Umpqua, Oregon, Mass Public Killings, Oct 1st 2015.

[photonrider]

Update: 03:35 Hours GMT/UTC Thursday, October 8th, 2015.

There will always be Heroes in the Home of the Brave, and the Land of the Free.

In the wanton wake of slaughter that a self-confessed satanist trailed as he ruthlessly, nay - according to several accounts - gleefully exterminated, after interrogation, members of the public . . . there was no shortage of heroes.

Someone called 911 immediately - saving countless lives.

Someone looked for a Fire Alarm and set it off - saving more lives.

Someone defied the manic murderer head-on, determined to save more lives, adamant to live through his own son's birthday, and was shot multiple times but continued his heroic stand. Saving more lives.

Two officers, sent by dispatch, were on the scene in minutes, and within five minutes of being dispatched had not only diverted the attention of the killer but saw to his immediate karma. More lives were saved.

The nearby hospitals, were ready for triage in minutes, sending out ambulances immediately, and, when the injured were brought in, fought to save lives and bring down the death-count. Again, lives saved.

We were not entirely defeated in this battle - though we mourn the carnage that was once our breathing loved ones, our friends, our neighbors. We won this battle because of all these unsung heroes, and all those who still are alive today who might have been dead if not for all those heroes.

Those heroes not only all deserve the Medal of Freedom, but may dare to call the Land of the free truly also the home of the Brave.

The villain will get his set-piece in Wikipedia.

____________________________________________

Update 08:16: P.M. UTC/GMT Wednesday 14th October 2015


Victims:

The Douglas County Sheriff's Office identified the nine people killed as Lucero Alcaraz, 19; Quinn Glen Cooper, 18; Kim Saltmarsh Dietz, 59; Lucas Eibel, 18; Jason Dale Johnson, 33; Lawrence Levine, 67; Sarena Dawn Moore, 44; Treven Taylor Anspach, 20; and Rebecka Ann Carnes, 18.

Injured survivors:

One week after the shooting, three additional victims — Cheyeanne Fitzgerald, Julie Woodworth and Amber McMurtrey — remain in Oregon hospitals.
Fitzgerald is at Roseburg's Mercy Medical Center. She is listed in fair condition, according to a hospital spokeswoman.
Woodworth is at PeaceHealth RiverBend hospital and is listed in critical condition. She was shot five times. On Thursday afternoon, hospital officials gave an update on her condition. She's expected to remain in the hospital for several more weeks.
McMurtrey is also in the Springfield hospital. She is in fair condition.

Heroic action:

Detective Todd Spingath, 41, is a United States Air Force veteran employed by the Roseburg Police Department for 16 years. He received the Medal of Valor for another shooting in Oregon in 2005.
He was with his partner Sgt Joe Kaney, 49, when they received the alert of gunfire in Umpqua Community College last week
Kaney is a former Marine who has been employed by the Roseburg Police Department for 23 years.
He also received a Medal of Honor for the 2005 shooting, as well as a and Purple Heart from the Oregon Peace Officer Association as he was hit.

Chris Mintz, army vet, father, student:
When the gunman, (edited) tried to enter the army veteran's class, Mintz, 30, told the students in his classroom to get to a safe place and said, "you're not getting by me."
At that point, the shooter shot (Mintz) five times and the shooter moved on and apparently didn't go in to that classroom," Pastor Dennis Kreiss told People. "I applaud the guy's heroism. He may have saved the people in that classroom."

________________________​

Original Post beginning the discussion:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...cials-active-shooter-oregon-college/73153610/

This is becoming routine. How can we change this?

 

[Dennisch]

Ban all the guns. Arm the teachers. Soldiers on campus. Arm the students. Stricter gun laws. Back ground checks.

Or, as usual, report about it. Cry outrage. And move on to the next one.

 

[photonrider]

As Obama said - even the reporting is becoming routine. Really sad we have numbed ourselves to this point.

 

[terminator363]

How about just no guns Dennisch? It works everywhere else in the world.

 

[Dennisch]

How about just no guns Dennisch? It works everywhere else in the world.

Ban all the guns.

.....

Edit.

Does anyone else see a difference in the font of my post?

 

[terminator363]

.....

Edit.

Does anyone else see a difference in the font of my post?

whoops sorry I mistook your post.. carry on

 

[CodeRedR51]

Does anyone else see a difference in the font of my post?

Yes.

In any case, I can't stand guns and unfortunately most of my friends are avid second amendment supporters so I never hear the end of it when I share something anti-gun on my facebook page.

 

[Swagger897]

How about just no guns Dennisch? It works everywhere else in the world.

Can't do that (well Obama can't) because then he'd be going against the constitution (you know, that piece of paper that crazy guy Rand protects so much).

I'm indifferent to it right now. I don't know what type of weapon was used, so saying ban guns isn't the issue, when the issue across America is actually with hand guns, and not rifles. Honestly to really do anything with the issue is to deal with the ammunition. On mobile right now so can't post all my ideas, but I'll try later on.

 

[Vegard]

Taking away the guns is not going to fix the root cause. People will still find ways of killing large numbers of people in a short amount of time if that is their objective.

USA must take a long, hard look in the mirror.

For example: Having the state conducting large scale mass killings without due process hardly sets a good example for the rest of the population, does it?

 

[Dennisch]

Stricter gun laws only work for registered weapons.

Is there information available about all the mass shootings that happened over the year about the legality of the weapons used during those shootings?

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Why don't we ever look into the situation at home, and what the parents are like?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Taking away the guns is not going to fix the root cause. People will still find ways of killing large numbers of people in a short amount of time if that is their objective.

So, you just want to take it on the chin, then as the price of maintaining a right?

The problem is not the number of guns or the unfettered access to them. The problem is the NRA and the attitude that any regulation amounts to fascism. Obama is right in that there is scope for moderate, reasonable reform; regulation that allows gun owners to legally and responsibly exercise their right to bear arms, but at the same time, prevent tragedies like this. But the NRA won't even have that conversation because any regulation is fascism. And without a willingness to discuss it, there is very little chance that anything significant will happen. If the Sandy Hook massacre didn't change anything, I am afraid nothing will.

 

[Dotini]

I'd like to know more about the mental and medical history of the shooter. I'm guessing he had a lot of both.

But for supposedly such an advanced society, America does indeed have a lot of gun violence.

I suppose Switzerland is an advanced society, and I suppose it has as many guns per capita as the US.

But why do the Swiss have less mass shooting than the Americans?

 

[Dan]

When the media chooses to report on mass killings, they need to report it in the most dull and boring way possible. Starting off the segment on nightly news with sirens blaring, crying students running for their lives, and family members clutching each other tightly makes the story too dramatic and sensational. When the media plasters the name and face of the killer all over the news, the killer is being treated like a superstar. Think back to some of the most gruesome mass killings in the past few years. Sandy Hook Elementary School, Aurora movie theatre, and the Charleston church. Can you remember the names of any of the victims? How about the killers? That's an easy one. Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and Dylann Roof. These names are memorable because the media chose to put their names everywhere. If the news agencies were smart, they would have listened to experts in the field of criminology who constantly tell them not to make these situations big stories. When you treat a ruthless killer like a superstar, you're giving them what they wanted. You're inspiring copycat killers to commit the same atrocities so they can get their wish of being known forever. By making the story brief and not as engaging, you strip the killers of their wishes. People will always want to be informed, but there is a right and wrong way of delivering the information. There will always be killings because you can't secure everything. Shopping malls, schools, colleges, hospitals, hotels, sports events, concerts, you name it. They are targets and nothing will change that, but we can slow down the severity of these crimes if we don't sensationalize them like we have been for years.

Rant over. I think this is the longest post I've ever made on GTP. I expect to be quoted, rebutted, and picked apart by many of you. I ask you to please be respectful in your criticism, and allow me adequate time to make a response to your posts.

 

[Dennisch]

@CallmeDan

You're absolutely right about the way the media handles it.

 

[Dan]

@CallmeDan

You're absolutely right about the way the media handles it.

Thank you. 👍

 

[The Bman]

When the media chooses to report on mass killings, they need to report it in the most dull and boring way possible. Starting off the segment on nightly news with sirens blaring, crying students running for their lives, and family members clutching each other tightly makes the story too dramatic and sensational. When the media plasters the name and face of the killer all over the news, the killer is being treated like a superstar. Think back to some of the most gruesome mass killings in the past few years. Sandy Hook Elementary School, Aurora movie theatre, and the Charleston church. Can you remember the names of any of the victims? How about the killers? That's an easy one. Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and Dylann Roof. These names are memorable because the media chose to put their names everywhere. If the news agencies were smart, they would have listened to experts in the field of criminology who constantly tell them not to make these situations big stories. When you treat a ruthless killer like a superstar, you're giving them what they wanted. You're inspiring copycat killers to commit the same atrocities so they can get their wish of being known forever. By making the story brief and not as engaging, you strip the killers of their wishes. People will always want to be informed, but there is a right and wrong way of delivering the information. There will always be killings because you can't secure everything. Shopping malls, schools, colleges, hospitals, hotels, sports events, concerts, you name it. They are targets and nothing will change that, but we can slow down the severity of these crimes if we don't sensationalize them like we have been for years.

Rant over. I think this is the longest post I've ever made on GTP. I expect to be quoted, rebutted, and picked apart by many of you. I ask you to please be respectful in your criticism, and allow me adequate time to make a response to your posts.

This right here is exactly what I think as well.

Criminals who commit mass homicides are narcissistic and mentally insane and only seek to have their names remembered, even if in a negative light. Other aspiring maniacs who are on the verge of becoming homicidal murderers realize that an act like this would be their chance to shine and be remembered in infamy. As much as the media may say "This is horrible!", they just glorify the perpetrator by plastering his name everywhere. They need to focus on building sympathy for the victims as opposed to the constant coverage of the criminal.

 

[Vegard]

So, you just want to take it on the chin, then as the price of maintaining a right?

No, I want to see the root cause addressed.

The problem is not the number of guns or the unfettered access to them. The problem is the NRA and the attitude that any regulation amounts to fascism. Obama is right in that there is scope for moderate, reasonable reform; regulation that allows gun owners to legally and responsibly exercise their right to bear arms, but at the same time, prevent tragedies like this. But the NRA won't even have that conversation because any regulation is fascism. And without a willingness to discuss it, there is very little chance that anything significant will happen. If the Sandy Hook massacre didn't change anything, I am afraid nothing will.

I think you, the media, politicians, and indeed the NRA are exploiting tragedies like this to promote a political agenda, shifting focus away from the root cause. That is why nothing has changed.

 

[Pupik]

Meanwhile, let's forget all about our problems with some gun-wielding action movies and some first-person shooters.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I think you, the media, politicians, and indeed the NRA are exploiting tragedies like this to promote a political agenda, shifting focus away from the root cause. That is why nothing has changed.

It's kind of hard to talk about the root cause when groups like the NRA shut down any discussion before it can begin. As soon as anyone starts talking about an issue thst they feel will become a platform for a wider discussion about gun control, they shut it down and demonise it as a government-sponsored attack on their rights.

For an issue like this one, there is not going to be one easy solution. Gun control and gun control alone won't fix it - just as mental health support and mental health support alone won't do it. A multi-lateral approach is needed, but it will only work if you have equal support on all fronts from all parties. And so long as the NRA are on the fringe - acknowledging individual tragedies but refusing to recognise the wider problem, even to deny that it exists - that's not going to happen.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

 

[Grayfox]

Does the US gun shop just check if you were committed in an asylum to deny you a gun or do they do a psych evaluation to see if you are unstable.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Does the US gun shop just check if you were committed in an asylum to deny you a gun or do they do a psych evaluation to see if you are unstable.

Yes. It is associated with a federally mandated background check each time you buy a gun. The background check became law with the Brady Bill, passed after the attempted assassination of President Regan.

Some states, in particular New York, requires a health care professional to break Dr./Patient privilege and report to the authorities if the patient threatens suicide or the lives of others. You are then, immediately reported to a state office (I forget which one in New York), where you are stripped of the right to own a gun and all legally owned firearms seized.

New Jersey's laws are also a bit outside of the norm. If you are from out of state with a valid firearms license, and you cross into the state, you can be arrested on gun charges (most common, illegal possession of a firearm) even though you legally have the right to carry the gun in 49 other states. Currently, 19 States, the NRA and 34 Congressmen are suing the state over their laws, which like New York, were passed during the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting.

Also, the reports are coming in that this shooter was only shooting Christians.

 

[photonrider]

.....

Edit.

Does anyone else see a difference in the font of my post?

I saw your post as an echo of mine, albiet a more sardonic, if not succinct, version.

Yes. That is the point. The precedents have been set. "Nothing to see here. Let's move along . . . .."

And once again the elegant equations for and against gun ownership.
The point was not the means used - the means may be controlled, may be regulated, may be changed, may be forbidden - but if someone wants to go out and express their anger and their hate or their disillusionment of the system they will find a means to the ends.
The ends being the betrayal of social trust.

Society is based on trust.
We trust what's in the can is not poisoned when we grab it off the supermarket shelf.
We trust the guy driving behind us to not ram us when we stop for the red.
We trust our co-workers to not suddenly leap into our office and slash our throats.

We trust that when we go to school, some guy isn't going to be upset enough to kill us.
Doesn't matter what the hell they use to that end - the end is the same. A breach of trust.

We have now accepted that the regular breach of trust by fellow members of our society is normal.
Not unprecedented. Routine news.
That is the real tragedy.

Arguing endlessly about the means used, and how to control all possible means - whether guns, bombs or slings and arrows - that can be used to hurt innocent people, misses the point.
The point is that people in public, unarmed, going about their lives, trusting the society they live in, are then trusting in an illusion.
No one is safe.

.........XsnipX............If the Sandy Hook massacre didn't change anything, I am afraid nothing will.

Sandy Hook should have changed everything.
How could we accept as possible that a young lad would walk into a classroom of toddlers and adolescents and murder the whole lot of them in public?
But that impossibility became a reality.
The reality was a score of parents who lost babies (in some far away, far away land for some of us) while left with unwrapped presents under a tree of goodwill.
The reality is that the impossible when it comes to public massacre is - ho-hum - something to be accepted.
The reality, simply, is that the public are not safe.

In a day and age when we pride ourselves on being at the top of the food chain, when we prance around with glee about the probe we landed on a distant planet, when we can delve into the very workings of the ion pumps in a neuron, the fact that we cannot trust each other is hardest to accept - and naturally denied.
Sandy Hook showed that such trust was misplaced.

I'd like to know more about the mental and medical history of the shooter. I'm guessing he had a lot of both.

Snippets from the New York Times hint at more:

They said one witness told them that he asked about people’s religions before he began firing. “He appears to be an angry young man who was very filled with hate,” one law enforcement official said.

Kortney Moore, 18, from Rogue River, told the Roseburg newspaper, NR Today that the gunman was asking people to stand up and state their religion and then started firing away. She said she saw her teacher get shot in the head, adding that she herself was on the floor with people who had been shot.

In August, according to the most recent government figures, Douglas County had an unemployment rate of 8.1 percent, tied with another county for the second-highest rate in the state. About 20 percent of residents in the city and county live below the federal poverty line.

The college, with about 3,000 students, reflects that struggle, with many of its students coming back to school to gain skills for a career change. The average student is 37 years old, and popular courses of study include winemaking, nursing, welding and auto mechanics. “It’s a community college, so a lot of our friends and family attend this college,” Sheriff Hanlin said.

But for supposedly such an advanced society, America does indeed have a lot of gun violence.

I suppose Switzerland is an advanced society, and I suppose it has as many guns per capita as the US.

But why do the Swiss have less mass shooting than the Americans?

An interesting conundrum. But while per capita is a factor we must remember that when:

"On September 4, the Senate voted to change the language of the Second Amendment by removing the definition of militia, and striking the conscientious objector clause: A well regulated militia, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." (Wiki)

There were a lot less guns around. That Amendment now affects a lot more guns.
The Swiss also approach the meaning of 'trust' differently; they trust each other - united against the outsiders.
Why would one of them turn a gun against another of the society they are armed to protect?

 

[Mike Rotch]

That is why nothing has changed.

No.

Nothing has changed because politicians are entirely driven by the goal of re-election, not governing for the betterment of society.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Rumours are floating around that the gunman lined people up and asked them their religion and then shot the Christians dead. Those that refused to answer or said no were wounded instead.

http://nypost.com/2015/10/01/oregon-gunman-singled-out-christians-during-rampage/

 

[McLaren]

Not sure if I'd consider this a strong argument given just how incredibly easy it is to get a license/buy a car in the US.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Rumours are floating around that the gunman lined people up and asked them their religion and then shot the Christians dead. Those that refused to answer or said no were wounded instead.

Call me a cynic, but that matches the crimes committed by Islamic separatists in Kenya (albeit with a few tweaks), and the rumours didn't really start until after Obama downplayed as "routine" to highlight the apathy of the American public to these massacres. The cynic in me wonders if the rumours were deliberately crafted that way to sink Obama's point - and because "we're under attack from an organised front" sells more than "random, senseless gun violence - again".

 

[PzR Slim]

Just another day in the US then.

I know that sounds flippant but it really is how many outsiders view the states. How long are you guys going to put up with this? Does it still shock you as much as the first one you remember? And I wouldn't wait for politicians to change the status quo. As Mike said a few posts ago, politicians do what gets them re-elected. It's people that can affect change. If enough people make a stance the politicians will do the will of the people to get re-elected.

 

[sk8er913]

How about just no guns Dennisch? It works everywhere else in the world.

Because, Republicans - "Freedom!"