Alien Loves Predator Forum Index
         
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    RegisterRegister    ProfileProfile    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    Log inLog in 
Guns and knives
    page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Alien Loves Predator Forum Index -> The Soap Box
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Twistys



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 418
Location: Finnland, I think. Not sure... Is that a Polar Bear

PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:17 pm    Post subject: Guns and knives Reply with quote

I'm sad.
An 18-year-old male student shot 7 other students and a headmaster this noon. After that he shot himself to the head. He's alive though brain dead.
The whole country is in some kind of shock. So am I. If I feel this bad I cannot understand or know how bad the victims parents and others going through the whole situation feel. I read about Virginia Tech and such and never could have I thought it could happen in here.
The guy had made a video last night and put it on YouTube titled something like the Massacre in Tuusula High School. He also had a manifest where he wrote Humanity is overrated and he was only executing his ideology about darwinism. You know, strongest survive... And that he was full of hate towards people and humanity and that he was enjoying the feeling.
This is terrible. How can this be possible, why. How can someone be so angry and hateful. They were kids for gods sake. If it was all about politics then why kill children.
I'm sorry, I just had to open my heart in somewhere and this place feels the most secure place at the moment. Question
_________________
"Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alternate Spideygal



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 3222
Location: Any where a friendly neighborhood Spider would be.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just heard about what happened, Twisty. *hug*

I can't understand why a kid would snap like that and take it out on everyone else. And the fact that he enjoyed it makes me wonder what his home life must have been like. All you can do is pray for the families who lost their children and even pray for the kid who took the lives of his classmates, ya know?
_________________

Married to Azrael.
Queen of Innuendo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Azrael



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 4810
Location: AWOL no more

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really, really, really despise the idea of snuffing out innocent life. I believe I've stated this before. Especially when the victims are young, the younger they are the more cruel it is. I mean really, what if one of the students that was killed was supposed to grow up and be a great doctor, one that cures cancer? If any one should be killed it should be the ones that would kill innocent people for no reason.

I have felt this experience personally, too. A long time ago, when my cousin was killed in a stupid "gang war" he had nothing to do with. He was just driving by, going home from his work, he was shot just because he was there. And what happened to the gang? No casualties, just several arrests.

All of these people, they make me sick. They make me sick to know that there is such plankton among us. I hate them, I hate every single one of them. All of this was shoved into my face while I was young, it has made me what I am today. I wish all of that never happened or ever will, and maybe I would have turned out as someone better.

I don't like what I do. I honestly never did.
_________________
Only the strongest will survive.

Married to SpideyGirl.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Twistys



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 418
Location: Finnland, I think. Not sure... Is that a Polar Bear

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for all the supporting words.

What can I say. It was bound to happen some day. When I was in senior high we all knew this one boy who was very shy and introvert. One day he threatened to bring a shotgun to the school. After that he started raging with a axe. He was drunk at the moment though but I don't think he was kidding about it. What happened yesterday might have happened earlier but thankfully the boy centered his anger towards his hobby. I think his well now. But there might be someone else filled with hatred and despise. This incident might just be fuel to his fire.

The killer died last night. He had it easy, I think. Now it's his parents who have to suffer from his deeds. He, the killer had a very good family. He had it all too good. What's ironic, his mother is member of municipal council and is a nature activist talking about saving the world. The killer said that he hated "green hippies". Just goest to show you that if you go crazy you go crazy regardless of the backgrounds.

Like da bandaman said: "-- some are bound to be totally fucked up, --" Shit things happens. Now it just happened the worst possible way. We mourn a moment and move on at some point. It may take for a while to get over this madness but the life goes on. It just has to.
_________________
"Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon_Says wrote:
Yet another reminder that humans are capable of doing virtually anything. I can't truthfully say that I understand or can sympathize with what you one going through, Twisty, but you gotta understand that with 6-7 billion people on this planet, some are bound to be totally fucked up, beyond any discernible reason, and beyond hope.

Still, my condolences for the families & friends of the victims. What happened should not have taken place. Right now I ask you to try to be the opposite of that soulless son of a bitch, and be the most humane person you can be. It's what's needed from you right now.


i know it ain't an instant cure for the school killings but how about restricting access to firearms? why did the guy have a gun? do all people in Finland have guns? or in US&A for that matter? what the fuck for? is this gun owning paranoia gonna ever end?
i know. owning a gun don't make you fucked up. but it helps not to have one once you do get fucked up.


i'm curious as to what Digit has to say on the subject though.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ipsa



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 1631
Location: Wherever God takes me.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sal wrote:
or in US&A for that matter? what the fuck for?

In the States, guns laws vary with each state. But essentially, if you're a minor, illegal immigrant, or convict/ex-con you're not supposed to be able to purchase one through a dealer (though, if you're buying it in an alley from some guy's trunk, that's a different story). If anyone wants to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon, s/he generally has to take a class on the proper use of firearms, get a background check, etc. But, again, it varies with each state. Clicky goodness.
Of the people I know who do own guns, it's split evenly for owning them out of just interest in weapons, protection, or sport.
_________________
"Yeast devil! Back to the oven that baked you!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cfos



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 2901
Location: everyday I'm hustlin'

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ipsa wrote:
Sal wrote:
or in US&A for that matter? what the fuck for?

In the States, guns laws vary with each state. But essentially, if you're a minor, illegal immigrant, or convict/ex-con you're not supposed to be able to purchase one through a dealer (though, if you're buying it in an alley from some guy's trunk, that's a different story). If anyone wants to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon, s/he generally has to take a class on the proper use of firearms, get a background check, etc. But, again, it varies with each state. Clicky goodness.
Of the people I know who do own guns, it's split evenly for owning them out of just interest in weapons, protection, or sport.


As Ipsa stated, it varies. True, you could remove access to guns, but the gun is just a tool and there are plenty of other tools in the shed ranging in size from a knife to an airplane. It is the ideology that needs to be changed, but who is going to be the ideology police?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aurelyn
Moderator


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 3578
Location: Aw Hell No!

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

True, a gun is just a tool, but it's a little hard for a kid to walk through a school and, say, knife half a dozen people to death.

Personally, I'm with Sal on the ownership of guns by civilians issue. What the fuck for? A gun is a tool for killing things. Period. While a rifle can be used to hunt animals, a handgun is essentially a tool for killing people.
_________________
Da Fro-mastah of da aLp Forums!

Master Chainsaw wrote:
Aurelyn becomes enraged by imbecilic displays of illiteracy, as is his wont.


Simon_Says wrote:
Sal would know. He stole many jobs from guys named Shaun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Twistys



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 418
Location: Finnland, I think. Not sure... Is that a Polar Bear

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sal wrote:
why did the guy have a gun? do all people in Finland have guns?


In Finland 18 year old can own a gun. The guy had turned 18 at July. He had a membership with a shooting club and he bought the gun a month ago. In Finland it is estimated that we have something like 3 million guns. Finlands population on the other hand is only 5 200 000. The high number is explained by the popularity of hunting. All though we have too many guns they're not used in assaults as often as you might think. Because like I said, most of the guns are rifles and such hunting weapons.

I read from the news that the killer had stopped taken his depression meds some time before he went homicidal. So, he definitely was mentally ill. Its sad because the government has constantly decreased the allowance of the youth's and children's mental care. Teachers in schools don't have either will or power to stop the bullying and help those who are falling from the pace.

I was bullied 10 years from elementary school to the junior high. There was a time I hoped really bad things to others for what they had done to me. But it's not a reason to start killing people. I didn't. I wen't to senior high, got my diploma and I continued to the University of applied sciences. My bullies? Well, they're out-of-work teenparents who drink too much to forget their miserable life.
And I'm feeling sorry for them that they had to end up like that.
_________________
"Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cfos



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 2901
Location: everyday I'm hustlin'

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aurelyn wrote:
True, a gun is just a tool, but it's a little hard for a kid to walk through a school and, say, knife half a dozen people to death.

Personally, I'm with Sal on the ownership of guns by civilians issue. What the fuck for? A gun is a tool for killing things. Period. While a rifle can be used to hunt animals, a handgun is essentially a tool for killing people.


Hmmm... I disagree to an extent. I find target practice and or competitions (did somebody say olympic event?) to be acceptible. I mean, bows 'n arrows would have to fall in this category too, and be outlawed, right? Obviously, there is no need for anyone to own a sword, either right?

I've always found that these arguments to be a slippery slope. Granted, I am in favor of more strict regulations regarding firearms, but not necessarily comfortable with Sal's and Aurelyn's opinion (I think we are beginning to delve into another section rather than -- what made me unhappy). I am also comfortable with the idea that some people are just "bad" (edit: obviously there is a distinct between "bad" and "mentally ill" and I am not passing judgement on those that are mentally ill -- just those that may be morally reprehensible) and will commit henious acts regardless of what is restricted, outlawed or freely available.

I think I once posted something that may have been lost earlier when the site crashed, but if we are going to do something for civility, we could outlaw alcohol and tobacco. I'm sure much life (brain cells and lung tissue) would also be saved (no drunk driving) as there really aren't benefits from either. And, before someone (my guess would be Munan although Aurelyn does post more regularly...) goes ahead and jumps on the red wine is good for the heart bandwagon, why don't people just substitute red wine with exercise and proper diet. Sure, it isn't as thrilling, but you would obviously do more for the heart (and body) with exercise and proper diet than a simple glass of red wine, mmmmmmkay?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simon_Says



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 6823
Location: Being generally opposing.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree wtih Sal and Aurelyn, firearm use and purchase should be extremely prohibited to civilians. I'm not saying eliminate civilian sale entirely, however there should be some tight limits.

Using the gun for safety? Tasers and maybe even tear gas or something are perfectly capable of stopping your typical thug. If they took armor or something, then you're dealing with someone you just better hand your wallet over to. The authorities should have little trouble finding him. Martial arts are also a good defense. Although not really an option against 3+ people, against one or two a moderate-level belt should be able to disarm and overpower the average mugger without excruciating difficulty. It would also get people off their lazy asses and foster some positive values.

Recreation & Interest? The state should run some kind of firearm storage where they keep your weapon under guard, and you have to sign out that you took it out for the day. Then you better sign in at the hunting park with your weapon within the next few hours or whatever scheduled time it is or else the cops go out on your ass under suspicion of carrying a firearm for illicit purposes.

And the screening process must be absolutely excruciating. Thorough background check, check for any criminal history in family members or known affiliates, a full psych examination, and automatic denial to anybody who's used mental drugs, treatments, therapy etc. in the last couple years. You better be in fucking control of yourself before you're given a firearm, which of course will be stored by the state.

And fuck anyone who says it's inconvenient. The ability to kill someone as easily as you could with a gun should not be convenient, and its not a convenience.

I know that such measures won't stop illegal firearm availability, but it should make events such as Columbine, VirginaTech, and Jokela much more difficult, possibly impossible. That's a step in the right direction.
As for tobacco and alcohol, tobacco should be kept an entirely private affair (no smoking in public spaces during daytime hours), and alcohol should simply carry harsher penalties. However, add fast food to the mix. That should definitely be regulated, considering that it's complete poison and it kills more people than tobacco or alcohol.

Also on the subject, body armor should be made much more accessible to the public. Classes should be able to turtle-up behind a wall of riot shields once the bullets start flying.

Also cfos, bows and swords are much more difficult to hide and use than handguns. To use a bow you need some pretty good training as well as space, swords too. They also don't have anything approaching the stopping power of a pistol or shotgun. A pistol has plenty of stopping power, that can be dealt quickly, without training even. They're also ridiculously small. Archaic weapons shouldn't be carried in public, but they're not nearly as much a problem as small arms.
_________________


Last edited by Simon_Says on Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:21 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Alternate Spideygal



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 3222
Location: Any where a friendly neighborhood Spider would be.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is the human race so bad that we have to hide from one another?

This is a sick sad world we live in.
_________________

Married to Azrael.
Queen of Innuendo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Azrael



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 4810
Location: AWOL no more

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We all have our secrets.
_________________
Only the strongest will survive.

Married to SpideyGirl.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aramor



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 14141
Location: On a cyborg unicorn pony!

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aurelyn wrote:
True, a gun is just a tool, but it's a little hard for a kid to walk through a school and, say, knife half a dozen people to death.


He'd become a legend on the server Razz

cfos wrote:
I think I once posted something that may have been lost earlier when the site crashed, but if we are going to do something for civility, we could outlaw alcohol and tobacco.


Right, that'll give you some popularity points. But why stop with alcohol and tobacco? Outlaw sugar as well, fat food, polluting cars and other stuff that's hazardous to your health...

[/sarcasm]
_________________
Photoshopperholic wrote:
Mighty Lord Aramor


Fail of the day:
Syn wrote:
your balls didn't get suck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Satan Crime Wash



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 1980

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arm Romeo wrote:
Outlaw sugar as well, fat food, polluting cars and other stuff that's hazardous to your health...

We could all live in a world like the one in Demolition Man! Let's force people to diet! And ban sports, because someone might get hurt!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

and replace all the music on the radio with jingles!


i see where cfos is coming from. of course, the gun doesn't kill, the man does (actually, the bullet...), of course you can kill in many many ways, gun or not. but like Simon and Aurelyn point it out, it is so much easier and more effective with a gun that maybe it shouldn't be lumped in the same category with knives and swords.

i sense cfos is bent on the freedom of individual issue, and any form of state regulation in the form of what Simon suggests is unacceptable. i assure you, i believe in the freedom of individual too. but fuck that, i'm willing to accept being supervised and controlled as long as it serves a purpose of ensuring greater public safety.
it's straight way to corruption and totalitarian state, you may say. it's a matter of striking a balance and coming up with a good self-restricting system run by competent people, i answer. such balance is extremely hard to achieve, you may reply. so is it better to not do anything and read about another campus shooting every month, i provocatively ask?
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aramor



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 14141
Location: On a cyborg unicorn pony!

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blondie wrote:
of course, the gun doesn't kill, the man does (actually, the bullet...)


I've had it with people whining about 'guns kill people,' guns don't kill people, death kills people. Ask a doctor, it's a medical fact. You can't die from a bullet. You can die from a cardiac arrest or organ failure or a major hemorrhage, small piece of metal ain't the problem.

Blondie wrote:
it's straight way to corruption and totalitarian state


Hey, I'd enlist in the army then straight-away. I'd rather be at the less dangerous side of the barrel Wink
_________________
Photoshopperholic wrote:
Mighty Lord Aramor


Fail of the day:
Syn wrote:
your balls didn't get suck


Last edited by Aramor on Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:41 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Ipsa



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 1631
Location: Wherever God takes me.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon_Says wrote:
Tasers and maybe even tear gas or something are perfectly capable of stopping your typical thug.

Yes, which is why you hear reports about police officers using them on children and the elderly. Knocks 'em right out!

sal wrote:
i believe in the freedom of individual too. but fuck that, i'm willing to accept being supervised and controlled as long as it serves a purpose of ensuring greater public safety.
it's straight way to corruption and totalitarian state, you may say. it's a matter of striking a balance and coming up with a good self-restricting system run by competent people, i answer.

I believe that although many people on an individual basis are competent, it changes when you have a large group of people. Take for example, the prohibition movement in American history, which was essentially religion forcing its way into government. Some groups thought it was highly immoral to drink and wanted to ban everyone from having alcohol, for the greater good. Problems with drunkenness, people doing bad things when drunk, health, etc. It went so far as to becoming an amendment in the Constitution, but was later repealed.
If you take the stand of legislating or monitoring something that has the potential to be a bad thing (e.g. firearms/weapons, alcohol, drugs, etc.), then where do you draw the line of what is and isn't "bad" and what should or shouldn't be monitored? And how do you make that legal distinction?

Also, maybe some nice mod like Blaster or Munan will move these posts to the soap box/debate section.
_________________
"Yeast devil! Back to the oven that baked you!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Munan
Moderator


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 3232
Location: Living on my own

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Done. Because I'm like that. Nice.

I still don't see the valdity of the comparison between alcohol and drugs and guns. It's a totally different thing.

The one is a tool/weapon. The other is a toxicant.

Alcohol and drugs might cause you to want to kill someone. A gun enables you to do so.

It's a whole different thing. They don't fall in the same categories and therefore one should not be used to diffuse discussions about the other, imho.

Mind you, I just say that for logic's sake, not for taking a stand in this discussion. As far as gun control goes, I think that since high school shootings seem to be becoming somewhat popular these days and it's spreading across the borders, restriction might be a wise thing for a while. That's not a principal stand, but a pragmatic. Principally, my gut reaction is: what the hell do you want something designed specifically to harm or kill other people with for?! As a nice person (see above) I just can't understand that. But to each his own.

Right now, I'm happy that I live in a country where it is extremely difficult to purchase a gun. I'm convinced there's probably a (potential) weirdo like the guy in Finland, being inspired by the shootings in USA and not taking his medicine, sitting somewhere here in the Netherlands and I think it's a good thing he won't be able to get a gun easily.
_________________
The Justified Ancient of Mu Mu
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ipsa



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 1631
Location: Wherever God takes me.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Munan wrote:
I still don't see the valdity of the comparison between alcohol and drugs and guns. It's a totally different thing.

I was mainly going for how someone or a group of people can decide what can and cannot be allowed for a society and how to enforce it.

If, for logic's sake, we take out drugs and alcohol, cars and planes kill people and they're tools which can also be used as weapons.

edit: Thanks for moving it!
edit 2: Upon further reflection, I still think that alcohol and drugs are still decent comparisons since they are things that, like guns, have been legislated at least to some degree but are widely abused.
_________________
"Yeast devil! Back to the oven that baked you!"


Last edited by Ipsa on Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Munan
Moderator


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 3232
Location: Living on my own

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ipsa wrote:
If, for logic's sake, we take out drugs and alcohol, cars and planes kill people and they're tools which can also be used as weapons.



So are pens. But all these are not specifically designed to kill or harm and for disturbed guys like these, they do not have the same aura which makes guns so attractive, nor are they as effective (though potentially, cars probably are). Come on, I suppose you've read Aristoteles, you know how to define categories.

And planes are not as easy to use to kill people as they once were, in the olden days.

Again, I find myself wondering: why would you want to own a weapon? Why would you want to own something that is designed to harm others, even if only for sport?

True, I own a dagger myself, but it is only an ornamental Kris - it would be pretty hard to really use that and if it weren't, I'd probably wouldn't want to have it.
_________________
The Justified Ancient of Mu Mu
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Aurelyn
Moderator


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 3578
Location: Aw Hell No!

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As mentioned above, it all boils down to the ease with which you can kill someone. Bows and crossbows, and to a lesser extent, hunting rifles, require a deal of training and skill to use effectively, they're pretty slow (relatively) to reload, and, most importantly, they're difficult to conceal. Same goes for swords (minus the reload, of course), and it's much harder to kill someone with a concealable edged weapon like a knife. It's the smaller, concealable firearms that are the real problem, because, as is being constantly demonstrated, any old numty can use them to kill a lot of people in a short space of time with no warning.

Whatever about justifying shotgun or rifle ownership with hunting, the only reason to own a handgun, is, as I mentioned above, to hurt another human being (unless you live in an area with a wild boar problem, I guess). Civilians have no reason to carry them, and therefore shouldn't be able to.
_________________
Da Fro-mastah of da aLp Forums!

Master Chainsaw wrote:
Aurelyn becomes enraged by imbecilic displays of illiteracy, as is his wont.


Simon_Says wrote:
Sal would know. He stole many jobs from guys named Shaun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cfos



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 2901
Location: everyday I'm hustlin'

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edit: To address Aurelyn: Being able to shoot accurately also takes a great deal of practice. The running joke at many ranges when a noob picks up a gun is you don't mind being the person they aim at -- you just don't want to be the person standing next to them.

To address Simon: The second ammendment of the Bill of Rights allows Americans to have (and hold) guns and I seriously doubt there will ever be enough support for it to be repealed. I think you may be missing the reason that I introduced bows and swords. I said that to directly address Aurelyn's comments about a handgun is a tool to kill something you are-- well, what about a bow? You can't really hammer nails or paint the garage with a bow. The point is that if you accept Aurelyn's argument, then there really isn't a purpose for having a bow or a sword and the point that it is less likely or "harder" to kill someone with these instruments of death due to concealment issues, that is missing the point.

To address Aramor: [sarcasm] We all realize that you are pro alcohol due to the amount of tail that winds up in your bed and you are only picking on sugar and sugary foods because a Krispy Kreme hasn't gotten a chick to take off her clothes for you [/sarcasm]. But seriously, if you want an argument against that, I would say that having sugar in your diet does not adversely contribute to another persons' death. Drinking may lead to someone elses death due to any number of causes (e.g. drunk driving). Likewise, second-hand smoke can do the same for someone who is merely in the vicinity. Point me where a like number of death result from you example.

For my darling Sal: I am for personal freedoms and, yes, I am a gun owner. I enjoy target shooting or shooting trap. Neither involves killing anything and I don't hunt or fish and don't have much desire for either. I do have a CCP, but don't carry --rather, I have the permit to ease my drive to and from a range should I ever be pulled over for something and the officer finds that there aren't "2 locks" separating gun from ammo. However, I am for a more strict form of screening and would vote for improving the current system. As an example, I am for the regulation that doesn't allow private individuals to buy automatic weapons or silencers (I do have to admit, if I had the $9k at the time, I would have been tempted to add an uzi to my collection; of course, this is something that I can live without and still be quite happy). I don't necessarily agree with Simon's body-armor availability program. Here, in the states, it is accessible although very expensive. I would also restrict access to this as much as guns because the career gang-banger likely would be the one wearing it, not the guy who has his home invaded.

Munan: I understand your argument, I just don't agree with it. In my view, alcohol is a tool to get drunk -- just observe your students. What is the redeeming point of drinking for the young kids? Are they trying to improve their heart? Or are they trying to provide an socially acceptable excuse for behavior they wouldn't act out upon when sober? Likewise, many drunk people don't need a gun when they want to commit violence for they still have their hands, chairs and whatever else is in the room. Regarding your opinion that planes being used to kill people as being the "olden days"... what is "olden"... 6 years ago?

To the general publica: Relative to the assumptions that tragedies such as school killings would be non-existant with the absence of guns... not sure I buy this. The teasing, ridicule, etc would still be there and while I haven't conducted a longitudinal study, my guess is that these people that commit such acts would likely find another avenue whether it be rape or serial killing, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. perhaps at another age. Just a theory.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simon_Says



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 6823
Location: Being generally opposing.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sal wrote:
i assure you, i believe in the freedom of individual too. but fuck that, i'm willing to accept being supervised and controlled as long as it serves a purpose of ensuring greater public safety.
Actually, that's the crux of the biscuit. Individual freedom and public safety. However, I view the possession of a gun to be a right, not a freedom. A right that one must earn and not betray.

And this is what I was trying to achieve with what I wrote. I didn't say people shouldn't have guns, just that they shouldn't be given to people who obviously shouldn't have them. And the definitions are very simple: anyone who passes a psych test without problem, has no recent history of criminal activity or criminal associates. And although I do see how the whole 'state storage' plan would be problem, the underlying idea I think is undeniable: require some sort of 'login' in order to use the weapon. Such a thing wouldn't be too difficult to implement, 'grip-keys' are already in development (the gun will only function for a specific set of user's grips on the weapon), and it wouldn't be too hard to devise a little radio or something that will alert and/or set off security systems in specific locales, such as schools.

Ipsa wrote:
I believe that although many people on an individual basis are competent, it changes when you have a large group of people. Take for example, the prohibition movement in American history, which was essentially religion forcing its way into government. Some groups thought it was highly immoral to drink and wanted to ban everyone from having alcohol, for the greater good. Problems with drunkenness, people doing bad things when drunk, health, etc. It went so far as to becoming an amendment in the Constitution, but was later repealed.
If you take the stand of legislating or monitoring something that has the potential to be a bad thing (e.g. firearms/weapons, alcohol, drugs, etc.), then where do you draw the line of what is and isn't "bad" and what should or shouldn't be monitored? And how do you make that legal distinction?
Easy, public referendum. That's the basis of democracy: the collective judgment of the public is more valid than the judgment of the individual.

Munan wrote:
Again, I find myself wondering: why would you want to own a weapon? Why would you want to own something that is designed to harm others, even if only for sport?
True, I own a dagger myself, but it is only an ornamental Kris - it would be pretty hard to really use that and if it weren't, I'd probably wouldn't want to have it.
Quite simple: It's a power symbol. The power to kill with just a twitch of a finger. It makes some people feel safe, some feel superior, some feel awed, etc.

cfos wrote:
Edit: To address Aurelyn: Being able to shoot accurately also takes a great deal of practice. The running joke at many ranges when a noob picks up a gun is you don't mind being the person they aim at -- you just don't want to be the person standing next to them.
The point of a typical school shooting is to just take down as many as you can and terrify whoever's left. You don't need accuracy for that. I'm guessing Auvinen was actually shooting all over the place, and didn't just use up 8 bullets.

cfos wrote:
To address Simon: The second ammendment of the Bill of Rights allows Americans to have (and hold) guns and I seriously doubt there will ever be enough support for it to be repealed. I think you may be missing the reason that I introduced bows and swords. I said that to directly address Aurelyn's comments about a handgun is a tool to kill something you are-- well, what about a bow? You can't really hammer nails or paint the garage with a bow. The point is that if you accept Aurelyn's argument, then there really isn't a purpose for having a bow or a sword and the point that it is less likely or "harder" to kill someone with these instruments of death due to concealment issues, that is missing the point.
True enough. Functional bows and swords might as well be controlled as guns are. They're killing tools as well.

cfos wrote:
I don't necessarily agree with Simon's body-armor availability program. Here, in the states, it is accessible although very expensive. I would also restrict access to this as much as guns because the career gang-banger likely would be the one wearing it, not the guy who has his home invaded.
True, again. I still think riot shields in schools are a good idea.

cfos wrote:
To the general publica: Relative to the assumptions that tragedies such as school killings would be non-existant with the absence of guns... not sure I buy this. The teasing, ridicule, etc would still be there and while I haven't conducted a longitudinal study, my guess is that these people that commit such acts would likely find another avenue whether it be rape or serial killing, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. perhaps at another age. Just a theory.
We never said anything about school killings, only school shootings. And as for redirecting violent urges, I don't believe that 'criminals' (for lack of a better word at the moment) redirect their intentions in a different action when their first choices are unavailable. It's addicts that do that.

Also, Munan, it's knives, not knifes. Stupid, I know.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Ipsa



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 1631
Location: Wherever God takes me.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Munan wrote:
Come on, I suppose you've read Aristoteles, you know how to define categories.

Just because I study classics doesn't mean I remember any philosophy I've had to read. Razz

Simon_Says wrote:
However, I view the possession of a gun to be a right, not a freedom. A right that one must earn and not betray.

That's a part of the problem. There are people who have been able to get guns and they view right of ownership and freedom of ownership as pretty much the same thing. If it is something that they are accustomed to having, then it will be very difficult to take it away from them.

Simon_Says wrote:
Easy, public referendum. That's the basis of democracy: the collective judgment of the public is more valid than the judgment of the individual.

The collective judgment is not more valid than individual judgment. If at a public referendum the final vote only passed because 58% voted yes to whatever, are the 42% who voted no to be pushed away so easily? Or even if it was a two-thirds approval, it is still a sizable portion of the population that is effectively ignored. The people are more easily swayed into voting one way than is one person (there's a passage in Herodotus about this, so it's not a new view). All sorts of stuff gets passed out of fear, like all of the travel regulations that are now in place. Something intended for good, but is really mostly an inconvenience.

If school shootings hadn't happened, would you have the same thoughts about gun control? Personally, I'm more concerned about the guy standing on the street corner looking to rob someone and his having a weapon than a kid who might flip out. But maybe that's because it's a more likely situation and I live outside of Philly, which has a pretty high homicide rate right now.
_________________
"Yeast devil! Back to the oven that baked you!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Alien Loves Predator Forum Index -> The Soap Box All times are GMT - 5 Hours
    page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group