New Research Confirms Gun Rampages Are Rising—and Armed Civilians Don't Stop Them

Quantico Shooting: 3 Dead, Including Suspected Gunman, On Marine Base In Virginia (VIDEO)

gypsyman wrote:

Well, I guess I should have used quotation marks because it is a quote I received on my iPhone from a news station.

gypsyman wrote:

ScottFromWyoming wrote:

I know, I was just being picky. But, notice, that in the order of relevance, "rampage" is pretty far downrange (snorts at own joke). However, I do think that a Bacchanalian shopping spree not only sounds interesting, it may be just what the doctor ordered. Not that there's anything wrong with a plain old spree, mind you.

gypsyman wrote:
I ran into someone yesterday getting all bent over another word because the etymology indicated a meaning completely different from its current meaning. I thought to myself, "That person disabuses me of the notion that everyone should use a dictionary." And now here we have another, similar case.

There's no reason to think that all examples of synonyms given are appropriate in all cases; they simply list as many as they've run across. Certainly you're not also insisting that a shopping spree always includes a bacchanal? In this case, I think the synonym that's most applicable here would be "rampage."

2cats wrote:
Is a spree like a lark? Is there shopping involved?

Thesaurus.com:
Part of Speech: noun Definition: wild activity Synonyms: bacchanalia, ball , bash , binge , caper , carousal , carouse, carousing, celebration , field day, fling , frolic , high jinks, high time, jag, jamboree, junket, lark , merry-go-round, orgy, party , rampage , revel , rip *, spending expedition, splurge, tear *
Maybe spree isn't quite the perfect fit.... Again, absolutely no antagonistic bent here, just that "spree" has always been a tough descriptor for me to associate with shootings. Most likely due to my strict upbringing....

Four dead in gun spree in upstate New York.

bokey wrote:
Sorry, I am not forensically qualified to assess the photograph, so I don't know what fact or facts it represents. I certainly know who it is, and have seen the photo before (I lived through the thing, as you probably did, as well), but I assure you in a completely un-antagonistic way that I don't know what to look for.

gypsyman wrote:
Fact before I go to sleep.
Find more detailed images that show the fake shadows better.

I dunno who did it,but it sure wasn't this guy.

ScottFromWyoming wrote:
Lots of hyperbole, not many facts. I think we'll all get along better with facts, don't you?

ScottFromWyoming wrote:

I think the Oswald photo with the rifle,pamphlets and Barry Bonds head was the impetuous behind Photoshop.

gypsyman wrote:
This whole line of reasoning is Nugent-level unstable. Geordie's right to be concerned.

They had to go back 5 decades to find an example that fit their narrative? The exception proves the rule. The rule in this case being some fictional bogeyman both set up and shot down by the same graphic.

geordiezimmerman wrote:
Why, not convenient for you to accept a wacko Democrat killing a whole bunch of people without an "assault style" weapon? Doh!

geordiezimmerman wrote:

The only help I might have needed was cropping the facebook tag at the bottom calling Obama the worst ever. Ignore that part. Or embrace it, its what is above that that matters. I wasn't going to download and reupload to my flickr account and waste the time or space.

... thank you for your concern.

geordiezimmerman wrote:
Why, Geordie? Do you see inaccuracies in Kurt's post? Or is it just that you can't abide facts that don't agree with your preconceived opinions?

kurtster wrote:
Seek help. And soon. Not joking.

kurtster wrote:
Yea that guy was a terror! Deranged snipers are about as terrifying as you get especially trained ones. That is a fine gun he was using, I wish I could afford one.

kurtster wrote:
Kurt, you have gone off the rails and are falling off the cliff.