7 residents, 1 nurse die in N Carolina nursing home shooting

Monday 30th March, 06:35 AM JST

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

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 82 Total Comments Show All

sailwind at 11:04 PM JST - 30th March

Sen Harris Blake, a Moore County Republican,

Gald to see this non-biased article felt that was soooo important to include.
Good_Jorb at 11:12 PM JST - 30th March

Gald to see this non-biased article felt that was soooo important to include.

They should have wrote "Sen Harris Blake(R)" as most of the news media does. At any rate, he just stated what he heard had happened, so I don't see how it baised the story.
smithinjapan at 11:25 PM JST - 30th March

Madverts: "You guys are at best living in La La Land in regards to the carnage one could easily cause with easily obtainable, non-firearm objects were I foaming at the mouth prepared to commit mass-murder. I could buy an industrial gas-powered nail gun, remove the security feature in 10 minutes and cause equal carnage, maybe worse than a nutter with a 9mm."

You completely ignored the part of my post as to people dying by the gun in cases where a simple argument turns bad, or where accidents occur. Do you think some guy is going to carry a industrial gas-powered gun to a bar, get drunk and get in a fight and nail someone to the wall? Of COURSE anyone who is intent on murder can find a way to do it, but the point is that, even then it's going to take a lot more ingenuity, planning, and technical know-how (yes, even the modifications you mention would not be easy for many) to accomplish what they can currently with a gun.

Look, the bottom line is this: you have yet to prove that removing guns or tightening restrictions would make things worse. You can talk all you want about how some nut intent to kill could turn a microwave into a deadly weapon, but what most people are saying is that the number of gun deaths OVERALL could be reduced (including suicides, homicides, accidents, etc.) if guns were better controlled.
Alphaape at 11:31 PM JST - 30th March

We have gun control laws in the US. People who obey the law abide by them. D.C. has some of the strictest hand gun laws in the states, and yet they have one of the highest murder rates in the U.S. It is the people who do not wish to abide by the laws who wind up doing the most killing. We own guns, keep them locked, and only by God's grace have we not had to fire them to protect ourselves. But yet, I know they are there if I need them. That is what responsible gun ownership is. If you don't like guns, then don't own one.
Madverts at 11:47 PM JST - 30th March

smith, this isn't the case of a drunker geezer getting into a brawl and shooting somebody.

It's the pre-medidated mass-murder of people he apparently had no connection to whatsoever. Bing, bing, bing....one afte the other.

Nail gun, burning torch, gas, baseball bat, samurai sword.....all would have achieved his murderous gains in the plural.
smithinjapan at 11:54 PM JST - 30th March

Madverts: "smith, this isn't the case of a drunker geezer getting into a brawl and shooting somebody."

Ahhh... so while it is a general argument for guns when you were posting, now it's specifically related to this case when I make a general argument about guns. Or... were you talking specifically about this case when you said:

"You guys are at best living in La La Land in regards to the carnage one could easily cause with easily obtainable, non-firearm objects were I foaming at the mouth prepared to commit mass-murder."

or

"If you want proof of the NRA's favourite expression that outlawing guns leans only outlaws have them then look no further."

or

"I've already stated my position, which is that tight gun control - what you are advocating - has been proven not to work in the UK, as guns become more freely available on the black market to the people more likely to use them in a crime."

In fact, I think the Mods already asked you to keep on the thread once. But then suddenly when I point out generalizations about how gun control would benefit the overall death toll (in terms of reducing it) you say 'that's not the case here'.

"Nail gun, burning torch, gas, baseball bat, samurai sword.....all would have achieved his murderous gains in the plural."

I doubt it would have done even half the carnage it did with ANY of those... save that in this case it was an old age home and the ability of the people to fight back may have been slightly less than if they attacked a school or workplace, as is normally the weekly case.

Come on, Madverts, you're way off your game, here.
smithinjapan at 12:01 AM JST - 31st March

AlphaApe: One of the most hilarious examples of self-contradiction I've seen today!

"So maybe the boday count is not as high as could have been with a gun, but those deaths are still needless tragic events done by some insane individual."

So you admit that if he had a gun, there could easily have been a higher body count -- and it's all but guaranteed the other sister would be dead. As it is, she's alive. Why? She could deflect the stabbings and merely receive defensive wounds. Tell me, how good do you think she would have been at deflecting bullets? Thank you for more than proving my point.

"We ahve gun control laws in the US. People who obey the law abide by them"

Quick question for the 'law abiding citizens' commenters: what was this guy's criminal record before he did this? He was probably a law-abiding citizen up until he pulled the trigger. Hell, skipthesong admits to carrying guns on him... so is he a criminal? Not at all! But if he shot someone, he would cease to be a law abiding citizen and would be a criminal. The people that only count the criminal stats after gun crimes have been committed are morons, in that they fail to take into account almost all gun related crimes are done by 'law abiding citizens' (or they were until the crime took place). And one more question for such people.... is a child who accidentally shoots him or herself with, say, an uzi at a gun show where you can simply pick up and fire automatic weapons, a criminal?
Madverts at 12:50 AM JST - 31st March

"Ahhh... so while it is a general argument for guns when you were posting, now it's specifically related to this case when I make a general argument about guns."

Nope, I was being radical and trying to stay on topic. I've already stated that I don't think certain guns should be legal, that more thorough restrictions be put in place, and that elsewhere where draconian gun laws have been passed, gun crime rises.

"I doubt it would have done even half the carnage it did with ANY of those"

Then you don't know what you're talking about. And since you've had it and rejected, please be aware I don't give two hoots if you don't like my opinion on the matter. :)
smithinjapan at 02:17 AM JST - 31st March

Madvets: 'Nope, I was being radical and trying to stay on topic. I've already stated that I don't think certain guns should be legal, that more thorough restrictions be put in place, and that elsewhere where draconian gun laws have been passed, gun crime rises.'

Ah, yes... you were being 'on topic by staying that draconian laws elsewhere have been passed and gun crimes have risen', but I was off topic in saying guns contribute to accidental deaths because, "this isn't the case of a drunker geezer getting into a brawl and shooting somebody"

That's about how it reads. Now, go ahead and twist it how you like, but the fact of the matter remains you have been jumping from extreme generalizations, to saying things are not on topic when talking about general gun control in other cases. Again, for possibly the first time since I've seen you posting on here, ever, you are WAY off your ball.

Rather sad, really, watching you go down like that. And all over guns.

"Then you don't know what you're talking about. And since you've had it and rejected, please be aware I don't give two hoots if you don't like my opinion on the matter. :)"

Yeah... you're right... my suggesting that if they guy had a nail gun or blow darts in his garage instead of the gun he committed this crime with it might not have happened the same way means I don't know what I'm talking about. And suggesting that means I "don't like your opinion" is ludicrous, it's that I'm pointing out the flaws in what you claim to be factual. If someone 10 meters away has a gun, that's a fact, not an opinion. You're saying you don't like his opinion is not going to stop the bullet. Sadly, that's about what it would take for someone like yourself to wish the guy had a samurai sword you could try to outrun.

Moderator: Readers, enough of this sniping. Please focus your comments on the story, not at each other.
Madverts at 08:53 PM JST - 31st March

smith - you've had my opinion, discarded it, and claimed yourself a winner.

The fact remins that you are advocating tighter gun restriction whilst simaltaeneously ignoring the facts I have given you; which are that tighter firearm restriction has, I agree incredibly, made the problem worse. I have no desire to "snipe" at you or the moderator, you're just going to have to accept other people are allowed to think differently from yourself, and that one rule where you live might differ from others.
likeitis at 06:37 PM JST - 1st April

I could buy an industrial gas-powered nail gun, remove the security feature in 10 minutes and cause equal carnage, maybe worse than a nutter with a 9mm.

And another guy could make a huge bomb out of household products. And another could grab two knives and slash a bunch of throats during the Chistmas rush (and one did). What fails to escape your attention though is that people with special skills are special people. Most people are not so special. MOST people prefer the weapon that takes no skill at all. It is a weapon, only a weapon, and designed only to kill. This is not about preventing a few odd incidents. This is about doing something to greatly reduce the numbers of pre-mature deaths. And guns are a major player that, being a weapon and only a weapon, is a major player modern society does not need floating around freely.

The point is that THIS particular nut undoubtedly could NOT have caused this much carnage with the gun. A sub point is that without the ease of obtaining a gun and the difficulty and thought it takes it to employ other methods, he might have thought better of it, and even more likely, just given the idea up for the trouble.
likeitis at 07:16 PM JST - 1st April

Alphaape: D.C. has some of the strictest hand gun laws in the states, and yet they have one of the highest murder rates in the U.S.

Your premise seems to be that adding more handguns to D.C. would have kept the murder rates down. Well....

It is interesting that since that ban in 1976, it took about 12 years for murder rates to suddenly jump and for D.C. to become murder capital city of the world's murder capital country. It is also interesting to note that in that time D.C. was falling apart. From the 50s to the 80s, it lost one quarter of its population; a huge demographic shift. Then, it was gripped by the crack epidemic. Murder rates went up. Then they went back down to half of the peak in 2005, and HOLY COW but look at that! It happened without giving everyone a handgun!

Now, I will be the first to admit that the gun laws suck. After all, this nursing home slayer should never have been able to get one, but he did. But it was not because the laws were too strict, and making them more lax is not a solution either. What is needed is smarter gun control, not chucking the baby out with the bathwater.
Madverts at 10:02 PM JST - 1st April

liketis,

I'm sorry but I just don't agree with that. For one, you have no information on the alleged killer so you can't say he was without any sort of skills as you don't know anything about him, and secondly - some nutters are often paradoxically gifted. Look at Bundy....

My main point, the one that had smith hyper-ventilating until he apprently imploded under the weight of his argument, is that tighter gun restriction has been proven not to stop the problems, in fact in some cases, it has made things a damned sight worse.

I have no idea what sends these people to commit un-thinkable acts, but whatever makes them snap will only neccesatate finding other means for mass murder were shooters not freely available in th US. As you stated, the end result could also be far worse than a nutter brandishing a 9mm...
likeitis at 11:47 PM JST - 1st April

For one, you have no information on the alleged killer so you can't say he was without any sort of skills as you don't know anything about him

Hello? He is one man. Odds are, he has none. If he does, he is still one man.

Look at Bundy....

Exactly! Look at Bundy. A rarity.

tighter gun restriction has been proven not to stop the problems

One of the best chunks of evidence I have seen for that has been D.C. Yet, as I have shown, its highly dubious. You got anything else? (And I am not talking about the gun toting community where crime is low. I am talking about gun restriction actually making the problem worse. Even if you do, there is going to be more to look at than just the gun restrictions, guaranteed.)

As you stated, the end result could also be far worse than a nutter brandishing a 9mm...

Among rare individuals at the center of rare incidents. You really just to seem to be looking at the big picture here. Such rare and unique incidents are just not worth focusing on. But incidents and nuts like these, including the ones with less of a body count, are far more common and likely to happen again soon than another Ted Bundy.
Madverts at 12:25 AM JST - 2nd April

"Hello? He is one man. Odds are, he has none. If he does, he is still one man."

Like I said - you know nothing about him, but wish your speculation to be taken as fact.

"Exactly! Look at Bundy. A rarity."

Not from where I'm standing - look at Joef Fritzl for pete's sake. Are you going to tell me he wasn't a nutter? Or are you going to say that becuase he didn't walk into a nursing home spraying bullets then he's qualified to have your "special skills", but gun-toting nutters aren't?

"I am talking about gun restriction actually making the problem worse"

The United Kingdom. I've already told you this, and provided the facts to back it up. I'm hardly one to support the NRA bud, but the UK has long proven when you outlaw guns, only outlaws have 'em. Kids are now shooting kids, and I mean kids - not adolecents.

"Among rare individuals at the center of rare incidents."

It's not as if these incidents are daily, though there are a lot more in the US I agree. I still think tackling the problem with society is the key to the issue, along with sensible (rather than draconian) gun licensing laws.