Hypothetical:
Lets say a few people started carrying weapons at schools and wherever.
Some random kid comes in and starts shooting.
One of the kids with concealed weapons manage to stay calm, get cover, and unholster their gun. He tries to get in a shot, and in doing so, another innocent kid with a gun sees him and mistakes him for another gunman as well. This kid then shoots the other kid. Repeat until everybody with guns are dead.

Why does everybody seem to know that they immediately can assess the situation well enough to not kill other innocent people that are also trying to save the situation?

It is a fantasy. It might occasionally come true, due to luck, circumstances or whatever, but that doesn't mean that should be the go-to method.
Guns should be used for hunting. Fully automatic weapons have nothing to do with hunting, and should be banned. Permit should require checkups at a shooting range.

Run. Hide. Call 911. Don't carry guns!

Sheesh.. Can't believe we're having this discussion..

Good thing the gunman in this knew exactly who to shoot at first.

If somebody walks into my class and starts shooting then I'd prefer he wasnt the only one with a gun. Unfortunately I sure as hell don't want to be carrying the rest of the time, and I don't want my classmates armed either.

Basically I can accept that there are situations where a rampage is cut short by a gun owner, and hell maybe they aren't reported as often as where the rampage continues...but then you have to also accept that the murders that don't happen at all because the perp couldn't get their hands on a firearm also don't get reported. Anecdotes only take you so far.

And ya, this "study" seems pretty bs.

On Oct. 1, 1997, Luke Woodham, 16, part of a satanic cult, stabbed and bludgeoned his mother before driving her car to Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., where he shot dead two students and wounded seven others with a rifle he made no attempt to conceal. He then got back into his mother’s car and planned to go to Pearl Junior High School to kill some more. But assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a .45-caliber pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham.

On Jan. 16, 2002, Peter Odighizuwa, 43, of Nigeria, went to the Appalachian School of Law campus in Virginia with a handgun and killed three and wounded three others. At the sound of gunfire, two other students – both police officers – retrieved guns from their cars. Meanwhile, another police officer and former Marine jumped Odighizuwa and disarmed him by the time the other officers got to the scene.

On Aug. 23, 1995, a band of crack cocaine addicts entered a store in Muskegon, Mich., with a plan to kill everyone and steal enough cash and jewelry to feed their habit. One member of the gang shot store owner Clare Cooper in the back four times. He still managed to grab his shotgun and fire on the gang as they fled. They were all apprehended.

On Dec. 9, 2007, a 24-year-old gunman named Matthew Murray launched an attack on the congregants of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs that left two victims dead. A former police officer, Jeanne Assam, a member of the security team for the church, shot Murray 10 times, killing him, as he was shooting at her. Murray had killed four others at a church 70 miles away earlier in the day.

On July 24, 2012, Richard Gable Stevens rented a rifle at a shooting range in Santa Clara, Calif., and herded three employees out the door, saying he intended to kill them. One of the employees, however, was carrying a .45-caliber handgun and shot the assailant.

On Dec. 17, 1991, two men armed with stolen pistols herded 20 customers and employees of a Shoney’s restaurant in Anniston, Ala., into a walk-in refrigerator and locked it so they could rob the establishment. However, one customer was armed with a .45-caliber handgun hidden under a table. He shot one of the gunmen dead. The other robber, who was holding the manager of the restaurant at gunpoint, began firing at the customer. But he was wounded critically by return fire, ending the incident.

On July 13, 2009, an armed man entered the Golden Food Market in south Richmond, shooting and wounding a clerk while firing at store patrons. He was shot by another customer who had a concealed-carry permit, likely saving the lives of eight other people in the store.

On July 29, 2012, Charles Conner shot and killed two people and their dogs at the Peach Tree RV park in Early, Texas. Vic Stacy got a call from one of the neighbors, got his .357 magnum and shot Conner as he fired upon the first police officer to arrive at the scene. Stacy was credited with saving the life of the officer.

The truth is that every single day mass murders are averted by armed civilian

Yet, every time there is a horrendous slaughter like we saw at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, there is a knee-jerk outcry for stricter control of guns.

taken from http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/how-to-stop-the-slaughter-of-the-innocents/#oA9kiFClUvLJ8gIK.99

The buzz surrounding this event seems to be headed down the road that led to further firearms on the ban list.

The Miasma from Chicago has always been in favor of gun control measures which do nothing to address causes but minimally treat symptoms and the whims of those who would control humans by eliminating choices along with personal responsibility. He's discussing it right now using fake tears and more than a few examples of the retarded logic that dystopiafurtdy here posted above. It's insulting both to my intelligence and sensibilities to be addressed by a U.S. President, like a blind child with down syndrome.

Cerberus Capital Management, a New York-based investment firm that that owns the largest U.S. gun maker Freedom Group (Bushmaster, Remington) is poised to sell, while stocks in Sturm, Ruger & Company has increased more than 700 percent (Smith and Wesson, 253% ) since Obama was elected in 2009. Not very wise stewards of those pensions for teachers, California!.....The same retarded ban on firearms in California happened back when I lived in San Francisco. One lone gunman walks into the 101 California Street building and kills a few peeps with a variety of guns and "BOOM!", people who don't know how to use a shovel properly, acting on emotions and severely compromised common sense,support bans on a whole spattering of guns, ammo, etc., because on-accounta it was so horrible and was apparently the gun's fault Now SOH Feinstein is at it again, another fractured piece of out-of-touch, privileged human pieces of garbage appealing to emotions rather than reason, and playing the game she was placed in position to play.

Dipshits?? No, same intentional, systematic plans like the Brady Bill and the National Assault Weapons Ban, a knee-jerk, and well-timed coup on individual rights relative to protecting oneself and family.

How about for STARTERS, "Anyone ever treated for mental illness or prescribed anti-psychotic or psychotropic drugs for the treatment of the same, can't even be around anyone with guns, much less purchase them. That would stop MOST of these random acts of carnage.

I won't even begin to mention in detail the amount of illegal firearms on the banned lists-to-date that are in the hands of drug dealers, pimps, gang members, etc. and the insanity of THAT subset of society, COPS, and SOLDIERS being the only people with that kind of monopoly on firepower. Fuck that shit. Time is nigh to becoming a criminal or expatriate.

Disheartening indeed - http://news.msn.com/us/brother-of-conn-gunman-wrongly-cited-as-shooter

Ah, I see.

...no actually, I don't follow.>> ^quantumushroom:

The taxocrat-loyal media tried to blame the attack on Gabrielle Giffords by a lone douchebag gunman on Republicans.

The taxocrat-loyal media tried to blame the attack on Gabrielle Giffords by a lone douchebag gunman on Republicans.

Yup. It was a reaction to his being surprised at the arrest. Cheap jab.>> ^PostalBlowfish:

>> ^mtadd:
Messenger, please explain yourself if you would. It sounds like you're saying that he's not just a racist, but a racist psychopath...and that's to his credit.

I took it to mean maybe he is a psychopath, but the police in Florida have given him reason to think they wouldn't care if someone shot a black person. ie. A jab at the Sanford police and George Zimmerman.

>> ^mtadd:

Messenger, please explain yourself if you would. It sounds like you're saying that he's not just a racist, but a racist psychopath...and that's to his credit.


I took it to mean maybe he is a psychopath, but the police in Florida have given him reason to think they wouldn't care if someone shot a black person. ie. A jab at the Sanford police and George Zimmerman.

If it were a sane implementation of a self defense law. Martin would have had an obligation to continue to back away from the fight until given no other choice. He would have to have legal provocation, meaning that he must prove that he was in a position in which not using self-defense would most likely lead to death or serious injuries. So pushing or grabbing might not be enough unless he was going for for something vital like your neck instead of your arm or hand or back of your shirt.

In a lot of cases this means someone pretty much has to have a weapon ready to use or make moves to take physical action against you.

Until scene photos come out showing he was in trapped in a corner, he had possible escape routes or he could have knocked on doors or whatever to get attention draw to what was happening if he didn't have time to call police. Some witness woman said it happened in her backyard, and if what they showed on video was it there was no fence but I can't be sure. The houses they showed were really close together, if it was the neighborhood shouting would have been heard by at least 6 houses given how close they were barring planes flying overhead or other noise.

Based on their laws, if SYG applied to Martin (and it should barring they come up with some reason why) he would have had immunity under the law, and Zimmerman wouldn't have been covered if he was found to meet criteria under "Aggressor". However SYG is a rather crazy law, I'll post a blurb at the bottom of this to show there's indication that people abuse it and it's very hard to apply in any sane matter due to nearly all encounters resulting in the other person ending up dead.

But in a less "kill the other guy" type self-defense law you have emphasis placed on avoiding the fight and have to have a damn good reason for lethal force and not just "reasonable belief". If you get provoked your "culpability" is assessed to see if you tried to avoid the fight at all costs.

In this case, blame would have probably been split something like 10-20% Martin 80-90% Zimmerman. A court in a sane area would say that Martin had ample opportunity to call police, ask for help as a door, or yelled for help before Zimmerman caught up. Or perhaps that he could have kept running. Hard to say for sure. But for him to be totally blameless Zimmerman would have had to have shown physical action toward him or some such...the following wouldn't have been enough.

But under SYG, the following could have been enough to give Trayvon reasonable belief that Zimmerman meant imminent use of unlawful force against him. And if you look up unlawful force it's defined as "force to escape arrest, forced use by non-law enforcement, or and non-consenting touch"...it's extremely vague I couldn't find a good definition of it anywhere. I found about 6-8 of them and just took the things in common and different variations and tried to compact it down to that....seriously try googling it and finding a good clear, applicable definition and one that is from Florida...I couldn't.

So Trayvon basically has to reasonable believe that Zimmerman was going to grab him, push him, or otherwise place his hands on him. And I think someone being chased could reasonable expect that.

Here's the blurb from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

Stand your ground laws are frequently criticized and called "shoot first" laws by critics. In Florida, the law has resulted in self-defense claims tripling, with all but one of those killed unarmed.[32][33] The law's critics argue that Florida's law makes it very difficult to prosecute cases against people who shoot others and then claim self-defense. The shooter can argue they felt threatened, and in most cases, the only witness who could have argued otherwise is the victim who was shot and killed. The Florida law has been used to excuse neighborhood brawls, bar fights, road rage, and even street gang violence.[33] Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used."[34][35]

The Trayvon Martin case brought a large degree of criticism to the law. While the shooter, George Zimmerman, claimed self-defense, evidence indicates that he first pursued Trayvon Martin, prior to the altercation that resulted in the shooting. Legal experts are split as to whether charges will be dropped under Florida's stand-your-ground law before the case even goes to trial, as the extant Florida law allows Zimmerman to argue that the charges should be dropped before trial even begins. Legal experts are also split as to whether Zimmerman's actions will be viewed as self-defense should the case go to trial.

Basically in Florida you can go crazed gunman on a place if you say they were threatening and leave no one alive. If they do the kind of investigation they did with Trayvon, they might not even check all the witnesses or for security footage of the area, and then you'll have immunity....and none of the victims families can sue you for wrongful death, etc. If Im reading the immunity clause of it correctly.



>> ^longde:

How can Martin not be 100% innocent? I don't get how you think he could be at all culpable.>>

The vast majority of those labeled trolls some might guess, are those whose diatribes/comments are fueled by a personal world view in conflict with that of the majority of the herd. Easy to gang up on a lone gunman.
Frankenstein was similarly misunderstood.
How many men were hanged or lynched for stealing a horse they had never seen?
How many grandmothers returned to their bottles after serving time on a blog where they thought they could help future mothers decide to choice life over eugenics, after being tag-teamed by vehement anti-abortion creatures?
How much longer will people continue to separate themselves from healthy interaction with their fellow man choosing to trade that knowledge and power instead, for a keyboard and piles??!!

Oh the fucking humanity²!

It's just so...sad how he repeatedly rewrites history to fit his twisted view. Free market ended child labor alone? hah!

It's insanity to not agree with dystopianfuturetoday on this. We've got record profits for corporations, all time low taxes for them. Where are the jobs....where are the jobs?

Can anyone fact check what schiff said to the protesters? It appears he's pretty obviously lying when he says gov't takes half of what he earns. but it would be nice to have something to fire back when people say shit like that.

But even if he is true. taxing the uber wealthy at 50 percent may not exactly be horrible. even at 50 percent they still live like sultans. They're still here in the USA. If the tax rate is so horrible, why haven't they left? History has shown that high tax rates don't necessarily kill jobs. Combine that with the history we're living right now that low taxes does NOT create jobs.

If someone pulls a gun on your spouse and says "if you take a step closer, I'll kill them" If you step forward, it's still the gunman's fault if they shoot them. That's what I think of every time a CEO says they might not hire anybody or start firing if they raise taxes. It's still their fault...their responsibility when they hold us hostage like that, not Gov't.

Basic Spiderman 101: With great power, comes great responsibility. And the CEOs have forgotten that.

Bill Maher To Panel On Norway Gunman: "He’s A Christian Terrorist"

3 months prior:
Bill Maher: You’re Not A Christian if You Celebrated Bin Laden’s Death

>> ^ChaosEngine:

It's a sad day when two comedians have higher journalistic standards than actual journalists. We need to raise Cronkite and Murrow from the dead and let them unleash zombie justice on the people who have sullied their profession.


I think it's kind of great. I love that the fools are here to remind us of our hubris or whatever you want to call it. Comedians/fools/performers are never given enough credit for their role in society.

>> ^luxury_pie:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^luxury_pie:
Here on the sift we would NEVER jump to conclusions.

The problem with that statement is, we here on the sift are not journalists. We are normal every day type people. Journalists/news organizations should not try to taint or slant public opinion. They are supposed to be unbiased. This is just another example of the media using scare tactics to keep us fearing the "brown people" that want to kill us all. It's really quite disgusting.

You call that journalism?


That was kind of my point. And no offense taken