There have been 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook

  • 164 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Posted by PS4hasNOgames (984 posts) -

just read an article saying there have been 74 school shootings since the sandy hook massacre which left 20 children and 6 adults dead. I myself support the second amendment, fine have your guns, but what can be done to stop this? Its like every fucking week a new school shooting, people should be able to go to school and not feel scared that some psycho will shoot them.

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

These psychos shoot up a school because they can't get laid? And to those that say arm every student with a gun....please just stop that will cause any fucking small argument to lead to a shooting.

#2 Posted by vidplayer8 (18544 posts) -

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/how_many_school_shooting_incid.html

#3 Posted by Master_Live (13594 posts) -

if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

wat.

#4 Edited by Master_Live (13594 posts) -

I just finished my manifesto. Now I'm looking into leasing a black luxury car....

#5 Edited by xdude85 (4313 posts) -

#6 Posted by PS4hasNOgames (984 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:
if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

wat.

because he will steal his dads gun

I just finished my manifesto. Now I'm looking into leasing a black luxury car....

don't get it, are you referring to that kid who shot up the school last week who couldn't get laid?

#7 Posted by hippiesanta (9726 posts) -

Thank gawd me am not in amurika.... I'm still alive till today..

however I need u beautiful amurika to make my favourite movies and videogames ... and my favorite drink cococola and KFC and bik mack.

merci beaucoup amurika ... thanks for everything

#8 Posted by Korvus (2329 posts) -

Well, this is one way to start a depressing day =/

#9 Posted by Iszdope (9395 posts) -

Fuck this shit.

Fuck it.

#10 Posted by robokill (1060 posts) -

Couldn't possibly be the economy and the education system, it's dem guns, gotta control em so they can force their "curriculum" upon the slaves

#11 Posted by elkoldo (882 posts) -

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

Someone take way that kitchen knife from my mom.

#12 Posted by chaplainDMK (6649 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@ps4hasnogames said:

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

Someone take way that kitchen knife from my mom.

So you're implying that a student armed with a kitchen knife is just as lethal as a student armed with a semi-automatic rifle?

#13 Edited by 4myAmuzumament (1743 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: both are equally lethal (gun and knife). The killer decides how lethal he wants to be.

If a knife wielder hangs out in the bathroom and clandestinely slits peoples throats as they come in, he may get away with more killings than by opening fire in a public place.

#14 Posted by chaplainDMK (6649 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: both are equally lethal (gun and knife). The killer decides how lethal he wants to be.

If a knife wielder hangs out in the bathroom and clandestinely slits peoples throats as they come in, he may get away with more killings than by opening fire in a public place.

Contrary to Call of Duty, you can easily still make noises when your throat is being slit, and you don't die in 1 second. So this guy would have to be really good, or professionally trained SEAL or something, to manage to contain peoples limbs and mouth while at the same time slitting their throat and then somehow making sure the blood isn't noticeable from everywhere. Also he would have to be damn lucky that at no point multiple people wouldn't go in or that somebody wouldn't come and check in when their friend goes missing.

Meanwhile a guy with a gun can just run into a classroom and kill and wound a bunch of people with very little chance of them retaliating just because he can shoot them at range while they either have to run away or close the distance and somehow disarm him. If he ran in with a knife at best he can kill one guy and the rest either run away or somebody just smacks a stool over his head.

#15 Posted by Korvus (2329 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: Sometimes I wonder why it is so difficult for some people to tell reality and video games apart...

#16 Posted by always_explicit (2619 posts) -

I can see that a country in extreme social turmoil may find the right to bare arms constitutionally neccessary waaay back in history. However a modern society does not need its citizens to be armed in order to cohabit successfully and without fear. If kids getting shot in schools isnt enough of a shock to make people change their ways then WTF is?

#17 Posted by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

I can see that a country in extreme social turmoil may find the right to bare arms constitutionally neccessary waaay back in history. However a modern society does not need its citizens to be armed in order to cohabit successfully and without fear. If kids getting shot in schools isnt enough of a shock to make people change their ways then WTF is?

But if they gave every child a gun then they could just shoot the shooter before he shoots anyone.

#18 Posted by 35cent (876 posts) -

Wow that's a lot. No idea it was that many since Sandy Hook.

#19 Posted by Wilfred_Owen (20794 posts) -
#20 Posted by killzowned24 (7286 posts) -

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/how_many_school_shooting_incid.html

suckers will believe anything these days lol.

#21 Posted by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

@vidplayer8 said:

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/how_many_school_shooting_incid.html

suckers will believe anything these days lol.

Indeed. What a stupid article.

#22 Edited by jasean79 (2153 posts) -

#23 Edited by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

@jasean79 said:

And who's going to pay them? And how is the solution to add more guns into the mix?

There are 98,817 public schools in the USA. The average pay for a security guard is $22,000. To have three guards in each school would cost $6,521,922,000. That's a hell of a lot of money to pay for something that probably won't do anything.

#24 Posted by sonicare (53432 posts) -

Shootings are multifactorial. Obviously, having easier access to guns means that they will be more likely used for gun related crimes. Not sure what the solution is. I can understand someone's feelings about their rights to own a gun. Most gun owners are responsible, but unfortunately we suffer from the ones who aren't. Statistically, they do not make us safer but rather increase the chance of someone being killed. Part of the trouble is that any regulation towards limiting guns creates panic in certain groups - they feel that's just the first step in eliminating them for good.

Secondly, I think the media does a lot to worsen this issue. They seem to glorify the shooters - giving them instant fame and in the case of that CA kid - publishing his manifesto. I think they would be better served to report on a shooting but not give the name of the shooter. Deprive them of what they want. A somewhat less than ideal comparison is what used to happen in sports games. Sometimes fans would run unto the field or court and disrupt the game. Cameras would pan to them and they'd get all this attention. Then leagues adopted this rule that the cameras would not film fans doing that. Now, it's extremely uncommon for that to happen. No attention and fame.

#25 Posted by jasean79 (2153 posts) -

@jasean79 said:

And who's going to pay them? And how is the solution to add more guns into the mix?

I"m sure many veterans would do it for free. The solution is rather simple, you place guns in the hands of trained professionals - veterans of the United States Armed forces - would be willing to protect its citizens (children) from harm.

#26 Edited by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

@jasean79 said:

@toast_burner said:

@jasean79 said:

And who's going to pay them? And how is the solution to add more guns into the mix?

I"m sure many veterans would do it for free. The solution is rather simple, you place guns in the hands of trained professionals - veterans of the United States Armed forces - would be willing to protect its citizens (children) from harm.

And what's to prevent these veterans from shooting people or for someone to just shoot him and take his gun? Also that image seems to be suggesting that it would help with the unemployment problem, if they aren't getting paid then it doesn't help at all.

#27 Posted by LJS9502_basic (149453 posts) -

I think you are playing fast and loose with the term school shooting. The news would have been all over those incidents....and yet no news reports of 74 shootings. You might want to read your source material next time before posting.

#28 Edited by uninspiredcup (6776 posts) -

In the UK we had Hungerford massacre in which a man with semi-automatics went on a rampage and Dunblane. Since both of these happened major laws went into place to stop people freely getting semi-automatics and handguns with bans. From what I understand (unsurprisingly) it's been highly effective.

But Americans seem to love the right to bear arms. Odd. Since it was created in 1689. A time when sexual relations with children and capture and slavery of black people was the norm. Values may have been somewhat different back then.

#29 Posted by killzowned24 (7286 posts) -

In the UK we had Hungerford massacre in which a man with semi-automatics went on a rampage and Dunblane. Since both of these happened major laws went into place to stop people freely getting semi-automatics and handguns with bans. From what I understand (unsurprisingly) it's been highly effective.

But Americans seem to love the right to bear arms. Odd. Since it was created in 1689. A time when sexual relations with children and capture and slavery of black people was the norm. Values may have been somewhat different back then.

Americans are not stupid enough to be forced into cowboy era technology. Gonna take a lot more gun deaths to truly mean something with a population of almost 320 million people.

#30 Posted by foxhound_fox (86825 posts) -

I'd really like to see the statistics on how many of those weapons were legally acquired and responsibly stored.

#31 Posted by joehult (350 posts) -

The numbers have been debunked, it was started by that fascist Bloomberg. Those numbers represent robberies, fights, drug deals, accidental discharges, and a majority of them take place near colleges. Two mass college shootings have taken place since sandy hook. Two have taken place at a military base.

#32 Posted by DJ_Headshot (6176 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: both are equally lethal (gun and knife). The killer decides how lethal he wants to be.

If a knife wielder hangs out in the bathroom and clandestinely slits peoples throats as they come in, he may get away with more killings than by opening fire in a public place.

The average mass murder isn't likely to be trained I remember when sandy hook happened some psycho went around stabbing children in china I believe 30+ where injured in the attack but no one died meanwhile we all know how many kids died in sandy hook where guns where involved. Guns are clearly more lethal in there ability to kill as many people as quickly as possible even by untrained individuals you can't compare the two.

#33 Posted by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

In the UK we had Hungerford massacre in which a man with semi-automatics went on a rampage and Dunblane. Since both of these happened major laws went into place to stop people freely getting semi-automatics and handguns with bans. From what I understand (unsurprisingly) it's been highly effective.

But Americans seem to love the right to bear arms. Odd. Since it was created in 1689. A time when sexual relations with children and capture and slavery of black people was the norm. Values may have been somewhat different back then.

Americans are not stupid enough to be forced into cowboy era technology. Gonna take a lot more gun deaths to truly mean something with a population of almost 320 million people.

The UK has a population of 60 million. So America has roughly five times as many people. America doesn't have 5 times as many school shootings as the UK, it has more school shootings a month then the UK has had in its entire history.

Population has nothing to do with it. The fact is in America you are five times as likely to be murdered than in the UK.

#34 Posted by WolfgarTheQuiet (147 posts) -

@hippiesanta: Only reason why everyone should own a gun is in case corrupt government turns on its people. Thats why back in the old days every house hold in any country had a gun or two. problem in America is that so many people are on these fucked up medication that actually makes you even crazier.

#35 Posted by 4myAmuzumament (1743 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

#36 Posted by toast_burner (21122 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

You really can't tell the difference between fiction and reality can you?

#37 Posted by Jag85 (4230 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@ps4hasnogames said:

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

Someone take way that kitchen knife from my mom.

Your mum is using the kitchen knife to cook food... What is your dad doing with the gun?

Sometimes, I just don't get Americans.

#38 Posted by chaplainDMK (6649 posts) -

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

Then you're going to have to be the school cook and bring a pretty decent amount of a tasteless and colorless poison and mix it into the food, the poison also has to be slow acting enough that the cook that will certainly taste it won't die beforehand and also a poison that won't be affected by the cooking. The poison also must be something weird so the doctors wont instantly know what to do with the patients, like for example rat poison. Poison that meets all of this criteria will almost always need a special permit to get, which again limits it's usefulness.

And that's beyond the point, poisons are regulated for a function. Rat poison can't be bought in large quantities for this very reason, neither can almost any other poison. Guns in the US are unregulated as hell, it's easier to get a gun and shoot a guy than to get poison and poison him. I mean the funniest thing I find with US arms regulations is that you can't get a fully automatic weapon, but you can get a semi automatic. Like they know there's a problem with guns, but they think just limiting automatic firearms will be good enough. Even if it's a 7,62x51 semi-automatic battle rifle that will go through three walls and still kill someone. Why aren't grenades legal then? I mean apparently the kids are the problems, not the grenades.

#39 Edited by uninspiredcup (6776 posts) -

@4myAmuzumament said:

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

Doesn't make sense.

Killers who actually kill with poison prefer the distance and unanimity with mostly introvert personalities. Usually having a superiority complex or motive (many times financial) rather than last stand. They are a minority and in pretty much all cases, don't want to be found.

The act of walking into a school and shooting people is about as humanly personal, direct and attention seeking as you can get. Many wanting it to draw attention and be theatrical as possible. Many making videos before hand declaring bla bla bla, thinking they are important.

We can always say "well, they can use knife and bombs" but the fact is, it's guns that draw people and guns that are readily available and incredibly easy to use. Point, click, dead.

People who are recorded as poisoning, do not do it in mass, it's rare. And unless they are specifically trained do so (e.g.. a chemist) they generally do piss poor job of even killing one person.

#40 Posted by Master_Live (13594 posts) -

@4myAmuzumament said:

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

Then you're going to have to be the school cook and bring a pretty decent amount of a tasteless and colorless poison and mix it into the food, the poison also has to be slow acting enough that the cook that will certainly taste it won't die beforehand and also a poison that won't be affected by the cooking. The poison also must be something weird so the doctors wont instantly know what to do with the patients, like for example rat poison. Poison that meets all of this criteria will almost always need a special permit to get, which again limits it's usefulness.

And that's beyond the point, poisons are regulated for a function. Rat poison can't be bought in large quantities for this very reason, neither can almost any other poison. Guns in the US are unregulated as hell, it's easier to get a gun and shoot a guy than to get poison and poison him. I mean the funniest thing I find with US arms regulations is that you can't get a fully automatic weapon, but you can get a semi automatic. Like they know there's a problem with guns, but they think just limiting automatic firearms will be good enough. Even if it's a 7,62x51 semi-automatic battle rifle that will go through three walls and still kill someone. Why aren't grenades legal then? I mean apparently the kids are the problems, not the grenades.

Which restrictions do you propose?

#41 Posted by comp_atkins (31109 posts) -

no amount of legislation is really going to stop crazy people. what will more likely slow them is vigilance on the part of their family members, friends, neighbors etc.. if you notice your child isn't quite right, maybe it's a good idea to lock up the guns in your home a little better.

#42 Edited by chaplainDMK (6649 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@chaplainDMK said:

@4myAmuzumament said:

@chaplainDMK: using poison to contaminate the food used for school lunches is just as lethal as a gun or knife as well. Killers are the problem, not guns.

Then you're going to have to be the school cook and bring a pretty decent amount of a tasteless and colorless poison and mix it into the food, the poison also has to be slow acting enough that the cook that will certainly taste it won't die beforehand and also a poison that won't be affected by the cooking. The poison also must be something weird so the doctors wont instantly know what to do with the patients, like for example rat poison. Poison that meets all of this criteria will almost always need a special permit to get, which again limits it's usefulness.

And that's beyond the point, poisons are regulated for a function. Rat poison can't be bought in large quantities for this very reason, neither can almost any other poison. Guns in the US are unregulated as hell, it's easier to get a gun and shoot a guy than to get poison and poison him. I mean the funniest thing I find with US arms regulations is that you can't get a fully automatic weapon, but you can get a semi automatic. Like they know there's a problem with guns, but they think just limiting automatic firearms will be good enough. Even if it's a 7,62x51 semi-automatic battle rifle that will go through three walls and still kill someone. Why aren't grenades legal then? I mean apparently the kids are the problems, not the grenades.

Which restrictions do you propose?

The US is already beyond hope. The entire countries "gun-culture" is developed to a degree that no regulation will do anything. People have private arsenals full of assault rifles, carbines, hunting riffles, pistols etc., unless the government goes house to house checking and seizing gun nothing is really going to change. I watched a TV show on NatGeo where they prepare for the "apocalypse", and this couple in Texas (go figure) built a "command post" on top of their house so they will be able to organize the resistance at the point where the US Government reveals they are truly alien Lizard-People. At the end of the show they simulate an attack on the command post where they call up a bunch of friends. Suddenly 10-15 people show up, armed with M4s, M16s, G3s etc. etc., and the couple even set up booby traps consisting of explosives around the house, and they play out the dummy attack. If this thing doesn't really illustrate how disillusioned Americans have become with their gun obsession I don't think anything does.

Realistically just needing everyone that wants a gun to state a reason for what he needs it, do a psychological evaluation and needing to do regular check-ups after that to see if the reason is still valid and if he hasn't gone psycho in the meantime will go a long way. Also limit what the hell people can buy, you don't need damn high powered rifles on the market for any reason, hunters can have the high powered hunting rifles, but regular people just stick to 9mm and similar low velocity weapons. I really find it absurd that in America I can go to the local gun shop and buy a .308 Winchester battle rifle, and then pimp it out with a scope. Why, why in gods name do you need something that the Army considers overpowered for use? Self defense?

If people want to fire military grade fire-arms just have a law set up that allows gun ranges to stock these weapons and people can come and use them.

#43 Posted by happybuddha420 (26 posts) -

Probably due to black on black crime, not racist I'm from Detroit so I'd know.

#44 Edited by no-scope-AK47 (2654 posts) -

The issue is not guns it is the failure of the mental health system in America. Where you have the highest legal gun ownership crime is lowest.

#45 Posted by shadowkiller11 (7945 posts) -

In the UK we had Hungerford massacre in which a man with semi-automatics went on a rampage and Dunblane. Since both of these happened major laws went into place to stop people freely getting semi-automatics and handguns with bans. From what I understand (unsurprisingly) it's been highly effective.

But Americans seem to love the right to bear arms. Odd. Since it was created in 1689. A time when sexual relations with children and capture and slavery of black people was the norm. Values may have been somewhat different back then.

Too many of the American population have guns though so to eradicate that would be almost impossible. America screwed up a long time ago in regards to that so now they'll just have to deal with it.

#46 Posted by elkoldo (882 posts) -

@Jag85 said:

@elkoldo said:
@ps4hasnogames said:

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

Someone take way that kitchen knife from my mom.

Your mum is using the kitchen knife to cook food... What is your dad doing with the gun?

Sometimes, I just don't get Americans.

He got no gun, and I ain't no American.

#47 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (6846 posts) -

There is no fool proof defense against individual acts. The best schools can do is have effective lockdown protocols in the event of a shooting and a police officer on campus. The officer wouldn't be necessary in many cases. My old high school has a lockdown plan and a security gate that someone within the office needs to unlock to let visitors in - no police on standby.

#48 Posted by Open-Casket (72 posts) -

School shootings? Damn dude, it's not just happening there.

#49 Posted by Jag85 (4230 posts) -

@elkoldo said:

@Jag85 said:

@elkoldo said:
@ps4hasnogames said:

I say any sign of mental disorder...no guns....if a kid has a mental disorder even if its depression take away their parents guns.

Someone take way that kitchen knife from my mom.

Your mum is using the kitchen knife to cook food... What is your dad doing with the gun?

Sometimes, I just don't get Americans.

He got no gun, and I ain't no American.

Then would I be right in assuming you're from one of the many other pro-gun nations in the world?

#50 Posted by killzowned24 (7286 posts) -

@killzowned24 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

In the UK we had Hungerford massacre in which a man with semi-automatics went on a rampage and Dunblane. Since both of these happened major laws went into place to stop people freely getting semi-automatics and handguns with bans. From what I understand (unsurprisingly) it's been highly effective.

But Americans seem to love the right to bear arms. Odd. Since it was created in 1689. A time when sexual relations with children and capture and slavery of black people was the norm. Values may have been somewhat different back then.

Americans are not stupid enough to be forced into cowboy era technology. Gonna take a lot more gun deaths to truly mean something with a population of almost 320 million people.

The UK has a population of 60 million. So America has roughly five times as many people. America doesn't have 5 times as many school shootings as the UK, it has more school shootings a month then the UK has had in its entire history.

Population has nothing to do with it. The fact is in America you are five times as likely to be murdered than in the UK.

I was meaning that will there will always be a bad banana and more likely in the US than elsewhere, but that doesn't mean just because there are 15 bad ones in a ton, you just dump it all. The genetic lines alone should say the US is more risky and crazy because they had to be to risk it all and start a new.