Friday, September 28, 2012

Minneapolis Shooting - 2 Dead 4 Wounded

Local Fox News reports

"Several" people are dead, including the gunman, after a workplace shooting in Minneapolis, police confirmed at a Thursday evening news conference.

That's an update from a previous report confirming two people dead and four others injured. Minneapolis Police Deputy Chief Kris Arneson said the exact number of those killed in the shooting could not be confirmed at this time.

The office shooting was reported around 4:45 p.m. Thursday at Accent Signage Systems Inc. on Chestnut Ave. W. in the Bryn Mawr area of Minneapolis, near Interstate 394 and Penn Avenue.

Hennepin County Medical Center confirmed they are treating at four victims from the shooting, including three in critical condition.

The shooter reportedly arrived at the office Thursday afternoon after being terminated from his job that morning. A source tells FOX 9 police have information indicating he may have been targeting specific employees.

1. Was he a lawful gun owner
2. Was he an NRA member
3. Did he have a concealed carry permit
4. If you answered yes to any of those, is this kind of thing such a rare occurrence that we can write it off?

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. 5. Was the workplace a posted no carry location?
    6. Were any employees targeted or otherwise law abiding gun owners that were disarmed due to company policy against weapons in the office?
    7. If so, should the company be liable for failing to protect their employees after denying them the resources to protect themselves?

  2. 1. Let's imagine for a moment that he was a lawful gun owner. Do you believe that we could have predicted this was going to happen? The truth is that to prevent something like this, we'd have to take guns away from all citizens. That's not going to happen.

    2. Who cares whether he was a member of the NRA, the PTA, PETA, the local Wiccan coven, the NAACP, or any of a number of other groups. To my knowledge, none of them would approve of this.

    3. We don't know, but given the millions of carry license holders who don't do this, we can say that even if he was one, he's rare.

    4. Compared to the number of gun owners--100,000,000 or more--and the number of guns--at least 300,000,000--these incidents are also rare. You're consistently incapable of understanding the relevant numbers.

    1. The gun culture is a failure because it has led to frequent mass shootings. The failure is in the assumption that it is a good or desirable thing for everyone to have guns everywhere they go and to undertake shooting each other rather than relying on things like police, or NOT shooting each other. THAT is the core essence of why the gun culture in this country is such a MASSIVE EPIC UNPARALLELED FAILURE, complete and total.

      We CARE if he was a member of the NRA, because the NRA has financed the promotion of the gun culture, and because those who belong to the NRA are more likely to have bought in to the gun culture I just described in the preceding paragraph. It is that failed train wreck of a gun culture that promotes the notion of everyone buying a gun (because the job OF the NRA is to sell as many guns for their REAL constituency, the gun manufacturers) so YES, the NRA really DOES LOVE THIS KIND OF INCIDENT. Because they don't give a good god damn if people die (see what they promote - hell, take a good long look at Ted Nugent on any given day). Events like this, and a lack of skills in critical thinking replaced by your emotional thinking, is something they use to sell more guns.

      You pulled 3. and 4. out of your ass, you don't have valid statistics, and we're not allowed to KEEP better statistics because of the laws and other requirements passed by the NRA.

      Glad I could connect the dots for those of you who are either too cognitively impaired, or suffer some form of neurological damage from lead exposure. That is an actual serious problem for some people involved in doing their own loading.

      And YES, sooner or later, this country will pull it's head out of whatever fog it is stuck in, and like other, saner, better places will change our gun culture. We've changed other failed parts of our society, this one is inevitable too.

      We just have to wait for the dim bulbs to evolve a little further intellectually. That seems to be more of a problem with our red states, which typically don't do well in education, health care, or employment.

      And YES, there were apparently specific employees who had been targeted based on who was killed.

    2. Greg, if we took guns away from all the ones who prove themselves to be unfit, the fewer of these incidents would happen. It's not all or nothing.

    3. Dog Gone, you connected no dots for me. Let me try to help you see things:

      1. Are you aware that the NAACP gives a discount for membership if the person is in prison? Does that mean that the organization advocates being a criminal? That's the same kind of reasoning that you're using to claim that the NRA wants to see people killed.

      2. I wish that your side would define the word "frequent." To quote Inigo Montoya, I do not think it means what you think it means.

      3. You say that I pulled the statistics out of my ass. Does the Government Accountability Office reside in my colon? That's the source for the number of carry license holders. Esitmates about the number of gun owners and guns come from a variety of sources, including Gallup. Are they living in my G.I. tract?

      4. You say that gun control is inevitable. It's curious how more and more people are buying guns, getting carry licenses, and not voting control freaks into office.

      Mikeb, the only way to determine who's unfit is to take away guns from everyone. There is no test that will show in advance who would act like this and who wouldn't. Every person has a breaking point. To accomplish what you claim is your goal, you do have to demand all or nothing. It won't remove violence from our society, of course, but I really do doubt that you care about that.

  3. dog gone it! wish i'd said that! a few more cases like trayvon and we americans will wake up and take our country back...not!.........we'll take it !!!!forward!!!!
    tom webber miami

  4. Can anyone please tell me why any additional gun control laws would even be successful?
    (1) Why would human failings such as apathy, incompetence, corruption, and limited resources -- all of which hamper enforcement of the laws already on the books -- go away with new gun control laws?
    (2) Why would criminals not smuggle guns into the U.S.?
    (3) Why would criminals not make simple, effective guns with a few dollars in parts from local hardware stores?

    And please tell me where government gets the power to infringe on a citizen's rights to life, liberty, and property? If it is for "safety" or "public welfare", please tell me a concrete standard when government can step in and infringe rights.

    1. Criminals would smuggle guns in and make them in their basement, but the availability would not be nearly has high as it is now if we had proper gun control.

      The government is already infringing on your 2A rights, that's because you live in a society of other people who have rights too. Scalia said reasonable restrictions are OK. Now we're just haggling about where to draw the line.