shooting in colorado school

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/13...igh-school?lite

Watching CNN right now. I don't even have the energy to blog this one for everyone like the bombing or the cop killer in CA. Just too damn sad.

CNN is reporting the gunman is dead and 2 injured. I hope for once they got it right the first time out.

Sad, but it won't be the last. Punish the person that committed the crime and pray for the families. All you can do.

Agreed.

Wow. Arapahoe is where my girlfriend went to high school, she also grew up in Littleton where Columbine is located. Fortunately her family no longer lives in the area. They were smart enough to get out.

 

Looks like the kid was looking to kill one of his teachers. The teacher left the building when he found out the kid was in the school with a shotgun looking for him. The two injured were students, both are still alive. One was shot when she confronted the shooter.

sickening

I talked to a boy who is a sophomore at the school, he knew the shooter well and said he was a pretty normal guy but could be rude and didnt understand some social boundaries. He was out to kill his speech/debate teacher after he got kicked out of the class. Apparently most of the school thought it was just a joke/drill until the fire alarms went off and police stormed the building. Two bad injuries, one of them is a freshman girl who's currently in the ICU. Some other people got trampled when everyone was running away but are okay.

He walked in the front door with a shotgun in his hands and just walked around like the Terminator for 20 minutes, in a school down the street from Columbine. The school totally failed. These schools don't get it and never learn. This one is no surprise and this will continue until these schools quit worrying about offending people and start defending them.

Honestly a miracle that nobody else was killed. Obviously, the kid had plenty of time to go on a shooting spree.

 

Does Colorado have police officers assigned to schools during the day? Regardless, armed teachers are sounding better and better. Gun free zones are a sick joke that only end up getting people killed.

There was an SRO on site, but I haven't read anything on where he actually was on campus.

More districts in Ohio are allowing teachers to be armed. I think this is the only way to truly defend against an active shooter. Even having an armed officer or two may not be enough because they're usually known by the students and there are only 1-2 of them in most schools. Armed teachers can remain unknown until a situation is unfolding and then can respond and there could be several of them in a large school.

Irony is it turns out he was a pro-gun control socialist it seems too.

Turns out the School Resource Officer is why he shot himself as soon as he did. The SRO was armed and confronted him:

 

After that, Pierson set off one of the Molotov cocktails, setting at least three bookshelves on fire, investigators told KDVR.com. When an armed school resource officer entered the room, Pierson believed he was cornered and turned his gun on himself, Robinson said. The entire attack lasted approximately 80 seconds and was captured by security cameras.

 

~~~ http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/15/color...uring-shooting/

Is that a Lambo he is driving in the picture? LINK

Is that a Lambo he is driving in the picture? LINK

Can't see the pic. The pic I saw was a lotus though.

Irony is it turns out he was a pro-gun control socialist it seems too.

 

Keep the name-calling out of this. And quit with the Fox News BS. He was a fcuking kid with screws loose. No need to throw politics or socialism into this (I don't get why so many people confuse state totalitarian communism with democratic socialism - but that's another story for another time).

 

Joseph McCarthy called, he wants his batshit back.

It really shows the nature of just how fucked this country is when people are trying to break-down a MALE TEENAGER's ideological views. What should really be brought up each time this happens is: Why is it only men who are going on these killing sprees? Where did they get the guns? Why isn't comprehensive mental health a priority?

Can't see the pic. The pic I saw was a lotus though.

Tesla roadster... so basically the same thing interior wise.

Keep the name-calling out of this. And quit with the Fox News BS. He was a fcuking kid with screws loose. No need to throw politics or socialism into this (I don't get why so many people confuse state totalitarian communism with democratic socialism - but that's another story for another time).

 

Joseph McCarthy called, he wants his batshit back.

 

Not name-calling and I do not confuse totalitarian socialism with democratic socialism, however I would think if he had been a fire-breathing gun rights person and argued forcefully for right-wing positions, that it would have been much more widely reported. As it is, the Denver Post had edited out that a classmate had claimed he was a very opinionated socialist. Since his positions didn't jive as much with the story the media wanted, they aren't covering it as much.

 

Also, while I see your point (I probably shouldn't have mentioned the socialism) to a degree politics will get involved in a story such as this, because it involves hot-button issues. I apologize though if I offended you.

Turns out the School Resource Officer is why he shot himself as soon as he did. The SRO was armed and confronted him:

 

 

 

~~~ http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/15/color...uring-shooting/

 

If some SRO cornered him and the kid checked out within 80 seconds. Why did the Sheriff who gave the news conference say it took the police 20 minutes to find him?

 

Someone is lying.

Keep the name-calling out of this. And quit with the Fox News BS. He was a fcuking kid with screws loose. No need to throw politics or socialism into this (I don't get why so many people confuse state totalitarian communism with democratic socialism - but that's another story for another time).

 

Joseph McCarthy called, he wants his batshit back.

 

You're out of line.

 

1. If someone calls for more gun control then runs out and buys a gun to hurt others, that hypocrisy is a fairly relevant fact.

 

2. We have some fairly interesting common denominators among all these assholes, and support of leftist ideas appears to be one of them. Maybe even MORE consistent than a history of mental illness.

 

3. If he had ever drank a cup of tea, let alone was an outspoken conservative (as opposed to an outspoken Marxist, as his friends have claimed), it would be wall to wall coverage on the news.

 

 

The mentality, motivations and thought processes of these people is absolutely relevant to understanding their actions.

 

 

And stop blaming the world's problems on fox news, when it's the leftists at MSNBC who have had to fire two hosts in as many weeks for making VIOLENT, HATE-FILLED outbursts on camera. Watching Fox may make you a conservative, but it doesn't encourage you to hurt people who you disagree with. Thats what passes for debate on the left now.

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/us/colorado-...n-karl-pierson/

 

 

To schoolmates, Pierson was known for his outspoken intelligence that served him well on the debate team. But at times, he acted "weird" and alienated peers with rants about communism and his aggressiveness to win every argument, they said....

 

Senior Chris Davis, 18, was among many students Saturday trying to make sense of Pierson's shooting rampage.

"He was a weird kid," Davis said. "He's a self-proclaimed communist, just wears Soviet shirts all the time."

Pierson became easily aggravated, "always liked to be right" and didn't like losing, Davis said.

Why is it only men who are going on these killing sprees?

Because men commit almost all violent crime. Always have. Always will.

 

Where did they get the guns?

 

At a gun store. Legally.

 

Why isn't comprehensive mental health a priority?

 

How would it have made any difference here? He had no history of mental illness. He had no criminal history. He's intelligent, a great student, and he had a morality that said when somebody disagreed with him, he was justified in killing people.

You're out of line.

 

1. If someone calls for more gun control then runs out and buys a gun to hurt others, that hypocrisy is a fairly relevant fact.

 

2. We have some fairly interesting common denominators among all these assholes, and support of leftist ideas appears to be one of them. Maybe even MORE consistent than a history of mental illness.

 

3. If he had ever drank a cup of tea, let alone was an outspoken conservative (as opposed to an outspoken Marxist, as his friends have claimed), it would be wall to wall coverage on the news.

 

 

The mentality, motivations and thought processes of these people is absolutely relevant to understanding their actions.

 

 

And stop blaming the world's problems on fox news, when it's the leftists at MSNBC who have had to fire two hosts in as many weeks for making VIOLENT, HATE-FILLED outbursts on camera. Watching Fox may make you a conservative, but it doesn't encourage you to hurt people who you disagree with. Thats what passes for debate on the left now.

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/us/colorado-...n-karl-pierson/

 

It's easy to stir debate with gun control. All it takes is the slightest mention of "regulation" and everyone starts screaming.

 

I was pissed off when I wrote that - and honestly wouldn't have written it now that I think about. I know my audience here. I'm pro-gun, but also for tight restrictions of who the hell owns them. Call me hypocritical, but I definitely know I'm in the minority.

 

And I don't watch cable news. No one should. It's all shit and none of it is journalism. I just have to call the McCarthism when I see it. Blaming lefts or rights for mass shootings from psychopaths is a core problem. Trying to blame "the other" or "someone else." This kid was crazy. The last one was. The next one will be. The key here is that none of these kids seem moderate in their beliefs. If they are leftist, then it's full to the extreme batshit communism. If they are on the right end of the scale, it's full on fundamentalist religious believer or anti-gov't conspiracy theorist.

 

The common denominator is that they are all extremists in their beliefs and are fundamentally "not right." Sure, many are not diagnosed with any illness before. But they have to obtain a weapon somehow. Often legally, and often with little to no resistance.

 

All I'm trying to argue is that there needs to be some common ground on preventing these. If that means more SRO's, armed teachers, locking down schools like prisons... Until you can fundamentally change why people want to go shooting in the first place, so be it.

 

I've said it before, I'll keep saying it. Psych evals, gun registration, and the end of handshake gun sales in parking lots. Some pretty basic, common sense solutions. Oh, and a federal carry permit handled by states. Carry anywhere, but your training will be intense. Tax-funded shooting schools - call me big government.

 

Trying to keep this reasonable. Sorry for blowing up on Wheels, but I just hate to see name-calling as the solution. As if "the other guy" is the reason. If only they were a conservative, this would have never happened....

 

And this is a great post from one of my favorite authors. Very interesting, coming from a social liberal and someone who most would think would be ANTI-gun - is actually pro but for many of the restrictions/programs I would like to see put in place: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun

 

Last link. This is a follow-up to Sam Harris's previous blog about violence/firearms. More of an FAQ. Both are great reads. Highly recommended.

 

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/faq-on-violence

 

It's easy to stir debate with gun control. All it takes is the slightest mention of "regulation" and everyone starts screaming.

 

That's cause each layer of regulation is one step to more. And if you give an inch, the other side may take a mile (NY SAFE Act for example).

 

I was pissed off when I wrote that - and honestly wouldn't have written it now that I think about. I know my audience here. I'm pro-gun, but also for tight restrictions of who the hell owns them. Call me hypocritical, but I definitely know I'm in the minority.

 

And I don't watch cable news. No one should. It's all shit and none of it is journalism. I just have to call the McCarthism when I see it. Blaming lefts or rights for mass shootings from psychopaths is a core problem. Trying to blame "the other" or "someone else." This kid was crazy. The last one was. The next one will be. The key here is that none of these kids seem moderate in their beliefs. If they are leftist, then it's full to the extreme batshit communism. If they are on the right end of the scale, it's full on fundamentalist religious believer or anti-gov't conspiracy theorist.

 

Calling a person a socialist who was an outspoken socialist isn't McCarthyism.

 

The common denominator is that they are all extremists in their beliefs and are fundamentally "not right." Sure, many are not diagnosed with any illness before. But they have to obtain a weapon somehow. Often legally, and often with little to no resistance.

 

All I'm trying to argue is that there needs to be some common ground on preventing these. If that means more SRO's, armed teachers, locking down schools like prisons... Until you can fundamentally change why people want to go shooting in the first place, so be it.

 

I've said it before, I'll keep saying it. Psych evals, gun registration, and the end of handshake gun sales in parking lots. Some pretty basic, common sense solutions. Oh, and a federal carry permit handled by states. Carry anywhere, but your training will be intense. Tax-funded shooting schools - call me big government.

 

None of that is common-sense though, or basic, unless you view gun ownership strictly as a privilege granted by the State. Gun rights people see right to arms as a fundamental, pre-existing, natural RIGHT that the government exists to protect. If you had to undergo a psych evaluation before buying a computer, background check, fill out paperwork and pay a fee/fine for a permit, wait for the permit to be approved or not, then upon buying said computer, register said computer with the government, then to use said computer on the Internet, you have to go and get an Internet Usage License, which requires more paperwork, waiting, etc...plus strict rules regarding where on the Internet you can use the computer, etc...don't you think that would constitute a mockery of freedom of speech? Or if you required psych evaluations and passing a literacy test before being able to exercise your right to vote, wouldn't then that make a mockery of right to vote?

 

Registration is bad for two major reasons:

 

1) Historically, gun registries almost always lead to gun confiscation

 

2) It goes against the very concept of a right to keep and bear arms. If you have to go and register your weapons with the almighty State, then that doesn't seem like much of a right anymore. If you had to register your computer and books with the State, same.

 

Trying to keep this reasonable. Sorry for blowing up on Wheels, but I just hate to see name-calling as the solution. As if "the other guy" is the reason. If only they were a conservative, this would have never happened....

 

That's okay, but that's not what I was arguing. And I wasn't name-calling either, just pointing out what it was reported the guy was.