Thursday, October 7, 2010

One Dead Two Wounded - So Far

The action is happening in Illinois and Indiana. Luckily they have a description that should narrow it down.

The shooter - whom police described as a heavyset white man in his 40s, weighing about 245 pounds, with brown hair and wearing a baseball cap.
What's your opinion? Are you starting to think they have too easy access to guns, they being all the lunatics who what one.

Please leave a comment.

21 comments:

  1. Man, a description like that pretty much narrows it down to most every NRA member.

    If the police stake out all-you-can-eat joints, they'll stand a good chance of nailing the suspect.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In addition to the chain store like McDonald's, Burger King,etc...I would suggest 5-0 stake out the area Wal-Marts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. weighing about 245 pounds, with brown hair and wearing a baseball cap

    I found him!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mikey W: Unfortunately, I haven't brown hair, am in outstanding shape, and have significantly more than a HS diploma--so I can't qualify for NRA membership.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sounds like they're describing Michael Moore.

    As for "Are you starting to think they have too easy access to guns, they being all the lunatics who what one."...can we apply the same logic to...maybe...cars? Are we giving alcoholics and other dangerous drivers too easy access to cars? After all, cars kill far more people than guns.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ahh, yes. The inevitable comparison to cars.

    Several facts, gunloons like to omit, however.

    1. Auto fatalities are only a little higher than gun-related fatalities. (About 34K to 30K).

    2. Auto fatlities have steadily declined over the past 50 years, despite the fact the number of cars and drivers and miles driven have increased every year. OTOH, gun ownership is down.

    3. Govt. regulation is largely responsible for the decline in auto fatalities; initiatives such as seat belts, crash standards, air bags, braking systems, better roads, greater enforcement (drunk driving, etc)have led to declines in fatalities.

    This is not to suggest more cannot be done to increase auto safety. The Govt is subsidizing industry to come up with smart vehicle technologies and are campaigning against distracted driver (cellphones, etc) factors. More also could be done WRT more rigorous testing of elderly drivers and those with poor driving records.

    ReplyDelete
  7. We can talk about risk quotient in relation to things such as guns and cars. For example, how many miles are traveled in an automobile risk free? Additionally, there is the factor of utility regarding automobiles.

    Automobiles are designed as transport.

    Firearms are deadly weapons.

    While firearms can be used for sporting purposes, such as target practise and hunting, their utility comes from the fact they are deadly weapons. Even some sporting uses rely upon the fact that firearms are lethal (i.e., hunting).

    So, we are talking objects which are purposefully made for killing and trying to compare them with objects which serve a non-lethal and socially acceptable purpose (cars for transportation).

    Laci

    ReplyDelete
  8. am in outstanding shape...

    Judging by the picture, pear shaped.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Mikey W: Unfortunately, I haven't brown hair, am in outstanding shape, and have significantly more than a HS diploma--so I can't qualify for NRA membership."
    Riiight...as I sagely say.
    I didn't know having brown hair was a requirement for NRA membership, nor that not having brown hair disqualified one for membership.
    I do have brown hair, am in pretty good shape, have significantly more than a HS diploma, and am an NRA Life Member; however, if one studies the odd denizens of Jadeworld, one learns new (and inaccurate) things all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. so I can't qualify for NRA membership

    Just the other day you claimed to have been an NRA member. Were you lying then or now?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Mikey W: I have no idea whether or not I'm on the NRA rolls; I have requested not to be.

    Periodically, you or one of your friends will sign me up and since the NRA sells its membership list, I start getting the mailers for gold, bizarre tax seminars, and the like.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Come now, TN Bud.

    We all know NRA members--particularly, life members--said goodbye to their feet years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I can't figure out if Jade is a chronic liar or just retarded.

    Annual deaths by automobiles are over twice that by firearms, not only slightly higher.

    Gun ownership is at an all time record, not declining.

    "We all know NRA members--particularly, life members--said goodbye to their feet years ago."

    Ok, so I can't defend that one.

    ReplyDelete
  14. At first I thought, oh no, Jadegold has realy done it now encouraging the ridiculous car comparisons. But, by taking it seriously he's made some good points. So, can we keep talking about guns now, please?

    I also like what Laci added about how cars are used continually every day by the average owner whereas guns are not, at least for the average owner. I realize the extremists like to have that gun on them, or nearby, 24/7.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Don't forget the guns are lethal objects, which is why they are the "best self-defence method".

    Push a gunguy on things such as pepper spray and they just aren't as good as a gun. Nevermind that Police forces world wide have used pepper spray for crowd control for about 30 years.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Laci: "Nevermind that Police forces world wide have used pepper spray for crowd control for about 30 years."

    And yet they still carry guns.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Some odd dog yelped:
    > ...objects which are purposefully made for killing ... compare them with objects which serve a non-lethal and socially acceptable purpose (cars for transportation).

    Too bad killing IS a socially acceptable purpose in limited circumstances, and even if killing wasn't, one that not all guns serve. Last year guns in the U.S. fired six to nine billion times. If their purpose was soley to kill, we'd be extinct.

    Of course, not all cars serve socially acceptable nor non-lethal purposes either. So your entire argument is moot.

    ReplyDelete
  18. > Govt. regulation is largely responsible for the decline in auto fatalities; ... braking systems

    I'll just leave this here.

    And helmet laws apparently increase deaths and injuries.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Come now, TN Bud.

    We all know NRA members--particularly, life members--said goodbye to their feet years ago."

    Actually, Jade, I nearly said goodbye to my right leg two years ago, due to a motorcycle wreck, but it was saved. At the time, I was 90 days away from rejoining the military, so I wasn't in bad shape, & still am not.
    Maybe you're thinking of that other NRA member, Michael Moore.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous, You showed us how helmets and brakes actually kill, what about seat belts? They must be bad news too, and the laws that require their use immoral.

    Van Dyke, You're absolutely right, guns CAN save lives and cars CAN kill.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes, Mike, in some cases seat belt laws encourage dangerous behavior.

    http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/SAE%20seatbelts.pdf

    Just like trigger locks and legislated holster locks are known to cause gun accidents.

    ReplyDelete