Gun owner murders young adults at nightclub

this is horrible and sad. we do not need common sense gun law, we need a total ban of all guns

https://abc7chicago.com/thousand-oaks-shooting-13-killed-at-nightclub-including-gunman-ian-david-long/4645238/

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/california-shooting-intl/index.html

It’s a shame no one was carrying at the time of attack - less people would’ve lost their lives.

@Sevenizz: Yup, because the answer is obviously more guns. Less gun deaths that way.

@sealionact: Regardless of where you stand on gun control, you can’t deny that a carrier would’ve saved lives.

You mean like the cop who got killed as well?

Yes you can absolutely deny that, most of the time carrying a gun does more harm on these situations than good.

Some people have serious problems and need help.

I'd say take all guns, but then all law abiding citizens would be even more vulnerable to the criminal element who has no limitations. Of course I'd be totally willing, if I actually had faith in police/fbi/etc. Like if I went to a place with security, and knew they'd keep me safe I'd be all for it. But how many of these killers had signs of being a deviant, and their instability went unchecked. I know a couple of them were on high risk charts and shit, even brought in by FBI, and yet still managed to get guns and attack people. If they can't stop people like that, how they gonna stop the random crazed person.

I refuse to believe that not 1 person knew he was capable of this, and wonder how easily this could have been avoided if given proper mental care. They need to test kids in school for the psychopaths and tag them. If I was tagged, I'd gladly give up several of my freedoms for welfare of country, like can't buy guns, etc. I think what they really need is facilities people can go to when they hit breaking point, like a planned parenthood but for troubled minds, not troubled genitals. If he felt he could have gone somewhere safe, and got medical treatment without being ostracized for having mental break down, maybe he would have checked himself in for the weekend.

@Sevenizz: Who would carry? The victims? You saying people in nightclubs should carry while alcohol is abundant? The doormen? They would be targets. Less guns with tighter control would mean less deaths....you can't argue with that.

You have a violence problem, not a gun problem.

When people make the decision to just take lives they’ll find a way to do it.

The shooter was a Marine, I think he would have still killed a lot of people. Oh and let's not discount the fact that one of the law enforcement officials responding was killed, and he was armed. So...

Escalation is rarely a good answer. You would rather everyone carry a gun than no one?

Suspect was a Marine, it is entirely possible he had some issues and, even if he could have gotten some mental health help, there is a huge stigma behind receiving it.

Re-reading the article and watching the video, the guy should have been monitored. Emotional issues, PTSD, combat vet, and a previous encounter with law enforcement.

When do we start taking the guns away from people like this? Or preventing them from buying them (he legally purchased a .45 Glock and extended clip). I think it's pretty obvious he should not have had them, veteran status be damned.

Nope. And in many of these shootings cops are hit as well. They certainly carry......but hey keep parroting the NRA that works for the gun industry.

And some people just want to kill. He was recently cleared of mental health issues by the way. Apparently he had none. We can't sweep all these under the mental health label. People suck. Period.

@LJS9502_basic: yeah just saw that. Sounds like they're checking him for "radicalization".

It's also possible the people assessing his mental health made a mistake, or he lied. He has a history of it, so even if he was cleared at that time, it does not mean he didn't suffer a relapse.

I suffer from mental health issues as well so I don't want to generalize and I definitely don't want people to be afraid of anyone with issues, but I can't help but feel it's still a mental health issue that led to this. With that said, I'd sooner find out the reason he went in and shot up the place was due to a variety of circumstances than simply because he was just "sad".

I happen to think people are pretty awesome, btw, and only a few truly suck.

@Sevenizz: it depends on the situation. In cases like this or the theatre shooting, more people may have gotten injured if everyone was carrying.

It's dark, it's loud, it's confusing. You'd have a bunch of untrained retards trying to figure out who the shooter is and instead of one active shooter, you have multiple people firing in all directions. It would be a giant shitshow.

So if we ban guns, then who would be left with guns? It seems like more and more shootings are happening where guns are either banned or more limited. Strange.

Actually false. Guns save more lives each year than they kill by crazy amounts. Do you have sources or are you just pulling information out of your ass? Because if you want sources then I can provide them.

This is true. This is why also places where guns are banned, stabbings quickly go on the rise.

This about as news as 'Sun Rises Again'.

Lol @Diddies, you'd rather be shot than stabbed?

I remember my Falmouth days and no-one worldwide are as tough as the British-Cornish. It was like gladiatorial combat. I remember watching two young women locked in combat outside Club-I with a ring which had been formed as the female titans duelled like it was a proper war or something. One of those girls could have broken me with one hand, she was enormous. It's a good job I was looking/cowering out of a second story window - it was intense.

But at the end of a day all you have to do is pick up the nearest beer bottle and you are basically armed to kill if you're a bonafide psychopath which it turns out, many people are.

I just don't think it makes sense to allow weapons because other people might have weapons. That's kind of a small-arms civilian cold war in some ways.

I've never seen anyone pull a knife or a gun. But the guns death stats in the US are the biggest stain on it's reputation.

As Doug Stanhope pointed out, in the US, the risk of actual instant death make most fights an exercise posturing and fearing for your life. In uk, no-one has a gun and there is an nhs so so you can just go get stitched up that same night, for free! So fighting is pretty much a national sport in your average town center or poverty stricken area (Wales, the South West and Scotland and Northern Island).

Have fun trying to figure out who to shoot in a dark club with loud music, especially if multiple people started trying to take out the shooter, you'd have no idea who the "good guy with a gun" is and who the shooter is. Also, you can give me all the stats that you like, fact is that if guns were banned you wouldn't need them to save you. Why else do you think so many people die of gun violence in the US and not in European countries where they are banned/very heavily restricted?

You can't kill nearly as many people with a knife as with a gun.

...right

No, banning all guns is ridiculous.

They need to institute federal-level gun control that limits gun ownership to those who can pass a test, limits gun ownership to weapons that are designed more specifically for sport shooting, hunting and home defence (i.e. small calibre handguns, shotguns and bolt action rifles; no civilian needs to own a 5.56mm assault rifle with a bump stock, high capacity magazine and silencer) and close loopholes like the "gun show loophole" that allows people to exchange weapons without documentation or background checks.

America doesn't have a gun problem, it has a radical white nationalism and a culture of violence problem. There are millions of gun owners in the US, many of whom own more than a dozen guns of various types, that never go on a killing rampage, and in states with stricter gun control laws (like Illinois) amounts of gun related crimes and deaths are higher than those with looser gun control laws (like Texas).

In fact, I've read somewhere that there is a correlation between permissible concealed carry laws and lower amounts of gun related crime in the US. It's almost like if you know someone beside you in line at the convenience store could be packing heat, you are less likely to commit a crime.

@MonsieurX: I’m talking about the U.S. however if you want to talk about crime then why are stabbing a really a problem now in countries such as the UK?

@deeliman: you are talking about one instance. Imagine the million plus lives saved each year I’m America due to guns. Imagine if they were banned.

Damn. Can't go outside these days....

Though I think an outright ban on guns is unrealistic.

@deeliman: I don’t know. There was that attack in I believe China like last year where he killed like 13 people. But you are being single minded. Imagine if those people had a gun and wanted to defend themselves, it would be stopped quickly. If you ban guns then violence will stay the same as history has shown. However the means of killing will just change, or only bad guys will have guns. Then millions would die.

Just like in Australia

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42749089
Context is important

Although knife crime is on the increase, it should be seen in context. It's relatively unusual for a violent incident to involve a knife, and rarer still for someone to need hospital treatment.

Most violence is caused by people hitting, kicking, shoving or slapping someone, sometimes during a fight and often when they're drunk; the police figures on violence also include crimes of harassment and stalking.

The Crime Survey for England and Wales, which includes offences that aren't reported to police, indicates that overall levels of violence have fallen by 25% since 2013.

@MonsieurX: yes you are correct. There are now more victims than a lot of countries, even the US, since they can’t defend themselves now. Thanks for pointing that out.

You missed the part were they reported the rates of violence dropped down by 23%

@MonsieurX: you messed the part that they are one of the most victimized first world countries now. Also more and more people are getting guns in Australia now more than ever.

TIL: UK is a first world country

You are assuming an awful lot here.

You have no idea how the cop reacted or how he was killed, he could have done everything by the book and simply got unlucky, or he could have simply been outclassed by a trained US marine. Or he could have been badly trained and went in with his head under his arm. Fact are that we have no idea.

But one thing is sure though, At the game with the Republican senators trained secret service agents saved a lot of lives that day.

So that's a cop, and you gun nut idiots think that a random drunk guy at a club would have done a better job? GTFO

Where did i say that?

Why else defend the idiotic "you can’t deny that a carrier would’ve saved lives" comment? Or are you contrarian for shits and giggles?

How do you go from "Trained secret service agents" to a random gun carrier?

Your logic is pretty .............. let´s say "special"

But since you missed the point, the point was simply that using the cop as an argument against guards with guns is moronic when there are countless cases of situations where trained agents with guns saved lives.

It would be nice, but it's not happening.

What exaclty are you saying? That there should be "trained agents with guns" in every fucking clud 24/7? Why are you even takling about some secret service guys in the first place, were they present at the scene?

Yeah maybe they do. But you can't kill as many people if you're only armed with a knife....and you DO have to get close to them which gives them a chance to disarm you as well. Bad analogies are bad.

Again it was pretty clear.

I am saying that using a cop being killed as an argument against armed guards is stupid when it does not prove anything. There are plenty of valid arguments both for and against but that argument is not one of them.

WTF.............why should public places be armed? Maybe with no guns we wouldn't have to worry about that. Also having an armed guard doesn't stop massacres. Hell they'd just target the guard first.

@LJS9502_basic: dumb mindset. Knife wounds are more likely fatal than gunshots.

I see reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Also no. A trained marine is going to hit center mass. That is fatal.

@LJS9502_basic: I see basic logic isn’t yours. You think banning guns will do anything. Lol I bet you are a failure in the real world too and blame it on other people as well.

Nope. Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not and never have been a failure. You know what does say failure? When you can't make coherent arguments and have to resort to ad hominem attacks on other individuals.

Knife attacks are much easier and with less casualties than gun massacres. Fact. Now wrap yourself up in the NRA blanket and be quiet.

I'm neutral on the gun situation. But have any of you wondered what would happen if all the guns were taken away or even harder for these idiots to get, that they'd just find another way to accomplish the crime. These are premeditated crimes. They could easily make pipe bombs and throw a dozen of those in a nightclub and do much more damage than a single bullet. I don't think there's any good solution. Maybe better security where a mass amount of people will be, with metal detectors etc.

@deeliman: How would you know? Almost all mass shootings happen in gun free zones. Where it's illegal to carry a gun. Yet guess what happened? He still brought a gun in.

@LJS9502_basic: fact...guns save lives way more than they take.

@Sevenizz: their were armed cops in the room. They killed just as well.