Uh, Whale?
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=191094
Printed Date: 24 November 2025 at 11:59am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Uh, Whale?
Posted By: tallen702
Subject: Uh, Whale?
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 9:18am
|
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/UCF-dorm-evacuated-after-discovery-of-body-guns-explosives/-/1637132/19355112/-/1apu1p/-/index.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.clickorlando.com/news/UCF-dorm-evacuated-after-discovery-of-body-guns-explosives/-/1637132/19355112/-/1apu1p/-/index.html ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Replies:
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 9:35am
|
Posted By: Reb Cpl
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 10:52am
Its good, he just sheared his toe off with some broken glass. ------------- ? |
evillepaintball wrote:Posted By: RoboCop
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 12:05pm
| It is oddly suspicious. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 2:21pm
|
I go to UF now, but I still know some people at UCF and some friends who work for local media who were up all night. I'll be curious to see what kind of explosives it was or if there was any indication that the student was going to cause any more destruction.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 2:22pm
Yep. Caught the corner of a pane of glass out of a picture frame between the toes, corner jagged in about a half-inch into my foot.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 4:56pm
| Police are saying the kid had hundreds of rounds of ammunition and at least for explosives in his backpack, and had the intention to kill as many people as possible this morning, but he changed his mind last minute and decided on suicide. |
Posted By: JohnnyCanuck
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 8:12pm
how lucky, and tragic, what was this guy dealing with that he felt killing 'as many people as possible' would fix whatever he was going through..very disturbing that there are probably more disturbed and suffering people with the same issues. ------------- Imagine there’s a picture of your favourite thing here. |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 9:11pm
| Really shouldn't quit taking SSRI's cold turkey. |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 18 March 2013 at 11:25pm
That one has always made me puzzled. It's as if a couple hundred rounds of ammo is something not commonplace for people who own guns. Obviously in this instance, he intended to use them for nefarious purposes, but still. It's always "so and so had over 100 rounds of ammunition at their house." I have 5x that much in a single box of .22lr downstairs. Don't even get me started on the spam cans of 7.62x54R where I have over 1,000 rounds for my two mosin-platforms. I'm just a small time collector and I have at least 2,000 rounds of ammo at this very moment. Just always seems like it's a scare tactic that reporters like to use to get their hooks in. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: DaveEllis
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 12:20am
Yeah, I'm not impressed until you at minimum have a Killdozer |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 3:21am
|
I think in this case the ammunition count is used to further prove that his intent was less than noble. If they had said he was found with a gun and ammunition, it could leave it open to interpretation that it was just a random suicide. ------------- 
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 8:11am
Yeah, but then you always read about the guy who went on a filibuster length rant at a town hall meeting in NJ and someone called the cops saying they were making "threats" and then the cops show up, confiscate weapons and ammo, and the news reports that he had 3 high powered rifles (even if they're just lever-action 30/30's) and 200 rounds of ammunition as if that was something overly dangerous. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: Ceesman762
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 8:48am
Seltzer water and a shop vac.. ------------- Innocence proves nothing FUAC!!!!! |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 8:48pm
It's a statement of fact of something that occurred.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 8:49pm
If he had 200 rounds of ammunition in his home, and the news reported he had 200 rounds of ammunition in his home, what exactly is the issue?
|
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 19 March 2013 at 9:04pm
| I would like to know more about the explosives. Who cares about the ammo. |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 8:21am
Because there is a decision in each of these cases to report "just enough truth" rather than the whole truth. It's always "x-guns and x-rounds of ammo" but never any information on what caliber, what make, etc. If you're going to omit pertinent facts and keep vague ones, what's the point? ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 8:28am
|
Case in point. Cops seize 4 rifles, 2 handguns, and 1,000 rounds of ammo from John Doe's house. That's a basic fact, but gives so little information as to be superfluous. "Cops seize four .22LR bolt-action rifles, two .22LR revolvers, and one-thousand rounds of .22LR ammo from John Doe's house" and "Cops seize one AR-15, one illegally-converted automatic SKS, one AKM, an unregistered fully automatic Uzi, two CZ-61 Skorpion assault pistols and 1,000 rounds of ammunition in those calibers." Two very, very different stories, but in the minimal facts fear-monger approach, they are the exact same. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 10:07am
------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 10:36am
|
Pretty much. The number of rounds has nothing to do with intent. I've probably got a about 2000 rounds of .22, 1000 rounds of 9mm, 750 rounds of .45ACP, 120 shotgun round and a mix of rifle calibers that probably make up another couple of hundred. Doesn't mean I'm gonna shoot people simply because I have ammunition. Buying in bulk saves money..... KBK ------------- Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo. H = 2 |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 11:47am
Because news is written for the average person to consume -- if this were a firearms trade magazine covering an incident, that would be acceptable. A very good portion of the public is not going to know what that means, and "two rifles" is plenty acceptable.
And one wonders how the paranoid gun-nut stereotype forms.
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 11:58am
|
I think the issue is that they give just enough information to make it sound scary. Why say "3 assault type weapons(OMG a black rifle!) and 700 rounds of ammunition instead of: 1) Tallen's point, being specific, or, 2) "3 guns and ammunition" ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 12:11pm
Because a good portion of people are not going to know what that means. I could see an argument that, to some extent, explanation as to what the type of gun means could be included, but that's not to say that the media is inherently incorrect in simply saying the number of rifles, pistols, etc.
What difference does it make to specify rifle/pistol/shotgun?
People are going to know what those things mean. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 12:26pm
|
Every story I've seen so far about this situation has said what type of rifle and pistol he had, including the calibre. From what I've seen, there has not been much confusion about it. This is someone who left a note saying his intentions were to "give them hell," and was illegally keeping a gun and ammunition in his dorm. I guess I'm just confused as to what the issue is with stating how much ammunition he had in the news stories? |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 1:22pm
Okay, so a good portion of people aren't going to know what it means, but a good portion of people also aren't going to understand the significance or lack there of, of the amount of ammunition. Why not just state that pistols or rifles or whatever were seized along with ammunition? Whale, I know you've been taught that "this is the way it's done" but the reality is that it intentionally omits relevant information. We're in the world of electronic media now where there's no need to fit a column into a column-sized space on paper. If the industry is going to stand on the grounds of "we report facts" then report them and let the readers determine if they're relevant or not. It's like saying it's relevant to explain that the quarterback for the football team is out with an ACL injury rather than just a "knee injury" but it's not relevant to say .22 caliber AR-15 instead of "Assault Weapon." ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: SSOK
Date Posted: 20 March 2013 at 2:25pm
|
It's like in my thread, the kid was holding a S&W MP15-22, a 22 AR. Fox News called it a hunting rifle. CBS or NBC may call it a Assault Weapon. Truth is, it is a MP15-22 All three names are correct-sorta. It can be used for hunting, but its more of a plinker. People can call it an assault rifle, but it isn't full auto, it doesn't fire and intermediate cartridge, and NJ bans what they call an assault rifle anyway. Saying "xxx number of riflesand xxx ammo" can be fear mongering. Because "a crusty old Soviet rifle and one can of ammunition" sounds significantly less "scary". ------------- 
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 21 March 2013 at 1:00pm
And others wonder when the trademarks of yellow journalism became the gold standard for responsibility in the media. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: Reb Cpl
Date Posted: 21 March 2013 at 2:04pm
 ------------- ? |
Posted By: paintbusta
Date Posted: 21 March 2013 at 9:23pm
|
nice ------------- 
|
Posted By: Bunkered
Date Posted: 29 March 2013 at 1:24pm
It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you, right? Funny, because I didn't really know about these goings-on at all. I've been a bit out of the loop as far as current events go, too caught up with work and such. If this trend of illegal raids continues happening, this is going to spiral out of control really quickly. I really do believe the government entities raiding the houses got fairly lucky. If people start thinking the government is going to raid their houses, all the "paranoid gun nuts" are going to get even more paranoid and someone - police or civilian - is going to get killed... Right or wrong, many people in this country do have a "cold dead hands" mentality when it comes to guns. ------------- 
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 29 March 2013 at 5:34pm
So, here's my question. This is from ABC News just yesterday:
Okay, relevant points highlighted. ABC did a good job saying what type of weapons. I'm cool with that so long as they do it all the time. They also point out how many mags and rounds there were. Which is interesting to me. 154 spent rounds, but the story only says that 4 magazines were recovered, so where are the rest of them? I'm pretty goddamned sure he didn't stop to load mags in the middle of his rampage.... The math doesn't add up. So is ABC trying to say that he only had 4 super-baby-killing mags? Or did they omit the part of the report that states how many empty mags they recovered, because, you know, that's a rather pertinent and relevant FACT that is worthy of being reported.... ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |