School shooting "phenomenom"

[jman 0]

Isn't it obvious?

Because a car, alcohol, screwdrivers, chairs, motorcycles, lamps, guitars, clothes, tape etc. isn't designed to kill.

Although they DO have the ability to kill other people, their function which they are designed for is not to kill/hurt other people.

Jeez, this is like talking to a kid  

They are not designed for that but are just as good if not better in the case of cars.  We can at least agree that cars are very good for murder cant we?  If people shouldent have guns why should they have anything that gives them the abilty to kill easily?  

Anyways maybe I should just move to your country where I don't have to worry about high crime, a dictatorship or being killed for being white.  Then I wouldent need guns.  I would still want them for the fun of it though.  It must be great.  BTW where are you people from?  I guess you dont need to worry about people with knifes or bats.  Here I know I would.  I guess your country is a lot better.  Probably not much racial tensions either?

[VictorTroska 0]

Quote[/b] ]arent rednecks supposed to be poor?

There are also some rich "rednecks".

Quote[/b] ]But if you truely wanted your liberty, you wouldn't live in a country with so many laws

Indeed.

Quote[/b] ]Has anyone in your country used a car a mass murder weapon?  Its happened here.

Wouldnt surprise me.

Quote[/b] ]Jeez, this is like talking to a kid

Maybe he is a kid.

Quote[/b] ]We can at least agree that cars are very good for murder cant we?

No.

Quote[/b] ]If people shouldent have guns why should they have anything that gives them the abilty to kill easily?

Yup..we should just live in a box and do nothing...

Quote[/b] ]I would still want them for the fun of it though.  It must be great.

Why would u want to have  weapons for fun?

Quote[/b] ]I guess your country is a lot better

I bet it is,imo i know it is.

[jman 0]

You dont think cars are effective weapons?!? Whats wrong with enjoying target shooting? Im 22 btw.

[-Snafu- 77]

You dont think cars are effective weapons?!?  Whats wrong with enjoying target shooting?  Im 22 btw.

Using that logic, then, what is wrong with enjoying a drive round the block?

Nothing.

Cars may be effective 'weapons' but their purpose is transportation. In the area I live there are a high number of young people who are killed while driving. 100% of people in my area that have been killed by or in a vehicle has been an accident.

Cars are very rarely used for intentional killing, most are accidents.

Guns, however, are designed for killing.

[karantan 0]

Cars are maded for transportation, guns are maded for killing. So? Any device have and serve to some purpose.

Have you ever been afraid that one day you'll kill someone with your car? Or that you, your wife, your kids you're driving behind one day can be killed in/by the car? Have you? I have some of those fears almost every day when I'm behind the wheel. Is this the reason to be against the cars? No. Is this a reason not to use a car? It could be, but it isn't. Is the reason that the guns are maded for a killing enough to be against the weapons? As I see it, NO. In my eyes to be against the weapons is just a pose, a fashion. No real and effective reason is behind it. And I doubt it will ever be. Sadly the weapons are part of us, part of our culture. As they're the transportation units.

[Cormega 0]

There goes an old saying;

Quote[/b] ]Those who beat their swords into plowshares wind up plowing for those who did not.

[Daddl 10]

Quote[/b] ]Those who live by the sword, die by the sword.

[xawery 0]

There is also the saying "give a man a hammer, and everything he sees is a nail." So? Which little bit of conventional wisdom is correct?

Neither and both, of course. It is rather pointless to resort to such arguments: sayings are quite often contradictory, and we use the ones that serve our purpose on a case-by-case basis.

It's rather sad to see that this "tragedy"* has been hijacked for the purpose of having an old discussion all over again. Just search the USA politics thread and you will know what I mean. The arguments haven't changed, nor has the empirical evidence. Owning a firearm actually increases the risk of homicide (see the research by Kellerman and Killias for example). One conclusion is especially revealing: "There was no negative correlation between the rates of ownership and the rates of homicide and suicide committed by other means; this indicated that the other means were not used to "compensate" for the absence of guns in countries with a lower rate of gun ownership." (Killias, 1993).

The authors explicitly state that a more comprehensive study is needed to control for such factors as societal tendencies towards "violent solutions". I have no data or research to fall back upon, but I would hazard the guess that such incidents have more to do with the US society than the availability of firearms.

To quote Eddie Izzard: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people... but the guns sure do help!"

Regards,

Xawery

*I used quotation marks because the term "tragedy" is used far too often and far too selectively. On the day of the Virginia Tech shooting 150 Iraqi civilians died in a terrorist attack. The War in Iraq thread remains empty.

[Major Fubar 0]

Just a reminder to everyone to keep a calm head while debating. This is a traditionally heated topic of debate, but there is no need to be rude or offensive to your fellow forum members when posting.

[Daddl 10]

There is also the saying "give a man a hammer, and everything he sees is a nail." So? Which little bit of conventional wisdom is correct?

Neither and both, of course. It is rather pointless to resort to such arguments: sayings are quite often contradictory, and we use the ones that serve our purpose on a case-by-case basis.

Just my point: you find a saying for everything, and they can be interpreted and (ab)used in any way and for any argument (good or bad) you can think of.

[karantan 0]

I completely agree with your post Xawery, and there're many things that could be addded on, but I'll only like to add that the human resourcefulness when it comes down to a killing knows no limits or boundaries, and it must be never underastimated, so I think the lack (prohibition) of guns would not change much the overall killed victims ratio. Like all such debates this is like a spelled circle and by the time/pages as is evident they more or less loose their meaning; the (true and correct and core btw) fidings/statements like

Quote[/b] ]I would hazard the guess that such incidents have more to do with the US society than the availability of firearms.

have already been stated right at the beginning of this debate.

The 'reason' I'm participating in this is also because I'm finding kinda hypocritical that some which are playing a computer simulation where is all about the war and the killing, have such an 'attitude' and the 'relationship' towards the weapons; a man would expect that the weapons would rather be their fetish.

[jman 0]

Quote[/b] ] Owning a firearm actually increases the risk of homicide (see the research by Kellerman and Killias for example).

I don't think that is true. The liberals in this country skew statistics to prove their point of view. Like counting criminals in the total gun deaths and counting some people as both an adult an a child. They also are pretty good at lieing and being stupid. Ill see if I can dig up some evidence to counter that.

[-Snafu- 77]

Cars are maded for transportation, guns are maded for killing. So? Any device have and serve to some purpose.

Have you ever been afraid that one day you'll kill someone with your car? Or that you, your wife, your kids you're driving behind one day can be killed in/by the car? Have you? I have some of those fears almost every day when I'm behind the wheel. Is this the reason to be against the cars? No. Is this a reason not to use a car? It could be, but it isn't. Is the reason that the guns are maded for a killing enough to be against the weapons? As I see it, NO. In my eyes to be against the weapons is just a pose, a fashion. No real and effective reason is behind it. And I doubt it will ever be. Sadly the weapons are part of us, part of our culture. As they're the transportation units.

No I'm not afraid that I might kill someone when driving. I know it might happen but I don't think or worry about it, I'm too busy concentrating on the road to worry about 'what if?' scenarios.

Please re-read my post. I never mentioned anything about being against weapons. What I was saying is that you cannot compare the death rates of cars and guns. They are two completely different things.

Firearms should stay in use with the necessary authorities eg Army and Police. I don't know why people would want Joe Public toting a revolver when most people fail to apreciate the fact that guns kill.

For example I remember that a Scottish oil worker was over in Texas state (I think) about 10 years ago. He had just arrived and was driving his rental car looking for his hotel. The guy eventually got lost and pulled up to a house to ask for directions. As he proceded to the front door the owner of the house shot and killed him because he thought he was a burglar.

That is why I don't think guns belong in the hands of the public.

[Cormega 0]

I grew up in a town in New Hampshire where taking a gun to school was considered normal, because you might be "varminting" the crops on the way back home or joining an older family member to shoot a little extra meat for dinner. My grandfather had a recipe for Venison mincemeat pie that started, "Step 1: Shoot a deer!" Everyone got their first rifle at age 12, and gun safety was the second religion. We didn't have to worry about drive-by shootings; anyone foolish enough to try such a stunt would have been instantly dead.

The current culture of crime blossomed when people were tricked into surrendering their own self-defense and allowed themselves to become dependent on a government with questionable motives for assuming such control of our lives.

All hype aside, the numbers speak for themselves. Where the people have guns, crime is low. Where guns are banned, crime is rampant.

Great Britain enacted a total gun ban supposedly in the name of public safety. Crime went up, including home invasions and attacks on the elderly. But the government of Great Britain, obviously more concerned with keeping the subjects helpless than safe kept the gun ban on the premise that British subjects BELIEVED they were safer with it, even though they were not.

Every year in the US, lawful gun owners prevent millions of crimes. Millions! The police do not prevent any crimes. They show up afterwards, act official, clean up the mess, collect their paychecks full of tax dollars and go home. Between the low convictions rate and high recidivism, the current police force seems little more than a costumed show, suited to writing tickets to extort money from traffic offenders, and certainly far removed form the mythical crime-solving abilities of TV shows.

[InqWiper 0]

also are pretty good at lieing and being stupid.

People who live in glass houses...

I cant imagine how much stupid shit you must have posted all over the internet. If I were you I would start hunting down all my posts and editing them to empty before someone finds them all and shows them to the world at some point in my life (that may never come) when I want to be taken seriously.

[xawery 0]

Quote[/b] ] Owning a firearm actually increases the risk of homicide (see the research by Kellerman and Killias for example).

I don't think that is true. The liberals in this country skew statistics to prove their point of view. Like counting criminals in the total gun deaths and counting some people as both an adult an a child. They also are pretty good at lieing and being stupid. Ill see if I can dig up some evidence to counter that.

You don't think that's true? Who cares? If it doesn't coincide with your viewpoint you're obviously going to be inclined to disbelieve it, but why is that relevant? Come back when you have some empirical evidence. Pure opinions count for little.

"lieing and being stupid"

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

All hype aside, the numbers speak for themselves. Where the people have guns, crime is low. Where guns are banned, crime is rampant.

ROFL, all hype aside?!

HAHAHA

[Major Fubar 0]

also are pretty good at lieing and being stupid.

People who live in glass houses...

I cant imagine how much stupid shit you must have posted all over the internet. If I were you I would start hunting down all my posts and editing them to empty before someone finds them all and shows them to the world at some point in my life (that may never come) when I want to be taken seriously.

That is NOT an acceptable way to speak to another member of this forum, no matter what the provocation.

Consider this my LAST warning before PRs start getting handed out, and/or the thread get's locked.

[cozza 24]

I grew up in a town in New Hampshire where taking a gun to school was considered normal, because you might be "varminting" the crops on the way back home or joining an older family member to shoot a little extra meat for dinner. My grandfather  had a recipe for Venison mincemeat pie that started, "Step 1: Shoot a deer!" Everyone got their first rifle at age 12, and gun safety was the second religion. We didn't have to worry about drive-by shootings; anyone foolish enough to try such a stunt would have been instantly dead.

The current culture of crime blossomed when people were tricked into surrendering their own self-defense and allowed themselves to become dependent on a government with questionable motives for assuming such control of our lives.

All hype aside, the numbers speak for themselves. Where the people have guns, crime is low. Where guns are banned, crime is rampant.

Great Britain enacted a total gun ban supposedly in the name of public safety. Crime went up, including home invasions and attacks on the elderly. But the government of Great Britain, obviously more concerned with keeping the subjects helpless than safe kept the gun ban on the premise that British subjects BELIEVED they were safer with it, even though they were not.

Every year in the US, lawful gun owners prevent millions of crimes. Millions! The police do not prevent any crimes. They show up afterwards, act official, clean up the mess, collect their paychecks full of tax dollars and go home. Between the low convictions rate and high recidivism, the current police force seems little more than a costumed show, suited to writing tickets to extort money from traffic offenders, and certainly far removed form the mythical crime-solving abilities of TV shows.

That is one of the stupid peices of shit I have ever heard. If you want to use guns like that fine. Just stay the fuck out of my country and every other country.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]That is one of the stupid peices of shit I have ever heard. If you want to use guns like that fine. Just stay the fuck out of my country and every other country.

 Chill out, what's your problem?

 

Quote[/b] ]I grew up in a town in New Hampshire where taking a gun to school was considered normal, because you might be "varminting" the crops on the way back home or joining an older family member to shoot a little extra meat for dinner. My grandfather  had a recipe for Venison mincemeat pie that started, "Step 1: Shoot a deer!" Everyone got their first rifle at age 12, and gun safety was the second religion. We didn't have to worry about drive-by shootings; anyone foolish enough to try such a stunt would have been instantly dead.

The current culture of crime blossomed when people were tricked into surrendering their own self-defense and allowed themselves to become dependent on a government with questionable motives for assuming such control of our lives.

All hype aside, the numbers speak for themselves. Where the people have guns, crime is low. Where guns are banned, crime is rampant.

 This is true, for the most part. Where guns are banned it's because there were a lot of gun related crimes at one point, usually the city. However it doesn't solve the problem.

 Guys bare withe me on this, I have the solution. Ok here it goes... lock up criminals. Yeah that's it lock them up. "But wait they already do that right?" you may be asking. The answer is no, the amount of crimes you have to commit in the states before you get locked away is insane. The stuff you can get locked away for is also insane. Write some bad checks, jail, marjuana possesion, jail, steal a car, probation up until the fith car then you get a few monthes, attack some one, community service.

 The problem in America is not guns. The problem is Americans and their law system. Cormega makes a valid point, where I grew up most people handled a fire arm for hunting or just target shooting and every one was safe and there were rarely any violent crimes. When my father was a child the same thing and so forth with my grand father.

 It's different now, as there is a massive drug problem where I grew up now. Those are the people I am nervous about, they are the ones who go around robbing, assaulting and killing. Given time they end up killing people with a knife and rarely a gun, it happens but rarely. So why not lock these scum bags off the street, that will make it safer.

 They never get locked up though. When I was working the graveyard shift at a gas station earlier this year most the people that came in were crack heads. I couldn't believe this shit they bragged about, assaulting people robbing houses stealing cars over and over again and not jail time. If you want a safer society you have to accept that some people are just ass holes and cannot participate in it with out hurting others. You then have to lock them away. However in the sates our system doesn't bother they just let them fucking walk and continue their crimes. These are the people who eventually steal a gun or buy one illegally and use it in a crime.

 I also have to mention nearly all the regular customers at my gas station were driving on suspended drivers licences. Any time there was a police man getting gas at the station no customers would come because they all just drive with a suspended license. If they get cought it doesn't really matter as they jsut get a small fine that they wont pay any how. Now I ask you this, what makes you think those people will follow a gun control law when they choose to ignore all the other laws?

 In a land where no one has recourse to the law to begin with do you really think passing new laws will make a difference? The solution is enforcement and punishment of criminals.

 But no lets censor video games and enact gun control. It's so much easier than controling the criminal element and punishing criminals.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Also one more point. There is always that statistic thrown out that %1 of the USA population is in prison. I'm willing to bet nearly %80 of them shouldn't be there.

They need to stop arresting people for victimless crimes so we can make room for these career scumbags that just rob steal and attack.

The bottom line is this will never happen though. Western civilization is collapsing. I hold no hope for the west reforming and using a little common sense. The laws are insane, the violent and the klepto walk the streets free, hell some own corporations. Meanwhile we spend our time locking up pot heads and people who fucked up on their taxes.

[cozza 24]

sorry if I seemend like a arse but I've been threated to be shot once and I'm only 18

Got into a bit of a fight with a bully and he treated to shot me with his rifle one day. And I know his got one coz I hear he talk about it all the time. But he moved away.....just a bit edgy over civilians with guns.

[karantan 0]

No I'm not afraid that I might kill someone when driving. I know it might happen but I don't think or worry about it, I'm too busy concentrating on the road to worry about 'what if?' scenarios.

Please re-read my post. I never mentioned anything about being against weapons. What I was saying is that you cannot compare the death rates of cars and guns. They are two completely different things.

Firearms should stay in use with the necessary authorities eg Army and Police. I don't know why people would want Joe Public toting a revolver when most people fail to apreciate the fact that guns kill.

For example I remember that a Scottish oil worker was over in Texas state (I think) about 10 years ago. He had just arrived and was driving his rental car looking for his hotel. The guy eventually got lost and pulled up to a house to ask for directions. As he proceded to the front door the owner of the house shot and killed him because he thought he was a burglar.

That is why I don't think guns belong in the hands of the public.

My post was not meant for you (directly) mate, but more for that discussion and comparition which jman started about the weapons and cars and forks ,,, but while we're already here...

Well, while I'm driving a car I am afraid all the time that someone might get hurt because of me, concentrating or not concentrating on the road have nothing to do with it, it's about the awareness that many of devices can also hurt and kill. But we don't rising our voices against them, that they should/must be banned e.g. wannish from our daily lifes. Why? From a pure selfish reasons (to suit our commodity), we humans are full of such a hipocricy.

And you're right, you cannot compare the death rates of cars and guns. In any country the death rate caused by cars is multiple times greater from that caused from a firearms, the difference is sometimes so great that those numbers are almost incomparable. And there're no alarms ringing, there're no campaigns against the cars ,,, and the cars are 'killing' us all all the time, they're all the time choking the Earth with their exhaust gases ...

Between the low convictions rate and high recidivism, the current police force seems little more than a costumed show, suited to writing tickets to extort money from traffic offenders, and certainly far removed form the mythical crime-solving abilities of TV shows.

Sadly this is very true, and this police 'problem' is by my opinion a global thing. Everyone with a little brain can see that the Police is not doing their job properly.

I have a friend which is a policeman, and on some summer evening a few years ago, while we seat on some pub's garden sipping a cold bear we had a conversation (joke him) about the 'police doing nothing'. You know what he said? He said something like this: "I will not expose myself and risk my head to rumble with some criminals. I'll write some traffic ticket and that's it, that's my career, I'm not stupid, I don't give a fart about the rest, being someone in distress, needing our protection from the attackers and all that shit. We usually came when is all over, didn't you noticed that we're always late?"

"But that's your job, your obligation to help and to protect and to serve!" we said.

"Screw that, I do not serve to nobody and my job and obligation is to reach my pension. Ask any cop this, not some freshy, still enthusiastic greenhorn, and you'll get such an answer." was his answer. And this was in one of the calmest (so far) europian countries.

So much about giving the arms (only) in hands of public servers (Police) to protect us, and it was such a police 'dedication' also on work in that last school shooting?

[JdB 151]

"But that's your job, your obligation to help and to protect and to serve!" we said.

"Screw that, I do not serve to nobody and my job and obligation is to reach my pension. Ask any cop this, not some freshy, still enthusiastic greenhorn, and you'll get such an answer." was his answer. And this was in one of the calmest (so far) europian countries.

So much about giving the arms (only) in hands of public servers (Police) to protect us, and it was such a police 'dedication' also on work in that last school shooting?

That's the same for many different professions. For example the Dutch ISAF troops in Afghanistan. They're sent there to make Afghanistan a safe and democratic country, but if you ask any one of them what they work for it will be something like "to all get home in one piece".

You can't expect everyone to risk their lives every day for people they don't even know, the world is not Hollywood.

[-Snafu- 77]

Great Britain enacted a total gun ban supposedly in the name of public safety. Crime went up, including home invasions and attacks on the elderly. But the government of Great Britain, obviously more concerned with keeping the subjects helpless than safe kept the gun ban on the premise that British subjects BELIEVED they were safer with it, even though they were not.

This is just lies. The level of crime has nothing to do with the availablity of guns. Crime is more influneced by factor such as social class, geography etc.

@ Karantan  

Yeah mate I see what you mean and completely agree with about the car/gun deaths.

      As for the Police Officers I don't know about that and wouldn't generalise but my mates dad is a cop in a town nearby and he is pretty motivated with his job. although the area im in is pretty rural, the biggest issues here are drugs, car accidents and people fighting when they are out on the piss. The attitude of cops is probably different in the likes of Glasgow.

However, I still think that firearms should not be so freely available to the public.