Can Anyone else figure this senario out ? Let's SEE , gun-free zones , hmmmmm , Perhaps this is Precisely Why these Goofs are Targeting these areas ! Yes , it Is Sick and Demented , But , It Is Also an Open-Door for these Nuts to take FULL Advantage of !

This Texas congressman who believes we need assault rifles to protect us from the U.S. government must be unfamiliar with the United States military.

My Air Force (retired) husband says, "Good luck with that rifle, Sir!"

Of course, civilians armed with assult rifles are giving US soldiers a heck of a time in Iraq. And in the US, many soldiers wouldn't take up arms against citizens, and some would join them.

Eddie-Wilson are you suggesting arm all to even the score? All schools are gun free.

It sounds like the NRA , arm all and then they won't try....not true .

Should any of the birthers or prepers or other delusionals take up weapons against the dutifully elected US Government, at that moment they cease to be citizens and become terrorists.
I understand part of their delusion would be that they view themselves as patriots, but they will be alone in that fantasy opposing the will of the majority and the power of the US military.

Scubus, first of all it's not their assault rifles that are giving our soldiers the most problems over there. If that's all they had they would have been taken over long ago. And while we have the greatest fighting force ever assembled, we are not ruthless killing tyrants. We could wipe them out with nerve gas or bombs that are much more destructive than those we use now. We are more civilized than that, and we have some concern for the civilian population and world opinion. And you're right, many soldiers wouldn't take up arms against US citizens, but they would take up arms against traitors that are trying to destroy our republic, which is how these citizens would effectively be portrayed. A true tyrant who would try to take over this country would either be a ruthless butcher (a Hitler type); or a conglomeration of corporate interests who would convince Americans that some enemy (communists, socialists, atheists, humanists, liberals, or some other current popular boogie man) was trying to take away their freedoms. Your guns would be futile in either case.

Will you, Ron Byers. I owned over seven guns, 5 of them handguns, one of them was a Kimber Tactical Law Enforcement 2 1911 .45 (a very good gun, used by various spec-ops teams as well as special police forces). After much research and much trial and error, I sold and re-sold most of my guns with very little wiggle-room in the price. Often making a small profit.

I openly carried a Beretta 92FS (three steps from firing) in a tactical quick-draw holster. I had 20 round magazines, flush, special ones that many soldiers would buy with their own money as the 92FS and M9 have only very very small differences, only someone with real knowledge would notice them.

The point I'm getting at is I love my guns. I've sold most of them, I gave a smaller one away, a .25 auto, called a "saturday night special" back in it's day. A favored throw-away assassins weapon. But for someone who isn't an assassin it's a very good ankle-gun and .25 packs quite a bit more whallop than a .22.

Anyway, I am 100% sure we need a single-payer system like most of our better-to-do allies. We definitely need better mental health care, we have far too many mentally ill in prisons and on the streets. None of this "state-by-state, politicians and "regular Joe-folk" setting the rules" we need real, qualified scientists who don't have a huge paycheck of an agenda leaning one way or another. We need far better gun regulation, I live in Utah, where it's easier to buy a shotgun and ammo than it is to buy Coricidin Cough & Cold alcohol, after all, it breaks the Mormon "Word of Wisdom" (lol...)

If I lost the ability to have a high-capacity mag, like the THIRTY-THREE ROUND MAGAZINE I HAVE FOR MY HIGHLY CONCEALABLE GLOCK 26 (an ultra-compact 9mm, nearly indestructible semi-auto, where the @!$%#ing magazine, loaded, weighs more than the gun itself, not entirely uncommon in plastics, but it really shows here)

Why do I need this other than for fun? For the pure joy of shooting something so ridiculous-looking on camera or at some targets. It certainly isn't good for shooting past 15 yards, and that's if you're a good shot. But it would be good if you say, had a bunch of people cornered in a room, or needed to create a distraction. You could have this gun in your "bad hand" firing randomly to force people to cover, knowing you have 33+ rounds, and if you got extra mags...well..And in the other hand carry another gun or a rifle meant for the real killing.

It's doable..

Finally, my dad was Marine Recon in 'Nam, then went into further spec-ops. He was the guy who taught the "first-off-the-assembly-line" SEALS how to kill up close and personal, with a pistol, using it as a wepaon in ways you wouldn't imagine, with a knife, with your hands, your teeth, whatever you got. He was damn good, and has real combat experience. At 63 with a jolly smile on his face, glasses, a big jelly-belly and a Santa Clause-y demeanor, being a socialist-liberal and having one son who is gay and another who is a mixture of a hippie and a self-defense and combat-defense junkie/wannabe writer and cannabis activist, he's had to keep an open mind about things :P. He's a wonderful father and a great man.

He's taught me a lot, gave me a military-grade level of instruction when I needed it with guns, with knives, with my fists. He made sure I got other professional instruction, too,with some of the top fighters in the state and in the world. Guys like Gene Fullmer and Eddie "Flash" Newman. Guys who trained hundreds of other guys, dozens who became great, 200-300 who became really good. Even if you're half-good like me you're still better than any average person once you commit.

My dad though, he knows what it;s like to be in a crossfire and to be in the heat of battle. He knows how pointless it would be to try and battle an Aurora-styled gunman with a pistol and maybe one-two magazines with confused people all around you, in a darkened theater, etc. He's seen friendly fire happen in ways that would seem blatant and insane when the enemy was very clearly identified, but it happened all the same, thousands of times. It happens today still. People who think that they can do better than men like my old man who understands real combat are morons. I've never seen combat like my dad has and I never will, I hope. I have had to defend myself in one life-or-death situation against two men with a large jagged pipe and a knife. I got cut and bled a bit but it was one of them who was going away in an ambulance, not me.

Self-defense is important, and we've "drifted" away from the concept of it. Gotten more into the just looking armed and badass. I know people who have amazing guns they either got in a trade or they loaned someone some moeny and got it as collateral, etc. AMAZING guns, barely used already, and they NEVER fire them but keep them loaded "ready to use as my first line of defense" a freaking 1911 compact, and you're going to use that as your first line of defense? What's that? You've never shot a .45 before? You've only been in two real fightsi n your life and your were @!$%#-pissed each time?

Yeah, you're a badass alright. Not everyone needs to be a fighter, or learn from the best of the best (not saying I did, I learned from some great men and women though.) But everyone, within reason, can gain some competency in self-defense. REAL self-defense. That would go a long way, I think, physical health, discipline, mental health as well.

All that said, health care, the drug war, mental health, the prison industrial complex. We need solutions to them and we need to end the idea that we need to pour more gas on the flames to finally end the fire.

So yes, I do plan on putting more than just some reactionary thoughts into this problem. It's an on-going thing for political activists. The problems are so interconnected between healthcare, the prison systems, poverty, the drug war. We can't face one of them without seeing the whole thing if you dig enough, see the dirt for what it is, take a step back and realize what the hell it is you've been seeping through.

Well said

I just want to point out, for records sake.

Japan has less gun killings than the U.S.? They also have a smaller country.

There has been a steadily climbing trend of amount of deaths from shootings?

Guess what else is steadily climbing. The population of the freaking country.

Don't get me wrong. I find this number too large period. But if you're gonna make a point, make sure it explains what you're trying to point out.@ the Chart.

Sorry to say it, but, Eddie-Wilson is right. These killers don't go flipping out anywhere that they're going to have someone shooting back at them. They're cowards and go where they can kill as many people as they can with little resistance.

I look forward to teachers at my daughter's high school being allowed to exercise concealed carry privileges. It is reasonable. Numerous assaults have been stopped by someone else who was carrying a gun, though the media will not report those facts.

Janet, no one is suggesting "arm all."

With respect...

How many public places are armed to the tooth? Beside the police dept ? Your rationale is absurd , 99% of american public places are unarmed

Marc Willett is correct, Scubus, if you take up arms against the US government, that is treason.

You will have no chance against the greatest military in the world anyway, so rid yourself of that delusional idea. There's a name for people with these kinds of crazy ideas: Whackos.

Timothy McVeigh saw himself as a patriot, fighting back against the tyranny that 'caused' the deaths of the Branch Davideans and at Ruby Ridge... The day-care center was just collateral damage...

Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. It is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding; it seeks to annihilate rather than to convert.

- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Laura S., Eddie is NOT right. Do not forget Fort Hood. THAT gunman shot 13 people on a military base. And I don't know if the Aurora shooting was in a school-safe zone, but it certainly was not in a school. THINK before you start to agree with someone who has not thought for himself!

One hopes this is 'snark', although the misspelling of "guards" may indicate otherwise. . .

Obama failed to give you a brain Luz...

The Republican led congress cut the budget the Obama administration wanted to spend on embassy security by nearly a half a billion dollars...and you claim Obama didn't post enough guards at Bengazi (nevermind the fact that he's not actually in charge of posting guards at embassies). Wow.

Jan-21270 - i know "tone" isn't always obvious in print, but I BELIEVE Luz was being sarcastic and I for one am still giggling to myself. "Obama - do this" and "Obama - do that". "Obama - get us world peace". "Obama - make jobs. And get us more money. And we want the sky to be purple now - so change that too. And get on with the business of making the 'Death Star'. And why do you let bad things happen to good people?"
Look, I'm SO glad he's in the drivers' seat. I wouldn't want ANY. OTHER. PERSON in the entire realm of politics anywhere NEAR the Oval Office OR the red button. He's just a dude. A dude with a lot of crap to deal with. We'll all muddle through this together.

Yes, snark.

yeah, trying to ridicule the NRA/repuke/troll position, probably should have been a reply to a troll...

An excellent suggestion. But too simplistic- how does one 'criminalize' guns, and what drugs will we legalize?

In these 'events' too often drugs (I.E. prescriptions instead of psychiatric counseling) are the problem.

Also too bad is that so many of the perps are dead, and cannot be asked "why".

Exactly, Day. We can't create a black market for guns while bitching about the black market creating by drugs. Compared to how many people are hooked on pharmas these days it's a freakin' joke to go after Cannabis, Meth and Heroin users. Cannabis, MDMA, LSD, Mushrooms and truffles, and cocaine should at least be taken off and regulated. Heroin should be given to addicts in reasonably low, clean, administered quantities that help lower the addiction, keeps the drugs and needles clean, and yes, we pay for it.

In the end the cost is MUCH lower than housing them in a prison and much more humane. We need to recognize that addiction is something most people want to end, not continue. But having one-foot-in and one-foot-out in this partly-privatized for-profit nonsense doesn't help. We literally have slaves working in for-profit prisons because they got caught with weed or heroin, etc. Their lives are NOT better now that they're in there, branded a felon, and forever lost the right to vote over virtually nothing.

If we regulate drugs, if we regulate our healthcare and get rid of the private industry, the profiteering going on, we eliminate the NEED for corruption. That addiction to power and money that thrives on these industries and judging other people for much less destructive (on society as a whole, not as much on themselves, most of the time) addictions. We literally are creating companies, prison-based companies, and arms of the government meant to combat drugs that are "too big to fail" (the scariest @!$%#ing term invented in the past decade). The DEA.

Anyway...just adding some details while agreeing with you :P

#5 You won't hear those adjectives from me. This was an unspeakable deed. He was a heinous murderer.

Thom Hartmann had it right. He wouldn't even use the murderers name on the air. And from what I have heard, this murderer know what he was doing. Why else damage his computer and hard drive? He also know it was a one way trip.

That's the difference when you are white and live in a house worth $1.6 million.

A HUMAN heinous murderer. If we forget that, we're not much better than someone who can commit such an act.

While I will not try and 'humanize' that young man, I don't think it helps in the long run to demonize either. These types of incidents have a totally different psychopathy than other types of violence and perhaps trying to understand rather than the aforementioned demonization would be helpful.

After the reports of the shooting, a friend said, well, at least he is not at large and I responded, they never are in this type of shooting. They always intend to die at the scene and I think this aspect might be helpful as well.

JH Robbins, With all due respect, my ability to even care to understand doesn't come into play in this massacre wherein this man killed 20 children, six adults and his mother.

This may have looked like an empassioned rage murder, but he was cold blooded enough to plan it and destroy his hard drive at home to cover any evidence. Not too crazy, I'd say. This was just too evil for me to WANT to understand.

Helpful, yes, that he shot himself, but he should have done that first.

Why in heaven's name did his parents, especially his mother, glorify guns & expose him to shooting range(s), and keep her "enthusiast" collection of guns insufficiently locked & sequestered? The parents knew the young man was psychologically & emotionally unstable. The guy was clearly deranged; parents should be responsible here.

intelligence and benefiting society are not the same thing. he probably was a genius, with math or computers or whatever. that doesn't mean he was a worthwhile human being. i don't think they're trying to humanize him by saying he was a genius. i think they're trying to sensationalize it, and maybe take just-folks satisfaction in the idea that someone who is a genius is totally effed up. plus, lanza was basically a child, and his brain wasn't right. he was still a monster. but labeling him a monster is an easy way to make us feel better about not having prevented this from happening. because monsters can't be fixed or prevented. but a lot of mental illnesses can be treated. and his wasn't treated, or dealt with, even by putting him in prison. calling him a heinous animal lets everyone else off the hook. calling a child "troubled" can remind us that many of us are complicit.

I would think she had those guns locked up, but since he son lived with her, he knew how to get to them.

india, i can understand not wanting to think about the dark recesses of the kind of disgusting mind that can plan and act on the murder of a six-year-old, but it is imperative that somebody try to figure it out. even if you want to take these people out and shoot them behind the tool shed, you have to be able to identify them first. and we can't.

wicious, #5.10,

This is such a complex problem, not so much identifying these people, but reaching them. I suspect this mother, (RIP) had plenty of issues of her own. She, (and this is often the case) was in the type of denial that you often see, and she kept him protected and pretty much isolated. She was probably afraid of him, or of what he would do, but kept denying it to herself. Why she had the guns, and worse, let him shoot and know where they were, is mystifying to me. Well, like I said, she was no poster child for mental health and I hate to say it, but if that woman didn't have those guns, 20 innocents would be alive and so would everyone else, including her.

#6,

Good post, thanks, I couldn't remember Wayne LaPierre's name to save me. What a cowardly creep in the same vein as Grover Norquist. NRA has shut down its FACEBOOK page and has not even expressed sympathy to these families.

So far we're a free country, thanks to congress and the NRA: Free to see this type of horror. They've given us a number of freedoms I could do without. Congress had better get a grown up act in order.

So true, India...I, too, only wish he shot himself and spared those families their horror. I expect nothing less (or more) from the NRA. They're existing on borrowed time. Their power and influence over Washington is waning, just like Grover's. The tide is turning, that's for sure. All that is needed is political courage in Congress and effect some meaningful change and enact common sense gun control legislation that focuses on background checks and psych evals for gun buyers.

epluribus 1forall,

I really hate the NRA and especially Wayne LaPierre. They made it their mission to destroy Obama, for one thing, which, as a member of the DNC, made me mad. Their deep pockets and lobbying, in my opinion, put lots of blood on their hands. There are many good members of the NRA, but the leadership is atrocious and corrupt.

As for this disgusting congress and its T-Party house, I can't say anything that is under a PG 13 rating, so I'd better be quiet. I will say, "For once, do what you were sent there for: Represent US, the people of this country. You know, the 98% of us!"

Hear, hear!

It's a combination of the two.

Identifying behavioral problems and specifically mental illnesses, is controversial to define. Nearly every mass murderer like this just "snaps". Or did they?

Then the guns... our government is barely capable of functioning, much less legislate some realistic gun regulations. These issues are complex... but NOTHING is being done except more lockdown on our public and private living spaces.

Or maybe it's a combination of both? And where does parental responsibility fit in? It's a complex issue to which a complex, not simplistic, solution is required.

If someone wants a license-to-own, require them to first have a few months of psychological counseling, including anger management, communication skills & self-assertion, safety training, etc.

If someone wants a license-to-carry, require them to have a few more months of psychological counseling, including anger management, communication skills & self-assertion, safety training, etc.

We are missing a piece of the puzzle that is glaring in this specific incident , EVERYONE in the house where the guns are stored should be required to pass the psych test , other wise the point is still moot for this shooting

Amen! But money for Mental Health, along with other social ills has been cut to the bone and is on track with Republican led states and our Congress to be slashed to the bone through cuts to Medicaid. I think it was Joe on Morning Joe that said it is about money as well as all the other reasons we bring up for horrors like Sandy Hook. People are making lots of money who sell guns, and the laws we have are not enforced.

uh....yes - it's cumulative.

no, everything is rounded by ten so the dots aren't clumped together.

The article says that it is cumulative. All things being equal, one would expect a linear increase over time, not an exponential increase over time. All things are not equal, though.

Since 1940, the population of the United States has increased at a fairly linear rate. Assuming the per capita violent crime rate remains constant from year to year, the actual number of violent crimes would increase each year along with population. The graph of these numbers over time would be fairly linear, matching the growth of population.

A cumulative graph of these numbers over time, though, would appear like the one above: exponential. Adding them together like they're "roll-over" crimes is misleading. A year-by-year non-cumulative graph of murders in the United States (counted by amount of victims) accompanied by a graph that plots those numbers as a percentage of the US population overall would be far more useful and accurate.

NOTE: I know that violent crime has not been a constant ratio of the US population over time. Judging by my cursory research, the ratio increased at an overall linear rate (meaning the actual NUMBER was increasing exponentially) until the early 1990's, at which point it started to fall dramatically. The number continues to fall, but not as quickly as in the 90's. The percentage of homicides in the US is currently (as of 2010) at its lowest level since 1963. This is partially because of a lower percentage of murder attempts, but also partially because of more effective emergency medical practices.

The problems of mental health treatment are vast. There is no money for real treatment. Most insurance covers only a few sessions with a therapist, but will cover medications. No one covers long term hospital stays. The laws are written to protect patient's rights, therefore let them go as soon as they are able to act calm for a few hours. Contrary to what others have said, it is often very easy to spot these folks. 18-22 is the prime age for schizophenia to emerge, and its victims are often quite odd before they get full blown symptoms. Just because you are delusional doesn't mean you lack the ability to plan a horrible act. You may plan that act based on the delusions which develop slowly--thinking others are conspiring against you, are going to hurt you, have causes your misery, etc. I agree with the person who said it is all connected to lack of universal health care. However, we would still need to pay the therapists a living wage. Part of the reason MH care is so poor is that the folks who take care of the sickest people are often the most poorly paid, with the least experience. I could go on and on...Poverty is part of it too, although rich and poor get nuts at the same rates, the rich can buy better care and can hide their person more easily. With psychiatry, poor comes fast at over $150 per hour in many places. I could go on, but I won't.

All those hours I spent playing Duck Hunt growing up...If it weren't for that laughing dog, I might have been a shooter, too! Big scary video games and all.

Face it, it's not video games. It's not music. It's not TV. It's not movies or Hollywood. It's the fact that we fail our children, and our government failed us all. As soon as you can remove your head from your orifice and realize this, THEN we can begin fixing what's wrong.

Jamie, I agree that the trend can never descend, given the cumulative values. However, I can't understand how the magnitude is "exaggerated"; there is no norm for comparison. The variations from the mean are extreme, and the increase in total deaths since 2007 is frightening. The deaths represented here are sad indicators of social trends in America.

Morgan Freeman agrees with you! The person who commits these acts wants to be a "famous person" and the media will be sure to make him one by endless coverage of him. He plans to die, death by cop usually, but in this case he killed himself. This young man planned this. Killing your mom is pretty horrible in itself, but killing innocent children would get a lot of media coverage.

One of the reasons I am proud to be Scottish/American.

The UK doesn't fool around. Most civilized countries don't. It is our politicians who've done this. Their hands always held out to the lobbyists from the likes of the NRA.