Gun murders in north england (near the nuclear plant)

Post Reply New Topic

This is bad, I have no idea why the taxi driver started killing people.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100602/ap_ ... n_shooting

Oh yeah I read that he's killed 12 people. It's terrible when events like this happen. It seems to have just been random.

Man, it'd be hilarious, in an ironic sort of way, if he used a bird or rabbit gun.

Poor victims.

The 30 hit ain't going to be in a good state.

E: yep, a shotgun (bird) and a .22 rifle (rabbit).

Another example of how well "gun-free" zones work.

Just like Fort Hood?

Further to this: the killer was licensed for firearms and had been for 20 years. Everyone has the option to go mad...

Good Lord, Holmes! What a ghastly slaying!

Quick, Watson! The game's afoot.

ruveyn

The "gun-free" zones (countries with strict firearms regulations) sure work quite a lot better than the places where guns can be bought by every Tom, Dick or Harry at the nearest mall. Tragic incidents like this will happen, but do not say that gun regulations do not work, because they do.

[quote="Macbeth"]Further to this: the killer was licensed for firearms and had been for 20 years. Everyone has the option to go mad...[/quote}

Murder en masse topic

It is undorturnate that we cannot always tell that a person licensed to own a firearem will always act rationally. We do know that guns aquired illegally will be used for nefarious and deadly reasons. And not all murderers use guns. The self-named Crossbow Cannibal (now before the courts in the UK) used a crossbow. Many mass murderers use machetes, or are suicide bombers. Some mass murders are political statements and/or ordered by governments, and there are those that are personal/sociopathic and/or vengence crimes.

The terrible thing is that in this case the person was not a known suspect, though sometimes there are warning signs. This is what the forensic investigators are for, and in many cases, there is no clear cut reason--nothing tangible to predict the worst. Sometimes there is not even a suicide note. The "option to go mad" is indeed a heavy one.

No, they do not work. There is no logical way for them to work.
What do they accomplish? Making something illegal does not make it impossible to obtain.
We’re not talking about taking things from babies in a playpen. You can’t keep people from getting what they want if they want it bad enough. A classic example would be the War on Drugs, what a joke!
About all you get is that the law abiding citizens, in fear of the law, are disarmed and unable to protect themselves against deadly force which gives the criminal element a target rich environment to operate generally un-opposed.
Personally, I feel much safer in a state where I’m lawfully permitted to carry a concealed handgun. This at least gives me fighting chance as long as I have a chance to react.

Someone is suggesting that he might have been on Seroxat/Plaxil.

http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/201 ... ia-gunman/

There is no evidence of that whatsoever. It is 100% speculation by someone who appears to have an axe to grind against that drug company.

Of course they don't. The fact that the UK has some of the tightest gun laws in the world and also one of the lowest gun death rates in the world is mere coincidence.

I know there's no evidence, but all the ideas about Bird's motivations are speculation so far.

The guy whose blog/site I linked to may be grinding an axe on this case, but I'm not surprised he's doing so, after the experience that so many seem to have had on the two drugs, of increasing irritability, aggressive tendencies, anger, violent outbursts, instability and paranoia etc.

I just thought that it was a somewhat more interesting, thought-provoking, theory than most of the others doing the rounds.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 05 Jun 2010, 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hm. What about Switzerland?

It's a terrible set of events but that part of the UK is very rural and things like this don't happen that often here - thank God!

PS. The reason that I thought it was interesting is that his circumstances, ( divorced, serious/alarming financial difficulties, a family feud, and a heated argument with coworkers ), do not in themselves sufficiently explain his behaviour; lots of people are in the same situation and do not go around attacking people.

Even his having a gun does not *explain* it, simply made his murderous outburst far more deadly.

So the question is, *what* made the difference? And the theory that he might have been on the kind of medication ( eg. Seroxat/Paxil ) which allegedly produces violent behaviour in a significant minority of patients seems perfectly reasonable, if for the moment completely speculative/unsupported.

.