So... am I the only one who feels driven to a blind rage over today's shootings in Connecticut?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have an 8 yr old and a 6 yr old. It is kind of frightening.
It's on every channel here and has been all day.
It always leads to a gun control debate though, and the entrenched views seem hard to shake... that said, we went from very relaxed to very tight, and it was the best thing that ever happened.
My little girl turns five in a few days, she's in preschool and all day I've just had this sick feeling in my stomach.
In the last ten year we had about 5 school shooting with 3+ people killed each in Germany - however, as a teacher I don't worry about that (it feels a bit like it happened on a different planet) - guess its different when you have kids :/
On a sidenote - in the German Wikipedia the Arkansa River looks great :)
This was a rather good reply to a challenege for a 'battle', between a pair of gentlemen rhymers... chap-hop is so entertaining.
Gansta for sure...
After checking the news: I don't get why owning a firearm is still so easy in the US...how many of you (meaning the campfire members from the US) have a gun at home which isn't locked away securely?
That's not the bit that I get lost at. The bit that throws me is what gets people to the point of discharging said firearms at total strangers.
When we speak about people with mental/social disorders, that isn't very surprising
Yeah, I can't read that but it sure is a pretty picture :D
I don't own a firearm at all.
They are so easy to obtain legally because it's written into our constitution that we have the right to bear arms and many Americans, especially Republicans are super big on protecting the constitutional rights when it serves them to do so.
The problem, primarily, but not solely, is not legally obtained firearms. In most instances of shootings such as these, the shooter illegally obtained a firearm either by stealing it or by buying it black market.
Our President, much to the dismay of many, has been talking about limiting the types of firearms that are available to civilians.
|
After checking the news: I don't get why owning a firearm is still so easy in the US...how many of you (meaning the campfire members from the US) have a gun at home which isn't locked away securely?
Owning a firearm is pretty easy in Germany, too (you get the license without trouble if you are in a Schützenverein and have no criminal record). We need a special licence to carry a firearm though which is pretty much limited to professionals.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The funny thing is that the Second Amendment reads something like this:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Which leads to the question, what is the intent - that everyone should be able to have machine guns and bazookas, or that people should be able to join militias to defend themselves against governments seeking to usurp their rights. This was written during an age of musket loaders and civil and political streif. I doubt it was the intention of the founders to let everyone run around armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction.
In addition, it is interesting that it is the "right of the people", since people is being used in the plural sense, it would clearly appear that the intention was not to let every yahoo have a gun, but rather to keep the government from taking all guns away from the public. Clearly if they intended every person, irrespective of how loony they might be, to have a machine gun, this would have been phrased as "each and every person" or "each and every citizen" rather than "people".
Personally, I do not have any guns and do not plan on ever having any. My choice would be to require every bullet to have a unique identifier on it and the purchaser to be fully liable as a conspirator if the bullet us used in ay type of a crime. This would not stop the violence, but in relation to gang and criminal violence, it would make things much tougher. These guys would all have to make their own ammunition, and if found with unregistered ammo that they made, they would be punished. Is it a fix, no, but it would assuredly make it much more difficult for those using guns for unlawful purposes.
interesting statistic- there are more places to acquire a firearm in the US than Starbucks in the world.
They are just everywhere. The guns in the latest tragedy I heard were a pair of AR-57s which were owned by his mother, one of the kindergarten teachers. Something seriously wrong with this country when kindergarten teachers have semi-automatics...
I've never had any interest in owning. My brother (with 4 small children) has a small collection, but at least he keeps them in a safe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are just everywhere. The guns in the latest tragedy I heard were a pair of AR-57s which were owned by his mother, one of the kindergarten teachers. Something seriously wrong with this country when kindergarten teachers have semi-automatics...
Really? She didn't bring them to school. She didn't decide to loan them to her twenty something year old son so that he could shoot her and most of her class. For all we know she kept them locked up and disassembled.
Limiting guns in any form would not have limited this tragedy. It might have made it messier since damn near anyone can get the materials to make a pipe bomb, or pick up an axe, or have a set of very sharp kitchen knives.
Given the sheer amount of effort and firepower that was put into this it's exceedingly doubtful that a simple lack of firearms would have detterred this tragedy. Merely transformed it into something equally bloody.
I've been taught (by a Brazillian professor teaching USA History, so take it with a grain of salt) that since the US didn't have a regular army at the start of the revolution, militia actions were invaluable. The people were armed and since they gained their freedom that way, they pushed for keeping that right (although I've always thought that did that preparing for a hypothetical takeover by the other american federations).
interesting statistic- there are more places to acquire a firearm in the US than Starbucks in the world.
They are just everywhere. The guns in the latest tragedy I heard were a pair of AR-57s which were owned by his mother, one of the kindergarten teachers. Something seriously wrong with this country when kindergarten teachers have semi-automatics...
I've never had any interest in owning. My brother (with 4 small children) has a small collection, but at least he keeps them in a safe.
Owned and purchased illegally (according to CNN). She worked at a different school, though. It really does make you wonder why we didn't hear more about that little detail.
feytharn, we have to have a license to carry them on our persons as well.
Tirion, I agree with most of what you said completely. I'm not real big on the idea of the owner being completely responsible as such, because there are times where they loose their property through no fault of their own.
On a semi-side note, this actually kept me up until 5 am and then it was nearly 7 before I could sleep. *Sigh* the days I would love for my kid to sleep in she gets up the same time as she would normally have too... without the fuss. Oh well, I'm going to watch The Hobbit today! Yay!
Tirion, I agree with most of what you said completely. I'm not real big on the idea of the owner being completely responsible as such, because there are times where they loose their property through no fault of their own.
My view is that they are deadly items, you should know where they are. Responsible people keep the ammunition in the safe. The gun is about as deadly as a baseball bat without ammo. If someone steals it, you IMMEDIATELY report it to the police. Otherwise, middlemen would just buy the ammo and sell it to gangbangers for a profit and then "claim" it was stolen.
People don't "lose" ammo. Especially when even cheap stuff like .22 shorts are expensive.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Tark: I highly doubt that an "axe-massacre" would result in the same body count as a "M416 massacre".
You're right that violence can't be stopped by limiting guns, but at least you would change the outcome.
@Fey: That is only half correct - in Germany you can't own anything comparable to an assault rifle legally. You are allowed to have certain rifles and pistols if you are in a Schützenverein, but even then you must keep them locked in a safe that is controlled every now and then.
My view is that they are deadly items, you should know where they are. Responsible people keep the ammunition in the safe. The gun is about as deadly as a baseball bat without ammo. If someone steals it, you IMMEDIATELY report it to the police. Otherwise, middlemen would just buy the ammo and sell it to gangbangers for a profit and then "claim" it was stolen.People don't "lose" ammo. Especially when even cheap stuff like .22 shorts are expensive.
And I don't disagree with the sentiment, the problem with that philosophy is though, that unless it's a really big safe, what's to keep them from stealing the safe? Also, come on, not everyone owns a safe. Gun safes are usually small, portable things that are super easy to pick up and walk away with. My friend has a gun safe in his car that has a wire lock securing it to his drivers seat from behind. That's cool and all, but just like any lock that will only "keep an honest man out" if someone were out looking for something like that, a simple pair of bolt cutters would allow him to walk away with the gun safe to take home and pick open at his leisure.
And most people do call the police immediately when they realize they've been robbed.
In Germany you have to have a gun safe and a second one for the ammunition.
|
|
@Fey: That is only half correct - in Germany you can't own anything comparable to an assault rifle legally. You are allowed to have certain rifles and pistols if you are in a Schützenverein, but even then you must keep them locked in a safe that is controlled every now and then.
Unfortunatly you can obtain 'grade b' firearms with a 'grüne Waffenbesitzkarte', which isn't that hard to get. Grade b weapons include several assault weapons like the M 16.
You are fortunatly right about the safe, but controls are pretty rare.
@ Tark: I highly doubt that an "axe-massacre" would result in the same body count as a "M416 massacre".
Against unarmed five year olds how much do you really need?
Come on now we play in a hobby that involves a great deal in creative thinking when it comes to violence. And people are a lot easier to kill than a band of armed goblins.Don't get me wrong. Control and regulation should be better.
BUT it needs some common sense applied to it. Treat firearms the same way we treat cars. Consider what they're used for and base your limitations on that.
Example: You don't need a 30 round magazine for hunting, or even for target shooting.
Or
Tax the ever loving s$~@ out of ammunition. Incentivize gun owners not only to buy and use carefully (no mag dumping at the range you jackass my ears hurt enough as it is) but to guard it well since it's so freaking expensive.
Have people learn to handle guns the same way people learn to drive cars. In both instances you are using something with an altogether too easy capacity to kill.
If you do ban something ask why it's being banned. Too many antigun lobby's ban things that are merely erroneous or pointless to ban.
@ Tark:
You're right that in this case it wouldn't have made much of a difference - but in the case of Virginia Teach or Columbine it would have made a difference.
You are also right when it comes to bombs/cars/self-made flamethrowers...bans alone wouldn't help solve the problem, but maybe more severe restrictions coupled with some kind of educational programme could help...geez, what a mad world
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The world does seem a little crazy right now. I never thought being a teacher would be a dangerous job! It does make me very grateful for my family and to be at home. My son and I went to the Hobbit today and this evening my we trimmed our Christmas tree with my wife.
So, What did you guys think of the Hobbit? I thought it was awesome!
Is it suitable for an 8 yr old? Not sure whether mine is ready for it yet.
Will be a light posting day tomorrow as my son and I are going to sit in the rain and watch the Bears and the Packers.
Is it suitable for an 8 yr old? Not sure whether mine is ready for it yet.
I was reading hard-scifi by third grade sir.
Granted this will probably have more goblin stabbing then the book.
Which was mostly everyone running like hell.
I do not recommend it for 8 yet. The battle sequences are quite similar to what you saw in Lord of the Rings.
But they weren't really overly gruesome, not bloody. I thought it was pretty good. Though, you might want to watch it yourself first just in case.
Granted this will probably have more goblin stabbing then the book.
Which was mostly everyone running like hell.
It does feature an awful lot of running. It's also funny as hell.
@Tirion: While it does have combat (and blades slipping into goblins/orcs) there's no blood for some reason. It really feels like a D&D movie (Player: I hit the orc and deal 10 damage. DM: It's dead, you won!). Also, Elrond showing off his Loremaster skills is pure awesome.
Erm, not meaning to necro the previous subject, but I figured this would be a good place to ask:
Do any of you guys know of a good, annotated version of the American Constitution? I need to study it in fine detail for my American History class and I'd rather have a look at the original. If it happens to have commentary on the reason for the articles and ramifications of it, the better.
*shrugs* I'd just do a Google search for it, you can find a copy of it easy enough, but you'll want to specify annotated in your search.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Tark:
You are also right when it comes to bombs/cars/self-made flamethrowers...bans alone wouldn't help solve the problem, but maybe more severe restrictions coupled with some kind of educational programme could help...geez, what a mad world
If it was really that easy, the coalition forces would have been out of Iraq and the 'Ghan in about five minutes. The truth is very few people can competently assemble a real device of any honest to goodness devastation, but any six year old can pull a trigger.
We used to have mass shootings in Aussieland, but after the last one we decided enough was enough and our conservative Govt brought in tight control and a buy-back scheme.
We have yet to see any bombings occur or any alternate methods of mass destruction used.
Yes some criminals still use firearms, but in almost all cases its against other crims.
I am pro-firearm, but also pro-control/restriction. Farmers here get by just fine with bolt action rifles and shotguns. Recreational shooters can have lever actions and all sorts of funky pistols, but they stay at a range.
Anyhow, thats my view, hopefully one day things change for the better.
Why can't people just be friends?
Why can't people just be friends?
Because Shifty has to eat. :)
Sad but true :(
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Limiting guns in any form would not have limited this tragedy. It might have made it messier since damn near anyone can get the materials to make a pipe bomb, or pick up an axe, or have a set of very sharp kitchen knives.
I'm gonna have to say I strongly disagree. Yes, there will always be psychopaths out there that are driven to harm others, but guns make killing far easier and more effective than anything else.
There's a reason axes and swords are relegated to our shared fantasy games. They are ridiculously inefficient with firearms around. It takes a lot of time and effort to hack someone apart.
Pipe bombs are way overrated. They rarely kill and are more likely to injure the dummy trying to build one.
I'm not sure just locking up bullets is an answer as pretty much anyone can buy them.
I'm not totally against guns, but to deny their role in these tragedies and deny the need for any limitations doesn't seem reasonable to me.
I agree with both Tark and VC here. I do not deny that firearms provide the individual with a high degree of destructive potential, but as we have seen in the last decade of combating terrorism (which school shootings are a form of) most our losses have been to bombs of one sort or another. The suicide vest is and was very popular in Iraq.
The tragedy seems worse when we think of the terror that those children and adults went through, how often do we here about school buses overturning or getting hit by a train killing everyone inside? The lose of life was just as tragic, yet the incident is often quickly forgotten because no one gets re-elected by creating school bus legislation.
In Missouri, a couple of years ago, some fool sent 11 text in 11 minutes prior to causing a pile with two school buses killing himself,one other and injuring 38. This led the Fed to advocate for banning texting while driving, but I do not think that this is nation wide yet. It seems so innocent and everyone has done, but what we have done is far more irresponsible and dangerous than I am sure any of us as firearm owners has done with a gun.
The simple fact is the firearm is a tool and tools can be abused. In 2007 there were 270,000,000 privately owned firearms accounted for in the US and the rate of homicides was 10,129 individuals killed by a firearm and another 6,800 by other means. That is a lot of guns compared to the number of homicides. Over 3000 were killed on US roads as a result of distracted driving and another 10,228 were lost to drunk drivers. At 246,000,000 privately owned vehicles on road in the US maybe the car needs to be banned worldwide as it is statistically more dangerous than a gun. Sounds a bit ridiculous doesn't it? Any machine can be used for the wrong reasons. When a Ryder truck filled with ammonia and fertilizer pulled up outside a federal building in Oklahoma City vaporized 168 people including 19 children under six, a sick bastard miss used a there tool, too.
The real issue is what is happening in our society, our world society, to drive people into these sick screams for attention? Where have gone wrong in the raising of our children? Are not making them accountable enough and shattering their fragile egos when they have buck and make the tough decisions? This is a problem that cannot be written away with laws banning a tool. It takes us fixing the problem with the person using it.
Yeah... but you're kinda skirting around the fact there that guns are tools that are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to living beings, and some, are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to humans.
The other things are not.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Too much for the quotation code;-)
As far as I know, building bombs is illegal under federal law in the US, thus the use of tools is regulated. I don't think banning guns is a solution to the problem, but regulating gun ownership more then it is now may help lowering the bodycount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BBB- you'll get no argument from me that cars are extremely dangerous, but they kill when used improperly. as said above, killing isn't their primary function. and they usually aren't tricked out to maximize killing. apples and oranges really.
On suicide bombs, well that's a terrorism network. It usually takes a group to come up with the expertise and materials for a bomb. I tend to think the OK City bombers had some support, but I don't know. I think much was done to trace fertilizers, etc to stop this type of thing from happening again. So we seemed to learn from that one. The only lone bomber I can think of is the Unabomber, who managed sadly to kill 3 over his 16 year career of 20 something attempts.
I don't know that the shooter in CT would have been recognized as a threat. So far it just sounds like he was possibly autism spectrum. I guess we'll learn more as the story unfolds.
I know it's a touchy subject, but I just find the defensive, no limits on guns reaction troubling. Maybe more so as I teach in a state where the legislature thinks its more important to pass right to carry laws on campuses rather than actually fund education... that'd be Arizona.
I hadn't heard Australia's story, but I find that enlightening. Thanks, Shifty.
Yeah... but you're kinda skirting around the fact there that guns are tools that are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to living beings, and some, are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to humans.
The other things are not.
It's not skirting. It's an udnerstanding of human reality. We are very very good at killing s*@+. We've gone for thousands of years without the invention of blackpowder and managed not only to top the food chain but make it brunch but to build civilizations and go on to make something called culture because all the other monkey's hadn't quite got the hang of attaching pointy rocks to sticks and then making handy levers to hurl them with incredible force. We are at the terrifying point in history where a man with a chemistry set and time can instantly wipe out hundreds. Nations can wipe out the planet.
And keep in mind there's another aspect to gun ownership beyond the taking of life and that is the simple preservation of it. If a 300lb. guy decides it would be a nice idea to smash into your home and do abominable things to your and yours would you rather have a phone and a prayer or a semi automatic with those damn humie exploding bullets? One of these things is more likely to help you immediately than not.
It's notable that in every case of mass shootings it's been in places where OC or CC has simply not been allowed. We could speculate what might happen if such a shooter came across a campus full of CC'ers who just got back from the range and itchy to become "heroes" but I doubt that'll ever happen since such people ultimately are suicidal not stupid.
I think Bilbo brings a fair point with ye olde fertilizer bomb. Timothy mcveigh did more damage with his truck and basic farming equipment in less time than all of those mass shootings combined. Heck 9/11 was perpetrated by a pack of dudes wielding boxcutters, not firearms. No matter how much we fight and snarl and blame the tool ultimately it comes down to the finger pulling the trigger.
Since VC brought it up, I'd like to go ahead and say just so there is no confusion, that Autism is not linked to this sort of violence. If this man was on the spectrum, it was a coincidence to his psychotic behavior and not the cause of.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since VC brought it up, I'd like to go ahead and say just so there is no confusion, that Autism is not linked to this sort of violence. If this man was on the spectrum, it was a coincidence to his psychotic behavior and not the cause of.
Specifically it was aspergers. Which has not been linked to violence no. But to D&D and MMO's so brace your butt.
Yeah... but you're kinda skirting around the fact there that guns are tools that are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to living beings, and some, are specifically designed to cause physical injury and/or death to humans.
The other things are not.
It's not skirting. It's an udnerstanding of human reality. We are very very good at killing s&&*. We've gone for thousands of years without the invention of blackpowder and managed not only to top the food chain but make it brunch but to build civilizations and go on to make something called culture because all the other monkey's hadn't quite got the hang of attaching pointy rocks to sticks and then making handy levers to hurl them with incredible force.
And keep in mind there's another aspect to gun ownership beyond the taking of life and that is the simple preservation of it. If a 300lb. guy decides it would be a nice idea to smash into your home and do abominable things to your and yours would you rather have a phone and a prayer or a semi automatic with those damn humie exploding bullets? One of these things is more likely to help you immediately than not.
It's notable that in every case of mass shootings it's been in places where OC or CC has simply not been allowed. We could speculate what might happen if such a shooter came across a campus full of CC'ers who just got back from the range and itchy to become "heroes" but I doubt that'll ever happen since such people ultimately are suicidal not stupid.
I think Bilbo brings a fair point with ye olde fertilizer bomb. Timothy mcveigh did more damage with his truck and basic farming equipment in less time than all of those mass shootings combined. Heck 9/11 was perpetrated by a pack of dudes wielding boxcutters, not firearms. No matter how much we fight and snarl and blame the tool ultimately it comes down to the finger pulling the trigger.
I think that BBB portraying guns as merely tools is skirting the fact that the tool was designed for the purpose of harm. Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely antigun, and you bet your ass that if I had a gun and my child's, my own or even just anyone else' life was in danger I would use that gun. Or that axe. Or that butcher knife. Or that rock. Or hell, even this empty aquarium I have sitting next to me with nothing but a cricket in it. It doesn't change the fact, though, that the gun was designed to hurt a person (even if it is self defense) whereas the axe was meant to cut wood, the knife meant for food processing and the aquarium for housing animals, and the rock was meant to just be a rock. Sure, what a person does with those tools is of grave importance, but as was previously said, guns are far more dangerous especially rapid fire weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since VC brought it up, I'd like to go ahead and say just so there is no confusion, that Autism is not linked to this sort of violence. If this man was on the spectrum, it was a coincidence to his psychotic behavior and not the cause of.Specifically it was aspergers. Which has not been linked to violence no. But to D&D and MMO's so brace your butt.
exactly, that's why I said he likely wouldn't have been identified as a threat if that's all he was diagnosed with.
I believe Aspergers has been reclassified as Autism Spectrum though maybe that hasn't been approved. and yes, I indeed have witnessed the link between AS and gamers!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh i'm sure as professional soldiers shifty and bilbo can give you 101 uses for there countries rifle of choice other than "shoots people". Afterall most of their job is carrying heavy s~@+ and waiting around for something exciting to happen.
Lol, no one said that a gun can't be used for other things, but that it what it was designed for, and for some guns, do recall that's for "shoots animals" :P
VC, you're right, Asperger's is considered to be on the Autism Spectrum and I understood what you meant completely. My daughter is autistic, and so is one of my cousins and a friend of mine. I didn't think you were saying anything against autism or anything like that, but just felt the need to specify in case anyone didn't know :)
Lol, no one said that a gun can't be used for other things, but that it what it was designed for, and for some guns, do recall that's for "shoots animals" :P
I know of a gun that was specifically designed to grind coffee. :)
I know of a gun that was specifically designed to grind coffee. :)Lol, no one said that a gun can't be used for other things, but that it what it was designed for, and for some guns, do recall that's for "shoots animals" :P
??? and could this gun be used to kill in the conventional sense?