world

Suspect caught in South Carolina church shooting rampage

107 Comments

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

© 2015 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

107 Comments
Login to comment

More gun mess in the US.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

Another massacre in America. Its not even in any of the headlines in most major news services and publications around the world. Whats wrong with black people there. When are they going to stand up for themselves and stop accepting this inhumane type of treatment by white supremacists and the authorities.

-25 ( +5 / -29 )

Wait for the inevitable NRA statement, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

19 ( +23 / -4 )

OK, I owned and used guns, various reasons bunting, military and go so called "protection". The protection part is a gamble can you get to your gun on time, etc.

Now with this massacre we have a few points why I can't blame the gun(besides a piece of machine is beyond blame/guilt).

He said for 1hr in the church, he killed 9 people(RIP) but the real victim is the one woman he left alive and asked her to tell all that happened.

Not the action of a rational being, he was stopped before on other offenses. Another thing is his family and background, NONE of my friends would give a Gun as a present especially to a 21yr old kid who appears to have problems.

Now I don't want to take guns away from Americans but I think it is time to rethink and adjust the 2nd Amendment (which can be done).

In closing he obviously wanted attention and he could have other more peaceful ways to get it. Lock him up and get him a good shrink and also check his family out.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

Another deranged killer easily obtains a gun.

Americans, and sadly their legislative representatives, have decided to live with this slaughter.

Many, especially NRA members, have made millions in the scare and sell reactions to these slaughters.

And there is nothing more to say. Nine beautiful people are dead and Americans still have their guns and many more will buy many more guns both legally and illegally and many more will die at the hands of both legal and illegal gun wielding Americans.

Enough is never enough and there are never enough tears.

12 ( +17 / -5 )

it seems that America is ever cursed by guns and racists. Tragedy would happen again and again.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Wait for the inevitable NRA statement, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

More like people who take anxiety drugs kill people. Once again, we find out that he was on some type of drug that altered his mood. He was arrested earlier this year, and the police found on him Suboxone, which is a habit-forming drug that has been connected with sudden outbursts of aggression.

So whomever pushed these drugs (big Pharma) drugs would be just as responsible according to your logic as the NRA. This guy had issues, and sadly he attacked people that had not done him wrong. This type of violence happens in the USA, but the rest of the world too (remember Charlie Hebdo).

I hope that calm remains in Charleson and that the baiters on both sides of the spectrum don't use this event to push some agenda, and that we don't forget that the lives of 9 people were lost in a church.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

In my country some Calibers and Models are illegal, like automatic ruflesy, etc.

But easy to get a Gun, do a Gun safety course than get your licence.Now we got a variety of licences hunting, home protection (gun can't leave the property), carry licence (bout 20% of applicants get it) but it is an open carry.

Back home all hidden or concealed weapons are illegal. Yes, we do have murders with guns, etc too.

Said that my country makes a lot of military weapons and vehicles, best known are Steyr like the AUG(diff names per country) and Block.

Works for us, hencevwhy I think the 2nd Amendment is outdated and its original intent is lost.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

There are Americans on YouTube claiming that they 'need guns to protect themselves from blacks who genetically more disposed to violence', so there seems to be guns + racism = more guns and more racism, spiral of doom thing going on. I see that there is an academic study demonstrating the link between gun ownership & opposition to gun control and racism. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0077552, summarized here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56HThf3mRpw.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Alphaape: "More like people who take anxiety drugs kill people. Once again, we find out that he was on some type of drug that altered his mood. He was arrested earlier this year, and the police found on him Suboxone, which is a habit-forming drug that has been connected with sudden outbursts of aggression."

So, if he had a bag of salt instead of guns, he could have done the same thing is what your saying? All you've said is fine, but you forget to address the fact that he had extremely easy access to guns, and that because of that, he could kill so many so easily. Sorry, bud, but you only help the anti-gun argument.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

The gun was given to him on his 21st birthday in April by his father.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

RIP, So the NRA is now going to provide miniguns to pastors and ministers to prevent this?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

RIP, So the NRA is now going to provide miniguns to pastors and ministers to prevent this?

I believe their suggestion for school shootings was that teachers carry guns to school, was it not? Recommending pastors, ministers and priests carry guns would be in line with that.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Other news media reported that he was a "withdrawn and troubled young man who showed signs of being fascinated by white supremacy."

So his father gave him a .45 for his birthday!

9 ( +9 / -0 )

I read all these threads on JT with gun issues blaming guns and the gun nutters are killing Americans. One observation I will introduce here. It's not the gun nuts in mass shooting massacres. It's almost always an unbalanced individual who obtains a firearm and uses it in all the wrong ways. Meanwhile the "gun nuts" are blamed. I am for increased background check but not a ban on firearms. The psychotic deviants will continue to commit acts of violence against their imaginary enemies. Numerous methods can be used for mass murder besides a gun.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Randomly shooting Christians who gathered in a church to pray. Sounds like the work of yet another liberal.

-22 ( +2 / -24 )

It's not the gun nuts in mass shooting massacres. It's almost always an unbalanced individual who obtains a firearm and uses it in all the wrong ways. Meanwhile the "gun nuts" are blamed.

And where do the nutters get the guns from? From the gun nuts. The same gun nuts who deserve the right to own and sell guns. Guns that are then used to shoot children in the face, people walking down the street, and no churchgoers praying at church.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Another massacre in America. Its not even in any of the headlines in most major news services and publications around the world.

What are you talking about? BBC is carrying it, CNN is carrying it, JapanToday is carrying it, SmithinJapan's favorite news source the CBC is carrying it.

More like people who take anxiety drugs kill people. Once again, we find out that he was on some type of drug that altered his mood. He was arrested earlier this year, and the police found on him Suboxone, which is a habit-forming drug that has been connected with sudden outbursts of aggression.

The more plausible explanation at the moment is that this was motivated by racism and not by the side effects of drugs. Usually sudden outbursts of aggression don't motivate you to travel so far and for so long in one direction to attack a very specific target.

Gun massacres are here to stay and that's just the path we've chosen. Families and kids will be shot, sometimes in large groups at once, because people really like their Constitutionally protected hobby. The end

I have no problem saying that or owning it, especially when considering that gun homicides and non-fatal assaults are on a downward trajectory.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

It is also the top headline in my country. I keep up with the news online.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Charleston shooter Dylann Storm Roof was reportedly taking a drug that has been linked with sudden outbursts of violence, fitting the pattern of innumerable other mass shooters who were on or had recently come off pharmaceutical drugs linked to aggression.

A website devoted to horror stories about the drug called SubSux.com also features a post by a woman whose husband obtained a gun and began violently beating his 15-year-old son after taking suboxone.

According to a Courier-Journal report, suboxone “is increasingly being abused, sold on the streets and inappropriately prescribed” by doctors. For some users, it is even more addictive than the drugs it’s supposed to help them quit.

As previously highlighted, virtually every major mass shooter was taking some form of SSRI or other pharmaceutical drug at the time of their attack, including Columbine killer Eric Harris, ‘Batman’ shooter James Holmes and Sandy Hook gunman Adam Lanza.

As the website SSRI Stories profusely documents, there are literally hundreds of examples of mass shootings, murders and other violent episodes that have been committed by individuals on psychiatric drugs over the past three decades.

Pharmaceutical giants who produce drugs like Zoloft, Prozac and Paxil spend around $2.4 billion dollars a year on direct-to-consumer television advertising every year. By running negative stories about prescription drugs, networks risk losing tens of millions of dollars in ad revenue, which is undoubtedly one of the primary reasons why the connection is habitually downplayed or ignored entirely.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

MarkG: I am for increased background check but not a ban on firearms

Not knowing you personally, Mark, but I sometimes have a hard time when I hear people say this. A vast majority of Americans say they want extended background checks, yet it has zero chance of passing. How the heck does that happen? Personally I feel that gun supporters say this as lip service and not much else.

Noliving: I have no problem saying that or owning it, especially when considering that gun homicides and non-fatal assaults are on a downward trajectory.

Well hats off to you. Most gun supporters I've seen here and elsewhere seem uncomfortable linking their hobby to children dying. I think there's a real disconnect there.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Good. Now prosecute him to the full extent of the law.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Sincere condolences to victim families and community.

How/when will our communities and establishment take the initiative to seize and address the root causes of radicalization, its manifestations, the determining mechanisms that drove 21-year-old Dylann Roof to commit such a heinous and despicable crime?..

The soul searching has got to be a whole broader than the 'Politics' of gun control, and constitutional amendment navel gazing.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Tragic. not sure the definition of this as a hate crime makes it any worse, does it? Folks die anyway. seems to me that anyone who willingly takes the life of someone else is motivated by hate, no?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Harry_GattoJUN. 19, 2015 - 09:30AM JST Other news media reported that he was a "withdrawn and troubled young man who showed signs of being fascinated by white supremacy."

So his father gave him a .45 for his birthday!

He's father had to have seen the warning signs before giving his son a gun. World's greatest dad, that one.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Harry_GattoJUN. 19, 2015 - 09:30AM JST Other news media reported that he was a "withdrawn and troubled young man who showed signs of being fascinated by white supremacy."

So his father gave him a .45 for his birthday!

He's father had to have seen the warning signs before giving his son a gun. World's greatest dad, that one.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Just noticed a typo in my previous post, typing one handed while getting a drip might to that.

Steyr AUG (love that rifle) and Block should be Glock(of course).

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Glad they caught him. Reminds me of another Timothy McVeigh.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The right to bear arms - correct me if I am wrong - includes the necessity of local militias as a defense against overbearing government. Yet, despite the clearly overbearing government prying into everyone's business the targets of deranged shooters often seem to be normal people going about their lives. I just don't get it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

After the murders at Columbine and other schools, many schools have now implemented security measures at their entrances similar to what you see at airports. Are churches next? It's truly a shame when it seems like no place is sacred anymore.

I do believe America is a better (not perfect, but better) country today than it has ever been before in terms of equality. However, sad to say, there are nutty streaks which still bubble up from time to time and stain the American cultural landscape.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I feel the same way.

When the 2nd Amendment was added to the Constitution army and civilians were pretty much on an equal footage weapon wise.

Now civilians stand very little chance against the US Armed Forces if the Government decides to use them. US Forces are better equipped (tanks, fighter planes, etc) and way better trained.

This is reason why i think the 2nd Amendment needs to be modernised, no more need for an armed Militia. Civil War between and a populace ends bad, plenty of examples worldwide.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Now civilians stand very little chance against the US Armed Forces if the Government decides to use them. US Forces are better equipped (tanks, fighter planes, etc) and way better trained.

You'd be surprised how many law abiding, gun owning citizens there are. Most have had the training. Many are prior US Armed Forces, former federal / state employees, even active or retired LE.

If guns stayed in "these" hands, then there wouldn't be any headlines.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Just noticed a typo in my previous post, typing one handed while getting a drip might to that.

They really do need an edit function on this, Mod's when are you going to add an edit function to this?

Now civilians stand very little chance against the US Armed Forces if the Government decides to use them. US Forces are better equipped (tanks, fighter planes, etc) and way better trained.

Not as true of a statement as you would think, look at Iraq and Afghanistan. The truth of the matter is that if US soldiers engage the enemy without artillery or air support they are surprisingly on equal footing with those that just only carry a rifle or a shotgun and some homemade explosives.

What the civilian population lacks in sophisticated weapon systems they would more then make up for in numbers. The USA is to large of a landmass and the US military is to small and spread out for the landmass and population size to be able to contain a civilian uprising. The distance for example from Paris to Moscow is basically the same distance from LA to St. Louis and if you go the y axis the distance from Dallas to Fargo is around 1,000 miles. Just do the square mileage and then realize there is around ~100 million people living in that area alone.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

American society is suffering a terrible moral crisis. I can only see it getting worse with the radical change in mores and values that have occurred in recent years. The culture is broken. America is a house divided. It seems that America is plowing headlong into a morass of moral decay, victimhood, and reprisals. It's so sad to see. America had a chance to unite together after the Civil Rights movement succeeded so spectacularly in the 1960's. Unfortunately, Americans are constantly drawing lines to separate themselves from one another by race, ethnicity, sex, religion, and in any other way they can use for their advantage.

Most gun supporters I've seen here and elsewhere seem uncomfortable linking their hobby to children dying. I think there's a real disconnect there.

A lot of things kill children (and adults) but these things are just the means to the tragic ends. Cars, trans fats, the disintegration of the family and all of the terrible side effects that result are terrible killers as well. One could just as easily point out that the Democrat party's abortion fetish can be linked to many times more children dying. And we all know that ol' Kermit Gosnell was doing his upmost to keep it safe and rare don't we? Besides, in America the right to own a gun is not a hobby it is a Constitutional right. So the Left can just go ahead and add to it's list of rights it hopes to repeal along with their crusade to repeal freedom of speech and religion.

Anyway, I hope SC isn't squimish about using the death penalty.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

It's not the gun nuts in mass shooting massacres

Priceless!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Gun, knife, sword, fire, poison.... can be used as weapon to kill people. The core of the matter is the heart and mind of killer, not just about gun culture. Anyone who exploits this madness for political or personal gain is having a mental case as the killer himself.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

'Numerous methods can be used for mass murder besides a gun.'

Oh, for crying out loud can people drop this silly line of argument. A gun is an extremely efficient device for carrying out mass murder. This man's weapon of choice wasn't a pool cue for good reason. Guns are designed to kill people efficiently while minimizing injury to the user. The gun nuts are forever telling us the issue is not guns but mental health, drug or social or racial divisions. Hasn't it ever crossed their minds that a society with all of these problems shouldn't be knee-deep in firearms or shouldn't be encouraging an arms race among citizens?

6 ( +8 / -2 )

A firearm is and always will be an offensive weapon, nothing defensive about it.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

With an estimate upwards of 350 million non-military firearms in private ownership in the US, in all honesty, and with a heavy heart for the victims of this senseless slaughter, what practical method of gun control would have any realistic effect?......

Only the American people will ultimately take the first tentative steps towards comprehensive universal background screening. US public will certainly not respond to what it considers outside inference questioning doctrine to United States Constitution individual rights.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Anyone who exploits this madness for political or personal gain is having a mental case as the killer himself.

Agreed: NRA, arms makers and retailers - all looney tunes.

Democrat party's abortion fetish... I hope SC isn't squimish about using the death penalty

Pro Life, and Pro Death Penalty? Make your mind up, man!

2 ( +4 / -2 )

It's not the gun nuts in mass shooting massacres. It's almost always an unbalanced individual who obtains a firearm

gun nut = unbalanced individual who obtains a firearm.

If you're balanced, you don't feel the need to obtain a firearm. If you're balanced and you feel your present environment requires you to arm yourself with a lethal weapon for the purposes of self-defence, you move to a different environment where there aren't so many gun nuts making you feel uncomfortable and unsafe.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

It`s hard to believe there are people out there capable of such evil.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

If guns stayed in "these" hands, then there wouldn't be any headlines.

As my granny used to say: "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride".

The fact is the guns don't and won't stay in "those" hands. That's pretty clear. As long as guns are legal, people who shouldn't have them will get them, and nothing will change that.

The blood of these 9 people is on the hands of everyone who supports the right to own guns. It's your support of that right that has directly led to their deaths.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Noliving: Not as true of a statement as you would think, look at Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ah, you've found your distraction. :) Congrats.

Wolfpack: A lot of things kill children (and adults) but these things are just the means to the tragic ends. Cars, trans fats,

At some point, probably in the near future, this argument is going to fall by the wayside, just as the "protection from the US government" argument has. It's just too silly for adults to continue to say with a straight face. And, honestly, if you believe it, then sell your guns and buy....anything else, since apparently any one item is just as good as another.

Wc: You'd be surprised how many law abiding, gun owning citizens there are.

I'm not surprised at all. I know a lot of them. But if I tell you that I'm a responsible cocaine user, then would you agree to make cocaine legal for everyone?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

If you're balanced, you don't feel the need to obtain a firearm.

Even if you're balanced, what is wrong with having and owning a firearm. I think it's rather insulting to label perfectly sane people as unbalanced if they choose to own a firearm. I get it, you hate them, I love them and I am a law-abiding citizen. I have NEVER threatened anyone, my kids are also very responsible when using a firearm, we often go hunting, I don't see what the problem is. If you want to ban guns, how about blaming the nuts or the people that knew some of these nuts have the possibility to go out and cause some major damage or have the propensity to kill someone. Please try not to lump us all in one monolithic group.

If you're balanced and you feel your present environment requires you to arm yourself with a lethal weapon for the purposes of self-defence, you move to a different environment where there aren't so many gun nuts making you feel uncomfortable and unsafe.

I feel safe in Japan and yet, I still would love to own a firearm in this country.

If you're balanced and you feel your present environment requires you to arm yourself with a lethal weapon for the purposes of self-defence, you move to a different environment where there aren't so many gun nuts making you feel uncomfortable and unsafe.

No, I just like shooting, target practice and hunting.

The blood of these 9 people is on the hands of everyone who supports the right to own guns. It's your support of that right that has directly led to their deaths.

Say what you want, but I bear NO responsibility for what this moonbat did! He did it, NO one told him to do what he set out to do, the 9 people he murdered, that's on his soul. Trust me, I sleep very well at night.

-8 ( +5 / -13 )

If you're balanced, you don't feel the need to obtain a firearm.

If you don't want to have a gun I can respect that. Funny thing though, a couple of years ago in my home town in the south there were a series of break-ins occuring in churches in the area, even one where the perps shot up a church on a Sunday. Most of the churches in some areas do have security guards or members who act as security and some of them are armed. Sad to say that the cases in my hometown were Black on Black crime cases and the perps were caught.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Sad to say that the cases in my hometown were Black on Black crime cases and the perps were caught.

This sort of draws the problem right here. When it's "black on black crime", it's someone else's problem, someone else's fault/problem.

Why not think of it as an "American on American" crime, and take some responsibility for it happening in your community under the rules of your community. As long as you think it's someone else's fault/problem, there is no drive to solve the problem.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The American preoccupation with the Second Ammendment and 'the right to bear arms' now borders on the ridiculous. Somebody ought to explain to America that the Second Ammendment was written at a time that applied to how things were then. It's a bit like telling men that everyone should be still shaving with a cutthroat razor. Anyway the biggest problem are the ignorant rednecks that run the National Rifle Association. Of course they make a dollar from every gun sold and that is the main motivation. The blood that they have on their hands is far more than the Mafia and the Marines combined.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

This sort of draws the problem right here. When it's "black on black crime", it's someone else's problem, someone else's fault/problem.

True, how can you say such a thing, so now Whites all have to bow their heads in shame and feel guilty for what their ancestors during slavery did 160 years ago?? No one should feel guilty about it. We can't change the past and people shouldn't hang onto something a relative did eons ago.

Why not think of it as an "American on American" crime, and take some responsibility for it happening in your community under the rules of your community.

It's an American crime perpetrated by Black on Black crime.

As long as you think it's someone else's fault/problem, there is no drive to solve the problem.

Everyone NEEDS to take responsibility and be held accountable for their own actions.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

If their were two Black Panthers with semi automatic rifles standing guard outside that church this would never happened. Guns and racial hatred will always be apart of the South. It was founded on these two things.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Guns are made for the sole purpose of harming people, and they happen to be really good at it. If you can't see that obvious difference, there's really no arguing with you.

If you want to ban guns, how about blaming the nuts or the people that knew some of these nuts have the possibility to go out and cause some major damage or have the propensity to kill someone.

We can blame them all we want, but what good would that do? Do you have any suggestions for dealing with mental illness? That's a much harder nut to crack... no pun intended.

No, I just like shooting, target practice and hunting.

Is a hobby worth the occasional mass shooting?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

A gun is an extremely efficient device for carrying out mass murder.

Not really. Firearms require marksmanship and realistic practice (practice reduces stress, stress reduces accuracy and reloading speed). Their utility is very much dependent on the proficiency of the operator.

High explosives are FAR more efficient....which is why the worst mass casualty events in US history are due to explosives. Perhaps you've never heard of the Bath School disaster of 1927? Not to mention the Oklahoma City bombing...

But if I tell you that I'm a responsible cocaine user, then would you agree to make cocaine legal for everyone?

Yes. I'd also put the most insane tax rates on cocaine (and other drugs), partly to pay for addiction treatment.

If you're balanced and you feel your present environment requires you to arm yourself with a lethal weapon for the >purposes of self-defence, you move to a different environment where there aren't so many gun nuts making you feel >uncomfortable and unsafe.

And what do you do when you run out of save havens to flee to? Probably beg someone armed with lethal weapons for protection.....essentially offloading your responsibility to defend yourself onto someone else (who is probably a "gun nut" in his off-duty time).

I've stayed in Japan partly for safety reasons....safety from abuse by law enforcement. I'm an ethnic minority, the US government's domestic enforcers are the most dangerous "gun nuts" I'm likely to encounter.

But I'm also totally comfortable arming myself, and defending my friends and family if necessary. I owned 3 rifles in Florida, and started the paperwork for a concealed carry permit just before I came to Japan. Firearms ownership, wide roads, and cheap V8 engines are the only things I miss about America.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

"You have a room full of knives and swords eventually someone's going to get cut." - Yoda and Confucious

1 ( +2 / -1 )

'No, I just like shooting, target practice and hunting.'

You love guns. You posted that and I admired your honesty. The issue of US gun culture is a complex one but wouldn't you at least admit that people's love for these things doesn't help in a lucid debate? These are things designed to kill and love of them should be regarded as unhealthy ( I have my own vices and I'm certainly not claiming to be holier than thou - being a too fond of the booze is one ). I lived in the States and can remember watching a documentary about guns with a gravelly voiced narrator describing the intricacies and power of these things in an almost erotic manner. It was perverse. Reading a gun magazine was far worse than any poster of the Marlboro Man.

The debates about the second amendment are serious and worth having but I can't help but think many are approaching them like a loving parent defending a problem child to a schoolteacher.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I want to take moment to bring this up. In the past few years, a white male has shot up elementary schools, movie theaters,airports and churches. Do we as a society blink twice when a white male walks by a school? Do we cast wary glances as he looks for a seat in a movie theater? Do we watch him closely as he stands at airport security wondering if and when he will pull out a gun and go postal? Will every black church congregation now freak out whenever he enters the building? Probably not. And you know why? Because logic tells us that fanatics don't represent the whole. Unfortunately this logic is being twisted and used to support one of the oldest hypocrisies in our in our nation. So instead of raging out on all white people, let's rage at the PEOPLE who feign ignorance to the screwed up social narrative our country was founded on and insist that this tragedy is more shocking than what it was. Because the unfortunate truth is, for those of us that are part of the black community, this is another screwed up chapter in our nation's history.

And that's my OPINION. So agree or disagree with it. Last time I checked, that was still a constitutional right or something like that.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"The right to bear arms - correct me if I am wrong - includes the necessity of local militias as a defense against overbearing government. Yet, despite the clearly overbearing government prying into everyone's business the targets of deranged shooters often seem to be normal people going about their lives. I just don't get it."

Moonraker, the Second Ammendment which you refer to is a right that was written for a time that necessitated such action but clearly lacks any legitimacy in the 21st century. I hope you're not suggesting these deranged shooters,who seem to pop up with increasing regularity, should shift their focus to the government?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

bass4funk: "but I bear NO responsibility for what this moonbat did!"

You absolutely do if you support and have voted in favor of the right to bear arms.

"It's an American crime perpetrated by Black on Black crime."

What?? The guy who did this was white. Are you saying you blame BLACK people for this??

Noliving: "SmithinJapan's favorite news source the CBC is carrying it."

Ummm... is this a cheap attempt at an insult? The CBC isn't my favorite news source, nor do I ever watch it at all. Ah, because I'm Canadian, right? way to undermine all your comments, bud!

Wolfpack: "A lot of things kill children (and adults) but these things are just the means to the tragic ends. Cars, trans fats, the disintegration of the family and all of the terrible side effects that result are terrible killers as well."

Let's flip this argument on its head for a moment so you can realize how lame an argument it is in support of guns. If you HONESTLY believe that guns are not a problem, that because of guns people who commit massacres could not do so because of the guns but because they wanted to (and could have done it with anything), and that other tools are just as responsible and efficient at killing others, why not outlaw guns and have people buy a car to 'defend themselves'? If trans fats are just as good for killing people, why not stock up on those in case of home invasion -- why the need for a gun with all of these tools at your disposal, Wolf? If guns don't make it easier to stop someone dead, from a distance and with minimal risk, than cars, knives, trans fats, and kazoos, what's the gun for?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Not really. Firearms require marksmanship and realistic practice (practice reduces stress, stress reduces accuracy and reloading speed). Their utility is very much dependent on the proficiency of the operator.

Most of the shooters we've had in the past weren't especially trained. Some of them were kids.

High explosives are FAR more efficient...

They're also far less available and require more of that knowledge and training you mentioned, resulting in incidents involving them being a lot less common.

Yes. I'd also put the most insane tax rates on cocaine (and other drugs), partly to pay for addiction treatment.

I agree with this.

I'm an ethnic minority, the US government's domestic enforcers are the most dangerous "gun nuts" I'm likely to encounter.

I can agree with this too, but don't you think that the availability of guns only makes this problem worse? If anyone is potentially armed, the cops will be more likely to shoot first and ask questions later. I'm not excusing it any way, but I'm sure it's a factor.

It really comes down to what can actually be done about the problem. The mental health of these gunmen is a far less controllable issue than a comprehensive ban on guns, which has been proven to work in reducing mass murders in countries like Japan and Australia.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

so now Whites all have to bow their heads in shame and feel guilty for what their ancestors during slavery did 160 years ago??

I'm not sure where you got that from. I was talking about being members of the same community. It has nothing to do with slavery.

It's an American crime perpetrated by Black on Black crime.

As I said, that type of thinking makes it 'their fault/problem'.

Everyone NEEDS to take responsibility and be held accountable for their own actions.

I agree. Anyone who shoots someone bears full responsibility for that. But that doesn't remove the existence of societal issues that lead to the shooting. And as members of society, people should be looking to fix these societal issues. Saying 'oh, it's just blacks shooting each other' doesn't help anyone or anything, anywhere. It certainly doesn't stop anyone from getting shot. It also doesn't do anything to address the systematic and societal issues that make it easier for someone to shoot someone else.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Was just reading about how since it was a white person who committed all the killings Faux News is bending over backwards to try and figure out a way to spin it and say it was "not racially motivated" -- despite the shooter shouting, you know, "I'm here to shoot blacks" and "You rape our women!", etc. I can actually just imagine O'Reilly suggesting this is the fault of black people being uneducated and is 'not a racial issue'! Classic!!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Racist terrorist given a gun as a birthday present. Only in the US.

The fact is, despite all the grief and horror that follows these depressingly regular gun massacres, the US does not want to do anything about it. They choose to keep the status quo, be it the institutionalised racism that fuels these white supremacists or the obsession over guns. Very few want change, those who do are frightened to stick their necks out for fear of being accused of being 'UnAmerican'.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Racist terrorist given a gun as a birthday present.

How could he be a terrorist? He was white. In America, terrorists are other colors.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Guns & Gun Violence are part of US culture sadly & the carnage will continue un-abated likely, scary stuff!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Most of the shooters we've had in the past weren't especially trained. Some of them were kids. [High explosives] also far less available and require more of that knowledge and training you mentioned, resulting >in incidents involving them being a lot less common.

Which is why the body counts from shootings have been so low. If you replaced any of the shooters with a Marine infantryman, for example, there'd be 2-3x as many casualties, easily. But Timothy McVeigh, on the other hand, wasn't exactly an expert bomb-maker and still managed to kill 168 people with just one truck full of fertilizer.

It really comes down to what can actually be done about the problem. The mental health of these gunmen is a far less controllable issue than a comprehensive ban on guns

With 350 million private firearms in the US, a ban is pretty much impossible to implement anyway. I think I read once that US citizens own something like HALF of all the small arms on the entire planet. But we don't account for half of the world's gun-related deaths, so clearly the relationship between "# guns" and "# deaths", while positive, is non-linear.

But the mental health of an infinitesimally small portion of the population is absolutely easier to adjust. The problem there is as mentioned: the big pharmaceutical companies that sell the psychotropic drugs that turn these guys crazy are major financial backers of the media networks.....so no public awareness about their negative impacts ever comes to light.

The problems we are seeing today are entirely cultural. Back in the 1920's you could buy fully automatic Thompson submachine-guns in mail-order catalogs. This was before the implementation of strict Federal Firearms Licenses. Were schools or churches being shot up on the regular? No. The only criminal use of automatic weapons was by professional gangsters. What are the issues in our society that are driving so many people to acts of wanton violence?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

what do you do when you run out of save havens to flee to? Probably beg someone armed with lethal weapons for protection

Safe haven?? What are you talking about? The civilised world is not a 'safe haven', it's just the place where normal non-gun-nut folk live and go about their business.

I have never once in all my years in this earth (and they are not few) felt the need to 'beg someone armed with lethal weapons for protection'.

The mind boggles at the very thought of the kind of world you seem to think you live in. Paranoiaville on steroids.

I'm also totally comfortable arming myself

That's not the point. The rest of us are not at all comfortable having paranoid gun-nuts walking around among us carrying lethal weapons - like a man with a hammer looking for and finding nails everywhere. And when it comes to the mentally unstable, like this boy seems to be, or the criminally insane, there is simply no case to be made for the ownership of guns by 'law-abiding citizens'. They're all law-abiding till the first time they pull the trigger.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Allegedly 21-year-old Dylann Roof atrocities were permutated at a weekly Bible study group.

Roof spent an hour studying the characteristics, physical appearance, he must have reasoned his action, a behavioral intention to commit a unspeakable act to a minority ethnic group.

What restraint either mentally or physically allows a 21 year old attitudinal influence to terminate the lives of a bible study group. It is truly an act of extreme callousness, what drove this boy, yes a boy, my Brother is 24, what separated Roof from his humanity. He had an hour to think through his murderous actions and intentions.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Which is why the body counts from shootings have been so low.

A body count of one is too high in my opinion. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.

With 350 million private firearms in the US, a ban is pretty much impossible to implement anyway.

I agree it'll be tough, but the chances are zero if you don't even try.

The problem there is as mentioned: the big pharmaceutical companies that sell the psychotropic drugs that turn these guys crazy

There's a lot of problems with pharmaceutical companies, but pinning the shootings on them is a bit of a stretch. We had mentally ill people way before psychotropic drugs came around. And it's not like America is the only country where such drugs are used.

Back in the 1920's you could buy fully automatic Thompson submachine-guns in mail-order catalogs. This was before the implementation of strict Federal Firearms Licenses. Were schools or churches being shot up on the regular?

They may have been legally within reach, but financially? I doubt it. I bet it cost Al Capone amounts of money to get your hands on one.

What are the issues in our society that are driving so many people to acts of wanton violence?

The main thing that separates America from other countries is the easy access to guns. Other countries have violent histories, other countries have mentally ill, other countries have social problems, and so on. It amazes me how gun advocates search endlessly for other explanations when the most obvious reason is staring them right in the face.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The police did a fantastic job in the investigation, apprehension and capture of this psychotic racist.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

'What are the issues in our society that are driving so many people to acts of wanton violence?'

Until that is worked out, wouldn't you agree that having a country awash with easily obtained firearms may not be the best idea? I have a lot of affection for the U.S. and I'd love the chance to go back there to work ( not Texas again ) but it isn't a country that struck me as best suited to extraordinarily lax firearms laws in the same way as my home country of the UK isn't suited to nomihodais.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Once again. The U.S. needs gun control. It needs to be as tight as it is in Japan. The NRA and similar gun nut organizations should be held accountable for mass murders like this. Their campaigns against rational gun control have helped put guns in the hands of pond scum like the racist perpetrator of this latest outrage.

My heart goes out to the victims and their families.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

You can all vote me down but believe until heaven and hell collide I believe the black people in America are owed. Apologies, compensations, all of that especially in the South. Justice must be done.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Totally agree. Black people are owed big time. I am all for reparations.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

@cleo

Safe haven?? What are you talking about? The civilised world is not a 'safe haven', it's just the place where normal non-gun-nut folk live and go about their business

Safe Haven. Noun. A place of safety or refuge. You specifically mentioned moving to "a different environment" that makes you feel safe. And can you be specific about what places you consider the "civilized world". I'm sure pretty much all of them have, in living memory, either a) been host to overwhelming quantities of violence (all of continental Europe) or b) been secured from such violence by large numbers of gun-toting men willing, but not required, to commit violence.

I have never once in all my years in this earth (and they are not few) felt the need to 'beg someone armed with lethal >weapons for protection'.

You've never called a police officer, or been the victim of a violent crime? Consider yourself fortunate.

The mind boggles at the very thought of the kind of world you seem to think you live in. Paranoiaville on steroids.

While riding the train with one of my girls in Tokyo, she noticed my comments about other passengers ("That guy is obviously Japanese military" "that man there looks like a MMA fighter"). She said "You are always thinking about danger". It's called Mental Condition Yellow. At which point I had to explain Cooper's Color Codes to her.

http://www.policeone.com/police-trainers/articles/2188253-Coopers-colors-A-simple-system-for-situational-awareness/

That's not the point. The rest of us are not at all comfortable having paranoid gun-nuts walking around among us >carrying lethal weapons

Do you cower in terror when you walk past a martial artist? If not, why? Probably because you recognize that a normal well-adjusted human being is no threat despite his possession of the knowledge and tools (his hands and feet) necessary to murder you on the spot. Adding a hunk of steel and plastic to his hip doesn't change that equation. Unless you have irrational fear of inanimate objects.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

I love watching the pro-gun set try and defend guns post massacre.

Delusion, wrapped in paranoia, cloaked in the illogical.

No guns = no gun massacres.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The police did a fantastic job in the investigation, apprehension and capture of this psychotic racist.

MarkG FYI

a lady pulled up to a stop light next to him 250 miles away, recognized him, and called the police.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

'Do you cower in terror when you walk past a martial artist? If not, why? Probably because you recognize that a normal well-adjusted human being is no threat despite his possession of the knowledge and tools (his hands and feet) necessary to murder you on the spot. Adding a hunk of steel and plastic to his hip doesn't change that equation. Unless you have irrational fear of inanimate objects.'

Inanimate objects? Are you saying it is irrational to be more afraid of a person carrying a gun than a person carrying a bunch of flowers? Would you rather be in a church when a psycho enters wearing a Bruce Lee pyjamas or when one enters carrying a firearm with spare ammunition? Do you know that those fight scenes you saw on Enter the Dragon where Bruce Lee either kills or knocks out scores of henchmen were staged? It's more efficient to use a gun to kill 9 people than flying kicks. This man knew that. That's why mass murderers are generally not found flying through air making high pitched screams.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Jon Stewart says it all: http://youtu.be/YtNGQ2avSl0

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Good Bad FizzBitJUN. 19, 2015 - 09:45PM JST The police did a fantastic job in the investigation, apprehension and capture of this psychotic racist.

MarkG FYI

a lady pulled up to a stop light next to him 250 miles away, recognized him, and called the police

.

As I said, the police did a fantastic job in the investigation, apprehension and capture. Yes, they leak info out for public help, it worked! Within a couple hours. She would not have recognized the details the police released otherwise.

Good Bad StrangerlandJUN. 19, 2015 - 10:41PM JST Jon Stewart says it all:

This in not even the remotest way related to the jihadist threats. This was terrorism, it was a lone act as we know thus far. Regarding the confederate generals glorified......it's a bit deeper than that. They were family and leaders of the south. Would I have done that? No. I also was baffled why the confederate flag carried so much respect decades ago, not this week, decades ago.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Inanimate objects? Are you saying it is irrational to be more afraid of a person carrying a gun than a person carrying a >bunch of flowers?

Yes. It's the man that matters, not his tools. Some states have "open carry" laws (I think Texas does). If two white men walked into a white church in Texas, one with flowers and the other with a pistol in a drop-leg holster....neither is cause for alarm. But if a Middle-Eastern looking guy with a long beard and a crazed look in his eyes walks into a white church carrying flowers.....me might be a suicide bomber, and not just someone making a flower delivery.

Would you rather be in a church when a psycho enters wearing a Bruce Lee pyjamas or when one enters carrying a >firearm with spare ammunition?

Unlike you, I wouldn't automatically assume that a man with a firearm is a psycho. I wouldn't even necessarily assume that a WHITE man walking into a predominantly-BLACK church is a threat. But a guy walking into a church in Bruce Lee pajamas? Yeah, that's out of place......so he's probably unhinged.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

AMERICA IS SICK decaying within!

In america if the shooter is an Arab he would be a terrorist, If he's black he would be a thug or gang banger s If white its called mental illness which caused him to do the crime. There’s so much research and studies on how “gang culture” is the source of violence in minority communities, but there’s no research on white manhood and violence (which has been a problem for over 500 years).  

White and the media call it a mental illness I guess the VERY SHORT LIST of guys below had a "mental illness"

Tim Mc Veigh bombed the federal building Andrew Engeldinger fired from job and decided to shoot up the place Michael Page Sikh shot kids and adults at a temple Adam Lanza shot up a elementary school James Holmes shot 71 people 12 died

Is there something about the white, male, middle-class experience that makes it easier for sick young men to turn schools, movie theaters and now churches into graveyards? America was founded on the murder of Indians and enslavement of Africans. They considered their conquest of the America’s a victory, and see no reason to stop the violence. I remember news reports saying how smart Holmes (the theater shooter) was, and how privileged he was. Just because someone is smart does not mean they are moral. Intelligence and morality are not inclusive of each other. Americans need to get that through their heads. I remember reading in Laughlin Arizona the shooter who shot and killed seven people, and almost killed a Congresswoman, and nothing changed. Yet, in the African American Community the Police want to be able to, Stop & Frisk young men at will. What is wrong with this picture? Even when white kids kill their own parents it is overlooked and swept under the rug. White males who belong to the NRA who run this country the Politicians are afraid of them. Look for this to happen again as another White Male try to beat Holmes record. I don't mean to sound racist here and for those of you who want to know I consider myself of the human race and a researcher. For those of you who have been to america and spent some time visiting and living there Ask yourself “What Hispanic, Asian or African American even comes close to the Murder and Mayhem of White males. I ask this question because americans seem to put race as a representation of self or a class of minority if you are non-white? Since whites arrived in america and started murdering Indians, they have not let up on violence as a solution.” Instead the white media portrays violence at its worse in poor neighborhoods, where minorities live being hispanic, black and even though their are poor whites rarely do the media show white america in such light.

Well, the fact is that whites commit significantly less violence in proportion to, say, African Americans and other minority classes. Which makes this rant ring a little hollow, don’t you think? I personally feel that arguing about which race is “worse” is childish and counterproductive, but if AMERICANS especially WHITE AMERICANS want to open that can of worms then they should be ready to discuss ALL the facts.

“The biggest problem here in america and no one in mainstream media wants to talk about is that violence on a massive scale is part of American culture and specifically white culture…but no one wants to look inwards or look at white history in this light.” It's TOTAL DENIAL"

Says who? And based on what? The ability of multiculturalists to make vague/immeasurable assertions based on ambiguous sentiment never ceases to amaze. Violence on a massive scale is part of American culture and specifically white culture? Connect the dots here for me. THE TRUTH HURTS!! AMERICA IS SICK!!! And he people are in denial!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

can you be specific about what places you consider the "civilized world".

How about places where folk don't need to be in an edgy 'mental condition yellow' all the time? Places where you can be pretty sure you are not surrounded by potential nutters packing heat and ready to blow for no discernible reason. Basically, most of the developed world that isn't gun-crazy America.

You've never called a police officer, or been the victim of a violent crime?

No, never. If you think being the subject of violent crime is the norm, you might find this comparison enlightening - http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Japan/United-States/Crime

If two white men walked into a white church in Texas, one with flowers and the other with a pistol in a drop-leg holster....neither is cause for alarm. But if a Middle-Eastern looking guy with a long beard and a crazed look in his eyes walks into a white church carrying flowers.....me might be a suicide bomber, and not just someone making a flower delivery.

I cannot believe the wanton blindness we are seeing here. Roof is not in the least Middle-Eastern looking, does not have a long beard, and from his photos he seems to have more of the typical sullen teen look, rather than a crazed look. Maybe we should just take it as proof that your 'situational awareness' skills aren't as honed as you think they are.

She said "You are always thinking about danger"

= She thinks you're paranoid. She's probably right.

Do you cower in terror when you walk past a martial artist? If not, why?

No, I don't. Because I don't live in a place where martial artists commit mass killings on a regular basis.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I'm a proponent of stricter gun control, but it's hard to see how it would have made any difference in this case; the shooter used a .45 cal 1911, which is a pretty standard semi-auto handgun; he could have done the same with virtually any other pistol. He was given the gun by his father, so background checks or gun permit requirements would not have helped. (I'm now hearing alternate reports saying that the shooter bought the gun, in which case it would seem that a background check either wasn't done or failed to do what it was supposed to...)

I think we have to accept that, as long as people have access to firearms, this sort of thing is inevitable.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You anti gun people ..........

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Steve CrichtonJUN. 19, 2015 - 07:35PM JST You can all vote me down but believe until heaven and hell collide I believe the black people in America are owed. Apologies, compensations, all of that especially in the South. Justice must be done.

KabukiloverJUN. 19, 2015 - 08:47PM JST Totally agree. Black people are owed big time. I am all for reparations.

Apologies from who? And to who? The time of black slaves is gone 150 years ago. How far back should apologies go? To the Egyptian Pharos time period? Should the blacks who enslaved also apologize and pay the defendants compensation?

It's time to move on. Dwelling on history does nothing but irritate those who do.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

In america if the shooter is an Arab he would be a terrorist

We have hundreds if not thousands of examples of Muslim terrorists going into places of worship and killing multiple people. People aren't going to be so quick to attach the same label to every incident where shots are fired at a church by anyone.

Triumvere: He was given the gun by his father

Just curious, but how does that work? Can I go to a gun shop, pass a background check, buy a gun, then gift it to anyone?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Detectives and FBI agents headed to Shelby, a four-hour dive away in North Carolina—where Roof was apprehended during a traffic stop—to interview the suspect and gather evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130827/Heroine-florist-spotted-suspected-gunman-Dylann-Roof-way-work-chased-35-miles-police-caught-him.html

-A hairdresser followed his car for 35 miles until local police could intervene.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Pro Life, and Pro Death Penalty? Make your mind up, man!

I have. Death for killers like Roof and life for innocent babies once they have a heart-beat and brain activity.

What I don't understand is how someone can be for the dismemberment and death of an innocent viable baby and life for a horrible killer like Roof. What kind of twisted thought process makes this seem reasonable to someone?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Back on topic please.

You absolutely do if you support and have voted in favor of the right to bear arms.

Sorry, I do not. I never told that idiot to shoot anyone, please don't convolute the issue.

"It's an American crime perpetrated by Black on Black crime."

What?? The guy who did this was white. Are you saying you blame BLACK people for this??

No, I am saying that most Black homicides are committed By Blacks and the Black homicide rate is off the charts. They are killing their own people more than any other ethnic group.

Let's flip this argument on its head for a moment so you can realize how lame an argument it is in support of guns. If you HONESTLY believe that guns are not a problem, that because of guns people who commit massacres could not do so because of the guns but because they wanted to (and could have done it with anything), and that other tools are just as responsible and efficient at killing others, why not outlaw guns and have people buy a car to 'defend themselves'?

Now we have to use the Oranges and Apples analogy again? Yaaawn.....

If trans fats are just as good for killing people, why not stock up on those in case of home invasion -- why the need for a gun with all of these tools at your disposal, Wolf? If guns don't make it easier to stop someone dead, from a distance and with minimal risk, than cars, knives, trans fats, and kazoos, what's the gun for?

Anyway, I'll keep my guns, Thank you very much. By the way, I'll be in the states next week on business for a few weeks and me and my kids are going deer hunting!!! Can't wait!

Was just reading about how since it was a white person who committed all the killings Faux News is bending over backwards to try and figure out a way to spin it and say it was "not racially motivated"

They weren't trying to spin it, at first when the reports came it, it just seemed that it was a crazed loon that shoot some innocent people and it didn't look AT FIRST that there was a racial component, later they realized, this is what happens when information comes in and you muddle through all the confusion and can sort and decipher through all of it, then you get your facts sorted out and then it was without a doubt a stupid loon that was indeed a racist and made it a racial issue.

-- despite the shooter shouting, you know, "I'm here to shoot blacks" and "You rape our women!", etc. I can actually just imagine O'Reilly suggesting this is the fault of black people being uneducated and is 'not a racial issue'! Classic!!

What O'Reilly said, was the conversation about the out of control Black on Black crime an entirely different topic. Which by the way needs to be addressed and NO one wants to touch it with a 10ft. pole.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

According to the CDC...

Perhaps you could provide a link. The data on the CDC site Google led me to does not reflect your claims. For example you claim 38~39,000 deaths from drug overdose, yet the list I saw does not include drugs at all in the top 15 causes of death nationwide. Nor does it mention gun deaths as such, though I imagine they are included in accidents and intentional self-harm (suicide).

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/LCWK9_2013.pdf

The truth of the matter is that there are many things that kill Americans in similar numbers

You may as well state that we're all gonna die in the end, and guns (and drugs, and alcohol, and traffic, and STDs) only affect the timing, not the result.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Watched American History X the other night, too bad this kid couldn't soak it up, even if he saw it. It's too bad we Americans couldn't elect a black person for President, or even half black, then finally race relations in America would be addressed.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Alcohol - purpose is to intoxicate. When used responsibly for its purpose, people have fun, no one gets hurt.

And yet the statistics don't support that. Tell me Stranger, how does the argument of its purpose to intoxicate in and of itself will result in Alcohol harming and killing less people then firearms on a per capita basis? When can I expect Alcohol to kill less people and children on a per capita basis then firearms? Show me on a statistical basis how that distinction has proven to have practical benefits in Alcohol's favor in terms of killing less people then firearms. Tell me how if the goal is to save lives why it would be relevant to make such a distinction? Because as far I can tell if the goal is to save lives then it is irrelevant if something is designed to kill or not, after all a premature and preventable death is a premature and preventable death regardless of the cause.

In fact if I'm not mistaken health officials when it comes to saving lives and public policy don't really care if something is designed to kill or not, all they care about is if doing this will result in less preventable and premature injuries and deaths.

Guns - purpose is to kill. When used responsibly for it's purpose, people die.

And yet firearms kill people as a grand total, and more importantly on a per capita basis, kill less people than something that is not. Tell me again how when something that is not designed to kill kills more people than something that is how that helps your argument.

It's a false equivalency

No it is not a false equivalency, the argument you put forward was that those that support anything have blood on their hands when as a consequence of supporting or approving anything results in someone being injured or killed. The idea that the argument stops at only things that are designed to kill is not credible.

Lets say for example a company provides a product or a service, like say an airbag for cars, that is not designed to kill but carries with it a risk that it will harm someone and possibly even kill someone and as the product spends more time on the market reported injuries and deaths start to come in and the company refuses to make design changes, heck lets say they did make design changes and are comfortable with the reported injuries and death toll numbers, or refuse to even withdraw the product from the market. Would they not have blood of their customers on their hands?

See Stranger you know that Alcohol kills more people than firearms do, and more importantly you know that going forward that Alcohol will harm and kill people and even more importantly you are knowingly supporting the continued legalization of a product that will kill and harm more people than firearms after knowing it kills more than firearms.

When you know those things and you make those types of decisions you can't just wash yours hands of the blood of those people injured or killed by claiming it wasn't designed to do that, it may not have been designed to do that but you sure as hell knew it was very likely going to happen and even after knowing it was likely going to happen or even was happening you still support its legalization. In other words you have the blood of everyone who is injured or killed by Alcohol on your hands Strangerland. There is no getting around that fact, that fact goes for everything we knowingly know harms people and support its continued legalization.

No, the blood of those that die by drug cartels is on the hands of those that support prohibition, thereby creating an environment where the cartels thrive.

So what you are saying is that if you were to purchase pot directly from the drug cartel and you knew it was going to be used to purchase weapons to kill people you would not have the blood of those people killed on your hands.....Talk about cognitive dissonance.

Sorry, but your arguments fall flat on their face.

No, it doesn't. You are just in denial about your own hypocrisy.

Perhaps you could provide a link.

Sure:

Drugs minus Alcohol: In 2011, there were 41,340 deaths due to drug poisoning

www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db166.pdf

Alcohol: Excessive alcohol use led to approximately 88,000 deaths and 2.5 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) each year in the United States from 2006 – 2010

www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm

Drownings:

In the United States, almost 4,000 persons die from drowning each year

www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Water-Safety/drown-activities.html

As for your point that it is sophistry, no it is not, I am merely pointing out that you support prohibitions of firearms not to save lives but instead to get rid of something you don't approve of.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Just curious, but how does that work? Can I go to a gun shop, pass a background check, buy a gun, then gift it to anyone?

You can give anyone anything; don't know how legal that is, but that's kind of the point: how are the authorities going to stop you?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You are just in denial about your own hypocrisy.

That should be the NRA's new motto...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Really? Because every day millions upon millions upon millions of people drink alcohol, and only a tiny percentage has any problems.

And would you say statistical wise that the percentage is higher than guns or lower than guns? The statistical evidence would suggest that firearms are even less deadly than alcohol, and that is pretty much true when you take America's gun violence rate and then compare it to the Alcohol death and hospitalization rate of pretty much every industrial/civilized country.

You can't. But the purpose of alcohol is not to kill, it's to intoxicate. So when used for it's purpose, people don't die.

If I can't then what is the point from a practical sense of making such a distinction when the claimed goal is to save lives?

People do in fact die when it is used for the purpose of getting intoxicated: Drunk driving, intoxicated fights, acute alcohol poisonings that were not intended, impulse suicides, accidental falls, etc.

Getting rid of something that has the purpose of killing makes sense.

Only if no other non-malicious killing or no-killing use can be found.

For something that has a goal other than killing, finding ways to minimize risk makes sense. There is no minimizing risk with guns - they are meant to kill. If you minimize the risk, the gun makes no sense.

Sure you can minimize the risk with firearms, clearly the military and law enforcement agencies of the world have found ways to minimize the risk their weapons pose to the civilian populations they protect.

If you primarily intend to use the firearm to not kill people maliciously, then yes if you do minimize the risk the gun makes sense. Bows and swords are meant to kill people, if find ways to minimize the risk does that mean sports like archery and fencing don't make sense?

I didn't say that. You're just like Bass - make up something I didn't say, then go on to deride me for that thing I didn't say.

Yes you did!

I asked you if pot smokers who knowingly buy pot that has a high potential of the money falling into Drug Cartel hands, which is obviously going to be used to buy things to kill people, had blood on their hands. You said that no they don't but instead the government does for enforcing a prohibition that resulted in the black market. So in other words if you directly bought a product from a group of people who you suspected handed money over to people who would use the money to purchase things to kill people you would not have blood on your hands.

Except that I'm not, as proven by the logic I've outlined above.

Your logic is nothing more then cognitive dissonance

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MarkG: "It's time to move on. Dwelling on history does nothing but irritate those who do."

You mean move on like this terrorist has? from the time that blacks were considered inferior? sounds like it's the racists and people who deny this was racially motivated to actually move on and try to work for the betterment of humanity as a WHOLE -- not just some old standard that applied only to white men.

bass4funk: "Sorry, I do not. I never told that idiot to shoot anyone, please don't convolute the issue."

The sorry I'll accept, because you do indeed hold some responsibility so long as you support private ownership of guns and the propogation of guns in the US. That's all there is too it; nothing convuluted about it at all.

"No, I am saying that most Black homicides are committed By Blacks and the Black homicide rate is off the charts. They are killing their own people more than any other ethnic group."

What does that have to do with this white man, killing nine black people, solely because they are black, bass?

"Now we have to use the Oranges and Apples analogy again? Yaaawn....."

It's YOU guys that keep saying the people who commit gun massacres could have done the same with anything, literally including apples and oranges, if they had the intent. So, if you're going to yawn, yawn at your own, tired defense -- because we are laughing at it.

"Which by the way needs to be addressed and NO one wants to touch it with a 10ft. pole."

You're right that they are unrelated, because he ALWAYS misdirects, as you have done in this very same thread! You mention black on black crime no less than TWICE on this thread about a white man killing blacks, and NOW you say they are unrelated?? Make up your mind! As for no one touching it, it's because O'Reilly is a loon and a pathalogical liar, and the subject as he presents it, and he himself, have been proven wrong umpteen dozen times so it is not WORTH getting into an argument with him cause he'll just go home and beat a woman or something and deny everything but his own, misguided and incorrect, beliefs.

"They weren't trying to spin it,"

YES, they were! They were trying VERY hard to deny the fact that race played a part, after ALREADY having the news. They still are, or are simply avoiding the racist element altogether. That's your news group, pal.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@cleo

Places where you can be pretty sure you are not surrounded by potential nutters packing heat and ready to blow for >no discernible reason. Basically, most of the developed world that isn't gun-crazy America.

Places like China? Mass knife attack: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Kunming_attack

Or Norway? Bomb for the 1st attack: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

Or even here in Japan? Chemical weapons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

All of those places had a total absence of "gun crazy Americans", but perhaps some of the victims would have survived if they had been mentally alert. I'd rather be labelled paranoid for 10 years and survive a once-in-a-lifetime attack than to walk around like a complacent sheep, be caught oblivious, and end up dead. It's not like being aware of your surroundings incurs any real costs, either. Any moderately intelligent person's brain should be able to multi-task in this fashion. Marines are trained to do it.....and a lot of my fellow Marines aren't too bright ^_^.

While it is possible to reduce the incidence rate of random violence/murders with strict weapons controls, it also has another, far more significant consequence: it reduces the personal responsibility of the individual and further reinforces their reliance on an intrusive Nanny State.

Roof is not in the least Middle-Eastern looking,

I'm fully aware of that. I was making a comparison to highlight how profiling a person based on physical attributes (rather than the tools they possess) can be used for threat analysis.

No, I don't. Because I don't live in a place where martial artists commit mass killings on a regular basis.

For arguments sake, what would you do if that were the scenario?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Places like China? ......Or Norway? .....Or even here in Japan?

I can't say that China is a place I would choose to live. And I'm not sure it can be included in 'most of the developed world'.

Norway - certainly a very terrible incident, the deadliest attack in the country since the end of WW2. One incident in over half a century. The odds on not getting killed in a massacre by a madman in Norway is still pretty low.

Japan - you have to go back over 20 years to find anything comparable to ho-hum another mass killing today gun-crazy America?

It's not like being aware of your surroundings incurs any real costs

There's a difference between being 'aware of your surroundings' and being paranoid. Chronic paranoia is a mental disorder.

I was making a comparison to highlight how profiling a person based on physical attributes (rather than the tools they possess) can be used for threat analysis.

And in doing so you highlighted the fact that your criteria (Middle-Eastern-looking, long beard = suicide bomber: white, armed to the teeth = regular guy), in this case at least and thus in every case, are useless.

For arguments sake, what would you do if that were the scenario?

If I were surrounded by mad martial artists committing mass killings on a regular basis? I would move, and take my family, to a place where I was not surrounded by mad martial artists committing mass killings on a regular basis. I would certainly not demand the law be changed to allow me to pack heat 'for self-defence purposes' - that would mean in no time the streets would be teeming with mad martial artists waving guns around. Out of the proverbial frying pan into the proverbial fire. But I don't live in such a place, so the argument is irrelevant. I certainly would never consider living in America.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@cleo

I can't say that China is a place I would choose to live. And I'm not sure it can be included in 'most of the developed >world'.

You might want to travel a bit more. The advances in China's major economic powerhouses (Shanghai, Shenzhen, etc.) might surprise you.

If I were surrounded by mad martial artists committing mass killings on a regular basis? I would move, and take my >family, to a place where I was not surrounded by mad martial artists committing mass killings on a regular basis.

Which goes back to my point about safe havens. What do you do when there are no more madman-free places for you to relocate to? I get the distinct impression the idea of being personally responsible for your own defense is inconceivable to you.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Which goes back to my point about safe havens. What do you do when there are no more madman-free places for you to relocate to?

You seem to be assuming that America is the norm, and that the whole world is teeming with madmen out to kill by whatever means. And that to counter that we all need to fight fire with fire by turning into madmen ourselves and weaponing up. Therein lies madness.

In the real world, I'm in a relatively madman-free place that is also relatively free of lethal weapons (though as the gun nuts are always eager to point out, a kitchen knife, rolling pin, chopstick or stale sandwich can all be used to lethal effect if you really put your mind to it). I feel no fear and no need to relocate. But thank you for your concern. :-)

3 ( +5 / -2 )

21 year-old Dylann Roof was charged with felony possession in February, 2015: According to South Carolina court documents, Roof was arrested in Lexington County on felony charges of possession of cocaine, methamphetamine and LSD on February 28, 2015. This alone disqualified him from legal carry and purchase of a firearm. In South Carolina, you only have to be charged with a felony to lose your 2nd Amendment right. Roof would have failed a background check to purchase a firearm. It was earlier reported that his father purchased him a handgun for his 21st birthday(that would likely qualify as a Straw Man purchase) . Roof's birthday is listed as April 4, 1994. His 21st birthday was this past April. Two months after he's charged with a felony his father buys him a gun? This means if his father purchased a gun for his birthday it was a straw purchase, a felony, punishable by up to 10 years in jail and a $250,000 fine.  In order for laws to work, criminals (in this case, both father and son) must follow them.  Exit question: Was this the firearm used in the massacre?  *Jim Hoft reports that the firearm used in the massacre was stolen from his mother. Same gun? Her gun? Either way, he stole a firearm, another felony charge.  **ALSO: CNN reports that the family changed their story and claims that Roof was given birthday money to purchase a gun and they "don't know what he did with [the money]." Bottom line: He was ineligible to carry in any case and the truth will out in this. Three things to consider, however: 1) If Roof, who was ineligible due to the pending felony charges (remember, charges only for ineligibility in SC) purchased a firearm through a storefront, that store will likely face charges and lose their FFL. It's a violation of federal law to make an illegal sale such as this.  2) If such a sale was allowed to go through and his 4473 wasn't flagged, who in the state did not note this on his record? What is the point of having a law that a felony charge renders someone ineligible to excercise 2A if nothing is noted on the record to prevent a background check from going through? What is the point of laws if the state refusese or fails to enforce them?  3) The family could be lying to avoid an investigation into a felony straw man purchase.  Indeed, the truth will out. 

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Roof has a website that has turned up pictures of him burning the American flog.

Anyone have a doubt now that this boy is a home grown white racist terrorist? He probably is a Christian as well as was and still is the KKK organization.

It is amazing to see that the denial of terrorism by the right wing types on JT about Roof but if this killer was from Syria they would be calling for invasion right now. But not a word on the American swastika flag that still flies over the statehouse in South Carolina. Which was not lowered in honor of the dead by the South Carolina state government even though other flags, the US flag, was lowered. Outright racism even after 9 people killed by a white racist terrorist. Simply amazing and clearly demonstrates how racist the US is still and how the SC elected representatives, republicans mostly, display that racism even after a massacre.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Mmm people...dont think so much. Its really very simple. The fact that Dylann Roof is a racist, mentally unstable or pissed off with his boss is irrelevant. The fact that any of the above have easy access to firearms is hugely relevant. Thank you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Texas A&M

Nice false dichotomy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Basically, most of the developed world that isn't gun-crazy America.

@ cleo: You do realize that in Austria on the same day, a man used his car to ram into 3 people, killing them and getting out of the car and slashing people with a knife. He later turned himself in to the local police, without first stating his religious reasons for doing so.

No guns were used, yet people were killed. I have known churches as I have stated that have had persons in the pews with guns. Some had concealed carry and some were there serving as security. One reason, one of the best places for a criminal to do a break in is in a large area where many people are otherwise occupied. That's shy in some churches they have roving security in the parking lots, to make sure that those who would do break-ins into cars and attack persons going in with their money to give to church aren't harassed and robbed. You will not hear about this in the news, but I come from an area that has this scenario and more that occurs every Sunday.

Doping young men (as in the case we find out in this case) is the root cause. What you will see is that after his toxicology report comes out, it will be negative for drugs, where sadly in this case it should have shown some of the psychotropic drugs he was on since at least they kept him in check for the years he was on them. Just like the shooters in the other mass shooting cases (VA Tech, Colorado) they were "off" their meds, meds that they have been on for years that they shouldn't have been on in the first place.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You do realize that in Austria on the same day, a man used his car to ram into 3 people, killing them and getting out of the car and slashing people with a knife. He later turned himself in to the local police, without first stating his religious reasons for doing so.

No guns were used, yet people were killed.

You don't directly draw the conclusion, but assuming it is that 'people will kill people even if there are no guns', then that just goes to show that we don't need guns.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

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