School shooting reported at a Community College in Oregon

[Sir Sirius]

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-north ... at_um.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/01/us/or ... index.html

Evidently 15 dead, though the casualty figures are somewhat conflicting.

[Me2005]

20 year old male shooter announced dead by Governor Kate Brown at a press conference.

[Broomstick]

Apparently was asking people about their religion, but whether this is a Christian shooter, Muslim shooter, or something else shooter has not been said.

I'm getting really tired of this shit.

[Skywalker_T-65]

As someone who actually lives on a college campus, this string of shootings is...less than promising. At least it hasn't reached the point where any random student has to worry yet.

Still, there have been a lot of these recently.

[Elaro]

Only in the United States.

There's a reason I don't go there.

[Joun_Lord]

The "shooting Christians" thing sounds like an echo of the Columbine freaks (though I think that story was partially debunked). Either way its going to get Christians up in arms about persecution. Oh joy, not only do I have to hear anti-gunners or anti-righters or whatever the fuck people want to call them but also Christians whining.

The shootings sucks, it really does. I feel sympathy for the people murdered by what is clearly a mentally unbalanced asshole. I don't feel sympathy for the clowns who are going to milk this like a toothless meth whore with a dick for 10 bucks.

The anti-gunners are going to go on how this is all the fault of guns, guns are evil, guns make people kill blah blah forks make people fat and flash drives makes people hackers blah fucking blah and we aren't doing enough to keep them out of the hands of people and arms of bears who shouldn't have them. Pro-gunners are going to say guns aren't the problem and blame video games or point to how Obama has his kids protected by armed guards and the only thing that can stop these is a good white Christian man with a gun (homosexuals, minorities beyond tokens, and wimmen need not apply).

Both have some right but have alot wrong but both fucking miss the point like an anti-gunner vegan firing a gun at Bambi.

More shit does need to be done to ensure guns don't wind up in the hands of people who shouldn't have them and especially out of the hands of goddamn bears, be all stealing our honey and shit at gunpoint, shit. Arbitrarily banning them so we wind up like the damn Brits who are round tip knives and shit themselves over shell casings isn't the way to go, nor is criminalizing the millions of law abiding gun owners who are an overwhelming majority of gun owners.

Guns aren't the problem themselves, their misuse is however part of the problem. They being used badly are a symptom of a larger problems or problems. Guns don't create violence, when they are misused it is done so by people who would be inclined to do so anyway even without guns. They'd do so with knives or cars or bombs or bleach or acid or crossbows. But arming everyone isn't the freaking solution. A person shouldn't be required to pack heat to walk down the damnable road to get some petrol and spotted dick.

Both either can't or won't look to WHY this shootings happen though. They'd rather just play the blame game or come up with quick fix feel good solutions that will create more problems. People don't just kill other people because their weapons tell them to. When someone swings a sword or twirls a Glawk it ain't telling them to taint the women, burn the water, and rape the crops. When people commit violence they do so for a reason.

Extreme poverty, mental illness, culture, lack of opportunities, lack of social safety net, good ol' fashioned human hate, whatever. When some fused out autist drooly decides to shoot up a school because he likes spinning things he does so because he is wacked in the head and thanks to social stigma, retardly high health care costs and Saint fucking Reagan help is nearly impossible to get. When some gangbanger in the hood shoots up some others guy for wearing different color he does so because he was taught to do so by his culture taught him violence is the answer, because he has no opportunities to get a job or education, and because the other dude would cap his ass if given the chance. When some methhead who probably is a neighbor of mine blows away the competition he does so because of greed, he does so because he hasn't the education or ability to do anything else, and because WVians need a past-time aside from getting rocks from under freaking mountains and having intimate relations with farm animals.

The gun violence is just symptoms or results from a problem rather then the problem itself. They are the headache that results from the pain after someone backs up a car onto your foot. You don't take aspirin for the headache or blame the pain on your hand as you use it to try to push the car off your foot but thats exactly what pro and anti idiots do.

If they could work together, actually work towards a long term solution, and actually do some work to find out the problem rather then relying on their intestines and livers and pancreas, gun violence and violence in general might be able to be solved. I mean it was already kinda solved their for awhile when crime rates went down substantially and are still fairly low, maybe people could look into why violent crime went down so much from its highs in the 90s.

Nope too hard, lets just blame guns. Fucking idiots.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm actually surprised that its been this long since I last heard about a large scale shooting in the US. This has become almost routine, which is obviously horrible.

My thoughts and prayers are with all those involved in this terrible event.

As for the motives of the shooter, I don't like to say it because it really shouldn't matter, but I hope it has nothing to do with Islam. Because a random nutcase or even a Christian shooter is likely to largely be ignored, and as bad as that is, a Muslim shooter will likely be turned into something even worse- propaganda for the Islamophobes, warmongers, and police state types who already have way to much power.

[Gandalf]

On CNN, unnamed sources in the local police are naming the shooter as Chris Harper Mercer.

So, it looks like a diagnosis of "mentally ill" is in the pipeline assuming those reports are accurate.

[The Romulan Republic]

On CNN, unnamed sources in the local police are naming the shooter as Chris Harper Mercer.

So, it looks like a diagnosis of "mentally ill" is in the pipeline assuming those reports are accurate.

I must point out that a not obviously Muslim name does not mean the shooter wasn't influenced by Islamic extremism (or some completely other form of political/ideological motivation as opposed to just mental illness).

[Gandalf]

Well you missed my point, but that may be on me for not being clear. The provision is a shooter's name is all that's needed for society to apportion blame.

No tough questions are asked, because that makes society look bad and people might have to do stuff to remedy it. Just assign the blame and try to forget it until the next one pops up.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well you missed my point, but that may be on me for not being clear. The provision is a shooter's name is all that's needed for society to apportion blame.

For some people that's undoubtably true.

No tough questions are asked, because that makes society look bad and people might have to do stuff to remedy it. Just assign the blame and try to forget it until the next one pops up.

Oh, people will try to change things alright. Its just that each side will have its own goals and compromise and bipartisan ship are not terribly easy to find these days in American politics.

[Sgt_Artyom]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34419802

I'd watch the clip of Obama talking to the press here. He just seems so entirely fed up, it's weird seeing the POTUS like this.

Then again, I'd be tired of having to keep on saying the same damn thing every time a tragedy like this occurs without any discernible change or even the desire to consider change.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

The problem is that the debate has become toxic, poisoned along ideological lines, with neither side of that ideological divide offering anything helpful. The anti-gun-control side rants and raves and froths at the mouth while staging absurd displays of openly carrying assault rifles around town. The pro-gun-control side, meanwhile, blows its emotional load prematurely every time one of these shootings happens, infected with feel-good bullshit like magazine size restrictions (lol) and assault weapon bans.

Until and unless moderate voices on either "side" (though frankly there really shouldn't be sides on this, but rather "people interested in a rational solution") are allowed to become more dominant in these discussions, nothing is going to get done.

[salm]

Boiling this down to guns is silly. It is a lot more complex than guns.

[Alyrium Denryle]

On CNN, unnamed sources in the local police are naming the shooter as Chris Harper Mercer.

So, it looks like a diagnosis of "mentally ill" is in the pipeline assuming those reports are accurate.

I must point out that a not obviously Muslim name does not mean the shooter wasn't influenced by Islamic extremism (or some completely other form of political/ideological motivation as opposed to just mental illness).

No. This guy was just a shitty person who did it for the fame and attention. He was bragging about his plans on 4Chan after waxing poetic about the notoriety gained by mass shooters. He was encouraged, because 4Chan.

[The Romulan Republic]

On CNN, unnamed sources in the local police are naming the shooter as Chris Harper Mercer.

So, it looks like a diagnosis of "mentally ill" is in the pipeline assuming those reports are accurate.

I must point out that a not obviously Muslim name does not mean the shooter wasn't influenced by Islamic extremism (or some completely other form of political/ideological motivation as opposed to just mental illness).

No. This guy was just a shitty person who did it for the fame and attention. He was bragging about his plans on 4Chan after waxing poetic about the notoriety gained by mass shooters. He was encouraged, because 4Chan.

I was not claiming that he was Muslim or that he was ideologically motivated. I merely observed that the fact he does not have an obviously Muslim name didn't prove that he wasn't motivated by Islamic extremism. Its right their in front of you.

If he was encouraged to commit a shooting by other people, incidentally, shouldn't they be arrested and charged for inciting/advocating a violent crime? Or was it vague/not explicit enough to have grounds to arrest them?

[Broomstick]

If he was encouraged by people on line there is the problem of identifying and locating the little toads, and if they're in a foreign country there's jack the US authorities can do as a practical matter. They're not going to call out Seal Team Six for a bunch of 4chan assholes.

[Metahive]

The posters? Forget about those, go after the guy who maintains 4Chan instead, Christopher "Moot" Poole. After all, if he allows criminal activity to be coordinated on his website, he's an accessory to the crime.

[dragon]

Boiling this down to guns is silly. It is a lot more complex than guns.

I agree the worst school massacre had no guns involved. The Bath School Disaster of 1927 had 44 dead, 58 wounded and no guns. Instead he used homemade explosives. Also consider knowledge of bomb making back then was more scarce than ti is today with all info available on the internet. Hell I know a couple of students that I went to school with made nitro in their high school chem lab.

Go ahead ban guns people will still find a way.

[Melchior]

The posters? Forget about those, go after the guy who maintains 4Chan instead, Christopher "Moot" Poole. After all, if he allows criminal activity to be coordinated on his website, he's an accessory to the crime.

I suspect it's not that simple, but besides that, he stepped down and sold the site some time ago.

[The Romulan Republic]

If he was encouraged by people on line there is the problem of identifying and locating the little toads, and if they're in a foreign country there's jack the US authorities can do as a practical matter. They're not going to call out Seal Team Six for a bunch of 4chan assholes.

Their is if those countries are willing to extradite them to the US.

[AniThyng]

The posters? Forget about those, go after the guy who maintains 4Chan instead, Christopher "Moot" Poole. After all, if he allows criminal activity to be coordinated on his website, he's an accessory to the crime.

I suspect it's not that simple, but besides that, he stepped down and sold the site some time ago.

Sounds like one of those things that would be hard to prove before the fact.

[Joun_Lord]

If he was encouraged to commit a shooting by other people, incidentally, shouldn't they be arrested and charged for inciting/advocating a violent crime? Or was it vague/not explicit enough to have grounds to arrest them?

I feel its wrong to go on a witch hunt for the people online who might have inadvertently given this moron words of encouragement. He was going to do it either way whether or not he posted online in the cesspit of the internet. Its another "blame everyone else" tactic that I was whining so loudly aboot earlier. Random strangers on the internet didn't force him to commit these vile acts, he did.

And this is one a site known for its trolling, attention driving antics. Their was no way to know this was real, this is on the same site that has people posting in character as Duke Nukem, pedobear, and Chris Hansen or have loch ness monster or spagetti stories that are played completely straight. From a bit of research this doesn't seem to be even the first time someone has posted similar shit that turned out to be false, a similar thing was done around Sandy Hook that turned out to be false and there was a "mickey finn" post about the murder of Lauren Giddings in a related message board that also turned out to be false.

There was no way to know that this time is actually wasn't fake. Now an argument could be made about censoring what people can post online but thats runs into free speech problems. You can't stop people from posting stupid shit like these fake murder posts or the reactions people have to them without severely limiting peoples free speech rights. An argument can be made this is like the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" thing but I dunno if that holds. Someone yelling fire will directly cause harm by the stampede. Someone posting online encouraging some probably fake post about a mass killing with a (if you'll excuse the use of a slur, their words not mine) "do it f@gg0t" does not directly cause harm, at most only adds to already existing harm happening and even thats a bit of a stretch.

The person who is at fault for this is the guy who pulled the trigger. Not guns, not the media for glamorizing violence (though they could do a solid and maybe tone that shit down, that be real kind of them), not Obama, not the NRA and their vice presidents foot in mouth disease, not 4chan, and not frogs.

Just the guy who did it.

Alleged post about the killings.

Sounds like one of those things that would be hard to prove before the fact.

Not really. There is plenty of just months old news articles of moot announcing his retirement. Just go do a google search for "moot steps down" and you will find a whole bunch of articles from January of this year speaking about moot getting the fuck out of 4chan along with plenty of other articles blaming that ass-pimple Gamergate and quite a few calling moot a cuck who was brainwashed by Gawker.

[The Romulan Republic]

A "witch hunt" implies going after people who are innocent/persecuting people unfairly, at least to me. I'm talking about arresting people if they were advocating mass murder, which is and bloody well should be illegal, regardless of weather the shooter would have committed murder anyway.

And don't give me this slippery slope horse fuckery. While I suppose their could be posts that are ambiguous, their is no right to explicitly advocate murder, nor should their be. It does not require "...severely limiting peoples free speech rights." to not allow that.

I doubt you'll find a person on this forum who is a stronger supporter of the First Amendment than I am. I don't support hate speech bans. I even have ethical misgivings about being able to sue people for slander sometimes. But their is a line, and this is about as basic and essential a limit as you can get.

Also, its not about "...blame everyone else...", at least not for me, and I'll thank you not to make false assumptions about my motives. Its about enforcing the fucking law.

And inadvertently my ass. What, did the posters accidentally support mass murder? I don't give a shit if they didn't take it seriously- their are some things you should always take seriously, and this is one of them.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I feel its wrong to go on a witch hunt for the people online who might have inadvertently given this moron words of encouragement. He was going to do it either way whether or not he posted online in the cesspit of the internet. Its another "blame everyone else" tactic that I was whining so loudly aboot earlier. Random strangers on the internet didn't force him to commit these vile acts, he did.

You know what would happen on this board if someone went into OT and started talking about their plan to shoot up a university campus?

The post would be reported 80 times, and Dalton would contact the authorities with the IP address of the individual, their email address, and screen shots.

Depending on jurisdiction, there are crimes that the site admins could be charged with, and possibly even the individual posters.

From a bit of research this doesn't seem to be even the first time someone has posted similar shit that turned out to be false, a similar thing was done around Sandy Hook that turned out to be false and there was a "mickey finn" post about the murder of Lauren Giddings in a related message board that also turned out to be false.

That does not discharge ethical and legal obligations.