Terrible tragedy in Oregon
- Thread starter Doctor Doom_rivals422927
- Start date
I'll need to know what his voter's registration card says before I can comment.
Attention all mental health patients: you can pick up your firearms at the front desk as you exit the building.
Nothing to see here.....not in America......not any gun violence to discuss......everything is great........now, pick up your guns......yee haw!
It's really great in Chicago....
Final September Totals
Shot & Killed: 58
Shot & Wounded: 303
Total Shot: 361
Total Homicides: 61
Year To Date
Shot & Killed: 348
Shot & Wounded: 1971
Total Shot: 2319
Total Homicides: 396
Wrong as usual. In the state of Oregon, students can carry on any state campus as long as they have the proper paperwork.
The college must not have gotten the message. As I posted, even the security guard was unarmed. This campus had one of the strictest gun control measures in the country.
BREAKING: MASS SHOOTING AT UMPQUA COLLEGE in Oregon – 13 Dead – Gunfree Zone
Jim Hoft Oct 1st, 2015 1:38 pm 656 Comments
BREAKING: MASS SHOOTING AT UMPQUA COLLEGE in Oregon – 10 Dead – Gunfree Zone
Up to 15 dead–
Several more injured…
WCNC reported:
A shooter who opened fire at at Umpqua Community College Thursday in southern Oregon injured as many as 20 people before he was downed, a Douglas County official said.
KATU-TV reports that Oregon State Police say there were multiple fatalities, but that could not be immediately confirmed.
County commissioner Chris Boice told KGW-TV that 15 to 20 people were injured in the melee, including one woman shot in the chest.
Shooter is down…
Umpqua College is a gunfree zone.
No guns allowed…
You've got to stop reading the morons at Think Progress:
by BRANDON DARBY1 Oct 201511
ThinkProgress published a factually incorrect piece in the immediate aftermath of the mass shooting at an Oregon community college. Pundits and experts mentioned that the campus was a gun-free zone and ThinkProgress wasted no time in publishing, “UCC Was Not A ‘Gun-Free Zone’ Because Public Colleges in Oregon Can’t Ban Guns.” The apparent pro-Democratic Party front group mistakenly assumed that the community college in question was somehow under the same guidelines as state universities.
The school, Umpqua Community College, was, in fact, a gun-free campus. An archived copy of their student code of conduct shows:
In addition to the written policy of the community college, the university’s president, Rita Cavin, stated in a press conference that the university is a gun-free campus and there are “no plans” to change security policy.
The ThinkProgress piece asserted:
On Thursday, a shooter reported killed at least 13 people and injured many others at a community college in Oregon. Just minutes after the incident, commentators sought to attribute the incident to the fact that Umpqua Community College was a “gun free zone.”
“The gun free zones are the areas that tell licensed gun owners that you are not allowed to carry your weapon in this facility…If you’re going to perpetrate some act, you know that most people are not going to be armed,” CNN “military analyst” Rick Francona said a few minutes after the shooting.
A retired Navy Seal, Jonathan Gilliam, also appearing on CNN, went even further. Blaming the “gun free zone” for the scope of the tragedy and adding “the only thing that’s going to stop a gun is another gun.”
Umpqua Community College, however, was not a gun free zone. A 2011, state court decision prohibited public colleges from banning guns on campus. The decision stemmed from a suit filed by the Oregon Firearm Education Foundation, a gun rights group. There was an effort to pass a new law to reinstate the ability of public colleges to ban guns. That measure was defeated by gun rights advocates.
Breitbart News will update this article to reflect that ThinkProgress corrected their false assertions if they do so. At the publishing of this article, several thousand of their readers have tweeted the false information to their own followers.
CBS evening news reported that students could carry. It really doesn't make any difference whether it's gun free or not, when we let crazy people in this country have access to firearms.
I completely agree that crazy people should not have access. But I believe those laws exist today.
The problem with liberal thinking is that mental illness has to be protected. Doctors cannot report mentally unstable people to authorities. Make it permissible for the insane to be reported to authorities and I will believe that libs are being serious.
Yes, nobody should be made to feel bad about themselves, everyone is "special." On the other hand, the standard NRA/GOP lines will be "enforce the laws on the books" and "now is not the time for this discussion" while they whine that keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people is the first step to confiscating every gun from every owner. Sadly, the window for any meaningful change in our gun control laws to keep guns out of the hands of known mentally ill persons slammed shut forever more on December 14, 2012. If we can let 20 babies be massacred by a loony without batting an eye, we may as well shut up about it.
Agaln, liberal mantra is to not report crazy people to authority, that is when I know Libs have changed whenthey want the crazies reported.
I'm just waiting for someone surviving one of these situations to blow up gun control debate by suing the institution and government for inhibiting them the right to carry for self protection.
LOL...there are a lot of people that have defended themselves with guns that would disagree with your statement.
NRA is backing legislation that attempts to tackle the issue of mental illness and guns.
There was a good discussion on one of the morning shows this morning about how other countries are doing a much better job of tackling mental illness than the US - implying that there needs to be a heavier focus on that if we want to have an impact on violent crime.
There needs to be a heavier focus on that if we are going to be an open carry society with very few guns laws. And btw, I own many guns and am a concealed permit holder. The NRA isn't doing this country any favors at all.
I agree we need to do something. I have yet to see a rationale proposal that makes sense. And to the NRA, while they go way far, if it wasn't for their influence, you wouldn't have your CCW or probably even your firearms.
Didn't Oregon just go to background checks for all purchases - both through a licensed store and gun shows? What more laws do you want?
Here's a start - a very large percentage of the gun related crimes are perpetrated with guns that are not bought legally (a guy this morning said that only 3% of gun crimes are perpetrated with guns bought legally - not sure if true) - how about we crack down on the illegal gun market first...it's the low hanging fruit.
I may be wrong on how I feel, but to me it feels like we (politicians, laws) focus more on things like texting while driving and drinking and driving than gun violence. Although both of those kill people, the gun violence, to me, is the most important and should be at the top of the agenda. Don't get me wrong, NOBODY should text while driving or drive under the influence. But the punishment for those things are getting more severe. While guns.......ahhh.......nothing to see.....move along......let me cash that lobbying check from the NRA.......
More people are killed by guns during the commission of a crime rather than this kind of random violence. Impose stricter penalties (10 years) on criminals that use guns during their crime. Impose stricter penalties on those caught with guns purchased illegally (guns with no provenience) and those who provided the guns.
In a free society, it's almost impossible to stop a madman like this. But gun free zones provide happy hunting for these kinds of people.
In a free society, it's almost impossible to stop a madman like this. But gun free zones provide happy hunting for these kinds of people.
We're vastly hypocritical on the subject, and many people discuss it from an area of ignorance.
We could vastly reduce the number of deaths in this country by doing lots of things, but we balance the loss of life with those actions. For example, there are tens of thousands of deaths each year due to vehicle accidents, way more than those that die by gun violence. So why don't we physically limit ALL vehicle traffic to 25 MPH and save a number of lives? Because we choose to take the risk with our lives so we can go faster on the road. And driving is simply a privilege.
You also have politicians who don't understand firearms at all and therefore are not in any position to realistically draft laws to curtail their use. Instead they use buzz words like "Assault Rifle", or "Cop Killer" or "Automatic" or "Clips" and attempt to satisfy fears over what they don't understand.
Gun violence is on the decline while gun ownership is at an all time high... but we suddenly have a problem? Our problem is not about guns but about society in general.
I'm calling ******** on this. You really are brainwashed.
Even "the most liberal president in our history" hasn't taken anyone's guns.
Well, the NRA was asleep at the wheel in the mid 90's and an "assault weapons" ban was signed into law. Meanwhile, CCW restrictions in many states have been lifted due to NRA influence in legislation and lawsuits.
You are wrong first of all.
We already have strict laws regarding gun violence. We do not have strict enough laws from drinking and driving or texting and driving. These 2 are far greater killers than deaths by guns.
Also, do not forget, the right to own a gun is Constitutionaly protected right as much as freedom of religion, speech, and the press.
With that said, there are things that make sense that can be done but I have no faith in te leadership of the country to get it right with out trampling on that constitutional right. Everyone throws out the "mentally ill" thing. Ok fine, classify mentally ill for me? Someone that seeks counseling? Someone that is depressed? What if it was temporary due to divorce or the death of a child/spouse? Bi-Polar? What about Tourette's syndrome? What about PTSD? All of these are mental illnesses. What if you are cured? What if you have a TBI? What about being undiagnosed? How do you get their guns once they are? Government take them or can a family member have them?
Where do you draw the line? How do you enforce? Are doctors going to be required to report you? Doesn't that violate Doctor patient confidentiality?
I'm sitting in my truck right now waiting on my wife in a very high crime area of Baltimore and I'm unarmed. I want to be armed. How in the hell is that ok?
I wonder how they determine that. Isn't it legal for me to go onto Craig's List and buy a gun? And isn't it legal for the seller to sell it to me without a background check?
No I'm not. I'm not even a member of the NRA. You are either blind, stupid, or drunk if you don't think the Gov't wouldn't have pulled the reigns waaaaay back on Gun ownership of it wasn't for the NRA.
The fact that every state in this country isn't a shall carry state is the precise reason there is a need for them.
I just watch knee jerk reactions of people that allow their emotions to override rationale thinking, despite it being extremely difficult to continue to stare this kind of stuff in the face.
And yes, perhaps you missed the 90s when the AWB was put into effect. Reclassifications were made and it became a felony to own many of those types of firearms. That's absolutely "taking someone's guns"
Yes and no. It depends on the state and the type of transaction. On Facebook "Gun trader" pages are very popular, what you see on these pages are not people attempting to skirt the law and actually requiring that their transactions be run through a licensed dealer.
If you buy or sell across state lines.... you MUST go through an FFL or you are breaking the law.