• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gunman Kills Self and Others at CT Company

apparently with a 223 rifle which the press erroneously called an "assault rifle". CT btw bans such weapons even though a major maker of such rifles is Colt in Hartford CT. I doubt any of the victims were armed
 
Why would they be?

In many states people can carry concealed weapons. most of these mass shootings take place in areas where people cannot
 

Now reports are that he was being harrassed because he was black...being sent taunting text messages and pictures. What a shame. Although he'd never complained to anyone about it, his family knew. He apparently was caught on video tape stealing beer off his truck. He was a Teamster, so he was losing a great job. All for a few cases of beer?? What a fool. And THEN to kill nine people and himself....what a tragedy.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-c...driver-disciplinary-hearing/story?id=11313457
 
Now reports are that he was being harrassed because he was black...being sent taunting text messages and pictures. What a shame. Although he'd never complained to anyone about it, his family knew. He apparently was caught on video tape stealing beer off his truck. He was a Teamster, so he was losing a great job. All for a few cases of beer?? What a fool. And THEN to kill nine people and himself....what a tragedy.

Hartford Distributors Shooting: Shooter at Connecticut Beer Distributorship Opened Fire at Disciplinary Hearing - ABC News

at least he saved the taxpayers a couple million in prosecuting him. The only way to stop someone who plans on killing others and himself is to kill him as fast as possible.
 
apparently with a 223 rifle which the press erroneously called an "assault rifle". CT btw bans such weapons even though a major maker of such rifles is Colt in Hartford CT. I doubt any of the victims were armed

That son-of-a-bitch is in trouble now! Using an illegal weapon to commit a murder!
 
I doubt any of the victims were armed

I think it would be really appalling and disgusting for any of us to attempt to use this tragedy to make political hay on a gun agenda, whether that agenda is pro or anti-gun.
 
I think it would be really appalling and disgusting for any of us to attempt to use this tragedy to make political hay on a gun agenda, whether that agenda is pro or anti-gun.

he's not making political hay; simply stating a fact. Mass shooting occur in places where people are least likely to be armed.
 
Sad thing to read about. My thoughts will be with those harmed and their families.
 
I think it would be really appalling and disgusting for any of us to attempt to use this tragedy to make political hay on a gun agenda, whether that agenda is pro or anti-gun.

I will keep that in mind when the brady's and the other scum in the gun ban movement start whining about it. But let's look at this honestly--the rifle he used is banned in Connecticut. That law didn't stop the crime. However, it is a rather strong possibility if the victims had been armed, less would have died.
 
Ah, those gun-free zones once again working perfectly. :roll:

they worked exactly as intended

honest people got killed and gun banners have some more blood to splash around.

what sort of mileage would Diane Feinswine or Sarah Brady get if the mope had been capped by some factory worker before he killed a bunch of people?

later folks
 
I note Nightline is trying to make this tragedy into a gun control debate

I note they were rather quiet after the McDonald decision
 
It seems as if the disinfranchised/insane/depressed or whatever you care to label them aren't satisfied with ending themselves but feel a need to take out as many others as they can. Totally unpredictable, can happen anywhere, which makes it all the more frightening.

I always have my gun and I 'm always aware of my surroundings. With my job, I'm always on the lookout for someone. I don't trust anyone to begin with....checking out the crowd with my head swiveling like a gyroscope
 
Now reports are that he was being harrassed because he was black...being sent taunting text messages and pictures. What a shame. Although he'd never complained to anyone about it, his family knew. He apparently was caught on video tape stealing beer off his truck. He was a Teamster, so he was losing a great job. All for a few cases of beer?? What a fool. And THEN to kill nine people and himself....what a tragedy.

Hartford Distributors Shooting: Shooter at Connecticut Beer Distributorship Opened Fire at Disciplinary Hearing - ABC News

1) If the perp hadn't been complaining about this alleged harassment, his family wouldn't know about it.

2) He didn't lose the job, he was caught stealing. Ergo, he threw the job away, and he was always going to know exactly where it was. In someone else's paycheck.

3) We have to train people that the correct way to conduct a murder suicide is to start with the suicide.
 
Its probably way to early to pronounce any judgments on this case. A lot of stuff just doesnt add up. Reports were that he used a .223 rifle? And that he was in a meeting about pending disciplined...came out and started shooting? Where did he keep the rifle? It will be interesting to see where/how this all plays out.
 
I agree that in hostage or very violent situations where a gunman assures impending harm, the best method is to simply kill him. It's not like his guilt is in question.

I do find it distasteful though that this incident is being used as part of the pro-gun agenda. Just because people can carry concealed in some areas does not mean that all factors would line up in their favor in a situation like this. Someone could pull a gun on him and easily get shot dead if he reacts fast enough. I mean, who knows how it could really go down in a situation that is so volatile and unpredictable. Adding more guns does not guarantee a positive outcome per se.
 
I agree that in hostage or very violent situations where a gunman assures impending harm, the best method is to simply kill him. It's not like his guilt is in question.

I do find it distasteful though that this incident is being used as part of the pro-gun agenda. Just because people can carry concealed in some areas does not mean that all factors would line up in their favor in a situation like this. Someone could pull a gun on him and easily get shot dead if he reacts fast enough. I mean, who knows how it could really go down in a situation that is so volatile and unpredictable. Adding more guns does not guarantee a positive outcome per se.

I find it just as repulsive when 'news' programs immeidately jump to the "assault rifle" connection and use it as a means of promoting gun control...
 
I find it just as repulsive when 'news' programs immeidately jump to the "assault rifle" connection and use it as a means of promoting gun control...

Hence my comments above. Gun proponents, most people aren't going to be carrying a weapon on their person or in their desk at work in corporate America, thus it wouldn't be accessible when needed it in a scenario like this. Gun opponents, you can't outlaw crazy. Banning guns just leads to criminals being the only ones with guns.

Mass killings are tragedies, but they are tragedies that are very difficult to prevent through gun possession/banning. That's the logical facts.
 
Last edited:
Hence my comments above. Gun proponents, most of you aren't going to be carrying a weapon on your person or in your desk at work, thus it wouldn't be accessible when you needed it in a scenario like this. Gun opponents, you can't outlaw crazy. Banning guns just leads to criminals being the only ones with guns.

Mass killings are tragedies, but they are tragedies that are very difficult to prevent through gun possession/banning. That's the logical facts.

Truth be told, after the loss of life (which trumps all and probably should have its own and separate thread) perhaps the GREATEST tragedy isnt that individuals werent allowed to be packin heat...its that we have been pussified to believe that when someone starts firing our best recourse is to hide and look for a safe place to die when the asshole shoots us or runs out of bullets. Unless we are talking a fully automatic weapon there are probably 101 different weapons within arms reach that any one or two people could employ that would either stop an individual or screw up their aim long enough to attack and disable them. And no...Im not talking about guerrila forces or special ops training. A set of keys, followed by a wallet, a pocket knife, a book, an iPod, a clipboard, or even a pen, then a cell phone in a barrage would make damn near anyone flinch even when holding a weapon. its unexpected and abnormal to stand unflinching while an object is flying at your eyes. We need to teach people to stop with the victim mentality. Lay down and die...dont worry, the cops will protect you.
 
Hence my comments above. Gun proponents, most people aren't going to be carrying a weapon on their person or in their desk at work in corporate America, thus it wouldn't be accessible when needed it in a scenario like this. Gun opponents, you can't outlaw crazy. Banning guns just leads to criminals being the only ones with guns.

Mass killings are tragedies, but they are tragedies that are very difficult to prevent through gun possession/banning. That's the logical facts.
I disagree with that Catz. Many people hold defensive arms as close to themselves as possible. I can't bring them into certain establishments and that is fine, but my firearm is normally within a reasonable distance to me in proximity. I'm not a rare case in the south.
 
Truth be told, after the loss of life (which trumps all and probably should have its own and separate thread) perhaps the GREATEST tragedy isnt that individuals werent allowed to be packin heat...its that we have been pussified to believe that when someone starts firing our best recourse is to hide and look for a safe place to die when the asshole shoots us or runs out of bullets. Unless we are talking a fully automatic weapon there are probably 101 different weapons within arms reach that any one or two people could employ that would either stop an individual or screw up their aim long enough to attack and disable them. And no...Im not talking about guerrila forces or special ops training. A set of keys, followed by a wallet, a pocket knife, a book, an iPod, a clipboard, or even a pen, then a cell phone in a barrage would make damn near anyone flinch even when holding a weapon. its unexpected and abnormal to stand unflinching while an object is flying at your eyes. We need to teach people to stop with the victim mentality. Lay down and die...dont worry, the cops will protect you.
Situational awareness. I cannot stress to people enough how important it is to know your surroundings, how to read people, and keep a level head in case a crisis should happen to occur. In this situation a combination of a mentally unstable person and panic resulted in multiple needless deaths.
 
I think it would be really appalling and disgusting for any of us to attempt to use this tragedy to make political hay on a gun agenda, whether that agenda is pro or anti-gun.




I fully FULLY disagree.... When these tragedies happen it is imperative we learn from our mistakes...... The difference between life and death due to restrictions on CONSTITUTIONAL freedoms, should always be brought to the forfront...

You have the rest of your life to win a gunfight as these people sadly found out.



On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
 
Back
Top Bottom