Author Topic: Another school shooting in the US  (Read 50237 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
Re: Another school shooting in the US
I gave him the benefit of the doubt and assumed by "these killings" he meant shootings, otherwise yeah. There are always ways to kill people. It's never about preventing all killings, that's pretty much impossible, it's about taking steps to minimize chances at an appropriate cost. The gunshow loophole is a simple, common-sense step to take that can reduce the number of unchecked firearm sales without significantly harming MUH FREEDUM, for example. If anyone actually want to ban and confiscate all guns in an effort to halt violence, well, good for them.

Of course I meant these school shootings, and I fervently believe those paragraphs to be true. I know other countries where people do carry guns do not suffer from these issues, but I do not attribute those differences to "mental issues", but rather to its own gun culture. Americans have a very special relationship with guns which I do not recognize in other developed country's people.

Quote from: Swantz
The point I'm really trying to get across in that post is that even removing those firearms from the hands of the populous won't seriously dent the number of mass killings such as these.

Rubbish. In China one mad tried to do the same and was only able to hurt some people, not kill anyone. Why? He had only access to a knife, not a semi-automatic. If you could magically handwave away all the firearms from americans, these killings would stop 100%. What I wanted to point out is that such measures are in the realm of magic wonderland, not reality. Americans will never accept gun bans and I don't blame them. They want that freedom and I can't judge that. Take these shootings however as a kind of "tax" over that freedom they have. Just as they take the amazing costs of their badly managed private healthcare as a "tax" over the freedom they have of not paying for anyone else's healthcare and so on.

Freedom costs money and lives, and it's on the Americans to choose how free they want to be, not me.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Who said you can't support universal healthcare and oppose gun bans?

Who indeed.

It's not a 100% overlap in either case, but it's a significant enough correlation to forgive Karajorma for linking the two.

Except I didn't link the two. And I was very careful not to link the two. That's the hilarious thing. Everyone is so certain that must have been what I said that no one bothered to actually read what I said.

I said that there was no way America was going to accept the kind of socialised healthcare necessary to catch the mentally ill people who might commit this sort of thing. The cluster-**** that occurred surrounding Obama's first attempt makes that quite clear. Without that people are going to slip through the net cause seeing a doctor is too expensive. Most likely, it's going to be the kind of person who needs to see a doctor most.

I didn't once correlate that people who are pro or anti-gun control. I know there is, as you say quite an overlap but there's no need to point the finger. All that matters is that it won't pass. So it's as impractical a solution as simply wishing away all the guns.

And that's before we get to the point Battuta keeps making that even with better mental care, you're still not certain to catch even a majority of these people.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Ulala

  • 29
  • Groooove Evening, viewers!
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Not to derail or lend any credibility to conspiracy theory tinfoil hat wearing nutjobs, but can anyone explain this 30 second video to me?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=urrRcgB581w

Regardless of the strange video, I can't believe how many conflicting reports have come from this.. "the AR was found in the trunk.. the AR was found in the school.. the AR was used in the shooting, as well as his suicide.. wait 3 handguns found in the school instead.. the AR was found in the trunk but somehow he still used it in the shooting... no wait it was just the 4 (not 3) handguns.. we sure had better ban those ARs." Is it really so hard to get the story straight? Seems like it shouldn't be.
I am a revolutionary.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: Another school shooting in the US
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/18/bath_school_bombing_remembering_the_deadliest_school_massacre_in_american.html

38 children, 45 ppl dead

short circuit in the dude's wiring was the only thing that kept 500 pounds of dynamite + some gunpowder from going up as well and killing even more people.

Someone else remarked:

Quote
Michael Tremoglie on the Italian website, Academia Res Publica, offers some food for thought about the Sandy Hook school shooting. He writes that the worst school killing in history wasn’t committed by a disaffected teenager, didn’t involve a gun, and happened before there was violent entertainment and before God was taken out of schools. In 1927 in Bath, Michigan, a middle-aged farmer blew up a schoolhouse, then detonated a car bomb. He killed 38 kids and six adults, and nobody ever figured out why.

Tremoglie notes that the only scholarly study of mass school killings was published by an Ohio sociology professor in 2007. It found that there is no holistic approach to investigating school killings, where interdisciplinary experts examine every possible angle and share their knowledge. Instead, different groups quickly seize on the tragedy to advance whatever angle they already believe. Liberals blame lax gun control laws. Conservatives blame violent media. Mental health groups say it shows the need for more funding. And so on. The study suggested that until we start investigating these tragedies the way we do other disasters, where experts from many different fields work together to discover the truth, we may never learn what really causes them or how to prevent them from happening again.

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Redirecting some of the tangent's here...

Look, folks, you can't ban firearms outright.  Not practical.  But conversely, you can't say that mass shooters will "just find another way" and therefore regulation of firearms is pointless too.

As data from several functioning countries demonstrates quite admirably, the best practices surrounding firearms are practical regulations with the minimum intrusiveness necessary to keep honest people honest and make stupid people honest - making it a good deal harder for a child or mentally-ill person to acquire and use a weapon.  Regulation's effect on the active criminal element is, at best, a small to moderate reduction in their ability to easily acquire firearms.  Therefore, effective regulation should also not make criminals out of non-criminals because of administrative issues.

Bombs are irrelevant to the discussion.  Knives are irrelevant to the discussion.  That there are other means by which a person can commit mass murder or injury has nothing to do with mental illness and the general irresponsible half-assed piecemeal regulatory scheme concerning firearms in the United States.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Another school shooting in the US
The argument actually reminds me of someone telling me that it's pointless covering up the electrical sockets in a room with a toddler cause he could just as easily stick whatever he was going to stick in the socket in his eye.

Well yes he could. But that doesn't mean it's not a good idea to cover up those sockets.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Plus isn't the main purpose of those to prevent the toddler from sticking their finger in the socket? :p

  

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: Another school shooting in the US
there are those who think they should leave the outlets uncovered so as to teach children about the dangers of electricity. they might get zapped, once (or in my case learn to booby-trap outlets so as to zap others).
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 08:21:53 pm by Nuke »
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline Swazi Spring

  • 2-∞ - User does not compute
Re: Another school shooting in the US
You Americans and your wonderful, precious guns...

Here in the UK we have about 1/5 of your population, many cultural similarities and about 1/200 of your shooting deaths. No one has guns, not even the cops.

Over there every Tom Dick has a gun. You can just buy a gun, you pick up bullets from a grocery store. Guns are just a part of your life, of course people are going to use them. That and the whole macho man image America likes to project. So when you pull a gun on someone and they don't back down, you're going to think "Oh, I'm going to look like a ****ing pussy now if I don't shoot..."

 :snipe:

That and everybody who wants to fight is going to be packing a gun because everyone has a gun, instead of using their fists or at worse a knife or a bat.

 :snipe: :snipe: :snipe: :snipe: :snipe:


I posted this a while back on another forum I go to, but you have since made me dredge it back up. In the future, I suggest you do your research before posting.

I am posting this to discuss and inform people on the fundamental human right to bear arms. There are quite a few lies and uninformed statements that some unsavory individuals have been throwing around as of late and as a citizen of this great country, it is my duty (as well as your duty) to fight this propaganda. Always remember that "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" and that "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Lets start by looking at the empirical data, shall we? Gun control advocates like to go make bigoted and misinformed statements, alleging that Europeans "have no guns and thus they have no crime." While it is true that some European countries do have lower violent crime rates than the United States, all of the evidence shows that guns have absolutely nothing to do with that. In fact, the data shows that violent crime, including homicide, has been drastically on the rise since the implementation of gun control. For instance, the United Kingdom is known for it's draconian and anti-freedom gun control laws. The first of these laws in recent times was the Gun Control Act of 1968, which introduced strict restrictions on gun ownership and required firearms be registered. This law has been a complete and utter disaster and not only are the people less free, but violent crime rates (including homicide) have skyrocketed and continue to skyrocket. The homicide rate rose 52% since the law was enacted and it continues to rise. In 1997 the British government completely banned handguns, after forcing all owners to register their guns with the 1968 law, this again resulted in violent crime (including homicide) rates skyrocketing and continue to rise. In fact, after the 1997 handgun ban, homicide rates have risen by 15% since the law was enacted. In fact, the countries in Europe that have the lowest crime rates are the ones that have the most gun owners and/or least strict gun laws, such as the Czech Republic, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.

Gun control isn't just a failure in other countries, it's a failure in America as well. In the United States, every time gun control has been implemented, it has failed miserably, made us less free, and empowered criminals. Take for instance the handgun bans in Chicago and the District of Columbia, which have been struck down as unconstitutional. Handguns were completely banned in the District of Columbia in 1976, this resulted in violent crime (including homicide) rates skyrocketing. In the District of Columbia, homicide rates rose by 73% since the law was enacted.. Chicago banned handguns in 1981, this resulted in violent crime (including homicide) rates skyrocketing. In Chicago, homicide rates rose by 40% since the law was enacted.

Now lets look at the fundamental human right to concealed carry, shall we? Currently every state except Illinois and the District of Columbia have concealed carry and both of those states are currently in the process of allowing concealed carry, seeing as how not allowing concealed carry violates the United States Constitution (and Illinois Constitution). Concealed carry has been hailed as a massive success, not only for those who love freedom, but also for lowering violent crime (including homicide) rates. Concealed carry has drastically lowered homicide rates everywhere that it has been implemented. Every study conducted shows that the right to concealed carry has saved many lives and has taken virtually zero. In fact, concealed carry has even begun to spread to other countries, such as Canada, the Czech Republic and Israel.

Lets look at what gun control advocates mean when they talk about "big scary assault weapons;" the first thing that pops into your head is probably that they are talking about fully automatic rifles, however, this is not the case. These so-called "assault weapons" that gun control advocates always talk about banning are nothing more than so-called "assault" modifications to guns, such as bayonets and pistol grips. It doesn't cover fully automatic firearms at all, which were previously banned under the Hughes Amendment. All of the evidence shows that fully automatic weapons are used in virtually no crimes. Statistics show that prior to the Hughes Amendment there was not a single instance of a fully automatic gun being used in the commission of a crime. It wasn't until AFTER fully automatic weapons were banned that a crime was committed with one, and in that incident, nobody was killed (other than the two bank robbers). The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004 and absolutely nothing bad happened like gun control advocates claimed.

Gun control advocates try to mistakenly say that Barack Obama "supports gun rights" and/or that he "isn't anti-gun rights," even though all of the evidence shows that he is perhaps our most anti-gun rights president in American history. Gun control advocates only claim that he is "pro-gun rights," because they want to trick ignorant people into thinking he isn't a horrible person who hates guns and freedom. Throughout Obama's political career, he has made various anti-gun rights statements and support anti-gun rights bills. Barack Obama said that he supports banning semi-automatic guns and increase firearm restrictions. He also said that he supported banning handguns and concealed carry. Obama voted in favor of holding firearm manufacturers responsible for murders. Obama also said he would renew the Federal Assault Weapons Ban and immediately upon being re-elected, he had his congressional Democrat friends introduce a bill to renew it. Obama also said he believes people living in "inner cities" shouldn't be allowed to own guns. Obama cosponsored a bill that only allowed citizens to buy one gun a month. Obama also said he supports requiring guns be registered and licensed. Obama said that he believes that local gun bans do not violate the Second Amendment. Obama also said that he would consider supporting a ban on buying ammunition online. This is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of all of the anti-gun rights statements Obama has made and the anti-gun rights bills he has supported.

Gun control advocates try to claim that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution does not refer to an individual right, but instead refers to the right of individual states to form militias (such as National Guards). This claim is completely false and has been disproved many times. First off the rights of the states to form militias is already protected under Article I of the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment is as follows: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." As you can see, the Second Amendment does allow for the creation of a military force, which makes sense, since you need a national military to defend your country. However, the Founding Fathers separated the right to form a militia from the right of the people to bear arms. Note the grammatical separation and note how it says the right of the people, as opposed to the "right of the militia."

Every legal reference in history to the right to keep and bear arms has referred to it as an individual right. The first recorded use of the 'right to keep and bear arms' comes from the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which referred explicitly to an individual right. Fourty-four of the fifty states protect the right to keep in their state constitutions and this right refers to an individual right in all fourty-four of them. The right to keep and bear arms has always referred to an individual right in other countries constitutions as well. Islamic law also calls for governments to respect for the individual right of the people to bear arms, though this right is not generally respected by Muslim countries in practice. The Second Amendment does not create any new rights, it only protects a pre-existing natural right that all sapient beings have. This has been proven time and time again by the Founding Fathers, the United States Supreme Court, John Locke and countless classical liberal philosophers.

Now lets look at United States case law and legal precedent for the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms in general. As previously mentioned, the first recorded legal usage of the right to keep and bear arms comes from the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Prior to the formation of the United States, the Thirteen Colonies also had a long-standing history of having a right to bear arms, which included the right to self-defense. Prior to the United States Constitution being formed, states that had declared their independence from Great Britain had protected the right to bear arms in their state constitutions and it included the right to self-defense. For instance, the 1776 Constitution of Pennsylvania states that "the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state." When the United States Constitution was being drafted and ratified, the Founding Fathers stated explicitly that the right to bear arms was a right of the people, not a "right of the militia" as some gun control advocates claim. In fact, many of the Founding Fathers wanted to require every free citizen to own a gun, viewing it as a civic duty. I will provide a list of these quotes from the Founding Fathers towards the end of this post.

Interpretation of the Second Amendment has always been that of recognizing it as an individual right. In fact, it was most commonly interpreted as a right that cannot under any circumstances be restricted or limited. Even foreigners held this view, including William Blackstone, who wrote about it in his Commentaries on the Laws of England. The Second Amendment uses the term "shall not be infringed," which not only states that the right to keep and bear arms is a pre-existing natural right, but also that it shall not be infringed upon. In fact, the only real criticism levied against the Second Amendment, was by those who thought it didn't provide enough protection to the right to bear arms. St. George Tucker and William Rawle, two lawyers and abolitionists (and in the case of Tucker, a Virginia Supreme Court justice) were among those who criticized the Second Amendment for not protecting the rights of gun owners enough. Tucker and Rawle argued that the Second Amendment needed to have provisions in order to help the poor be able to exercise their right to bear arms; they viewed this as difficult under the current laws, seeing as how many poor people couldn't afford firearms. Joseph Story, an early federal Supreme Court justice wrote in his work, Commentaries on the Constitution, that: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." Story also wrote that the right to bear arms is a natural right. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that all restrictions placed on the federal government also apply to state and local governments. One of the main reasons this amendment was added to the Constitution was because former slave states would often times refuse to allow freed slaves to bear arms, which violated their rights as protected under the Second Amendment.

It wasn't until the late 20th and early 19th century that socialists and so-called "progressives" tried to re-interpret the Second Amendment to mean a collective right to form state militias. Dred Scott v. Sandford ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right, however it also ruled that the Second Amendment did not apply to slaves. United States v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois and Miller v. Texas ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right, however, it also ruled that the First and Second Amendments only limit the federal government. United States v. Miller ruled that that: "These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense," which is to say that the people consist of the militia. United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez ruled that the Second Amendment (and the Bill of Rights in general) was an individual right that also applied to non-citizen aliens. United States v. Lopez ruled that the so-called "Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990" violated the Second Amendment and was unconstitutional. United States v. Emerson, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago reaffirmed that the Second Amendment refers to an individual right that applies to state and local governments, as well as the federal government. Moore v. Madigan ruled that the ban on concealed carry in Illinois violated the Second Amendment and was thus unconstitutional, requiring Illinois to adopt concealed carry.

Lets also take a look at what the Founding Fathers had to say about the Second Amendment and right to bear arms:
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." -Thomas Jefferson

"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them." -Thomas Jefferson

"We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;" -Thomas Jefferson

"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -Thomas Jefferson

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

"To model our political system upon speculations of lasting tranquility, is to calculate on the weaker springs of the human character." -Alexander Hamilton

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -James Madison

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws." -John Adams

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. " -Noah Webster

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." -Tenche Coxe

"[The new government] shall be too firmly fixed in the saddle to be overthrown by anything but a general insurrection." -William Symmes

"[A standing army] if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?" -Theodore Sedwick

"[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it." -Richard Henry Lee

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." -Patrick Henry

"O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?" -Patrick Henry

"[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor..." -George Mason

"[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." -Zacharia Johnson

"That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power." -Virginia delegation to the constitutional convention

"The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." -Albert Gallatin

"[C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded." -Roger Sherman

As you can clearly see, gun control is not only a failure, but it also takes away our freedom and is unconstitutional. What can we do to lower violent crime rates then? That is a good question and the answer to the question doesn't include gun control. I believe we should primarily focus on the causes of violent crime, as opposed to focusing on the symptoms. We need to overhaul our public education system and work to eliminate poverty. As for guns, we should protect the right of the people to bear arms, including the right to concealed carry. We should also bring back firearms classes in public schools, these classes would teach our young people about gun safety and responsibility.


Sources
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm
https://supreme.justia.com/us/92/542/case.html
https://supreme.justia.com/us/116/252/case.html
https://supreme.justia.com/us/307/174/case.html
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
https://supreme.justia.com/us/60/393/case.html
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/153/535/case.html
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_09_10_08_1521_PetitionerAmCuHeartlandInst.authcheckdam.pdf
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/14664/statistics-show-concealed-carry-saves-many-lives-takes-few
http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb0110.pdf
http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/research-concealed-carry-and-guns-save-lives-95307939.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/concealed-weapons-save-lives-article-1.1121161
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/12/20121218132050819.html
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689



/thread

 

Offline LordMelvin

  • emacs ftw
  • 28
  • VI OR DEATH! DOWN WITH EMACS!
Re: Another school shooting in the US
You Americans and your wonderful, precious guns...
[snip]


I posted this a while back on another forum I go to, but you have since made me dredge it back up. In the future, I suggest you do your research before posting.
[snip]

I'm sorry, I really am, and I tried, I really did, but that's just too much text.

TL;DR;S
Error: ls.rnd.sig.txt not found

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Oh I like where this is going.

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Another school shooting in the US
hlp gets only the best

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: Another school shooting in the US
yea if i wanted to read a wikipedia article id have done so on wikipedia.

that said i think we should have an assault rifle a mandatory item on every kids list of school supplies.
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Another school shooting in the US
I'm sorry, I really am, and I tried, I really did, but that's just too much text.

TL;DR;S

Yep. It's way too much. So I simply picked the one part I know about and checked that.

For instance, the United Kingdom is known for it's draconian and anti-freedom gun control laws. The first of these laws in recent times was the Gun Control Act of 1968, which introduced strict restrictions on gun ownership and required firearms be registered. This law has been a complete and utter disaster and not only are the people less free, but violent crime rates (including homicide) have skyrocketed


Okay, I'll give you that murder rates in the UK have risen. I question your attempting to link something as nebulous as the murder rate to something as precise as gun control. Especially when

a) the number of gun homicides have fallen (which belies that whole "If the criminals want guns, they'll get guns" argument people are so fond of).
b) The number of homicides in the 4 European countries you name as having lots of guns have also, for the most part, shown similar patterns.
c) The murder rate in England and Wales are actually at a 30 year low.

That said, having managed to get one thing correct (an increase in the overall murder and violent crime rate) this very quickly goes downhill. Had you simply suggested trends I might have been more lenient but you've gone so far as to post bogus statistics and that's something I don't allow to pass me by easily.

Quote
and continue to skyrocket.


Bollocks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-1981-to-2007.png

Quote
The homicide rate rose 52% since the law was enacted and it continues to rise.


Bull****!

It's not rising at all. In fact it's been falling since the turn of the century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime#United_Kingdom

Quote
Regarding murder, "increasing levels of homicide (at around 2% to 3% per year) [have been observed] from the 1960s through to the end of the twentieth century". Recently the murder rate has declined, "a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index.


Quote
In 1997 the British government completely banned handguns, after forcing all owners to register their guns with the 1968 law, this again resulted in violent crime (including homicide) rates skyrocketing and continue to rise.

Hogwash! (see above).

Quote
In fact, after the 1997 handgun ban, homicide rates have risen by 15% since the law was enacted.

Bunkum! (see above).

Quote
In fact, the countries in Europe that have the lowest crime rates are the ones that have the most gun owners and/or least strict gun laws, such as the Czech Republic, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.

Cherry-picking. You fail to point out that with the exception of Norway (which as the same rate) all 4 have higher gun homicide rates than the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Or that the Czech Republic has a higher overall homicide rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade

Basically this entire line of argument is nothing but flim-flam and a desperate attempt to claim that correlation is causation, all the while ignoring the most pertinent facts about gun crime. You want to link the rise in crime to gun bans but I could just as easily link it to half a dozen other factors. Abortion rates, number of atheists, number of players of Call of Duty, % of 20 year olds who are bronies, whether people from those countries look good in a kilt. I suspect I could make at least one of those fit the data as well as you did for gun control.

You ignore that the number of gun deaths in 2008 is reported as a 20 year low and instead try to paint the picture that the gun ban has lead to an increase in violent crime despite the fact that gun crimes are happening less often or that statistical research does not claim any such correlation.


If the rest of your argument is as flawed as this tiny section of it, it definitely wasn't worth my time to read it all.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 08:34:35 pm by karajorma »
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Swazi Spring

  • 2-∞ - User does not compute
Re: Another school shooting in the US
I'm sorry, I really am, and I tried, I really did, but that's just too much text.

TL;DR;S

Yep. It's way too much. So I simply picked the one part I know about and checked that.

For instance, the United Kingdom is known for it's draconian and anti-freedom gun control laws. The first of these laws in recent times was the Gun Control Act of 1968, which introduced strict restrictions on gun ownership and required firearms be registered. This law has been a complete and utter disaster and not only are the people less free, but violent crime rates (including homicide) have skyrocketed


Okay, I'll give you that murder rates in the UK have risen. I question your attempting to link something as nebulous as the murder rate to something as precise as gun control. Especially when

a) the number of gun homicides have fallen (which belies that whole "If the criminals want guns, they'll get guns" argument people are so fond of).
b) The number of homicides in the 4 European countries you name as having lots of guns have also, for the most part, shown similar patterns.
c) The murder rate in England and Wales are actually at a 30 year low.

That said, having managed to get one thing correct (an increase in the overall murder and violent crime rate) this very quickly goes downhill. Had you simply suggested trends I might have been more lenient but you've gone so far as to post bogus statistics and that's something I don't allow to pass me by easily.

Quote
and continue to skyrocket.


Bollocks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-1981-to-2007.png

Quote
The homicide rate rose 52% since the law was enacted and it continues to rise.


Bull****!

It's not rising at all. In fact it's been falling since the turn of the century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime#United_Kingdom

Quote
Regarding murder, "increasing levels of homicide (at around 2% to 3% per year) [have been observed] from the 1960s through to the end of the twentieth century". Recently the murder rate has declined, "a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index.


Quote
In 1997 the British government completely banned handguns, after forcing all owners to register their guns with the 1968 law, this again resulted in violent crime (including homicide) rates skyrocketing and continue to rise.

Hogwash! (see above).

Quote
In fact, after the 1997 handgun ban, homicide rates have risen by 15% since the law was enacted.

Bunkum! (see above).

Quote
In fact, the countries in Europe that have the lowest crime rates are the ones that have the most gun owners and/or least strict gun laws, such as the Czech Republic, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.

Cherry-picking. You fail to point out that with the exception of Norway (which as the same rate) all 4 have higher gun homicide rates than the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Or that the Czech Republic has a higher overall homicide rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade

Basically this entire line of argument is nothing but flim-flam and a desperate attempt to claim that correlation is causation, all the while ignoring the most pertinent facts about gun crime. You want to link the rise in crime to gun bans but I could just as easily link it to half a dozen other factors. Abortion rates, number of atheists, number of players of Call of Duty, % of 20 year olds who are bronies, whether people from those countries look good in a kilt. I suspect I could make at least one of those fit the data as well as you did for gun control.

You ignore that the number of gun deaths in 2008 is reported as a 20 year low and instead try to paint the picture that the gun ban has lead to an increase in violent crime despite the fact that gun crimes are happening less often or that statistical research does not claim any such correlation.


If the rest of your argument is as flawed as this tiny section of it, it definitely wasn't worth my time to read it all.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post, even though you refused to read most of it.

You keep randomly calling the facts and statistics I've posted "bollocks," yet you have yet to even attempt to disprove a single fact. My sources come from the British Home Office, which is a cabinet-level position. You point to 2008 which saw a reduction in overall violent crime, yet you ignore the 52% and 15% increases in homicide since the gun control laws were enacted; increases which are still on the rise and remain well above their pre-ban statistics.

Again you're cherry picking. All of the data shows that the countries with high-gun ownership rates are far-less violent. Whereas, the United Kindgdom, where guns are banned, is the most violent country in Europe (and North America), not the Czech Republic. Correlation obviously doesn't equal causation, but that applies for you as well. You liberals claim "Europe got no gun, Europe got no crime; 'murica got gun, 'murica got crime." However, anyone who does any research into this claim can see that it's bogus. The last time I checked, the left hasn't been trying to blame homicide on bronies or abortion. I will give you Call of Duty though, since liberals want to ban video games and have succeeded in doing such in several liberal nanny states alright.

I would appreciate it if you read read the rest of my essay. I have read your entire post, the least you could do is return the favor.

 

Offline watsisname

Re: Another school shooting in the US
You seem to be struggling with the idea of correlation =/= causation, which was the point karajorma was making there with those examples.
In my world of sleepers, everything will be erased.
I'll be your religion, your only endless ideal.
Slowly we crawl in the dark.
Swallowed by the seductive night.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Another school shooting in the US
You're quoting the Daily Mail!

ROFLMAO

You keep randomly calling the facts and statistics I've posted "bollocks," yet you have yet to even attempt to disprove a single fact.

Codswallop!

I posted links for pretty much all the claims I made. You posted a Daily Mail article which doesn't give links to where any of the numbers come from. My links disprove what you've said. Your links go to a newspaper famous for its biases and for making stuff up.

Quote
My sources come from the British Home Office, which is a cabinet-level position.

And you've read them incorrectly.

Quote
You point to 2008 which saw a reduction in overall violent crime, yet you ignore the 52% and 15% increases in homicide since the gun control laws were enacted; increases which are still on the rise and remain well above their pre-ban statistics.


Cherry-Picking to a ridiculous degree. Page 20 of the PDF you linked to has a table of the number of offences recorded by year. 1997 - 609 homicides, 2008/2009 - 651. Seriously? You're basing your argument on 40 murders? When that document specifically says to be careful of trends since murders are added to the total of the year they are discovered and not the year they happened? Harold Shipman alone adds around 150 to the total for one of those years. So we're talking about a number that can be altered by the effect of one single serial killer.   So lets be honest, your data for the 15% figure is basically statistically useless.

Oh and there is an upwards trend going back long before the gun ban. You can claim 52% since the gun ban but I can claim even more since 1966 and say that the murder rate has nothing to do with firearms and everything to do with England not winning the World Cup since then.

More importantly, you're yet to prove that the homicide rate is in any way linked to the number of guns available. You're trying to claim that the lack of guns somehow makes the UK more dangerous by comparing it against other European countries. This is absurd reasoning given that America has more guns and does worse when it comes to the same crime statistics. If your logic was even the slightest bit sensible, those numbers should be less.

Quote
The last time I checked, the left hasn't been trying to blame homicide on bronies or abortion.

My point was that using the exact same arguments you have used, they could. Which means your arguments are invalid.

Quote
You liberals claim "Europe got no gun, Europe got no crime; 'murica got gun, 'murica got crime."

Where have *I* claimed that? Don't try to argue with me based on a strawman.

Quote
I would appreciate it if you read read the rest of my essay. I have read your entire post, the least you could do is return the favor.

Actually my interest in your post is confined to the ridiculous number of lies, misrepresentations and poor reasoning you have applied to the UK crime statistics. I personally don't give a **** about the 2nd Amendment and I couldn't give a toss about constitutional arguments. It's not something that affects the UK and despite your rather poorly argued attempts to claim that increased gun ownership would make the British public safer, it's not something that should affect them.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 11:23:01 pm by karajorma »
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: Another school shooting in the US
All I got from this page was how many ways you could say "Bull****"

Codswallop. I'm going to use that
"No"

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Another school shooting in the US
Quote
I will give you Call of Duty though, since liberals want to ban video games and have succeeded in doing such in several liberal nanny states alright.
So the genius head of the NRA who blamed "violent video games" for what happened in Connecticut is a liberal?  Who knew!

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Another school shooting in the US
All I got from this page was how many ways you could say "Bull****"

Codswallop. I'm going to use that

'tis a thing of beauty.

Swazi Spring:
Hi there. Welcome to Hard-Light Productions, where the consensus swings ever so slightly to the evidence-based side of things. You are advised to keep your FUD inside your head at all times, and will be ridiculed if it turns out that you lack the fact-finding and argumentative skills necessary to survive in an environment where rationality is king. If you cannot find hard facts to support your position, your position will be deemed invalid. If you continue to rant and rave about how liberals are evil and left is the new doom, you will very quickly find yourself unable to participate in any discussions.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns