RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 9:46:21 AM)

Mike, what type(s) of law do you believe would have prevented many of the recent mass murders?  It's already against the law for convicted felons, folks adjudicated mentally defective, folks with restraining orders in effect, and anyone convicted of domestic violence to buy a gun.  I don't think any of the recent shooters had criminal records or had been involuntarily sent to a mental health facility. 

Since you've already stated that you don't favor a gun ban; what exactly do you want?  How will any new law put a stop to these kinds of incidents? 



popeye1250 -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 9:46:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Is the need to register a weapon a loss of liberty worth dying over.
Is the need to have a background check(presupposing you can pass one)a  loss of liberty worth dying for.
Even the most ardent gun rights defenders would not take that position.Though they resist these things they rally there resistance around the slipper slope theory.Once the gov't knows about my weapons they can take my weapons....and I need my weapons to resist the gov't...is the usual refrain.
Even that is silly,if the U.S. gov't were ,with the support of the U.S. armed froces want to take private weapons...who is going to stop them.


Mike, who's going to stop them? Oh, I dunno, maybe 295 million Americans?
That's the very reason for the second amendment to stop a *tyranical government.*
Thomas Jefferson had a good bit to say about that.
The Bill of Rights and the Amendments to the Constitution are not a shopping list where we get to pick and choose which ones we like and discard the rest.
Would you be in favor of doing away with the first amendment?



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 9:57:27 AM)

Slaveboyforyou...you might want to check out Cho's mental health history before you hang your hat on that statement.
To answer your question please see the Columbine thread,page 4(I can't do the links thing very well,I apologise for that)That Dammed Panda articulated quite nicely some common sense laws that might be useful....and didn't sound like they were fashioned by the NRA.Closing the damm loophole would be an excellent start,reinstating the assualt weapon ban another move in the right direction...a federal data base of all weapons and their markings seems reasonable...as I said the Panda did an excellent job of fashioning a common sense approach to the issue.Would it make everyone happy,no....the guns rights people would find most of these too stringent....the anti gun folks would find it too loose.In other words good common sense....so good it pisses off both sides
The laws in place right now have been either written by, or eviscerated by lobbyists.Much like having the pharmecutical Co.'s writing the Medicaide Prescription plan....it just doesn't work when lobbiest fashion our laws.



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:01:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Is the need to register a weapon a loss of liberty worth dying over.
Is the need to have a background check(presupposing you can pass one)a  loss of liberty worth dying for.
Even the most ardent gun rights defenders would not take that position.Though they resist these things they rally there resistance around the slipper slope theory.Once the gov't knows about my weapons they can take my weapons....and I need my weapons to resist the gov't...is the usual refrain.
Even that is silly,if the U.S. gov't were ,with the support of the U.S. armed froces want to take private weapons...who is going to stop them.


Mike, who's going to stop them? Oh, I dunno, maybe 295 million Americans?
That's the very reason for the second amendment to stop a *tyranical government.*
Thomas Jefferson had a good bit to say about that.
The Bill of Rights and the Amendments to the Constitution are not a shopping list where we get to pick and choose which ones we like and discard the rest.
Would you be in favor of doing away with the first amendment?

You know Popeye that ship has passed....the days when a well armed militia could rise up in defiance of the federal gov't is just a red herring used by gun lobbiest's
Not that I beleive the U.S. military would ever fire on U.S.citizens in a populist revolt...apparently you do beleive this could come to pass.I hope you realise the U.S Armed Forces are made up of the kids next door....do you really see a need for private armories to defend against such an eventuality?



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:04:21 AM)

Where is the outcry against all thes gun questions that are being fired at me....heh?
Isn't this the thread where we are supposed to ignore guns?
Whose driving this bus? Who is derailing it?
Are people having a difficult time restricting their comments to the narroww parameters set by the OP?
Heavens to murcatroy,what shall we do?



popeye1250 -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:12:32 AM)

You know Mike, I thought you were a Liberal. After reading this post it's starting to sound like you're a leftist.
Do you consider President Obama to be "too conservative?"



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:20:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

You know Mike, I thought you were a Liberal. After reading this post it's starting to sound like you're a leftist.
Do you consider President Obama to be "too conservative?"
I am neither a "liberal" nor a 'leftist" popeye......but I am curious what has driven you to such a "radical" beleif.
Was it my assertion that American sons and daughters would never enter into armed conflict against their fellow citizens....Do you envision an American Military responce to a peacful assembley of citizens.What ideological stripe would you ascribe to someone who harbored such beleifs?
I know what I would take such a person to be .....'right-wing lunatic fringe" works for me.



philosophy -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:36:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

If I might interject here, I have to wonder who is really being intellectually dishonest.

We have a thread here about gun violence claiming that guns have nothing to do with the violence.



...er......read the thread title. It's mass violence under discussion here, not gun violence exclusively. So, bombers are part of the equation here. Or, say, the Sarin gas attack on the japanese subway. While we keep being caught up in whether gun control is the answer we veer away fro the deeper subject.

Guns appear to be the weapon of choice in mass killings in the US, however in the UK there have been many more mass killings by bomb than gun. Why does a member of any given society feel the need to kill a large number of their fellow citizens? Is there a pattern we can discern?



rulemylife -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:43:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

If I might interject here, I have to wonder who is really being intellectually dishonest.

We have a thread here about gun violence claiming that guns have nothing to do with the violence.



...er......read the thread title. It's mass violence under discussion here, not gun violence exclusively. So, bombers are part of the equation here. Or, say, the Sarin gas attack on the japanese subway. While we keep being caught up in whether gun control is the answer we veer away fro the deeper subject.



...er... read the first few lines in the OP

Here, I'll help out:

"slvemike's thread on Columbine is the driving force behind this one. Just about every thread on violence and guns devolves into a debate on regulation, registration, limits, something along those lines".



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 10:43:56 AM)

Okay,in the interest of clarity...bombings would seem to have an ideological point,as twisted as that might seem.
After reading a number of your response's Philo,I am driven to ask this question...Did you ever actually read the OP.did you per chance notice the "driving"force behind the OP,did you see his direct mention of "guns and violence"
From what you have posted I suspect the answer to these question is NO



philosophy -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 1:12:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Okay,in the interest of clarity...bombings would seem to have an ideological point,as twisted as that might seem.
After reading a number of your response's Philo,I am driven to ask this question...Did you ever actually read the OP.did you per chance notice the "driving"force behind the OP,did you see his direct mention of "guns and violence"
From what you have posted I suspect the answer to these question is NO


...and the folliowing is also from the OP...

quote:

No gun legislation debate please. Only what you think is driving the violence.



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 1:23:49 PM)

Yeah I saw that Philo,hence the term "intellectual dishonesty".Do you recall me labeling that early on...it is sort of the basis of my whole objection.
Shall I repeat my cigarette analogy....we can discuss lung cancer ,but no mention of cigarettes please.
Do you see the basic futility of that argument,or are you so intent on having a discussion on a "higher" plane....that you are missing the point entirely.I am very disappointed in you Philo...extremely so.



philosophy -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 1:54:22 PM)

So, you berate me for, in your opinion, not following the OP in its entirety while reserving the right to...er...not follow the OP in it's entirety. And you accuse me of intellectual dishonesty?

Right, some straight questions for you.......

Has anyone, ever, committed an act of mass murder not using a gun? Yes or no.
If yes, then should any discussion of the causes of mass murder exclude all methods of murder that aren't guns? Yes or no.
Does focussing exclusively on the means used to commit an act shed any light on the motivations of those who wish to commit an act? Yes or no.

Suicide is a terrible thing. Multiple methods are used to commit the act. Individuals who commit suicide do so for highly personal emotional reasons. Is the best way to treat such people to address those emotional concerns, or to ban the sale of methods used to commit suicide? The former or the latter.

The question in this thread is not how mass murder is committed but why.



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 2:06:55 PM)

And when discussing the recent spate of mass murders in American society you will ,if you are being honest,have to address the issue of GUNS.
Sorry if you feel berated,perhaps avoiding personal attacks and snide comments might help you avoid that in the future....as to your questions
1)yes
2) no...feel free to discuss other methods all you like....I am not a big fan of "limited" discussions,these things tend to go where they will go....understand?
3)No,but since ,as I said I don't like exclusion I will qualify that...Excluding the one major object most of these acts have in common from the conversation...is asinine(and btw an act of intellectual dishonesty)
I won't banter with you about suicide
As for your closing line,it is my contention that the availability of the means makes the act much more prevalent than need be.Ignoring that is again intellectual dishonesty...now if their is some confusion with the definition of that phrase....search for an earlier post of mine I supplied one for your edification.



ModeratorEleven -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 2:16:41 PM)

This is the last time I'll say this, if you want to have another "guns are good/bad" debate, do it in one of the already existing threads.

XI



samboct -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 2:18:48 PM)

"I won't banter with you about suicide"

Actually, Mike that's the problem here!  We ARE discussing suicide, since the people behind the recent mass killings all wind up dead- and that seems to be the plan.  It's an old Heinlein quote- "Your status in hell is determined by the size of your honor guard."  From my perspective, you've certainly made your point about guns- and it's a valid point.  It just doesn't invalidate the reason for this thread and your insistence on it doing so has lead to bathos.  So rather than a possibly constructive and illuminating discussion about the causes of these suicides, we're left to debate the ready availability of the tools used- which is certainly an appropriate separate discussion, but isn't on the topic.

Since we're discussing suicide, a medical analogy may be apt.  You're choosing to focus on the symptoms, and your preferred method of treatment as the only way to treat this illness, while the rest of us are trying to get at the root causes of the illness, to see if perhaps a prophylactic solution presents itself.  We've gotten your suggestion for the amelioration of the symptoms- the point has been made- and beaten totally into bloody submission.  But the rest of us are trying to have a different discussion.

Sam



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 4:48:25 PM)

~FR~

Not sure if it has been brought up, as I am not going to wade through a lot of posts that do not seem to deal with "why".

There have been studies that strongly suggest that overpopulation, meaning population that exceeds resources, can cause extreme destructive behavior in mammals.

http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/2008/jan/07/species_overpopulation/



philosophy -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 5:32:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

There have been studies that strongly suggest that overpopulation, meaning population that exceeds resources, can cause extreme destructive behavior in mammals.


...interesting point. Essentially, it's about access to resources. Overpopulation prevents members of a given population having access to that which they believe they need. Perhaps overpopulation isn't the only way that can happen. In any society, if the gap between rich and poor gets wide enough then a similar effect can happen. This can be prevented in a number of ways. The first is what i'll euphemistically call, 'knowing your place'. Some cultures through history have had societal mechanisms in place that justify such imbalances. The caste system is one. Serfdom another. i believe the US had a revolution about it.
The second system is to reduce the apparent gap between rich and poor. To make the return on hard work more similar, may be another way of putting it. i know, it's dangerously close to socialism.....so perhaps the US isn't ready for that either.
The third is to have a society where everyone feels they have a stake. Where no-one feels unfairly excluded. It's one thing not to be able to afford lobster every night. It's another not to be able to afford medical treatment.



painpup -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 5:46:37 PM)

all good points then You 've the one's who don't Like CHANGE esp if They feel there Liberity is slipping away with said Change



slvemike4u -> RE: Mass killings and underlying reasons (4/13/2009 5:51:07 PM)

Columbine...2 kids from well off families
Wong(binghamton)...maladjusted immigrant who never assimilated to American society,not rich but certainly had access to basic necessities
Cho(Virginia tech) was the son of small business owners,not rich but certainly not lacking for access to basic necessities....
I could go on ,but I think the point is made ,there are other things going on  here than economic deprivation...or even ,as evidenced by the inclusion of the immigrants, something other than being American born



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125