U S: Six Dead In Santa Monica Shooting Rampage

[webfact]

Six dead in Santa Monica shooting rampage

"We heard a loud bang which sounded like a shotgun or a small bomb"

SANTA MONICA: -- At least six people are dead after a series of shootings around a college in Santa Monica, California, say police.

The rampage began at a house and ended on campus where police say they shot the gunman in the college library.

Police say the attacker killed two people in the home, two more as he headed to the nearby Santa Monica College and another two on campus.

The unidentified gunman was clad in black and armed with an assault-style rifle, according to the authorities.

The violence broke out before noon, when a man in black opened fire on a house, which caught fire, and then a car, wounding the driver, police said. The suspect fled the scene in a car.

Full story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22823290


-- BBC 2013-06-08

[sustento]

Obviously what they need is 'MORE GUNS' !!!

[Suradit69]

Obviously what they need is 'MORE GUNS' !!!

The NRA will undoubtedly blame the six people who died because they weren't armed. Of course it's a Constitutional issue. The dubious Constitutional defense of the right to bear arms is more important than the mass slaughter of people who were in their homes or attending college without a Kalashnikov at their sides and body armor strapped on.

Probably, and this is pure speculation, the Ninja-wannabe had some grievance, aka a face-saving matter to sort out.

[manfrommanteo]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

[Keesters]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States!

Obviously not tough enough.

[F430murci]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Edited June 8, 2013 by metisdead

[NeverSure]

California. Assault type weapons with high capacity (more than ten rounds) magazines are already illegal there. Of course laws don't stop criminals.

The police believe more than one person was involved. A rifle and a shotgun were heard. One is dead, another in custody.

Two guys plan this? I'll wait until I hear what their backgrounds are. At the least if they have a criminal history they aren't allowed to own guns. At the worst they could wind up with strange last names and associates.

I want the rest of the story.

[Suradit69]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

"...toughest gun laws in the entire United States."

Gee, the entire US! Not much of a hurdle to jump.

[NeverSure]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Let's at least get our facts straight, OK? California doesn't have a gun show loophole. Background checks are required. California doesn't allow high capacity "assault" type weapons.

Laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and see what the facts are, OK? Apparently there were two guys and who knows what motivated this?

[F430murci]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Let's at least get our facts straight, OK? California doesn't have a gun show loophole. Background checks are required. California doesn't allow high capacity "assault" type weapons.

Laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and see what the facts are, OK? Apparently there were two guys and who knows what motivated this?

But they can buy in Arizona, Texas or where ever at gun show and take it back to Cali. Correct. Haha, take the Otis test and let's put my theory to test!!!

[NeverSure]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Let's at least get our facts straight, OK? California doesn't have a gun show loophole. Background checks are required. California doesn't allow high capacity "assault" type weapons.

Laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and see what the facts are, OK? Apparently there were two guys and who knows what motivated this?

But they can buy in Arizona, Texas or where ever at gun show and take it back to Cali. Correct. Haha, take the Otis test and let's put my theory to test!!!

They could also buy them in Mexico. As I said, laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and get the facts, OK?

[Scott]

Those that are going to defend the killing of 6 people are going to receive a suspension. FACT.

[Morden]

The speculation is starting in advance of clear information. Even the news reporters on the scene are confused about the detail.

CNN has said this morning:

1. According to a woman on the bus, the killer was of very white complexion.

2. The other person arrested is said 'to be of interest' and 'Asian in appearance'. No-one other than a few reporters has yet connected this person with the killer.

3. The gun is said to be an AR15.

However, given the present confusion, we don't know whether any of this is correct or what the background of the dead killer and the 'Asian' might be.

All that seems to be established publicly is that there has been yet another gun rampage with significant loss of life involving a long barrelled gun.

On a general note, the more legal guns there are around, the more illegal guns there will be. I can't understand why there is still so much support in the US for open gun laws amongst people who seem to have no compassion for the victims or their families.

[Ulysses G.]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

[Morden]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

So, are you promoting the same tired argument for more guns rather than fewer?

I agree that, given the lax laws and lax enforcement of them, it may take years to reduce the number of illegal guns but, surely, it's worth making a start.

The common argument that you could defend yourself against a rampant killer if you carried a handgun is flawed. If you are lucky enough to see him coming and pull out your gun, you may well be his next target. If you manage to let of a few rounds in Tesco, you may well kill some innocent people yourself. Even the police have difficulty in keeping to their targets. The Boston police shot up a whole street a few weeks ago and the New York police accidentally took down some passers by whilst trying to shoot a suspected criminal. What chance a civilian with adrenalin flowing of keeping to his target?

[geriatrickid]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Let's at least get our facts straight, OK? California doesn't have a gun show loophole. Background checks are required. California doesn't allow high capacity "assault" type weapons.

Laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and see what the facts are, OK? Apparently there were two guys and who knows what motivated this?

Nothing precludes someone from buying a gun out of state. This is what the problem is. Some states have tough laws, and others do not.

In any case, the gunman is reported to have killed his father and brother. Hardly seems like anything other than a mentally ill male.

[geriatrickid]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

Ahh so you advocate the removal of guns from society.

Jolly good.

I knew you would come around.

[Jingthing]

Gun laws to be effective need to be FEDERAL. Duh. Thank you Australia for showing the way. Too bad the USA has become retarded in attempting such basic and helpful changes to save the lives of their OWN citizens.

[Morden]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

The highest gun crime is in the cities and states with the toughest gun laws; LA, California; Chicago, IL; New York, NY. States that encourage gun ownership and concealed/open carry have the lowest gun crime rates. Armed citizens are a deterrent to violent criminals. Also, since 1993 the incidence of gun related homicide is down -- 49%. And even Illinois, a state with one of the most strict gun control laws has just recently legislated to allow concealed carry by citizens.

As for the NRA blaming the victims for not carrying, that is simply a stupid statement. However, we do blame over-zealous politicians who make it difficult for the average, citizen to own (and carry) a firearm for self-protection. Gun ownership by law-abiding citizens deters crime, especially violent gun related crime.

If you aren't an American who was brought up around guns and the gun culture, you'll never understand. And if you're a non-American, we really don't care what you think, although you're welcome to your opinion.

Perhaps most non-Americans here grew up in countries where there is a sensible attitude to guns and are aghast at the crazy logic among some Americans.

I'm sure that you don't care what others think. When your head is buried in the sand you can't even hear a different point of view. On the other hand, American politicians and military often seem preoccupied with telling people in other countries how to live their lives and using their gun culture to enforce their views. If you give it out, be prepared to take it back once in a while.

[TexasRanger]

I am willing to bet you could pick up a carving knife in central and kill a lot mote than 6 before (and if) the cops came.

[connda]

The speculation is starting in advance of clear information. Even the news reporters on the scene are confused about the detail.

CNN has said this morning:

1. According to a woman on the bus, the killer was of very white complexion.

2. The other person arrested is said 'to be of interest' and 'Asian in appearance'. No-one other than a few reporters has yet connected this person with the killer.

3. The gun is said to be an AR15.

However, given the present confusion, we don't know whether any of this is correct or what the background of the dead killer and the 'Asian' might be.

All that seems to be established publicly is that there has been yet another gun rampage with significant loss of life involving a long barrelled gun.

On a general note, the more legal guns there are around, the more illegal guns there will be. I can't understand why there is still so much support in the US for open gun laws amongst people who seem to have no compassion for the victims or their families.

The AR15 is one of the most common semi-automatic rifles in America. It's used for competition, sports shooting, target practice, and hunting. But it's only one of many semi-automatic rifles sold. But the media loves to demonize it because it looks like a fully-automatic M16. It isn't. An the media is simply fear-mongering.

Educate yourself: http://www.assaultweapon.info.

Also, gun advocates are generally individuals with conservative values: like the love of family. We have immense compassion for the victims of gun related crimes. We arm ourselves so we (and our families) do not become victims of gun related crimes. And I reiterate...since 1993 gun related homicide in the United States has decreased 49%.

[Morden]

Gun laws to be effective need to be FEDERAL. Duh. Thank you Australia for showing the way. Too bad the USA has become retarded in attempting such basic and helpful changes to save the lives of their OWN citizens.

That's absolutely clear.

Both Australia and the UK took quick action after they suffered massacres and it seems to have worked. After the Hungerford massacre, which was similar to the Santa Monica massacre, the law was changed to ban semi-automatics and pump action shotguns. After Dunblane, similar to Sandy Hook, handguns were banned. Only a few sporting shooters had any objection.

Here's something from the BBC about Britain's developing gun laws. It shows that Britain had a Bill of Rights confirming the right to bear arms and that the law was changed periodically in line with changing circumstances.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7056245.stm

[Ulysses G.]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

Ahh so you advocate the removal of guns from society.

Jolly good.

I knew you would come around.

Actually, I am not against that, but it would have to be ALL guns - including criminals - and that is a lot easier said than done.

[brfsa2]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

Yes, laws that forbid people to have guns will only increase and make the ilegal gun business much more profitable and high demand. Yet normal hard working citizens loose the their rights to defend themselves. It makes you wonder who is lobbying for gun control? I want to have a gun so I can defend my self and my family if I have too, but of course you need training, security understanding and special skills in order to have a gun.

This kind of crimes are very unfortunate and I feel for their families and relatives from what happened today...

also, imagine if a guy was carrying his gun and saw the shooting, he could have killed the guy before he went further killing more people.

[Joe Mamma]

As a retired California peace officer for many decades, I have seen more than my share of carnage. The repeat offenders are the bulk of the gun problems and the disregard for human life is at an all time high. The media and movies and newspapers all glorify the anti-hero street gangsters, many urban youth are raised by gangs and guns, drugs prostitution are their nursery grounds. Probably the most dangerous of bad people are the good citizens that go on rampages and lose it, many reasons for this and no predictability.

The plain fact is the average working responsible citizen that takes up arms and gets proper safety training and practices their shooting skills prudently, will help with the crime problems instead of contributing to the muang madness. I can tell you personally, there is no good after glow feeling after taking any human life, good or bad or indifferent.

[Morden]

The speculation is starting in advance of clear information. Even the news reporters on the scene are confused about the detail.

CNN has said this morning:

1. According to a woman on the bus, the killer was of very white complexion.

2. The other person arrested is said 'to be of interest' and 'Asian in appearance'. No-one other than a few reporters has yet connected this person with the killer.

3. The gun is said to be an AR15.

However, given the present confusion, we don't know whether any of this is correct or what the background of the dead killer and the 'Asian' might be.

All that seems to be established publicly is that there has been yet another gun rampage with significant loss of life involving a long barrelled gun.

On a general note, the more legal guns there are around, the more illegal guns there will be. I can't understand why there is still so much support in the US for open gun laws amongst people who seem to have no compassion for the victims or their families.

The AR15 is one of the most common semi-automatic rifles in America. It's used for competition, sports shooting, target practice, and hunting. But it's only one of many semi-automatic rifles sold. But the media loves to demonize it because it looks like a fully-automatic M16. It isn't. An the media is simply fear-mongering.

Educate yourself: http://www.assaultweapon.info.

Also, gun advocates are generally individuals with conservative values: like the love of family. We have immense compassion for the victims of gun related crimes. We arm ourselves so we (and our families) do not become victims of gun related crimes. And I reiterate...since 1993 gun related homicide in the United States has decreased 49%.

The AR15 and Bushmaster might be useful for target shooting but I doubt even that is they are no more than .22 rifles with fancy bits stuck on them. There are several hunting programmes on the box made in the USA. In none of them is anything other than a standard rifle used.

How is putting a gun within reach of your children 'love of family' when there are so many cases of siblings killing siblings whilst playing with Dad's loaded gun? if you really feel the need to protect yourself at home, and I fully understand that, then you should learn how to keep the thing safe. Carrying a loaded gun stuffed under your jacket in public is likely to cause more trouble than it might solve.

'Love of family' is not exclusive to gun toting Americans. Some other countries deal with that my taking action to minimise gun crime.

Gun homicide might have decreased but what about massacres involving guns that have no legitimate use outside of a gun club?

[Morden]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

Yes, laws that forbid people to have guns will only increase and make the ilegal gun business much more profitable and high demand. Yet normal hard working citizens loose the their rights to defend themselves. It makes you wonder who is lobbying for gun control? I want to have a gun so I can defend my self and my family if I have too, but of course you need training, security understanding and special skills in order to have a gun.

This kind of crimes are very unfortunate and I feel for their families and relatives from what happened today...

also, imagine if a guy was carrying his gun and saw the shooting, he could have killed the guy before he went further killing more people.

'Very unfortunate'? Is that the extent of your feelings about yet another massacre?

Your assumption about the possible increase in illegal gun trading isn't borne out by the experience of Australia and the UK. Sure, there are still illegal guns around but not so many as there seem to be in the US.

A gun at home properly controlled by someone of sound mind and with training may be reasonable. However, as I understand it, most US States don't even require the owner to have a gun safe. Carrying a weapon in public is lunacy and, if it's necessary, a sign of a society that has some serious problems.

[NeverSure]

But it happened in CALIFORNIA, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the entire United States! Can't keep a quitter from quitting, a loser from losing, or a madman from doing harm.

Until they tighten up gun show loop holes, I guess we will never know. BTW, those loopholes put assault weapons and guns in the hands of criminals in case you didn't know. I mean xxxx, does common sense and people brains just blow out the window when guns are discussed. I wish we could IQ test all members of the NRA to fully appreciate the . . .

Let's at least get our facts straight, OK? California doesn't have a gun show loophole. Background checks are required. California doesn't allow high capacity "assault" type weapons.

Laws bind only the law abiding. Let's wait and see what the facts are, OK? Apparently there were two guys and who knows what motivated this?

Nothing precludes someone from buying a gun out of state. This is what the problem is. Some states have tough laws, and others do not.

In any case, the gunman is reported to have killed his father and brother. Hardly seems like anything other than a mentally ill male.

I am very sorry about the killings.

You are mistaken. A person may purchase a firearm only from a citizen or dealer in his own state. A Federally licensed gun dealer may transfer a gun to another Federally licensed dealer in another state, where then within that new state a citizen of that state may purchase the gun from that dealer in his state. All sales through dealers require background checks.

So, if I wanted to sell a gun to my best friend who lived in another state, I would have to go to a licensed dealer in my state and have him ship the gun to a dealer in my friend's state. Then my friend could go to that dealer in his state and pay the transfer and background check fees, fill out the Federal paperwork and get his gun. I would have to fill out paperwork with the dealer in my state, and pay him to ship to the new dealer in the other state.

In this case of California, no dealer would accept a gun which had a magazine which held more than 10 rounds because such magazines are illegal in California. That applies to rifles and handguns.

[puck2]

Because there are already so many guns out there that new laws will have no effect on criminals for at least another 50 years. Law abiding citizens want some chance to defend themselves.

So, are you promoting the same tired argument for more guns rather than fewer?

I agree that, given the lax laws and lax enforcement of them, it may take years to reduce the number of illegal guns but, surely, it's worth making a start.

The common argument that you could defend yourself against a rampant killer if you carried a handgun is flawed. If you are lucky enough to see him coming and pull out your gun, you may well be his next target. If you manage to let of a few rounds in Tesco, you may well kill some innocent people yourself. Even the police have difficulty in keeping to their targets. The Boston police shot up a whole street a few weeks ago and the New York police accidentally took down some passers by whilst trying to shoot a suspected criminal. What chance a civilian with adrenalin flowing of keeping to his target?

U., what a logic. When somebody shot you, you return the fire

Edited June 8, 2013 by puck2

[NeverSure]

The speculation is starting in advance of clear information. Even the news reporters on the scene are confused about the detail.

CNN has said this morning:

1. According to a woman on the bus, the killer was of very white complexion.

2. The other person arrested is said 'to be of interest' and 'Asian in appearance'. No-one other than a few reporters has yet connected this person with the killer.

3. The gun is said to be an AR15.

However, given the present confusion, we don't know whether any of this is correct or what the background of the dead killer and the 'Asian' might be.

All that seems to be established publicly is that there has been yet another gun rampage with significant loss of life involving a long barrelled gun.

On a general note, the more legal guns there are around, the more illegal guns there will be. I can't understand why there is still so much support in the US for open gun laws amongst people who seem to have no compassion for the victims or their families.

The AR15 is one of the most common semi-automatic rifles in America. It's used for competition, sports shooting, target practice, and hunting. But it's only one of many semi-automatic rifles sold. But the media loves to demonize it because it looks like a fully-automatic M16. It isn't. An the media is simply fear-mongering.

Educate yourself: http://www.assaultweapon.info.

Also, gun advocates are generally individuals with conservative values: like the love of family. We have immense compassion for the victims of gun related crimes. We arm ourselves so we (and our families) do not become victims of gun related crimes. And I reiterate...since 1993 gun related homicide in the United States has decreased 49%.

The AR15 and Bushmaster might be useful for target shooting but I doubt even that is they are no more than .22 rifles with fancy bits stuck on them. There are several hunting programmes on the box made in the USA. In none of them is anything other than a standard rifle used.

How is putting a gun within reach of your children 'love of family' when there are so many cases of siblings killing siblings whilst playing with Dad's loaded gun? if you really feel the need to protect yourself at home, and I fully understand that, then you should learn how to keep the thing safe. Carrying a loaded gun stuffed under your jacket in public is likely to cause more trouble than it might solve.

'Love of family' is not exclusive to gun toting Americans. Some other countries deal with that my taking action to minimise gun crime.

Gun homicide might have decreased but what about massacres involving guns that have no legitimate use outside of a gun club?

I can't even understand your first paragraph.

Bushmaster is only one manufacturer of AR-15's. If you are saying they are just .22's, you are mistaken. They are .224 caliber. A .22 is a small rim fire cartridge, but a .224 NATO round (5.56 NATO) is a much larger center fire cartridge that has a much bigger and heavier bullet that travels at three times the speed of the .22lr. It has far more range, and is legal and effective at killing deer in my state. If it's effective on Taliban, it's effective on deer.

It is a very viable hunting rifle and often used. It happens to be black which seems to freak people out.

What's this about having "no legitimate use outside of a gun club?" It would be my gun of choice for deer hunting as it's light weight and easy to carry.