*another* cop ambushed in WA state

[paulsby]

this is getting REALLY old...

2 cops sitting in a car talking to each other. shot (one killed , one injured)
4 cops sitting at coffee shot and killed
in WA state...
and now this... clearly imo copycat. it's now the "in thing" in our area.

prior to this string of shootings, ambushes were RARE. we've had a couple of other incidents too recently. it's just getting insane.
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/84300272.html
LONG BEACH, Wash. - A state trooper was shot in the head at point-blank range while on a routine call early Saturday, and now the Washington State Patrol has launched a manhunt for the gunman.
In an afternoon update, WSP Chief John Batiste said the injured trooper's condition continues to improve, and the State Patrol announced a $26,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the shooter.

The incident began shortly before 1 a.m. Saturday along Highway 103 near 12th Street in the coastal community of Long Beach. Trooper Scott Johnson was inventorying the contents of a vehicle about to be towed when a man walked up, said WSP spokeswoman Krista D. Hedstrom. There was a short verbal exchange between the subject, Johnson and the tow truck driver. The gunman suddenly pulled out a small-caliber handgun and fired twice.

Johnson suffered two gunshot wounds, including one to the head. The trooper was able to return fire as the gunman fled the scene, but it is unknown if the suspect was hit. Johnson was rushed to Ocean Beach Hospital in Long Beach, then was transferred to Oregon Health Science University in Portland. Hedstrom later reported that Johnson is alert and conscious at Oregon Health and Science University Hospital. And in an afternoon update, Batiste said the trooper continues to improve.

"I am incredibly relieved to see Scott doing so well," Batiste said. "Despite having been shot in the head, he was laughing and joking with those around him. His behavior today sets a new standard for professionalism and heroism." Johnson is a 25-year veteran of the State Patrol. He has worked in the Pacific County area his entire career.

The tow truck driver was not hurt.

[Quantess]

1. How terrible.

I don't know what else to say.

[roguevalley]

94. we had one here in Anchorage. I think its aryans or a militia.

[Quantess]

110. There, in Anchorage?

I'm sorry to hear it.

The last police shooting (edit..I meant a cop or cops being gunned down) in the Puget Sound region of WA was definitely not aryan, and probably not militia.

[roguevalley]

113. no one knows who did it and he's getting better. just drove up and

shot him.

[tavalon]

2. That's quite enough, dammit

Cops may not always be my favorites but they are on the front lines. It is no more okay to shoot a cop than to shoot a fireman or nurses or doctors. Or anybody. It just isn't okay.

[baldguy]

3. Gee, if only they were allowed to carry guns...

[sharesunited]

4. He is alive. He's laughing, joking, and improving.

And it will take a special measure of integrity on his part to support any claim of right to guns in the hands of the general public.

[Edweird]

6. That Bill of Rights really burns you up, huh?

Luckily, you get no say in the matter.

[sharesunited]

7. I certainly support the right of anyone to enlist if they want to play with guns.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sharesunited]

11. The armory is precisely where they ought be kept.

You seem sort of angry to have guns. Frankly, it's not reassuring.

[Pavulon]

16. A select fire weapon was by far the least destructive thing I ever laid hands on

You seem ignorant of reality and the world around you. I spent over a year around heavily armed men with access to real machine guns, grenades, explosives and no one got shot. How is that possible.

Thanks for the head shrink freud. Your emotional sensitivity meter is a truly amazing thing.

[sharesunited]

21. You were well regulated, indoctrinated, drilled, and subjected to discipline.

Exactly as the Second Amendment envisions.

The general public is not.

[Pavulon]

24. You obviously have never experienced Army edge on life

I met some of the dumbest mouth breathing sister fucking trash in the Army. People I would not trust with a fork, never mind a co-ax weapon. Met some really smart guys too. Those words could be applied, if you worked really hard at it, maybe one at a time.

That indoctrinated part goes away when you realize you cant leave.

[sharesunited]

36. Since they were not in prison, it is reasonable to conclude that they are more or less

representative of the population which spawned them.

To wit, the general public.

If you wouldn't trust your mouth breathing comrades with a fork given all the boundaries and limitations of life in uniform, why would you trust the general public who are completely free range feral?

Or are you saying you think you need guns because you don't trust the general public?

Yet you support arming them?

That's quite paradoxical.

[Pavulon]

42. I worry about cars, heart disease, and cancer

not guns. Guns are like the lottery, my chances of being a victim of violent are next to nil. I support the rights of people to legally own firearms.

Even the ones who could fuck up a cup of coffee.

[sharesunited]

52. So WHY do you support that? F-ups having guns, I mean? Why would you think it's a good thing?

[Pavulon]

56. The same reason I support f ups having free speech.

being a moron is not illegal. Unless someone is a criminal there is no reason they should have their right to own a gun, or VOTE restricted.

[sharesunited]

58. The risk of killing or crippling themselves or others is the important difference.

A risk which does not attend speech and suffrage.

But I think you evaded the substance of my question.

Why should possessing the means of inflicting convenient and efficient death be elevated to a right?

How does that promote the general welfare?

[Pavulon]

60. Speech has led to more death than the existence of a weapon

stalin organized the murder of millions without firing a shot. Lets cut the bullshit. You can change the constitution, that will never happen. You have no votes. Never Ever. You can try to stack the courts, that will lead to a republican administration.

You can try to change the laws in congress, that will lead to a republican administration. You have as much chance bringing back Jim Crow.

You can actually fix the root cause that makes america more violent than places like canada, finland, switzerland, etc with similar laws and access. See that is hard no one wants to push for mental health care, abolish drug laws, and educate people who are killing each other.

Shuck and jive is easier than substance.

[Buzz cook]

117. Jezuz what a load of bull

"Speech has led to more death than the existence of a weapon"

The wheels fell off that argument the moment you thought it. But that didn't stop you from dumping it in the punch bowl did it?

Stalin happened to have an army and a huge secret police force to enforce his "speech". Why the heck would he need a gun?

"You can try to change the laws in congress, that will lead to a republican administration. You have as much chance bringing back Jim Crow."

Consider that gem. Why is it that you associate Jim Crow and gun control? It's because the same people that rush to the polls to vote down gun control are the same people who rush to the polls to vote against civil rights.

"You can actually fix the root cause that makes america more violent than places like canada, finland, switzerland, etc with similar laws and access. See that is hard no one wants to push for mental health care, abolish drug laws, and educate people who are killing each other."

Once again, the people that oppose gun control with every fiber of their being are also the people that oppose health care reform, oppose civilizing drug laws, and oppose access to education.

[immoderate]

50. "Well regulated" in revolutionary times, meant something different.

It meant the same as well skilled. You can read about it in the Federalist papers. You may not like it that citizens can own guns, but you won't get help from the 2nd Amendment.

--imm

[sharesunited]

54. I won't get any help from willful misinterpretations of the 2nd, THAT's for sure!

[immoderate]

71. And you won't get help from accurate interpretations either.

In Federalist #29, Hamilton wrote "...to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia..."
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa29.htm

I invite you to read it yourself, which I doubt you'll do because it doesn't fit your preconceptions. Militia, by the way, means anyone who can pick up a gun for defense, not an organized group.

--imm

[sharesunited]

74. Quaint, obsolete mysticism on Hamilton's part. With literally no modern relevance or applicability.

This steaming pile of yesteryear is supposed to justify bullets entering the bodies of your fellow Americans?

What a disappointment.

[immoderate]

89. I like my red herrings pickled, with onions and cream sauce.

You see, it was you who originally invoked that language to support your frenetic prohibitions. When I point out that it doesn't mean what you think it means. Suddenly, it's "Quaint, obsolete mysticism?" Did you read it in context of Hamilton's avoiding standing armies? Makes sense to me. Is the rest of what the founders wrote "a steaming pile of yesteryear" also? How do you differentiate? "Bodies?" Red herring over strawmen shouldn't be a forced choice, if you get what I mean.

Or is this National Oversimplification Week, and I didn't get the memo? :shrug:

--imm

[beevul]

101. Ouch.

Remind me never to get in an argument with you, immoderate.

/hat-tip

[immoderate]

107. It's almost like MrBenchley was back.

Thanks, I think.


--imm

[beevul]

109. Heavens no!! Anything but that.

"It's almost like MrBenchley was back"

I think I'd rather be waterboarded, tazered, and pepper sprayed - all at the same time - than listen to that again.

[immoderate]

114. LOL!

I just pulled up the same bookmarks that I used to keep for Benchley.

--imm

[MicaelS]

97. The problem with YOUR interpretation

Of the Second Amendment, is that are plenty of Progressives, many right here on this 'site, that dislike and even hate both the Military and Law Enforcement. They call them racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, war-mongers, just to use a few of the terms. So in the name of non-violence, public safety and reducing crime, you plan to only allow these racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, war-mongers, representatives of the government to have all the guns in society. Is that correct? And if you believe that government will disarm itself, or allow itself to be disarmed, you are living in a dream world.

[Vickers]

13. I enlisted, and I now own guns.

YOO FAYUL.

I do play with myself too much, though. :blush:

[Edweird]

17. What you support, plus 50 cents, will get you a newspaper. Nobody cares.

I do, however, find it disgusting that you use every tragedy to push your loser agenda.

[sharesunited]

49. Well, now. I find it disgusting that there is a tragedy every day which makes my point.

I also find it disgusting that so many of my fellow DUers are in utter denial about that.

[Edweird]

53. Yeah, but we've had quite enough of 'give up your rights and you'll be safe'.

Plus, just about everybody has realized what a lie it is.

[proteus_lives]

62. I find your authoritarianism disgusting.

So we're even.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

105. You find it so disgusting you have made a game out of it.

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

93. Already did that. Glad to hear you approve of my continued use.

[depakid]

12. It's always impressive to watch the rationalizers hide behind far right misinterpretations

of the 2nd Amendment.

Particularly since they don't seem to very much care for the same sorts of sweeping misinterpretations of the 1st Amendment.

If it were only their interests at stake- one could say good riddance- you deserve what you get, but unfortunately, everyone else in the states has to live with the consequences too.

Accordingly....ic tock until the next mass shooting, cop killing, family murder, tragic accident or workplace massacre.

[Edweird]

15. So, everyone - except you - is wrong, huh? Good luck with that.

[depakid]

18. Nope- Just Scalia et al.

The case was wrongly decided- as 4 Justices laid out quite clearly in their well reasoned and responsibly measured dissent.

[Edweird]

23. Maybe you should go tell them how great Australia is. I'm sure that'll sway them.

[depakid]

26. Actually- if more Americans travelled and spent quality time abroad they could see for themselves

and not just about the merits of responsible firearms regulation...

In the meantime, the responsible jurisprudence laid out by Mr. Justice Stevens will suffice, namely- that Scalia et al engaged in "a strained and unpersuasive reading" which overturned longstanding precedent, and "bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law.

Much as they did with the First Amendment in Citizens United.

[Pavulon]

31. Your firewall is looking like the one I worked behind in China

they have you by the balls. Better check your own government. Big brother is protecting you, but I am sure you are all good with that.

[Edweird]

32. It must suck rooting for the losing (and unpopular) side.

[sharesunited]

61. It is frustrating when the opposition has such little validity.

Why do you want guns?

Because it's my right.

That's debatable. Why do you want them?

So I can defend myself against bad guys. So I can resist tyranny.

But if guns are available, bad guys can shoot you first.

Who is the tyrant you expect to fight? The police? The army? They will overwhelm you with fire.

Bottom line: You want guns because you just do-- for reasons which cannot be adequately justified or explained-- and the cost to society be damned.

[Edweird]

65. I know, I know.. If we would only give up our rights, everything would be perfect.

That's what all the authoritarians say.

Every would-be dictator hates it when citizens have rights.

Too bad for you, huh?

[sharesunited]

69. Your right to what, though, and for what reason? Seldom anything offered except Because.

It might be charming for its childlike insistence, if it were not for its deadly implications for all of us.

[Edweird]

70. Rights don't require justification. What part of that is confusing you?

You know what's childlike? The naive belief that if law abiding gun owners are stripped of their rights, bad things would stop happening. Guess what? The world doesn't work like that. Mexico has some of the strongest gun laws IN THE WORLD. That's not working out too well for them. England's laws have failed. Even Canada is about to repeal theirs.

As far as 'deadly implications' - there are about 3 times as many auto related deaths as gun related. Heart problems are about 10 times as much. Spare me your bullshit 'concern'.

[Pavulon]

22. Here is reality for you. Right after Jesus christ returns to preach at madison square garden

will you see a more restrictive gun law hit the books in the US. That is the reality of things. This is not 1994, you can not fool stupid people into thinking some half ass gun law impacts crime.

You have a better chance of passing jim crow laws creating a separate society for black americans.

Did your firewall hold up to the porn barrage sent your way. You know the one your government set up to control you.

You have bigger problems than american gun laws, who would have thought. 1984 right in your back yard.

Better protect your rights, they are slipping between your fingers.

[beevul]

99. The problem...

The problem, and yours too, with claiming that heller was a "far right misinterpretation", is that the bill of rights itself supports just such an interpretation:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

http://billofrights.org/

Saying its a misinterpretation, simply does not make it so, unfortunately for you.

[bridgit]

28. There you see? The Bill of Rights is so vibrant & malleable you can shoot a cop then behind the 2nd

[rd_kent]

39. That post is incoherent, please try again.

[bridgit]

46. You try again, that was feeble on your part

[rd_kent]

48. I'm serious. Your post seems to be missing some words.

Try again. Right now it reads like a Sarah Palin speech. Seriously.

[bridgit]

55. Your point is that it is OK to shoot & kill cops? The gist if the OP, if you care to remember...

Is that cops were ambushed. The natural flow of DU 'discourse', believe me, boils down quickly into rights with respect to the 2nd...that's the 2nd in the Bill of Rights I mean come on. But that is just as quickly becoming an abstraction to people that have not had a loved one gunned down by randomly specific, rather less than supported by the 2nd such Murderous Intent, now...

Do you support ambushing & killing cops or do you not?

[sharesunited]

63. No, the pro gun posters here don't support gun crime.

They do feel, however, that any amount of gun crime is tolerable as long as they get to keep their guns.

[C_Lawyer09]

76. News flash, genius

Gun crime will continue as long as there are criminals. Legislation is unworkable, and the people that enact it, are prone to imposing ridiculous laws. i.e. categorizing a semi-automatic rifle as an assault weapon. Anybody can slice and dice the 2nd amendment to their hearts content. Doesn't do a damn thing either way. I've had two individuals attempt to rob me in "the hood" while delivering pizza, I'm thankful I was in possession of a firearm. Restricting rights of gun ownership, bears no relation on decreasing violent crime statistics. It is extremely simplistic to think that better laws will benefit the citizenry and not the criminal.

[rd_kent]

78. Since this is the first post in weeks from you that makes any sense at all, I wil respond.

You are half right. Pro-second amendment folks here do not support crime. You got that part right.


But what you have failed to grasp, shares, is that we do not think ANY amount of gun crime is tolerable. But what you fail to grasp, shares, is that GUNS do not embolden crime, as you like to think. What you fail to grasp, shares, is that the REASON for crime is NOT guns. What you fail to grasp, shares, is that CRIME needs to be dealt with, and that taking away Constitutional Rights will not do a single thing to stop CRIME.


Now, I'm sure you will come back with one of you not so clever, strange statements about turning off the spigot, or emboldening, or any of your other trademark phrases.....

[rd_kent]

77. No, my point is that your post is incoherent. Did I say anything else? NO, so stop projecting.

[bridgit]

83. Stop stalking, its unattractive and ill-advised

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7710466#7710499

[Edweird]

41. I think your post is missing some words.

[bridgit]

44. Oh, please do: which ones?

[Edweird]

51. Beats me. All I know is that it doesn't make any sense.

A little proof reading wouldn't kill ya.

[bridgit]

57. Then allow me to explain a few of yours: you think its fine to ambush & kill cops...

then attempt to apply the 2nd amendment of The Bill of Rights in such a way as to obfuscate violently criminal, murderous intent against authority figures, correct? If not, then either report here the import of your own post, pick one side *of* your own post and stick with that, or - *or* - give the www a clue why you posted it...wouldn't kill'ya, right?

edit: OP

[Edweird]

59. Please quote where I have stated any such thing.

Hint: I have not.

Equating support for the 2nd with desire to kill police is about as disingenuous as you can get.

The post I responded to put words in the mouth of the police officer in furtherance of the poster's own agenda.

[bridgit]

81. "quote" you, you're too clever for that - you'll seldom if ever come out and say what *you* mean...

And so here we are in a world where it has been sing/song/sung "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose" heh-heh, well, 'left'...get it? Oh never mind, this is just DU GD: Gen-er-al Discussion and you're contributing to that mightily while pointedly demanding specifics of everyone else, but...

*IF* freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose (just more words on more paper when you think about it) then "That Bill of Rights really burns you up, huh? Luckily, you get no say in the matter." - Mr. Edweird (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 08:09 PM Response to Reply #4, I hasten to add - is just another way to provide cover for murderous, socially corrosive criminal activity in the course of denying me/my rights to express myself, also set forth in The Bill; only codifies imo your 'I like picking produce in the produce department' approach to the Bill of Rights pro-actively supports not necessarily mine, who am I to presume; but the rights of others - some of them appreciative of their rights as set forth, some of them off the map that also is their right, and some them *completely out from under* the Bill of Rights by way of their nefarious intent, but all - are you saying or are you not cause you still haven't said so either way - expressing their Constitutional Rights whether they understand them, ever fought for them, or are in fact abusing them to deny them to others in the forms of murder and cheap shots from the hip, now...

And you can call it corny if you'd care to I don't mind, it is your right to do so but: my fiance was a Chp shot and later died from a simple traffic stop on a county road. They are opinions such as yours that lend his killers tremendous reason albeit read between the lines of your flip post; to show up for court and spit in my face on top of it all but not to worry...

His killers were never found. And I can; I can hear a faction of DU cyber-musing as these keys go back & forth, "Fuck you, bridgit, stupid bitch. Hope you choke on your tears too, idiot! Luckily, you get no say in the matter."

But that dog just won't hunt now will it, would you care to know who is far more proactive in the application of their Rights?

You got it,


The RW is arguing with you while you are arguing with me, and they like it that way. They like it when the left continues to be easily defined as the Lop Eared rabbits of Watership Down twitching their noses in front of every "malleable" topic before hopping off to twitch before yet another somewhere round the dell full of fern and clover

The rest is yours, I find these cops ambushed & killed/Bill of Rights/2nd (that's the 2nd amend in The Bill of Rights in closing mind you)/'If you can't handle the Freedom & Liberty of America then just stand there and be shot & killed' to be some of the very most boring & effete discussions *at* DU...but that is also your right therefore adieu ~

[Edweird]

84. I'm truly sorry for your loss.

I am not 'anti cop'. I have friends and relatives that are law enforcement. In my job we deal with them regularly on different levels - sometimes they are first on the scene of lines down and sometimes we need them to close lanes or roads. Even more so during storms.

I sincerely hope that your fiance's killer is found and punished to the fullest extent.

If the problem were simply 'the guns', then prisons would be safe. However, the murder rate in prison is alarmingly close to that of the free world. Without guns. Or knives (except rudimentary handmade weapons). Why is that?

Hating on guns takes the focus off the criminals and places it on the tool they used. That is a mistake in my humble opinion.

[bridgit]

92. Eh, its all good - I later discovered I was made out of rubber...

I do hear you much of what you are saying, and I do think we, the left, need to coalesces round key topics; make them ours - so that when 'they' start talking their shit, and you know that they will; we will have already worked out the details. I think that is part of the combination ;) Oh...

And I do maintain a CCW permit - I've done gangs of security and wouldn't wish doing security for Korn on anyone including my enemies ;) ;)

[winyanstaz]

73. umm wtf are you talking about? I didnt read that in that post at all.

No one is for crimes just because they support the right to be armed.

[rd_kent]

79. So, you accused this poster of the same thing you accused me of? WTF?

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bridgit]

98. Making "incoherent" posts is a TS-able *offense* here at DU, are you suggesting I be TS'd?

[bridgit]

100. Would anyone else care to suggest I be TS'd, cause my membership is nearly up...

No one here gives a tinker's damn for me and I really-really do have better things to do than to be demeaned & spat on here at DU for voicing my thoughts yeah? Then step forward and let your sickness flow into me: make it so make it thus make it happen ENGAGE! - or whatever needs be done just do it!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1ScBNkXaJk

[Pavulon]

8. You guys are oxygen thieves. ^

find a new issue this one is done. You have a better chance of getting jim crow back on the books.

[depakid]

14. You're the anachronism here- and the burden on society as incidents like this reveal all too clearly

And eventually, American will get fed up with it- and with people who rationalize dysfunctional obsessions with firearms and their proliferation.

At which time, you'll begin to find ways to rejoin the civilized (and more prosperous) nations of the world.

[winyanstaz]

19. o yes...give up your guns like England did....

and you too can live like a slave with garbage cops in your garbage and family cops in your homes and cameras on every corner and then there will be no more deaths by guns.
Of course there will be a whole lot more deaths with knives but hey! We middle class can feel "safer" when only the criminals have guns.

[depakid]

35. Guess what? We already did- with excellent results

Then again, we're not cowardly, juvenile and laughably paranoid like some Americans who endanger themselves and their families by keeping guns in their houses because they're afraid of "bad guys" looming at every turn.

Oh, and btw: in Australia- bikies do have illegal guns and guess what? they shoot each other. Not their families, not cops, not schools, workplaces or random violence.

Oops. Another myth bites the dust.

[winyanstaz]

40. I understand families living in the outback/countryside in your country...

have a lot of doors being kicked in..even when they are home...because it takes so long for the cops to get there.
And bikiers shooting each other with illegal guns IS gun violence you silly.
You better pray like hell they dont get tired of killing each other and start coming for your mangy butt..because what will you do then?
And what will you do if your government ever gets out of control like we have here? Hold them off with your butter knives?
sheesh..I think youve been out in the sun too long.

Ok your post pissed me off so much I did a little research...what a misinformed person you are.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

I guess it hasnt been so good giving up guns now has it?
sheesh...

[depakid]

67. Whoever told you that doesn't have the first clue what they're talking about

and any Australian living in rural areas would just LAUGH AT YOU and mock your paranoid ranting. They literally would!

And btw: before you toss around more nonsense- read the peer reviewed science on point (that's the standard, mate).

The buyback and restrictions worked:

Per the summary: The reforms banned the use of semi automatic and pump action shotguns and rifles, destroying more than 700,000 weapons taken from a population of 12 million adults.

....in the 18 years before the legislation was passed, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, in which 112 people died and 52 were wounded.

There have been no mass shootings since the law came into force.

The fall in the number of deaths associated with the use of firearms, including suicides, rapidly accelerated after the law took effect.

The decline was at least twice as high (6%) as it had been before the reforms were introduced.

In the 18 years prior to the legislation, on average, 491 people took their lives, using a firearm. After the legislation, this fell to an average of 246.

Similarly, the number of murders using guns fell from an annual average of 93 to just over 55.

There was no evidence that the use of other methods to commit suicide or homicide increased.

Before the introduction of the law, the overall number of homicides not related to guns had increased 1% a year. After the law took effect, this number fell by almost 2.5% a year.

And the total numbers of suicides fell by 4% after having risen annually by 2% before the introduction of the gun laws.

http://www.physorg.com/news85298565.html

Full study: http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.full

Meanwhile, just in the last two days we've seen a university mass shooting, a multiple shooting rampage in Tampa, a 12 year old charged with the murder of his stepfather in Iowa, another police ambush in Washington- and this just in from Oregon: off-duty Clackamas County sheriff's sergeant opened fire at a lounge, killing his wife and another woman before fatally shooting himself.

To name only a few headlines- some of which won't make it past local news! Something fundamentally wrong with that picture, don't you think?

Of course, rural Australian can still legally own guns- just not for reasons like "being frightened of bad guys" and also not the sorts of semi-automatic hand guns, "rifles," and pump action shotguns meant only for killing people.

In fact- we were just out in rural New South Wales last week, and this was parked outside the pub in Gulgong:



That's a hunter's ute. The caged area's for the dog(s) and yep- that's blood on the back from a recent venture to bag one of these:



As in many areas of the states, they're not native and destructive- so they're not regulated as other animals might be.

[winyanstaz]

72. If you had bothered to follow the link you would have seen I was quoting

a former Australian police officer.

and there is this as well

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia#cite_note-autogenerated1-18

I also see where gun suicides did go down? Other forms use to committe suicide rose.

I also see that you have NOT given up all guns and rifles.

I also saw that some of the mass shootings you used to have were by those same criminal gangs of "bikies" you still have.

As well as the fact is..you have not had all the guns gone that long in the first place..nor is your economy and job market as bad as Americas.
I hope it does not get that bad for your country because you will not be able to stop the gangs that will be coming out of the woodwork looking for food.
And again..you now have NO protection from your own government. I am glad you can trust those in power so much.
As for me, and mine...I prefer to keep the rights that We the People kept for ourselves if at all possible.
People like you can give up your guns if you want to..but keep your hands off our guns because we are not cowards nor do we want the government to be able to control us that much...not that that is doing us much good right now.
It may well be fairly safe in your neighborhood right now...so you dont feel the need for guns.
I invite you to come and stay in a few of America's neighborhoods and we will see how fast you change your mind.

[depakid]

75. Welp, the peer reviewed science didn't find significant substitution effects

Since we're on the topic of law enforcement, we spoke with a " screw" (prison guard) outside Bathurst Gaol (something of a historic- though still functioning) prison about comparative gun laws. Per his personal experience, he was stoked with the results and wondered how in the world Americans could or would put up with senseless tragedy, bloodshed- and all of the related expense.

This bloke had pretty much seen it all- and I really had no answer for him that he could grasp. He just shook his head (which is a common response to a lot of things, e.g. healthcare, looney fundamentalists, Bush & torture, etc.)

[friendly_iconoclast]

104. Would this be an argument from authority or an argumentum ad populum?

Tell you what, I'll chat up one of the employees of the local Whole Foods and we'll discuss Australian policy on carbon
emissions.

I fully expect you to treat our conclusions with the same due respect as your argument above deserves...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

96. The majority of murders in the US are criminal vs. criminal. See how much we have in common.

[proteus_lives]

64. Excellent point!

But he won't have the courage to respond.

[Pavulon]

25. Can you get here from NSW? That new firewall is online now.

better put your government in check, you'll be back pulling your pud to good old analog magazines if your not careful.

Seriously, you are looking like mainland china. Dont worry about my rights, protect yours.

[depakid]

30. LOL. dishonesty in pursuit of obsession knows no bounds, does it?

Sorry to inform you again- but that ain't gonna happen.

[Pavulon]

34. It is for the greater good, protect the children!!

Looks like they are busy trying to protect the little children. That black list they have is pretty big too. If I were you I would be in the streets over this.

http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/115/

[depakid]

38. One last time per your digression

The Greens hold the balance of power and will only increase their representation in the next election.

That has as much chance of becoming law as YOU have of getting universal healthcare.

Slim to none.

[Pavulon]

47. The sure tried really hard. You own government

trying to bend you over.

[Edweird]

27. I hear Canada is about to do away with their abomination. Of course, Mexico is a great success.

[friendly_iconoclast]

33. I think the anti-American chauvanism is a bit of a displacement mechanism for you

After all, if you're busy bashing Yanks you don't have to think about Australia's racial tensions, worsening water shortages, or your government's attempts at Chinese-style censorship...

[depakid]

45. Just unique perspective on the inherent problems you face- and are seemingly incapable of solving

Hell- a lot of the time a majority of the people in the states won't even recognize or admit there's a problem!

See, e.g. this thread- or any number of them re: your corporate media.

[friendly_iconoclast]

66. I stand corrected- it's not chauvanism, it's flat-out xenophobia

Couched as 'perspective'.

Well, I can understand this seeing as you apparently come from that other Australia. You know, the one that doesn't
have:

Pauline Hanson, One Nation, Hillsong, Exclusive Brethren, severe drought, anti-immigrant racism, Cronulla Riots, attempts at censorship that would make Alberto Gonzales splooge his pants, massive coal exports, and an Native population that
mostly lives at Third World levels of poverty.

Or stuff like this, it would seem:

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/man-stabbed-in-wa-after-gang-storms-home-20100214-nz5e.html

Man stabbed in WA after gang storms home February 14, 2010 - 2:54PM
AAP

A Perth man has been stabbed multiple times after a gang of five armed men wearing balaclavas burst into his home on Sunday morning.

The 53-year-old man was rushed to Royal Perth Hospital for emergency surgery after the men forced their way into his semi-rural Hilbert home in Perth's south-eastern suburbs at about 7.15am (WST).

Police said the home owner tried to fight off his attackers, but was overpowered and stabbed....

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/jail-downgraded-for-greenough-axe-killer-20100214-nz6q.html


Jail downgraded for Greenough axe killer February 14, 2010 - 3:59PM
AAP

Relatives of the victims of one of Australia's worst sex killers have been angered by his transfer to a medium-security regional jail.

The Sunday Times newspaper on Sunday reported that axe murderer William Patrick Mitchell had been shifted from Western Australia's maximum-security Casuarina Prison to Bunbury Regional Prison, about 180km south of Perth.

Mitchell, 40, was sentenced to a strict-security life sentence, which carries a minimum non-parole period of 20 years, for the brutal murders of Karen MacKenzie, 31, and her three children, Danny, 16, Amara, seven, and Katrina, five, in their Greenough beachside home, about 400km north of Perth, in February 1993.

In one of WA's and Australia's most notorious cases, Mitchell interfered with Ms MacKenzie's body and sexually assaulted Amara during a frenzied axe attack, fuelled by a cocktail of drugs....


Good thing no guns were involved, eh?

[depakid]

68. Grasping for straws- and in denial, like an addict justifying their habit.

Dude- I've lived in both countries (and been back and forth numerous times for many months the past 4 years). Gives a perspective- call it an immersion- that most people lack.

[friendly_iconoclast]

87. Repeatedly proclaiming the inferiority of another society *is* xenophobia

Reflexively bashing the States when something bad happens here speaks ill of you.

And, frankly, if mindless boosterism of one's own society and denigration of others is your thing, you should
start a Free Australia site. The US Freepers can give you tips.

The trash talk is something I'd expect from a small-town high school football supporter, and won't make the real problems
of Australia go away.

I think the fact that we are here discussing this shows an awareness of the problem and faults of USAian society.

[depakid]

90. Reality check

Look around you and make an issues (or problems) list.

Looks at the economic and sociological trends- and then compare and contrast those, too.

Next, think about what- if anything, is likely to occur or process that might be harnessed to solve those problems or reverse those trends.

Now- do the same for _____________ (pick a nation). Compare and contrast.

Straight up rational analysis. No cheerleading or nationalism required. Simply what a 12 step program might call "a searching moral inventory."

[friendly_iconoclast]

88. I might remind you of what a cynic once said:

"It's the converts who sing loudest in church".

[rd_kent]

43. Perhaps that will happen in the fantasy world you seem to live in.

But here in reality, you could not be more wrong.

[rd_kent]

37. Why do you hate the Constitution so much?

[Tejas]

86. You stay classy now!

The VPC must be very proud of you. Thanks to the existence of the 1st, you have the freedom to post your views, even those views you express in disdain about the 2nd.

[quiller4]

108. The patrolman who was shot is a member of the Second Amendment Foundation

It is rare to find a rank-and-file law enforcement personnel who oppose the right of the public to carry though that view is quite common amoung law enforcement administrators.

[seabeyond]

5. it is beyond old, and i am sorry. nt

[tularetom]

10. it's a terrible thing, totally unacceptable in a civilized society

but is it an "ambush"?

I didn't look up the dictionary definition but to me that implies the scumbag lured the cop into a vulnerable situation and then shot him. From what I read there doesn't appear to be any evidence that was what took place.

It doesn't seem that it would be too difficult for either the trooper or the two truck guy to identify this asshole.

Hope the officer recovers quickly and completely.

[SeattleGirl]

20. Jeebus Christ on a crutch!

Enough!!!

Just fucking ENOUGH!

[dixiegrrrrl]

29. Every time I hear of a cop killing in Wa. I worry it might be either of my 2 brothers.

Both are policemen up there.

this getting nerve wracking.

[madokie]

80. I like cops

and every time I've had any dealings with them I've treated them like I knew, (even though I didn't) that their son was just run over by a drunk driver or that his wife had just told him that morning that she wanted a divorce. They always treat me nice. I smile they smile I go

[Robb]

95. That's probably good advice dealing with about anyone. nt

[tkmorris]

102. This has been an incredibly civil discussion

I would like to personally thank all those present for their participation, and an quite certain that we all leave with refreshing new perspectives on this topic and a newly discovered respect for those who were heretofore our ideological opposites. Kudos, all of you!

[JetCityLiberal]

103. Racist Bigot Mike Hope is a big cause.

Walk the beat RACIST BIGOT Hope.

Slime rethuglican bigots and liars like Hope causes this tragedy.

Paul

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

106. What in the hell are you talking about?

[Quantess]

118. JetCityLiberal got the granite pizza.

[upi402]

111. Saw that story, bummer.

I hope it's not retaliation for a real or perceived abuse of power. The guy before him was talking in jail that he would kill cops when he got out because, he said, "There ain't no justice here."

[stevedeshazer]

112. Wow. That's not the Long Beach I know.

This streak of cop killings in Washington is disturbing.

:scared:

[Bucky]

115. I once saw an "A well armed society is a polite society" bumper sticker. I shot him

the finger.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

116. What do you think the common link is

or the common denominator ? The coffee shop killer for example,the thing he did in his own home to his wife and her kids. The thing about making them remove their cloths on a sunday morning because he said to them everybody must be naked for an hour on Sunday,bazaar as it is, thats what he made them do.OK so each one of those scumbags is nuts or was, but what is the common link?The criminal psychopath is what I am talking about,the old incurable criminal psychopath.

As you know crime itself is age old. And as you know the prisons are full of criminal psychopaths.You know you take them off the streets and the cops job is done, after trial of course. And than the guards take over.And what happens after that is not something the average citizen has the stomach to handle, unless of course you are tough as nails in fact.

So, what do you think the common link is? Really? Again the criminal psychopath is age old as is crime itself.
So, lets look at it and ask,. What does this all mean? For openers cold blooded murder is pure evil right? Lets start there and have a look.

I mean a string of cop killings, all in rather short time frame. The shooting are not related but circumstances are.
The word ambush is not the common link , it is the method of choice those psychopaths use.
I think copy cat as you mentioned is more or less a pot shot at it. I do not think one psychopath is simply copy catting another psychopath.Grant it now they are all nuts, but I think there is far more involved in all that has happened . Psychopaths simply are, in the same way feelings simply are,But the things psychopaths do is what makes them what they are.I don't think that old theory about what happens in a place can happen in a different place in the exact same way.
In theory it happens twice in two different places, could be here and England example.
I don't buy that ,but I don't buy non related inncidents either although I do not suspect a orginized effort.

At the same time I do know they are nuts and there must be some type of tracable link to the pattern.
You know, connecting the old dots.

So narcissism,the prisons are filled with narcissists,after all criminal psychopaths are narcissistic and they are all narcissists right? And as you know, nobody or no circumstances make a narcissist a narcissist, narcissists simply are what they are.

So whats the common link that binds these death lovers together? There must be a common link, there has to be.

Loners,social out casts,all the stereo typical back round stuff,but whats the common link?

Church's, I recall some coverage by KIRO news about five years ago about the night time or early morning activities of sex offenders . Kiro actually uncovered some of those sex offender meeting places and don't you know the code word for a sex offender secret meeting place was church or Church's. Places where sex offenders would meet in secret in the early morning hours,the hours what those sex offenders ,come out shall we say. They talk freely among themselves and trade voyeurism pictures ,buy and sell information -leads and other felon types were known to gather at those secret meeting places.
Think about it, it's tough for a registered sex offender to gain legitimate employment other than menial task minimum wage work. ,so they find other ways to make up the difference. Like passing along or selling information to another felon about a hot spot to rob.

So one need not be a sex offender to gather at those church's or secret meeting places. Scum of every kind is welcome.In those prisons ,information is like currency ,money in the bank.

Anywhooo, whats the common link. Again crime itself is age old as are criminal psychopaths.
I mean we know that all criminal psychopaths are nuts, thats a link, but this is a cop killing murder spree ,separate incidents non related,but, whats the link?