world

6 killed, including gunman, in Denver area shootings

31 Comments
By COLLEEN SLEVIN

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

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.


31 Comments
Login to comment

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

15 ( +15 / -0 )

we are seeing more and more unhinged and unbalanced people committing increased acts of violence

Since bass 'n friends don't want to figure guns into the equation, we've got to conclude that America has more unhinged and unbalanced people than any other developed nation. That can be the ONLY reason mass shootings by guns happen at such an alarming rate. Right?

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Still no gun control? How many people have to die before the government does something?

9 ( +9 / -0 )

What was this guys sick problem?

The Second Amendment: obscenely sick.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Ultimately, the sad truth behind all of this is that America has failed to see the “gun control debate” for what it truly is: a myth.

There is no debate. The debate ended when America as a nation decided that 20 dead elementary schoolers was an acceptable price to pay to protect the Second Amendment. Any chance of meaningful change ended after Sandy Hook. America has decided that making schoolchildren unwilling martyrs for other people’s ‘right’ to treat guns like playthings has ended all debate and removed all doubt: Americans value their own guns over other people’s lives.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Sick people with guns is the problem!

It’s becoming more and more clear that gun ownership is increasingly happening with mentally unstable people and little is being done to prevent it!

6 ( +6 / -0 )

What was this guys sick problem?

He was sick, yet still able to get a gun. America is sick and made sicker by gun carrying sick people, including thugs of all castes, and by the businesses that profit from the sickness.

Hats off to the brave officer who was shot. May she fully recover. Thanks to all emergency responders for doing their jobs knowing that at almost any time a sick person with a gun might create more problems for you and innocent people nearby.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Yet another mass murder, and it will not be the last. One bright outcome is that at least this murderer will not get an interview with Tucker Carslon on Fox Spews.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It seems that only when enough people have died so that everyone has lost a friend or relative will the citizens of the USA wake up and do something about the glaringly obvious problem. Until then look forward to more of the above and more hand wringing and posts on JT....

2 ( +3 / -1 )

There is no debate. The debate ended when America as a nation decided that 20 dead elementary schoolers was an acceptable price to pay to protect the Second Amendment.

I agree. If a country doesn't stand together after the killing of twenty elementary schoolers to say, "This needs to stop!" then there's not a lot of hope. At the federal level there will never be any change unless, far in the future, the Supreme Court swings back to a democratic majority and they reinterpret the Second Amendment - again.

But while the debate never achieves anything, it does still exist. Despite the two main defeats in the senate after Sandy Hook (The 2013 Assault Weapons Ban and the Manchin-Toomey Amendment) there were 23 executive orders signed by Obama, and in the five years after that tragedy there were 210 laws enacted to strengthen gun safety at state level.

Americans value their own guns over other people’s lives.

'Some' Americans. Fewer than 50% of U.S. adults (32%) say they personally own a gun, while 44% report living in a gun household according to Gallup.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

But let's not forget, these mass random shootings are rare. The biggest gun problem is young blacks killing other young blacks day in day out....

You bring up a good point: the racialized aspect of gun ownership and how Americans view race and guns. When a white person shoots up a school, the media coverage and apologia from the right always treats them as unfortunate sufferers of mental illness. “If only we did more to help support these poor kids’ mental health. If only they had friends. If only they weren’t shunned by their peers etc etc.”

One the flip side, when black people perpetrate gun violence (or any crime for that matter) they are ‘thugs’. While the right wing media loves to wax pathetic about the need for mental health services when a white boy commits an atrocity, they’re the first to portray any attempt to put black violence in a context of socioeconomic deprivation as beings “soft on crime”.

Or to put it more succinctly, the righ’s response of a white guy shooting up a bunch of people is “we need to arm ourselves with even more guns to protect ourselves and our neighborhoods”. But when a black person commits a drive by, Fox News et all never seems to talk about arming low-income inner city minorities as the best solution. I wonder what it is about armed black people that conservatives dislike so much?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The gunman had multiple social media identities and published some books about his, cough cough, "philosophy". This quote from one an April 2020 post sums him up nicely ( I edit some swear words) :

“Our entire society is made up of stty little fks who insult bad@$$es & get away with it because law enforcement & social norms protect the WEAK from the STRONG. I’m over it.”

“The weak better buckle up... sh!t is about to get real,”

Nice guy, huh.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/weak-better-buckle-denver-gunman-000540877.html

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Desert Tortoise

The issue is, when it comes to limiting firearm FEATURES (ammo capacity, detachable magazines, operating action etc) is that the definitions need to be both very broad and constantly updated to keep loopholes closed. The lengths gun loonies will go to to skirt around laws would put drug runners to shame. Just look at the Olympic Arms OA-98. It is an AR-15. That’s what it is. But by chopping down the barrel, removing the stock, and skeletonizing as much of the receiver as physically possible, they were able to get the weight down to under 50 ounces and that’s all it took to turn this semi-automatic, rifle-caliber, high-cap-mag-capable assault rifle into a legal ‘pistol’.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Couldn’t agree more. Another competent should be proof of minimum training in firearm safety

You should need to get a license after taking a practical test and a written test of relevant laws; you should have the gun registered by receiver number; you should need paperwork to transfer ownership; you should need insurance to cover damages it may cause; and you should be able to lose your license for failing to use it safely.

If we agree these are good enough for a car, they’re good enough for a gun

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Another day, another shooting … this madness has got to stop. Mental illness and firearms are a dangerous combination.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise,

Big problem with that idea. ...

Absolutely. Although there are certain types of speech not protected by the first amendment. Further, I think if what is a 'red flag' is well defined, certain posts could be measured against strict parameters. Anyway, I put forward the idea, knowing it wasn't a reality, as when I asked for other suggestions as to what could be done, I was met with crickets. As usual. Thought I'd get the ball rolling.

I'm not sure your suggestions would pass muster either, by the way. They seem pretty infringing. Training requirements are certainly a good option, and constitutional.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

ReynardFox,

Just look at the Olympic Arms OA-98. It is an AR-15. That’s what it is. But by chopping down the barrel, removing the stock, and skeletonizing as much of the receiver as physically possible, they were able to get the weight down to under 50 ounces and that’s all it took to turn this semi-automatic, rifle-caliber, high-cap-mag-capable assault rifle into a legal ‘pistol’.

Great point. Then put a stabilizing brace on it and you have the Boulder shooting back in March. Although that was a Ruger.

Such modifications were a big reason the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban wasn't particularly effective.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@RiskyMosaic

Exactly. The Assault Weapons Ban failed because it allowed for too many loopholes by outlining features and saying “A gun can’t have more than X number of these features.” All you gotta do is get down to below the threshold. For example, I had a buddy with an L1A1. Normally it would be banned because it had a detachable magazine, protruding pistol girl, a flash hider, and a bayonet lug. That’s four features, when the legal limit was three. So he just put a thumb hole stock to eliminate the pistol grip and boom, the gun and all the other ‘illegal’ features are now legal and the functionality of the gun hasn’t changed in the slightest. A thumb hole stock does not make people safer than a pistol grip. It was an aesthetic change. But that was good enough for the feds.

Laws need to be much MUCH tighter and constantly adapting.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

He was sick, yet still able to get a gun.

The Second Amendment: obscenely sick.

Define sick.

He was functioning and lucid enough to arm himself with enough weaponry and ammunition to engage the police several times and even come out on top once or twice. He also had the capacity to disguise himself as a cop “in tactical gear with a police logo and badge and carrying a rifle.” And, he was able to hit, successfully, several targets across two cities and about an hour.

Furthermore, although evidence suggests that people with poor mental health are more likely to commit acts of mass violence than those without, many mass shooters have no mental illnesses, and having one isn’t a predictor of mass shooters.   Evidence is mixed about other ‘stressors’ such as depression and anxiety.

They’re more likely to be driven by feelings of rage, resentment and vengeance. All of us have these kinds of feelings from time to time, but it doesn’t make us 'sick.'  And you can point to this guy’s extremist views, but given his targets it was more likely to have been motivated by "personal and business dealings" as stated in the article.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Easy access to guns is the problem.

I think a check of an applicant's social media accounts should be part of a background check, and that a background check should be required for every gun sale or transfer in the country. If it's a private sale, the seller and buyer should have to have a NICS check performed at a federally licensed firearms dealer.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

 killing five people and wounding two, targeted his victims based on previous personal and business dealings, authorities said.

A country that considers itself "developed, modern and civilized" should not admit the use of weapons by the civilian population. Period !!..

What was this guys sick problem?

The typical attitude that turns a blind eye to this great epidemic that is killing more than 40,000 people a year in the US.

Sick is the idolatry of firearms in the US..

Sick is the infamous and murderous second amendment..

Sick is the NRA and the Republican legislators who allow these massacres of innocents for their economic and political interest..

Sick are those who like to solve their problems by murdering people..

Sick is a country that has more weapons than people and considers itself brave and free, confusing freedom with debauchery.

Sick are those who do not care about these massacres and believe that saying "thougth and prayers" will solve everything..

Sick country..

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think a check of an applicant's social media accounts should be part of a background check, and that a background check should be required for every gun sale or transfer in the country. 

Big problem with that idea. Political thought and expression are protected by the 1st Amendment. Who is any entity at any level of government to say this person's politically protected speech is acceptable and therefore that person is eligible to exercise their 2nd Amendment right to own a firearm while the politically protected speech of someone else is judged to be somehow unacceptable and thus that person is no longer eligible to own a firearm, the 2nd Amendment notwithstanding? That is emphatically not someplace the US should go and I would be willing to bet a lot more than beers the US Supreme Court would shoot any such law down, and rightly so.

A better idea is to limit hand guns to 6 rounds maximum and limit rifles to bolt action with a maximum capacity of 6 rounds, and no replaceable magazines. You have to hand load all six rounds when they are expended. Same for shotguns. Limit ammo capacity and rate of fire.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Keep shooting, after all, that is fast turning into a national hobby.

As people having all kinds of mental disorders are on the rise, such tragedy is worsening for sure.

What is the cure..?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Laws need to be much MUCH tighter and constantly adapting.

Right. After New Zealand banned certain types of semi-automatic rifles, many people simply sold their old and worn but newly prohibited weapons at the buybacks then went straight to GunCity and got more modern ones.

For example, centrefire semi-autos were banned but rimfires were not.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

ReynardFox....

Nailed it!

The death toll is acceptable to the majority....

But let's not forget, these mass random shootings are rare. The biggest gun problem is young blacks killing other young blacks day in day out....

But that is usually "off topic" in the US and on more local media.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Still no gun control? How many people have to die before the government does something

This year, Colorado introduced about half a dozen new firearm laws. Colorado will create an office of gun violence prevention, allow cities to pass stricter gun laws than the state, people with certain violent misdemeanors will be banned from buying a firearm for five years, including child abuse convictions, domestic violence and sexual assault, safe storage laws and mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms. In addition to their existing state laws, and the federal baseline. And of course the laws against murder.

What else do you propose?

https://coloradosun.com/2021/04/19/new-gun-control-laws-colorado/

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

What was this guys sick problem?

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

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