Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/12/17 08:43:19
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Well, I'm not saying that it screening and treatments wouldn't have made a difference. Although so far he doesn't seem to come across as a crazy mental type pre-shooting.
And I do think that gun laws can be improved. Trigger guards and gun storage devices should be mandatory, but would your kids know the combinations and then take the guns anyway?
It's not an easy fix and "hurr durr ban all guns" won't work.
2012/12/17 01:43:32
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
People can go undiagnosed until the day they die. Maybe they had a bunch of differing episodes that were written off as merely stress or too much to drink or the result of divorce or other social situation. There's no way to just force everybody in the country into therapy or the loving arms of psychopharmacology.
What you can do is test those who wish to purchase and own firearms legally. The wait periods are probably the most effective tool beyond all others. From my understanding the reason this individual had to steal his mother’s firearms was because he had attempted to purchase a firearm with his brother’s ID and would have had to wait to receive said firearm.
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did.
2012/12/17 01:46:27
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Crablezworth wrote: She's basically saying, don't worry about guns, give me more financial aid for my crazy kid who costs me a lot financially and emotionally.
You've just failed basic reading comprehension.
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/12/17 01:49:08
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Crablezworth wrote: She's basically saying, don't worry about guns, give me more financial aid for my crazy kid who costs me a lot financially and emotionally.
You've just failed basic reading comprehension.
I didn't get that impression at all.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
2012/12/17 01:50:12
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Mental health testing for firearms is probably not going to happen anytime soon. Just political suicide to push for that. Must have insurance to get that exam, would insurance cover "mental fitness exams for gun ownership", would any psychiatrist be willing to sign of on the "won't kill people" paper and risk being sued by the family of survivors, etc etc etc
I am in favor of a waiting period , I am also in favor of fixing the gun show craziness that we seem to have.
2012/12/17 01:51:51
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Crablezworth wrote: She's basically saying, don't worry about guns, give me more financial aid for my crazy kid who costs me a lot financially and emotionally.
You've just failed basic reading comprehension.
I didn't get that impression at all.
Really? Because the conclusion of the article was :
Then another tortured soul shoots up a fast food restaurant. A mall. A kindergarten classroom. And we wring our hands and say, "Something must be done."
I agree that something must be done. It's time for a meaningful, nation-wide conversation about mental health. That's the only way our nation can ever truly heal.
No mention of money, or guns, or any actual suggestion on how to solve the issue. Just a basic call for an honest discussion. From the point of view of a mother of a violent sick child, the important factor will be the sickness. How could anyone twist that into request for funding, I do not know...
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/12/17 01:56:45
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
d-usa wrote: Well, I'm not saying that it screening and treatments wouldn't have made a difference. Although so far he doesn't seem to come across as a crazy mental type pre-shooting.
And I do think that gun laws can be improved. Trigger guards and gun storage devices should be mandatory, but would your kids know the combinations and then take the guns anyway?
It's not an easy fix and "hurr durr ban all guns" won't work.
Depends on the age of the kid. I remember my best friend's dad's safe's door was heavy enough that one of us alone had trouble moving it when we were putting the .22 we'd just finished cleaning up. That was at... thirteenish or so? (door needed some WD-40...)
It boggles my mind that some people own guns without a basic locker or safe of some kind...
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
Crablezworth wrote: She's basically saying, don't worry about guns, give me more financial aid for my crazy kid who costs me a lot financially and emotionally.
You've just failed basic reading comprehension.
I didn't get that impression at all.
Really? Because the conclusion of the article was :
Then another tortured soul shoots up a fast food restaurant. A mall. A kindergarten classroom. And we wring our hands and say, "Something must be done."
I agree that something must be done. It's time for a meaningful, nation-wide conversation about mental health. That's the only way our nation can ever truly heal.
No mention of money, or guns, or any actual suggestion on how to solve the issue. Just a basic call for an honest discussion. From the point of view of a mother of a violent sick child, the important factor will be the sickness. How could anyone twist that into request for funding, I do not know...
Gee, maybe it's the "no one is helping me (or us)" vibe of the whole thing, or the characterization of education as free daycare... She's not wrong in the sense that any gun control legislation that passes will do sweet FA for her or her son and that' exactly my point, her article is great but shifts the argument entirely to the mental health side of things which in turn will do sweet FA about mass shootings or crazy people getting guns. I'll worry about getting them help after I subdue them and remove their means of harming others thanks.
And that's not to say my heart doesn't go out to her, it seems her situation really sucks. And yeah, chances are in the long run her problems and her sons problems might become everyone's problem from a crime standpoint. Still, she brings up half of america's problems in her little microcosm. That's like the first sentance in a congressional hearing on gun control being all about globalization or tort reform.
There are plenty of people out there who want to pretend the problem is solely crazy people and has nothing to do with guns, for which I say the problem very much is crazy people.... WITH GUNS.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:09:46
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did.
2012/12/17 02:13:06
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
d-usa wrote: Why not capitalize the crazy people in your post as well then?
Because crazy people without guns are starting bar fights, harming small animals or watching fox, not murdering 27 people with a fireaerm. And the odd ones who attempt to without a gun aren't meeting much success.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:16:41
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did.
2012/12/17 02:19:32
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
So we can ignore them and not spend any time focusing on them?
Because there is a pretty long list of crazy serial killers who have a list of victims that can be longer than many mass killings who never once picked up a gun.
Or we can stop playing "the other side is completely at fault" and admit that there are two district and equally important issues here. Undiagnosed and untreated mental health issues AND easy access to weapons.
2012/12/17 02:19:51
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
It boggles my mind that some people own guns without a basic locker or safe of some kind...
It should not, especially since they justify it with the same argument that people who want to justify owning these guns.
"What if I need to protect myself?"
Keep a small gun safe that is bolted to your night stand with a quick pin-number combination (that makes sure you are at least somewhat awake and cognizant before you handle your weapon)?
Truthfully, the only time your gun should be out of your safe and/or trigger lock is when it is being cleaned or on your person.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:23:46
2012/12/17 02:25:55
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Not sure if it's been posted in here or not already... But CNET ran an article saying that the group "Anonymous" posted certain members of the Westborough people's information, in retaliation to them announcing plans to protest at the school in CT.
It would seem that even groups like Anonymous who reportedly cause all sorts of mischief and mayhem online also have a collective conscience, and want those who were slain to be remembered properly.
The same article also talked about a petition on the white house webpage requesting that the Westborough Baptist Church be officially recognized as a Hate Group, and treated as such. The petition, according to the article and it's posting time, has 46k signatures.
2012/12/17 02:28:13
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
d-usa wrote: Or we can stop playing "the other side is completely at fault" and admit that there are two district and equally important issues here. Undiagnosed and untreated mental health issues AND easy access to weapons.
Right, and the proposed solutions to the undiagnosed/treated of mental health problems are what exactly? Oh right, it's incredibly complicated, there are no easy answers because it encompasses everything from the drug industry, the healthcare industry, the criminal justice system, parenting or the lack of it and oh yeah the jail industrial complex... unlike the gun control side in which there are some incredibly easy answers, like closing the gun show loophole for one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:28:47
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did.
2012/12/17 02:32:39
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Crazy people will flip out and do terrible things. Not all or even most crazy people, but the rare disturbed individual. For the most part (or so it seems) due to the lack of mental healthcare diagnosing and providing actual aid to these individuals as witnessed by the "Anarchist Soccer Mom" in her "Thinking the Unthinkable" article.
How do we stop them?
It is worth noting that crazies have armed themselves with a variety of weapons besides firearms ranging from less destructive to massively more so. (Oklahoma City for example)
Second issue, it seems that crazies do have the capacity to arm themselves without much interference. American gun control blocks criminals from the new purchase of firearms well enough with the majority of criminal guns being stolen or obtained through illegal secondary sources* it does not however account for nutcases.
That leaves us the following as I already said above, how do we stop them?
* The Armed Criminal in America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons , James D. Wright, Peter H. Rossi,
National Institute of Justice (U.S.), 1985
* Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Gary Kleck, Aldine de Gruyter, 1997.
It boggles my mind that some people own guns without a basic locker or safe of some kind...
It should not, especially since they justify it with the same argument that people who want to justify owning these guns.
"What if I need to protect myself?"
Keep a small gun safe that is bolted to your night stand with a quick pin-number combination (that makes sure you are at least somewhat awake and cognizant before you handle your weapon)?
Truthfully, the only time your gun should be out of your safe and/or trigger lock is when it is being cleaned or on your person.
I can certainly protect myself just fine and I have a safe, biometric single pistol safes work great for behind the nightstand, though I have a holster set up on the head board of my bed for nighttime stowage. Otherwise it's in the steel box with the rest of the weapons.
d-usa wrote: Or we can stop playing "the other side is completely at fault" and admit that there are two district and equally important issues here. Undiagnosed and untreated mental health issues AND easy access to weapons.
Right, and the proposed solutions to the undiagnosed/treated of mental health problems are what exactly? Oh right, it's incredibly complicated, there are no easy answers because it encompasses everything from the drug industry, the healthcare industry, the criminal justice system, parenting or the lack of it and oh yeah the jail industrial complex... unlike the gun control side in which there are some incredibly easy answers, like closing the gun show loophole for one.
The loophole wherein you have to get a background check like anywhere else you buy?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:33:34
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
So ban every single gun, or just enact any sort of sensible gun control law.
Tomorrow is "gun control day +1", hurray now crazy people can't buy guns legally anymore.
What's that over there? A giant pile of legally purchased and legally owned firearms that we accumulated over the last 200+ years that are all around people with mental illnesses? Don't worry about them, it doesn't matter, we made sure they can't buy any NEW guns so the problem is solved. Crazy people will never use weapons that were around for over 200 years now that we have a new law regulating the purchase of new weapons. So just keep on ignoring the dismal state of mental health treatment in the United States because guns are no more, except all the ones already around of course...
Yep, real simple solution there. I also like how you ignore the point aboit mentally ill serial killers who kill for decades without ever picking up guns.
2012/12/17 02:41:40
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
She makes some great points but lets be honest here, her son might do something violent, might kill someone with a sharp or blunt object, but right now he doesn't have access to a firearm and my guess is his harry potter fan club membership isn't going to get him the correct street cred to get in with the kind of individuals who would sell him a firearm illegally.
Buddy, I've lived in places where $50 cash was all the 'street cred' you need to buy illegal guns. Guys with 'street cred' get offered weapons stolen straight from the US military. Buying a sawed off doesn't take 'street cred'. Buying a crate of Stingers or a surplus tank or howitzer that somehow failed to be demilled does.
Let me put it this way: I have all the right paper to make this legal, but once upon a time I bought, in pieces, an entire 40mm oerlikon. Each part, individually, is totally legal to own and purchase without any sort of background check (though the receivers are hard to find NIB) and absolutely minimum licensing. You can even get them through the mail. It's only when you put them together do you have a weapon restricted under the law.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: Crazy people will never use weapons that were around for over 200 years now that we have a new law regulating the purchase of new weapons.
The newly formed United States first mass murderer was a veteran of the Revolution who had the charming habit of locking people in their houses and burning them down.
You'd be amazed how frequently arson has been used since then. It's cheap, effective, and hard to trace. Guns just grab headlines. Right up until someone nails the doors shut and burns down an elementary school.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/17 02:45:50
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2012/12/17 02:53:09
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Crazy people will flip out and do terrible things. Not all or even most crazy people, but the rare disturbed individual. For the most part (or so it seems) due to the lack of mental healthcare diagnosing and providing actual aid to these individuals as witnessed by the "Anarchist Soccer Mom" in her "Thinking the Unthinkable" article.
How do we stop them?
It is worth noting that crazies have armed themselves with a variety of weapons besides firearms ranging from less destructive to massively more so. (Oklahoma City for example)
Second issue, it seems that crazies do have the capacity to arm themselves without much interference. American gun control blocks criminals from the new purchase of firearms well enough with the majority of criminal guns being stolen or obtained through illegal secondary sources* it does not however account for nutcases.
Wow, that's almost as if looking at the big picture actually helps, instead of blaming anyone not approaching the issue from the same angle as you do of 'coping out'.
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/12/17 03:10:46
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, gun laws need to be ramped up. If a country is going to allow guns, then very strict regulations need to put upon them.
***We have them.
Someone owning a gun would need to have a background check.
***We have that.
Only specially licensed shops should sell them, and there should not be many of them.
***We have that.
The idea of selling guns in hypermarkets is ridiculous!
***They don't. You have to be a licensed dealer.
A person should only be allowed to own one gun and a limited amount of ammunition. Finally, only small handguns should be sold.
***Why? If i am a nutjob I could kill a bunch of school children with a baseball bat. Its not hard.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: Having the rifle doesn't matter since of was left in the car, was not used, and didn't kill a single person.
Doesn't matter to those who want to ban it. The real question is why are all these known nutjobs roaming around free? I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of crazies, but crazies should have mandatory treatment.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/17 03:15:35
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 03:16:57
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Well, a legal right should normally be founded in a moral one. A law enabling mass murderers isn't very well founded, and modifying it would be justified.
Of course, that's if it's impossible to curb availability without changing the 2nd Amendment. Which I have no clue about.
A person should only be allowed to own one gun and a limited amount of ammunition. Finally, only small handguns should be sold.
***Why? If i am a nutjob I could kill a bunch of school children with a baseball bat. Its not hard.
Maybe, but then the PE teacher got access to an armory to match yours, and top it 30 times. Guns, not so much.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 03:18:39
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/12/17 03:22:11
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Well, a legal right should normally be founded in a moral one. A law enabling mass murderers isn't very well founded, and modifying it would be justified.
Of course, that's if it's impossible to curb availability without changing the 2nd Amendment. Which I have no clue about. .
Sure but enabling several million people to defend themselves IS fairly moral.
Given the most conservative estimate I've found is that there are approx 100,000 defensive gun uses yearly (which high numbers into the millions) I'd say that's pretty morally grounded.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
Ratbarf wrote:The only state I know of that doesn't require a mental health background check is Georgia.
Bull Gak
Other than the state of Fantasy none of them require a "mental health background check"
And the funny thing about the only background check they do, the NICS, is that its national.
The NCIS has a requirement for mental state. you can't have been interned or whatever the word is. I'm for making that more severe.
I should note I don't really have a dog in this fight. I don't have a tacticool rifle or want one. I just want a deer rifle with a nice scope, and not even to hunt with, just pop paper. I don't have a tacticool shotgun with lights and all that crap, just an 870 thats longer than a house.
Its not a comfort, but those children are innocent and in heaven now. They will never know any more pain, or loss, or hurt. Only joy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 03:31:11
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 03:31:40
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Which is entirely open to interpretation by the Supreme Court as necessary.
The "right to bear arms" is a relic of a bygone era. An era when the United States was a nation fresh from a war to earn its independence and a nation which was primarily unspoiled wilderness.
The Second Amendment was intended for a nation where the army of the time had no distinct advantage over the regular citizenry with their muskets and rifles.
For the Second Amendment to have any applicable logic for today citizens would have to be allowed to own tanks, attack helicopters, anti aircraft weaponry, anti armor weaponry, and advanced night vision equipment.
I don't see any of those beyond the night vision equipment being allowed currently.
Also, gun laws need to be ramped up. If a country is going to allow guns, then very strict regulations need to put upon them.
***We have them.
Someone owning a gun would need to have a background check.
***We have that.
Only specially licensed shops should sell them, and there should not be many of them.
***We have that.
The idea of selling guns in hypermarkets is ridiculous!
***They don't. You have to be a licensed dealer.
A person should only be allowed to own one gun and a limited amount of ammunition. Finally, only small handguns should be sold.
***Why? If i am a nutjob I could kill a bunch of school children with a baseball bat. Its not hard.
If we're going to make this argument, "a nutjob could kill a bunch of school children" using their hands.
REGULATE HANDS!
This idea that it is simply "a nutjob" performing these things is preposterous. It's a strawman from the pro-gun side.
d-usa wrote: Having the rifle doesn't matter since of was left in the car, was not used, and didn't kill a single person.
Doesn't matter to those who want to ban it. The real question is why are all these known nutjobs roaming around free? I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of crazies, but crazies should have mandatory treatment.
Why in the world do people insist on using the term "nutjob" and "crazies"?
Most of these individuals are as functional as the rest of society. There is no hard or fast rule for what causes them to perpetuate these acts of violence.
2012/12/17 03:35:57
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Which is entirely open to interpretation by the Supreme Court as necessary.
Well have I got news for you! They have, it's still valid and it still applies. In fact under those interpretations Illinois's concealed carry ban was just struck down.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
d-usa wrote: It's a big part of the discussion that is being ignored IMHO.
If there is a problem with mentally ill people getting a hold of weapons and using them for mass killings, then why would you say "we need to do something about guns" and ignore an entire half of the problem?
Of course in these parts we will have the two discussions:
"Gun control? Government is going to take away my guns and then we will end up in concentration camps!"
and
"Mental Health reform? They are going to screen us all and force treatment and put us in concentration camps!"
Yep.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 03:39:20
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
This is an interesting analysis... I want to preface this with a question: When comparing numbers to other counters, are the reported incidents counted the same way?
Oh... one other thing...UK is more violent? Say whaaat? I've tried some google-fu and the data is all over the map. o.O According to Wiki, US has 470 per 100,000... which wouldn't put us in the top 10 list below if that list is accurate.
WARING: Link contains gruesome image, NSFW.
whembly, please warn folks about this kind of thing in the future. Thanks! ~Manchu
I thought it would be useful to assemble in one place factual data refuting the Left’s instinctive demand for gun control in response to the Newtown tragedy. In no particular order, I’m setting out their arguments and the factual counter arguments: 1. America’s out-of-control guns make it the most violent place in the world.False. First of all, there are two different types of violence. The first is violence by a government against its people. The second is violence by a people against each other.
Thankfully, America is still way, way, way low on the list of violence by a government against its people. I’m sure that the beleaguered citizens in North Korea, or China, or Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, or Gaza and the West Bank, Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or in any other dictatorship around the world would love to have a chance to live in America. They would laugh at what we call “violence,” because they understand that the worst violence is always that visited by an armed government against an unarmed citizenry.
As for the people against people violence, putting aside fairly anarchic places such as Brazil or Peru or Mexico, America still doesn’t even rank near the top of the list. The most violent place to live if you’re afraid of your fellow citizens is . . . drumroll please . . . England, a country with ferociously stiff gun control laws. (See the chart, above.) Incidentally, the violent crime rate in England increased dramatically from the moment the Labour government put extremely harsh gun-control laws in place. Not only was there more gun crime, there was more of every kind of crime. If you read the British papers, you learn that the Brits got very creative about violence, resorting with ferocity to knives, broken bottles, head stomps, drowning, choking, poisoning, etc. People who want to kill will kill.
2. Countries with strict gun control laws don’t have mass murders along the lines of Columbine or Newtown. False. There are three types of mass murderers: (1) ideological killers, who are usually Muslims with the random Timothy McVeigh thrown in for good measure; (2) insane people; and (3) professional killers, along the lines of the drug gangs Mexico. These people are driven to kill and will do so regardless of any limitations placed upon them.
Your crazed or professional killers will always get guns and bombs, as Anders Breivik did when he killed 77 people, mostly children, in strict-gun-control Norway. They will use fertilizer and box cutters to turn trucks and airplanes into bombs, as Timothy McVeigh did in Oklahoma and Al Qaeda did on 9/11. They will turn cities into charnel houses, as the Mexico drug gangs have done in Mexico, despite Mexico having some of the strictest gun control laws in the world. (Of course, the interesting twist to the Mexico murders is that Attorney General Eric Holder ignored Mexican law and ran hundreds of illegal weapons into Mexico, courtesy of Operation Fast and Furious.) They will blow up buses and subways, as Muslim extremists did in London; and trains, as Muslim extremists did in Spain. They will slaughter school children, as one madman did in Scotland. Islamic extremists in Mumbai were not slowed down even a little bit by India’s strict gun control laws. Germany, another country in love with strict gun control, also couldn’t stop a mass murder at a school. Gun control does not stop mass murder. 3. Gun control in America will lower the number of gun related murders.False. Even if one concedes that ideological killers, insane people, and professional killers are in a class by themselves, and operate outside of gun control laws, won’t gun control laws stop garden-variety criminals, suicides, and impulse killers? No. Emphatically no. Guns are a very useful deterrent, especially for women. Men have a physical advantage over women, but they don’t have any advantage over a trained and armed woman. (The picture above is of Sarah McKinley, an 18-year-old widow and mother of a small child, who killed home intruders seeking drugs.) Homeowners are sitting ducks if robbers know that they are unable to defend themselves. If you doubt these assertions, just look at the statistics.
Howard Nemorov kindly assembled some statistics and they show definitively what the NRA has always claimed: when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns: Collating gun ownership rates with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) homicide data underscores the above conclusions:
* States with the lowest firearms ownership average the highest firearm and non-firearm homicide rates. * As firearms ownership rates increase, homicide rates generally decrease. * States with the highest gun ownership have the lowest firearms homicide rates.
[UPDATE: I've also been reminded that Switzerland and Israel, both of which arm their citizens, have amongst the lowest violent crime rates in the world.]
4. At the very least, gun free zones are safe places. False. Gun free zones are barrels and those in the zone are the fish. Gun free zones are the one place in the world the mass murderer knows that he cannot be stopped. This is true whether the gun free zone is an army base, a school in Columbine, or a university in Virginia. In each of these locations, mass murderers took advantage of everyone else’s unarmed status to go on gleeful killing sprees. Here's the USA Today piece pointing out the problems with this:
Spoiler:
"After a shooting spree," author William Burroughs once said, "they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it." Burroughs continued: "I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military."
Plenty of people — especially among America's political and journalistic classes — feel differently. They'd be much more comfortable seeing ordinary Americans disarmed. And whenever there is a mass shooting, or other gun incident that snags the headlines, they do their best to exploit the tragedy and push for laws that would, well, take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.
There are a lot of problems with this approach, but one of the most significant is this one: It doesn't work. One of the interesting characteristics of mass shootings is that they generally occur in places where firearms are banned: malls, schools, etc. That was the finding of a famous 1999 study by John Lott of the University of Maryland and William Landes of the University of Chicago, and it appears to have been borne out by experience since then as well.
In a way, this is no surprise. If there's someone present with a gun when a mass shooting begins, the shooter is likely to be shot himself. And, in fact, many mass shootings — from the high school shooting by Luke Woodham in Pearl, Miss., to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo., where an armed volunteer shot the attacker — have been terminated when someone retrieved a gun from a car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.
Policies making areas "gun free" provide a sense of safety to those who engage in magical thinking, but in practice, of course, killers aren't stopped by gun-free zones. As always, it's the honest people — the very ones you want to be armed — who tend to obey the law.
This vulnerability makes some people uncomfortable. I teach at a state university with a campus gun-free policy, and quite a few of my students have permits to carry guns. After the Virginia Tech shooting a few years ago, one of them asked me if we could move class off campus, because she felt unsafe being unarmed. I certainly would have felt perfectly safe having her carry a gun in my presence; she was, and is, a responsible adult. I feel the same way about the other law students I know who have carry permits.
Gun-free zones are premised on a lie: that murderers will follow rules, and that people like my student are a greater danger to those around them than crazed killers. That's an insult to honest people. Sometimes, it's a deadly one. The notion that more guns mean more crime is wrong. In fact, as gun ownership has expanded over the past decade, crime has gone down.
Fortunately, the efforts to punish "the people who didn't do it" are getting less traction these days. The Supreme Court, of course, has recognized that under the Constitution, honest people have a right to defend themselves with firearms, inside and outside the home, something that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit recently acknowledged in striking down Illinois' gun-carry ban. Given that gun-free zones seem to be a magnet for mass shooters, maybe we should be working to shrink or eliminate them, rather than expand them. As they say, if it saves just one life, it's worth it.
5. Congress should outlaw guns. False. Even if you think Congress should, it can’t. Like it or not, the Second Amendment stands in the way, stating as a matter of contract between government and people that the American people the right to bear arms. There is only one mechanism to bypass the Second Amendment — more amendment. Or, as Article 5 of the Constitution says:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Funnily enough, gun control advocates seem disinclined to attempt either of the options the Constitution provides for its amendment.
6. America’s culture is violent. Sort of true, but let’s figure out where to place the blame. I say “sort of true” because, while America certainly isn’t up there with Britain or certain other European countries when it comes to violence, we’re certainly a more violent country than Iceland or Japan. (Although Japan has an insanely high suicide rate, so lack of both violence and guns doesn’t mean lack of suffering.) Because we are a ginormous, heterogeneous country with a huge influx of immigrants, both legal and illegal, we are never going to have the social unanimity that other countries use as a counter to violence. We cannot mimic Iceland or Japan because our population is too differently constituted. In this regard, it’s worth noting that Nordic countries such as Sweden, Norway, and Denmark that have opened their Leftist hearts to a vast influx of Muslim immigrants who don’t subscribe to Nordic social norms have seen a huge increase in one very specific type of violence: rape.
There’s another reason America has a violent culture: our entertainment industry celebrates it. Movies, TV shows, video games, and music are all blood-soaked. They are also all the product of a dominant Progressive industry. Yup — the people who are selling American disarmament are also the same people glorifying an extraordinarily violent culture. My suggestion is that, before the Progressives take away my Constitutional right to bear arms, they give some thought to changing the message they sell to America and the rest of the world.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 15:07:08
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2012/12/17 03:40:29
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
I don't think anyone is under the illusion you can legislate or regulate sick crazy feths out of existence, they’ve been around forever, but you can obviously reduce their ability to access efficient death machines.
Hey America, take a long hard fething look at your gun laws, because you seem to have a disproportionate amount of crazy sick feths… and they keep getting their hand on firearms.
Gun laws are protected by the Second Amendment. Firearms rights are not just laws but an actual right enshrined under the Second Amendment.
Which is entirely open to interpretation by the Supreme Court as necessary.
Well have I got news for you! They have, it's still valid and it still applies. In fact under those interpretations Illinois's concealed carry ban was just struck down.
Which does not prove a single thing about the constitutionality about the right for individuals to own "assault weapons", which is a big sticking point for both sides of the gun debate.
The ability to conceal a handgun on your person != the right to bear arms, by the way.
Oh and look. Here comes Whembly with blog posts!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 03:41:45
