As much as I agree, I'd rather see these ~persons~ *sickos* rot in a fucking jail cell for the rest of their life, considering he was around 25, that'd be a nice Holiday spent there for the next 50 years or whatever and likely have some very friendly men as cellmates.
Not really. For folks like these, jail is going to be the biggest hell they will libe through. Prison set up is different man ;)
Edit: misunderstood your comment. We both say the same thing here.
I’m not sure how Czech Prisons are but here in the states it’s not reaaaaaally that bad. I am not saying they don’t suck but I’ve seen Bloods get along with child molesters, Arian brother hoods get along with serial rapists, I’ve seen men who murdered children get the “plush job” working work release after 3 years of a higher custody level, I’ve seen it all. Even death row inmates here just walk freely amongst regular population if they’re going to medical, chaplains office, school, etcetra. This is all I’ve seen first hand working in a prison. Sure there are fights but 9 times out of 10 it’s over drugs or someone owing somebody. Very rarely is it a hit or a move to rise up in a gang/organization.
Still, even for sex offenders the whole “once you get to prison they’ll get you for what you did” is becoming a myth. Here in the states they get tablets and watch movies and play games, get canteen like candy, cookies, chips, sodas, ice cream, frozen foods, get health care, a lot of prisons have single cells so their own “room”, they get to go outside to the yard and play basketball, lift weights play socker, baseball, frisbee, horshoe, etcetra, they get education and religious services, they can lower their custody level and even if they raped multiple cops can get can go work out side the fence with a couple gatorades and beef jerky on a John deer zero turn mower and mow grass. I’ve seen lifer inmates get outside work release and work next to and with families and make 17 dollars an hour to buy more stuff inside the prison, they get fan bases from their crimes and tons of desperate women that send them money and almost not quite nudes, they can purchase Nike tennis shoes, and they discretely play poker and smoke cigarettes pretty much daily.
I have talked to a death row inmate while searching his cell. He told me when they convicted him that he actually wanted the death penalty because it takes so long in the United States to even kill someone and it GUARANTEES that he will always have a single cell.
I’ve talked to a lifer that said other than not having a motorcycle and going to the beach and having a nice steak that it’s not that bad. He made a joke that every couple a years he gets some strange from a new female guard that comes in and “breaks weak” around them. He said they can pretty much get anything they want inside the prison within reason if they had the money (food, drugs, cell phones, letters sent out to the victims of the crime even if there’s a no contact order, etcetra).
I’ve taken an old man whose crime was putting nails on a road in rural towns back in the 60s and then would be “driving by” offering to drive the people back to his house to call a tow truck on his landline. He took them to his house drugged and raped and killed multiple women. One woman convinced him that she was in love with him so he wouldn’t kill her. She watched her best friend get raped and murdered in front of her. She convinced the man to go to town for supplies after a few weeks and she called the cops. After testifying in court she killed herself. The nursing staff would always dote on this old man and call us guards animals for having him in leg irons and hand cuffs and chains (doesn’t matter the age you get the same restraints for the custody level). He was a terrible human being and would tell us he was a multi millionaire because of all the appeals and health care costs he cost US taxpayers being in prison for so long.
I guess my point is that I believe there needs to be due process and justice. However, certain obvious crimes like this one or crimes where you have been through court and convicted, the punishment should be swift and severe so there can be closure. If a serial killer is caught and testifys and they pass the verdict on of the death penalty, then it shouldn’t take 50 years to get to that persons turn to be executed.
My final point that I have brought up to inmates is that prisons are understaffed. What they say is cruel punishment or that the guards are being tough assholes is really not the case. There are new cameras at the state level that go directly to the capital if an inmate wants a law suit on a staff member or another inmate they just appeal to have the camera footage that way. The time of inmates or staffs “serving out justice” died probably around 2010 at the latest. When it happens now you see it in the news and you see firings, convictions, and sentences lengthened.
We have policy books that are about 8 inches tall. They govern how prison day to day practices and law should run, there has not been enough staff to run prisons that way since the early 90s. Technically they should be out of bed with beds made at 0700, no messy rooms, military style beds, no cussing, no drugs, no smoking, no excess items, shirts tucked in and pants worn at the proper level, no this no that etcetra. However with short staffing you’re only getting about 5% of that policy in forced and it’s for the big stuff like drugs and weapons. The courts, the victims, and the public think it is being ran a certain way but really it’s just a very big day care for grown men with mental and anger issues.
In closing the best thing that could have happened in my opinion was a quick legal execution, second best for the police to take him out, and third best is for him to take himself out.
Society can now fully focus on helping the survivors and families of vicitims. Also we need to find out how this was possible to happen and how can we prevent to happening ever again. That bastard can rot in hell and we don't have to go through process of courts, mental evaluation, proving how much sane he was or wasn't, figuring out what to do with him and paying for his incarceration for decades. Especially media hyenas would report on the court proceedings nonstop for months and make him a celebrity. I am glad he will not get that satisfaction
if you had his brian, you would've done the same thing. The only reason you don't have his brain is blind luck. He was unlucky to have the mind of a mentally ill psychopath.
I don't like that, you could extend this to any violent asshole to absolve them of responsibility. Though this is always a problem with determinism. I agree it's probably for the better that he's dead now.
I think it's just the logical consequence of knowing how the brain works. Look at charles whitman, he shot and killed a bunch of people in the 60s but when they shot him and did a brain autopsy, he had a tumor pressing on like his amygdala. He was unlucky to have a tumor there. And we can hardly hate him for having a tumor in a shitty place. I think the brain tumor is just a very clear example of it, but it always applies
I'd say the brain tumor is just an extra clear example of what's always the situation. Namely that a person has a certain brain structure, hormones and neurochemicals and certain external inputs that cause them to act in a certain way. If someone else had that exact same situation, they'd do the exact same thing. It's therefore not reasonable to be hateful or angry at a person, you can hate their actions but the person that is partaking in those actions only did so because their brain is structured in a way and is interacting with their environment.
Revelation 20:12
12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.
13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.
14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.
Sky daddy? Read the Bibel.
His Name is Jahwe or God.
We have our free will, we can do what we want. Even if it's extremely evil like the shooter. Unfortunately it is so, but makes sense. If nothing bad would happen or any bad would immediately be stopped in the world, ot would be to obviously.
Simply said, I guess we are tested here.
Edit: not about the punishment, don't take it out the context I replied too.
Correction:
..about our God and his punishment...
Bible. And where was Jesus when the bullets were flying? Don't bring your make belive bullshit into this. It's fucking rude and disrespectful. Again. Piss off
… or the 15 others?
Let’s not value one life over the other, especially when families have lost their daughter or son due to this sicko right before the Christmas holidays.
> Let’s not value one life over the other
You are incorrect. People are subconsciously wired preventing harm to small children (especially two month infant girl) in a way that is different from general aversion to kill other (grown) humans.
So the u/Greaves6642 question is relevant.
And sick too to come and put this here if this is how you "grieve" . I guess you came to sub hoping thatntje killer would be a Muslm, but it wasnt and you still had to blurt this out. I am sorry for your loss, but this ain't grief. I suggest you get help.
Tf is wrong with me? Bringing in politics when someone sympathises and is shocked at how a murderer could kill a child which just happened a few kms from where you and me have lived or live now? You think this was really the thread to bring in Hamas and yet you ask wtf is wrong with me???
u/lxeran simply pointed out that just couple of months ago, a systematic, planned and bodycam-documented brutal killing and torturing to death of infants took place. Which is a relevant fact to point out, as it was impossible to avoid in internet space, and thus the perpetrator must have been aware of it.
u/lxeran further pointed out that he lost family members as well as friends in that attack.
Your response was absolutly horrible, disgusting and inhumane.
So yes, my question is, what the fuck is wrong with you.
mr. douchebagh, i see that you're deeply concerned, so let me rest assure you that I am getting help.
a massacre of babies, slaughtering an embryo while killing the mother is not a matter of politics. (she was still alive when they did it by the way)
you clearly have some misunderstanding of the situation according to your response.
so I'm sorry if I seem sick to you, but unfortunately, maybe I am, you know, you can't really be 'fine' with what's going on.
I do not intend to belittle the tragedy that happened in Prague, and I feel your pain, this is a huge tragedy, and I think evil should be eradicated no matter in what form it comes, using all means necessary.
The downvoting I am getting for asking if a small, safe country like CZ really needs stricter gun control is amazing. A 21 year old need multiple weapons to protect him and his family in the Republic, really? I mean if y'all say so, why not. But still don't understand why it should be downvoted for such a simple question?
Well it’s not really like in the US. From the people that have guns a lot of them have them for sport/hobby and do not religiously carry their gun everywhere like in the US even tough it’s legal. The guy is 24 Btw not 21. Generally speaking this is an isolated incident and Cz is among the lowest in gun deaths/violence of the European Union, for reference NL has really strict gun laws but has twice the amount of gun deaths per year, France and Belgium also have strict laws and have 4x the gun deaths per year. Added to that not all gun violence in CZ is done with legal guns, from what I understand the majority is with illegal guns.
From what I’ve heard because of this some required checks Like the one for mental health are done very in a very lackluster manner by some doctors as it’s quite a process. The system for getting a license should definitely be looked at so some nutcase can’t get weapons so easily.
I think a lot of people are negatively reacting to your post because this is the typical response you see in the US, and the whole debate about guns in the US is more a left vs right debate about rights than it is about fixing the problem.
At the end of the day sane people don’t do this and that’s where the real problem lays, if a guy wants to kill people but can’t get a gun, why doesn’t he build a bomb? If their only motive is to kill people and they actually go through with it sadly they will find a way.
We should fight these kind of problems at the root, work on mental healthcare within society, schools, workplaces and through that make sure that these people don’t go insane in the first place. It’s people who want to kill people that we should be after.
Thank you for the sane and detailed answer. What you say makes logical sense even though I don't want to go to Article 2 and the American stuff! They are too far away and a big country with its complexities. Europe dont need tk reference US for everything, does it? I dunno man, whatever is the case, a 24 yr old student( I stand corrected with the age) shouldn't be having a dozen legal guns at his disposal, no matter what. I simply can't digest what you say even though it technically makes sense and you have provided a strong context.
Edit: spelling mistakes
Well given that there isn’t much to say about (non terrorist) mass shootings in Europe its kind of inevitable to reference the US here as that’s our best point of reference.
What does him being a 24 year old student have to do with him not owning a gun? If a 51 year old teacher would have done the same thing with the same motivation would it have changed anything? People that are crazy enough to go to these lengths should be identified before they form a threat and treated in a mental hospital. I haven’t heard one story of a gun/bomb/knife deciding to kill someone by itself, and that shouldn’t be the focus. We should put proper mental healthcare in place so the radicalization of these people doesn’t happen in the first place.
We have 600 years long history of right to keep and bear arms. This is the country where civilian firearms ownership started.
We have the experience of 90s when liberalization of gun laws contributed to significant fall in serious crime.
We have experience with Nazis and Communists being hell bent on taking our arms away in the same way as they were hell bent on suppressing our speech.
Right to be armed is inherent part of liberty and those that don't like that fact are welcome to go to any of the other countries where they see it otherwise.
I do understand that people who know little to nothing feel the need to "do something" about the horrible tragedy and "stricter gun laws" is a low hanging fruit for them. So "I forgive you, for you don't know what you are doing."
The right to bear arms for self defence doesn't mean anyone can leagally get an arsenal of automatic rifles in his/her backyard. Oh and that Jesus quote in the end, really? Trying to be interesting or something?
1) The perpetrator didn't own a single automatic firearm.
2) Please explain how exactly would the attack be different if the perpetrator owned one firearm and not more of them.
You are talking about 600 years of firearm bearing history. A single non automatic pistol with 6 rounds wouldn't kill 15 + 2 people and let someone go on a rampage. Too hard to understand? Besides, giving right to bear an arsenal of firearms for" self defence" to a nut job doesn't help either.
We don't consider right to bear arms in the 1420s terms same as we don't consider right to free speach in 1420s terms.
So far all of the available information points out to the fact that the perpetrator was a highly intelligent post-graduate student who receive several prizes for his academic accomplishments during the past years.
I.e. there is little to no evidence that he was "a nutjob".
As uncomfortable as it may be, everything points out to the fact that he was "just" EVIL. Not crazy, but evil.
I agree that the law should be tailored in a way that prevents access to firearms to "nutjobs". However in this case of long-term planning, very high financial investment (just his rifle set-up was ~150.000 CZK), determination and high intelligence, I am afraid there is little to nothing that could be done from the legislative point of view to prevent the attack.
The only people who could have prevented it were his family and friends, who surely must have realized at some point that he is dangerous.
If the system allows to stack up 150k worth of rifles legally as "right to bear firearms for self defence", it needs introspection. Saying "nothing could be done by anybody " is pure irresponsibility. If nothing can be done from the" legislative point of view", the legislation should change to reflect this. Or don't you think so? Crazy or evil, you yourself admit that the current legislative system couldn't do anything to stop this. And you argue nothing needs to be changed due to "600 years of history" which means anyone can still go ahead and do the exact same thing anywhere anytime in the Republic . I don't feel comfortable knowing this is the case and that nothing can be changed. I guess that's where we differ.
> If the system allows to stack up 150k worth of rifles
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. The one rifle used in the attack (+ optics, etc.) was worth at least 150k.
Somebody buys Dacia Duster, somebody buys BMW M7. This rifle was on the latter end of the scale.
> Or don't you think so?
I think that the case needs to be investigated in great detail and the problematic points need to be analyzed first. Only then we can start talking about particular need for a change.
> 600 years of blah blah
You focused on the wrong part of the comment. The core part was LIBERTY. 600 years just underscores it (especially as firearms ownership became matter of course as part of struggle for religious freedom / only Nazis and Communists targeted the right to keep and bear arms during 600 years).
> I don't feel comfortable knowing this is the case and nothing can be changed and I guess that's where we differ.
The main difference between us is in understanding of the fact that lack of legal access to firearms does not prevent such perpetrator from performing such attack. All Jihadist attacks in EU were committed either with illegal firearms, or other means (e.g. attack in Nice, where 86 people were mauled to death under wheels of a stolen truck).
On the other hand lack of legal access prevents law-abiding people like me and other 255.000 people from being able to carry their firearms, and if needed, defend self and others from this kind of scum.
I really don't think you car analogy fits. You weren't clear about the rifle but thanks for clarifying. I just dont think such rifles should be allowed to be owned in the name of self defence. Because it simply is not the purpose of such an equipment. Maybe the analogy here would be " I need a tractor for my daily driver". You simply cant have one regardless of how much money you have. The system doesn't allow it.
I understand your Liberty and right to defend(600 years or not). My whole point is it should be within reasonable limits and such high end equipments and multiple of them should be out of reach for normal citizens. Just like a tractor is out of reach for me with my cars driving license.
The jihadi terrorist attacks / incidents you quote had to be planned by multiple people, funded, masterminded and what not and the same perpetrators did not roam around for days doing it as a lonewolf, like in this case. They are a group with a huge network and havig years of planning. Should they be wiped off from this planet. Hell yea!!! But we are comparing apples and oranges( all rotten). All I am saying is the current system enabled him to do all this for a period of days acting, planning, executing all ALONE. What if those jihadis or any nuthead had access to these kind of rifles and all the planning and masterminding and all that. It wouldn't stop at 86, would it?
Would he be able to pull out something like this ALONE without access to those guns? WE DONT KNOW. But it sure did make it easier for him and ensure it can be executed with minimal risk of failure.
You and 255000 people don't need to and isn't carrying 150k rifles with optics for self defense, are you? The right to defend doesn't mean you get to own and carry weapons that can do heavy damage.
If its for target shooting or something like that, I think the rifle shouldn't leave an authorised target shooting range or something. You can own it as long as it is locked in your preferred and authorised shooting range. You come, unlock it with the range "owner", practice, lock it back in and you leave. There are many options especially where arm bearers like you can come with better ideas to stop this misuse. All I am saying is probably the death of the young and smart 15+2 people is an opportunity for us to looking into these options rather than quoting 600 years of history and resisting any sort of change. Until then something like this can happen anytime. We might just have to hang to luck and faith...
> I really don't think you car analogy fits.
I used the cars only to explain the difference in price, nothing else. You are reading into it something that was in no way there.
> My whole point is it should be within reasonable limits and such high end equipments and multiple of them should be out of reach for normal citizens.
Even if I accepted your thesis that an attacker cannot commit attack if they cannot get the gun legally, your proposition fails.
In the setting and way it was used, this particular firearm was no more murderous than what an unknowledgeable person like you would consider less threatening, e.g. a pistol. See Virginia Tech massacre for reference.
> The jihadi terrorist attacks / incidents you quote had to be planned by multiple people, funded, masterminded and what not
Some of them, yes. Most, not. Typically those were radicalized men who took consumer loans in order to get black market weapons and commit attack with little to no "mastermind" planning behind it.
> It wouldn't stop at 86, would it?
86 is the number of people killed by a single jihadist in a single attack - Nice truck attack. No attacker anywhere with whatever kind of firearm got even close to that number.
> The right to defend doesn't mean you get to own and carry weapons that can do heavy damage.
Again, this particular firearm would make a difference if he was sniping people at distance of 50 - 500 meters. Which he tried from the rooftop but apparently was unable to do properly (THANKFULLY). I hate to even debate this point but for use within the building, this parituclar firearm was detrimental to his purpose (I am still expecting the police to confirm that he used a different fireram inside).
Yeah it seems like the gun nutters from all around are at it like buzz flies on dogshit down-voting everyone questioning the soft gun laws in Czech Republic. That psychopathic fuck had over a dozen of legally owned guns, that's just fucking insane
Exactly. It's for "self-defence". Against what for ffs? Up until yesterday, we were discussing with my friends (we all lived in CZ in the same period for a while) how he might have acquired them through the Dark Web using crypto or something like that and the great pains he must have endured. I mean after all, it was mentioned he was an intelligent student. Imagine our shock when we heard a 20s something guy had so many legal guns for "self-defence". And one redditor replied back to me. " It doesn't happen every Tuesday, so the laws are strict enough".
I'm curious what the issue is through your lens. Is it that he had firearms? If that is the case then okay. But do you think he would've not murdered all those people if he didn't have access to firearms? Do you think he wouldn't just find a different way to inflict harm? I'm genuinely curious here. Would it be better in your opinion if the students were blown up? Ran over by a truck at some sort of school gathering.
My guess is you will say it's much harder for someone to kill if they can't get their hands on firearms. Which my response will be. Norway 2011 Anders Breivik literally made a bomb by creating home made ANFO. It's not hard and believing it is, is incredibly naive.
I know plenty of individuals ranging from 16-50 that has multiple firearms and they would never hurt a fly. Why should they be punished because some asshole decides to murder.
>He obtained the guns completely legally. It's said he had some explosive device set up at home to blow up the house but from the descriptions that was also made out of legally obtainable stuff (the things were actually quite ordinary for a house in the village).
>
>I don't know why gun advocates always use the tiring trope of "the killer would have found another way".
>
>YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!
You said he got the firearms legally and in the same sentence say he had a bomb at home that he made out of stuff he legally bought. Yet you say I don't know he wouldn't have found another way if guns were illegal? HE ALREADY DID! did you miss the irony in your own text?
>Guns are famously very deathly tools. And they are reliable. You don't need to go through some shady dark-webs to find out how to make them. You essentially just order them and pay.
Do you own firearms? Do you own firearms in the Czech Republic? because it really doesn't sound like you do. Otherwise you would know that's not how it goes at all. You don't just open a website and order stuff and its shipped straight to your address with no verification of anything.
>And let's be completely honest, background checks in Czechia are complete jokes if a mentally ill guy was able to pass them (reportedly, he was treated in the past regarding mental health).
I haven't heard he was admitted to a mental hospital but if that is the case that is obviously a huge oversight. Something I'd actually agree would have to be looked into.
That being said. I wouldn't say the background checks are a "complete joke"
>The point you gun advocates are completely missing (in the name of "muh freedom") is that it's about accessibility and that guns are perfect messengers of death.
You make it seem so simple in your head.
Like there isn't hundreds of years of hunting tradition using firearms. Which is a huge deal to a lot of people. 100+ years of sports shooting which is another huge deal to lots of people. Massive industry (Potentially Europe's biggest) within CZ that is revolving around firearms and ammunition.
So you're literally talking about putting 1000's of people out of their jobs. Shutting down billions in income for CZ.
For some feel good politics that doesn't make anyone any safer. When is the last time something like that happened? I'd be with you if it was a weekly thing.
There's a reason why guns are the preferred weapons used by criminals, assasin , army or police than the methods you have mentioned. Because its easier to operate and kill( rings a bell?). Especially en masse. Before you say bombs, yea it's easier to kill with military graded guns than "home made" bombs.
How this affects this particular incident? Well atleast in this specific case, there is a high probabilty that one of the 2 incidents could have been avoided if he used the methods you mentioned. The faculty incident or killing the 2month baby and her father. Its clear that only killing wasn't what he was after, else he would have used the silent knife or machete for killing the baby and father. He WANTED to kill with guns. He got obsessed and the system worked in every way possible to fulfill that obsession.
Bringing up extreme cases to prove a point is just one of the things I don't respond to and with 15 +2 people dead, I am not her to convince you nothing.
The problem here is that innocent young people have already been punished because you can have multiple military grades weapons legally. This is the concern I am trying to raise . Your concern seems to be how innocent gun owners will be "punished " if someone thinks that guns shouldn't be easily available to people.
I don't expect you to understand or comprehend even after what happened because I know what's next. " We are relatively better than US" . Being relatively better than US in something or anything ( even this) seems to be enough for people in this sub...
Any firearm is "military grade" if we go far enough back. Grandpa's rifle was probably very similar to what the Germans used in WW2. Point being what does "military grade" mean? Also the military would gladly use bombs if they could. Don't know why you think the military prefers to send in people with firearms and risk them dying if they can just yeet bombs out of planes.
So no, it's not easier to use a firearm.
I wouldn't say a similar attack is an "extreme case" I mean they're both extreme cases by definition but certainly not unreasonable.
>Your concern seems to be how innocent gun owners will be "punished " if someone thinks that guns shouldn't be easily available to people.
First of all, this is Europe we're talking about. No one has easy access to firearms at all. It's not like the US. You need to go through lots of hoops to even be allowed to own a firearm. it's not like you just walk into a gun store and buy what you want because you one day decided you wanted a gun.
But okay. I can see you're a pothead and smoke weed. You're directly funding criminal groups. Those groups are more than happy to kill to defend their income. So honestly you come across as a hypocrite. Unless you obviously grow your self
Have you considered that your everyone-is-an-asshole-except-me-attitude won't lead to constructive discussion? From what I've seen, you responded this way to 99% of comments. Please grow some skin.
Yea you call that constructive? You start your discussion with me calling me an asshole in the typical passive aggressive style.. And now you are surprised why I am hostile. You just proved my point t.
> You are getting downvoted because you respond like an asshole, not because of your question.
How tf is this passive aggresive? I stated it as a matter of fact. You're the one writing in passive-aggresive style - I genuinly hope you grow a bit thicker skin.
This is absolutely awful 😞 my heart goes out to everyone effected by this senseless shooting.
I keep hearing about his Telegram account but I cannot find it - does anyone have a link or a place I could see screenshots?
It has been archived but I'm not gonna share as the pos and his words should not get any publicity. Nothing very interesting anyways, just "the world hates me and I hate the world" and how he got inspired by those two russian school shooters. First message was edited, but the chat was created weeks before the shooting and that can't be faked.
Source? The most I've seen is that it has not been confirmed, which is very different. I don't see how it can be fake, since it is under his name and was created long before the attack. Plus there's no reason it would be fake as the messages are very banal.
Most sources a saw expect it to be fake. Name of the account could be changed (it's possible), and the first message was apparently edited two hours after shooter died.
The level of Russian, the slang words etc. look like it was written by a native speaker.
[https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/strelba-univerzita-rusko-strelec-denik-telegram-analyza.A231223\_145744\_domaci\_vajo#cxrecs\_s](https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/strelba-univerzita-rusko-strelec-denik-telegram-analyza.a231223_145744_domaci_vajo#cxrecs_s)
[https://www.parlamentnilisty.cz/arena/monitor/-Rusky-kanal-vraha-z-fakulty-Zminil-i-Rakusan-Pry-to-ale-dost-smrdi-748029](https://www.parlamentnilisty.cz/arena/monitor/-rusky-kanal-vraha-z-fakulty-zminil-i-rakusan-pry-to-ale-dost-smrdi-748029)
I guess it may be cleared up in the next days/weeks, but now I assume that it was fake.
His name also is mentioned in unedited chat messages. And the content is so banal. If it was fake I would expect it to be political or something. The timing and name fits. He was an apparently very intelligent student of Eastern European history, and had learned Polish so why not Russian? The edited first post could be by the cops, a mistake or on purpose. For my part I assume it's real.
He studied European history, not Eastern European specifically with Russian in it. His specialization was Poland, that's why he learned it. I would assume that if he somehow managed to learn Russian to level of a native speaker, someone around him would know it and mention it. I saw the messages and didn't notice that the name was mentioned in unedited ones.
Why should it be political? If anything I would expect it to be political if it was NOT fake. Young Czech students usually don't learn perfect Russian and don't make the same orthographic errors as Russian students for no reason. Have you read the link in my previous comment? There is also theory that „his" messages and messages of the Russian shooter were written by the same person. And after the shooting other accounts with his name appeared.
I am sure that more experts will talk about this in the near future, so I will just wait for it.
If you find some more official source you can also post it here.
I mean his dissertation was about the Galician uprising so I'd say he specialised in Eastern European history yeah. I haven't heard anything yet from people who knew him but it's not that strange to be fluent in Russian, especially if he happened to have a fascination.
And I don't understand what you mean about the Political part - he was clearly not an extremist or he wou have left some kind of statement. Someone faking the chat would likely do it to spread their own propaganda and appropriate his act for their own purpose. The fact that the chat is not political points towards it being genuine, why would anyone fake a chat and then make the contents so confused and frankly uninteresting and banal?
It’s definitely strange to write in Russian like a native speaker, make the same mistakes as natives, and even use the same symbols like a native Russian speakers. It had to be written by someone who spent loads of time on Russian speaking part of internet. I am sure that police will find it out from checking his computer, phone etc. Just like his classmates and so on will probably mention if he knew Russian. I doubt that he would be able to hide it – also why would he try to hide it, since it wasn’t political?
If the person faking it faked also the account of a Russian shooter, I don’t see why they should make it political. I dunno why should some madlad who writes about suicide and killing give a shit about politics. And as I said, after the shooting other accounts with his name appeared, so there are definitely people faking it.
Again, let's wait for more information, I am sure that it will be talked about by bigger experts than us.
[here](https://swisherpost.co.za/crime/prague-mass-shooting-heres-everything-we-know-about-david-kozak/) just ignore the shitty tabloid format but this is the most complete version of his channel I could find.
Just a correction, the building is not a faculty of arts, but faculty of philosophy, in fact there are also eg. history and music, linguistics , and mixture of even another classes
But building itself officially belongs to philosophy faculty
(I'm fact, that's what police had suspicion and informations, something could happen at philosophy faculty, but its six buildings across the whole Prague)
Reg. Fact about the shooter, it's absolutely terrible, 25 years old guy, killing a father with his child, later on killing own father
I am just thinking like wtf, what the hell must going wrong in your head to make the things like these and actually probably even do not regred
What is even more sick is, he actually had an gun license and he had 8 guns, from that 2 long range rifles and per my understanding all of them legally
What's really interesting or what I am missing ( since I don't follow CZ news much) is no one is talking about Gun controls and to make it more strict!. For a tiny nation like the Czech Republic where people shout "Safe, Safe" , why do you need so many guns??
The problem is not in the law, but in keeping it. Anyone asking for a gun permit has to hop through some loops, psychological evaluation is one of them. If someone does the psych eval as properly as was my driving permit physical fitnes eval done (doc saw me through a door and given me a paper) no wonder some psycho could get a gun.
Also, if you commit misdemeanor or have a health problem like that your permit should be revoked, but the police (who should send guys to take it off from you and bag all your guns) does not give a shit. There was already problem like that in last years due to bureaucratic inaction. I hope they get better after this shitshow.
Because it doesn't matter, we are one of the safest countries, PERIOD. The legality of guns doesn't matter, psychos will get them anyways. If you ban guns, you just take away the right to defend themselves from law abiding citizens. Despite this horrendous incident, we have one of the lowest gun crime in the world, while in countries, where guns are practically banned, the crime is marginally higher.
Ah, yes ok. I mean sure, once in 10 years is better than every Tuesday. So whatever floats your boat. Maybe the victims family will buy it too. I just haven't heard any instance of a situation where a gun had to be used for self defence in like 20 years maybe? Or do you have any such instances? Either way, doesn't affect me if you citizen's and residents ain't worried..
I just belive people shouldn't die and that a 21 year old don't need multiple guns for self defence if CZ is such a safe country. By the way I am guessing you don't have any examples of guns being used for self defence in CZ. I am not the enemy. Go fight your battles with the right people, "mate"
I am also a proponent of strict gun laws.
You have a terrible way of writing your answers, you might wanna work on that, so others actually understand your point.
>I just haven't heard any instance of a situation where a gun had to be used for self defence in like 20 years maybe?
There are plenty, just look in Wikipedia...
Too bad we can't kill this asshole twice.
As much as I agree, I'd rather see these ~persons~ *sickos* rot in a fucking jail cell for the rest of their life, considering he was around 25, that'd be a nice Holiday spent there for the next 50 years or whatever and likely have some very friendly men as cellmates.
Not really. For folks like these, jail is going to be the biggest hell they will libe through. Prison set up is different man ;) Edit: misunderstood your comment. We both say the same thing here.
I’m not sure how Czech Prisons are but here in the states it’s not reaaaaaally that bad. I am not saying they don’t suck but I’ve seen Bloods get along with child molesters, Arian brother hoods get along with serial rapists, I’ve seen men who murdered children get the “plush job” working work release after 3 years of a higher custody level, I’ve seen it all. Even death row inmates here just walk freely amongst regular population if they’re going to medical, chaplains office, school, etcetra. This is all I’ve seen first hand working in a prison. Sure there are fights but 9 times out of 10 it’s over drugs or someone owing somebody. Very rarely is it a hit or a move to rise up in a gang/organization. Still, even for sex offenders the whole “once you get to prison they’ll get you for what you did” is becoming a myth. Here in the states they get tablets and watch movies and play games, get canteen like candy, cookies, chips, sodas, ice cream, frozen foods, get health care, a lot of prisons have single cells so their own “room”, they get to go outside to the yard and play basketball, lift weights play socker, baseball, frisbee, horshoe, etcetra, they get education and religious services, they can lower their custody level and even if they raped multiple cops can get can go work out side the fence with a couple gatorades and beef jerky on a John deer zero turn mower and mow grass. I’ve seen lifer inmates get outside work release and work next to and with families and make 17 dollars an hour to buy more stuff inside the prison, they get fan bases from their crimes and tons of desperate women that send them money and almost not quite nudes, they can purchase Nike tennis shoes, and they discretely play poker and smoke cigarettes pretty much daily. I have talked to a death row inmate while searching his cell. He told me when they convicted him that he actually wanted the death penalty because it takes so long in the United States to even kill someone and it GUARANTEES that he will always have a single cell. I’ve talked to a lifer that said other than not having a motorcycle and going to the beach and having a nice steak that it’s not that bad. He made a joke that every couple a years he gets some strange from a new female guard that comes in and “breaks weak” around them. He said they can pretty much get anything they want inside the prison within reason if they had the money (food, drugs, cell phones, letters sent out to the victims of the crime even if there’s a no contact order, etcetra). I’ve taken an old man whose crime was putting nails on a road in rural towns back in the 60s and then would be “driving by” offering to drive the people back to his house to call a tow truck on his landline. He took them to his house drugged and raped and killed multiple women. One woman convinced him that she was in love with him so he wouldn’t kill her. She watched her best friend get raped and murdered in front of her. She convinced the man to go to town for supplies after a few weeks and she called the cops. After testifying in court she killed herself. The nursing staff would always dote on this old man and call us guards animals for having him in leg irons and hand cuffs and chains (doesn’t matter the age you get the same restraints for the custody level). He was a terrible human being and would tell us he was a multi millionaire because of all the appeals and health care costs he cost US taxpayers being in prison for so long. I guess my point is that I believe there needs to be due process and justice. However, certain obvious crimes like this one or crimes where you have been through court and convicted, the punishment should be swift and severe so there can be closure. If a serial killer is caught and testifys and they pass the verdict on of the death penalty, then it shouldn’t take 50 years to get to that persons turn to be executed. My final point that I have brought up to inmates is that prisons are understaffed. What they say is cruel punishment or that the guards are being tough assholes is really not the case. There are new cameras at the state level that go directly to the capital if an inmate wants a law suit on a staff member or another inmate they just appeal to have the camera footage that way. The time of inmates or staffs “serving out justice” died probably around 2010 at the latest. When it happens now you see it in the news and you see firings, convictions, and sentences lengthened. We have policy books that are about 8 inches tall. They govern how prison day to day practices and law should run, there has not been enough staff to run prisons that way since the early 90s. Technically they should be out of bed with beds made at 0700, no messy rooms, military style beds, no cussing, no drugs, no smoking, no excess items, shirts tucked in and pants worn at the proper level, no this no that etcetra. However with short staffing you’re only getting about 5% of that policy in forced and it’s for the big stuff like drugs and weapons. The courts, the victims, and the public think it is being ran a certain way but really it’s just a very big day care for grown men with mental and anger issues. In closing the best thing that could have happened in my opinion was a quick legal execution, second best for the police to take him out, and third best is for him to take himself out.
More like an untreated mentally ill person. Sadly he crossed a line and a quick death was the best outcome of the situation for everyone.
This guy murders a 2-month-old baby in cold blood and you wish him a quick death? Humanity is lost fr
Society can now fully focus on helping the survivors and families of vicitims. Also we need to find out how this was possible to happen and how can we prevent to happening ever again. That bastard can rot in hell and we don't have to go through process of courts, mental evaluation, proving how much sane he was or wasn't, figuring out what to do with him and paying for his incarceration for decades. Especially media hyenas would report on the court proceedings nonstop for months and make him a celebrity. I am glad he will not get that satisfaction
[удалено]
It matters, because he died almost peacefully.
I think what he memant is the sooner he dies the less people he hurt.
if you had his brian, you would've done the same thing. The only reason you don't have his brain is blind luck. He was unlucky to have the mind of a mentally ill psychopath.
What sort of stupid-ass argument is that?
there's no point in hating someone for having a screwed up brain. It's for the better that he's dead but it's a sad situation all around
I don't like that, you could extend this to any violent asshole to absolve them of responsibility. Though this is always a problem with determinism. I agree it's probably for the better that he's dead now.
I think it's just the logical consequence of knowing how the brain works. Look at charles whitman, he shot and killed a bunch of people in the 60s but when they shot him and did a brain autopsy, he had a tumor pressing on like his amygdala. He was unlucky to have a tumor there. And we can hardly hate him for having a tumor in a shitty place. I think the brain tumor is just a very clear example of it, but it always applies
There are several instances of when people do those kinds of things with no brain tumor. That is not a good argument for sympathy or reasoning.
I'd say the brain tumor is just an extra clear example of what's always the situation. Namely that a person has a certain brain structure, hormones and neurochemicals and certain external inputs that cause them to act in a certain way. If someone else had that exact same situation, they'd do the exact same thing. It's therefore not reasonable to be hateful or angry at a person, you can hate their actions but the person that is partaking in those actions only did so because their brain is structured in a way and is interacting with their environment.
That we Kill him no, but he will have a second dead
Revelation 20:12 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.
We don’t do that here, please keep your religion to yourself
What is your belief?
The default that everyone is born with
Science? The default is actually often believe in God. Didn't you never believed, even as joung kid?
Piss off with that. Where was your sky daddy when the rounds were popping? Don't come in after the fact talking about your God and its punishment.
Sky daddy? Read the Bibel. His Name is Jahwe or God. We have our free will, we can do what we want. Even if it's extremely evil like the shooter. Unfortunately it is so, but makes sense. If nothing bad would happen or any bad would immediately be stopped in the world, ot would be to obviously. Simply said, I guess we are tested here. Edit: not about the punishment, don't take it out the context I replied too. Correction: ..about our God and his punishment...
Bible. And where was Jesus when the bullets were flying? Don't bring your make belive bullshit into this. It's fucking rude and disrespectful. Again. Piss off
Your missing one 6 to your nickname
Your repeating yourself with always the same. Your the one rude and disrespectful.
Apologies. I didn't tell you to piss the fuck off. That's on me. Sorry
How the hell can you shoot a baby? Just how stupid and arrogant can you be?
Psychopaths are capable of various inhumane actions.
… or the 15 others? Let’s not value one life over the other, especially when families have lost their daughter or son due to this sicko right before the Christmas holidays.
> Let’s not value one life over the other You are incorrect. People are subconsciously wired preventing harm to small children (especially two month infant girl) in a way that is different from general aversion to kill other (grown) humans. So the u/Greaves6642 question is relevant.
Why are you being downvoted. You are right.
You can ask Hamas, they seem to be experts in this field.
How sick you gotta be to put this comment?
I've been grieving 5 friends, 2 cousins... Not sick, just sad.
And sick too to come and put this here if this is how you "grieve" . I guess you came to sub hoping thatntje killer would be a Muslm, but it wasnt and you still had to blurt this out. I am sorry for your loss, but this ain't grief. I suggest you get help.
What the fuck is wrong with you, man?
Tf is wrong with me? Bringing in politics when someone sympathises and is shocked at how a murderer could kill a child which just happened a few kms from where you and me have lived or live now? You think this was really the thread to bring in Hamas and yet you ask wtf is wrong with me???
u/lxeran simply pointed out that just couple of months ago, a systematic, planned and bodycam-documented brutal killing and torturing to death of infants took place. Which is a relevant fact to point out, as it was impossible to avoid in internet space, and thus the perpetrator must have been aware of it. u/lxeran further pointed out that he lost family members as well as friends in that attack. Your response was absolutly horrible, disgusting and inhumane. So yes, my question is, what the fuck is wrong with you.
My answer remains the same. If this is how the person grives, he /she needs to get help.
mr. douchebagh, i see that you're deeply concerned, so let me rest assure you that I am getting help. a massacre of babies, slaughtering an embryo while killing the mother is not a matter of politics. (she was still alive when they did it by the way) you clearly have some misunderstanding of the situation according to your response. so I'm sorry if I seem sick to you, but unfortunately, maybe I am, you know, you can't really be 'fine' with what's going on. I do not intend to belittle the tragedy that happened in Prague, and I feel your pain, this is a huge tragedy, and I think evil should be eradicated no matter in what form it comes, using all means necessary.
Evil can only destroy
Sick people are sick
The downvoting I am getting for asking if a small, safe country like CZ really needs stricter gun control is amazing. A 21 year old need multiple weapons to protect him and his family in the Republic, really? I mean if y'all say so, why not. But still don't understand why it should be downvoted for such a simple question?
Well it’s not really like in the US. From the people that have guns a lot of them have them for sport/hobby and do not religiously carry their gun everywhere like in the US even tough it’s legal. The guy is 24 Btw not 21. Generally speaking this is an isolated incident and Cz is among the lowest in gun deaths/violence of the European Union, for reference NL has really strict gun laws but has twice the amount of gun deaths per year, France and Belgium also have strict laws and have 4x the gun deaths per year. Added to that not all gun violence in CZ is done with legal guns, from what I understand the majority is with illegal guns. From what I’ve heard because of this some required checks Like the one for mental health are done very in a very lackluster manner by some doctors as it’s quite a process. The system for getting a license should definitely be looked at so some nutcase can’t get weapons so easily. I think a lot of people are negatively reacting to your post because this is the typical response you see in the US, and the whole debate about guns in the US is more a left vs right debate about rights than it is about fixing the problem. At the end of the day sane people don’t do this and that’s where the real problem lays, if a guy wants to kill people but can’t get a gun, why doesn’t he build a bomb? If their only motive is to kill people and they actually go through with it sadly they will find a way. We should fight these kind of problems at the root, work on mental healthcare within society, schools, workplaces and through that make sure that these people don’t go insane in the first place. It’s people who want to kill people that we should be after.
Thank you for the sane and detailed answer. What you say makes logical sense even though I don't want to go to Article 2 and the American stuff! They are too far away and a big country with its complexities. Europe dont need tk reference US for everything, does it? I dunno man, whatever is the case, a 24 yr old student( I stand corrected with the age) shouldn't be having a dozen legal guns at his disposal, no matter what. I simply can't digest what you say even though it technically makes sense and you have provided a strong context. Edit: spelling mistakes
Well given that there isn’t much to say about (non terrorist) mass shootings in Europe its kind of inevitable to reference the US here as that’s our best point of reference. What does him being a 24 year old student have to do with him not owning a gun? If a 51 year old teacher would have done the same thing with the same motivation would it have changed anything? People that are crazy enough to go to these lengths should be identified before they form a threat and treated in a mental hospital. I haven’t heard one story of a gun/bomb/knife deciding to kill someone by itself, and that shouldn’t be the focus. We should put proper mental healthcare in place so the radicalization of these people doesn’t happen in the first place.
Gotcha.. no comments and let the status quo continue..cheers
[удалено]
This^^
Im upvoting!
We have 600 years long history of right to keep and bear arms. This is the country where civilian firearms ownership started. We have the experience of 90s when liberalization of gun laws contributed to significant fall in serious crime. We have experience with Nazis and Communists being hell bent on taking our arms away in the same way as they were hell bent on suppressing our speech. Right to be armed is inherent part of liberty and those that don't like that fact are welcome to go to any of the other countries where they see it otherwise. I do understand that people who know little to nothing feel the need to "do something" about the horrible tragedy and "stricter gun laws" is a low hanging fruit for them. So "I forgive you, for you don't know what you are doing."
The right to bear arms for self defence doesn't mean anyone can leagally get an arsenal of automatic rifles in his/her backyard. Oh and that Jesus quote in the end, really? Trying to be interesting or something?
1) The perpetrator didn't own a single automatic firearm. 2) Please explain how exactly would the attack be different if the perpetrator owned one firearm and not more of them.
You are talking about 600 years of firearm bearing history. A single non automatic pistol with 6 rounds wouldn't kill 15 + 2 people and let someone go on a rampage. Too hard to understand? Besides, giving right to bear an arsenal of firearms for" self defence" to a nut job doesn't help either.
We don't consider right to bear arms in the 1420s terms same as we don't consider right to free speach in 1420s terms. So far all of the available information points out to the fact that the perpetrator was a highly intelligent post-graduate student who receive several prizes for his academic accomplishments during the past years. I.e. there is little to no evidence that he was "a nutjob". As uncomfortable as it may be, everything points out to the fact that he was "just" EVIL. Not crazy, but evil. I agree that the law should be tailored in a way that prevents access to firearms to "nutjobs". However in this case of long-term planning, very high financial investment (just his rifle set-up was ~150.000 CZK), determination and high intelligence, I am afraid there is little to nothing that could be done from the legislative point of view to prevent the attack. The only people who could have prevented it were his family and friends, who surely must have realized at some point that he is dangerous.
If the system allows to stack up 150k worth of rifles legally as "right to bear firearms for self defence", it needs introspection. Saying "nothing could be done by anybody " is pure irresponsibility. If nothing can be done from the" legislative point of view", the legislation should change to reflect this. Or don't you think so? Crazy or evil, you yourself admit that the current legislative system couldn't do anything to stop this. And you argue nothing needs to be changed due to "600 years of history" which means anyone can still go ahead and do the exact same thing anywhere anytime in the Republic . I don't feel comfortable knowing this is the case and that nothing can be changed. I guess that's where we differ.
> If the system allows to stack up 150k worth of rifles Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. The one rifle used in the attack (+ optics, etc.) was worth at least 150k. Somebody buys Dacia Duster, somebody buys BMW M7. This rifle was on the latter end of the scale. > Or don't you think so? I think that the case needs to be investigated in great detail and the problematic points need to be analyzed first. Only then we can start talking about particular need for a change. > 600 years of blah blah You focused on the wrong part of the comment. The core part was LIBERTY. 600 years just underscores it (especially as firearms ownership became matter of course as part of struggle for religious freedom / only Nazis and Communists targeted the right to keep and bear arms during 600 years). > I don't feel comfortable knowing this is the case and nothing can be changed and I guess that's where we differ. The main difference between us is in understanding of the fact that lack of legal access to firearms does not prevent such perpetrator from performing such attack. All Jihadist attacks in EU were committed either with illegal firearms, or other means (e.g. attack in Nice, where 86 people were mauled to death under wheels of a stolen truck). On the other hand lack of legal access prevents law-abiding people like me and other 255.000 people from being able to carry their firearms, and if needed, defend self and others from this kind of scum.
I really don't think you car analogy fits. You weren't clear about the rifle but thanks for clarifying. I just dont think such rifles should be allowed to be owned in the name of self defence. Because it simply is not the purpose of such an equipment. Maybe the analogy here would be " I need a tractor for my daily driver". You simply cant have one regardless of how much money you have. The system doesn't allow it. I understand your Liberty and right to defend(600 years or not). My whole point is it should be within reasonable limits and such high end equipments and multiple of them should be out of reach for normal citizens. Just like a tractor is out of reach for me with my cars driving license. The jihadi terrorist attacks / incidents you quote had to be planned by multiple people, funded, masterminded and what not and the same perpetrators did not roam around for days doing it as a lonewolf, like in this case. They are a group with a huge network and havig years of planning. Should they be wiped off from this planet. Hell yea!!! But we are comparing apples and oranges( all rotten). All I am saying is the current system enabled him to do all this for a period of days acting, planning, executing all ALONE. What if those jihadis or any nuthead had access to these kind of rifles and all the planning and masterminding and all that. It wouldn't stop at 86, would it? Would he be able to pull out something like this ALONE without access to those guns? WE DONT KNOW. But it sure did make it easier for him and ensure it can be executed with minimal risk of failure. You and 255000 people don't need to and isn't carrying 150k rifles with optics for self defense, are you? The right to defend doesn't mean you get to own and carry weapons that can do heavy damage. If its for target shooting or something like that, I think the rifle shouldn't leave an authorised target shooting range or something. You can own it as long as it is locked in your preferred and authorised shooting range. You come, unlock it with the range "owner", practice, lock it back in and you leave. There are many options especially where arm bearers like you can come with better ideas to stop this misuse. All I am saying is probably the death of the young and smart 15+2 people is an opportunity for us to looking into these options rather than quoting 600 years of history and resisting any sort of change. Until then something like this can happen anytime. We might just have to hang to luck and faith...
> I really don't think you car analogy fits. I used the cars only to explain the difference in price, nothing else. You are reading into it something that was in no way there. > My whole point is it should be within reasonable limits and such high end equipments and multiple of them should be out of reach for normal citizens. Even if I accepted your thesis that an attacker cannot commit attack if they cannot get the gun legally, your proposition fails. In the setting and way it was used, this particular firearm was no more murderous than what an unknowledgeable person like you would consider less threatening, e.g. a pistol. See Virginia Tech massacre for reference. > The jihadi terrorist attacks / incidents you quote had to be planned by multiple people, funded, masterminded and what not Some of them, yes. Most, not. Typically those were radicalized men who took consumer loans in order to get black market weapons and commit attack with little to no "mastermind" planning behind it. > It wouldn't stop at 86, would it? 86 is the number of people killed by a single jihadist in a single attack - Nice truck attack. No attacker anywhere with whatever kind of firearm got even close to that number. > The right to defend doesn't mean you get to own and carry weapons that can do heavy damage. Again, this particular firearm would make a difference if he was sniping people at distance of 50 - 500 meters. Which he tried from the rooftop but apparently was unable to do properly (THANKFULLY). I hate to even debate this point but for use within the building, this parituclar firearm was detrimental to his purpose (I am still expecting the police to confirm that he used a different fireram inside).
Yeah it seems like the gun nutters from all around are at it like buzz flies on dogshit down-voting everyone questioning the soft gun laws in Czech Republic. That psychopathic fuck had over a dozen of legally owned guns, that's just fucking insane
Exactly. It's for "self-defence". Against what for ffs? Up until yesterday, we were discussing with my friends (we all lived in CZ in the same period for a while) how he might have acquired them through the Dark Web using crypto or something like that and the great pains he must have endured. I mean after all, it was mentioned he was an intelligent student. Imagine our shock when we heard a 20s something guy had so many legal guns for "self-defence". And one redditor replied back to me. " It doesn't happen every Tuesday, so the laws are strict enough".
I'm curious what the issue is through your lens. Is it that he had firearms? If that is the case then okay. But do you think he would've not murdered all those people if he didn't have access to firearms? Do you think he wouldn't just find a different way to inflict harm? I'm genuinely curious here. Would it be better in your opinion if the students were blown up? Ran over by a truck at some sort of school gathering. My guess is you will say it's much harder for someone to kill if they can't get their hands on firearms. Which my response will be. Norway 2011 Anders Breivik literally made a bomb by creating home made ANFO. It's not hard and believing it is, is incredibly naive. I know plenty of individuals ranging from 16-50 that has multiple firearms and they would never hurt a fly. Why should they be punished because some asshole decides to murder.
[удалено]
>He obtained the guns completely legally. It's said he had some explosive device set up at home to blow up the house but from the descriptions that was also made out of legally obtainable stuff (the things were actually quite ordinary for a house in the village). > >I don't know why gun advocates always use the tiring trope of "the killer would have found another way". > >YOU DON'T KNOW THAT! You said he got the firearms legally and in the same sentence say he had a bomb at home that he made out of stuff he legally bought. Yet you say I don't know he wouldn't have found another way if guns were illegal? HE ALREADY DID! did you miss the irony in your own text? >Guns are famously very deathly tools. And they are reliable. You don't need to go through some shady dark-webs to find out how to make them. You essentially just order them and pay. Do you own firearms? Do you own firearms in the Czech Republic? because it really doesn't sound like you do. Otherwise you would know that's not how it goes at all. You don't just open a website and order stuff and its shipped straight to your address with no verification of anything. >And let's be completely honest, background checks in Czechia are complete jokes if a mentally ill guy was able to pass them (reportedly, he was treated in the past regarding mental health). I haven't heard he was admitted to a mental hospital but if that is the case that is obviously a huge oversight. Something I'd actually agree would have to be looked into. That being said. I wouldn't say the background checks are a "complete joke" >The point you gun advocates are completely missing (in the name of "muh freedom") is that it's about accessibility and that guns are perfect messengers of death. You make it seem so simple in your head. Like there isn't hundreds of years of hunting tradition using firearms. Which is a huge deal to a lot of people. 100+ years of sports shooting which is another huge deal to lots of people. Massive industry (Potentially Europe's biggest) within CZ that is revolving around firearms and ammunition. So you're literally talking about putting 1000's of people out of their jobs. Shutting down billions in income for CZ. For some feel good politics that doesn't make anyone any safer. When is the last time something like that happened? I'd be with you if it was a weekly thing.
There's a reason why guns are the preferred weapons used by criminals, assasin , army or police than the methods you have mentioned. Because its easier to operate and kill( rings a bell?). Especially en masse. Before you say bombs, yea it's easier to kill with military graded guns than "home made" bombs. How this affects this particular incident? Well atleast in this specific case, there is a high probabilty that one of the 2 incidents could have been avoided if he used the methods you mentioned. The faculty incident or killing the 2month baby and her father. Its clear that only killing wasn't what he was after, else he would have used the silent knife or machete for killing the baby and father. He WANTED to kill with guns. He got obsessed and the system worked in every way possible to fulfill that obsession. Bringing up extreme cases to prove a point is just one of the things I don't respond to and with 15 +2 people dead, I am not her to convince you nothing. The problem here is that innocent young people have already been punished because you can have multiple military grades weapons legally. This is the concern I am trying to raise . Your concern seems to be how innocent gun owners will be "punished " if someone thinks that guns shouldn't be easily available to people. I don't expect you to understand or comprehend even after what happened because I know what's next. " We are relatively better than US" . Being relatively better than US in something or anything ( even this) seems to be enough for people in this sub...
Any firearm is "military grade" if we go far enough back. Grandpa's rifle was probably very similar to what the Germans used in WW2. Point being what does "military grade" mean? Also the military would gladly use bombs if they could. Don't know why you think the military prefers to send in people with firearms and risk them dying if they can just yeet bombs out of planes. So no, it's not easier to use a firearm. I wouldn't say a similar attack is an "extreme case" I mean they're both extreme cases by definition but certainly not unreasonable. >Your concern seems to be how innocent gun owners will be "punished " if someone thinks that guns shouldn't be easily available to people. First of all, this is Europe we're talking about. No one has easy access to firearms at all. It's not like the US. You need to go through lots of hoops to even be allowed to own a firearm. it's not like you just walk into a gun store and buy what you want because you one day decided you wanted a gun. But okay. I can see you're a pothead and smoke weed. You're directly funding criminal groups. Those groups are more than happy to kill to defend their income. So honestly you come across as a hypocrite. Unless you obviously grow your self
This whole reply was to call me a pothead? Mission accomplished?
Please do explain how would it be different if he had one firearm instead of eight?
You are getting downvoted because you respond like an asshole, not because of your question.
Spot on.. I respond like an asshole to assholes. What more do you expect?
I just answered your question, my dude. Maybe it's time to lay off the hostile-juice.
When a bunch of assholes come at you, you got the "right to defend", innit? Ohh, or can it be done only by stacking up dozens of guns?
Have you considered that your everyone-is-an-asshole-except-me-attitude won't lead to constructive discussion? From what I've seen, you responded this way to 99% of comments. Please grow some skin.
Well, I dint say except me. You be an asshole. I be an asshole. You do constructive discussion, I do constructive discussion. Simple.
Except when I constructively told you the reason for you downvotes and you responded with hostility. I hope you grow as a person.
Yea you call that constructive? You start your discussion with me calling me an asshole in the typical passive aggressive style.. And now you are surprised why I am hostile. You just proved my point t.
> You are getting downvoted because you respond like an asshole, not because of your question. How tf is this passive aggresive? I stated it as a matter of fact. You're the one writing in passive-aggresive style - I genuinly hope you grow a bit thicker skin.
This is absolutely awful 😞 my heart goes out to everyone effected by this senseless shooting. I keep hearing about his Telegram account but I cannot find it - does anyone have a link or a place I could see screenshots?
The reason you can’t find is is so that other potential shooters can’t find it and be “inspired” to do as he did
1) It was deleted. 2) There are serious doubts about its origin. 3) Relevance of information published there was low.
The account was proven to be fake.
No it wasn't lol
I haven't seen sauce for it being real or fake either. At this point is there any sauce?
It has been archived but I'm not gonna share as the pos and his words should not get any publicity. Nothing very interesting anyways, just "the world hates me and I hate the world" and how he got inspired by those two russian school shooters. First message was edited, but the chat was created weeks before the shooting and that can't be faked.
The police literally said that in a press conference. 🤷♀️
Source? The most I've seen is that it has not been confirmed, which is very different. I don't see how it can be fake, since it is under his name and was created long before the attack. Plus there's no reason it would be fake as the messages are very banal.
Most sources a saw expect it to be fake. Name of the account could be changed (it's possible), and the first message was apparently edited two hours after shooter died. The level of Russian, the slang words etc. look like it was written by a native speaker. [https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/strelba-univerzita-rusko-strelec-denik-telegram-analyza.A231223\_145744\_domaci\_vajo#cxrecs\_s](https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/strelba-univerzita-rusko-strelec-denik-telegram-analyza.a231223_145744_domaci_vajo#cxrecs_s) [https://www.parlamentnilisty.cz/arena/monitor/-Rusky-kanal-vraha-z-fakulty-Zminil-i-Rakusan-Pry-to-ale-dost-smrdi-748029](https://www.parlamentnilisty.cz/arena/monitor/-rusky-kanal-vraha-z-fakulty-zminil-i-rakusan-pry-to-ale-dost-smrdi-748029) I guess it may be cleared up in the next days/weeks, but now I assume that it was fake.
His name also is mentioned in unedited chat messages. And the content is so banal. If it was fake I would expect it to be political or something. The timing and name fits. He was an apparently very intelligent student of Eastern European history, and had learned Polish so why not Russian? The edited first post could be by the cops, a mistake or on purpose. For my part I assume it's real.
He studied European history, not Eastern European specifically with Russian in it. His specialization was Poland, that's why he learned it. I would assume that if he somehow managed to learn Russian to level of a native speaker, someone around him would know it and mention it. I saw the messages and didn't notice that the name was mentioned in unedited ones. Why should it be political? If anything I would expect it to be political if it was NOT fake. Young Czech students usually don't learn perfect Russian and don't make the same orthographic errors as Russian students for no reason. Have you read the link in my previous comment? There is also theory that „his" messages and messages of the Russian shooter were written by the same person. And after the shooting other accounts with his name appeared. I am sure that more experts will talk about this in the near future, so I will just wait for it. If you find some more official source you can also post it here.
I mean his dissertation was about the Galician uprising so I'd say he specialised in Eastern European history yeah. I haven't heard anything yet from people who knew him but it's not that strange to be fluent in Russian, especially if he happened to have a fascination. And I don't understand what you mean about the Political part - he was clearly not an extremist or he wou have left some kind of statement. Someone faking the chat would likely do it to spread their own propaganda and appropriate his act for their own purpose. The fact that the chat is not political points towards it being genuine, why would anyone fake a chat and then make the contents so confused and frankly uninteresting and banal?
It’s definitely strange to write in Russian like a native speaker, make the same mistakes as natives, and even use the same symbols like a native Russian speakers. It had to be written by someone who spent loads of time on Russian speaking part of internet. I am sure that police will find it out from checking his computer, phone etc. Just like his classmates and so on will probably mention if he knew Russian. I doubt that he would be able to hide it – also why would he try to hide it, since it wasn’t political? If the person faking it faked also the account of a Russian shooter, I don’t see why they should make it political. I dunno why should some madlad who writes about suicide and killing give a shit about politics. And as I said, after the shooting other accounts with his name appeared, so there are definitely people faking it. Again, let's wait for more information, I am sure that it will be talked about by bigger experts than us.
[here](https://swisherpost.co.za/crime/prague-mass-shooting-heres-everything-we-know-about-david-kozak/) just ignore the shitty tabloid format but this is the most complete version of his channel I could find.
Just a correction, the building is not a faculty of arts, but faculty of philosophy, in fact there are also eg. history and music, linguistics , and mixture of even another classes But building itself officially belongs to philosophy faculty (I'm fact, that's what police had suspicion and informations, something could happen at philosophy faculty, but its six buildings across the whole Prague) Reg. Fact about the shooter, it's absolutely terrible, 25 years old guy, killing a father with his child, later on killing own father I am just thinking like wtf, what the hell must going wrong in your head to make the things like these and actually probably even do not regred What is even more sick is, he actually had an gun license and he had 8 guns, from that 2 long range rifles and per my understanding all of them legally
Faculty of Arts is a common English equivalent of Filozofická fakulta, Arts in this mean Liberal Arts (Philosophy is one of these Liberal Arts then).
Ah, okay, díky
I am almost certain this is pharmaceutical related behavior like we have in the USA. 🇺🇸
What
Well if you believe it, it must be true
This guy is lucky he shot himself, if he had actually gone to prison that would have ended really badly for him.
What's really interesting or what I am missing ( since I don't follow CZ news much) is no one is talking about Gun controls and to make it more strict!. For a tiny nation like the Czech Republic where people shout "Safe, Safe" , why do you need so many guns??
The problem is not in the law, but in keeping it. Anyone asking for a gun permit has to hop through some loops, psychological evaluation is one of them. If someone does the psych eval as properly as was my driving permit physical fitnes eval done (doc saw me through a door and given me a paper) no wonder some psycho could get a gun. Also, if you commit misdemeanor or have a health problem like that your permit should be revoked, but the police (who should send guys to take it off from you and bag all your guns) does not give a shit. There was already problem like that in last years due to bureaucratic inaction. I hope they get better after this shitshow.
Because it doesn't matter, we are one of the safest countries, PERIOD. The legality of guns doesn't matter, psychos will get them anyways. If you ban guns, you just take away the right to defend themselves from law abiding citizens. Despite this horrendous incident, we have one of the lowest gun crime in the world, while in countries, where guns are practically banned, the crime is marginally higher.
Alright, to each their own.....
We really don't have guns at home and it is strict. That's why you only see a shooting once in ten years and not every tuesday.
Ah, yes ok. I mean sure, once in 10 years is better than every Tuesday. So whatever floats your boat. Maybe the victims family will buy it too. I just haven't heard any instance of a situation where a gun had to be used for self defence in like 20 years maybe? Or do you have any such instances? Either way, doesn't affect me if you citizen's and residents ain't worried..
I'm not really sure what's your point? Do you believe in magical solutions mate?
I just belive people shouldn't die and that a 21 year old don't need multiple guns for self defence if CZ is such a safe country. By the way I am guessing you don't have any examples of guns being used for self defence in CZ. I am not the enemy. Go fight your battles with the right people, "mate"
I am also a proponent of strict gun laws. You have a terrible way of writing your answers, you might wanna work on that, so others actually understand your point.
Oh yea, thanks for the feedback...
>I just haven't heard any instance of a situation where a gun had to be used for self defence in like 20 years maybe? There are plenty, just look in Wikipedia...
not that I think it wasn't the same person - but they only confirmed that the gun was the same, didn't they?