It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Shooting at Pennsylvania school

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 12:16 PM
This is getting worse and worse. second shooting at school in 2 week. Where are we going?
A gunman has attacked an Amish school in the US state of Pennsylvania.
Several people are said to have died in the attack on the one-room schoolhouse in the town of Nickell Mines in Lancaster County.

"There are a number of people dead," Police Cpl Ralph Striebig said. "The exact number I do not know yet."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:02 AM
With all the shootings in the U.S (especially when it involves children) I don't know why the government doesn't bring in gun laws...oh that's right it's in the constitution that ALL Americans can own a gun

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:28 AM
The guy probably chose that school because it was the most chance of success for his plan. Other schools had multiple rooms and halls, this was only a one room school house. The Amish are pacifists, chances were high that no one else would have a gun at the school or even want to fight back.

I found it very shocking that someone would even think to do this, let alone plan and execute it.

The last news I heard that there were 4 confirmed dead and the rest in critical conditon.

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:30 AM
Surely after this, the gun laws will be tightened, it seems to me that any old nut in the states can go and buy one.

Get real!

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:38 AM

urely after this, the gun laws will be tightened, it seems to me that any old nut in the states can go and buy one.

Would you feel better if he beat them to death with a Baseball Bat?

Would that make more sense to this madness?


posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:43 AM
What? No, of course that wouldn't be better, if guns weren't so easy to obtain, these invasions wouldn't happen and if they did, without a gun the invader would be easier to take care of.

Here in Britain, guns are really hard to get hold of and I have never heard of a school being shot up, or even 'beat' up.

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:05 AM

New firearm legislation was introduced to Britain in 1996 after Thomas Hamilton walked into a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland and shot to death 16 school children and their teacher


young woman was killed as a result of a shooting rampage at a Montreal college Wednesday. The suspected shooter, a 25-year-old Quebec man, died after a police confrontation.

Germany ...

Eighteen people died when an expelled former pupil went on a shooting spree at his school in the eastern German city of Erfurt.

I can do this all night.

The point is, if people want to kill, they do.

Blaming it on an inanimate article is ridiculous.


posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:23 AM
This crime isn't about guns but what drives a man to such a psychotic state that he feels the need to take the life of innocents.

Were there indications in his behavior that went ignored?

Premecitated crimes of violence of this type are much more complex than just a black and white, good vs evil explanation.


Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:23 AM
Woops, double post, sorry!

[edit on 3-10-2006 by whaaa]

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:29 AM


I am sure we will hear more in the upcoming weeks.


posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:12 AM
Just some facts and figures for you all to "mull" over.

Major crime fell dramatically in states which have legalized the carrying of concealed handguns, according to a comprehensive new study at the University of Chicago.

For the first time, researchers analyzed crime statistics for all 3,054 counties in the United Sates between 1977 and 1992, according to one of the authors of the unpublished study, Professor John Lott. After adjusting for a general fall in crime rates, the study found that:

* In the 31 states that now have "concealed right to carry" laws, murders were down, on average, by 8.5 percent.

* Rapes were down 5 percent and serious assaults by 7 percent.

* In cities with populations of more than 250,000, murder rates dropped after the passage of such laws by an average of 13.5 percent.

According to the study, the fall in crime did not result from an increased use of guns, but from potential criminals avoiding confrontations. In fact, criminals apparently shifted to lower-risk offenses, since property crimes increased in those states. Other findings included:

* The most dramatic falls in murder rates were in areas where the number of women carrying firearms was high.

* The study found that for every woman who carries a concealed hand, the murder rate fell by three to four times more than it would have if one more man had carried a concealed gun.

* If states with concealed handgun bans had allowed them in 1992, about 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes and more than 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided.

In addition, the researchers found no evidence of an increase in accidental killings or suicides in states with concealed carry laws.

Concealed-carry reform reaffirms the basic idea that citizens have the right to defend themselves against criminal attack. And since criminals can strike almost anywhere at any time, the last thing government ought to be doing is stripping citizens of the most effective means of defending themselves. Carrying a handgun in public may not be for everyone, but it is a right that government ought to respect.

It may SHOCK YOU that the Gun Control crowd will dispute this, but the numbers are there and if you look up the FBI statistics, and do not "SKEW" them, they are clear.

As for what the Founding Fathers wanted? Well under the Constitution, you have NO, that's correct, NO right to vote. Yet the RIGHT to carry arms, is clear and succinct.


posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:15 AM
What i don't understand if he shot all them excution style, how could he manage to just put most them in critical condition and not instant death, surlly he can aim, as critical death is worse most time than being dead.....

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:30 AM
Unlike on TV,

Even a shot to the head is not always a death sentence.

Though far more often fatal compared to a body shot, there is still a high degree of survivability, depending on caliber of the weapon, angle of shot, age and health of the victim, etc.
Also what was the "execution style" the press is touting? Who knows? They always make the report as inflammatory as possible.

Maybe to them (the press), his act of lining them up is considered "Execution Style" and the shots were to the torso.


[edit on 10/3/2006 by semperfortis]

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:18 AM
Hm what i was thinking, just the way the press says it, it's like he line them up, and singly puts guns in front their forhead and bang, that is almost mostly instant death, and if they had not died he could easiley noticed and finished them off, you wouldn't instantly be knocked incouncious won't you more likly spasm if still alive.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:05 AM

Originally posted by Galiega
What i don't understand if he shot all them excution style, how could he manage to just put most them in critical condition and not instant death, surlly he can aim, as critical death is worse most time than being dead.....

Why do you say this? For whom is it worse? I believe if it were my child I'd be praying as hard as I could for my child to live and come out of it ok. Better still I think its best that other people don't take out their problems of any sort on others. That other person has every right to live life and go through life and not have it taken away by someone selfish, arrogant, rude, and on a self pitted--feel sorry for me type of person.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 05:30 AM
We have less shootings here in Aussie since bringing in gun laws. It seems to me the U.S don't give a damn about it's citizens especially their children when guns are so easily to get hold of.

I saw a docco on T.V where a bank gave you a gun when you opened up a new account with them but the catch was you had to buy your own bullets for it cause it was illegal to have a loaded gun in a bloody stupid is this when a bank gives you a gun. What a crock of crap that is

The U.S complain about all the gang shootings, school shootings and drive by shootings but what do they do about it...sell more guns to who-ever wants one and then when some one gets shot they get mad about about idiotic .

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 03:53 PM

Recent scholarship in the criminologic, sociologic, and legal literature shows that the defensive uses of firearms by citizens amount to 2.5 million uses per year and dwarf the offensive gun uses by criminals. Between 25-75 lives are saved by a gun for every life lost to a gun. Medical costs saved by guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are 15 times greater than costs incurred by criminal uses of firearms. Guns also prevent injuries to good people and protect billions of dollars of property every year.
Moreover, the actual U.S. health care costs of treating gunshot wounds is approximately $1.5 billion, which is less than 0.2 percent of the U.S. annual health care expenditures. The $20-$40 billion figure so frequently cited in the medical literature, has been found to be deliberate and exaggerated estimate of lifetime productivity lost, where every victim of crime is assumed that had not his life ended untimely he would have become a wealthy successful citizen. Reality points otherwise: Many "victims" are criminal elements who have been killed in the act of perpetrating serious crimes either by the police or by law-abiding citizens acting in self-defense.
On the other hand, Prof. John R. Lott, Jr., reviewed the FBI's massive yearly crime statistics for all 3054 U.S. counties over 18 years (1977-1994), the largest national survey on gun ownership and state police documentation in illegal gun use. The data show that while neither state waiting periods nor the federal Brady Law is associated with a reduction in crime rates, adopting concealed carry gun laws cut death rates from public, multiple shootings (e.g., as those which took place in Dunblane, Scotland, and Tasmania, Australia in 1996 or the infamous Columbine High School shooting in Littleton, Colorado, in 1999) --- by an amazing 69 percent. Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crime --- without any apparent increase in accidental death. If states without right to carry laws had adopted them in 1992, about 1570 murders, 4177 rapes, and 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided annually.(6)
When concealed carry gun laws went into effect in a given county, murders fell by 8 percent, rapes by 5 percent, and aggravated assaults by 7 percent.(6)
Australians are learning the lessons of indiscriminate, draconian gun control laws the hard way. In 1996, a criminally insane man shot to death 35 people at a Tasmanian resort. The government immediately responded by passing stringent gun control laws, banning most firearms, and ordering their confiscation. More than 640,000 guns were seized from ordinary Australian citizens.(10)

As a result, there has been a sharp and dramatic increase in violent crime against the disarmed law-abiding citizens, who in small communities and particularly in rural areas are now unable to protect themselves from brigands and robbers. That same year in the state of Victoria, there was a 300 percent increase in homicides committed with firearms. The following year, robberies increased almost 60 percent in South Australia. By 1999, assaults had increased in New South Wales by almost 20 percent. Two years following the gun ban/confiscation, armed robberies rose by 73 percent, unarmed robberies by 28 percent, kidnappings by 38 percent, assaults by 17 percent and manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Interestingly, the same thing occurred in Great Britain. Following a 1996 massacre of school children by a madman in Dunblane, Scotland, the British government banned and ordered the confiscation of most firearms. Since then a horrific crime wave has taken place in England and Scotland. In 1998, the U.S. Department of Justice declared that the rate of muggings in England had surpassed that in the U.S. by 40 percent, while assault and burglary rates were nearly 100 percent higher in England than in the U.S.
Author : Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD

As you can see, the issue is not so easy to dismiss. Also taking into account that we are a FREE Country (Still) and the Second Amendment Guarantees us this right, we also like to take into account some historical perspective.

The very first official act on coming into power Hitler did, was to BAN all private ownership of firearms.

You stay down under where you think it's safe. I'll take my chances with my children here. See, they both have concealed carry permits and my Girls are EXCELLENT shots and both score very well on tactical courses.


posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 04:32 PM

Originally posted by Koori
I saw a docco on T.V where a bank gave you a gun when you opened up a new account with them but the catch was you had to buy your own bullets for it cause it was illegal to have a loaded gun in a bloody stupid is this when a bank gives you a gun. What a crock of crap that is

The U.S complain about all the gang shootings, school shootings and drive by shootings but what do they do about it...sell more guns to who-ever wants one and then when some one gets shot they get mad about about idiotic .

The bank ad is interesting, it's definitely not being done here in Califronia. In the US each of the 50 states have different gun control laws. Some, like AZ, are more open towards allowing carry concealed permits (CCW) for any citizen who hasn't been convicted of a felony. Others, like California, are more restrictive; here it is almost impossible to get a CCW unless you're a law enforcement officer or politician. Yes we can still own the guns and keep them in our home but you can't be walking around the city with them.

The majority of shootings that you illustrated above are committed with illegal guns. Gang bangers do not go out to a gun store and apply for a permit ... they obtain their weapons through criminal means. Violent criminals will always find a means to their ends.

When you look at statistics it shows that violent crime goes down with CCW permits being allowed. I've heard the argument that gun control is worth it even if one life is saved (ie kid accidentally killing himself). Well if we use that argument there are a whole lot of things we need to get rid of and outlaw, such as swimming pools. Look at the statistics of pools vs guns:

Standard summer companions in our desert climate, swimming pools can be deadlier for children than guns. A child is 100 times more likely to die in a swimming accident than in gunplay, writes Steven D. Levitt, University of Chicago economics professor and best-selling author.

Levitt analyzed child deaths from residential swimming pools and guns and found one child under 10 drowns annually for every 11,000 pools. By comparison, one child under 10 each year is killed by a gun for every 1 million guns, according to his research, outlined in a new book "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side to Everything," which he co-wrote with journalist Stephen J. Dubner.

Swimming Pools More Deadly Than Guns to Children -- On a side note I recently read the Freakonomics book by Stephen Dubner, very interesting book with all kinds of strange reasearch.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 05:33 PM
I find it truely saddening that whenever these tragic events come down the importance of them is always lost in the mad rush to find a scape-goat.

Any time there's a shooting of this type, there are several highly predictable scapegoats that are brought out for the masses to be distracted by:

  • Violance in TV and movies
  • Video games
  • Music (usually heavy metal)
  • Visible Subcultural groups (goths, punks, rockers, hippies)
  • Gun control

    I propose to all of you than NONE of these issues have ANYTHING to do with these tragities (or atleast aren't the core factors).

    I suggest that we need to look at more pervasive issues.
  • Pop culture teaches us that only "the pretty people" deserve success.
  • The celibration of greed within our culture drives a sence of hopelessness for those who come to understand that they will NEVER be pretty, rockstars, or fantasticly rich (and thus their downtroden existance is worthless).
  • Any attempt to speak out about the inequity of our system is immediatly dissmissed, thus robbing those impacted by it of any kind of voice.
  • Social appathy wherein we dissmiss those who are suffering as deserving of their fate.

    These factors combine to create and enviroment that promotes extream actions in those who might be suffering from emotional trauma. Those people can't find any way to properly express their frustrations or to speak out against the system, so they look to other ways of making an impact.

    I do NOT condon their actions. I condon NO act of violance (other than in personal self defence). It is IMPROTANT that we stop being led by the nose by mass media when it comes to the reasons why these things happen and start looking at the social realities that we have imprisioned ourselves within.

    Thanks for reading this semi-rant. It's something that has been gnawing on me for awhile. If elaboration is required on any of my statements, ask and I'll do my best to express more thoughts on the subject.

  • posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 08:47 AM
    Regarding the Amish schoolhouse shooting...

    If I ever get quoted for anything, I hope it is this message right here. The News Journal today quoted the following in an interview of a Mennonite mid-wife who had spent a lot of time with the Amish community:

    "This gist of what they'll say is to make it clear that the girls are in heaven and they will see them again in heaven," she said. "And secondly, they will challenge everybody present to look at their own lives and be sure they are right with God and ready for heaven."
    The Amish believe that being "right with God" is accomplished by faith in Jesus Christ, she said.
    "When you accept the Lord Jesus into your own heart as your personal savior, confess your sins, accept his forgiveness and determine to follow the Lord - at that point, you have a peace and a lightness feeling," Rhoades said. "You know you're right with God. It's a feeling that descends upon you. And it your intention to be serving God?"

    top topics

    <<   2 >>

    log in