kickasspartan117 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Just a few hours ago an x-employee at my local post office whent crazy got her gun went to the post office and killed six people and wounded a bunch of others. It amazes me that something like this can happen. If that woman did not have a gun those people would still be alive. I think is pretty stupid that the 2nd amendment exists. Over there in the U.K. you guys dont have guns, hell the police dont even have guns and crim is a lot less. I think it is incredible that somebody would do something like this and sombody would give the gun to do it with. Anyway, Ill get back to you with more details. Link to post Share on other sites
Spantney Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 People in Britain do have guns, even the police...just not to the extent you guys do over in the states. Police over here are becoming better armed infact due to terror threats, etc. But I know what you mean. Still a terrible incident however Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Rough stuff. Tried to watch the story on digital news, but that puppet Afghan leader was the main story. I don't want this to come out the wrong way, but haven't disgruntled Postal workers done this sort of thing before? I've heard references to it at least. Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Shame the SWAT boys only seem to be capable of taking down kids with airsoft guns. Link to post Share on other sites
pokethepope Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 more info here. Link to post Share on other sites
TheDio Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Shame the SWAT boys only seem to be capable of taking down kids with airsoft guns. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Lol....No. From what i heard, when they went in they found her dead. She did the work for them. Shame people need to do these things...Cant they just shoot themselfes? Do they have to kill others? Link to post Share on other sites
Sledge Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Just out of curiosity, has a local person been quoted as saying "I guess her cheese just slipped off her cracker. To tell the truth, I could have gone all day without this happening"? Link to post Share on other sites
Lance Jackass Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 This reminds me of a story i heard the other day. A while back some nutter with an airsoft gun went into the the General post office in Dublin with a few mates and started shooting left right and centre.* *There may be some historical innacuracies. Link to post Share on other sites
Soloman Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 I was to say something about going postal, but im'm not Link to post Share on other sites
Onechance Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 This reminds me of a story i heard the other day. A while back some nutter with an airsoft gun went into the the General post office in Dublin with a few mates and started shooting left right and centre.* *There may be some historical innacuracies. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The actual GPO? or the Irish post office HQ? Link to post Share on other sites
oikoik Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 that might keep Uwe Boll's film at bay for a bit then... Link to post Share on other sites
hivemind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Just a few hours ago an x-employee at my local post office whent crazy got her gun went to the post office and killed six people and wounded a bunch of others. It amazes me that something like this can happen. If that woman did not have a gun those people would still be alive. I think is pretty stupid that the 2nd amendment exists. Over there in the U.K. you guys dont have guns, hell the police dont even have guns and crim is a lot less. I think it is incredible that somebody would do something like this and sombody would give the gun to do it with. Anyway, Ill get back to you with more details. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The lady was crazy. if she didn't have a gun, she would have set fire to the place, used a knife, or drove her car into the building. The gun did not kill those people, the person shooting the gun did. But hey, let's ban knives, cars and matches too before anyone else gets hurt. -1 for being a hysterical anti-gun fearmonger. Link to post Share on other sites
Kipper Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 -1 for being a hysterical anti-gun fearmonger. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In england we dont shoot the messenger Link to post Share on other sites
Crandall Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 He wasnt just being the messanger, if he'd said "some lady shot up the Post office near my house, discuss" he'd be a messanger, but by adding the "ohh lawd, it's teh guns fault!" he then becomes a "hysterical anti-gun fearmonger." Link to post Share on other sites
Cerebus Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Just a few hours ago an x-employee at my local post office whent crazy got her gun went to the post office and killed six people and wounded a bunch of others. It amazes me that something like this can happen. If that woman did not have a gun those people would still be alive. I think is pretty stupid that the 2nd amendment exists. Over there in the U.K. you guys dont have guns, hell the police dont even have guns and crim is a lot less. I think it is incredible that somebody would do something like this and sombody would give the gun to do it with. Anyway, Ill get back to you with more details. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is the most pathetic gun fearing knee jerk reaction I've see on this site so far, what the hell are you even doing on a replica gun forum ? You sound like an idiot from the Brady group. If businesses had the balls to allow qualified CCW owners the choice of carrying their personal sidearms during work someone might have been able to stop this woman before she caused too much damage, you're as stupid as you sound if you actually think removing the 2nd amendment would have made a difference to her actions. And as for crime in the UK do some damn research. Link to post Share on other sites
PariahWolf Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Erm.... hes right, crime here is massively less than in the US. America's gun crime statistocs are like proportionally 4 times worse than those here. Its his opinion, hes entitled to it. Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Conversely, countries where guns are legal don't have such a high crime rate as America- go watch Bowling for Columbine for some figures. Link to post Share on other sites
hivemind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 As food for thought, I put forward Kennesaw, Georgia, USA as an example of why we need more guns, not more gun control. http://www.kennesaw.ga.us/PoliceDepartment...Statistics.aspx This town experienced rapid population growth in the 80's, and with it, an commensurate increase in violent (and other) crime. The town enacted a novel solution: a law requiring all households to have a gun (with certain exceptions). Now, their crime rates are lower than both the national average and the Georgia state average by a significant amount: 1981 (Year prior to Gun Ordinance) Population: 5,242 Burglaries: 54 Total Part 1 Crimes: 228 1982 (Year Gun Ordinance Passed) Population: 5,308 (+1% ) Burglaries : 35 ( -35%) Total Part 1 Crimes: 165 ( -27%) 1998 (Compared to 1981) Population: 19,000 ( +275%) Burglaries: 36 (-33%) Total Part 1 Crimes 227(+0%) There you have it. Ipso facto, we need more guns, not less. Throughout history, most people have been armed. In the 1800's, most people had a rifle on their horse or a shotgun on the backboard of their carriage. In the 1600's, everyone carried a dagger, and people of any social status whatsoever also carried swords. These were duelling swords, specifically designed and carried to make people be polite. This goes back throughout history. The first thing any tyrannical regime wants to do is disarm the population. Look how hard the Northern Irish are fighting to keep their weapons as part of a peace agreement there, and I don't blame them. As soon as there's proof they're disarmed, they'll get *fruitcage*ed. Link to post Share on other sites
Blade3000 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 People kill and people die every day. Violent incidents capture the media attention however every day thousands die from accidents, starvation, drug abuse, cancer and plain old age. More people die in swimming pool accidents each year in the US than by gunfire. People tend to forget the unrest in Northern Ireland, that conflict has been waged with guns and bombs for many years despite any gun ban in the UK. Never follow the path of disarmament lest you end up with a tyrannical government that has by decree the authority to compel you to do whatever they decide. . Violent gun related crime has soared in my birthplace the UK since the banned private gun ownership. I would not give up my constitutional right to bear arms if these incidents happen every day which they do not. glock21 Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Jebus Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 ZOMGWAFFLESWTF she went postal! Seriously, It's true, Us postal workers do tend to go crazy and that's were the phrase 'going postal' came from (Warning: Unsubstanciated rumour) Link to post Share on other sites
Spudgun Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If that woman did not have a gun those people would still be alive. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If the others had a gun, they'd still be alive. 2nd ammenment rights applies to everyone. Link to post Share on other sites
squarepusher Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The lady was crazy. if she didn't have a gun, she would have set fire to the place, used a knife, or drove her car into the building. The gun did not kill those people, the person shooting the gun did. But hey, let's ban knives, cars and matches too before anyone else gets hurt. -1 for being a hysterical anti-gun fearmonger. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Implausible headline #2323: Ex-Postal Service employee kills 6 with match car knife etc. He's got a point, you have far more guns than you need. Same applies to the bible, times change. Absolutists will stick by the old ways because they're the word of God and you're sort of doing the same thing here. Not that I'm going to, but I should also -1 you for being an over-the-top triggerhappy reactionary. He wasnt just being the messanger, if he'd said "some lady shot up the Post office near my house, discuss" Discuss? What? Then you'd simply have a go at any one who expressed the opinion that a firearm facilitated this crime...? he'd be a messanger, but by adding the "ohh lawd, it's teh guns fault!" he then becomes a "hysterical anti-gun fearmonger." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> HARDLY what I'd call hysterical. At least he didn't resort to doing something stupid like pretending to be the woman and giving her leet speak. So put the retort back up your *albatross* and sit on it. Link to post Share on other sites
hivemind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Implausible headline #2323: Ex-Postal Service employee kills 6 with match car knife etc. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/pos...7553712217.html Link to post Share on other sites
squarepusher Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Ok mate, now go find one where the postal worker stabs SIX (6) people and then you'll have half an argument! <3 Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hehe, i think the argument was that the worker did not necessarily buy the gun solely for the purpose of killing lots of people. Therefore the gun did not inspire the massacre as such, rather the postal workers hatred for the other people. However, it is possible to argue that the postal worker would not have committed the crime without a means to the end, i.e- a firearm. If the postal worker had to engineer a sofisticated plan to systematically kill the six other workers with a customised virus then perhaps they wouldn't have bothered. Either way, I think it would be obtuse to argue that it is solely one factor or the other. Yes the postal worker was mad. Yes the postal worker had a gun. Would the postal worker have committed the crime if they didn't have a firearm? I don't think anyone can truthfully answer that question. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.