News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...  (Read 11389 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gwaihir

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2830
  • Country: 00
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #40 on: October 19, 2006, 03:07:01 PM »
Quote from: Barr'El O'Rum
That's because you've got it arse backwards. You're associating drinking with the injury and ignoring the driving part. Drinking does not kill more people than firearms. Drunk driving does kill people. Since you're equating firearms as tools it would be more appropriate to suggest banning the automobile as it is the tool in question that has been inappropriately used and caused injury. Vehicles also provide far more benefit to society than firearms so you're really barking up the wrong tree there.

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
Ther arguments that drunks kill people is a stupid one. Drunks kill people with cars. A car also saves lives. More people are saved by cars than die by them.

Siiiiighhhh.  You just don't want to see it do you?   :-\ A drunk driving accident has three basic factors all of which combine to cause the accident:  the person, the drink, and the car.  Remove any of these from the picture and the accident doesn't occur.  A bottle of booze and a car = no accident.  A car and a person = no accident.  A person and a bottle of booze = no accident.  Put the three together and there is an accident.  Now, if you can remove one of the three to prevent an accident, it might be a good idea.  Let's get rid of the person, well I guess that isn't such a good idea.  Let's get rid of the car, but as you've already stated cars help lots of people.  Let's get rid of the booze.  Now we're onto something.  Booze doesn't have any real benefits, it doesn't save lives or make people safer so what's the harm in getting rid of it?  Well doing so will infringe on liberties in ways that people don't like.  It would undoubtably save many lives with out a loss of any helpful benefit, but I don't see a huge drive to outlaw booze. 

Let me repeat and please don't simply ignore this crutial point, all three (booze, person, vehicle) combine to make the accident.  You can't blame it solely on any of the three.  Getting rid of one of the three would help reduce deaths without the loss of any real good.

Now, when a crime is committed with a gun there are two key components:  the gun and the person.  At this point the comparison begins to weaken.  If we get rid of the gun, the crime may still occur.  For example, if a rapist wants to rape, a gun may make the crime easier to commit, but he is still more than capable of committing the crime if he doesn't have one.  (Unless his intended victim has one, in which case the crime may not occur.)  If we get rid of the person, the crime will not occur.  The problem is that we don't just get rid of people, at least not until they have actually committed a crime.  Our only option is to get rid of the gun.  In the drunk auto accident I considered getting rid or the car or the booze.  The problem with getting rid of the car is that there are many benifits that cars convey.  Getting rid of the booze was less of a problem because of the lack of benefit.  So does the gun compare better with a car or with booze.  Well, there are tangible benefits to having guns as Susan Buxton , Thomas Morganstern, Roland Burns as well as hundreds of thousands of other Americans can attest.  Guns like cars can save lives as well as taking them, and unlike booze can do more than just make people feel good.

To sum up let me say that people, guns, cars, and booze can all combine to kill people.  If our end is to save lives at the very least we should get rid of booze which does little if anything useful.  Getting rid of guns makes about as much sense as getting rid of cars.  Both frequently are used for good rather than just evil.  My intent is not to say that we should get rid of booze, that discussion is for another board.  I use it simply as a basis for comparison because it is something few who argue for the abolition of guns would advocate getting rid of even though it does less good and leads to more harm than guns.

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
Ther arguments that drunks kill people is a stupid one.

A statement like this does nothing to further your argument, and as a logical fallacy hinders it.  A better start to your paragraph would have been "your argument is wrong because..."

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
So if your constitution allowed you to kill grannies with machetes would you protect that right? No you would take that right out and bury it. Why? Cause its a damn stupid right. Constitutional protection is different from common sense.

It doesn't.  Why?  Well you have already supplied the answer.  This is an argument through hyperbole.  (For more examples of meaningless hyperbole refer back to the nija and octupus attack arguments made ealier.)  No sensible person would support such an idea making it a senseless analogy.  Though you may disagree with them, plenty of sensible people support their constitutional right to bear arms.  This is why a healthy debate is taking place over the issue of guns rather than machetes and grannies.

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
And please please please don't say its a freedom. Freedom to defend yourself is totally different to freedom to carry a tool of murder.

But if you need to defend yourself against someone intent on rape or murder who has the means to be successful, a tool of murder may be your only means of defending yourself.  The individuals I mentioned ealier were no match for the intruders physically and they would have been incapable of self defense without a "tool of murder" as you call the tool that saved their lives.

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
Bikers must wear helmets as its extremely annoying for people to clean the pavement of all the brains
And the restricition of speed is there as a freedom of others. The freedom to walk accross roads without the relative risk of death that comes from people speeding. For that you sacrifice your gas guzzling hot rod's top speed and maintain a more "safe" 30 MPH so that, God forbid you hit someone, they suffer from broken bones not death. You are also less likely to wrap your car round a tree at 30 MPH... Again Seatbelts are law cause we are a bit tired of stupid young men dying when they drive thier cars to fast when they crash and indeed for a brief few seconds of their lives become a physics experiment to conservation of momentum. Same goes for sitting in back of pick up trucks. You are'nt free to hurt other people or die in stupid ways. So far you are listing common sense, not loss of freedom... Compare my "fortress" idea to your gun idea and you will see that it makes more sense to avoid conflict.

If you feel that security is better than freedom, what can I do?  Keep this in mind though, you are asking me to forfeit a concrete, tangible real freedom so that you can enjoy a perceived security.  I give up what I have and get hopes and maybes in return.  I don't think that is a fair trade. 

I'm not free to die in stupid ways?  Why not?  Are we to ban all dangerous activity?  Where do we stop?  You can't eat that, its not healthy.  You have to exercise, or you will die early.  Swimming is dangerous ban it.  People get bit by dogs, ban 'em.  If we set speed limits low enough poeple won't die in car accidents.  Life is inherently risky.  If you want to avoid those risks, feel free.  But you are arguing that I don't have that right.  That I should be told by the government and a bunch of busibodies how to live my life.  No thanks.  Freedom is more important than security because security without freedom is meaningless.  You don't have the right to deprive me of my freedom.

Quote from: The Full Metal Geneticist
And you don't realise what freedom means. Freedom means the ability to make choices within a large framework of rules without impinging on the freedoms of others. So while I am free to listen to music, I am not free to rock out at 2 in the morning on a school night since other people apart from me are affected. It does'nt mean do whatever you feel like. Thats anarchy. And thats the start of the ugly side of man.

Wrong!  Rules are by their nature limitations to freedom.  This is not to say that rules aren't necessary, they are.  I have an issue with unecessary rules and rules that take away my freedoms without conferring a relative benefit.  Your example of music is interesting.  You have a freedom that is limited when its exercise affects others.  If I own a gun, it has no effect on anyone unless they break into my house.  If you take away my gun, I have lost something and no one has gained anything because I am not going to use it wrongly.  If you take away my stereo, I have lost something and no one has gained anything because I am not going to have it blaring at 2:00 in the morning.  Why don't we take the guns and stereos away from the people who misuse them and let the people who don't keep them.




Read the story behind custom titles and tell us about yours.


"You cannot win tommorow, for you do not know why we fight today."  --Farseer Fa'alorath, Craftworld Fa'alnor-The Fate Weavers.

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #41 on: October 19, 2006, 03:18:53 PM »
You're still comparing apples to oranges. A drunk person in a car may have an accident. They may still have the same accident if they're sober in a vehicle. It's not a case of a+b=c  The amusing thing for drink driving statistics is that it's a drinking related case even when the one having the drink was the victim. Idiot runs a red light and slams into someone who had a drink - drunk driving statistic.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Gwaihir

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2830
  • Country: 00
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #42 on: October 19, 2006, 03:44:16 PM »
But the odds of them having an accident dramatically drop if they are sober.  In most cases where a drunk driver kills someone, it wouldn't have happened were it not for the drinks which had been consumed.  You are essentially saying that drinking and accidents aren't linked.  They are.  Far fewer accidents will happen if people stop drinking.


Read the story behind custom titles and tell us about yours.


"You cannot win tommorow, for you do not know why we fight today."  --Farseer Fa'alorath, Craftworld Fa'alnor-The Fate Weavers.

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #43 on: October 19, 2006, 04:01:34 PM »
But the odds of them having an accident dramatically drop if they are sober.  In most cases where a drunk driver kills someone, it wouldn't have happened were it not for the drinks which had been consumed.  You are essentially saying that drinking and accidents aren't linked.  They are.  Far fewer accidents will happen if people stop drinking.

Not at all. I was saying that may have an accident. It's no where near close to a certainty. One drink does not equal one accident, two drinks does not equal two accidents and so forth.  This is ignoring at what point you'd call someone "drunk" and at what point a level of drinking has any negative effect on a person's driving abiliity. Far fewer accidents would happen if people stopped driving compared to those who stopped drinking. What are the odds of getting into a car accident each day and what are they if you have a drink before hand? 

Using your own example - in most cases when a gunman shoots a child it wouldn't have happened if the gunman was unarmed. These forms of statements are meaningless in their construction.

What about a drunk gunman that kills someone? Would they have killed without the booze or without the firearm? removing the former factor may help, removing the latter factor would certainly help.

It's the misuse of the tool that causes the death. Firearm = tool. Vehicle = tool. Booze = contributing factor.

Apples and oranges.

Returning to the matter at hand, the original question involved whether arming teachers would help reduce the number of school shootings. The general concensus was - no. Increasing the number of firearms in the area wouldn't help reduce the deaths. The follow on "these things wouldn't happen if there were no firearms" statements are alike to what we are discussing above. A "well, duh" statement. Meaningless in its construction. Same as "you wouldn't get wet if you were not standing in the rain."
« Last Edit: October 19, 2006, 04:28:39 PM by Barr'El O'Rum »
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Twistedstorytella (the 3rd)

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 828
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #44 on: October 19, 2006, 05:41:23 PM »
Quote
Of course this will be near impossible because some people have it in their heads that its their "right" to carry guns and endanger themselves and other if certain situations occur.

It is not a "right", it is a right.  The second amendment to the constitution of the United States grants us that right!  It is a right in the same way as we have a right to say what we want, believe what we want, have a jury trial and not be compelled to be witnesses against ourselves.

I don't think it is stupid to allow people to defend themselves.  If anything is stupid it is telling people to get shot numerous times while waiting patiently for the police to show up to take pictures of their lifeless corpses.

There is a balance between freedom and security.  Some are tempted to give up many or all of their freedom for the hope of security.  That is what you are advocating. 

We have laws telling bikers to wear helmits--security over freedom. 

Laws regulating the speed we may drive--security over freedom. 

Laws telling us we have to wear seatbelts--security over freedom. 

Laws telling us not to ride in the backs of pickups--security over freedom.

Building codes telling us how to build our homes--security over freedom.

Every time we pass laws to make ourselves feel more secure, we give up a bit of freedom.  At some point we have so many laws designed to make us feel secure that we no longer have our cherished freedom.  We are left with a bland nominally secure life which must be lived under the pressing weight of too many laws.  It is a dangerous game to allow government to take freedom in exchange for the promise of security.

Technically we have no freedom...everythin g we say or do is already dictated by the media and education. 

Sure its a smart thing to allow people to defend themselves but dont forget, that single law is proberbly the reason of why so many crimes and deaths have happened in america.  Everything that has happened to you lot in america hasnt happened to us Brits on such a large scale simply because guns are illegal,

Do you know how many people would die or get wounded in east, north and south london if guns were legalised?? To be honest, i dont either ;D but i know for sure that almost every rudeboi (black dudes with hoodies who go around mugging and hurting people for no particular reason) and chavs (stupid young white guys who have the intelligence of 10yr olds who go around beating people up) would try and get their filthy hands on a firearm.

It's your right to defend yourselves with guns but if so many abuse that law, is that Right worth it?
« Last Edit: October 19, 2006, 05:43:43 PM by Twistedstorytella (the 3rd) »
Mr. Freeze: "A jazz dancer comin to a bboy audition, you know, just cuz he could do those continuous backspins, which the commercial public knows as windmills, doesn't mean that he's a bboy, he's just an idiot that learned how to spin on his back."


Offline Andalharan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • To love is to live, to live is to love.
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #45 on: October 19, 2006, 06:17:05 PM »
Actually despite thousands of people dying in India due to Gandhi's freedom movement we hold no ill will to the british because of the way we won our independance. We never saw them as villains cause we can move on beyond that mentality unlike americans have. To date there is one major movie with a british villain... ONE. And thats because its set in colonial times and involves cricket. Its a villain who challenges enemies to cricket matches. Hardly the kind of villainy portrayed as the british in the USA. And put it this way what they did in India was far far worse than anything in the US. And far far more recently we still have individuals who were alive then. So we do know a thing or two about stopping riot

Whoa. Since when do Americans still hate the Brits and think of them as villains? Did I miss a memo? 'Cause some of my best friends are from the UK. And last time I checked most Americans I know like the folks across the pond just fine.

Criminals in the UK don't carry guns for two very good reasons.
1. A gun is expensive since they are so rare in the UK that getting one costs a lot and so using it regularly is expensive.
2. A gun attracts attention. Normally the police would grab you and rush you. A gun would result in you being shot and again getting every policeman in the UK after you.

If the police are there when the crime is taking place that is. And it's not so hard to conceal a handgun. No harder than concealing a good combat knife.

Only Idiots carry guns. Such that any shooting is often carried out by total amateurs in gangs rather than anyone in crime. The lack of guns reduces such incidents on the whole. Why? Cause it means that carrying a gun is a crime so a lot of criminals stop carrying it to reduce the chance of being caught. Being caught in possesion of a joint is a caution... A gun is a automatic jail sentance. Why would you go to jail for that really expensive piece of metal that can't be used as much as you would like to. So few criminals carry it. And those that do are often the ones carrying the "kick me sign" when the police turn up with better guns and training to deal with them.

I resent you calling people I know idiots. You don't know them, so don't judge them. Yes, lack of guns may lower rate of gun crime. But gun crimes aren't the only kind of violent crime. Many common objects can and are used as lethal weapons. And firing a warning shot from a gun wielded by a potential victim can really discourage an assailant who is armed with a not-so-conspicuous weapon. Even carrying a holstered pistol openly often discourages a violent crime before it even starts.

Er... My way means that there is no 50:50 chance...
Read again. My way stalls any invader for more than 15 minutes Allowing a decent police force to do its job. You would'nt need guns as people just don't get close enough to you to even use a gun and all but the most determined criminal will give up in 30 seconds after trying to enter. So its safe. Safer than your method. And a lot less likely to kill fido or your kid in the dark by mistake to boot. Are you saying your cops are so crap that while a criminal is attempting to enter this house with bars and sirens going off and lights illuminating him that they are off eating donuts and will only turn up after 15 minutes? Come on thats just silly. A good home security will keep your house safer than any gun.

Your house will be safer, yes. But what about a woman walking home at night through the park? The gas station manager for the gas station out along an empty stretch of interstate (something America has quite a bit of)? The guy who ends up having to walk home through the wrong part of town? What security system can protect them?

I respect your opinion. But please, understand that your viewpoint may not be shared by others. Don't call others idiots because they disagree with you. That is a sign of a closed mind. And for someone with the amount of intelligence you appear to have, having a closed mind would be a pity.

Sure its a smart thing to allow people to defend themselves but dont forget, that single law is proberbly the reason of why so many crimes and deaths have happened in america.  Everything that has happened to you lot in america hasnt happened to us Brits on such a large scale simply because guns are illegal,

As far as I have seen, violence levels in America are not that much higher than those in other countries. And I live 20 minutes away from downtown Washington, D.C. It pays to keep in mind that America is a much larger country with a much larger population. It follows that our crime levels would be proportionally higher. We also have a much more varied population density, which is a factor as well. In the Midwest, for example, crime rates are much lower than in major east or west coast cities.

Just my 2 cents folks. Take 'em or leave 'em. Just keep in mind while responding that I respect your opinions, so please respect mine.
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

Offline Full Metal Geneticist

  • Sir Quotesaplenty | No new bastardy suits.
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
  • Country: 00
  • Defender of the Text Wall
    • FMG's Angry Rantings
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #46 on: October 19, 2006, 06:53:33 PM »
I think you have misread me...

IN THE UK only an idiot would carry a gun. Why? Cause the jail sentences are harsh. Why? Cause guns are illegal. What if he uses it? He better pray he does'nt hit someone. What if he hits a cop. He is screwed... They will hunt his ass down using the full force of the law. They won't even shoot to stop if he is a threat they will kill him on the spot. Hence guns are rare. Only idiots and amateurs would rely on such a weapon which would call attention to themselves and would'nt be worth the cost of having the police investigate you thoroughly...

And criminals who mug people with holstered pistols will still win. A holstered pistol is just as useful as having no pistol against a mugger. Why? Muggers seldom ask you to hand over your wallet. They are more likely to kick your arse then search for the wallet. If they have a gun they will already be pointing while you won't. Its not "safe" unless you are running about with a gun out and safety off... The woman walking the park is just as unsafe with a gun as she is without one. Infact with a gun she is more likely to get killed. Why? Imagine assailant grabs her with knife. She tries to go for gun, assailant panics and stabs her. Cause shooting "suspicious people" is murder... You can only act in self defence if you know you are being attacked. Late night garage's may as well hand over all the money. The insurance will cover it. And robbers won't be so interested in killing people. OR you can have a bullet proof glass shielded booth for the employee to work in. That way you are less likely to lose employees in gun battles. And indeed safing your intake would work too. I.E buy a big ass safe... Every so often Put your Cash in via slot. You can put money in but can't take money out. Every day the manager before night shift takes money to bank. That way minimal money is in till, any excess is in safe and untouchable by the average criminal. Also put up signs stating that only small change is kept in the tills. Very few morons will rob such a store...

And what the hell just give them the money, its just money you can earn more stuff.

And I think your last comment is equally silly. Fine I put up India a country with 3 times the population as the USA and a murder rate of nearly half that. Sure it has more murders and indeed is one of the few countries that do have a lot more murders than the USA BUT if you factor in murder rates and the fact that murders include terrorist victims you see that the rate is rather low. So the whole "America is larger than other countries and with more population malarky" does'nt fly when there is a distinct antithesis to it. So lower violent crime and higher population, greater density and great diversity... Its disproving that theory.


It is pernicious nonsense that feeds into a rising wave of irrationality which threatens to overwhelm the hard-won gains of the Enlightenment and the scientific method. We risk as a society slipping back into a state of magical thinking when made-up science passes for rational discourse. I would compare it to witchcraft but honestly that's insulting to witches.

Offline Lochland

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 232
  • To the victor the spoils
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #47 on: October 19, 2006, 07:09:46 PM »
I am soooooo gonna get flamed for this but only the U.S of A has the problem of kids getting shot in school, do you know why? Its becuase of your silly gun culture (you need a gun to feel hard)

If you banned guns, fair enough you'd have a couple of riots but I can garuntee nobody will get shot in school, has an incident like this ever happened in the UK before?

nope

lead by example, if you cant take all the problems surronding a gun toting country than make it a non gun toting country

and before you start you don't need a gun to defend yourself, sheesh thats what martial arts and big kick of baseball bats are for

just my thoughts

lochland
Anyone heard the Black and white Knight on the black and white horse before?

Offline Full Metal Geneticist

  • Sir Quotesaplenty | No new bastardy suits.
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
  • Country: 00
  • Defender of the Text Wall
    • FMG's Angry Rantings
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #48 on: October 19, 2006, 07:39:58 PM »
Actually there was an incident called Dunblaine in the UK. After that the UK tightened up security on guns. Massive confistication events were held and possession of illegal firearms became a major crime. Indeed last year a moratorium was stated for public wishing to turn in weapons without any police action. The number of guns take off the street was staggering. A distinct drive was made to not want guns by the people themselves after this tragedy. So much so that guns are so expensive due to the criminal demand as guns are harder to steal and indeed smuggle in. And even then the guns in the hands of criminals are often recovered from replicas or disabled guns. These guns are quite pricey and indeed are quite dangerous to their user due to the attention packing a gun brings from the police. The mere presence of a gun means a high response. So its not worth carrying.


It is pernicious nonsense that feeds into a rising wave of irrationality which threatens to overwhelm the hard-won gains of the Enlightenment and the scientific method. We risk as a society slipping back into a state of magical thinking when made-up science passes for rational discourse. I would compare it to witchcraft but honestly that's insulting to witches.

Offline Andalharan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • To love is to live, to live is to love.
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #49 on: October 19, 2006, 10:00:57 PM »
I think you have misread me...
IN THE UK only an idiot would carry a gun.

Thank you for the clarification. The way it was phrased suggested a blanket statement. I apologize.

And criminals who mug people with holstered pistols will still win. A holstered pistol is just as useful as having no pistol against a mugger. Why? Muggers seldom ask you to hand over your wallet. They are more likely to kick your arse then search for the wallet. If they have a gun they will already be pointing while you won't.

Muggers generally go for "soft" targets, ie. those that they believe will not pose a threat to them. Therefore carrying a holstered pistol is a deterrent.

Its not "safe" unless you are running about with a gun out and safety off... The woman walking the park is just as unsafe with a gun as she is without one. Infact with a gun she is more likely to get killed. Why? Imagine assailant grabs her with knife. She tries to go for gun, assailant panics and stabs her.

If you were a thug with a knife, would you attack someone with a gun? I think not. Most stab wounds are not immediately fatal, especially if done in panic. A gunshot also has the secondary effect of letting people in the surroundings know something is wrong, possibly bringing others to the victim's aid.

Late night garage's may as well hand over all the money. The insurance will cover it.

Yes, let's show criminals that they can get what are essentially free handouts.  ::)
Can you say crime rate increase? Not to mention the fact that the store will lose even more money as their insurance rates skyrocket.

OR you can have a bullet proof glass shielded booth for the employee to work in. That way you are less likely to lose employees in gun battles. And indeed safing your intake would work too. I.E buy a big ass safe... Every so often Put your Cash in via slot. You can put money in but can't take money out. Every day the manager before night shift takes money to bank.

Have you recently priced bullet-proof glass and high-end safes? Some small businesses can't afford such luxuries.

That way minimal money is in till, any excess is in safe and untouchable by the average criminal. Also put up signs stating that only small change is kept in the tills. Very few morons will rob such a store...

You'd be suprised how stupid your average robber can be.

And what the hell just give them the money, its just money you can earn more stuff.

Just money is some people's livelihood. And again, if criminals realize they can get money just by waving a gun around and making threats, don't you think they'll do it more often?

And I think your last comment is equally silly. Fine I put up India a country with 3 times the population as the USA and a murder rate of nearly half that. Sure it has more murders and indeed is one of the few countries that do have a lot more murders than the USA BUT if you factor in murder rates and the fact that murders include terrorist victims you see that the rate is rather low. So the whole "America is larger than other countries and with more population malarky" does'nt fly when there is a distinct antithesis to it. So lower violent crime and higher population, greater density and great diversity... Its disproving that theory.

What I said was that you can't compare two different countries due to differences in population and density. And America has one of the widest variations in population densities in the world. India simply has a high density. Therein lies the diffrence.

I am soooooo gonna get flamed for this but only the U.S of A has the problem of kids getting shot in school, do you know why? Its becuase of your silly gun culture (you need a gun to feel hard)

Blanket statements like this are made on the basis of stereotypes and bias. Does belittling Americans make you feel cool or something? Because it doesn't. You were right to think you might get flammed for such an statement.

If you banned guns, fair enough you'd have a couple of riots but I can garuntee nobody will get shot in school, has an incident like this ever happened in the UK before?

Nah, they'll just get stabbed and beaten to death instead. Or blown up. Gotta love those homemade explosives. Which really aren't that hard to make.

and before you start you don't need a gun to defend yourself, sheesh thats what martial arts and big kick of baseball bats are for

Yes, because everyone can use martial arts and baseball bats. Including the elderly and the disabled, two of the most frequently victimized population groups. Quite.

just my thoughts

Duly noted.

The problem is most criminals in America don't buy their guns legally. Instead they are purchased free of serial numbers and traceable paperwork off of the black market. Ironically, the people who buy the guns legally are the ones that will use them solely in self defence and for peaceful activities (hunting and target shooting).

And confiscating the gun after the crime doesn't do the victim a damn bit of good.

Interesting debate. Do any of you anti-gunners actually live in the States?
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #50 on: October 19, 2006, 10:08:53 PM »
So much for this thread then.

Muggers generally go for "soft" targets, ie. those that they believe will not pose a threat to them. Therefore carrying a holstered pistol is a deterrent.

As in openly upon the side? Else how is a mugger supposed to know? Either way - not helping. How about wearing an open firearm invites attack as it means a free weapon when you're bushwacked?

A gunshot also has the secondary effect of letting people in the surroundings know something is wrong, possibly bringing others to the victim's aid.

Now, where do you live where people actively seek out the source of an unknown firearm discharge rather than merely ignoring it or calling the police?

Interesting debate. Do any of you anti-gunners actually live in the States?

Anti-gunners? Come on, that's not even trying. That's like calling people who car pool "Anti-Combustion."
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Mr.Peanut (Turtleproof)

  • Ride Like Lightning, Crash Like Thunder | Infinity Circuit | Pork Sword of Mod-Justice | Took the basket, nuts and lol | Good grief, ye hennie pennies
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13225
  • Country: 00
  • Turtleposting At The Speed Of SHift
  • Armies: Eldar, Dark Eldar, Sigmarines, Chaos, Demons
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #51 on: October 19, 2006, 10:27:00 PM »
This thread has gone quite a bit off-topic.  The pros and cons of carrying a firearm is a valid topic, but I think we should take a break from it for now.
You are
What you do
When it counts
     -The Masao
"Getting what you want can be dangerous.

Offline Full Metal Geneticist

  • Sir Quotesaplenty | No new bastardy suits.
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
  • Country: 00
  • Defender of the Text Wall
    • FMG's Angry Rantings
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #52 on: October 19, 2006, 10:34:27 PM »
Pardon... India has a high population density...
India is called the subcontinent for a reason... The reason being it fulfils every single requirement for continenthood. I.e Almost every different terrain type from permafrost to deserts. And are you serious? India has Bombay and Calcutta two monstrous cities with densities similar to Mexico City... And its got a lower crime rate despite being more diverse than the US since every state has such a radical difference in culture. Your argument flyeth not all things considered. What you think we are a billion equally spaced out people?

So you want people to walk around like a wild west movie... Oh dear lord thats so stupid... So now instead of merely mugging you they will stab you to prevent you shooting them. It does'nt matter what weapon you are packing if you are'nt conscious or alive to use it. Simple... Jumped knife to throat... "Drop your gun boy" Can you fight back? No you can't. Why? Cause you have just been mugged badly. Or worse? Man in front of you approaches, slams you against a wall and pulls knife while his friend approaches you and cuts of your escape route. Both pull out knives and are close to you. Are you saying you are fast enough to pull out your gun and indeed safety it and shoot them both before they pincushion you? Unlikely. Criminals may prefer soft targets but they too know how to deal with a gun. Indeed they are more likely to kill you if you have a gun as fear of death makes mind's clear.

A stab wound may not be painful... BUT they hurt a lot. And I would like to see you aim with a punctured lung or a damaged diaphragm... Two very common stab injuries. Oh wait you can't as you lose oxygen so quickly that by the time you drag the gun out you are choking on your own blood. Man you have been watching too many cartoons where knife fights leave cut marks not gaping wounds. Stab wounds incapacitate you very quickly.

Are you serious? Do you know that every business has a safe? Even a small 120 pound safe will do. Its a safe, unless they have explosives its going to last a fair while. They are criminals of ordinary caliber not master safe crackers. So cheap ass safe will do you fine. They are'nt going to be getting away quick with a 50 Kg metal safe. Its worth an investment. Man learn to do business properly. All the money you make ain't worth the paper its printed on if you can't keep it safe. You don't need a big one to be fair, you need a small safe which can carry a day's earnings. Its worth it when you start a business. If you don't have one then you have'nt planned properly and deserve to be robbed for you taking stupid risks. You don't need Alcatraz... You want a heavy ass box. Most of which cost around 50 pounds... IF you are a medium sized single unit business you can spare a 100 pounds for a safe. Most of these safe's come with insurance included in the cost of the contents inside. Usually 1000 to 3000 pounds for a safe's contents. Thats more than enough for a day's takings don't you think? And extremely worth the security. Bullet proof glass... Pricey it is but worth it if you don't like being robbed. You must admit its worth the life of an employee or yourself. But the safe works...

AND note robbers ain't "stupid". Its survival of the fittest and stupid robbers tend to be ones that end up in jail. Likewise most can think out rough plans. IF they know there is "no money" in the till the place is less likely to be robbed. Sure you get the few "stupid criminals" BUT since crime is a third party insurance your premium does'nt go up. Also your losses won't be so high since your days taking is safe and "untouchable".

Oh... and in the UK there were two school stabbings. But the thing is the stabbings were both perpetrated on the owner of the knife. Kid pulls out knife on bullies to scare bully. Bully injured slightly. Bully fights back and kills kid with his own knife... Bully acts in self defence. Kid dies idiotically.
USA? Kid pulls out gun, wastes bully and goes on rampage since its a lot easier to kill people with a gun than a knife which can be taken out by weight of numbers and by running away and shutting doors...
Beaten to death? Man we are cultured people, we don't beat people to death anymore. And home made explosives... Are you serious...


It is pernicious nonsense that feeds into a rising wave of irrationality which threatens to overwhelm the hard-won gains of the Enlightenment and the scientific method. We risk as a society slipping back into a state of magical thinking when made-up science passes for rational discourse. I would compare it to witchcraft but honestly that's insulting to witches.

Offline Andalharan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • To love is to live, to live is to love.
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #53 on: October 19, 2006, 10:58:53 PM »
Bah. Why bother replying? You all obviously think I'm a stupid git and nothing I can say will make you think differently. Obiviously a citizen of the country whose laws are being called into question has no idea what he's talking about at all. Continue stereotyping Americans as foolish trigger happy hicks if that's what makes you happy.  :-\

Fine, you're right. Happy now? You've won the argument. Go stroke your ego. If you ever see me post again it certainly won't be in here. See you in the Warhammer Background section. At least there people's opinions are treated with respect and courtesy. And to think I came to this site looking to talk about a tabletop miniature game... just look at the mess I've created.  :-[

I apologize for ruffling y'all's feathers. Guess I should just join the rest of the head-nodding sheep.

This thread has gone quite a bit off-topic.  The pros and cons of carrying a firearm is a valid topic, but I think we should take a break from it for now.

Sounds reasonable. I apologize for the inconvenience.
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

Offline lunargamer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 59
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #54 on: October 19, 2006, 11:01:47 PM »
I feel that teachers with guns is a bad thing.  As has been stated, they are in a purely reactionary position.  They can't do anything until someone fires a gun.  Either they are the first ones to go or the damage is already done.  Also, is it absolutely right to shoot a teenager who has lost it?  We do have a death penalty, but not every murderer is sentenced to death.  I cannot accept putting that responsibility on the shoulders of teachers.  

I'll make my apology, now, although I did actually say something about the actual topic, already.  I'm sorry, but I have to make one comment on the gun-ban interplay.  True, guns don't kill people, people kill people.  Guns just make it easier.  In point of fact, my uncle's father just killed himself with a gun (I'll spare the details).  Yes, you can commit suicide in a number of ways, but a gun is probably the easiest.  I believe we would be a safer country with a gun ban, but that doesn't mean that I think it is a good idea, either.  People need to make those decisions for themselves.  However, I disagree with the idea that guns protect people.  They may protect one person, but that comes at the expense of another person (despite the fact that the other person may be a criminal).  It only takes one finger on the trigger to commit an act that cannot be taken back.  Actually, this wraps back to my feelings about giving guns to teachers.  We have a justice system (as flawed as it may or may not be) in which 12 people decide a person's guilt.  I don't believe we should put teachers in a position (even if they voluntarily accept the position) to be judge and jury.

lunar
I still like the classic:
"I took the road less traveled by
And that has made all the difference."

Offline DUDEMAESTRO

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 534
  • JESUS SAVES! Everyone else takes critical damage.
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #55 on: October 20, 2006, 12:36:43 AM »
Quote
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.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"...powerful words. When the founding fathers sat down to write the Bill of Rights they decided that it was most important that a person be able to express their views freely. The very next thing that they thought was that a person aught to be able to defend themselves and the security of their free state by both bearing arms, and having a well Regulated (read “equipped”) Militia. If it was only a situation that guns were kept in an organization like the National Guard, then mentioning the “peoples  right to keep and bear arms” would be unnecessary. And even if that’s not enough to convince some of you then by definition a Militia is

militia (m?-li(sh'?) pronunciation
n.

   1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.
   2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.
   3. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

Americans are subject to a draft at the age of 18 so in effect become militia. 18 is the legal age to buy a rifle.
We are an "army" of Ordinary Citizens
As far as number three goes I guess you could make an argument to disarm the handicapped... bt that would be discrimination.

We have the opportunity in this nation to possess and carry firearms for the protection of ourselves, our nation, our families and our children. Although I disagree that a teacher should be made to carry a gun, he should have the option. He should also have training available on the safe employment of said gun and that training should be paid for on the taxpayers dime.

The US is a nation where at least 80 million homes possess a gun, many (like me) possess a lot more them one. Disarming the population is a very, very dangerous proposition for any government, and would be unhealthy for any police force. It is simply unrealistic to assume it is, even remotely possible, to disarm a population who’s arms are so ingrained in their culture. I tell you now that I would hand mine over to the authorities one round at a time. And I have things that are best described as “Belt Fed”, and I am not alone in this pint of view. I do not want to shoot at authorities, but I would if they were forcing me into an illeagal and unconstitutional action with precieved force. So it would be very bad for every one involved. So now we need a realistic solution, not a feel good solution.

 It is strange to me that I walk into a place that develops computer software every day , and every day I pass men with guns that protect the front door of that facility and they check all that enter. And yet schools in this nation have several entrances that no one watches where a person ( weather they be strapped with a baby killing AKM or 8 Lbs. Of  home made explosives strapped to themselves) can come and go as they please.

Schools are a “gun free zone”. I find this sentiment ridicules. I find it ridicules because it is always at these gun free zones where some nut goes and starts executing people. When was the last time there was a shooting at an NRA convention? Or a gun store? Or a company that was protected by men with guns? Never, it does not happen because as soon as your crazy butt starts waiving your pistol around you get shot by trigger happy taxpayers. So they do the logical thing, they go where they can do the most damage. In a word, they go to Schools.

If you have something that is worth protecting, be it your family, software, our children then you better have a man with a gun that will protect it.

And FMG, seriously, not better off confronting an assailant with a gun? States with little to no gun control in my country have the lowest crime rates. “Its ok to be raped and robbed as long as you just let it happen cause then its not so bad....” <Weak
Quote
BUT if you factor in murder rates and the fact that murders include terrorist victims
And man... this is weak... you have less crime if you do not include some (a chunk?) murders based on your higher terrorism rate? Come on. Well lets not inlcude murders in the states perpetrated by Illegal Mexican immigrants who continue 90% of the arrest warrant for murder in California alone...

I submit to you Ghandi wisest man ever....
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to the Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn."

-Mahatma Gandhi, Autobiography. Translated from the Gujarati by Mahadev Desai. Public Affairs Press, Washington, D.C. 1948.

Even your hero "got it".
« Last Edit: October 20, 2006, 01:17:41 AM by DUDEMAESTRO »
"... of the liberty of conscience in matters of religious faith, of speech and of the press; of the trail by jury of the vicinage in civil and criminal cases; of the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; of the right to keep and bear arms... If these rights are well defined, and secured against encroachment, it is impossible that government should ever degenerate into tyranny."

-James Monroe

Offline Kjata

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 538
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #56 on: October 20, 2006, 01:10:00 AM »
Dude, Andalharan, they dont think your idiots(or they do, are their just a douche). You were having a discussion. The discussion board. That is what this board is for.  And that was a helluva debate.

And secondly, don't critisize how we feel about guns if you don't live here. When a non-Us citezen is talking about gun laws, you make good points, but think about it this way.  We may or may not have more crime, I dont care. But if we do, we are willing to live with that extra crime so we could have guns.  The ONLY people who have a right to be-atch about guns in the US are citezens of the US. End of story.

Offline Bill the Bloody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #57 on: October 20, 2006, 05:06:34 AM »
Hi, been reading the discussion with interest. Could someone from the USA please clarify something for me. Just what are the rules concerning carrying concealed handguns, and holstered weapons on view in public? I had previously assumed that people in the USA could keep a weapon at their home legally but only people with an applicable license could carry weapons in public (i.e bounty hunters, private detectives etc), NOT the general public.

Just to put my opinion in the arena I don't believe that arming the teachers at American schools will deter the school shootings. For one thing the kids would know who to shoot at first, so at least one teacher would be shot at the least. Also as far as I am aware, the kids who have started the most prolific shooting sprees in the news have never planned to survive it, they wanted to go out with a bang and take as many people with them as they could. I could imagine they wouldn't regard an armed confrontation with their teacher as a detterrant.

Regarding gun law in the USA I respect that the right to bear arms is sacred to many americans but agree with many here that such a proliferation of weapons is a hindrance to a safe society. How many americans have died from legally bought weapons misused by non-criminals who have just 'lost-it' from finding out about cheating partners, bullying bosses, collegues or classmates? Please correct me if I'm wrong but I had thought that all the weapons used in the school shootings were bought legally if not by the perps themselves then by their relatives.

"Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici"

Offline Brother Asreus

  • Brother Captain, Resident Spokesman for Idiots.
  • Ancient
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2175
  • Closed captioned for the thinking impaired
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #58 on: October 20, 2006, 06:38:55 AM »
Last time guys, if you want to talk about the right to bear arms make another thread. This is talking about how to deal with school shootings and arming teachers. Another off tpoic post and this one gets locked for the sake of my sanity.


Cthulhu for Pres in 2012!!! Why vote for the lesser of all evils?

Offline Gwaihir

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2830
  • Country: 00
Re: This is NOT a solution to school shootings...
« Reply #59 on: October 20, 2006, 09:13:32 AM »
If there are no guns available to the teachers, then they are at the mercy of the assailant until he (A) runs out of ammo, (B) kills himself (probably because he is about to run out of ammo, (C) until the police show up, or possibly in some rare cases (D) gets talked out of it.

A--you have to wait untill he runs out of ammo.  Until he actually does, new people are getting shot.  If someone can shoot back at least there is a chance that he can be stopped before he runs out of ammo.  All the ammo that he hasen't use hasn't splattered someone's brains all over the school.

B--if he is going to kill himself anyway, why not help him along before he takes as many with him.  It would be nice to help him, but the lives of his fellow students should be a higher priority.

C--when they finally show up, he may well be nearing the process anway.  The school in the meantime is at his mercy.  The police tend to take their time about entering a situation.  This isn't particularly helpful if you are being shot at.  Of course if you can return fire, you might actually be able to stop the assailant, then the police can do their job of collecting evidence and taking pictures.

D--wouldn't it be nice if this happened more frequently.  Sadly it doesn't.

A basic argument that has been frequently posed here is that you can still get hurt/killed if you have a gun, so you shouldn't have one.  This argument chooses to completely ignore the fact that you also have a good chance of not getting hurt.  Without a gun you are completely at the mercy of your assailant unless you both have similar physical prowess and stature and are both unarmed.  With a gun you have a chance against your assailant regardless of his strength our your weakness.

One thing that bears repeating is that school shootings are not the seeming epidemic that the media loves to hype them into appearing to be.  The vast majority of students will not be shot at school or have fellow students shot at school.  Sensationalism sells even though it doesn't give an accurate portrayal.

Access to guns at a school is not a bad idea provided there are controls.  Having a teacher carry one on his person is not such a good idea.

Bill the Bloody--

Some states allow common citizens to carry guns just about anywhere they go.  Not sure if they have to be visible hidden or both, but I think that, at least in some places, it doesn't matter.  As Dudemaestro pointed out, these states tend to have low levels of crime.

Dudemaestro--

Great post!


Read the story behind custom titles and tell us about yours.


"You cannot win tommorow, for you do not know why we fight today."  --Farseer Fa'alorath, Craftworld Fa'alnor-The Fate Weavers.

 


Powered by EzPortal