Shooting in Conn. School

[quote name='cancerman1120']I agree with most of that. There needs to be a change in our relationship with guns in this country though.[/QUOTE]

Why is it that we keep hearing about the "gun culture" in this country and how it needs to change, but whenever someone brings up violence in media - which glamorizes guns and violence, well, those people are demonized?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Why is it that we keep hearing about the "gun culture" in this country and how it needs to change, but whenever someone brings up violence in media - which glamorizes guns and violence, well, those people are demonized?[/QUOTE]

let's forget about the violence for a second.

To me the bigger problem is a society where it has become normal to see young girls dressed like sluts who listen to and idolize even bigger sluts.

Do we really need 12 year old girls idolizing and and listening to Rihanna? Nicki Minaj?

Okay back to violence
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Why is it that we keep hearing about the "gun culture" in this country and how it needs to change, but whenever someone brings up violence in media - which glamorizes guns and violence, well, those people are demonized?[/QUOTE]

Mostly because the studies have shown there is no link between watching fake violence and performing real violence. "Gun culture" deals with actually shooting guns which is real violence. Shooting anything whether a target, animal or person is a violent act. Someone watching Pulp Fiction is a passive participant in the violence. One could argue video games are more active but it is still a virtual activity. There is a big difference watching the UFC and punching someone in the nose or sparring. Same can be said about guns. Watching someone on TV shooting guns (which is even less real than the UFC) is very different from pulling the trigger yourself.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']Mostly because the studies have shown there is no link between watching fake violence and performing real violence. "Gun culture" deals with actually shooting guns which is real violence. Shooting anything whether a target, animal or person is a violent act. Someone watching Pulp Fiction is a passive participant in the violence. One could argue video games are more active but it is still a virtual activity. There is a big difference watching the UFC and punching someone in the nose or sparring. Same can be said about guns. Watching someone on TV shooting guns (which is even less real than the UFC) is very different from pulling the trigger yourself.[/QUOTE]

Violent media may not make people more violent but I'd be willing to bet it desensitizes them. Meaning that when fucked up ship happens rather then being like "OMG" people are just like *shrug*.

Think about when the internet was first put up and you could watch faces of death or go to sites like coroner.com. At that time that was some messed up stuff. Now we are bombarded by that type of stuff every day in the news, in our media and video games.
 
I do feel like people need to pass a common sense test to own a gun though. I know many people, and what I see on Facebook (stupid website), people are pretty damn ignorant. I see them saying stuff like "These guys tried to give me a bible, so I grabbed my rifle and said, you better get off my property or else", when you can't legally shoot someone unless they enter your residence. Anything outside would be murder.


But like he was saying, games and movies don't make people commit violent acts. Unless there has been a study shown that proves it, which I don't think there is. People like to blame Natural Born Killers, just because of all the violence. I never have watched a violent movie and thought, "oh, now I want to take a knife and slice someone's throat". Movies are for one thing, entertainment.
 
[quote name='OregonFirefighter']I do feel like people need to pass a common sense test to own a gun though. I know many people, and what I see on Facebook (stupid website), people are pretty damn ignorant. I see them saying stuff like "These guys tried to give me a bible, so I grabbed my rifle and said, you better get off my property or else", when you can't legally shoot someone unless they enter your residence. Anything outside would be murder.


But like he was saying, games and movies don't make people commit violent acts. Unless there has been a study shown that proves it, which I don't think there is. People like to blame Natural Born Killers, just because of all the violence. I never have watched a violent movie and thought, "oh, now I want to take a knife and slice someone's throat". Movies are for one thing, entertainment.[/QUOTE]

How come we can say that violent media doesn't cause people to commit violent crimes but it has been proven that violent crimes cause people to cause violent crimes (i.e. copycats).
 
Our violent culture existed long before violent movies and video games. Those things are nothing but an outgrowth of that culture.
 
There's not a direct link between watching a violent movie or playing a violent game, and then committing violence yourself.

I think there is desensitization toit though. It also depends how the violence is portrayed. With purpose? Detachment? Mindlessness?

Even just the news reports of these shootings seem to trigger other shootings or threats. Even the next day after the Sandy Hook one, there were reports of other people threatening to shoot up schools. Would they have done so without the first shooting precipitating them?

The whole thing spreads like a meme.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']So I guess if you don't like a person's view and they are from a different country you try to get them deported now.

"Tens of thousands of people have signed a petition calling for British CNN host Piers Morgan to be deported from the U.S. over his gun control views."

http://news.yahoo.com/pro-gun-rights-us-petition-deport-piers-morgan-130319681.html[/QUOTE]

They wouldnt have to be from a different country for me to support deporting some people.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']So I guess if you don't like a person's view and they are from a different country you try to get them deported now.

"Tens of thousands of people have signed a petition calling for British CNN host Piers Morgan to be deported from the U.S. over his gun control views."

http://news.yahoo.com/pro-gun-rights-us-petition-deport-piers-morgan-130319681.html[/QUOTE]

I think it's more along the lines of some obnoxious, pretentious foreign douchebag trying to change social and legal norms in this country. CNN has always been a liberal hive of tyranny. He's getting people riled up and it could lead to more violence or more a potential civil war. Laugh if you want. Rednecks and Libertarians don't like their rights trampled.

If you or I were somewhat famous and went to the United Kingdom and tried to push for serious changes in their country.......the Brits would be flipping out and protesting for the person to be hung, drawn and quartered.

For what it's worth, fuck him. I've applied for my CCW and will be buying an AR15/AK47 immediately upon approval from my chief of police.
 
[quote name='Calipso']I think it's more along the lines of some obnoxious, pretentious foreign douchebag trying to change social and legal norms in this country. CNN has always been a liberal hive of tyranny. He's getting people riled up and it could lead to more violence or more a potential civil war. Laugh if you want. Rednecks and Libertarians don't like their rights trampled.

If you or I were somewhat famous and went to the United Kingdom and tried to push for serious changes in their country.......the Brits would be flipping out and protesting for the person to be hung, drawn and quartered.

For what it's worth, fuck him. I've applied for my CCW and will be buying an AR15/AK47 immediately upon approval from my chief of police.[/QUOTE]

How do you know Brits would do that?
 
[quote name='IRHari']How do you know Brits would do that?[/QUOTE]

You clearly think the best of people. Go over to another country and act like an obnoxious loudmouth and see where it gets you. Americans don't like the British or French much. Pretty much all of Europe (The world also perhaps) dislikes Americans.

There is mentioning your opinion of a situation like a normal person. Then there is shouting from your soap box 24/7 and basically acting like a media troll.

Follow Piers Morgan's twitter. He has NOTHING else relevant to talk about. If this shooting didn't happen, he'd be ignored like the rest of the social commentators.
 
[quote name='Calipso']I think it's more along the lines of some obnoxious, pretentious foreign douchebag trying to change social and legal norms in this country. CNN has always been a liberal hive of tyranny. He's getting people riled up and it could lead to more violence or more a potential civil war. Laugh if you want. Rednecks and Libertarians don't like their rights trampled.

If you or I were somewhat famous and went to the United Kingdom and tried to push for serious changes in their country.......the Brits would be flipping out and protesting for the person to be hung, drawn and quartered.

For what it's worth, fuck him. I've applied for my CCW and will be buying an AR15/AK47 immediately upon approval from my chief of police.[/QUOTE]

CNN is a liberal hive of tyranny? LOLZ...I guess it's true if you think Fox News and Breitbart are left leaning centrists.

Btw, that CCW is a pipe dream if you live in Boston and there's almost no way you can get either of those guns in the immediate future. Gun shops around town aren't even picking up their phones. You're not one of those posers that put Boston as their location, but really live in some podunk town trying to steal some shade, are you?
 
[quote name='dohdough']CNN is a liberal hive of tyranny? LOLZ...I guess it's true if you think Fox News and Breitbart are left leaning centrists.

Btw, that CCW is a pipe dream if you live in Boston and there's almost no way you can get either of those guns in the immediate future. Gun shops around town aren't even picking up their phones. You're not one of those posers that put Boston as their location, but really live in some podunk town trying to steal some shade, are you?[/QUOTE]

I think Fox News is the epitome of right-wing nutbags.

I live outside of Boston. I put Boston as a location because when I put North Shore people think of some area in California. Podunk town? Hahaha. A city of over 80,000 is really podunk.

Local gun shops aren't answering their phones (Four Seasons) but there are plenty of private sellers on forums selling in the Boston area.

Go vote for Warren again why don'tcha?
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/26/guns-kill-people-in-one-chilling-graph/

Clearly we need to ban stranglers.[/QUOTE]

Clearly.

For every person that kills someone with their car, we need more strict car laws.

For every person that strangles someone, we need more strict personal space laws.

For every person that comes down with some type of medical issue (diabetes, heart problems), we need more strict eating laws.

For every person that goes on a rampage we need more strict gun laws.

For every person that poisons someone, we need more strict poison labeling laws.

For every person that drowns, we need more strict supervision near water.

I wonder when the government will finally get it right, and protect everyone from everything! That will be paradise...finally :)
 
Car - extensive requirements to get a license and then purchase and use a car legally. I can go get a gun in about an hour and I've never held one before.
(that's actually a complete lie. I've held many, shot more and had to actually defend property and personage. The false bravado of US gun owners sickens me. Go ahead and shoot someone, see how you live with yourself afterwards)

Strangle - Manslaughter laws

Medicine - Education on better eating, better food, more exercise

Rampage - Actually hit the nail on the head there.

Poison - Mr. Yuck does ok. Thing is, we need to identify what is actually poison and ensure that the public is educated.

Drowning - False equivalence but more education and lifeguards where applicable (at the city lake yes, on the lake behind your middle of nowhere cabin you're on your own)

Paradise - Not sure which version of paradise includes paranoid citizens arming themselves. Certainly not mine.
 
[quote name='Clak']I'm starting to think that Bioshock was created more as a warning than an actual game.[/QUOTE]

1984 and Fahrenheit 451 were as well.
 
[quote name='nasum']Car - extensive requirements to get a license and then purchase and use a car legally. I can go get a gun in about an hour and I've never held one before.
(that's actually a complete lie. I've held many, shot more and had to actually defend property and personage. The false bravado of US gun owners sickens me. Go ahead and shoot someone, see how you live with yourself afterwards)

Strangle - Manslaughter laws

Medicine - Education on better eating, better food, more exercise

Rampage - Actually hit the nail on the head there.

Poison - Mr. Yuck does ok. Thing is, we need to identify what is actually poison and ensure that the public is educated.

Drowning - False equivalence but more education and lifeguards where applicable (at the city lake yes, on the lake behind your middle of nowhere cabin you're on your own)

Paradise - Not sure which version of paradise includes paranoid citizens arming themselves. Certainly not mine.[/QUOTE]

Yet murder by gun, poison, drowning, strangling, and food still occur every day.The government isn't doing enough to protect us!

When's the last time a legal gun owner used their legally licensed gun to go on a rampage? Would any part of your gun laws have prevented these recent incidents? Short of banning guns completely, there is no solution. Yet you blame the legal gun owners.

Paranoid people aren't a part of my paradise either. It's too bad that you are so paranoid that every aspect of life is out to get to you because anything that happens to someone else has the potential to happen to you. So you need to hinder everyone else's lifestyle in a futile attempt to protect yourself. It is actually far more paranoid than gun owners wanting to protect themselves, but you keep toting that line. It's called life for a reason. People find what they need to do horrific things.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Yet murder by gun, poison, drowning, strangling, and food still occur every day.The government isn't doing enough to protect us![/QUOTE]

How much murder by poison, drowning, strangling, or food really happen? Where do you get your facts - tv serials

You fucking clown :lol:
 
[quote name='camoor']How much murder by poison, drowning, strangling, or food really happen? Where do you get your facts - tv serials

You fucking clown :lol:[/QUOTE]

I don't see "Guns" anywhere on these lists:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/index.html


In fact I would say it is more likely for a child to die by unintentional drowning then by a school shooter...

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Water-Safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html


Overview

Every day, about ten people die from unintentional drowning. Of these, two are children aged 14 or younger. Drowning ranks fifth among the leading causes of unintentional injury death in the United States.1

How big is the problem?

From 2005-2009, there were an average of 3,533 fatal unintentional drownings (non-boating related) annually in the United States — about ten deaths per day. An additional 347 people died each year from drowning in boating-related incidents.2
About one in five people who die from drowning are children 14 and younger.2 For every child who dies from drowning, another five receive emergency department care for nonfatal submersion injuries.1



And don't forget the unintentional poisoning:

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Poisoning/index.html

Unintentional Poisoning

Every day, 87 people die as a result of unintentional poisoning; another 2,277 are treated in emergency departments.1 Unintentional poisoning deaths in the United States increased by 160% from 1999 to 2009.1
 
[quote name='GBAstar']I don't see "Guns" anywhere on these lists:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/index.html


In fact I would say it is more likely for a child to die by unintentional drowning then by a school shooter...

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Water-Safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html


Overview

Every day, about ten people die from unintentional drowning. Of these, two are children aged 14 or younger. Drowning ranks fifth among the leading causes of unintentional injury death in the United States.1

How big is the problem?

From 2005-2009, there were an average of 3,533 fatal unintentional drownings (non-boating related) annually in the United States — about ten deaths per day. An additional 347 people died each year from drowning in boating-related incidents.2
About one in five people who die from drowning are children 14 and younger.2 For every child who dies from drowning, another five receive emergency department care for nonfatal submersion injuries.1



And don't forget the unintentional poisoning:

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Poisoning/index.html

Unintentional Poisoning

Every day, 87 people die as a result of unintentional poisoning; another 2,277 are treated in emergency departments.1 Unintentional poisoning deaths in the United States increased by 160% from 1999 to 2009.1[/QUOTE]

Nice try but unintentionals are a different convo. We're talking about murder. Murder by guns vs murder by FOOD. Let's see your stats on that. :lol:
 
Yeah, guys - that's a different conversation. Who cares about children who die unintentionally? We only care about the murders.
 
[quote name='camoor']Nice try but unintentionals are a different convo. We're talking about murder. Murder by guns vs murder by FOOD. Let's see your stats on that. :lol:[/QUOTE]

No we're not. I at least am more concerned by the ever popular "nanny state" trend which is exactly where these gun regulations topics are heading.

While you might not see the similarity between the government putting bans on things like energy drinks / sugary sodas AND regulating firearms I however do.

And this is coming from someone who doesn't own a firearm.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']No we're not. I at least am more concerned by the ever popular "nanny state" trend which is exactly where these gun regulations topics are heading.

While you might not see the similarity between the government putting bans on things like energy drinks / sugary sodas AND regulating firearms I however do.

And this is coming from someone who doesn't own a firearm.[/QUOTE]

I was talking to Knoell. Because you can't understand the difference between intentional and unintentional, you and me aren't talking at all.

AB convo, please C your way out.
 
We over react to SOOOO much stuff. I would bet that the U.S. has killed more people than live right now in it. I'm not saying its not bad, just over publicized in the media.
 
[quote name='camoor']How much murder by poison, drowning, strangling, or food really happen? Where do you get your facts - tv serials

You fucking clown :lol:[/QUOTE]

Murder by food? I don't know....let's just take one example. There are quite a few groups out there blaming McDonalds and others for the obesity and heart disease in this country. Heart disease is close to, or is the leading cause of death in the country. So you could very well say......murder by food. Dun dunn dunnnnnn

That is just one example there are hundreds more. Believe me, I don't believe this crap either, but you guys are pushing it.

Responsible gun use is perfectly acceptable in today's society. If you are looking to stop people from doing something before they do it (by taking away their weapon) they will find another way to do it. Taking firearms away from law abiding citizens does not fix the issue, it is a paranoid knee jerk reaction to the fear and wish to prevent such things from happening. Problem is, it won't.
 
[quote name='camoor']I was talking to Knoell. Because you can't understand the difference between intentional and unintentional, you and me aren't talking at all.

AB convo, please C your way out.[/QUOTE]

Law abiding firearm owners who wish to continue owning firearms did not intentionally shoot up sandy hook, just like Mcdonalds did not intentionally give your 10 year old heart disease.

Funny how we always want to blame the object of contention rather than the person behind it. Religion? That fucked people up. Guns? They kill people. Bad Food? That kills you. TV? That makes you more dumb.

How about the fact that it is the person behind each of those things that corrupts it. Religion? People can fuck with it. Guns? People use them to do bad things. Bad food? People eat too much of it. TV? People don't take the time to educate themselves.

I know you guys don't want to hear it, but it is about time we stop blaming objects or ideas, and just admit that some people are fucked up, and will do fucked up things.

Don't be mad because he tore you apart.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Murder by food? I don't know....let's just take one example. There are quite a few groups out there blaming McDonalds and others for the obesity and heart disease in this country. Heart disease is close to, or is the leading cause of death in the country. So you could very well say......murder by food. Dun dunn dunnnnn.[/QUOTE]

lol no one forced them to eat McDonald's. That's suicide.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Murder by food? I don't know....let's just take one example. There are quite a few groups out there blaming McDonalds and others for the obesity and heart disease in this country. Heart disease is close to, or is the leading cause of death in the country. So you could very well say......murder by food. Dun dunn dunnnnnn

That is just one example there are hundreds more. Believe me, I don't believe this crap either, but you guys are pushing it.

Responsible gun use is perfectly acceptable in today's society. If you are looking to stop people from doing something before they do it (by taking away their weapon) they will find another way to do it. Taking firearms away from law abiding citizens does not fix the issue, it is a paranoid knee jerk reaction to the fear and wish to prevent such things from happening. Problem is, it won't.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Knoell']Law abiding firearm owners who wish to continue owning firearms did not intentionally shoot up sandy hook, just like Mcdonalds did not intentionally give your 10 year old heart disease.

Funny how we always want to blame the object of contention rather than the person behind it. Religion? That fucked people up. Guns? They kill people. Bad Food? That kills you. TV? That makes you more dumb.

How about the fact that it is the person behind each of those things that corrupts it. Religion? People can fuck with it. Guns? People use them to do bad things. Bad food? People eat too much of it. TV? People don't take the time to educate themselves.

I know you guys don't want to hear it, but it is about time we stop blaming objects or ideas, and just admit that some people are fucked up, and will do fucked up things.

Don't be mad because he tore you apart.[/QUOTE]

Meh. I don't want you to have crazy-ass ordinance like AK-47s or grenade launchers, other then that I'm not trying to take your guns.

I was just making the point that your posts suck. Murder by food - come on dude even you are backpedaling on that earlier post.
 
Oh, hey - another interesting note about myke's story - the shooter was already in the custody of authorities and even that didn't stop him from illegally obtaining a firearm.

Thanks again for bringing that news piece into the thread, myke. Hopefully it adds some clarity for some folks.

[quote name='elessar123']lol no one forced them to eat McDonald's. That's suicide.[/QUOTE]

I agree. Sadly, there are others that don't.

Similar to the various tobacco lawsuits or such.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Similar to the various tobacco lawsuits or such.[/QUOTE]

I don't agree 100% with tobacco, since nicotine is addictive. Being a former smoker, and having had lots of friends struggle to quit, it's not quite the same as McDonald's.
 
Considering the anti-tobacco movement has been around for years (If you wanted to, you could tie it back to the early 1600's and King Henry's "A Counterblaste to Tobacco", where he specifically said it was bad for your lungs... but I don't think there was a whole lot of science behind that at the time), I'd say you could very easily liken anyone who takes up smoking without knowing the dangers to those who eat poorly without knowing the dangers.

Sure, nicotine is addictive, but you can't get addicted if you don't start. And, with rare exception, no one forces anyone to start.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Considering the anti-tobacco movement has been around for years (If you wanted to, you could tie it back to the early 1600's and King Henry's "A Counterblaste to Tobacco", where he specifically said it was bad for your lungs... but I don't think there was a whole lot of science behind that at the time), I'd say you could very easily liken anyone who takes up smoking without knowing the dangers to those who eat poorly without knowing the dangers.

Sure, nicotine is addictive, but you can't get addicted if you don't start. And, with rare exception, no one forces anyone to start.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say I completely disagree. Obviously, the person was responsible for starting, even though most people I knew started before they were 18 (including myself). Some of that responsibility disappears because it's kids being kids.

However, unlike McDonald's, once you start, it's harder to stop. You can just as easily or as cheaply buy a salad (without ranch or other really bad dressings).
 
Question for strict constitutionalists, where in the right to bear arms does it state I can't have a flame thrower, rocket launcher, tank, fighter jet, chemical warhead, nuclear bomb?
What about landmines? Those are perfectly legal in South Africa for instance and that could be used for personal defense of my property.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']Question for strict constitutionalists, where in the right to bear arms does it state I can't have a flame thrower, rocket launcher, tank, fighter jet, chemical warhead, nuclear bomb?
What about landmines? Those are perfectly legal in South Africa for instance and that could be used for personal defense of my property.[/QUOTE]

Heh yep, Mykes made this point several times, no one is an absolutist when it comes to Amendment Dos.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']Question for strict constitutionalists, where in the right to bear arms does it state I can't have a flame thrower, rocket launcher, tank, fighter jet, chemical warhead, nuclear bomb?
What about landmines? Those are perfectly legal in South Africa for instance and that could be used for personal defense of my property.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='IRHari']Heh yep, Mykes made this point several times, no one is an absolutist when it comes to Amendment Dos.[/QUOTE]

Well if you live in LA I guess Rocket launchers are fair game. This is some crazy ass shit.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/12/rocket_launchers_lapd_gun_buyback.php
 
"The AT-4 Rocket Launchers in the photo are inert trainers as indicated by the yellow band. They're about as dangerous as a PVC pipe. Also, the author is sensationalist, considering the use of "military-grade" rocket launchers. As if there is a "commercial-grade" rocket launcher."

"Intact AT4 and LAW systems are illegal for civilian possession in the U.S. If you were to find a live system and purchase it, you would be guilty of a Felony.

Gun laws in Mexico are much more strict than the U.S., and obviously Northern Mexico has no issue with gun violence, right?"



From the comments section, true?
 
[quote name='egofed']"The AT-4 Rocket Launchers in the photo are inert trainers as indicated by the yellow band. They're about as dangerous as a PVC pipe. Also, the author is sensationalist, considering the use of "military-grade" rocket launchers. As if there is a "commercial-grade" rocket launcher."

"Intact AT4 and LAW systems are illegal for civilian possession in the U.S. If you were to find a live system and purchase it, you would be guilty of a Felony.

Gun laws in Mexico are much more strict than the U.S., and obviously Northern Mexico has no issue with gun violence, right?"



From the comments section, true?[/QUOTE]

Well if that is true then I apologize for the post. Not looking to misinform anyone.
 
[quote name='egofed']"The AT-4 Rocket Launchers in the photo are inert trainers as indicated by the yellow band. They're about as dangerous as a PVC pipe. Also, the author is sensationalist, considering the use of "military-grade" rocket launchers. As if there is a "commercial-grade" rocket launcher."

"Intact AT4 and LAW systems are illegal for civilian possession in the U.S. If you were to find a live system and purchase it, you would be guilty of a Felony.

Gun laws in Mexico are much more strict than the U.S., and obviously Northern Mexico has no issue with gun violence, right?"



From the comments section, true?[/QUOTE]
The real lesson here should be that the people that have guns illegally would rather have money, or giftcards, than guns. So economics is a factor in crime, one might say? In response to that, others might say, "No shit."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top