world

2 dead, 9 wounded in Empire State Building shoot-out

34 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

34 Comments
Login to comment

Another senseless crime, and this will never stop. Believe or not, University of Colorado dorm. are allowing students to keep guns in their rooms as CU is a state funded university and they have to follow Colorado Gun law. Crazy. We are trying to change the law to make it tougher.

There are too many crazy people like him here in US and we need to do something about it. Better solution for this madness? Anyone? I would like to read your progressive feedbacks. Thanks.

Updated July 21, 2011 The current U.S.A. population is over 311 million people

http://geography.about.com/od/obtainpopulationdata/a/uspopulation.htm

The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. If you add those owned by the military, law enforcement agencies and museums, there is probably about 1 gun per person in the country.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_guns_are_in_the_united_states_of_America

4 ( +8 / -4 )

He was downsized from his job. That is no reason to kill people and get himself killed. Find another job or start your own business designing and making women's accessories. Be an entrepreneur not a crazy dead person.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Ok, so were are the idiots who will spew out their NRA propaganda saying that GUNS DO NOT KILL?? This angry laid off man, gets a pistol, shoots his former boss in the head?? So guns do not kill?? Sure, keep on smoking ganja!! Crack, and your underwear if you still think that guns do not kill!!!

0 ( +5 / -5 )

If the blame game is going to start, I'd like to submit my equally absurd notion:

Obama's Economy Kills.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Ok, so were are the idiots who will spew out their NRA propaganda saying that GUNS DO NOT KILL?? This angry laid off man, gets a pistol, shoots his former boss in the head?? So guns do not kill?? Sure, keep on smoking ganja!! Crack, and your underwear if you still think that guns do not kill!!!

No one is saying guns can't kill, what they are saying is that in order for a gun to kill it needs someone to squeeze the trigger, in other words guns by themselves won't kill people it requires a sentient being to do it.

Another senseless crime, and this will never stop. Believe or not, University of Colorado dorm. are allowing students to keep guns in their rooms as CU is a state funded university and they have to follow Colorado Gun law. Crazy. We are trying to change the law to make it tougher.

Please tell me how before this policy change how it prevented someone with a gun from coming onto to campus or dorms and opening fire? Also they are not allowing students to keep guns in University of Colorado dorms. In fact guns in the dorms are still prohibited. What they are allowing are those with conceal carry permits to have them in off campus housing units, which are not dorms, they are not even on the campus.

You got a link to show where you are fighting this?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

He was downsized from his job. That is no reason to kill people and get himself killed. Find another job or start your own business designing and making women's accessories. Be an entrepreneur not a crazy dead person.

Sad as it is and it is a horrific tragedy, violence is never the answer, but given the current climate financial situation, this is what it has come to and I am sad to say, but I think this only beginning if nothing changes and the way the economy looks, it doesn't look hopeful as of now.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think this is one of those situations where you can't completely blame ease of access to guns -- the man planned this and was obviously intent on killing people. Granted, as I myself constantly argue, he could not have inflicted as much damage with other weapons, but this is not like cases where in the heat of the moment someone with access to guns murders someone over a toy on Black-Friday at Wall Mart. I'm not in favour of the lack of gun control in the US one iota, but this is one of the trickier ones where you can't completely blame said lack.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

New York's Mayor Bloomberg has it bad but not as bad as Chicago's Rahm Emmanuel.

There were thirteen citizens shot in that city yesterday in the space of thirty minutes. Most of the victims were in their teens.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I'm not in favour of the lack of gun control in the US one iota, but this is one of the trickier ones where you can't completely blame said lack.

If he had only had a knife, I don't think he would have shot that guy in the head. You think I am being funny? Not at all. The gun made it very easy to kill. One shot, boom, dead. If he had only a knife, the victim might have ran and suffered on injury, or got the knife stuck in his ribs and lived.

Or, a knife being so much more difficult to wield, what with all that chasing people down stuff, he might not have even bothered.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It was unclear whether the gunman had time to fire at the police and some of the gunshot wounds to bystanders may have been caused by stray police bullets, the mayor said. “Some may have been shot accidentally.”

Now this is the difference between a gun and another weapon like a knife. I really doubt that he would have been able to injure 9 bystanders this way throwing knives or bats at cops trying to fend them off and hitting bystanders with incidental weapons like knives and bats. It's just lucky that those 9 wounded weren't critically hit.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

We knew that area around the Empire State Building! The Japanese UNIQLO flagship store is there.

The perp did shoot once at the police, then the police returned fire. Sadly, bystanders got caught by missed police bullets and ricochets.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

He got laid off and went nuts with a gun? What a tosser, killing someone to make himself feel better.

I think everyone who buys or currently owns a gun of any sort needs to be psychologically examined by a shrink. Seriously, you can't have any Tom, Dick or Harry just being allowed to own a gun. There has to be a justified reason, a cast iron reason.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I think this is one of those situations where you can't completely blame ease of access to guns -- the man planned this and was obviously intent on killing people.

I'm not so sure it is people, I think it is more person. I think he was really only after his ex co-worker, if there was no police there the question then becomes would he have shot other people and from what it sounds in terms of motive I would say the answer is no.

He got laid off and went nuts with a gun? What a tosser, killing someone to make himself feel better.

Well it wasn't like he got laid off and then the next day went out and did this, he had been unemployed for a year and obviously couldn't find any other work and he probably held his ex co-worker responsible for him losing his job.

There has to be a justified reason, a cast iron reason.

Why does there need to be a justified reason? Can't it just be they are mentally competent and have no violent criminal background?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

He was downsized from his job. That is no reason to kill people and get himself killed. Find another job or start your own business designing and making women's accessories. Be an entrepreneur not a crazy dead person.

Sad as it is and it is a horrific tragedy, violence is never the answer, but given the current climate financial situation, this is what it has come to and I am sad to say, but I think this only beginning if nothing changes and the way the economy looks, it doesn't look hopeful as of now.

bass, please tie your post for the gun issue. You have lost me. financial situation to guns? Please buck them up with facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Will someone explain to me why people living in what is advertised as an "advanced country" can get and use guns so easily?

This is a real question.

I'd like to know.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm not so sure it is people, I think it is more person

America is filled with a person with mental issues.

American society has been broken. More than a 50% of marriage ends in divorce. We are not investing enough to teach our children what is right and wrong. We are not teaching anger management. We are not investing enough for mental health.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

And furthermore, as Mayor of NYC Bloomberg stated, it is our responsibility to elect congressmen and governors who are willing to modify gun control laws little tougher. Unfortunately, American political arena has been taken over and raped by the Tea Party (The American-Jihad) congress members who are closely tied with NRA.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It now appears from a recent New York Times article that Steven Ercolino basically bullied and humiliated Jeffrey Johnson at every opportunity he got. This in no way justifies what Jeffrey Johnson did but considering what he went through it is not exactly surprising that this happened.

Will someone explain to me why people living in what is advertised as an "advanced country" can get and use guns so easily? This is a real question. I'd like to know.

What do ease of access to guns have anything to do with the requirement of being an "advanced country"? Can you show where guns laws are used to determine what is an advanced country.

And furthermore, as Mayor of NYC Bloomberg stated, it is our responsibility to elect congressmen and governors who are willing to modify gun control laws little tougher.

Little tougher? Have you seen the laws Bloomberg wants when it comes to guns?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

NolivingAug: No one is saying guns can't kill, what they are saying is that in order for a gun to kill it needs someone to squeeze the trigger, in other words guns by themselves won't kill people it requires a sentient being to do it.

Ah, now I understand. Guns by themselves are not dangerous. We just have to keep them away from "sentient beings" who might "squeeze the trigger" to make the world that little bit safer - which seems to be an argument for increased gun control to me...

But in this case, where it was one person deliberately targeting and killing another, whether he had a gun or a knife, he would have been able to achieve the same result, so gun control is not really relevant to this story. It's only really relevant to the indiscriminate mass killings that seem to so regularly occur. In this case, we can only mourn for the innocent man killed, be thankful for the brave construction worker and the police, and also be thankful that no one else was killed in the shoot-out.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Although it also appears that Johnson also bullied Erolino.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Little tougher? Have you seen the laws Bloomberg wants when it comes to guns?

Noliving, would you please tell me how Bloomberg has changed the gun law in NY? I am sure he had a great impact among congressmen in the State of NY. I am interested in OLD vs NEW.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ah, now I understand. Guns by themselves are not dangerous. We just have to keep them away from "sentient beings" who might "squeeze the trigger" to make the world that little bit safer - which seems to be an argument for increased gun control to me...

Which is exactly what the NRA has been saying the entire time. The argument that the NRA is saying is that the current gun control laws in the US are working to reduce gun violence, grand total gun violence down by 50%+ in the past 20 years, and thus any new additional "gun control" won't have any measurable effect on reducing gun crime. The only thing that would work is a complete and total gun banning and gun confiscation. There are currently 22k gun laws in the US what additional gun law is the US missing that would really have a measurable impact on reducing gun crime?

would you please tell me how Bloomberg has changed the gun law in NY? I am sure he had a great impact among congressmen in the State of NY. I am interested in OLD vs NEW.

Where did I say he had changed them? I said have you seen the gun laws that Bloomberg wants? Have you seen the gun laws that he wants Global?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noliving, yes I have. He is a front runner encouraging politicians to close loopholes.

There are many articles written for this topic all over the USA. FYI

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noliving, yes I have. He is a front runner encouraging politicians to close loopholes. There are many articles written for this topic all over the USA. FYI

So then what was the point of your question? Oh he is encouraging much more than just closing loopholes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh he is encouraging much more than just closing loopholes

From what I have learned from others, he is going further.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From what I have learned from others, he is going further.

So in other words he is going a lot further than a "little tougher". Are you ever going to answer my question?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Are you ever going to answer my question?

I did, Noliving.

He and other governors are trying to set up solidarity to go further. You will see more activities after the election. Hope this answer will satisfy your question. Good luck to all of us.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the current gun control laws in the US are working to reduce gun violence, grand total gun violence down by 50%+ in the past 20 years

20 years ago gun deaths in America were at a peak, after rising steadily over the previous decade. Compared to 35 years ago, gun-related deaths remain constant: the argument that 'gun crime has fallen so we must be doing it right' simply doesn't hold up; it's like claiming in February that it's colder than it was last August, so global warming must be a myth. Gun violence in America is way, way higher than in any other country you might possibly want to hold up as an example of the way things should be; it's in the company of places like South Africa, Colombia, Mexico, Zimbabwe, all places Americans and the world point to as being problem states.

http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/welcome.htm

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Cleo, thanks for the stats. US current gun control laws, with holes like swiss cheese, are not working.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

20 years ago gun deaths in America were at a peak, after rising steadily over the previous decade. Compared to 35 years ago, gun-related deaths remain constant: the argument that 'gun crime has fallen so we must be doing it right' simply doesn't hold up; it's like claiming in February that it's colder than it was last August, so global warming must be a myth. Gun violence in America is way, way higher than in any other country you might possibly want to hold up as an example of the way things should be

Whenever a crime trend goes down the the year preceding the down trend year is almost always the peak year, and yet the trend of falling gun crime has fallen below previous decade of the 80's even the 70's and were now looking at gun crime that is set to match the mid 1950's. So using 2011 data from the FBI crime stats compared to 1975 it is not constant in fact it is below 1975. Actually it not a steady constant, in your example there were over 11k gun homicides that number is now just below 10,000k. Also even if it was a constant the per capita rate would still have gone down. In fact the overall homicide rate of the US is the same of 1961.

Actually anything that shows crime falling over a period of 20 years would mean your doing something right. For example if test scores increase over a period of 20 years but were not as high as they were 50 years ago means you're doing something right, it means you have reversed the downward spiral and it means you have been able to maintain the gains from the previous years and not only that but also be able to build off of them consistently and it is really only a matter of time before your test scores are as high as they were 50 years ago.

So yes the argument that the total number of gun crime has been cut in half over a period of 20 years a time that saw the total number of legally owned firearms in the US go from 200 million to just over 300 million in which its population also increased by a grand total of just over 60 million people does in fact hold up and this is a really long run on sentence.

As for the global warming please that is not even a valid argument/comparison. In order for that to even come close to being a valid argument you would have to compare the same month of each year and it would have to be over multiple years. Your argument is comparing two different months within a span of less than one year that is not even close to being a valid argument by you cleo. By your argument that is like saying if you had it where February was colder than the previous February and that was consistent for 20 years it wouldn't be an indication the earth is getting colder because 20,000 years ago the earth was that same temp if not colder. So by your argument the past decade can't be an indication of global warming because during the Jurassic age the earth was hotter than what it is now. In fact if your going to claim that since 2000 the years after indicate global warming than you can't claim the previous 20 years of gun violence going down does not mean the gun laws are not working because if your going to claim that than you can't use the past decade as evidence of global warming.

it's in the company of places like South Africa, Colombia, Mexico, Zimbabwe, all places Americans and the world point to as being problem states.

No its not those countries homicide averages are at least 3.333 to 7.8 times that of the US's

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Cleo, thanks for the stats. US current gun control laws, with holes like swiss cheese, are not working.

Global, lets say the US has 20 years of test scores improving however though they are not as high as they were in the 1950's. would you say then that US education policies are not working when you have 20 years of improving test scores? That is basically what Cleo's argument is, that if you have 20 years of improving test scores that the educational policies you have in place are not working because they are not as high as they were some time ago.

I did, Noliving.

No you didn't, read the following:

Noliving, would you please tell me how Bloomberg has changed the gun law in NY?

Where did I say he had changed them?

What was the point of that question? I never stated that Bloomberg has changed the gun laws in NY, I stated he wanted to pass tougher gun laws that doesn't mean he has done it. So what was the point of you asking that question?

He and other governors are trying to set up solidarity to go further. You will see more activities after the election. Hope this answer will satisfy your question. Good luck to all of us.

That is completely irrelevant to my question, you questioned me to show were Bloomberg has changed NY gun laws, I never stated he did, I asked you to show me where I stated that Bloomberg has changed NY guns laws. If your not going to show me where I stated Bloomberg has changed NY gun laws than why did you ask me to point out where Bloomberg has changed the NY gun laws? What was the point of you asking that question?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How about a law banning murder and violence? Oh, wait, there are already lots of those. Isn't the real problem violence? Laws banning objects (or substances) don't work because they don't address the underlying issue.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What do ease of access to guns have anything to do with the requirement of being an "advanced country"? Can you show where guns laws are used to determine what is an advanced country.

One of the basic requirements is public safety.

Being able to walk down a street without being mugged, robbed, beaten up, etc.

Someone pointed out that some American cities are so dangerous that you need a gun to protect yourself - just going through every day life.

If the government of a country cannot provide basic public safety, quite simply it's not doing its job.

Surely, one of the first actions would be to pass a very strict gun licensing law and have all those who wish to own guns give a REAL reason why they so desperately need to have one.

Antique guns can be (and should be) rendered harmless by drilling a hole in the barrel.

And then, all non-registered guns should be confiscated.

The police should create a peaceful situation, and having created one, keep it. They should be in the streets, walking, looking, talking to people, NOT in patrol cars.

I honestly don't know why the U.S.A. can pretend to be a "world police force" when its own country is in such a mess.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Being able to walk down a street without being mugged, robbed, beaten up, etc. Someone pointed out that some American cities are so dangerous that you need a gun to protect yourself - just going through every day life.

I don't see anyone pointing that out here on this thread. You can in America, over 85% of America's counties have an average homicide rate of 0.0. Canada's rape rate is twice that of the US for example. The UK violent crime rate is nearly 3 times that of the US, the only thing they beat the US is Homicide.

I honestly don't know why the U.S.A. can pretend to be a "world police force" when its own country is in such a mess.

The US has never claimed to be the world's police force, all the US has claimed to do is protect its interests. The whole world police force is a nick name the Europeans gave to the US.

If the government of a country cannot provide basic public safety, quite simply it's not doing its job.

Crime rates are falling, it seems to be doing its job.

The police should create a peaceful situation, and having created one, keep it. They should be in the streets, walking, looking, talking to people, NOT in patrol cars.

That is the fault of city/town planning, that is not something the police have any control over.

Surely, one of the first actions would be to pass a very strict gun licensing law and have all those who wish to own guns give a REAL reason why they so desperately need to have one.

They do, target shooting, hunting, and self defense.

Antique guns can be (and should be) rendered harmless by drilling a hole in the barrel.

Or you could just take away the barrel.......

And then, all non-registered guns should be confiscated.

Why? When was a registered gun ever stopped a crime or be the primary means in which a suspect was identified and or caught?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites