Am I the only one bothered by this article?

D

Dino.

Moderator
A gunman in Nevada entered an IHOP, shooting 12 people and killing 4 before turning the gun on himself.
No motive has been revealed but the gunman was reported to have a history of "mental health issues".

Following the incident, I found this ...
http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_n...trying-to-track-the-ihop-guns-path-from-china

An article soley dedicated to the "evil" gun(s) involved in the incident.
As if the specific make and model of these guns (or even guns in general) are somehow responsible for the actions of this troubled individual. As if following the path of this gun will help explain this individual's actions and/or motives. :rolleyes:
 
If they get you asking the wrong questions - the answers don't matter.

Tracing the weapon is about as relevant as investigating whether or not the shooter was an illegal immigrant.
 
Yeah, I don't understand how it's relevant either.
THAT's what really irks me.

I find it unfortunate that this author feels the need to use a tragedy caused by some troubled individual to serve his own personal agenda for gun control.
It's just unappropraite, IMO.
 
Let's be real, tracing the gun might give some indications as to motive as they found out what he said when it bought it, how he practiced etc. Motivations are complex and any info can help.

You are being a touch too reactive. Why not discuss this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44420433

An armed civilian failed to engage as he thought the situation was too dangerous to face the shooter's gun.
 
The Clinton-era assault weapons ban applied to weapons like it, but the law expired in 2004. When Barack Obama first came into office, the administration suggested it would ask Congress to reimpose the ban, but that idea was quickly abandoned.
Click to expand...

That hints at some political motivation.

Regardless, he may have obtained the weapon illegally. Tracing it then would be helpful, although nearly impossible. Has anyone checked with the Fast and Furious guys yet?
 
The article seemed fairly straightforward to me, merely reporting on one aspect of the investigation.

My thought, like Mr. Meyer's, is that it's their job to backtrack absolutely everything -- everyone he's talked to lately, his movements, where he got his weapons, anything he's written, etc. -- to figure out A) whether anyone else was involved, and B) his motives.

One hopes (that's not quite the right word) his weapons were not supplied by someone wanting to assist him in going off to commit evil, and were just acquired in the normal course. But you sure want the police to figure that out before declaring it an irrelevant dead end.
 
Crazy, I'd be pounding the pulpit, demanding to see if ATFE is involved, keep GunWalker and it's unholy siblings in the public eye.
They will make MUCH of the armed citizen who retreated, but will never mention that being an armed citizen does NOT mean you are a cop! He was under NO legal obligation to engage that I am aware of. It would have been an excellent ending if he had engaged and stopped the threat, but I cannot condemn him for not shooting.
I wish also our soldiers were allowed CCW themselves, as uniformed service members in peacetime areas not on watch are always unarmed. Let them CCW, too, they can set up gun lockers at Traffic Control on base, if need be.
 
But when Sencion started toward him, Swagler backed away.
Click to expand...

I cant fault him for this, many would retreat, some would fire upon the man.

The fact that folks wish to commit suicide is OK with me but why do they want to take others with them? Party bus to heaven?

Too bad this happened, cant blame it on the gun tho.
 
Common usage - why is it interesting? Just curious.

And let's not go off the deep end about how this is a plot, blah, blah.

If you have hard evidence of such, why tell the world.

Why go out this way - ah, studied by many and the answer may be that:

1. They have a grudge and the target represents in some manner revenge for the grudge or who harmed them. Revenge is a strong evolutionary set motive.

2. Killing in this manner makes a societal point to change some behavior of society that will be realized when the killing is understood. This sometimes called reciprocal altruism. You sacrifice yourself for society.

3. You want to die (as your life is crappy) but not as a lone loser. By killing others and then self you die what is perceived to be a 'warriors' death. Some opponent was slain, some cause promoted. You have honor is this way out.

4. Something delusional - drive by a biological cause.

And all of these and some of these may be true and interacting. Does this make any sense to a rational mind? Probably not. But that's what we think is up with these folks.

Class is over.
 
Since apparently this has the media getting us to ask the wrong questions and events are interesting...

This does get curiouser and curiouser. Another spree shooting mass murder in a non-gun free zone. There was another one last month in Ohio, but few people noticed it as the media did not focus on it despite being committed with a firearm, people killed in two homes and during a chase down an alley. http://fairlawn-bath.patch.com/arti...-autopsies-ongoing-as-investigations-continue

And now another such shooting attended by a person with a gun who did not intervene. Just because people carry does not make them super heroes and doesn't make them prepared for suddenly intense, horrific, and dangerous situations.

Somehow, I don't see the media as being the one at fault in these situations or the police for trying to put all the pieces together to comprehend what went on, how, and why.
 
My biggest issue with that article is the layout.

They only talk of tracking the gun, tracking the gun, tracking the gun

And in the middle of the article there is a link with the heading

"Nevada IHOP shooter was 'gentle, kind man'"

Yes, a gentle, kind man is possessed by a banned "assault rifle" and forced into killing.

It's odd, but when I read an article about someone killing a pedestrian with a car, the article seldom mentions what type of car it was. And when someone is killed by a drunk driver, they never go into great lengths describing what brand of scotch he/she was drinking, or where he drank it.

If someone is killed with a hammer, does it really friggin matter if the hammer was bought at Home Depot?
 
" Why go out this way - ah, studied by many and the answer may be that: "

Another one told to me by a clinical psychologist is the person wants to take out people that have "wronged " them but, does not want to be around to face the ramifications of their act.


" It's odd, but when I read an article about someone killing a pedestrian with a car, the article seldom mentions what type of car it was. "

Probably because most cars are pretty ordinary. Hit someone with a Rolls or exotic and it will be mentioned.


" And when someone is killed by a drunk driver, they never go into great lengths describing what brand of scotch he/she was drinking, or where he drank it. "

Where he drank it would be relevant if it was a wild party that spilled into the neighborhood otherwise it would be pretty ordinary.

" If someone is killed with a hammer, does it really friggin matter if the hammer was bought at Home Depot? "

But is the hammer was a shingle or brick hammer ( edged ) it gives the connotation of being more dangerous.

At some point the AR AK people have to come to the realization that calling their fire arm a " Assault Rifle " and playing up the scary black gun aura isn't helping their cause. Remember, these weapons were designed for one thing, killing the enemy. Not accepting what the original design parameters are is living in denial.

As for the news writers, some call them idiots but expect them to be geniuses and know fine minutia about every subject. Some also look down on cops but expect them to know every law in a split second.

I think for the most part, the news writers are just like any other working stiff trying to make it through the day writing copy and don't have time to twist stories to please the great and powerful Oz. Sure, there will be instances where the writer inserts their own views because they are going to write about what they know.
 
I wish also our soldiers were allowed CCW themselves, as uniformed service members in peacetime areas not on watch are always unarmed. Let them CCW, too, they can set up gun lockers at Traffic Control on base, if need be.
Click to expand...
Makes way too much sense, AM.

The local Guard Base Commander responded by forbidding soldiers to wear their uniforms off the base.

Jamie
 
Would a "hunting rifle" be more "benign"?

WANT A LCR 22LR:
At some point the AR AK people have to come to the realization that calling their fire arm a " Assault Rifle " and playing up the scary black gun aura isn't helping their cause. Remember, these weapons were designed for one thing, killing the enemy. Not accepting what the original design parameters are is living in denial.
Click to expand...

So what if it's "designed for one thing, killing the enemy"? Would a rifle designed for hunting or target shooting be more "benign"?

Let's not forget that the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting or target shooting. When our Founders were asked, "What kind of arms shall the People keep and bear?", their answer was "All the terrible weaponry of the soldier".

Abusus non tollit usum.
 
And now another such shooting attended by a person with a gun who did not intervene. Just because people carry does not make them super heroes and doesn't make them prepared for suddenly intense, horrific, and dangerous situations.
Click to expand...

Swagler owns Locals BBQ and was in his restaurant when this went down. Locals is 65 yards North across the parking lot. I think he made the right choice in not engaging someone with a semi-auto rifle at that range. i herd his 911 call and he did a good job giving information. his restaurant took rounds.

My buddy had just got to Fandango Casino which is 135 yards or so West across Carson St from I Hop when the shooting started. Hes a gun guy and said it sounded like a semi-auto AK and a lot of rounds were fired. He was armed and said he could not get into the casino fast enough to take cover. Casino Fandango took some rounds when the shooter came out of I Hop and started shooting in all directions.

I carry and let me tell you as soon as gunfire erupts I for sure am not going toward it, not my job. Now if I was in the restaurant and something like this went down I would engage the shooter if the opportunity presented itself.
 
Personally, I believe this statement is going to haunt someone for a long time....

“I had my pistol; I wasn’t going up against an automatic rifle,” Ralph Swagler
[owner of BarBQ next to the IHOP] said. “I’m sorry. I wish I would have shot him
in the back now as he was going toward IHOP, but I wasn’t clear on the situation.”
Click to expand...

Men more often regret things they failed to do...
rather than what they did.
 
Well in pretty much every CCW class they tell you to leave ASAP if you have a way out, dont be a "hero". Im sure that guy will have quite some guilt to deal with in the long run but you cant fault him for not taking action, having a CCW doesnt mean you automatically have to prevent every crime going on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top