Friday, December 14, 2012


Yes, there was a mass stabbing incident in China where 23 victims were stabbed- at least two of them seriously!  None are dead!
Security at China's schools has been increased in recent years following a spate of similar knife attacks in which nearly 20 children have been killed.

The BBC's John Sudworth in Shanghai says many of the attackers have been mentally disturbed men, prompting a debate about the effects of China's recent, rapid social change and the inability of an antiquated hospital system to cope with rising levels of mental illness.

The agency also quotes a county hospital administrator as saying that the man first attacked an elderly woman, then the children, before being overpowered by security guards
Let's see how many mass shooting with how many dead have there been in the US in the last year?

More here


  1. Remember that Mother Jones article that we discussed a while ago? It said that there have been sixty-one mass shootings over the last thirty years. That's not a huge number. What this does show is that a crazy person who wants to cause a lot of harm will find a way.

    1. According to this no one died. two mass shootings in the states in 48 hours, latest leaving over 2 dozen dead, 18+ children.

    2. You hit the nail on the head there Greg. If someone wants people dead, they'll find a way. It's not the law abiding ones that kill folks

    3. Remember Greg, the United States Government allows civilians to possess and obtain lethal firearms. Your society may soon choose other options.

    4. Allows? We allow the government to have a limited measure of power. That's the American system.

    5. Kane, you're mistaken about that. Most of the mass shootings are done by formerly law-abiding people. I call them "hidden criminals."

    6. Mikeb, what you lack is a magic decoder ring to identify those hidden criminals without also sweeping up all the good gun owners.

    7. I agree I don't have super powers to identify all the hidden criminals. One solution is a strict one-strike-you're-out policy. You fuck up with a gun, you lose your rights. Another part of the solution is to raise the bar on who can qualify to own guns.

      If you had the least bit of decency, you would be the first one on board with those two suggestions. As a gun owner you would benefit in a double way. But, alas, I don't expect such decency and common sense from you or any other gun-rights fanatic.

    8. Mikeb, the problem is arbitrary power. You want to hand over power to a government agency to make decisions about our lives. The ones deciding would not be elected representatives. They'd be civil servants with little consequence to face if they denied rights on a whim. You also deny ownership and carry are rights. Because of that, no compromise is possible with you.

  2. "Remember that Mother Jones article that we discussed a while ago? It said that there have been sixty-one mass shootings over the last thirty years. That's not a huge number."

    Not to you, obviously.

    Since you don't furnish the citation (and I am not responsible for finding them for you) I'll go with what I found here: *

    by their criteria, it's a whole lot more than sixty one:

    This tally:

    While Thomas didn't refer to trends over a longer period than just three years, the numbers for the longer term are murky as well. To more easily analyze Fox's data -- which goes back to 1976 -- we averaged the number of incidents for each five-year period (or, in the case of 2006 to 2009, a four-year period). Here are the results:

    • 1976-1980: 20.6 incidents annually
    • 1981-1985: 16.8
    • 1986-1990: 18.2
    • 1991-1995: 23.0
    • 1996-2000: 20.0
    • 2001-2005: 21.0
    • 2006-2009: 25.5

    is for the shooting incidents, involving 4 or more people over the period form 1976--2009. If we throw out the numbers from 1976-1981, we are left with statistics for 29 years (1981-2009). If my math is correct the numbers indicate that there were 623 mass shootings (4 or more persons shot in an incident). That's just shy of 2500 people. The author(s) of the article state that they have been informed that if incidents involving 3 or more persons are added to this total it would, approximately, quintuple--to about 3,100 indicents and 12,500 deaths.

    Feel free to refute this with some data, not your opinion on their opinion but data that contradicts THEIR data. mmmkay?

    "What this does show is that a crazy person who wants to cause a lot of harm will find a way."

    Right and what the FBI's crime statistics tell us is that they "cause a lot of harm" where mass killings are concerned with, by a huge margin, teh gunz.

    * Politifact says that the author of the piece they critiqued is "Half right". They also think that Weenie LaPutrid is more than a bit, "loose", on the facts of gunz and gunz violence (

    1. Democommie, do you have a solution? You come here to rant and rave, cuss, fling insults and poo, but I never see you offering an answer.

  3. Yes, everyday I wake up and before putting on the uniform of my country, I just wish America could be a bit more like China. Such a beacon of human liberties.

    1. TF - That's it in a nutshell! Thank you!

    2. Thanks to you gun guys, we're the laughing stock of the world. Even China gives us good advice.

  4. Mass shootings are carried out by madmen. Not by typical criminals that we talk about in the context of who is law abiding and who is not.
    Hardened criminals will find a way to get weapons.
    But they are rational actors and don't do these things anyway. There is nothing to be gained from it.
    Madmen on the other hand can and do act on impulse and easy availability of guns is an issue.

    Right to Bear arms was important during the foundation of the republic.
    It has clearly out lived it's 'use by' date.

    1. So you admit that criminals will get guns without regard to the law, but you want to disarm good citizens because one or two wackos a year do something crazy?

      You'd better hope that you live near a police station--and pay your bribe to the Fraternal Order of Police.

    2. "One or two a year," is that what you say? Since the Connecticut shooting, in just 3 days, there have been over 100 murders with guns and another 120 gun suicides. You really think that has nothing to do with gun availability? Every bit of that carnage would have been accomplished with knives and baseball bats if no guns were available?

  5. Even though the 2nd amendment does not mention self defense the supreme court has ruled that it does. And it does really offer broad protection to citizens to obtain weapons. This is the law of the land so we have to accept it, but it does not make it 'right'.
    With this outdated and unnecessary and harmful ammendedment in force I don't think there is a point in nibbling at the issue. The only thing to fix the problem is to repeal the damn thing.

    It was enacted way before I was born and I am sure most of you have not had a chance to vote on it!
    One last thing this right that some people treat as so fundamental is neither necessary (United Kingdom) or sufficient (Yemen) to ensure a free state. It was not and is not one of the things that makes America great.


  6. Hey I know this is off topic but I was wondering if you knew of any
    widgets I could add to my blog that automatically tweet my newest twitter updates.
    I've been looking for a plug-in like this for quite some time and was hoping maybe you would have some experience with something like this. Please let me know if you run into anything. I truly enjoy reading your blog and I look forward to your new updates.

    my web site; legal amphetamines