Jump to content
Sal's RuneScape Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Jethraw

School Shooting in Connecticut - At Least 27 Dead

Recommended Posts

To be honest the day of a shooting like this is not the time to talk gun politics.

 

I can't think of a more relevant time to talk gun politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd rather go against a person with a knife than a gun.

Banning guns will only disarm those who seek to defend themselves.

 

If I want to rob someone, It's pretty much guaranteed that I'm going to be armed in some way. So isn't it smart to arm yourself and face me on equal terms?

Edited by theking1322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd rather go against a person with a knife than a gun.

Banning guns will only disarm those who seek to defend themselves.

 

If I want to rob someone, It's pretty much guaranteed that I'm going to be armed in some way. So isn't it smart to arm yourself and face me on equal terms?

I'm not familiar with your crime rates, but I don't think the chances of being robbed or mugged are high enough to justify the laxness of your gun laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to prevent this from happening is to abolish gun-free zones and have an armed adult inside the school who can protect the kids. The law in this case did not prevent someone from entering the school with a firearm but it did prevent someone inside the school from using theirs for defense.

 

Prohibition doesn't work. Criminals and lunatics will always find ways to get their hands on lethal weaponry. Gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

 

Explain to me, then, why every country with strict gun laws has a much lower firearm-related death per capita?

 

 

Condolences to all the people involved, so tragic :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to prevent this from happening is to abolish gun-free zones and have an armed adult inside the school who can protect the kids. The law in this case did not prevent someone from entering the school with a firearm but it did prevent someone inside the school from using theirs for defense.

 

Prohibition doesn't work. Criminals and lunatics will always find ways to get their hands on lethal weaponry. Gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

 

Explain to me, then, why every country with strict gun laws has a much lower firearm-related death per capita?

 

Condolences to all the people involved, so tragic :(

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

 

Wait, that can't be it because it would invalidate your point.

 

How about this bit: After Australia banned firearms, their rate of armed robberies went up 69%, assaults with guns went up 28%, Gun murders went up 19% and home invasions went up 21%.

 

The real issue that needs to be talked about here is the attention we give to such events. Yes, mass-murder is terrible. We get it. But showing the killer's face on TV and scrutinizing every aspect of his life only elevates him to the status of an antihero.

 

Edited by theking1322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd rather go against a person with a knife than a gun.

Banning guns will only disarm those who seek to defend themselves.

 

If I want to rob someone, It's pretty much guaranteed that I'm going to be armed in some way. So isn't it smart to arm yourself and face me on equal terms?

I'm not familiar with your crime rates, but I don't think the chances of being robbed or mugged are high enough to justify the laxness of your gun laws.

Perhaps not, but the letter of the law of the land is justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to prevent this from happening is to abolish gun-free zones and have an armed adult inside the school who can protect the kids. The law in this case did not prevent someone from entering the school with a firearm but it did prevent someone inside the school from using theirs for defense.

 

Prohibition doesn't work. Criminals and lunatics will always find ways to get their hands on lethal weaponry. Gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

 

Explain to me, then, why every country with strict gun laws has a much lower firearm-related death per capita?

 

Condolences to all the people involved, so tragic :(

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

 

Because guns are easy to acquire in America?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to prevent this from happening is to abolish gun-free zones and have an armed adult inside the school who can protect the kids. The law in this case did not prevent someone from entering the school with a firearm but it did prevent someone inside the school from using theirs for defense.

 

Prohibition doesn't work. Criminals and lunatics will always find ways to get their hands on lethal weaponry. Gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

 

Explain to me, then, why every country with strict gun laws has a much lower firearm-related death per capita?

 

Condolences to all the people involved, so tragic :(

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to prevent this from happening is to abolish gun-free zones and have an armed adult inside the school who can protect the kids. The law in this case did not prevent someone from entering the school with a firearm but it did prevent someone inside the school from using theirs for defense.

 

Prohibition doesn't work. Criminals and lunatics will always find ways to get their hands on lethal weaponry. Gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

 

Explain to me, then, why every country with strict gun laws has a much lower firearm-related death per capita?

 

Condolences to all the people involved, so tragic :(

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

And if that's not true (which it is), the only other conclusion is that the US is a collective of psychopaths.

 

(Besides, news report that the weapons he had were his mother's. So much for being illegally acquired...)

Edited by Arianna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sick sight has been seen over and over again in the US and it's time for the American people to start asking themselves WHY rather than make empty remarks behind a podium. It is so sad and so pathetic to know that the same cycle will take place after this. Politicians the pro-gun groups doing the same side show, making empty promises and speaking empty words about "coming together as a nation" and "leaving the discussion till tomorrow". That is such an insult and a slap to the face of the grieving families. Tomorrow, tomorrow, ALWAYS TOMORROW. Tomorrow never comes to these people and children will continue to die because of it.

 

There are gaping holes in the US gun control system. No matter what the spin doctors from the NRA say, that is truth. It's time for people to open their eyes because it doesn't help to not admit that there isn't a problem in policy cause there clearly is.

Edited by Phoenix Rider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun control is needed; and yes, it does work, because I have never seen a gun in my life in the UK, and I rarely see gun crime in the UK for that exact reason. If gun control did not work for whatever reason, then having it does not hurt anything. Banning guns has no real disadvantage, so why not just do it?

 

And regarding arguments about rising knife crime - who would you rather face: a person with a loaded gun or a person with a knife? Which one would you stand more of a chance against? Knives can be rendered useless with a silly plank of wood, guns can be rendered sub-useless with bullet resistant materials.

 

It's time to break these traditions, there is no civil war in America any more, they don't need guns any more, http://en.wikipedia....ides_by_firearm

Edited by error404

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest the day of a shooting like this is not the time to talk gun politics.

It is the right time. I know families will be mourning, but this is not the first time this has happened and it is most certainly not the last. This is an occurring problem and you guys really need to ask yourselves why this is happening.

I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, just leave it for another day. This should really be about mourning the deaths of little children instead of arguing over gun control. Sounds mushy I know but it's true.

An American friend of mine said that he was really tired of the media kneejerk reactions to such disasters, because nothing ever changed anyway. He rather clearly said that, in about 10 days, no one will really care anymore and then they will be totally absorbed by their own lives. If you take that into account, then the debate really ought to be taken immediately, because without media coverage, there will be no debate. With no debate around a controversy, there will not be any changes or decisions made.

Well I just hate how many people have seemingly ignored the shooting and decided to talk about gun politics. I don't think people are going to forget this and shove the gun control issues to the side. There have been way too many mass shootings and little children getting killed is going to hit home in the minds of everybody for a long time. It is clear that right now that there is something wrong with the system and it has to be fixed (whether that be gun control or armed guards at schools). Just discussing it the day of the event is not right in my opinion.

 

I feel bad for Ryan Lanza. He was incorrectly identified as the perpetrator of the crime (it was really his brother) and his mother and father are murdered in the same day. I'll give a very rare Sal's Realm shoutout to Fox News as they seemed to be the first major television network to figure this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Waits for the hoard of people to scream "BAN ALL GUNS"*

 

Oh wait....they're here already.

 

To kill that argument real quick: Anyone could come in with a Bow n Arrow (Reference the move "We need to talk about Kevin"), a huge metal bat, crossbows, swords, knifes, molotov cocktails...etc. Point is, anything can be used as a weapon and used to cause the same destruction a gun can do.

 

That's unfortunately how life is currently, and if anything we need more guns to protect ourselves more. IE, having virtually anyone with a brain armed with a gun. That is how you save lives. The police do not help in this situation.

 

We need to equip ourselves with more guns. Not reduce the amount of guns. Hurray for living in America.

 

Implementing a "Ban on guns" would turn out kind of like how drugs are illegal. People will still acquire them. There's a way to acquire anything in today's world. And the same results will happen, ONLY....more people will be defenseless due to a "ban on guns."

 

 

Gun control is needed; and yes, it does work, because I have never seen a gun in my life in the UK, and I rarely see gun crime in the UK for that exact reason. If gun control did not work for whatever reason, then having it does not hurt anything. Banning guns has no real disadvantage, so why not just do it?

 

UK =/= US. It's a bit difference in this crazy country we call the US. Please reference this quote from this nice gentleman:

 

 

How about this bit: After Australia banned firearms, their rate of armed robberies went up 69%, assaults with guns went up 28%, Gun murders went up 19% and home invasions went up 21%.

Edited by Ghostfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Waits for the hoard of people to scream "BAN ALL GUNS"*

 

Oh wait....they're here already.

 

To kill that argument real quick: Anyone could come in with a Bow n Arrow (Reference the move "We need to talk about Kevin"), a huge metal bat, crossbows, swords, knifes, molotov cocktails...etc. Point is, anything can be used as a weapon and used to cause the same destruction a gun can do.

 

That's unfortunately how life is currently, and if anything we need more guns to protect ourselves more. IE, having virtually anyone with a brain armed with a gun. That is how you save lives. The police do not help in this situation.

 

We need to equip ourselves with more guns. Not reduce the amount of guns. Hurray for living in America.

 

Implementing a "Ban on guns" would turn out kind of like how drugs are illegal. People will still acquire them. There's a way to acquire anything in today's world. And the same results will happen, ONLY....more people will be defenseless due to a "ban on guns."

 

 

Gun control is needed; and yes, it does work, because I have never seen a gun in my life in the UK, and I rarely see gun crime in the UK for that exact reason. If gun control did not work for whatever reason, then having it does not hurt anything. Banning guns has no real disadvantage, so why not just do it?

 

UK =/= US. It's a bit difference in this crazy country we call the US. Please reference this quote from this nice gentleman:

 

 

How about this bit: After Australia banned firearms, their rate of armed robberies went up 69%, assaults with guns went up 28%, Gun murders went up 19% and home invasions went up 21%.

The American National Rifle Association claimed in 2000 that violent crimes had increased in Australia since the introduction of new laws, based on highly unrepresentative statistics from newspaper articles. The federal Attorney General Daryl Williams accused the NRA of falsifying government statistics and urged the NRA to "remove any reference to Australia" from its website.
In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn, noted that the level of legal gun ownership in New South Wales increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on violence.

I want better sources that the gun control in Australia had in fact led to more gun crime per person.

 

You do not need more guns, you need less guns. Less guns = Less Deaths. It is as simple as that. If no one had guns, no one could shoot anyone. Improvised weapons are not as nearly as dangerous as guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this bit: After Australia banned firearms, their rate of armed robberies went up 69%, assaults with guns went up 28%, Gun murders went up 19% and home invasions went up 21%.

 

If true, I'd be interested to know, was this a sustained effect, or did it stay the same afterwards? Was it a trend that was happening before they banned firearms - for example, if they were going up twice as fast before they banned firearms, firearms banning may have helped. Were there any other significant changes in Australia at the time?

 

On a more general note, facts and figures are what's gonna back up your arguments best. Raging backwards and forwards 'MORE GUNS MEANS WE CAN DEFEND OURSELVES' 'NO LESS GUNS LESS DEATHS' 'NO LESS GUNS MEANS MORE DEATHS' is much less likely to change people's minds.

Edited by Mano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we did ban guns I think we would still see atrocities like this.

 

How come 50-40 even 30 years ago when we still had access to assault rifles and semi-automatic handguns, we did not see random massacres like this?

 

Quite possibly the mindset of people have changed. So I really do not see the gun as the problem.

 

If a person is intent on killing people, He wont stop when he finds out he cant obtain a gun, he will simply find other means.

 

Yes a gun is efficient at killing, but it is also a deterrent.

 

Without citizens legally owning guns, Only the government and criminals have them.

 

Like hell I'm going to wait for the cops when my life is at stake.

 

~Stash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

There's something circular about this logic.

 

Also, I don't have a problem with gun control in general, if it's actually done somewhat intelligently. I don't mind having people go through a background check before they can buy a pistol, I also think you should have the opportunity to carry concealed weapons if you qualify for the permit.

 

Unfortunately, however, what we get are idiotic laws like the Assault Weapons ban, which sets arbitrary criteria for what defines an assault weapon and then bans firearms en masse without helping anything.

 

Also, this shooting was a failure of gun control on part of the gun's owner, the perpetrator's mother. Apparently he gained access to one of her weapons and then killed her with it. If the weapon was properly secured, this would not have happened. The problem is irresponsible gun ownership.

Edited by theking1322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

There's something circular about this logic.

Yes, but you keep getting down to the same two possible starting factors:

 

Either the widespread availability of firearms is the originating source, or the US is a nation of homicidal sociopaths.

 

So, which is it? Do you have more gun-related crime because you all are sociopaths, or because it is easy to have a firearm and, surprise surprise, people are unable to handle it properly yet aquire it way too easily?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

There's something circular about this logic.

Yes, but you keep getting down to the same two possible starting factors:

 

Either the widespread availability of firearms is the originating source, or the US is a nation of homicidal sociopaths.

 

So, which is it? Do you have more gun-related crime because you all are sociopaths, or because it is easy to have a firearm and, surprise surprise, people are unable to handle it properly yet aquire it way too easily?

 

Sociopathy according to the WHO: It is characterized by at least 3 of the following:

  • Callous unconcern for the feelings of others;
  • Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations;
  • Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them;
  • Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence;
  • Incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment;
  • Markedly prone to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society.
     

 

Sociopathy does not mean murderer. For one thing, I wouldn't murder because I don't have strong enough reasons to outweigh the risk of being caught, regardless of 'rights' of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not need more guns, you need less guns. Less guns = Less Deaths. It is as simple as that. If no one had guns, no one could shoot anyone.

 

It would be perfect it if it worked that way, but unfortunately, it doesn't. Prohibition didn't work, and you can buy marijuana at any high school, so what makes you think banning guns will prevent people from acquiring them?

Edited by cash money95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not need more guns, you need less guns. Less guns = Less Deaths. It is as simple as that. If no one had guns, no one could shoot anyone.

 

It would be perfect it if it worked that way, but unfortunately, it doesn't. Prohibition didn't work, and you can buy marijuana at any high school, so what makes you think banning guns will prevent people from acquiring them?

It's a lot harder to manufacture a gun than it is to grow marijuana. I'm not for banning guns, and I don't see many people who are, but your gun control laws are just so lax. In a lot of places all you guys require is a criminal background check and you can just get yourself a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not need more guns, you need less guns. Less guns = Less Deaths. It is as simple as that. If no one had guns, no one could shoot anyone.

 

It would be perfect it if it worked that way, but unfortunately, it doesn't. Prohibition didn't work, and you can buy marijuana at any high school, so what makes you think banning guns will prevent people from acquiring them?

It may not completely wipe out their existence, but it will certainly reduce their numbers. That's one step closer to solving the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because the US has a higher homicide rate in general?

...and why is it easier to commit homicide in the US compared to most other countries? Availability of the necessary tools to efficiently murder someone.

There's something circular about this logic.

Yes, but you keep getting down to the same two possible starting factors:

 

Either the widespread availability of firearms is the originating source, or the US is a nation of homicidal sociopaths.

 

So, which is it? Do you have more gun-related crime because you all are sociopaths...

I know you are trying to get personal here but just because 1 out of 500,000 Americans is a murderer does not mean that everyone in America is a sociopath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to that, not every murder is perpetrated by a psychotic maniac. This number of homicides also includes gang shootings, mafia murders and the like. As I said, you'd be hard-pressed to find a city in Norway that has the same kind of crime and gang violence as Los Angeles for example.

 

Also, it's unfair to compare a country such as Norway to the United States because the United States has a huge variety of regions that vary in terms of socioeconomic development and crime rate.

Edited by theking1322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines and Privacy Policy.