Another shooting rampage in the US

POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Monday, April 9, 2012 03:40
VIEWED: 7272
PAGE 1 of 1

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, April 2, 2012 8:45 PM

5 dead in university near San Fransisco.

http://www.theage.com.au/world/five-dead-as-university-gunman-opens-fi
re-20120403-1w9b9.html

Not far from you, Niki?

AURAPTOR

Monday, April 2, 2012 8:56 PM

Terrible.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NIKI2

Monday, April 2, 2012 9:12 PM

Omigawd, that's right across the Bay! I guess nobody can say "It can't happen here" anymore, can they? How awful...I'll have to check it out. No doubt it's all over the local news...

ETA: Yeah, it's all over the news. Dead count up to 6.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/04/02/several-shot-inside-oaklan
d-christian-school/?hpt=hp_t1

As of 23 minutes ago (photos and video)

http://www.kpho.com/story/17313515/man-captured-after-california-schoo
l-shooting

KWICKO

Monday, April 2, 2012 11:16 PM

Must've been Muslims.

WHOZIT

Monday, April 2, 2012 11:18 PM

I'm sure this is Sarah Palin's fault....some how.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 2:18 AM

Korean, eh ? Wasn't the shooter at Va Tech Korean?

Actually, yes, he was...

Quote:

Seung-Hui Cho ( /?t?o? s??'hi?/; January 18, 1984 – April 16, 2007) was a senior-level undergraduate student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University who killed 32 people and wounded 25 others on April 16, 2007, in the shooting rampage which came to be known as the "Virginia Tech massacre." Cho later committed suicide after law enforcement officers breached the doors of the building where the majority of the shooting had taken place. Cho's body is buried in Fairfax, Virginia. Born in South Korea, Cho arrived in the United States at the age of 8 with his family. He became a US permanent resident as a South Korean national

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

RIONAEIRE

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 2:38 AM

:(

I assume you're my pal until you let me know otherwise. "A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 12:37 PM

Remember that guy who tried to go on a shooting spree without a gun and everyone just stomped his @ss?.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 6:05 PM

"Remember that guy who tried to go on a shooting spree without a gun and everyone just stomped his @ss?."

Remember that guy who tried to break into someones house, armed with a pistol, intent on killing, robbing, raping the owners and the homeowner shot him so full of holes?

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 6:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"Remember that guy who tried to go on a shooting spree without a gun and everyone just stomped his @ss?."

Remember that guy who tried to break into someones house, armed with a pistol, intent on killing, robbing, raping the owners and the homeowner shot him so full of holes?

Then we agree - guns in houses = good, outside = not so much.
Look around you, I barely trust my fellow man when he's unarmed. That's not some flaming liberal concept either. Zimmerman? Hmmm, does he remind you of anyone?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 6:50 PM

"Then we agree - guns in houses = good, outside = not so much.
Look around you, I barely trust my fellow man when he's unarmed. That's not some flaming liberal concept either. Zimmerman? Hmmm, does he remind you of anyone?"

It ain't your place, or right, to say. A man, or a woman, has just as much right outside their home to protect themselves, their property, and their loved ones as anything else.

Not trusting your fellow human doesn't change that. Hey, I agree with you in one sense. I don't trust my fellow man either. Which is why I carry a gun everyplace I go. Never had to use it, thank God... but if I need it, its there.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 7:14 PM

So if you'd had a gun when growing up would you have killed your aggressors then?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 7:45 PM

What does that have to do with anything, other than to try and score some points?

To answer your question, I would have shot back.

But who is to say I didn't?

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 7:48 PM

Quote:

But who is to say I didn't?

Quote:

Never had to use it, thank God

Hello,

You are.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 7:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Then we agree - guns in houses = good, outside = not so much.
Look around you, I barely trust my fellow man when he's unarmed.

Hello,

I don't think your fear of me is a good reason for me to be disarmed.

This incident is a tragedy. It happens to involve a gun. It is not about a gun.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
What does that have to do with anything, other than to try and score some points?

To answer your question, I would have shot back.

But who is to say I didn't?

I'm just trying to make it more real, to put it in a context you've actually lived, and not an abstract like a scene from a movie would be.
I guess if you have shot and killed or wounded someone then you know all about it, nm.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I don't think your fear of me is a good reason for me to be disarmed.

This incident is a tragedy. It happens to involve a gun. It is not about a gun.

Weird how gun tragedies always seem to involve dead people.

Anthony

do we really want to do this again?

hee hee...

I'd say in this case it was definitely about the gun and the crazy guy with the gun - it does take someone to pull the trigger.

"Before embarking on a shooting rampage at a religious college that left seven people dead, the gunman, a former nursing student, moved deliberately through a school building, lining students up against a wall before gunning them down execution-style and hunting others down after they had taken cover under their desks, the authorities said Tuesday."

Trying to think of any other inanimate "just a tool" object a person could do this with and get away with it.

Never going to happen - we're a gun crazy nation and the NRA has our nuts in a jar.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:26 PM

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/latest_news.php?nid=36135

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35995544/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/stud
ents-killed-china-knife-attack/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china-news/kindergarten-shanghai-killi
ng-taixing-children-34455.html

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/international/europe/2011/08/16/313539/6-p
eople.htm

Hello,

It's really not about the gun. A gun is just the tool of murder this man had. You can murder, even mass murder, with other tools.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:28 PM

Well, Pizz

You are free NOT to be armed. I mean, its your belief, its your right (noone is trying to pass laws to say you HAVE to be armed), its no religion, its whatever you want.

The funny thing about the gun-control argument is that one side is saying you are fine to be unarmed (if stupid) and the other side wants to take away our tools of self-defense.

Yet, even if they passed a law saying you have to have a gun... they could only leave it on your doorstep, and walk away.

But they would have a firefight if they tried to TAKE the gun away.

One is a postal drop-off, the other is a SWAT fight.

Wonder which one is right, or worth it?

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:35 PM

Hello Wulf,

I always lament it when I find myself on the same side of an issue as you.

I know it makes me look bad to have such allies.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:40 PM

Well, for my part, I'm happy when the Alliance are on the right side of things, for a change.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello Wulf,

I always lament it when I find myself on the same side of an issue as you.

I know it makes me look bad to have such allies.

Don't worry Anthony, there are plenty of stand up people on the wrong side of this one!

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/latest_news.php?nid=36135

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35995544/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/stud
ents-killed-china-knife-attack/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china-news/kindergarten-shanghai-killi
ng-taixing-children-34455.html

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/international/europe/2011/08/16/313539/6-p
eople.htm

Hello,

It's really not about the gun. A gun is just the tool of murder this man had. You can murder, even mass murder, with other tools.

I think you've been saving those links for a special occasion...

Ok, let's examine them, the single Oakland attacker killed 7 with his gun:

1. 9 attackers killed 13 with knives

2. 1 attacker kills 8 with a knife

3. 1 kills 4 with a knife

4. number of attackers unknown at this time (we'll say 1) killed 6 with a knife

12 attackers with knives killed 31 people
12 attackers with guns would kill 84

The gun IS better!

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 9:01 PM

Hello,

I actually grabbed those links on the fly. Took me 5 minutes. Ever since I did some research on a Monk being hired as a bodyguard in China, I became aware of the fact that mass murder with knives is becoming disturbingly routine there. Google China Knife Attack.

England also has a few bad knife attacks, on account of there being fewer guns there. So when people have some crazy killing to do, they use what they have.

Quote:
12 attackers with guns would kill 84

LOL! Would they? Well, I guess you can say so. Why not?

A handful of guys with box-cutters killed thousands on September 11th.

Honestly, a mass-murder is not a good reason to strip my rights away. Why do some people remember this when dealing with terrorists, but forget it when dealing with other types of criminals?

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 10:25 PM

Damn threat ate my post.

I agree with pizmo. Guns have been invented and improved upon to make them more effective weapons. That is why you don't get modern armies that only use knives. Of course people can kill others in many ways. They can use their bare hands if nothing else is available, but the gun will make it easier and that is its purpose. To make killing easier.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 1:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Damn threat ate my post.

I agree with pizmo. Guns have been invented and improved upon to make them more effective weapons. That is why you don't get modern armies that only use knives. Of course people can kill others in many ways. They can use their bare hands if nothing else is available, but the gun will make it easier and that is its purpose. To make killing easier.

Hello,

Obviously. As tool using humans, we have built killing machines that exceed the capacity of the knife. But since there is more than one way to skin a cat, we should broaden our gaze.

As a child, I used to get 'homework notices' for failing to do my homework. These were slips of paper explaining my naughtiness to my parents. If my parents saw these slips, I would be punished. So I used to hide them, destroy them, throw them away. To my child mind, this seemed like an adequate solution to the problem.

As it turned out, there were other methods for the teacher to reach out to my parents, and I was eventually punished anyway. The respite was temporary, and the tranquility was an illusion.

I do not mean to say that killings and homework have anything in common.

But the thought process that says removing the homework notices will solve the problem has a lot in common with the mentality that says removing the guns will solve the problem. Not to mention that once established, "Remove the tool" can go on to reach ludicrous levels. After guns, then knives, then anything that can possibly be a weapon. Till all law abiding citizens are empty handed.

Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.

In my opinion.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 2:34 AM

Quote:
March 23, 2007 by Marko Kloos
why the gun is civilization.

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

Of course, as Anthony so effectively pointed out, this wasn't about guns, it was about some seriously disturbed dude going banco - and he woulda done that with regardless of the selected weapon.
I looked into this, a bit, and like a lot of these incidents there was a very long conga-line-trauma leadup to it which became progressively more obvious, but it seems as always no one wanted to get involved or intervene...
I don't mean that in a legal sense, mind you - the LAST thing I want is the predators pretending to be our protectors having more excuses, I mean it in a personal sense, in that nobody personally stepped in and tried to head off the ever more obvious and inevitable, maybe they didn't feel it was their problem, maybe they didn't wanna put in the time and hassle, maybe they just didn't care, wha

NIKI2

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:38 AM

I notice, as usual, this becomes an "all=or-nothing" argument. Does anyone here really want to take away people's guns? I sure don't.

Can anyone debate this on the middle ground, like say, maybe people shouldn't have semi-automatic weapons with thirty-round clips or something? I know Wulf can't, his NRA-sodden mind sees any attempt to put ANY limitation on guns as a horrendous infringement on EVERYONE's gun rights, so I'm not addressing him. I'm talking about the semi-reasonable people here, and I ask: Is there not a middle ground?

RIONAEIRE

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:52 AM

You know how many colleges have a no-guns-on-campus rule? Well all that does is keep the ordinary people from carrying them, because it sure doesn't keep the killer people from carrying them. Maybe if someone had been carrying it would have ended with less deaths.
We have a guy at my church who packs, we all know it too, if something were to happen we know who would finish it, and it wouldn't be the person who showed up shooting. I wonder how many other guys and gals there carry just in case.

Niki I do remember when we had some restrictions on semi automatics, that didn't really bother me much and I thought it would be renewed after it expired a few years ago, I don't recall whether it was or not.

I assume you're my pal until you let me know otherwise. "A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

OONJERAH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:47 AM

This one's easy for me. I agree with Anthony.
Things are not as peaceful as they used to be, either.
Perhaps I will get a gun and learn to use it.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 7:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Obviously. As tool using humans, we have built killing machines that exceed the capacity of the knife. But since there is more than one way to skin a cat, we should broaden our gaze.

As a child, I used to get 'homework notices' for failing to do my homework. These were slips of paper explaining my naughtiness to my parents. If my parents saw these slips, I would be punished. So I used to hide them, destroy them, throw them away. To my child mind, this seemed like an adequate solution to the problem.

As it turned out, there were other methods for the teacher to reach out to my parents, and I was eventually punished anyway. The respite was temporary, and the tranquility was an illusion.

I do not mean to say that killings and homework have anything in common.

But the thought process that says removing the homework notices will solve the problem has a lot in common with the mentality that says removing the guns will solve the problem. Not to mention that once established, "Remove the tool" can go on to reach ludicrous levels. After guns, then knives, then anything that can possibly be a weapon. Till all law abiding citizens are empty handed.

Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.

In my opinion.

--Anthony

Anthony, I don't mean to get into a debate about gun laws with you. We've been over this before and we have values which differ fundamentally. I live in a society where guns are restricted and I am happy about this. You live in a society where guns are readily available and you are happy about this. We should both continue to live where laws support our values.

I was responding only to what I perceived as your argument ie guns are no worse than knives at being potential harm doers to people. I assume that is your argument, hence the links you posted. So I disagree. I agree that knives can kill, as can many other forms of weapon, but guns are a more effective weapon, and some guns/firearms are more dangerous than others. Hence they have been invented and continued to be developed into more effective killing mechanisms.

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 11:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"Remember that guy who tried to go on a shooting spree without a gun and everyone just stomped his @ss?."

Remember that guy who tried to break into someones house, armed with a pistol, intent on killing, robbing, raping the owners and the homeowner shot him so full of holes?

Remember the guy that tried to go on a shooting spree but was stopped by armed civilians...no...me neither!

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 11:43 AM

Actually there was something that happened here, where unarmed people stopped an armed man.

Sandro De Maria says he doesn't like the fuss that goes with receiving Australia's highest honour for bravery. But he is proud of what he did.

"It feels good that I was responsible for stopping this guy doing what he intended to do."

Mr De Maria helped disarm convicted killer Peter James Knight at an East Melbourne fertility clinic in July last year.

Knight shot dead a security guard and had turned his rifle on Mr De Maria's partner Lillian Kitanov, when Mr De Maria lunged at him.

It was an "instantaneous reaction", Mr De Maria said last night, recalling that Knight was three feet away from Ms Kitanov when he tackled him, grabbing the rifle before two men came to his aid.

Knight was captured with 16 litres of kerosene, three cigarette lighters, brackets to seal doors, 30 gags, a hammer, the rifle, and a further 12 rounds of ammunition.

Mr De Maria's actions have earned him the Star of Courage, the highest award in the Australian Bravery decorations, announced today.

The 38-year-old construction worker from Reservoir is the sole Victorian and one of three Australians to receive the Commonwealth award, which is granted annually.

Mr De Maria said his first response on hearing the shot fired by Knight at the security guard in the clinic's waiting room was "just shock in trying to comprehend what had taken place".

"It all happened so fast and then when he pointed the gun at Lillian, I was just immediately stopping him because he was going to shoot her."

When Tim Anderson came from behind and helped him pin down Knight, Mr De Maria "felt relief". "I did fear for my life."

He said it took more than a year for him to stop playing out scenarios of how he might have reacted differently. "No one knew what happened in that clinic except me and my partner. "If you weren't there you don't know. You don't see someone getting shot the way we saw someone getting shot."

The experience had made them closer.

"You value life more and enjoy life more on a day to day basis because you come to the realisation that anything can happen."

"I saw that with security guard, he was just within a couple of minutes of going home and he never made it."

Mr Anderson, of Upper Beaconsfield, grabbed Knight's rifle as Mr De Maria wrestled with him. He also has been awarded a bravery medal.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/08/11/1028158047401.html

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 1:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I notice, as usual, this becomes an "all=or-nothing" argument. Does anyone here really want to take away people's guns? I sure don't.

Can anyone debate this on the middle ground...

Sadly, no.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 1:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

And that is OUR responsibility, collectively, as human beings and fellow travellers, not no government, not no business, OURS, each and every - and we failed it.

It ain't simpler than that.

And yet it doesn't happen - it's a beautiful sentiment but we'll all be dead and buried before our society ever reflects that kind of generosity at effective levels. There's the trope about "there's no truly unselfish act." Since I am stubborn and hell bent on being contrary at times I tried to find a completely unselfish act I could perform. I may have had it wrong but on each attempt I was thrown back, denied, and left cold. In one particular case when trying to help a relative, I was even rebuked, "you just want to gloat." I was there to help but they saw it as my taking pleasure in their pain, the exact opposite of my intentions. So I am putting "the intervening to help others" on hold.

In terms of guns making a more civilized society? So more police with guns then?

or at least police as they should be. I agree with gun advocates when they say that a large part is "the person with the gun" and I don't trust some guy who's been to the range and never had any more training to make those life and death calls, not around me. It's never that clear cut, situational training has a real purpose. Zimmerman???????

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 1:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.

Please note that no one advocates removing guns - appreciate it.
The idea that your gun will protect you from strong people who want to do you harm seems quaint since they rarely announce themselves and most of the evil you'll have visited on you will be from unarmed people.
I am glad to see that you realize how much more lethal guns are than knives at least! Imagine how many more deaths there would be in China if your average knife wielding whacko had a 9mm instead of a knife?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 1:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I notice, as usual, this becomes an "all=or-nothing" argument. Does anyone here really want to take away people's guns? I sure don't.

Can anyone debate this on the middle ground, like say, maybe people shouldn't have semi-automatic weapons with thirty-round clips or something? I know Wulf can't, his NRA-sodden mind sees any attempt to put ANY limitation on guns as a horrendous infringement on EVERYONE's gun rights, so I'm not addressing him. I'm talking about the semi-reasonable people here, and I ask: Is there not a middle ground?

That's the thing, people like Wolf want to build strawmen instead of having rational debate. No one wants to take all the guns away from people. That is why they are called control laws and not banning laws.

Letting a person with no training and no back ground check buy a AK47 with a 100 round drum is stupid. Unless your house it going to come under attack from a 30 man death squad it is over kill for home and personal defence.

The best weapon for home defence is a shot gun loaded with 00 buckshot. Good stopping power, good spread, and legal for people to buy without special permits. Even with this a person will need to know how to use it or it will be worthless.

Hand guns need even more training to be used correctly. A person with little or no training will not be able to use a hand gun, or other weapons, anywhere near effectivly in an emergency situation. If nothing else that person is going to just make the situation more dangerous.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 2:09 PM

Quote:
No one wants to take all the guns away from people.

Hello,

Actually, some people do want this. I wouldn't be so concerned otherwise. People do want this and people have stated they want this and people work to achieve this.

Even some of those who graciously allow that I should be able to own a gun admit they'd prefer if I didn't actually carry one around.

Some would prefer to limit what sort of gun I should carry, of what caliber, of what capacity, of what COLOR AND SHAPE, of what MELTING POINT, etc.

If I knew that all attempts to control my ownership and carrying of guns would end at a competency test and a license at the local DMV, then I'd be very happy with that arrangement.

In any event, the point I made when posting the knife attack articles has clearly been lost by some here.

It's to show that the problem is not the gun. It's the guy who decides to commit mass murder. It's the society where people wake up and say, "Hey, I'm going to kill as many people as I can today." And it's the idea that they can do these things because they can find large groups of people who are defenseless.

When you take away weapon X from good people, bad people will either continue to acquire weapon X or proceed to weapon Y to do their dirty deeds.

And weapon Y can be surprisingly more effective than you'd thought. The real weapon, as always, is the man with murder on his mind.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 2:12 PM

Quote:
since they rarely announce themselves

Hello,

People with weapons frequently announce themselves when planning to do a bad thing. They usually say, "Hey, look, I have a weapon, and I want to do this bad thing."

This is also true in shooting rampages, where even if they don't say the words, they still manage to broadcast their intentions quite loudly.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
since they rarely announce themselves

Hello,

People with weapons frequently announce themselves when planning to do a bad thing. They usually say, "Hey, look, I have a weapon, and I want to do this bad thing."

They really don't. You are imaging perfect scenarios, where the evil doer brandishes his weapon and announces his evil intent. I imagine ones where they come up from behind and put the gun in your back or are suddenly with a gun in your face- neither of which would give you time to reach safely for your weapon. And in case you think you have time to reach and get off a shot who knows who might get shot in the chaos that follows?

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

This is also true in shooting rampages, where even if they don't say the words, they still manage to broadcast their intentions quite loudly.

Yet in all of these scenarios I've yet to read about an armed citizen stopping the event. Curious. I think even at G. Giffords assault there was a trained and armed citizen but he was unable to get a shot or some such thing prevented his intervention. Wasn't it an older women who jumped him? See below****

Some comments from the latest updates about the recent shooter, very wise imho and from many different vantage points:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/04/us/oikos-university-gunman-lined-up-
victims.html?ref=us

Dave K, Cleveland OH:
****"Another interesting example: During the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, there was at the scene an ex-Marine with a pistol. He never drew his weapon, much less fired at Loughner. Instead, he took cover until the shooter had to reload, and then used the opportunity to tackle and disarm. As a Marine, we can safely assume that he knew how to handle his gun, was not afraid to shoot it, and was not any sort of coward, and yet he never did what the pro-gun folks always say he would do, which is shoot the attacker.

That's the thing: People with actual training don't think that more guns solve the problem.

David St. Louis, MO:
"We live in Kirkwood, Missouri where there was a tragic killing of sever people at a city council meeting two years ago. On his way in, the Kirkwood gunman killed two armed, trained police officers. This too negates any argument that MORE guns will help. This again is tragic, and our hearts go out to the victims of this tragedy, and all gun-related tragedies."

JSB NYC:
"Every time one of these senseless massacres takes place, I think of George W Bush's comments just after the killings at Va Tech, where he led off with a reassurance that gun rights would be protected. It was the most insensitive and disgusting moment in an administration built on those, as if the invisible hand of the gun lobby had a barrel in his back. Advocates of sensible gun control can wring their hands and wax rhetorical, yet again, but unless legislators meet fire with fire - excuse the expression - "American exceptionalism" will continue to be piled high with the bodies of the innocent."

Thomas FieldDallas, Tx.
"Nothing to see here folks, just another mass shooting in the trigger happy USA. Let's go through the motions though....

1. How tragic! Why would someone do such a horrible, senseless thing?
2. The guy was mentally ill, and no one could have seen it coming or prevented it.
3. Begin standard gun debate. Cue the NRA to shout down all sane restrictions on lethal weapons, and counter-intuitively call for even more guns.
4. Shrug shoulders, wring hands, bury the dead, and return to what passes as normal (excluding the wounded and the surviving relatives of course, for whom things will never be normal again).
5. Wait till the inevitable next time and repeat steps one through four.

And there will be a next time. In this country, more and more it seems, an unstable person with a gun and a grudge equals a mass shooting. The gun is as easily obtained as the grudge.

It's supremely ironic, that whenever this happens, the shooters complain they were disrespect

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
No one wants to take all the guns away from people.

Hello,

Actually, some people do want this. I wouldn't be so concerned otherwise. People do want this and people have stated they want this and people work to achieve this.

Even some of those who graciously allow that I should be able to own a gun admit they'd prefer if I didn't actually carry one around.

Some would prefer to limit what sort of gun I should carry, of what caliber, of what capacity, of what COLOR AND SHAPE, of what MELTING POINT, etc.

If I knew that all attempts to control my ownership and carrying of guns would end at a competency test and a license at the local DMV, then I'd be very happy with that arrangement.

In any event, the point I made when posting the knife attack articles has clearly been lost by some here.

It's to show that the problem is not the gun. It's the guy who decides to commit mass murder. It's the society where people wake up and say, "Hey, I'm going to kill as many people as I can today." And it's the idea that they can do these things because they can find large groups of people who are defenseless.

When you take away weapon X from good people, bad people will either continue to acquire weapon X or proceed to weapon Y to do their dirty deeds.

And weapon Y can be surprisingly more effective than you'd thought. The real weapon, as always, is the man with murder on his mind.

Your right, some people do want to ban all guns, that is a very small percentage.

Banning or restricting certain types of guns will make it harder for people to get them. A person can do a lot more damage with an assult rifle then with a hand gun.

Yes the problem is ultimatly people. If we did not have people who decide to harm others we would not need any type of restrictions.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:31 PM

Quote:
Prisons have strict gun control. If only the rest of us "free" people did.

Hello,

I suppose the difference between us is that the above quote horrifies me, and you see it as an ideal.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:46 PM

Quote:
Yet in all of these scenarios I've yet to read about an armed citizen stopping the event. Curious.

http://www.ktvn.com/Global/story.asp?S=8378732

Hello,

It does happen sometimes.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
Prisons have strict gun control. If only the rest of us "free" people did.

Hello,

I suppose the difference between us is that the above quote horrifies me, and you see it as an ideal.

I actually don't, that's not me saying that, but in any event I believe the writer was being facetious, using irony to make their point.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
Prisons have strict gun control. If only the rest of us "free" people did.

Hello,

I suppose the difference between us is that the above quote horrifies me, and you see it as an ideal.

I actually don't, that's not me saying that, but in any event I believe the writer was being facetious, using irony to make their point.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com]

Hello,

Apologies. I didn't realize you were quoting the comments you disagreed with.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 4:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
Yet in all of these scenarios I've yet to read about an armed citizen stopping the event. Curious.

http://www.ktvn.com/Global/story.asp?S=8378732

Hello,

It does happen sometimes.

I take this as more of a life lesson on where not to hang out - 2:30am Sunday morning at a dive bar "Players" in Nevada with 300 bikers.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

PIZMOBEACH

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 5:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Apologies. I didn't realize you were quoting the comments you disagreed with.

Sorry, I should have made it more plain that I disagreed with your take on this person's meaning.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 5:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
And yet it doesn't happen - it's a beautiful sentiment but we'll all be dead and buried before our society ever reflects that kind of generosity at effective levels. There's the trope about "there's no truly unselfish act." Since I am stubborn and hell bent on being contrary at times I tried to find a completely unselfish act I could perform. I may have had it wrong but on each attempt I was thrown back, denied, and left cold. In one particular case when trying to help a relative, I was even rebuked, "you just want to gloat." I was there to help but they saw it as my taking pleasure in their pain, the exact opposite of my intentions. So I am putting "the intervening to help others" on hold.

In terms of guns making a more civilized society? So more police with guns then? or at least police as they should be. I agree with gun advocates when they say that a large part is "the person with the gun" and I don't trust some guy who's been to the range and never had any more training to make those life and death calls, not around me. It's never that clear cut, situational training has a real purpose. Zimmerman??????

I myself do not hold with such a hobbesian view of society, and feel that if the better way, the gentler path is untrue, then we should MAKE it true, if we do not have the answer then each of us, as individuals, must then BE the answer.
And I do try to do that, and damn the "cost" cause overall I consider it cheap at the price...
Being an already unhappy fellow, trading a little bit more misery for the happiness of others is barely a transaction in my eyes to the point where sans someone pointing it out, it often falls beneath my notice - all big things are made of little things, and never underestimate the power of small kindnesses.

As for firearms and training, I have stated repeatedly that I would much prefer someone with the training but not the weapon, than the weapon without the training - and I have no particular issue with the idea of making said training and proof of skill a mandatory requirement for ownership, I simply do not trust the Government to be directly involved in the process because they have proven, over and over, that they cannot be trusted with it - I would rather settle for manufacturers and dealers making and enforcing such a requirement in exchange for indemnity from lawsuit...
But this is what I call a Teflon Argument - people get so emotionally invested that logic and reason slide right off, you know ?

It's just a tool.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 6:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
[As for firearms and training, I have stated repeatedly that I would much prefer someone with the training but not the weapon, than the weapon without the training - and I have no particular issue with the idea of making said training and proof of skill a mandatory requirement for ownership, I simply do not trust the Government to be directly involved in the process because they have proven, over and over, that they cannot be trusted with it - I would rather settle for manufacturers and dealers making and enforcing such a requirement in exchange for indemnity from lawsuit...

I agreed with you up until the governmant part...that part was spoken like a true conservative!

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 7:35 PM

That's the fun part of being an Anarchist.

The Liberals think you're too Conservative.
The Conservatives think you're too Liberal.

The Communists and Socialists hate your guts since they're always arguing about who gets to make resource decisions and you pointing out that no one NEEDS someone else to make that call kicks the foundations out from under their argument.

The Libertarians think you're a threat cause you're either what they'd like to be and do not dare, or cause they're a Randroid pretending those values to get their way and a natural enemy.

The Greens can't stand you cause you point out that Government has more often enabled or initiated ecological carnage than prevented it.

And the Fascists utterly despise you cause you stand in total opposition to everything they are.

While the Government hates you cause you generally ignore them and consider them irrelevant.

Hell is a pretty nice place, when there's nobody in charge of it, you know.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 8:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

That's the fun part of being an Anarchist.

The Liberals think you're too Conservative.
The Conservatives think you're too Liberal.

The Communists and Socialists hate your guts since they're always arguing about who gets to make resource decisions and you pointing out that no one NEEDS someone else to make that call kicks the foundations out from under their argument.

The Libertarians think you're a threat cause you're either what they'd like to be and do not dare, or cause they're a Randroid pretending those values to get their way and a natural enemy.

The Greens can't stand you cause you point out that Government has more often enabled or initiated ecological carnage than prevented it.

And the Fascists utterly despise you cause you stand in total opposition to everything they are.

While the Government hates you cause you generally ignore them and consider them irrelevant.

Hell is a pretty nice place, when there's nobody in charge of it, you know.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

...and here I thought the fun part of it was ignoring basic realities.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 8:45 PM

YOU, yes YOU, have the right to not own a tool.

I, yes I, have the right to own a tool.

The end.

Anything else is the puling of the pathetic.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 9:39 PM

Hello,

The Puling of the Pathetic?

Don't martial arts teach you to show respect to your opponent any more?

That used to be a thing, when I was young.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, April 5, 2012 12:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
YOU, yes YOU, have the right to not own a tool.

I, yes I, have the right to own a tool.

The end.

Anything else is the puling of the pathetic.

I'm sorry that you are so simple minded that you have to deal with the world in only black and white.

...am also sorry for the person who has explain to you what I mean.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, April 5, 2012 1:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
YOU, yes YOU, have the right to not own a tool.

I, yes I, have the right to own a tool.

The end.

Anything else is the puling of the pathetic.

Speakin o which...

There's also an inherent right to BE a tool.
But goddamn Wulfie, there's times I wish you'd refrain from exercising it.

Oh and Nick - I might point out that I am prolly not anything like most Anarchists you've met, and certainly not anything like the strawman perceptions fostered about em, certainly I don't get along too well with the rest of em, mostly cause of a specific set of hypocrisy they fall into.

If you go round smashing social-legal structures other people WANT - are you not then imposing your will on them by force as much as any Government ?

But we can discuss that another time and place.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, April 5, 2012 1:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Oh and Nick - I might point out that I am prolly not anything like most Anarchists you've met, and certainly not anything like the strawman perceptions fostered about em, certainly I don't get along too well with the rest of em, mostly cause of a specific set of hypocrisy they fall into.

If you go round smashing social-legal structures other people WANT - are you not then imposing your will on them by force as much as any Government ?

But we can discuss that another time and place.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

If you would like I'm up for it. We can start a thread. For me Anarchy like libertarianism does not seem t hold up. Maybe your way of Anarchy is different.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

KWICKO

Thursday, April 5, 2012 2:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Oh and Nick - I might point out that I am prolly not anything like most Anarchists you've met, and certainly not anything like the strawman perceptions fostered about em, certainly I don't get along too well with the rest of em, mostly cause of a specific set of hypocrisy they fall into.

If you go round smashing social-legal structures other people WANT - are you not then imposing your will on them by force as much as any Government ?

But we can discuss that another time and place.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

If you would like I'm up for it. We can start a thread. For me Anarchy like libertarianism does not seem t hold up. Maybe your way of Anarchy is different.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

No "pure" form of any ideology will "hold up", though. Not pure liberalism, pure conservatism, pure libertarianism, pure anarchism, pure socialism, pure communism, pure capitalism, or pure anything else. It's all pure horseshit.

1KIKI

Thursday, April 5, 2012 2:16 AM

"Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong."

Or place people sitting in their living room at the mercy of a drive-by. The idea that somehow guns 'equalize' the weak with the strong is false. Guns empower the aggressive.

ANTHONYT

Thursday, April 5, 2012 2:39 AM

Quote:
The idea that somehow guns 'equalize' the weak with the strong is false. Guns empower the aggressive.

Hello,

Initiative empowers the aggressive. Though initiative can be taken by the defender as well. But that's another discussion.

http://articles.latimes.com/1993-11-10/news/mn-55144_1_wheelchair-woma
n-shoots

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/local_news/Person-Shot-in-Gwinnet
t-Burglary-20110511-am-sd

It's factually incorrect to say that a gun can't serve to level the playing field between the weaker and the stronger. It can. It has.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, April 5, 2012 3:08 AM

They can level the field in some situations. In others they can increase a person's risk of being killed.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-r
isk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

1KIKI

Thursday, April 5, 2012 3:17 AM

"It's factually incorrect to say that a gun can't serve to level the playing field between the weaker and the stronger. It can. It has."

But far more often it empowers the aggressive. Just look at the gun-murder statistics.

RIONAEIRE

Thursday, April 5, 2012 4:54 AM

"They say God created all men but Sam Colt made 'em equal". Quoted on Back to the Future III

I assume you're my pal until you let me know otherwise. "A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

BYTEMITE

Thursday, April 5, 2012 5:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

That's the fun part of being an Anarchist.

The Liberals think you're too Conservative.
The Conservatives think you're too Liberal.

The Communists and Socialists hate your guts since they're always arguing about who gets to make resource decisions and you pointing out that no one NEEDS someone else to make that call kicks the foundations out from under their argument.

The Libertarians think you're a threat cause you're either what they'd like to be and do not dare, or cause they're a Randroid pretending those values to get their way and a natural enemy.

The Greens can't stand you cause you point out that Government has more often enabled or initiated ecological carnage than prevented it.

And the Fascists utterly despise you cause you stand in total opposition to everything they are.

While the Government hates you cause you generally ignore them and consider them irrelevant.

Hell is a pretty nice place, when there's nobody in charge of it, you know.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

Frankly, with them thinking we're all wrong, it makes me inclined to think we might be on to something. But I'm contrary that way.

Nick: Yeah, anarchy isn't really about bomb throwing or V for Vendetta stereotypes. There's a lot more nuance than it's given credit for. There's distrust for the military/intelligence/corporate/industrial/government complex, sure, which to a degree is healthy I think, because a dislike for corruption and constant vigilance against it is the only way to keep a republic on the straight and narrow.

But if you want a basic difference between anarchy, conservatism, and libertarianism, it's that an anarchist doesn't really care what socio-economic system people use so long as the they can choose what kind they have or how involved they want to get. Otherwise we think it's exploitative.

ANTHONYT

Thursday, April 5, 2012 5:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"It's factually incorrect to say that a gun can't serve to level the playing field between the weaker and the stronger. It can. It has."

But far more often it empowers the aggressive. Just look at the gun-murder statistics.

Hello,

The thing that most empowers the evildoer (to use a broad, if somewhat comical phrase) is knowing that his target is defenseless.

I think England's violent crime statistics bear this out. Of course, you may tell me that you'd rather be stabbed while disarmed than shot while armed, and I admit this is a matter of personal preference.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

1KIKI

Thursday, April 5, 2012 6:43 AM

I'd rather be stabbed and live than shot and die.

UK murder rate 2011 1.23, US murder rate 2011 4.8.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide
_rate

OONJERAH

Thursday, April 5, 2012 7:16 AM

It's basic difference in values and manners.

UK: home of Sherlock Holmes and most of the other great fictional detectives.
UKers can truly appreciate the perfect murder. If their true murder rate was
actually known, it might be twice as high.

. . . . .The worst and most frequent consequence of paranoia is that it's self-fulfilling.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, April 5, 2012 11:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Nick: Yeah, anarchy isn't really about bomb throwing or V for Vendetta stereotypes. There's a lot more nuance than it's given credit for. There's distrust for the military/intelligence/corporate/industrial/government complex, sure, which to a degree is healthy I think, because a dislike for corruption and constant vigilance against it is the only way to keep a republic on the straight and narrow.

I was not thinking bomb throwing at all.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NIKI2

Thursday, April 5, 2012 3:54 PM

Sigh...so this turned into another gun debate. How sad.

Update:

Quote:
Saddled with debt, a failed marriage and a crumbling business, One L. Goh left Virginia and headed west in 2009 to start over.

It got much worse in the Golden State.

The brother of a heavily decorated Iraq War veteran lost a job as a Korean food deliveryman in San Mateo due to a hot temper. Another job at a peninsula Korean supermarket failed to pan out. His Army hero brother died in a tragic car accident shortly before his mother passed away in his home country of South Korea.

The naturalized U.S. citizen's life seemed to take a turn for the better last year when he enrolled at a tiny Christian vocational nursing school in Oakland, but that too went sour when he dropped out for unspecified reasons after a fight with administrators over tuition.

One, 43, reached his limit and bought a gun in February.

On Monday, the former student walked into Oikos University's single-building campus across Interstate 580 from the Oakland Coliseum and began shooting students he said teased him about his age and poor English. He killed a secretary, six former classmates, and injured three others in the worst mass shooting in California in two decades.

The remorseless One turned himself into police an hour later. He was identified by some of the survivors and other witnesses as the shooter, and was formally arrested Tuesday morning on seven counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder, carjacking and kidnapping, authorities said.
.....
Saddled with debt, a failed marriage and a crumbling business, One L. Goh left Virginia and headed west in 2009 to start over.

It got much worse in the Golden State.

The brother of a heavily decorated Iraq War veteran lost a job as a Korean food deliveryman in San Mateo due to a hot temper. Another job at a peninsula Korean supermarket failed to pan out. His Army hero brother died in a tragic car accident shortly before his mother passed away in his home country of South Korea.

The naturalized U.S. citizen's life seemed to take a turn for the better last year when he enrolled at a tiny Christian vocational nursing school in Oakland, but that too went sour when he dropped out for unspecified reasons after a fight with administrators over tuition.

One, 43, reached his limit and bought a gun in February.

On Monday, the former student walked into Oikos University's single-building campus across Interstate 580 from the Oakland Coliseum and began shooting students he said teased him about his age and poor English. He killed a secretary, six former classmates, and injured three others in the worst mass shooting in California in two decades.

The remorseless One turned himself into police an hour later. He was identified by some of the survivors and other witnesses as the shooter, and was formally arrested Tuesday morning on seven counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder, carjacking and kidnapping, authorities
.....
By November, One dropped out of the one-year program and sparred with the administration after he tried to recoup his $6,000 tuition, police said. He told investigators, classmates irked him by teasing him over his broken English and older age, and started ignoring him.
.....
In February, One legally bought a .45 caliber semi-automatic handgun at a Castro Valley gun shop. On Monday, he rode BART and took a bus to the campus, sneaking in through an open side door, police said. The front glass doors of the university are always locked.

Once inside, One grabbed the secretary and headed to his old nursing program classroom from the previous semester. The female administrator he targeted was not on campus, but inside the classroom, he found some familiar faces and some new students, investigators said. He ordered students against a wall, but once he shot the first victim, chaos ensued. He only stopped shooting when he saw students calling 911, police said.

As he fled, One stole a deceased s

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

OONJERAH

Thursday, April 5, 2012 9:32 PM

Quote Niki: "a guy whose life kept getting worse and who snapped."

Not as a "rush to judgement," I'll have go.
He sounds like a Type. A well-intentioned Misfit with low self esteem, depression likely.
He wasn't a criminal, but he did commit murder. Life was always too much for him.
He didn't know where or how to get help. Perhaps he believed he shouldn't need help.

When low self esteem is profound instead of mild, it can take years just to shut down
the self-destructive crap and settle into a neutral spot. That would be the step before
healing could start.

Looks like One didn't find whatever he needed to turn himself around. He just kept slam-
ming himself into a brick wall. Then hopelessness took over.

. . . . .The worst and most frequent consequence of paranoia is that it's self-fulfilling.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, April 9, 2012 3:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Obviously. As tool using humans, we have built killing machines that exceed the capacity of the knife. But since there is more than one way to skin a cat, we should broaden our gaze.

As a child, I used to get 'homework notices' for failing to do my homework. These were slips of paper explaining my naughtiness to my parents. If my parents saw these slips, I would be punished. So I used to hide them, destroy them, throw them away. To my child mind, this seemed like an adequate solution to the problem.

As it turned out, there were other methods for the teacher to reach out to my parents, and I was eventually punished anyway. The respite was temporary, and the tranquility was an illusion.

I do not mean to say that killings and homework have anything in common.

But the thought process that says removing the homework notices will solve the problem has a lot in common with the mentality that says removing the guns will solve the problem. Not to mention that once established, "Remove the tool" can go on to reach ludicrous levels. After guns, then knives, then anything that can possibly be a weapon. Till all law abiding citizens are empty handed.

Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.

In my opinion.

--Anthony

don't really get the homework analogy. don't think the metaphor held up too well.

I don't feel weak at not owning a gun, but I guess I lived somewhere where guncrime was rampant, or I was in the middle of a civil war, I'd probably want one. But then again, I dont see guns in terms of individual rights any more than ownership of nuclear weapons is an individual right (or the right of any country).

However, I now (after many years of internet discussion) understand the US perspective on gun ownership, being a way of preventing tyranny. I see that was the purpose humdreds of years ago when the constitution was drawn up and the world was a different place. I fail to see a scenario in which an population the size of the US would be able to reach consensus enough to use its arms to overthrow a government, especially not a government backed by the kind of military prowess that it currently possesses, but I get that it is part of a collective consciousness, one which I do not share. I see restrictions around ownership of weapons pretty similar to restrictions around ownership of any kind of arsenal. I don't want the bloke next door in possession of a dirty bomb or a grenade launcher because it makes him feel safer. But I also accept that he may illegally own one of these things.

I see no evidence that having a highly armed society leads to a safer society, in fact I believe it is quite the opposite, as the stats in the US continually bear out. But some people choose to forsake safety for an individual right. I have no issue with that. I remember CTS used to talk about that quite a lot with her views on society and she was prepared to sacrifice safety for her view of what constituted freedom. I respect that view. But I cannot hold with the rather feeble truthiness that is used by pro gun advocates that do not ackowledge that an armed society will increase the risk of death or injury by gun.