another school shooting tragedy, Umpqua Community College Oregon

Jon

Hall of Fame
Feb 22, 2002
15,648
12,576
282
Atlanta 'Burbs
So at what point will this be considered a hate crime seeing as how the shooter was apparently, according to eyewitnesses, seeking out Christians? Oh that's right, IT WON'T. Christians aren't a protected group.
Hate crimes shouldn't exist, what the person committing a crime was thinking should never matter. Murder is murder, assault is assault, the reasons should only concern us when we are trying to figure out preventing future cases.

All that said this does worry me, no one should ever be targeted for their beliefs
 

cbi1972

Hall of Fame
Nov 8, 2005
18,145
1,301
182
51
Birmingham, AL
The problem with "warning signs" is that the world is awash in potential warning signs with no way to tell which ones will turn out to become an actual problem.

This isn't Minority Report.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,315
45,174
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
The problem with "warning signs" is that the world is awash in potential warning signs with no way to tell which ones will turn out to become an actual problem.

This isn't Minority Report.
the other problem, imho of course, is that it's just too damned easy to get guns
 

AlistarWills

All-American
Jul 26, 2006
4,852
2,223
187
Hate crimes shouldn't exist, what the person committing a crime was thinking should never matter. Murder is murder, assault is assault, the reasons should only concern us when we are trying to figure out preventing future cases.

All that said this does worry me, no one should ever be targeted for their beliefs
I will agree with you, a crime is a crime regardless if the person committing the crime hated the other person or not. The problem here is that our current Justice Department throws the word "hate" onto crimes committed against those who are black, gay, muslim, etc. The sentences levied against those who commit said crimes get stiffer penalties. Had the assailant in this case chose to ask for all the black people to stand up and shot them, or asked people if they were gay or not, and shot those that were, the Justice Dept, the President, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson all would be crying from the rooftops that these hate crimes must be stopped. In this case, Christians were targeted and we get political agendas of "take away the guns and it wouldn't have happened". I've heard nothing from the Sharpton and Jackson camps, both of whom CLAIM to be Christian preachers.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,905
35,282
362
Mountainous Northern California
The problem with "warning signs" is that the world is awash in potential warning signs with no way to tell which ones will turn out to become an actual problem.

This isn't Minority Report.
There are certainly limitations and every case is different. There is no one size all regarding warning signs but I would hope someone would pay attention to them.
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
Hate crimes shouldn't exist, what the person committing a crime was thinking should never matter. Murder is murder, assault is assault, the reasons should only concern us when we are trying to figure out preventing future cases.

All that said this does worry me, no one should ever be targeted for their beliefs
Rare that it may be...I agree 100%.
 

cbi1972

Hall of Fame
Nov 8, 2005
18,145
1,301
182
51
Birmingham, AL
There are certainly limitations and every case is different. There is no one size all regarding warning signs but I would hope someone would pay attention to them.
Easier said than done

In the fall of 1973, the Syrian Army began to gather a large number of tanks, artillery batteries, and infantry along its border with Israel. Simultaneously, to the south, the Egyptian Army cancelled all leaves, called up thousands of reservists, and launched a massive military exercise, building roads and preparing anti-aircraft and artillery positions along the Suez Canal. On October 4th, an Israeli aerial reconnaissance mission showed that the Egyptians had moved artillery into offensive positions. That evening, AMAN, the Israeli military intelligence agency, learned that portions of the Soviet fleet near Port Said and Alexandria had set sail, and that the Soviet government had begun airlifting the families of Soviet advisers out of Cairo and Damascus. Then, at four o’clock in the morning on October 6th, Israel’s director of military intelligence received an urgent telephone call from one of the country’s most trusted intelligence sources. Egypt and Syria, the source said, would attack later that day. Top Israeli officials immediately called a meeting. Was war imminent? The head of AMAN, Major General Eli Zeira, looked over the evidence and said he didn’t think so. He was wrong. That afternoon, Syria attacked from the east, overwhelming the thin Israeli defenses in the Golan Heights, and Egypt attacked from the south, bombing Israeli positions and sending eight thousand infantry streaming across the Suez. Despite all the warnings of the previous weeks, Israeli officials were caught by surprise. Why couldn’t they connect the dots?

If you start on the afternoon of October 6th and work backward, the trail of clues pointing to an attack seems obvious; you’d have to conclude that something was badly wrong with the Israeli intelligence service. On the other hand, if you start several years before the Yom Kippur War and work forward, re-creating what people in Israeli intelligence knew in the same order that they knew it, a very different picture emerges. In the fall of 1973, Egypt and Syria certainly looked as if they were preparing to go to war. But, in the Middle East of the time, countries always looked as if they were going to war. In the fall of 1971, for instance, both Egypt’s President and its minister of war stated publicly that the hour of battle was approaching. The Egyptian Army was mobilized. Tanks and bridging equipment were sent to the canal. Offensive positions were readied. And nothing happened. In December of 1972, the Egyptians mobilized again. The Army furiously built fortifications along the canal. A reliable source told Israeli intelligence that an attack was imminent. Nothing happened. In the spring of 1973, the President of Egypt told Newsweek that everything in his country “is now being mobilized in earnest for the resumption of battle.” Egyptian forces were moved closer to the canal. Extensive fortifications were built along the Suez. Blood donors were rounded up. Civil-defense personnel were mobilized. Blackouts were imposed throughout Egypt. A trusted source told Israeli intelligence that an attack was imminent. It didn’t come. Between January and October of 1973, the Egyptian Army mobilized nineteen times without going to war. The Israeli government couldn’t mobilize its Army every time its neighbors threatened war. Israel is a small country with a citizen Army. Mobilization was disruptive and expensive, and the Israeli government was acutely aware that if its Army was mobilized and Egypt and Syria weren’t serious about war, the very act of mobilization might cause them to become serious about war.
 
Last edited:

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,736
287
54
Hate crimes shouldn't exist, what the person committing a crime was thinking should never matter. Murder is murder, assault is assault, the reasons should only concern us when we are trying to figure out preventing future cases.

All that said this does worry me, no one should ever be targeted for their beliefs
We're in total agreement here, and you verbalized a point I've made for years: I don't give a rip what your REASON for the crime is (homophobia, racism, sexism, xenophobia) - it's the same damned thing. It is preposterous to have additional sentencing because something is arbitrarily deemed a 'hate crime.' This is pretty much the original 'black lives matter' under another rubric. I don't care if Timothy McVeigh hated the federal government or if he killed all those people because all of them had terminal illnesses or because he couldn't get season tickets to OU football games. The reason is irrelevant. The result is the bottom line.
 

pluckngrit

Suspended
Nov 2, 2003
823
0
0
Yeah, when I wrote that last night I had just heard on O'Reily that it was not a gun free zone. This morning on the Morning Joe they said it was gun free. Anyway, whether it was or not probably had little to do with why this nut chose that location. He was a nut and they tend to not make rational decisions or care about their own safety.
Seriously? The school had discussed arming the security guard recently but the students and teachers argued against it. That shooter knew exactly what he was doing.
 

cbi1972

Hall of Fame
Nov 8, 2005
18,145
1,301
182
51
Birmingham, AL
Well, sometimes a ridiculous statement requires a ridiculous response.
It's not as ridiculous as it might seem. Exercising the right to keep and bear arms isn't just about obtaining a weapon, but being in compliance with the law while doing so.

It is challenging to comprehend the ever changing patchwork of legal requirements in various jurisdictions.

Traveling through a few states? Better leave the gun at home or risk violating some ordinance and being charged with something.

Want to talk reasonably about gun policy? Okay.
Let's have all states to honor concealed carry from other states.
Let's have licenses, not to possess firearms legally, but to skip all the silly checks that criminals don't care about anyway, similar to an FFL.
Let's focus on dealing with violent aggressive people instead of adding burdens to regular citizens.
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
Traveling through a few states? Better leave the gun at home or risk violating some ordinance and being charged with something.

Let's have all states to honor concealed carry from other states.
I suspect a court will apply "full faith and credit" to this issue at some point, not to mention the applicability of the "privileges and immunities" clause of the 14th Amendment.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,736
287
54
Every time I hear about one of these shootings I get physically ill at the thought.

And before I even have a chance to recover, I have opportunistic pathogens, er, politicians jumping the gun to tell me why I need to have 'more gun control' to prevent these things - before the public even knows the names of the dead people. Anyone who points out the obvious - that (as much as I hate to quote it) 'the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun' - is ridiculed as wanting us to go back to the Old West and mocked as a cowboy.

Why doesn't any mocker stop for just a second and realize that (virtually) EVERY SINGLE SHOOTING like this ends the exact same way - with the shooter felled by a bullet, either self-inflicted or from another armed person. The shooter never seems to run out of ammo or stop with killing four or five (unless the whole purpose was to kill an estranged person from his life).

I've watched political discussions for some 30 years plus now. I'm always amused by the fact that people will tell me that you may as well have legalized abortion (even if you think it is murder) because 'people are going to get them anyway.' I'm told the very same thing about drugs, alcohol (gee, I think we tried that one), pornography/strip clubs, handing out condoms in high schools (my Gawd, middle school nowadays) and pretty much everything. May as well legalize whatever and deal with it. Fair enough.

But make the subject guns and these same people will look you right in the eyes and insist that if we just have better laws or somehow - in a vague, never defined way - make guns harder to get........and that will stop it. Making abortion harder to get won't stop it but making guns harder to get WILL? I can't even follow that logic, particularly when you consider that gun ownership has been recognized as a constitutional right for a whole lot longer than abortion has.

And these same folks will mock a Mitt Romney with laughter, saying there's no way you can go round up 12 million illegals and deport them and yet.......the same folks (insert Dukakis reference for one) actually believe that you CAN register and account for 270 million firearms (and that's just the legal ones).

I can't sit here and say I know with utter certainty what the solution is. I sometimes think the 'mental health' and 'video games' approach is just as wrong-headed as the 'more gun control' approach (though I can understand the first one more so than the second, which was what we heard after Columbine). All seem too simplistic to me.

But here's the catch - the guy at UCC LEGALLY (per the ATF) obtained his weapons. He has no criminal history (so far as we know). The weapons themselves are legal. He didn't go in there with an M-16 firing 1,000 rounds a la Rambo.

So how in the hell is more gun control gonna solve this one?

And btw - guns are already banned on campus and we all see how well that worked.

He had a 9 mm, a .40 caliber S/W, a .40 caliber Taurus, and a .556 Del-Ton.

Again.....how is gun control gonna stop this one?
 

AUDub

Hall of Fame
Dec 4, 2013
16,294
5,975
187
Give me ambiguity or give me something else.
Every time I hear about one of these shootings I get physically ill at the thought.

And before I even have a chance to recover, I have opportunistic pathogens, er, politicians jumping the gun to tell me why I need to have 'more gun control' to prevent these things - before the public even knows the names of the dead people. Anyone who points out the obvious - that (as much as I hate to quote it) 'the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun' - is ridiculed as wanting us to go back to the Old West and mocked as a cowboy.

Why doesn't any mocker stop for just a second and realize that (virtually) EVERY SINGLE SHOOTING like this ends the exact same way - with the shooter felled by a bullet, either self-inflicted or from another armed person. The shooter never seems to run out of ammo or stop with killing four or five (unless the whole purpose was to kill an estranged person from his life).

I've watched political discussions for some 30 years plus now. I'm always amused by the fact that people will tell me that you may as well have legalized abortion (even if you think it is murder) because 'people are going to get them anyway.' I'm told the very same thing about drugs, alcohol (gee, I think we tried that one), pornography/strip clubs, handing out condoms in high schools (my Gawd, middle school nowadays) and pretty much everything. May as well legalize whatever and deal with it. Fair enough.

But make the subject guns and these same people will look you right in the eyes and insist that if we just have better laws or somehow - in a vague, never defined way - make guns harder to get........and that will stop it. Making abortion harder to get won't stop it but making guns harder to get WILL? I can't even follow that logic, particularly when you consider that gun ownership has been recognized as a constitutional right for a whole lot longer than abortion has.

And these same folks will mock a Mitt Romney with laughter, saying there's no way you can go round up 12 million illegals and deport them and yet.......the same folks (insert Dukakis reference for one) actually believe that you CAN register and account for 270 million firearms (and that's just the legal ones).

I can't sit here and say I know with utter certainty what the solution is. I sometimes think the 'mental health' and 'video games' approach is just as wrong-headed as the 'more gun control' approach (though I can understand the first one more so than the second, which was what we heard after Columbine). All seem too simplistic to me.

But here's the catch - the guy at UCC LEGALLY (per the ATF) obtained his weapons. He has no criminal history (so far as we know). The weapons themselves are legal. He didn't go in there with an M-16 firing 1,000 rounds a la Rambo.

So how in the hell is more gun control gonna solve this one?

And btw - guns are already banned on campus and we all see how well that worked.

He had a 9 mm, a .40 caliber S/W, a .40 caliber Taurus, and a .556 Del-Ton.

Again.....how is gun control gonna stop this one?
It goes both ways. One of the major talking points right off the bat was "gun free zones."
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.