Another Week. Another Shooting in the Good Ol' USA

[paft.livejournal.com]

From the Seattle Times: Shortly after a gunman stalked SPU’s Otto Miller Hall on Thursday afternoon, fatally shooting one student and wounding two others, Meis made a split-second decision that some now say helped stop further carnage.

As the gunman stopped to reload his weapon in blood-splattered Miller Hall, Meis, 22, a senior engineering student from Renton, saw an opportunity, his roommate said Thursday night.

Meis, who was working at the time as a monitor who sits at a desk in the lobby, near the Hall’s front door, quickly moved in to pepper-spray the gunman, then he tackled him to the ground. Police arriving moments later moved in to handcuff and arrest the suspect, other witnesses said.

So yesterday, we had another shooting, this time in Seattle. Adam Ybarra walked onto the Seattle Pacific University Campus and opened fire with a shotgun. He was prevented, not by a "good guy with a gun," but by being tackled and subdued with pepper spray.

I really don't know how long this insanity is going to be allowed go on in my country. Not only do we have the occasional nutjob like this walking into crowded places and opening fire just for the helluvit, we've not got roving bands of "open carry" gun afficionados trying to promote the notion that only silly "gun-grabbers" object to the sight of civilians walking around brandishing shotguns in coffee shops, fast food joints, etc.



My current favorite is a fellow named Tov Henderson who recently went on MSNBC to bat his eyes prettily and pronounce himself baffled by the notion that anyone would consider gun-weilding crowds menacing.

Joy Reid: Just as an ordinary guy -- Do you think it would scare people in a movie theater if you walked into the theater with your long gun exposed?

Tov Henderson: I’m not aware of any group that’s walked into a movie theater.

Reid: I’m asking you, sir, do you think it would scare people… do you think it scares people, let alone one armed person but a bunch of armed people in this day and age when we have so many shootings? Do you think it scares people?

Henderson: I think it has the potential to do anything, to have all kinds of emotions…I could potentially have a large range of emotions….

Reid: Name some of the emotions you think it could elicit.

Henderson: Well, most of the emotions we get is support and people walking up to us… in the past when we actually did restaurants, we don’t do restaurants any more, we didn’t have any terror, we didn’t have any fright. All we had was really interested people wanted to know, ‘Hey, why don’t you guys open carry handguns, isn’t that rifle overkill?’ and we get to explain to them, it’s really a strange law but we can’t open carry our glocks…

This is the level of irrationality we've reached folks. A guy goes on national television to argue, in all seriousness, that the reaction of the average citizen to a crowd of armed civilians gathering in a business parking lot is completely up for grabs.

Because surely, if they were frightened, their first impulse would be to walk right up to the guy carrying a gun and tell him they disapproved.

Can we talk about gun control now? Please? I know, we just had another young person die in yet another random shooting, but these things seem to be happening more and more frequently, and the window of time when it might be deemed "acceptable" is becoming non-existent.

Comments

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Michael Moore was apt in saying this is the "new norm" for a lot of Americans.

"With due respect to those who are asking me to comment on last night's tragic mass shooting at UCSB in Isla Vista, CA — I no longer have anything to say about what is now part of normal American life. Everything I have to say about this, I said it 12 years ago: We are a people easily manipulated by fear which causes us to arm ourselves with a quarter BILLION guns in our homes that are often easily accessible to young people, burglars, the mentally ill and anyone who momentarily snaps."

If you can believe this (it's hard to, I admit) the NRA was criticized for being TOO SOFT on gun rights and by agreeing its members should NOT carry rifles and guns into family-friendly establishments like Chipotle and Starbucks. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nra-slams-texas-gun-group-downright-weird-scary-article-1.1814498)And the NRA suggested "To those who are not acquainted with the dubious practice of using public displays of firearms as a means to draw attention to oneself or one's cause, it can be downright scary. It makes folks who might normally be perfectly open-minded about firearms feel uncomfortable and question the motives of pro-gun advocates.” And, calling the practice "downright weird."


Brian Chrusciel of Fort Worth, Texas, poses for a portrait holding a pocket version of The Constitution of the United States and his Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, as he and members of the Open Carry Tarrant county group gathered for a demonstration on Thursday in Haltom City, Texas.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

How is that that any different from this?



"We're not going away, so get used to us!, and to make our point we're going to wave our genitalia in your face"

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

This is the level of irrationality we've reached folks. A guy goes on national television to argue, in all seriousness, that the reaction of the average citizen to a crowd of armed civilians gathering in a business parking lot is completely up for grabs.

Because surely, if they were frightened, their first impulse would be to walk right up to the guy carrying a gun and tell him they disapproved.

"It scares me" is not a reason to restrain one's rights, thankfully. If people have irrational reactions to rational activity, the issue is not the rational activity.

Can we talk about gun control now? Please? I know, we just had another young person die in yet another random shooting, but these things seem to be happening more and more frequently, and the window of time when it might be deemed "acceptable" is becoming non-existent.

It doesn't actually seem to be happening more and more frequently (http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/09/23/mass-murder-decline), so no, there's no reason to be talking about gun control. Keep trying if you must, though, but the tide has definitely turned on this issue, both in terms of general carry and open carry, and not in your direction:

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

You have a strange sense of rationality.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Vermont.

What a fucking hell hole that place is, amirite?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Thank goodness my state hasn't followed the national trend on this. One decent thing our Governor has done (that an gay marriage)

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Also:

[paft.livejournal.com]

bdj: "It scares me" is not a reason to restrain one's rights, thankfully. If people have irrational reactions to rational activity, the issue is not the rational activity.

There is absolutely nothing irrational about being scared by civilians brandishing weapons in a public. That's not irrationality. It's common sense.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I'm actually of the opinion that gun control does little to mitigate these events. (Not that I believe less gun control will do it either)

What's more relevant is gun culture, America's ammosexuality. You go to countries with bigger gun control and the public opinion of guns is very low in general. They have the kind of attitude that people in big cities in the states have. You can't just go to a rural place and restrict guns and expect that to solve the problem. First you have to get those people to think of guns as uranium, a dangerous material that they should use only as necessary.

Also, our draconian attitude toward mental illness. We need to stop shaming people with mental illness, putting them into these corners so they end up committing these crimes.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

"It scares me" is not a reason to restrain one's rights, thankfully. If people have irrational reactions to rational activity, the issue is not the rational activity.

Now, if only conservatives had told lynch mobs this in the 1870s-1960s, as opposed to leading the howling mobs killing people.

[korean-guy-01.livejournal.com]

There needs to be a social shift where concealed carry is a fundamental right without taxation in every US state. Otherwise, open carry will continue to be demonstrated.

[oportet.livejournal.com]

Looking at the bottom picture, you would think it'd only be a matter of time before a 'conceal and carry' person walks into a restaurant or out of a restaurant bathroom, sees some jackass with a rifle up and the finger on the trigger, and drops him without checking to see if he's posing for the camera...

[usekh.livejournal.com]

Their needs to be a social shift away from paranoia

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Otherwise, open carry will continue to be demonstrated.

There are reasoned arguments for concealed carry, but this isn't really one of them.

[vehemencet-t.livejournal.com]

Meis, who was working at the time as a monitor who sits at a desk in the lobby, near the Hall’s front door, quickly moved in to pepper-spray the gunman, then he tackled him to the ground. Police arriving moments later...
He was prevented, not by a "good guy with a gun," but by being tackled and subdued with pepper spray.

Yeah...I think it's safe to say that if Meis had* been carrying a gun at the time he could have subdued the shooter some time before this and from a larger distance away with respect to his safety. But that's just speculation. What makes individuals like this stand out is not the kind of weapon they are carrying, whether it is a firearm or chemical spray, but the inner courage, determination and willingness to endanger their own life to stop someone who is hurting others. Overcoming the biological fear and flight instinct is not accomplished lightly and requires extraordinary individuals or those who have undergone rigorous training. If someone else had been at that desk who didn't have that kind of inner strength, the pepper spray they had wouldn't have mattered much to the people who his actions spared further harm.

That said, something being scary is not a reason to make a law or restrict ordinary people beyond what is reasonable to them. It is far too subjective.

For example, I experience fear when I see a police person nearby who is armed because I know that if I accidentally did something which spooked them or questioned their authority or which they felt gave them cause, they could draw that weapon and shoot me dead with very little consequences from their superiors in the department. It has happened many times before. In fact, police shooting of civilians without just cause happens much more frequently than these mass shootings. Yet no one is offering any serious suggestions for how to curtail them, because the police are not up for debate in our society.

So be it. From my perspective, neither is the basic freedom of civilians to possess firearms.

Also you said, "let's talk about gun control". But offered nothing in the way of parameters. What would be your proposed form of gun control, for example, and how would you implement it?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Yeah...I think it's safe to say that if Meis had* been carrying a gun at the time he could have subdued the shooter some time before this and from a larger distance away with respect to his safety

Adding another shooter doesn't always result in less deaths.

Not to detract from his heroism, but the fact that the shooter was reloading afforded the hero the opportunity to subdue him without collateral damage.

something being scary is not a reason to make a law or restrict ordinary people beyond what is reasonable to them

Personal nukes! Maybe even combine the concept with Spike Jonze's "Her" and have AI self aware nukes!

[paft.livejournal.com]

v: Yeah...I think it's safe to say that if Meis had* been carrying a gun at the time he could have subdued the shooter some time before this and from a larger distance away with respect to his safety.

No, actually it's not "safe to say that." Meis, as far as I know, is not a trained policeman or serviceman adept enough with guns to aim and shoot it at exactly the person he'd want to shoot. And mass shooters, when they've been disarmed and stopped by civilians, have typically been disarmed and stopped by civilians without guns tackling them while they reloaded.

v: That said, something being scary is not a reason to make a law or restrict ordinary people beyond what is reasonable to them. It is far too subjective.

It is perfectly reasonable to be scared by the sight of a civilian walking around in public showing everyone his or her gun. It is even more reasonable to be scared by the sight of a group of civilians doing this.

Particularly when "jokes" like this are popular among a certain group of people.



My proposed form of gun control would involve banning handguns and certain automatic weapons and implementing it in ways that other industrialized countries have implemented gun control. Australia seems to have done a pretty good job. They would not be a bad model to follow..

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

I really do not understand the rationale of some of our conservative friends... How can one argue in the face of a shooting tragedy in favour of more guns as the only way of preventing another shooting tragedy? Does not compute...

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Actually I don't believe the argument is for more guns, it's probably for less restrictions.

As far as not computing, most all (including the Fort Hood shooting) mass shootings happen in "gun free zones". Would there have different results if open or even concealed carry was allowed? I don't know, and am unaware of data that could be used to extrapolate an answer.

For the record guns bother me and I don't even own a BB gun :D

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

"And the Lord granted upon his creation the right to Automatic Rifles, RPG's, explosives, chemical weapons, and personal nukes."

[vehemencet-t.livejournal.com]

"And yea did their Governments thus use them to Occupy, Oppress and Enforce their Capitalist Will on Their Subjects and Make War everywhere they could get away with It around the whole World."

[telemann.livejournal.com]

[flaming-goat.livejournal.com]

You seem to be acting like Chicken Little.
https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

That stats can demonstrate declining violence means we should never address existing violence.

I'll tell you what, if you experience violence non consensually, we'll just ignore it because of Pinkers stats.

[paft.livejournal.com]

And you're interpreting this to mean we shouldn't bother trying to reduce the death rate from gun violence