|
Hmmm...
Let's say the backpack was stuffed full of books, papers, etc., and the gun was in the farthest front part of the bag (furthest away from the shoulder straps), and then was set down on a desk with the shoulder straps being down, that would mean the gun would be ponting at around shoulder level if the victims were sitting adjacent to the kid with the gun.
But as I've said 19 times, guns don't do that. So why did it do that? Maybe the gun was modified.
|
On January 19 2011 06:47 LazyMacro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 06:39 Nyx wrote:On January 19 2011 05:31 MidKnight wrote: How often do school shootings stuff happen in the other parts of the world btw? There are a lot of fucked up people all over the world, sure, but a random student WILL NOT be able to get a firearm in most other countries, so it usually just remains a fantasy..
I'm sorry, but 2nd amendment is a joke.It's a law enforced 200+ years ago and now people look at it as some sort of "tradition" which "made America oh so great".It's plain and simple brainwashing. Apply common sense moar..
Other than that, let's hope there will be no casualties out of this thing.. We don't have shootings, but kids still manage to kill each other with knives, so.... I think this just illustrates that if someone has malicious intent, they will carry out their plan with what is available. It's not like you make all guns disappear, and all the murderers, rapists, robbers, and psychos just go, "Aw, shit" and go home.
Well, yeah, but one psycho student can't efficiently go on a rampage and kill 20 kids with a knife. I mean, I DO AGREE that a person with malicious intent will do something sometime eventually, restricting guns wouldn't solve the problem per se, but I'm sure that school shootings wouldn't happen the way they have been happening, just because a kid could find his father's pistol in his drawer..
America's 2nd amendment is one of those old laws which don't really make sense anymore, but it is still applied because "the founding fathers gave us these rights blah blah blah".
For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
I'm talking about developed countries.Lithuania has a long way to go until it can be compared to any of the superpower ones.. What I'm saying is that with a relatively easy acess to a firearm shit like school shootings can happen.A random geek who was abused at school can't really decide to go on a rampage as easily otherwise.
Obviously, it's one of those subjects which don't have right or wrong answer, it's more about where were we born and how were we raised.If you were a Euro and I was born in USA, our roles would most likely be switched..
|
most modern semi-automatic firearms have something called a drop safety, which means the firing pin will not engage when the gun is dropped on a hard surface. unless he had a revolver with the hammer back or the safety off with something engaging the trigger or a really old POS firearm, the gun did not go off by simply setting it on the table.
|
The Google ads here have a sick sense of humor.
|
On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland
|
On January 19 2011 07:48 theron[wdt] wrote: most modern semi-automatic firearms have something called a drop safety, which means the firing pin will not engage when the gun is dropped on a hard surface. unless he had a revolver with the hammer back or the safety off with something engaging the trigger or a really old POS firearm, the gun did not go off by simply setting it on the table.
So we are assuming that he has a modern firearm? As far as I know we still don't know what type of weapon it was, could have been a WWII Sten, which is known for accidental discharge when it is dropped. And although I doubt it, a long rifle, which most do not have a drop safety.
"Accidental discharges not involving trigger-pull can also occur if the firearm is mechanically unsound: poor maintenance, abuse, inept "gunsmithing," or the use of substandard materials or defective ammunition in the gun may all lead to breakage."
Old dirty gun not taken care of from grandpas old stuff in the attic? Until they tell us more, we are kinda stuck on the AD part of it.
|
On January 19 2011 07:58 bluefuzz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 07:48 theron[wdt] wrote: most modern semi-automatic firearms have something called a drop safety, which means the firing pin will not engage when the gun is dropped on a hard surface. unless he had a revolver with the hammer back or the safety off with something engaging the trigger or a really old POS firearm, the gun did not go off by simply setting it on the table. So we are assuming that he has a modern firearm? As far as I know we still don't know what type of weapon it was, could have been a WWII Sten, which is known for accidental discharge when it is dropped. And although I doubt it, a long rifle, which most do not have a drop safety. "Accidental discharges not involving trigger-pull can also occur if the firearm is mechanically unsound: poor maintenance, abuse, inept "gunsmithing," or the use of substandard materials or defective ammunition in the gun may all lead to breakage." Old dirty gun not taken care of from grandpas old stuff in the attic? Until they tell us more, we are kinda stuck on the AD part of it. Agreed. This is why I keep calling bullshit on the "official" reports. It's not the first time they've said things that aren't true.
There's a factor other than "it was dropped."
|
On January 19 2011 07:58 bluefuzz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 07:48 theron[wdt] wrote: most modern semi-automatic firearms have something called a drop safety, which means the firing pin will not engage when the gun is dropped on a hard surface. unless he had a revolver with the hammer back or the safety off with something engaging the trigger or a really old POS firearm, the gun did not go off by simply setting it on the table. So we are assuming that he has a modern firearm? As far as I know we still don't know what type of weapon it was, could have been a WWII Sten, which is known for accidental discharge when it is dropped. And although I doubt it, a long rifle, which most do not have a drop safety. "Accidental discharges not involving trigger-pull can also occur if the firearm is mechanically unsound: poor maintenance, abuse, inept "gunsmithing," or the use of substandard materials or defective ammunition in the gun may all lead to breakage." Old dirty gun not taken care of from grandpas old stuff in the attic? Until they tell us more, we are kinda stuck on the AD part of it. This is most likely it, a very similar (without wounding anyone) shot was fired at my school by accident.
Kid brings gun to school, has it in pocket, discharged and did not hurt anyone. I just don't understand if you were showing off or intimidating why you would need a loaded weapon.
|
On January 19 2011 08:02 Terrakin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 07:58 bluefuzz wrote:On January 19 2011 07:48 theron[wdt] wrote: most modern semi-automatic firearms have something called a drop safety, which means the firing pin will not engage when the gun is dropped on a hard surface. unless he had a revolver with the hammer back or the safety off with something engaging the trigger or a really old POS firearm, the gun did not go off by simply setting it on the table. So we are assuming that he has a modern firearm? As far as I know we still don't know what type of weapon it was, could have been a WWII Sten, which is known for accidental discharge when it is dropped. And although I doubt it, a long rifle, which most do not have a drop safety. "Accidental discharges not involving trigger-pull can also occur if the firearm is mechanically unsound: poor maintenance, abuse, inept "gunsmithing," or the use of substandard materials or defective ammunition in the gun may all lead to breakage." Old dirty gun not taken care of from grandpas old stuff in the attic? Until they tell us more, we are kinda stuck on the AD part of it. This is most likely it, a very similar (without wounding anyone) shot was fired at my school by accident. Kid brings gun to school, has it in pocket, discharged and did not hurt anyone. I just don't understand if you were showing off or intimidating why you would need a loaded weapon. Well, plenty of people having loaded firearms for various legitimate reasons, but carrying a loaded firearm improperly to school where you're prohibited from having it and then sweeping the muzzle across fellow students while your piece of shit gun shoots them isn't legitimate.
/run on
|
On January 19 2011 07:55 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland
Finland needs stricter gun restriction laws. As does USA.
|
On January 19 2011 08:09 11cc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 07:55 BlackJack wrote:On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland Finland needs stricter gun restriction laws. As does USA.
Simple concept: less gun control, less gun related crime. It doesn't have to make sense to you and you don't have to like it but facts are facts.
|
Didn't even take a page to devolve into foreigners demanding some country overseas to change it's law based on their own culture. sigh, I see the "How hard is it to get "pointbeingmade" a lot... How hard is it to get that parents should raise their children better? Sorry but this only reinforces the fact that I need a gun(don't have one don't care) to protect myself from feral children with very little parental monitoring. So easy for you guys to believe that taking away the temptation is the solution when instead the willpower that gave into temptation is the thing to be tempered into something remotely beneficial to society. So the reality of the matter is that we need to have a population and birth cap... Cause I mean it's related to a school shooting no? Less kids=less people to shoot less statistical probability that the kid would've even existed... related right.... I hate you guys. :D But for real, population cap would satisfy all the problems you claim gun control would fix... If a kid had the gall to go to a school to shoot someone, I think even without a gun they'd find a way, tho it'd probably be a bomb, seeing as how the "kid" wouldn't have the nerve to do something a personal as a knife killing. Bombs are ez to make, maybe we should start banning all the ingredients of home made pipe bombs, and books, let's ban those cause they create inciteful ideas in progressive children's minds. Also, TV seems to be a negative influence as well as video games, let's get rid of those why don't we? I mean while we're at it we might as well, don't want to do anything half assed amirite? Yeah I'm using slippery slope theory on you, what of it, you use it to justify your point so I can't?
Edited to be less condescending. I don't wanna be banned again. *shudder* >.>
|
On January 19 2011 05:28 Haemonculus wrote:Show nested quote +At that point it doesn't matter if it's a gun, a knife, a cup of hot coffee, etc. This argument has never made sense to me.
This is of course hypothetical, please don't jump the gun on this (no pun intended).
If I wanted to cause serious damage to my school and maim a large number of students as well as inflict damage on the actual building, I could make a small bomb with easily accessable materials and do so. If I wanted to kill indiscrimitely, I could drive my SUV through any crowd and take down as many ppl as I see fit. Hell, I could simply mess up the train tracks around my house if I felt so inclined and kill commuters.
The point of this arguement is, its not hard to kill people and the physical act of murder is the problem, not guns.
|
On January 19 2011 08:13 reg wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 08:09 11cc wrote:On January 19 2011 07:55 BlackJack wrote:On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland Finland needs stricter gun restriction laws. As does USA. Simple concept: less gun control, less gun related crime. It doesn't have to make sense to you and you don't have to like it but facts are facts. Reg says it, so it is true?
Oh how I love thee, internet.
A quick Google showed numerous studies from Yale etc explicitly challenging the idea.
|
On January 19 2011 08:28 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 08:13 reg wrote:On January 19 2011 08:09 11cc wrote:On January 19 2011 07:55 BlackJack wrote:On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland Finland needs stricter gun restriction laws. As does USA. Simple concept: less gun control, less gun related crime. It doesn't have to make sense to you and you don't have to like it but facts are facts. Reg says it, so it is true? Oh how I love thee, internet. A quick Google showed numerous studies from Yale etc explicitly challenging the idea.
But did they take into account that facts are facts?
|
On January 19 2011 08:28 Romantic wrote: Reg says it, so it is true?
Oh how I love thee, internet.
A quick Google showed numerous studies from Yale etc explicitly challenging the idea.
On January 19 2011 08:35 11cc wrote:
But did they take into account that facts are facts?
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/busting-the-gun-control-equals-less-crime-myth
Perhaps next time you can keep your snide little fingers away from the keyboard and participate like an adult. If you have a disagreement voice it but don't waste my time with your stupidity.
User was warned for this post
|
so pro carrys would claim it was lack of education on properly handling a firearm that led to this tragedy. lol
|
On January 19 2011 05:17 Gatsbi wrote: how does a trigger of a gun get pulled by falling? this doesnt make any sense
If the safety is not on, the gun can accidentally discharge, but still....WTF? I've heard of one round discharge, but three? For one thing, even if he did have a license, he should have had the freakin' safety on .
And for another thing... you cannot be in possession of a firearm until at least 18...and plus the fact that you would only be permitted to own shotguns or rifles even with a license at that young of an age, not concealed handguns.
The school smells of phony...probably just trying to cover their own asses from any paperwork...either way the kid is going to get charged.
|
On January 19 2011 08:13 reg wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 08:09 11cc wrote:On January 19 2011 07:55 BlackJack wrote:On January 19 2011 07:46 MidKnight wrote: For some reason developed countries which have gun restriction laws don't have bad guys killing regular citizens left and right because regular citizens "oops they didn't have guns to defend themselves".
You know who has the most school shooting deaths per capita in recent history? Finland Finland needs stricter gun restriction laws. As does USA. Simple concept: less gun control, less gun related crime. It doesn't have to make sense to you and you don't have to like it but facts are facts.
I would love to know what your definition of "fact" is
The CCN url says three students and the article says 2 students, as well as saying that the gun fell down on the grass and shot one student in the face and one in the neck, i wonder how that works.
|
On January 19 2011 05:10 DwD wrote: ??? That can't be right. How can the gun shoot 3 people on accident while being dropped? Did he carry a fucking m16 in his backpack...
Please don't start this again because everyone knows that most of the shootings in the U.S. are by illegally obtained guns. The only thing a gun law restricts is the right for law abiding citizens to have them. Duh.
|
|
|
|