Santa Barbara shooting

My son goes to UCSB and I even know the apartment building where Rodger lived quite well. Thank you. And, yes, I blame guns. Hell yes I blame guns. The fact that you can say "Well, yeah, deaths happen all the time that are not caused by guns" does not exonerate our lax and irresponsible gun laws. The is a stupid argument. I am quite sure the parents of the two girls shot outside the sorority -- killed very rapidly and easily, without the slightest chance of defending themselves -- and the father of the boy who was just buying a sandwich would agree.

There are too many gun laws in California as it is and they are not enforced. I blame law enforcement and State mental health, and the parents. There were warning signs, action could have been taken but it wasn't.

Sure, hindsight is twenty-twenty. That's the cliche because it is true. Easy to see the signs after the fact. Not so with the present. The present is never so transparent and predictable.
Better to restrict or get rid of the guns. Another gun is not a shield for the innocents and potential, and actual, victims and never will be. Dodge City was not the safest city in America because everyone had a gun to defend themselves. It was actually the most violent and deadly.
Time to say our children -- your children, my children, Santa Barbara's children, Newtown's children, Columbine's children, Sparks', Nev., children, etc. -- are more important than unrestricted access and ownership. Seems the lesser price to pay...

Sorry, I don't agree with the restriction or ban on guns. People kill people. What device they use is not as important as is the why do they kill people. This POS killed three people with a knife but I don't see anyone saying a word about that except Crazy Steve. Earlier this year a crazy POS killed 38 people in China with a knife. I have seen people killed with all kinds of weapons unfortunately in my previous career as a firefighter. Gun laws keep lawful people from being able to protect themselves. They don't apply to people like this or the gang bangers in Chicago because they don't care. They are going to do what they want to do without thought as to what weapon they use. They will use what is available.

This quote was from the first page so it's most likely been forgotten, however, there is always something to be said for restricting weapons from everyone. Yes, that would include law-abiding people BUT it also restricts people from having guns who should 100% not have them at all.

That's extremely important. I live in Edmonton, Canada, and do you know how often I hear of shootings?

Rarely.

You can't dismiss the obvious results from more restrictive gun laws just because this man also carried a knife.

Unfortunately, it only happens in "gun free zones" like schools, movie theaters, etc. Laws do not prevent crime.

"gun free zones"? If you have a conceal carry you can have a gun on campuses. These events happen all over, it just so happens schools get more news coverage then a street shooting. Look at all the shootings in Chicago, how many end up on national news?

chicago is basically a gun free zone brah. and I have my conceal carry and I can't carry on campuses, or into court, and into a few other places as well..

honestly I wish more women were trained to conceal carry.. its the loudest rape whistle you can prob get.

While I completely understand your last sentiment, the problem with what you're saying is that by "training" women to conceal weapons on them, we should still "teach" girls that they need to carry a weapon in order to protect themselves, rather than teaching the people who rape and hurt women to not do so.

The debate over gun laws has been waged over many many years... That will not end anytime soon... "teaching" these animals not to act they way they do is a bit like a lion act... You may have a bit of control over them and can reward them for doing good... But they are still an animal and at some point will lash out... I wish we could be everywhere every second of the day... We cant and the innocent need to have the ability to protect themselves from these animals...

Additionally, to respond to the "more women should carry guns so they don't get raped" (paraphrased) comment: women shouldn't have to worry about being raped. Women shouldn't have to carry a gun, or a knife, or put their keys between their fingers to ward off a possible attacker just because they're alone. Where is the responsibility for the people who rape? Do they get off scott free because their victim was alone/wearing a skirt/drunk or drugged? No, they committed a crime and the victim of the crime should not be held responsible for doing something COMPLETELY NORMAL like walking.

With that, I'm just leaving the thread because I already know that this will not end well. Maybe you guys can sift through my posts to see how much I hate men too /sarcasm

I don't understand where the thought that a rapist has no responsibility comes from? They should pay for their crimes just like a murderer or a bank robber or any other criminal. I've seen nowhere in this thread where it's been stated that the victims are at fault.
You are correct that no one should HAVE to carry a gun to defend them selves but since the beginning of time defense of one's self has been a necessity, this is nothing new. I carry a gun everyday, I carry because I have a responsibility to my family to come home safe every night, you wear a seat belt in your car to protect yourself from harm don't you?

It's purely a mental health issue. There were signs that were ignored, a long list of problems, and history to learn from. It has nothing to do with guns, or knives.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you...

i'm SO very glad to see that at least a few people grasp the real issue. i had a big TLDR typed up for this and lost it. so here's the cliffs:

sick = sick, body or brain
stigmatizing the mentally ill doesn't help. it makes it worse.
people are not less deserving of compassion just because they are sick in the brain.
if mentally ill people hurt others because they are mentally ill, hold them accountable and keep others safe (lock em up, sure) but
never forget they are just as human as you and i.
our systems for addressing mental-health issues are badly broken, often to the point of exacerbating problems.
these kinds of problems will only get worse until/unless we do something. we cannot wait for gummint to get its act together.
compassionate communities that pay attention to and take of people are the best ground-level intervention.
compassioate communities are comprised of compassionate individuals.
we will never stop all the whackjobs. this kind of thing will always happen, but it could happen a lot less. if we started to care more. you know, about everyone in our communities, not just the people we know and like.


having had my ow experiences with mental illness (in myself and others), i have 100% compassion for the mentally ill. nobody treats you like *kitten* because you're diabetic. but crazy? then you're the scum of the earth.

He was a psycho. That's really all there is to be said about him. Here's his writings describing his plans to attack.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-isla-vista-document-20140524-story.html#page=3

dismissing violent misogynists as "crazy" is a neat way of saying that violent misogyny is an individual problem and not a cultural one

Thanks so much for saying this.

da faq you talking about?! Cultural?!

Is this Saudi Arabia we are talking about?!

Misogyny/sexism/violence against women comes in a vast number of ways, not just men going out looking to shoot women.

It's absolutely everywhere. Ads on television which show that men are idiots and can't do laundry so the women have to do it, it's on billboards that you see on the street every day, in video games with the helpless damsels in distress, it's in our language and the way that we refer to tank tops as "wife beaters." it's in how we call each other "*kitten*" for being weak because having a vagina signifies that you're automatically a weak person.

It goes beyond what you're seeing.

+1

Again, your logic is faulty. No one says it is a simple, one-dimensional problem, or that one single law is going to prevent every single killing, every day of the year. But we don't need to say that.
I think the point is: Given all the problems we have, if someone unknown to you was to decide that they had a grudge against you, or your wife or husband, or someone else in your family, would you rather that person was armed with a semi-automatic or a knife?
C'mon. You must choose one. Which would you choose?
You cannot argue that with restrictions it would not be much harder for a potential multiple murder to get a firearm. That's what a restriction is. Saying that a restriction is not going to be perfect is not an acceptable objection -- when it might save somebody's little boy's life.
Personally, I choose that boy's life. We have freedom in this country. Not complete freedom. We never have had complete freedom.

Sorry you're wrong, you think that it might save a life but how about the lives it could cost in taking away the ability of self protection, especially taking it away from those who aren't physically able to protect themselves from an attacker, don't they deserve the right of self defense?
As far as whether an attacker has a gun or a knife it really doesn't matter, if an assailant is within 7 yards of you and armed with a knife it is well proven that a motivated assailant can close that distance and cut/stab you no matter what you do.
I'm simply responding to your statements that there needs to be more gun control, you're failing to substantiate your assertion, I have provided examples that show you're incorrect.

Nobody hates what has occurred more than I do, but I will not set quietly and let the opinions of others take away a basic right. The police were notified of this persons instability and they did nothing, now after the fact they have decided to review their findings, his parents read his writings and at the last minute decided it was time to act. The parents had to know years ago that there was a problem, whether it was a conscious decision on their part to ignore it we will never know. There were multiple opportunities to prevent this...

No. A bullet is not a shield.
Those girls, even had they been carrying firearms would not have had a chance because they had no warning. I believe, and I think you would be hard pressed to refute, that those girls would have stood a much better chance of protecting themselves if that guy had had to come running up to them and physically accost them than they did when he simply shot from out of the darkness.
I put it to you again, if guns are such great protection, than why wasn't Dodge City safe and sane? Someone mentioned how safe and civilized Texas is, and concluded that the reason for that was loose guns laws. But it occurs to me that Texas has had its share of mass shootings -- and those occurred on military bases where guns are ubiquitous and people are trained to use them. Those guns were a big help there, weren't they?

0% sympathy for this load of *kitten* human

male entitlement kills (& rapes) women and this is just a blown up in your face example of that

so beyond disgusted that I might actually cry

You sound fun want to go out sometime.

A.) Quality women can be found all around the world, just as immature girls can be too...

B.) Feminism is seen as a bad word now because many people, even those who claim it for their own, don't fully understand it. It's not supposed to be about hate, it's not supposed to be about women being better than men, it's not supposed to be about women BEING treated as men. It's suppose to be about women having the strength and courage to be who they want to be, who they really are. If you truly want to be a housewife then that is a beautiful thing and should be persued, however, if you don't want that life and you want to go after a high power career then do it.

I hate when feminists tear down the opposite sex or women who choose to do something against their own beliefs, it defeats the purpose of the whole movement...

Wow. An intelligent and reasonable post!? You must not be a regular MFPer.

Hijacking the murders of innocent people to further one's own misandrist agenda before the bodies are cold. Stay classy, MFP.

Couple thoughts on this:

First, it's interesting that there are three issues being discussed here; guns, mental health, and misogyny, all being argued by both sides of each issue, but you choose only to focus on one, and instead of contributing intelligently and maybe even providing a counterpoint, just choose to call names and shame the contributors who have provided thoughtful answers to this discussion. Almost positive that no one on this thread has said they hate men, so calling anyone a misandrist is not only petty, it's nonsensical.

Second, I did not know the victims. They were not personal friends of mine or even acquaintances. It would not make sense or be financially feasible for me to fly to California to their funerals to pay respect. I don't believe I belong there either. In my own way, discussing the issues that led to their tragic deaths is my way of paying respect to them. When would you prefer we discuss these issues, all 3, not just the misogyny. When they are buried? One year from now? 10? To keep silent is the true disrespect. Only by discussing what had happened, recognizing it and trying to improve the situations that led to it can we avoid further tragedies like this one. Keeping quiet won't help anyone, it will just pave the way for another individual to do the same thing to more victims.