Adam Lanza's Attack Took Less Than 5 Minutes

[The Rabbi]

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

 

[Pogo]

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

Mark the date and stop the clock -- Rabbi and I agree on something.

Of course this is what I've been saying since I came to this board...

 

[Rozman]

And if he had magazines with a lower count the attack would
have taken 6 minutes.He just would have kept swapping clips.

 

[Pete7469]

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

Ditto, I didn't think he had it in him. To bad there aren't more anti-gun bed wetters with that much sense.

Hell, with all the laws against coke and heroin we got plenty of that shit to go around too.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Congress might pass some unfunded background check bullshit to assuage the Boo Kitty crowd, but probably not even that.

The only people in favor of it don't have the clout to make it happen. They're much better at trying to legislate through the courts.

 

[FA_Q2]

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

Mark the date and stop the clock -- Rabbi and I agree on something.

Of course this is what I've been saying since I came to this board...

The real question is what to do about it though. As many have incredulously stated: what do you want us to do about sandy hook? Nothing?

That is usually followed with some snarky remark and a dismissal of your arguments because you did not ‘fix’ anything. The reality is though that gun legislation is not going to do and you cant legislate that the community or culture change as drastically as needed to drop the gun culture, nor should we. Culture is not something for the government to attempt to legislate even if it were possible.

Legislate removal of violence from movies and games? No, that’s not the answer either for not only is that a pretty big overreach, its also ineffective. We see how that has worked for the sex industry – as tightly regulated and controlled as it is here, it is certainly a MUCH larger presence in America than in a place like Europe where it is all over the damn place and no one cares.

So what is the solution? I am not sure if there is one tbh. Collectively at least. I can teach my children differently but I am one person and there are a hundred that don’t give a shit for every one that cares.

 

[CMike]

I do find it upsetting.

It's extremely unfortunate that there was nobody here with a gun to stop him.

-- because the answer to one guy with a gun is ... another guy with a gun, right?


nute period. One, maybe? Of course, he could have brought more than one gun. So, two?

If the children had nobody to protect them, he could have killed just as many, it just would have taken a little longer.[/QUOTE]

Both of these beg the question -- why should schoolchildren need someone to protect them?


**** the symptom. Let's address the disease.[/QUOTE]

Exactly right. Unless the gunman kills himself, the only thing that will stop a man with a gun is another man with a gun.

 

[eflatminor]

So what is the solution?

In my honest opinion, I think longer sentencing for those convicted of violent crimes and more cops on the streets is the best way to realize a reduction in the rate of violent crime/murder. Further, if you can find a way to force unstable individuals into treatment without violating due process and other rights, that may help. Tricky that last one...the ACLU would be all over it.

Anyway, I think more cops and longer sentences for violent criminals is an easy and effective answer to curbing violent crime. I understand this may require freeing up jail space, but that's something I think we should be doing anyway. I do not support incarcerating someone for consensual activity between adults in which no one was harmed and nothing taken, which currently represents the majority of inmates.

That would be my suggested solution.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Uh - no, I don't think that works. We have what -- 300 million guns in this country? More? And a large portion of that undocumented. Truth is, we could pass legislation tomorrow making all guns illegal across the board, and those who want one (or two or three) would still be able to get them. That's not the answer.

The key word is "want".

You don't stop a shooter who's intent on shooting. But take away his desire to shoot in the first place, and you have no issue to deal with. As I noted back in 139, we are a culture that celebrates death and guns, every opportunity we get. Television, movies, books, games, internet message boards, the NRA, foreign policy, even religion. And that's why he (Lanza) chose not only the action but the method. If we were a culture that celebrated death and poisoning, then we'd be talking about a poisoning episode at Sandy Hook.

Stop glorifying gunplay, stop holding Almighty Gun up as some deity, jettison the culture of destroying things, and abandon the idea that the answer to violence is even more violence.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our guns but in ourselves. Our values, to which we are underlings. What the **** are we thinking with this culture of destruction shit?
I have no doubt Shakespeare would have put it just like that.

Stop glorifying gunplay, stop holding Almighty Gun up as some deity, jettison the culture of destroying things, and abandon the idea that the answer to violence is even more violence.

This is where your wires are getting crossed. Only the anti gunners think guns are some super beings I hold my rights higher than anything and the gun is a tool in place that will be what I use to defend those rights.

That's ^^ a serious use of a tool, considering it's one designed to take a life.

Here's where your logic fails: A garden hoe is a tool too. Do we have a hoe culture? Do we have a National Hoe Association? Do we have an obligatory scene of a gardener hoeing in every TV drama and movie? Do we have hoe video games? A hoe religion? Hoe shows? A foreign policy of going to other countries and hoeing their fields?

We don't. A hoe is not an implement of destruction, which means we're not interested.

But if a hoe could be made to mow down 20 kids in five minutes because it looked really cool in a video game -- we would. Because that's what we like -- blowing things up, blowing things away and destroying shit. George W. Bush recounted how he would stuff frogs with firecrackers and blow them up. That's not his personal perversion; it's the culture he grew up in. He was a child of his culture, as are we. As was Adam Lanza.

That's why I keep coming back to the culture; it's always there behind every shooting, whether it's an "assault" weapon or not, whether it's a mass random shooting or a targeted murder. whether the culprit is mentally deranged or a cold calculating hit man; the gun fetish is the commonality throughout.

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

If you think it cools that's on you
Again your wires are cross and not connecting with your brain.

 

[Pogo]

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

Mark the date and stop the clock -- Rabbi and I agree on something.

Of course this is what I've been saying since I came to this board...

The real question is what to do about it though. As many have incredulously stated: what do you want us to do about sandy hook? Nothing?

That is usually followed with some snarky remark and a dismissal of your arguments because you did not ‘fix’ anything. The reality is though that gun legislation is not going to do and you cant legislate that the community or culture change as drastically as needed to drop the gun culture, nor should we. Culture is not something for the government to attempt to legislate even if it were possible.

Legislate removal of violence from movies and games? No, that’s not the answer either for not only is that a pretty big overreach, its also ineffective. We see how that has worked for the sex industry – as tightly regulated and controlled as it is here, it is certainly a MUCH larger presence in America than in a place like Europe where it is all over the damn place and no one cares.

So what is the solution? I am not sure if there is one tbh. Collectively at least. I can teach my children differently but I am one person and there are a hundred that don’t give a shit for every one that cares.

You've got exactly the right idea at the end; it starts with "me". But the "legislate culture" concern is misplaced. You can't legislate culture and I never suggested that approach (actually if I thought we could legislate culture I wouldn't be wasting the energy on message board; I'd be pitching it to legislators).

Clearly not every problem is solved by throwing legislation at the problem, least of all culture. Teach your children well. It takes time. But the longest journey begins with a single step.

 

[CMike]

If the children had nobody to protect them, he could have killed just as many, it just would have taken a little longer.

ME>> Both of these beg the question -- why should schoolchildren need someone to protect them?


ME>> **** the symptom. Let's address the disease.

Exactly right. Unless the gunman kills himself, the only thing that will stop a man with a gun is another man with a gun.

[/QUOTE]

Not nice to edit someone else's words. I never wrote "nute period". I don't even know what that means. Fix that willya.[/QUOTE]
Because there are evil people out there.

 

[koshergrl]

"**** the symtom".

In other words, "who gives a shit if kids are getting killed? They can keep getting killed until we figure out what makes killers tick."

 

[Pogo]

I do find it upsetting.

It's extremely unfortunate that there was nobody here with a gun to stop him.

-- because the answer to one guy with a gun is ... another guy with a gun, right?


nute period. One, maybe? Of course, he could have brought more than one gun. So, two?

If the children had nobody to protect them, he could have killed just as many, it just would have taken a little longer.

Both of these beg the question -- why should schoolchildren need someone to protect them?


**** the symptom. Let's address the disease.

Exactly right. Unless the gunman kills himself, the only thing that will stop a man with a gun is another man with a gun.

Not nice to edit someone else's words. I never wrote "nute period". I don't even know what that means. Fix that, willya?

 

[Pogo]

This is where your wires are getting crossed. Only the anti gunners think guns are some super beings I hold my rights higher than anything and the gun is a tool in place that will be what I use to defend those rights.

That's ^^ a serious use of a tool, considering it's one designed to take a life.

Here's where your logic fails: A garden hoe is a tool too. Do we have a hoe culture? Do we have a National Hoe Association? Do we have an obligatory scene of a gardener hoeing in every TV drama and movie? Do we have hoe video games? A hoe religion? Hoe shows? A foreign policy of going to other countries and hoeing their fields?

We don't. A hoe is not an implement of destruction, which means we're not interested.

But if a hoe could be made to mow down 20 kids in five minutes because it looked really cool in a video game -- we would. Because that's what we like -- blowing things up, blowing things away and destroying shit. George W. Bush recounted how he would stuff frogs with firecrackers and blow them up. That's not his personal perversion; it's the culture he grew up in. He was a child of his culture, as are we. As was Adam Lanza.

That's why I keep coming back to the culture; it's always there behind every shooting, whether it's an "assault" weapon or not, whether it's a mass random shooting or a targeted murder. whether the culprit is mentally deranged or a cold calculating hit man; the gun fetish is the commonality throughout.

Guns don't kill people; the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

the idea that it's a cool thing to do so with them does.

If you think it cools that's on you
Again your wires are cross and not connecting with your brain.

I don't think it is, but then it's not my idea or one I subscribe to. Nor am I a killer.

 

[Wicked Jester]

-- because the answer to one guy with a gun is ... another guy with a gun, right?


Goes right along with this:


Both of these beg the question -- why should schoolchildren need someone to protect them?

I went through every day of every grade of school with no security guards, no armed teachers, no nuttin'. Nor did any situation ever come up that even hinted at such a need.

What changed?

There is our question.
**** the symptom. Let's address the disease.

your common sense hardwire is not connecting with your brain. how do you stop someone from shooting a large group of people?
By disarming that large group of people?

Uh - no, I don't think that works. We have what -- 300 million guns in this country? More? And a large portion of that undocumented. Truth is, we could pass legislation tomorrow making all guns illegal across the board, and those who want one (or two or three) would still be able to get them. That's not the answer.

The key word is "want".

You don't stop a shooter who's intent on shooting. But take away his desire to shoot in the first place, and you have no issue to deal with. As I noted back in 139, we are a culture that celebrates death and guns, every opportunity we get. Television, movies, books, games, internet message boards, the NRA, foreign policy, even religion. And that's why he (Lanza) chose not only the action but the method. If we were a culture that celebrated death and poisoning, then we'd be talking about a poisoning episode at Sandy Hook.

Stop glorifying gunplay, stop holding Almighty Gun up as some deity, jettison the culture of destroying things, and abandon the idea that the answer to violence is even more violence.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our guns but in ourselves. Our values, to which we are underlings. What the **** are we thinking with this culture of destruction shit?
I have no doubt Shakespeare would have put it just like that.

Todays Culture is a huge part of it, but discussing it in this thread at this point is rather moot, seeing as it's getting to the point that the thread has just about run its course.

Start a new thread, from a different perspective, so people who've abandoned or unsubscribed from this one, may show up to discuss from a culture issue perspective, and not as just gun issue perspective.....Because yes, banning guns, or enacting further restrictions in any way will not do a damn thing to even remotely curb the violence.

Just a suggestion, and I know i'd participate in another thread on the subject.....And if you do start a new one, shoot me a PM.....I'd start one, i'm just not in the mood.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That's the msot intelligent thing I've seen you post. It's true. Gun availability has nothing to do with gun violence. Culture is much more determinative. Ergo laws about guns are pretty well useless.

Mark the date and stop the clock -- Rabbi and I agree on something.

Of course this is what I've been saying since I came to this board...

The real question is what to do about it though. As many have incredulously stated: what do you want us to do about sandy hook? Nothing?

That is usually followed with some snarky remark and a dismissal of your arguments because you did not ‘fix’ anything. The reality is though that gun legislation is not going to do and you cant legislate that the community or culture change as drastically as needed to drop the gun culture, nor should we. Culture is not something for the government to attempt to legislate even if it were possible.

Legislate removal of violence from movies and games? No, that’s not the answer either for not only is that a pretty big overreach, its also ineffective. We see how that has worked for the sex industry – as tightly regulated and controlled as it is here, it is certainly a MUCH larger presence in America than in a place like Europe where it is all over the damn place and no one cares.

So what is the solution? I am not sure if there is one tbh. Collectively at least. I can teach my children differently but I am one person and there are a hundred that don’t give a shit for every one that cares.

There is a solution but most Americans won’t like it, and it has noting to do with new bans, restrictions, or regulations of firearms and magazines.

 

[Ava]

attack took less than 5 minutes

Once again, proof positive that when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

Do any of you gun supporters see anything upsetting about this???

Children killed by lunatic in a gun free zone? Yes, it is clearly upsetting.

People like this Adam Lanza have to be stopped.

More gun free zones? Pass.

By: Dana Loesch (Diary) | March 28th, 2013 at 12:14 PM | 16



"I’ll admit it, my entire goal this evening was to get my friend Piers Morgan to admit the truth, which is that he’d prefer to see magazine capacity limited to zero. He answered my question. It’s a question about which many have wondered: “where do you draw the line?” Beginning around 4:00 in, via Jim Hoft:

It goes without saying that any loss of life from criminal use of guns is tragic. Morgan believes that magazines which hold 30 rounds should be banned.

Adam Lanza had several and reportedly reloaded four times. He stopped his spree when other guys with equal magazine capacities arrived on the scene. The takeaway: he reloaded. It takes seconds to reload. It takes seconds to reload a handgun — the atrocity at Virginia Tech was committed with illegally used handguns. Morgan says high capacity magazines should be banned to prevent massive loss of life. Obviously 26 lives lost is heinous, but are ten lives lost OK? Ten rounds was the limit under the ban enacted in 1994 (after which Colombine occurred).

"Some governors say now only seven rounds are acceptable. So are seven lives lost acceptable to Piers? By falsely tying saving lives to the number of rounds allowed in a magazine Morgan inadvertently answered that he would prefer zero rounds in the chamber, using his logic and the standard of measurement he himself established. Excuse the irony that more lives were saved when good guys with equal rounds showed up at the scene — but note that this was omitted."

 

[Wicked Jester]

attack took less than 5 minutes

Once again, proof positive that when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.



Children killed by lunatic in a gun free zone? Yes, it is clearly upsetting.

People like this Adam Lanza have to be stopped.

More gun free zones? Pass.

By: Dana Loesch (Diary) | March 28th, 2013 at 12:14 PM | 16



"I’ll admit it, my entire goal this evening was to get my friend Piers Morgan to admit the truth, which is that he’d prefer to see magazine capacity limited to zero. He answered my question. It’s a question about which many have wondered: “where do you draw the line?” Beginning around 4:00 in, via Jim Hoft:

It goes without saying that any loss of life from criminal use of guns is tragic. Morgan believes that magazines which hold 30 rounds should be banned.

Adam Lanza had several and reportedly reloaded four times. He stopped his spree when other guys with equal magazine capacities arrived on the scene. The takeaway: he reloaded. It takes seconds to reload. It takes seconds to reload a handgun — the atrocity at Virginia Tech was committed with illegally used handguns. Morgan says high capacity magazines should be banned to prevent massive loss of life. Obviously 26 lives lost is heinous, but are ten lives lost OK? Ten rounds was the limit under the ban enacted in 1994 (after which Colombine occurred).

"Some governors say now only seven rounds are acceptable. So are seven lives lost acceptable to Piers? By falsely tying saving lives to the number of rounds allowed in a magazine Morgan inadvertently answered that he would prefer zero rounds in the chamber, using his logic and the standard of measurement he himself established. Excuse the irony that more lives were saved when good guys with equal rounds showed up at the scene — but note that this was omitted."

Moron, er, Morgan made a complete ass of himself.

 

[CMike]

There is no way to stop violent crime.

If you want to reduce it, keep violent criminals in prison longer.

 

[CMike]

-- because the answer to one guy with a gun is ... another guy with a gun, right?


nute period. One, maybe? Of course, he could have brought more than one gun. So, two?

If the children had nobody to protect them, he could have killed just as many, it just would have taken a little longer.

Both of these beg the question -- why should schoolchildren need someone to protect them?


**** the symptom. Let's address the disease.

Exactly right. Unless the gunman kills himself, the only thing that will stop a man with a gun is another man with a gun.

Not nice to edit someone else's words. I never wrote "nute period". I don't even know what that means. Fix that, willya?

Sorry I was posting from my phone.