There were few Mass shootings in Australia before the new laws- and few after the new laws. The new laws- which were certainly well intentioned- did not really seem to change things, altho that is debated.
The father was a licensed gun owner of long standing and had permits for 6 guns. Initial police info is that no additional illegal firearms were used, although there was also an explosive device(s) in their car.
There are many things I don’t understand, and becoming a terrorist is one of them; but an order of magnitude more incomprehensible to me beyond that is the idea of throwing away not your own life but your child’s life just to make someone else more miserable.
Yeah, we probably shouldn’t discuss that opinion of yours that you brought up.
We’re not going to.
During the Giffords shooting there was a man there who had a concealed carry and his gun on him. By his own testimony he was so confused he almost shot the people who had captured Loughner, thinking Loughner was innocent.
Went from 16 dead to 15.
It’s 15 victims plus one of the shooters. 16
Sorry, that was in response to Idle Thoughts, not you DD.
That is a huge concern of mine. I’ve seen some really bad gun handling in some of the CCW classes I’ve taken. And then on top of that, most who carry are not trained in tactical strategies and controlling your nerves and emotions in tense life-or-death scenarios.
15 innocent victims, one murderer.
I was sad he didn’t smack the shooter with it. It looked like he was getting away although we now know he didn’t.
A “good guy with a gun” almost shot the wrong person at the Tucson massacre. He had a licensed concealed weapon, and almost shot a man holding a weapon, but decided not to fire when he realized he might have taken it from the shooter, which in fact turned out to be the case. The man with the gun, and some other people, had also wrestled the shooter to the ground, and had pinned him there until he could be arrested.
The shooter who was killed was the father of the arrested suspect. Yes, a father and son duo committing a terrorist act. Horrible. BTW, one report said the weapons used here were legally obtained and registered.
Moderating:
This is a Breaking News thread, a point which you appear to acknowledge by stating it should not be hijacked into a discussion that belongs in its own thread. But you’ve already hijacked it into a discussion about comparative gun control, and that doesn’t belong in this thread, either.
By including the language about hijacking, you effectively foreclose further discussion by others who may disagree with you about this topic. That’s a jerk move.
If you want to debate the issue of gun control in the USA v. Australia, take it to a different thread. No more posts about it in a Breaking News thread, and no more junior modding about what constitutes a hijack and what doesn’t – especially after engaging in a hijack yourself.
I heard the civilian who disarmed one of the shooters received gunshot wounds. Is that true? What are the circumstances under which this happened?
The video doesn’t show him receiving wounds.
The surviving shooting suspect is described as a model citizen.
By his mother. Probably not by his dead, murder accomplice father unless this how he was indoctrinated.
Most likely, it happened a few seconds after he disarmed gunman #1, and that was edited out.
Well, perhaps a model citizen until he wasn’t.
“He doesn’t drink, he doesn’t smoke, he doesn’t go to bad places”
See, model citizen. 
I’ve drank and smoked a lot and went to some really sketchy places in my life, but I never had the urge to kill as many Jews as I could. Am I the bad guy?
Maybe morals are really a matter of priorities… /s
From the other shooter on the bridge I think who was signalling the disarmed guy to join him.