Another mass shooting in the U.S

Witcher

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

True but surely in the long run it will make guns redundant,can't think of any other solution.

True, but how long it could take is anyone's guess, plus there's people to have legitimate reasons to own firearms and use them regularly for hunting/target shooting...it's hard to clamp down on the bad without hitting the good too.

Snickers Man

somebody else wrote:

I mean, arming teachers has been suggested....Christ!!!

Manic Moran wrote: »

Why not?

Really, what is the rational argument why not?

Is there some force field which surrounds schools which prohibits people bringing firearms into schools? Do you suggest that schools should become fortified zones, surrounded by barbed wire, guard towers and airport-style metal detectors and X-rays to turn them into a sterile zone?

Arming the teachers is way too limited. The Obama Administration should immediately institute a federal-program to support the arming of students.

Think of the benefits!!!

First, a great increase in the production of tiny derringer-like firearms suitable for kindergarten-sized trigger fingers. What a boon to the arms manufacturing industry!!! This will do more to create blue-collar American industrial jobs than any number of tax-payer "bail outs" to the dinosaur that is the US auto industry.

For your more white-collar types there will be a huge increase in the numbers of "trainers" needed to coach the kids in firearm safety and the correct procedures necessary to take down a Bad Guy.

Ole Rich Wyatt and his pneumatic step-daughter Paige must be salivating at the prospect.



I am of course being sarcastic. The really scary thing is, I suspect you are not. :rolleyes:

MadsL

If teachers were armed in the US they would not be the first country to do so - Israel and Thailand already arm their teachers.

Patrick2010

Americans apparently like to have their guns for a variety of reasons that include some bizarre clause in their constitution that gives citizens the right to bear arms.
For some citizens this seems to stem from a fear of their own government, others for self defence.
At this stage the genie is probably out of the bottle and there are so many guns out there that any ban would take years to have any effect. At the end of the day its Americas problem to solve. As long as they allow easy access to guns they'll have to expect shootings like yesterday.
Its their problem, not ours. Our priority should be making sure we don't allow the same easy access to firearms that could see similar school shootings here.

MadsL

Patrick2010 wrote: »

Our priority should be making sure we don't allow the same easy access to firearms that could see similar school shootings here.

Yes. That is the priority. Not dealing with violent gang crime or the economic meltdown. As long as law abiding people are prevented from having firearms, all will be well.

Suryavarman

tigger123 wrote: »

Gun control is the first logical step. There's many people shot in the heat of the moment, during robberies that go wrong etc. From wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

"There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths.[6] In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 60% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm.[7]"

There is no logical argument against much tighter gun controls in the US.

Guns can also be a powerful deterrent against crime. The more likely it is for a criminal to be shot when committing a crime the less likely they are to commit a crime. As Gary Kleck mentions in this survey:

Our results ended up indicating, depending on which figures you prefer to use, anywhere from 800,000 on up to 2.4, 2.5 million defensive uses of guns against human beings -- not against animals -- by civilians each year.

Stricter gun laws would result in less people being able to defend themselves against criminals and as I have pointed out earlier in the thread, there would be more crime to defend themselves.

As for there being no logical argument against tighter gun laws, I can only assume you haven't read any of this thread? I and other posters have posted plenty of evidence to show stricter gun laws don't make a place safer, generally it is the opposite. There is no logical or empirical reason for stricter gun laws.

Tony EH wrote: »

You're wasting your lad, because you're answering fools.

One of these massacres could happen every week and gun nuts would still want to play with their pop guns.

They just don't care about 5 year olds getting blown away.

That's really what it comes down to.

What it really comes down to is that, anti-gun people don't care about women being raped, the elderly having their homes broken into and they don't care about peoples ability to walk down the street without being robbed, murdered or assaulted.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's sanctioning vigilantism. It leads to a climate of fear and creates a breeding ground for sh!t like Zimmerman vs Martin (some douche took 'neighbourhood watch' too seriously and decided to shoot a guy because he "didn't like the look of him").

Once you start telling people it's ok to use lethal force in a wide array of circumstances, where does it end exactly? Lethal force should be reserved for incidents in which there's absolutely no other alternative whatsoever to prevent loss of life.

Granted, in this case lethal force WOULD in fact have been justified. But with a culture of vigilantism comes the inevitable "get off mah lawn *bang*" crap, because a sad fact of life is that there are an inordinate amount of f*cking idiots in this world who can't be trusted with that kind of responsibility.

Zimmerman didn't shoot Trayvon Martin because he didn't like the look of him, he shot him because he feared for his life due to Trayvon Martin attempting to beat him to death.

The use of a gun is okay on any occasion when one individual seeks to harm a person, their family or their property. It is then up to a court to decide whether the level of force was justified.

How often do people get shot for merely straying onto somebodies garden? I think you are living in some alternate universe when it comes to the outcomes of a society having more guns. For every person that can't be trusted with a gun there are dozens that can and should be trusted with guns.

wonderfullife wrote: »

What good is a background check? The shooter yesterday, the shooter in Aurora, Breivik, the Columbine shooters.....none of them had criminal records. People fly through background checks.

If people want the right to have a gun over there then they should be willing to sit through a mandatory psychiatric evaluation in order to get a license.

In nearly all the American mass-shootings in recent years, we hear accounts of the young men having problems that people were aware of. They shouldn't be simply allowed walk in a store and buy a gun and ammo.

Look, obviously this guy could still have got his hands on guns, some of the weapons might not have been his - but making sure anybody legally owning a gun is of sound mind is a good first step.

What makes you think that mandatory psychiatric evaluations wouldn't make things worse? What about the cost involved? What about the increases in crime because less people have guns because a psychiatric evaluation cost too much time or money? Why should mentally ill people have no right to defend themselves just because a couple of mentally ill people did terrible things with guns?

Dolbert

'Merica. Where guns are a right, and healthcare is a privilege.

MadsL

Dolbert wrote: »

'Merica. Where guns are a right, and healthcare is a privilege.

If you really stopped for a minute and thought about the history of America you would understand why that is the case.

But (somebody else's) cheap jokes are always easier than actually thinking why America places such emphasis on self-reliance.

steve9859

MadsL wrote: »

So peaceful law abiding citizens are at fault for events like this (as they don't care) - how about you give up drink and lobby to ban alcohol to show you care about drunk driving deaths? Or do you just not care?

Peaceful law abiding citizens don't f****** need weapons like these! The culture has developed such that that is perceived as normal. Changing the laws won't stop these incidents in the next few years, but surely, surely, it is the first step in changing the gun culture in America.

Ironic isn't it that the 'land of the free' is bound by the 200 year old constitution when other countries change theirs to reflect the changing times....

Patrick2010

MadsL wrote: »

Yes. That is the priority. Not dealing with violent gang crime or the economic meltdown. As long as law abiding people are prevented from having firearms, all will be well.

No, I was refering to gun control in Ireland as I'm sure you know. If you Americans want free access to guns thats your right. We'll tackle issues like gang crime or economic problems.

Suryavarman

steve9859 wrote: »

Peaceful law abiding citizens don't f****** need weapons like these! The culture has developed such that that is perceived as normal. Changing the laws won't stop these incidents in the next few years, but surely, surely, it is the first step in changing the gun culture in America.

Peaceful law abiding citizens do need hand guns because not everybody is a peaceful law abiding citizen. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the gun culture in America.

Ironic isn't it that the 'land of the free' is bound by the 200 year old constitution when other countries change theirs to reflect the changing times....

Well America has changed theirs plenty of time in the last 200 years or so. Not including the Bill of Rights the US Constitution has been amended 17 times. None of those amendments have removed the right to bear arms though because a huge number of Americans believe it is a fundamental right.

nucker

dd972 wrote: »

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/police-respond-us-school-shooting-reports-153441807.html

condolences to those affected, wonder though if these will go on indefinately and the gun culture of the U.S is set in stone

It is sad, specially when it involves kids

UrbanSea wrote: »

Can't believe the stupidity of a huge number of Americans defending the gun laws over there. It seems no matter how many of these mass shootings occur they'll still defend it

It's something to do with the constitution, people don't have one gun, most have multiple guns, rifles and automatic weapon

MadsL

steve9859 wrote: »

Ironic isn't it that the 'land of the free' is bound by the 200 year old constitution when other countries change theirs to reflect the changing times....

Yeah, I mean it's not like Ireland ever was bound by it's constitution to prevent things like divorce, contraception or abortion. Oh wait. Sorry, you were saying?

Patrick2010 wrote: »

No, I was refering to gun control in Ireland as I'm sure you know.

So was I. You really think the priority in Ireland is to prevent law-abiding people from having guns to shoot a few rabbits or deer? As opposed to tackling the economy or drug crime or gang violence or, or...? Wow.

If you Americans want free access to guns thats your right.

I'm not American, and was talking about Ireland.

We'll tackle issues like gang crime or economic problems.

Just first have to crack down on those violent target shooters, you know, as a priority, first.

Killer Wench

Patrick2010 wrote: »

Americans apparently like to have their guns for a variety of reasons that include some bizarre clause in their constitution that gives citizens the right to bear arms.
For some citizens this seems to stem from a fear of their own government, others for self defence.
At this stage the genie is probably out of the bottle and there are so many guns out there that any ban would take years to have any effect. At the end of the day its Americas problem to solve. As long as they allow easy access to guns they'll have to expect shootings like yesterday.
Its their problem, not ours. Our priority should be making sure we don't allow the same easy access to firearms that could see similar school shootings here.

First there was a poster who said that the 2nd Amendment was in response to the Civil War, now here's a poster calling the 2nd Amendment a bizarre clause. The 2nd Amendment is part of our our Bill of Rights.

I agree with you that this is an American problem and we should deal with it as we want.

token101

Suryavarman wrote: »

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the gun culture in America.

You can almost understand when people say they need guns to protect themselves in America because guns are too far out of control there to start applying restrictions, but to say there's 'nothing wrong' with the gun culture there is probably the stupidest ****ing thing I've heard yet. That's closely followed by suggestions that arming teachers will solve the problem because some teachers are members of a gun club and are apparently about to be cast into the role of John Rambo in the classroom. You would sooner see support for snipers in classroom air vents then get support for common sense. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

Killer Wench

steve9859 wrote: »

Peaceful law abiding citizens don't f****** need weapons like these! The culture has developed such that that is perceived as normal. Changing the laws won't stop these incidents in the next few years, but surely, surely, it is the first step in changing the gun culture in America.

Ironic isn't it that the 'land of the free' is bound by the 200 year old constitution when other countries change theirs to reflect the changing times....

Weapons like what? I know people in Alaska who have moose that crap on their lawn and deal with other wild animals on a daily basis; for them, these type of weapons are a necessity and you can bet your bottom dollar that they are law abiding. I know people on Indian reservations in South Dakota that use rifles to hunt for food for traditional gatherings and to feed their family. They too are law abiding individuals. I know of a father who was out in Seattle when a man attempted to steal his car with the children in it, he showed his handgun, and the man ran away. He was a law abiding individual who simply used the weapon as a deterrent.

It isn't the guns that are the problem. It is the bad actors that use them for their own purposes; we need to examine those purposes, and make laws to combat them.

Manic Moran

I am of course being sarcastic. The really scary thing is, I suspect you are not. :rolleyes:

I asked for a rational argument or rebuttal. The best you can come up with is satire.

Razor wit is only a term of phrase, it does not actually provide any practical defense against those who would do harm to you or those in your care.

opti0nal

Blay wrote: »

Just because people like to play COD etc. doesn't mean they're going to slaughter kids in a school. Don't turn this into a 'video games breed violence' thread..it's a fruitless debate.

It's not that such games breed violence but they may indicate such a prelidiction. Get those people into therapy before they progress to contact offences.

kuldeep121

That is really so shocking and sad
Just because of some stupid fellow the whole lot has to suffer!!

MadsL

opti0nal wrote: »

It's not that such games breed violence but they may indicate such a prelidiction. Get those people into therapy before they progress to contact offences.

Are you serious?

Killer Wench

opti0nal wrote: »

It's not that such games breed violence but they may indicate such a prelidiction. Get those people into therapy before they progress to contact offences.

I play World of Warcraft.


I guess I better be committed before I go hunting for the Lich King and slaughter a football player by mistake.

MadsL

Has no-one blamed Marilyn Manson yet? tsk. tsk.

My name is URL

3 people have just been shot at a hospital in Alabama, apparently

MadsL

My name is URL wrote: »

3 people have just been shot at a hospital in Alabama, apparently

Authorities in Alabama say a man opened fire in a hospital, wounding an officer and two employees before he was fatally shot by police.

Birmingham Police Sgt. Johnny Williams says the officer and employees suffered injuries that are not considered life-threatening.

Williams says police were called because a man with a gun was walking through St. Vincent's Hospital on Saturday morning. When he was confronted by officers, he started shooting and wounded one of the officers. That's when the second officer shot and killed the man.

Detectives are still working to determine why the armed man was in the hospital.

Police stop gone badly wrong.

opti0nal

MadsL wrote: »

Are you serious?

Yes. It's worth considering this approach. Somone with an interest in shooting people for fun and who has access to firearms should obviously be a cause of concern.

mikom

opti0nal wrote: »

It's not that such games breed violence but they may indicate such a prelidiction. Get those people into therapy before they progress to contact offences.

Genghis khan was a divil for the ould GTA...

Killer Wench

My name is URL wrote: »

3 people have just been shot at a hospital in Alabama, apparently

Yes, and a man killed himself after shooting a woman at the Excalibur hotel. It is unclear their connection at this time.


In 2011, 9800 people died in drunk driving accidents. In 2011, 8700 people died as a result of firearms.


So,more Americans died in alcohol related car accidents then gun deaths in 2011; by some poster's rationale, should we ban cars or alcohol?

Suryavarman

token101 wrote: »

You can almost understand when people say they need guns to protect themselves in America because guns are too far out of control there to start applying restrictions, but to say there's 'nothing wrong' with the gun culture there is probably the stupidest ****ing thing I've heard yet. That's closely followed by suggestions that arming teachers will solve the problem because some teachers are members of a gun club and are apparently about to be cast into the role of John Rambo in the classroom. You would sooner see support for snipers in classroom air vents then get support for common sense. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

People should have guns to protect themselves no matter where they are. It's just a sad reflection on modern civilisation that only America and a few other countries give people that right.

What exactly is wrong with the gun culture in America?

Calls for teachers to be allowed bring their legally carried guns to work with them and give them a chance against shooters seem like far more common sense solutions than the policies that would lead to more murder, rape and assault that all the anti-gun people on this thread are advocating.

My name is URL

Killer Wench wrote: »

Yes, and a man killed himself after shooting a woman at the Excalibur hotel. It is unclear their connection at this time.


In 2011, 9800 people died in drunk driving accidents. In 2011, 8700 people died as a result of firearms.


So,more Americans died in alcohol related car accidents then gun deaths in 2011; by some poster's rationale, should we ban cars or alcohol?

I never said anything should be banned. I'd like to see more restrictive laws for gun ownership... simple as that.

Can you imagine how much higher the numbers killed in drink driving incidents would be if people were free to drink and drive?

Suryavarman

My name is URL wrote: »

I never said anything should be banned. I'd like to see more restrictive laws for gun ownership... simple as that.

Can you imagine how much higher the numbers killed in drink driving incidents would be if people were free to drink and drive?

Why do you want to see more restrictive gun laws?