According to the NY Daily News, the WI shooter was found dead. I'll give the
link: www.nydailynews.com.
A suspect in the mass Wisconsin spa shooting has been found dead at the scene, a county dispatcher told the AP. Radcliffe Franklin Haughton, who is reportedly the estranged husband of a spa employee, was wanted in connection with the shooting, which left three dead and four injured, at Azana Salon & Spa in Brookfield, Wis.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com#ixzz29yW9BwQu
= new reply since forum marked as read
they could have taken him out, we need more guns. 
You're talking not only a complete structural reorganization in terms of society and economics; you're advocating for a completely authoritarian state.
~ Constant surveilance ("More eyes in the sky"
~ Extensively monitored and controlled public spaces ("machines... in the perimeter"
~ Essentially TSA everywhere. Ever. ("allow more security... like at the airport, only bigger and better."
~ Directly saying that anyone who doesn't agree with a complete police state is hiding something. ("yes... won't want it"
~ That such measures are applied all the time, everywhere, to everyone. ("100% of the people."
Likewise, even the example you give is blatantly authoritarian. "You ring the area making the sickness..."
Let me ask you something, friend. Are you telling the good people of DU that the best method of managing gun violence is to round up every one of the three-hundred-plus million people of America, disarm them of all guns, and then continue to do so for the foreseeable future? If so, why in the name of anything sacred would -any- Democrat support such an action? It's a blatant violation of almost every basic human right.
Most crime is handguns not machine guns, and I would rid handguns from outside along with all other types.
and my 1st amendment rights trump your 2nd
1% of the nation is a member of the NRA
I support getting rid of this super pac bully
and I support a better supreme court that one day will rule corporate personhood illegal,
and reinterpret the 2nd(which was referring to cannons anyhow).
your handgun is destroying my safety
"and freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose"
c)K.K.
meaning your gun destroys my freedom and kills me, therefore I have nothing left if I am dead.
so the first thing a country has to do is make its people safe.
guns destroy that.
And when you cut the hyperbole and your name calling me, then people rationally talk,
well, that is how they get rid of the flu, and it has been done without a major change in the cigarette industry
make people aware of the peril, and the majority do not want it.
get rid of the NRA, and the single loudest pro-gun voice will stop being there to bully.
it really is simple
the question is safety. NOT bullshit.
your gun is more dangerous than the cure for the gun.
and you can own your gun. Long as it is in your home where that pesky #2 interpretation of yours states it belongs.
NOT IN A MALL, not in a restuarant, not in a movie theatre.
Want to stop Colorado movie event? Make sure NO gun gets in. legal or illegal.
Legal guns are a bigger problem than illegal guns.
And your hyperbole last line is such delicious irony.
Someone blowing my brains out if I have mental issues is a human right?
Judge/jury/executioner?
In what alternate universe is that logic???
That my friend, reeks of Master-race-ism. Get rid of the mentally ill by killing them.
sheesh. all for the love of a gun and a bullet.
Reminds me of the movie "THE MASTER".
A gun is a cult mass brainwashing if you ask me.
and since 9-11, there haven't been many episodes of plane violence.
I am man enough to walk through security.
Hell, living in NYC, I have been frisked 1000 times in the last 4 decades going into Madison Square Garden to see concerts and ballgames. If I don't want to be frisked? Hell, I just stay home.
so please stop the name calling and the hyperbole love of the gun nra soundbytes.
sticks and stones may break my bones, names will never harm me
but a gun and those dear bullets will kill me.
imho. (c)g4a.
remember-Columbine happened with legal guns. So did Colorado. So did most other big crimes.
It's all such bull.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
According to the First Amendment, no, your first amendment rights do not trump second amendment rights. In fact, given that the Bill of Rights is a restrictive and not permissive document, no "Right" is held in any higher esteem than any other, given that the rights laid down in said Bill of Rights specify interference of the government, not of interpersonal communication, as being restricted. To be blunt, whatever I choose to do around you cannot directly infringe upon your rights as laid down by the Bill of Rights itself.
and reinterpret the 2nd(which was referring to cannons anyhow).
Incorrect, as I pointed out briefly in the Gungeon thread titled "Second Amendment Wording." You should stop by and engage in that dialogue; I'm sure you'll learn something new.
your handgun is destroying my safety
You're more likely to be hit by a meteorite three times in your lifetime than to be killed by a gun once. Your statement is false.
And when you cut the hyperbole and your name calling me, then people rationally talk,
well, that is how they get rid of the flu, and it has been done without a major change in the cigarette industry
I'm not entirely certain how to respond here; you make four separate and unrelated statements, then use them to correlate each other. All debate aside, is English a second language for you?
make people aware of the peril, and the majority do not want it.
get rid of the NRA, and the single loudest pro-gun voice will stop being there to bully.
I can't speak on the nature of the NRA itself, but in regard to "Majority", it seems that there are conflicting views. The majority still agrees that "some gun control laws" are favorable, but that number has declined immensely. Surveys in 2002 found that 57% of Americans supported "stricter gun control laws". The same surveys in 2012 found that only 51% support those same laws. The same study found that in 02, 37% of those polled opposed stricter gun control laws, while in 2012, the number opposed to strict gun control laws rose to 47%. That's a twenty percent swing right there, and that's just in ten years. The "majority" opinion of strict gun control laws is deteriorating. Extrapolations based on polling data and firearms sales indicate that the majority opinion will soon be of the mindset that stricter gun control measures are not necessary.
the question is safety. NOT bullshit.
your gun is more dangerous than the cure for the gun.
Authoritarian police states are -never- the answer. To think otherwise is, as you state, "bullshit."
and you can own your gun. Long as it is in your home where that pesky #2 interpretation of yours states it belongs.
NOT IN A MALL, not in a restuarant, not in a movie theatre.
So rights guaranteed not to be violated by the government, as laid down in the Bill of Rights and our associated Constitution, end when we set foot out of the house? It seems like we're back to that "Authoritarian" theme.
Want to stop Colorado movie event? Make sure NO gun gets in. legal or illegal.
You could also stop the Colorado movie event by not showing movies, or by not making movies that would inspire a potential killer to do such things, or by not opening a store until everyone waiting outside is certified gun-free by an appropriate authority.
Legal guns are a bigger problem than illegal guns.
Prove it.
And your hyperbole last line is such delicious irony.
Someone blowing my brains out if I have mental issues is a human right?
Judge/jury/executioner?
In what alternate universe is that logic???
That my friend, reeks of Master-race-ism. Get rid of the mentally ill by killing them.
sheesh. all for the love of a gun and a bullet.
No, someone blowing your brains out if you have mental issues is a fundamental human failing. However, what -is- a basic human right is the ability to defend oneself against you if you prove yourself an imminent and violent, life-threatening hazard. The minute you have directly and obviously become a threat to one's continued existence, "Judge/jury/executioner" ceases to apply, no matter WHAT your problems are. You know what that reeks of? Common sense. All for the love of life.
and since 9-11, there haven't been many episodes of plane violence.
And before 9-11, there hadn't been many episodes of plane violence.
I am man enough to walk through security.
So are hijackers. Your point?
Hell, living in NYC, I have been frisked 1000 times in the last 4 decades going into Madison Square Garden to see concerts and ballgames. If I don't want to be frisked? Hell, I just stay home.
so please stop the name calling and the hyperbole love of the gun nra soundbytes.
No one has called any names. I would appreciate it if you ceased attempting to characterize your one-sided beat-down of a "discussion" as you being victimized; I'm simply calling you on your inaccuracies, and you are refusing to fight back. That sure isn't my fault, friend.
sticks and stones may break my bones, names will never harm me
but a gun and those dear bullets will kill me.
Tell Miss Amanda Todd that names will never harm her. Tell every homosexual child who has committed suicide due to bullying that names will never harm them. Tell every woman who has ever defended herself against domestic abuse with a firearm that they were wrong to do so.
remember-Columbine happened with legal guns. So did Colorado. So did most other big crimes.
No they didn't. Most of the guns were illegal through current gun control. ALL of the guns were obtained by fraud. That same year, two thousand students brought firearms to school and were expelled, even though there is a law directly forbidding it: There were only two instances of school shootings in the same year.
Likewise, in examining a history and researching the details of school shootings, the vast majority are perpetrated with guns that should not legally be held by the persons in question. Ammo is stolen, guns are stolen, the types of weapons are already illegal or outright banned. In Aurora, the gunman had thirty homemade (and go figure, illegal) grenades primed and ready to take lives. His firearm purchase history stretched back six months before the shooting, and his obvious premeditation is assured. Are you telling me that this lunatic (Who, according to you, should not be held responsible because he is "Ill"
wouldn't have killed people if he didn't have access to firearms?
Listen mate, I appreciate where you're coming from. I really do. Death is a sad thing, and anything that can be done to lessen it is a noble goal. You are terribly, horrifically wrong on almost all points that you bring up, though. I'm willing to continue this otherwise civil discussion, but I'm beginning to believe that you are either deliberately obtuse, or are genuinely uninterested in any viewpoint other than your own.
very well written post. As you can tell, writing is not my strong suit, I guess that's why I got into Law Enforcement. You just pretty much countered every thing he said and very effectively. 
