Shooter Dead In Denver School On Eve Of Newtown Anniversary

  • Comments (75)

A student opened fire Friday inside a suburban Denver high school, Friday, one day before the anniversary of the Newtown murders.

CNN reported that the student injured at least two people before turning the gun on himself.

The shooting took place at Arapahoe High School in Centennial. CNN reported that the student entered the school with the intention of confronting a teacher.

At least one person was taken to Littleton Adventist Hospital with a gunshot wound. That person was described as a minor.

  • 75
    Comments

Comments (75)

Piage:

YET MORE DEATHS DUE TO WEAK GUN LAWS AND THE NRA AND THE RIGHT WINGERS
2 dead in shooting at medical facility

A gunman and another person were killed during a shooting at a medical building at Renown Regional Medical Center, said Tom Robinson of the Reno, Nevada, Police Department

hoffy97:

Actually, reports are that he did engage. There was an armed deputy sheriff on duty, and reports are that he was able to point his weapon at the shooter, who then took his life. He only managed to get off 5 shots before killing himself. The Arapahoe sheriff credits the deputy's actions with preventing any more injuries or deaths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arapahoe_High_School_shooting

The shooter entered the school with a shotgun, 125 shells, and 3 molotov cocktails. It sounds like he fire a few random shots, as well as one at the girl, but ended up in the library, and got one of his molotov cocktails off, burning several stacks in the library. All said and told, it was only about 80 seconds between him walking in the school and him taking his own life.

Reports are coming out now that it appears his intentions were beyond just the debate coach. He had letters and numbers corresponding to 5 different classrooms, and with 125 shells (of 12ga no less), it seemed he was looking to shoot more than 1 person.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/officials-arapahoe-shooter-planned-to-attack-at-least-five-areas-of-the-school/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/17/new-details-emerge-in-arapahoe-high-school-shooting/4070815/

A simple interpretation is that he intended much more damage, but (as usually happens with mass shooters) once he faced armed resistance, he ended his life.

Again, do your research, guys.

M3-Driver:

The DV must be too liberal to post that the guard was armed that was on staff?

lousfool:

At the end of the day, no matter how much whining, the right wingers know that guns are out of here and it's just a matter of time before the second amendment is repealed .

GTR:

hoffy97
The end of the second amendment is near and that WILL fix the problem..
I know you right winger hate facts but the number don't lie.
58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

hoffy97:

Sure, numbers don't lie, so lets use some useful numbers. Your statistic looks at absolute numbers, instead of the rate (since the US is much bigger than the UK), and it ignore homicides and crimes overall, just focusing on a subset. For example, Greenland has 11 homicides, but that's 4x the homicide rate as the US.

So, lets look at the RATE (as reported by each country, this is important as I'll explain later), instead of absolute numbers, since the UK is much smaller than the US (63 million vs 317 million)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

United States is 4.7/ 100,000 (14,612 total)
United Kingdom is 1.2 / 100,000 (722 total)

So, it's really only 4x the rate, but it's also far from the full story. The main difference is that the US and UK calculate homicides differently. The US counts homicides very generally, basically anytime they find someone dead and it's not suicide or self inflicted. 1 body = 1 homicide.

In the UK, they don't count it as a homicide until there's a conviction. There stats tend to be a bit irregular, cause if a trial lasts a couple of years, that homicide isn't "booked" until the year of conviction. (This happened with Harold Shipman, who killed over 250 people over a 25 year period, but all his murders show up in the year 2000 statistics, since that's when he was convicted). Additionally, it means homicides aren't counted if there's no conviction, self defense, justifiable homicide, and police killings. From digging around, it turns out the UK doesn't count dangerous driving as homicide either, which many other countries do. So, it's hard to get a true "apples to apples" comparison when countries are using different reporting methods.

http://www.omg-facts.com/Interesting/The-UK-Deflates-Their-Homicide-Rate-By-O/58665

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm (read footnotes 35 and 36) (and yes, this was posted by the UK parliament itself)

Another way to look at this is to look at violent crime. NationMaster tries to distill down the stats to get an "apples to apples" comparison. They don't have violent crime in total, but looking at assaults, the UK comes in with 2.8% and the US with 1.2%. Pretty substantial difference:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass_vic-crime-assault-victims

There's a big gap with rape too: UK is 0.9% which US is less than half at 0l.4%:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-victims

I'm sure the reasons are complex, but in the UK, criminals know that the worst they will face is a knife, while in the US, there's much higher risk of someone defending themselves with a gun, especially in rural areas where street crimes are basically non existent. (Criminals have the same luxury in places like NYC where it's just about impossible to get a permit to carry; the only ones who have handguns in NYC are the criminals.)

[another aside: I look only at violent crimes, cause the overall crime rate is skewed by the US's war on drugs, which criminalizes a LOT of non-violent people.]

Robby.Rob:

Hoffy
You can post all the long drawn out posts filled with nonsense that you like in a lame attempt to justify weapons of mass destruction. However the only numbers that matters to the smart people are these.
58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

END OF STORY

Elizabeth G:

hoffy
you can keep supporting the mass shootings and the weapons of mass destruction, but the smart people know better. What is it with you right wingers that you support everything that destroys.

M3-Driver:

At the end of the day, no matter how much whining, the liberal knows that guns are here to stay.
Any news involving a gun, the liberal media DROOLS and makes it front page. Sort of like when a "huge winter storm" is coming. They have to sell ads, and need people to tune in.

Activist Bill:

I've noticed that all the left wing nut jobs who have posted their comments here, are very disappointed that this shooting did not result in a massacre where dozens of lives were taken. The left wing nutters love it when there is a massacre committed by one mentally ill person with a gun, as it seemingly strengthens their call for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Even if it's ever repealed, there will always be guns available, and the criminals will continue to commit their crimes against the people.

Piage:

It seems the only answer is a repeal of the second amendment.
YES WE CAN

Greenbeanie:

Fine. If you want to repeal the Second Amendment, go ahead and try. Now, if you REALLY want to reduce the incidence of gun murder in this country, you have to consider repeal of the Thirteenth Amendment. Well, are you serious?

Ken P Jr:

Why not mention that he killed himself when he realized another person with a gun was there? Our biggest weapon of mass destruction might just be the democrat voters. Gun free school laws cost lives. Do some real ground breaking reporting & tell the truth our elected officials keep under wraps.

Elizabeth G:

Kenny
If guns were outlawed and they will be it would have been a non issue from the start

58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

Greenbeanie:

Come to think of it, I think we should repeal the Nineteenth Amendment as well.

Right Wing Insanity:

If you read the posts from the pro weapons of mass destruction group on this site they prove the need for gun control.

norwalkspends4:

The shooter was a socialist....maybe we should ban socialists.

Robby.Rob:

Norwalkspends
The shooter was a Republican.. Everyone knows it.

norwalkspends4:

Not according to those who knew him.

He was a Socialist
.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/12/14/student_on_arapahoe_school_shooter_very_proud_of_being_a_socialist.html

Robby.Rob:

That was a lie made up by the far right wing blogs

hoffy97:

It was actually something he himself said, both to frieds and posted on his Facebook page. This information is out there. I don't understand why you don't want to look at what is out there.

Bacigalupe:

Anyone that would say are nation is built on gun ownership clearly has mental health issues. These are the same type of wackos that are responsible for the many msny mass shootings of late.

hoffy97:

Well, keep in mind that gun ownership is how this country came into existence in the first place.

M3-Driver:

The person that wants to appeal the second amendment does not understand that our nation is a nation built on gun ownership. That right will never ever be taken away, no matter how many liberal new stations make people frightened.

Politicians use pro and anti gun laws only to get elected. GOP and NRA in bed, and the DEM's try to pretend they are anti gun and pass all the laws they can get for votes while they all have carry permits.

Guns are not going anywhere. The liberals can whine all they want, but the fact is there are too many gun owners to let that happen.

It's too bad some crazy kid ended up with one last year.

BCT:

Statistically, gun deaths are definitively two fold - murders in urban neighborhoods using illegal weapons and suicides in rural areas where guns are legally registered.

Legal guns in rural areas are not just cultural, they are a tool and their role in suicide can be alleviated by better mental health treatment.

Guns in the inner city are all about crime and defense against crime; a vicious circle. Stricter gun laws have not and will not get illegal guns off the street.
Gun control advocates either conveniently ignore or demonize the role of 'stop and frisk' tactics by police in high crime inner city neighborhoods because it very clearly targets minorities. Unfortunately, that's where gun violence takes the worst toll.

If gun control advocates are actually serious about stopping gun violence and not just wringing their hands with moral righteousness, then illegal guns need to be taken off the streets of the inner cities where strict gun laws have failed. Until we have that inconvenient discussion, there are no real solutions.

Robby.Rob:

BCT
You have posted your fact less opinion nothing more and nothing less

NinaB:

Lets look at the 'knockout game' where youths have killed numerous people in gratuitous acts of violence. What do we ban there - teenagers fists? What amendment should be banned there, the right to wear hoodies? We have problems America because violence is glorified - sex and drugs are also glorified, all over tv and music. The most popular tv is reality tv where everyone tries to backstab each other.The family unit has fallen apart so how can you expect people to have these 'chats' over dinner about how everyone is feeling? If you don't know who your dad is, how can he coach you thru life. We are not even allowed to say a simple prayer in school and we wonder what is wrong out there. We wonder why kids lack moral compass as they enjoy Miley Cyrus, Kanye and Jay-Z. We celebrate divorce and sleeping with anyone possible, and hate and shooting cops but take 'god' and religion out of schools. But the problem must be the second amendment and the right wingers? Wake up

The.Truth:

SEEMS LIKE GUN LAWS WORK

CHICAGO — If the grimly regular tally of shootings provides plenty of grist for both the local and national media mills, the reality of violence in Chicago may be quite different — at least according to a study about to be released.

Crime in the city of Al Capone and John Gacy has dipped to a 40-year low, said Andrew Papachristos, a criminologist and associate professor at Yale University who conducted the research. Chicago officials aren't missing their chance to seize on the data and tout the improvement.

This year alone, "Chicago appears to be on track to have both the lowest violent crime rate since 1972, and lowest homicide rate since 1967," he said.

hoffy97:

One could take a deeper look at the Chicago stats too, cause it doesn't necessarily back that strict gun control laws work. First off, if you go from the early 90's to current day, Chicago's homicide rate has fallen by about 50%. That's great. It was REALLY bad back in the day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago

1992 - 943, or a rate of 33.9 / 100,000
2011 - 435 or a rate of 16.1 / 100,000
(I'll skip 2012 cause there was a bit of an uptick and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, especially cause 2012 is tracking similar to other past years. Also, this data will be a bit noisy since it's a fairly small data set)

BUT, the national homicide rate has also fallen by 50% (actually a bit more):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Homicide

9.8 / 100,000 in 1992
4.7 / 100,000 in 2011

So really, Chicago just did what the rest of the country was doing. In fact, it actually lagged the national trend. (As in, Chicago would have seen an even steeper decline if it had followed what was happening in the rest of the country.)

Near as I can tell, there wasn't any major policy or law change in Illinois or Chicago during that time. At the national level, they passed the assault weapons ban in '94, but then it was repealed in '04. It's interesting if you look at the homicide numbers around the repeal:

2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448

For whatever reason, there is a marked decline in homicides when you the assault weapons ban was repealed. (Now, this is just correlation; I doubt it would apply to Chicago directly, as it still had its own assault weapons ban, but it's an interesting data point.)

Nothing else major happened at the national level, but at the city and state level, Chicago and/or Illinois made several changes. Chicago was forced to allow people to own handguns starting July 2010 (US Supreme Court - McDonald vs Chicago - June, 2010), and then the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Illinois' concealed weapons ban was unconstitutional (Moore v Madigan - Dec, 2012), giving them 180 days to comply. They got a short extension, but then in July 2013, passed the "Firearm Concealed Carry Act" which opened the door for concealed carry, making Illinois the final state to offer a concealed permit. In September, 2013, Chicago repealed the registration requirement for firearms, while also in September, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled the "Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon" act unconstitutional, as it effectively banned carrying concealed (Peave v. Aguilar) and now ran counter to the "Firearm Concealed Carry Act".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Aguilar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

Looking at the recent years:
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 516
2013: 411 by now (and on track to be a record low)

In the last few years, Chicago residents have been able to own handguns at home, and starting right around now, they can carry them (with a permit) and are no longer required to register them. We haven't seen a spike in homicides since the handgun ban was lifted, and this year is tracking to be an all time low. Obviously, it's too soon to see the impact of the concealed permit law, but the repeal of the handgun ban has been in place for 3 years to seemingly no ill effect.

So, Chicago's decline wasn't due to any change in laws on their part, per se, as it was mostly tracking the national trend. Additionally, the changes that HAVE been made are all in the direction of more permissive gun laws.

Just make sure to do the research, read these links (and whatever other data you can find), and take a deep look at these numbers, and in historical context, before jumping to any conclusions.

As an aside, I agree that the 2nd-amendment crowd's claim that Chicago is some murder-death-hell-hole is a bit extreme, as it's not even in the top dozen cities by homicide (though it does come in 13th).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

Detroit and New Orleans far outpace the rest, at least for 2012, and you can speculate why.

Plus, Chicago (and Illinois) is a good case for the 2nd amendment cause, as it's yet another case where a city/state relaxes their gun laws, which is an overall national trend (with a few exceptions). If you don't believe me, watch the gif showing the states passing more permissive concealed carry laws from the 80's till now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc2.gif - red means no concealed carry permit, blue means anyone (non criminal) can get a permit, and green means you don't even NEED a permit to carry.

GTR:

The Truth
Excellent post... Thanks for the true facts.. The right wingers must be very upset now that their Chicago theory has been debunked.

Mary Jane Nelson:

@The Truth
I also read the article and stats you posted in USA today. I guess this must infuriate the right wingers as this disproves the Chicago nonsense that they have been posting for years. It does however prove that strong gun laws in fact work.

Bacigalupe:

The truth
Excellent informative fact filled post. Thanks

M3-Driver:

How about posting some real stats and a link to back it up?

Highest crime rate in the country, only criminals use guns and that's what you want for all of America? I don't think so. The best part is, one year after this sad, tragic incident very little has changed, nor will it.

Oh while you are at it, post some stats about VT gun laws!

Paige:

M3-Driver,

Here are the statistics... http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/

Chicago had 400 murders this year as of today and it was a drop of 19% over previous years. However, that still means that 400 families were visited by police officers or got a phone call saying, "I'm sorry to inform you that your family member or friend is dead."

Don't know about you, but to me, 400 murder victims in one calendar year - and we are not done yet - are 400 too many. One other question one would have to ask is whether or not the decrease in murders was due to a recent change in Illinois firearms law.

"A federal appeals court in Chicago ruled last December that under recent pro-Second Amendment U.S. Supreme Court precedents, Illinois’s statewide ban on carrying concealed guns in public was unconstitutional. Illinois had been the last state to forbid concealed carry. In response to the ruling, state lawmakers gave full control of gun licensing to the Illinois State Police. That, in turn, required the abolition of Chicago’s gun registration and permitting rules."

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-09-12/another-gun-control-setback-this-time-from-gang-scarred-chicago

GTR:

Paige
When you go to the site the numbers are completely different than what you post. If I remember correctly you were called out for this in the past.. Some just never learn.

Paige:

I guess you have some reading comprehension difficulties. The only numbers I quoted were 400 murders and a 19% drop in that number.

Here's the quote from the page at http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/

Chicago on Sunday surpassed 400 homicides for the year, a RedEye analysis of preliminary police data found.

A 26-year-old man was fatally shot Sunday in the 5600 block of West Bloomingdale Avenue in Austin, according to the Tribune. This was the 400th Chicago homicide of the year, RedEye determined.

A 22-year-old man was shot to death later Sunday in the 300 block of West 60th Place in Englewood, the Tribune reported.

Chicago reached 400 homicides in 2012 on Sept. 24 and in 2011 on Nov. 15.

Homicides are down 19 percent year-to-date compared to the same period in 2012 and 5 percent versus 2011.

jason parraga.5:

Paige
I agree with you and "The Truth" that the strict gun laws of Chicago have lowered the homicide rate. Just think what an improvement it would be if the 2nd amendment were repealed.
58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

Baclgalupe:

Yes Jason
I agree it does prove that strict gun laws work. You also make a good point about the repeal of the second amendment and the facts of the US vs the UK.
I was surprised to see Paige agree but I guess even the far right wingers realize this is correct. I guess it would take a compete fool not to see these facts

Paige:

Jason,

You may want to read the information I quoted from Bloomberg's Business Week again. The State of Illinois changed their firearm regulations and now the State of Illinois issues the permits. This means that the municipality of Chicago no longer has control over who is issued a permit. It is a step towards more reasonable firearm regulations rather than a repeal of the Second Amendment.

Right Wing Insanity:

Robby
You should know the right wingers hate facts.

Many User Names:

We must repeal the second amendment. The right wingers prove this with their posts. .

Suzanne_:

The answer is simple repeal the second amendment
The weapon used by the shooter was purchased legally, the sheriff said.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/us/colorado-school-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

Many User Names:

Suzanne_
You are 100 percent correct..GREAT POST

GTR:

All one needs to do to see the reason for gun laws and the repeal of the second amendment is read the insane posts from the pro gun wackos. Clearly they would never pass a mental stability background check.

fatmanscandy:

The big problem is the pussification of America. These weak, sick kids think they can grab a gun and shoot a bunch of people because they are upset. They are always cowardly, nerdy, and weak. A gun is a tool. You can't ban them since these overly sensitive pieces of human sludge get their hands on them

susieqcbsi:

IT goes back to Family values. Years ago Mom & Dad would sit down and "TALK" with their kids. Find out how their day was. Kids don't have that today. THe only time they get "talked at" is in school. Even there, they use to have music, art, sports, etc. to release some of this anxiety that they had. Now that's gone too.

Getting rid of guns is not the answer. Dealing with our kids (ie talking to them) and letting them be kids Maybe the answer.

Activist Bill:

I don't see what the uproar is all about. Nobody was killed by the "shooter". He killed himself, saving the taxpayers millions of dollars in court costs, etc.

The.Truth:

activist BILL
I guess the girl in critical condition means nothing to the right wingers. Typical...

NYJETFAN75:

Amen, Bill.

pickle8:

The answer is not guns. The answer is understanding the reason(s) that trigger such incidents. Guns are merely symptoms of the dis-ease. And disease cannot be cured by treating symptoms. They can only be cured by understanding and treating the cause(s). Teachers need to become more "human." They need to express caring, kindness, and understanding that enables students to feel comfortable and non-defensive. It is in mutual understanding and camaraderie that productive relationships flourish and not in condescension and intimidation. Schools are a microcosm of the "real" world. Most of the pathologies that abridge the precepts of civility are germinated by developmental dichotomies in so-called advanced civilizations and by ignorance elsewhere. Be human. Show care and understanding.

In Other News

News

Another Cold Night In Weston, Easton, Redding Could Bring Frost

News

CL&P Reports Power Outages In Weston

News

Easton Woman Fights To Save House Of Historic Fairfield Aviator

Politics

Redding Republicans Make Endorsements, Including Shaban For Congress