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.
Given the sentence that the RCMP killer in Moncton New Brunswick got, 25 years times three dead Police officers, a total of 75 years before any possible parole, the La Loche shooter should get 100 years. Four times 25 years, before any chance of parole.
I don't care if he was drunk, I don't care if he was high, I don't care if he was suicidal........
He killed four people, two of whom were his own brothers, and he also wounded 7 other people. That is first degree, pre meditated murder. There is NO doubt WHO did it, there is no doubt that HE did it, and there is no doubt that HE was the shooter. In a community of 2000 people, everyone knows each other.
That merits a life sentence.... he should die in prison.
Jim B.
Life is life. The 25 years is the minimum that must be served before you potentially have parole. Your sentence is never done though. It is truly a life sentence. Also, they're probably served concurrently, not consecutively.
Four people have been killed and two others are critically injured after a gunman opened fire at a school in western Canada, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says.
The alleged shooter, a student at the school, is now in custody.
What's probably had you confused is the fact Canadians don't need or want a proliferation of handguns, nor do we primarily use them to kill each other.
Your confusion is understood though; you've been misinformed by vested interests of one kind or another for years.
Nice to see the Canadian media is more responsible than the American media. The predictable media reaction in the US is as follows when a school shooting occurs:
1) Media members become uncontrollably sexually aroused.
2) Media starts reporting things that are completely untrue.
3) Media reports the wrong person as the shooter.
4) Media reports the right person as the shooter and glorifies the hell out of them.
What's probably had you confused is the fact Canadians don't need or want a proliferation of handguns, nor do we primarily use them to kill each other.
Your confusion is understood though; you've been misinformed by vested interests of one kind or another for years.
Nor do people in the US "primarily' use guns to kill each other. The vast majority of guns in the US aren't used in such a manner. Come on now. Some data for you from the FBI:
Looking at the data, in 2014, we had a total of only 8,124 homicides from guns out of a population of roughly 320 million people. Do the math on that one to arrive at an ultra small % of people impacted. And most of these homicides are criminal activity in the inner cities. Canada also has different demographics than the US in regards to who's causing most of the homicides via shootings. Here in the US:
So I think your statement, "Your confusion is understood though; you've been misinformed by vested interests of one kind or another for years." can be said about how others get a distorted view of the US in regards to gun homicides from various sources, hyping reality and the risk way out of bounds.
Nor do people in the US "primarily' use guns to kill each other. The vast majority of guns in the US aren't used in such a manner. Come on now. Some data for you from the FBI:
Looking at the data, in 2014, we had a total of only 8,124 homicides from guns out of a population of roughly 320 million people. Do the math on that one to arrive at an ultra small % of people impacted. And most of these homicides are criminal activity in the inner cities. Canada also has different demographics than the US in regards to who's causing most of the homicides via shootings. Here in the US:
So I think your statement, "Your confusion is understood though; you've been misinformed by vested interests of one kind or another for years." can be said about how others get a distorted view of the US in regards to gun homicides from various sources, hyping reality and the risk way out of bounds.
It's a step in the right direction, but I think even that is too much.
There's a reason why they don't televise idiots running out on to the playing field, the same should apply here.
I agree with you and have been saying the same thing for years now. Don't mention their names, just their description, and certainly don't publish their "manifesto". As that is exactly what they are craving and what is behind their willingness to carry out their insanity.
`
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.
The vast majority of guns in the US aren't used in such a manner. Come on now. Some data for you from the FBI:
