Author Topic: School shooting (Read 2214 times)

JimBeam · « **Reply #15 on:** October 11, 2007, 04:13:32 PM »

guns dont kill people bullets do

Charon · « **Reply #16 on:** October 11, 2007, 04:15:53 PM »

Quote

You take away guns, nutter will stab you, you take away knives...

The most successful nutters, those who kill tens to hundreds at at time, use a can of gasoline and a match, fertilizer and diesel fuel or box cutters and a 757. Firearms barely make the grade. Not enough "bang for the buck" pun intended. The most disastrous school attack in US history involved dynamite.

Charon

Maverick · « **Reply #17 on:** October 11, 2007, 04:17:15 PM »

It's kind of like adult males who cause an injury that requires medical treatment to a female in a drunken fight should also be punished for the assault.

That does not mean that all males much less men should be held accountable for the acts of those who do such a thing. It's simply foolish to punish the many for the act of the very few. You punish those who do the act, not those who did nothing wrong.

Rino · « **Reply #18 on:** October 11, 2007, 04:59:37 PM »

See Rule #6

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 11, 2007, 06:00:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
The most successful nutters, those who kill tens to hundreds at at time, use a can of gasoline and a match, fertilizer and diesel fuel or box cutters and a 757. Firearms barely make the grade. Not enough "bang for the buck" pun intended. The most disastrous school attack in US history involved dynamite.

Charon

WAY too true, Charon-I'm waiting for someone to get a buncha chlorine from a Swimming-pool supply store, and figure out how to make it into poison gas.

However...One has to ask themselves, with this happening this close to a national election (well, not really close, but the campaigns' have started anyway), Will this incident be a factor? Even though gun control has been seen by many in both parties to be a political 'dead horse', will someone revive it?

I know many of you would rather hit yourself in the testicles with a ball-peen hammer than look at what these people say, but it's always wise to keep tabs on what these guys are doing and saying:http://www.bradycenter.org/

Keep an eye on it, to see if they spout out with something.

Slash27 · « **Reply #20 on:** October 11, 2007, 06:33:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ocean27
As for myself, I was hauled into court once - for a speeding offence - 7mph above the limit! But the police screwed up - had charged me under the wrong legislation. I was able to destroy their case in court, and was awarded costs for my trouble. Not too bright, the police. I guess some things are true the world over, eh Maverick?

We are not related.

Charon · « **Reply #21 on:** October 11, 2007, 06:56:59 PM »

Quote

Not punish those except those who committed the act - I feel i'm being punished because of bad drivers who cannot handle a car above 70mph. Because of them, a blanket speed limit of 70mph applies to ALL drivers, even those who are more capable and experienced. How does this work in America? Is there a two-tier system of speed limits - one for experten and one for mere mortals? Believe it or not, just such a system operates in France - and in China, I believe. But I'm guessing that everyone is expected to adhere to the posted limit. Thus the better/more capable drivers are being punished for the folly of the bad drivers.

We already have over 20,000 gun laws. Remarkably, legal gun owners broadly tend to obey those laws. They don't typically "drive over the limit." And the same restrictive (even ridiculous in many cases) laws apply to everyone. For example, even though I have a safe full of guns I have to wait 3 days to get a new pistol after purchase as a "cooling off" period.

The funny thing is, if you are not a criminal the chance of you being a firearm homicide victim is not worth considering. While the "carnage" in the US may be higher than in Europe, and every one of the crimes gets the distortion of the media play, the real relative risk to our daily lives is minimal -- unless you hang in those circles. Far less than alcohol or any number of other factors that are part of daily living.

Charon

Vulcan · « **Reply #22 on:** October 11, 2007, 07:50:34 PM »

US School shootings seem to be fairly uninteresting news these days (unless a decent body count can be clocked up). It seems these are acceptable losses for the right to bare arms. It is an interesting way to look at things, good luck to you guys in the US. I think you have a hard road ahead whichever path your gun laws lead you down.

p.s any of you guys willing to take a headshot from a 1200fps air gun?

Mark Luper · « **Reply #23 on:** October 11, 2007, 08:10:05 PM »

Why do so many people write bare instead of bear. One bears arms and one takes of his cloths to be bare.

Mark

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #24 on:** October 11, 2007, 08:30:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mark Luper
Why do so many people write bare instead of bear. One bears arms and one takes of his cloths to be bare.

Mark

I think it's a moot point with an armed naked guy at your door.

Charon · « **Reply #25 on:** October 11, 2007, 08:36:27 PM »

Quote

See Rule #5

What world do you live in? Such events are the source of a media circus every time they happen. 200 people get hit each year in the US by lightning. Far, far fewer than that will be killed in a deranged gunman school shooting. Far, far more youngsters will be killed as a result of alcohol, or jumping in a swimming pool, or riding a bicycle or hot rodding their first car.

Now, a lot of teenaged gang bangers do die as part of their lifestyle. But the illegal gun they possess didn't condition them to take somebody's life because he flashed the wrong gang sign or had a nice looking pair of sports shoes. In fact, a lot get stabbed to death too. Even so, a non gang banger at even the worst inner city US high school will survive just about as well (from a real world, relative risk standpoint) as a student in New Zealand.

Chicago has about 3 million people. Even though it is a high crime "gun violence" city only about 400-600 people die each year total from homicide. Say 80 percent are firearm related -- average at 400. About 80 percent of these are criminals killed by other criminals. So, out of 3 million people roughly 80 innocents are killed by firearms -- robberies, domestic violence, drunken rage, etc. Do the math. 0.0026 percent of the non criminal Chicago population is killed each year because of our right to bear arms. Of course we don't know how many of those would have been killed if no gun was present. And, we don't know how many people were saved because they had a gun and criminals are cowards. (Actually, not many in Chicago, since really only the criminals have guns in that city.)

Now, do the math on alcohol, or motorcycle accidents or any number of other behaviors -- like sex, for example. Logically, our privilege (not right) to get soused is FAR more destructive to us as a society. Do you want to bet more than 80 people contract HIV each year in Chicago?

Quote

p.s any of you guys willing to take a headshot from a 1200fps air gun?

Airsoft. You know what Airsoft is right? Toy BB guns that shoot plastic pellets at 250-400fps. Has about 1/10 the energy of a typical paintball gun. They are toys. People play army with them. They shoot each other in the head all the time.

Charon

Mark Luper · « **Reply #26 on:** October 11, 2007, 08:40:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
I think it's a moot point with an armed naked guy at your door.

Mark

Vulcan · « **Reply #27 on:** October 11, 2007, 08:53:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
Chicago has about 3 million people. Even though it is a high crime "gun violence" city only about 400-600 people die each year total from homicide. Say 80 percent are firearm related -- average at 400.

New Zealand has ~4 million people, we have a reasonable above average gun ownership level, and 45 murders per year ( http://www.nationmaster.com/country/nz-new-zealand/cri-crime )

You figure out what world I live in.

Charon · « **Reply #28 on:** October 11, 2007, 09:43:28 PM »

Quote

You figure out what world I live in.

It's certainly not America, given the lack of knowledge expressed in your fact-free opinion piece.

What's your gang violence like Vulcan? You do have aggressive street gangs like MS13, ect. fighting inner city gang wars to control the crack cocaine market? Right? That's your world? All 4 million New Zealand residents live in some 230 square urban miles just like a major US city like Chicago?

How many of those 4 million live below the poverty line in a major urban area? Historically, what per capita percent of your population has been murdered each year for the past 100 years? How does that reflect relative to countries were there is both more and less gun ownership? Has the gun regulation in your country changed that? Were you less safe 50 years ago? More safe today?

According to this link you current homicide rates have been fairly consistent going back to the 1970s. Same for the US for that matter, with both having a bump in the late 70s early 1980s. and there is more data on the US showing a consistent homicide rate all the way back to about 1900. Same for the UK. During this range of times the availability and restrictions on firearms have varied greatly in all these countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homicide_rate

The most dramatic example is in the UK though, where it used to be easier to own and carry a firearm than in the US, and now there is a total ban. Guess what, firearm crime (and violent crime in general) is shooting up. The reason is not related to the tool or its legal availability, but to the criminal structure in place. US style street gangs are now popping up in areas they never existed before in Europe. And, if these criminals want a gun they get one off a smuggler just like the illegal drugs they sell. Of course, those who want to be able to defend themselves now lack that option.

Here's an article on this issue:
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/second_amendment/rk0405/

Charon

T

Vulcan · « **Reply #29 on:** October 11, 2007, 11:24:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
It's certainly not America, given the lack of knowledge expressed in your fact-free opinion piece.

And what exactly was my fact free opinion piece. The only two opinions I offered were 1) that shootings in the us are no longer leading news items and 2) you guys have a hard road ahead whether you get more restrictive laws OR less restrictive laws.

But you seemed to be reading something else into it? Perhaps you are insecure about the current state of things in the US?

Yes NZ has poverty, we have one of the largest polynesian populations in the Pacific. Yes we have drug problems, yes we have gangs, and yes we even have the occasional shooting. Yes we can own firearms, yes they are licensed, yes a lot of people in NZ participate in hunting (especially given rabbits, possums, wild goats, and deer are considered pests here).

My point is perhaps you guys should start looking beyond your borders to see what potentially can happen. I'm not saying you shouldn't own handguns, from what I read hear I wouldn't want to live in the US without from the stuff I read here. But maybe a long term plan on where your country wants to end up with guns would be a good idea.