He'll need extensive post-recovery physical therapy, both legs were broken by bullets. I'd be surprised if it was all covered.Josh123914 said:
The Oregon shooting
- Thread starter Josh123914
- Start date
And once again, I'm wondering what the hell is wrong with people? The worst part is that nobody seems to see the signs until it's too late... My condolence to the family of the victims.
What Guppy said, but also it may help him deal with the time off work and school. The man has a family that may rely on him to some extent, and I have no issue if my money goes to help with that as well. He earned it.Josh123914 said:Would they really charge him? Because I distinctly remember with the Dark Knight movie shooting, the hospital waived the charges for people.Revnak said:https://www.gofundme.com/s75ge9y4BloatedGuppy said:Yeah I'll double-down on the shout-out for Chris Mintz (not to be confused with Christopher Mintz-Plasse, whose most compelling contribution to society to date was his portrayal of McLovin in "Superbad").Revnak said:
Student and Army veteran. Charged the gunman, got shot five times, survived.
I remember reading about the Ecole Polytechnique Massacre, and how the guys who were ordered out of the room so the murder of the remaining women could begin were haunted by their inability to prevent what happened. We all like to think we'd charge down a gunman, but in reality most of us would just freeze up. Charging at someone while being shot in an attempt to prevent harm to others isn't just a heroic act, it's extraordinary.
There's a gofundme to pay for his medical bills. A man like him doesn't deserve to live in debt over this.
This is becoming depressingly routine. Oh who am I kidding, it HAS been depressingly routine. I'm just getting numb to it. And that's the last thing you want with something like this.
Yeah, it's become normal, part of the plan. There's the usual song and dance, but no reason to change anything.erttheking said:
Honestly, I think that's the heart of the problem. I mean, sure, gun control and how we handle mental health are definitely factors, but in my personal opinion, I think the reason why we've seen such a meteoric rise in mass shootings is that every time they happen, the shooter's name gets plastered all over the media and everyone knows who they are. It's a free ticket to instant fame (or rather, infamy, which to some people is preferable to obscurity). So if an effort to squish out their actual name and instead focus on anything except them were to be made by the media and their audience, we might finally see this trend slow down. But then, I'm only hypothesizing.Revnak said:
Here's the sad truth.thaluikhain said:
Statistically speaking, nothing happened yesterday. Barely even a blip in our national firearm death rate. The vast, vast, vast majority of firearm deaths are not a part of these "spree" killings.
So, from a certain pedantic, semantic perspective, you are correct: there is no reason to change anything, because it was just another day.
I've named him Worthless Smeghead, and whatever he was called, that is what he was and ought to be always remembered as. Well, as far as anyone will be prepared to remember yet another useless failure of a man with a rifle. Spit on his memory.Revnak said:
I'd donate, but I'd imagine the blood would spoil in the post.
I said it in the last shooting thread we had (and the fact that I can type that saddens me greatly) and I guess I'll just say it again...
I love my country. I love living here. I do believe that 'Merica is one of the best places to live...
but this is something that we just can't keep burying our head over. People will mourn, both sides politically ("BAN ALL GUNS!!!!" versus "Gun-free zones mean easy kill zones!!!") will bicker, and a whole lot of nothing will get done until the next mass shooting when people will do the same exact thing.
Unfortunately, I don't have any clue what can actually be done. Guns are just too damn prevalent in our culture; getting rid of them just plain isn't possible unless we can somehow convince EVERYWHERE in the country to do so (and once you have that done, let me know cause I want the next Genie wish please) and our mental health care system (well...all of it is but let's focus on mental health for now) is just too damn broken but no one wants to pay to fix it because Capitalism.
...yah 'Merica?
I love my country. I love living here. I do believe that 'Merica is one of the best places to live...
but this is something that we just can't keep burying our head over. People will mourn, both sides politically ("BAN ALL GUNS!!!!" versus "Gun-free zones mean easy kill zones!!!") will bicker, and a whole lot of nothing will get done until the next mass shooting when people will do the same exact thing.
Unfortunately, I don't have any clue what can actually be done. Guns are just too damn prevalent in our culture; getting rid of them just plain isn't possible unless we can somehow convince EVERYWHERE in the country to do so (and once you have that done, let me know cause I want the next Genie wish please) and our mental health care system (well...all of it is but let's focus on mental health for now) is just too damn broken but no one wants to pay to fix it because Capitalism.
...yah 'Merica?
The anti-gun crowd has a fair bit of fun with the definition of "mass shooting" and the statistics.thaluikhain said:
In other news:
/r9k/ has some fun and frames a regular and every news outlet on the planet eats it up while showing furthermore why we have these shootings while /r9k/ fires back in their den which is currently being heavily monitored by the alphabet soup while they wait for the guy who had his identity slaughtered on national TV to find a lawyer and make bank.
Quite the Thursday.
Nothing has been "done" about it because the ruling liberal president and his party's broken record of an agenda here is to pass more gun laws, which in the context of mass shootings is basically saying that you're going to make mass murder more illegal than it already is.Casual Shinji said:
It's true that there are no easy or simple solutions to the mental healthcare crisis in the US. That is the reason it goes neglected, because there are easier and simpler solutions than directly dealing with it and doing so with efficacy. Gun control and prescription meds are cheap, easy, lucrative solutions that don't solve our problems, but they do work out well for pols and big pharma.ScaredIndie said:
I don't think anyone's made it out to be rocket science, but your solutions are scattered and several are nonsense. They start out fine but the ATF is an arm of federal government tyranny, background checks are already a thing (and many mass shootings prove them ineffective), it's silly to make tougher laws against mass murderers and no business is held to the kind of liability you seem to suggest firearm manufacturers should be (could BMW be responsible for road rage?).Lense-Thirring said:
There are common sense solutions, just not common agreement on what they are, and the reality is that they won't be accepted because the problems are with American culture, starting with our media, and it's basically impossible to tell them how to do their jobs when they beam into our heads telling us how to live, think and feel. It's their job to make these shootings and the shooters stars in our national drama series. We're the audience, and our culture is produced for us.
In the age of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, etc., we're simultaneously more connected than ever and more isolated than ever. Bad ideas fester and good ideas are a meme for a week and then stumble off to die. Anger and hatred echo, growing louder day by day, each moment that nothing seems to occur to address the insurmountable wrongness of the situation deepening the idea in certain heads that the only way things will change is to put words aside and commit an act of violence that can't be ignored.
After the church shooting in Charleston, one thing that struck me is that the gunman hesitated when the members of the church talked to him. Ultimately, they weren't successful in stopping him that way, it's true. But for a time, at least, they were able to get him to stop thinking of them as abstract concepts, targets worthy of his hate, and instead consider them as human beings, human lives.
I wish someone had talked to him that way, sooner. These kinds of acts almost always end the same way- not just the victims dying, but the shooter as well. Knowing that and going on all but requires the perpetrators to not just disvalue the lives of their victims, but their own as well. To feel that they could have no possible impact, but that they burn out all at once.
-
In most of these kinds of situations, it sounds like there was a great deal of confusion. I've always thought that the idea that one or more "good shooters" could bring things to a good end was born more of action movies than reality; in such situations, how are "good shooters" to distinguish each other from the "bad shooters"? How are security or law enforcement to do so? What stops the whole thing from becoming a massive crossfire, or just putting another loaded weapon in the hands of someone looking to commit indiscriminate violence?
-
No matter what becomes of health care tomorrow- if every city and town in America suddenly has access to free mental health conseling- it isn't going to help that much as long as seeking counseling is stigmatized and treated like weakness. Even those who would never themselves do violence are often willing to participate in a climate that vilifies and disparages others not for what they do, but for what they feel.
I don't know that anyone ever stopped feeling something- certainly not something as powerful as rage or hatred- just for being told they should stop by someone who clearly regarded them with contempt.
Others have said as much, but if all we do is the usual "Restrict access to guns!" ("RAH!") "More access to mental health care!" ("RAH!")... And then it peters out in a month, well... What can you do but shut down your news feed, 'cuz there is going to be another shooting, you could almost set a goddamn clock by it at this point. What are we willing to do about it? Not some nebulous "we", the "someone" who should do "something" about this deplorable situation we're clucking our tongues about?
Change our Facebook photos for a week?
After the church shooting in Charleston, one thing that struck me is that the gunman hesitated when the members of the church talked to him. Ultimately, they weren't successful in stopping him that way, it's true. But for a time, at least, they were able to get him to stop thinking of them as abstract concepts, targets worthy of his hate, and instead consider them as human beings, human lives.
I wish someone had talked to him that way, sooner. These kinds of acts almost always end the same way- not just the victims dying, but the shooter as well. Knowing that and going on all but requires the perpetrators to not just disvalue the lives of their victims, but their own as well. To feel that they could have no possible impact, but that they burn out all at once.
-
In most of these kinds of situations, it sounds like there was a great deal of confusion. I've always thought that the idea that one or more "good shooters" could bring things to a good end was born more of action movies than reality; in such situations, how are "good shooters" to distinguish each other from the "bad shooters"? How are security or law enforcement to do so? What stops the whole thing from becoming a massive crossfire, or just putting another loaded weapon in the hands of someone looking to commit indiscriminate violence?
-
No matter what becomes of health care tomorrow- if every city and town in America suddenly has access to free mental health conseling- it isn't going to help that much as long as seeking counseling is stigmatized and treated like weakness. Even those who would never themselves do violence are often willing to participate in a climate that vilifies and disparages others not for what they do, but for what they feel.
I don't know that anyone ever stopped feeling something- certainly not something as powerful as rage or hatred- just for being told they should stop by someone who clearly regarded them with contempt.
Others have said as much, but if all we do is the usual "Restrict access to guns!" ("RAH!") "More access to mental health care!" ("RAH!")... And then it peters out in a month, well... What can you do but shut down your news feed, 'cuz there is going to be another shooting, you could almost set a goddamn clock by it at this point. What are we willing to do about it? Not some nebulous "we", the "someone" who should do "something" about this deplorable situation we're clucking our tongues about?
Change our Facebook photos for a week?
Modern preservation and transport methods make this a non-issue.Fappy said:I'm O-. I'd donate, but I am on the literal opposite side of the country
Pretty much this.LegendaryGamer0 said:
Given what we've heard about this guy, I'm legitimately curious if people think that if he didn't have access to firearms, he would have simply gone "Wow, I have to put a bit of effort into causing the pain and suffering I want to cause for attention? Guess I'd better not..."
Figuring out why these people snap is much more conducive to actually FIXING the problem than any number of dozen half-baked kneejerk reactions that merely bandaid the problem.
And in turn, basically this.Areloch said:
Everyone just wants to make bad attempts to do what they believe will disable someone from doing this shit(it won't) instead of going to the root of the problem, and also realizing that it isn't always a simple "oh just fix X" but many snowflakes making the avalanche, for lack of a better way of putting it.
Going on a stabbing spree ends in a lot less bodies than a shooting spree.LegendaryGamer0 said:
OT: I think this article sums up my thoughts on the matter nicely: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a38458/oregon-shooting-price-we-pay/