Mass Shooting at Perry Iowa H.S., Multiple injuries. Suspect identified. No further danger to public.

[TimHauck 2,598]

14 hours ago, squistion said:

Link to anything that proves this claim?

This is like the "Kids are allowed to act like cats in schools" nonsense that no could find a link for here that it actually happened.

The ironic (and sad) thing about the “schools are putting litter boxes in for kids that think they’re cats” line being brought up in this thread is that the true story behind it is that it was schools in the Columbine area put them in so kids could have a place to pee if there was a school shooting…

[TimHauck 2,598]

So he had a shotgun but only killed 1 person?  The GC told me shotguns would be more effective for school shootings 

[seafoam1 2,798]

48 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Cool, good to see you disagree with the narrative that “violent trannies are a major problem”

"Tranny" is a major problem. In every way. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

43 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So he had a shotgun but only killed 1 person?  The GC told me shotguns would be more effective for school shootings 

You still have to know how to use them.  Training is still key. 

Why are you so sad about it?  You should be happy that this tranny/tranny-lover didn't know how to use it.  So now not only do we have one liberal poster defending the shooter (pimpadouche), we have another that's sad this person didn't kill more kids?  WTF?  What's wrong with you gals?

[TimHauck 2,598]

Just now, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

You still have to know how to use them.  Training is still a key.

Yeah, isn’t that kinda the argument for restricting AR-15’s and such?  That they make it easier for an untrained person to kill multiple people?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

Just now, TimHauck said:

Yeah, isn’t that kinda the argument for restricting AR-15’s and such?  That they make it easier for an untrained person to kill multiple people?

No, because you need to know how to use that too.

[seafoam1 2,798]

12 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Yeah, isn’t that kinda the argument for restricting AR-15’s and such?  That they make it easier for an untrained person to kill multiple people?

Holy hell. This is over the top dumb. 

[TimHauck 2,598]

8 hours ago, squistion said:

How many of these are classified as mass shootings? 

:crickets:

Some of them are.  But the other difference is that school shooters are more likely to have used legally obtained guns. So additional red flag laws and whatnot might actually prevent some school shootings (albeit not this one), which unfortunately probably isn’t the case with gang violence.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t care about Chicago or other inner city violence, but it’s a much tougher issue to solve, and would be more about helping those folks get an education and employment, and not additional gun laws.

Although back to your question, “but Chicago” also often comes up when AR-15’s and such are discussed since technically handguns are used in most shootings overall.  But here’s a quote from an article that @Strike provided in the Maine shooting thread (thanks buddy!), showing that 67% of incidents where 6 or more people were killed involved “assault weapons.”   Obviously an “assault weapon” wasn’t used here but also only 1 person was killed.

On 10/26/2023 at 10:50 AM, TimHauck said:

The second was irrelevant to mass shootings, it only talked about homicides.

Edit:  Actually I take that back.  Most of it was just about homicides but I just read further and noticed this tidbit, supporting what I said earlier:

Although handguns are involved in most shooting deaths, the use of semi-automatic rifles is climbing, said Louis Klarevas, a research professor at Teachers College, Columbia University who specializes in gun violence and safety. In the 1980s, less than 20% of gun massacres (which he counts as six or more victims killed) involved assault weapons, according to a report he issued as an expert witness in a California court case over banning assault weapons.

In the last three years, 67% of gun massacres with six or more deaths were with assault weapons, Klarevas' 2020 report said.

 

 

 

 

And before anyone says "wHaT's An AsSaUlT wEaPoN?!!?!," I'm just quoting from Strike's "reputable source"

 

 

[TimHauck 2,598]

45 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

No, because you need to know how to use that too.

While it doesn’t specify the ability to better kill multiple people, “Preparedgunowners.com” in a post from 2016 agrees that an AR-15 is easier for an untrained person to use than a shotgun or even a handgun

https://preparedgunowners.com/2016/07/12/why-i-plan-to-switch-from-a-shotgun-to-ar-15-for-home-defense/

I assume the don’t tread on me logo at the top means this site doesn’t really cater to libs, FWIW.  Actually because I am a centrist here is another post by the same guy also from 2016 talking about how having a “good guy with a gun” present tends to help reduce the number of casualties.  

https://preparedgunowners.com/2016/06/16/fact-armed-citizens-do-stop-mass-murder-active-killers/
 

I don’t think there needs to be less guns in general  But to your point @EternalShinyAndChrome, particularly if people plan on carrying regularly, they need to be trained.    However I think additional red flag laws and possibly limiting AR-15’s and such could help reduce the number of mass shootings or at least the number of victims.

[Gepetto 1,286]

The mental health discussion/evaluation should be appointments at the mental health providers office, not in the schools. Require it for every student every so often like vaccines and physicals are required, in order to be able to attend school each year, maybe each semester. This would also help cut down on the stigma of mental health by having every single student have appointments.

[Ron_Artest 1,040]

50 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

No, because you need to know how to use that too.

Bullshite.  Anyone that knows guns knows that not all guns are created equal.  He had a .22 which is a glorified BB gun

[BuckSwope 654]

6 hours ago, 5-Points said:

 All good.

My point was, if there were white trash gangs roaming Appalachia, shooting each other over real estate that they didn't own, over who had the right to deal drugs there, it would be a thing. The last time two rural white gangs made headlines it was the Hatfield's & McCoy's. 

The murder rate in inner-city America far outpaces the mass shooting murder rate in this country but one makes headlines and the other doesn't. Because one can be exploited to further a narrative and a political agenda and the other is an inconvenient truth that can't be. 

Chicago, specifically the West Side, has long been a hotbed of gang violence. Where shooting deaths have outpaced the national average for decades and very little has seemingly been done to curb the violence.

So when one nutjob loses it and shoots 20 people, and we get the wall to wall coverage of it, for days on end, accompanied by the requisite call for more "common sense gun laws" & "assault weapons bans", when murders committed with rifles, any kind of rifle, are a drop in the bucket compared to murders committed with any other weapon, including hands and feet, it rings hollow to some of us. 

 

 

Again, it comes back to exactly what you are looking for.   Of course there are more murders than mass shootings.  It's a broader category of crime you are looking at.  Of course there are more incidents of crime and murder in the cities, especially inner city/gangs than in a town like mine in rural WI.   

I guess my point was, as usual, that both sides of the debate use things to push an agenda.   For the left - you are right, there is a focus on mass shootings and AKs.   It helps push their narrative about scary looking guns and their platform of banning them.   My point was for the right, there is focus on Chicago as well for narrative reasons.   As I said, when you actually look at the rates/capita Chicago drops down and other places pop up.   Again, it depends on the specific stat you are looking at (murder rate vs. gun violence vs. mass shootings vs. gun homicide) but there are places worse and often you start to see red states and areas climb to the top of the list.   So Chicago is front and center because the narrative is the issue is lib run places like Chicago and inner city AAs.   The stats don't reflect that narrative.  

Yes, Chicago is an issue, and as you pointed out the majority of the crime is located in certain areas.   Did you know that the south side didn't even have a Level 1 trauma center until about 5 years ago?  I was listening to an interesting podcast talking about how things like that also need to be parsed out when thinking about this issue since it would affect if a murder occurred or not.  They were talking about how the murder rate could have been reduced 20-30% in the many years before that if so many didn't die on the way to the hospitals on the north side, since most of these shootings are on the south side.   They suggested looking at other stats as well to get a better picture of what is going on in different areas.   Was there that many more shootings, or were they just more likely to die vs. other cities with better hospitals.  

I get the frustration with the last paragraph, but I don't control the media.   I always suggest turning off that wall to wall coverage for these reasons.  My point was when you dig into stats you can find a different picture than either side is selling or willing to talk about.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,912]

46 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Again, it comes back to exactly what you are looking for.   Of course there are more murders than mass shootings.  It's a broader category of crime you are looking at.  Of course there are more incidents of crime and murder in the cities, especially inner city/gangs than in a town like mine in rural WI.   

I guess my point was, as usual, that both sides of the debate use things to push an agenda.   For the left - you are right, there is a focus on mass shootings and AKs.   It helps push their narrative about scary looking guns and their platform of banning them.   My point was for the right, there is focus on Chicago as well for narrative reasons.   As I said, when you actually look at the rates/capita Chicago drops down and other places pop up.   Again, it depends on the specific stat you are looking at (murder rate vs. gun violence vs. mass shootings vs. gun homicide) but there are places worse and often you start to see red states and areas climb to the top of the list.   So Chicago is front and center because the narrative is the issue is lib run places like Chicago and inner city AAs.   The stats don't reflect that narrative.  

Yes, Chicago is an issue, and as you pointed out the majority of the crime is located in certain areas.   Did you know that the south side didn't even have a Level 1 trauma center until about 5 years ago?  I was listening to an interesting podcast talking about how things like that also need to be parsed out when thinking about this issue since it would affect if a murder occurred or not.  They were talking about how the murder rate could have been reduced 20-30% in the many years before that if so many didn't die on the way to the hospitals on the north side, since most of these shootings are on the south side.   They suggested looking at other stats as well to get a better picture of what is going on in different areas.   Was there that many more shootings, or were they just more likely to die vs. other cities with better hospitals.  

I get the frustration with the last paragraph, but I don't control the media.   I always suggest turning off that wall to wall coverage for these reasons.  My point was when you dig into stats you can find a different picture than either side is selling or willing to talk about.  

What was your point?

[squistion 1,944]

6 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Libtards like BuckDope, squishy and the generally retarded couldn’t wait to get in here and defend one of their pets hours after it killed a sixth grader. Demented and gross. 

Who has defended the shooter in this thread and how exactly did they defend him?

[ROCK BOTTOM 58]

Just now, squistion said:

Who has defended the shooter in this thread and how exactly did they defend him?

Read the thread.

[squistion 1,944]

1 minute ago, ROCK BOTTOM said:

Read the thread.

Dude, I started it and have.

[TimHauck 2,598]

On 11/8/2023 at 5:00 PM, TimHauck said:

Righty commits mass shooting.  Geek club:  we really need better access to mental health services

Trans person commits mass shooting (first one since 2019).  Geek club: liberalism did this, they’re being taught to kill white people!

 

I said this in a different thread, but yup.  Although not yet confirmed if this one was even a tranny, and this of course was also not a mass killing.

[lickin_starfish 1,889]

Better mental health services should have a positive effect on liberalism and trannyism. They are linked together.

[TimHauck 2,598]

6 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

Better mental health services should have a positive effect on liberalism and trannyism. They are linked together.

Except you’ve got someone in this thread saying trannies should be banned from schools

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

4 hours ago, TimHauck said:

So he had a shotgun but only killed 1 person?  The GC told me shotguns would be more effective for school shootings 

Maybe this particular shooter had an agenda other than maximum body county.

[BuckSwope 654]

12 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

Better mental health services should have a positive effect on liberalism and trannyism. They are linked together.

Awesome.  You'd think the right would be pushing even harder for this then.  Two birds one stone and all.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,912]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

Awesome.  You'd think the right would be pushing even harder for this then.  Two birds one stone and all.  

The right is stopping it? 

[squistion 1,944]

26 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

Better mental health services should have a positive effect on liberalism and trannyism. They are linked together.

Trannyism?

[TimHauck 2,598]

14 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Maybe this particular shooter had an agenda other than maximum body county.

According to the NY Post, he had “plans to kill many more”

https://nypost.com/2024/01/04/news/who-is-iowa-school-shooting-suspect-dylan-butler/

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

3 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

According to the NY Post, he had “plans to kill many more”

https://nypost.com/2024/01/04/news/who-is-iowa-school-shooting-suspect-dylan-butler/

Perhaps he did.  Perhaps the reality of the act was different than the fantasy and he abandoned his plan after the first shot.  I have been one who has put forward the argument that a shotgun is more deadly than an AR 15 in the typical circumstances of a school shooting.  I put that argument forward being intimately familiar with each platform.  You seem to disagree.  that is fine.

[BrahmaBulls 628]

17 minutes ago, squistion said:

Trannyism?

Better word for what you all call yourselves?

 

[5-Points 3,386]

2 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

Again, it comes back to exactly what you are looking for.   Of course there are more murders than mass shootings.  It's a broader category of crime you are looking at.  Of course there are more incidents of crime and murder in the cities, especially inner city/gangs than in a town like mine in rural WI.   

I guess my point was, as usual, that both sides of the debate use things to push an agenda.   For the left - you are right, there is a focus on mass shootings and AKs.   It helps push their narrative about scary looking guns and their platform of banning them.   My point was for the right, there is focus on Chicago as well for narrative reasons.   As I said, when you actually look at the rates/capita Chicago drops down and other places pop up.   Again, it depends on the specific stat you are looking at (murder rate vs. gun violence vs. mass shootings vs. gun homicide) but there are places worse and often you start to see red states and areas climb to the top of the list.   So Chicago is front and center because the narrative is the issue is lib run places like Chicago and inner city AAs.   The stats don't reflect that narrative.  

Yes, Chicago is an issue, and as you pointed out the majority of the crime is located in certain areas.   Did you know that the south side didn't even have a Level 1 trauma center until about 5 years ago?  I was listening to an interesting podcast talking about how things like that also need to be parsed out when thinking about this issue since it would affect if a murder occurred or not.  They were talking about how the murder rate could have been reduced 20-30% in the many years before that if so many didn't die on the way to the hospitals on the north side, since most of these shootings are on the south side.   They suggested looking at other stats as well to get a better picture of what is going on in different areas.   Was there that many more shootings, or were they just more likely to die vs. other cities with better hospitals.  

I get the frustration with the last paragraph, but I don't control the media.   I always suggest turning off that wall to wall coverage for these reasons.  My point was when you dig into stats you can find a different picture than either side is selling or willing to talk about.  

I think the narrative is moreso "the left only gets 'outraged' when it's a mass shooting. They never say a word about the 100's of people a day being shot and killed in places like Chicago." There may be worse places than Chicago these days but Chigaco is the go-to because of how long gang violence has been a problem there. 

Now part of that is pointing the finger at lib run cities and the failure of their policies to bring about the utopian society they claim their policies create. Another part of that is because the left vehemently opposes the 2A and would abolish it if they could. So when they use mass shootings to try and push that agenda it gets met with obstinance from those of us who know that they won't stop with "assault weapons." AR's are just the first step. When that doesn't bring about the change they claim it will, and it won't, there will be further campaigns to ban the next gun or group of guns until the 2A is rendered obsolete. 

As for level 1 trauma centers, I agree that quicker access to that kind of medical care would go a long way towards saving the lives of a lot of inner-city GSW victims. But the fact that that level of medical treatment is necessary to save lives in inner-city America is the issue.

 

[TimHauck 2,598]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Perhaps he did.  Perhaps the reality of the act was different than the fantasy and he abandoned his plan after the first shot.  I have been one who has put forward the argument that a shotgun is more deadly than an AR 15 in the typical circumstances of a school shooting.  I put that argument forward being intimately familiar with each platform.  You seem to disagree.  that is fine.

Well we know the principal (among others, although some could have been the result of the same trigger pull) were also shot, so it seems likely he fired multiple times.  
 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/05/perry-shooting-iowa-high-school-principal/72118272007/

Yes, I know we’ve had this conversation before and IIRC your argument centered around the skill of the shooter, referring primarily to people that were in fact skilled shooters.   I can’t remember if we discussed it last time, but do you still think a shotgun is easier to kill more people in a school setting than an AR-15, for an unskilled shooter?

 

 

[shadrap 220]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Well we know the principal (among others, although some could have been the result of the same trigger pull) were also shot, so it seems likely he fired multiple times.  
 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/05/perry-shooting-iowa-high-school-principal/72118272007/

Yes, I know we’ve had this conversation before and IIRC your argument centered around the skill of the shooter, referring primarily to people that were in fact skilled shooters.   I can’t remember if we discussed it last time, but do you still think a shotgun is easier to kill more people in a school setting than an AR-15, for an unskilled shooter?

 

 

no.  also most shotguns have a plug where the maximum shells being loaded are 3.  for close in shooting a shotgun is best, but you normally have to re-load after 3 shots.

[squistion 1,944]

7 minutes ago, BrahmaBulls said:

Better word for what you all call yourselves?

 

We don't have a word because there is no such thing as trannyism. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

2 minutes ago, squistion said:

We don't have a word because there is no such thing as trannyism. 

There is for racist, which is what you are and vote for!

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

3 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Well we know the principal (among others, although some could have been the result of the same trigger pull) were also shot, so it seems likely he fired multiple times.  
 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/05/perry-shooting-iowa-high-school-principal/72118272007/

Yes, I know we’ve had this conversation before and IIRC your argument centered around the skill of the shooter, referring primarily to people that were in fact skilled shooters.   I can’t remember if we discussed it last time, but do you still think a shotgun is easier to kill more people in a school setting than an AR-15, for an unskilled shooter?

 

 

I do.  I understand that just as the Ar 15 is a semiauto weapon so to are many shotguns.  I understand that for each trigger pull on the AR 15 one round goes down range.  I understand that for erach trigger pull of a 12 gauge holding 00 buck shot that 9 to 13 projectiles larger than the projectile fron an AR chambered in in most common caliber of .223 or 5.56mm goes downrange.  Nine times the firepower and less accuracy required.  Perfect for short distances with targets clustered together.

 

Now out on a schools sports field where targets are at distances greater than say fourty yards and are scattering the shotgun would be useless while the AR would come into its own.  Heck, kids two soccer fields away would still be in substantial danger.

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

4 minutes ago, shadrap said:

no.  also most shotguns have a plug where the maximum shells being loaded are 3.  for close in shooting a shotgun is best, but you normally have to re-load after 3 shots.

That plug can be removed in under 30 seconds.  Also there are drum magazines for semi autos and there are very effective speed loaders.

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

Bing Videos

A decent video showing speed loading of a shotgun.  There are thousands of such videos and hundreds of such systems.

[lickin_starfish 1,889]

Adaptive Tactical makes a sweet kit that lets you convert your pump action shotgun into a drum/magazine fed model. The drums hold 10 rounds, and the magazines can hold 5.

[Engorgeous George 2,121]

This awesome 'trench broom' terrified Germans in both World Wars (wearethemighty.com)

[Voltaire 5,181]

On 1/4/2024 at 9:43 PM, Horseman said:

Trans flag, female avatar, pronouns he/they, posting in r/trans reddit page asking others what holds them back from transitioning.  You're the expert, but, I call that a tranny.  

 

On 1/5/2024 at 6:42 AM, Ron_Artest said:

The latest we have is this kid was bullied for years and reached his breaking point.  He made the terrible decision to kill people and then himself and now everyone suffers from his cowardly abhorrent actions.

His weapons were a shotgun and a .22 handgun, which is major reason why there is only 1 dead.

He was not transitioning, was not taking hormones which caused any of this, was not radicalized.

He may have been influenced by Columbine.

More to come.  Tragic all around.

Continue with your misinformation and hatred.

This thread has eight pages and I'm writing this only after getting to the bottom of page four. So, I'll look to see if these conflicting facts get ironed out, but at this point in the thread, I'd appreciate some links to see where these counter-claims are being made.

[Ron_Artest 1,040]

1 minute ago, Voltaire said:

 

This thread has eight pages and I'm writing this only after getting to the bottom of page four. So, I'll look to see if these conflicting facts get ironed out, but at this point in the thread, I'd appreciate some links to see where these counter-claims are being made.

I believe the shooter had a pride flag in their TikTok bio, like many kids do today as a show of support.  Was born male, traditional male name, he/they pronouns.  There also one hashtag of genderfluid or something that was likely a joke.  He never claimed to be transitioning to female, never wore female clothing or had any other female characteristics.

The trans haters will try and make every shooter a tranny since the Nashville shooting to push an anti-trans agenda.  They failed again here.

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

I think the narrative is moreso "the left only gets 'outraged' when it's a mass shooting. They never say a word about the 100's of people a day being shot and killed in places like Chicago." There may be worse places than Chicago these days but Chigaco is the go-to because of how long gang violence has been a problem there. 

Now part of that is pointing the finger at lib run cities and the failure of their policies to bring about the utopian society they claim their policies create. Another part of that is because the left vehemently opposes the 2A and would abolish it if they could. So when they use mass shootings to try and push that agenda it gets met with obstinance from those of us who know that they won't stop with "assault weapons." AR's are just the first step. When that doesn't bring about the change they claim it will, and it won't, there will be further campaigns to ban the next gun or group of guns until the 2A is rendered obsolete. 

As for level 1 trauma centers, I agree that quicker access to that kind of medical care would go a long way towards saving the lives of a lot of inner-city GSW victims. But the fact that that level of medical treatment is necessary to save lives in inner-city America is the issue.

 

There's also a perfectly reasonable reason for this as well.  Most of us have kids in school, go to malls, theaters, etc.   Most of us won't go near the crime riddled areas of the big cities.    People tend to click on and focus on this that they relate to and pertain to them.    I agree that there is a baked in agenda when you are talking about media narrative, but there is also a reason people around the country would be outraged over something like a school shooting, even if it's very rare.  

Your second paragraph is 100% the reason why I bring up the stats like I do.   I agree the narrative from the right is a focus on lib policies.  I pointed out how when you look at the stats as I suggested, you see a lot of red counties and red states popping up.    Again, it depends what stat you are looking at exactly but you start to see TX, SE states, and red counties pop up.   IF it was just liberal policies generating the violence, how do we explain those stats?    That's why I said I think the right is pushing narrative just as much.   The left is stupid about this issue - who cares if some whine about abolishing the 2A or banning guns.  Anybody with a brain should understand that is never going to happen.   They need to focus on realistic solutions.  

That level of care is necessary to save lives everywhere.   I was just shocked that a city as big as that didn't have that care for about 1/2 their population until 2018 or so.   I also thought it was an interesting tie in to think about when we are talking stats like gun murder/death.   

[squistion 1,944]

1 minute ago, Ron_Artest said:

I believe the shooter had a pride flag in their TikTok bio, like many kids do today as a show of support.  Was born male, traditional male name, he/they pronouns.  There also one hashtag of genderfluid or something that was likely a joke.  He never claimed to be transitioning to female, never wore female clothing or had any other female characteristics.

The trans haters will try and make every shooter a tranny since the Nashville shooting to push an anti-trans agenda.  They failed again here.

That happened in one of the first few posts of this thread before anyone knew anything about the shooter.