CNN: 7 Dead. Up to 30 People hurt; Shooting in a Wisconsin Sikh Temple; Children held as hostages

[Faux]

This is probably going to devolve into a gun rights discussion. But honestly, people who are still defending guns, need to critically reassess their position.

 

http://content.usato.../1#.UB6sKKCf4sc

[spoiler=Article]Several people have been injured in a shooting incident at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., just south of Milwaukee, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports.

 

Update at 1:25 p.m. ET: Two men have been admitted to Froedtert hospital, a hospital spokeswoman said. One is in critical condition in the surgical intensive care unit; the other has been sent to an operating room, CNN reports.

 

Update at 1:23 p.m. ET: Fran McLaughlin, spokeswoman for the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department, says a call came in at 10:26 a.m. CT. She says officers are at the scene but she has no other information to report, AP reports.

 

Update at 1:13 p.m. ET: Two shooters are possibly still inside with children as hostages, according to someone who sent a text message to a Journal Sentinel reporter, the Journal-Sentinel reports.

 

CNN is reporting that the shooter is at large.

 

Update at 1:07 p.m. ET: Reports of 20 to 30 shot at Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, possible hostages, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports.

 

There are reports that the head priest was locked inside a restroom with a cell phone and said there were as many as 30 victims in temple, the Journal-Sentinel reports.

 

As of about noon, the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's Office said it had not been called to the scene.

 

Meanwhile, Brookfield police officers were dispatched to the Sikh Temple at 3675 N. Calhoun Road as a precaution in the aftermath of the Oak Creek shooting.

 

At least three squads were at the temple in Waukesha County.

 

Original post: The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinelis reporting that multiple people, an undetermined number between 8 and 20, have been injured in a shooting incident at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., just south of Milwaukee.

 

The shooting took place around 11 a.m. local time at the Sikh Temple, 7512 S. Howell Ave., in Oak Creek.

 

Oak Creek police, the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department and other law enforcement agencies have responded.

 

 

Wisconsin gun laws:

 

Rifles and Shotguns

• Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No.
  
• Registration of rifles and shotguns? No.
  
• Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No.
  
• Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No.
  

Handguns

• Permit to purchase handgun? No.*
  
• Registration of handguns? No.
  
• Licensing of owners of handguns? No.
  
• Permit to carry handguns? No.
  

http://crime.about.c.../gunlaws_wi.htm

 

But yeah, guns keep you safe, etc.

Edited August 6, 2012 by stevepole
reworded the last bit of the intro paragraph.

[TTanT]

I wonder if this is more a copycat of TDKR shooting, or just another maniac?

[Faux]

I wonder if this is more a copycat of TDKR shooting, or just another maniac?

 

CNN says more than one shooter.

[Guest Rob]

While I disagree with Wisconsin's gun laws, I don't think guns are to blame here. Truthfully if the guy wanted to shoot up a temple, he'd have been able to get a gun illegally if there were stricter laws towards guns/guns were completely banned. Regardless, this is horrible and I hope there's going to be a peaceful resolution - or at least peaceful towards the hostages. If the shooter(s) are killed in the process then so be it.

[nine naked men]

I would bet money that the shooter(s) thought the victims were Muslims.

 

Some links to the news livestream and the Milwaukee law enforcement radio feed if anyone's interested.

[Dexek]

If someone wants a gun, they will acquire it.

[Danqazmlp]

While I disagree with Wisconsin's gun laws, I don't think guns are to blame here. Truthfully if the guy wanted to shoot up a temple, he'd have been able to get a gun illegally if there were stricter laws towards guns/guns were completely banned. Regardless, this is horrible and I hope there's going to be a peaceful resolution - or at least peaceful towards the hostages. If the shooter(s) are killed in the process then so be it.

If someone wants a gun, they will acquire it.

 

 

Yes, because the gun laws are crap in the first place. If they were made illegal now, there are still hundreds of thousands of guns in circulation which would indeed be easy to get illegally. But, Instead of thinking about the present, think about future generations. With a change of law comes the possibility of a change of culture with future generations, with guns being perceived rightly as bad things tor civilians to have, and the possibility of many being taken out of circulation, making aquiring them illegally much more difficult, stopping many of these shootings from happening.

[Veiva]

While I disagree with Wisconsin's gun laws, I don't think guns are to blame here. Truthfully if the guy wanted to shoot up a temple, he'd have been able to get a gun illegally if there were stricter laws towards guns/guns were completely banned. Regardless, this is horrible and I hope there's going to be a peaceful resolution - or at least peaceful towards the hostages. If the shooter(s) are killed in the process then so be it.

If someone wants a gun, they will acquire it.

 

 

Yes, because the gun laws are crap in the first place. If they were made illegal now, there are still hundreds of thousands of guns in circulation which would indeed be easy to get illegally. But, Instead of thinking about the present, think about future generations. With a change of law comes the possibility of a change of culture with future generations, with guns being perceived rightly as bad things tor civilians to have, and the possibility of many being taken out of circulation, making aquiring them illegally much more difficult, stopping many of these shootings from happening.

 

I love the crap that a determined criminal would be unable to obtain a gun if gun laws were strict and guns were "hard" to obtain. As I have pointed out in the TDKR thread, obtaining a gun over time is much easier than anyone thinks. A computer savvy individual could have an arsenal over the span of some months given proper planning, without raising much if any suspicion.

 

But honestly, people who are still defending guns need to shut up.

 

That's not a good way to start a topic. In fact, it's completely ignorant. Putting your cultural and moral ideals above another group only leads to hate, is is evident in your OP.

[Faux]

A computer savvy individual could have an arsenal over the span of some months given proper planning, without raising much if any suspicion.

 

 

You don't need computer savvy to walk into a gun show and buy a gun on the spot. It's all legal.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Kimberly
Removed offtopic banter

[Guest Rob]

While I disagree with Wisconsin's gun laws, I don't think guns are to blame here. Truthfully if the guy wanted to shoot up a temple, he'd have been able to get a gun illegally if there were stricter laws towards guns/guns were completely banned. Regardless, this is horrible and I hope there's going to be a peaceful resolution - or at least peaceful towards the hostages. If the shooter(s) are killed in the process then so be it.

If someone wants a gun, they will acquire it.

 

 

Yes, because the gun laws are crap in the first place. If they were made illegal now, there are still hundreds of thousands of guns in circulation which would indeed be easy to get illegally. But, Instead of thinking about the present, think about future generations. With a change of law comes the possibility of a change of culture with future generations, with guns being perceived rightly as bad things tor civilians to have, and the possibility of many being taken out of circulation, making aquiring them illegally much more difficult, stopping many of these shootings from happening.

 

I agree 100% that the gun laws are crap. I personally think that guns should be illegal as the only purpose that they really serve is killing in the first place. But lots of things are illegal (drugs, for example) and people are still able to obtain those. As long as killers exist there will be killings.

 

Will making guns illegal reduce the number of killings like this? Yes. Will it make them a lot less common? I think so. But it won't stop it completely.

 

 

A computer savvy individual could have an arsenal over the span of some months given proper planning, without raising much if any suspicion.

 

 

Computer savvy? Rofl. Any redneck in the south can have an armament of guns. You don't need computer savvy to walk into a gun show and buy a gun on the spot. It's all legal.

 

I think he means if they were illegal. To be honest I'm not entirely sure how being computer savvy would help - can you clarify that?

[Faux]

I don't think he meant it that way because he just sampled the TDK shooter (who also got his guns within legal means).

[Veiva]

Wow, I'm talking about if guns were illegal [in the United States]. I thought the quote I was replying to would be enough context, but man... The guy had some illegal stuff on him, such as armor and a smoke grenade. I guess that being illegal didn't stop him, but whatever.

 

As far as computer savvy, I'm not going to clarify much (it's against site rules I'd assume to name any of these "proxies" [proxies in a vague sense of the term]), but I'll try explain as well as I can. Heard of bitcoin? Anonymous money, you say? Untraceable ways to wire funds? Sites that exist only in dark shadows of the internet, only able to be accessed anonymously and via an encrypted connection? BOOM. Illegal blackmarket. That's all there is to it.

[Alg]

Rifles and Shotguns

I'm pretty sure the reason we have these is wildlife, whether for hunting or defense.

[Faux]

Wow, I'm talking about if guns were illegal [in the United States]. I thought the quote I was replying to would be enough context, but man... The guy had some illegal stuff on him, such as armor and a smoke grenade. I guess that being illegal didn't stop him, but whatever.

 

As far as computer savvy, I'm not going to clarify much (it's against site rules I'd assume to name any of these "proxies" [proxies in a vague sense of the term]), but I'll try explain as well as I can. Heard of bitcoin? Anonymous money, you say? Untraceable ways to wire funds? Sites that exist only in dark shadows of the internet, only able to be accessed anonymously and via an encrypted connection? BOOM. Illegal blackmarket. That's all there is to it.

 

The reason why it won't be banned is because USA is ran by lobbyists and the gun industry is huge. Can you imagine if Obama tried to shut down that industry with the economy as it is? He might as well just throw away his 2nd term.

 

As for the armor and smoke grenade being illegal, I just googled "body armor purchase" and first result you can buy with any credit card. Lol bitcoin. Smoke grenades are also not illegal. People even use those for paintball.

 

Either way, pretty sure the guns killed those people. Not a smoke grenade or an armor.

[Faux]

Rifles and Shotguns

I'm pretty sure the reason we have these is wildlife, whether for hunting or defense.

 

Semi-automatic guns (e.g. converted AKs) are legal. Overkill for wildlife, imo.

[Veiva]

Wow, I'm talking about if guns were illegal [in the United States]. I thought the quote I was replying to would be enough context, but man... The guy had some illegal stuff on him, such as armor and a smoke grenade. I guess that being illegal didn't stop him, but whatever.

 

As far as computer savvy, I'm not going to clarify much (it's against site rules I'd assume to name any of these "proxies" [proxies in a vague sense of the term]), but I'll try explain as well as I can. Heard of bitcoin? Anonymous money, you say? Untraceable ways to wire funds? Sites that exist only in dark shadows of the internet, only able to be accessed anonymously and via an encrypted connection? BOOM. Illegal blackmarket. That's all there is to it.

 

The reason why it won't be banned is because USA is ran by lobbyists and the gun industry is huge. Can you imagine if Obama tried to shut down that industry with the economy as it is? He might as well just throw away his 2nd term.

 

As for the armor and smoke grenade being illegal, I just googled "body armor purchase" and first result you can buy with any credit card. Lol bitcoin. Smoke grenades are also not illegal. People even use those for paintball.

 

Either way, pretty sure the guns killed those people. Not a smoke grenade or an armor.

 

"The USA is ran by lobbyists." Well duh, you just described every form of government that has graced the Earth! Congratulations!

 

And you may laugh at bitcoin, but it's a major player in illegal, blackmarket transactions on the internet regardless of what you think. Guns are as easily obtainable as drugs are on the internet. And let me tell you, I could buy whatever drug I want and have it in under a week. Would I do it? Obviously not. But the OPTION is there.

 

I would also like to know how many innocent lives are saved thanks to guns in the United States. Sadly, such a figure cannot be determined...

 

All you "anti-gun nuts" can do is provide extreme examples of gun violence.

[Guest Rob]

Even if guns save lives, they take lives too. I'm not just talking about murders here, I'm talking about accidents. They save people but they also kill (innocent) people even when killing isn't intended.

I don't think anyone has provided any 'extreme' examples. We've only really been discussing the thread's topic's shooting and TDKR shooting.

[Veiva]

Even if guns save lives, they take lives too. I'm not just talking about murders here, I'm talking about accidents. They save people but they also kill (innocent) people even when killing isn't intended.

I don't think anyone has provided any 'extreme' examples. We've only really been discussing the thread's topic's shooting and TDKR shooting.

 

If 40ish injured/killed or over a dozen killed are not an extreme example of gun violence, then I don't know what is.

[sarg1010]

I have to wonder, though. If something like this had been done with a knife, baseball bat, explosive, or any other non-ballistic weapon, would it change the whole "ermahgerd guns r bad BAN THEM ALL!" feel of this thread (and the TDKR thread)? Maybe we should just ban all forms of weapons, huh?

 

Making guns illegal wouldn't change anything IMO. If anything, it'd just make things worse, in that it would fill our already overflowing prison population even more.

 

Plus, I'm fairly sure Texas would secede from the U.S., and then the government would promptly invade to reclaim the oil refineries.

[Zeno]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people, with guns

 

If someone wants to kill a person or a group of people, nothing can stop them except interception prior to the incident, because with the ways people can acquire a vast amount of just about anything in today's world, anybody can get their hands on anything to get their objective done

[Faux]

And you may laugh at bitcoin, but it's a major player in illegal, blackmarket transactions on the internet regardless of what you think. Guns are as easily obtainable as drugs are on the internet. And let me tell you, I could buy whatever drug I want and have it in under a week. Would I do it? Obviously not. But the OPTION is there.

 

I would also like to know how many innocent lives are saved thanks to guns in the United States. Sadly, such a figure cannot be determined...

 

All you "anti-gun nuts" can do is provide extreme examples of gun violence.

 

I'm not necessarily anti-gun. But allowing even nutjobs to a gun is just sad. Do you understand what your laws mean? Gun vendors can sell a gun without any background check.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Kimberly
Removed quote of a rulebreaking post.

[Danqazmlp]

I have to wonder, though. If something like this had been done with a knife, baseball bat, explosive, or any other non-ballistic weapon, would it change the whole "ermahgerd guns r bad BAN THEM ALL!" feel of this thread (and the TDKR thread)? Maybe we should just ban all forms of weapons, huh?

 

Making guns illegal wouldn't change anything IMO. If anything, it'd just make things worse, in that it would fill our already overflowing prison population even more.

 

Plus, I'm fairly sure Texas would secede from the U.S., and then the government would promptly invade to reclaim the oil refineries.

 

The difference is that all of those (except explosives which should come under the same laws as guns) have other, safe uses. Anything can use used to kill, but that is misusing said item. However, misusing a gun is to not kill. Guns were invented for, and are made to kill. Yes, we should ban all forms of weapons except in the right hands.

 

Attacks with other tools will also usually do much less damage.

 

Now hunters and maybe professional shooters should be allowed guns, but that is where strict tests and home visits need to take place. These tests would make sure that the person needs to have the weapon in the first place. People always say that guns are needed for these people, but out of all the gun owners, how many actually use them for them? A guy living in the middle of a city or suburb isn't going to be defending himself from bears any time soon.

 

Guns don't kill people, people kill people, with guns

 

If someone wants to kill a person or a group of people, nothing can stop them except interception prior to the incident, because with the ways people can acquire a vast amount of just about anything in today's world, anybody can get their hands on anything to get their objective done

 

 

But stricter laws make it harder. When it's harder, they may try other means or give up. Or, they may get detected while attempting to get them. It also has the chance of changing the attitudes and culture surrounding dangerous weapons, meaning that they ring alarm bells much sooner, possibly preventing attacks before they happen. There are so many possibilities that stricter laws bring, but only one, bad possibility that not acting brings.

[Sir_Squab]

So, what, with the last topic ending in "gun control law debate" we decided to start this one with it?

 

Honestly, trying to make guns harder to acquire in the states is... messy. I think working on mental health might be less controversial. Trying to make guns harder to acquire makes tens of millions, maybe even over a hundred million americans very upset. It's a political landmine.

 

Also, for the record, altho it's basically impossible in this day and age to make guns impossible to obtain, making them harder to obtain will deter people and has a very very high chance of lowering the rates of things like this. (Good luck making guns significantly harder to obtain in the U.S. tho, between all the people who make guns and all the guns in circulation.)

[Veiva]

And you may laugh at bitcoin, but it's a major player in illegal, blackmarket transactions on the internet regardless of what you think. Guns are as easily obtainable as drugs are on the internet. And let me tell you, I could buy whatever drug I want and have it in under a week. Would I do it? Obviously not. But the OPTION is there.

 

I would also like to know how many innocent lives are saved thanks to guns in the United States. Sadly, such a figure cannot be determined...

 

All you "anti-gun nuts" can do is provide extreme examples of gun violence.

 

I'm not necessarily anti-gun. But allowing even nutjobs to a gun is just sad. Do you understand what your laws mean? Gun vendors can sell a gun without any background check.

 

I don't live in Wisconsin, by the way. Gun laws in my state are much stricter...

 

Edited August 8, 2012 by Kimberly
Removed quote of a rulebreaking post and off-topic replies

[jasignhagj]

Rifles and Shotguns

I'm pretty sure the reason we have these is wildlife, whether for hunting or defense.

 

Semi-automatic guns (e.g. converted AKs) are legal. Overkill for wildlife, imo.

 

Any time someone says something like this it just shows how they have no clue what they are talking about. An AK styled semi automatic rifle is no more dangerous than any other semi automatic rifle, but since they look scary people rush to ban them. In fact an AK or AR 15 actually shoots a smaller round than say a M1 Garand, which is legal even in Canada.