Another shooting at a school.

DS1119

Bentleyspop wrote:

Another politician who missed the part of the Constitution that mentions the separation of church and state

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mike-Huckabee-s-God-Issue-or-Lack-of-Gun-Control-to-Blame-for-Newtown-315011.shtml

Obama mentioned praying and God in his speech yesterday.

rollings

pandora wrote:

This latest tragedy shows us mentally disturbed people are not getting the help they need.

it's also fairly well-known that mentally disturbed people don't even seek or want or follow through with the help they need.

Cliffy6745

pandora wrote:

I will not get into another gun debate ... it is futile.
It is disrespectful to the one's lost including the killer.

This might be the dumbest fucking thing ever written on this board. Debating the cause of death is fucking disrespectful? You know what I think is fucking disrespectful? Not fucking talking about it and not trying to come up with a solution before this happens again and again. It's disprespectful to bury your head in the sand and pretend this guys access to guns has nothing to do with what happened. Infuckingcredible

Pandora the victim in 5, 4, 3 ,2 .....

Cliffy6745

rollings wrote:

petejm043 wrote:

Everyone should be outraged and sad. But this would have happened with or without guns. Earlier this week a man in China walked into a school and stabbed 22 children. The world is going mad.

I cannot comprehend what you might really mean. Please explain then how its possible that 20 little children could have possibly been shot & killed WITHOUT guns.

fatal gunshot wounds on 5-year olds beg for your answer please.

It's incredible the pro gun people keep using this argument. NO ONE FUCKING DIED! That is the point

rollings

DS1119 wrote:

Bentleyspop wrote:

Another politician who missed the part of the Constitution that mentions the separation of church and state

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mike-Huckabee-s-God-Issue-or-Lack-of-Gun-Control-to-Blame-for-Newtown-315011.shtml

Obama mentioned praying and God in his speech yesterday.

maybe God even if only as a means to what is good and/or some kind of semblance of peace of mind isn't such a bad idea at the present time, don't you think?

keeponrockin

Cliffy6745 wrote:

pandora wrote:

I will not get into another gun debate ... it is futile.
It is disrespectful to the one's lost including the killer.

This might be the dumbest fucking thing ever written on this board. Debating the cause of death is fucking disrespectful? You know what I think is fucking disrespectful? Not fucking talking about it and not trying to come up with a solution before this happens again and again. It's disprespectful to bury your head in the sand and pretend this guys access to guns has nothing to do with what happened. Infuckingcredible

Pandora the victim in 5, 4, 3 ,2 .....

Quoted for truth.

DewieCox

I think it's foolish to make this as cut and dry as "take away the guns, take away the killing". May stop stuff as shocking and headline grabbing as this but criminals would still have guns and there wouldn't be anything to scare them off. There's more violent crime in states that have tighter gun laws than vice versa and there's exponentially more crime done with illegally obtained/used guns(including this instance) than legal, responsible gun owners.

I agree that nobody need assault weapons, automatic weapons and frankly conceal/carry freaks me out to no end. This comin from somebody that's had some good times shooting them with friends.

There needs to be more accountability and it needs to be harder to get guns and ammunition. A cop can scan a barcode on my license and pull up my permanent record. It can't be that hard for something similar with gun buyers.

There needs to be psychiatric evaluations for anybody that's gonna own a gun and the doctors need to face harsh penalties for signing off on patients that commit violent crimes.

Gun dealers is probably the biggest problem. I've heard stories from my gun owning friends about dealers at gun shows. They'll setup in the parking lots afterwards and offload any unsold guns for next to nothing with little to no paper work. Wouldn't be hard to bust alot of these with the stories I've heard.

rollings

DS1119 wrote:

Horos wrote:

And I'm tired of the silly 2nd Amendment argument. The framers of The Constitution never imagined our modern society.

With all due respect they didn't imagine gay marriage or abortion when they framed the Constitution either but the COnstitution always gets brought up with those issues as well.

Exactly.... which means for the constitution to remain relevant, we have to take not the literal word, but the reason & intention of the constitution, which is the passage of rights to the individuals, and apply it in the context of an ever-changing society.

DS1119

pureoc wrote:

If you want to own a hunting rifle fine, but I still have yet to hear a logical reason as to why anyone needs a semi-automatic/assault weapon.

Same reason people own sports cars and motorcyles that can go 200mph plus. Actually if everyone thinks about it, pretty much everyone's car here can go 120-130 mph. What's the reason for that? If those sports cars were banned wouldn't that save some lives? How about everyone's car is governed to drive no faster than the speed limit? How about requiring cars with electronic kill switches installed that could be activated by police to avoid a car chase? These measures alone would save 1000's and 1000's of lives every year.

DS1119

rollings wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Bentleyspop wrote:

Another politician who missed the part of the Constitution that mentions the separation of church and state

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mike-Huckabee-s-God-Issue-or-Lack-of-Gun-Control-to-Blame-for-Newtown-315011.shtml

Obama mentioned praying and God in his speech yesterday.

maybe God even if only as a means to what is good and/or some kind of semblance of peace of mind isn't such a bad idea at the present time, don't you think?

Just bringing up the fact that he mentioned God and praying.

pureoc

DS1119 wrote:

pureoc wrote:

If you want to own a hunting rifle fine, but I still have yet to hear a logical reason as to why anyone needs a semi-automatic/assault weapon.

Same reason people own sports cars and motorcyles that can go 200mph plus. Actually if everyone thinks about it, pretty much everyone's car here can go 120-130 mph. What's the reason for that? If those sports cars were banned wouldn't that save some lives? How about everyone's car is governed to drive no faster than the speed limit? How about requiring cars with electronic kill switches installed that could be activated by police to avoid a car chase? These measures alone would save 1000's and 1000's of lives every year.

Was I asking about cars or motorcycles? No. They actually serve a purpose, to get people places. Guns serve one purpose, to kill. I will post my question again, why does anyone need a semi-automatic/assault weapon?

Longueuil

It seem harder to do a carnage when you're armed of a knife instead of a gun.

A man wielding a knife wounded 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes on Friday

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/man-stabs-22-children-in-china.html?_r=0

Different country, different ending.

Cliffy6745

Longueuil wrote:

It seem harder to do a carnage when you're armed of a knife instead of a gun.

A man wielding a knife wounded 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes on Friday

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/man-stabs-22-children-in-china.html?_r=0

Different country, different ending.

Bingo

rollings

DS1119 wrote:

rollings wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Obama mentioned praying and God in his speech yesterday.

maybe God even if only as a means to what is good and/or some kind of semblance of peace of mind isn't such a bad idea at the present time, don't you think?

Just bringing up the fact that he mentioned God and praying.

oh. I suppose I couldn't derive in what context you were mentioning it then.

DS1119

pureoc wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

pureoc wrote:

If you want to own a hunting rifle fine, but I still have yet to hear a logical reason as to why anyone needs a semi-automatic/assault weapon.

Same reason people own sports cars and motorcyles that can go 200mph plus. Actually if everyone thinks about it, pretty much everyone's car here can go 120-130 mph. What's the reason for that? If those sports cars were banned wouldn't that save some lives? How about everyone's car is governed to drive no faster than the speed limit? How about requiring cars with electronic kill switches installed that could be activated by police to avoid a car chase? These measures alone would save 1000's and 1000's of lives every year.

Was I asking about cars or motorcycles? No. They actually serve a purpose, to get people places. Guns serve one purpose, to kill. I will post my question again, why does anyone need a semi-automatic/assault weapon?

I was trying to make an analogy. But I guess to answer your question because they can. Some choose to do it for defense. Some choose to do it for sport. Some just do it to collect them. No different than any other item an individual owns. It is their right to do if they do it legally.

BTW, I just want to reinforce I don't and have never owned a weapon. To mena outlawing or severely restriciting guns is not the issue. It's a person issue.

riotgrl

brianlux wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

vduboise wrote:

As reports are flying around- was he really mentally ill? Or is that just an excuse we can give to wrap our minds around this tragedy. Oh, he's mentally I'll, So I'll give him a pass.

I'm sorry Pandora, but he could be just plain evil- and him AND a gun killed those people.

There was a report that his brother told police that the shooter is autistic and has a personality disorder. It's yet to be confirmed if he does in fact have a mental health diagnosis, and if so what the diagnosis is and what role it may have played in this crime. There's already so much stigma associated with autism, I'm afraid to see what else this stirs up. The personality disorder would probably have a lot more to do with a crime like this (probably a narcissistic or antisocial personality or paranoid personality disorder or a combination), perhaps compounded by an inability to empathize. Personality disorders are very chronic and can't be cured with medication. They aren't psychotic in nature. People don't have a break with reality. They know exactly what they're doing, but they just don't care. I've heard a lot of misinformation in the media already about the nature of these disorders and what should have been done. Insurance companies don't like to pay for AXIS II disorders and usually don't because they're so chronic in nature.

And I agree - a combination of those personality disorders would equate to pure evil.

This is a very good point, comebackgirl. It might be useful to look at what causes people to have these serious personality disorders. My guess it would have something to do with population crowding (a lot of research is out there on this), toxicity (decades of industrialism has put a lot of that in our food and environment), our culture's love of guns and the proliferation of violence in our media (tv, movies, etc.).

And I totally agree with your concerns for increasing the stigma of autism. Some very wonderful autistic people- Temple Grandin for example- have done wonderful things to make our world better.

I believe narcissism also plays a role in some of the modern day mental health issues from which some suffer. We continue to raise children that are incapable of exhibiting any level of empathy for another human being. What if this guy or others aren't truly mentally ill but because of our focus on granting every little wish and not providing a stable and disciplined environment for our children, we create generations of kids that are narcissistic and unable to grow out of a normal stage of development into a mature, empathetic adult? Couple that with ongoing exposure to violence and environmental toxins and we have created illness where it might not have otherwise existed. It's time to examine gun control laws and mental health advocacy but what about our parenting styles?

petejm043

Zoso wrote:

petejm043 wrote:

Zoso wrote:

the most annoying statement I have heard today 'I'm a gun owner but I'm not violent".. well either was this guy before yesterday! He didn't have a record either.. These people that do this type of things aren't career criiminals or gang members so that argument doesn't hold water at all because a person with a background check that gets denied a gun because of their record aren't the people that do this...

Adam Lanza could have said the same thing after the movie theatre shooting this year....

So all gun owners are violent people? Is that what you are saying? I am a gun owner and I am outraged by what happened yesterday. The events yesterday are beyond sick...but to point the finger at gun ownership is the easy way out.

obviously not saying that.... I'm saying that how do you vet a person like the gunman yesterday who had NEVER had a record or any inclination to be a mass murderer.. so when people say 'I'm a gun owner, but I'm not viokent'.. doesn't make sense because most of the mass murderers haven't ever been in trouble. I don't think EVERY gun owner is violent.

Sorry I misunderstood what you were saying. But the animal that commited yesterdays atrocity was not the owner of the weapons. His mother was the legal owner. But I understand your point. How do we prevent something like this to happen again? With that being said....I do beleive we need to have a serious discussion of what is happening in this country. It is not only gun violence but the direction that are youth are taking. We are losing respect for one another.

blackredyellow

rollings wrote:

pandora wrote:

This latest tragedy shows us mentally disturbed people are not getting the help they need.

it's also fairly well-known that mentally disturbed people don't even seek or want or follow through with the help they need.

That's what gets lost in this too... One thing that everyone is pretty much in agreement is that there needs to be a better focus on mental illness, and more done on that front.

But what does that mean if an adult has mental issues and doesn't want help? Do we go and arbitrarily commit people or forcefully medicate people because we think that they could snap one day?

Is that what the republicans would rather have happen instead of stricter gun control policies?

I swear, it's like bizarro world right now... The right is calling for better mental health care, more secure schools and armed police/security, etc... Instead of just facing the elephant in the room (gun control), these freedom loving small government people seem much more eager to give up more freedom, and spend more money, instead of angering campaign contributors.

Evil is out there... evil has always been there, and always will. But high capacity semi-automatic weapons are a game changer as far as what damage evil can accomplish.

rollings

DS1119 wrote:

Actually if everyone thinks about it, pretty much everyone's car here can go 120-130 mph. What's the reason for that? If those sports cars were banned wouldn't that save some lives? ....



(in reference to guns)
.....Some just do it to collect them. No different than any other item an individual owns.

I'm not picking on you DS1119 or anything, but just saying in general....based on my observations, the more far-reaching away from the subject-at-hand an argument has to go, the more as far off base it is.

DS1119

rollings wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Actually if everyone thinks about it, pretty much everyone's car here can go 120-130 mph. What's the reason for that? If those sports cars were banned wouldn't that save some lives? ....



(in reference to guns)
.....Some just do it to collect them. No different than any other item an individual owns.

I'm not picking on you DS1119 or anything, but just saying in general....based on my observations, the more far-reaching away from the subject-at-hand an argument has to go, the more as far off base it is.

I don't think it does actually. It all comes down to an individuals rights within the law.