Mountain Project Logo

Montana murder suspect charged for 2013 Ten Sleep Canyon shooting

Matt Wilson · · Vermont, USA · Joined May 2010 · Points: 316
USBRIT wrote: I imagine its quite difficult to shoot people without a gun.
By your logic, Vermont should be the most dangerous state in the country, since it has essentially no gun regulation, and places like Detroit, Washington DC, and New York City should be much safer, since they have effectively banned all gun ownership.
doligo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2008 · Points: 264
Matt Wilson wrote: By your logic, Vermont should be the most dangerous state in the country, since it has essentially no gun regulation, and places like Detroit, Washington DC, and New York City should be much safer, since they have effectively banned all gun ownership.
The thing is, people on the streets of New York are killed with guns bought in the states like Vermont. That's the frustration NYC mayors have had with gun laws in this country.
BirminghamBen · · Birmingham, AL · Joined Jan 2007 · Points: 1,620
USBRIT wrote:Overall its a silly redneck type question.
I keep reading this in my best British accent...and it makes me chuckle every time.

"How does one overthrow the government, gub'ner?" --- says the Canadian.
"Well, that's a silly, redneck sort of question." --- says the USBRIT.
"(birds chirping)"

Fantastic troll by Paul, though.

Sorry for the victims here. Sorry the perp seems to have much trouble heading his way. Seems no winners.
Zac St Jules · · New Hampshire · Joined Dec 2013 · Points: 1,188
UncleBen wrote: I keep reading this in my best British accent...and it makes me chuckle every time. "How does one overthrow the government, gub'ner?" --- says the Canadian. "Well, that's a silly, redneck sort of question." --- says the USBRIT. "(birds chirping)"
Ah that is good.

Its more likely that the conversation would go something like this:

"Well, how does one overthrow the government you loyalist hoser?"
"You must be dead from the shoulders up, you silly daft of a man. What a ridiculous sort of queston."
Paul Ross · · Keswick, Cumbria · Joined Apr 2001 · Points: 22,236

Of course there is no solution to gun problems in the USA... Its still is and always will be the Wild Wild West..Just keep your head down.!!!

BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385

There will never be a solution to the gun problem in the U.S.A., just as there has never been a solution to the rock, stick, sword, bow and arrow, metal object issues throughout history and worldwide.

This is not an inanimate object issue, but a worldwide issue of human nature and/or mental anomalies only.

There are people/nations in this world who wish power/rule/greed and they don't believe what you want, and couldn't care less how you feel about it. They will use whatever is at their disposal. Some of these people, for whatever reason, will never understand the "living by the Golden Rule" mindset.

Take away the cat's claws, the ant's bite, the bee's sting and let them fend for themselves.

You be the one who capitulated when that time, if ever, comes. I'm an American, and as such, I believe in standing up for those of you who will not themselves. Americans stand against those who wish power/rule/greed for a nefarious purpose, so keep your head up.

Until you can extract the human nature that wishes evil to those they deem unworthy, weak, or easily subjugated... well, if you could figure that out, the world would be a better place I believe.

Until then what would you ask of those who wish to protect what is theirs?

Those who are in the news... they are not like you. They have wrongs inside, and do not think like you. Who, or what will defend you?

When someone invents a device to completely disintegrate someone only using the mind, and can be worn as cheaply and easily as a watch, will we still have a gun problem?

Edit to add:
Glad the person was caught and no further tragedy can occur from this person. I hope the lives affected can prosper again.

will ar · · Vermont · Joined Jan 2010 · Points: 290

Sorry if I'm derailing the gun control debate here, but I remember when this first became news that the climber who was shot was hit with huge medical bills (~$50k). Just curious if anyone knew if he was still struggling to pay it off or had gotten help. Recently some of the survivors and victims' families of mass shootings have received significant sums of money under a federal grant for victims. Now that the shooting in question was definitely a malicious act and not an accident maybe he is eligible to receive assistance?

Bill Kirby · · Keene New York · Joined Jul 2012 · Points: 480
will ar wrote:Sorry if I'm derailing the gun control debate here, but I remember when this first became news that the climber who was shot was hit with huge medical bills (~$50k). Just curious if anyone knew if he was still struggling to pay it off or had gotten help. Recently some of the survivors and victims' families of mass shootings have received significant sums of money under a federal grant for victims. Now that the shooting in question was definitely a malicious act and not an accident maybe he is eligible to receive assistance?
The gentleman shot was from outta the country so I doubt he's able to get any of that money.

But.. The government gives money to anybody who doesn't wanna get it on their own so I wouldn't be surprised if there's something out there.
Scott McMahon · · Boulder, CO · Joined Feb 2006 · Points: 1,425
Bill Kirby wrote: But.. The government gives money to anybody who doesn't wanna get it on their own so I wouldn't be surprised if there's something out there.
haha that's a can of worms right there!!!
Matt Wilson · · Vermont, USA · Joined May 2010 · Points: 316
doligo wrote: The thing is, people on the streets of New York are killed with guns bought in the states like Vermont. That's the frustration NYC mayors have had with gun laws in this country.
Man you'd think they would pass a law banning people from buying guns underground like that.

Or better yet, cut to the chase and just make it illegal to murder people. I mean, it's just a matter of passing the right laws, right?
lozo bozo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2015 · Points: 30
powhound84 wrote: I don't care what any dirtbaggers think about my stance on government aid. If you don't contribute, your opinion doesn't matter.
and what makes you think your opinion matters to anyone?
Paul-B · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2011 · Points: 115
fruitloop wrote: and what makes you think your opinion matters to anyone?
Perhaps it was the guy arguing with him about his opinion, perhaps that tipped him off.
Matt Wilson · · Vermont, USA · Joined May 2010 · Points: 316
Tim Lutz wrote:wow, harsh toke broski. I would think the long history of good ol Murikan dirtbaggers would disagree with your stance as well. Hope you find some relief from your nausea... Maybe try focusing on the 1% of humans that hold onto 80% of the wealth while smacking the environment around and sucking it dry of resources. That makes me puke.
I am going to assume you do your part of not handing more money to the 1% by, for example, not shopping at large chains, not purchasing a vehicles new, not paying for a high speed internet connection, not buying gasoline, etc?
Paul Ross · · Keswick, Cumbria · Joined Apr 2001 · Points: 22,236

I guess we are now on a different subject .. Non working climbers (sometimes call dirtbags by the more conservative members of the sport) . In my long history of climbing with and knowing many such climbers there are mainly two different reasons they can climb and not work.This is not taking into consideration the current help of sponsorship that makes life very easy for these lucky climbers if they have some talent they will become well known and with big reputations due lots of publicity provided by their sponsors and of course they do not work a 9 to 5 job..
Perhaps the majority of non working lads who often appeared to be dirtbag climbers both in the US and UK were sponsored by their parents rich enough to allow international travel and unlimited time to follow their sport
.. The alternative to this was of course the real dirt bags who lived on the dole or lived as best they could on other climbers floors and good will . Very early climbers who started their careers with extremely low funds and no parental help were such climbers as Joe Brown ,Chris Bonington,Don Whillans and many others of those 1950/60 years,and they are still a few around today. All these climbers you read about that are hitting the headlines on a regular basis I'm afraid they do not have time to work !! However these non working climbers are usually the ones who push the standard and produce the first ascents that the mostly weekend warriors can enjoy..

Altered Ego · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jul 2008 · Points: 0

I've heard the argument before that the more people armed, the safer everyone is because it acts as a deterrent and in the case of an actual event the general population is equipped to deal with it. This may seem logical on some level and is a similar approach that countries have taken with respect to nuclear arms.

I wonder what it would like in real life however. Take the Aurora shooting for example. Someone opens fire in a dark theatre full of armed people of all ages and what happens next? What would you do as an armed citizen in that crowd? I imagine things would get out of control pretty quick with people firing all over the place not being able to see what is going on while the adrenaline is surging. Then what do the police do when they arrive on the scene and there’s a bunch of random shooting going on? What if someone is accidentally killed?

I think it is unrealistic to think an average person could handle that situation at all effectively. It takes a tremendous amount of training and experience for police or military to become able to engage these situations.

To me it seems like a psychotic way to deal with the ever present threat of violence just as it is with nuclear arms. In an effort to protect ourselves we have created a more dangerous situation that could destroy the entire planet. Surely there is a better way.

Aleks Zebastian · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jul 2014 · Points: 175

Climbing friend,

May I ask how you would be defending yourself in this country against, armed, drunk, crazy and predatory rednecks when climbing in rural area? In Norway this is not so much of problem.

Climbing friend dong, you say your post quite well, myah?

cragmantoo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2015 · Points: 175
Aleks Zebastian wrote:Climbing friend, May I ask how you would be defending yourself in this country against, armed, drunk, crazy and predatory rednecks when climbing in rural area? In Norway this is not so much of problem. Climbing friend dong, you say your post quite well, myah?
rneck2
Petsfed 00 · · Snohomish, WA · Joined Mar 2002 · Points: 989
Long Duk Dong wrote:I think it is unrealistic to think an average person could handle that situation at all effectively. It takes a tremendous amount of training and experience for police or military to become able to engage these situations.
This is actually why the police tend to be really bad shots (the all too common "$deadCriminal$ was hit 8 times. Police fired their weapons a total of 120 times" line in a news story). Not because they don't train, but because that situation is really hard to deal with even for (ostensibly) trained professionals.

That fact is the main reason I don't own firearms for self-defense. The time- and resource-cost of training is actually greater than the opportunity-cost of simply not going to dangerous places, and the expectation value of the return on investment (e.g. take your average life-insurance pay-out and multiply that by the odds of it actually happening) is still less than the cost of training.

Its simply not worth it to me to get to a point where shooting the thing is more effective (and less likely to cause collateral damage) than throwing it.
Tony B · · Around Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 24,665
Long Duk Dong wrote: Take the Aurora shooting for example.
Why take the radical exception as an example?
Most gun deaths are not murders, they are suicides. (64%)
As for the rest, gang murders are much more common than mass shootings, and simple handguns are the weapon, not automatics or semi automatics.
"Mass shootings" are a statistical anomaly accounting for a fraction of a percent. More people are beat to death with blunt objects anually than are killed by "assault weapons."

Trying to work out anything using Aurora as an example will get you nowhere because it is nonsense. But if you insist, I will invite you to find me an example of the horror of which you speak, whereas a civilian opens fire in defense in the fog/haze and kills even more folks. The opposite has however happened. I won't bother with details though because it doesn't matter. The media sensations are just that because they are rare. I can't make an example of that any better than can you.

This post is intended to educate anyone who is actually interested in the truth.
In other words, I doubt if anyone cares.
cragmantoo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2015 · Points: 175
Tony B wrote: In other words, I doubt if anyone cares.
If nobody cared. there would not be such heated discourse about the subject on a climbing forum.
The reality is, you can argue either side (or the middle ground) on some issues (such as guns) endlessly and most people are alreday set in their opinions & facts/statistics/other opinions will never change their minds. Doesn't mean nobody cares though it often seems futile to argue about it.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Wyoming, Montana, Dakotas
Post a Reply to "Montana murder suspect charged for 2013 Ten Sle…"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.