Virginia Reporter Shooter actually filmed the act.

[Boges]

Not really debatable but take a look while it's actually still available.

http://www.infowars.com/graphic-shocking-complete-video-shot-from-virginia-gunmans-point-of-view/

It'll be interesting to see if we find out dude's true motives. Apparently he felt he was being racially discriminated against.

[socialist]

Not really debatable but take a look while it's actually still available.

http://www.infowars.com/graphic-shocking-complete-video-shot-from-virginia-gunmans-point-of-view/

It'll be interesting to see if we find out dude's true motives. Apparently he felt he was being racially discriminated against.

Sounds like the guy was a major headache wherever he worked.

[sharkman]

What an idiot gone wrong. Who cares what his "motives" are, he deserved death for that disgusting attack. he committed suicide, which oddly enough may have been the only way he was going to die depending on where he was tried.

Sidebar: Colorado couldn't even put to death the theater shooter, James Holmes, for what he did. I hope he gets it in the big house.

[Bonam]

Putting aside everything else... how the heck did no one see the gun the first time he pulled it out? How did no one even glance at the guy as he was standing there right while they are doing their interview?

Just seems a bit odd somehow.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Bonam

[Topaz]

You guys must know this isn't the last of these kind of killings, the US loves their guns and there many people with other mental sickness or other reasons for killing people, we just don't know how many more will die before the majority of the population says, enough is enough.

[Hal 9000]

You guys must know this isn't the last of these kind of killings, the US loves their guns and there many people with other mental sickness or other reasons for killing people, we just don't know how many more will die before the majority of the population says, enough is enough.

Says enough is enough and....? What?

[cybercoma]

If the US spent half as much time, money, and effort addressing gun violence as they did terrorism or even drugs, the problem would be solved.

Edited August 27, 2015 by cybercoma

[Black Dog]

You guys must know this isn't the last of these kind of killings, the US loves their guns and there many people with other mental sickness or other reasons for killing people, we just don't know how many more will die before the majority of the population says, enough is enough.

If this didn't happen on TV, it wouldn't even register. Another day, another gun massacre.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Black Dog

[Civis Romanus sum]

This is not really a gun issue. It is a society issue. People focus on the guns due to their visibility. It's easy to grasp that a person used a gun to kill another person. It is less easy to grasp what in society caused them to believe they had the right to do such a thing. The US has a lot of guns. It had a lot of guns in 1950,as well, and such things did not happen then, except exceedingly rarely. The first public attack I am familiar with was the the Texas shooting in the nineteen sixties. Now they happen routinely. Why? It isn't because guns are more readily available. It's because of other factors. I have a hand gun. If I was fired, even if I thought it unfair, I would never consider shooting the people at work, if for no other reason than it would destroy my life.

This person was thus suicidal. He didn't care if he lived or died, so he didn't care if others lived or died. What made him like that? What makes so many like that today? It's not the guns.

I know, you think guns make it easier. They don't. I could kill far more people, far faster with my truck if I wanted to. Just find a crowd and drive into them at high speed, keep driving. I could easily kill dozens in the right location.

Mental health is the issue, both on an individual and societal level.

[Black Dog]

This is not really a gun issue. It is a society issue.

A society with guns.

People focus on the guns due to their visibility. It's easy to grasp that a person used a gun to kill another person. It is less easy to grasp what in society caused them to believe they had the right to do such a thing.

Whatever "causes" mental illness and homicidal behavior, the ability to act out in a violent way is greatly enhanced by the availability and ease of acquiring firearms.

The US has a lot of guns. It had a lot of guns in 1950,as well, and such things did not happen then, except exceedingly rarely. The first public attack I am familiar with was the the Texas shooting in the nineteen sixties. Now they happen routinely. Why? It isn't because guns are more readily available. It's because of other factors. I have a hand gun. If I was fired, even if I thought it unfair, I would never consider shooting the people at work, if for no other reason than it would destroy my life.

Did it though? The U.S. had about 50 million guns 20 years ago. There's about 300 million guns now (both these are rough estimates since real data is hard to come by, but they'll do for our purposes). Now, per capita rates of gun ownership have declined heavily since then, but there are a lot more guns now than there were 20, 30, 40 years back.

I know, you think guns make it easier. They don't. I could kill far more people, far faster with my truck if I wanted to. Just find a crowd and drive into them at high speed, keep driving. I could easily kill dozens in the right location.

You can't take a truck into a school or a movie theatre or workplace, can you?

Mental health is the issue, both on an individual and societal level.

Mental health is a smokescreen gun advocates like to toss up to distract from the issue of firearms.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Black Dog

[Big Guy]

It seems that when somebody from the media gets killed then it is far more important than just a regular American. This story is being played now for two days. According to American statistics, about 70 Americans were killed through gun violence over those two days.

What about those 68 other killings?

[On Guard for Thee]

Says enough is enough and....? What?

And put some meaningful gun laws in effect and take a step back from continually flogging this 2nd amendment crap (even though they usually misrepresent it anyway). Unfortunately, the place is now so awash in guns, it may take a while for anything to have much effect. Sometimes you have to look long term.

[Black Dog]

It seems that when somebody from the media gets killed then it is far more important than just a regular American. This story is being played now for two days. According to American statistics, about 70 Americans were killed through gun violence over those two days.

What about those 68 other killings?

It's not about the media, it's the fact it happened live on air.

BTW: are members of the media not also regular Americans?

[Black Dog]

Boy you know shooting sprees are old hat when even the resident gun nuts can't be arsed to rouse themselves to trot out their usual fake-ass NRA talking points.

Anyway, here's an answer to the the usual line about "what about (insert other shooting here)?"

...you simply can’t get angry at every gun death you read about or hear about on TV.

We literally can’t. Our brains are incapable of that sort of extended, mass empathy. Evolution has programmed us to fear threats we can see. If you see a woman being shot, her face shocked and in terror, our brains physically react. Our adrenaline gland releases hormones. We want to fight or flee. We are scared. We get angry. We demand action.

There were 32,000 gun deaths in the U.S. last year; that’s more than there were car deaths. We read about a tiny percentage. And unless you’re a cop, or a mortician, odds are you didn’t see any of them, unless perhaps you looked at the front cover of the New York Daily News today. There was one of those murders, one of those people as they died.

Link

Edited August 28, 2015 by Black Dog

[Mighty AC]

Did it though? The U.S. had about 50 million guns 20 years ago. There's about 300 million guns now (both these are rough estimates since real data is hard to come by, but they'll do for our purposes). Now, per capita rates of gun ownership have declined heavily since then, but there are a lot more guns now than there were 20, 30, 40 years back.

Your post is bang on about the presence and prevalence of guns enhancing the death toll. However, to this point above I would also add that social and financial equality has declined since the 1950's. There are more poor, household incomes are flat, but it now takes two people (on average) to earn what one did 50 years ago. More people below the poverty line, with few options and little hope leads to crime and anger and violence. Introduce guns into angry situations and we have a plethora of deaths. Removing guns would instantly help the death toll, reducing poverty and wealth inequality would also help crime rates, education rates, the economy, life expectancy, health care costs, etc.

The US is essentially an illustration of the conservative race to the bottom, the privatization of profits but socialization of costs, coupled with deadly weapons.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Mighty AC

[WestCoastRunner]

Studies have also shown (and I'll post later on im on my iPhone) that while rates of mental illness haven't increased much, mass shootings have.

[Derek 2.0]

Boy you know shooting sprees are old hat when even the resident gun nuts can't be arsed to rouse themselves to trot out their usual fake-ass NRA talking points.

Why bother? We've "won", even a Socialist like Bernie Sanders is pro gun rights......partaking in the gun-control nuts grave dancing only gives some semblance of credibility to their position, much like debating conspiracy theories or trolling on internet forums.

To the conclusion offered by the author of your linked piece:

On an average day in America, 87 people will be killed by guns. That’s 29 dead by breakfast, 47 by lunch. It’s three o’clock as I write this. That’s 55 killed so far today. But these deaths go unseen and unnoticed. Maybe if they didn’t, if we saw the horrific, obscene truth of those numbers, people would pay more attention. If newspapers and magazines printed crime-scene photos and shared CCTV footage, we might keep talking. Maybe, like the McDaniels photo, it could lead to something. Or, like the McDaniels photo, it won’t lead to enough. Either way, at this point, we need to try.

Despite the suggestion of gaining more attention through the use of more horrific images of gun deaths (further grave dancing) the antis still don't see why they are doomed to still fail.........reasonable people don't equate such deaths to the majority of firearms owners across the United States, nor do reasonable people equate such deaths even to the NRA........

The anti's agenda and methods are much like social conservatives and religious groups arguments against gay rights and abortion.......through your own manner of discourse you've only achieved painting yourself into the corners of the lunatic fringe........as I've said countless times, if you want to see further reductions in gun crime, you've got to sort yourselves out first, than discuss that actual root causes.

Until then, we've won and you've lost.

[bush_cheney2004]

Your post is bang on about the presence and prevalence of guns enhancing the death toll. However, to this point above I would also add that social and financial equality has declined since the 1950's.

This is laughable of course....easily written by someone who did not grow up or live in the U.S. since the 1950's.

Watching on American TV doesn't count.

[TimG]

Studies have also shown (and I'll post later on im on my iPhone) that while rates of mental illness haven't increased much, mass shootings have.

That is because the media, the internet and social media ensure wide distribution of whatever crazy ideas the shooter may have. We could not create a better environment for encouraging mass killings if we tried. Edited August 28, 2015 by TimG

[bush_cheney2004]

...Until then, we've won and you've lost.

It was always "won"....never a battle, and certainly not from Canada. Something about the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

[WestCoastRunner]

That is because the media, the internet and social media ensure wide distribution of whatever crazy ideas the shooter may have.

What does that have to do with what I posted?

[TimG]

What does that have to do with what I posted?

Your posted the claim that the number of mass killings has increased even as the rate of mental illness remains constant. I am saying the notoriety bestowed on crazies by the media/internet creates an environment that encourages crazies to kill people in order to be heard. Edited August 28, 2015 by TimG

[Shady]

Studies have also shown (and I'll post later on im on my iPhone) that while rates of mental illness haven't increased much, mass shootings have.

Dealing with mentally ill people is much more difficult than it used to be in the past because of liberal do-gooders like yourself. This isn't a gun issue at all. This crime could've been committed with a hunting rifle. And nobody's pushing the idea of banning those.

[WestCoastRunner]

Your posted the claim that the number of mass killings has increased even as the rate of mental illness remains constant. I am saying the notoriety bestowed on crazies by the media/internet creates an environment that encourages crazies to kill people in order to be heard.

I won't disagree with you on that point. There is a bizarre culture in America to gain fame Edited August 28, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

[Shady]

Oh and gun violence is actually down despite WCR lies and assertions.