Many were cited in the New York Times. So yeah, national news.
No, they would have made national TV news as well as local TV news.
They make national and local TV news nowadays and they are less rare now.
Post me some links, because I really think this is BS on your part.
And I will be very surprised if you are right that there were at least 12.
I'm not going to search the archives of every TV news broadcast of the 50s for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...d_States#1950s
Each shooting is cited. That's where the Times links are.
He tried to do just that. Do you have a point to make? This is getting quite boring.
What stopped him?
Do you have a point to make?
You and I both know it would have made the TV news.
When Ira Addaberry shot people at the Battle of Flowers parade, it made national TV news.
When that idiot in the UT tower in Austin sniped all those people, it made national TV news.
And both those were men doing the killing.
You damn better believe if some kid killed people at a school somewhere, it would have most definitely made the national TV news.
If we find out what stopped his purchasing his own weapon, maybe.
Some of them might have.
I am very very surprised!
So, not extremely rare.
I guess not as rare as I thought.
Whitman in Austin was mentioned in the 60s.
But I would have thought that was the exception rather than the rule.
And that wasn't a grade school.
I can see high school gang related shootings, especially in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles, but other places, I don't see it often.
I left out college shootings from that number. Bumps it up a bit.
He didn't want to wait for a background check. So, what is your point?
Oh. Well in that instance a law did work.
Interesting.
Still, nothing stopping him from buying from a private citizen, was there -- right?
He may have still passed a background check though, I'm not sure if he had ever been adjudicated as mentally defective. It sounds like he just didn't want to wait the 14 days. To your second question, I am not familiar with Connecticut state laws regarding private sales, are you?
When the shooter plans to kill himself, this really does not matter much.
Right, but he was deterred in that instance.Could be. We only know what happened.I'm not sure if he had ever been adjudicated as mentally defective. It sounds like he just didn't want to wait the 14 days.Who's to say they would follow said laws?To your second question, I am not familiar with Connecticut state laws regarding private sales, are you?
Agreed.
So we've concluded a waiting period stopped him from making a purchase on his own now what is your point?
That was the point on that issue.
I can't be sure he could have been stopped one way or the other. I mean one can be obsessed with killers and killings but can someone be denied a gun just for that?
Adam Lanza was not just some person obsessed with killers and killings, he was 100% ed in the head and should have had zero access to guns in his own home. So yes, a person of his mind should absolutely be denied a gun. It's possible he would have still acquired one, but his mom is as much at fault as he was for her utter stupidity.
She likely hasn't hit her teenage years yet.
His mom is dead. He killed her before he went rampage on that school. Pointless to blame the dead.
So who makes that call outside of his mother's house?
If you are trying to say the background check system is broken due to a lack of health records being shared just say so because I'd agree. Your 20 questions schtick is played out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote