Ah yes, about time the concept of reporting possible thoughtcrime to the "appropriate people" came along since doublethink is quite abundant in this thread already.
Ah yes, about time the concept of reporting possible thoughtcrime to the "appropriate people" came along since doublethink is quite abundant in this thread already.
The nut of the problem is, many people in the states sees gun ownership almost a holy right and their gun almost as important as their penis.
If history didn't happen as it is, the solution may be as simple as gun control.
So that's a compounded problem, taking any one element out wouldn't completely solve the issue - so they will just have to live with mass murdering on a monthly basis.
"Guns isn't the problem" doesn't mean widespread gun ownership is alright, it just means your social fabrics are so f'ed up, it wraps itself around terrible decisions like this and it became your culture, your life.
We live in a different time, wars are no longer won by small firearms. The need to carry guns to defend ourselves is totally irrelevant - twenty really smart hackers in a dark room will do a much better job and a million armed citizens.
Some people think it's blasphemy but The Constitutions like any other things, can be outdated.
Of course we can never argue against their status quo because it is simply impossible to remove guns from the US of A, it's the foundation of their ideology and identity.
Even if in the rest of the civilized world we are perfectly okay never owned a gun in our lives.
If anything, getting rid of gun rights... People wont give a damn for the most part. Im all for not allowing assualt rifles, i think there should be regulations on gun control (ie use etc)
An armed guard disarmed the shooter in yesterday's middle school shooting in South Eastern Atlanta before anybody was killed.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/w ... anta-police-says.html.csp
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/w ... anta-police-says.html.csp
Please inform us which war was fought and won without guns. You're exaggerating, which in a topic of debate that calls for real facts and statistics is not helpful to your argument or this thread.
Congratulations to the security guard who saved children's lives, his heroism is buried at the very bottom of the page even on Foxnews.com. I wonder if MSNBC will cover it?
Incidentally every war that was won with guns was also lost with guns, by the other side. Wars may be fought with guns but they are won with money.
^ This. ^
Actually there usually about money, like all crime it's about stealing someone else's.
And while there's a huge outcry about disarming American's, There's complete silence about America's murder of non American children in their 'War for Terror'
CIA Drone Strikes in Pakistan 2004–2013
Total US strikes: 362
Obama strikes: 310
Total reported killed: 2,629-3,461
Civilians reported killed: 475-891
Children reported killed: 176
Total reported injured: 1,267-1,431
US Covert Action in Yemen 2002–2013
Total confirmed US operations (all): 54-64
Total confirmed US drone strikes: 42-52
Possible extra US operations: 135-157
Possible extra US drone strikes: 77-93
Total reported killed (all): 374-1,112
Total civilians killed (all): 72-177
Children killed (all): 27-37
US Covert Action in Somalia 2007–2013
Total US strikes: 10-23
Total US drone strikes: 3-9
Total reported killed: 58-170
Civilians reported killed: 11-57
Children reported killed: 1-3
http://www.globalresearch.ca/t ... by-barack-h-obama/5320570
And this doesn't include the latest invasion of Africa which is strangely focussed on control of gold mines.
But all wars are for Bankers, usually selling arms to both sides to maximise profits.....
And while there's a huge outcry about disarming American's, There's complete silence about America's murder of non American children in their 'War for Terror'
CIA Drone Strikes in Pakistan 2004–2013
Total US strikes: 362
Obama strikes: 310
Total reported killed: 2,629-3,461
Civilians reported killed: 475-891
Children reported killed: 176
Total reported injured: 1,267-1,431
US Covert Action in Yemen 2002–2013
Total confirmed US operations (all): 54-64
Total confirmed US drone strikes: 42-52
Possible extra US operations: 135-157
Possible extra US drone strikes: 77-93
Total reported killed (all): 374-1,112
Total civilians killed (all): 72-177
Children killed (all): 27-37
US Covert Action in Somalia 2007–2013
Total US strikes: 10-23
Total US drone strikes: 3-9
Total reported killed: 58-170
Civilians reported killed: 11-57
Children reported killed: 1-3
http://www.globalresearch.ca/t ... by-barack-h-obama/5320570
And this doesn't include the latest invasion of Africa which is strangely focussed on control of gold mines.
But all wars are for Bankers, usually selling arms to both sides to maximise profits.....
I realize that in your mind every topic of conversation is just "USA", but what we're talking about here and what you are talking about are actually not the same, but it was pretty creative the way you tried to make it seem like one follows from the other. It does not.
i think it makes a lot of sense
to protect the us from the absolute certainty of a totalitarian government they need guns and a totalitarian government
I think the other irony is that anti-social behaviour in flymikes opinion instantly means that someone is psychologically unstable and should be monitored.
Often people who are intelligent often appear as if they are anti-social. Flymike would, under his criteria, say these people should be monitored for being psychologically unstable. Lets weed out, en masse, most programmers as being psychologically unstable. Cops can just arrest people en masse at Linux conventions, PHP conventions and other programming related gatherings (except Javascript. Everyone knows 99% of JS programmers are hipsters that don't understand computer science in the slightest).
Often people who are intelligent often appear as if they are anti-social. Flymike would, under his criteria, say these people should be monitored for being psychologically unstable. Lets weed out, en masse, most programmers as being psychologically unstable. Cops can just arrest people en masse at Linux conventions, PHP conventions and other programming related gatherings (except Javascript. Everyone knows 99% of JS programmers are hipsters that don't understand computer science in the slightest).
I find it funny how some americans are just so stupid. 
Yes.
I think I've been reasonable and concise with my views in this thread. Its always easy to just say I'm stupid when you disagree without knowing your own views well enough to say why you disagree and have something called a conversation.
I also never suggested that weird people should be arrested, but it every time a shooter kills a bunch of people everyone comes out of the woodwork with 20/20 hindsight and can list all of the signs they should have reacted to in order to prevent the loss of innocent lives. I'm simply suggesting that people react to those signs when they see them instead of after a shooting. Anti-social people should be directed towards sources of support in their community and people who are willing to listen to them. They obviously do not seek out help for themselves enough to make a difference when it matters, so everyone in a community needs to get their faces out of their phones and pay attention to the people around them. Is it wrong to pay attention?
I also never suggested that weird people should be arrested, but it every time a shooter kills a bunch of people everyone comes out of the woodwork with 20/20 hindsight and can list all of the signs they should have reacted to in order to prevent the loss of innocent lives. I'm simply suggesting that people react to those signs when they see them instead of after a shooting. Anti-social people should be directed towards sources of support in their community and people who are willing to listen to them. They obviously do not seek out help for themselves enough to make a difference when it matters, so everyone in a community needs to get their faces out of their phones and pay attention to the people around them. Is it wrong to pay attention?
Except antisocial people don't always want support. Some people are genuine recluses who don't want to be social with people. That doesn't automatically make them a problem or a risk. I hate being in social situations, but I'm not gonna go buy a gun ever (not to mention even if I had a nervous breakdown I couldn't buy a gun for months!)
Also, you did say that anti-social people should be watched. I will quote:
Also, you did say that anti-social people should be watched. I will quote:
watched as in paid attention to by everyone, not arrested by the police.
You can't have it both ways and say that anti-social people need more and better access to mental health care and then say leave them alone to stew in their own thoughts.
You can't have it both ways and say that anti-social people need more and better access to mental health care and then say leave them alone to stew in their own thoughts.
But you're implying that all anti-social people have problems, and even that anti-social people are the problem with gun violence. Anyone can have a psychological break and go postal. The news in America loves to demonize shooters as being antisocial with a specific hobby, but that's also media. Anyone can have a bad day/week/month and just lose their shit. That's an issue not related to how social or not you are.
The only difference between places with tighter gun laws and the USA is that the probability of someone having a psychological break and already owning a weapon is much higher. And to have it on them at all times is equally prevalent.
To focus on one group of people (anti-social.. Which is ironic cause usually anti-social people aren't found in groups) is ignoring the whole problem. Anyone can get pissed and go on a rampage. Having a gun already just makes it easier.
The only difference between places with tighter gun laws and the USA is that the probability of someone having a psychological break and already owning a weapon is much higher. And to have it on them at all times is equally prevalent.
To focus on one group of people (anti-social.. Which is ironic cause usually anti-social people aren't found in groups) is ignoring the whole problem. Anyone can get pissed and go on a rampage. Having a gun already just makes it easier.
No, you just made that up. The number of people who are licensed to carry concealed and murder people is pretty much none. They (we) are infinitely less likely to be involved in a shooting unrelated to self defense than someone who carries a concealed weapon without a permit (like gangbangers do every day). If you wanted to kill people why would you wait 6 weeks to get a permit?
I refuse to believe that every gun owner in the country is equally likely to go on a shooting spree because they obviously are not. Being raised in a functional and complete family, finishing basic education and using that education to obtain gainful employment are not hallmarks of a mass murderer. Neither is having a group of supportive friends who would tell them murder is not cool. It is not my problem that people decide not to provide or encourage those things for their children, nor should I be punished for their actions.
Despite what has been in the news recently, gun crime is a problem that effects urban areas and minorities far more everyone else, so why take guns from small town white dudes to solve the problem of inner city gun crime? I don't have anything to do with gun crime in Los Angeles or Atlanta or anywhere!
I refuse to believe that every gun owner in the country is equally likely to go on a shooting spree because they obviously are not. Being raised in a functional and complete family, finishing basic education and using that education to obtain gainful employment are not hallmarks of a mass murderer. Neither is having a group of supportive friends who would tell them murder is not cool. It is not my problem that people decide not to provide or encourage those things for their children, nor should I be punished for their actions.
Despite what has been in the news recently, gun crime is a problem that effects urban areas and minorities far more everyone else, so why take guns from small town white dudes to solve the problem of inner city gun crime? I don't have anything to do with gun crime in Los Angeles or Atlanta or anywhere!
Because I'm sure that's what all shooters do.. go to their friends "i'm gonna go murder someone". Especially when it's unplanned or just a situation that's gone down
Because of consistency. You can't say "this city can have guns, but this can't". Laws don't work that way, especially when it's written (150+ years ago I will add) into your constituation. Plus then you've made it pointless by giving the people in a city where it's "banned" to just drive to get one anyways.
For a gun law to work, it needs to be consistent and uniformly applied to everyone. Just because you may live in a rural hick town, doesn't mean you should have any different rules to someone who lives in the Ghetto in LA.
Most gun laws are current. All concealed carry laws have been written since 1987. The most important act of legislation protecting gun owners was passed in 1986, and the affirmation of the rights of citizens to peacefully keep and bear arms was a decision made by the supreme court only in 2008. The fight for protection under the law to exercise our right has only really been successful since the 80's.
Incidentally, large cities that had gun bans saw an instant decrease in murders after the bans were lifted. Washington D.C. is the best known example where homicide rates dropped 50% after the ban was lifted. In fact, every type of crime fell after the gun ban was deemed unconstitutional. I don't think there is evidence that gun bans work to reduce overall crime. They don't work in the UK, they don't work for shit in Mexico, and they don't work in the US.
No facts or statistics exist to corroborate your views that access to guns causes higher rates of shooting deaths. I really don't know why I'm continuing this with you since you are obviously not backing up anything you say with evidence.
Incidentally, large cities that had gun bans saw an instant decrease in murders after the bans were lifted. Washington D.C. is the best known example where homicide rates dropped 50% after the ban was lifted. In fact, every type of crime fell after the gun ban was deemed unconstitutional. I don't think there is evidence that gun bans work to reduce overall crime. They don't work in the UK, they don't work for shit in Mexico, and they don't work in the US.
No facts or statistics exist to corroborate your views that access to guns causes higher rates of shooting deaths. I really don't know why I'm continuing this with you since you are obviously not backing up anything you say with evidence.
Because it's simple logic. More guns == more shootings. If there were no guns, would there be any shootings?
Exactly.
Exactly.
I understand that your thinking is very very simple, but it doesn't make it true.
In Mexico, there are far fewer guns than in the US, and lawful citizens are also banned from owning them. Do I need to describe the situation in Mexico to you?
Not even your thoughts which are so simple that they required only the dull flicker of one neuron to form are true.
In Mexico, there are far fewer guns than in the US, and lawful citizens are also banned from owning them. Do I need to describe the situation in Mexico to you?
Not even your thoughts which are so simple that they required only the dull flicker of one neuron to form are true.
And guess where the vast majority of the guns in those cities come from.
Gun shops north of the border.
Seems border patrol don't care so much about what goes the other way.
thats true enough, its not a great example of freedom in action. it really sucks down there.
Tragedy and Video Game Violence
(270 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG