US school shooting
- Thread starter Bodhi
- Start date
- Status
That's child's play when compared to South Africa.
http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/southafrica/news/carjackingpart1.html
How do we know that better gun laws wouldn't help? Sure illegal guns exist but where do they come from?
I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you haven't seen someone die from a gunshot wound, if you haven't worn their blood, if you don't know what spilled blood smells like you haven't a clue about the cost. Congressmen should have a "scared straight" class on gun violence. Let them spend some time with victims and their families.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you haven't seen someone die from a gunshot wound, if you haven't worn their blood, if you don't know what spilled blood smells like you haven't a clue about the cost. Congressmen should have a "scared straight" class on gun violence. Let them spend some time with victims and their families.
Here are some interesting stats. I picked Russia to compare with the US because the population size is similar.
First, here is a chart of the crime statistics.
This is interesting because it is broken down into types of crime.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Russia/United-States/Crime
Next are the rules of gun ownership in Russia.
Note that many of the rules that some in the US would like to have in place have actually been in place in Russia for many decades.
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/russia
What I take from all this is that gun violence is only symptomatic of a much larger sickness in society, one that I eluded to earlier in the thread.
Making rules doesn't fix decay. They only serve to exacerbate the problem by polarizing people.
We need serious discussions about the condition of our society, and how to improve it, not feel-good gestures that do nothing constructive.
Last edited:
I agree that the problem lies within but easy access to guns makes the outcome worse. Better mental health care will help but people have to realize that psychologists cannot predict what people will do. The science just isn't there. The NRA will never let you take guns away from people even if they are obvious nutjobs.
Say what you want, these kind of events, and the daily ones that don't make the news will continue. Gun laws, as they stand, play a part.
Say what you want, these kind of events, and the daily ones that don't make the news will continue. Gun laws, as they stand, play a part.
Look at the statistics Bruce. Cities with the toughest gun laws have the highest gun crime rate. Criminals and loonies will always be able to find a guns and use them. Why disarm the law abiding public of their right to sport and defense ? I know I don't want to be a victim. Don't expect the gov't to be there when someone kicks in your front door, god forbid. I will not go down w/o a fight, nor will the NRA and the majority of the country that believes in responsible gun ownership. That is all I have to say in the matter.
I have never seen a wound inflicted by someone for self defense, unless it was a police shooting. Never in 30 years of running to the ER for gunshots. Never.
Gun laws that end at the city or state limits are of no use. It's easier for criminals to get guns if there are millions of them out there.
Gun laws, as they exist, are responsible for the carnage we see every day in the US. Psychologists can't help. Changing human nature takes generations.
Gun laws that end at the city or state limits are of no use. It's easier for criminals to get guns if there are millions of them out there.
Gun laws, as they exist, are responsible for the carnage we see every day in the US. Psychologists can't help. Changing human nature takes generations.
The problem isn't the states with, it's the states without gun laws and proper security checks. Seems amazing we can ask for voter ID and not gun checks. Ask the cops in NJ and NY about the I95 gun running corridor.
Analog vs. digital.
Objective vs. subjective.
Gun control vs. gun rights.
I can hardly wait for the next thread... - Don (NRA Endowment Life member but see absolutely no point in debating something like this here)
Objective vs. subjective.
Gun control vs. gun rights.
I can hardly wait for the next thread... - Don (NRA Endowment Life member but see absolutely no point in debating something like this here)
It's easy to conflate the gun debate with the audio debate - there are some obvious parallels. Thing is, one of them is life and death, it's important to discuss it but we aren't allowed to in this forum
No one wants to read the stats, much less consider that half the victims were killed by a knife. I put the stats in the thread, but they got zero mention. Why not? I submit that it is an agenda driven argument that is not affected by reality. I am not an NRA guy, but I do try to remain objective.
Even worse, no one wants to even touch the actual root causes of these societal problems. Let's just pass a law, and make it all go away. If that would actually work, I would fully support destroying every gun that can be found. Unfortunately, we live in the real world.
You are spot on there. It makes it hard to have a rational debate when positions are so entrenched on both sides
"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."
My interpretation of the second amendment is that if you are a member of A well regulated Militia then you can possess a firearm. Not a member, then no firearm. Eventually, this will become the accepted interpretation. Being a solitary individual on the street is not being a member of A well regulated Militia. Others may have a different interpretation, but this is all I am going to say about it.
My interpretation of the second amendment is that if you are a member of A well regulated Militia then you can possess a firearm. Not a member, then no firearm. Eventually, this will become the accepted interpretation. Being a solitary individual on the street is not being a member of A well regulated Militia. Others may have a different interpretation, but this is all I am going to say about it.
If only we knew!
My theory is that people are essentially irrational. Our opinions are based on random things that we don't remember (an overheard conversation about guns when we were kids etc) and we fill in rationalisations after the fact and pretend that we have considered, well thought-out decisions
Not sure how your takeaway emerges from comparing two countries with dissimilar systems and entirely different histories. There are so many variables that to make any conclusion about guns, seems unsupportable at best.
I don't see that comparing the US to Russia on this issue has any validity. Why not compare to societies with more similar political systems such as Canada, England or Australia?
Why not? I would say that the mistake you make is in believing that the US system is like the others you mention when it is fundamentally different from all three. We can go into that, if you wish.
What is real is violent crime wherever it is found. Further of note are the Russian laws that some in the US would like to copy. They seem to be of little use there, if you want to make an objective comparison. The problem isn't the means of violence in either country so much as it is the predisposition to commit the violence, and why the nature of the violence differs, depending on the culture. That is what I believe needs to be addressed. That is also one reason why Russia was used as an example. Curiously, this killer hated women, and women are many times more likely to be raped in the US than they are in Russia. Why is that?
Still of interest to me is why the root cause for violence has been avoided in this discussion, but much about guns, especially when we consider the fact that half the fatalities in this case were by knife.
I think it's a pretty easy argument that the US is more like England/Canada/Australia than Russia, but that is for another place. The more relevant point to this thread is that to draw the conclusion you do about guns/gun laws from the information you present, when there are so many variables, is shaky at best IMO.
I don't think anyone believes gun laws will solve all the problems. Laws are about regulating and limiting the worst consequences of the damaging urges in human nature, not curing the urges themselves. We need to tackle the problem from both ends IMO.
Whenever an incident like this happens, the pro gun lobby immediately changes the subject to "all the criminals will get their hands on guns anyway", and "don't infringe on my constitutional rights". Of course, not a a SINGLE incident that triggers the gun control discussion involves criminals using guns. It is always some psycho going on a rampage, and we then learning said psycho had very easy access to guns. Common sense reform gun reform never even puts the issue infringing on the rights of "qualified" gun owners. It is always about background checks, closing gun show loopholes or (oh horrors) biometrics locks, in other words common sense ideas to avoid psychos going on rampages, kids accidentally killing themselves, or say gun related suicides. All this is off limits, because of the paranoid fear of "the government taking my guns" whipped up by the NRA and their ilk (personified by nutcases like joe the plumber http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/27/joe-the-plumber-guns_n_5397981.html).
I can't buy a fu%*&^*ng gas lighter without a child lock in this country, and a 60 year old has to to show his ID at a fairground to by a beer, but hey - don't touch my guns. Frankly, it makes me sick to my stomach, and the "all debate is off limits" faction of the pro gun crowd are assholes plain and simple. So there you have it.
- Status
Similar threads
