• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 
Page: 123456...11
Posted:eek eek eek eek eek eek

Tragic Loss of Life

This [censored] really saddens me. My thoughts go out to the victims, survivors and all their families.


Delete Topic

pounce
SILVER Member since Jan 2003

pounce

All the neurotic makings of America's lesser known sweetheart
Location: body in Las Vegas, heart all a...

Total posts: 9831
Posted:Gun control is necessary, I do believe that. And I don't think every single American should carry a gun. But as long as violence is prevalent, I don't think disarming citizens is a solution. Or at least the only solution. I think we need to attack the root of the problem--the underlying violence in people--before we take away all defenses to that problem.

I was always scared with my mother's obsession with the good scissors. It made me wonder if there were evil scissors lurking in the house somewhere.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

**giggles**

Delete

pounce
SILVER Member since Jan 2003

pounce

All the neurotic makings of America's lesser known sweetheart
Location: body in Las Vegas, heart all a...

Total posts: 9831
Posted:Carrying a gun has nothing to do with how I perform my job. You're comparing apples and oranges. And I own my own private practice, so IMO my "employer" is looking after me just fine wink

I was always scared with my mother's obsession with the good scissors. It made me wonder if there were evil scissors lurking in the house somewhere.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

**giggles**

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted:Gun reduction does result in a decrease of gun crime, however it usually also directly results in an increase of overall violent crime.

FireTom, why do you think that people who carry weapons are so eager to use them? CCW holders are some of the most law abiding citizens out there. They have to be, or they cannot legally carry anymore. I completely agree, if someone tries to rob me on the street I'll gladly give up my wallet and car keys. Even if someone broke into my house they can take whatever they want. But if they make any threats, or attempt to harm me or my loved ones you better bet I'll fight back. There are *very* specific laws for when you can and cannot use a weapon to defend yourself.


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

Mr Majestik
SILVER Member since Mar 2004

Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear

Total posts: 4693
Posted:CAUTION: i picked specific things in peoples discussions i wanted to comment on. sorry if this wrecks the 'flow'. (also theres lots of quotes!)

 Written by: Lurch

My government has no responsibility to protect me. Likewise to my law enforcement. I would never ask anyone to get into a deadly situation on my behalf. In facts the courts have even upheld that law enforcement has no duty to protect you. Their job is to mop up afterwards, and arrest those guilty. They do not prevent crime. They cannot prevent crime. EVERYONE has a duty to protect themselves. If you're a parent, you have a duty to protect your child. Why anyone would want to shirk that responsibility, or limit their ability to do so is beyond me.



confused2 god. if thats your attitude then no wonder everyone over there is gun crazy. personally when i look at my police forces website i believe them when they say "Our Mission: "To make Tasmania safe."" and as far as i can see that directly contradicts your statement that all they're there for is to 'mop up after'.what that means to me is the police ARE there to protect society. and society starts with individuals. so i personally find your attitude bizarre and frightful. if you cant trust your own government and police force to do what they're employed to do then your problems are worse than i ever imagined.

 Written by: lurch

I understand that the majority of the world does not hold our mindset. I understand that most of you guys would prefer there never being guns. But you can akin this to the MADD mentality of the Cold War. As much as you hate cliche' statements "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws would have guns" is never more true. No matter what the good guys, should be better armed than the bad guys. That is what keeps a balance. Better trained, better armed.



civilians are not the "good guys" mate, unless you're a nation of vigilantes. police are trained and armed SPECIFICALLY to keep the 'outlaws'(wild westrefernce?) in check.

 Written by:

Actually American gun makers don't dominate defensive weaponry by any means.



that may be true, but many of their customers are in the US, and i very much doubt tey'd want that market closed to them. also the fact that you mentioned a croat company thats american owned shows that indirectly there is still a vested intrest in the manfacture of firearms in the US.

 Written by: lurch

As for these arguments that the entire class would be filled with armed individuals, it's just idiotic. CCW holders are a small part of the population, at or below 1%. So statistically speaking, from the 4 classrooms that he entered there probably would have been 1 person who was armed.



yes, but i think they were referring to the proposition made that MORE people should be allowed to carry guns to prevent massacres. at least thats what my scenario was referring to.

 Written by: lurch

I agree that there is no use for autmatic weapons outside of law enforcement, military, and sport.



eek automatic guns.......for sport? what sport is that? who can pump the most rounds the fastest and look real tough??? umm

 Written by: lurch

If he had been shot dead by an armed student or teacher, they would be being praised as heroes right now and all of you know it.



yeah, if the police didnt mistake the plain clothed student/teacher holding a firearm around dead bodies for the murdered and shoot him/her first.

 Written by: lurch

http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Selick/GunOwnershipFirearmRobEng.gif
br>http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page38.asp
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page24.asp
[url=http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page40.asp


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

Dentrassi
GOLD Member since Apr 2003

Dentrassi

ZORT!
Location: Brisbane

Total posts: 3044
Posted:ubblol are you going for a record of 'most people quoted in a single post' wink

"Here kitty kitty...." - Schroedinger.

Delete

pounce
SILVER Member since Jan 2003

pounce

All the neurotic makings of America's lesser known sweetheart
Location: body in Las Vegas, heart all a...

Total posts: 9831
Posted:Mr M....I don't have my weapon for immediate situations like that. I would much rather fight someone hand to hand than use a weapon, and I am trained for those situations as well. My office is behind a locked door out towards the reception area. The most likely situation in which I would potentially need to use my gun is for a past client who returned to my office to attack me because of being angry I "took away" their children. This actually has happened. I've had past clients come to reception screaming and shouting and banging on the door to get in. In situations like that, I would have plenty of time to draw my weapon should they come barrelling through the door.

I was always scared with my mother's obsession with the good scissors. It made me wonder if there were evil scissors lurking in the house somewhere.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

**giggles**

Delete

Icarus
GOLD Member since Sep 2003

member


Total posts: 165
Posted:That scares me pounce. I am sure it is just the way it came across though. Surely if someone walked into your office and threatened you, your first thought wouldn't be to draw a gun? What would you do to make yourself safe if you didn't have your gun?

I've been in a job where i have been the very visible face of 'taking someones child away" yet i have never even thought about owning a gun. Sometimes i think about escape routes, calling the police (although where i live they would respond quickly - from what i gather, some places in US aren't that lucky), or hitting them over the head with a blunt object.

I am not saying people don't get shot in Australia. Just as i am not saying you could get rid of all guns. I am saying it is much less likely. Its a totally different world when people have to try much harder to kill you!

When there arent that many guns around, you really don't worry that someone will shoot you. Promise.


... simplify ...

Delete

Icarus
GOLD Member since Sep 2003

member


Total posts: 165
Posted:Seperate point -
I do think that you can't just ban guns and make it that simple. I think the US would have to pour some of that "war money" into a better policeforce (more police + better training!). Then you have the power to inforce the laws and get the guns of the street quickly (shortening the time the felons and nutjobs had them and the civilians didn't).

Oh and Mr Majestik - like your thinking sunshine hug


... simplify ...

Delete

pounce
SILVER Member since Jan 2003

pounce

All the neurotic makings of America's lesser known sweetheart
Location: body in Las Vegas, heart all a...

Total posts: 9831
Posted:I am not a Neanderthal, I don't immediately reach for my gun without thought as to other ways to keep myself safe! My first thought would be to call the police. My second thought would be to try and talk to the person in the hopes I could calm them down and mediate the situation. Let me make this clear....I, like MANY gun owners, hope to NEVER have to use my firearm. It is a LAST RESORT. I am trained in self-defense. I am trained in disarming someone. I am also trained in talking to people and helping them calm down. I know guns can be lethal, and I don't ever want to live with the idea that I've killed someone. But I know I'd also rather live, and if using my gun versus not using it is going to make that a reality for me, you better believe I will protect myself and my family any way necessary. There seems to be this global ignorance as to who owns guns and their level of responsibility, and I think people would find themselves really surprised to know the reality of the typical gun owner.

I was always scared with my mother's obsession with the good scissors. It made me wonder if there were evil scissors lurking in the house somewhere.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

**giggles**

Delete

Mr Majestik
SILVER Member since Mar 2004

Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear

Total posts: 4693
Posted:yes pounce i suppose in the situation where you are the owner of the clinic (?) it does put things in a slightly different perspective. as the owner i guess its reasonable for you to have a firearm to protect your business/staff/customers if you dont have any security staff, although i must say thats an awkward position to be in. on the one hand theres the option of employing a security guard, but then theres the costs and licenses associated with it. and on the other hand there is the path you have taken, which i guess is quite reasonable with the situations you and your staff may face.

i guess your main problem would be the possibility of a client coming in with a firearm, as in that situation a phonecall to police/whatever will make little difference. in Australia with our gun culture that scenario isn't even worth contemplating as its so improbable.

i'd be interested to know what the security situation is with clinics of the same type in australia or the UK.


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

biggins
SILVER Member since Sep 2002

biggins

member
Location: In Bed

Total posts: 165
Posted:now i'm not 100% sure BUT in the UK i'm fairly certain its not common (hasn't become necessary) for staff at those institutions to carry firearms.

Wielding a Wooden Spoon

Delete

Mr Majestik
SILVER Member since Mar 2004

Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear

Total posts: 4693
Posted:look at my scenario biggins wink, its not as likely someone will come in with a handgun in the uk is it?

also, dentrassi tongue ubbangel


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:The newly released pictures, videos and texts of this sad kid reveal a certain attitude, that is home bred.



Apart from everything he said - which I am very careful to comment at this point:



HOW CAN SOMEONE, WHO HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A THREAT TO HIMSELF OBTAIN A FIREARM? umm



(it's like that attitude: "wanna kill yarself? Here boy, have a rope for ya. Ah, naaa - hang on take a gun, matey, who knows how creative you can get with this one...)



What scares me even more is that he referred to the Columbine shooters as "martyrs"...



Another suggestion: NO firearms before age 30 - if any at all - how 'bout that? umm



He clearly had a message, no?



One sad, lonesome and very angry kid...

EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176972384)


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

biggins
SILVER Member since Sep 2002

biggins

member
Location: In Bed

Total posts: 165
Posted: Written by: FireTom

HOW CAN SOMEONE, WHO HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A THREAT TO HIMSELF OBTAIN A FIREARM? umm



thank you. the question that i have been trying to get round to posting all evening.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

look at my scenario biggins wink, its not as likely someone will come in with a handgun in the uk is it?



not anywhere that i have heard of.

*sigh*, i dunno, frankly, and i know this because i'm a left wing bleeding heart liberal hippy from lovely green and fluffy britain where its all sheep and bunnies and candy floss, but i just cannot get my head round this is still going on.....what kind of society drives individuals to this kind of insanity and gives them the tools (easily) to massacre ppl.


Non-Https Image Link




ps: 200 killed in iraq today alone in civil war caused by unlawful invasion by lying PM and dubiously elected president


Wielding a Wooden Spoon

Delete

biggins
SILVER Member since Sep 2002

biggins

member
Location: In Bed

Total posts: 165
Posted:ps: the fact that you feel the need to carry a gun in your line of work makes me very sad frown

Wielding a Wooden Spoon

Delete

_Clare_
BRONZE Member since Oct 2002

_Clare_

Still wiggling
Location: Belfast

Total posts: 5967
Posted:"200 killed in iraq today alone"

Just what I've been thinking.

Why do we value life so differently... depending on geography?

frown


Getting to the other side smile

Delete

mcp
PLATINUM Member since May 2003

mcp

Flying Water Muppet
Location: Edin-borrow.

Total posts: 5276
Posted: Written by: Lurch


http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Selick/GunOwnershipFirearmRobEng.gif

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page38.asp
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page24.asp
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page40.asp

Might want to check those out MCP



er why?

those statistics are not about gun crime. Harold Shipman didn't kill his victims with guns, not did the july 11th bombings. See what word gave it away there? Sexual crime? That's not gun crime either.

And the first one? Some random gif file hosted on a .ca domain? Where is that anyway? It's not the UK governments home office.

So er, do you have any actual facts to back up your statement? Maybe I should go and check out the dilbert cartoon, will that back you up?


"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade

I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.

Delete

Neon_Shaolin
GOLD Member since Jul 2005

Neon_Shaolin

hehe, 'Member' huhuh
Location: Behind you. With Jam

Total posts: 6120
Posted:Part of me wants to say 'Because we are naturally xenophobic and ignorant?'



And also we are sadly desensitised to death an violence happening in places where death and violence is so commonplace that it has almost become a way of life.



I remember when Eddie Izzard said of Pol Pot (a leader of Cambodia) 'he killed XXmillion of his own people, and we're sort of fine with that(!)' sadly it appears to be true.



Also, it seems when the death toll goes over triple-figures, the media don't seem to be able to put names to the list of the dead and high death toll becomes more of a statistic.


"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock

Delete

onewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield

Total posts: 3252
Posted: Written by: Dentrassi





its seems to go something like - "i feel unsafe because because of all the criminal with guns out there... so what the solution? buy MORE guns!" well i dont really agree with that in principle (but do understand the need to protect oneself - if i lived in a different area i would probably have a different opinion, but i dont tongue )

the entire Gun Control debate is somewhat related to the 'Limits of Freedom' concept - how much must our freedom be structured and curtailed by laws to ensure that we continue to exist with what freedom we have.

i have the freedom to drive a car, must i need to get a license first, and obey the laws of the road to maintain that freedom/privelage. i cant simply drive anywhere and any speed i want to, without a seatbelt, with a 7 year old child in an oompa-loompa outfit tapdancing on the roof. Freedom in this case has been restricted to protect both myself and others from harm. Its not perfect - people still get killed. We could ban cars completely sure - but thats clearly not going to happen.
someone feels unsafe driving in a small car with kids in the back - so they buy a large 4wd tank with a bull bar to drop the kids off at school, which then increased risks to other pedestrians and small children - if only things could change so the 4wd didnt havent to be bought in the first place. alas - safety is still an issue so guns are bought for peace of mind.

the precise balance of laws, freedom, privileges, and perceived rights is quite the hotpot - just as it is for Gun Control.





I pretty much agree with all of that- good analogy with the car scenarios.


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete

onewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield

Total posts: 3252
Posted: Written by: pounce



I am not a Neanderthal, I don't immediately reach for my gun without thought as to other ways to keep myself safe! My first thought would be to call the police. My second thought would be to try and talk to the person in the hopes I could calm them down and mediate the situation. Let me make this clear....I, like MANY gun owners, hope to NEVER have to use my firearm. It is a LAST RESORT. I am trained in self-defense. I am trained in disarming someone. I am also trained in talking to people and helping them calm down. I know guns can be lethal, and I don't ever want to live with the idea that I've killed someone. But I know I'd also rather live, and if using my gun versus not using it is going to make that a reality for me, you better believe I will protect myself and my family any way necessary. There seems to be this global ignorance as to who owns guns and their level of responsibility, and I think people would find themselves really surprised to know the reality of the typical gun owner.







Despite being against guns, were I am a similar situation to you, I'd probably be inclined to arm myself too.



I wouldn't want to put down well-trained and responsible carriers- given the state of the US and its gun situation I'm not surprised people feel the need to be armed.



However, it seems in this thread there's two seperate issues- the one above concerning resonsible and heavily trained carriers- then the fact that totally unsuitable people can wander into the local gun shop, tick a box to 'prove' they're not mentally ill and come out with a gun.



In other countries, the default legal position for guns is either ultra-controlled or totally banned, so they can stay on top of the problem easier than could be the case in the US where gun freedom has always been lax.



So, in attacking the problem, I don't think that limiting concealed carry by provenly responsible and heavily trained individuals should be the first priority.



Stopping shops selling to any adult (without a record etc) who wants one should be stopped though.



Aspiring to a point where the only people who can legally have a gun undergo extensive training and are regularly assessed as still being suitable.



I also like the earlier suggestion that the age limit is raised to something like thirty- whilst not without problems, I think that suggestions like that could have a lot of merit.


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete

Stone
GOLD Member since Jun 2001

Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne

Total posts: 2830
Posted:This thread is moving faster than me, so Im just picking up from where I left.

As far as gun reform goes, Id say:

Lurch, removing guns from America is possible. We did it in Australia, and it has nothing to do with population size. Its about change, and what it takes as a nation to change an outdated attitude. Its paradigm shift, or a willingness to give up something. Perhaps, what is only a story, a romanticized story about pioneering and the Wild West.

Do you think Australians would have given up their guns if they didnt think its would benefit the whole of society? Its only impossible, because you say its impossible. Wouldnt you like to live in a world without guns?

Two things that helped change peoples attitude to gun reform in Australia were, a federal government funded gun by back scheme, and an increase in the knowledge of wildlife required to get a hunting license. As Dentrassi said, the right to own a gun is a privilege, and should be treat as such.

Pele, I cant imagine that any sane person would go on a shooting spree. Then, there is the copy-cat factor.

later


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Btw: Is this thread about US gun laws, or is it about the shooting itself? confused wink tongue 'xcuse

the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted: Written by: Mr Majestik

god. if thats your attitude then no wonder everyone over there is gun crazy. personally when i look at my police forces website i believe them when they say "Our Mission: "To make Tasmania safe."" and as far as i can see that directly contradicts your statement that all they're there for is to 'mop up after'.what that means to me is the police ARE there to protect society. and society starts with individuals. so i personally find your attitude bizarre and frightful. if you cant trust your own government and police force to do what they're employed to do then your problems are worse than i ever imagined.



You're misunderstanding me. That is not my opinion, or my attitude, that is plain and simple fact. There is nothing in 90% of law enforcement contracts that requires them to put themselves at any ammount of risk. They are not required to chase anyone down. It's a common misconception though. They DO do it, because that is the type of people they are. It goes back to the sheep and sheepdogs, when guns go off, or people start screaming, most people run away, and a few of us run towards them. It's not that I can't trust my government, I have loads of respect for everyone in the LEO community. I volunteer with them as much as possible and am even in the process of becoming one. But WHY would anyone ask someone else to put their life at risk for you? I'm sorry, but morally that just isn't something I would do to a complete stranger. Yes it may be their "job" in your eyes, but they aren't paid all that well. That is a LOT to ask of someone. Most people have a complete disdain of cops, they disrespect them constantly and do everything they can to hinder them in their job, until something like this happens, and they hide behind them for protection, or complain that they didn't put their lives on the line fast enough. That is disgraceful IMHO.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

civilians are not the "good guys" mate, unless you're a nation of vigilantes. police are trained and armed SPECIFICALLY to keep the 'outlaws'(wild westrefernce?) in check.



You don't have to be a vigilante to be a good guy. If you are in good standing of the law, and have good morals and ethics I would generally consider you a "good" person. As opposed to being evil, or bad. Are you saying that you're not a good person simply because you're a civilian? I'm confused. The sad reality is that police are not as well trained as you'd think they are. That is purely due to monetary reasons. If a civilian has his CCW there is a very high chance that he is also a recreational shooter, and has put many many hundreds of rounds through his weapon for sport and for practice, oddly enough without killing anyone in the process...

 Written by: Mr Majestik

yes, but i think they were referring to the proposition made that MORE people should be allowed to carry guns to prevent massacres. at least thats what my scenario was referring to.



I for one never said that MORE people should be allowed to carry. I do however feel that if an individual is properly trained, and legally able to, they have every right to carry a weapon for their protection. The bill that failed in the house only a few short months ago would have enabled properly licensed individuals to carry their weapons on school campuses. The reason it failed is because someone thought it would make the campus "safer" to make it a "gun free zone." Obviously that didn't work, because criminals don't obey the rules.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

automatic guns.......for sport? what sport is that? who can pump the most rounds the fastest and look real tough???



Granted there are not many "Sporting" applications for these weapons, but no legally owned Class III weapon has been used in a crime. As for shooting sports in general, there are many, ISSA, Cowboy Action Shooting, Muzzle Loading Competitions, Benchrest Shooting, Fullbore Target Shooting, IPSC, USPSA, IDPA and many others.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

yeah, if the police didnt mistake the plain clothed student/teacher holding a firearm around dead bodies for the murdered and shoot him/her first.



LEO's do not generally shoot on sight. The only situation where this might occur would be the freak chance that they saw the "goodguy" shoot the "badguy" but did not see the badguy threaten anyone. There should always be a warning, and a chance to surrender when coming into a new situation. Legal responsibilites, and proper interaction with Law Enforcement is all taught(required) during CCW courses.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

i'd be interested to see that first table in its original context. however all the other tables in no way relate to gun crime, which is the focus of this discussion. perhaps we could view some statistics of non gun related violence in the US just to take us totally off track?



I never said that it increased gun crime, it does however correlate to a direct increase in VIOLENT crime. Criminals have free reign to hurt whomever they wish because if they fight back, the VICTIM is charged with assault with a weapon?? Thats an exreme breach in logic IMO..

 Written by: Mr Majestik

i agree, however i think the availability and ambivalence toward firearms only exacerbates the problem.



Oddly enough I also agree, at least partially. Guns are a part of our society, as much as some of you would wish otherwise. They DO pay a large part in our protection, and the peace keeping of our society. Guns are used every day to STOP crime from happening. The ambivalence to weapons is appaling though. Just 30 years ago it was normal for highschool kids to have a rifle in their truck at school, there weren't school shootings then. Most schools even had shooting teams. Shootings in general were not a common problem, it comes down to education. If you grow up around guns, you have a respect for them, it's not just as it is in the movies.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

if you read the statistic mentioned before that within 20 ft a knife is more likely to be effective than a gun, how can you say a firearm is 'extra protection'?



That statistic is misleading, and only really applies in certain circumstances that most people who carry do not allow themselves to be put into. CCW holders are some of the most law abiding citizens out there. While they carry they are more docile, and less willing to get into a confrontation. The weapon is purely about defense, not offense.

 Written by: Icarus

I do think that you can't just ban guns and make it that simple. I think the US would have to pour some of that "war money" into a better policeforce (more police + better training!).



I'll agree to that much of what you said wink

 Written by: FireTom

HOW CAN SOMEONE, WHO HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A THREAT TO HIMSELF OBTAIN A FIREARM?



I'll also agree to that. However, the crimes that he was charged with were dropped, which in turn stopped both the school, and law enforcement from persuing them. I don't have any problem with removing guns from mentally unstable people. Once the charges were dropped though the issue was dropped legally speaking. And that is how it should be, how would you like it if someone could claim you were crazy and you get put on the black list for the rest of your life?

 Written by: mcp

So er, do you have any actual facts to back up your statement?



Read what I said again, I never said it increased gun crime, but it did increase crime overall, or do you think it's just a coincidence that as soon as the general population was unarmed violent crime skyrocketted?

 Written by: onewheeldave

However, it seems in this thread there's two seperate issues- the one above concerning resonsible and heavily trained carriers- then the fact that totally unsuitable people can wander into the local gun shop, tick a box to 'prove' they're not mentally ill and come out with a gun.



Again, I agree completely, there are laws in place, they're just poorly executed (the check box for example)

 Written by: Stone

Lurch, removing guns from America is possible. We did it in Australia, and it has nothing to do with population size. Its about change, and what it takes as a nation to change an outdated attitude. Its paradigm shift, or a willingness to give up something. Perhaps, what is only a story, a romanticized story about pioneering and the Wild West.

Do you think Australians would have given up their guns if they didnt think its would benefit the whole of society? Its only impossible, because you say its impossible. Wouldnt you like to live in a world without guns?

Two things that helped change peoples attitude to gun reform in Australia were, a federal government funded gun by back scheme, and an increase in the knowledge of wildlife required to get a hunting license. As Dentrassi said, the right to own a gun is a privilege, and should be treat as such.



It *does* have to do with population size. I'm not sure how much it cost Australia to "get rid" of all its weapons, but America has at least 10x that coming to it if we want to try. I believe that there were only about 200,000 firearms in Australia to begin with.

I can guarantee that there were many Australians who didn't want to give up their weapons, and not just the 'crazy criminals' Does that mean their opinions and viewpoints were any less right? Would I like to live in a world without guns? Yes, ignoring the fact that it is just plain fun to go shooting (if you haven't done it don't pass judgement) Yes I would like to live in a world without guns, and as I've said before, if you can ensure that the criminals don't have them, I would gladly give up mine. Until then, I'll hang onto them thank you very much.



With all that said, Virginia Tech was a 'gun free zone' and that didn't stop this from happening. Washington DC is also "gun free" and has the highest murder rate in the nation. Guns do cause violence, but they prevent crime as well. The trick is to find the balance. Banning weapons is not a solution though.

Apologies if I missed anyone hug


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:It's all right, but may I point at the background that is surfacing right now?

 Written by: AP

Long before he snapped, Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui was picked on, pushed around and laughed at over his shyness and the strange way he talked when he was a schoolboy in the Washington suburbs, former classmates say.

(...)

Once, in English class, the teacher had the students read aloud, and when it was Cho's turn, he just looked down in silence, Davids recalled. Finally, after the teacher threatened him with an F for participation, Cho started to read in a strange, deep voice that sounded "like he had something in his mouth," Davids said.

"As soon as he started reading, the whole class started laughing and pointing and saying, `Go back to China,'" Davids said.

(...)

He shot 32 people to death and committed suicide in the deadliest one-man shooting rampage in modern U.S. history.



How 'bout that? umm


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted:It's unfortunate, and appaling. Everyone is picked on at some point, he was obviously unstable and certain steps were not taken and an opportunity to stop this was missed. I've never argued that, children are cruel, even at the college age, for anyone to think otherwise is foolish.

If we're posting articles for reference, I may as well pitch this in and see what you guys think about it. It's even written by an Australian wink

 Written by:

Amid all the inevitable grief and finger pointing arising from Americas worst school massacre in history, one aspect you are unlikely to hear much about is why nobody was able to end the reign of horror by shooting back.

There will be plenty said about the failure of the college to issue warnings, how Americas gun culture allowed it to happen, and what drives someone to do it. But the fact remains, nobody stopped it until the gunman killed himself.

This is in a State (Virginia) with quite liberal gun laws, including concealed carry permits. Quite possibly some of the student victims themselves had concealed carry permits.

Virginia law states that holders of concealed carry permits are allowed to carry on university campuses (http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary/wb/80510 ). However, in the name of safety, certain persons lobbied successfully to prevent the carrying of firearms on Virginia Techs campus.

In fact, pro-gun forces just last year tried to get the Virginia legislature to address the problem. The bill to allow permit holders to carry on state-supported college campuses died, due in no small part to rabid opposition from Virginia Tech itself.

VT spokesman Larry Hincker put it this way after it became obvious that the bill would not pass: Im sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assemblys actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.

The unfortunate irony continues when one recalls that not long ago, two students at nearby Appalachian School of Law managed to stop a gunman at that institution. Happily, they were able to dash off-campus to retrieve their guns from their vehicles.

The rules forbidding the carrying of firearms did not prevent Seung Hui Chos senseless slaughter. In fact, they encouraged his rampage because law-abiding citizens were unable to prevent Cho from completing his butchery.

The blood of those 32 innocents is on the hands of those who lobbied for victim disarmament, and on the hands of the president of the university who acquiesed to their shortsighted demands.



#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:ok I took notes smile

I would like to say that I do have sympathy for Cho. He was a victim of a faulty mental healthy system. I have sympathy for his family too. You can be disgusted and revolted by Cho's actions. But the media package alone shows how unbalanced he was and how the health system failed by not commiting him. He got the guns because in Virginia they have an instant background check which from what I gather is like what happens when the police pull you over and run your license. Because he was never committed, he did not have a mental health flag. This should be changed. If you have ever visited a facility, you should not pass the instant check and I hope Virginia lawmakers will change the law to close this gaping hole that aided in this tragedy. I also don't see that Cho snapped. This took planning. He made videos. He bought one gun and then another.

I am not saying what he did was right. And most of my prayers lay with the victims and the families and the survivors, but knowing what mental anguish I go through and then to know that someone was in so much pain to do something like this...

CBS interviewed some soldier back home and asked how they felt with the numbers so high in Iraq and the nation focusing mostly on the VT shooting. The soldiers all said that they had made a choice and their reality is horrible, but these are kids who made no choice, and have no combat training.

Gunowners are not ambivalent in majority. I might even go so far as to include those with illegal guns. Most of us know guns are not toys, do not play with them. Treat them with respect because they can maime or kill you. What makes the news is the idiots, and the irresponsible owners. For all those that have guns in their possession, the few morons who do not have safeties or leave them where children can get them or use them for nefarious purposes is a minority. This can be minimized by requiring a training program to recieve a license like we do with cars and motorcycles, that has to be renewed.

Now lets address this attitude the world has of our attitude toward guns. It is important at a time like this to address the stereotypes and misconceptions the world has of us. Mostly it is annoying and sometimes intimidating when we want to travel, but here it is vital. Why can't we just hand in our guns? Because there are failures in our police system. I like police because they protect me for the most part but living here I've also seen the bad side of cops. I've had friends with drugs planted, weapons too. I've had a friend tasered 5 times, because he was the local drunk and the cops felt like it. I've had them try to intimidate me because I hung out with the "wrong" crowd and they knew I knew people and wanted me to flip for some up coming cases agains LKs and VCs. I know cops who ignored domestic disturbances with threats to kill because someone had become nuisance and they didn't think that he would escalate. I would not drop off a gun because they say they will destroy them. I'll go dump it in the lake first. That being said I do have friends who are cops, former cops or cops in training. And they are good people, but it is the few bad apples that ruin it for everyone.

This cowboy attitude you seem to think we have. We don't unless we are cowboys. Our attitude has nothing to do with a cowboy attitude. Most gun problems seem to be in our cities. Not only but most of what is reported. Which leads me to gangs and the dangerousness of the US. Our gangs are serious. They are not just wannabe hoodlums trying to prove themselves (which is scarey). Some of the dons have direct connections to the drug trade and weapons trafficing. They do not just shoot criminals, some of the victims are criminals.

But then we have to look at what a criminal is. Some of them are addicts. Do they deserve to be shot? Some of them are hoods or dealers? Do they not have families that love and care for them? They have wives and babies and mothers and siblings. Some of the families rely on this income because they have come to believe it is the only way out.

These criminals are not just cold blooded killers. Some of them call you on your birthday, or holidays. Some see that you are hungry and they take time out of their delivery schedule, money out of their profits, food off their mother's table to help you. When they hear that you are alone on the holiday they swing through to say hello. These same people will threaten you when you censored with them though. They will rip you off when they need to make something happen. Point being that criminals are people too and not "evil" but behave in rotten ways sometimes.

The US is not that dangerous. You don't need to be afraid to come here. They did a study where they sent someone out in New York, who had an accent, I do not remember which type, I think eastern European and they sent him out to get a taxi to go to a location around the corner. I think 3 cabbies took them there. The rest refused to take them because the location was so close. They gave him directions. They walked him there. Almost all the cabbies warned him that he had to be careful because he could easily be taken advantage of in the city. Mostly, you don't have to worry about being in the US. You are not going to get hurt. But the US is like any other place you travel, be smart and don't make yourself a target.

And is this about the shooting or gun control. The two are joined at the hip. Just like the mental health system and this. And mental health and weapons. I've been treated for depression, should I be allowed to own a gun?

I believe we are all sending good wishes and sympathies to VTech and the community. But this shooting opens and important dialogue that will keep things from returning to the status quos and hopefully prevent this sort of thing from happening again.

As for other schools starting to do searches, and one school finding a student with a weapons in his dorm, and now you are afraid of a witch hunt. This is about prevention of another massacre. It is profiling and it worked. If other schools had not done this, and there had been another shooting, people would have been outraged that there was a student who raised suspicions but nothing was done. In the near future, a copycat incident is a real fear. Already, there have been bomb threats. At UW-LaCrosse someone threatened to blow up a building. Right now, we must be vigilant.

ok done bounce


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Please, Lurch would you be so kind to quote your sources?

Btw - as I heard there was a student on campus with quite an arsenal of arms (correct me if I'm wrong, please)... illegal however. If this information is right I wonder why he didn't take the opportunity to be/come a "hero"...


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted:That was taken from an Australian gun owners blog, the incident at the appalachian school of law did indeed happen, although the media by in large conveniently left out the fact that it was someone with a gun, who forced the badguy to surrender.



(one source for you, you can google it and find many more if you wish http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26458 )



As for the 'arsenal of arms' I haven't heard about that, but regardless it would be idiotic to do so. "Close quarter combat" is one of the most dangerous things you can do. You do *not* go on the "hunt" during a situation such as that. Police will not even enter a school in a shooting situation until have have a team of at least 4 officers to enter at once. No CCW holder would run over to try and play hero, if they did they would be an idiot. I'm not asking for that, the small chance that someone, in one of those classrooms, would have had a weapon to defend themselves with would have been enough. Those weapons are for self defense. That means someone threatening you, or a 3rd party. It does not give you the right to chase after someone, such an act *would* be vigilantism and quite possibly manslaughter if not murder.



I believe the time between the shots fired (for the second time) and the police arrival was about 5 minutes. Those five minutes cost 30 lives.



I'm not out to kill people, I don't want to be a vigilante, I hope to God I never have to use my gun. I've never used any weapon on anyone for that matter. If someone were to break into my apartment, I would not leave my bedroom, I would however make my presence known, and if they attempted to enter my room they would not be walking out. I do not see that as unreasonable, I will not tolerate a threat to my life.


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:i didn't like his show, but i like larry elders as a radio guy and columnist

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

sagetree
GOLD Member since May 2006

sagetree

organic creation
Location: earth

Total posts: 246
Posted:i agree that gun control will not solve the problems with violence, but it can help. IMO striving towards less(no) guns is by far the healthier choice for society. i understand that in a society with so many reports of gun violence that owning/carrying a gun for self defense and to protect loved ones seems (to some) necessary. i focus on the big picture, for generations to come, to be able to live in a world without so many deadly weapons and without such fear and need for protection. IMO worrying about being a victim (too much) might increase your chances of being a victim and owning a gun could make you more likely to be in a situation where you will have to use one.

"The Law of Attraction posits that one should never dwell on the negative, as the "metaphysical principle of life" is embodied in a "law of attraction": "you get what you think about; your thoughts determine your destiny."[1] It is also said that emotions are the factor that increase or decrease the speed of attraction relative to how much you feel about the subject you are attempting to attract."

am i the only one that is incredibly sick of hearing outdated laws/rights being enforced today?


Delete

Page: 123456...11