Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Flipside on July 25, 2009, 12:01:37 am
-
Saw this on the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8168465.stm
And it made me start thinking, some people will blame the gun for this, no gun, no dead kid, simple, but it also got me thinking about parental responsibility.
How irresponsible do you have to be, as a parent, to leave a loaded handgun laying around in a house with 2 very young children in?
It infuriates me sometimes, because people scream, quite rightly in my opinion, that the Government has no right to dictate their choices inside their own house, and then go and prove time and time again that they are incapable of acting with a modicum of sense when trusted.
The US has a lot of fringe groups calling for Government regulation of just about anything from Guns to Music to Video Games, and stuff like this just adds weight to the argument that parents are unable to do their jobs properly without the Government holding their hands.
-
My God, has no one ever heard of a safety?
It infuriates me sometimes, because people scream, quite rightly in my opinion, that the Government has no right to dictate their choices inside their own house, and then go and prove time and time again that they are incapable of acting with a modicum of sense when trusted.
The US has a lot of fringe groups calling for Government regulation of just about anything from Guns to Music to Video Games, and stuff like this just adds weight to the argument that parents are unable to do their jobs properly without the Government holding their hands.
While I fundamentally disagree with most of the stuff referenced in the second paragraph, it just goes to show that most people are stupid, and can't be trused with shiny toys.
-
I'm not really saying these groups are right or wrong to be honest, just saying that stuff like this, for example, can be used as an argument that parents aren't capable of looking after their children without Government intervention.
For my part, I think that's a bad thing, but that won't stop them trying to say exactly that.
-
The article is curiously vague about where the gun was. Still, anything less than a combination locked storage device is inadequate for a home where children at that age live.
I hope this doesn't end in legislation.
-
Even a locked gun-cabinet would have been enough to deter them to be honest. My own guess is under the bed, that seems to be a common favourite.
It won't end in legislation this time, I'm certain, but the more parents are irresponsible with their children like this, the more fuel it adds to the fire.
-
Yeah, Flipside, USA has become increasingly crazy and worse in more ways than one and it may end up the way Rome did, but in my honest opinion, that is what happens to selfish materialist societies that deserve that and I don't mind seeing selfish societies collapsing. That is how I feel and I will say how I feel no matter the ridicule. I'm sure many non-American people agree with me and maybe even a few Americans out there somewhere too. I was reading how societies who are too individualistic and don't care much for the common good are the ones that eventually will collapse and the caring for the common good and individuals sacrificing things for it is why Asia is having a growing economy while here it is failing.
Sorry if that seems off topic but I felt a need to say that after reading the first post and being aware of the lack of safety and sanity in USA. Here also lacks discipline and emotional strength and emotional stability overall. Two major weaknesses in a culture among others.
This is interesting:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/great-debates/504303-selfish-america.html
and this:
http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/Science/Social%5CMoral_Decline_and_its_Effect_On_the_Collapse_of_Nations_-3462102.htm
-
Well, I'm not really certain this is so much a question of Morality as Responsibility, but the two are linked to a certain degree, there are certain 'morally responsible' things that all people should be expected to do, especially when they have chosen to take on the burden of young children who are wholly dependent on them for food, love, protection and shelter.
-
Yeah, Flipside, USA has become increasingly crazy and worse in more ways than one and it may end up the way Rome did, but in my honest opinion, that is what happens to selfish materialist societies that deserve that and I don't mind seeing selfish societies collapsing. That is how I feel and I will say how I feel no matter the ridicule. I'm sure many non-American people agree with me and maybe even a few Americans out there somewhere too. I was reading how societies who are too individualistic and don't care much for the common good are the ones that eventually will collapse and the caring for the common good and individuals sacrificing things for it is why Asia is having a growing economy while here it is failing.
Sorry if that seems off topic but I felt a need to say that after reading the first post and being aware of the lack of safety and sanity in USA. Here also lacks discipline and emotional strength and emotional stability overall. Two major weaknesses in a culture among others.
This is interesting:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/great-debates/504303-selfish-america.html
and this:
http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/Science/Social%5CMoral_Decline_and_its_Effect_On_the_Collapse_of_Nations_-3462102.htm
.... .... .... The Hell did that come from?
Well, I'm not really certain this is so much a question of Morality as Responsibility, but the two are linked to a certain degree, there are certain 'morally responsible' things that all people should be expected to do, especially when they have chosen to take on the burden of young children who are wholly dependent on them for food, love, protection and shelter.
That seems to be a growing problem worldwide. :/
-
.... .... .... The Hell did that come from?
Read my post carefully and all the way through to find out.
-
While I fundamentally disagree with most of the stuff referenced in the second paragraph, it just goes to show that most people are stupid, and can't be trusted with shiny toys.
Oh my god. Shut up. All of you. Seriously. Shut the **** up. Because I am so ****ing tired of this stupid ****ing generalization of society that everyone, and I mean everyone, believes in. It's the greatest fiction of our time that everyone in even a single state, much less country or continent, are essentially the same and shares the same cultural, religious, economic values, and intelligence levels. Well, news flash, THEY DON'T. AT ALL. Even in most families these things very wildly from person to person as to often fail to remotely resemble the parents, and now we're trying to claim that an entire ****ing society of millions of people follows consistent patterns from person to person? NO. External obedience to social rules does not indicate overwhelming agreement and consensus. IT DOES NOT. PERIOD. STOP OVERGENERALIZING. That's what the media does; they've inadvertently spread the greatest lie of modern times: the idea that we are all alike.
So when one idiot father leaves a gun in an unsafe position and when one idiot boy (most young children fear guns, that is a generalization that is actually true) finds the gun and accidentally shoots his sister, THAT DOES NOT MEAN EVERYONE IS STUPID. JUST BECAUSE ONE IDIOT FAMILY DID THIS, AND THE MEDIA REPORTS IT, DOES NOT MEAN EVERYONE IS STUPID. The media selects the worst stories and over-represents them. In fact, considering how biased the media is in reporting the horrifying and disturbing over the boringly happy, people are actually quite responsible in general considering how few times this gets reported. Because you see, IF YOU HAVE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, THEN SOME OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE STUPID. SOME. MAYBE A VERY SMALL NUMBER - which will then get overrepresented via the media, thus making them look MUCH MORE NUMEROUS THAN THEY REALLY ARE. In fact, if I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd believe the media was intentionally doing this to support elites by trying to prove that the common people are idiots. Whatever; intentional or not, you all have taken it hook, line and sinker.
If I had any serious interest in sociology, which I do not, I would spend years writing a paper that proves that the average deviations between individuals, between different subcultures inside a community, and between different self-contained communities (in a cultural sense, and as much as the word "self-contained" can be used these days) are so staggeringly large as to make genuine generalized assessment across communities essentially meaningless. And I'd win the frelling Nobel Prize, because I'd be right. I'd be the ****ing Werner Heisenberg of sociology. All hail Degeneralization Theory.
Moral of the story: EVERYONE IS NOT THE SAME. DO NOT GENERALIZE. AND DO NOT TRUST THE MEDIA TO SHOW A BALANCED SAMPLE OF SOCIETY (assuming that that's even possible).
I will be very angry if anyone else starts saying "lol, everyone but us and my buddies is stupid." We don't know about everyone else, actually. But we do know thanks to your statement that you are, definitely stupid.
So please stop overgeneralizing people in western society, especially for cynicism's sake. You are wrong. End of story. Bad things will happen if people keep saying this. It will get ugly. I promise. That's one individual saying that. No stupid generalizations at all there. Unless I had like multiple personalities or something. That would be wierd.
-
The only way consensus in a society occurs in any meaningful way is via the existence of lasting institutions. And really then it's just the institutions themselves that posses the consensus, which they promptly force upon an atomized society to a limited extent. That's all it is.
-
Which is, to a part, my point, it's not how often this happens that is the real problem, it is the fact that such stupidity always ends up being applied to the public in general, instead of being applied to those who were irresponsible for their kids. Every time the Media reports an incident like this, it just increases the belief that people are genuinely incapable of getting by without laws reaching right into their very homes, for this debate, ignoring what I consider 'common' laws like Murder and Sex crimes.
That is why parental responsiblity is such a big issue in the US, people can be as different as they like, but it is the stupid few who are irresponsible that risk doing the damage.
Edit: Though I would ask that you don't tell people to 'shut up', debate them if you like, but if you silence them, then nothing gets learned in either direction.
-
I really am growing weary of all this disdain and outright hatred for western civilization, particularly America. If you dislike western American style consumerism "selfish" culture so much, go take a walk. Seriously, if you think we are so degenerate, I suggest you examine what it would be like to live in a culture you find more palatable.
-
I really am growing weary of all this disdain and outright hatred for western civilization, particularly America. If you dislike western American style consumerism "selfish" culture so much, go take a walk. Seriously, if you think we are so degenerate, I suggest you examine what it would be like to live in a culture you find more palatable.
I tend to agree actually. Western culture may have its problems but the people who complain about it most are generally the people who would hate living in any other culture more. While it's fine to complain about the problems and seek a solution to many people go far beyond that into ridiculous comments about how come everyone is stupid but them.
-
No charges have been filed in relation to either case.
That should change. It is unfortunate that people only take responsibility when there is a deterrent, but I believe demonstrably the case from a social science perspective, at least as it appears to apply to large, western societies, regardless of how MV feels.
-
While it's fine to complain about the problems and seek a solution to many people go far beyond that into ridiculous comments about how come everyone is stupid but them.
When have you last seen someone claim "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) while explicitly excluding themselves? Frankly I can't recall if I ever have.
If someone claims "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) and you then proceed to ask them if they're the exception to the rule, you sure won't get a "yes" for an answer.
-
When have you last seen someone claim "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) while explicitly excluding themselves? Frankly I can't recall if I ever have.
If someone claims "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) and you then proceed to ask them if they're the exception to the rule, you sure won't get a "yes" for an answer.
Let's see then.
it just goes to show that most people are stupid, and can't be trused with shiny toys.
Are you stupid? Can you be trusted with shiny toys?
-
When have you last seen someone claim "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) while explicitly excluding themselves? Frankly I can't recall if I ever have.
If someone claims "everyone is stupid" (or something similar) and you then proceed to ask them if they're the exception to the rule, you sure won't get a "yes" for an answer.
Let's see then.
it just goes to show that most people are stupid, and can't be trused with shiny toys.
Are you stupid? Can you be trusted with shiny toys?
Well, I would have preferred something a bit closer to "everyone" than "most", but I guess that'll have to do...
-
I tend to agree actually. Western culture may have its problems but the people who complain about it most are generally the people who would hate living in any other culture more. While it's fine to complain about the problems and seek a solution to many people go far beyond that into ridiculous comments about how come everyone is stupid but them.
I agree about this.
Actually I think Chinese appeared more selfish when I was there (up to the point I started to feel sick about it). Compared to here, Asian culture in general seems more tough towards misfortunes and failures. Though I do understand the reasons behind that.
EDIT: Several Chinese researchers I have met with told me they would never allow firearms to be available for common people in China. The pointy sharp objects were enough in their childhood.
-
1. cultures are different and change over time
2. not all things are equal and not all change is good
THEREFORE:
Not all cultures are equally good. Seems logical enough to me.
That said, when people say that western culture sux, methinks most refer to the US and it's culture.
-
The cultural debate is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we license all sorts of things because of their potential for danger to other people and make safe-practices training a mandatory requirement of operation - automobiles are a good example. The majority of people are not totally stupid and will drive reasonably safely - yet the licensing exists because of a minority that exhibit dangerous practices. What makes firearms a logical exception to this?
A simple licensing requirement whereby a person must prove they have the knowledge to safely handle and store a firearm could have prevented both these incidents. You don't even need storage laws to enforce it, as all you'd have to charge anyone who negligently stored a firearm with is unsafe handling.
Canada has gone way overboard on the whole gun control issue and spent a ridiculous amount of money implementing measures that are supposed to control firearms themselves (but actually don't). At the same time though, we've also implemented tough licensing and safety training requirements and educated storage requirements, which are the biggest impact factors in preventing accidental firearms-related injuries.
Sooner or later, someone is going to realize that despite their presence in the Second Amendment firearms are just as inherently dangerous as automobiles when operated incorrectly and force a national requirement for licensing and standardized safety training. Gun control is not the problem - owner control and knowledge is.
-
I tend to agree actually. Western culture may have its problems but the people who complain about it most are generally the people who would hate living in any other culture more. While it's fine to complain about the problems and seek a solution to many people go far beyond that into ridiculous comments about how come everyone is stupid but them.
I agree about this.
Actually I think Chinese appeared more selfish when I was there (up to the point I started to feel sick about it). Compared to here, Asian culture in general seems more tough towards misfortunes and failures. Though I do understand the reasons behind that.
There could be a good side to that. It may help people be more disciplined and learn a lot and learn to be polite and less selfish and take better care of themselves with their diet and exercise. Like a teacher being a little rough on you so you will learn better and teach a person to live healthier and with more wisdom and less sloth. Otherwise many people become spoiled and lazy (just look at the obesity rate and lack of effort many people show here), put less value on education like many kids here do and want only fun, and more people start throwing trash on the ground, like I encounter many people doing here, and leaving their carts at Fred Myer's sitting around in random places in the parking lot not caring if they roll and hit someone's vehicle instead of putting them back where they go. It sickens me when people become that selfish and lazy and I see a lot of that around here, but I always put my cart away and throw my trash in the can. I am going by experience of living here, not just by what I read. I typed up "selfish America" and came up with a hit.
By being tough towards you, it can give you more motivation to try harder. Making it so you have more respect for yourself and for others. I think they should be tougher here, honestly, like in oriental Asia. So it is good if it is something you can change but not being tough on you for something you can't change, like age or a syndrome, though.
Does anyone realize that Japanese have the highest life expectancy in the world? Their infrastructure seems sleek and up to date too. They have discipline with their diet and I heard on the news that they have about 30,000 people at the age of around 110+ these days.
-
For this scenarios it's clearly the parents fault, definitely... 3 year old holding a gun? I bet the gun was left in a very accessible place and with no custody at all.
A 15 year old holding a gun is a completely different story, those kids have the means to get the gun, no mater how good is it hidden or locked up.
And we have to face this, kids seem to be more aggressive day after day, I myself being 24 can easily tell the difference between me at 5/10 years old and the kids of the same age right now.
-
Parents responsibility is inherant, it comes weith the title. In fact they're the same thing.
If you're not responsible, you're not a parent. You're a bystander.........
-
*Reads*
I'm not sure how to reply to this, but I have something to say on the issue of gun rights: All those laws that are being passed, they intend to limit the amount of guns in the US. But that can only hurt legal gun owners, since those that use then for illegal purposes will STILL GET THEM ANYWAY.
-
Thing is, you go to these Middle East countries, where 4 people can end up being shot by accident at a Wedding, and you realise that it isn't the slightest question of culture or country, and totally a question of people not treating the gun as exactly what it is, a weapon designed to kill things, and not considering other peoples safety.
-
But that can only hurt legal gun owners, since those that use then for illegal purposes will STILL GET THEM ANYWAY.
BY STEALING THE LEGAL ONES.
Funny how that last bit never seems to get added. :p
-
Oh hai Karajorma...
-
:eek: So many over-generalizations...
I honestly don't know what to do.
EDIT: Anyway, here I go.
But that can only hurt legal gun owners, since those that use then for illegal purposes will STILL GET THEM ANYWAY.
BY STEALING THE LEGAL ONES.
Funny how that last bit never seems to get added. :p
Well, I guess I'd rather have the government steal my guns than some random person. At least I know that the government was elected by the people that they'll be taking the guns from.
There could be a good side to that. It may help people be more disciplined and learn a lot and learn to be polite and less selfish and take better care of themselves with their diet and exercise. Like a teacher being a little rough on you so you will learn better and teach a person to live healthier and with more wisdom and less sloth. Otherwise many people become spoiled and lazy (just look at the obesity rate and lack of effort many people show here), put less value on education like many kids here do and want only fun, and more people start throwing trash on the ground, like I encounter many people doing here, and leaving their carts at Fred Myer's sitting around in random places in the parking lot not caring if they roll and hit someone's vehicle instead of putting them back where they go. It sickens me when people become that selfish and lazy and I see a lot of that around here, but I always put my cart away and throw my trash in the can. I am going by experience of living here, not just by what I read. I typed up "selfish America" and came up with a hit.
Either you must live in a town that's in some serious trouble, or I must live in a really nice place, because I haven't encountered any of those problems. Plain and simple, where I live, the vast minority of people "don't care,"
What does this mean? Enacting policies to undo something in a manner that affects everywhere is a waste of resources. If you want to pick up litter, don't sweep areas that have no litter. If you want lower obesity rates, making people that already play a few sports take Gym again isn't going to help. If you want higher test grades, don't force people that already have an A test grade average to study more.
Whatever you do, don't inconvenience the people that are doing it right because some retards are taking it easy.
-
You could start by explaining what you think are over-generalisations ;)
-
You could start by explaining what you think are over-generalisations ;)
Considering you just made one. :p
-
Sigh. Just don't start saying all people are stupid unless you actually have evidence that everyone is stupid, and not just one nut who ended up on the news.
-
In my defense, I said most, not all.
-
And we all make generalizations all the time. It's how we make sense of things. It's just that this one is completely at odds with the facts.
-
You could start by explaining what you think are over-generalisations ;)
Considering you just made one. :p
Amazing how people are saying this, and yet still failing to explain what this supposed over-generalization is, despite my asking twice, and two people have accused me of it, without bothering to state their case...
Maybe there is none...
At least Sizzler justified his opinion, I'm now waiting for you.
-
In my defense, I said most, not all.
You sure about that? What percentage of people you know are stupid? What percentage of people you met that you could tell immediately that they were stupid? It seems reasonable. But think about it some more. The people you've worked with in a crappy fast food restaurant. Were they really stupid or did they just not care enough to do things with any competence? Once you impose any real standards it just melts away IMO.
-
BY STEALING THE LEGAL ONES.
Funny how that last bit never seems to get added. :p
The evidence I've seen suggests this accounts for slightly less than half of illegal firearms in areas of the US with looser gun-control laws. The guns you'll find on the street in California or New York being used for crimes were most likely purchased, legally, in bulk, at a gun show somewhere in Texas or Georgia. Try again Kara.
-
In my defense, I said most, not all.
You sure about that? What percentage of people you know are stupid? What percentage of people you met that you could tell immediately that they were stupid? It seems reasonable. But think about it some more. The people you've worked with in a crappy fast food restaurant. Were they really stupid or did they just not care enough to do things with any competence? Once you impose any real standards it just melts away IMO.
Yes. I am very sure that I said "most" and not "all."
-
And personally, I'd be all for banning everything except for rifles, except for the fact that I do believe in the right to bear arms - in the event that the government needs to be overthrown. If you take away our guns then we're gonna have to convince elements of the army to support us which will be tricky and then there will be the threat of the army simply replacing a corrupt civil government after the coup. So I do think we should be allowed to bear non-hunting firearms for the sake of this purpose. It's just that too many people are killing each other with them, and the only alternative to gun bans is a grinding social war against organized crime, which might lead absolutely nowhere.
Yes. I am very sure that I said "most" and not "all."
I'm not talking about all silly. I'm questioning if that number is above fifty percent. I just don't think it is; a lot of cases of "stupidity" can be explained away by apathy and the inability of our society to allocate mental resources properly.
-
And also the abominably poor system that is American public school.
-
Sooner or later, someone is going to realize that despite their presence in the Second Amendment firearms are just as inherently dangerous as automobiles when operated incorrectly and force a national requirement for licensing and standardized safety training. Gun control is not the problem - owner control and knowledge is.
I love this presentation. You are my new hero. at least for the day :)
-
Agree 100%, Gun control begins and ends with the person with the gun, that's why I've been stating since the start of the thread that the people calling for banning etc are fringe groups and how the stupid few are ruining it for the sensible many :)
Some people seem to have not got my message, but that is, in essence, what I am saying.
-
I'm not talking about all silly. I'm questioning if that number is above fifty percent. I just don't think it is; a lot of cases of "stupidity" can be explained away by apathy and the inability of our society to allocate mental resources properly.
By my definition, that basically means stupid. :p
-
So when one idiot father leaves a gun in an unsafe position and when one idiot boy (most young children fear guns, that is a generalization that is actually true) finds the gun and accidentally shoots his sister, THAT DOES NOT MEAN EVERYONE IS STUPID. JUST BECAUSE ONE IDIOT FAMILY DID THIS, AND THE MEDIA REPORTS IT, DOES NOT MEAN EVERYONE IS STUPID. The media selects the worst stories and over-represents them. In fact, considering how biased the media is in reporting the horrifying and disturbing over the boringly happy, people are actually quite responsible in general considering how few times this gets reported. Because you see, IF YOU HAVE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, THEN SOME OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE STUPID. SOME. MAYBE A VERY SMALL NUMBER - which will then get overrepresented via the media, thus making them look MUCH MORE NUMEROUS THAN THEY REALLY ARE. In fact, if I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd believe the media was intentionally doing this to support elites by trying to prove that the common people are idiots. Whatever; intentional or not, you all have taken it hook, line and sinker.
Most applaudable statement. :yes:
As stated or implied earlier in this thread, it ultimately comes down to the individual. If the individual lacks morals or discipline, then to hell with laws or governance. People generally have a way of doing whatever they want, even in light of the repercussions. The best laws are the laws which enable, not deprive. However, if the individual (which so often is made to represent the whole of society, also noted in previous posts) posesses no or insufficient levels of discipline and/or moral fiber, then laws are implemented which deprive: laws which control. The reasons for this are as vast as the limits of logic or imagination. The worse a socity is precieved by its leaders as being (media at work...), the more restrictive the laws become. Figuring out the rest is child's play.
Tenants of honor and disciple carry a society. Once those are lost, the whole thing goes to the gutter. The best example of this I can think of is Rome.
-Thaeris
-
I'm not talking about all silly. I'm questioning if that number is above fifty percent. I just don't think it is; a lot of cases of "stupidity" can be explained away by apathy and the inability of our society to allocate mental resources properly.
By my definition, that basically means stupid. :p
Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it), "properly" is subjective in this case.
-
This is going well... But i'm watching just in case. There have been too many locks for silly things lately. I'm glad this is going so smoothly :yes:
-
I'm not talking about all silly. I'm questioning if that number is above fifty percent. I just don't think it is; a lot of cases of "stupidity" can be explained away by apathy and the inability of our society to allocate mental resources properly.
By my definition, that basically means stupid. :p
But will their future actions be stupid if their circumstances are altered, if they are put in a social and economic environment that caters to their strengths? We want a complete description of someone's nature, not just an account of what they did in the past.
This is going well... But i'm watching just in case. There have been too many locks for silly things lately. I'm glad this is going so smoothly
Um, I may be out of the loop and I may be gullible, but is Colonel Dekker really a moderator? Colonel Dekker?! Does he at least have to take a breathalyzer test before he gets mod rights?
-
Umm, he's been a mod for longer than I've been here. It actually has his name under the GenDisc "Moderators" list. It's right there on the main page of the forums.
-
Wow, I never caught that. I'm still terrified though.
-
I'm a mod too!
-
Yes, but you aren't terrifying as a concept.
-
Back on track please.....
Or at least throw in a token comment to validate the post.
Snail pulls his weight.....i think ;)
I agree with individual responsibility being paramount, but a sizable chunk of the cause is obviously down to distribution regulation. Actually now i think about it, why the heck do they produce so many for civil use? Surely there are enough about now?
-
BY STEALING THE LEGAL ONES.
Funny how that last bit never seems to get added. :p
The evidence I've seen suggests this accounts for slightly less than half of illegal firearms in areas of the US with looser gun-control laws. The guns you'll find on the street in California or New York being used for crimes were most likely purchased, legally, in bulk, at a gun show somewhere in Texas or Georgia. Try again Kara.
So another route that wouldn't be possible if purchase of firearms were banned then? Fine if you want to be pedantic about it and kill the joke.
BY STEALING THE LEGAL ONES OR BUYING THEM OFF SOMEONE WHO BOUGHT THEM LEGALLY.
Most of the arguments that criminals can always get guns I hear are simple two dimensional arguments that ignore where the gun came from before the criminal got it.
And that's assuming you're correct about cause and effect. While you might be correct that the guns might have originally been bought in Texas or Georgia what proof do you have that they weren't also stolen from Texas or Georgia too? States which have looser laws on buying guns also tend to have looser laws on reporting stolen guns. In fact only a handful of states require a gun owner to even report a lost or missing gun and studies I've seen state that half a million guns are lost or stolen every year in America so it's a little hard to prove the chain of custody for the gun between purchase and use in a crime.
-
I'm not talking about all silly. I'm questioning if that number is above fifty percent. I just don't think it is; a lot of cases of "stupidity" can be explained away by apathy and the inability of our society to allocate mental resources properly.
By my definition, that basically means stupid. :p
But will their future actions be stupid if their circumstances are altered, if they are put in a social and economic environment that caters to their strengths? We want a complete description of someone's nature, not just an account of what they did in the past.
Ahh, I understand, that is where the words; dimwit, idiot, moron, ignoramus, airhead and kook come into play. As you see, there are many types of stupid once you narrow it down. :D
-
I must say, even with all of the people telling me that a gun ban would prevent a lot of gun crime, and even assuming that is true, I still don't want to ban guns.
Banning guns would save lives. Then again, so would banning cigarettes. And matches. And alcohol. And cars.
On a personal level, I don't mind trading a perfectly safe home for some guns and a slightly less safe home. But I can't speak for anyone else.
I don't think having a nation-wide vote on whether to ban guns or not is a bright move. I don't think electing 435 representatives and a president to decide for us is a bright move. I don't think having a state-wide vote is a bright idea. And a county-wide vote is just plain stupid.
Plain and simple, someone will always be complaining. Unless you physically separate the two sides', which is so stupid I shouldn't have bothered to mention it. But guns do indeed kill people, and you know, even if a gun band would result in a net gain of one person's life, it might be worth it.
But then we'd need to get into the practicality of how to do any possible gun ban. How do you collect millions of firearms from millions of people on millions of square miles of land? Would the ban turn into prohibition from the 20's? How could such a turn of events be prevented? How will the American people be told that the second amendment is null and void? What do we do with the millions of responsible gun owners that will inevitably keep their weapons, and much more concerning with the millions of irresponsible gun owners?
Call me a cynical, terrible, evil person, but I don't think that a gun ban is worth not only the trouble, but the denial millions of deserving people their weapons.
Personally, I'd think the way to go would be to do what MP-Ryan was talking about a page or two back.
But we could be wrong, maybe more attention to proper enforcement of gun laws, or a less stringent gun ban, or whatever is the right thing to do.
EDIT: You know what, screw the rest of this post. All I actually want to do is keep on plinking and shooting clay pigeon at my cottage. That's pretty much the only reason that I don't want guns banned or anything.
-
Wow, I never caught that. I'm still terrified though.
Look who the other GenDisc mod is.
I think that the answer to a lot of the worlds (and North America's) problems is education. People need to be taught to think rationally and problem solve, people need to be taught how to use a gun, how to drive a car etc. If we do this, they will go on to teach their kids the same thing, thus creating a cycle of not-stupid.
-
^ THIS
However, you can't get there when the Education system is control by groups who seek "social justice" by deed if not by creed. Who are aided and abetted by a system that rewards mediocrity on the part of those "in the trenches", IE teachers and they're immediate superiors.
-
So another route that wouldn't be possible if purchase of firearms were banned then? Fine if you want to be pedantic about it and kill the joke.
And then they get smuggled in from Mexico. Or China. ****, they already do. The LA Port Authority and US Customs have seized gun shipments coming through the Port of Los Angeles enough times by now that it should be obvious there will always be a source.
As to why I know: you don't crack down on theft in LA to get guns off the street. You watch people who are coming into high-crime areas from out of state. Smuggling, if you can call it that, guns across state lines is slightly less profitable than running drugs, but much safer.
-
Sooner or later, someone is going to realize that despite their presence in the Second Amendment firearms are just as inherently dangerous as automobiles when operated incorrectly and force a national requirement for licensing and standardized safety training. Gun control is not the problem - owner control and knowledge is.
I love this presentation. You are my new hero. at least for the day :)
Do you realize I've been your hero something like four times in the last six months? I'm starting to feel embarrassed :P
-
Changing the tack of the subject sightly, but after all the outrage over 'Chemo Kid' running away because he didn't want treatment, and all the work to find him, I was amazed to see this:
http://friendlyatheist.com/2009/07/24/ava-worthingtons-parents-found-not-guilty-of-manslaughter/
Which doesn't make any sense whatsoever, all things considered...
Sorry about the source, there are others, but this was the first I came across.
Edit: It should also be noted, before any comments about 'Christians' come in, that many religious groups also were somewhat baffled by the ruling, especially considering there is another court case pending from the same family where another child died of the same problem and the same negligence. How many children does this 'church' have to kill before it's not 'OK'?
-
I wanna know what nutbomb inbred POS cult they belong to....
-
I must say, even with all of the people telling me that a gun ban would prevent a lot of gun crime, and even assuming that is true, I still don't want to ban guns.
Frankly I don't care whether you do or not. I just find it hilarious when people make silly comments about how criminals can always get guns as if that in and of itself should be the end of the discussion.
-
I just find it hilarious when people make silly comments about how criminals can always get guns as if that in and of itself should be the end of the discussion.
But it's true. Well, sort of. A gun ban wouldn't solve the problem. At best, it would be a good step to solving the problem, and at worst, it would be prohibition all over again, except with guns.
A gun ban eliminates one source of guns from criminals, the very same source of guns for the responsible people. As NGTM-1R said, you still have all of the rest of the sources of guns.
So the result of a gun ban is the near total loss of guns from responsible owners, and a very declined amount of guns in the hands of the less responsible. You still have a problem on your hands. You need to enact more policies stemming all of the other sources of guns, and you need to take the guns away from the people that didn't turn them in as a result of the initial ban. Plus, you'd have to be aware that the initial ban on guns would only make further actions much more difficult.
It seems like pro-violent-killing-gun people fail to see that a ban on guns couldn't be the only action taken to "completely" solve the issue, and anti-second-amendment people fail to see that most of their ideas probably aren't practical any more. Or I just fail to see how I'm completely wrong...
Whether a gun ban would be practical or not isn't really something that my feeble high school mind can figure out, but if I had to guess, I'd say it couldn't be done properly.
I know even less about whether a gun ban would is worth the resources to carry out and follow up or not. Since I don't think that a gun ban could be done properly, of course I don't really think it should be done.
-
This discussion, although interesting is way off the mark of parental responsibility. . .
Regarding the previous few posts above, it seems to me that any action is better than no action and i'm far from qualified to criticise anyone for agreeing or disagreeing with it. . . .
-
The discussion needn't stay on topic as long as it's a real discussion, and not spam. My .02
-
Yeah, I must say I've gotten used to a thread that reads like a stream of consciousness novel. It's fun, and who knows where you will end up? :D
On-topic (lol): Personal thoughts: Gun ban == bad. Stricter gun control (as in liscensing) != bad. Compulsory reporting of missing guns == good.
-
On-topic (lol): Personal thoughts: Gun ban == bad. Stricter gun control (as in liscensing) != bad. Compulsory reporting of missing guns == good.
QFT. I wish this happened in Canada. Buying a gun is so damn difficult here...
-
I'd go further than compulsory reporting and raise that to compulsory re-registration every year. You have to do it with car tax over here and the government find that very useful when it comes to fighting car crime, yeah it's a hassle but it would do a hell of a lot to cut down gun smuggling.
-
I'd go further than compulsory reporting and raise that to compulsory re-registration every year. You have to do it with car tax over here and the government find that very useful when it comes to fighting car crime, yeah it's a hassle but it would do a hell of a lot to cut down gun smuggling.
That's all well and good for people who only own a couple of sidearms. But there are a suprising number of people (mostly hunters and enthusiasts) who own well over a dozen firearms. I doubt that such a requirement would easily come to be. :/
-
I doubt that any of the suggestions on this thread could easily come to be. No matter how sensible.
-
I wanna know what nutbomb inbred POS cult they belong to....
What genuinely scares me about that story is the Jury to be honest, cults exist, but to have a Jury turn around and say it's ok for parents to neglect their child to death rather than take them to hospital is contemptible. After all, how many people go to hospital with urinary tract problems and survive?
It's not a question of not 'believing' in doctors, that's like not believing in a table, the thing that infuriates me is that the child could have been saved, there is law in place to prosecute people who cause a childs death through precisely these circumstances, and yet the Jury were still willing to let them walk away, I think that disgusts me more than the cult itself.