The killer has been identified as a 23 year old South Korean. I wonder what, if any, level of abuse he was subjected to at college during these times of animosity towards anyone of middle Eastern, or Asian appearance?
No. Democracy would be an inappropriate word there, unless you believe a lynch mob is a democracy. Rights precede democracy.
certain rights are protected in a democracy. these rights are decided by the majority with protections for abuse. most of them are personal... privacy, speech, thought, belief, etc. owning a gun is not some sort of universal human right. it's a choice. if we can regulate drugs, we can regulate guns. i'd think the latter would make more sense as it is much more likely to be used upon others.
I'll admit, I've never owned a gun (nor my parents) which is odd, because I am form the south and it seems to be a rite of passage here. What are the requirements to obtain a firearm? Can I own as many as I want and is there a limit to what I can possess? Is there any training required before one can own a gun? What laws are already on 'the books' and are they enforced?
none. there is some sort of background check, but that is about it. as i understand, it's pretty loosely enforced, shoddily done, extremely expensive, and apparently quite ineffective. no training whatsoever is required. no knowledge of how to use a gun (do they come with instruction manuals?) is required. they basically hand them to anyone with cash, with some vendors actually bothering to do background checks to make sure the buyer hasn't killed anyone before.
Try telling that to the families... that they shouldn't have the choice to make it harder for potential psychos to get their hands on guns :rolleyes:
How is telling that to the families any different than telling it to you?
125million guns in the USS?? :eek:
Eek what? Do you expect me to be afraid of 125,000,000 guns in the hands of people that in all likelihood will not kill me with a single one of them? The only people currently threatening me with guns are the people who are telling me I have no right to own one, and that they'll use theirs to take mine away.
certain rights are protected in a democracy. these rights are decided by the majority with protections for abuse.
Hehe...if you can decide away a right, it is not "protected". Sorry.
most of them are personal... privacy, speech, thought, belief, etc. owning a gun is not some sort of universal human right. it's a choice. if we can regulate drugs, we can regulate guns. i'd think the latter would make more sense as it is much more likely to be used upon others.
You can regulate anything you'd like. And you'll all sit there and say "guns have no good purpose, therefore you can't own them". Just try to not say that while holding the guns you use to enforce your regulations.
Alienating people's rights undermines the very fabric of what our society is based on.
It's a catch .22 (caliber)
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Hehe...if you can decide away a right, it is not "protected". Sorry.
You can regulate anything you'd like. And you'll all sit there and say "guns have no good purpose, therefore you can't own them". Just try to not say that while holding the guns you use to enforce your regulations.
sure you can. if you grant someone an easement over your land, they have a right to use that land. but you can take that right away becos it is only bestowed by your leave. in any case, im still not sure how owning a gun is some sort of god-given right. that's a bit of a stretch. can i claim a god-given right to dunkin donuts? crack? heroin?
but be that as it may, im not one to advocate stripping people of gun rights. i only stepped into this 1) becos it is utterly ridiculous to assert that the ease of access to guns has NO relation to these mass slaughters we occasionally have here and 2) becos i think we need to rethink how we handle guns cos what we're doing isn't working. i've expressed my ideas in the past, i actually favor less restrictive gun laws. i favor smarter ones, not stricter ones. and this background check nonsense is stupid.
sure you can. if you grant someone an easement over your land, they have a right to use that land. but you can take that right away becos it is only bestowed by your leave.
One can certainly bargain one's rights. That's the essence of government. However, my point was that the rights come first, not the government. If government creates rights, the only fundamental exchange between men is violence.
in any case, im still not sure how owning a gun is some sort of god-given right. that's a bit of a stretch. can i claim a god-given right to dunkin donuts? crack? heroin?
You cannot claim a "god-given" right so something that involves someone else's labor, no. Do you have no "god-given" right to dunkin donuts, crack or heroin, unless of course you can make them yourself. In that case, yes, you do have a right to those things.
but be that as it may, im not one to advocate stripping people of gun rights. i only stepped into this 1) becos it is utterly ridiculous to assert that the ease of access to guns has NO relation to these mass slaughters we occasionally have here and 2) becos i think we need to rethink how we handle guns cos what we're doing isn't working. i've expressed my ideas in the past, i actually favor less restrictive gun laws. i favor smarter ones, not stricter ones. and this background check nonsense is stupid.
One can certainly bargain one's rights. That's the essence of government. However, my point was that the rights come first, not the government. If government creates rights, the only fundamental exchange between men is violence.
You cannot claim a "god-given" right so something that involves someone else's labor, no. Do you have no "god-given" right to dunkin donuts, crack or heroin, unless of course you can make them yourself. In that case, yes, you do have a right to those things.
Ultimately I don't think anyone should be able to prevent or make anything illegal. It just creates opposition out of spite. If someone wants to abuse heroin, or own rooms full of guns etc.. these are lessons only that individual can learn from. You can never have the government, or anyone else for that matter, parent people on what they can or can't do. People need to learn from the consequences of their own actions.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
There are roughly 250,000,000 guns in America. About 10,000 people are killed a year using firearms, roughly.
10,000... you certainly rounded down there!!!
there were 16000+ suicides in 2004 alone where a gun was used... i havent even counted accidents, murders, etc
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
The killer has been identified as a 23 year old South Korean. I wonder what, if any, level of abuse he was subjected to at college during these times of animosity towards anyone of middle Eastern, or Asian appearance?
LOL. That's it. It must be because America is racist. Good one.
Or maybe he was fucking nuts.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
there were 16000+ suicides in 2004 alone where a gun was used... i havent even counted accidents, murders, etc
There were about 16,000 murders in the United States in 2004. About 2/3 involved a firearm. Hence the 10,000 number. None of these statistics count suicides or accidents.
Good god, what’s the point in arguing? FFG would have us all armed with nukes if he had his way :rolleyes: So we can all do whatever we want. And my choice to take somebody’s life supersedes somebody’s choice to live?
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Good god, what’s the point in arguing? FFG would have us all armed with nukes if he had his way :rolleyes: So we can all do whatever we want. And my choice to take somebody’s life supersedes somebody’s choice to live?
I've had my disagreements with ffg, but I don't see that he's making a point like you describe here.
I'll admit, I've never owned a gun (nor my parents) which is odd, because I am form the south and it seems to be a rite of passage here. What are the requirements to obtain a firearm? Can I own as many as I want and is there a limit to what I can possess? Is there any training required before one can own a gun? What laws are already on 'the books' and are they enforced?
It depends on the state... I grew up in Pennsylvania, and I bought a handgun about 5 or so years ago. All I had to do was pay an additional $10 for a call-in FBI background check and I was good to go. I also got a carrying permit for a small fee. I was never fingerprinted or anything... I actually scared me how easy that it was.
I'm not entirely sure, but for rifles and shotguns, I don't think that there is any background check.
I live in New York state now, and if I want to legally own my handgun here, I have to pay $100 for a license, and I think pass some sort of test. The degree of difficulty in getting a license depends on the county, and that is the big problem.
I know that gun control won't solve all of the gun violence, but I will stop some in the long run. And for everyone who has lost someone to gun violence, I think that they would have loved for their to be at least a chance that the killer didn't have easy access to a gun.
I just think that a common sense approach of a standardized background check/evaluation and enforcement of it (at gun shows, small stores, pawn shops, etc) would go a long way at reducing the supply of handguns. I am not saying that law abiding people shouldn't be able to own guns, but we need a standardized way of weeding out the people who shouldn't be able to buy them.
With the hundreds of millions of guns in circulation, it is definitely an uphill battle, but just think how many less guns that we would have in circulation if steps like this were implemented 20 years ago - if the only new firearms introduced into circulation in the last 20 years were registered to someone and legally purchased how much lower would that number be?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
LOL. That's it. It must be because America is racist. Good one.
Or maybe he was fucking nuts.
Typically moronic comment from your good self. Nothing in what you've said holds any water. Firstly, a country can't possibly be racist. Only people can be racist. So that part of your comment can be dismissed.
Secondly, what does 'fucking nuts' mean? Let's just say that we are able to categorize someone as being 'fucking nuts' and are thereby able to immediately understand every facet and ramification of his motivations, and actions. Then what? Are you saying that everyone who exhibits any kind of neuroses or mental aberration should be locked up for being a potential mass murderer?
That part of your post can also be dismissed as irrelevant gibberish.
I don't know why I bother responding.
Good god, what’s the point in arguing? FFG would have us all armed with nukes if he had his way :rolleyes:
Not really, no. Why would I want you armed with nukes? Furthermore, why would my idea of what you should or should not be armed with have any determination over what you are actually armed or not armed with?
So we can all do whatever we want.
No. You can do whatever you want, so long as it is not violent. If you want to be violent, that actually is your right as well. But at that point you've declared that aggression is your chosen medium of exchange. And what goes around tends to come around there.
Anyway, owning a gun is not violent. Shooting someone with it is.
And my choice to take somebody’s life supersedes somebody’s choice to live?
No. Your choice to own a gun need not supersede someone's choice to live. Millions of gun owners prove this everyday.
There were about 16,000 murders in the United States in 2004. About 2/3 involved a firearm. Hence the 10,000 number. None of these statistics count suicides or accidents.
no.. there were 16000+ suicides... plus those murders makes 32000.. all with a firearm
it was you who said this
There are roughly 250,000,000 guns in America. About 10,000 people are killed a year using firearms, roughly.
32000 people killed per year isnt 10,000 as you first indicated... far from it
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Yes, rather than blame the perpetrator like I tend to do, it makes much more sense to deflect that and blame American society as you tend to do. Moronic indeed.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
It really is no different. I'm not trying to make the point that it's different.
ok, you just seemed a bit more concerned about guns than anythings else. some of your comments recalled charlton heston's "from my cold dead hands" nonsense. i wondered why you lacked similar passion when it came to the war on drugs, or pharmaceutical regulation, or whatever else.
Yes, rather than blame the perpetrator like I tend to do, it makes much more sense to deflect that and blame American society as you tend to do. Moronic indeed.
most of the gun school shooters are a product of your society... guns have a high place in your society and so you kill each other a lot with them.. they are not in our society so we tend to twist nipples when someone fucks us off... it still hurts but no-one has actually died yet... yet!!!
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Then you're in an anarchy.. every one decides what his/her right is regardless of other individuals and the rest of society and what would be beneficial to the community... my right to use my gun to shoot and kill you in the process.. oops... forgot about your right to live in peace.. damn.. too bad for you! I stood my ground and I was stronger or crazier than you...
Not really, no. Why would I want you armed with nukes? Furthermore, why would my idea of what you should or should not be armed with have any determination over what you are actually armed or not armed with?.
See you just contradict yourself there. Would it not bother you if I have nukes... and I'm not a particularly stable person! You literally don't know who's living nextdoor to you... as, unfortunately, many parents of small kids have found out. So if that person has access to a gun it gives them a much better chance of doing wider damange than otherwise... how hard is that to understand?
No. You can do whatever you want, so long as it is not violent. If you want to be violent, that actually is your right as well. But at that point you've declared that aggression is your chosen medium of exchange. And what goes around tends to come around there.
Anyway, owning a gun is not violent. Shooting someone with it is..
Hmm... so what uses do guns have that AREN'T violent? Unless it's an antique you put on the wall to look at. Guns are destructive and their sole use is destruction.
No. Your choice to own a gun need not supersede someone's choice to live. Millions of gun owners prove this everyday.
If you are tempted to use a gun, it's easier to give into temptation when there's one sitting in front of you :rolleyes: Ah, I'm not getting into riddles with you again
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
You know, I got to thinking while in the shower that Byrnzie may be on to something. I can't remember which gun thread he expressed his ideas, but it concerns the underlying problem. Earlier, I posted some stats on Switzerland. Their citizens are armed, like the US, but somehow they don't have these mass shooting like we have in the US. Perhaps removing all guns will only be a temporary band-aide to a bigger underlying problem (although the ease to obtain a gun is quite unnerving). We need to get to the heart of the matter, as to why children and young adults resort to mass shootings.
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
no.. there were 16000+ suicides... plus those murders makes 32000.. all with a firearm
it was you who said this
I never said anything about suicides, prior to my last post. Look, your numbers don't even add up. You have 16,000 suicides with a gun in 2004. You have 10,000 murders with firearms in 2004. That's 26,000 total. Assuming a 1:1 ratio between guns and murders (which would not be the case), you still have 26,000 of the 250,000,000 involved in a willful killing. That's 0.0104% of the active firearms in 2004 being used in a killing, meaning that 99.99% were not used in a willful killing.
32000 people killed per year isnt 10,000 as you first indicated... far from it
I'm not considering a suicide a relevant statistic. A suicide is not a crime.
Yes, rather than blame the perpetrator like I tend to do, it makes much more sense to deflect that and blame American society as you tend to do. Moronic indeed.
I was trying to find answers.
This person didn't exist in a vacuum. He was affected by his environment, as we all are. As the 2 lads at Columbine were, and as every other perpetrator of a school or college massacre in the U.S has been.
Comments
certain rights are protected in a democracy. these rights are decided by the majority with protections for abuse. most of them are personal... privacy, speech, thought, belief, etc. owning a gun is not some sort of universal human right. it's a choice. if we can regulate drugs, we can regulate guns. i'd think the latter would make more sense as it is much more likely to be used upon others.
none. there is some sort of background check, but that is about it. as i understand, it's pretty loosely enforced, shoddily done, extremely expensive, and apparently quite ineffective. no training whatsoever is required. no knowledge of how to use a gun (do they come with instruction manuals?) is required. they basically hand them to anyone with cash, with some vendors actually bothering to do background checks to make sure the buyer hasn't killed anyone before.
How is telling that to the families any different than telling it to you?
Eek what? Do you expect me to be afraid of 125,000,000 guns in the hands of people that in all likelihood will not kill me with a single one of them? The only people currently threatening me with guns are the people who are telling me I have no right to own one, and that they'll use theirs to take mine away.
Hehe...if you can decide away a right, it is not "protected". Sorry.
You can regulate anything you'd like. And you'll all sit there and say "guns have no good purpose, therefore you can't own them". Just try to not say that while holding the guns you use to enforce your regulations.
It's a catch .22 (caliber)
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
sure you can. if you grant someone an easement over your land, they have a right to use that land. but you can take that right away becos it is only bestowed by your leave. in any case, im still not sure how owning a gun is some sort of god-given right. that's a bit of a stretch. can i claim a god-given right to dunkin donuts? crack? heroin?
but be that as it may, im not one to advocate stripping people of gun rights. i only stepped into this 1) becos it is utterly ridiculous to assert that the ease of access to guns has NO relation to these mass slaughters we occasionally have here and 2) becos i think we need to rethink how we handle guns cos what we're doing isn't working. i've expressed my ideas in the past, i actually favor less restrictive gun laws. i favor smarter ones, not stricter ones. and this background check nonsense is stupid.
One can certainly bargain one's rights. That's the essence of government. However, my point was that the rights come first, not the government. If government creates rights, the only fundamental exchange between men is violence.
You cannot claim a "god-given" right so something that involves someone else's labor, no. Do you have no "god-given" right to dunkin donuts, crack or heroin, unless of course you can make them yourself. In that case, yes, you do have a right to those things.
Fair enough.
then i assume you build your own guns?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
10,000... you certainly rounded down there!!!
there were 16000+ suicides in 2004 alone where a gun was used... i havent even counted accidents, murders, etc
LOL. That's it. It must be because America is racist. Good one.
Or maybe he was fucking nuts.
No. I buy them. That is how I acquire the labor of others, via exchange. Free exchange with others is my "god-given" right.
There were about 16,000 murders in the United States in 2004. About 2/3 involved a firearm. Hence the 10,000 number. None of these statistics count suicides or accidents.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
It depends on the state... I grew up in Pennsylvania, and I bought a handgun about 5 or so years ago. All I had to do was pay an additional $10 for a call-in FBI background check and I was good to go. I also got a carrying permit for a small fee. I was never fingerprinted or anything... I actually scared me how easy that it was.
I'm not entirely sure, but for rifles and shotguns, I don't think that there is any background check.
I live in New York state now, and if I want to legally own my handgun here, I have to pay $100 for a license, and I think pass some sort of test. The degree of difficulty in getting a license depends on the county, and that is the big problem.
I know that gun control won't solve all of the gun violence, but I will stop some in the long run. And for everyone who has lost someone to gun violence, I think that they would have loved for their to be at least a chance that the killer didn't have easy access to a gun.
I just think that a common sense approach of a standardized background check/evaluation and enforcement of it (at gun shows, small stores, pawn shops, etc) would go a long way at reducing the supply of handguns. I am not saying that law abiding people shouldn't be able to own guns, but we need a standardized way of weeding out the people who shouldn't be able to buy them.
With the hundreds of millions of guns in circulation, it is definitely an uphill battle, but just think how many less guns that we would have in circulation if steps like this were implemented 20 years ago - if the only new firearms introduced into circulation in the last 20 years were registered to someone and legally purchased how much lower would that number be?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Typically moronic comment from your good self. Nothing in what you've said holds any water. Firstly, a country can't possibly be racist. Only people can be racist. So that part of your comment can be dismissed.
Secondly, what does 'fucking nuts' mean? Let's just say that we are able to categorize someone as being 'fucking nuts' and are thereby able to immediately understand every facet and ramification of his motivations, and actions. Then what? Are you saying that everyone who exhibits any kind of neuroses or mental aberration should be locked up for being a potential mass murderer?
That part of your post can also be dismissed as irrelevant gibberish.
I don't know why I bother responding.
but we've placed limits on that all over this country. what makes guns any different?
Not really, no. Why would I want you armed with nukes? Furthermore, why would my idea of what you should or should not be armed with have any determination over what you are actually armed or not armed with?
No. You can do whatever you want, so long as it is not violent. If you want to be violent, that actually is your right as well. But at that point you've declared that aggression is your chosen medium of exchange. And what goes around tends to come around there.
Anyway, owning a gun is not violent. Shooting someone with it is.
No. Your choice to own a gun need not supersede someone's choice to live. Millions of gun owners prove this everyday.
no.. there were 16000+ suicides... plus those murders makes 32000.. all with a firearm
it was you who said this
32000 people killed per year isnt 10,000 as you first indicated... far from it
It really is no different. I'm not trying to make the point that it's different.
Yes, rather than blame the perpetrator like I tend to do, it makes much more sense to deflect that and blame American society as you tend to do. Moronic indeed.
ok, you just seemed a bit more concerned about guns than anythings else. some of your comments recalled charlton heston's "from my cold dead hands" nonsense. i wondered why you lacked similar passion when it came to the war on drugs, or pharmaceutical regulation, or whatever else.
most of the gun school shooters are a product of your society... guns have a high place in your society and so you kill each other a lot with them.. they are not in our society so we tend to twist nipples when someone fucks us off... it still hurts but no-one has actually died yet... yet!!!
See you just contradict yourself there. Would it not bother you if I have nukes... and I'm not a particularly stable person! You literally don't know who's living nextdoor to you... as, unfortunately, many parents of small kids have found out. So if that person has access to a gun it gives them a much better chance of doing wider damange than otherwise... how hard is that to understand?
Hmm... so what uses do guns have that AREN'T violent? Unless it's an antique you put on the wall to look at. Guns are destructive and their sole use is destruction.
If you are tempted to use a gun, it's easier to give into temptation when there's one sitting in front of you :rolleyes: Ah, I'm not getting into riddles with you again
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
I never said anything about suicides, prior to my last post. Look, your numbers don't even add up. You have 16,000 suicides with a gun in 2004. You have 10,000 murders with firearms in 2004. That's 26,000 total. Assuming a 1:1 ratio between guns and murders (which would not be the case), you still have 26,000 of the 250,000,000 involved in a willful killing. That's 0.0104% of the active firearms in 2004 being used in a killing, meaning that 99.99% were not used in a willful killing.
I'm not considering a suicide a relevant statistic. A suicide is not a crime.
I was trying to find answers.
This person didn't exist in a vacuum. He was affected by his environment, as we all are. As the 2 lads at Columbine were, and as every other perpetrator of a school or college massacre in the U.S has been.