CNN - Colorado gunman killed himself

[Poiuyt]

AP: Police say autopsy results show Colorado church gunman Matthew Murray killed himself.

cnn.com

I guess God didn't help that security guard after all.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. LOL

[madinmaryland]

28. That Rita Cosby photo is a classic!

:rofl:

[Angela Shelley]

2. OH NO, that changes everything!

[Catherine Vincent]

3. Oh, you mean "Killed" himself?

Did the lady acknowledge that she did? I haven't been watching the news.

[Poiuyt]

5. Thanks - corrected

[malaise]

4. All I can say is

Oh Gawd!

[Jeanette in FL]

188. Ditto.

Good gawd, is right. I haven't been following the story, but caught a bit of her on the news last night.

[PassingFair]

6. She's STILL a HERO!

Poor thing.

Now all that stuff about why she was fired
from the police department is going to come
out FOR NOTHING.

:evilgrin:

It's god's will!

[CTyankee]

32. I didn't see that on GMA this morning. She said she had hit "rock bottom" before turning to God

but didn't mention being fired. It was a big story on this morning's show. Guess their faces are red over at ABC!

[malaise]

39. Remember that when it comes out only

their god can judge them, forgive them and fire them. Their god can even fire shots for them. This religious business is way too convenient.

[The Magistrate]

7. Interesting, Sir

It is a commonplace of military history that a great deal of 'over-claiming', most based on genuine mis-apprehension, occurs in the heat of a fight....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. God helped her lie about it.

[The Magistrate]

That, Sir, Runs Ahead of The Available Evidence

Her statements do not rise to the level of lying; they are normal mis-apprehensions under the stress of combat.

[tom_paine]

65. As always, you speak calm rational sense, Sir.

:hi:

But this think has already turned into a DU flamefest, for God's sake, so thems that were flamed before now get their revenge.

If it turns out the OP or CNN is mistaken, the tables flip and we'll have another round of "I told you so" flaming.

Even if he did kill himself (and it is best to wait for ALL the evidence ot come out), that doesn't diminsh the heroism of what she did, if he was still alive and blasting, her resistance probably forced him to take him own life much sooner than he would have wished.

But really, we can't know for certain, yet. In the worst case scenario, she lied about everything and oh Lord the crazy flamefests THEN.

It is probably a mistake to get in the middle of these things, even when speaking calm, rational sense as you are.

[The Magistrate]

67. She Did Fine, Sir, No Question

Ran to the sound of the guns, and all that, and hazarded her life to protect others.

Some of her statements, based on her religious convictions, are profoundly offensive to me on several levels, but that is really not a matter of great importance: none of us have the right to expect all others to agree with us on such questions.

[RebelOne]

49. I don't think she lied about it at all.

She probably didn't know that he shot himself. I'm sure she thought that her bullets did the trick.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

52. Uh huh.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

244. Next time

Youre fighting someone with an automatic rifle with a 9mm in a crowded church let us know howclear the play by play is..

[Mike Daniels]

56. This really doesn't change anything

She shot the perp which led to him committing suicide.

Regardless of who delivered the fatal shot, she still prevented things from possibly being worse than they already were.

[benEzra]

177. They DID do the trick. Her shots dropped him and stopped the killing.

He shot himself after he was hit 3 to 4 times and involuntarily put down, and was lying on the floor wounded when he killed himself, according to official reports.

[CTyankee]

38. And sometimes not based on mis-apprehension of anything.

Case in point was the esteemed, Pulitzer Prize winning historian Joseph Ellis. I must say his "wartime experiences" in Vietnam were a full fashioned bolt of whole cloth, if ever I saw one. Followed by his glorious "civil rights marches in the South" and his "antiwar protests." I've heard some good ones -- including my parents' friend who "flew with the RAF before WWII" -- but Ellis gets the prize!

[The Magistrate]

84. We Have All Heard Some Corkers, Ma'am, Certainly

But is often instructive to compare accounts from both sides of a fight, as there is often little overlap.

One of my favorites is an air fight in the early days of WWI, from which three participants emerged alive to write accounts of it, two on one side and one on the other. The two on one side agree three machines of their side were involved, one of which dove out of the fight with a jammed gun early on. Both agree one of them shot the gunner of the machine they were attacking, either killing or severely wounding him, and both were sure the machine they attacked spiraled in to crash beyond a tree-line. The pilot of the machine attacked reports there were six enemy attackers, that his gunner shot down one of them before collapsing in his cockpit stricken with air-sickness from the violence of the evasive manouvers he was engaging in to avoid the swarm of attackers, and of course, that he leveled out of his spin barely short of the ground and sped for home amazed he was not closely pursued by the enemy. No one involved told a single lie; every one of them was seriously deceived about the events he participated in through knowing only his own immediate perceptions of them.

[CTyankee]

98. Of course! Your account reminds me of the play "Rashomon."

Interesting how the mind "embroiders" on the truth. The best intentioned of minds can mislead themselves; I did it myself with the setting of a poem I had written years ago. I had completely forgotten the circumstances under which I had written it. In a creative writing course (some 25 years later) we were asked to submit a work and I dug this one out of a drawer. It took me a little time to realize I had "fabricated" the event I described in the poem in a vain attempt to write something like my then-idol, W.H.Auden. Strange thing, the mind!

[The Straight Story]

8. I bet the person doing the autopsy is an atheist

or maybe a buddhist.... :rofl:

[Richard Steele]

9. Shhh! Don't spill the beans about "the war on Coroners"!

Too soon!

[The Straight Story]

12. Or they were a christian covering up how god was not able to help her shoot the gun away

and only injure him :) Yeah, that's it - christians covering for christians and god.

[AngryAmish]

59. There are no atheists in the autopsy room

just like a fox hole.

[Ishoutandscream2]

90. I'm laughing here

Keep up the one liners. LOL!

[TwilightGardener]

10. So...who's going to admit to buying that hero bullshit? NOT ME!!!

[The Straight Story]

14. If he did kill himself, it may have been because she was there with a gun to stop him

:) Still a hero when you face down a gunman and put yourself between him and others.

But then, maybe we don't like heroes if they have faith.

[TwilightGardener]

22. She sounds like a big liar to me. Has nothing to do with faith. I'm always

suspicious of people who are scrounging for their 15 minutes--that's how she strikes me.

[onenote]

154. sounds like you're wrong

Her shots stopped him and put him down. He finished himself off. But without her intervention, he goes on a killing spree. Maybe you wouldn't have minded if he had, but most people would be glad that she took the actions she took.

[CTyankee]

23. I doubt that the guard's armed presence "made" him commit suicide. In most of these shootings

the gunmen turn the gun on themselves. It also happened in my family -- the gunman (family member) killed himself after a shooting rage that left my 24 year old neice dead and her mother and grandmother wounded.

[PassingFair]

78. Oh no.

I'm so sorry, CT.
It does seem to happen that way, though.
I think it is predetermined by the gun"man" going in.

How awful for you and your remaining family.

[CTyankee]

126. Thank you. Gun violence has been very real in my family's life as you can see.

My neice's mother, my former sister in law, is the only living survivor and I often wonder how horrible it must be for her to have seen her daughter die before her very eyes. My brother, who was divorced from her at the time never recovered from his daughter's death. I believe it led to his own death. My other neice became an ordained minister as a result of the tragedy to her sister.

Sad things, indeed...

[beevul]

92. Whether or not...

the guard's armed presence "made" him commit suicide, it DID prevent him from using that thousand rounds of amunition he was carrying.

[CTyankee]

106. I have already commented in this thread on the difference between a lawfully

armed person who has been background checked and has a license from the state to own a gun and the disturbed armed gunman. The REAL point here is how this individual got possession of the gun and the "thousand rounds of ammunition he was carrying."

Furthermore, the guard shot the gunman in performance of her duties as a guard. I would have preferred that the church call the police for protection, since they had been alerted to this gunman by the shooting he had done earlier. The police are more accountable to the public, since they are public servants.

As you can see from my statements, I am applauding the safeguards employed in allowing the guard to have a gun. That is "governement interference" to some people, a violation of 2nd Amendment rights. Here the balance seemed right, EXCEPT for the fact that the guy got the gun and ammo in the first place.

Don't you find that disturbing?

[beevul]

164. Well...

"The REAL point here is how this individual got possession of the gun and the "thousand rounds of ammunition he was carrying."

It has not been established to my knowledge that he was a prohibited person. If he wasn't, he may have just bought them at retail. If he was a prohibited person, and stole them, that would make him a criminal, by definition.

"Here the balance seemed right, EXCEPT for the fact that the guy got the gun and ammo in the first place.

Don't you find that disturbing?"

Disturbing yes. Preventable? Not likely. So long as people have rights, rights will be abused by the few, sometimes at the cost of lives. Thats reality. That doesn't mean I like it when it does cost lives. But it DOES mean that I accept it as part of living in a free society.

[CTyankee]

197. Huh? REally?

There are rights and rights. But my First Amendment rights to free speech do not cost you your life. Nor do my 4th Amendment rights to privacy.

What the hell are you talking about? You DO NOT have the right to take the life of innocent people because you think there is a right to brandish a gun and then shoot indiscrimentally.

What has happened to people's sense of right and wrong? If you do not know this, I cannot help you, but I suggest you get some help somewhere. There is something wrong with you that needs fixing.

Dear god...

[beevul]

221. Excuse me.

There are rights and rights. But my First Amendment rights to free speech do not cost you your life. Nor do my 4th Amendment rights to privacy.

What the hell are you talking about? You DO NOT have the right to take the life of innocent people because you think there is a right to brandish a gun and then shoot indiscrimentally.

What has happened to people's sense of right and wrong? If you do not know this, I cannot help you, but I suggest you get some help somewhere. There is something wrong with you that needs fixing.

Dear god...

You say your rights to free speech do not cost me my life. If you were to abuse those rights they could. Do you deny that?

"What the hell are you talking about? You DO NOT have the right to take the life of innocent people because you think there is a right to brandish a gun and then shoot indiscrimentally."

You go right on pretending I said anyone has the right to "take the life of innocent people because you think there is a right to brandish a gun and then shoot indiscrimentally". Big strawman there. I DID say that there will always be potential for people to ABUSE thier rights. I guess you missed that.


And then we have the kicker here:

"What has happened to people's sense of right and wrong? If you do not know this, I cannot help you, but I suggest you get some help somewhere. There is something wrong with you that needs fixing."

Nothing wrong with MY sense of right and wrong. I do not need your help. Whats so hard to understand about the concept that freedom and liberty on the part of the people leaves room for those freedoms and liberties to be abused? That being said, I don't support abusing rights and freedoms, and I really don't think anyone does. The potential is there though, its a part of life. Its reality.

Lets take your example of freedom of speech. Are you in favor of gagging people to prevent them from abusing freedom of speech? You know, gags in crowded movie theaters to prevent people from falsely yelling fire and so on? If not, then you accept the fact that rights have potential to be abused in a free society the same as I do.

[CTyankee]

227. Falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater hasn't killed anybody recently but

we've got this loop of gunmen on the loose, shooting and killing in schools, malls and now churches, to the point where it has become commonplace in our culture. What I cannot comprehend is the attitude of shrugging off these murders as if they are part of our "liberty" and it's just too bad if you or your loved one is dead.

Again, we should be asking "How did this gunman get such a vast store of weaponry?" Let's start there. What is your suggestion?

[beevul]

256. Thats a non-answer.

"Falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater hasn't killed anybody recently but we've got this loop of gunmen on the loose, shooting and killing in schools, malls and now churches, to the point where it has become commonplace in our culture. What I cannot comprehend is the attitude of shrugging off these murders as if they are part of our "liberty" and it's just too bad if you or your loved one is dead.

Again, we should be asking "How did this gunman get such a vast store of weaponry?" Let's start there. What is your suggestion?"

I think you get the point. I think you accept the idea that with freedoms and liberties, bad things are going to happen when people abuse them. You say I "shrug off these murders". Thats not true. I dislike the fact that they happen every bit as much as you do. I do however accept that if people are allowed to own firearms, that a relative few will misuse them, or steal them from those that don't , then misuse them. The same way I accept that if alcohol and automobiles exist and are prevalent in our society, that a few people will drink and drive. Thats not an endorsement for drinking and driving. Its a simple observation that when theres potential for misuse of a thing, or combination of things, and no matter how many laws safeguards or hurdles you erect someone will find a way to do it. In a society of hundreds of millions, thats going to translate into a larger number obviously, and it does. Whether with alcohol, automobiles, or firearms.


"gunmen on the loose, shooting and killing in schools, malls and now churches, to the point where it has become commonplace in our culture"

The only thing commonplace about any of these, is that with few exceptions, they happen in gun free zones. Columbine...VT...the omaha mall...all places where MANY died...gun free zones.

I really think its pointless to start at "How did this gunman get such a vast store of weaponry", because:

A) 2 handguns and a rifle are hardly a "vast store of weaponry";

B) Wheretheres a will theres a way. No law, restriction, or hurdle, is going to stop someone thats intent on doing a thing. Sure, you might stop a tiny fraction through better law enforcement and mental health care, but some will fall through the cracks. It wont be enough though, because the effects on these things happening will be negligable at best.


Resourceful people who really want to do a thing, wont be stopped by things like laws.

The only things that are going to stop a person with intent, is metal detectors, and someone taking these shooters out. Whether that be cop or citizen - assuming that our society remain a free one.

[CTyankee]

257. analogy is false

An automobile's primary purpose is not to kill or maim. Alcohol in moderation is good for one's health. But a gun's primary purpose is to kill or maim. I know you would say it was for prevention, but only if it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy that in our society we have to arm ourselves because others are armed. I don't think that need be the case and it is a tragedy when it is not. We obvously have a profound difference of opinion about what our society should be.

Crime, including crime committed with guns, is deterred by a number of factors and there is no one winning formula. My point is that we've got to try and not give up.

When I am in Europe I have a very different feeling about going out at night in big cities or small cities or little towns. I do see more armed carabinieri in Rome, but in the daytime and usually around embassies (I don't argue for a military police force in this country, tho). And I've seen daylight take-downs by non-uniformed police (no weapons brandished) that my Italian friends notice but I do not. I have even felt safe in going out with friends for dinner in Palermo (!). Perhaps my experiences in some of the European capitals show me that civilized societies can and do exist. It certainly has made me think about our own society differently...

[beevul]

260. No, there is nothing false about it.

"An automobile's primary purpose is not to kill or maim. Alcohol in moderation is good for one's health. But a gun's primary purpose is to kill or maim. I know you would say it was for prevention, but only if it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy that in our society we have to arm ourselves because others are armed. I don't think that need be the case and it is a tragedy when it is not. We obvously have a profound difference of opinion about what our society should be."

The primary purpose of a legally sold, possessed, and owned thing, is the legal use of that thing - whether it be gun, a knife, a firearm, alcohol, or an automobile. Any purpose related to its design, is irrelivant when the discussion is misuse of a thing, rather than legal use of a thing, in line with its design, and thats what we are discussing here.


If you could snap your fingers and make guns dissappear from the hands of ALL misusers right now, someone would still be attempting to kill someone else with a knife within minutes. Removing the tools will simply lead to a substitutional effect at best. I don't think we have that big of a difference in our views of what society should be, but I do see that...what wed be willing to give up to try to make it so (and fail), are 2 verry different things.

"Crime, including crime committed with guns, is deterred by a number of factors and there is no one winning formula. My point is that we've got to try and not give up."

There may not be one winning formula, but there are a number of losing formulas. Like gun free zones. Seen any gun free zones preventing any tragedys lately? (Seems to me a CCW holder stopped one yesterday.) Like pissing off gun owners to the point that they vote against Democrats en masse for decades, which contributes largely to preventing things like universal healthcare, like equal rights for the glbt community, and enables things like our pResident, a million plus dead in iraq, and a few other less than savory things.

"When I am in Europe I have a very different feeling about going out at night in big cities or small cities or little towns. I do see more armed carabinieri in Rome, but in the daytime and usually around embassies (I don't argue for a military police force in this country, tho). And I've seen daylight take-downs by non-uniformed police (no weapons brandished) that my Italian friends notice but I do not. I have even felt safe in going out with friends for dinner in Palermo (!). Perhaps my experiences in some of the European capitals show me that civilized societies can and do exist. It certainly has made me think about our own society differently..."

The US is not europe. The US isn't going to be europe. The society of the US will never be what the society of europe is. Acknowledging that would be a start.

For about every "civilized" society you can think of, I can find a something or two far less than civilized about it.

There is no utopia.

[CTyankee]

262. Primary purpose does have some meaning here, though.

It goes to the heart of the matter of public safety, IMHO.

I did not say that the US is like Europe. My point was that people can exist happily and sanely without a proliferation of guns in the midst. Have you ever been to Europe? It disturbs me that I am safer in most of Europe's cities than in my country's cities. They have their problems but the people go about their business without fear of a shooter in the Piazza Navone or lurking in a campanile (bell tower) which are common in Italy, ready to shoot from above to the people taking their passagiata after dinner below. It is a pleasant way to live, let me tell you...

[beevul]

263. As you say, thats your opinion.

"It goes to the heart of the matter of public safety, IMHO."

Like I said, thats your opinion. The fact that you do not seem willing to differentiate between lawful purpose versus misuse, and would rather concentrate on some general definition of "purpose" is interfering with any potential for you to see things as they really are.

Judging by your posts, my take is that you do not like firearms at all. Am I wrong?

"I did not say that the US is like Europe. My point was that people can exist happily and sanely without a proliferation of guns in the midst. Have you ever been to Europe? It disturbs me that I am safer in most of Europe's cities than in my country's cities. They have their problems but the people go about their business without fear of a shooter in the Piazza Navone or lurking in a campanile (bell tower) which are common in Italy, ready to shoot from above to the people taking their passagiata after dinner below. It is a pleasant way to live, let me tell you...

Likewise, people by and large can exist happily and sanely coexisting with the fact that they and thier neighbors, and the majority of those in thier community possessing firearms. This again, points to the reality of the issue...not one of firearms, but of MISUSE of firearms.

I have not been to europe, though my daughter will be spending a few weeks there this summer.

I think, unintentionally, you touched on something here:

"It disturbs me that I am safer in most of Europe's cities than in my country's cities."

The truth of that statement, depends largely on what you consider to be your countrys "cities". Also, you don't seem to be considering that the US isn't just a few big cities. Theres an aweful lot of rural area where people by and large own firearms at high rates, yet do not have the problems you speak of. In fact, rural living is also quite a pleasant way to live.

Many rural folk, are rural folk because they want no part of the rat race, restrictions, and problems, that seem to go hand in hand with big cities. Quite often, when they go to the polls to vote, its a vote to keep "big city" and its restrictions, problems, and its "solutions" such as gun bans...as far away from thier rural living as possible.

[CTyankee]

265. My advice is go to Europe. Experience a big city that isnot so taken up with gun fascination.

as in Europe is an illuminating experience.I am still amazed at what I learn when I go there.

Please see the art, learn the culture (at least a little bit), hear about the history that is really us, what we were before we came here. This is important. It gives you perspective to things you don't know (I know this because of things I DIDN'T know before I studied) about culture and history.THEN things start getting interesting! Once you start getting into that, you are often lost on your own local community, unless they share those interests. This is what happened to me. I felt I had little, or nothing, in common with my Texas heritage. Its gun heritage was minor compared to its racial and hispanic mindset at thetime. I basically gave up on Dallas. But I learned about the hispanic culture at the same time.

I know this is difficult for you to hear and that you do not want to hear. It is a voice, though, that can be kind. I hope that you hear this, altho I think it is difficult if you are always thinking of how you can defend yourself against attack.
I think of this as static in our communication as Americans, not as a nasty attack, so I hope this discourse will be helpful...

[beevul]

270. You aren't listening.

"My advice is go to Europe. Experience a big city that is not so taken up with gun fascination."

You just aren't getting it. Big cities aren't "taken with gun fascination", they're riddled with gun MISUSE.

"Please see the art, learn the culture (at least a little bit), hear about the history that is really us, what we were before we came here. This is important. It gives you perspective to things you don't know (I know this because of things I DIDN'T know before I studied) about culture and history.THEN things start getting interesting! Once you start getting into that, you are often lost on your own local community, unless they share those interests. This is what happened to me. I felt I had little, or nothing, in common with my Texas heritage. Its gun heritage was minor compared to its racial and hispanic mindset at thetime. I basically gave up on Dallas. But I learned about the hispanic culture at the same time."

I am an adopted, full blooded Norwegian ethnicity American. My views have nothing to do with any "heritage", mine or anyone Else's. My ancestors weren't HERE during the wild west. They weren't HERE during prohibition. "Gun heritage" has nothing to do with my beliefs. My "heritage" belongs to nobody except me. The "heritage" of others does not belong to me. There is no "history that is really us, what we were before we came here" for me, outside Norway. I'm so typical Norwegian that I have had notoriously stubborn people tell me that I'm hopeless. I make no denials about how stubborn I am either.

Art to me, is holding one and one half ten thousandth of an inch tolerance on a precision machining operation (thats .00015 of an inch, or approximately 1/50 the thickness of a human hair). Art to me, is a perfectly tuned engine. Art to me, is over 100% volumetric efficiency on a flow bench. In short, art to me, is precision. I don't expect everyone to share that definition, and thats not to say that there are not other things that are art, especially to others. But they should not expect me to share their definition of it either.


What I am, is one of those rugged individualists that people always talk bad about. What I don't need, is to visit europe to be able to decide with a sound mind - the meaning of liberty, the meaning of rights, I neither need nor want the restricted hectic life of living in or close to a big city, regardless of what nation it is in. I form my own opinion, make my own decisions, and trust me when I tell you, visiting europe wont change them. Reinforce them maybe, but change them, no. The fact that I am here, alive, and am not a criminal, is evidence enough for me that I have done a decent job on all counts thus far. I form form my own opinions, and I try very hard for them to be well educated opinions. I do not need a political party, a "nanny state" government, a visit to europe, the nra, the brady bunch, or religion - organized or otherwise, to form them.

"I know this is difficult for you to hear and that you do not want to hear. It is a voice, though, that can be kind. I hope that you hear this, altho I think it is difficult if you are always thinking of how you can defend yourself against attack.
I think of this as static in our communication as Americans, not as a nasty attack, so I hope this discourse will be helpful..."

Now I'm doubly convinced that you have me totally wrong. I'm not always thinking how I can defend myself from attack. I don't carry a gun generally, unless I am scaring coyotes off the property. I own a grand total of 4 guns, 2 of which are family heirlooms, and 2 of which are used here on the farm. I don't have a concealed carry permit, and am not seeking one. I don't own any so called "assault weapons" nor do I intend to.


I'm just a guy thats come to the conclusion, because of the lessons of life that present themselves every single day to those with eyes not so blind to see them, thats its best to be prepared, and its best to allow others to be prepared as well.

Is that so hard to understand?

edited for spelling

[CTyankee]

266. I am not sure that all rural folk are so happy with the guns in their midst.

The Colorado folks are not New Yorkers, you would certainly agree, yet look at their losses, not just now but with the Columbine shooters.

I'm not happy with any American cities' gun slaughter rate, to tell you the truth. Sorry, but that is the way I feel about it.

I think we could take some lessons from the Europeans and grow up, frankly. Don't get cranked. I've just seen a different way of living. You haven't. I advise you to get serious about seeing the way folks can live in other countries. Start with Europe. I am going to be in Turin, Italy in May. I hope to see you in the Al Bicerin coffee shop there at the Piazza della Consalata. We can discuss this over the "bicerin" which consists of coffee, chocolate and heavy cream. Life doesn't get better than that...

[beevul]

271. No one that I am aware of said they ALL were.

"The Colorado folks are not New Yorkers, you would certainly agree, yet look at their losses, not just now but with the Columbine shooters."

Indeed, there are some losses. No one that I am aware of is denying that.

"I'm not happy with any American cities' gun slaughter rate, to tell you the truth. Sorry, but that is the way I feel about it."

No reason for you to be sorry about it. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that WAS happy about it. I certainly am not.

"I think we could take some lessons from the Europeans and grow up, frankly. Don't get cranked. I've just seen a different way of living. You haven't. I advise you to get serious about seeing the way folks can live in other countries. Start with Europe. I am going to be in Turin, Italy in May. I hope to see you in the Al Bicerin coffee shop there at the Piazza della Consalata. We can discuss this over the "bicerin" which consists of coffee, chocolate and heavy cream. Life doesn't get better than that..."

I think you again, read me wrong. I am not, and have not been, angry with you. But this "growing up" you speak of...I'm not entirely clear what you mean, exactly, by that. In the context of what I want for my life and that of my children, fellow citizens and the society I live in, and how we run our affairs, I am not interested what folks do in other countries, or how they run their affairs. I'm content to respect the individuality of, and respect the sovereignty of other countries (if my damn government would just do the same thing, but thats another debate eh?), and all I wish is that they do the same thing in return. I am neither an isolationist, nor a communitarian, but I'll not be assimilated by any collective, either.

Now, I'm not a coffee drinker, though I do respect the power of chocolate, but Id be more than happy to sit down with you out here at the farm, on the picnic table, next to the barbecue, and discuss this over a beer and my family secret recipe 12 hour marinaded rib-eyes with sides of baked potato, and our own organic home grown sweet corn. After the winter thats just descended on us, of course. One bite of that rib eye-eye and you might reconsider what life doesn't get any better than.

A steak sizzling on the grill is an entirely new experience, when you can actually hear it without the rest of the world drowning its sound away.

[CTyankee]

273. Whever I visit Dallas I try to eat at Dickey's Barbecue Pit

not just for the bbq but also the fried okra (I actually like it southern style, boiled and all slimy and "hairy" which makes my New England friends cringe)and collard greens. I go easy on the bbq now, tho.

So you see we can all have appreciation for both our heritage (all my people were southern and I am 3rd generation Texan) and what we learn to experience later in life. I will never eat trippa (tripe) that my Roman friends love, however, no matter what. But I love that I can have exquisite chocolate in one Perugia's beautiful chocolate shops staffed by uniformed servers and then walk so much around that old city's winding hilly streets that I never gain weight when I visit!

You are right, we do see beauty and art in many different ways. My art of course may not be your art. I truly get that. I was 16 when my mother took me to Paris, London and Amsterdam. I cannot tell you how thunderstruck I was by Winged Victory in the Louvre and by Rembrandt's "Night Watch" in Amsterdam. I am no art historian but the treasures in Rome's Borghese Gallery are worth a small peek, I think (stay away from the Uffizi in Florence because it will give you art overload!). This May will also be in Padua to see Giotto's magnificent frescoes. It blows my mind when I see that they were painted 1302-05!

I will close by wishing you a wonderful holiday season. Stay well and ciao!

[onenote]

155. several of her shots hit him before he turned the gun on himself

Maybe he would've killed himself anyway...eventually. But he didn't kill himself after the first shootings and he clearly was prepared to do a lot more killing before he was done. The guard's intervention made a huge difference.

[durrrty libby]

29. It would be refreshing if people admitted to having faith in their

own abilities and judgment

[Beausoir]

13. Oh wow. I thought the woman claimed she had killed him?

[The Straight Story]

15. She may have shot him and he may have also shot himself after that

hard to tell at this point.

[Gormy Cuss]

25. The AP link in LBN says just that.

She hit him several times but he died from a self-inflicted gunshot.

[The Straight Story]

36. So he was down, afraid of jail, and offed himself - so she still stopped him

Why people have an issue with that is beyond me, and thanks for that update.

[Gormy Cuss]

41. Or, as someone pointed out in another thread,

she may have shot him after he shot himself. However, I can't see a reason why the gunman would choose that moment to off himself other than the fact that someone was pointing a gun at him.

[CTyankee]

You have a point there. If she was a duly appointed guard with a background

done on her suitability to carry and use a gun (which was also licensed by the state) in performing her duty as a guard, she was fulfilling her duty. The real question is how did HE get his gun?

[sammythecat]

51. Exactly,

my guess is the gunman probably intended to kill himself at some point. He just didn't have an exact time but I think it's likely he didn't expect to be alive the next day.

The coroner's report says he was struck "multiple times" but delivered the fatal shot himself. He shot himself when he knew it was all over. Bottom line is her actions stopped him.

[CTyankee]

120. Wouldn't it have been better if the police had been there instead of the guard?

There is real deterrence to a clearly identified squad car parked in full view and armed police standing in front of the building. The gunman in that case would never have gotten out of his car in the first place!

The church alerted their guard as a result of the story of the gunman earlier at another church. They could just as easily gotten police protection, given the circumstances.

Deterrence in the hands of well trained police officers (who are accountable to the public) is preferable in these cases.

[piedmont]

132. Somehow I think police presence at every congregation in the state wouldn't be possible. nt

[CTyankee]

152. No. The gunman was at large in the community. The church itself

realized it might be a target. It makes sense that they should have called the cops.

But back to my question: wouldn't armed police be better than a voluntary guard, qualified tho she may be?

[joshcryer]

156. The Church had no evidence it was a target. Precautions, but nothing substantitive.

If every Church called the police with the evidence that they had the police would've been unable to do anything.

[piedmont]

157. The first shooting happened 80 miles away, and he had no connection to the 2nd church.

They did not know he was so close until he was there shooting.

As to your question, police would probably be more effective than the guards they had, but police can't be everywhere at once.

[CTyankee]

193. The church knew enough to call upon their voluntary guard.

They were in the community and felt that they were at risk and called their guard. The local police knew this guy was on the loose in the community.

I just don't know why you don't feel that they were justified in asking for police assistance. A well regulated police force is just better at combating this kind of threat than a single guard, don't you agree?

[piedmont]

200. Well then, EVERY church in CO should have had policemen

Does CO have that many police? Should they all have been diverted to churches for the whole day over something that nobody knew in advance would happen?

I don't know where you you keep getting this idea that they knew he was on the loose in the community. His first killings were 80 miles away. That's not the same community at all. This church was being as cautious as anyone (but you, of course) could expect them to be.

"A well regulated police force is just better at combating this kind of threat than a single guard, don't you agree?"
Haven't you asked me this already, and haven't I said yes? BTW, the church had several armed guards, not just one.

[Ghost in the Machine]

150. "They could just as easily gotten police protection"... No, not really..

How far away were the church and the missionary training facility? Did they have any reason to think that the gunman would travel to the other church? What if EVERY church in a 50 mile radius requested a police presence? Would there have been enough officers on the force to comply? How much manpower would have been tied up?

They had NO INDICATION of a clear and present threat and the police were under no obligation to serve as armed guards for them without that clear and present threat.

It's easier to look in retrospect and say what "should have" or "could have" been done, but that just denies the reality of the situation. No one had any way of knowing what *could* have happened, but they did the right thing handling it how they did.

Do you think that they *never* have an armed guard there? Think about this: In a 10,000 member mega-church, if each parishoner gave a $10 thithing, they're collecting $100,000 per week on Sundays. Wouldn't *you* have an armed guard?? I know *I* would...

[joshcryer]

179. Oh it's way way more than that though, many parishoners give 10% of their paychecks.

[CTyankee]

194. Well, the second church itself alerted the guard after the first attack..

Please, all I am saying is why the police were not asked to intervene? Isn't this an instance of public safety? If not, why not? Can you answer that?

[Ghost in the Machine]

199. "If not, why not? Can you answer that? ".....

For the same reasons that the cops won't come guard *your* house when you go to work just because another house in the neighborhood was burglarized the day before. They *might* patrol through the neighborhood a few times to show a presence, but they aren't going to guard each individual house.

They had no way of knowing *for sure* that the shooter would go anywhere else, did they?

Ask yourself a question: What do the cops tell you when you report a missing person? They tell you "we can't do anything for 24 hours"... *unless* someone actually witnessed a child or person being abducted.

Again, there was no *credible threat* to the second location. For all anyone knew, it was a random shooting that happened.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that that's how it is...

PEACE!

Ghost

[CTyankee]

204. Look, all I am saying is that police protection is better. It is more accountable and, if properly

regulated, more responsible, than relying on a private guard that may or may not be so.

All we do know is that the gunman was at large in the community. He had attacked a fundamental Christian church. The one in question had "let him go" and so he had a grudge. So he had a motive and he was at large! What more does a police dept. need, in your estimation?

But I think my real question to you is, do you really think law enforcement is better handled by a well regulated, well trained police force or by individual vigilantes?

[piedmont]

206. As I understand it, he had no connection whatsoever with New Life.

And nobody knew his identity anyway.

[Ghost in the Machine]

211. Do you not know, are you forgetting or are you just ignoring the fact

that the guard was an ex-cop? Isn't that enough training for you?

While he was at large after the first shooting, was he identified?? If so, why wasn't an A.P.B. put out on him and his vehicle? Again, they had NO CREDIBLE THREAT to the second location. Period. If he was unidentified, how would ANYONE know what his motive was, or where he might go next???

As for your last question: How much training does the average street patrol officer have in the use of his weapon? Some of them NEVER shoot their weapons unless they are on the firing range for qualifying every six months to a year. I could be wrong about those times, as I'm going from memory, and they vary from city to city.

I live in a county that has 4 cops and I live 12 miles from town, out in the boonies. Some of us don't have time to wait for cops for everything. If I heard someone breaking into *my* house, calling the cops would be the LAST thing on my mind. It would take them at least 15 mins to get here, and that's *if* they were at the station and not at the opposite end of the county over 30 miles away or tied up with someone issuing a ticket or investigating an accident or another crime. Defending ourselves is pretty much an unspoken rule where I live. In the time it took for an officer to get here, my kids and I *could* be dead....

[CTyankee]

212. You have a serious problem I hope to god I never have.

Unlike you, I prefer to live in a community where we have civil control of crime and guns. I am sincerely sorry you do not and I do not understand why you are on democraticunderground.com. I truly think you would do better to be on a more vigilante geared website. More than likely Republican.

You make assertions you have not proved in your post. You simply said there was no APB on the gunman. Do you know that as a fact? How is it that the second church knew there was a threat?

I am very sorry that you live in such a horrible place with no police protection. That is a real problem. I suggest you work on THAT in your community, if for no other reason than for LAW AND ORDER.

What I want to know is how did YOU let this happen?

[Ghost in the Machine]

214. You have 2 problems I hope I never have. 1 is a reading comprehension problem,

the second is a lack of couth and a severe "I'm better than you" attitude. You should work on them both, it'll do you a world a of good.

Unlike you, I prefer to live in a community where we have civil control of crime and guns. I am sincerely sorry you do not...

*I* prefer to live any goddamned place I WANT to live, without some snotnosed holier than thou fuckwad telling me WHERE to live. I'm sorry *you* choose to live in overcrowded, crime ridden areas where you *need* to be babysat by the cops. Who the fuck do you think *you* are????

I am sincerely sorry you do not and I do not understand why you are on democraticunderground.com. I truly think you would do better to be on a more vigilante geared website. More than likely Republican.

Again, who the fuck do you think you are?? What the fuck is wrong with you that you can't accept an honest answer to a question that you asked?? Maybe *you* are the one who would be better off on a differently geared website. Maybe something like whineyasswindbagsunderground.com or nannystateunderground.com To top that off, you have the audacity to imply that I'm "more than likely Republican"?? Fuck off, assclown. I mean that sincerely.....

How is it that the second church knew there was a threat?

Do *you* have proof that they DID know there was a clear and present threat?? Or is it likely that they just took *precautions* because there was a gunman on the loose. Again, *if* there was a break-in in *your* neighborhood, would you not take extra precautions to make sute *your home* was as secure as it could be?

I am very sorry that you live in such a horrible place with no police protection. That is a real problem. I suggest you work on THAT in your community, if for no other reason than for LAW AND ORDER.

What I want to know is how did YOU let this happen?

First off, I don't live in "such a horrible place". I live in a very nice place, out in the country, on 12.5 acres of land with only a few other houses around, which includes my parents, my sister and her kids and an aunt and uncle. There's a 4 more homes up here, but we all know each other. It's very quiet and peaceful and I wouldn't trade it for the world.

We don't have crime problems like you apparently have, where you feel the need to have cops in your life 24/7 all day, every day. I'd suggest that YOU work on YOUR community, ours is just fine, thank you...

How did *I* let this happen?? That's the most asinine question I've seen yet!! Yes, I am responsible for a town that has been in existence for over 150 years. It's ALL MY FAULT!! I'm the Mayor, Town Council, Sheriff and Comptroller and I set the the budget for one of the poorest counties the 4th smallest county in Tennessee.

You need to pull your head out of your ass before you respond to me again, because the shit stuck between your ears is stopping your brain function and clouding your ability to have an intelligent discussion.

:hi:

[CTyankee]

225. I am sincerely sorry my post upset you to the point of using obscenities against me.

That is not my style no matter how heated a debate might be. I don't think such verbal usage really gets you where you want to go. Or maybe it does and I just don't understand your method of "discussion." The underlying anger is also disturbing to me. I hope you can calm down and reason out my message which is basically civil control over dangerous weapons too easily obtained by nutcases in American communities. I have not heard a suggestion that would stop these individuals from getting weapons in the first place, hence my question to you which was really not rhetorical. There, I've asked it again. Can you give me your thoughts on solutions to this problem? I'd love to hear them even if I question them. Rational discourse is illuminating.

[Ghost in the Machine]

258. Is *this* what you call "rational discourse"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTyankee (1000+ posts) Tue Dec-11-07 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #211
212. You have a serious problem I hope to god I never have.
Unlike you, I prefer to live in a community where we have civil control of crime and guns. I am sincerely sorry you do not and I do not understand why you are on democraticunderground.com. I truly think you would do better to be on a more vigilante geared website. More than likely Republican.

You make assertions you have not proved in your post. You simply said there was no APB on the gunman. Do you know that as a fact? How is it that the second church knew there was a threat?

I am very sorry that you live in such a horrible place with no police protection. That is a real problem. I suggest you work on THAT in your community, if for no other reason than for LAW AND ORDER.

What I want to know is how did YOU let this happen?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTHING about this post was rational. Period. I seriously don't understand your disconnect with people living in rural or remote areas. I grew up and lived most of my life in Miami, Fla. so I am fully aware of crime and horrible areas.

Now to answer your question:
We will NEVER be able to stop people from getting guns. Period. There are 270 MILLION guns in the United States alone. There's no way, short of continued door to door searches and seizures, which isn't possible. Even if it were possible, there are too many people who know how and materials to fabricate guns and they would NEVER be totally gone from society.

The only things I can think of that is going to make a dent in the problem is:

1.)legalize drugs, which will cut down on the criminal activity and black market trade,

2.)hand out extremely severe sentences for ANYONE caught with a gun who is forbidden to own one legally and

3.)swift & sure execution of anyone who murders another human being. If they are caught redhanded, if they confess or if DNA evidence is present that ties them 100% positively to the crime, walk them outside to a gallows and hang their ass publicly.

People think the death penalty won't deter crime, but they are WRONG in that assumption. The reason it hasn't been a big deterent is because it's not carried out immediately. Criminals know that even if they ARE sentenced to death that they can languish in a prison cell, at taxpayers expense, for 20 years or more while they tie up our court systems with frivilous appeals. Knowing that they will be walked out of the courthouse and hung upon conviction would be a bigger deterent, IMHO.

I know support of the death penalty is an unpopular opinion and stance here, but I fully support it. If you want to fix society, you do away with those who have proven themselves unfit to live in a civil society. You don't do that by putting them in a prison cell for life, where they have free housing, food, clothing and medical care for the rest of their lives. You do it by eradicating them from the face of this earth.

[CTyankee]

259. We can only agree on #2 of your post.

So you see we agree on this one point which is keeping the guns out of the hands of sick or criminal individuals. That doesn't solve the problem presented by the present case in point. What would you do to prevent the shooter from having the gun in the first place?

[beevul]

261. How about you?

You said in an earlier post:

"I have not heard a suggestion that would stop these individuals from getting weapons in the first place, hence my question to you which was really not rhetorical."

and then in the post I responded to:

"What would you do to prevent the shooter from having the gun in the first place?"


How about YOU answer those questions.



What do YOU suggest?

[CTyankee]

268. I would find it interesting to know what is being suggested by

opponents of gun violence, don't you think? I am sure they have some ideas for legislation that has been stymied for YEARS while Americans have been slaughtered by guns in our midst.

Want to start with some of them?

[beevul]

272. Do you know of any?

"I would find it interesting to know what is being suggested by opponents of gun violence, don't you think? I am sure they have some ideas for legislation that has been stymied for YEARS while Americans have been slaughtered by guns in our midst."

If you have some examples of "legislation that has been stymied for YEARS", by all means lets hear it.

Want to start with some of them?

It depends just who your talking about. Some of these "opponents of gun violence" have these strange notions that laws, and signs that say things like "gun free zone" actually make some sort of difference where a criminal and his intent is concerned.

And after the criminal shows them them that thier laws and thier little signs don't do diddley, these "opponents of gun violence" start screaming to take away the guns of millions of people that do obey the law, and respect the "gun free zone" signs.


Its really the strangest thing.

[Marrah_G]

242. How many cops do you think we have?

Your statement is absurd, it really is. Your argument has no basis at all.

Your seething hatred for this woman, more then likely based on faith and perceived political leans in blinding you from any sort of reasonable thought.

[sammythecat]

192. Exactly to you too

That would have been the responsible thing to do.

I was only saying that she stopped the guy. Whether she delivered the fatal shot, or if he did, doesn't change the fact that she stopped him.

You're right though. To me, it seems guards are there to intervene if some unexpected trouble occurs. In this case it seems reasonable to think it somewhat likely trouble might occur. Really big trouble! They should have canceled the services if they were concerned about the possibility of gun violence. It seems ridiculously irresponsible that they didn't if they had such concerns. At the very least, the very least, they should have warned the congregation and requested police presence.

on edit: I responded to your response without reading the other responses to your comment. I have to admit that I'm not familiar with much of the details of who knew what, only that she thought she killed the guy and it turned out she wounded him and he then killed himself. She stopped him.

[CTyankee]

196. Thanks. Yours is a very rational response. It makes me wonder why

more people don't seem to understand that a well regulated police force, accountable to the people, isn't the best first responders, or advance responders in this cae, to this kind of threat?

[ileus]

208. Let them use their money, not peoples tax dollars.

[malaise]

17. The story is weird

She hit him several times and took him down but he killed himself?

He must have been a mega-human.

[BadgerLaw2010]

24. Normal handguns are notorious for poor stopping power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout

[krispos42]

42. Actually, handgun wounds are rarely immediatley fatal or incapacitating

Usually when a person is shot with a handgun, any incapacitation is more psychological than physiological.

Your 9mm and.45 handguns don't have enough power to deliver enough shock to disable a person immediately, unless the bullet hits the brain or upper spinal cord. People usually panic when shot with a handgun (oh God, I'm hit!!!!!), typically becoming very very concerned with their own wounds and mortality and seeking escape and medical help. Popular culture overstating the effectiveness of handguns is a factor, too.

This is why people in a rage or on drugs are so dangerous to police officers. Such a person does not have the normal life-preserving reactions when they get shot, and continue to attack.

If she shot this guy, he probably went down, stunned and surprised, and decided he didn't want to face his failure. He wanted to kill himself before somebody or something (like blood loss) could keep him from doing it, so rather than keep shooting, he ate his gun.

Cops carry handguns because it's convienent, not because they are particulary effective. Give a choice and a chance, cops always grap a shotgun or a rifle when they know they are facing trouble.

[October]

138. Maybe it's a technicality?

I mean, maybe it was "technically" his own bullet that caused his death, even though hers hit him, as well.

<shrug>

[riderinthestorm]

19. No silly, she claimed that GOD killed him!!

He just used her hands and gun is all....

LOL!! :popcorn: The fallout from this particular piece of news should be fun to watch.

[slackmaster]

102. She said she "took him down", which is perfectly true

:argh:

[devilgrrl]

16. D'oh!!!! And here I thought we had a "hero". Where was GAWD on this one?

:sarcasm:

[vincent_vega_lives]

104. She prevented more killing

and as a bonus didn't have to kill anyone.

She knowingly placed her self in a lethal situation in order to protect lives. That makes her a hero in my book.

[gratuitous]

18. Doesn't matter

The High Church of Redemptive Violence has already written its narrative, and not one jot, not one tittle will pass away until all has been fulfilled.

[piedmont]

172. ^^^ Another total pacifist, unhappy that lives were saved. nt

[Mike Daniels]

229. It amazes me

A total whackjob who had killed several people and who would have killed many more is stopped and there are some people who seem utter put out by the fact.

That, or they think they have an "AH-HA" or "Gotcha" moment because the gunman put a bullet in his brain and that nullifies any role the guard had in ending the whole affair.

[gratuitous]

253. Breathtakingly ignorant

But it's my own fault for interrupting your worship service.

[piedmont]

20. The woman is still a hero. He wouldn't have shot himself if she hadn't confronted him. nt

[gatorboy]

26. Shhhhh. They're celebrating.

[riderinthestorm]

37. Nope, the only ones celebrating are the NRA

as the meme that every Murkin should be armed everywhere, all the time in case they are confronted by mentally ill people in church, just got another 24 hours of prime time media coverage complete with good looking white Christian woman spouting that God really did it.

[gatorboy]

44. Sooo you would've stopped the man with...Hugs?

Seriously, would do you think would've been a better option? :shrug:

[riderinthestorm]

48. He shot himself. He stopped himself.

And it could be theorized that "hugs" - either literal or metaphorical or even pharmaceutical ones - administered at some point during this man's religiously indoctrinated childhood just maybe, could have, perhaps might have stopped the entire episode from happening in the first place.

The only things we know for sure about him is that he was raised as a fundy evangelical homeschooled kid who was rejected from missionary school for "physical" reasons. It sounds troubled from this very initial reporting.

Sorry but I just think guns at churches is an oxymoron of the moran variety. And to say the shooting by that security guard was directed by God, whilst the troubled young man's shooting is somehow... not directed by God, wtf?

[gatorboy]

53. You seem to have missed the report that he was armed to the teeth.

He was most definitely prepared to do more damage had he not been confronted. Use some logic, man.

[riderinthestorm]

68. Okey dokey then. Now I just wish it was a whole range of mothafuckers

at the church taking out Matthew Murray at once - kinda a Rambo thang, his body riddled with hundreds of bullets, lying spread eagled across the pews, in a pseudo Jesus arm spread.

Excellent! And of course, God's hand would have steadied everyone of those believers' hands so nobody else could of, or would of, been injured, everyone praising God that so many parisheners were armed that day!

"Rock on" sayeth the Lord, "vengeance is mine!" And he pulled the trigger himself to smite that evildoer Matthew who dared enter his house.

Yeah, okay, logic applied. I'm convinced. No way anyone could have knocked Matthew down, or perhaps God could have just shot him in the arm or something without actually killing him. Nope, it takes weapons in the house of the Lord.

[piedmont]

72. You're not making a lot of sense. And you already started a thread devoted to the...

"why didn't God shoot him in the arm?" question.

[riderinthestorm]

88. The woman security guard was gloating over the fact that she shot that man dead

in church. Did you see her press conference? I found her to be enormously offensive on several levels. I started the other thread with a mostly rhetorical question in response to that media appearance. Ie: if God could direct her hand to kill him, why wouldn't God just direct her hands to knock the gun out of his hands etc. etc.

That thread also provoked a lot of discussion about whether Christians should even have weapons in church amongst other things. Gatorboy appears to be saying that Christians arming themselves in church is the only logical response to perceived dangers both real or imagined which I find ironic coming from people of "faith" especially in light of the fact that the guy killed himself, which could be construed as the ultimate hand of God on the situation with even more extrapolations about faith and actions proceeding even deeper into that death spiral of a convo.

Obviously just too tricky for you. So feel free to move along.

[beevul]

94. Its been reported that she only SHOT him...

and that the gunman took his own life afterwards.


What say you now?

[riderinthestorm]

103. Say about what?

Jeanne Assam's most repulsive press conference praising God's skill with a handgun? Disgusting and open for criticsm which I gave freely.

Or that the gunman actually killed himself? I already gave that answer too upthread.

Or that it's oxymoronic that people of faith, in Jesus' house, are packing weapons designed to kill other people? Yup, touched on that too.

What exactly are you looking for me to answer now?

[beevul]

109. Say about this:

"The woman security guard was gloating over the fact that she shot that man dead
in church."


Your words.


Now contrast those with reality...that the gunman killed himself.

[riderinthestorm]

124. I was flamed for criticizing Jeanne Ammas' performance on teevee

I stand by that criticism. She was offensive on many levels for me.

That Matthew Murray killed himself is a tragedy and underscores even more how repulsive Jeanne Ammas' public appearances are to me. I will bet you big money that young man was mentally ill and this story could and should have had a very different ending, with changes occurring that should have re-written the outcome years earlier. I'm not sure what else you are trying to get me to say but that pretty much sums it up for me.

[beevul]

158. I may not be as clear as I intend to be...

I don't disagree that she is mildly offensive.

I just don't think your characterization of her was...as accurate as it could have been...is all.


Not a huge deal...I been accused of picking nits before, and guilty as charged.

[onenote]

165. of all of the tragedies involved in this incident, the "tragedy" of Murray's

suicide ranks at the very bottom.

He killed innocent people and would've killed many more. If we could commission the old "way back" machine and go back in time and take care of him in a way that prevented this entire event from occurring, it would be great. But until you find the keys to the way back machine, I'm going to base my reactions to the reality of the here and now. And that reality is that not stopping him would've been more tragic than stopping him and there was no apparent way, as the event was then unfolding, of stopping him short of shooting him.

[piedmont]

96. I saw a woman rejoicing that she could save people's lives.

I'm well aware of what issues got raised in that thread. What I'm wondering is why you are duplicating those questions in this thread.

[gatorboy]

75. No, no, I think you're still missing that logic thing.

Must be your obsession with religion getting in the way. ;)

[riderinthestorm]

93. Or my lack of obsession with religion

As an atheist, I am a couple of decades past my obsession which lasted through a couple of decades of fundyism, religious seeking and finally release from that whole shebang.

Perhaps I just find this particular story so fascinating because it is a terrible junction of God, guns, the religious right (that church is a notorious right-wing fundie hell hole), megachurches and their distortion of true Christianity PLUS I honestly believe Matthew will be shown to be mentally ill. It's all truly sad.

Anyway, peace out to you. :hi:

[gatorboy]

95. You still seem pretty obsessed with the subject.

But I'm not saying it's just you. Most atheists here do for some reason. I honestly don't get it. :shrug:

[riderinthestorm]

108. I'm a farmer in Illinois, watching an ice storm outside. Bored.

Not much else to do. Had dinner in the crockpot this morning and have been sitting on my ass all day. Usually I find these kinds of threads tedious and avoid them. Today was the perfect storm of laziness and bad weather.

Like I said, this story mixes up all the worst parts of organized religion, guns, delusions about hearing voices from God, etc. etc. It's obviously not just atheists who are "obsessed" today, not just atheists by a long shot. Mycritters2 from the other thread is an ordained, seminary graduated minister in a large church who was deeply involved in commenting. You are a christian I am guessing as are many (most) others on this thread alone.

You should see me on women's issues threads... talk about obsession! :P

[piedmont]

112. Off-topic: what do you grow/raise? nt

[gatorboy]

121. Considering the weather, I'd say iceburg lettuce.

[riderinthestorm]

131. You devil you! nt

[gatorboy]

137. Thank you, thank you. I'll be here til thursday

Try the angel food cake at the buffet!

[riderinthestorm]

130. Horses. And since nobody can get turned out, the staff puts them in the indoor arena

all day, in small groups which means I don't ride anyone. Thta's the bulk of my work. We also have 2 acres in mixed organic veggies that I grow for a roadside stand, an organic restaurant, myself, my boarders and clients, and any of the staff that care to go down and pick their own.

So weather like today means I get to sit on my ass and eat and cook and DU.

[piedmont]

135. Cool. Western or English? nt

[riderinthestorm]

141. Dressage and combined training which is "english"

It's basically the old cavalry tests run over three days. First day is dressage testing accuracy and rideability (like figure skating patterns), second day is galloping over cross country obstacles (which is how Christopher Reeve broke his neck), and the third day is over stadium fences like you typically see featured on the Olympics.

I "run" the farm, do the gallops and some of the training, my husband "finishes" the horses and competes them.

So days like today when I can't ride/train or really be productive typically end with me still in my pajamas at 4 pm and trying to decide if I should finally go brush my teeth!

Eek! Probably TMI.

Anyway, I am on a very slow rural dialup and won't be able to load this thread much longer anyway so it's probably more than time I got off and actually DID brush my teeth!

Here's a picture for you of my husband and I looking peeved while we watched a woman get dumped off at the water jump this past summer: we are both exhausted and hotter than Hades which is wierd to think of on an ice storm day like today. I always laugh at our exact same body language.

[/IMG

[piedmont]

151. I'm familiar with three-day eventing. I always wanted to do it.

I trained hunter/jumper while I was in high school. I wish I had the money to go further with it. Maybe eventually I will. Working on that part, though.

Those are some beutifully kept horses, from what I can see. I hope the weather lets up so you can get back to business.

[riderinthestorm]

161. Thanks! They are both homebreds.

The gray TB has competed through Advanced**, the dark bay TB/TK (she looks black in the photo since she is coated in sweat), is a young horse just going Prelim. We hosted Jimmy Wofford at a clinic at our farm and this young woman was really inappropriately mounted. Mr. Wofford actually nicely, politely, told her she was out of his clinic after she fell in the water that day.

Anyway, I posted them since we are so OT anyway. Hope you get back to your horsey dreams soon yourself too someday.

[beevul]

123. Also OT...

We had it go through here as well...well...the northern tip of it anyway.

I hope you and your family remain uneffected by this storm. Reports are last I saw, 22 dead, due to it.


I drove through it last nite to get 20 gallons of gas for the generator...just in case.


Last years ice storm left us without power for nearly a week.

[riderinthestorm]

134. Stay safe out there!

We have a 300 gallon gas tank and a 300 gallon diesel tank, and several generators. I have 40 horses at my place so running out of power isn't an option for me.

Be careful and stay warm!!

[beevul]

153. I have observed this SO many times...

Between living in rural MN and rural NE most of my life...


Farmers are some of the best prepared folks I have ever seen, with few exceptions.

"Be careful and stay warm!!"

You too.

[joshcryer]

128. He didn't stop himself, she stopped him. He prevented himself from being caught.

He was going out, losing consciousness, he was DYING, but he wanted to be SURE he was going to die. He didn't want to wake up in a hospital room.

With a lot of explaining to do.

[piedmont]

45. Where are you getting that he was mentally ill?

And why do you think eliminating "gun free" zones equals arming everyone?

Oh, wait, you don't. You're just being dishonest.

[riderinthestorm]

62. News reports of his wash-out at the missionary school indicate that it was because of mental illness

that's how I interpret the reports of "physical" reasons for his rejection. Also the fact that this fucker decides to take his issues out via a mass murder killing spree would seem to indicate he was just a tad bit mentally unhinged.

Secondly, I don't advocate elimating "gun free" zones, I just personally believe guns at church is oxymoranic.... Nothing to do with arming everyone or not.

[piedmont]

69. I took the "physical reasons" bit to mean just that-- physical reasons

otherwise they would have called them mental reasons.
As for mass murder as a symptom of mental illness, you may have more of an argument there. But using that line of thinking, couldn't one just as easily say that all murders are the result mental illness?

[riderinthestorm]

74. Tell you what, I'll make a bet right now that reports are coming that this was a troubled young man

And that his "physical" reasons for being rejected as a missionary were all about mental healh issues. I would bet even further that people knew he wasn't "right" for a long time....

[piedmont]

91. I'm sure they will come. But I doubt he had been diagnosed with anything.

And being "not right" doesn't equal mental illness. I'd say that Bush, Cheney, etc. are "not right," but I won't excuse them with mental illness.
As stigmatized as mental illness is in America (and especially among fundies), it wouldn't surprise me if he did have mental health issues that were never treated properly. On that we can agree.

[eleny]

184. Our local news just said it was "health" reasons - no specifics

John Farrugia reported on our channel 7 News at 4 PM that Matthew was let go because of "health" reasons and that it was not specified if it was mental or physical health.

[I work for workers]

149. I'm celebrating along with them. LOTS of Democrats support the NRA.

He killed himself after being put on the floor by several gunshots the HERO women pumped into him.

[PassingFair]

33. Did god tell you that? n/t

[piedmont]

55. See post #54 and get back to me, smartass. nt

[PassingFair]

60. Seems to me that a LOT of these whack jobs off THEMSELVES.

Gunshot wounds, hand-O-god, or sun-in-the-eye,
feet slipped or for whatever reason.

Glad you seem to GNO for sure what went down....

On Edit:

Forgot, Smartass!

[piedmont]

61. I agree that he would have killed himself anyway. AFTER killing others.

"Glad you seem to GNO for sure what went down...."
Well, the Vietnam vet witness did say that the guard shot the killer. :eyes:

[PassingFair]

63. Glad you know how many he was going to kill.

Is god talking to you right now?

[piedmont]

66. He was in the process of shooting people when she came up on him.

How much evidence do you need?

[PassingFair]

71. First you tell me that he wouldn't have shot himself.

He wouldn't have shot himself if she hadn't confronted him. nt

...When I read ALL THE TIME that these whackos USUALLY shoot themselves.

Then you tell me that he was going to shoot others.
(Do you have an inside line on HOW MANY).

Since you write so emphatically and with such KNOWLEDGE
of what the shooter would have done, I figure god must
be guiding your typing fingers, much the way he guided
the security guard's (and, by extension, the other guy's
hand).

So....unless god IS talking to you, please stop pretending
to know what you do not know.

[piedmont]

80. Hey, since overwhelming evidence doesn't convince you of anything,

why are you here? Why debate at all? Why not resign yourself to being a know-nothing?

The murderer stated that he wanted to kill as many people as possible. He went to that church when it had hundreds of people inside. He killed people at the door so that he could gain entry. Before he could finish killing people at the door, she came and shot him. After she shot him, he shot himself.

And you don't think she saved people's lives?

[joshcryer]

133. Do you think he would've shot himself without unloading a good deal of those 1k rounds?

Are you really that delusional? He was done for, thus he did himself in. It was his only "out." Had he survived the wounds he'd be spending the rest of his life in jail, he'd be a test subject for psychologists everywhere. Life imprisonment. Questions. Probing.

He couldn't have that. He wanted to go out in glory, just like all of these assholes do when they kill themselves. No reprecussions, no end results, no having to deal with the effects of what they did.

But if you think for one fucking second that he didn't intend to kill a whole lot of people you're deluded. If you don't think that the woman who shot him preventded him from doing this, then you are also delusional.

[beevul]

79. Do you REALLY think...

"Police said Murray was armed with an assault rifle, two handguns and a backpack jammed with bullet clips carrying 1,000 rounds as well as smoke bombs."


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/dec/10/cops-search-arapahoe-home/


Do you really think he had a thousand rounds with him because he planned to take himself out after shooting less than 50?


Please...

[PassingFair]

83. No, as you can see, I have made NO predictions and no

statements concerning facts which I do not possess.

Unlike others here.

[beevul]

86. Thats really neat, but your dodging.

Let me put this another way...


He was carrying 100 rounds of ammunition.


What do YOU think he intended to do, considering he was carrying that much ammunition?


Answer please.



He was shooting people. Had shot people earlier in the day at a different location.


It is COMPLETELY reasonable to deduce that he intended to shoot MANY more people, and would have, had he not been stopped.


Refute that.

[PassingFair]

89. Is it reasonable to deduce that he wasn't going to kill himself?

Because that's what whatshisname said.

Then he called me a smartass.

Refute that.

And I'm not "dodging" anything.

[beevul]

97. That, is beside the point.

"Is it reasonable to deduce that he wasn't going to kill himself?
"Then he called me a smartass."

What "whatshisname" likely meant is that the gunman did not intend to kill himself at the place and time that he did. The FACT that the gunman possessed a thousand-ish unfired rounds at the time of his suicide supports this.

But thats neither here nor there.


"And I'm not "dodging" anything."

Then answer the bleedin question:


What do YOU think he intended to do, considering he was carrying 1000 rounds of ammunition?

[PassingFair]

99. How many people did he kill at his first destination? n/t

[beevul]

105. Would you just answer the question please.

What do YOU think he intended to do, considering he was carrying 1000 rounds of ammunition?

[PassingFair]

110. Well, by YOUR logic, if he was carrying that 1000 rounds of ammo

...he had already killed 1000 people!
Having not been brought down by the hand of god
previously!

[beevul]

119. What?

"Well, by YOUR logic, if he was carrying that 1000 rounds of ammo...he had already killed 1000 people!"

Care to explain how that works exactly?

If he had already killed 1000 people, hed have expended those thousand rounds, rather than still have them in his possession.


POINT: He didn't carry all those rounds (which amound to quite a hefty amount of weight) if he did NOT intend to use them. Thats my I belief, and logic supports it.


You still haven't answered.

What do YOU think he intended to do with those thousand rounds?

Im not asking for facts, I'm asking for what YOU believe he intended to do with them.

What do YOU think he intended to do with those thousand rounds?

[PassingFair]

122. How many people did he kill at his first stop?

Did he use every bullet he had on him?
Half of them?
A quarter of them?

[beevul]

143. Thats not relivant.

Thats not relivant, since CLEARLY he had another stop to make, which he made. There are no reports of him carrying a backpack of 1000 rounds with him at the first shooting. And its not relivant, because of how the circumstances took place, according to the information currently available:

The shootings — at a missionary training center near Denver and at an evangelical megachurch in Colorado Springs — turned a quiet Sunday of fellowship into a day of high drama and gunfire, with bystanders running for cover, swarms of police officers rushing to the scenes, followed by lockdowns, evacuations and a manhunt for the gunman who got away after the first attack.

That shooting occurred about 12:30 a.m. in Arvada, 15 miles west of Denver, at a dormitory of Youth With a Mission, an interdenominational Christian organization with hundreds of centers around the country that train young people for short-term missionary service around the world.

Just over 12 hours later in Colorado Springs, an hour’s drive to the south of Arvada, a gunman also clad in dark clothing invaded the grounds of the New Life Church, a 14,000-member institution founded by the Rev. Ted Haggard, who resigned in disgrace last year after acknowledging a three-year sexual relationship with a male prostitute.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/us/10shooting.html?ex=1212901200&en=b8e61ec732631050&ei=5087&excamp=GGGNnewlifechurch&WT.srch=1&WT.mc_ev=click&WT.mc_id=GN-S-E-GG-NA-S-new_life_church

"Police say Murray had a backpack with him in Colorado Springs with about 1,000 rounds of ammunition."

http://www.9news.com/news/top-article.aspx?storyid=82535

From the information currently available, he goes to the first location, argues with people there, and kills 2, and injures 2. He then flees. Next we see him at a 14000 member church armed with 2 handguns and a rifle, and a thousand rounds of ammunition.


What do YOU think he intended to do with that ammunition?


Edited for spelling.

[joshcryer]

136. That's ridiculous, we don't even know if he had 1k rounds at the first place.

It is possible he took out a few people there in order to go to the bigger event and really do some damage. In fact, that seems like the logical outcome.

[piedmont]

100. Oh, I see I should have inserted a time qualifier for the literalists out there.

He wouldn't have killed himself WHEN HE DID if she hadn't confronted him. I really didn't feel that had to be explained. Notice also that I didn't say "He NEVER would have killed himself..." I can assure you that if that's what I meant, I would have included the "never."

[PassingFair]

101. What EVER. I get it!

You KNOW all.
You SEE all.

I can tell by the things you type.

By your blanket statements of "fact".

[piedmont]

107. You still don't.

I go by evidence. When there's enough of it for me, I make conclusions. Like the way mountains are formed, or how organisms evolve from other organisms. I didn't see those either, but I can make statements of fact about them from the available evidence.

And the evidence still tells me you're a smart-ass who enjoys snide comments like "are you talking to God right now?" instead of engaging in friendly debate.

[PassingFair]

111. And the evidence tell ME that you make blanket statements without

evidence.

Smartass.

[piedmont]

114. That's all you've got?

Whistle on by all that evidence I gave you.

[PassingFair]

117. Here is what you said:

"The woman is still a hero. He wouldn't have shot himself if she hadn't confronted him. nt"

THAT is what I responded to.

Your "evidence" is WHAT?

We can ALL read the news items.

You are NOT in anyone's head.

Sorry.

[piedmont]

127. Oh noes! Unqualified statements on DU!

It's perfectly clear what I meant. I would have used the word "never" if I meant he would never have shot himself. Making that clarification takes nothing away from what makes this woman a hero.

The evidence is that he stated he was going to kill as many christians as possible, and he was in the act of shooting people when he was shot by the woman who had run TOWARD the gun-fire. He only turned the gun on himself after she shot him. That's a very large pile of evidence that she ended this spree.

Ignore away.

[krispos42]

46. Oh, he probably would still have shot himself

Just after a few dozen more rounds had been fired.

[piedmont]

47. Good point. nt

[fascisthunter]

167. lol

:crazy:

[piedmont]

171. right back at ya

:crazy:

[fascisthunter]

175. "I Have To Be Right"

"I have to be right.... she's still my hero" You are nuts.

[piedmont]

176. "I have to lie about what other people have posted"

You are dishonest.

[fascisthunter]

181. I know you do

that's why I think you are nuts

[piedmont]

182. You're seriously using the "I know you are but what am I" debating technique...

and you call me nuts? Well... I know you are but what am I?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. God, apparently, left his glasses at home while he was shopping at the mall.

[Gold Metal Flake]

27. I'm gonna need a drawing for this one.

Someone diagragm this thing, please.

But I wonder, is the killer a hero for killing the killer?

[PassingFair]

34. Only if....

god steadied his hand....

:evilgrin:

[NNN0LHI]

30. Well I wonder who the woman with the big gun aired out was now?

Passerby maybe?

Don

[Tommy_Carcetti]

31. The "let's arm everyone" crowd will be very disappointed... n/t

[uppityperson]

35. No, you see, she slowed him down enough so he could kill himself.

Gave him a chance to pause, to meditate, to consider what he was doing. He was overcome with remorse and killed himself. See? Let's arm everyone because you never know when someone will need to be slowed down enough to meditate on their actions.

[benEzra]

118. No, he was lying on the floor incapacitated from being SHOT...

he didn't stop shooting people willingly, even after being confronted. He did stop shooting people as soon as he was dropped to the floor by one of his would-be victims.

BTW, I'm not in favor of "arming everyone." I do believe that allowing the 1-2% of the population who are licensed and competent to carry a weapon, to be allowed to do so, can be a good thing, and it certainly saved lives here.

[uppityperson]

162. I didn't think I needed to put this in there...

:sarcasm:

[benEzra]

174. My bad...some people in another thread were saying just that...

because she didn't kill him, just dropped him, she didn't do diddly squat and is an attention-seeking liar for taking any credit for anything. I read your post in that light, and hence misread it. Mea culpa.

Added on edit, one example of the genre:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3097995&mesg_id=3098080

[joshcryer]

148. He wasn't overcome with remorse, he was CAUGHT. BUSTED. DONE.

He killed himself as to insure that he'd never have to deal with the problem.

He would've laid there bleeding, they would've brought an ambulance, he may have survived, and then had to DEAL with the problem.

All of these spree killers who kill themselves (quite a lot) don't want to have to handle the reprecussions.

[uppityperson]

160. I didn't think I needed to post :sarcasm:.. Guess I was wrong. nt

[joshcryer]

169. Sometimes I'm not surprised by convoluted opinions posted on DU.

Which is why I didn't realize you were apparently being sarcastic.

[uppityperson]

187. sorry, sometimes it is difficult to tell.

[Guaranteed]

217. No, I think he was "done"- disabled- and didn't want to get captured.

The game was over, but he didn't want to end up at a trial for what he did. His plan was most likely always to kill himself after whatever he was going to do, and now that he couldn't carry out anything further, decided to end it.

What she did led directly to his death.

[uppityperson]

218. For you and others who may read my post, sarcasm.

She slowed him down so he could meditate on what he did was sarcasm.

[piedmont]

43. Was everyone at that church armed?

Eliminating "gun free" zones does not equal arming everyone.

[beevul]

82. Who?

"The "let's arm everyone" crowd will be very disappointed..."


Who might this "let's arm everyone" crowd be, and are there any hereabouts?

[DS1]

40. NO DAMMIT! It was a magic bullet which once fired, reached his weapon

did a 180, loaded itself, was fired again through his barrel then did another 180 and slammed into his face.


Why is this so hard to believe?

[The Straight Story]

50. Maybe she used bullets doused with holy water

Oh wait, that's catholics :)

[Sanctified]

54. The guy only killed himself after he was down from gun shot wounds.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/11/colorado.shootings/index.html

"The death of Matthew Murray has been ruled a suicide. It should be noted that he was struck multiple times by the security officer, which put him down. He then fired a single round killing himself," the statement said.

[lumberjack_jeff]

57. I thought there might be something Private Lynch-esque about this story. n/t

[piedmont]

58. Nothing Lynch-esque at all. See post #54. nt

[Nailzberg]

64. She DID stop the assailant.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hU4ax39rFCnqHnipVp5TCGP6TKqgD8TFEJO00
The man who killed four people at a church and missionary training center died of a self-inflicted shotgun wound, police said Tuesday.

Matthew Murray, 24, was struck multiple times by a security officer at New Life Church Sunday but died after firing a single shot at himself, the El Paso County Coroner's Office concluded after an autopsy.

Volunteer security guard Jeanne Assam shot Murray after he entered the church. Investigators had earlier suggested his death could have been a suicide, but credited Assam's bravery with averting a greater tragedy.

She confronted a gunman who had killed four people, approached while under, and returning fire. The gunman was struck multiple times, and wounded he turned his weapon on himself.

[Lint Head]

73. So Gwaaaaaaaaaaaaaad pulled the trigger?

:dem:

[Nailzberg]

76. No. She pulled the trigger.

She credits God for the strength to face their challenges. Millions of Americans believe in the power of faith in one's life helps them face challenges and overcome fear.

Everyone seems to be letting prejudices (against fundamentalists, guns, or both) as an excuse for bashing this woman. Many more would have been killed if she didn't act. Two other armed men stood frozen in fear while she approached and returned fire.

[CTyankee]

147. Do you see any rational reason the church didn't call the police for protection?

A squad car and a couple of well armed cops would have prevented the gunman from approaching and starting to fire. As a matter of fact, they would have seen him and his gun if he had been foolish enough to even get out of his car.

Why is everybody missing this point?

[piedmont]

168. Yes, I do. The first shooting happened 80 miles away.

The shooter had no connections to the 2nd church. Effective police protection for every church within traveling distance of the 1st shooting would have been impossible.

[Nailzberg]

173. One rational reason could be the police do not have the manpower to protect every church

But the church had the resources to protect itself.

Just a thought.

[CTyankee]

198. Well, then, why do we even have a local police force at all?

It was a community event. The church did feel threatened, which is why they called their voluntary guard. They could just as easily called their local police who, knowing of the threat in their community, would have sent protection.

My question again is, why not call the police? AT least try?

[Nailzberg]

205. There's a couple hundred places of worship. Post an officer at each one?

[CTyankee]

207. But didn't he have a grudge against this one?

Even so, why is this an argument against the police? Aren't you in favor of law and order in a community?

[Sanctified]

250. Next time someone is shot in their home anywhere in an 80 mile radius to your home.

Call the police and ask to have a squad car stationed in front of your house and see how far that gets you.

[Lint Head]

70. Do you mean she didn't 'make his day'?

Wow, where is Clint when you need him? I guess they look up to Chuck Norris now and he just uses his fists. :dem:

[AlCzervik]

77. looks like the media jumped the gun.

[eleny]

81. So now we learn that he killed himself after being wonded by her shot

None of this is good. Not his possible schizophrenia, not her promotion of herself & the god of her beliefs, not Tony Perkins rushing to blame the secular media for the killings.

I only hope that the fundy churches and their members can scratch out some small epiphany about mental illness and how it touched their church. Maybe they'll try to learn more about it and recognize it when someone in their membership has symptoms. He was sick, they kicked him out and he went completely mad.

Now he's dead along with the other innocent young people. Only young people who had their whole lives ahead of them are dead. I hope the living can find a freaking clue.

One last thought -
As soon as she started giggling durng her introduction at yesterday's press conference I was turned off by Jeanne Assam.
They better keep an eye on her as there's something seriously wrong with her, imo.

[piedmont]

85. Where have you heard anything about possible schizophrenia? nt

[eleny]

113. On CNN right before I posted

The broadcaster was discussing it with a mental health professional. I didn't take note of his name and I don't recall ever seeing him before. They were talking about Matthew possibly hearing voices.

We'll learn more about this in the days ahead. I'm in Colorado and they devote a lot of time to this during the local news.

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

140. You bring up an interesting point.

"I only hope that the fundy churches and their members can scratch out some small epiphany about mental illness and how it touched their church."

Don't count on it. I'm willing to wager my next two paychecks that 99.9% of the members of this "church" supported Ronald Reagan and his policies (Including the funding cuts given to mental health treatment programs). Truth be told people who attend these churches really don't give a damn about people in need. Rest assured they won't learn the real lessons of Sunday's tragic event, they'll continue to blame the usual suspects: liberals, gays, atheist, abortion doctors, muslims, and for good measure illegal immigrants.

This might be the first time in the history of the modern evangelical movement that members were forced to face the consequences of their actions.

I feel terrible that I can't work up too much sympathy for the "victims". Not only has "New Life Church" done more than its share to pollute Colorado politics, the members tend to support war, have no use for government programs, and could care less about the welfare of people different from them.

on edit: yeah that woman is crackers.

[stray cat]

87. Security guard stopped him so he killed himself

Murray was shot multiple times by a security guard at New Life Church, but the El Paso County Coroner's Office said the shot that killed him came from his own weapon.

"The death of Matthew Murray has been ruled a suicide. It should be noted that he was struck multiple times by the security officer, which put him down. He then fired a single round killing himself," the statement said.

Sounds like the security guard stopped alot of others from getting killed and put her own life at risk to do so. Sure sounds like a great person to condemn.....

[eleny]

116. People who do great things can also be nuts...

.... thereby turning off people around them. I watched her entire news conference and was turned off to her as they were introducing her. Interpret my disgust as you wish but her giggling during her introduction put my teeth on edge.

I see her as a nut case despite how she helped bring down a mentally deranged killer.

[Sanctified]

129. I have watched this press conference now 4 times and have not seen this giggling you speak of.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14817480/detail.html

[eleny]

144. I watched it live on local tv - our Channel 7

They were rolling cameras before anyone even took to the podium. It was probably a good decision, for her sake, to edit that out.

[RamboLiberal]

142. Did you ever think she might be suffering from sleep deprivation

and PTSD? Saw one interview where she said she hasn't slept since this happened. And I bet she hasn't eaten much. She was coming off a 3 day fast.

People under stress sometimes giggle at an inappropriate moment. Like funerals.

Also we're such a media driven society. Personally I'm always appalled at the appearance of the families of the victims on TV seemingly before they've even had the time to arrange the funerals. Both fathers of the 2 killed at the first shooting were on Larry King last night and one father said this was his 4th interview of the day!

[eleny]

183. that's why I said in another thread that she should never have been allowed on camera

Worth repeating.

I still think she's a nut case.

[TCJ70]

186. So you would criticize the church...

...for not recognizing this guys possible mental problems, but lash our against her for being put in front of a camera at a time when she may not be in a good mental state? Hrm...

[eleny]

190. Criticizing the church for kicking out one of theirs who needed them so much

It was just reported on our local news that he sent notes to friends saying goodbye and that he'd see them on the other side in a better place. He knew he was going to die.

And I became disgusted with her while watching her at the press conference live on local tv here. Giggling during her introduction, acting coy about telling her age and thanking god for choosing her as his vessel. Blech.

[TCJ70]

195. I don't think he was a member of that church...

...nor did they kick him out. He was removed from the YWAM program as far as I know. It's a missionary school. Maybe he didn't make the cut, wasn't there something out there about him being removed for physical reasons?

So you don't think she could be in a bit of an odd mental state considering what's just happened? I saw another poster say that people under a lot of stress (specifically PTSD) can giggle at odd times and have reactions that may seem opposite to what's just happened.

[Mike Daniels]

139. I guarantee that if a white supremacist had been shooting up a mosque

and it ended the same as this situation you wouldn't see the smart-ass comments and second guessing you see in this case.

[joshcryer]

146. That's 100% true. Had it been anyone else but Christians the responses would be starkly different.

[stray cat]

115. How many people here have risked their life to save someone else?

I haven't.

[PassingFair]

125. I have.

Jumped off a sailboat to save a friend from drowning.

Didn't claim that god guided me, though.

[joshcryer]

145. Do you believe in God?

Had a very bad car accident, the odds of my survival were slim to none. Woke up with a thick tree branch inches from my head, it'd gone through the glass and my head was resting nicely on it.

I didn't say it was God.

But statisically, it was a miracle.

I just had a few bruises.

Does my saying it was a miracle make me a terrible and deluded and whatever you want to say, a crazy person? I think not.

[Arugula Latte]

203. If you believe in god, why didn't your deity prevent your accident in the first place?

:shrug:

[piedmont]

220. Maybe the accident served some other purpose?

[Arugula Latte]

243. Yeah ... That's a good one.

"Ours is not to question God's wisdom. There is a plan. So what if it involves death, disease, carnage and untold suffering? The Deity knows what He is doing." (Of course it's always a "He.")

I don't know how people continue to swallow this hogwash.

[piedmont]

254. It's not hogwash that I care to swallow, but I understand how it may comfort others.

[joshcryer]

224. My beliefs are irrelevant. PassingFair makes a strawman if they don't believe in a diety.

Their commentary is completely and utterly irrelevant if they have no belief in a higher being or have some sort of faith in general. Period.

So you can take your 'shrug' and shove it. ;)

[slackmaster]

159. I have, although the risk to me was minimal

A friend of mine and I pulled two men out of a rip current while we were bodysurfing.

We were well prepared for the conditions. Our rescuees weren't.

[ecstatic]

163. Would he have killed himself if she didn't confront him?

:shrug: Most likely he would have continued his killing spree... or am I missing something? You guys are something else!

[joshcryer]

170. I know, isn't it hilarious? It's just. An incredible leap of logic!

As if her actions had no effect! My God! Oh shit. I said the G word! I'm in trouble now!

[BuyingThyme]

178. Why wouldn't he just try to kill her?

(I'm new to this "story.")

[joshcryer]

180. Because he was already dead and dying. Raising his gun to her would've resulted...

...in her unloading another clip. He just ended it for himself. Especially as undoubtedly he was beginning to lose consciousness and at that point could've wound up in a hospital with lots of people asking lots of questions he was unprepared to answer.

[CTyankee]

210. Wow, that sounds like a heroic ending to a tragic film...

here he was ready to unload another clip. "He ended it for himself", how Hemingwayesque! Oh, and the nice touch "especialy as undoubtedly he was beginning to lose consciousness..." Lovely conceit, that!

REally, have you already cast the part of the shooter in your mind? What Hollywood star do you think would deserve this role?

[joshcryer]

222. Yes I have, nihilists tend to believe in grandious BS.

They think that their actions are worth something. Look at the VA Tech shooter, look at the Mall shooter, look at Colombine, look at the vast majority of cases.

I only frame it how he felt he was. How he believed, deep down in whatever counts for a soul that he had. He was A God Among Men. Destorying All That Was Wrong With The World.

But in the end he died a deseprate pathetic fool, being shot down without even remotely achieving his goal!

What Hollywood actor would play the role of such a deseprate and pathetic fool? I can't think of any actors that want to lose their standing. It'd probably have to be an unknown (and undoubtedly as the film would have to portray it in a completely unrealistic light; ie, moral ambiguities and whatnot, the actor would sore to the heights that others would've never before witnessed!).

[CTyankee]

226. Jodie Foster took that role in "The Brave One," a disturbing film about a disturbed woman.

The movie has its flaws but Foster as usual delivered a powerful performance. So it can be done. If you missed it in theatres I urge you to view it on a DVD. It tells us something about how violence can eat into one's being, mind, body and soul. Chilling, to say the least...

[Pavulon]

209. Because she shot him.. Firing weapons

has effects people dont think about. Lack of hearing is the first. He would have been deaf or nearly so after firing a rifle in a closed space.

If she dropped him by shooting him somewhere other than in the head or heart he would have been alive.

Guns are not magic. Pistol wounds are almost always non fatal. Being hit in this hip, lungs, liver, or general torso other than heart will disable. But not immediately kill.

So he could have shot himself.

[Guaranteed]

215. Because he was probably severely disabled but wanted to make SURE

he wasn't going to make it long enough to be captured.

[BadgerLaw2010]

185. Probably after killing everyone else, given what usually happens.

[eleny]

191. Our local Colorado news just reported he sent notes to friends saying goodye

He said goodbye, that he would see them on the other side in a better place. I think they may have been emails but I didn't catch that part of the report.

[HughMoran]

202. I don't know enough to comment on that

Does anybody here know what really happened?

[Pavulon]

213. According to news

would be mass murderer was hit low in the legs and lower torso. This is pretty common in defensive shootings.

Then the guy popped himself. Saving us the pain of a trial and cost of incarceration.

If he had just shot himself first if he was determined or walked into a hospital and said, i am going to kill myself nine of this would have happened.

I feel bad for the people he shot for no reason, because he was a twisted little shit.

[fascisthunter]

166. I Guess He's a Hero

or did God tell him to off himself? So confusing.....

[spanone]

189. maybe god helped the shooter?

[HughMoran]

201. I heard that

Weird. I wonder if the person actually pulled the trigger on their own weapon?

[kentuck]

216. I reported that this morning and was called a pariah.

:shrug:

[piedmont]

219. Because you tacked this on:

"She has lived in the Spirngs since 2000 and nobody knows what she did up to just few months ago. She is the "personal bodyguard" of the new preacher who took over for Ted Haggard. Some wonder just how "personal"?

If this Church has another Reverend doing hanky-panky behind their backs, God may not be happy with that Church, if we wish to lower the conversation to one of Heavenly intervention. There are many questions that still remain about this story, even if the lady is a true hero."

[kentuck]

228. Get real!

How naive are you? You think people don't htink that after the Ted Haggard incident? She left a better paying job as a Parole Officer at the Dept of Corrections to be the personal bodyguard of the new Preacher.

"if we wish to lower the conversation to one of Heavenly intervention" is a direct response to those that think somehow that God intervened in the situation. That is a response to those that say Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans because of the Homosexual Convention that was planned for the city. "If we wish to lower the conversation" should have been the phrase that showed the intent of the comments. I apologize if it was not clear to you.

[piedmont]

231. Spin, spin, spin.

It was a smear job and you know it.

[kentuck]

234. You have a problem with free speech...

and not necessarily inflammatory speech. You have a problem with anyone that does not think like you. I hope DU has not adapted your way of thinking. I have been away for a few months but I will not stay if that is the case. I will publically ask Skinner to close my account and I will graciously say goodbye.

[piedmont]

235. I have no problem with your right to say whatever dumbass thing you can think up.

There are countless places on the internet for you to spew this shit on. If your thread got locked, then DU may not be one of those places.


"I will publically ask Skinner to close my account and I will graciously say goodbye. "

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Oh great! Another "good-bye, cruel DU" OP in General Discussion! Those are always fun.

[kentuck]

237. Brilliant !

As always.

[piedmont]

238. I know.

[kentuck]

239. I know you think you know...

But a chicken has a brain about this size (*) and it has the sense to get out of the rain. I think you are in competition with that chicken. :-)

[piedmont]

240. I know that when all else fails you, you go right back to smears. nt

Look, I get it. You don't like guns and you don't like christians. So when a christian uses a gun in self-defense and defense of others, you take a page out of the FR playbook and start digging and slinging feces. And when you get called on it, you whine and cry and threaten to leave DU forever. Nice!

[kentuck]

245. Go cry to your Momma...

Tell her that kentuck slapped you up side the head 'cause you were spouting right-wing propaganda.

[piedmont]

246. Why should I do that, when clearly the only one getting emotional about this is you?

What right-wing propaganda am I spouting? Got a link?

[kentuck]

247. Uh-huh...

:-)

[piedmont]

249. Yep.

"I hope DU has not adapted your way of thinking. I have been away for a few months but I will not stay if that is the case. I will publically ask Skinner to close my account and I will graciously say goodbye."

:rofl:

[kentuck]

251. Yep.

You got it. You are a fart smeller....I mean you are a smart feller. If you are the norm on DU, then I do not wish to be any part of it.

[piedmont]

252. Well then, give us your "goodbye cruel DU" rant. nt

[spoony]

223. Let me offer a summary of the last 24 hours

When we thought the woman had killed him, the anti-theist brigade here screamed in half a dozen threads, "Why didn't God help her wound and stop him instead of killing him??!!!111"

Now that we know that's exactly what she did--wound him, the same bloody people have shifted to a new position: "Why did God have bad aim???!!111"

Stupid statements are one thing. Making numerous different stupid, contradictory statements to adapt to updated news all whilst feeling smug is something else. Above and beyond. Supererogatory banality.

[gatorboy]

233. Because, like many on the right, they argue for the sake of arguing. n/t

[piedmont]

236. No, they don't. nt

[riderinthestorm]

267. Nope, the question was "why did God kill Matthew Murray?"

As Jeanne Assam asserted - "God" did the actual trigger pull. Instead one might have wondered why didn't "God" simply wound Matthew Murray, a mentally ill young man?

Yes, the first question stands: why didn't "God" simply wound this young man so he could go into therapy and get help, instead of simply kill him? That would seem to be the compassionate stance, the one that might have actually addressed real time issues of mental health in our societies. Nope, instead "God's" answer is to blow that fucker away, in his house no less. And rejoice that one did so! On national teevee, over and over, loudly and with great praise.

Of course, that ASSumes that most people understand that Jeanne Assam really just did try to KILL a mentally ill man in church. Oh, and actually gloated about it in the media, and even further, assigned that killing to God. And NOW she is proven to be a media whore for "God" (cough), just what God (and Christianity) needs....

Talk about distorting actual DU posts or didn't you really understand their content?

[Highway61]

230. Well

The more of this crap I see, the more the christian right is exposed....keep it comin

[TCJ70]

232. Exposed for what? n/t

[Highway61]

241. The 26 year old

or ...I mean...the 40 something security guard who claimed hero status wasn't....Huckabee wanted to "round up" HIV positive folks and contain them...They preach..."thou shall not kill" and are for the death penalty etc etc....

[lame54]

248. you should check this out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2455540

[TCJ70]

255. I'm talking about this instance...

...as for her behavior at the press conference, she did just go through something most of us will never have to. What effects that has on a person in the short term can't be predicted.

You don't think she did something heroic? She put her life inbetween a gunman and 7,000 other people. That doesn't count for anything?

[Perry Logan]

264. The ways of the Lord are mysterious. Some would say devious.

[Danger Mouse]

269. She still saved a bunch of lives.

What is it with people? Would they have been happier if she had done nothing and instead he had killed a hell of a lot more people?