ivan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 That victim, one law enforcement official said, was Mr. Lanzas mother, Nancy Lanza, who worked at the school. She apparently owned the guns he used. So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? the 1791 solution goes a good deal beyond keeping muskets out of the hands of half-wits... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? the 1791 solution goes a good deal beyond keeping muskets out of the hands of half-wits... One report was saying the perpetrator was far from a half-wit - had some form of mild autism, but was extremely intelligent, even described as a "genius". So much for "half-wits" being the problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 (edited) US constitution is becoming Koran of the country and the prophets, who wrote it were omnipotent geniuses. Like they were not wrong on slavery! Well, the Constitution is the highest law of the land, so there's that. I don't suppose you disagree with a concept of the rule of law, given that the alternative is, well, to put into place systems like shariah - which is basically carte blanc for religious zealots to do pretty much whatever they want to, or not even bother and just go with an omnipotent dictatorship. Any constitional scholar would readily agree that the 2nd Amendment was very poorly written - even to the point of nonsensical grammar, and therefore very ambiguous in its intent or meaning. As with any part of the Constitution, its up to us moderns to interpret what it all means and make changes accordingly. The right of self defense is a basic one. The right of self defense with a gun is not. Most free societies today get along very well without it. Edited December 15, 2012 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 (edited) Most gun deaths are family members shooting themselves or other family members. The argument that "this tragedy could not have been prevented through stricter gun control" doesn't wash nationwide when these thousands of incidents annually are considered. Perhaps any one incident would not be prevented by stricter gun control, but many, many other tragedies would be. Again, the statistics for other civilized nations regarding gun violence and the effectiveness of their strict gun control policies in preventing it speak for themselves. The difference between those societies and America is stark and tragic. There is no real argument (although there are plenty of non data based phoney baloney ones) that strict gun control doesn't reduce all kinds of gun violence: it does. Anecdote: a guy I used to work with bickered with his wife a lot. What set him apart from the standard Bickersons family situation was this: He had a handgun handy, coming from a gun totin' family, and when he got really pissed, a condition fueled by alcohol, he chose to wave it around at his wife. Fortunately for him and everyone else, this situation did not end in tragedy or even arrest, just divorce. It's a very, very common one here in America, however, and one that we can do something about with better gun control policies. Edited December 15, 2012 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? the 1791 solution goes a good deal beyond keeping muskets out of the hands of half-wits... One report was saying the perpetrator was far from a half-wit - had some form of mild autism, but was extremely intelligent, even described as a "genius". So much for "half-wits" being the problem like typical commie like brainwashed republifuck, of course all you can advocate is to do nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 US constitution is becoming Koran of the country and the prophets, who wrote it were omnipotent geniuses. Like they were not wrong on slavery! Well, the Constitution is the highest law of the land, so there's that. I don't suppose you disagree with a concept of the rule of law, given that the alternative is, well, to put into place systems like shariah - which is basically carte blanc for religious zealots to do pretty much whatever they want to, or not even bother and just go with an omnipotent dictatorship. Laws should reflect current times, and laws should be changed if not working. 2nd amendment is "carte blanche" for gun nuts and their free for all approach. I don't see an shred of difference between that and shariah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Also, why didn't a single mass murdering maniacs go down in a hail of bullets shot by NRA members? It's because a gun in the hand of untrained person is worthless. That is why police and military does the drills and training. For 99% gun just provides a falls sense of security. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? the 1791 solution goes a good deal beyond keeping muskets out of the hands of half-wits... One report was saying the perpetrator was far from a half-wit - had some form of mild autism, but was extremely intelligent, even described as a "genius". So much for "half-wits" being the problem you should reread the quote as you didn't quite grok it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? the 1791 solution goes a good deal beyond keeping muskets out of the hands of half-wits... One report was saying the perpetrator was far from a half-wit - had some form of mild autism, but was extremely intelligent, even described as a "genius". So much for "half-wits" being the problem you should reread the quote as you didn't quite grok it... Reading skilz is not his strong suit. Repeating bunch of bullshit overheard on fox is. You are trying to argue with a half-wit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 mostly i've used hand n' shotguns to harangue hate upon failed fucking electronics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonG Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 This horrible tragedy got me delving into the Bureau of Justice homicide statistics . While the mass shootings certainly get the gun control debate flowing, often I find the back and forth relatively free of hard data. I think we can all agree that there are way too many guns deaths in the US each year, but how do we reduce these tragedies? And, I'm talking realistically. There are millions of guns already on the streets so don't think the calls to just take guns away (or go back to muskets) are really going to go very far. On the other hand, arming everyone so that they can take out crazy sociopaths doesn't seem realistic either. I surely don't know the answer, but the data paints an interesting picture, one that can maybe better inform the policy debate. Source: Gallup Poll General Social Survey What I take from this data is that while overall gun homicides are way down from their peak in the 1990's (esp. when expressed as per capita), multiple shootings are up. Since these certainly make a splash in the media, I think most of us are under the impression that guns deaths are significantly on the rise (this was my impression at least). What have we done to reduce handgun homicides by so much? Can similar tactics be applied to the reduction of multiple homicides? I think comparisons to other countries are interesting and all, but for better or worse we have the situation we have today here in the US with easy access to firearms and we have to come up with a realistic way to deal with the consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Jason, The problem is society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_warfield Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) After what happened yesterday, anyone arguing against a legit gun control (and type of gun laws actually working) is a psycho-puke-fuckheaded retard. I am from Montana. Come down and debate with the locals. Don't come unarmed. And the only way to avoid violence is to wake up every morning, lay on the floor and stare at the ceiling until you die. Otherwise shit is going to happen from the fringe. Edited December 16, 2012 by matt_warfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonG Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 The problem is society. Has "society" improved much from the mid 90's? Americans are certainly killing a lot less people with firearms compared to then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonG Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Since you brought up the subject of society, this graph caught me by surprise: Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics (see post above for link) The murder rate is HALF of what it was when I was a kid, and similar to levels seen in the 1950's, AND heading down? Why doesn't the media focus on these positive trends? I know I sure didn't know the story. There are a bunch of other positive trends in the wealth of data publicly available- child murders by strangers way down from 1980, etc. This doesn't make what happened in Conn. any easier to take, but I think it should inform the debate about gun control, incarceration, etc. By almost all measures we are safer now that we have been in decades. Someone is doing something right. I sure don't know what, but there are some theories out there from folks in this field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 And the only way to avoid violence is to wake up every morning, lay on the floor and stare at the ceiling until you die. Otherwise shit is going to happen from the fringe. Excellent point. We should just keep guns easily available. I mean, you can't escape violence anyway. School shooting like this? You can't stop them, because violence is inevitable. So let's just legalize automatic weapons and nukes. Because people will fid some way to kill each other anyway. Right? Herp derp! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 The problem is society. Has "society" improved much from the mid 90's? Americans are certainly killing a lot less people with firearms compared to then. I'm referring more to how a person can snap and go on a rampage like this, and feel it is "ok" somehow to slaughter so many innocents. But then again it may just be evil, which has always existed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_warfield Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 And the only way to avoid violence is to wake up every morning, lay on the floor and stare at the ceiling until you die. Otherwise shit is going to happen from the fringe. Right now your sarcasm is killing me. The first time you are in front of a mentally ill person with a big gun, you have to decide whether it is better for them to be well armed or you. Excellent point. We should just keep guns easily available. I mean, you can't escape violence anyway. School shooting like this? You can't stop them, because violence is inevitable. So let's just legalize automatic weapons and nukes. Because people will fid some way to kill each other anyway. Right? Herp derp! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Excellent point. We should just keep guns easily available. I mean, you can't escape violence anyway. School shooting like this? You can't stop them, because violence is inevitable. So let's just legalize automatic weapons and nukes. Because people will fid some way to kill each other anyway. Right? Herp derp! The guns were stolen from his mother, after he murdered her. Was his mother the kind of person that should not have owned guns, the kind of person more legislation would even impact? If not, then your point again is off target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Excellent point. We should just keep guns easily available. I mean, you can't escape violence anyway. School shooting like this? You can't stop them, because violence is inevitable. So let's just legalize automatic weapons and nukes. Because people will fid some way to kill each other anyway. Right? Herp derp! The guns were stolen from his mother, after he murdered her. Was his mother the kind of person that should not have owned guns, the kind of person more legislation would even impact? If not, then your point again is off target. Yes, she lived in a house with a mentally disturbed son? She probably should not have had guns and body armor. Or at the very least they should have been secured. I wonder how hard it was for him to get at the guns. I promise you my kids could not get their hands on MY guns. Even if they killed me first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_warfield Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. On the other hand gun ownership should involve lockboxes for handguns and shells for shotguns, rifles, and of course AK47s are illegal anyway right? That means an illegal weapon will become even more illegal with a new law and it will vaporize and we will all have to fight with knives and swords and cut people's heads off with a guillotine like back when things were civilized. But it is a serious issue to have an uncontrolled gun in the house. Afterthought: A mixed martial artist could have done the same thing in about the same time without any weapon at all. Edited December 16, 2012 by matt_warfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Not really http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_warfield Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) How many of the people in all those countries have a lockbox or have been to a firearms course? I didn't see where N. Korea and Syria are on the list. And there is a reason why CSI, Law and Order, and Criminal Minds exist. They draw ideas from real life. Edited December 16, 2012 by matt_warfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 AK47s and any other assault weapon one cares to own are perfectly legal as long as they are not full auto. An owner can obtain a full auto upgrade kit on the web however. Assault weapons are banned in CT, but not federally, so the ban doesn't really mean much. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. On the other hand gun ownership should involve lockboxes for handguns and shells for shotguns, rifles, and of course AK47s are illegal anyway right? That means an illegal weapon will become even more illegal with a new law and it will vaporize and we will all have to fight with knives and swords and cut people's heads off with a guillotine like back when things were civilized. But it is a serious issue to have an uncontrolled gun in the house. Afterthought: A mixed martial artist could have done the same thing in about the same time without any weapon at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraysovereign Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 That victim, one law enforcement official said, was Mr. Lanza’s mother, Nancy Lanza, who worked at the school. She apparently owned the guns he used. So, gun control (disallowing the mentally ill from obtaining them) helps how here exactly? If it was more difficult for Mrs Lanza to legally acquire all those guns, maybe she wouldn't have had them (I've heard nothing to suggest that she wasn't law-abiding). If she hadn't had them, he wouldn't have been able to take them all from her cold, dead hands. If he hadn't been able to take all those guns from his mother's cold, dead hands, there wouldn't have been 26 more sets of cold, dead hands before morning recess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.