Update on Appomattox mass shooting

[MountainCat]

These ran in the local paper this morning:
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/lo ... ols/24115/

http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/lo ... uns/24116/

http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/lo ... rty/24117/

[zephyp]

He certainly did have an arsenal. That dont look like an ordinary collection to me...

I wonder how much of that would be auctioned off if that new bill becomes law...

[MountainCat]

I didn't see it mentioned in any articles but during the situation the shooter had police in his scope good enough to read their name tags. He choose not to shoot them because he always wanted to be a cop. Go figure.

[GS78]

hmm, when I read the story I got the feeling that the "reporter" was dismayed that he did not find more anti gun sentiment......

[MountainCat]

hmm, when I read the story I got the feeling that the "reporter" was dismayed that he did not find more anti gun sentiment......

That reporter has posted here before.

Here's an opinion piece by a different author on restaurant carry that everyone should read. It's the typical anti-piece written by the mis-informed. Feel free to leave comments below the article

http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/op ... ome/24123/

Hotlinked image from here: http://blog.ivman.com/signs-that-make-you-wonder/

[tfltackdriver]

hmm, when I read the story I got the feeling that the "reporter" was dismayed that he did not find more anti gun sentiment......

I'm the "reporter." I'm always interested in feedback when someone feels they have detected bias in my stories. Please give me a PM.

Thanks,
Chris

[allingeneral]

I see no problem with discussing it here, in the open forum. It might even be interesting.

My opinion is that there are no laws that can be written that will keep things like this from happening. It's like trying to build the perfect car that, when wrecked into a tree, no one dies. Or trying to build a perfect bobsled course, etc.. You get the point, I'm sure. It just can't be done. You can't stop every tragedy from occurring.

Further restricting firearms will not stop the problem, as evidenced by the fact that the Appomattox fella had a multitude of illegal weapons that NO ONE in the United States is allowed to own. He broke the law by owning them, then further broke the law by killing a bunch of people.

Now, if he had killed people and had not broken a law in doing so - THEN, I would support enacting a new law to stop it from happening again, but since there's already a law against killing people, it's already covered - and he will pay the price.

[zephyp]

The facts are simply:

1 - no law (old or new) can stop anyone from breaking a law or committing a heinous act
2 - laws (old or new) do not restrict the actions of law breakers
3 - laws (old or new) restrict the actions of law abiding citizens
4 - new laws where old suffice only serve for legislators to show they accomplished something

These are facts and truths -- perhaps certain journalists should report on things like this. It could help citizens understand the issues a little better and motivate them to bring pressure on legislators to enforce existing laws and quit blaming tragic events on lack of laws where they clearly do exist.