6 shot dead in Santa Monica, CA

Is that your blog?

If not, it is considered customary (as well as legal) when quoting someone else's writing, to acknowledge the source and the author.

Old Dog said:
Apparently the gunman was not familiar with the myriad California gun control laws or simply decided to ignore them.
Click to expand...

Old Dog's link said:
Apparently the gunman was not familiar with the myriad California gun control laws or simply decided to ignore them.
Click to expand...
 
Unfortunately, this tragedy will likely be linked back to some sort of conception that the current firearms laws are not strict enough. Moreover, it'll probably lead to even the most Draconian of the recent attempts at furthering gun control legislation by the politicians there to be passed into law. It will be interesting to see more on this story and how the politicians there react as it develops.

That being said, it is good to hear that the criminals were put to justice in a timely manner.
 
I heard that the shooter is dead now. My impression based on early reports was that the shooter had both a rifle and handgun. But that could have been press bias as well... clips and so forth...
 
Six dead

They only attempt to pass guns laws that do nothing to solve the problem, because they do not want to solve it, then they can say "SEE WE NEED MORE GUN LAWS." Pushing toward their real goal which to take away all the guns. Note this shooting is a SAD and tragedy.......but all of us know
that as long as there are GUN FREE ZONES this will happen. We also know
that with armed guards the result will be a dead shooter (Bad Guy) and fewer
people killed.
I don't just speak to the choir, I let people and my respersenatives
know I feel this way.
 
I'm shocked that the shooter didn't put down his weapons and walk away after realizing that no one inside that gun free zone was unarmed.

That's what Feinstein told us would happen...
 
I'm shocked that the shooter didn't put down his weapons and walk away after realizing that no one inside that gun free zone was unarmed.

That's what Feinstein told us would happen...
Click to expand...

No you are not shocked and unless you have a direct quoted source, I am fairly certain Feinstein never said what you claim.

This shooting spree (defined as a series of shootings in multiple locations with no cooling off period) did not start in any sort of gun-free zone. It started in a home and moved out onto the streets before ending up on a campus. That part of it happened in a gun-free zone really doesn't matter at all. Whether or not the shootings occur happen regardless of zoning.

I noticed that nobody on the forum made a big deal about Estaban Smith's shooting rampage in Texas, in a rural area where a LOT of the locals are armed. Nobody here sarcastically claimed he wasn't familiar with gun laws, life laws, driving laws, or any other laws or proclaimed the failure of all these other laws to stop his crimes. Nobody misquoted Feinstein or claimed mock shock. Smith apparently killed his wife back home in NC first, and for whatever reason went on a shooting rampage in rural Texas. He wounded 5 and killed 1 in the process in Texas, also using an assault rifle, and was put down by cops at the end of his 90 minute spree. Unlike the Santa Monica shooting, Smith was a decorated combat Marine with multiple tours under his belt.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...d-wife-went-on-shooting-spree-say-police?lite
http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/05/texas-shooting-spree-marine-esteban-smith/
http://abcnews.go.com/US/marine-killed-cops-linked-deaths/story?id=19266221#.UbMk_U4o6M8

This notion of acting all shocked and put out because laws were violated really is absurd. We all know that people break the law and that laws do not prevent anybody from doing anything they really want to do. The shooter in Santa Monica did enter a gun-free zone, sure enough, but you know what, all of the zones crossed by both shooters were attempted murder and murder-free zones.

And just to be a bit more clear on the OP's shooting spree, only 4 people were killed by the gunman. He was killed by the cops. I don't know why we only focus on the number of dead, but he also wounded 5 others. They matter as well.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-santa-monica-shooting-20130607,0,323148.story
 
People are getting desensitized to these events because of the medias overboard coverage of these shootings. By Monday no one will even be talking about this shooting and I blame the media but to tell you the truth I'm glad that's the case. Attention is what these idiots committing these crimes are looking for and it seems CNN are the only ones left who are obliging them.
 
Last edited:
It's not "New York." It's the Daily News, which competes quite well with Rupert Murdoch's worst tabloids in the arena of sensationalist "journalism."

The article described the shooter as a "crazed madman," a "berserk black-clad gunman," a "crazed killer," and a "madman," all in the space of about 10 sentences.

The comments are... from people who like that kind of "reporting."

Responsible journalism, anyone? :cool:
 
It's not "New York
Click to expand...
It is to some extent. An acquaintance is in Brooklyn right now, and according to her, the coverage is quite lurid.

Local news cut to a shot of the supposed weapons used. One was a single-action revolver, and the other appeared to be a very old and worn Armalite CAR with triangular handguards.
 
Shooter's last name is Zawarhi, I don't like to stereotype, but that may tell something. There will be more information coming out soon.
 
According to this LA Times piece, he was of Lebanese descent, and he was set off by some sort of complicated family dispute, possibly involving his parents' divorce. It seems that he first killed his father and brother and then set fire to their house.
 
It started in a home and moved out onto the streets before ending up on a campus. That part of it happened in a gun-free zone really doesn't matter at all. Whether or not the shootings occur happen regardless of zoning.
Click to expand...

Disagree. We don't know everything so far but from the LA police statements and leaks to reporters the operating view seems to be that he did in fact intend to go to the school. At first they were indicating they believed he merely ended up a the school, what they are saying now is that that was his destination.

I find the "gun free zone" as a target of spree killers to be compelling and germane.

The triggering event for many these spree killers may be unplanned, but that does not mean the killers are acting randomly and without a plan.

For all we know Lanza had a some kind of argument (domestic dispute) or random event with his mom that set him off on what had previously been a fantasy that he ran over and over in his head and was well thought out.

This Santa Monica killer may have had a triggering "family dispute" event occur, triggering the acting out an existing school shooting fantasy.

WE do know these spree school shooters are often focused on prior shooters and attaining high body counts. That is indeed why they target gun free zones which enable those body counts.

Essentially these young men are suicidal and seek to defeat their insignificance through fame that derives from the final act. That fame is increased by a high body count. the high body count is in some part enabled by heading to a high density gun free zone.

The fact that Feinstein believes in gun free zones is also germane. Not simply because they are ineffective and in many cases ironically draw the shooter. But because they are a diversion from the real causes and sources of criminal violence. The anti gun movement, particularly the politicians who use it, involves at its heart, a massive diversion. That diversion has two core problems/evils: a) it implies it is solving the problem but it is not; b) it scapegoats and sanctions an innocent class of persons (gun owners).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top