Oregon Shooter's Mother Wrote About Guns In Online Forum

[Roudy]

Insane or sane, these shootings are going to continue, and so will the daily killings all over major urban areas across this country. If all the guns are gathered up properly, and the sale of guns for hobby or personal use is banned, you will see the gun violence numbers drop dramatically. Change the constitution and put the gun industry out of business.

If we cleaned out the ghettos we'd be the safest first world nation on the planet.

If you want to stay safe you need to be living in a good, well policed neighborhood. You can be armed to the teeth in a bad neighborhood and you will still get shot by a stray bullet while walking in the street.

Which is why we need to clean out the ghettos.
The only way we curb gun violence is to make long prison sentences mandatory when someone commits a crime with a gun.
As we all know it's the repeat offenders doing most of the killing.

I agree, the only way the ghettos can be cleaned is if we bring in the national guard and martial law to those areas, but then again, it's a slippery slope. Where do we stop?

Until all illegal guns are gone. It's simple.

It won't help. The gangs and criminals will close shop and move elsewhere.

Gun free cities or zones don't work when there are guns all over the country. Either all or nothing. The school the shooter went into was stupid not to have at least one or two armed guards. Every school should have armed police the way I see it.

 

[Roudy]

Oh let it go man. He was just another lunatic who the public can't forget soon enough.

Move on.

Fuck you! With that attitude nothing will change.

It won't. The crazies have completely flooded this country with guns to the point of no return. You want to save lives? Invent a gun that can set phasers to 'stun.' Maybe stun guns will take the market share.

Ya just cant hold the black women responsible for giving her crazy ass son the go ahead to own firearms knowing he was nuts can you?

Fact: it's easier for bad guys to get a gun in this country than any other country on the entire planet.

There will be much less opportunity for bad guys to get guns when all guns are banned.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Oh let it go man. He was just another lunatic who the public can't forget soon enough.

Move on.

Fuck you! With that attitude nothing will change.

It won't. The crazies have completely flooded this country with guns to the point of no return. You want to save lives? Invent a gun that can set phasers to 'stun.' Maybe stun guns will take the market share.

Ya just cant hold the black women responsible for giving her crazy ass son the go ahead to own firearms knowing he was nuts can you?

Fact: it's easier for bad guys to get a gun in this country than any other country on the entire planet.

There will be much less opportunity for bad guys to get guns when all guns are banned.

Since thats out of the question we need to lock up criminals for long stretches.

 

[Roudy]

It isn't going to happen, obviously....

.... because people like you aren't willing to do what's necessary to get the job done.
Instead, you mindlessly snipe form behind the safety of your monitor and achieve nothing.
You REALLY think guns are a problem? Do something about it.

FYI I am a conservative and Trump supporter, except when it comes to guns. There is nothing I or anyone else can do about guns, unless the constitution is changed. Do people really think an "armed militia" of citizens owning handguns and shotguns, is going to stop the most advanced and best trained military we have in the U.S.? Seriously. This is not what the founders envisioned. I can guaran fucking T you that.

You're assuming the military is going to be on the side of the gun grabbers.
I promise you they wont be.

Well that's why owning guns is supposedly in the constitution.

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

.... because people like you aren't willing to do what's necessary to get the job done.
Instead, you mindlessly snipe form behind the safety of your monitor and achieve nothing.
You REALLY think guns are a problem? Do something about it.

FYI I am a conservative and Trump supporter, except when it comes to guns. There is nothing I or anyone else can do about guns, unless the constitution is changed. Do people really think an "armed militia" of citizens owning handguns and shotguns, is going to stop the most advanced and best trained military we have in the U.S.? Seriously. This is not what the founders envisioned. I can guaran fucking T you that.

You're assuming the military is going to be on the side of the gun grabbers.
I promise you they wont be.

Well that's why owning guns is supposedly in the constitution.

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

 

[Roudy]

Fuck you! With that attitude nothing will change.

It won't. The crazies have completely flooded this country with guns to the point of no return. You want to save lives? Invent a gun that can set phasers to 'stun.' Maybe stun guns will take the market share.

Ya just cant hold the black women responsible for giving her crazy ass son the go ahead to own firearms knowing he was nuts can you?

Fact: it's easier for bad guys to get a gun in this country than any other country on the entire planet.

There will be much less opportunity for bad guys to get guns when all guns are banned.

Since thats out of the question we need to lock up criminals for long stretches.

And how can we even go after the criminals when Obama constantly bashes the cops and virtually incapacitated our police force from profiling and taking strong actions? The justice dept is now on the criminal's side. Plus non of the laws we have on the books now will prevent any future shootings and massacres from happening. Let's not kid ourselves. It's good to pretend that mental illness is to blame and not the open availability of guns, but where do we draw the line? Who and what decides that a person is mentally ill? Does taking anti depressants qualify as a reason to take away a person's right to have firearms? Does a history of violence? How about a call from a relative or friend? Imagine the number of false alarms and can of worms that will be opened with all the litigation from people who's guns have been taken away. It's not as easy as one might think.

 

[Roudy]

FYI I am a conservative and Trump supporter, except when it comes to guns. There is nothing I or anyone else can do about guns, unless the constitution is changed. Do people really think an "armed militia" of citizens owning handguns and shotguns, is going to stop the most advanced and best trained military we have in the U.S.? Seriously. This is not what the founders envisioned. I can guaran fucking T you that.

You're assuming the military is going to be on the side of the gun grabbers.
I promise you they wont be.

Well that's why owning guns is supposedly in the constitution.

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

Winning a war is a different story. Using the military to get control and stay in power is another. Regardless of whether a people are armed or not, no govt. eventually wins a war if the people don't want them there. It's like a powder keg that will explode one day.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It won't. The crazies have completely flooded this country with guns to the point of no return. You want to save lives? Invent a gun that can set phasers to 'stun.' Maybe stun guns will take the market share.

Ya just cant hold the black women responsible for giving her crazy ass son the go ahead to own firearms knowing he was nuts can you?

Fact: it's easier for bad guys to get a gun in this country than any other country on the entire planet.

There will be much less opportunity for bad guys to get guns when all guns are banned.

Since thats out of the question we need to lock up criminals for long stretches.

And how can we even go after the criminals when Obama constantly bashes the cops and virtually incapacitated our police force from profiling and taking strong actions? The justice dept is now on the criminal's side. Plus non of the laws we have on the books now will prevent any future shootings and massacres from happening. Let's not kid ourselves. It's good to pretend that mental illness is to blame and not the open availability of guns, but where do we draw the line? Who and what decides that a person is mentally ill? Does taking anti depressants qualify as a reason to take away a person's right to have firearms? Does a history of violence? How about a call from a relative or friend? Imagine the number of false alarms and can of worms that will be opened with all the litigation from people who's guns have been taken away. It's not as easy as one might think.

The whole pandering to criminals is part of a larger issue involving government manipulation of our society.
You're not going to stop all murders no matter what you do,all we can do is limit them.
You start locking up the career criminals that are responsible for the majority of killings in this country and you'd see a huge difference.
As far as the mentally ill go they fall into the same category of "you cant stop em all" but I believe more could be done to keep guns out of the hands of nut jobs but it has to come from the family not the government,there's just way to many chances for abuse.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You're assuming the military is going to be on the side of the gun grabbers.
I promise you they wont be.

Well that's why owning guns is supposedly in the constitution.

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

Winning a war is a different story. Using the military to get control and stay in power is another. Regardless of whether a people are armed or not, no govt. eventually wins a war if the people don't want them there. It's like a powder keg that will explode one day.

True to a certain extent,the government can hold onto power if the military supports them,but it's usually at the cost of civilian lives which of course doesnt go over to well with the populace which insures the eventual failure of the country.
If the military doesnt support em it'll be over quickly for those in power.

 

[Roudy]

Well that's why owning guns is supposedly in the constitution.

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

Winning a war is a different story. Using the military to get control and stay in power is another. Regardless of whether a people are armed or not, no govt. eventually wins a war if the people don't want them there. It's like a powder keg that will explode one day.

True to a certain extent,the government can hold onto power if the military supports them,but it's usually at the cost of civilian lives which of course doesnt go over to well with the populace which insures the eventual failure of the country.
If the military doesnt support em it'll be over quickly for those in power.

China, Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Cuba, etc. these are all govt.s that the people do not want them in power, but have the support of the military. They continue to kill and brutalize the people. Until a Western govt. interferes using military power, like with Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya, it doesn't look like they're going away anytime soon. You cannot overthrow a govt. and it's military using "armed militias" of citizens in the 20th and 21st centuries.

The whole premise of the 2nd amendment is false and no longer valid. Unfortunately, nothing is going to change and we will keep seeing people killed in inner cities and horrific massacres like the Oregon school shooting.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Thats exactly why it's there.
And you have to remember how difficult it would be be for the government to control 300 million pissed off people.
It cant be done and they know it.

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

Winning a war is a different story. Using the military to get control and stay in power is another. Regardless of whether a people are armed or not, no govt. eventually wins a war if the people don't want them there. It's like a powder keg that will explode one day.

True to a certain extent,the government can hold onto power if the military supports them,but it's usually at the cost of civilian lives which of course doesnt go over to well with the populace which insures the eventual failure of the country.
If the military doesnt support em it'll be over quickly for those in power.

China, Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Cuba, etc. these are all govt.s that the people do not want them in power, but have the support of the military. They continue to kill and brutalize the people. Until a Western govt. interferes using military power, like with Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya, it doesn't look like they're going away anytime soon. You cannot overthrow a govt. and it's military using "armed militias" of citizens in the 20th and 21st centuries.

The whole premise of the 2nd amendment is false and no longer valid. Unfortunately, nothing is going to change and we will keep seeing people killed in inner cities and horrific massacres like the Oregon school shooting.

So did those governments disarm the populace to gain and keep control of it's citizens?
The intent of the 2nd is pretty clear and still very valid.
The only way the gov wins is if the military turns on the people,which I highly doubt is going to happen in the U.S.

 

[Lakhota]

To make the OP even more bizarre - the shooter's mother is a nurse. A nurse!

 

[williepete]

So did those governments disarm the populace to gain and keep control of it's citizens?
The intent of the 2nd is pretty clear and still very valid.
The only way the gov wins is if the military turns on the people,which I highly doubt is going to happen in the U.S.

History proves that even under the most despotic, ruthless tyrants, heroes and patriots, civilian and military rise to the occasion.

Operation Valkyrie

Claus von Stauffenberg

(1907 - 1944)

Germany remembers Operation Valkyrie, the plot to kill Hitler | Germany | DW.COM | 20.07.2011








Off topic. Sorry.


---------------------------------

 

[2aguy]

Investigators say Harper-Mercer's mother has told them the son was struggling with some mental health issues.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The mother of a gunman who killed nine people and himself at an Oregon community college allowed her troubled son to have guns and acknowledged in online posts that he struggled with autism, but she didn't seem to know he was potentially violent.

The online writings by Laurel Harper date from a year ago to nine years ago and offer fresh insight into the gunman, 26-year-old Christopher Harper-Mercer, and his relationship with his mother.

The Associated Press didn't speak with Harper about the online postings; a knock on her door went unanswered Tuesday, and her phone's voicemail box was full. However, the postings included an email address that is linked to Harper.

She and Harper-Mercer shared an apartment outside Roseburg. Investigators have recovered 14 firearms — six found at Umpqua Community College, where the killings occurred, and eight at the apartment. Neighbors of the mother and son in California, where they lived before moving to Oregon in 2013, have said the two went target shooting together.

Investigators say Harper-Mercer's mother has told them the son was struggling with some mental health issues.

In her online postings, Laurel Harper talked about her love of guns and her son's emotional troubles, but there are no hints of worry that he could become violent.

"I keep two full mags in my Glock case. And the ARs & AKs all have loaded mags. No one will be 'dropping' by my house uninvited without acknowledgement," reads a 3-year-old posting.

She was referring to a Glock handgun and to military-style rifles. A Glock and a military-style rifle were among the weapons seized after the Roseburg shooting rampage.

Laurel Harper wrote in another posting: "I love the long guns & I have an AK-47 en route." She complained about gun-control efforts in "lame states."

She posted several times that her son had Asperger's syndrome, a mild form of autism.

More: Oregon Shooter's Mother Wrote About Guns In Online Forum

Struggling with mental health issues? Asperger's syndrome? Autism? Holy shit, this nut was a ticking time bomb - and his gun nut mother was too dumb to see it - or acknowledge it. The shooter was like a poster boy for universal background checks.

No.....do you know how many people in this country have those same mental health issues and don't kill anyone.....

He would have passed a universal background check moron.......just like he passed the current federally mandated background check..

The colorado shooter and the sandy hook shooter would have both passed universal background checks.

Did you mention that the mother is allegedly African American....? Seems like the press keeps forgetting that.....

 

[2aguy]

This woman has a lot to answer for. She knew her son was unhinged but did nothing about it.

How do you know what his symptoms were.......how many people have his exact symptoms and don't shoot anyone?

 

[2aguy]

Oh let it go man. He was just another lunatic who the public can't forget soon enough.

Move on.

Fuck you! With that attitude nothing will change.

It won't. The crazies have completely flooded this country with guns to the point of no return. You want to save lives? Invent a gun that can set phasers to 'stun.' Maybe stun guns will take the market share.

Ya just cant hold the black women responsible for giving her crazy ass son the go ahead to own firearms knowing he was nuts can you?

Fact: it's easier for bad guys to get a gun in this country than any other country on the entire planet.

There will be much less opportunity for bad guys to get guns when all guns are banned.

Nope, criminals get guns easily even when they are banned.

 

[Lakhota]

This woman has a lot to answer for. She knew her son was unhinged but did nothing about it.

How do you know what his symptoms were.......how many people have his exact symptoms and don't shoot anyone?

The Army kicked him out after only one month in basic training. This guy had many red flags.

 

[Lakhota]

Investigators say Harper-Mercer's mother has told them the son was struggling with some mental health issues.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The mother of a gunman who killed nine people and himself at an Oregon community college allowed her troubled son to have guns and acknowledged in online posts that he struggled with autism, but she didn't seem to know he was potentially violent.

The online writings by Laurel Harper date from a year ago to nine years ago and offer fresh insight into the gunman, 26-year-old Christopher Harper-Mercer, and his relationship with his mother.

The Associated Press didn't speak with Harper about the online postings; a knock on her door went unanswered Tuesday, and her phone's voicemail box was full. However, the postings included an email address that is linked to Harper.

She and Harper-Mercer shared an apartment outside Roseburg. Investigators have recovered 14 firearms — six found at Umpqua Community College, where the killings occurred, and eight at the apartment. Neighbors of the mother and son in California, where they lived before moving to Oregon in 2013, have said the two went target shooting together.

Investigators say Harper-Mercer's mother has told them the son was struggling with some mental health issues.

In her online postings, Laurel Harper talked about her love of guns and her son's emotional troubles, but there are no hints of worry that he could become violent.

"I keep two full mags in my Glock case. And the ARs & AKs all have loaded mags. No one will be 'dropping' by my house uninvited without acknowledgement," reads a 3-year-old posting.

She was referring to a Glock handgun and to military-style rifles. A Glock and a military-style rifle were among the weapons seized after the Roseburg shooting rampage.

Laurel Harper wrote in another posting: "I love the long guns & I have an AK-47 en route." She complained about gun-control efforts in "lame states."

She posted several times that her son had Asperger's syndrome, a mild form of autism.

More: Oregon Shooter's Mother Wrote About Guns In Online Forum

Struggling with mental health issues? Asperger's syndrome? Autism? Holy shit, this nut was a ticking time bomb - and his gun nut mother was too dumb to see it - or acknowledge it. The shooter was like a poster boy for universal background checks.

No.....do you know how many people in this country have those same mental health issues and don't kill anyone.....

He would have passed a universal background check moron.......just like he passed the current federally mandated background check..

The colorado shooter and the sandy hook shooter would have both passed universal background checks.

Did you mention that the mother is allegedly African American....? Seems like the press keeps forgetting that.....

How does the mother's "blackness" factor into your equation?

 

[Roudy]

If the US military can clean up cities like Fallujah from terrorists, guns, and bombs, they can do the same inside the US as well.

Not without killing US none combatants. The government knows it cant win a war with the American people. Why do you think dems wanted to label returning vets as terror threats? They know they're about to do something thats going to piss those vets off. The only way they win is to disarm the public and demonize our vets in hopes of turning the general public against them.
And again,the military wont side with the government unless it's a legal and moral order and this is the only thing holding dems back.

Winning a war is a different story. Using the military to get control and stay in power is another. Regardless of whether a people are armed or not, no govt. eventually wins a war if the people don't want them there. It's like a powder keg that will explode one day.

True to a certain extent,the government can hold onto power if the military supports them,but it's usually at the cost of civilian lives which of course doesnt go over to well with the populace which insures the eventual failure of the country.
If the military doesnt support em it'll be over quickly for those in power.

China, Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Cuba, etc. these are all govt.s that the people do not want them in power, but have the support of the military. They continue to kill and brutalize the people. Until a Western govt. interferes using military power, like with Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya, it doesn't look like they're going away anytime soon. You cannot overthrow a govt. and it's military using "armed militias" of citizens in the 20th and 21st centuries.

The whole premise of the 2nd amendment is false and no longer valid. Unfortunately, nothing is going to change and we will keep seeing people killed in inner cities and horrific massacres like the Oregon school shooting.

So did those governments disarm the populace to gain and keep control of it's citizens?
The intent of the 2nd is pretty clear and still very valid.
The only way the gov wins is if the military turns on the people,which I highly doubt is going to happen in the U.S.

Exactly. The U.S. military will never turn on its people, and if it does the people have no chance anyhow. So why again do we need hundreds of millions of guns again? We are going to relive these school shootings again and again, not to mention daily the gun violence until we find a workable solution.

 

[Roudy]

This woman has a lot to answer for. She knew her son was unhinged but did nothing about it.

How do you know what his symptoms were.......how many people have his exact symptoms and don't shoot anyone?

The Army kicked him out after only one month in basic training. This guy had many red flags.

And so many more have red flags that don't end up doing this shit.