He is a 20 year old Turkish American kid. Looks like an ordinary shooting for now. Apparently he refuses to say anything.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/24/us/washington-mall-shooting/index.html
Washington mall shooting: Police arrest 20-year-old suspectQuote(CNN)One day after a shooting left five people dead at a mall north of Seattle, authorities arrested a 20-year-old suspect Saturday after an overnight manhunt that left the city on edge.
Arcan Cetin is suspected of killing four women and a man Friday night at the Cascade Mall in Burlington, Washington.
Washington state authorities said it's too early to rule out terrorism or anything else because their investigation is still in the preliminary stages.
Before the suspect's arrest, an official with the FBI had told reporters there was "no evidence at this time" of a link to terrorism.
'Kind of zombie-like'
When police confronted the suspect walking down the street near his residence in Oak Harbor, he did not try to run, he just froze and complied, said Lt. Mike Hawley of the Island County Sheriff's Office.
The suspect, who was not armed at the time of his arrest, said nothing, "kind of zombie-like," Hawley said.
Cetin immigrated from Turkey and is a legal permanent resident of the United States, authorities said. It's unclear when he moved to the US.
Overnight manhunt
The shooting stunned the small town as authorities warned residents to stay indoors and be on alert Friday night. The gunman vanished into the night along Interstate 5 after the attack, according to state patrol Sgt. Mark Francis
For much of Saturday, authorities searched the mall for evidence. A blurry surveillance photo of a rifle-toting man inside the mall offered a big lead in the hunt for the shooter.
"The city of Burlington has probably changed forever," Mayor Steve Sexton said. "This is a senseless act. It was the world knocking on our doorstep, and it came to our little community here."
Motive unknown
Authorities say they believe only one person fired the shots that killed five people.
he grainy security camera footage showed the suspect initially appearing to enter the mall unarmed and -- about 10 minutes later -- walking into Macy's carrying a rifle.
The suspect "fired multiple times, struck four females ranging in age from a teenager to seniors," said Mount Vernon police Lt. Chris Cammock.
It's unclear whether the suspect knew his victims.
"I don't know what his motivation was," Cammock said. "I don't know what his motivation was to continue, I don't know what his motivation was to stop, but I certainly intend to find out."
He said police recovered a rifle at the mall but would not disclose the type or caliber.
The FBI office in Seattle is helping with a review of intelligence. There's no information to suggest additional attacks were planned in the state, it tweeted.
Moviegoers asked to leave
Witnesses described chaotic scenes and confusion when the shooting started about 7 p.m. Friday local time.
Brandi Montreuil told CNN she was watching a movie at the mall when attendants suddenly told them to leave.
"I didn't know anything," she said. "The theater attendant came in and apologized for stopping the movie and said they were asked to have everyone leave immediately."
At first, she thought it was a drill.
"But you immediately think about what happened in Aurora, Colorado, so you start moving faster," she said, referring to the 2012 shooting at a movie theater that left 12 dead.
When they got outside, they saw police vehicles but no officers in sight, Montreuil said.
"We didn't know if it was a fire so we were looking for smoke of some kind. Then a few officers started canvassing through the crowds, asking if anybody saw anything."
An officer "with a large gun started yelling for people to leave and fast," she said.
Chaos, confusion
Armando Patino said he was working at a T-Mobile store near Macy's when he heard the commotion.
"Out of nowhere I just hear somebody yell and then after that, I turn around and just look at the Macy's and I just hear shots," Patino told CNN affiliate KOMO-TV in Seattle.
"I hear one shot and then stand kinda still and like two, three other people start running out saying, 'gun.' "
Some people dashed out of Macy's, unsure of where to go.
"I just moved them into the (T-Mobile) store," Patino said.
"We went in the back where we have a door ... and we just stayed there until they told us to evacuate."
Officers using K-9 units searched the 434,000-square feet mall throughout the night, including in secure rooms, authorities said.
Victims' identities not released
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee sent his condolences to the families of the victims and prayers to those injured.
The bodies were removed from the mall Saturday and are in the possession of the Skagit County Coroner's Office.
The coroner's office is identifying the victims and notifying their families before the names are released publicly.
Imagine if he couldn't get his hands on guns.
Guns don't kill people, people do! /sarc
Quote from: Atheon on September 25, 2016, 05:24:36 AM
Imagine if he couldn't get his hands on guns.
Imagine if every nut case was kept in a sanatarium against their will, sent their by compassionate parents ... and paid for by a compassionate government. We used to do that, but their rights were violated. When they let some folks out in the 70s, thanks to the movie One Flew Over A Cookoo's Nest ... one former patient knifed an innocent waiting in line at the airport. What if we couldn't get our hands on knives.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on September 25, 2016, 06:15:59 AM
Guns don't kill people, people do! /sarc
So the only perp's error ... is not killing more killer apes.
Quote from: Atheon on September 25, 2016, 05:24:36 AM
Imagine if he couldn't get his hands on guns.
Yeah, Imagine....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings)
Quote from: drunkenshoe on September 25, 2016, 06:15:59 AM
Guns don't kill people, people do! /sarc
"But I think the gun helps."
~ Eddy Izard
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on September 25, 2016, 12:38:17 PM
"But I think the gun helps."
~ Eddy Izard
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
So does the lack of a frontal lobotomy. Lobotomies for everyone!
Quote from: Johan on September 25, 2016, 10:47:22 AM
Yeah, Imagine....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings)
I also want to guess that people freaked out over these because they almost never happen vs nonchalantly said, "Oh. Another shooting. Meh.".
Also, except for one of them it targeted people confined into a very tight space or too young/too old to fight back. That's a bit less indiscriminate than a gun which can take out the most capable person with no struggle at all, in any environment and at any time.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 02:48:24 PM
I also want to guess that people freaked out over these because they almost never happen vs nonchalantly said, "Oh. Another shooting. Meh.".
And a guess is exactly what that would be.
QuoteAlso, except for one of them it targeted people confined into a very tight space or too young/too old to fight back. That's a bit less indiscriminate than a gun which can take out the most capable person with no struggle at all, in any environment and at any time.
Yeah, about what I expected. I've stopped being surprised.
(http://i.imgur.com/3Vv2G6v.png)
Quote from: Johan on September 25, 2016, 03:05:33 PM
And a guess is exactly what that would be.
Yeah, about what I expected. I've stopped being surprised.
(http://i.imgur.com/3Vv2G6v.png)
A pretty educated guess though, given those events are rare whereas shootings... aren't, and when they happen it makes international news and everyone is shocked.
Oh, I got the point, I just found it utterly irrelevant and a poor one to try to excuse the fact that guns make killing unbelievably easy... and when you couple that with various factors in society and make them possible for anyone to get in about 20 minutes by just driving to their local Walmart... you are setting up a system where mass shootings are an inevitability. And lo-and-behold, they are.
Oak Harbor. I've been there. There's a Naval Air base there, but it's a very nice little spot.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 03:22:43 PM
A pretty educated guess though, given those events are rare whereas shootings... aren't, and when they happen it makes international news and everyone is shocked.
Actually I think you will find that in the country where those events took place and at the time that they took place, they were in fact statistically no more frequent nor rare than the mass shootings that came before them historically speaking.
So yeah. That.
And lest you misunderstand where I'm coming from, I'm not on the don't ban guns side. If its possible for a gun owner to not have a dog in this race, that would be me. I own couple guns. But you or anyone else is welcome to come git 'em if we decide that doing what Australia did is the way to go. For clarification purposes, that would mean you or someone else would come and take my .22 (hopefully giving me some kind of equitable compensation for it in the process). And I would immediately replace it with a pump action .22 which is what I'd rather own anyway.
The point I am making is that every time someone posts something to effect of 'if only guns were outlawed.... yada yada yada after these events happen, the assumed implication (at least to my reading of it) is that if we made guns illegal, people would magically stop carrying out senseless mass murders on unsuspecting victims in the shear numbers that we're currently seeing.
And my standard response to that is well, we don't have to guess, we've got history on our side. And history shows that when you take away the guns, people do not in fact stop carrying out senseless mass murders on unsuspecting victims. In fact they keep doing it with a very similar rate of occurrence. That's not speculation, it history. Look it up.
And now comes the important bit so read this carefully. I am in no way saying restricting access to guns isn't PART of a potential solution. In fact I believe it is. But I believe history has shown us that it is most definitely only one very small part of any potential solution which ultimately MUST attempt to tackle the core problem of why so many individuals feel the need to commit such acts these days.
And for that reason I am inclined to be offended anytime someone makes a glib little smug comment which suggests that if we ONLY limit access to guns everything will be solved. Its a comment based in ignorance. I don't believe anyone who understands the problem or the what would be a truly effective solution would ever make a comment like that.
If I'm wrong about that then I'm wrong. But I don't think I'll ever be able to read comments like that without thinking this is a person who does not understand what the fuck they're talking about.
If you say so. I care less about how rare their murders are and more how frequent ours are... and you said it yourself, their mass shootings were rare as well... which was my point that you only confirmed. They flip out over mass murder, we just shrug and say, "It is what it is.".
QuoteThe U.S. represents less than 5% of the 7.3 billion global population but accounted for 31% of global mass shooters during the period from 1966 to 2012, more than any other country, Mr. Lankford said, adding that he defines a mass shooter as one who killed at least four victims.
Sorry, but numbers like this are what interest me. Call me crazy, but I don't believe Americans are genetically predisposed, or culturally so different from every other human being on earth, to believe that it's our people are rampaging violent maniacs, nor that we have an abnormally disproportionate number of mentally ill people.
I don't know why the concept of, "Easy access to a gun = easy access to use a gun" seems like such a shocking and earth-shattering proposition to some people. And the statistics don't lie; if you own a gun, you are more likely to be murdered or commit murder. So why is the logical solution of restricting access to guns such a sin to say?
Sorry dude. Edited my post while you were typing.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 05:20:50 PM
If you say so. I care less about how rare their murders are and more how frequent ours are... and you said it yourself, their mass shootings were rare as well... which was my point that you only confirmed. They flip out over mass murder, we just shrug and say, "It is what it is.".
Sorry, but numbers like this are what interest me. Call me crazy, but I don't believe Americans are genetically predisposed, or culturally so different from every other human being on earth, to believe that it's our people are rampaging violent maniacs, nor that we have an abnormally disproportionate number of mentally ill people.
Genetically no. Culturally? Maybe. Definitely maybe. Culture counts for a lot.
QuoteI don't know why the concept of, "Easy access to a gun = easy access to use a gun" seems like such a shocking and earth-shattering proposition to some people. And the statistics don't lie; if you own a gun, you are more likely to be murdered or commit murder. So why is the logical solution of restricting access to guns such a sin to say?
The concept is not shocking. Again, I'm all for it. But at the same time I believe it is VERY disingenuous to suggest that restricting access to gun makes the problem just go away. It absolutely does not. And if the numbers are to be believed, it doesn't even reduce the problem by all that much. So like or not, anytime someone writes if only he didn't have access to guns.... banning/severely restricting access will magically make the problem just go away is EXACTLY what they're suggesting. And I for one believe that is a comment based on ignorance and sue me, I'm not going to be shy about saying so.
QuoteThe concept is not shocking. Again, I'm all for it. But at the same time I believe it is VERY disingenuous to suggest that restricting access to gun makes the problem just go away. It absolutely does not.
And there lies the fundamental problem; you interpret as saying it will make the problem go away when everyone is saying it will reduce the problem.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 05:48:56 PM
And there lies the fundamental problem; you interpret as saying it will make the problem go away when everyone is saying it will reduce the problem.
Is that so? Ok enlighten me.
Quote from: Atheon on September 25, 2016, 05:24:36 AM
Imagine if he couldn't get his hands on guns.
What exactly is the above suggests it will only reduce the problem? Show your work.
Quote from: Johan on September 25, 2016, 05:55:33 PM
Is that so? Ok enlighten me.
What exactly is the above suggests it will only reduce the problem? Show your work.
I could take one quote of yours to make it look like you imply gun regulation would do absolutely no good, but that wouldn't be accurate either would it?
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 07:02:07 PM
I could take one quote of yours to make it look like you imply gun regulation would do absolutely no good, but that wouldn't be accurate either would it?
Fair enough I suppose. Though I can't justify it or easily prove it, I still believe a magical solution is what most of those posters are implying most of the time. Perhaps that's because you never see any of them commenting on how the problem is larger and ultimately requires a more complex solution. Or maybe I'm just an asshole. Either one is possible.
Although I believe if anyone would care to search for it, they would quickly and easily find that I have been nothing short of outspoken in my belief that better gun control is a part of solution but only a part and that any true solution requires finding a way to cure the actual underlying problem of more and more people feeling the need to commit horrific acts in the course of suicide or otherwise ending their relationship with society.
Quote from: Johan on September 25, 2016, 07:16:41 PM
Fair enough I suppose. Though I can't justify it or easily prove it, I still believe a magical solution is what most of those posters are implying most of the time. Perhaps that's because you never see any of them commenting on how the problem is larger and ultimately requires a more complex solution. Or maybe I'm just an asshole. Either one is possible.
I can only speak for myself when I post about it, in that I think it would go a very long way in fixing the problem. But I think nearly as valuable would be changing economic and education conditions (gang related crime, which makes up a large majority of shootings) and providing better mental health services. The benefits of those two would also extend beyond violence.
That said, the accidental death & murder of family members in brief bursts of emotion is too statistically damning to think that heavily regulating guns would not be a very useful step.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 07:23:39 PM
I can only speak for myself when I post about it, in that I think it would go a very long way in fixing the problem.
Yeah that's what I think is just not knowable. Australia is a obviously different beast. But I think exactly how different is unknowable. And the fact is that their rate of mass murder didn't change all that much, only the method changed.
Is America different? Obviously it is. They didn't have nearly the gang violence problem that we have. But lets face it, if we eliminated all the 'mass murders' getting actual media attention in this country tomorrow and did absolutely nothing to stem the gang-related gun-based homicide rate in the least, most on the ban all guns side of this issue would happily go back to their normally scheduled lives and never mention it again. They don't give a fuck about gangs shooting one another. They only care about the potential for themselves and their loved ones ending up as innocent victims. And the incidence of that happening in relation to gang violence is minimal these days so long as you have the economic wherewithal to stay out of the 'Vietnam' sections of most of our cities.
So subtracting out gang violence, what would banning all semi-autos and most handguns do? I think if you subtract out gang violence, we're left to look at Australia's model. Their history shows that non-gang mass-murder didn't subside all that much, only the method changed. Would that happen here? I think its reasonable to assume it would. Which is not to say that restricting access isn't part of a broader solution. Its only to say that if you want to talk about restricting access with me, you'd better be fully prepared to also talk in detail about the broader solution. Saying well ben them now and we'll figure the rest out later doesn't get it with me because I've been screwed too many times in the past by that sort of thinking.
Quote from: Johan on September 25, 2016, 10:47:22 AM
Yeah, Imagine....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_Palace_Backpackers_Hostel_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings)
Quote from: Shiranu on September 25, 2016, 02:48:24 PM
I also want to guess that people freaked out over these because they almost never happen vs nonchalantly said, "Oh. Another shooting. Meh.".
We only had 5 mass shootings where the victims were unknown to the offender before a gun hating Prime Minister threatened to withhold funding for states if they didn't impose strict gun laws.
www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/21/1034561442556.html
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics the semi auto rifles we banned in 1996 accounted for just over 1% of all firearm deaths from 1980-1995.
In 1995 we had 67 firearm homicides with a rate of 0.3 per 100,000
Accidents - 283 deaths, military style rifle =5 deaths
Suicides- 5,487 deaths, military style rifle =52 deaths
Homicides - 813 deaths, military style rifle = 27 deaths
Total proportion of Military firearm deaths 1980-1995 = 1.3%
www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?OpenDocument
Non firearm homicides have declined at a greater rate than firearm homicides in Australia since 1996, firearm homicides were declining for over a decade and a half before our gun laws according to the ABS.
We allow semi auto pistols for target shooting in Australia, the gun grabbers say owning a semi auto rifle will turn you into a mass murdering terrorist.
A recreational shooter can have a Ruger Charger with a pistol license yet they cannot have the rifle version of the exact same gun the Ruger 10/22 because we banned semi auto rifles in 1996.
The worst mass murders on the east coast of Australia were done by lighting fires, the gun grabbers say being shot dead is worse than being burnt alive.
A Turkish muslim did this attack in the USA, how would gun laws have stopped it considering he stole the gun?
Quote from: baronvonrort on September 25, 2016, 08:34:04 PM
We only had 5 mass shootings where the victims were unknown to the offender before a gun hating Prime Minister threatened to withhold funding for states if they didn't impose strict gun laws.
www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/21/1034561442556.html
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics the semi auto rifles we banned in 1996 accounted for just over 1% of all firearm deaths from 1980-1995.
In 1995 we had 67 firearm homicides with a rate of 0.3 per 100,000
Accidents - 283 deaths, military style rifle =5 deaths
Suicides- 5,487 deaths, military style rifle =52 deaths
Homicides - 813 deaths, military style rifle = 27 deaths
Total proportion of Military firearm deaths 1980-1995 = 1.3%
www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?OpenDocument
Non firearm homicides have declined at a greater rate than firearm homicides in Australia since 1996, firearm homicides were declining for over a decade and a half before our gun laws according to the ABS.
We allow semi auto pistols for target shooting in Australia, the gun grabbers say owning a semi auto rifle will turn you into a mass murdering terrorist.
A recreational shooter can have a Ruger Charger with a pistol license yet they cannot have the rifle version of the exact same gun the Ruger 10/22 because we banned semi auto rifles in 1996.
The worst mass murders on the east coast of Australia were done by lighting fires, the gun grabbers say being shot dead is worse than being burnt alive.
A Turkish muslim did this attack in the USA, how would gun laws have stopped it considering he stole the gun?
Quoted for truth. Every word of it.
There is no fix to any problem. Every fix ... creates new problems. It is a bit like Chinese handcuffs (a child's toy). Stop trying to fix problems. Deal with them. Not the same thing. Can you fix the need to clean leaves out of rain gutters? No, just just deal with it at the end of every fall, before the snow flies. But people don't like that ... they want to ban leaves instead ... or invent self cleaning robotic rain gutters that plot to take over the world etc. There is always a technical fix, or a ban-it fix. People problem? Ban people. Otherwise don't think you are the least bit consistent in your other reasonings.
So if one chose to buy a house not far off the driving green ... and then you had one too many golf balls go thru your bay window ... do you call your lawyer and sue the golf course you knowingly moved next to? No ... lets form a new political party, or create a pressure group in an existing political party ... and simply ban golf courses. Problem solved, right? Don't like human violence ... then go all Dr Frankenstein with Monsanto, genetically reengineer billions of people to not be so violent ... and it is all good, as long as your intentions are pure. Or the tried and true ... lock everyone up, particularly people I don't like anyway. There is no solution, that doesn't generate bigger problems than the one you just thought you solved (but didn't really in the real world).