In Pennsylvania Gym Murders, Suicide Shooter Targets Female Victims

UPDATE (8/6): For the record, according to reporting by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, the shooter who murdered three women and wounded nine others at a Pittsburgh-area fitness club held a permit from the State of Pennsylvania to carry concealed weapons.

Two weeks ago, gun violence prevention organizations helped defeat a bill in Congress that would have allowed this killer to carry his loaded weapon almost anywhere in the country.

About three months ago, Congress approved legislation that would have allowed this killer to carry his loaded weapons in nearly every national park in the country.

#

Another in a long line of hateful, murderous shootings occurred last night in Pennsylvania.

According to reports, a man -- apparently consumed with a long-simmering anger concerning women and heavily armed -- walked into a suburban Pittsburgh fitness club where he was a member, and found a dance class with a number of women.

The killer reportedly turned off the lights, and then fired over 40 rounds of ammunition into the room in about a minute, killing at least three people and wounding another nine or more.

Then, like so many of these suicide shooters, he killed himself.

If President Obama and our other elected officials believe this incident is worthy of their attention at all, hopefully they will promise to explore ways to prevent such rampages in the future, rather than merely express "deep sadness" -- along with an unstated hope that America's gun violence problem somehow will just go away on its own.

This "nothing new that we can do" approach didn't work after the Amish school shootings in Pennsylvania in October 2006, or the Pittsburgh police killings earlier this year, and yesterday's massacre shows that it's not working now.

It's obviously too easy for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons in this country.

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

Comments

[jimtom]

BenEzra: "BTW, completely off the subject, "cash for clunkers" was a good idea, but as implemented it is about as anti-progressive as you can get. Taxing working families to give the well-to-do a slight discount on buying a new car, truck, or SUV doesn't help someone who can't afford to drop $20,000+ on a quality new car, and by reducing the supply of nice used cars, it is going to hurt the working class in the long run."

It appears that the program makes sense if the "big" clunker you own is now worth less than $4,500. It does not appear that you are restricted to buying cars that cost more than $20k. In fact, I just saw a Nissan commercial for a local NC dealer that claims there are a couple of sub-compacts you can buy for less than $8k net, factoring in the cash for clunkers and "factory discounts". I don't see how this hurts any particular socio/economic class unless you define "hurt" as not being able to trade-in a honking huge SUV or truck for another honking huge SUV or truck.

But back to guns, what do you think about the "libertarian" who openly carried to an Obama town hall in New Hampshire? He was on Hardball the next day where he expressed his opposition to social security, medicare, and the federal income tax, hence the "libertarian" branding. Was this meant to be a "militia's warning?"

[benEzra]

Gun ownership crosses political lines. I'm a registered independent, center to center-left. Not sure where that guy was coming from politically, but I suspect that both he and the media have been playing this up for publicity reasons, he so he can get on talk shows, and the media so they can stoke controversy and sell more advertising, as usual. Also, he was not in the "secure bubble" around the President, BTW; I'm not sure that reports made that clear.

As to the cash-for-clunkers thing, people of modest means replace their cars when they can afford to purchase something better than what they have now. If I could get $4500 toward trading mine on a newer USED car, I would jump at it. I can't afford $8K net, though, and even if I could, doing so to buy something inferior to what I have now (a stripped-down loss leader subcompact) wouldn't make sense.

Further down the socioeconomic ladder, my best friend is a single mother driving a 150,000mi compact with no working A/C because that is the best car she can afford. It is a shame that we can't take the newer passenger cars that the government has purchased and slated for destruction, and somehow swap them for older, less functional, and more polluting cars like my friend's (or even mine)---or the *true* clunkers that will continue to spew blue smoke for years because the people who drive them can't afford to trade up.

[Ohio9]

And the lies keep on coming.

The guy in New Hampshire didn't carry to "an Obama town hall". He was OUTSIDE the building on private property (with the owner's permission). He never so much as saw the president, much less got within shooting distance of him.

[jimtom]

OdinsEye: "As to the "grip pressure" system [of the MetalStorm O'Dwyer VLe], while I do not know all the details of it, I am quite sure that it would fail more than a few of the criteria I have detailed for you in the past."

I don't doubt for a second that the gun would fail some of the criteria you detailed for me in the past. But as I also stated in the past, you're not making the rules.

But if you want to check out the technical aspects of the New Jersey Institute of Technology R & D approach to date, you can find it below:

Volume 1, Issue 2, 2007
Handgrip Recognition

Zong Chen, Assistant Professor, Fairleigh Dickinson University
Michael Recce, Associate Professor, New Jersey Institute of Technology

Abstract: Dynamic handgrip recognition is a new biometric authentication method based on the human grasping behavior. Handgrip pattern recognition seeks to analyze the dynamics inherent in grasping behavior such as how the pressure varying during the grasping process. A novel real-time biometric system based on handgrip pattern is proposed for smart gun design in this paper. An experiment was initialized and the results proved that handgrip pattern recognition is a promising biometric technology for smart gun design.

http://www.scientificjournals.org/journals2007/articles/1226.pdf

[benEzra]

Look at the failure rates on page 10 of your link. And that is under lab conditions, not under stress, no adrenaline dump or fight-or-flight response, no hurried draw or incomplete grasp, which will undoubtedly make the user's grip even less consistent.

The IEEE article I posted downthread suggested that current recognition technologies are incapable of attaining the promised reliability, as I recall.

[jimtom]

I never meant to suggest that the NJIT prototype as of a couple of years ago met the reliability standards of the California legislation. Personally, I think the "grip pressure" technology route is iffy, but I'm not a scientist.

As to the "clunkers", you can help some people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't help all of the people all of the time.

[OdinsEye]

Thanks, but I looked at that before I replied. And based on the criteria I have given in the past, there is no doubt in my mind that it would fail.

[OdinsEye]

I looked at that prior to posting my comment. Again, I am quite sure it will fail several of the criteria I gave you several weeks back.

[Jadegold]

"BTW, Kleck's research has withstood numerous critical analysis and thus far the best anyone has really come up with to refute him is ad homs and modus tollens/mo­­dus/ponen­s fallacies."

Umm, no.

Kleck's studies have been widely panned as inaccurate and having used sloppy methodologies.

Here's one small example: Kleck claims 2.5M DGUs per year. Kleck also says that in 8% of these DGUs, the gun is fired at the perpetrator, wounding him. Kleck states 15% of all gunshot woundings are fatal. If you do the math, this means there are 30,000 perps killed by DGUs per year. According to the FBI UCARS, fewer than 300 people per year are killed in justifiable homicides--from all causes.

Kleck also states 33% of all DGUs involve burglary or theft at home. Doing the math, we see this means there are 825,000 DGUs involving burglary. Again, FBI UCARS data says there are approx. 1M burglaries each year when someone is home. This means, according to Kleck, about 83% of all burglaries where someone is home involves a DGU.

The list goes on. Note I'm using Kleck's own findings.

[OdinsEye]

"Here's one small example: Kleck claims 2.5M DGUs per year. Kleck also says that in 8% of these DGUs, the gun is fired at the perpetrator, wounding him. Kleck states 15% of all gunshot woundings are fatal. If you do the math, this means there are 30,000 perps killed by DGUs per year. According to the FBI UCARS, fewer than 300 people per year are killed in justifiable homicides--from all causes.
"

No, actually you misquote what Kleck said. This tactic has been tried in the past by others.

[Jadegold]

Nope, these are directly from Kleck.

Let's take them one at a time. Do you deny Kleck-Gertz had a conclusion to one their studies that said there were as many as 2.5 DGUs annually in the US? If you disagree that Kleck stated this, you'll be taking issue with most pro-gun groups--including the NRA--which cite this figure as Gospel.

Do you disagree Kleck stated that 8% of DGUs involved the wounding of a perpetrator? If so, see pp. 173-4 of Kleck-Gertz that states 17 of the sample cases--or 8.3% of DGUs--involved a wounding. If we assume a 95% confidence level--which Kleck did (see pp.183-4)--we get a confidence interval of 8.3% +/- 3.8% or between 4.5% and 12.1%.

I realize, at this point, some will jump in and claim this means 4.5% is as likely as 8.3%. But this would earn you an "F" in probability and stats. In this case, it means 8.3 is the most likely value and the further one moves--plus or minus--from 8.3 the liklihood of that value decreases.

Do you diagree Kleck claimed 15% of all woundings result in death? If you do, you disagree with Kleck-gertz as well as Kleck's book "Targetting Guns"(pp.164).

[jimtom]

There seems to be some kind of problem with the "reply" icon. it doesn't appear on several recent postings, I notified the "moderator" about this earlier today but so far no reply.

But I would like to comment on BenEzra's most recent post. I have traded emails with the then local D.C. rep. for MetalStorm, I'd say this was eight or nine months ago. He didn't know what the status of their current work with NJIT was at the time. But I never got the impression that they were planning to market an expensive handgun that working class and middle class folks could not afford to buy and keep operational. On the contrary, if BE will refer back to his IEEE Spectrum article, the MetalStorm person being interviewed indicated that the Company did not think adding biometrics would add more than about $50, I believe, to the cost of the gun. A rep from a competing gun manufacturer argued the costs would double or triple every handguns cost, thus his Company's decision not to develop one.

[benEzra]

The economics of a gun that cannot be reloaded by the user with bulk ammunition are incontrovertible. If you have to have multiple barrels that can only be loaded by authorized personnel, it is going to price the system out of the reach of all but the wealthiest shooters. Not to mention the fact that the Metal Storm ammunition requires a microprocessor in every round, AFAIK.

And $50 over the price of a regular gun (for a non-Metal-Storm style system) might buy you consumer-grade sensors, electronics, and solenoid, and a cell-phone-grade battery for a range toy. But the grade of components necessary for the required reliability for a defensive firearm are going to cost far more than that. So will hardening the system against easy bypass.

[durnik123]

Jimtom, You seem to forget, or not understand, that for any weapon to be an effective means of self defense the user must be proficient with it. That means practice, practice, practice. Most gun enthusiasts will shoot thousands of rounds every year for each gun they own.

It seems as this gun is meant for the person who buys a gun, loads it, and puts it in a drawer. It almost encourages this behavior by its design. The problem is that if you cannot afford to shoot your gun enough to become proficient then you should not have one. Clearly this gun is designed to be very expensive to shoot on a regular basis.

Instead of relying on technology to solve our problems maybe we should be trying to educate people on the safe handling, use and storage or their weapons.

[jimtom]

I wonder what percentage of American handgun owners practice, practice, practice? My guess is that the number is pretty low. Be that as it may, there is certainly nothing wrong with stepping up efforts to educate people on safe handling, use and storage.

[jimtom]

"Take the O'Dwyer VLE smartgun (developed by MetalStorm). It's the world's first completely electronic "solid state" handgun--the only parts that move are the bullets, stacked directly in the barrels (the model I held had four barrels, though the successfully fired prototype is a seven-shot, single-barrel handgun). There is no chance of jamming and the safety features include a coded receiver that prevents unauthorized use by children or criminals. The gun can be set to kill (with bullets) or stun (with bean bags) and features "rapid reload" capability." by Victorino Matus, 07/16/2003, The Weekly Standard

I'm somewhat confused by this statement. In an earlier posting BenEzra provided us with information that indicated he was very familiar with this prototype (this is the prototype that come with seven bullets). But indicated that a major drawback is that the weapon would have to be returned to the manufacturer for reloading, which would obviously be a major obstacle to its finding a place in the markeplace. But this article indicates that it has a "rapid reload" capability.

BenEzra, or anyone else out there, have information that might clear up the apparent contradiction? Does any know what the current status of this product is? The article, afterall, is six years old.

[benEzra]

The Metal Storm prototype is reloaded by replacing the barrel, as I understand it. And if I am not mistaken, the barrel has to be loaded by the factory; the end user cannot simply stuff fresh ammunition down the barrel.

If you are the military and have a logistics train that keeps you supplied with dozens of loaded barrel packs at taxpayer expense, then yes, you could reload the *gun* by swapping the barrel, yes. But you could not load ammunition in those barrels yourself; you would have to return the barrels to the factory, as I understand it.

FWIW, there is no chance of "jamming" with the Metal Storm system, yes, since it has no moving parts. The chance of *failure* is far higher with the NJ Metal Storm prototype than it is with a conventional handgun, though, undoubtedly one reason it is still in the prototype stage (and why no law enforcement agency will touch it).

[jimtom]

I've written to MetalStorm, citing the article in the Daily Standard. Will contribute what they say to the blog if they respond.

What is the source of your statement that the prototypes failure chances are so high?

If an owner keeps three or four loaded barrel packs in stock I don't really see the problem of sending them back to MS for reloading (other than reliability and the "hassle") compared to keeping additional stocks on ammunition and magazine clips on hand for regular guns. The prospective owner would have to ask himself if the safety aspects re: child accidents and teen suicides, of the gun outweigh the costs and hassle of sending empty barrels back for reloading, and he might also factor in the societal good aspect in terms of having a gun that if stolen would be useless to criminals.

[Jadegold]

"Police departments can only tally those DFUs that they are made aware of. Most DFUs are never reported. They will be made aware of nearly all criminal uses of firearms."

Absolutely no evidence to support this assertion.

In point of fact, it is almost assuredly backwards.

Why wouldn't a law-abiding citizen report a DFU? After all, if someone tries to break into your home and you prevent him from doing so by brandishing your firearm--wouldn't you want the perpetrator to be caught? At least, by reporting the crime, you'd probably get more frequent police patrols and the like to prevent this from happening to you or your neighbors again.

In reality, many DFUs aren't defensive in nature. As we know, most shootings occur between family and intimate acquaintances. Many DFUs are usually the byproduct of some domestic squabble or argument between folks who know each other. Usually, drugs and alcohol are a factor. That's why many so-called "DFUs" never get reported. Add in the fact that many DFUs probably include people who aren't eligible to possess guns.

[djkrlsn]

Why should someone call police if the mere display of a firearm caused a criminal to leave? Miss Cabot, of course you realize that when you claim something, the people who know you realize the truth is completely opposite to your assertion

[Jadegold]

Miss Elise: The reason why someone should call the police is apparent--an attempted crime took place. As such, it is in your best interest-and those of your community--to make the police aware this happened. In this manner, the police can be on the look out for such crimes or perhaps it may provide them info which would lead to the apprehension of the criminal.

Of course, your reluctance to notify the police is really indicative of something altogether different. It's far more likely you brandished a weapon--not at a criminal--but at a family member or acquaintance. There was probably liquor or drugs involved.

[OdinsEye]

"Absolutely no evidence to support this assertion."

Tons of evidence to support this assertion. At least 13 studies indicate this - some of them even done by *gasp* GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES! If we look at rapes, we can see that only about 1 in 4 ever get reported.

"In reality, many DFUs aren't defensive in nature. As we know, most shootings occur between family and intimate acquaintances."

Road apples.

[Jadegold]

As I said, no evidence exists to support DGU claims.

In desperation, Odin tries to equate DGUs with rape. Apparently, he believes being a victim of rape is the same as preventing a crime with a firearm. There's some very strange logic applied in this regard.

What's important to note is that DGUs are subjective; if Odin and Vespassian get liquored up and Odin threatens to beat up Vespassian and V. pulls a gun on him--is that a DGU? In V's mind, it probably is. In reality, however, it's 2 folks who got liquored up.

Contrary to what Vespasian claims, the FBI doesn't track DGUs. It may guesstimate them but their number is not based on any study done by them.

[kitty3363]

Where's the national conversation on The World's Undeclared War On women? Maybe a beer summit? I mean if the prez can take time out of his busy schedule to coddle a snotty self indulged Havard prof who got his feelings hurt maybe he would take a minute to discuss the fact that women OF ALL COLORS are raped,beat­en,shot,an­d tortured by men OF ALL COLORS every second of every day in this country and every other,most notably South Africa where a full one third of men admit to rape and over half of those admit to multiple rapes. Or Liberia where rape just recently became illegal...­..........­....I reside in Wa. State where we boast the likes of Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgeway who between them tortured raped and killed well over one hundred women. BECAUSE they were women. If any of these murders had been directed at ANY other demographic, for instance a specific religious group, African Americans, gays,etc it would be on the 24/7 news cycle and addressed by congress and the president. Where's our beer summit?

[kaveman4]

The Brady Campaign only cares about people who are shot.

A woman raped and strangled to death with her own panties does not concern them.

In fact, a woman who uses a firearm to fend off a rapist is met with scorn and ridicule by the BC.

[Jadegold]

AP Story on Eric Thompson:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g7YO9iIN5tFDz9NMN7w2E9a_Rl9gD99UDE500

[djkrlsn]

greenrocks is a millenium late and a few trillion short as usual

[Jadegold]

http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2007&issue=04000&article=00031&type=abstract

"Conclusion: Household firearm ownership levels are strongly associated with higher rates of suicide, consistent with the hypothesis that the availability of lethal means increases the rate of completed suicide."

[mike102]

We will excuse your hysteria.

You are like a drowning man going down for the third time.

[jimtom]

Given all the arguments and questioning of objectivity and accuracy of data relating to gun violence in America that takes place on this blog, I thought I might run the following by everyone.

I propose that under the Federal Economic Stimulus Package, local and state police agencies across the country be funded to the amount of roughly $3 billion over five years to better cooperate with the FBI in generating data currently either lacking or too vague to be of great use in the Uniform Crime Reporting series. Some or all of the following data points should be detailed.

How many violent gun crimes involved semi-automatic weapons of all types, broken down by pistol, rifle, caliber? How many had large volume magazines?

How did the shooter acquire the weapon? Bought it legally, bought it at gun show, bought it out of state, bought it illegally, as a straw purchase, from a friend, from a stranger, stole it from a home, from a gun shop.

Determine objectively in homes with guns: More or less likely for a family member to get shot (other than suicide) than homes without guns (there is data suggesting yes, but it's contested, if it comes from the FBI who got it from police agencies maybe it's less likely to be)? How many self-defense uses take place annually?

Much of this data would be under constant revision as more facts about a given case of firearm violence are learned, thus the size of budget.

[djkrlsn]

The last time I checked, magazine size limits have done NOTHING to reduce crime since it takes SECONDS to change a magazine (and revolvers using full moon clips are almost as fast), and if you are looking at the standard "duty" sized handgun-if the choice is a 10 round 9mm, a 10 round 40 or 7/8 round mag in a 45--I will go for the 40 or 45 EVERY TIME. For what I use handguns for--the only real role I have for a 9mm is to give a real advantage in rounds available or to provide a reasonable combo of power and ammo in a pocket gun. Also, since semiauto pistols and long arms are EXPLICITLY protected in Heller by the common use standard--beyond academic interest, what would be the purpose of your study?

[LtBromhead]

"I propose that under the Federal Economic Stimulus Package, local and state police agencies across the country be funded to the amount of roughly $3 billion over five years to better cooperate with the FBI in generating data currently either lacking or too vague to be of great use in the Uniform Crime Reporting series. Some or all of the following data points should be detailed."

It's not necessary to spend 3 billion dollars. Almost all of the stats you're looking for are compiled by the FBI/DOJ.

"Determine objectively in homes with guns: More or less likely for a family member to get shot (other than suicide) than homes without guns (there is data suggesting yes, but it's contested,"

It's contested partially because the DOJ/FBI puts the number of defensive uses of firearms at 80,000 a year. That's 219 a day. It seems that the criminals are in more danger from privately owned guns than Great Aunt Edna is after all.

[OdinsEye]

Police departments can only tally those DFUs that they are made aware of. Most DFUs are never reported. They will be made aware of nearly all criminal uses of firearms.

If you are gathering data on firearms used in crimes, it should be make, model, caliber, and shots fired. Mag capacity is of little importance.

[fishyjay]

jimtom: "Determine objectively in homes with guns: More or less likely for a family member to get shot (other than suicide) than homes without guns. How many self-defense uses take place annually?"

While we wait for this data, why not move on to the debate that would follow? What ratio of the former to the latter should require that gun ownership for self-defense be curtailed or eliminated?

2 to 1 family member shot to self-defense? 2 to 1 self-defense to family member shot? Other? None?

[jimtom]

I would not suggest to curtail or eliminate gun ownership for self-defense regardless of what the data shows. But it might provide the kind of information someone might want to have before deciding the pros and cons of buying a gun for home defense.

[fishyjay]

jimtom: "How many violent gun crimes involved semi-automatic weapons of all types, broken down by pistol, rifle, caliber?"

What about pump-action guns, banned and conficated with semi-autos in Britain and Australia?


jimtom: "How many had large volume magazines?"

Specifics? 20rd (Maryland)? 15rd (New Jersey)? 10rd (94 AWB)? 6rd (Stated BC goal)?

[OdinsEye]

How about a Civil War era Lemat with nine .44 caliber bullets and one .61 caliber slug/16 gauge shot? Is it a "high capacity" or is it a "revolver"?

A friend has a 1908 "Luger" complete with orginal 32 cartridge magazine.

[jimtom]

Well, the guy in PA., apparently fired 32 shots with two guns without reloading in less than a minute, so I'm guessing his magazines held at least 16.

[mike102]

Paul, I believe your headline is worded to instill fear and anger in women, regarding gun owners.

I wouldn't be surprised if it backfired, and gun sales to women spiked for a time.

[djkrlsn]

Mike--do you remember ANY of his headlines that were not deceptive (like the ones describing Heller as a win for the BC or the titles describing the 2nd amendment as something other than a protector of an individual right)?

[Jadegold]

Turns out the same gun dealer that sold murder weapons to the Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois killers also supplied George Sodini.

TGSCOM has become the place to be for your serial killing needs.

[molonlabe]

Hey look! Jade read his Brady talking points today!

http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/release.php?release=1169

And now, to create a valid argument, jade is going to show us the proof that TGSCOM sold Sodini his accessories illegally..

We'll wait.......

And in other news, multiple car dealerships around the country have been shown to have supplied vehicles to individuals who have killed innocent victims in DUI related deaths.

[djkrlsn]

And again greenrocks is supporting convicting people BEFORE they commit any crimes

[mike102]

WellJade, at least this time you told a half-truth, instead of the usual outright lie.

The fact is, this guy didn't directly supply guns to anyone in PA, or VA Tech. Being an out-of -state dealer, he was required to send the guns to local dealers in PA and VA. The criminals involved had to go to these dealers in their own respective states, and go through the NICS check that the BC has decided to name after themselves, before they could take delivery of the firearms.

The press release from the BC makes ZERO mention of this fact, in their usual effort to hoodwink the public into thinking anybody at all can get guns through the mail.

Shallow and transparent, as usual, Jade.

[benEzra]

That dealer didn't supply "guns" to the gym shooter. The gym shooter ordered a spare magazine and a thumb-saver magazine loading tool from them, just like a million other people. It is not clear if the spare magazine was used in the shootings or not.

Of course, making it sound like the VT shooter and the gym misogynist pig mail-ordered weapons from the same dealer is the impression the MSM apparently wished to convey.

[Ohio9]

Nice half truth.

In reality, Sodini bought only a single pistol magazine from TGSCOM, The NIU shooter only bought a few excessories from that store also. Both of them bought their guns elsewhere.

As for the VT shooter, he passed his background check because the state failed to put his mental health data into the NCIS. How exactly is that the gun dealer's fault?

[OdinsEye]

Looks like Jade has egg on his face.

[ms.understood]

This situation is just horrible, and my thoughts and prayers are with the families of his victims.

It's sad when you think about how disconnected this guy was from reality, and how his ego made him shoot those women whom had nothing to do with his "not having sex" for 19 years. This poor excuse for a person should have realized that no matter what, he could not "make" women "like him." He was an arrogant idiot whom the cops/federal agents should have been using provisions in the Patriot Act as an excuse to monitor.

[djkrlsn]

hell-since it was posted on a public blog, someone should have called it to police attention

[Jadegold]

"to make it clear for newbies--even with very strict gun laws, Japan loses as many people to suicide as the US loses to murder and suicide COMBINED"

Of course, there are several fallacies in the statement above. First, suicide is treated very much differently in the US as opposed to Japan. In the US, there is a negative social stigma attached to suicide; it is widely perceived a person who commits or attempts suicide is mentally ill. In some US jurisdictions, suicide is a criminal act. In Japan, suicide is considered more traditionally; in many instances suicide may be considered socially and morally responsible. In fact, many insurance companies will pay benefits in the event of suicide and suicide has never been criminalized.

Second, when we compare a much more similar culture (the UK) we find their suicide rate (7.1 per 100,000) is much lower than the US (12.1 per 100,000). Of course the UK's murder rate is much lower than the US, as well.

[djkrlsn]

greenrocks--still spreading your bogus stats I see

[benEzra]

Funny that you mention only the UK, since the U.S. suicide rate is lower than that of Canada, Norway, Japan, Denmark, Austria, Australia, Iceland, New Zealand, Portugal, Ireland, Germany, France, Belgium, and many others; the UK is the exception. And I would suggest that U.S. culture is somewhat more similar to that of Canada or Germany than that of the UK.

[djkrlsn]

Especially since a high percentage of the American population is German, Scandinavian, Scottish, Irish etc

[Jadegold]

Of course, BenE omits the fact the difference between US and Canada is 0.3 per 100,000. Between the US and Germany 0.9 per 100,000.

BTW, the US suicide rate is higher than Australia's and Ireland's. Portugal and the US have the same rate.

But BenE is merely trying to muddy the waters.

[mike102]

Of course, there are several fallacies in the statement above.

Like the fact that Jade is pretending to have a sociology degree in order to sidestep the issue.

Jade, the Japanese have been offing themselves by the bushell for centuries. For decades, their suicide rate has dwarfed that of the US suicide and homicide rate combined. For decades, guns have been forbidden in Japan.

Why the Japanese kill themselves is not the issue. The fact that they do it in great numbers, totally without guns, is the issue.

[OdinsEye]

So, what you are saying is that GUNS DON'T CAUSE SUICIDES and the INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS ARE INVALID because of uncontrollable factors.


Thanks!

[CanisLatrans]

The graveside tapdancing of the gun ban crowd has begun.

This poor man was mentally disturbed. He should have been helped, but what happens to people who seek mental help in this country? They are ridiculed. That is the real tragedy.

But instead, all gun owners now must be judged by the lowest of examples in society. What kind of thinking does that do? Should we take the worst examples of a society and apply those judgements to everyone? I guess so-- in the world of people like Helmke and the Brady Center, simply owning a gun is an inexcusable crime, regardless of whether you've ever done anything wrong or not.

[djkrlsn]

too true

[Jadegold]

Mentally ill people have problems distinguishing reality from fantasy. Certainly, Sodini failed to recognize his problems resided within him and not because of others. So, what are we to make of statements such as "people like Helmke and the Brady Center, simply owning a gun is an inexcusable crime, regardless of whether you've ever done anything wrong or not?"

Clearly, it does not mesh with reality. After all, there is no group or organization calling for all gun ownership to be criminalized.

[Dimensio]

" After all, there is no group or organization calling for all gun ownership to be criminalized."

Why, then, does the Brady Center advocate increasingly restrictive regulations and prohibitions upon firearms? For what reason do they advocate the reinstatement and the expansion of the entirely irrational and unreasonable "assault weapons ban", seeking to prohibit a rarely criminally misused class of firearm based solely upon the presence of cosmetic features? For what reason did they investigate the feasibility of instigating a federal handgun ban soon after the passage of the now-expired federal assault weapons ban?

[kaveman4]

"After all, there is no group or organization calling for all gun ownership to be criminalized."

Riiiiiiight.

IANSA simply wants to criminalize civilian ownership of any firearm capable of shooting beyond 100 yards.

[OdinsEye]

"After all, there is no group or organization calling for all gun ownership to be criminalized."

Haven't read the history of the BC and VPC or statements by Sarah Brady or Josh Sugarmann, have you?

[kaveman4]

"But instead, all gun owners now must be judged by the lowest of examples in society. "

If the group being judged were blacks, hispanics, gays, Christians, Muslims etc., it would be considered hate speech and denounced by the very same people who have no problems targeting gun owners with the most vile personal attacks imaginable.

[CanisLatrans]

Yup. It is the acceptable new McCarthyism-- persecuting people for their political beliefs.