of civilians intervening in chaotic situations. Police say that as two carjackers struggled with the owner of a car at a gas station in northeast Houston, a witness decided to take action into his own hands. He fired several shots, but missed the perpetrators and shot the owner of the car in the head. He then picked up his shell casings and fled the scene. Police are still looking for the shooter.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/texas-good-guy-wit...
doogz said:
Guns were designed to kill people. That's why so many Americans have them. Purely to kill someone.
I believe about a third of US firearms are handguns which, setting aside the argument that some of them are bought to kill paper targets, can be reasonably argued to be designed primarily to kill people.Of the other two thirds, some are military weapons like assault rifles, also designed to kill people, but most of them are designed to kill animals.
Doogz: so what you are saying is it is not ok to go for a recreational trip to a shooting range, which will have the incidental benefit of contributing to the job security of the people who work in the shooting range or make bullets, but it is quite ok for me to go on a motorcycle ride, with no particular destination and no reason (I ride motorcycles as well btw and accept that improperly used, they can be dangerous). The enjoyment I get from riding a motorbike is a valid form of enjoyment, but in your world the enjoyment recreational shooters get from shooting clay pigeons or bits of paper is not a valid form of enjoyment, because you say so?
creampuff said:
blinkythefish said:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/bicycle/
"In 2013 in the U.S., over 900 bicyclists were killed"
Crikey, as many as that!!!!!!! By the end of the year it'll be competing with the tally of the number of under-11s shot and killed in the US.
Have you been to the US? Almost nobody uses bicycles. The number of trips made by bicycle is less than 1% of all trips. 900 people still get killed. But when you drive around, almost half the houses you see have a gun inside. There are a lot more than 900 gunshot deaths, but nowhere in proportion to the number of bicycle deaths in proportion to the sheer number of guns out there. "In 2013 in the U.S., over 900 bicyclists were killed"
Crikey, as many as that!!!!!!! By the end of the year it'll be competing with the tally of the number of under-11s shot and killed in the US.
There are about 100M bikes in the US, 900 deaths.
There are (lets overestimate) 400M guns. Is the gun death rate higher or lower than 3600? just a little bit higher.
Or, how about: number of people cycling in the last 12 months since spring 2014:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/227415/number-o...
67Million.
so 900 deaths for 67Million riders== 0.0013%.
Now guns, you reckon half the households have guns. So say 320 Million people, half with guns= 160M gun owners; number of gun deaths? 30000?
30000/160M == 0.01875%, so 14X as dangerous. Does that need 28 "VERY"s in your pronouncement of how dangerous it is.
Edited by blinkythefish on Thursday 8th October 14:15
blinkythefish said:
Now guns, you reckon half the households have guns. So say 320 Million people, half with guns= 160M gun owners; number of gun deaths? 30000?
How did you get to 160MM gun owners from half the households having guns ?Edited by blinkythefish on Thursday 8th October 14:15
You are assuming that every household member owns guns
Corpulent Tosser said:
blinkythefish said:
Now guns, you reckon half the households have guns. So say 320 Million people, half with guns= 160M gun owners; number of gun deaths? 30000?
How did you get to 160MM gun owners from half the households having guns ?Edited by blinkythefish on Thursday 8th October 14:15
You are assuming that every household member owns guns
Either way the deaths per gun owner figure comes out at between 0.0255% and 0.051%, which is higher than the one based on 50% population.
jjlynn27 said:
Wasn't uzi girl shooting an instructor also an accident? If a kid dies riding a bicycle while 'properly supervised' I'll compare their parents with gun brandishing hillbilies. I heard that those pedals and bells are quite deadly when they ricochet.
But there is always an excuse. And it always boils to 'meh, it's happening to someone else who probably don't know what they are doing, are irresponsible etc.'
Perfectly normal.
The girl shooting the full-auto Uzi *wasn't* properly supervised. Full-auto Uzi's simply are not suitable for children as they are too difficult to control.But there is always an excuse. And it always boils to 'meh, it's happening to someone else who probably don't know what they are doing, are irresponsible etc.'
Perfectly normal.
The point you are missing is that accidents sometime do happen even though someone was being properly supervised or was taking all the appropriate precautions. Cycling is a potentially dangerous activity the consequences of which could be lethal yet we still allow kids to do it. Swimming can be fatal too but we also let kids do that.
Every single thing that you let kids tale part in is potentially dangerous and most are potentially lethal so do we just ban our kids from doing anything other than sitting at home watching telly and getting fat? That's not potentially lethal, after all!
creampuff said:
From this article about how some of the population would act if someone tried to remove their guns, even in the scenario that they become illegal."Many of whom would rather start a civil war than acquiesce"
That says it all. It's obsessive, not intellectual ownership. You don't have them for a reason, you have them because you believe the 2nd ammendment says you can, and you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes to anything you hear or see which says different.
That's not very grown-up now, is it.
From what I've seen of US police conduct, I can understand why americans don't like or trust them (the US police) and are not keen on relinquishing your firearms. But they never help. The answer to violent conduct is not more violent conduct. When's that going to sink in ?
Oakey said:
creampuff said:
I think it doesn't because the state would need to prove collusion or aiding of the carjackers by the person who shot the car driver in the head. OK for practical purposes, shooting the car owner in the head may well have aided the carjackers but I don't think that is the intent of the law. Someone the likes of Breadvan will also have to comment on if there is a felony attempted murder rule on the Texas statutes, or just a felony murder rule.
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
Again, when someone rides into a school and murders 20 kids with bicycle you'll have a point. =
Speaking of dangerous things, did you know bicycles are VERY, VERY DANGEROUS! The risk of getting killed on a bicycle is multiples that of being killed in a car and it is not that much lower than being killed on a motorbike. Parents, keep your kids away from bikes!
The theory raised by Corpulent tosser that the shooter may have been in league with the car jackers sounds to me like a crackpot theory. The shooter is reported to have been someone filling up at another pump. Two car jackers bring along a deep cover backup guy to pretend to be a bystander and intervene if the victim of the heist resists? Yeah right. Why not just bring three guys up front? Said backup dude is ace shot and hits resisting victim in head on purpose? Yeah right, using a pistol in a confused barney really works that way.
IIRC, some Statutory regimes in some States of the Union provide that anyone engaged in a felony during which someone is murdered could face a murder rap, regardless of joint enterprise. I may be making that up. If such a statute exists in Texas, a keen prosecutor might try his luck against the jackers if they are caught and the victim dies. Possibly ditto for attempted murder. I am speculating. I do not know Texas law. It starts from English law principles but is embellished in many ways, good or bad. For example, the idea of "no duty to retreat" (stand your ground) was, IIRC, a legal principle developed in frontier regions including possibly Texas in the C19. Thus, much self defence law in various US jurisdictions departs from self defence law elsewhere in the common law world (ie: the UK and most of the Commonwealth, also Ireland and other ex UK possessions not ion the Commonwealth). But that by the by.
creampuff's truly fatuous bicycle point is an insult even to his own level of intelligence, and that is saying something. creampuff appears now to be trolling, and may have been from the start. His niece with the gat may be a figment, to wind others up.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 9th October 13:42
Flopsy, Mopsy, Cottontail, and Peter plan to rob McGregor's Bank. During the robbery, they are confronted by PC Squirrel Nutkin. Peter produces a gun and shoots Nutkin dead. Flopsy, Mopsy and Cottontail are not armed and did not know that Peter had a gun. Flopsy and Mopsy are in the bank with the swag when Peter shoots. Cottontail is outside at the wheel of the getaway car. Discuss the criminal liability of each of Flopsy, Mopsy, Cottontail, and Peter.
(Actual criminal law exam paper circa 1985)
(Actual criminal law exam paper circa 1985)
Spin the question a bit more. PC Nutkin has run to the bank on hearing the alarm, but he is unfit from eating too many acorns, and has a heart attack and dies on the steps. Peter thinks that the constable is just taking cover or has fallen over, and shoots him, intending to kill him, but Nutkin is dead before Peter shoots. Discuss!
Criminal law is fun to study, but not so much fun in real life, most of the time.
Criminal law is fun to study, but not so much fun in real life, most of the time.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff