News – Chicago Sun-Times says gunman, who opened fire in a lecture building, is dead Local hospital says it expects to receive 15 patients, has treated at least two University had ordered student body to seek shelter, and it canceled classes Law enforcement official says that shooter used at least a shotgun
Not a member? Sign-up today!
sterlingburt19681962
adrielh791966
daducha
bruhaha
david_nwpa
Mutainia
MyWayOnNow
bizexpert
PracticalAdWords
JordanKasteler
vinatamayo
chapelhillNC
skeptic271
Beeboppin71
LumFan
lawrencee
deezin2
starshinediva
damnedviper
issor
avpd85
SkyNika
Macas
Radiofreeeuropa
Soft2uMin
Nowalive
justsay0pe
dreamme9669
totlespeed999
at01102002
food875dog
our0120home
star5cometo
zebayaa
MaryLynn_
y_soitenly
dissent
259)
A person who shot 13 people Thursday at Northern Illinois University's DeKalb campus outside Chicago has died, local reports said.
Most of the 13 wounded were shot in the head, said Theresa Comitas, spokeswoman for Kishwaukee Community Hospital, located about 10 minutes from the school.
According to the Chicago Tribune, the DeKalb County coroner's office said no fatalities had been immediately reported.
A local hospital tells CNN affiliate CLTV that it expects to receive 15 patients and has so far treated at least two.
This is happening too often!!
No kidding. There was a shooting in a school in Oxnard, CA (the town next to mine) 2 days ago. What the hell is going on???
Im STILL waiting to hear from one of my best friends. ugh.
2nd Amendment supporters...
How many deaths does it take to make you understand having the right to bear arms is not the answer? How thick-skulled do you have to be to see that guns, available to almost anyone, even after waiting a certain period of time to get them, taking lessons on how to use them, can still lead to violence like this?
Take away most of the guns and you'll take away the greatest threat of violence in America.
US How long before you realize that you can't blame a whole group for the actions of a relative few? Tell me...do actions like this occur everyday where you live for instance? Are you saying that EVERY responsible gun owner is a crazed frothy mouthed nut? I've had my gun for twenty years, and I NEVER felt the need to go out to a mall or a university for instance, and wipe out everybody that I can see. Stop trying to bring up mass hysteria with you're alarmist type of blather that's sort of sounds like it's thick skulled.
"US How long before you realize that you can't blame a whole group for the actions of a relative few? "
--Americans are violent. This is indisputable. If the shoe fits...
I'm an American and I abhor violence. So do all of my friends. Your generalization is very far from being indisputable.
Ever heard the expression "actions speak louder than words"?
"I'm an American and I abhor violence. So do all of my friends. Your generalization is very far from being indisputable."
I didn't say Americans *like* violence (although we do) I said we *are* violent. Just consider, for example, how many posters in this thread apparently believe that the way to prevent such incidents is to guarantee that all Americans are packing heat (as opposed to guaranteeing that we all have...I don't know, health insurance). I mean, the idea that the first response to come in to some people's minds would be *more* violence says a lot, wouldn't you agree?
From what I've read, and I could be incorrect in what I believe most of the posters meant, is that all Americans should have a right to at least look into obtaining a firearm. Also, Americans do like violence. Your point is valid... look at the "entertainment" of today for another reference to that.
"From what I've read, and I could be incorrect in what I believe most of the posters meant, is that all Americans should have a right to at least look into obtaining a firearm."
Thanks. I expressed no opinion as to whether Americans should have the right to own or "look into" getting firearms (though, frankly, I don't think the mere fact that we have a lot of gun violence means we need to arm everyone in order to eliminate the problem). I was merely stating facts which should be obvious to anyone who observes us.
Americans in general are very violent, we derive pleasure from seeing carnage (we're more horrified by the idea that our kids might see two guys kissing on the internet than we are at the prospect that they might see a man slicing off another man's head, for instance) and we have a love affair with weaponry and war. We're fighting two wars and we can't wait to jump into at least one more. Very, violent...
More correct to say humans are violent, IMO.
Some groups more than others, we tend to fall into the "more than others" group.
What dissent said below is true. If you don't believe us, just look at statistics. I empathize with those who don't want to acknowledge that the people who are going around the world "spreading democracy" are some of the most violent, war-prone and weapon-happy people on the planet. I'm not saying it to be antagonistic. It's about taking an honest look at our culture and our behavior.
Mesodude and dissent... nowhere did I state that we were more violent or less violent. I was simply stating that it is better to clarify at the beginning that all humans are violent... it would be more accurate and make your argument more powerful in general, IMO. It would have been better to say "Humans are violent. That is indisputable. However, Americans, statistically, are more violent then other nations that are as advanced." It would have completely nullified what I said as an argument against your statement before I'd have even had a chance to say it. I don't know. I just think it would have been a way of making the argument stronger and attract less criticism in general.
"nowhere did I state that we were more violent or less violent. I was simply stating that it is better to clarify at the beginning that all humans are violent..."
--Mdiar, I think I hear where you're coming from but, with all due respect, it seems to me that to state the obvious (that humans are violent) before (or instead of) stating that Americans are in a class by themselves when it comes to violence, muddies the issue rather than clarifies it. Furthermore, imo anyone living in the 21St century who would be startled to learn that Americans are remarkably and uniquely violent *should be* hit over the head with this reality (rhetorically speaking).
mesodude
-Americans are violent. This is indisputable. If the shoe fits...
Well said, curse of God is on America because you kill people indiscriminately just because they are Muslims, you use your Zionist media to justify your killing in Iraq, Afghanistan and also you have been supporting Israel to kill Palestinians in the name of Israeli Security. Your country is a the biggest fascist regime in the world after Israel. You are a people who worship devil in the name of God and your promote all kinds of immoral things and then argue that they are civilized actions. Your people are crazy idiots just love to kill innocent people in the name of freedom, wherever and whenever they get a an opportunity because they are mentally ill. Of course that the label you use but when there is a similar thing happens in a Muslim country you blame it on Islam. Atheism, Secularism and Zionism are the cause of all the ills in America. what is the use of freedom when people behave like advanced animals?
Who is doing the by far largest amount of killing in Iraq. Muslims. Get your facts straight Daylight. The kill crazy group that acts on it is the Islamo Fascists of your own religion. This incident was a crazy person who had a gun and took it into a gun free zone. The kill crazy idiots are the Muslim jihadists. Quit the Muslim lying to defend Islam. You sound silly.
"US How long before you realize that you can't blame a whole group for the actions of a relative few?"
The Anti-Islamic gun nut crowd does it every day. I guess they can't take the same criticism they like to dole out.
I have a feeling that this rampage was caused by runaway narcism brought on by a wacked out brain chemistry. Instead of believing he would get virgins in a slothful brothel (like the Quran teaches and radicalized madrasses solidify with brain-washing), he probably had a feeling that he'd just be remembered is all. But, do any of us remember the name of the wack-job at Virgina Tech who killed more? I'd have to look it up. Looks like his plan is already fading with our memories of him.
Mutainia
I have a feeling that this rampage was caused by runaway narcism brought on by a wacked out brain chemistry
In fact I too have a very bad felling and it has been reveal to us that you and your buddies will get virgin pigs in a slothful brothel in the hell for practicing Satanic rituals in your churches and Synagogues as your Bible and Talmud Preach you Christians and Jews.
Listen to these before you shoot your dirty mouth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_yApGEpmKk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBtEBCba3DI
I take it Daylight that you feel I'm a Talmudic follower of Pat Robertson? Boy, you REALLY don't know me, DO you, O Jihadist of the Pen?
LOL
He doesn't understand what are holy books and not. He also doesn't understand where the Talmud fits in. He likes to spout his ignorance.
Hello, Endoscopy. I'm just happy that he continues to think Allah enjoys his rantings than him thinking he can please Allah the way his Quran tells him to. May Daylight continue to think he'll "explode" with brilliance onto the keyboard, rather than in a pizza parlor of innocent.
yawn.... And what will you say when the same number of lunatics still come up with a gun and do the same thing? That is, of course, unless your plan is to simply remove all guns on Earth from existance...
Why do you think the solution is to to make more guns available to more people rather than monitoring lunatics before they do something dangerous?
How do you spot the lunatics? Some disorders are very difficult to diagnose. Besides, isn't the monitoring of lunatics basically the Patriot Act but different reasons are given for violation of privacy? I can't support that.
"How do you spot the lunatics? Some disorders are very difficult to diagnose."
--Well, I didn't mean monitoring them in the sense of surveillance. I think we could start by not referring to obviously mentally ill people as "lunatics" or deciding that anything we don't understand is "crazy." I don't mean to single you out (I do it too). As a society we have a lot of work to do in terms of demystifying and eliminating the stigma associated with mental illness. I also think we can do a way better job at educating ourselves about all illness.
How many people know how someone with schizophrenia behaves or what an epileptic seizure looks like or how a diabetic person with low blood sugar level might behave? Maybe they all would appear to be "crazy" to a lot of people and that discourages me.
Both of my parents are therapists. I understand, more then most, the problems associated with stigmas of mental illness and how to differentiate between an oddball (like myself LOL) and someone truly mentally ill. We do have ALOT of work to do in getting rid of that stigma. Its pretty annoying when I have relatives with depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia AND diabetics, lol!
Well that worked in Nazi Germany, the USSR and the People's Republic of China.
Yep, worked brilliantly too. The only people there that were guilty of mass killings were the military...who oddly enough, were the only people with guns. Funny how that works huh?
djrevelky
Yep, worked brilliantly too. The only people there that were guilty of mass killings were the military...who oddly enough, were the only people with guns. Funny how that works huh?
There is a small difference on the part of the United States of America that the mass murders are carried out by your elected president, his administration, intelligent agencies and your killing machines the military but of course you do that in somebody else's country. America is the land of the free and the brave, so the brave carry out the killings in schools, shopping malls and anywhere they think it is fit.
What about the mass murders who are responding to the cry of jihad? What about what they are doing in the name of Allah in Darfur?
Your brother Muslims of the religion of peace..
It seems to be working well in Britain.
Umm , if you want to live in a "surveillance society"--have you seen the cameras they have in GB--in London? I'd rather live free and be able to respond to a threat at hand than to rely on the "witness 2000 system" to bring the perpetrator to justice after I'm killed. Gun control has failed in britain , but they still want us to be like them.
interesting reading on http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html
Yes, it is working in Britain. I could care less about surveillance in public areas. However, the banning of guns is unconstitutional and there is no way to say otherwise. It violates something the founding fathers of this nation saw fit to put into the Bill of Rights. I don't disagree with gun control or insuring that only competent people obtain firearms, that have no history of mental illness, however I do disagree with an outright ban. It is unconstitutional to do so and to use the argument the Second Amendment was written in a different time with different problems can open the door to a repeal of other amendments. The Bill of Rights has taken enough of a beating over the years, I'd rather not see it take this hit. For your information, I am moving to the UK eventually because I hate guns.
It is not working in Britain. People are not allowed to defend themselves or they go to jail. Crime rate has soared since the criminals have nothing to fear from the law abiding people. A man defended himself in his own house with a gun and was jailed for longer than the thief. He had repeatedly been broken into and robbed and the police say they are the only ones to defend the people. Some defense.
The same pattern exists in the US where guns are basically outlawed in some areas. Places where the laws were rolled back to allow guns have had a drop in crime. The criminals go where they don't have to fear that some law abiding person has a gun on them.
And you complain about the Patriot Act, wire tapping and the loss of your civil liberties.
I support the Patriot Act and the wire tapping plan that Congress just killed. I don't have problem with them tapping lines of known terrorists calling the United States. Too bad guys like Russ Fiengold didn't actually read the bill before they killed it. Then again, he's the guy cut the military budget for years but was mad on 9-11 because there wasn't fighters available to splash the planes.
"I don't have problem with them tapping lines of known terrorists calling the United States."
It'd be nice if that was what they were doing, but it doesn't reflect the reality of recent wiretapping. FISA covered everything they needed, it still does. They can move as fast as they want to tap whomever they want and apply for a warrant afterwards. "Warantless" anything is an invasion of privacy and arguably destructive to the Constitution of the US.
Yup, indeed it is.
Since when has it been illegal to do counter intelligence. Since an idiot judge made it illegal. What do you think spies do.
"Then again, he's the guy cut the military budget for years but was mad on 9-11 because there wasn't fighters available to splash the planes."
--I have no idea where you're coming up with any of this stuff about Russ Feingold. It sounds like you just don't like him. What evidence at all do you have that he "didn't actually read the bill"? This is 100% your opinion--fantasy based crapola. Also, if you chickenhawks knew the military was in such sad shape prior to 9/11 (allegedly due to budget cuts made by the Democrats), would you please explain in what universe invading multiple countries in quick succession would be a testament to sound judgement?
If, as you people love to claim, you knew our military wasn't ready, *why* did you think it made sense to invade Iraq rather than stall for more time so that we could *get* prepared? Wouldn't *that* have been the more prudent course of action?
Are you brain damaged?
If everyone on that campus had been carrying a gun, the shooter would have been dead in 30 seconds!
You can remain defenseless, or you can submit to the police state, go through metal detectors and strip searches at the entrance to every building, station armed police on every corner.
I would prefer to retain the right to defend myself, because the police NEVER will!
How many have to die for you to realize that?
Are you really such a coward that you must have someone protect you at every moment, and will not, can not, ever defend yourself?
Preach on brother...you're right on this issue!
"If everyone on that campus had been carrying a gun, the shooter would have been dead in 30 seconds!"
--But the more guns that are floating around out there means the more chances some mentally ill person will get their hands on one and mow down lots of people. Maybe the solution is being able to identify the warning signs when people are in trouble.
No, it means that the relative odds of the mentally ill doing significant damage is LESS.
Do you suppose that if there were no guns at all, that there would be no such incidents?
He injured less than 20. He could have done just as much damage with a bow, or a good sword.
Killing unarmed people is really, really easy - if you have a decent weapon yourself, something that humans have made for themselves for over 100,000 years.
In Rwanda, they used cheap machetes.
"No, it means that the relative odds of the mentally ill doing significant damage is LESS."
--Unless you assume that no unstable person would ever be able to get off a single shot, I think at best the number of deaths would be the same.
"Do you suppose that if there were no guns at all, that there would be no such incidents?"
--No. My philosphy is that it's the exceptional person that doesn't "go postal" at least once during a week. Can you imagine what life would be like if everyone had a gun while waiting in a traffic jam or in line at the bank, the grocery store, or the...um, post office? Why increase the opportunities for people to commit mass murder?
"Killing unarmed people is really, really easy - if you have a decent weapon yourself, something that humans have made for themselves for over 100,000 years."
--Ok, so how does this work? Who gets to carry around a machine gun and who gets to carry around a revolver?