another student shot in school

haffajappa

aerial wrote:

There are crazy bastards in every walk of life.....
But there are plenty of Moms that can stay home or dads....but then they would not be able to afford the material things that bring them so much happiness.

so maybe we should say material things are the reason?
not lack of prayers in school.

haffajappa

aerial wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

aerial wrote:

parents need to teach there children respect for others....and bulling others is wrong....why does the school need to teach this?....this is basic parenting

and all kids have two parents these days to teach them that right?? not in this day in age when the divorce rate is >50% and the average school teacher spends more time with the kid than the single parent working 2 or 3 jobs trying tp make ends meet.. like the poster above said, this is NOT 1960 anymore...

and thats the problem....maybe
are you saying it's the schools job to raise kids?
Do you have any? I would guess not.

that sounds like the opposite of what they were saying, actually.

Cliffy6745

aerial wrote:

But there are plenty of Moms that can stay home or dads....but then they would not be able to afford the material things that bring them so much happiness.

Yes, parents these days just work for material things, not putting food on the table. Not sure if I have been dreaming the past 18 months, but it seems to me it has become much more difficult for most families to make ends meet. I thought your tea party (so hard not to use the term you so despise) were in touch with the average american?

aerial

haffajappa wrote:

aerial wrote:

There are crazy bastards in every walk of life.....
But there are plenty of Moms that can stay home or dads....but then they would not be able to afford the material things that bring them so much happiness.

so maybe we should say material things are the reason?
not lack of prayers in school.

That could be true.....but why take away the good things....did prayer ever make someone go shoot some one....ok I've said enough on the prayer issue....I did not mean to make this all about prayer

aerial

Cliffy6745 wrote:

aerial wrote:

But there are plenty of Moms that can stay home or dads....but then they would not be able to afford the material things that bring them so much happiness.

Yes, parents these days just work for material things, not putting food on the table. Not sure if I have been dreaming the past 18 months, but it seems to me it has become much more difficult for most families to make ends meet. I thought your tea party (so hard not to use the term you so despise) were in touch with the average american?

Look I have been the single mom route....I know how hard it is...and I meant no disrespect to any single parent....but I do know there are those that work for the material things in this world....I know some of them. It is happening

Cliffy6745

aerial wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

aerial wrote:

But there are plenty of Moms that can stay home or dads....but then they would not be able to afford the material things that bring them so much happiness.

Yes, parents these days just work for material things, not putting food on the table. Not sure if I have been dreaming the past 18 months, but it seems to me it has become much more difficult for most families to make ends meet. I thought your tea party (so hard not to use the term you so despise) were in touch with the average american?

Look I have been the single mom route....I know how hard it is...and I meant no disrespect to any single parent....but I do know there are those that work for the material things in this world....I know some of them. It is happening

Fair enough

_

rebornFixer wrote:

scb wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

I don't think he was "defending the weapon", which in any event is not a sentient entity and is therefore incapable of owning the guilt or responsibility in this situation. I believe in some reasonable gun controls (just so we're clear), but his point was that the genuine causes of this murder lie not with the tool itself but elsewhere. I agree with this point.

Can we all agree that gun violence requires BOTH a gun and a person to pull the trigger?

Certainly. Without the gun, said violence would be of some other sort. I think the fundamental issue pertains to whether having greater access to guns actually leads to more violence, or a greater level of violence relative to what would be there without access. This is actually a very hard question to answer, even though many people who dislike guns find it super-easy to jump to an "obvious" conclusion.

I guess my question was more for someone like Unsung.

So we agree that no guns = no gun violence, and the issue is whether or not gun violence is worse than other kinds of violence, right? So how do you measure what's "worse"? It does seem obvious to me that "worse" violence is the violence that, when it happens, results in greater harm (i.e. serious injury or death). Do you propose some other way to measure it? :?

_

rebornFixer wrote:

Underneath a proximal cause like weapon access are all kinds of psychological and sociological causes of violence, and if you ask me, fixing these is going to be the only way to reduce overall violence levels.

I agree that the root causes of why people commit violent acts are psychological and sociological and we should do something to reduce these root causes. But do you really think there's no other/additional way to reduce violence? Again, maybe we're talking about different things. I'm talking about how to reduce the consequences of violence, like death. Are you just talking about the incidence of violent acts?? :?

Pepe Silvia

_outlaw wrote:

I haven't read this whole thread in its entirety but the whole "you can't blame the device" argument is very illogical. That's like saying, on a more magnanimous level, that you can't blame the massacre of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki on nuclear weapons - only the people who fired them. Yeah, the people who fire the weapons are obviously at fault, but no one is saying they're innocent. But when there is a device that makes killing people easier and its readily available for use by almost anyone, it's a fucking problem. I mean no offense, really, but how is this not fucking obvious to anyone? Guns make killing people easier. A bat, a knife, any other type of weapon, would make things a little less difficult. And how the hell were cigarettes and alcohol and fast food and mosquitos brought into this discussion? This discussion is about weapons, not about anything that can cause someone's heart to stop beating. Alright, I gotta stop wasting time and finish writing my paper.

i wonder how many deaths by knives or bats happened in schools compared to guns?

and actually, technically the people who fired those bombs are innocent because 'war is hell'

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

someone said stabbings would be more frequent, but as a student of psychology it is much easier for people to stand back and shoot than it is to get right up on someone and stab them. stabbing is much more of a personal way to kill someone. same as asphixiation. many times when you kill out of hate you strangle or stab people, not shoot them. that is just the way it happens usually. anybody can pull a trigger, it takes a special person to stab someone and take a life that way....look at the studies during WWI and WWII where soldiers could shoot and kill and detatch themselves from the situation and get over it, but it was much more difficult to get over killing someone with a bayonette or in some other hand to hand situation...

This is true. Although I don't have any data readily available, I know from the years my dad worked at the morgue that when someone had been stabbed or strangled to death, it was almost always done by someone they knew. Not so with gun deaths.

rebornFixer wrote:

3) while guns do create psychological distance in a military context, statistics show that physical assaults with knives, blunt objects, and fists/feet are FAR more numerous than shootings, even in a "gun culture" like the U.S.

This is not comparable to what he said above. Just because incidence of various kinds of physican assault might be higher than the incidence of shootings does not dispute the fact that killing someone up close and personal does not allow for the physical and emotional distance that shooting someone allows.

OutOfBreath

The argument is similar to the one around the indoor smoking ban we now have in place in Norway.
Everyone said that that would do nothing, people wanted to smoke and so on. But the reality is a sharp decline in the use of cigarettes all round. So even if people are free to do as they will, laws like that do have an effect. It reduces the general accessibility of smoking and making it more of a hassle. That's all it takes to get a lot of people off it.

Now apply to guns... Maybe a reduction in the amount of firearms lying around and/or making owning them a little more of a hassle, will reduce deaths, even if people are still people and all underlying factors the same.

Peace
Dan

_

rebornFixer wrote:

Guns have NO power to create a kid who is so distressed and pissed off that he decides to go shoot up a school.

True. And yet guns give that angry kid the power to do a lot more damage than he would have been able to do without a gun. Don't you agree?

_

aerial wrote:

i can guarantee you this, if a person wants to kill someone,if they don't have a gun they will find something else to do the job....

I disagree. I think this is true in some cases, but in many cases it's the gun that bridged the gap between wanting to kill someone and actually doing it. There are plenty of times when a person has wanted to kill themselves or someone else and not done it either because it was too difficult/complicated or because by the time they got their shit together to do it they had calmed down. If all homicide was so well-thought-out, we wouldn't need to have different degrees of murder charges.

_

Sorry... I was behind. :oops:

Smellyman

aerial wrote:

keeponrockin wrote:

aerial wrote:

Thats my point some follow the rules (values, morals) some don't....but if they don't know what the rules are What Then?.....Don't know about the rest of you but I do the speed limit

I grew up in an atheist household... I've yet to kill someone, yet to steal.

And I'd like you to answer my other question. You said that there's been more school shootings, and tied in the fact of the removal of prayer in 1962. The march on Washington happened in 1963. Therefore, could one logically assume (from what you said) that this is because prayer was removed from schools?

I said "they say" and it does seem logical....kids were not shooting kids in school when I was going.....I think kids see the BS going on about how bad it is to say the Pledge of Allegiance...saying prayers...teachers can’t discipline kids in school....kids have no respect for teachers or anything else....is it the parents? is it the school? ....is it the trouble makers screwing with the American Culture....I have nothing against atheist......but why do they have a problem with me?....I don’t know the answers....I’m just pondering what the OP was asking.....What is making kids kill kids?

hahahaha. If only we could pray and say the pledge of allegiance. hahahahaha

gimmesometruth27

Smellyman wrote:

hahahaha. If only we could pray and say the pledge of allegiance. hahahahaha

what was that old saying, Praise the lord and pass the ammunition!!

rebornFixer

scb,

There were a lot of responses there and a lot of baffled smileys. I don't think I was that baffling, but hey. I'll just give one blanket reply ... First, I think we can agree that interventions to keep guns out of kid's hands would decrease death rates when violent acts are committed, and are thus a good idea. I responded to gimmesometruth's argument about the distancing effects of guns in the way I did because he or she seemed to be implying that guns somehow breed violence where no such tendency existed before. If this were true, gun crimes would be more common than other violent crimes, which of course they are not. I think one can argue that guns do result in higher death tolls when someone snaps and goes on a rampage, which is why I feel that controls are needed, so long as said controls lead to bona fide increases in safety for all concerned. Guns make violent people more effective at what they do, and are therefore part of the problem (pardon the wording "effective", you know what I mean). But they are only PART of the issue here.

WaveCameCrashin

violent crime has increased in areas where gun control laws have been enacted,making it more likely law-abiding citizens have been un able to defend themselves from armed criminals

I don't get why liberals think that we shoulkd advocate more restrictive "gun control" laws which would make obtaining a gun more difficult for average american citizens,but in REALITY it would do very little to prevent thugs from obtaining guns.

_

rebornFixer wrote:

First, I think we can agree that interventions to keep guns out of kid's hands would decrease death rates when violent acts are committed, and are thus a good idea.

I agree. Now what do you think about that same principle applied to adults?

rebornFixer wrote:

I responded to gimmesometruth's argument about the distancing effects of guns in the way I did because he or she seemed to be implying that guns somehow breed violence where no such tendency existed before. If this were true, gun crimes would be more common than other violent crimes, which of course they are not.

Oh. See, I didn't take it that way at all.

rebornFixer wrote:

I think one can argue that guns do result in higher death tolls when someone snaps and goes on a rampage, which is why I feel that controls are needed, so long as said controls lead to bona fide increases in safety for all concerned.

I agree.

rebornFixer wrote:

Guns make violent people more effective at what they do, and are therefore part of the problem (pardon the wording "effective", you know what I mean). But they are only PART of the issue here.

I agree.

See, I knew we agreed.

_

prfctlefts wrote:

violent crime has increased in areas where gun control laws have been enacted,making it more likely law-abiding citizens have been un able to defend themselves from armed criminals

Source, please?