4 dead, 3 police wounded in Pennsylvania shooting

World Dec. 22, 2012 - 06:24AM JST ( 24 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

24 Comments

8

yabitsDec. 22, 2012 - 07:02AM JST

Four people died on a Pennsylvania highway on Friday when a gunman shot dead three people and later was killed in a shootout with police, authorities said.

Why did Americans want this "shooter" to have guns?

Perhaps the NRA will suggest having one armed guard for every mile of US roadways.
5

gokai_wo_manekuDec. 22, 2012 - 09:01AM JST

It is getting so common, this one wasn't even covered by CNN or ABC evening news. America is at war with itself.
2

Hide SuzukiDec. 22, 2012 - 10:20AM JST

It's sad that I don't even feel that sad any more hearing another gun violence.

This is happening way too often and still the NRA will do everything they can to keep things the way they are.
3

TamaramaDec. 22, 2012 - 11:35AM JST

What a surprise.
5

frenchosaDec. 22, 2012 - 11:50AM JST

Obviously... you need an armed policeman at every Church in America
1

yabitsDec. 22, 2012 - 01:59PM JST

Friday’s shootings were the second involving a rural Pennsylvania church this month. An elementary school teacher is jailed on charges he fatally shot his ex-wife, a church organist, during a service in Coudersport on Dec 2.

Wow, an elementary school teacher who shoots people at a church. I guess society is lucky he didn't go and take it out on the kids, as in Newtown.

I can't believe the problem here is video games, movies, or the kind of mental health issues that would cause one to have to be locked up or denied the "right" to purchase guns.

No, I believe the problem is more fundamental than that. Read carefully: When you give some people the ability to acquire lethal firepower, it affects their minds such that they believe they can mete out their own justice to others. Taking the gun into their hands, it is soon followed by the idea that they can take the law into their own hands too. This definitely must hold true for an awful lot of these types of killers.
-1

Herve Nmn L'EisaDec. 22, 2012 - 02:49PM JST

Despite varied intentions of groups and politicians, evil acts by evil criminals cannot be stopped by punishing the law-abiding. There are over 22,000 gun laws on the books. Which of them stopped this crime? Only the good guy with a gun, the cop.
0

CosDec. 22, 2012 - 05:21PM JST

Sad to say, but if you start reporting all those cases of American daily life, that's like reporting the Shinkansens that arrive on time... there won't be space left for other news. Give a us a monthly statistic, together with how much we made with our stocks of Smith and Wesson.
0

SuperLibDec. 22, 2012 - 05:35PM JST

Maybe he played too many video games.
0

sailwindDec. 22, 2012 - 08:41PM JST

Why did Americans want this "shooter" to have guns?

That's just dumb, its obvious the man is a criminal and nobody wants a criminal to have guns period.
0

Thunderbird2Dec. 22, 2012 - 09:02PM JST

And so it continues...
0

nandakandamandaDec. 22, 2012 - 10:58PM JST

Completely confusing story with so much detail pulled that it is hard to feel involved or to comment. Must have been a nightmare for some, I guess.
-1

NolivingDec. 23, 2012 - 03:34AM JST

It's sad that I don't even feel that sad any more hearing another gun violence. This is happening way too often and still the NRA will do everything they can to keep things the way they are.

Everything happens way often in the US and it is all a result of US culture that says for conflict resolution it is acceptable to use violence.

Two people die each day from someone's bare hands in this country, 4-5 people die each day from stabbings. It isn't just guns it is everything.
0

NolivingDec. 23, 2012 - 03:40AM JST

Read carefully: When you give some people the ability to acquire lethal firepower, it affects their minds such that they believe they can mete out their own justice to others. Taking the gun into their hands, it is soon followed by the idea that they can take the law into their own hands too. This definitely must hold true for an awful lot of these types of killers.

Then you factor in a culture that says it is acceptable to use violence as a primary way to resolve conflicts..you get a powder keg.
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 05:52AM JST

That's just dumb, its obvious the man is a criminal and nobody wants a criminal to have guns period.

There is no indication that the man had a criminal record. But note the story:

"She said both men were the shooter’s neighbors in the tiny village of Geeseytown, about 70 miles (112 kilometers) west of Harrisburg, the state capital. “They were uneasy around him,” she said.

What was it about this soon-to-be criminal that made his church-going neighbors so "uneasy?" Certainly there were other people in the town who owned weapons and didn't give their neighbors the creeps. Is it "dumb" to question whether anti-social people like this guy should be allowed to have guns?
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 05:55AM JST

Then you factor in a culture that says it is acceptable to use violence as a primary way to resolve conflicts..you get a powder keg.

There is no better and clearer message that violence is acceptable than allowing or even encouraging everyone to obtain lethal firepower.
-1

sailwindDec. 23, 2012 - 09:47AM JST

There is no better and clearer message that violence is acceptable than allowing or even encouraging everyone to obtain lethal firepower.

Explain how taking away someones right to self-defense from said violence somehow now makes them safer from that violence.
0

NolivingDec. 23, 2012 - 01:10PM JST

There is no better and clearer message that violence is acceptable than allowing or even encouraging everyone to obtain lethal firepower.

That is one way of looking at it.
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 01:15PM JST

Explain how taking away someones right to self-defense from said violence somehow now makes them safer from that violence.

Explained in Matthew 5:5 and 26:52. Violence begets violence.

But you must admit there is a contradiction in your own statement: You don't believe that a person convicted of a felony or one who is mentally deranged has a "right to self-defense," such that they can legally obtain guns. Society's interest in being protected from guns falling into the wrong hands therefore outweighs the self-defense "rights" of some.

"She said both men were the shooter’s neighbors in the tiny village of Geeseytown, about 70 miles (112 kilometers) west of Harrisburg, the state capital. “They were uneasy around him,” she said.

No matter how anti-social or seemingly hostile the behavior of the person was, the pro-gun crowd supported his right to have deadly weapons right up until the very moment he started to turn them against other people. Therein lies the problem.
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 01:26PM JST

Those who are temporarily insane -- or who have serious "blind spots" in their power to reason -- can't be counted on to come up with reasonable responses to this very simple problem. Therefore, we get what the NRA had to offer.

The simple problem is this: When it is evident to members of the community that an individual is anti-social, all guns must be taken away from them and secured. The onus should be on the person whose behavior has caused genuine concern among his community to prove to them that such concerns are without basis -- at least by getting a clean bill of mental health from a professional. An individual may have been completely healthy when the initially obtained the firearms, but that health might have degenerated over time, or the person may have started to manifest serious problems with handling anger. Up to this point, society has largely stood by and done nothing. That has to change.

Yes, deal with the mental health issues, but first secure the weapons.

When conservatives were in office, notable ones among them talked of a "one-percent doctrine," whereby if there was a one-percent chance of a country supporting terrorism, there must be a response. With the shooter in this story, neighbors would have assessed the danger at far greater than one percent.
-2

sailwindDec. 23, 2012 - 03:01PM JST

No matter how anti-social or seemingly hostile the behavior of the person was, the pro-gun crowd supported his right to have deadly weapons right up until the very moment he started to turn them against other people.

Pure conjecture, we do not even know the mans name, if he had a criminal record or anything about the man or the situation at this point other than this man shoot people and the police killed him. We don't know if he purchased weapons, stole them, or asked if he could use one for whatever reason. You've made huge jumps in leaps of logic and made a whole storyline out of one statement.

Could we at least wait for the facts here first?
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 08:39PM JST

Pure conjecture, we do not even know the mans name, if he had a criminal record or anything about the man ...

Those keeping up on this story know the above as far more than "conjecture." It follows an all-too-common pattern in the United States.

His name is Jeffrey Lee Michael. Age 44. A man with some alleged domestic abuse issues in his past, as well as friends and witnesses who knew he had guns and who saw his mental deterioration -- developing slowly over years -- reach its final crescendo.

http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/567094.html
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 08:47PM JST

Could we at least wait for the facts here first?

The facts coming in make it clear that more should have been done far earlier to separate the mentally disturbed mad away from his guns.

Far more than putting more armed people on the streets, once the mental competence of a person comes into question by friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc., a process should begin whereby his/her "right" to possess firearms is temporarily rescinded until they can provide professional backing that they pose no danger to others. I would think that any responsible gun owner would be completely in favor of this process.
0

yabitsDec. 23, 2012 - 09:11PM JST

The facts coming in make it clear that more should have been done far earlier to separate the mentally disturbed mad away from his guns.

should have read "mentally disturbed man"