OT: Tragic Shooting.

General Discussion on any topic relating to CPAP and/or Sleep Apnea.
User avatar
deltadave
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:10 am
Location: near Newtown, Connecticut

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by deltadave » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:29 pm

...other than food...

SMenasco
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:38 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by SMenasco » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:32 pm

I really don't know how many guards were at OKC. There's no guarantee that anything is 100 percent effective. I agree that stopping hate is a worthy goal. How is that accomplished?

jnk
Posts: 5787
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by jnk » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:37 pm

And if people had only listened to Archie Bunker, der woulda been no 9-11?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLjNJI54GMM

Whodathunkit.

User avatar
49er
Posts: 5624
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:18 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by 49er » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:44 pm

SMenasco wrote:I really don't know how many guards were at OKC. There's no guarantee that anything is 100 percent effective. I agree that stopping hate is a worthy goal. How is that accomplished?
You start with the refusal to buy into stereotypes such as the ones that were coming out in the media inferring that all people with mental illness are violent and need to be locked up when the statistics don't support that.

On another board, someone said they feared that people with an MI label were going to be treated like the Muslims were after 9-11. Sadly, I had to agree.

49er

User avatar
deltadave
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:10 am
Location: near Newtown, Connecticut

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by deltadave » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:45 pm

SMenasco wrote:I agree that stopping hate is a worthy goal. How is that accomplished?
I don't know, but sign this petition while I think about it:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti ... o/XrsSn2zG
...other than food...

User avatar
49er
Posts: 5624
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:18 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by 49er » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:59 pm

chunkyfrog wrote:Universal mental health care, really CARE; not "Here's a pill-- take it or get locked up!"
Great post Chunkyfrog.

What is extremely frightening is the media is giving the mental health professionals who believe in the take a pill or get locked up philosophy a platform without seeking alternative opinions. It makes me sick.

NPR, which I derisively call National Psychiatric Radio, is a prime offender in my opinion. When Robert Whitaker wrote Anatomy of an Epidemic, which took a very critical look at the mental health system, NPR refused to interview him even though they interviewed all the psychiatrists who came out with new books.

He is not anti meds but feels the system needs to be revamped big time. Anyway, he created this site, http://www.madinamerica.com if people want to learn more.

49er

SMenasco
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:38 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by SMenasco » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:12 pm

I appreciate the arguments. However, I am not convinced that video cameras and armed guards are not a good idea. How could someone not support a guard engaging the assailant when he shot the window out to gain entrance? A tactical protection method must be employed while the strategic plans are devised.

User avatar
ChicagoGranny
Posts: 14539
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by ChicagoGranny » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:53 pm

Edyie Boyce Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are gua ranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
"It's not the number of breaths we take, it's the number of moments that take our breath away."

User avatar
porete
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 5:58 pm

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by porete » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:58 pm

ChicagoGranny wrote:
Edyie Boyce Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are gua ranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
I agree, the only defense is an armed citizenry. We should let teachers arm themselves, as in Texas and Utah. The only people who respect gun free zones are law abiding citizens, criminals couldn't care less about laws.

_________________
Mask: FitLife Total Face CPAP Mask with Headgear
Additional Comments: Pressure Range: 8.5-14, EPR: 3

ems
Posts: 2757
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:46 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by ems » Sat Dec 22, 2012 1:26 am

porete wrote:
ChicagoGranny wrote:
Edyie Boyce Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are gua ranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
I agree, the only defense is an armed citizenry. We should let teachers arm themselves, as in Texas and Utah. The only people who respect gun free zones are law abiding citizens, criminals couldn't care less about laws.
Yes, let's start when they are newborn... a breast and a gun at the same time. The moms can be shopping for the perfect gun while they are pregnant.
If only the folks with sawdust for brains were as sweet and obliging and innocent as The Scarecrow! ~a friend~

User avatar
49er
Posts: 5624
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:18 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by 49er » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:26 am

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

Sorry, either the website or my computer isn't allowing me to cut and paste. But it shows how the statistics posted below are misleading.

For example, in the Provence of Victoria with 4 million people, there were 7 firearms homicides in 1997 and 19 in 98 which isn't very statistically significant in light of all the population count. Obviously it is to the people who lost their lives but that is another issue.

Anyway, it says the number of firearms deaths committed is lower than before the buyback program.

49er

ChicagoGranny wrote:
Edyie Boyce Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are gua ranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!

User avatar
49er
Posts: 5624
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:18 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by 49er » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:36 am

porete wrote:
ChicagoGranny wrote:
Edyie Boyce Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are gua ranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
I agree, the only defense is an armed citizenry. We should let teachers arm themselves, as in Texas and Utah. The only people who respect gun free zones are law abiding citizens, criminals couldn't care less about laws.
So we should allow drunk driving since only non alcoholics obey drunk driving laws.

And where is the money going to come from that you conservatives keep wanting to cut from the budget, including reading teachers? By the way, did you know that the number of jails are built based on the 4th grade literacy rate?

Where are teachers going to find the time to get the necessary training as due to all the regulations in place now thanks to bother democrats and republicans who think the answer is more testing, they don't have time to even teach their classes?

And since kids will get into anything come heck or high water, where are teachers going to put their guns to keep them safely hidden? And since Adam Lenza killed many people within minutes with the high powered weapons that you conservatives don't want to ban in the name of your property rights, do you really think an armed teacher is going to have time to access her weapon that she needs to keep locked up to prevent people from being killed accidentally?

DD, my apologies for this response. I tried to restrain myself but I can no longer do it.

49er

User avatar
deltadave
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:10 am
Location: near Newtown, Connecticut

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by deltadave » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:45 am

49er wrote:http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

Sorry, either the website or my computer isn't allowing me to cut and paste. But it shows how the statistics posted below are misleading.
Great find, 49er. Yeah, looks like snopes has some sort of protective scheme.

Bob Cesca:
PROPAGANDA: Banning guns won't stop mass shootings because of the outlaws, blah blah blah.

REALITY: Once again, totally not true. Australia, May 1996, a lone gunman killed 35 people and wounded an additional 23. Subsequently, Australia passed a very strict gun control law that included a buy-back program that managed to recover 600,000 assault rifles and other arms -- 20 percent of all the known firearms in Australia. There were no more private sales of firearms, there were stringent registration laws, and, as with other nations, you had to prove to authorities that you had a specific reason for purchasing a firearm. And no, according to Slate, self-defense wasn't a valid excuse. What happened after that?

Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post's Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here's the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn't been a single one in Australia since.
...other than food...

User avatar
deltadave
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:10 am
Location: near Newtown, Connecticut

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by deltadave » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:48 am

49er wrote:DD, my apologies for this response. I tried to restrain myself but I can no longer do it.
None necessary. The President has started to post "time to start doing stuff" (see my previous link), so who am I to argue.
...other than food...

User avatar
49er
Posts: 5624
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:18 am

Re: OT: Tragic Shooting.

Post by 49er » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:59 am

deltadave wrote:
49er wrote:http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

Sorry, either the website or my computer isn't allowing me to cut and paste. But it shows how the statistics posted below are misleading.
Great find, 49er. Yeah, looks like snopes has some sort of protective scheme.

Bob Cesca:
PROPAGANDA: Banning guns won't stop mass shootings because of the outlaws, blah blah blah.

REALITY: Once again, totally not true. Australia, May 1996, a lone gunman killed 35 people and wounded an additional 23. Subsequently, Australia passed a very strict gun control law that included a buy-back program that managed to recover 600,000 assault rifles and other arms -- 20 percent of all the known firearms in Australia. There were no more private sales of firearms, there were stringent registration laws, and, as with other nations, you had to prove to authorities that you had a specific reason for purchasing a firearm. And no, according to Slate, self-defense wasn't a valid excuse. What happened after that?

Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post's Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here's the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn't been a single one in Australia since.
Thanks DD and thank you for posting the Washington Post statistics.

49er