Get Some
General => General Chat => Topic started by: monpepe on December 15, 2012, 10:20:27 am
-
Only in the US. 18 kids and 27 people all up have been killed so far.
Disgusting.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5TZ9nBYic
-
You're awesome for watching sourcefed.
-
Sad there isn't a solution to this. Can take all the weapons away, but you can't stop a fast growing mentally unstable and disenfranchised citizenship from making large statements with simple tools.
Terrible news, makes me want to go hide my son away from this horrible world.
-
Sad there isn't a solution to this. Can take all the weapons away, but you can't stop a fast growing mentally unstable and disenfranchised citizenship from making large statements with simple tools.
Terrible news, makes me want to go hide my son away from this horrible world.
Horrible world?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5vYE5KCEvM&list=FLHUkdEWuxtAelq2m-jNNIQw
-
Sad there isn't a solution to this. Can take all the weapons away, but you can't stop a fast growing mentally unstable and disenfranchised citizenship from making large statements with simple tools.
Terrible news, makes me want to go hide my son away from this horrible world.
Theres no solution to anything, except maths, but come on, making guns harder to get has got to help, there's far too much data supporting this.
-
The Onion has covered the story well:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/fuck-everything-nation-reports,30743/
Seems pretty clear to me that if the US had proper gun control it would be difficult for people with serious mental health issues to get the kind of firearms that can be used to kill a lot of people in a short period of time. Given Obama is second term, he could dedicate himself to repealing the 2nd Amendment. But they have had so many massacres that it's hard to see this changing anything.
-
Theres no solution to anything, except maths, but come on, making guns harder to get has got to help, there's far too much data supporting this.
If he didn't have access to a gun he would have found other means. Like this clown in China, that stabbed 20+ kids.
Link to said clown in China: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/world/asia/30china.html?_r=1&
-
Given Obama is second term, he could dedicate himself to repealing the 2nd Amendment. But they have had so many massacres that it's hard to see this changing anything.
I highly doubt a change like this could ever be made. Guns are America.
America was built on war, they have evolved on war, hell off the top of my head, Revolutionary war, Vs. Mexico for land, Vs. Native Americans, Vs. Themselves [civil war], WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq [twice!], Afghanistan. It just goes on an on! They are conquers and will never let their guns be taken away (or limited).
-
The only solution that would work would be compulsory mental health checks and mandatory euthenasia for those judged to be a risk to society.
Sadly that would less socially acceptable to many people than killing rampages by mentally deranged people, so we'll continue to see stories like this.
-
I feel desensitised to shootings in America now.
Last thread we had (those movie theatre shootings) someone posted a link that had crime stats for multiple deaths from guns. There was some outrageous number of them a month in the states.
(can't find link after 3-5 mins of searching)
-
It's because of the atheists.
-
Mike Huckabee is at it again:
"We ask why there is violence in our schools, but we have systematically removed God from our schools," Huckabee said on Fox News, discussing the murder spree that took the lives of 20 children and 6 adults in Newtown, CT that morning. "Should we be so surprised that schools would become a place of carnage?"
http://boingboing.net/2012/12/14/mick-huckabee-school-carnag.html
-
I highly doubt a change like this could ever be made. Guns are America.
America was built on war, they have evolved on war, hell off the top of my head, Revolutionary war, Vs. Mexico for land, Vs. Native Americans, Vs. Themselves [civil war], WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq [twice!], Afghanistan. It just goes on an on! They are conquers and will never let their guns be taken away (or limited).
I wish you were wrong, but I think you are probably right (and that saddens me).
-
If he didn't have access to a gun he would have found other means. Like this clown in China, that stabbed 20+ kids.
Link to said clown in China: [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/world/asia/30china.html?_r=1&[/url]
Its weird to use that as a example when alot of these chinese kids(and god knows who else) would be dead right now if he had used guns instead of a knife.
-
Its weird to use that as a example when alot of these chinese kids(and god knows who else) would be dead right now if he had used guns instead of a knife.
I was referring to how guns are not easily sought in the Chinese province that particular attack took place in. - If the shooter from today didn't have access to guns, he probably would've used knifes.. if not knifes.. then something else - he was mentally unstable enough to come to some bizarre conclusion that he needed to kill his mother and everything she stood for such as the children/adults at her work.
I'm not saying that banning guns or stricter gun control wouldn't help - I just don't think it would stop these particularly angry, psychologically and mentally unstable people from killing people.. guns or not.
-
Fucking facebook comments.
I swear to christ.
-
The only solution that would work would be compulsory mental health checks and mandatory euthenasia for those judged to be a risk to society.
Sadly that would less socially acceptable to many people than killing rampages by mentally deranged people, so we'll continue to see stories like this.
Yeah man, totally. "You can have a gun if you let us decide whether we kill you or not". I can see absolutely no other solution.
-
I was referring to how guns are not easily sought in the Chinese province that particular attack took place in. - If the shooter from today didn't have access to guns, he probably would've used knifes.. if not knifes.. then something else - he was mentally unstable enough to come to some bizarre conclusion that he needed to kill his mother and everything she stood for such as the children/adults at her work.
I'm not saying that banning guns or stricter gun control wouldn't help - I just don't think it would stop these particularly angry, psychologically and mentally unstable people from killing people.. guns or not.
the difference though would be limiting the harm/deaths. with a knife, usually the assailant has to get closer to the victims - and has to worry about getting overpowered or defending him/herself from the people they are attacking. with a firearm the assailant can stand out of range of the victims.
-
We shot our way into this mess and by god we'll shoot our way out!
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/piers-morgan-newtown-kids-die-gun-control_n_2307357.html
I enjoyed this venting of spleen.
Its of vid of piers morgan destroying some gun control lobbyists with righteous fury. Not especially helpful, but satisfying.
-
If he didn't have access to a gun he would have found other means. Like this clown in China, that stabbed 20+ kids.
Link to said clown in China: [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/world/asia/30china.html?_r=1&[/url]
and 5 were critically wounded....instead of 20 dead.
Thanks for making my point for me.
-
and 5 were critically wounded....instead of 20 dead.
Thanks for making my point for me.
MORGAN FREEMAN ON THE SHOOTINGS YESTERDAY:
"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.
It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you kn
ow the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.
CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations , sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.
You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem."
Also, making something against the law doesn't stop it's existence. It creates a thriving black market for the item in said location - guns aren't simply going to vanish in this world, the root cause needs to be addressed.
-
Only in the US.
Only in the US?
You ever heard of the Middle East? You know, that whole other half of the world?
Or does it not count because they don't speak English as a first language?
-
I really struggle to care each time I hear about a mass shooting in America.
Now before you start furiously posting that I am an Asshole for saying something like this (well I kinda am), let me put my reasons why I say this:
America has, on multiple occassions had the oppertunity to change or update their Second Amendment. But they haven't.
Firstly the Second amendment is out of date - the original purpose was to make sure that the US government couldn't turn Tyrannical. This in itself is a great idea (I am serious here, it is a great idea). The problem here is that 200 or so years ago when it was written, the armed forces that the American goverment could bring to bear were the same that a town/state Militia could Raise (breech loading Rifles and muzzle loading Muskets and shotguns) meaning that should the US government try to do anything tyrannical, it would find itself facing a similar sized force of civilian militia, armed with weaponary of approximately the same level.
Now lets move forward to today - sure the Well armed Redneck can own Assault rifles and even things such as Grenade launchers, but compare this to a battalion of M1 Abrams romping through your town, supported by the a Squadron of B52s pulling an Arc-Light style mission on your location. Even using the second amendment to its full potential, a citizen or citizens can still not bring to bear the same level of Firepower that the US military can. Thus rendering the thinking and situation in which the 2nd Amendment was created obsolete.
Next (and this is going to sound so Cynical) a LOT of organisations have a vested interest in the status quo and by extension the mass public shootings:
The Firearms industry
The NRA
The Police
The Religous organisations
The pharmaceutical companies
The Media companies
etc.
disagree?
Well - the Firearms industry is a multi Billion dollar industry in the US and it will do everything it can to make sure that people are able to still buy guns and firearms accessories.
The NRA is obvious, pretty much the lobby organisation for the Firearms industry - their logic is that if everyone was more heavily armed, then shootings wouldn't happen because the citizens could return fire and kill the shooter before he/her was able to kill lots of people. Great idea, but so flawed you could drive a Nimitz class aircraft carrier through it AND the escorts. If you don't see the flaws in the arguement, then please don't bother replying to this post.
The Police - Well although the Police are there to protect and serve, incidents like this make it a lot easier come budget time to ask for additional officers, equipment and firearms so that 'we can be ready if this happens in our town'. The MASSIVE increases in police expenditure in the wake of 9/11 is a testament to this.
The Religous organisations - the corpses aren't even cold yet and already we have the con artists, I mean preachers implying that a belief in a nonexistent deity will stop people from killing people (excusing the fact that Christianity has killed millions in the name of god over the years) and how the US needs to stop the separation of Church and State etc. etc.
The Pharmaceutical companies - In wake of this tragedy, we have developed a new drug! Is your son one of those weird kids at school? Does he dress in Black? Does he listen to evil music? Well if he does, HE COULD BE THE NEXT MASS MURDER! but just 1 dose a day of our new Triple Strength Coma inducing drug - Vegitas will render him completely harmless and no longer a threat to society! Why bother talking to your kids when you can just dose them up on drugs! don't worry about the Side effects - these are legal so they are Safe! Treatments start at $100 per pill - see your local Drug dealer, I mean doctor.
The Media outlets - they are already having a field day, as already mentioned in this thread - they create celebrities out of the perpetrators and the best bit is - by giving global coverage to these people, they are ensuring they have a steady supply of perpetrators in the pipeline ready and lined up for the next mass slaughter.
Next we have the American attitude towards power status - that the Weak/outcasts are there to be rungs on a ladder for those with power to climb higher. If I was bothered, I would go and find any one of the numerous incidents where Jocks/popular kids have got away with systematic and regular tormenting of their chosen victims with little to no reprimand from the school (normally because they are a member of a sports team) and the victim has either snapped and killed one of them (resulting in public outcry) or commited suicide (which is generally ignored).
Finally we have the glorification of violence and the repression of healthy sexual messages:
Ratings in the US for movies that have large amounts of Violence are generally much lower than the rest of the world, this in itself isn't bad, but combine it with the way that Sex is sold in the US - a film that features a bare female chest will generally receive a NC-17 rating (the equivalent of R18 over here) even if there is no overtly sexual context however in the US rating system there is little to no separation between this and a scene that glamorizes dominant/unhealthy sexual content (now a caveat here, I am not talking about personal preferences/fetishes here) - take any number of American films, generally Men are always portrayed in a position of sexual power and that the women are implicitly subservient to his whims. Combine this mainstream portrayal of sex to the other side of the coin which is the American Porn industry which pushes sex as a product to be bought and sold and that ones manhood is directly linked to his sexual prowess.
Now combine the two for someone who has low self esteem, easy access to firearms and chip on his shoulder about something:
Violence is okay, but you aren't really a man unless you are nailing multiple women.
After a while (particular with the disenfranchised shooter) this frustration starts to build into a full head of steam and they are convinced that they are less than worthless by their peers and by the media - so how does one rectify this? Well violence is okay so if I take this Assault Rifle and kill a whole load of people then I will show the world that I am a Somebody!!
Whereas the rest of the world would just have a 50 off the wrist or fuck a hooker - because they wouldn't have easy access to a weapon and there isn't the fucked up american attitudes and culture around sex.
so where does this leave us?
With countless dead children and countless children that are going to die through little to no fault of their own. Because it is only a matter of time before the next tragedy and unless the american government grows some balls and actually puts in place some form of legislation to restrict or better control/manage firearm ownership in the US then it will continue.
And for me it is very hard to care about something, tragic though it is, when nothing is done about it.
As one of the articles said - how many more children does the US have to bury before someone finally does something about it
-
Also, making something against the law doesn't stop it's existence. It creates a thriving black market for the item in said location - guns aren't simply going to vanish in this world, the root cause needs to be addressed.
I know, it'd be nice if the media didn't sensationalise things, but they do. And because they're big and powerful there's fuck all we can do about that.
I know making things illegal creates a black market, but it's still harder to acquire things even on a black market, and the simple acquisition of them makes the laws surrounding their acquisition higher, meaning people like this are more likely to be picked up and put into the mental health system.
Which I also agree needs more funding, for sure! BUT you cannot deny that the fact that the ease of acquiring guns in the US contributes to their problems, yes mental health does too, but that's a very broad and elaborate topic which cannot be solved as easy as making guns more difficult to acquire is. Which is very hard too I know, but with all problems you've got to start with the easy things first.
-
Only in the US?
You ever heard of the Middle East? You know, that whole other half of the world?
Or does it not count because they don't speak English as a first language?
Of course I have lived there. Didn't see the many mass killings. Were a few terrorist incidents but mostly people fighting each other not killing kids in schools.
-
Of course I have lived there. Didn't see the many mass killings. Were a few terrorist incidents but mostly people fighting each other not killing kids in schools.
Oh right. How naive of me.
Suicide bombings, civil war and genocide is quite different.
Only in the Middle East.
Oh wait...
-
WTF America + WTF America =
Westboro Baptist Church Members Say They Will Protest In Sandy Hook
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/westboro-baptist-church-members-say-they-will-prot
-
Very good Charlie Brooker vid from a couple of years ago, still relevant today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4
-
Try making a point swindle? Rather than leaving us to infer what your complaint of monpepe is and what your own point is.
Perhaps I am just too imaginative when reading between the lines...
-
Oh right. How naive of me.
Suicide bombings, civil war and genocide is quite different.
Only in the Middle East.
Oh wait...
Of course. However, they are not democratic western states like ours and violence in many parts there is common.
You are comparing apples with oranges.
-
they are not democratic western states like ours and violence in many parts there is common.
What is that to do with anything man? You say that like its fucking ok.
You say, "Only in the US". I say "Since when is there only mass killings in the US?"
Their age? So what man, people are people no matter how old they are.
Look man, this "Only in the US" shit has got to stop. Not having a go. Just since when the fuck did people adopt this and even start saying it like it even means anything.
-
Yeah man, totally. "You can have a gun if you let us decide whether we kill you or not". I can see absolutely no other solution.
Oh fuck I can't believe I missed this post!
Smashing. Can't stop laughing.
-
What is that to do with anything man? You say that like its $#@!ing ok.
You say, "Only in the US". I say "Since when is there only mass killings in the US?"
Their age? So what man, people are people no matter how old they are.
Look man, this "Only in the US" $#@! has got to stop. Not having a go. Just since when the $#@! did people adopt this and even start saying it like it even means anything.
People can say what they want. Violence is not ok but in its part of the world it has been common place forever. Where we live, in a western democratic society, it is not that common (well mass shootings).
You just have too much sand in your vagina. Chill out.
-
The Piers Morgan rant on CNN was great, watched that on tv.
That Chinese example has been used in the media as an example of why stricter gun control laws are needed. Strange to see it being used to the contra here, I agree that the poster seems to have missed th point entirely.
I was watching a Texan government official congressman, governor or something on CNN. His comment was if the teacher had a gun she could have shot the killer. I was like wtf you progun lobbyist idiot. Always comes back to this same bullshit cycle. Mourn, anger, finger point, advance political agenda, nothing happens.
As a parent watching the grieving, seeing the names, and listening to the epitaphs cuts me up. At the same time I have already discussed this at length with my children and students, listening, retelling and answering questions they may have(not so much my youngest).
I like the stat, which like all stats can be misleading from Australia. After stricter gun control laws were introduced in Aus after the Port Arthur massacre, the gun related death rate has fallen by a consistent 96%. Specifically targeting pistols I think...someone else can check that one out for certainty.
-
I was watching a Texan government official congressman, governor or something on CNN. His comment was if the teacher had a gun she could have shot the killer. I was like wtf you progun lobbyist idiot. Always comes back to this same bullshit cycle. Mourn, anger, finger point, advance political agenda, nothing happens.
And maybe if all the kids has guns as well, they could defend themselves. Ha, ridiculous.
Guns are definitely a big part of the issue. America is far too relaxed with there gun control.
I think countries like New Zealand and Australia have a better middle ground, people can still have guns for hunting etc, but there a licencing requirements and strict controls put in place.
-
That Chinese example has been used in the media as an example of why stricter gun control laws are needed. Strange to see it being used to the contra here, I agree that the poster seems to have missed th point entirely.
Again, I was stating that not only does gun control need to be looked into but also Mental health services. These school shooters and mass murderers nearly all share similar serious mental health issues.. why do we wait for them to 'erupt'?
I'm not that retarded or ignorant to think that gun control isn't the major cause/problem in the states - I just see a very similar underlying cause with nearly each and every mass-murderer in the last decade — all suffered from serious mental health conditions.
-
But it's very hard to find out these people with serious mental health issues. In many cases they live alone, have little contact with other people. They may not have any contact with thier family at all.
If we find them we can help them, but I think there will always be people who stay hidden away until they 'erupt'.
But I agree with you about more support for Mental health services.
-
Again, I was stating that not only does gun control need to be looked into but also Mental health services. These school shooters and mass murderers nearly all share similar serious mental health issues.. why do we wait for them to 'erupt'?
I'm not that retarded or ignorant to think that gun control isn't the major cause/problem in the states - I just see a very similar underlying cause with nearly each and every mass-murderer in the last decade — all suffered from serious mental health conditions.
Lol erupt, you dont know much about mental health huh?
-
Lol erupt, you dont know much about mental health huh?
I would say 'erupt' would be an accurate term for someone who goes on a shooting rampage.
-
Lol erupt, you dont know much about mental health huh?
are you just picking on everything I say now? don't you have a sarlac pit to clean or something? edit - this is sarcastic btw, no hate here <3
I used the word 'erupt' because most if not all of these individuals were relatively normal prior to going on these rampages.. is that not a fair term to use? :S
-
I used the word 'erupt' because most if not all of these individuals were relatively normal prior to going on these rampages.. is that not a fair term to use? :S
No no, I'm not worried about the actual word sorry, you're right, erupt is fitting.
What I mean is that, as you stated, these people are perfectly normal, you can't tell them apart from any one else, even psychologists can't, heck most people show signs of depression, anxiety disorder, schizophrenia etc look at gamers! My girlfriend works in mental health, she told me one evening that her flatmates show signs of all the things she's paid to help treat (I dunno if treat is the right word) It doesn't make them mentally unstable, but you honestly don't know.
So yes mental health (health in general) needs more funding, but it's not as simple as "oh that person is clearly going to shoot up a school, we should arrest them before they do that" if that was the case you'd have half of society including most police officers, lawyers and judges locked away.
Even those at high risk will find a way to hurt themselves or others, best thing to do is to take away their ability to do so, clip nails short, remove sharp objects, in extreme cases confine them, in this case the whole of america needs to have it's guns takes away.
That's why I say take the guns away first, then focus on the mental health.
Also to say "oh yeah lets treat the people rather than take away the guns" is very broad, how exactly are you going to treat the people? I know one of the most modern successful methods is regular visits at the persons house, are you going to send a psychologist into the house of a mentally unstable person who can buy a gun online? to be honest, good luck finding any.
You've then got to consider the other methods and even how you might reach out to these people, most of which think they're perfectly sane.
Take the guns, then focus on the mental health system.
Why are we even debating this? it's america, hardly relevant considering NZ has a pretty good track record of shootings (I can think of only 2 or 3? and they were relatively speaking, minor)
-
Why are we even debating this? it's america, hardly relevant considering NZ has a pretty good track record of shootings (I can think of only 2 or 3? and they were relatively speaking, minor)
Post the Aramoana killings 1990, I think we've had three mass murders with guns:
Schlaepfer killings in 1992 (6 + offender, with shotgun)
Bain killings in 1994 (5 with .22)
the Raurimu killings in 1997 (5 with shotgun),
Schlepfer and Stephen Anderson were definitely mental health issues. Bain, well, that needs a whole other thread. All of them more than 15 years ago.
-
Agree with what people have been saying re mental health...needs stringent screening. Piers had another eruption (hah!) on CNN. Proeveryonehazzagun guy was talking crap. Piers, kaboom.....gun lobbyist guy went quiet for a while, spoke up again, Kaboom. Lobbyist then admitted he was on medication for his mental health, this medication also suppressed his empathy, he thanked Piers for pointing out to him why the situation in the US was wrong.
Nice work with mental health checks of gun owning lobbyist on TV there ;p. Also agree about impracticality of regular stringent screening of existing gun owners. Report to the police station for psych evaluation on a yearly..2 yearly basis? Undergo similar process as when first acquiring firearms license? As a NZ gun owner I would not object to either of these conditions. I view firearms as a privilege, not a right guaranteed by an outdated constitution in a country like the US.
-
It sounds like his own mother a "survivalist” had issues as well.
-
Mental health screening can only work if there are reliable, measurable, quantifiable signs that someone is at an elevated risk for harming others with a gun.
Given the incredibly small proportion of people with mental illness who actually go coco-crazy with a gun, and the fact that most of them are not assessable because they're dead, that's a pretty tough ask.
Besides, even if they are suffering from some sort of mental disorder, they're not generally idiots. They're not going to go into a psych evaluation and say "God wants me to kill everyone at my school" or whatever.
A more concerning trend in my opinion is this fixation on the perpetrator. The victims are forgotten, and the shooter immortalised. Does anyone remember even a single victims name from the Aurora shootings? It must seem like a pretty easy way to go down in history for people with the requisite disregard for themselves and others.
-
The joker who plugged (plugs on my mind from another thread) lennon wanted notoriety, and he got it
-
Yeah man, totally. "You can have a gun if you let us decide whether we kill you or not". I can see absolutely no other solution.
http://gawker.com/5970539/columbine-had-an-armed-security-guard-on-duty-and-the-nra-is-dumb?utm_source=io9.com&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=recirculation
Columbine Had an Armed Security Guard on Duty and the NRA Is Dumb
Disregarding the fact that armed guards are people themselves, and thus fallible and susceptible to the kinds of brain disorders that might cause someone to shoot up a school of children, here's a fun fact: Columbine High School, the site of one of the most infamous school shootings in American history, employed an armed guard, Neil Gardner, at the time of the slaughter. And how did that work out? CNN has the report:
Gardner, seeing [Eric] Harris working with his gun, leaned over the top of the car and fired four shots. He was 60 yards from the gunman. Harris spun hard to the right and Gardner momentarily thought he had hit him. Seconds later, Harris began shooting again at the deputy.
After the exchange of gunfire, Harris ran back into the building. Gardner was able to get on the police radio and called for assistance from other Sheriff's units. "Shots in the building. I need someone in the south lot with me."
It was 11:26 a.m. Only five minutes had passed since Jefferson County Sheriff's dispatch center had announced a bomb explosion and subsequent fire on South Wadsworth Boulevard.
Wouldn't you know it: it turns out crazed school shooters have no qualms about shooting at armed guards, who, it also turns out, aren't necessarily effective at stopping gun-crazy madmen. After shooting at the guard, Harris and his partner, Dylan Klebold, stormed the school and were able to kill 13 people. After that, they killed themselves, effectively disproving the notion that "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to have a good guy with a gun." Columbine had a good guy with a gun, and the bad guys with the guns killed a bunch of kids and then stopped themselves.
-
What are we going to do about guns? More guns!
-
ALL the guns
-
Well I do so like reminding lias that he is a lunatic.
And yeah, the NRA has suggested putting the equivalent of 1/7th of the police force in schools during the day, hopefully reaching that happy medium (that definitely exists) where there are so many guns that no one wants to kill each other.
But yeah, just a violent society imo. How can the citizens be expected to stop killing each other when violence seems to be the primary conflict resolution strategy of the government?
-
Well I do so like reminding lias that he is a lunatic.
And yeah, the NRA has suggested putting the equivalent of 1/7th of the police force in schools during the day, hopefully reaching that happy medium (that definitely exists) where there are so many guns that no one wants to kill each other.
But yeah, just a violent society imo. How can the citizens be expected to stop killing each other when violence seems to be the primary conflict resolution strategy of the government?
Guvment? You cant trust no guv'ment!
(http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/063/4/9/SledgeHammer_Motivational_by_DarkGeneral.png)
-
But yeah, just a violent society imo. How can the citizens be expected to stop killing each other when violence seems to be the primary conflict resolution strategy of the government?
I'd go with 90% of these shooters topping themselves (no stats, just a guess) either way some how I don't think they're too worried if they die....
-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8622792/Boy-5-kills-sister-with-his-gun
In southern Kentucky, where children get their first guns even before they start school, Stephanie Sparks paid little attention as her 5-year-old son played with the rifle he was given last year.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Then, as she briefly stepped outside while cleaning the kitchen, "she heard the gun go off," a coroner said.
In a horrific accident that shocked a rural area far from the US debate over gun control, the boy, Kristian, killed his 2-year-old sister, Caroline, with a single shot to the chest on Tuesday (Wednesday NZT).
The rifle was made by a company that sells guns specifically for children - "My first rifle" is the slogan - in colours ranging to hot pink and multi-colour swirls.
White said the shooting had been ruled accidental. A police spokesman said it was unclear whether any charges will be filed.
Accidental....
Accidental....
.....[/FONT][/COLOR]
-
If they had better background checks in place for that 5 year old kid, this wouldn't of happened.
-
If they had better background checks in place for that 5 year old kid, this wouldn't of happened.
i lol'd ... my son (5 yrs old) cant even be trusted with a pair of scissors as the temptation to cut something is too great as with many many other things ... mind moves way to fast to be able to make a clear judgement call so WHY THE FUCK would you give your 5 year old kid a fucking rifle/gun : senseless wonderment: .. only in america
-
"The whole town is heartbroken," Phelps said of Burkesville, a farming community of 1800 northeast of Nashville, Tenn. "This was a total shock. This was totally unexpected."
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSuCa3WTqNR5pvILdoCvktofnkN8gOO3QgyPcFPsXhV3oLKqmrd)
-
The 2 year old sister should have been given a gun as well, so she could defend herself.
When will these people learn!
-
you look at the whole constitution and the way its worded and until its amended/removed they will never learn
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
look at how many things people can read into this ... remove it completely and you might stand a chance of stopping shit like that from happening on such a large scale.
-
[url]http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8622792/Boy-5-kills-sister-with-his-gun[/url]
Accidental....
Accidental....
.....[/FONT][/COLOR]
wtf they would be charged for sure in NZ, my old soccer coach didnt secure his shotgun and one of his sons friends got hold of it and killed his son.
He did a short term in jail after that I believe, you can't just leave a loaded gun in the corner of the room.
-
And ammunition must be kept in a separate locked compartment than the one the firearm is kept in, etc. IIRC.
I don't see any issue with teaching children to shoot. Sure 5 is probably a bit young, and bright coloured guns are also stupid as they could be mistaked for toys. But teaching a child about firearm safety and control at a young age is not bad in itself. Leaving a loaded firearm in the hands of a five year old in the living room (not the range) and then leaving said room... very stupid.
Parents should definitely be locked up.
But, they're from the south. Probably thought God would protect the children.
Maybe the boy is just a serial killer in the making. Who knows.
-
there is actually a town in texas where local legislation has made it that everyone over the age of 18 is legally bound to carry a loaded firearm on there person,
and yes irresponsible parents should be jailed if caught or persons injured/killed
i guess we live in a sheltered country where we have never really been exposed to firearms as much as the states .. maybe thats a good thing maybe its a bad one, personally i grew up around firearms, my father spent 26 years in the rnzaf and i was raised around a km from hobsonville firing range, seen a few accidents and a few friends parents discharged from the army for careless storage, kids playing with ammo ... got shot when i was 19 with a .22 in the forearm by a friend who was a lil irresponsible.
-
there is actually a town in texas where local legislation has made it that everyone over the age of 18 is legally bound to carry a loaded firearm on there person,
Yea but its sort of a symbolic law you can get an exemption from the law if "you don't believe in carrying firearms" so you only have to the follow the law if you want to follow the law :P
Still it's very weird and seems to be encouraging some sort of peer pressure to carry.
-
The 2 year old sister should have been given a gun as well, so she could defend herself.
When will these people learn!
The only thing that can stop a 5 year old with a gun, is another 5 year old with a gun.
-
there is actually a town in texas where local legislation has made it that everyone over the age of 18 is legally bound to carry a loaded firearm on there person,
and yes irresponsible parents should be jailed if caught or persons injured/killed
i guess we live in a sheltered country where we have never really been exposed to firearms as much as the states .. maybe thats a good thing maybe its a bad one, personally i grew up around firearms, my father spent 26 years in the rnzaf and i was raised around a km from hobsonville firing range, seen a few accidents and a few friends parents discharged from the army for careless storage, kids playing with ammo ... got shot when i was 19 with a .22 in the forearm by a friend who was a lil irresponsible.
I remember being taught about firearm safety in school.
And I don't mean high school.
-
I remember being taught about firearm safety in school.
And I don't mean high school.
yeah for sure its not a bad thing for kids to know about firearms as i guess these days they have so much exposure to them, but handing a 5 yr old a loaded firearm is just asking for trouble.
-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/8647572/Electronic-Arts-drops-gun-makers-not-guns/
The chief executive NRA said the video game industry was corrupt and violent.
Now EA is distancing themselves from gun manufactures, they're not going to bother licensing brand-name weapons and will just include them in game anyway.
-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8664979/Shoot-out-at-parade-in-US
And again...
-
Who cares about that story to be honest.
The real headliners are how Kate Upton broke into an A-list club and when Kate Middleton's baby is due.
The 2 stories that have been run as headline since the US shooting story broke.
-
We need to bring god back to mothers day parades.
-
Who cares about that story to be honest.
The real headliners are how Kate Upton broke into an A-list club and when Kate Middleton's baby is due.
The 2 stories that have been run as headline since the US shooting story broke.
Or Aaron Gilmore, because everyone cares about a low backbench MP.. Sick of seeing him tbh.
-
Or Aaron Gilmore, because everyone cares about a low backbench MP.. Sick of seeing him tbh.
I've got passed that point with Gilmore, all I want to hear is the next stupid thing he's spouted.
-
[url]http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8664979/Shoot-out-at-parade-in-US[/url]
And again...
all the good guys with guns must have been else where...
-
Well obviously there aren't enough guns in America and they need more then.
I know I always feel really safe when I see m16s carried by 19 year old civilians when I visit the West Bank.
-
The best defense against people with guns is remote controlled strike drones, it's their constitutional right, god dam it!