Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not sure how several gunmen killing school children and their teachers would be less shocking than a lone gunman. If anything, it might be more shocking.
But anyway, you are suggesting that the real facts aren't being released because the government wants to use fabrications to bolster its gun control efforts. Is that correct?
I'm not suggesting anything. All I'm doing is offering what could be a motivation if there were a conspiracy.
As for the several gunmen vs. individual gunman theory, I based that on the fact that there have been multiple eyewitness claims in shootings like Aurora and the Wisconsin Sikh Temple shooting that there were more than one gunman involved, but those claims have been dismissed by the authorities and the media. I'm not sure why they've been dismissed out of hand, but they have, so I just ran with the theory that for some reason "somebody" wants all of these recent shootings to be lone gunman scenarios.
Hey, I make part of my living by writing fairly boring technical type stuff. Once in a while I have to let my imagination play
That was completely different. The shooting at VT lasted only 12 min. and I've seen cell phone video of students taking cover outside, while cops were advancing in the direction of the gunfire.
The shooting at Columbine went on for an hour. Read the Wikipedia to see how pathetic the police response was. The only cops to even fire a gun at them was the School Resource Officer and the first responding officer. If those punks hadn't wasted so time trying to blow the building up, they could have easily killed every student in the school. The cops would have never have never ever even tried to stop them. The only reason the gutless cops finally went into the school three hours after the shooting stopped was because of the helicopter pictures of bloody students jumping out of second floor windows.
I don't know, but if a had a choice, I'd probably rather get my news from a foreign media source, rather then the American. They just seem to cover stories better and give a broader perspective on it. US media just seems to cover stuff in one dimension.
A story like Sandy Hook is difficult. Because the story still has to originate from the US media. But yeah, the foreign media will tell it like it is. Here is a quote from the Chinese media about Sandy Hook:
"School shootings happen often in the US. Can't politicians put away politics and prohibit gun sales?"
You will never hear CNN report something like that in a million years. They are too afraid of pissing off the gunnuts.
I'm not sure why, but for some reason reading about a news source from the country whose citizens randomly go on slashing sprees talking about the US and its "gun problem" strikes me as humorous.
I don't know, but if a had a choice, I'd probably rather get my news from a foreign media source, rather then the American. They just seem to cover stories better and give a broader perspective on it. US media just seems to cover stuff in one dimension.
A story like Sandy Hook is difficult. Because the story still has to originate from the US media. But yeah, the foreign media will tell it like it is. Here is a quote from the Chinese media about Sandy Hook:
"School shootings happen often in the US. Can't politicians put away politics and prohibit gun sales?"
You will never hear CNN report something like that in a million years. They are too afraid of pissing off the gunnuts.
Are you suggesting that China holds the answer to our woes? Can't say I agree.
Against a backdrop of rapid socio-economic change and modernization, China continues to be an authoritarian one-party state that imposes sharp curbs on freedom of expression, association, and religion; openly rejects judicial independence and press freedom; and arbitrarily restricts and suppresses human rights defenders and organizations, often through extra-judicial measures.
I'm not sure why, but for some reason reading about a news source from the country whose citizens randomly go on slashing sprees talking about the US and its "gun problem" strikes me as humorous.
I find nothing humorous about it. 23 children were injured in that Chinese school knife attack. None of them died. None of the children at Sandy Hook survived their injuries. 23 Chinese school children are alive because because their attacker didn't have a gun. 27 people in Newtown, Connecticut are dead because of our gun culture.
The thing is that neither the government nor media need to fabricate or cover up anything to prove that there is an epidemic of deadly gun violence in the U.S. There are on average over 1000 homicides, 4000 injuries, and 1500 suicides a month from firearms in the U.S. The real facts are damning enough. Gun control advocates don't need to doctor the facts on Sandy Hook to make the point that something needs to be done.
The thing is that neither the government nor media need to fabricate or cover up anything to prove that there is an epidemic of deadly gun violence in the U.S. There are on average over 1000 homicides, 4000 injuries, and 1500 suicides a month from firearms in the U.S. The real facts are damning enough. Gun control advocates don't need to doctor the facts on Sandy Hook to make the point that something needs to be done.
One of the absolute best posts in this entire thread.
I find nothing humorous about it. 23 children were injured in that Chinese school knife attack. None of them died. None of the children at Sandy Hook survived their injuries. 23 Chinese school children are alive because because their attacker didn't have a gun. 27 people in Newtown, Connecticut are dead because of our gun culture.
So, our "gun culture" is to blame for Sandy Hook? That's an interesting theory. I guess that since I own a firearm I'm part of that "gun culture." Oddly enough, I've never even been to Newtown, CT, so I can safely say that I'm not responsible for the shootings.
How about you get off your ideological high horse and look at some facts before you start bashing your keyboard in frustrated rage at all of us who own firearms?
As far as we know, Adam Lanza was the murderer at Sandy Hook. You can hate firearms and firearms owners all you want, but blaming an entire group of people for the actions of one individual is idiotic, asinine, and indicative of your inability to think logically.
You've been all over these forums pushing for gun bans. What you seem to forget is that the legislative history of the anti-gun movement is one of miserable failure.
Example 1: The 1994 AWB law, which had zero provable effect on firearms violence, but did manage to punish perfectly law-abiding citizens by prohibiting them from having firearms that had cosmetic, non-functional similarities to military weaponry. It was allowed to sunset for a reason, and that reason is that even the legislators who had originally supported it realized that it served no purpose.
Example 2: From 1970 to 1990, there were an average of 1.7 school shootings per year. In 1990, the Gun Free Zone law was originally passed and deemed unconstitutional, only to be 'revised' and passed again later. Since 1990, there have been an average of 3.21 school shootings per year. Please explain how that idiotic law is saving lives, if you would.
Now that you have a couple of facts, assuming that you aren't foaming at the mouth because I didn't bow down and agree with your viewpoint, let's get back to China.
China is one of the largest abusers of human rights that has ever existed. The average Chinese citizen survives at the whim of the ruling class, and that survival is not guaranteed from one minute to the next. Their news agencies are run by the government, as is everything else. Now, since the news agencies are government run, and the government in this case is one which views human life as expendable, what you are actually telling us is the following:
Quote:
The Chinese government, who actively treats its own citizens with less compassion than the average American would treat a stray cat, has published a news story that I agree with. Therefore, no matter what my fellow Americans may think, the Chinese government is correct.
Do you know what the Chinese citizens don't have, other than the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Access to firearms, because the Chinese government knows that if its citizens had firearms the chances of keeping them in perpetual slavery would be seriously diminished.
Are you suggesting that China holds the answer to our woes?
No, that was just the first example I could find. Here is an another example of a story that I don't think most of the US media would touch with a ten foot poll, for fear of pissing off the gunnuts.
Newtown citizens welcome Obama's plan for stricter gun control measures
In heartbroken town's cafes, many say they will be glad to see assault weapons banned but are cautious of what comes next
Adam Gabbatt in Newtown
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 16 January 2013 14.30 EST
At the Blue Colony Diner in Newtown Obama's gun control proposals were welcomed by some. "Fantastic," said Richard Marotto, 40, who was with his daughter Julia. She was a first-grader at Sandy Hook elementary who had the day off on Wednesday because of snow. Marotto said many of Julia's classmates died on 14 December.
"There's no need for an assault weapon in the hands of the public," Marotto said. "Assault weapon last time I checked means bad; assault means bad."
Of universal background checks, Marotto said they should "absolutely" be introduced. "And the people that own these guns should want that too. It's making them look bad.
"I can't understand why they can't have a compromise. Any time there's a gun tragedy and they want to do a specific gun ban, these crazy people think they want to take all their guns away. Then they start citing the second amendment. Well the second amendment has well-regulated written into it and its not well-regulated right now."
Roy Hallquist, 83, was eating soup with his wife Betty, 81. "Those things I can handle," he said of the proposed ban on assault weapons and universal background checks "I was in the army, I fired weapons that were similar to that. I think they're for war, not for the average citizen."
The thing is that neither the government nor media need to fabricate or cover up anything to prove that there is an epidemic of deadly gun violence in the U.S. There are on average over 1000 homicides, 4000 injuries, and 1500 suicides a month from firearms in the U.S. The real facts are damning enough. Gun control advocates don't need to doctor the facts on Sandy Hook to make the point that something needs to be done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by calipoppy
One of the absolute best posts in this entire thread.
Those numbers have been steadily declining without government interference. If we could get the government away from the idiotic war on drugs, they would go down a lot further and a lot faster.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
