27 shot dead in Conneticut school

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2012/12/14/20431771.html

NEWTOWN, CONN. - At least 27 people, including 18 children, were killed on Friday when at least one shooter opened fire at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, CBS News reported, citing unnamed officials.

If confirmed, it would be one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history. It comes after a series of shooting rampages in the United States this year that have killed multiple victims.

The principal and school psychologist were among the dead, CNN said.

The shooter, an adult, was dead and two handguns were recovered from the scene, NBC News reported without citing a source.

There were unconfirmed reports of a second shooter after witnesses reported hearing dozens of shots, CBS reported.

Sandy Hook Elementary School teaches children from kindergarten through fourth grade - roughly ages 5 to 10.


“It was horrendous,” said parent Brenda Lebinski, who rushed to the school where her daughter is in the third grade. “Everyone was in hysterics - parents, students. There were kids coming out of the school bloodied. I don’t know if they were shot, but they were bloodied.”

Television images showed police and ambulances at the scene, and parents rushing toward the school. Parents were seen reuniting with their children and taking them home.

“This is going to be bad,” a state official told Reuters, requesting anonymity because the scope of the tragedy remained uncertain.

All Newtown schools were placed in lockdown after the shooting, the Newtown Public School District said.

Lebinski said a mother who was at the school during the shooting told her a “masked man” entered the principal’s office and may have shot the principal. Lebinski, who is friends with the mother who was at the school, said the principal was “severely injured.”

Lebinski’s daughter’s teacher “immediately locked the door to the classroom and put all the kids in the corner of the room.”

Danbury Hospital, about 11 miles (18 km) west of the school, had received three patients from the scene, a hospital spokeswoman told NBC Connecticut. The mayor of Danbury, Mark Boughton, told MSNBC: “They are very serious injuries.”

A girl interviewed by NBC Connecticut described hearing seven loud “booms” as she was in gym class. Other children began crying and teachers moved the students to a nearby office, she said.

“A police officer came in and told us to run outside and so we did,” the unidentified girl said on camera.

One child was carried from Sandy Hook Elementary School by a police officer, and the child appeared to have been wounded, the town’s weekly newspaper, the Newtown Bee, said on its website.

[MasterKiller]

F@cking A, man.

How do you stop this sh1t?

[sanjuro_ronin]

AH dude, I don't know...
I have a 9 year old, it could have been her....
Why do these things happen?
WHY do people kill other people, children, like it was nothing more than erasing a mistake off a paper?
WTF ?

[GeneChing]

How absolutely horrifying.

Elementary school massacre: 26 dead, including 18 kids, in Connecticut (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/14/15907407-elementary-school-massacre-26-dead-including-18-kids-in-connecticut?lite)
An elementary school student recalls the terrifying moments following sounds of shots fired at her Connecticut elementary school, saying "teachers told us to go in the corner so we all huddled."
By Miguel Llanos and Tracy Connor, NBC News

Updated at 1:30 p.m. ET: A young man clad in black and carrying two handguns shot up an elementary school in a small Connecticut town on Friday, leaving 18 small children and eight adults dead in one the nation’s worst school massacres, law enforcement officials said.

The gunman, described as a 20-year-old man from Connecticut, was later found dead, a federal law enforcement official told NBC News. A second person was in custody for a possible connection to the shooting, NBC’s Pete Williams reported.

Students – mostly under age 10 -- described the terror that gripped Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown when the rampage began around 9:30 a.m., sparking a massive police response that included SWAT officers going room to room to search for victims.

The Hartford Courant, citing unnamed sources, said many of the victims were in a kindergarten classroom.

"I was in the gym and I heard a loud, like seven loud booms, and the gym teachers told us to go in the corner, so we all huddled," one student told NBC Connecticut. "And I kept hearing these booming noises. And we all … started crying.

"All the gym teachers told us to go into the office where no one could find us," she added. "So then a police officer came in and told us to run outside. So we did and we came in the firehouse and waited for our parents."

Dozens of emergency vehicles from across Fairfield County raced to the 600-student school, along with panicked parents hoping to be reunited with their children.

“It was horrendous,'' Brenda Lebinski, mother of a third-grader, said at the scene.``Everyone was in hysterics -- parents, students. There were kids coming out of the school bloodied. I don't know if they were shot, but they were bloodied,'' she said, according to Reuters.

Children are led from Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., on Friday after a reported shooting there.

One parent picking up his young son said the shooting was “the most terrifying moment a parent can imagine.” He described the anguish of waiting to find out if his son was a victim and then running to his child.

“It was the greatest relief in my existence,” the father said. “I’m just happy that my kid’s OK.”

Bracing for a large influx of wounded, Danbury Hospital went on lockdown and cleared four trauma rooms. It received only three patients, including a teacher shot in the foot, the Associated Press reported.

The motive for the shooting was unknown, and the gunman’s name was not released.

Two 9mm handguns were recovered from the scene, an official told WNBC's Jonathan Dienst. The Associated Press said one of the guns was a.223-caliber rifle.

The FBI was on the scene, assisting with the investigation.

President Obama was told of the shooting at 10:30 a.m.

"I think it's important on a day like today to view this as I know the president, as a father does, and I as a father and others who are parents certainly do, which is to feel enormous sympathy for families that are affected,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said.

BreakingNews.com's coverage of the incident
Swarming police response in mall shooting highlights 'paradigm shift'

The death toll is the highest from a school shooting in U.S. history since a gunman killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in 2007. At Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, two teens killed 13 people and wounded 24 in 1999.

Parent Stephen Delgiadice, whose 8-year-old daughter was not hurt, said he never could have imagined such carnage in the small bedroom community – where the police force has only three detectives.

"It's alarming, especially in Newtown, Connecticut, which we always thought was the safest place in America," he told The Associated Press.

[sanjuro_ronin]

We really to find a way to stop this, no more arguing about guns or whatever, we really need to focus on WHY this happens.

[Eric_H]

As a CT native, I'd never have seen this coming.

I'm trying to find words to speak about it and nothing comes out.

[rett]

From the facts so far sounds like there's a custody dispute behind it.

It's just unbelievable. Little Connecticut of all places.:(

[SoCo KungFu]

AH dude, I don't know...
I have a 9 year old, it could have been her....
Why do these things happen?
WHY do people kill other people, children, like it was nothing more than erasing a mistake off a paper?
WTF ?

Because some people are simply defective. Sure, we could go into long discussions on nature vs nurture, ethology, neurobiochemistry etc. But at the end of the day, what do you do with that information? We can't test every human on the planet for oxytocin receptor polymorphism. At some point people are going to have to come to the realization that we have to make a choice. Either we decide that we can't control behavior and so we have to take steps to mitigate the damage that behavior can bring or we accept that events like this will happen as a result of our decision not to take those steps.

You say we need to stop arguing about guns, but the problem, is that is the very decision we need to be coming to terms with. Will it stop this from happening? No, these people are defective (whether its genetically, environmentally, whatever) and that will always be a component of society. But you know, its a lot more difficult to go slashing up 26 people than it is to shoot. We need to decide if that is enough means to mitigate the damage these people inflict on society. Because its pretty obvious what we are (not) doing at the moment isn't working.

[rett]

There was a kindergarten attack in a village in Henan China yesterday. There they just have knives. Maybe this guy saw that in the news and it set him off.

So this guy's mom worked at the school? Depressed guy flips and wants to punish the whole town. From the name that's been in the news and looking at his twitter it looks pretty ominous. No way to have guessed where it was going, of course.

[TaichiMantis]

...and people don't believe in original sin :rolleyes:

[SoCo KungFu]

There was a kindergarten attack in a village in Henan China yesterday. There they just have knives. Maybe this guy saw that in the news and it set him off.

So this guy's mom worked at the school? Depressed guy flips and wants to punish the whole town. From the name that's been in the news and looking at his twitter it looks pretty ominous. No way to have guessed where it was going, of course.

So what? Knives, guns, screwdrivers. They're all tools in some hands and weapons in another. Difference is, one of those is significantly more effective in the weapon department. Like I said, you'll never eliminate harmful behavior. You can only hope to mitigate its effects. It doesn't matter what the trigger was that set him off. That's not the cause. The cause is the human brain, and that's not something we have the capability to change.

[rett]

I do think it's important to try to understand the trigger and cause to try to maybe prevent this from happening. And less effective weapons will mean less harm if it does happen.

What this guy has in common with the Henan guy is that they attack people much weaker than themselves. Children. And they group punish a whole town. They want to feel powerful and they want all they people they think humilated them to suffer.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Because some people are simply defective. Sure, we could go into long discussions on nature vs nurture, ethology, neurobiochemistry etc. But at the end of the day, what do you do with that information? We can't test every human on the planet for oxytocin receptor polymorphism. At some point people are going to have to come to the realization that we have to make a choice. Either we decide that we can't control behavior and so we have to take steps to mitigate the damage that behavior can bring or we accept that events like this will happen as a result of our decision not to take those steps.

You say we need to stop arguing about guns, but the problem, is that is the very decision we need to be coming to terms with. Will it stop this from happening? No, these people are defective (whether its genetically, environmentally, whatever) and that will always be a component of society. But you know, its a lot more difficult to go slashing up 26 people than it is to shoot. We need to decide if that is enough means to mitigate the damage these people inflict on society. Because its pretty obvious what we are (not) doing at the moment isn't working.


Its not about controlling behavior or guns ( you can't control both), its about understanding what drives people and how we can better condition them/us so that life has far too much value than to think that taking it is an option.

[bawang]

Its not about controlling behavior or guns ( you can't control both), its about understanding what drives people and how we can better condition them/us so that life has far too much value than to think that taking it is an option.
this happens when gun is allowed in a non martial culture.

[sanjuro_ronin]

this happens when gun is allowed in a non martial culture.

You know, that's not the first time I've heard that.

[MightyB]

You say we need to stop arguing about guns, but the problem, is that is the very decision we need to be coming to terms with. Will it stop this from happening? No, these people are defective (whether its genetically, environmentally, whatever) and that will always be a component of society. But you know, its a lot more difficult to go slashing up 26 people than it is to shoot. We need to decide if that is enough means to mitigate the damage these people inflict on society. Because its pretty obvious what we are (not) doing at the moment isn't working.

The simple truth is that it's just as easy to hunt bigger game with a muzzle loader as it is with an AR15.

I think a simple solution would be to go back to a 3 round chamber limit. There's no real legitimate reason for an honest civilian to need more than that in their gun.

[Syn7]

We need to explore the cause. Not just ban guns. Not just damage control. You don't need a gun to kill people. You can use all sorts of creative things to hurt people. You can make chemical weapons out of basic cleaning supplies, so many type of bombs out of regular items. So what, we ban all cleaners? Seems kinda silly.

Too bad one of the teachers didn't have a conceal and carry. Couldve ended this alot quicker.

I like the Swiss approach.

[Syn7]

this happens when gun is allowed in a non martial culture.

Fair point, but not all Americans are non martial. Some are in a constant state of war.

[Syn7]

The simple truth is that it's just as easy to hunt bigger game with a muzzle loader as it is with an AR15.

I think a simple solution would be to go back to a 3 round chamber limit. There's no real legitimate reason for an honest civilian to need more than that in their gun.

Unless you have it for self defense. Then limited rounds suuuuuck!

Not that I feel the need to have an AR, but the simple truth is that I can build things that would do more faster. So really, kind of a moot point to IMO. I'm not gonna talk about HOW in an open forum, but let's just say it's not hard to make chem weapons or large explosives out of regular products. Can't ban everything dangerous.

[MightyB]

We need to explore the cause.

Social erosion to multiply the wealth of our modern aristocracy.


*cut social programs and community mental health.

*cut education.

*cut adequate access to healthcare and affordable medication.

*eliminate middle class jobs.

*promote wealth and excess constantly on television creating unattainable goals and role models for the vast majority of people.

[MightyB]

Unless you have it for self defense. Then limited rounds suuuuuck!


This little weapon only holds 5 rounds and is considered by many to be the perfect home self defense weapon.

Taurus Judge (http://www.northcarolinasportsman.com/details.php?id=577)

[Syn7]

This little weapon only holds 5 rounds and is considered by many to be the perfect home self defense weapon.

Taurus Judge (http://www.northcarolinasportsman.com/details.php?id=577)

depends on what you're defending against. 5 rounds isn't enough sometimes. That being said, I'm sure even a double barrel 12 would be enough in most home defense scenarios.

It is nice to have a gun that wont jam on ya tho.

[MightyB]

depends on what you're defending against. 5 rounds isn't enough sometimes. That being said, I'm sure even a double barrel 12 would be enough in most home defense scenarios.

Do you live on the path of the raging Huns? Or the Mongolian Horde?

[SoCo KungFu]

Its not about controlling behavior or guns ( you can't control both), its about understanding what drives people and how we can better condition them/us so that life has far too much value than to think that taking it is an option.

This information is available. We even have while not confirmed, but shown pretty strongly, that we can figure this out right down to a biochemical level. Everything you are as a human being, is the expression of a continuous set of chemical interactions. Like I said, what will you do with this information? The reality is, you have little in the way of options. You're not going to be able to teach everyone to be moral. And frankly, some people are simply biologically incapable of "moral" behavior. What then?

People have been praying to some god or another for at least 40,000 years. Hasn't worked.

People have been trying to medicate behavior for over 100 years now. Hasn't worked.

People have been screaming for public awareness, to see the warning signs in our loved ones. Obviously from this, it hasn't worked.

We already know a great deal about what makes people do the things they do. Maybe not in the general public, but on an academic level we have a decent if incomplete picture. Certainly we know enough to begin making informed decisions on such matters. But we aren't stepping up and doing so. We aren't going to change the way some people behave or the decisions they make. All we can do is try to mitigate the damages.

[Syn7]

Social erosion to multiply the wealth of our modern aristocracy.


*cut social programs and community mental health.

*cut education.

*cut adequate access to healthcare and affordable medication.

*eliminate middle class jobs.

*promote wealth and excess constantly on television creating unattainable goals and role models for the vast majority of people.



An oversimplification, but a good start, I guess. Although I think the last one is most relevant.

[SoCo KungFu]

Can't ban everything dangerous.

Don't need to. There's a difference between fabricating a weapon and purchasing something already configured to do great harm. Not everyone has the ability to produce a bomb or the like. And we already track purchase of such chemicals. It doesn't stop everyone, but nothing will stop everyone. Its about making it as difficult as possible to do so and making it as obvious as possible to the people who can prevent it from going all the way.

And you didn't say it, but as far as blades are concerned, anyone taking the argument that they'll just use a knife is failing at reason. There's absolutely no way anyone can rationally consider a blade on par with a projectile weapon in terms of scope of possible damage potential. That argument instantly tells me someone isn't thinking logically.

[Syn7]

Don't need to. There's a difference between fabricating a weapon and purchasing something already configured to do great harm. Not everyone has the ability to produce a bomb or the like. And we already track purchase of such chemicals. It doesn't stop everyone, but nothing will stop everyone. Its about making it as difficult as possible to do so and making it as obvious as possible to the people who can prevent it from going all the way.

And you didn't say it, but as far as blades are concerned, anyone taking the argument that they'll just use a knife is failing at reason. There's absolutely no way anyone can rationally consider a blade on par with a projectile weapon in terms of scope of possible damage potential. That argument instantly tells me someone isn't thinking logically.

I can make a chem weapon with chems from the grocery store. These are not tracked like some people seem to think. Sure, if I bought a truckload of ammonium nitrate, it would be noticed. But all that isn't needed.


Anyone can build what I'm talking about. A simple google search is all you need to learn.

I am so tired of having my freedoms **** on for the "safety" of the public. You can't even make your own nitrocellulose anymore without ending up on some freakin list. It's weak and the wrong approach. There will be no overnight legal solution. It took a few hundred years to dig this mess of a hole. Don't expect it to be cleared up i your lifetime. Ya done ****ed up from the get go.


No I didn't say it..... BUT, you don't think somebody could walk into a classroom, block the exit and slowly but surely machete their way thru a crowd of people who are ****ing themselves? Granted a gun makes it easier, but a determined killer will kill. Now if the teacher had a conceal and carry, whole diff story.

It may be too late for the swiss model to work for the US, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a better way to go about it.

[wenshu]

I can make a chem weapon with chems from the grocery store. These are not tracked like some people seem to think. Sure, if I bought a truckload of ammonium nitrate, it would be noticed. But all that isn't needed.

But you can't make a chemical explosive or buy it ready made without going through a great deal of time and effort.

A twentysomething, neurochemically imbalanced ******* isn't going have the ability to concentrate for long enough to go all Walter White on an elementary school.

[bawang]

I can make a chem weapon with chems from the grocery store. These are not tracked like some people seem to think. Sure, if I bought a truckload of ammonium nitrate, it would be noticed. But all that isn't needed.


Anyone can build what I'm talking about. A simple google search is all you need to learn.

I am so tired of having my freedoms **** on for the "safety" of the public. You can't even make your own nitrocellulose anymore without ending up on some freakin list. It's weak and the wrong approach. There will be no overnight legal solution. It took a few hundred years to dig this mess of a hole. Don't expect it to be cleared up i your lifetime. Ya done ****ed up from the get go.


No I didn't say it..... BUT, you don't think somebody could walk into a classroom, block the exit and slowly but surely machete their way thru a crowd of people who are ****ing themselves? Granted a gun makes it easier, but a determined killer will kill. Now if the teacher had a conceal and carry, whole diff story.

It may be too late for the swiss model to work for the US, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a better way to go about it.

there is no reason for civilians to carry military grade weapons.

You know, that's not the first time I've heard that.

i think also low impulse control + ease of use

a paraplegic old woman with down siyndrom with a single assault rifle can kill an entire battalion of mongol warriors. i think firearms are too powerful to give to just anyone.

[wenshu]

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

[Syn7]

there is no reason for civilians to carry military grade weapons.


i think also low impulse control + ease of use

a paraplegic old woman with down siyndrom with a single assault rifle can kill an entire battalion of mongol warriors. i think firearms are too powerful to give to just anyone.

Carry or own? Nobody is allowed to walk around with an AR. A .22 revolver could have ended this sooner, that's all I'm sayin.



Wenshu, I dunno bout that man. I think they just choose the path of least resistance. And buying a gun is easier than mixing chemicals. Chemistry is easy. Safe chemistry is harder. But then some nut job making mustard gas isn't gonna worry too much about any sort of safety protocol.

[Syn7]

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

If you are ****ed off and wanting to cause harm, you will cause harm.

[SoCo KungFu]

I can make a chem weapon with chems from the grocery store. These are not tracked like some people seem to think. Sure, if I bought a truckload of ammonium nitrate, it would be noticed. But all that isn't needed.


Anyone can build what I'm talking about. A simple google search is all you need to learn.

I am so tired of having my freedoms **** on for the "safety" of the public. You can't even make your own nitrocellulose anymore without ending up on some freakin list. It's weak and the wrong approach. There will be no overnight legal solution. It took a few hundred years to dig this mess of a hole. Don't expect it to be cleared up i your lifetime. Ya done ****ed up from the get go.


No I didn't say it..... BUT, you don't think somebody could walk into a classroom, block the exit and slowly but surely machete their way thru a crowd of people who are ****ing themselves? Granted a gun makes it easier, but a determined killer will kill. Now if the teacher had a conceal and carry, whole diff story.

It may be too late for the swiss model to work for the US, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a better way to go about it.

Switzerland has a homicide rate of Germany, Italy and Spain; all far larger countries at that. The Swiss model is nothing special considering Norway has a lower rate and Finland and Netherlands are comparible in terms of both per capita and actual numbers. And all those nations have strict laws.

Of course I could mention Japan as well. Hell even China has a lower per capita rate than the US. But I won't since its a totally different culture....

A determined killer will kill. But a killer with a knife can be subdued by a couple motivated adults. You know, that's what stopped that last plane from smacking another building in '01. A gun? Good luck with that. The comparison is moronic on all levels and frankly deserves no more response.

You're not "free" to do a lot of things. If I really wanted to get pseudo-philosophical I could argue you aren't really free to do anything. Sometimes in the interest of society we have to make those choices. You say its the wrong approach, that its weak. I say statistics have ****ed that argument and its cowardly to run from the issue on excuses. But hey, there's plenty of people who take that approach in this country, they're call republicans. And they're all crying today about why this **** keeps happening.

There's a lot to be done in terms of social issues that can address a lot of this. Its ridiculous that for some people in this country its harder to earn a honest buck than it is by force. That needs to be fixed. But there's a huge difference between that type of violence and this here. Its not about a few hundred years of culture, its a matter of about 60 some odd million years of mammalian evolution. We know what kinds of things cause this crap. I'm telling you, you're not going to change this behavior, not in the culture we have in the US.

[bawang]

If you are ****ed off and wanting to cause harm, you will cause harm.

if you have inferior weapons to cause harm, you will cause less harm.

in ancient times killing more than 10 people is unheard of. that requires superhuman ability. a gun gives you the equivalent of superhuman powers. it can turn the weakest coward into a god.

[RenDaHai]

No, look, you really need to ban guns.

It doesn't stop every problem, not by a long shot. But this sh*t just doesn't happen any where near as much in countries that ban guns. England is similar to America in a lot of ways, but we don't have this happening all the time 'cause we don't have guns.

You want to go hunting? Use a f*cking bow.

[bawang]

it astounds me that ancient warriors would go on their knees and bow to their sword, and kiss their sword, treating their weapon with such respect, yet the most powerful, godly weapon ever made today are treated like toys.

[SoCo KungFu]

No, look, you really need to ban guns.

It doesn't stop every problem, not by a long shot. But this sh*t just doesn't happen any where near as much in countries that ban guns. England is similar to America in a lot of ways, but we don't have this happening all the time 'cause we don't have guns.

You want to go hunting? Use a f*cking bow.

There's far too many guns to ban in the US. It won't work. The only control mechanism we could hope to enact would be at the source and likely with ammunition. Ban it from ever even entering the civilian sector (not possession, just production and distribution); only available to military and law enforcement. People can keep their guns, when bullets start running out in 20-30 years they're all useless for criminals and honest folk alike. Sure some people will make their own. But in a couple generations that skill will likely die out. That's how culture is changed. Not by educating masses to change opinions. But by instilling norms that those who object eventually get old and die off. That's the way it is with any shift be it religious, scientific, you name it.

[Raipizo]

it astounds me that ancient warriors would go on their knees and bow to their sword, and kiss their sword, treating their weapon with such respect, yet the most powerful, godly weapon ever made today are treated like toys.

You're totally right. The Chinese really messed up inventing gunpowder and all. Times have changed, and yes guns are cowardly definitely by far, it takes no skill to use a gun. Now if you're using a sword that takes skill time and dedication which isn't found much anymore in today's schedule.

[Raipizo]

There's far too many guns to ban in the US. It won't work. The only control mechanism we could hope to enact would be at the source and likely with ammunition. Ban it from ever even entering the civilian sector; only available to military and law enforcement. People can keep their guns, when bullets start running out in 20-30 years they're all useless for criminals and honest folk alike.

You could ban gun sales. Then when their guns break, need something replaced it won't happen.

[bawang]

You're totally right. The Chinese really messed up inventing gunpowder and all. Times have changed, and yes guns are cowardly definitely by far, it takes no skill to use a gun. Now if you're using a sword that takes skill time and dedication which isn't found much anymore in today's schedule.

ancient chinese treated firearms as divine weapons. they were kept secret and used as last resort.

[RenDaHai]

There's far too many guns to ban in the US. It won't work. The only control mechanism we could hope to enact would be at the source and likely with ammunition. Ban it from ever even entering the civilian sector (not possession, just production and distribution); only available to military and law enforcement. People can keep their guns, when bullets start running out in 20-30 years they're all useless for criminals and honest folk alike. Sure some people will make their own. But in a couple generations that skill will likely die out. That's how culture is changed. Not by educating masses to change opinions. But by instilling norms that those who object eventually get old and die off. That's the way it is with any shift be it religious, scientific, you name it.

You could do it. You make it a crime to own a gun and not turn it in. A crime with massive financial penalty and after a few more years massive prison time. It doesn't get rid of all the guns but it slows things down and changes public perception. You make gun trafficking a capitol crime.

Then guns become very expensive on the black market. This means people plan the purchase of one for a specific crime. No longer do people get angry, go home, and there is a gun right there. They have to plan their crime and you get less spontaneous shootings. It will take time, but it will happen.

[Syn7]

if you have inferior weapons to cause harm, you will cause less harm.

in ancient times killing more than 10 people is unheard of. that requires superhuman ability. a gun gives you the equivalent of superhuman powers. it can turn the weakest coward into a god.

Fair enough, but as long as I can buy a gun with a few bucks and the right street corner, the legalities of how one can acquire a weapon are sort of moot. You wanna make a difference, start dealing with illegal firearms and arms traffickers. I even had a guy trying to sell a LAW in my area a few years ago. These weapons are out there and until they are used or some other crime draws attention to them, they stay out there. Shiiiit, they even found one on the side of the highway a few years ago.

I'm pretty socially "progressive", but not on this one. Not because I'm some NRA mouthpiece, but because I don't really see this as a gun issue. I don't think banning any or all guns will make much of a difference. Also I would like to point out that this is a very sad event and of course it totally sucks, but kids are being shot EVERY DAY with illegal or improperly stored firearms and it doesn't seem to make the news very often. Local, at best, for the most part. So 20 at once or 20 spread out, is one really worse than the others?

[RenDaHai]

I'm pretty socially "progressive", but not on this one. Not because I'm some NRA mouthpiece, but because I don't really see this as a gun issue. I don't think banning any or all guns will make much of a difference. Also I would like to point out that this is a very sad event and of course it totally sucks, but kids are being shot EVERY DAY with illegal or improperly stored firearms and it doesn't seem to make the news very often. Local, at best, for the most part. So 20 at once or 20 spread out, is one really worse than the others?

Yeah, it happens ALL the time. It Does NOT happen all the time in England.

I mean, think about road rage. If you have a gun in the car, you might use it and you know you have some kind of legal recourse.

But if guns are illegal, you know you are the criminal if you use it. ALso, you dont have it to hand, you have to plan buying it and take a lot of risks, by which point you probably forget why you are angry.

[bawang]

I don't really see this as a gun issue.

what issue is this then

[Syn7]

what issue is this then

Even tho might b oversimplified the issues, his points about cause are very valid. A society where everyone wants to live better than the next guy is not healthy. These kinds of attrocities are only one manifestation of a serious lack f balance in our lifestyles. Basically we are a bunch of spoiled brats who get sand in our vijayjays when we don't get our way. With enough pressure, stress or defective characteristics, people do dumb things. some self destruct with drugs, others shoot lil kids. and everything in between. Making laws about guns is like outlawing playgrounds because there are many inherent dangers in climbing around a jungle gym. While having restrictions are useful, like don't build too high, make soft landings etc, much more would just be ridiculous. Same with guns. Yeah don't hand out military grade weapons to everyone and anyone who can afford them, but taking them all away is overkill and will not solve the problem.

I don't think criminalizing drugs makes the problem any better. Clearly prohibition has not going well for us. It's not so diff with guns. Not exactly the same, but not that different either.

[bawang]

Even tho might b oversimplified the issues, his points about cause are very valid. A society where everyone wants to live better than the next guy is not healthy.

this is the foundation for your entire civilization. america is about uncontrolled growth and exploitation.

[Syn7]

There's far too many guns to ban in the US. It won't work. The only control mechanism we could hope to enact would be at the source and likely with ammunition. Ban it from ever even entering the civilian sector (not possession, just production and distribution); only available to military and law enforcement. People can keep their guns, when bullets start running out in 20-30 years they're all useless for criminals and honest folk alike. Sure some people will make their own. But in a couple generations that skill will likely die out. That's how culture is changed. Not by educating masses to change opinions. But by instilling norms that those who object eventually get old and die off. That's the way it is with any shift be it religious, scientific, you name it.

Interesting. I disagree about education. But I don't think it's the end all answer either. I think a balance between law and education is the only route.

I do agree that ammunition is a bigger problem than the guns themselves.

Like you said, and I said before, this isn't gonna have an overnight fix. This is going to take a few generations to solve. Some are too lost. We should focus on weeding their ideas out and letting those ideas die off with those people. Not easy, but then no solution will be easy. A gun ban is what I consider one of those "too easy" solutions. In these days, you don't need a gun to kill many in a short time. You have options all over the place.




By the way, Bawang, Greek fire was a WMD in it's day. So no, you didnt need skill to kill many. Just opportunity and the right circumstances.

[Syn7]

this is the foundation for your entire civilization. america is about uncontrolled growth and exploitation.

Great. So we agree then.


And it is YOUR civ too. You are hardly a rural mainland Chinaman! Even if you are from the ******* of the east coast! :eek:


:D Jokes, my friend.

[bawang]

Great. So we agree then.


And it is YOUR civ too. You are hardly a rural mainland Chinaman! Even if you are from the ******* of the east coast! :eek:


:D Jokes, my friend.

im here to exploit and squeeze the last drop of life from this land before i go back to china with a yacht and 4 wives. (srs)

the diffrence in my point is you say america needs to change, i say america cant change, or face collapse.

the future of america is the transition from republic to empire. that begins with gun control.

[Syn7]

im here to exploit and squeeze the last drop of life from this land before i go back to china with a yacht and 4 wives.

Won't be long till China is the better economic opportunity. You should go back. I don't mean that in a racist way, just that you should go home and help build a better China. I understand why so many have left, but you are in a position to do good works back home.

Sure they can change. Just not overnight. Same with China or anywhere else.

[Raipizo]

ancient chinese treated firearms as divine weapons. they were kept secret and used as last resort.

Yeah lots of mysticism in those days, but eventually it was abused power used for war and crime.

[RenDaHai]

Perception IS truth inside a population.

In America the fact that guns are NOT illegal sends completely the wrong message.

In the rest of the civilised world guns are criminal not just on our street but in our minds. That changes a lot.


Look at Cigarettes!!! We stopped people smoking inside in England and now pretty much no-one smokes anymore. It literally cut it down overnight. We didn't have to make it illegal, we made it dirty inside the publics perception.

[Syn7]

Perception IS truth inside a population.

In America the fact that guns are NOT illegal sends completely the wrong message.

In the rest of the world guns are criminal not just on our street but in our minds. That changes a lot.


Look at Cigarettes!!! We stopped people smoking inside in England and now pretty much no-one smokes anymore. It literally cut it down overnight. We didn't have to make it illegal, we made it dirty inside the publics perception.

So wait? You wanna make guns dirty or illegal?

[Raipizo]

Won't be long till China is the better economic opportunity. You should go back. I don't mean that in a racist way, just that you should go home and help build a better China. I understand why so many have left, but you are in a position to do good works back home.

Sure they can change. Just not overnight. Same with China or anywhere else.

China probably has a better economy than us, outsourcing and the like.

[GeneChing]

There was a kindergarten attack in a village in Henan China yesterday.

China stabbing spree hurts 22 schoolchildren
Knife-wielding man also attacked elderly woman in central Henan province (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/china-knife-attack-school.html)
The Associated Press
Posted: Dec 14, 2012 4:38 AM ET
Last Updated: Dec 14, 2012 1:25 PM ET

A knife-wielding man injured 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes Friday, police said, the latest in a series of periodic rampage attacks at Chinese schools and kindergartens.

The attack in the Henan province village of Chengping happened shortly before 8 a.m., said a police officer from Guangshan county, where the village is located.
henan, china

The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.

A Guangshan county hospital administrator said the man first attacked an elderly woman, then students, before being subdued by security guards who have been posted across China following a spate of school attacks in recent years. He said there were no deaths among the nine students admitted, although two badly injured children had been transferred to better-equipped hospitals outside the county.

A doctor at Guangshan's hospital of traditional Chinese medicine said that seven students had been admitted, but that none were seriously injured.

Neither the hospital administrator nor the doctor would give his name.
Children likely between 6-11 years old

It was not clear how old the injured children were, but Chinese primary school pupils are generally 6-11 years old.

A notice posted on the Guangshan county government's website confirmed the number of injured and said an emergency response team had been set up to investigate the attacks.

No motive was given for the stabbings, which echo a string of similar assaults against schoolchildren in 2010 that killed nearly 20 and wounded more than 50. The most recent such attack took place in August, when a knife-wielding man broke into a middle school in the southern city of Nanchang and stabbed two students before fleeing.

Most of the attackers have been mentally disturbed men involved in personal disputes or unable to adjust to the rapid pace of social change in China, underscoring grave weaknesses in the antiquated Chinese medical system's ability to diagnose and treat psychiatric illness.

In one of the worst incidents, a man described as an unemployed, middle-aged doctor killed eight children with a knife in March 2010 to vent his anger over a thwarted romantic relationship.
There is a significant difference here - the number of fatalities.

[Syn7]

China probably has a better economy than us, outsourcing and the like.

Many American and Canadian companies are bringing manufacturing back to the continent to save on costs and help availability. Like Apple is bring some assembly back to the US already in order to keep up with demand.

[Syn7]

There is a significant difference here - the number of fatalities.

No doubt. But it doesn't address the reason for the assaults in the first place. If we keep using bandaids, we will just end up with a massive infected wound of a society. Arguably, we already do. This is from quick fixes and an absolute refusal to readdress certain aspects of the American constitution. Not just with crime, but in general.

[RenDaHai]

So wait? You wanna make guns dirty or illegal?

The analogy applies just fine.

I want to make them criminal and evil within the human perception. That is more powerful than making them dirty or illegal.

But, illegal would be a good start.

[GeneChing]

But I just want to point out that the difference is significant. I see a lot of people on facebook citing the China Knifing spree as an argument for the right to bear arms. That is an illiterate argument - clearly those gun supporters didn't read the article complete. It actually hurts the argument for the right to bear arms more than it supports it.


"When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, "Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping." To this day, especially in times of "disaster," I remember my mother's words and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers – so many caring people in this world." - Fred Rogers

[Raipizo]

No doubt. But it doesn't address the reason for the assaults in the first place. If we keep using bandaids, we will just end up with a massive infected wound of a society. Arguably, we already do. This is from quick fixes and an absolute refusal to readdress certain aspects of the American constitution. Not just with crime, but in general.

It makes sense. For some reason people don't see that a document written a few hundred years ago shouldn't need gone over or provided some maintenance. Also good to see we're making our own jobs.

[Syn7]

The analogy applies just fine.

I want to make them criminal and evil within the human perception. That is more powerful than making them dirty or illegal.

But, illegal would be a good start.

Yeah but you used a cig analogy and went out of your way to point out that making them illegal was not necessary. So do you wanna give guns a bad name, or make them illegal or both? And do you think outlawing Cigs would have made it all happen faster and in a more positive way?

[bawang]

No doubt. But it doesn't address the reason for the assaults in the first place. If we keep using bandaids, we will just end up with a massive infected wound of a society. Arguably, we already do. This is from quick fixes and an absolute refusal to readdress certain aspects of the American constitution. Not just with crime, but in general.

the only path is transition from republic to empire.

[Syn7]

It makes sense. For some reason people don't see that a document written a few hundred years ago shouldn't need gone over or provided some maintenance. Also good to see we're making our own jobs.

Bout time ay! :) Manufacturing made us a great economic force. We need to replace those jobs with something. We can't all be middle men and wealthy owners.

I think the general American ideal of success is a sickness.

[Syn7]

the only path is transition from republic to empire.

Explain, please...

[Syn7]

But I just want to point out that the difference is significant. I see a lot of people on facebook citing the China Knifing spree as an argument for the right to bear arms. That is an illiterate argument - clearly those gun supporters didn't read the article complete. It actually hurts the argument for the right to bear arms more than it supports it.

Well, I would like to point out that there are distinctions between people who make money off of guns, people who just want to keep their guns and people who have an ideological issue with prohibition.

[RenDaHai]

No doubt. But it doesn't address the reason for the assaults in the first place. If we keep using bandaids, we will just end up with a massive infected wound of a society. Arguably, we already do. This is from quick fixes and an absolute refusal to readdress certain aspects of the American constitution. Not just with crime, but in general.

This is a fact of nature, it may be unfixable. Limiting their potential for damage may be our best option.


I'd like to relay to you an ancient fable;

In the beginning when Zeus constructed the Heavens and the Earth, he was proud, but tired. He wanted Animals and Men to populate it, so he bade the titan Promethius to construct men and beasts from a special kind of clay.

Promethius did as he was told. But when zeus saw his work he said there were too many animals, and too few humans. He told him to correct the balance.

But Promethius had already used all of the clay. So instead of making new humans, he took some of the animals and changed their outside form to resemble humans. But the indestructable soul, once forged could not be changed.

So it is today as it was that first day, that some humans have the form of men, but the souls of beasts.

This fable imparts valuable wisdom. It doesn't suggest a solution to the problem of evil people. It suggests that it is not a problem that can be fixed, it is simply a law of nature.

[bawang]

Explain, please...
the western world grows because of its expansionist policy. invention of mutally assured destruction nuclear weapons + rising technology level from ex slave/tribute nations means it no longer works.

constantly growth and prosperity supresses unrest. people are literally too happy to care. food, sex, drugs, music, games.

when you stop growing, unrest and squalor comes back. so america needs to switch from an expansionist policy with low citizen control to isolationalist policy with high control.


china is becoming more free because it is growing rich. when the growth stops there will be another mao.

[RenDaHai]

Yeah but you used a cig analogy and went out of your way to point out that making them illegal was not necessary. So do you wanna give guns a bad name, or make them illegal or both? And do you think outlawing Cigs would have made it all happen faster and in a more positive way?

I see.

But the image we want for cigarettes and drugs is something that can be explored but not made into a habit. Because they are fun in moderation.

But with Guns every measure needs to be taken to make them evil in the publics perception. Making them illegal is a good start.

[Syn7]

This is a fact of nature, it may be unfixable. Limiting their potential for damage may be our best option.


I'd like to relay to you an ancient fable;

In the beginning when Zeus constructed the Heavens and the Earth, he was proud, but tired. He wanted Animals and Men to populate it, so he bade the titan Promethius to construct men and beasts from a special kind of clay.

Promethius did as he was told. But when zeus saw his work he said there were too many animals, and too few humans. He told him to correct the balance.

But Promethius had already used all of the clay. So instead of making new humans, he took some of the animals and changed their outside form to resemble humans. But the indestructable soul, once forged could not be changed.

So it is today as it was that first day, that some humans have the form of men, but the souls of beasts.

This fable imparts valuable wisdom. It doesn't suggest a solution to the problem of evil people. It suggests that it is not a problem that can be fixed, it is simply a law of nature.


While I do agree that many people are bad and will continue to be bad regardless of education and consequences, I do NOT believe that most criminals are inherently bad people. If we can save those people from criminality, the VERY few truly disturbed will seem like a minor issue. You following me? I know what you mean, I just don't think our main problems are rooted with EVIL people. There are more psychopaths successful in business than there are psychopath killers. We need to re-orient our ideas of what is right and what is wrong and develop some sort of consistency that reflects reality. Bankers cause more harm than criminals. How many bankers on death row?

[Syn7]

the western world grows because of its expansionist policy. invention of mutally assured destruction nuclear weapons + rising technology level from ex slave/tribute nations means it no longer works.

constantly growth and prosperity supresses unrest. people are literally too happy to care. food, sex, drugs, music, games.

when you stop growing, unrest and squalor comes back. so america needs to switch from an expansionist policy with low citizen control to isolationalist policy with high control.


china is becoming more free because it is growing rich. when the growth stops there will be another mao.


I see. I agree. Expansionism can not be the foundation of your progressive movement.

That being said, a simple attitude adjustment can solve that problem. Wanting to live healthy, happy and equally is more healthy than competing and knocking eachother down in selfish quests for excessive wealth.

[bawang]

While I do agree that many people are bad and will continue to be bad regardless of education and consequences, I do NOT believe that most criminals are inherently bad people.

many criminals have genetic defects that makes them biologically incapable of feeling empathy, fear, or remorse. many more have permanent mental defects from childhood. (fetal alcohol syndrome)

thats why reform based punishment never works. only capital punishment as hard eugenics.


I see. I agree. Expansionism can not be the foundation of your progressive movement.

That being said, a simple attitude adjustment can solve that problem. Wanting to live healthy, happy and equally is more healthy than competing and knocking eachother down in selfish quests for excessive wealth.

its about being satisfied, even if it means reducing america to a third world nation. thats why it wont happen willingly.

[RenDaHai]

While I do agree that many people are bad and will continue to be bad regardless of education and consequences, I do NOT believe that most criminals are inherently bad people. If we can save those people from criminality, the VERY few truly disturbed will seem like a minor issue. You following me? I know what you mean, I just don't think our main problems are rooted with EVIL people. There are more psychopaths successful in business than there are psychopath killers. We need to re-orient our ideas of what is right and what is wrong and develop some sort of consistency that reflects reality. Bankers cause more harm than criminals. How many bankers on death row?

I see what you mean.

But it doesn't even have to be inherantly evil people. In a society there will always be those people who fall off the end. I mean look at our world compared to the ancient world.... Look at the privilege of our society compared to others. We still have as many criminals. This fable was written over 2000 years ago and it addresses the problem that we still see today. Maybe there will always be this element in society.

The greatest privilege in this life is to have good loving parents. Money doesn't matter one bit. Even when we get to a place where our society has amazing education that is equal for all, we still can't save a person from all his influences. His family, his friends. His DNA.

[bawang]

to the ancient world.... Look at the privilege of our society compared to others. We still have as many criminals. .

we have MORE. this is not the status quo. fundamental things in our civilization have changed.


I see what you mean.

But it doesn't even have to be inherantly evil people.

there are plenty of people out there who are inherently evil. modern western society SELECTS for evolutionary traits that are categorized by religion as evil.

[Syn7]

its about being satisfied, even if it means reducing america to a third world nation. thats why it wont happen willingly.

No, it's about unrealistic unsustainable expectations! These are not inherent to human nature. These are social constructs that can be changed with time. Maybe they will need to hit bottom to change. But like an alcoholic, not everyone needs to lose everything in order to make positive change. Sometimes a lil knowledge and wisdom does the trick.

[Syn7]

The greatest privilege in this life is to have good loving parents. Money doesn't matter one bit. Even when we get to a place where our society has amazing education that is equal for all, we still can't save a person from all his influences. His family, his friends. His DNA.

Sure we can. We do it all the time. For All The Above. The bigger question is....

do we have the right to profile citizens that show no criminality in their actions? Should we map all babies genomes and correct them early? Is that a good or bad thing? Does this open up more doors to bad situations or close them? Should we take children away from parents that don't follow the cookie cutter mold? Would they be better off with or without them and how do we decide? Where do we draw the line? Or do we handle it on a case by case level?

None of this is easy.

[bawang]

No, it's about unrealistic unsustainable expectations! These are not inherent to human nature.

cancerous growth is not inherent to human nature, but its vital for the survival and prosperity of america in its current state.

i know people talk about surviving zombie apocalypse. they would not survive another great depression.


Sure we can. We do it all the time. For All The Above. The bigger question is....

do we have the right to profile citizens that show no criminality in their actions? Should we map all babies genomes and correct them early? Is that a good or bad thing? Does this open up more doors to bad situations or close them? Should we take children away from parents that don't follow the cookie cutter mold? Would they be better off with or without them and how do we decide? Where do we draw the line? Or do we handle it on a case by case level?

we shouldnt, but it will happen. at least in china. its the only way for PRC to maintain stability. to take obedience to the next level, beyond social engineering and pschological warfare, to the biological and genetic level.

[Syn7]

As UnPC as eugenics are, there are very valid points that support it's use and necessity. Studies are starting to show that on average humans are getting dumber.

But in isolated cases, some are smarter than ever. It's just the sheer amount of sheep bring down the averages below what we have observed in the past.

[RenDaHai]

Sure we can. We do it all the time. For All The Above. The bigger question is....

do we have the right to profile citizens that show no criminality in their actions? Should we map all babies genomes and correct them early? Is that a good or bad thing? Does this open up more doors to bad situations or close them? Should we take children away from parents that don't follow the cookie cutter mold? Would they be better off with or without them and how do we decide? Where do we draw the line? Or do we handle it on a case by case level?

None of this is easy.

We shouldn't do any of these things unless the situation is extreme (life threatening birth defect, abusive parents etc. etc.) So there will always be people who we can't mould. And from them we will get some spectacular ones, and some despicable ones. It will still be unavoidable and we will have nasty people.

Free will implies evil. YOu can't have free will without evil. Its an old argument. So unless we take away free will of our citizens we will always have the evil element.

It is worth it to keep the free will right? So perhaps we need to think of containment as opposed to cure in this case.

[Syn7]

Well I'm doing my part. I only breed with smart good looking women!!!

[Syn7]

We shouldn't do any of these things unless the situation is extreme (life threatening birth defect, abusive parents etc. etc.) So there will always be people who we can't mould. And from them we will get some spectacular ones, and some despicable ones. It will still be unavoidable and we will have nasty people.

Free will implies evil. YOu can't have free will without evil. Its an old argument. So unless we take away free will of our citizens we will always have the evil element.

It is worth it to keep the free will right? So perhaps we need to think of containment as opposed to cure in this case.

What is the diff between 100% restrained free will and a simple lack of free will? One makes you an automaton and the other makes you go insane!


The information age is polarizing the world. I see two ends. One is war and death, the other is wisdom and understanding. I think simple restriction will lead to the former. But the latter is achievable. Never 100%, of course. But more than good enough.

Most people are who they were raised to be. Maybe we should start there huh. Truly bad people are not the problem. It's selfish greedy people. People who have been taught to take more than they give. Even when they preach and rationalize to show they do give when infact they are just lying to themselves and everyone else. Like Christians, for example. Not all, but most.

[bawang]

Free will implies evil. YOu can't have free will without evil. Its an old argument. So unless we take away free will of our citizens we will always have the evil element.


psychopathy is caused by faulty gene aka "the warrior gene" causing decreased ocular lobe activity in the brain, leading to lack of empathy, fear and remorse.

the harsh old world laws were an early form of eugenics.

Well I'm doing my part. I only breed with smart good looking women!!!

i breed with strong, powerful women who can produce a race of super warriors witht the strength of 10 ronnie colemans.

[RenDaHai]

What is the diff between 100% restrained free will and a simple lack of free will? One makes you an automaton and the other makes you go insane!


THere is a difference. YOu will go insane and you will rebel and the cycle will start again. But all the while you will revel in your conscious decisions.

When you don't have it at all you are just a robot... maybe you are not even conscious at all.

I mean, even when restrained at least you can dream freely. But with no free will you won't even have that becasue it changes the way you think.

[RenDaHai]

Well I'm doing my part. I only breed with smart good looking women!!!

I am more moral and less picky, I breed with good smart looking women.

[bawang]

THere is a difference. YOu will go insane and you will rebel and the cycle will start again. But all the while you will revel in your conscious decisions.

When you don't have it at all you are just a robot... maybe you are not even conscious at all.

I mean, even when restrained at least you can dream freely. But with no free will you won't even have that becasue it changes the way you think.

choice is an illusions. humans have varying degrees of impulse control.

[RenDaHai]

choice is an illusions. humans have varying degrees of impulse control.

Jury is still out on that one. All decisions exist as a probability wave. But why not call that wave 'free will'.

[Syn7]

I am more moral and less picky, I breed with good smart looking women.

Clever.

I don't really care how smart somebody looks.

[Subitai]

I'm also a CT resident...

I've had a sick feeling in my stomach all day. As a father of 2...you start to ask yourself, "what terror must have been playing through the childrens' minds"?

I keep rolling this massacre over and over in my mind... the pain doesn't go away.

As someone else said, if it can happen in sleepy ol' CT, you feel like it could happen anywhere.

I wanted to take the wife and kids to the movies tomorrow... sux that now I even how doubts about going to a movie theater.

New school uniforms mabe... kevlar vests.

I feel sad and like I have to puke, this friggin' sux. I can't even put myself in "Those Parents Shoes".

D A M N Friggin' H I M

[TAO YIN]

I saw a Virgin Air commercial, a short one. The CEO of that company, is in a plane, and of course, hovering over his layout first class seat, while flying in space...

Hey man what are you doing today? Ah, nothing much, going to take a flight to space. Check out the sites...

There is no way to change individuals without changing society too. Taking guns away simply tells crazy fuukks to plow over kindergarteners at crosswalks and bus stops. Banning cars won't help, because then that just tells crazy fuukks to work hard to become lunch ladys and poison the whole school.

The only way to fix this is from the top enforcing some impossible utopia.

In any case, can we please keep putting more people out of work, stop trading and bartering with other nations, raise taxes, build more universities rather than have any kind of on the job training, idolize the bling, forget family values, remember that gay is the new cool, that being stupid is the new cool. And that we are best. Divide and conquer, please.

[rett]

http://ktla.com/2012/12/14/former-fbi-agent-talks-about-the-mindset-of-mass-shooting-suspects/

The above is an interesting short news interview with a former FBI agent who was a first responder at a school shooting and who has interviewed killers from workplace/school shootings and similar. One thing he says is that people who do these kinds of deeds have been preparing for a long time and that there actually are a lot of signs. He describes it by saying they "leak a trail of breadcrumbs" even if they're trying to hide it, and gives some examples of things to look out for.

[Syn7]

It isn't that people ignore the signs, it's that they don't recognize the signs. They are there, but if you don't know what to look for, you may not notice. You may see a change, but you probably won't link it to the end result until hindsight kicks in. The average public is pretty ignorant about these kinds of signs. Also without proper perspective and a real understanding of these signs, the average guy will most likely misdiagnose and/or misinterpret the signals.

Also if you take two guys with the same mental defect and #1 lives a normal happy life and #2 goes on a spree, you can really see what happened when you compare their experiences. Having some of these defects does NOT automatically mean you are prone to violence. On the other end of that spectrum, if #1 and #2 are sociopaths and #1 kills a ton of kids, that does not mean #2 will. So an initial diagnosis means very little without context and behavioral observations over time.

It's tough to call these things unless the right people are watching the right person for the right length of time. Short of forcing everyone to get a psych degree, I'm not sure how we deal with that without causing a panic and having everyone pointing fingers at innocent people.

Random acts of violence like this may very well just be a fact of life. IMO illegal weapons and street murders are far more important. In most of those cases the social issues are what caused the criminality and not some mental defect or anti social tendencies. We should tackle something we can actually fix that does more damage. Then maybe after we solve that, we can come revisit this issue.

[David Jamieson]

Update and amend the gun laws in regards to who gets access.
Update, uphold and improve mental health services.
Put greater focus on the value of compassion into the early education system.
Tear down social constructs that support violence as an answer to a problem.

From a personal perspective, look well to your heart. What's in there?

regards.

[bawang]

Random acts of violence like this may very well just be a fact of life. IMO illegal weapons and street murders are far more important.

middle class people expect america to be like paradise on earth. endless food, drugs, sex, games, living like gods on mount olympus. so when reality intrudes, it really shocks them.

the same people terrified of things like this usually also think of third world as a kind of hell, and third world people as less than human.

[David Jamieson]

middle class people expect america to be like paradise on earth. endless food, drugs, sex, games, living like gods on mount olympus. so when reality intrudes, it really shocks them.

the same people terrified of things like this usually also think of third world as a kind of hell, and third world people as less than human.

while the first statement is a little blankety, it is overall a fair observation.

[bawang]

while the first statement is a little blankety, it is overall a fair observation.

i mean if we bring ourselves down from the clouds and view our world with humility, then while mass shootings are a tragedy, its not something that america is immune to, nor should it, because this is not heaven nor utopia. this is a normal country like everywhere else in the world. there will always be crazy people.

mass killings are not exclusive to "dirty brown countries". we are all human.

[Syn7]

Update and amend the gun laws in regards to who gets access.
Update, uphold and improve mental health services.
Put greater focus on the value of compassion into the early education system.
Tear down social constructs that support violence as an answer to a problem.

From a personal perspective, look well to your heart. What's in there?

regards.

I think these two are the most important. By FAR!

Not just mental health service, but public awareness as well. People need to know the facts. Mental health issues can be manageable and safe. Mental health issues does NOT mean crazy or dangerous.

The early education thing is SOOOOO important. Most of who we will be is decided in before we go into grade school. We are like lil computers and if the initial programming sucks, everything after that will be so much harder. Not that you can't change or anything like that. It's just really hard to change things that were put into you before you knew what anything really was.

As for the glorification of violence, meh, whatever. If people knew better they would just lose interest. Instead of battling effects, we need to get on causes. Bandaids are lazy and sloppy. Necessary sometimes, but quite often used as a path of least resistance. It's pure weakness.

[Syn7]

i mean if we bring ourselves down from the clouds and view our world with humility, then while mass shootings are a tragedy, its not something that america is immune to, nor should it, because this is not heaven nor utopia. this is a normal country like everywhere else in the world. there will always be crazy people.

mass killings are not exclusive to "dirty brown countries". we are all human.

Bawang. You're a smart guy and you make many great points, even when it concerns Ronnie Coleman, but you really need to step outside your bias from time to time. At least try to be somewhat objective. While many westerners are rank and file sheep robots, many are not. You aren't, do you think you are that unique? Not everyone born into a system agrees with it. What are you doing to change things you don't like? Being sarcastic online is, at best, a release.

How many people on here don't believe this:


mass killings are not exclusive to "dirty brown countries". we are all human.


More westerners agree with you than disagree. It's just that most are too weak or selfish to do anything about it. But that doesn't mean they don't agree. To a point, anyways.

[bawang]

well, im in college and see a lot of young people living in perpetual childhood and living in a bubble. i see a lot of apathy and disconnection to the real world.

im used to dealing with hundreds of people who havent had a single real job for 20+ years, so thats my mindset.

[Syn7]

well, im in college and see a lot of young people living in perpetual childhood and living in a bubble. i see a lot of apathy and disconnection to the real world.

im used to dealing with hundreds of people who havent had a single real job for 20+ years, so thats my mindset.

Whatcha takin? In Halifax?

[bawang]

im in guelph ON rite now. i left halifax because it was a rotting carcass.

[wenshu]

middle class people expect america to be like paradise on earth. endless food, drugs, sex, games, living like gods on mount olympus. so when reality intrudes, it really shocks them.


well, im in college and see a lot of young people living in perpetual childhood and living in a bubble. i see a lot of apathy and disconnection to the real world.

im used to dealing with hundreds of people who havent had a single real job for 20+ years, so thats my mindset.


im in guelph ON rite now. i left halifax because it was a rotting carcass.


Because of its low crime rates, clean environment and generally high standard of living, Guelph is consistently rated as one of the country's best places to live.[3][4] Guelph has been noted as having one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country throughout the 2008–2012 global recession,[5] and has ranked at the bottom of Canada's crime severity list for the past five years.[6]

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

Sounds like your a wee bit sheltered yourself.

And it's not like there aren't bourgeois enclaves full of entitled brats with silver spoons clenched firmly betwixt their cheeks in China. People in the middle class that I know all work 80+ hours a week and are just happy should they have a job with decent health insurance.

If you ever make to Southern California, I'll be happy to show you around the slums; might make you homesick for some of that good old third world provincial Chinese flavor.

[Syn7]

im in guelph ON rite now. i left halifax because it was a rotting carcass.

No argument there. Some nice lil spots on the island tho.

So you are taking what?

[Syn7]

Sounds like your a wee bit sheltered yourself.

And it's not like there aren't bourgeois enclaves full of entitled brats with silver spoons clenched firmly betwixt their cheeks in China. People in the middle class that I know all work 80+ hours a week and are just happy should they have a job with decent health insurance.

If you ever make to Southern California, I'll be happy to show you around the slums; might make you homesick for some of that good old third world provincial Chinese flavor.

Dude, he's from Halifax. That is 3rd world slum lands!!!



http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials/122142-crime-statistics-violence-in-halifax


Nationally, Halifax ranked second, behind only Winnipeg, for highest homicide rate among census metropolitan areas..

[RenDaHai]

mass killings are not exclusive to "dirty brown countries". we are all human.

No but they are far more prevalent in third world countries. It is important not to forget that even though everyone is afraid to say things like that for fear of being branded a racist. Our society is not perfect but it is moving the right direction.

[bawang]

No argument there. Some nice lil spots on the island tho.

So you are taking what?

im taking agriculture cereal grains.


If you ever make to Southern California, I'll be happy to show you around the slums; might make you homesick for some of that good old third world provincial Chinese flavor.

i come from village with no electricity water or toilets. then i moved to black ghetto.

[Drake]

Either ban guns or make them ridiculously difficult to get.

The environment in which the 2nd Amendment was written is not the one we live in now. We are no longer a bunch of colonists hiding in the dark, afraid of natives, the British empire, and clinging to life in a terrifying new world.

People want guns to defend themselves against government? Funny, because the government I see is crying on national television because one man was able to slaughter so many innocent children.

[RenDaHai]

Ban Guns.

But if you don't think you should ban guns (which, by the way, makes you a twat) Then I have an idea;

Make Public liability insurance mandatory if you own a gun. The insurance would cover paying millions in damages to people hurt by that gun. The insurance is more for more dangerous guns. It would be illegal to own a gun without insurance and the penalty would be very serious. This insurance would be very expensive and would dissuade people owning guns, certainly owning more than one gun or a gun with a high rate of fire and large magazine.

I mean, cars have to be insured 3rd party right? Thats the law, so make guns insured too.

[Drake]

Ban Guns.

But if you don't think you should ban guns (which, by the way, makes you a twat) Then I have an idea;

Make Public liability insurance mandatory if you own a gun. The insurance would cover paying millions in damages to people hurt by that gun. The insurance is more for more dangerous guns. It would be illegal to own a gun without insurance and the penalty would be very serious. This insurance would be very expensive and would dissuade people owning guns, certainly owning more than one gun or a gun with a high rate of fire and large magazine.

I mean, cars have to be insured 3rd party right? Thats the law, so make guns insured too.

Insurance isn't going to bring back those kids. Or the people in Aurora. Or the people in Tucson. Or the dozens of folks shot every single day.

[Syn7]

Either ban guns or make them ridiculously difficult to get.

The environment in which the 2nd Amendment was written is not the one we live in now. We are no longer a bunch of colonists hiding in the dark, afraid of natives, the British empire, and clinging to life in a terrifying new world.

People want guns to defend themselves against government? Funny, because the government I see is crying on national television because one man was able to slaughter so many innocent children.

**** son, I'm more worried about you than the British!!! :eek:

The 2nd amendment was to protect citizens against ALL tyrants, foreign and domestic. Seen any tyrants lately? I know I have. And they would take over if they had half a chance. It's not that I think everyone should arm up, I just think the option is a good thing. You wanna start working on gun solutions, start with illegal firearms. They kill more people in one day in the states than all the legal guns killed this year! And make HUGE fines for people who don't store their tools properly. It's not that I'm a gun nut, I don't own any automatic rifles and don't plan on getting any. But I don't agree with declawing a house cat either. To me that just seems profoundly and absurdly stupid as far as the cat is concerned. The problem is NOT guns, it's ****ed up people living in a ****ed up society with unsustainable unrealistic ****ed up ideals. No wonder people are going nuttz! Yeah let's castrate everyone, that will fix everything!:rolleyes:
Then what? We rely on YOU for everything? People giving up rights and relying on others too much IS the problem.

[Syn7]

im taking agriculture cereal grains.



To what end? Some sort of rural agricultural plan for back home?

[Syn7]

Ban Guns.

But if you don't think you should ban guns (which, by the way, makes you a twat) Then I have an idea;

Make Public liability insurance mandatory if you own a gun. The insurance would cover paying millions in damages to people hurt by that gun. The insurance is more for more dangerous guns. It would be illegal to own a gun without insurance and the penalty would be very serious. This insurance would be very expensive and would dissuade people owning guns, certainly owning more than one gun or a gun with a high rate of fire and large magazine.

I mean, cars have to be insured 3rd party right? Thats the law, so make guns insured too.

Not a bad idea. Still don't wanna see all guns banned tho.

It would be a good way to reduce gun ownership in general but would create some issues like only the wealthy could afford to have one. Despite there are many responsible gun owners of all socio-economic classes. So basically the only poor people with guns would be the ones kicking in your door or sticking to your head at a red light.

[RenDaHai]

**** thing. You wanna start working on gun solutions, start with illegal firearms. They kill more people in one day in the states than all the legal guns killed this year!

Yes, and where do these illegal firearms come from? I'm presuming they were legal when they were manufactured for the most part?

Quite obviously banning guns mean there are fewer guns made. Which means the only illegal guns available will be ones imported at great risk or stolen from police or military... either way they will be extremely expensive on the black market, much more than they are now.

This dramatically reduces the problem.

[Syn7]

Yes, and where do these illegal firearms come from? I'm presuming they were legal when they were manufactured for the most part?

Quite obviously banning guns mean there are fewer guns made. Which means the only illegal guns available will be ones imported at great risk or stolen from police or military... either way they will be extremely expensive on the black market, much more than they are now.

This dramatically reduces the problem.

You may want to do a bit of research on how legal guns become illegal.

I also feel that improperly stored guns should be a crime. If your gun ends up on the street, you should be held accountable for whatever that gun does, just as if you pulled the trigger yourself. You will be a murderers co accused.


Look, the whole point of the USA was to NOT end up some Orwellian society. The British Crown made similar arguments we hear the US making today regarding freedoms. What changed? A few hundred years of complacency and a complete lack of respect for the realities of our existence!

[RenDaHai]

The problem is NOT guns, it's ****ed up people living in a ****ed up society with unsustainable unrealistic ****ed up ideals.

No, the problem quite clearly IS guns. You will always have ****ed up people. Its a relative state. THe problem is that intelligent people like you have been so brainwashed by cultural programming that you can't accept that allowing everyone to buy guns is retarded. There is literally no close to valid argument for allowing guns, and literally everyone in the civilised world agrees on this except for America.

The 2nd amendment is badly written and full of unnecessary commas that confuse things.

It says 'Arms' NOT guns. A bow or a Knife fits into this category, you do not have to take it as guns. But also if you argue that at the time they meant guns, no at the time they meant muskets. Now, fine, allow people to have muskets, they take 10 seconds to load and are accurate over about 20 yards. Thats much better. Still enough to scare someone. Not as dangerous as an AR-15 that even a semi automatic could load and fire 50 shots in the time it takes the musket to load and fire 1.

[RenDaHai]

You may want to do a bit of research on how legal guns become illegal.

You too, my argument is still good.



I also feel that improperly stored guns should be a crime. If your gun ends up on the street, you should be held accountable for whatever that gun does, just as if you pulled the trigger yourself. You will be a murderers co accused.

Yes, that makes sense, but is a lot better banning them all together.



Look, the whole point of the USA was to NOT end up some Orwellian society. The British Crown made similar arguments we hear the US making today regarding freedoms. What changed? A few hundred years of complacency and a complete lack of respect for the realities of our existence!

Guns don't stop that happening. There is no way a militia can stand up to the might of the technology and training of the American army. Besides if anything America is more 'Orwellian' than England.

[Syn7]

No, the problem quite clearly IS guns. You will always have ****ed up people. Its a relative state. THe problem is that intelligent people like you have been so brainwashed by cultural programming that you can't accept that allowing everyone to buy guns is retarded. There is literally no close to valid argument for allowing guns, and literally everyone in the civilised world agrees on this except for America.

The 2nd amendment is badly written and full of unnecessary commas that confuse things.

It says 'Arms' NOT guns. A bow or a Knife fits into this category, you do not have to take it as guns. But also if you argue that at the time they meant guns, no at the time they meant muskets. Now, fine, allow people to have muskets, they take 10 seconds to load and are accurate over about 20 yards. Thats much better. Still enough to scare someone. Not as dangerous as an AR-15 that even a semi automatic could load and fire 50 shots in the time it takes the musket to load and fire 1.

Having inferior weapons defeats the whole purpose.

Also, I never once said I advocate "allowing everyone to buy guns". You shouldn't assume my position is the typical NRA stance. The NRA are complete waste of skin *******s.

[RenDaHai]

Virtually every gun starts out as a legally manufactured product, but the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) points to three common ways guns move from legal distribution channels to the criminal market:

Corrupt federally licensed gun dealers: Federally licensed gun dealers send more guns to the criminal market than any other single source. Nearly 60% of the guns used in crime are traced back to a small number—just 1.2%—of crooked gun dealers. Corrupt dealers frequently have high numbers of missing guns, in many cases because they’re selling guns “off the books” to private sellers and criminals. In 2005, the ATF examined 3,083 gun dealers and found 12,274 “missing” firearms.

Straw purchasing: Straw purchasing is the most common way criminals get guns, accounting for almost 50% of trafficking investigations. A straw purchaser is someone with a clean record who buys guns on behalf of someone legally prohibited from possessing guns. Straw purchasers are often the friends, relatives, spouses or girlfriends of prohibited purchasers. The two Columbine High School shooters recruited friends to buy guns for them at Colorado gun shows. One of the buyers admitted she would not have bought the guns if she had been required to submit to a background check.

Gun Shows and private gun sales: Gun shows have been called “Tupperware parties for criminals” because they attract large numbers of prohibited buyers. A loophole in federal law allows unlicensed or “private” sellers, many of whom work out of gun shows, to lawfully sell or transfer guns without conducting a criminal background check. Gun show dealers have been known to advertise to criminals with signs that read “no background checks required here.”



Seems like if you banned guns altogether, it would take away a lot of the illegal ones too.

[Syn7]

You too, my argument is still good.



Yes, that makes sense, but is a lot better banning them all together.



Guns don't stop that happening. There is no way a militia can stand up to the might of the technology and training of the American army. Besides if anything America is more 'Orwellian' than England.

Illegal guns have more to do with wealthy jerks making money off the good faith of ignorant manufacturers, than any sort of legal acquisition from some gun store making it's way to the street. Not to mention that a percentage of seized guns "magically" make it back on to the street. Besides, if I can buy a LAW illegally, who cares if you can buy a Roscoe at Walmart. Take guns away and disturbed people will just learn chemistry. Mass killings are not hard.

And do you really think a smaller groups of guerrilla fighters can't beat the all mighty American army? You are nuttz!!! Especially here at home. Or is your argument that even if it did come to all that, you would lose so why even try?

[Syn7]

Seems like if you banned guns altogether, it would take away a lot of the illegal ones too.

Your quote made my point for me. And most guns isn't enough. If most illegal guns are gone and all legal ones are gone, you still have a disproportionate advantage on the wrong side of the spectrum. Regulating ammunition is a far better idea.

You wanna stop illegal guns, crackdown on major dealers who hide behind money and diplomacy! And stop arming rebels for **** sakes!!!

And what about duck hunters and stuff like that? Should we all just go to the supermarket and STFU?

[RenDaHai]

Illegal guns have more to do with wealthy jerks making money off the good faith of ignorant manufacturers, than any sort of legal acquisition from some gun store making it's way to the street. Not to mention that a percentage of seized guns "magically" make it back on to the street. Besides, if I can buy a LAW illegally, who cares if you can buy a Roscoe at Walmart. Take guns away and disturbed people will just learn chemistry. Mass killings are not hard.

And do you really think a smaller groups of guerrilla fighters can't beat the all mighty American army? You are nuttz!!! Especially here at home. Or is your argument that even if it did come to all that, you would lose so why even try?

Yeah, killing a lot of people is possible in a lot of ways. But as we have established most gun crime isn't that. Most of it is when someone has a gun to hand when they are angry or committing a crime. This is a lot harder to do with chemistry.

Ok, I see what you mean, it would be worth fighting, but I don't think that possibility is a good enough reason to allow guns. Besides if it was that major a situation then there would be defectors from the army and police and you could access weapons. Plus you still have your chemistry.

[RenDaHai]

Your quote made my point for me. And most guns isn't enough. If most illegal guns are gone and all legal ones are gone, you still have a disproportionate advantage on the wrong side of the spectrum. Regulating ammunition is a far better idea.

You wanna stop illegal guns, crackdown on major dealers who hide behind money and diplomacy! And stop arming rebels for **** sakes!!!

And what about duck hunters and stuff like that? Should we all just go to the supermarket and STFU?

Because your average criminal will find it hard to get hold of a gun when there are only a few (like in England, there are still guns, but they are hard to get). There will be much fewer criminals with guns, so you would be much less likely to be in the situation.

Guns would require a bit of organisation and you will be at the disadvantage anyway because you will likely not have your gun with you and there will be several of them anyway.


Duck Hunters? Use a bow. More skill. Hunters **** me off. Whoever fires a gun in a forest is a dickhead. You can't see through the leaves so you don't know what is behind the thing your shooting at. Its stupid. If there are dangerous animals around, then sure, have a shotgun, two barrels, two shots. Thats enough.

[Syn7]

Look, it's not like I don't agree with some of your points. I just think the whole pandoras box thing is valid. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. This is the price of technological advancement. I can make a gun with a 3D printer in my home. What do you suggest we do about that? Ban 3d printers? Focus on the Ammo, not the guns. Your solution is there. Not that I can't and don't press my own shells, but I still have to buy the stuff to make it. I don't have a workshop full of mills and molds. But if I did, there would be nothing stopping me. All the stuff I need to make my robots can be used to make weapons instead. Should we outlaw electromechanical engineers from using the tools of their trade too? This is the info age, man. Anyone with an average intelligence can build a laser or fab a gun. It takes practice, but it's not the hardest thing to do. I can make a crude zip gun with household items. Imagine what could be done with the right tools. The same tools used to make all the other gadgets we all feel we need. Look, you getting my point? Banning stuff doesn't make it go away. Drugs take brains and gear to make, all illegal. How is prohibition working out for you?


I disagree with your hunting issues. Using a bow may be "sporting" to some. But it's a ****ty way to feed your family. And you know the stuff you buy at safeway is gonna just get worse and worse. We have no idea what these chems will do to the species, yet we push foreword anyways.

Granted, there are irresponsible hunters out there, but for the most part it's pretty safe if you think first shoot second. Not everyone is as useless as Dick Cheney with a gun.

I was raised to handle guns, it's just a part of who I am and where I come from. I learned gun safety as a small child. Never have I had a problem. They are all secure, and they are all trackable. I'm also in the process of designing gps mods for them. They already have RFID tags. Ofcourse I'm the only one who can access that info, but it doesn't have to be that way. I just went above and beyond because I am not retarded!

[Syn7]

Duck Hunters? Use a bow. More skill. Hunters **** me off. Whoever fires a gun in a forest is a dickhead. You can't see through the leaves so you don't know what is behind the thing your shooting at. Its stupid. If there are dangerous animals around, then sure, have a shotgun, two barrels, two shots. Thats enough.

Also, I would rather have bird shot land in my back yard than arrows or bolts. Bird shot is pretty harmless on its way down, unlike actual bullets(depending on the arc). The last thing you want is a bunch up people shooting bows in the air. Trust me!

Not that I don't have issues with hunting in populated areas, but as we have well established already, some people are dumb as ****!

[RenDaHai]

Look, it's not like I don't agree with some of your points. I just think the whole pandoras box thing is valid. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. This is the price of technological advancement. I can make a gun with a 3D printer in my home. What do you suggest we do about that? Ban 3d printers? Focus on the Ammo, not the guns. Your solution is there. Not that I can't and don't press my own shells, but I still have to buy the stuff to make it. I don't have a workshop full of mills and molds. But if I did, there would be nothing stopping me. All the stuff I need to make my robots can be used to make weapons instead. Should we outlaw electromechanical engineers from using the tools of their trade too? This is the info age, man. Anyone with an average intelligence can build a laser or fab a gun. It takes practice, but it's not the hardest thing to do. I can make a crude zip gun with household items. Imagine what could be done with the right tools. The same tools used to make all the other gadgets we all feel we need. Look, you getting my point? Banning stuff doesn't make it go away. Drugs take brains and gear to make, all illegal. How is prohibition working out for you?



Yeah, i do get your points.

And where there is a will there is a way. I reckon I can make a pipe gun in my garage.

But it takes a lot of effort. If you ban guns you will still get the crazy psychos but with their home made kit they won't kill as many. And what it will stop is the heat of the moment shootings. People using a gun in a road rage incident, shooting a guy over an argument, etc. It will be more exclusive to higher level planned crimes.

I realise there will be some parts of the states where there are dangerous wild animals or on farms where there are foxes eating your chickens or where you can actually hunt regularly enough to live on. Yeah, maybe some guns should be allowed for this kind of thing, but specialised ones, location specific and highly regulated.

Its just the best way to go. For the public consciousness, for the message, for the cultural imprinting, guns need to be illegal and everyone needs to understand why.

We already live in a culture where we don't all have the same rights. I don't have the right to prescribe medicine or make an arrest and nor should I. Some rights are privileges which need to be earned. A gun is such an extreme thing that we should make people demonstrate their responsibility before letting them have one.

[Syn7]

Motivating *******s to learn more destructive methods is not a cure.

Let's say this guy had no guns so instead he made a Molotov incendiary with a napalm reserve and lobbed it into a classroom. Or into the school bus. It would have been a lot worse. Especially if he is willing to die along with everyone else, which was clearly the case here. This was a general revenge fantasy coupled with a massive case of depression.

Who can't find a bottle, gas, benzene, polystyrene and a rag? Lil kids make these things in their back yards all the time. Add thermite and magnesium strips and you have something very ugly and very EASY to make. How do you erase that knowledge? You can't. Surely an adult wouldn't need to put much thought into making a good one. The instructions are even in wikipedia!

I have no issue with regulation. Well, not all, but some anyways. By all means, close the gunshow loopholes. Make psych profiling mandatory at the expense of the purchaser by qualified professionals who specialize in this field, and make it a longer process. If you need a gun for whatever reason, surely you can put in the year or so it should take to get one. Also make federally certified firearms courses mandatory. You must pass the exams and you can only apply once every 5 years. You fail, you wait 5 years before you can try again. There are all sorts of ways to go about it. I would also like to point out that in Canada the household per gun ratio is VERY high and yet we don't have anywhere near the problem you have. Granted many of these guns are long guns, but make no mistake, you can take a tone of people out with a semi-auto rifle whether it looks like an m-16 or an wooden hunting rifle. Same mechanics. And by all means, remove all semi-auto bursts and fully auto weapons from civilians. Not that a conversion is that hard, but atleast it would keep dumb people from spraying crowds. Also I have no issue with limiting mag sizes. If you are legit, no reason why can't just have extra mags. No need for these huge drums and extra long hadgun clips.

Again, I have no issue with strict requirements. Just not so strict that you have to be security, law enforcement, military or a rural farmer to have one.

[Syn7]

Yeah, i do get your points.

And where there is a will there is a way. I reckon I can make a pipe gun in my garage.

You can make a devastating pipe BOMB in your garage. With household items. You can even make a pressure bomb with shrapnel, baking soda, vinegar, a pipe, sealant and a small jar! It's common knowledge. We teach our children how to do it in science class in grade school. They simply need to think it thru a bit more to make the volcano a bomb instead.

I wouldn't be typing these formulas if they weren't easily accessible common knowledge. Trust me, there are many other ways to do damage that I will not be discussing here. A guy who makes even hobby rockets can make a devastating bomb. Not to mention that fireworks are a great source of materials that are otherwise illegal or hard to acquire without a license. Try buying Potassium Nitrate without ending up on some no fly list!!! But I can go buy fireworks down the street. Silly.

[Sardinkahnikov]

This information is available. We even have while not confirmed, but shown pretty strongly, that we can figure this out right down to a biochemical level.

That's interesting, could you indicate me some articles, if you remember any especific one?

As to gun control, it seems like an obvious measure. To me it seems the objective of the murderer was not to simply kill children, but exercising some sort of power, even if a malevolant one, in his society, a necessity brought upon by genetic factors, their social manifestations and the resulting psychological syndrome. He probably wanted people to know that he was the one who did it, that he could and did destroy their lives. Whatever social neglect or lack of love he perceived in his life was apparently worse than infamy, I suspect.

However, if people don't really push lawmakers to do it, such prohibition will hardly take place in the USA. Between gun industry lobbyist, compromising scumbag senators and moronic gun owners, the probably congress won't create any drastic gun control law anytime soon.

The 2nd amendment may have been written as a means to give the common people a lawful defense against tiranny, but, frankly, do you see any modern day american average citzen fighting "tiranny" or any sort of agression from the central government, gun in hands? Most people want to have guns because they feel like they have a second pen1s when they have an assault rifle in their hands.

[bawang]

To what end? Some sort of rural agricultural plan for back home?

gonna do reseaerch for kellogs

[Syn7]

The 2nd amendment may have been written as a means to give the common people a lawful defense against tiranny, but, frankly, do you see any modern day american average citzen fighting "tiranny" or any sort of agression from the central government, gun in hands? Most people want to have guns because they feel like they have a second pen1s when they have an assault rifle in their hands.

If pushed far enough, yeah, I do think people would fight for freedom. You don't need guns to hurt people. You don't need guns to hurt many people really quick. Just opportunity and some thought. Removing guns would simply change the focus of deranged lunatics who wanna kill kids. You can kill 20 kids without much effort. It's just a fact of life. Focus on the social issues that make people do these things and you will be on the right path. Short of profiling kids in some Orwellian fashion, there isn't much you can do about seemingly normal people who snap like that. The best we can do is educate people on how to handle themselves in dangerous situations and work on the things that make people go crazy like this. It's no coincidence that it's usually a 20-30 year old white male. Clearly the shifting demographics and the polarization of wealth are making a huge negative impact on the social classes that have been dominant in the past. I'm not saying it's bad that white men are no longer lords, I'm just saying the psychological effect of reality and the bubble are causing harm in many way. It's mostly because many of us lie to ourselves and to eachother. It all matters,whether you're talking about gang warfare or some idiot whiteboy shooting up his school!


We have so many examples since the beginning of civilization of showing governors turning on the people. But no, I'm just stupid. Everything is so different now from every other example in the history of mankind! No really, we've all changed. We are good and nice now. 50 thousand years of war and killing ended in a handful of generations, yeah that holds up!!! So I'm just gonna cut my nuttz off, put on a collar and be a good lil rank and file citizen. Coz as long as I'm fed and warm who cares! Do you really not see the parallels between what is happening today and all the prior examples of government misconduct ending in violent revolution?

Most of you walk around with no less than 3 rfid chips, two of which you probably aren't even aware of, and have no idea have they even work or just how vulnerable they are to abuse. Not just from a government, but from anybody. I can steal your info off your rfid devices within a four meter distance. A sniffer is an easy tool to make and use. You don't need to be oppressed, you are doing it to yourselves.

You are right tho, many get big weapons to feel cool. But a reasonable screening involving check and balances with psych profiles should weed most of these people out. Also, there is no need for any citizen to have a giant fifty cal in their garage. I mean, there are limits ofcourse.


Also, the statement "It's easier to get a gun than it is to get healthcare in the US" speaks VOLUMES!. Not about gun control so much, but about how the US places very little emphasis on mental health and the negative stigma attached to that conversation. Maybe had the USA placed a proper amount of emphasis on mental health 60 years ago when it should have, you wouldn't be in this lil quagmire! Never too late to start. More people have mental health issues than not. It's time to address this reality with an open and honest discussion about the negative and POSITIVE aspects of mental health. Not just talking head sound bites from cable news stations! Nodding and saying "oh yes, we should work on that" is NOT a solution. Man up already.

[Syn7]

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Gx6F7Zp8LmU/UM6G-ZveFJI/AAAAAAAAGkM/ZV9_RjfkBqA/s576/12+-+1+%283%29+%281%29k.jpg

[Drake]

Speculation about an oppression that isn't happening. Meanwhile, people are dying every day.

The box is already open.

[Syn7]

The box is already open.

What, exactly, do you mean by that?

[rett]

In the mid 1800s the USA still had slavery. And the rest of the civilized world shook their heads. In this regard the USA, an amazing and vibrant and innovative country that I admire with every bone in my body, was an embarrassment.

Defenders of slavery put forward all kinds of specious arguments in favor of their barbaric dehumanizing exploitation: including the fact that slaves are mentioned in the Constitution.

Now the USA is shackled with another anachronistic relic: liberal gun laws that put extremely destructive weapons in the hands of crazy people. And the rest of the civilized world are shaking their heads and tut tutting with all right.

Defenders of guns are putting forward flawed arguments based on things like the second amendment (which doesn't apply to a modern social context or to modern semi-automatic weapons) and defending yourself from the "gubment" and "dem d@mn revenuers" (yeah, good luck fighting the government:rolleyes:).

The self-defence argument and "only criminals will have guns" are also flawed. Liberal gun laws are like a destructive spiral. The surroundings become more dangerous, so decent folk feel they need guns to counter it, which makes more and more powerful guns available, which makes the environment more dangerous. And so on.

[Syn7]

In the mid 1800s the USA still had slavery. And the rest of the civilized world shook their heads. In this regard the USA, an amazing and vibrant and innovative country that I admire with every bone in my body, was an embarrassment.

Defenders of slavery put forward all kinds of specious arguments in favor of their barbaric dehumanizing exploitation: including the fact that slaves are mentioned in the Constitution.

Now the USA is shackled with another anachronistic relic: liberal gun laws that put extremely destructive weapons in the hands of crazy people. And the rest of the civilized world are shaking their heads and tut tutting with all right.

Defenders of guns are putting forward flawed arguments based on things like the second amendment (which doesn't apply to a modern social context or to modern semi-automatic weapons) and defending yourself from the "gubment" and "dem d@mn revenuers" (yeah, good luck fighting the government:rolleyes:).

The self-defence argument and "only criminals will have guns" are also flawed. Liberal gun laws are like a destructive spiral. The surroundings become more dangerous, so decent folk feel they need guns to counter it, which makes more and more powerful guns available, which makes the environment more dangerous. And so on.



In Canada there are approx. 3 guns per household on average. Yet we have significantly lower gun murders, murders in general. What we don't have are high powered automatic rifles and conceal and carry permits are not given out easily. Something to think about. And they found a LAW on the highway by my house. So clearly we do have these high powered weapons, just not legally. Still, lower murder rates. Why? We are more tolerant, have better access to health care and generally have(had maybe) a bigger percentage of middle class. Less racialized ghettos, less prisons, less authoritarian abuse. Shall I go on? If the amount of guns was relative to the murder rate then Switzerland, Israel and Norway would have murder rates similar to the US, and places like Ireland, Scotland, Mexico, Jamaica, Bermuda, Bahamas and Sri Lanka would have low rates. But guess what? Not so.


Now don't get me wrong here, Canada has 30.8 guns per 100 residents whereas the US has 88. So clearly you have more guns. Infact the most guns of anywhere in the world. But outright prohibition has never been the answer. I can't think of any case of prohibition that actually worked as advertised. Get rid of crazy guns, eliminate semi burst and full auto, regulate ammunition like a mother****er and crackdown on manufacturers and dealers using weak laws or loopholes to pump these things out in such numbers. And considering the gun culture in the US, not unlike alcohol, prohibition would create massive black arms markets and trafficking would become significantly more profitable. And you still have like millions of illegal guns making the rounds, guns that are not reasonable. Like submachine guns and fully auto rifles with all the extras.


The 2nd amendment isn't the route I would take to justify a position against prohibition, but it was brought up so I covered that. Complacency is a ***** tho. Most people don't know they are being screwed till it's over. But then IMO, you guys need to make a **** ton of amendments in many areas. It's not a bible, update or fail, up to you.

Most of my social views are progressive, my economic views are more centrist but mos def left to YOUR center. But on this, I just don't see prohibition as an answer. Look at what all the other prohibitions have done to your country. Alcohol, drugs, gambling. They all ended up creating powerful criminals. Prohibition simply doesn't work when enough people want whatever is being denied. And trust me, MILLIONS of Americans will by illegal guns with NO regulations if you outright ban them. Toughen up the regs if you have to, in some cases you don't even enforce your own rules. By all means, get on that. But don't go too far or it will be ugly for you.

Can anyone give me an example of a country wide successful prohibition on anything that enough people weren't willing to give up voluntarily? I can't think of one. But I can go on for hours about the ones I do know about and all the unforseen :rolleyes: negative impacts. Knee jerk reactions aren't the right way to do this. And it's gonna talke a LONG time for you to change your cultural values.

[RenDaHai]

But Prohibition of guns DOES work. It works in a lot of places.

Guns are not an addictive substance like alcohol, drugs or gambling.

Most people want them because people want to feel safe. Some want them because they were born with the genetic defect 'tiny *****'.

Now if there are fewer guns around they will feel safer and you eliminate the need. They will certainly feel less safe if they have an illegal weapon in their house.

Ban guns, do research into affordable ***** enlargement. job done.



Also, on the death statistics above... that says guns are second largest cause of intentional death. All the others are unintentional. That doesn't help your cause.

[rett]

I'm not advocating outright prohibition of firearms. Just the kinds of licensing and oversight procedures common in European countries, coupled with police measures to reduce the availability of illegal weapons. That means no assault rifles, period, (you might as well let private citizens buy claymore mines) and that it is quite difficult to get a handgun.

Hunters and other persons with legitimate reasons to need firearms should still be able to have them, subject to training and background checks.

[Syn7]

But Prohibition of guns DOES work. It works in a lot of places.

Guns are not an addictive substance like alcohol, drugs or gambling.

Most people want them because people want to feel safe. Some want them because they were born with the genetic defect 'tiny *****'.

Now if there are fewer guns around they will feel safer and you eliminate the need. They will certainly feel less safe if they have an illegal weapon in their house.

Ban guns, do research into affordable ***** enlargement. job done.



Also, on the death statistics above... that says guns are second largest cause of intentional death. All the others are unintentional. That doesn't help your cause.


Prohibition of guns CAN work in some places where the population is complacent in regard to firearms prohibition, but not in the US. And you know what is more powerful than addiction? Indoctrination, culture, habit. This is what stands in front of you. Make em illegal and they will do it anyways and now you have just criminalized another large percentage of the population. It won't work. Trying is irresponsible and dangerous.


I'm not advocating outright prohibition of firearms. Just the kinds of licensing and oversight procedures common in European countries, coupled with police measures to reduce the availability of illegal weapons. That means no assault rifles, period, (you might as well let private citizens buy claymore mines) and that it is quite difficult to get a handgun.

Hunters and other persons with legitimate reasons to need firearms should still be able to have them, subject to training and background checks.

....And a psych profile at their own expense. A real one. With actual guidelines that the enforcers actually enforce.

Fair enough. I wouldn't fight that. It's pretty much the rules I live by where I live and I'm fine with them. But we are a very different culture. Proximity is causing alot of spillover these days (thanx by the way), but we're still very different. I've said mine. Like ten times over. I have even changed my position slightly in certain areas after doing some more research. If you actually read my posts you'll see the transitions. And handguns aren't the cats ass anyways. If you really desire a smaller home defense weapon just cut down a shotgun. Works great for stopping people at a short range. Perfect home defense tool. Anyways, this whole thing is interesting to me on a more basic level. Yeah it sucks that people die, but cause and effect on such a scale fascinates me. Anyways, take it how ya wanna. I'm done :)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I don't think that anyone is for ANYONE getting a gun, there is always some form of gun control.
The issue is that a gun doesn't kill anyone, the person using it does.
Yes, guns make it far easier to kill people, but it was a bomb that killed 45 people in the 20's in the US, not a gun.
People will find away to kill as ling as they think that killing is a viable option.
Yes, we will always have the issue of random violence, but mass shootings don't really fall into that category per say.
We need to get better at seeing the signs of potential violence, we need to get better at treating people that need help, we need to stop glamorizing violence and making it acceptable.
On TV they edit a boob or nipples but they don't edit blood from a gun shot or some person getting pummeled.
We need to stop making living beings objects.

[GeneChing]

Clearly there's a cultural issue. I've got no issues with private citizens owning guns. I do have issues with the poor quality of gun education. You know, literally speaking, the 2nd Amendment only guarantees the right to bear arms. That doesn't speak to what kind of arms. As a swordsman, sword etiquette used to be paramount, but even that has decayed in today's society - another tradition caste to the wayside. I see the same issue with all arms today.


Well, I would like to point out that there are distinctions between people who make money off of guns, people who just want to keep their guns and people who have an ideological issue with prohibition.
I'm not quite sure how your point is in response to my point on the China knifing spree, but whatev. I've been saddened by so many of my pro-gun facebook friends using the China spree as an argument against gun bans, when as there were no fatalities there, it weakens their argument severely.


I'm also a CT resident...
Yeah, been thinking about you, brudda. My Shaolin bro Matt Polly (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26966) is in CT too. Condolences to your 'hood.

[wenshu]

i come from village with no electricity water or toilets. then i moved to black ghetto.

I concede.

[wenshu]

Since you cannot conceivably stop everyone who wants to drive their car 100mph on a residential street from doing so we might as well not even have speed limits.

The logic makes so much sense.

[Syn7]

Clearly there's a cultural issue. I've got no issues with private citizens owning guns. I do have issues with the poor quality of gun education. You know, literally speaking, the 2nd Amendment only guarantees the right to bear arms. That doesn't speak to what kind of arms. As a swordsman, sword etiquette used to be paramount, but even that has decayed in today's society - another tradition caste to the wayside. I see the same issue with all arms today.


I'm not quite sure how your point is in response to my point on the China knifing spree, but whatev. I've been saddened by so many of my pro-gun facebook friends using the China spree as an argument against gun bans, when as there were no fatalities there, it weakens their argument severely.

I agree. The comment was in regards to your generalization of "gun supporters". There is not just two sides to this, pro gun anti gun. That is oversimplifying this issue. Yes what happened in China was different. And thankfully china doesn't have a huge gun culture. Imagine if they treated guns the way they treat MA's. Well, ****, then they would be like Americans. And how well did MA prohibition work out in China? Prohibiting something everyone wants gone is fine, nobody will care. Prohibit something that enough people want and you create new illegal markets which in turn create a whole bag of nasty. Gotta change opinions before you can even try something like general gun bans. But by all means, regulate the hell out of it. Just don't make it so it's a money thing. So that only the wealthy can afford to have one.




and Wenshu, that is a weak argument that you could use against retards like the NRA. But not against people who disagree with outright prohibition but are advocates of more regulations, or better enforced regulations as it is in some cases.

I hate how every time I say no to outright bans, people automatically link my opinion to the moron talking head who shows up at every mass shooting memorial to hand out pro gun leaflets. Come on. It's not that simple and you know it. Actually read what people have been saying.

[GeneChing]

I agree. The comment was in regards to your generalization of "gun supporters". There is not just two sides to this, pro gun anti gun. That is oversimplifying this issue. Yes what happened in China was different. Gotcha. I agree with you then on the oversimplification of this all to a gun issue.

On a related note, has anyone else here read Noel Perrin's Giving Up the Gun? I read it years ago and remember it being quite good, great food for thought, especially for traditional martial artists.


Giving Up the Gun: Japan's Reversion to the Sword, 1543-1879 (http://www.godine.com/isbn.asp?isbn=0879237732)
by Noel Perrin

http://www.godine.com/images/0879237732.jpg

Was there ever a time when a civilization, technically sophisticated, and in full possession of its senses, reverted to an earlier, less advanced technology? You bet: Japan, 1543-1879. During this period Japan effectively prohibited all manufacture of firearms and gunpowder, and isolated itself from the rest of the world with a blockade that remained successful until Commodore Perry's celebrated "opening of Japan" in 1854. An altogether fascinating book -- because Perrin is a consistently good storyteller, because even his footnotes are a delight to read, and because this is a story that really has few parallels in modern history.

This is a significant story, and Perrin tells it marvelously well, with rich detail, captivating quotations from observers of the time, both Japanese and Western, and a wealth of revealing comparisons with contemporary technology, warfare, and life in Europe. This little book is both thought-provoking and a delight to read. — Edwin O. Reischauer, Former U.S. Ambassador to Japan

Praise for Giving Up the Gun

Professor Noel Perrin has written an elegant monograph, magnificently illustrated with a wealth of Japanese prints.
—New York Times Book Review

Through his description of one historical event in Japan's national experience, Noel Perrin has written a book as tight and elegant as haiku. The story is a fascinating one: Japan's introduction to, mastery of, and subsequent abandonment of, the gun.… Perrin's work is so crisp and interesting, and so loaded with background information and revealing anecdotes, that the whole peculiar episode it describes jumps to life from its pages.
—The New Republic

[Perrin] has set down a fascinating story, one which has long been inaccessible to the West. Giving Up the Gun, written for general readership, is thoroughly enjoyable -- filled with marvelous anecdotes and illustrations.
—Washington Post Book World

Noel Perrin (1927-2004) was the author of thirteen books and a frequent contributor to Vermont Life, Country Journal, The New Yorker, and other magazines.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Is that on amazon?

[GeneChing]

What isn't on Amazon?

:p

Being a publisher, I always prefer to link to the publishing house itself over Amazon. Go to the source.

[sanjuro_ronin]

What isn't on Amazon?

:p

Being a publisher, I always prefer to link to the publishing house itself over Amazon. Go to the source.

Coolio.
* bitter old *****

[GeneChing]

* bitter old *****
You know it, bro. You know it.

One thing I will say about this horrible tragedy - last Friday was a fascinating study on viral news.

[SoCo KungFu]

I don't think criminalizing drugs makes the problem any better. Clearly prohibition has not going well for us. It's not so diff with guns. Not exactly the same, but not that different either.

These two things are incredibly different. Physical contact with molded steel doesn't cause physiological dependence, aggravating attempts to acquire said substance following removal. Addiction (to include alcohol) is a medical condition, gun ownership is not.

[SoCo KungFu]

Interesting. I disagree about education. But I don't think it's the end all answer either. I think a balance between law and education is the only route.

I do agree that ammunition is a bigger problem than the guns themselves.

Like you said, and I said before, this isn't gonna have an overnight fix. This is going to take a few generations to solve. Some are too lost. We should focus on weeding their ideas out and letting those ideas die off with those people. Not easy, but then no solution will be easy. A gun ban is what I consider one of those "too easy" solutions. In these days, you don't need a gun to kill many in a short time. You have options all over the place.




By the way, Bawang, Greek fire was a WMD in it's day. So no, you didnt need skill to kill many. Just opportunity and the right circumstances.

You misunderstand my point on education. Educate the youth. But the policy making masses are often too crystallized in their ideology by the time they reach decision making age. Few can overcome their upbringing unless they've been vaccinated in youth. In that case, whether its racism, religion, same-sex marriage, acceptance of evolution, or simply should weed be ok or what's the more preferred sport baseball or football, cultural norms do not change through education but through turnover of generations to those with the "updated" knowledge base.

[SoCo KungFu]

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Gx6F7Zp8LmU/UM6G-ZveFJI/AAAAAAAAGkM/ZV9_RjfkBqA/s576/12+-+1+%283%29+%281%29k.jpg

This graph is so inaccurate. Whomever started floating this around the internet is mildly illiterate. The numbers for starters, are simply taken from the CDC. The individual that made this apparently has limited reading comprehension and made the mistake of thinking that "All Homicides" = "Non-Firearm Homicides." Which is amazing considering the presented numbers were categorized as All Homicide and Firearm Homicide. There was no mention of Non-firearm at all. Furthermore those numbers were from 2009. So according to the CDC when you correctly interpret the numbers, 68.4% of homicides were firearm related. These numbers are different from that posted by the FBI, which lists 66.8% of homicides are firearms related in 2009. A whopping 2%. Which leads me to believe that not only was this individual illiterate, but they also cherry pick their stats because if they actually correlated their number with other sources it'd have been blindingly obvious how wrong they were.

Speaking of baseball bats. If we look at crime trends for the past two years (because this is what is readily presented on the FBI's stats page), in 2010 there were 222,154 aggravated assaults via "Other Weapons," which when you look at the break down of weapon categories you can deduce that this is referring to any blunt object, excluding your own body (which has its own category). In 2011 there were 207,435 blunt object aggravated assaults. Compared to homicide statistics by weapon; there were 549 and 496 homicides via blunt object for 2010 and 2011 respectively. A little math using FBI's stats tells us that blunt objects account for 4.8 % and 3.9% of the total homicides for each year respectively (vs 67.4% and 67.8% via firearms). So that means with a bit more math, only 0.24% of attacks with blunt objects ended in death of the victim in 2010, 0.23% in 2011. Looking at the breakdown, assaults are not categorized with toxins, explosives, forced drowning etc. So the number of attacks contains a higher number than comparable to homicides. So adjusting for this, there's around a 0.05% increase in those numbers. I'm not going to break out a surety calculation on that change, but I'm going to say that difference is statistically negligible and be done with it.

So apparently, given that the number of attacks via blunt object is a bit under twice that of firearms, and yet such an extraordinarily few result in deaths (vs 8.8% and 8.5% of firearm attacks ending in death for those years), it would seem to me that the notion that "if we take away guns they'll just find something else," is extremely invalid. Statistically, taking away the ability to implement a gun in an attack is the absolute most strategically viable option we currently have at our disposal.

[Syn7]

yup. totally weak. My bad. I didnt think that one thru. It was a repost at like 3 am. Not my data. I still stand by my very clear stance tho.

[Syn7]

Gotcha. I agree with you then on the oversimplification of this all to a gun issue.

On a related note, has anyone else here read Noel Perrin's Giving Up the Gun? I read it years ago and remember it being quite good, great food for thought, especially for traditional martial artists.

Ha, word. My graph pic is proof of that.

[Syn7]

You know it, bro. You know it.

One thing I will say about this horrible tragedy - last Friday was a fascinating study on viral news.

VERY interesting indeed. I am fascinated by the whole dynamic. Gun and news. Add them together and you get a massive cluster**** data crunching wet dream!

[Syn7]

You misunderstand my point on education. Educate the youth. But the policy making masses are often too crystallized in their ideology by the time they reach decision making age. Few can overcome their upbringing unless they've been vaccinated in youth. In that case, whether its racism, religion, same-sex marriage, acceptance of evolution, or simply should weed be ok or what's the more preferred sport baseball or football, cultural norms do not change through education but through turnover of generations to those with the "updated" knowledge base.

I got you. Agreed.

And you can be addicted to cold steel. You can show compulsive tendencies with anything, really. And addiction is not purely medical. It also has many social factors. And I don't buy the whole disease argument. Defect, sure, disease, hell naw! And a defect is no guarantee either way. And not having the defect is not a guarantee either way. But your biggest hurdle is tradition, habit etc.... Not an easy task.

Guns are dangerous and can be misused in horrible ways. They also make it easier to take down a crowd. Won't get an argument from me over that. Totally agree. And if you were a diff country I may think prohibition was a good idea. But you aren't. You are the US and you are deep in it. Just look north to Canada, whats so different? Because we only have an average of 3 guns per home? How many do you need to kill? Your 88 per 100 is insane high, but basically means some people have MANY guns. Try to ban them, see what happens.

If you really were determined to ban them outright, it would have to be a slow process. A generational thing. I can dig that. As long as I can keep mine(the safest stored guns in my area I'm sure) I'm cool. I don't have a bunch of handguns and silencers. I have no fully auto or semi auto bursts. Just rifles, shotgun, and a few old roscoes. And that all I'm willing to admit to ;)

If you register and chip all your legal guns, that will help a lot. Of course you can take out a chip, but it would still help in locating and confirming some things. I amade rfid tags for mine and they aren't be obvious or visible and only I have the code. So if somehow they did go missing, I can track them via GPS AND RFID. The gps part is the hardest part, not done. I like chipping things(and people). My kids will have chips on them in random locations at all times. Of course I will be the on,y one to monitor them. IF something bad happened then I would relay the sequence to law enforcement.

[sanjuro_ronin]

We have to be careful on how we use and interpret stats.
Case in point school shootings.
IN theory, if we reduce the availability of guns, the severity of shooting should drop.
Of course if we want to eliminate school shootings by 100% all we have to do is ban schools and instill homeschooling.
No schools = no school shootings.

[David Jamieson]

Guns are here to stay.
But the laws in the US regarding access are stupid. period.

It is easier to get a gun than healthcare.

That so many don't have an issue with that indicates a cultural problem really. A gun culture is pretty backwards in this context.

Do you really need to have 100 round semi auto pistol clips available?
Do you really need to have assault rifles and assault rifle variants available to the genera public who are clearly not well educated about firearms and in many cases poorly educated?

The second amendment could use some more amending. If nothing else to minimize the amount of killing one person alone can do because of the access they have to high cap clips and assault rifles.

Home protection? Sure, but consider that most people do not deal well under pressure and there is no education or instruction tied to purchasing said home protection.

Laws need to be adjusted according to their effect on society. It's obvious that Americas gun laws are severely lacking the kinds of controls needed to educate people about firearms and quite frankly, access to guns is way too easy.

If America doesn't fix it now, it's only going to go through this again and again again.

[GeneChing]

Ha, word. My graph pic is proof of that. That's an odd graph because it clusters 'killers' together that are really apples and oranges in this topic. The top eight 'killers' aren't really violent or intentional, more accidental (I suppose you could make some argument for drug abuse, but that would be quibbling). Only the bottom two stats are relevant, and they are in the coolest colors, which is a typical way to slant opinions in a graph.

So, should we ban baseball bats?

[sanjuro_ronin]

That's an odd graph because it clusters 'killers' together that are really apples and oranges in this topic. The top eight 'killers' aren't really violent or intentional, more accidental (I suppose you could make some argument for drug abuse, but that would be quibbling). Only the bottom two stats are relevant, and they are in the coolest colors, which is a typical way to slant opinions in a graph.

So, should we ban baseball bats?

Many things kill more people than guns but only guns are made and used exclusively to kill.
That said, the banning of weapons only leads to the development of clandestine weapons, see Okinawa.
Also, banning the HOW doesn't address the WHY.

[GeneChing]

But then, 'Why?' is a huge complicated issue. I've been amused by so many fb comments that we should hire all the unemployed vets to work as security guards. Obviously that's from people who have no idea about the state of education in our country - our public school teachers are poorly paid so how could schools ever afford security guards?

But back to baseball bats... remember this one?

Baseball bat is a hit as a defensive weapon in China (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/01/business/la-fi-china-baseball-bats-20111102)
Although most Chinese know little about baseball, bats are a familiar accessory in a country where the pursuit of money at all costs and a weak faith in law enforcement have led many people to take matters into their own hands.
November 01, 2011|By David Pierson, Los Angeles Times

Reporting from Dingzhou, China — Truck driver Wang Yonggang has never seen a baseball game or sung "Take Me Out to the Ballgame." He couldn't explain a sacrifice bunt.

But Wang's got a good eye for bats. His is a lightweight aluminum model with a long barrel and a sticky rubber grip. He treasures his Chinese-made club so much that he keeps it tucked under the seat of his rig.

"I need it for protection," said Wang, 32, a native of Inner Mongolia who hauls heavy equipment across busy northeast highways stalked by thugs looking to steal loads and siphon fuel. "There's local hooligans everywhere and they'll threaten you if you don't pay them money."

Wang has so far resisted using his stick — even the handful of times he's been shaken down for cash at roadblocks. But if he's ever attacked, Wang hopes that a few hacks of his fire-engine-red bat will scare away the criminals.

In recent years, the offensive tool of America's national pastime has become a defensive weapon of choice in China.

Though baseball has barely made a dent in the consciousness of Chinese sports fans, bats are a familiar accessory in a country where the pursuit of money at all costs and a weak faith in law enforcement have led many people to take matters into their own hands.

"Chinese people do not feel safe today," said Zhou Xiaozheng, a sociologist at People's University in Beijing. "There's a coldheartedness to society."

Before mass urbanization took hold and most Chinese lived on farms, people protected themselves with the family shovel, rake or hoe.

Today, city dwellers have few options. Guns are outlawed. Daggers and machetes require permits. Shanghai and Beijing even require buyers to register their names to buy a kitchen knife.

Bats are less lethal and thus more attractive, said Chi Yiwei, a manufacturer in eastern Zhejiang province.

"You make the wrong move with a knife and you could accidentally kill someone," said Chi, a self-described former hoodlum. "Hit someone with a bat, you'll likely just injure them."

Chi makes a steel-alloy club with a long, thin barrel of exceptional toughness. His website features a video of him smashing red bricks in half with his bat and running it over with a car. In both instances, the bat survives without a dent.

Chi said the breakthrough for the domestic bat industry came six years ago, when authorities banned the online sale of popular collapsible steel rods that fit into pocket-sized holsters.

That gave sellers the idea to turn to baseball bats, whose availability had grown after the industry shifted from the U.S. to China about a decade ago.
Ads by Google

China is now the world's largest manufacturer of metal bats, filling orders for companies such as Van Nuys-based Easton Bell Sports and Hillerich & Bradsby Co., makers of the famed Louisville Slugger brand, according to the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Assn. in Maryland.

Search today for baseball bats on China's leading e-commerce site, Taobao, and you'll find an abundance of options under "self-defense."

When anti-government riots erupted in Xinjiang province in 2009, young men took to the streets waving pool cues, steel rods and enough baseball bats to field a couple of teams.

It's no accident that piles of bats can be found for sale at highway rest stops, where they often command prominent positions at the entrances to convenience stores.

The Shanghai Morning Post recently reported that bats had become a handy tool for drivers hoping to intimidate people should they find themselves in traffic disputes.

Chen Hai, a Shanghai arts dealer, often travels with an aluminum bat lying across the front passenger seat of his BMW sedan.

"I haven't had to use it yet, but it makes me feel safe and prepared," said Chen, 35, who transports valuable artwork through rural provinces that neighbor Shanghai. "Things are unpredictable once you leave the city."

He considered buying a kung fu sword but decided it would be too unwieldy. So he settled on a 34-inch purple-and-green bat, meant for self-defense, that he found at a camping store for $8.

Such bats would never be confused with the $125 handcrafted Marucci wooden beauties swung by St. Louis Cardinals slugger Albert Pujols. Often thinner than conventional U.S. bats, many Chinese models would be useless on the diamond. Customers here don't seem to care. Who needs a tapered handle or fat sweet spot for slugging kneecaps?

Dou Kai, owner of a bat-making company, said his most popular seller was a 30-inch aluminum club resembling a fungo bat, a specialized baseball bat used to hit balls to fielders during practice. He also makes a 25-inch model of hard steel that looks more like a billy club and weighs 52 ounces — about the same as the heaviest wooden bats used in the big leagues.

"That one's purely for self-defense," said Dou, pointing to a stack in his workshop emblazoned with logos such as Commando and Ronin, a reference to the Japanese samurai legend.

[sanjuro_ronin]

IT is far easier to focus on the how than the why BECAUSE it is a very complicated issue and more so because it requires EVERYONE to assume some blame.
Yep, we have to accept that we do NOT live in a vacuum and that all we do and say effects someone else and that we are " our brothers keeper".
And people do NOT want that.
Better to blame guns than to blame ourselves right?
Easier to ban guns than to ban prejudice and social out casting or spend money on mental health.
Happy, content and loved people do NOT go out killing.

[Drake]

You can either ban guns or ban crazy people.

Which one do you think is more feasible?

[sanjuro_ronin]

You can either ban guns or ban crazy people.

Which one do you think is more feasible?

If by feasible you mean easy?

Look, we are a society which means that every action we have has a reaction and even the omission of action causes a reaction.

Sure it is a lot hard to deal with the mental health issue, but THAT is what WILL fix the problem, that and a society that cares enough to stop violence from beginning, rather than lamenting that it happened.

Dude, I see TV and there is a boob blurred out or a nipple censored but the same show will shoe blood, shootings and killings.
There is something seriously wrong with that.
We see the human form every day, we see it at home, we see it at the beach but we are more acceptable of our children seeing violence than a boob or ass?

We need to instill in our kids that ALL life is important, that violence is wrong, that killing any living being is unacceptable, explain to them when and ONLY when violence is a last resort and why it is still wrong.

You wanna keep kids from killing? make the very thought of it seem so repugnant and repelling that it doesn't enter the equation because, guess what? right now it not only IS it in the equation, it carries the most power.

[GeneChing]

More boobs, less blood.

[sanjuro_ronin]

More boobs, less blood.

Well, yes.
:D

[RenDaHai]

More boobs, less blood.

Well I think we can all agree to this.




Was just thinking;

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there another big news mass shooting this year....
In a cinema at the premiere of batman or something.....where like 60 people were injured and a few killed....

Seriously....WTF America

[sanjuro_ronin]

Well I think we can all agree to this.




Was just thinking;

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there another big news mass shooting this year....
In a cinema at the premiere of batman or something.....where like 60 people were injured and a few killed....

Seriously....WTF America

Yes, that happened at the Batman, the dark knight rises premiere I think.

[Lucas]

just the other day at the clackamas town centre near me, there was a guy who unloaded 60 rounds from an assault rifle...luckily he was a very bad shot, he killed 2 people as apposed to the ammount that could have been killed in that attack. He killed himself as well.

[GeneChing]

...on the Dark Knight Rises thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1180266#post1180266).

[Faruq]

This sickening trend. I think I remember an "expert" last year or the year before stating that in every case up to that point where a student (below University level) had been the shooter, he had been bullied. But this year it's been adults so many times. I mean how do we stop something when we can't even agree on what it's caused by? How many times has this happened this year alone? God, what do we do?

[Syn7]

This sickening trend. I mean how do we stop something we can't agree on what it's caused by? How many times has this happened this year alone? God, what do we do?

Does anyone disagree that poor mental health, a slashed then slashed again then again and again mental health budget. The fact that most of the regs aren't enforced very well and the significant lack of general oversight is a huge part of the problem?

[SoCo KungFu]

I got you. Agreed.

And you can be addicted to cold steel. You can show compulsive tendencies with anything, really. And addiction is not purely medical. It also has many social factors. And I don't buy the whole disease argument. Defect, sure, disease, hell naw! And a defect is no guarantee either way. And not having the defect is not a guarantee either way. But your biggest hurdle is tradition, habit etc.... Not an easy task.

Guns are dangerous and can be misused in horrible ways. They also make it easier to take down a crowd. Won't get an argument from me over that. Totally agree. And if you were a diff country I may think prohibition was a good idea. But you aren't. You are the US and you are deep in it. Just look north to Canada, whats so different? Because we only have an average of 3 guns per home? How many do you need to kill? Your 88 per 100 is insane high, but basically means some people have MANY guns. Try to ban them, see what happens.

If you really were determined to ban them outright, it would have to be a slow process. A generational thing. I can dig that. As long as I can keep mine(the safest stored guns in my area I'm sure) I'm cool. I don't have a bunch of handguns and silencers. I have no fully auto or semi auto bursts. Just rifles, shotgun, and a few old roscoes. And that all I'm willing to admit to ;)

If you register and chip all your legal guns, that will help a lot. Of course you can take out a chip, but it would still help in locating and confirming some things. I amade rfid tags for mine and they aren't be obvious or visible and only I have the code. So if somehow they did go missing, I can track them via GPS AND RFID. The gps part is the hardest part, not done. I like chipping things(and people). My kids will have chips on them in random locations at all times. Of course I will be the on,y one to monitor them. IF something bad happened then I would relay the sequence to law enforcement.

Compulsive tendencies are not addiction. Addiction is a physiological change, such as destruction of dopamine receptors (which is largely why addicts relapse before cellular receptors can return to base levels). Addiction is very much a medical condition.

As for abnormal/psychotic behavior, see oxytocin, oxytocin receptor abnormalities (such as oxytocin receptor polymorphism). I wasn't just pulling words out my ass earlier. These are real things and while not concrete, show a strong indication to the chemical manifestation of "social" behavior. I'll ask again because no body seems to respond. What will we as a society do with that information? You guys up north have all that health care. We don't have that luxury here. Something is going to have to give. But I don't see treatment curbing the tide anytime soon. Assuming we can even get it instilled. Heck, right now there's a republican governor trying to cut public health funding for the mentally ill in his state budget.

I don't think banning guns will work. I support a mix of what Japan and a few Euro nations have done. A mix of various increased controls, random inspections from public officials, mandatory safety courses (in Japan its a week long and you have to pay to attend, not some little day camp crap) and proof of intent to use. Blue prints have to be provided to city officials outlining where in the house the weapon is stored and ammo must be stored separately. Stronger measures than that....I'd say banning sale of ammo to civilians or taxing the crap out of it. Not possession, just distribution. And production can only be on gov't contract. If you can make your own, ok. Most can't or are too lazy to do so. And in a couple decades no one will care either way. In this way, people can still have what they need for self defense, but you blow through your stock at an ammo range or hunting, tough ****. Self defense, when smart, you shouldn't ever have to draw your gun anyways. The only issue is rounds corroding over time. Criminals will still do what they do for about 20 years or so. When those supplies run out, then they'll have to find something else. Considering the alternatives are so much less lethal that's fine with me.

This doesn't take away from the social responsibilities. Its about using all of the above. That's what successful Euro countries have done. And I'm not naive enough to think people will just start becoming responsible. It would be great if the world worked that way, but its not. People don't account for their guns and so we have to have a way as a society to control for their failures.

[Faruq]

Does anyone disagree that poor mental health, a slashed then slashed again then again and again mental health budget. The fact that most of the regs aren't enforced very well and the significant lack of general oversight is a huge part of the problem?

You're right Syn

[Sardinkahnikov]

Controlling access to guns would help alot. Even if it could reinforce the black market, the types that usually conduct those mass murderers - socially isolated and psichologically disturbed young men - probably wouldn't easily make contact with shady characters who sell illegals guns.

Another factor that comes to mind as possibly important is the lack of proper PARENTING. If parents could bother to pay more attention to their children and their problems, intead of pretending everything is fine, the risk factors could be eased.

[Syn7]

Compulsive tendencies are not addiction. Addiction is a physiological change, such as destruction of dopamine receptors (which is largely why addicts relapse before cellular receptors can return to base levels). Addiction is very much a medical condition.

As for abnormal/psychotic behavior, see oxytocin, oxytocin receptor abnormalities (such as oxytocin receptor polymorphism). I wasn't just pulling words out my ass earlier. These are real things and while not concrete, show a strong indication to the chemical manifestation of "social" behavior. I'll ask again because no body seems to respond. What will we as a society do with that information? You guys up north have all that health care. We don't have that luxury here. Something is going to have to give. But I don't see treatment curbing the tide anytime soon. Assuming we can even get it instilled. Heck, right now there's a republican governor trying to cut public health funding for the mentally ill in his state budget.

I don't think banning guns will work. I support a mix of what Japan and a few Euro nations have done. A mix of various increased controls, random inspections from public officials, mandatory safety courses (in Japan its a week long and you have to pay to attend, not some little day camp crap) and proof of intent to use. Blue prints have to be provided to city officials outlining where in the house the weapon is stored and ammo must be stored separately. Stronger measures than that....I'd say banning sale of ammo to civilians or taxing the crap out of it. Not possession, just distribution. And production can only be on gov't contract. If you can make your own, ok. Most can't or are too lazy to do so. And in a couple decades no one will care either way. In this way, people can still have what they need for self defense, but you blow through your stock at an ammo range or hunting, tough ****. Self defense, when smart, you shouldn't ever have to draw your gun anyways. The only issue is rounds corroding over time. Criminals will still do what they do for about 20 years or so. When those supplies run out, then they'll have to find something else. Considering the alternatives are so much less lethal that's fine with me. Clearly irresponsible gun ownership for protection can backfire real bad. Just look at this what happened to this *******s mom. Killed with her own gun. And clearly not secured properly. She was a gun nut who died for her ignorance. So while I understand self defense issues, I do not recommend anyone purchasing a firearm without copious amounts of knowledge and understanding. The problem isn't too many guns(to an extent anyways, yall a bit overboard) it's too many guns in the hands of unqualified morons. You may also try screening soldiers better when they come home. "Oh he's a soldier, he knows gun safety" is ridiculous. Especially when back from a tour or three!

This doesn't take away from the social responsibilities. Its about using all of the above. That's what successful Euro countries have done. And I'm not naive enough to think people will just start becoming responsible. It would be great if the world worked that way, but its not. People don't account for their guns and so we have to have a way as a society to control for their failures.

No doubt you make some great points. And for the record, I said addiction isn't just a medical issue. But what I should have said, and meant, is that it isn't just a physiological problem. As far as the rest of the addiction info, no disagreements here.

Japan isn't the greatest example. Their stats are outright lies. They are selective with what they term homicide and what they term murder, and usually it has more to do with how good a chance they feel they have at solving the case. 95% success rate my ass.


Otherwise, I totally agree about the ammo part. Think back to when bubble printers where the ****. Then scanners came out and even though we had all seen a zerox machine, this was an amazing innovation to have at home. Most people who aren't into tech advances didn't see it coming. Same with 3D printers. It won't be long before we all have them. People will have the ability to manufacture arms in the home. They already do, it's just not very good yet. The printed prototypes typically are a one use deal. But that will change. Soon we will be printing metals and composites on the desktop. We will even be able to print shell casings to press our own ammo. But then you still need a bit of knowledge for that one. Charred cellulose, sulfur and potassium nitrate aren't THAT hard to get. The salt peter is getting hard, but there are ways around it. So really, the cat is out of the bag. I would also like to point out the MAJOR diff between a responsible knowledgeable gun owner and some douche who buys a .45 without any training at all. The reason why I am so careful and accountable with firearms is because I knew how to handle them, dis and reassemble them, clean them, use them, before I was 6. Grampa had a "kids gun" for learning. Obviously I wasn't using a 30/30. It was a .22 semi automatic rifle. We all knew how to carry and store them properly. How to always check the chamber and remove tha magazine when not in use. How to carry it so that it has little chance of firing and even if it did it would be facing the least harmful direction, which is typically a few feet infront of you. How to carry a loaded gun with a jacked round while waiting for use. All these things are needed. You need to make people take full courses before even considering their applications. And not just stupid day courses. Like a handful of weekends or something. And an exhaustive psych profile with dynamic back checks. Sworn statements with massive penalties for perjury.

The culture is DEEPLY entrenched. I think the solutions I have outlined like ten times would be more than enough. But I don't think any solution will fix this today. It's gonna take time and it's all on you.

And it's nice to see that the knee jerk ban all guns solution isn't being thrown around as much anymore.

One thing I would like to mention is the spill over of American values across international lines. SO tell me, what does the US have that Canada doesn't but should have? We don't really NEED eachother for very much. But proximity is changing us too. I, and many other Canadians , and people all over the world, would greatly appreciate if you people would start cleaning up the mess in your own backyard before it ruins ours. Bring home some of the resources you use to show everyone how special and right you are and deal with your ****. Please! The US is significantly bringing down the value of the hood, so to speak. And stay the **** out of our politics. Not that we can't talk, just your lobbyists can eat a dick.

[Lucas]

Don't sell guns at walmart...

[Lucas]

Mental health is a huge issue. Obviously every single person commiting these crimes are mentally un healthy. That is without question. Spotting the early warning signs, dealing with them appropriately, having access to proper resources, having anyone who even gives a **** and is willing to act, etc.

I'm a cold hearted ******* though. I don't put much into mental health rehabilitation. Sure it can work but how often do you think it works for people who are at the point of mass murder?

If this was a herd, those people would be the first to be left to the wolves.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Just an FYI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

[GeneChing]

...but I just couldn't resist posting this here.


Police to question Jackie Chan on gun claims (http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1107755/police-question-jackie-chan-gun-claims)
Wednesday, 19 December, 2012, 12:00am
Simpson Cheung simpson.cheung@scmp.com

Police are to question action movie star Jackie Chan over his claim that he once used "guns and grenades" to fend off triad members.

The actor made the claim in the same interview with a mainland magazine in which he controversially suggested the government restrict Hong Kong people's freedom to demonstrate.

Chan said he and other actors used to be bullied by triad members, who used guns to threaten them and extort money.

"In the past, when they bullied me, I hid in the United States. They opened fire at me once I got off the aeroplane. From that moment on, I needed to carry a gun every day when I went out. When I returned to Hong Kong and ate outside, more than 20 people surrounded me with melon knives," he said.

"I pulled out a gun, and had two more concealed. I told them they had been going too far and that I had been hiding from them. Later on, I confronted them with two guns and six grenades," he was quoted as saying.

He did not elaborate on when the events happened and how the confrontations ended. Chan did not say if he still carries a gun when going out.

Chan also condoned some forms of robbery.

"As long as there are people, there are thieves," he said. "If you can get away with gold from HSBC without hurting anyone, that's wonderful, and I think you are a genius. But it is unforgivable to injure anyone if you hold hostages."

A police spokesman said they would follow up on the remarks. A source said officers were trying to contact Chan.

Barrister Albert Luk Wai-hung said it would be difficult for police to collect evidence, as Chan could be making up the claims.

"Even if he says he had guns, or even if somebody saw them, it would not be enough. There would have to be proof they were real," he said.

Possession of firearms without a licence can bring penalties of up to 14 years' in jail.

Chan could not be reached for comment.

[Raipizo]

...but I just couldn't resist posting this here.

I think he's getting a little crazy in his old age.

[Syn7]

...but I just couldn't resist posting this here.

I believe him. You can only be pushed so far. And triads are like flies on ****. If they think they found a good score, they will try to get all they can until they have a reason to stop. Most triads are low level urchins doing what they have to do to get by. Not much unlike every other gangs we have to worry about. On average, most don't make much money selling drugs. So they do what they can. Don't get me wrong, some people make millions, of course. But most of the people are street level and they fight all sorts of problems. They get robbed, go to jail, get high of their own stuff. So robbing a famous actor starts to seem like a great idea.

[Syn7]

http://news.yahoo.com/utah-boy-charged-bringing-gun-school-cites-fears-023430546.html


Just........ wow.
























WOW!

[sanjuro_ronin]

You shouldn't find that too hard to believe when the media reports supposedly responsible adults stating that the CT murders could have been averted ( or at least minimized, whatever that means) if the teachers had been armed.

[David Jamieson]

http://news.yahoo.com/utah-boy-charged-bringing-gun-school-cites-fears-023430546.html


Just........ wow.

WOW!

This is the glaring ******** of the problem isn't it.

Access.

How does a 12 year old get access like that and how does he romp down the street to school with that?

Parent fail? Social fail? Both? All?

More to come, I am certain of it as the spiral of gunsanity sweeps across the US.

[sanjuro_ronin]

If a 12 years old can get an illegal drug, he can get an illegal firearm.

[sanjuro_ronin]

An interesting view:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215107

[mawali]

An interesting view:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215107

Nothing could have prevented this incident! Everything was legal within the present laws of the state. The X factors involve varying assumptions (ususlly false) was the nail on the coffin.
1. In my state (IL) they have been making cuts for mental health for over 2 decades. A noted mental facility (Elgin) has been sending the not so obvious patients into the street with no sources for intervention or review. Just think what will happen when the GOP starts cutting health care initiaves and you do not have to wait. It's happenning now:D

2. The person commenting about POTUS and others about gun control has to be naive. He seems unaware that the NRA is just a sales position, where ALEC and others use that positioning to trick the American people into more purchases by their rhetoric. The memebrs are sane people but the guys at the top of the NRA chain are great at milking the divide they created. Since Obama's election and reelection. sales of the gun sectors has increased at least 4x's the rate of growth of any sector. That is some clever marketing and it is good.

3. Any politician who goes against the NRA is fish food. So people measure their words so as not to **** off those who usr the NRA /Grover Norquistling template. Are citizens so unjknowing that they do not realize that the NRA has power thanks to Citizens United (corporations are people, right and as a consequence money is power). Last election 1/2 billion spent on campaigning on both sides! What if we had put that money into people projects (for US citizens)!:confused:

4. We think mental health is a problem now with so many people falling from the cracks! Take away Education, Emergency Management (anyone remember Katrina and recent Sandy), Pollution, FDA, etc and US will turn into a 4th world country.
Dity water, messed up drug surveillance manufacturing, education for only those who can affort it and what do you get? I wonder!

[RenDaHai]

An interesting view:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215107

interesting... I think you mean 'retarded'.


Starts off saying Obama can't identify with people because he has protection from army... yeah, but he wasn't born with it, he had a life before he was president, and he has this experience and presumably his memory is longer than 5 years.

Then tries to explain that without a gun a citizen has no way to defend against a criminal.... Except for the fact the citizen lives in a society. A society that knows the law and knows when it is violated. Witnesses will help, police will respond, the law will defend your actions, the criminal has all these things against him. This knowledge is powerful. Also countered by the fact that if there are fewer guns fewer criminals will have them as well.

3rd this person tries to justify an AR-15 because it is weaker than a hunting rifle, seemingly unaware that what makes a AR-15 more dangerous is that even in semi auto mode it can fire like 6 rounds per second, has a large magazine and can be reloaded quickly.

Actual quote from article 'Common hunting rifles are far more deadly than an AR-15' Really!???! Ok, lets go to an enclosed room, you have a hunting rifle, I'll have an AR-15 and we'll see who wins.


****!! Read the comments below the article as well. Makes me worry for America.

[RenDaHai]

I mean, did anyone stop to think the reason so many criminals in America have guns, is because they know the citizen might also have a gun and they want to be safe in their crime.

If guns were illegal the criminal would know the citizen doesn't have a gun, and so would be less inclined to use one himself because it makes his crime more serious and more punishable.

The criminals have guns because they need them to rob a potentially armed citizen. Similarly the citizens have guns to defend this. Its a spiral.

If you remove one, you would dramatically reduce the other, for this and the many other reasons discussed.

[wenshu]

An interesting view:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215107

Wow, that is one of the most poorly written pieces of dreck my eyeballs have seen all day and I've read like 4 of David Jamesons posts already. That's saying a lot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/joe-scarborough-newtown-shooting_n_2315100.html

This is interesting. And not just because it is nuanced and articulate.

[sanjuro_ronin]

****!! Read the comments below the article as well. Makes me worry for America.

Glad someone understood what I mean by "interesting".

[Lucas]

so did the world end in australia yet?

[David Jamieson]

Wow, that is one of the most poorly written pieces of dreck my eyeballs have seen all day and I've read like 4 of David Jamesons posts already. That's saying a lot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/joe-scarborough-newtown-shooting_n_2315100.html

This is interesting. And not just because it is nuanced and articulate.

I seriously just Laughed out loud at this. Thanks man...woman..whatever. :p

[Syn7]

This is the glaring ******** of the problem isn't it.

Access.

How does a 12 year old get access like that and how does he romp down the street to school with that?

Parent fail? Social fail? Both? All?

More to come, I am certain of it as the spiral of gunsanity sweeps across the US.

His parents gave it too him. Or atleast that's his story and that is what was reported. Possible that he just said that. But considering the last few weeks, I believe it.

But yes, guns are easy to buy. Legal or otherwise.

[David Jamieson]

His parents gave it too him. Or atleast that's his story and that is what was reported. Possible that he just said that. But considering the last few weeks, I believe it.

But yes, guns are easy to buy. Legal or otherwise.

so...complete parent fail.

What kind of idiot gives their kid a gun and doesn't teach them the basics...such as what caliber goes in it, never point it at anyone (the kid brandished it) and who knows what kind of crappy trigger discipline this kid had, I'm gonna guess none.

So, there is the huge problem with access. Just because you can get a gun doesn't mean you are responsible or knowledgeable enough to have it or use it properly.

There is too much defense of idiocy tied up in this gun rights stuff. You Americans don't actually think your home weapons will give you the upper hand on a corrupt government do you? Because if so, you Americans are failing badly at doing what you say you want the guns for.

Anyway, 700 mayors of American cities are gonna do something about it for the rest I guess.

Probably starting with ammunition tracking, banning of handguns in urban areas, go directly to jail if committing a crime with a gun and an eye towards literally throwing away the key on Murder 1 perps.

They definitely need some stricter gun laws if they don't want these things to pop up once a year or so and to even have "school shooting" moved into the common vernacular...that's just beyond apathy in my opinion.

[Syn7]

Word. And what a surprise. The first time somebody ****ed him off he pulled his gun on them. Who would have thought? an 11 year old overeacting. Let's arm them all, then EVERYONE will be safe!!! :eek:

Bottom line, 40% of guns are sold in America like a candy bar. No regs at all. If the US doesn't enforce the rules they have now, why would new ones help? Not that I'm against tougher restrictions.


Did some research on the NRA. Turns out they, and the GOP for that matter, were very pro regulation until they were hijacked by ultrarights in the 70's. There are even supreme court rulings and opinions by republican judges ****ting all over these new right wingers in the NRA. Then Reagan came and money was needed..... or wanted. Worst president ever. We are still reeling from his mistakes.


I learned VERY young how to handle firearms. But it's not like we ever had unsupervised access. That would have been retarded. I think of all the stuff I blew up when I was little, a gun would not have been used responsibly regardless of the knowledge. That being said, the supervision was part of that education and as I got older, I learned the right and wrong of it. As a small child I could understand basic safety a lot more than I could appreciate the overall context of having and using a gun on my own terms. It wasn't until later on that I was able to use them alone. Ya know, for good reason.

[SoCo KungFu]

so...complete parent fail.

What kind of idiot gives their kid a gun and doesn't teach them the basics...such as what caliber goes in it, never point it at anyone (the kid brandished it) and who knows what kind of crappy trigger discipline this kid had, I'm gonna guess none.

So, there is the huge problem with access. Just because you can get a gun doesn't mean you are responsible or knowledgeable enough to have it or use it properly.

There is too much defense of idiocy tied up in this gun rights stuff. You Americans don't actually think your home weapons will give you the upper hand on a corrupt government do you? Because if so, you Americans are failing badly at doing what you say you want the guns for.

Anyway, 700 mayors of American cities are gonna do something about it for the rest I guess.

Probably starting with ammunition tracking, banning of handguns in urban areas, go directly to jail if committing a crime with a gun and an eye towards literally throwing away the key on Murder 1 perps.

They definitely need some stricter gun laws if they don't want these things to pop up once a year or so and to even have "school shooting" moved into the common vernacular...that's just beyond apathy in my opinion.

This is why I think its utter naivety to keep screaming for responsibility and accountability. Those words that the right side of the isle like the throw around so much. People aren't going to wake up and just be more responsible. We have to be able to deal with the situations when they aren't.

And yeah, at least here in the south, people really do think they are vanguard of freedom from the oppressive centralized gov't. Its pretty scary at times. I mean, you guys hear the news reports, see the jokes on Daily Show. But its a totally different thing when you're down here and its coming out of the mouths of everyone around you. They truly believe this stuff, ape-****....

[wenshu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5MEzCtyRWP8

[GeneChing]

And don't forget those shooter videogames...


Inside the dark, lonely world of maniac Adam Lanza (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4702951/dark-world-of-school-massacre-adam-lanza.html)
Killer lived in windowless lair playing violent video games
Surrounded by posters of weapons, he plotted massacre
Exclusive
From PETE SAMSON, US Editor, in Newtown, Connecticut
Published: 17th December 2012

SCHOOL massacre maniac Adam Lanza fuelled his violent fantasies while hidden away in a windowless bunker plastered with posters of guns and tanks.

Lanza, 20, spent hours playing bloodthirsty computer games such as Call Of Duty and obsessivly studying weapons in the basement at mum Nancy’s home. It came as the first funerals of the victims were held yesterday.

Plumber Peter Wlasuk went into the basement many times while working at the plush four-bedroom house and got a glimpse into the disturbing underground world where Lanza plotted his crimes.

He said: “It was a beautiful house but he lived in the basement. I always thought that was strange.

“But he had a proper set up down there — computers, a bathroom, bed and desk and a TV. There were no windows.”

Peter, 45, said Lanza’s elder brother had previously lived in the basement before moving out.

He added: “Adam then moved down there. The boys were fans of the military. They had posters all over the wall in the basement.

“They had one poster of every piece of military equipment the US ever made.

“It was a huge poster with every tank every made. The kids could tell you about guns they had never seen from the 40s, 50s and 60s “The kids who play these games know all about them.

“I’m not blaming the games for what happened. But they see a picture of a historical gun and say ‘I’ve used that on Call Of Duty’.”

On Friday, Lanza used two handguns and a semi-automatic rifle to shoot dead Nancy at their home in Newtown, Connecticut, before heading for nearby Sandy Hook school.

He forced his way into the classrooms and murdered 20 six and seven-year-olds and six female staff members before killing himself.

The weapons used by Lanza — a Glock, a Sig Sauer and a semi-automatic Bushmaster — were owned by Nancy.

They are the sort of guns that feature heavily in games like Call Of Duty - in which players take on the role of soldiers and shoot dead scores of enemies. The latest version of the game, called Black Ops II, is a huge worldwide hit and will be on the Christmas wish list of millions of youngsters.

Lanza was also wearing a bulletproof vest and battle fatigues similar to those used by the US military in combat.

President Barack Obama paid tribute on Sunday to the innocents massacred by Lanza — and the teachers who died trying to protect their young charges.

Speaking during a vigil at Newtown High School, he said: “We know when danger arrived in the halls of Sandy Hook school the staff did not flinch, did not hesitate.

“They responded as we all hope we might respond in such circumstances — with courage and with love. Giving their lives to protect the children in their care.”

Obama also pledged to fight for gun control laws in America in the wake of the tragedy.

He said: “No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world but that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this? Surely we have an obligation to try?”

More incredible tales of survival emerged from Newtown yesterday.

Pastor Jim Solomon told how one six-year-old girl played dead after Lanza murdered all her classmates — then ran to safety when he moved away. He said: “She ran out of the school building covered from head to toe with blood.

“The first thing she said to her mum was ‘I’m OK but all my friends are dead.’

“Somehow, by God’s grace, she was able to act as if she was dead.

“How at six-and-a-half years can you be that smart, that brave?”

The heartbroken family of the British schoolboy killed by Lanza yesterday told how the last time they spoke he was excited because Christmas was coming.

Dylan Hockley, six, who had moved to Connecticut with his British dad and American mum, regularly spoke to his aunt Judith back in England using the internet.

Judith, 45, of Peterborough, Cambs, said: “Dylan was a typical six-year-old boy, he was confident and happy and loved his family. He was enjoying life in America and had made many new friends.

“His parents and older brother Jake were also enjoying their new life in Newtown, it sounded like such a nice place.

“When I last spoke to them they were looking forward to spending Christmas together.”

Judith said her husband and daughter had flown out to Connecticut to comfort Dylan’s dad Ian, mum Nicole and Jake, eight.

She added: “The whole family are devastated. Everyone is grieving for Dylan. The last few days have been very traumatic.”

- A MANIAC who knifed 23 children at a school in central China on Friday told police he did it because he believed an ancient Mayan prophecy that the world will end on Friday.

p.samson@thesun.co.uk

MyView
BY TERESA BLISS, Child and Educational Psychologist

THERE is no doubt that what children watch affects their behaviour. It isn’t healthy for children to watch people destroying other people.

Video games like Call Of Duty can lead children to become more immune to violence and death.

Without adult mediation, kids may start to think that the violence they see on their screens is normal.

Friends and family portrayed Adam Lanza’s mother Nancy as a paranoid person who stockpiled guns. It is unlikely that she would have been able to give him the influence he needed.

All the time he spent locked away playing the game would have been isolating.

When children are on their own they can’t develop social skills. Without alternative viewpoints his perspective will have been skewed.

Call Of Duty in rampages link

CRAZED gunman Anders Breivik played Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare to improve his shooting skills in preparation of his killing rampage.

The 33-year-old was jailed for 21 years earlier this year for slaughtering 77 people in a gun and bomb outrage in Norway.

The deranged games fan blew up a government building in Oslo killing eight.

He then shot dead a further 69 people, mostly teenagers, at a youth camp on Utoya island.

Another mass murderer who played Call Of Duty was al-Qaeda fanatic Mohammed Merah, 23.

His wife said they played the violent game before his shooting spree across Toulouse, France, in March that left seven dead.

He was killed by cops.
There's more to this article on the funerals of some of the children.

[Syn7]

There's more to this article on the funerals of some of the children.

That's like back in the day when they thought childrens summer diseases were caused by ice cream. Cause you know, kids eat ice cream in the summer, and the diseases only struck in the summer. Pretty obvious that it was the ice cream.

[hskwarrior]

could it all have been a hoax??????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx9GxXYKx_8&feature=youtu.be

[RenDaHai]

could it all have been a hoax??????


No.

This is just propaganda by the conspiracy theorists because they want their guns and they think this steps on that. Inconsistencies are easy to find everywhere because people make mistakes all the time and nothing happens exactly as we would expect it to.

They used to fear the UN invading. That never happened. Now they fear FEMA. Its all the same crazy people.

Face it middle America, the UN are never gonna invade, you have **** all that they want!

[David Jamieson]

If a 12 years old can get an illegal drug, he can get an illegal firearm.

Not in our town he can't.

also, Hitler used maps to plan his invasion! Let's ban maps! And Pens! And little toy tanks and boats that move around on maps! They enable genocide!!!!!

See how weird that tack is?

Blaming video games is bizarre.

you have kids with guns who shoot each other and video games get blamed.
Before video games? Why were people murdering each other then?
I think Ted Bundy committed his acts of heinous meaningless killing sometime around the release of pong 2 and there were no 1st person shooters available.

To blame anything other than the individual, poor laws and ridiculous access levels is silly in my view.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Not in our town he can't.

While I wasn't speaking of Toronto, getting an illegal firearm here is NOT as hard as many may think it is.

[David Jamieson]

While I wasn't speaking of Toronto, getting an illegal firearm here is NOT as hard as many may think it is.

It's not that easy either. Most of the illegal ones aren't for sale to you or me and get absorbed into the criminal world immediately. They are brought across for the criminal market. Of which, there is definitely no shortage around Toronto. There are plenty of scummy dirtbags all over this big old city.

You or I would be hard pressed to get our hands on one of those without already having a criminal connection or a degree away from that.

Besides, I can get pretty much what ever I want that is legal and available by going through the proper channels. So could you I would imagine.

Anyway, stat is about 70% of guns used in crime are from the USA smuggled in. The rest are pretty much stolen from legal owners and that is a serious access question as well. Typically gun storage is a big deal here. Trigger locks = required. Bullets stored in separate secure locker= required. All guns to be in lock boxes=required. Any hand guns en route and you have to notify the Police and the route you are traveling to your gun club etc etc.

You can't even walk into a Canadian Tire and buy a shotgun anymore. Or a walmart or anywhere that isn't a defined sport supply store (fishin and shootin store or farmer supply)

Frankly, I don't care how hard they make it to get guns. It should be hard to get them and t here should be extremely strict rules about ownership and storage etc etc.

I think America paralyzes itself on this issue for no good reason other than fear of government. And the second amendment is always read short.

It's always read by gun supporters as "The right to keep and bear arms" however, there is more than that which gives it a clearer context.

But it reads: "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."

A well regulated militia is essentially an elected police force. So, it's interesting that everyone thinks they and their drinking buddies are some sort of well regulated militia. :rolleyes: And to that end, forgo common sense in regards to the use, sale and distribution of firearms in the nation.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Actually, it isn't that hard once you have the right connections but of course to get those connections one is already going down a road with a very bad ending.
I agree about the militia/police force thing, I just don't think Americans do since they tend to view anyone that works for the government with some suspicion, even cops.

[GeneChing]

It's a fine opportunity for martial marketing. :rolleyes: In all seriousness, I've been approached by a few of our regular freelancers with queries about martial-counters-to-shooter-scenario articles. If anything good comes across, I'll be happy to publish it. I'm always happy to publish good material. ;)


Martial arts school offers free training for educators (http://www.gastongazette.com/martial-arts-school-offers-free-training-for-educators-1.78980)

http://www.gastongazette.com/polopoly_fs/1.78982.1358206612!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_445/neutralizing-a-shooter-4.jpg
Instructors Victoria Little, Sam Barksdale and Ryan Hoover, rear, demonstrate martial arts techniques for neutralizing an active shooter on Thursday January 10, 2013 at Ryan Hoover's Extreme Karate in Gastonia. (Ben Goff / The Gazette)
By Amanda Memrick
Published: Monday, January 14, 2013 at 18:39 PM.

Teachers can lock the door and hide when an armed intruder enters their school.

But that isn’t their only option.

Ryan Hoover of We are Fit to Fight at Ryan Hoover’s Extreme Karate wants to give school employees training and alternative ways to handle a shooter on campus with a newly created “Safer Campus Now” program.

“We aren’t trying to make teachers warriors,” Hoover said. “We only want to give them some options, should the unthinkable happen. The physical response options are only a small part of our program.”

Local school employees will learn some of those options at a workshop Feb. 2 at the West Gastonia Boys & Girls Club. Any local school employee can attend for free as long as they bring their school-issued ID. The workshop is open to all educators from custodians to teachers to principals.

Hoover created the Safer Campus Now program as a response to the tragedy in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six staff members were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary on Dec. 14. Hoover has children in the local school system and has dedicated his life to researching how to make people safer through martial arts training like Krav Maga, which provides a realistic approach to handling violent situations.

Participants will learn both tactical responses as well as ways to physically address an attack. Hoover recently assisted in a similar training course in San Antonio, Texas, where 70 educators learned self-defense tactics.

“We’ll do the lockdown simulation and some lockdown alternatives, and then the physical techniques,” Hoover said.

A shooting incident at a school is typically over in 10 to 15 minutes, often before police reach the scene, according to an active shooter report created by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. That means those on the ground have to be prepared mentally and physically to deal with an active shooter situation.

“During that point we’d like teachers and administrators to have options other than close the doors and turn the lights off,” Hoover said. “Unfortunately, we have a profile of what this kind of shooter is now, and he’s not a warrior.”

Typically, these kinds of shooters seek easy targets, aren’t physically fit and don’t look to get into a gunfight, Hoover said.

Getting educators to think differently about their response in those kinds of crisis situations means making them uncomfortable at first, Hoover said. The natural response of many people isn’t to fight, Hoover said, but if force is necessary and can save lives, it ought to be offered as an option.

“Is poison a good thing? Not unless you call it chemotherapy. Is violence a good thing? Well, no — unless you need it,” Hoover said. “My goal, my hope is that we start and continue a dialogue about better ways of making schools more secure.”

You can reach reporter Amanda Memrick at 704-869-1839 or follow @AmandaMemrick on Twitter.

------

Want more details?

The first Safer Campus Now workshop will be held from noon to 2 p.m. Feb. 2 at the West Gastonia Boys & Girls Club, 310 South Boyd St., Gastonia.

Participants should bring their school ID and wear comfortable clothes.

School employees that cannot attend Feb. 2 can contact Ryan Hoover’s Extreme Karate at 704-867-4020 for additional training opportunities.

Gaston County public and private school employees may train at Ryan Hoover’s Extreme Karate at no charge between now and the end of March.

[Raipizo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=DLUNgRAbR7w

[Syn7]

Interesting to see where this is all going. Lapierre is such a bought douche. They ***** that mental health is the issue not guns but refuse to back off on universal background checks. Stupid. I can't believe some people are so brainwashed retarded that he makes complete sense.

Did you know that only one in ten bullets fired by police actually hit their intended target? And these are the trained people who only shoot to kill. Those statistics do NOT include accidental discharge.

How many people here think that a wooden semi auto hunting rifle is pretty much the same thing as these "assault" weapons? Magazine size is diff. But I have fired both kinds, they feel the same. The biggest diff with the assault weapons is that you can attach a coffee maker to em. :p

When stripped down, there are differences, but not the kind of differences you hear in the media.

And for the record, if I wanted to do maximum damage, semi auto is preferable over fully auto. Choose your shots, make em count. Spraying has it's moments, but for the most part, in these mass shooting scenarios, semi auto is better.

So what's the answer here? Ban all semi auto weapons? I can live with that, I guess.

With a CNC, lathe, drill press and a few other hand tools, you can pretty much make any gun you want anyways. And now with 3d printing being more accessible, people are printing weapons now. So far I have found a decent one off single use. But it's only a matter of time before you will be able to print out good parts. Although, IMO, certain parts will always be better when machined than printed.

[GeneChing]

...and very OT (although I'm not confident about the source :rolleyes:)


DHS using Kung Fu movies to prepare for mass shootings (http://www.thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/dhs-using-kung-fu-movies-to-prepare-for-mass-shootings-t10636.html)
By Igor Toutellalai, American Media Collective

The Department of Homeland Security wants Americans to fight back against violent gunmen with the most effective means of self-defense without the risks associated with gun ownership: Kung fu.

The DHS has recently posted a training video on how to use such items as scissors to defend against an armed assailant. But this only the start in what DHS officials believes will be a popular transformation of American culture, from gun-toting cowboys to high-kicking martial artists.

“Many Americans remember the popularity of David Carradine’s gentle Kwai Chang Caine on the TV show ‘Kung Fu,” said Sally McClusky, a mass murder defense analyst with the DHS who is working on the new program. “We want more Americans to identify with him than all the cowboys he fought, all using his bare hands.”

McClusky says that President Barack Obama is very interested in moving American culture away from a gun-oriented society to one that is more peaceful. She said that the President has instructed the Department of Education to begin working on a new meditation curriculum for Kindergarten through Third Grade, after which students will begin martial arms training.

“For our part, DHS wants Americans to be safe without the risks associated with firearms,” said McClusky. “As we move away from gun ownership, unarmed self-defense is the natural direction that things will lead towards.”

Using existing videos from Hong Kong, DHS and the DOE are working on school training programs for teachers to defend their classrooms using such Kung Fu styles as Drunken Boxing, Eagle Claw, Five Animals, Hsing I, Hung Gar, Monkey, Bak Mei Pai, Praying Mantis, Fujian White Crane, Jow Ga, Wing Chun and T'ai chi ch'uan. Students will also see changes in their physical education requirements as traditional team sports will be replaced with group exercises and katas, which are formulated series of moves designed to teach students the necessary moves associated with the martial arts style they are studying.

The First Lady (Michelle Obama) has already decided that the Let’s Move program needs a drastic make-over in the fight to combat childhood obesity,” McClusky said. “You don’t see fat people doing kung fu, right? By getting Americans hooked on Kung Fu films and practicing unarmed martial arms techniques, we can get a whole lot of people healthier and safer at the same time.”

McClusky said that some teachers, due to medical conditions such as chronic obesity or PTSD will be excused from participation in the program. The DOE is planning to mandate that all teachers unable to handle the physical rigors of martial arts training will be paired with a classroom-based ‘sensei’ who will double as bodyguard and physical education instructor.

“We think that the meditation program will also help with classroom discipline,” added McClusky. “Plus, kung fu movies are full of positive messages like working towards your goals and standing up to bullies.”

This program is likely to be followed by a new DOE mandate banning all firearms, including those carried by security guards or police, from school campuses under what is now being called the ‘Empty Hand Zone’ where all campus defense will follow the kung fu model of unarmed combat.

[Jimbo]

...and very OT (although I'm not confident about the source :rolleyes:)

Yeah, I have serious doubts about that. For one thing, you cannot learn kung fu from videos. Unless of course you're experienced in a system and the vid shows another aspect of it.

If there were a program like that implemented, Krav Maga would suit it way better.

[David Jamieson]

It's a fine opportunity for martial marketing. :rolleyes: In all seriousness, I've been approached by a few of our regular freelancers with queries about martial-counters-to-shooter-scenario articles. If anything good comes across, I'll be happy to publish it. I'm always happy to publish good material. ;)

There's a guy...his name's Rory Miller.
A writer / martial artist / professional badass

He has written some stark realism about violence.
Also I promote him as he's a friend. :)

Anyway, check out Meditations on Violence by Rory to start. He's got a couple of others too bookwise and does seminars. Maybe he could be talked into doing an article for the magazine.

Linkage: Meditations on Violence by Sgt.Rory Miller (http://books.google.ca/books/about/Meditations_on_Violence.html?id=Ylo8PQAACAAJ&redir_esc=y)

[GeneChing]

There's a vid, which I didn't watch, if you follow the link.

Posted: Wed 12:13 AM, Feb 13, 2013
Reporter: Jorge Lopez Email
Updated: Wed 12:35 PM, Feb 13, 2013
Back to News - Home & Family
Local martial arts group says it can help prevent school violence tragedies (http://www.wrdw.com/news/homeandfamily/headlines/Local-martial-arts-groups-says-they-can-help-prevent-school-violence-tragedies-190967961.html)

News 12 at 11 o'clock / Tuesday, Feb. 12, 2013

EVANS, Ga. (WRDW) -- Members of a local martial arts group say they have the tools to help prevent school tragedies like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary in December.

Superior Academy will be hosting a free seminar for Lewiston Elementary students on Feb. 25 and Feb. 26. Group members say they want to prepare kids physically, emotionally and mentally to handle potentially deadly situations at school.

The students are learning Jeet Kune Do. It's a martial arts system developed by Bruce Lee.

Jason Herrera has been in the martial arts business for a long time, but after all the recent tragedies, especially the ones involving children, he wanted to do something.

"Some of the primary issues going on including mental and emotional disturbances," Herrera said.

Herrera, says those can be the triggers that cause people to do something out of the norm. He says his program has the steps to help kids overcome issues before they become serious.

"Situations like Sandy Hook occur because of the lack of emotional mastery in people, young people especially," Herrera said.

So, later this month, he's taking his program to Lewiston Elementary. It's simple and straight to the point.

"The martial arts and the self-defense teach you self control," he said.

And parents agree.

"If you are prepared mentally and physically by martial arts, for example, that would help a lot," said one parent.

Jason Linticum is a Columbia County school physiologist. He says he's looking forward to seeing the program in action and preparing students for any type of situation.

"There's huge benefit to knowing how you're going to react to a situation. Whether it's self-defense or something on a larger scale," Linticum said.

As for Herrera, he says his group is excited about the seminar at Lewiston Elementary and about teaching students these potentially life-saving skills.

And another...

Mountain View Martial Arts offers free self-defense classes for teachers, school staff (http://www.thereflector.com/good_for_you/article_5e25ee90-74ae-11e2-b80f-001a4bcf887a.html)

CONNIE KRAMBERG, a teacher in the Kelso School District, demonstrates a self-defense move with Mike Sonners, a student at Mountain View Martial Arts. Kramberg is also a current student at the facility. Photo courtesy of 4Ever Photography.

Posted: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 9:00 am
Joanna Michaud staff reporter

Starting Feb. 16, Mountain View Martial Arts & Fitness in Battle Ground will begin offering free self-defense classes to area school teachers, faculty and staff. The classes will be offered the third Saturday of each month at 9 a.m., at Mountain View Martial Arts, 807 E. Main St., Battle Ground.

The only requirement to be able to attend the free classes is that participants must show their proof of employment at any school in the surrounding area.

“We want to make this as simple and as inclusive as possible,” said Celenea Mitchell, a Battle Ground resident who took it upon herself to get the free self-defense classes going.

Mitchell, who is a mother, said that after what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, CT, she was filled with “such unbearable sadness and fear” and said she was “irate” that something like that was still able to happen. She said she was thinking of homeschooling her children when she realized she wanted to somehow help all children be safe. Mitchell said she volunteers at her children’s school twice a week, and she helps out other mothers and fathers with babysitting.

“I love them, I love all the staff,” she said. “Truly, I had to do something, not just for my little family, but for all of us.”

So, Mitchell decided to make up some fliers and passed them out at surrounding schools, taking a poll of how many staff members and teachers would be interested if free self-defense classes were offered somewhere. She said she called around and talked to the PTA president of her children’s’ school, the staff at the Battle Ground School District office, the Battle Ground Community Education staff and numerous martial arts instructors.

“I finally found one (a martial arts instructor), David Mason, probably the best one for the job, willing to put out his hand and help the community in a very meaningful way,” Mitchell said. “Before that day, I was starting to feel defeated, it seemed no one was willing to help with the actual teaching of the self defense. I wanted to cry tears of joy and I was elated when he said he would do this.”

Master David Mason, head instructor and owner of Mountain View Martial Arts, will run the self-defense classes for teachers and school staff each month.

“I am very honored and extremely happy to be able to help our school teachers in any way I can,” Mason said.

Mitchell said the self-defense classes will be basically the same each month and school staff can attend as many times as they want, honing the skills they learn or just once, with the idea to practice what they have learned at home. She also said Mason has tailored the class specifically for school staff. Mitchell said they will continue to offer the class for as long as there is a demand for it.

Teachers and/or school staff who wish to participate in the classes can just drop in if they want to, but Mitchell said a phone call or email would be appreciated in order to get an idea of how many people will be attending. Those wishing to participate can contact Mitchell at (360) 566-7068 or by email at 4celenea.mitchell@gmail.com, or they can call Mountain View Martial Arts at (360) 601-7713.

“I know this is not the whole answer to all of the school violence, but I look at it as possible damage control and a gift of empowerment to those who want it,” Mitchell said. “I hope the word spreads and other communities do this. But in the mean time, we are accepting anyone from anywhere who works in a school. I feel it’s the least I can do. They should be treasured and afforded this opportunity, if they so choose.”

[Syn7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCxRl5vglqU


The dems and their non existent cajones have done so well with the new bill so far.

Kinda sad. I don't believe they will even get the background checks in any meaningful and effective way.

[Scott R. Brown]

If people were really serious about saving lives they would ban alcohol, it kills more people and destroys more lives BY FAR than anything else!

Then work on banning cars!

[Lee Chiang Po]

Of the 6 million jews gassed and burned during WW2, a huge number were children. Look at the number of people that were doing this deed. People with children of their own that they loved dearly would without a second thought gas and burn the children of others. These were people that would be determined as completely sane. Most people can easily justify the things they do. The original sin was not murder by the way, it was simply disobedience. Eating of the forbidden fruit when told not to. How evil is that? Satan does not ask you to fornicate or murder, but simply to worship him, and he will give you all worldly things within his power. But then this is all BS. Fact is, the human brain works by chemical reaction. That is why we are all different. Of every 10 people it is difficult to find even 2 that have the same beliefs about everything. They will agree on some things, but not on everything. If we all worked the same we would all think exactly the same. These killers are not insane as such, but just have a rather different way of looking at things. There is nothing we can do to prevent such acts. As long as they have hands that can grip an object they can use it to kill with.

[Syn7]

If people were really serious about saving lives they would ban alcohol, it kills more people and destroys more lives BY FAR than anything else!

Then work on banning cars!

Yeah, it's a bit different.


I'm not for disarming people altogether or anything like that. I don't even have issue with semi auto rifles. Just close loopholes, have realistic background checks for ALL transfers, and basically enforce the laws already there. These giant clips are dumb too, but easy to make. I dunno how that will be enforced. And control ammunition. I.D. and firearm license for all purchases to also be recorded and archived. While I found the registry in Canada to be ridiculous, I see it could actually be useful in the US. If you aren't doing anything wrong, who cares. You register lots of stuff, why is it so bad when it's a gun? In Canada it was mostly a waste of money, not because it's a bad thiong, just cause we don't have enough gun crime to justify the cost. You guys do.

[Scott R. Brown]

Just like alcohol age limits stops underage drinking and drunk driving laws stop drunk drivers, right?;)

People who want guns will get them. We know for a certainty throughout the history of man, that once something is illegal that people will want, it creates a criminal underworld that will provide it for them.

If all these people who want gun control really cared about saving lives the would be even more rabid about getting rid of alcohol.

The fact is more people are killed due to alcohol use then are killed with firearms alone, by far.

These people want to keep their own vices but seek to keep others from owning weapons.

They are hypocrites one and all. Once these bloody do gooders get rid of alcohol, then perhaps they will say something worth listening too.

After all, it isn't people that drink, it is the alcohol that does it to them, therefore, in order to protect themselves from their own irresponsible behavior and my own family and children, we should ban alcohol FIRST, then begin discussions about what to do about firearm safety!

[Syn7]

Not the same. Trans fats kill more people than alcohol. But then non hydrogenated oils change with heat. Maybe we can ban heat too. Silly argument. Obviously you have to draw a line somewhere. Going to one extreme or the other is ridiculous and so is using it as an argument against sensible rules. And as long as education standards keep going downhill, a legal approach will be needed to hold back the tide while yall handle that. You can start by actually appointing an ATF director. No wonder the laws aren't being enforced.

Who said anything about prohibition? All I said was background checks, regulate ammo, simple registry, safety course and oh I dunno, maybe enforce some of the laws already in place. You wanna gun? No problem, go buy one legally. Simple. We regulate and register cars and DL's, what's the difference?

Rather than jumping to the party lines, why not address what I actually said.


None of what I said comes anywhere near prohibition. I have no problem with guns, not even semi auto rifles. And magazine restrictions are never gonna work, too easy to make on your own. But like cars, if you can't pass muster your ass shouldn't drive.

And the 2nd amendment specifically refers to arms in regards to militias. And guess what... your police force is very well armed.



I don't understand why people are so afraid that somebody is going to come take their guns. We all know that **** won't happen anytime soon. And nobody worth mentioning is proposing any such thing.

Of course their are some weapons that should be prohibited. No reason why any civilian needs a like a 50 cal machine gun,LAW's or anything like that. Obviously the same goes for military vehicles armed to the tits too.



I like guns, I grew up with guns, I have guns, I've built guns, I've done some cool mods/fab... I have no problem doing any of the things I mentioned above. I agree some people over react and have unrealistic goals. But you can't lump everyone into two groups, for and against. Many people like me are long time gun owners and stand somewhere in the middle. We like guns but we also agree that some measures need to be taken to keep things under control.

I have also owned illegal guns and had the option to purchase nasty ****. It's way too easy, even here in Canada where we don't have anywhere near the problem the US has. But the US style gun culture bull**** is slowly seeping across the border. Most of our illegal guns that aren't stolen from homes come from south of the 49th. At the very least, keep that **** outta my back yard.


As an ex CO, I would think you would have at least some appreciation for weapon restrictions.






Did anyone hear about the guy who shot himself at the gun safety class? I think it was in Wa.

[Syn7]

And do you really believe everything should be done consecutively? If the world worked that way we wouldn't get anything done.

Alcohol is regulated and if you look at enforcement stats you will see that things like education and road checks have decreased the number of alcohol related vehicular deaths by a significant amount. Why not with guns? Education and checks. Simple.

I don't understand what the big deal is with filling out a form? People do it all the time for all sorts of things and they don't get their panties in a tywist the way it does with this issue. To me it's straight up weird.

[Scott R. Brown]

You are the one not addressing my original point and keep changing the subject.

To be clear, here, I own no guns.

However, if people who wish increase gun regulation don't seek to address the greater problem of alcohol abuse, because presumably, they care about the children and saving lives, then they are being hypocrites.

People have their pet projects and do not consider the greater picture of their hypocrisy. Gun deaths are lower than deaths from alcoholism and other alcohol related deaths. That is a simple fact. But heaven forbid anyone should have to give up their beer. So what if enforcement has decreased deaths and ruined Iives by a minute amount, the total still far out weighs deaths from guns alone, because most violent crimes involve some sort of substance abuse.

Your example of transfats only makes my own point for me but using a different example. Automobile deaths would also be a good example.

It is unimportant which you use. Most people wont give up their cars, their trannsfats or their alcohol even though each one of these causes more suffering and death than gun deaths!

So, people need to get their priorities in order. First, get rid of alcohol and all other mind altering drugs, then watch gun violence and other kinds of violence decline as a result.

Then talk about guns.

But they won't, because people don't want to give up their right to get drunk.

You can't complain about guns if you wont complain about these other great risks to life and limb. Well, of course you can (and I mean you as in society not you in particular ), but you'd be a blooming hypocrite.

[Syn7]

Not the same thing.

I do agree that addiction isn't taken as seriously as it should be. Like 90% of the crimes people go to prison for are related to addiction. And mos def many lives would be saved if we addressed that issue properly.

I don't really drink. If it disappeared my life wouldn't change at all. And I don't eat crap food either, for that matter.

The difference between car deaths and gun deaths is that cars serve a greater purpose for our quality of life than a well armed citizenry. Cars also serve a useful usually peaceful function, guns do not. Especially in the hands of idiots. But hey, if I had it my way there are lots of things idiots wouldn't be allowed to do. ;)

[RenDaHai]

If people were really serious about saving lives they would ban alcohol, it kills more people and destroys more lives BY FAR than anything else!

Then work on banning cars!

But you miss the point.

You don't force alcohol on another person.

Dying from alcohol abuse is completely under your own power and control, it is your decision.

Dying from being shot is not. Guns is a way of influencing other people where as alcohol is only influencing yourself. Taking decisions away from people.

Cars are different. I wouldn't allow people who are really stupid to drive gigantic trucks. It is a serious weapon and in China road safety is a gigantic problem.

It is also the most hideous death. Getting hit by a truck.

If we can invent an iPad surely we can make cars safe. And invent a reasonable alternative to petrol. This is priroity number 1.

[LFJ]

Cars are different. I wouldn't allow people who are really stupid to drive gigantic trucks. It is a serious weapon and in China road safety is a gigantic problem.

They have a new scam going where guys on scooters will wait at a street corner for a car to come along beside them to take a right turn. Then they'll purposely collide with the side of the cars and demand money from the "careless driver" that hit them. They often come away with a couple hundred Yuan per "accident".

I travel underground though, subway, but crossing the street when I get out is the scariest part of my day. :)

[Jimbo]

But you miss the point.

You don't force alcohol on another person.

Dying from alcohol abuse is completely under your own power and control, it is your decision.

Dying from being shot is not. Guns is a way of influencing other people where as alcohol is only influencing yourself. Taking decisions away from people.

Every year, many people are seriously injured or killed indirectly as a result of alcohol, by drunk drivers. It would be one thing if the only people suffering the consequences are the drinkers themselves, but all too often it's not. For that matter, I definitely put texting/talking on the phone while driving in that same category.

[Syn7]

Every year, many people are seriously injured or killed indirectly as a result of alcohol, by drunk drivers. It would be one thing if the only people suffering the consequences are the drinkers themselves, but all too often it's not. For that matter, I definitely put texting/talking on the phone while driving in that same category.

Word, and more strict enforcement and education that was brought in a few decades ago has reduced the number of deaths... by far. Look it up. All that counterattack stuff made a big difference.

[Scott R. Brown]

Not the same thing.

I do agree that addiction isn't taken as seriously as it should be. Like 90% of the crimes people go to prison for are related to addiction. And mos def many lives would be saved if we addressed that issue properly.

I don't really drink. If it disappeared my life wouldn't change at all. And I don't eat crap food either, for that matter.

The difference between car deaths and gun deaths is that cars serve a greater purpose for our quality of life than a well armed citizenry. Cars also serve a useful usually peaceful function, guns do not. Especially in the hands of idiots. But hey, if I had it my way there are lots of things idiots wouldn't be allowed to do. ;)

Guns do serve a greater purpose, they protect the weak from the strong. There is no other defense better for the elderly, the handicapped, small people, and the weak against the strong. The police do not protect they show up later and pick up the pieces.

Not to mention the Koreans during the L. A. riots used firearms to protect their businesses legally.

Firearms are a necessary part of living a life not oppressed by others. Including the government. Governments, throughout history are noted for their oppression. You may trust your government, that is fine I guess, until they take something from you, you u want to keep.

Outlaw alcohol and many if not most violent crime will be greatly reduced.

Or perhaps increase regulation: no one can buy or use alcohol if they are younger than 40. Anyone who drinks underage or drives after drinking no matter how much loses their driving privilege permanently. Anyone who buys alcohol must register everytime they purchase in a National data base to track how much they are drinking. No one can drink more than 2 drinks per day of 8 oz or less. There must be a 2 day waiting period before receiving your alcohol. No alcohol for convicted felons.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yeah, prohibition worked really well the last time and crimes rates were insignificant.
:D

[David Jamieson]

The fact that I can go to a gun show and walk out with a piece because I have a drivers license and then I can turn around and sell that piece to my buddy.

This tells me that the problem is not in having guns, but in the fact that any ass hat wing nut that wants one can have one.

But hey, that keeps getting pointed out over and over again and people keep shouting about their cold dead hands.

Rome didn't disappear in a day...

[Syn7]

Guns do serve a greater purpose, they protect the weak from the strong. There is no other defense better for the elderly, the handicapped, small people, and the weak against the strong. The police do not protect they show up later and pick up the pieces.

Not to mention the Koreans during the L. A. riots used firearms to protect their businesses legally.

Firearms are a necessary part of living a life not oppressed by others. Including the government. Governments, throughout history are noted for their oppression. You may trust your government, that is fine I guess, until they take something from you, you u want to keep.

Outlaw alcohol and many if not most violent crime will be greatly reduced.

Or perhaps increase regulation: no one can buy or use alcohol if they are younger than 40. Anyone who drinks underage or drives after drinking no matter how much loses their driving privilege permanently. Anyone who buys alcohol must register everytime they purchase in a National data base to track how much they are drinking. No one can drink more than 2 drinks per day of 8 oz or less. There must be a 2 day waiting period before receiving your alcohol. No alcohol for convicted felons.


You should read what I advocate. I never once said anything about taking away guns. Stop doing that. Everytime I have this talk I get the neo con party line. Read all my words then comment. I have clearly said I would not ban semi auto rifles or handguns. Under my proposition no Koreans would lose their guns.


If it was up to me, one impaired driving offence would be an automatic 3 month suspension and massive fine. Like 5 digits. Second offense, short prison term with with a 5 year driving ban. 3rd offence, banned for life and at least 5 years in prison. A few folks would go down early, but trust me, things would change. I would also erase all the work done by the hospitality lobby and make it legal and common practice for cops to have roadchecks in parking lots for any establishment that sells or serves alcohol. But that's just me being serious about a serious problem. I know many would scream bloody murder at that one.


You come across like people I know in AA. Everything is always about alcohol. All lifes problems are because of alcohol.

As far as your national alcohol database, that's a bit much. You wouldn't use an alcohol registry to track and trace the bottle responsible for certain crimes, but you do with a gun registry. A record of all serial numbers, shell casing and striation samples all attached to a name that is accountable for their weapon. Allowing your weapon to be stolen would prevent you from getting another one for a certain amount of time. But I would be for keeping health premiums low for people who actually put in the effort to stay healthy. Genetics is what it is, but you can control your health to an extent and I would be all for rewarding good health with tax cuts or whatever. Practically speaking this would screw over a ton of people, but eventually it would balance out and we would be better for it. I would also heavily regulate the food industry and reclassify certain items and make healthier foods more affordable and accessible to the "economically disadvantaged".

And for the record, if people wanna drink themselves to death I am fine with that as long as I don't pay their med bills and they behave. As for guns, I don't care if you wanna shoot yourself in the head, my concern isn't for the guy with the gun, it's for me and mine. Just to be clear are you talking about alcohol fuelled violence or just alcohol related deaths but non violent? Like health problems and accidents? They are two very different issues. Connected, for sure. But what isn't... right?

And like I said before... I have no issue with people legally acquiring firearms. For sport or protection. My concern is with the people who should not have them. Under todays laws anyone can get somebody else to buy a gun for them or go behind some gun store in the alley and attend some impromptu "gun show". Ridiculous.

If you are on the up and up, why not fill out the form, take the day class and wait till the checks are done??? In Canada you cannot just go buy a gun in one day. You can't even get a license w/o taking the safety course. And we have no conceal and carries for average people. I wouldn't be opposed to a straight carry though. On the hip and visible to all. But it would be pretty excessive considering the gun crime rates in most of Canada.

But like I said before, that is all changing. The American style gun ethics are slowly but surely creeping in along with all the other crap. But don't get me started on that. :)

[Syn7]

The fact that I can go to a gun show and walk out with a piece because I have a drivers license and then I can turn around and sell that piece to my buddy.

This tells me that the problem is not in having guns, but in the fact that any ass hat wing nut that wants one can have one.

But hey, that keeps getting pointed out over and over again and people keep shouting about their cold dead hands.

Rome didn't disappear in a day...

Not even a DL David, any gov issue ID will do.

I don't understand why a law abiding citizen would have any issue with the sensible restrictions proposed. You say close loopholes and have background checks with a realistic registry and they say "why you tryna take mah guns!"

Silly.

I like what we have in Canada and never had any personal issue with jumping through these hoops. The fact that you have to have a license to have a gun is just common sense IMO.

My only issue with the long gun registry was the cost and lack of practical necessity. If it was free I would be all for it. But we don't have enough of a long gun problem to justify that kind of cost. The US clearly does.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Syn7,

I am not addressing you specifically, but the greater gun debate as a whole. Many people are advocating getting rid of guns altogether or a number of the scarier looking ones.

I am suggesting that we address the larger problems of society before the gun issue. We could track alcohol consumption and connect the alcohol to the crime just as easily as bullets and weapons.

To be as clear as I was about guns. I don't drink, I have never been drunk. Everyone on my mom's side of the family and I mean EVERYONE are alcoholics. Many of them have died from alcohol related means. My brother and sister are alcoholics and my father was killed by a drunk driver.

I am not actually against alcohol nor am I an anti-alcohol activist.

However, if its good enough for guns, then it is good enough for alcohol. Alcohol is involved in more deaths and violent crimes than guns. To be consistent then, for those who seek greater gun regulation for safety reasons must also advocate greater alcohol regulation.

But they won't because people want the right to get drunk on weekends. They ate hypocrites because they want regulation of what doesn't inconvenience them. They don't want a safer public, the are following a fad.

It is irrelevant if alcohol related crimes and diseases have decreased, alcohol still causes much more human suffering than guns and has done so far longer.

Nor will they regulate cars or transfats because it will cause inconvenience to themselves. People are basically lazy hypocrites. They are fine regulating anything that doesn't inconvenience themselves, but are not what is important to themselves personally.

So I say, i don't drink, let's regulate alcohol more and watch the public debate change and the people who whine about guns start whining about something that impacts them directly.

[Syn7]

I'm all for attacking it all at once, as a whole. Best would be a cohesive social program that covers all of it through satellites. In theory this is already the case, but we both know it doesn't work they way it was intended and fundamental changes need to be made, not just more bandaid ad ons. When something is edited too much, time for a rewrite. You can keep the framework, just reapply them in a more appropriate manner.

I'm not for outright banning anything like guns or alcohol. Or drugs for that matter. The US won't/doesn't do very well under such prohibitions. The desire has to be there. It's about informing people of the realities and waiting for the next gen to do a lil better. That's just how it is.

[Scott R. Brown]

Historically bans do not work in any society. It just goes underground.

[David Jamieson]

Historically bans do not work in any society. It just goes underground.

True, teenagers do not abuse alcohol in public, they do so in the privacy fo their friends homes.

But, it is not easy for them to obtain as it is for someone who is legally entitled to consume it.

the same could be true for guns. At times, it does seem like there is more restriction on alcohol and porn than there is on guns.

As a Canadian, in a country where per capita we have equal guns to the USA I have difficulty wrapping my head around the abuse of firearms in the US. I have no idea what the answer is to get to the problem and start a solution to it beyond knowing that rule of law is probably the only right way to go about it.

[Scott R. Brown]

As a Canadian, in a country where per capita we have equal guns to the USA I have difficulty wrapping my head around the abuse of firearms in the US. I have no idea what the answer is to get to the problem and start a solution to it beyond knowing that rule of law is probably the only right way to go about it.

I am just guessing here, but I would surmise you have fewer fatherless sons who have to gain their sense of identity through gang affiliation.

It is really just a matter of societal breakdown. There was less gun control in the 40's, 50's and 60's than there is now, but fewer gun deaths proportionally, by far, due to a stronger understanding of gun safety and more intact families.

I know people that used to bring their hunting rifles and shotguns to school so they could go hunting after school. One guy I knew went with his junior high school vice-principal. Yes, he brought his shotgun to junior high school with him, and left it in the office til after school. In the 40's you could buy a Tommy gun over the counter at a drug store or through mail order!

Something like 40% of births in America are into fatherless homes. This is a huge contributor to our societal break down. I blame those "d@mn dirty hippies"!!!!:mad:

[Jimbo]

I am just guessing here, but I would surmise you have fewer fatherless sons who have to gain their sense of identity through gang affiliation.

It is really just a matter of societal breakdown. There was less gun control in the 40's, 50's and 60's than there is now, but fewer gun deaths proportionally, by far, due to a stronger understanding of gun safety and more intact families.

I know people that used to bring their hunting rifles and shotguns to school so they could go hunting after school. One guy I knew went with his junior high school vice-principal. Yes, he brought his shotgun to junior high school with him, and left it in the office til after school. In the 40's you could buy a Tommy gun over the counter at a drug store or through mail order!

Something like 40% of births in America are into fatherless homes. This is a huge contributor to our societal break down. I blame those "d@mn dirty hippies"!!!!:mad:

Some great points.

Nothing is going to get better until people care enough to take responsibility for themselves, but with all the ignorant selfishness, that's not likely to happen soon. Guns are simply an instrument that the products/results of that selfishness attempt to legitimize themselves with. I remember when kids could get into a fight, and after it was over it was over. The kids nowadays *seemingly a high percentage of them* no longer seem able to handle conflict of any type without resorting to a gun. Take away guns altogether and they'll find another pu$$y way of dealing with things.

The hippy culture had a big part in this, but not all of it. Deadbeat fathers have always been a big problem, especially in rougher areas. I doubt your typical gangbanger has been influenced at all by 1960s/'70s hippies. I would blame the lasting hippy influence for the great number of narcissistic, spoiled, bratty suburban kids, though.

[Syn7]

Historically bans do not work in any society. It just goes underground.

Sometimes driving something underground is better than allowing a cultural shift through tolerance. If we really want to do better in the future we need to be more proactive, not reactive. But then you have all those idiots who say freedom isnt free then ***** about the cost when it's something that affects them directly in a way they don't like. Truth is... freedom is free. It's all the bull**** constructs abusing freedom that we have to pay for. It's all about choice when you come down to it. The US is full swing in a massive cultural shift. The Neo Con noise you hear is them dying. Like a racoon, out in the open it may fight or flee or choose to dance, but backed into a corner facing death it strikes out with viciousness in a way it doesn't in any other violent situation. This is what is happening to so called "conservative" thought in the US right now.

Canada is a bit of a different story. But then from the US perspective we are huge socialists.

[gunbeatskroty]

Since the post is specifically about the Connecticut massacre, the fault here lies significantly with the mother and no ban would have really helped. She was already a gun enthusiast, and thus had many in her possession, legally.

Her fault lies with her training an autistic kid how to shoot guns as a hobby, which is crazy. I knew a lady who had an autistic son in his 20's and sometimes, little things can set him off, like when he can't operate his remote to the TV (user error) to watch his daily shows, just like the Rainman. His mother had to call the cops a few times because he scared the **** out of her. Imagine if he freaked out but also trained with weapons and has a bunch of guns & ammo at his disposal.

Not all autistic kids are the same and have various levels of Rainman crazy, but I wouldn't teach them how to shoot guns as a hobby nor give them access to them, the hell with that.

[Syn7]

Gun Safe....!!!

[RenDaHai]

As someone from a country that doesn't really have many guns it is exceptionally difficult to understand anyones defence for guns.

I mean, I get it in terms of the countryside.... If i lived in a place with Bears and Cougars (the feline kind) I would want a gun too. But a shotgun will do surely?


In cities? Ok, so you want to defend yourselves.... Whats wrong with a tazer? Couldn't people invest money inventing a tazer that can shoot multiple darts over longer distance? But non lethal.

I mean, i get that everyone wants to defend themselves but why does it have to be by specifically lethal methods?

Surely put money into making a more effective stun gun, then ban actual guns....?

[Jimbo]

As someone from a country that doesn't really have many guns it is exceptionally difficult to understand anyones defence for guns.

I mean, I get it in terms of the countryside.... If i lived in a place with Bears and Cougars (the feline kind) I would want a gun too. But a shotgun will do surely?


In cities? Ok, so you want to defend yourselves.... Whats wrong with a tazer? Couldn't people invest money inventing a tazer that can shoot multiple darts over longer distance? But non lethal.

I mean, i get that everyone wants to defend themselves but why does it have to be by specifically lethal methods?

Surely put money into making a more effective stun gun, then ban actual guns....?

The problem would still remain...the law-abiding citizens would obey it, and the criminals would go around it. Nothing would change, except the fact that law-abiding people would be completely disarmed. A gun ban wouldn't make any difference to the criminals; if anything, it would help them. That's what the rabid anti-gun people just do not get. Seriously, does anybody really think that criminals can't easily obtain guns illegally?

Every year there are instances where guns save lives, but of course you will rarely hear about those. Because it doesn't read as well in the news.

I say this, and I'm definitely not a gun nut, nor even a gun owner, although I do sometimes go and practice at a shooting range. Although I do believe that certain people (non-criminals) should be prohibited from owning guns due to certain circumstances, IMO an all-out ban is not the best solution.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Of course, in SOME places,mandatory ownership of guns is, well, policy and...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

take note:
Gun crime

Further information: Gun violence and Crime in Switzerland
Government statistics for the year 2010[15] records 40 homicides involving firearms, out of the 53 cases of homicide in 2010.
The annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population was 0.70, which is one of the lowest in the world.[16] The annual rate of homicide by guns per 100,000 population was 0.52.[17]

[gunbeatskroty]

As someone from a country that doesn't really have many guns it is exceptionally difficult to understand anyones defence for guns.


Simple, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution is not only about personal defense from robbers and rapists nor is it all about hunting.

It is about enabling the citizens of the USA with adequate weaponry to fight a war, whether it be against foreign invading forces or our own government should it become tyrannical. This is not talking about crazy rednecks, running around in the woods with AR-15's and white sheets on, but that of normal Americans who must now decide whether or not to rebel against their own country that they love. A good example of such exercise in our history would be the American Civil War.

[Syn7]

Of course, in SOME places,mandatory ownership of guns is, well, policy and...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

take note:
Gun crime

Further information: Gun violence and Crime in Switzerland
Government statistics for the year 2010[15] records 40 homicides involving firearms, out of the 53 cases of homicide in 2010.
The annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population was 0.70, which is one of the lowest in the world.[16] The annual rate of homicide by guns per 100,000 population was 0.52.[17]

Note the conditions though. Like Canada, you need a permit. To get a permit you have to qualify. To qualify you have to jump through a few hoops. The conditions under which their guns may be stored, transported and carried are quite strict. And that is for privates. The gov issue weapons are distributed to a trained militia and are subject to inspection 24/7. The penalties for illegal ownership or improper use/storage of a gov issue weapon can be quite severe.

We also have to note that Switzerland, like Canada, has a VERY different gun culture than the US. Compared to the swiss, the US are literally cowboys. And I don't mean that as a compliment.

There are also other factors that reduce their murder rates. Crime rates in general. They have a great education system, most people have reasonable access to post secondary education. The swiss have a better GDP per capita. The list goes on. They are in a better position to succeed in MANY MANY ways.

Let us compare. In the US almost any moron can buy a gun or have one bought for them. They are proposing teaching "competing theories" in school that are PROVEN false. Post secondary tuition has TRIPLED in a very short time. Man, the list goes on. But I think I have made my point.


We can use switzerland as an example, but then we have to make note of all the other things they are doing as well. SUre, they have lower gun crime, but to say it is a direct result of gun ownership is oversimplifying the issue.

[Syn7]

Simple, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution is not only about personal defense from robbers and rapists nor is it all about hunting.

It is about enabling the citizens of the USA with adequate weaponry to fight a war, whether it be against foreign invading forces or our own government should it become tyrannical. This is not talking about crazy rednecks, running around in the woods with AR-15's and white sheets on, but that of normal Americans who must now decide whether or not to rebel against their own country that they love. A good example of such exercise in our history would be the American Civil War.

The 2nd amendment specifically states that you have a right to have a well armed militia. You do. They are called police.

[gunbeatskroty]

The 2nd amendment specifically states that you have a right to have a well armed militia. You do. They are called police.

Wrong, the police is not the militia.

[Syn7]

Wrong, the police is not the militia.

You may want to research that a lil. Take a step back and look at the history of your own police forces. Not to mention the many militia police forces around the world.

As for the second amendment you also need to take a look at the context and time in which such language was used.

[gunbeatskroty]

You may want to research that a lil. Take a step back and look at the history of your own police forces. Not to mention the many militia police forces around the world.

As for the second amendment you also need to take a look at the context and time in which such language was used.

No, you need to research it more.

Militia in US history refers to armed, ordinary citizens not controlled by the State. The police force is controlled by the state. A cop can join the militia if he wanted though.

Many of these "militia police forces" that you're talking about are referencing Communists countries as that's where such terminology stemmed from. If you're a Commie, that's fine...but I'm not and nor are most US citizens.

[David Jamieson]

It's not the guns themselves. It would seem to be about access and education.

In the USA they have a lot of access and not so much education.
That the law gives ignoramuses access without any education verified by some sort of High school course, or license or acquisition certificate as we have up here in Canuckistan is kind of the problem in many respects.

It's a culture of entitlement without making effort.
People want them and they don't want to educate themselves about them in a reasonable way.

Now of course that's not true of everyone, but if access was dependent on education, it might change the culture which in turn would reduce or erase these crazy events happening on what can be deemed a fairly regular basis despite that other stats are used to call them "rare".

they should be non-existent and would be if there were more knowledgeable people about.

[David Jamieson]

No, you need to research it more.

Militia in US history refers to armed, ordinary citizens not controlled by the State. The police force is controlled by the state. A cop can join the militia if he wanted though.

Many of these "militia police forces" that you're talking about are referencing Communists countries as that's where such terminology stemmed from. If you're a Commie, that's fine...but I'm not and nor are most US citizens.

Actually....

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home" but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose". They also clarified that many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court are consistent with the Second Amendment.

so...

[Syn7]

No, you need to research it more.

Militia in US history refers to armed, ordinary citizens not controlled by the State. The police force is controlled by the state. A cop can join the militia if he wanted though.

Many of these "militia police forces" that you're talking about are referencing Communists countries as that's where such terminology stemmed from. If you're a Commie, that's fine...but I'm not and nor are most US citizens.

Your police forces developed from militias. The difference is one is standing, the other is not. At the time the 2nd amendment was written, there were more "militia" than "police". Context matters. If the US decided to do harm to it's citizens and the police and military went along with it, no amount of semi auto rifles would change the facts on the ground. It would be a serious ass kicking. The only option would be to bug out and live in the forest biding your time. But these days it would be like a flies on a cows ass.

That being said, if the gov did become "tyrannical" many police and military would choose to side with the people. Then you could access real weapons.

Why not have a militia armory? Just keep them there. Then you can have the good weapons when you need them.


For the record, I am not about banning guns. I own guns, built guns, modified guns myself. But then I don't live in a place with the kind of problems you guys deal with. Proliferation will never be the answer. Sensible controls are more than reasonable to ask for. Especially to a culture that pimps out their values so much.