RE: Gun Control And Tragedy

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Gun Control And Tragedy

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/19/2007 9:38:47 PM

popeye1250

Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

Sinergy ---

I agree that Cho's problems were deeper than "methodology," but I also think his "methodology" -- i.e., guns -- enabled him to kill many more people than he probably would have otherwise.

DC

Not really. If it was "body count" he was after just rent a jeep or other big SUV or pick up truck and wait till classes change and start driving.
As big as that campus is he could have killed hundreds.

(in reply to dcnovice)

Profile

Post #: 261

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/19/2007 9:40:32 PM

BOUNTYHUNTER

Posts: 9259
Joined: 2/5/2004
Status: offline

The tight to bear arms are exclude in certain situation IE plans schools and most business's,there the line is drawn clearly,I have a concealed weapons permit and I ship my short gun in baggage when I travel,The original intent was to allow the militia to keep and bear arms.then some folk used they Gun to put food on the table..IT would take a Hugh effort for the left to get a change in the law...DIANE and I strap them on where ever we go and with my employment a glock is worn most of the day...I now worry about the copy cat stuff that will occur in the after math of the VT shootings..Lets hope the we can get a handle on this junk...bounty

_____________________________

US going to hell in a hand basket/

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Profile

Post #: 262

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/19/2007 9:44:05 PM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

All right, when people claim to believe that air flight would be safer if passengers were allowed to bring firearms on board, I'd say the conversation has reached the point of no return. Something tells me you don't truly believe that, and you just can't think a way out of the dead end that your ideology has now led you into--but, really, whether you do or don't, there's not much point in taking this further.

Have fun, guys.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

Also, according to your logic, people would be safer on airplanes if they could freely bring their firearms on board. That way, if anyone tries to hijack the plane, everyone else could just whip out their Glocks and blow him away. Do you really believe that? And if you don't, then why do you support gun control on airplanes if you don't support it in everyday society?

Didn't see this.

If people were known to be armed, hijackers wouldn't attempt it. They'll ALWAYS go for the softest target.

By every individual being armed, THERE ARE NO SOFT TARGETS.

< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 4/19/2007 9:45:37 PM >

(in reply to farglebargle)

Profile

Post #: 263

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/19/2007 10:29:21 PM

SEVADom

Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

It would probably lead to explosive decompression and cause the plane to crash anyway but that's beside the point.

Actually, the explosive decompression thing (caused by handgun fire) is a myth propagated by Hollywood. The size holes that could be caused by handgun ammo (and yes, they definitely would create holes if they hit the fuselage) would cause air leaks. Scary screechy-sounding ones that can, over time, let enough air out to cause hypoxia (for passengers who can't/don't do the oxygen bag thing). But if the pilot dove to about 10,000 feet (which he should do anyway if his cabin pressure gauge shows a steady or sudden unexplained decrease for this very reason), no-one should die of hypoxia. And no-one would get sucked out a hole.

It would take a several foot across hole created all at once (say, with a bomb) to cause explosive decompression. And even then, depending on where in the aircraft it happened, the aircraft would have some chance of landing. (I imagine a bad place, for example, would be at a wing attachment point!) However, in this case there's a good chance that some of the passengers would die in the process--because with a big hole, those right next to it could be sucked out. (And of course, it was a bomb ...) But such a sucking would last only a split second, so it would (by itself) not endanger those more than a few feet away. So, let's not allow bombs on aircraft. Oh, wait ...

There's a good, non-sensational article on the subject here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabin_pressurization

So I vote to allow ccw holders to carry on planes. Were that to happen, and become known, I suspect the incidence of hijackings on American aircraft would decrease to near zero. (I'd feel safer, whether I was carrying or not.)

The incidence of hijackings of American aircraft is already quite low now, since passengers and crew no longer follow the "wait 'em out and we'll all be fine" approach--because it doesn't work with the guys most likely to try it. And, if perchance a bad guy does get control of a commercial aircraft, there's a fair chance that some government will conclude that the risk of its being used as a projectile is too great and shoot it down. Now, someone says "hijack" on an aircraft and everyone within earshot is all over them like white on rice. It's really difficult to successfully hijack an American aircraft these days. It doesn't happen much. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_hijacking

(in reply to lockedaway)

Profile

Post #: 264

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 12:07:58 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

The fundamental right is self defense from both government and crime.
The right to self defense is long standing in Common Law.
Courts have ruled many times that the State does not have an obligation to protect you or your property as an individual.
That responsibility is your own.

You are awaken in the night by a criminal in your home, they are comming down the hallway headed towards your childs room, police response time is 10 minutes. You want a gun at that moment? Or would you rather risk it unarmed?

If I was a criminal I wouldn't be heading towards a child's room I would be seeking to eliminate the adults first but these hypothetical scenarios are beside the point, just about all murders in domestic situations are perpetrated by people known to the victims.

The right to self defence is long standing in common law, we have it in Britain but excess violence in self defence is also a crime and would in days gone by put that person outside the law, hence 'outlaw'.

If the State has no duty to protect its citizens and apply justice then what is the point of the State? Is the State there just to impose an economic system on its citizens? If that is so then what is morally wrong with people rejecting that imposition of an economic system they might see weighted against them and applying their own economics at the point of a gun since the gun is also there to protect the citizen from the State.

Hmm Isn't the US state in Iraq to protect its citizens from terrorism and why is it if the State has no duty of protection or is it to protect the State's economic interests from terrorism?

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Archer)

Profile

Post #: 265

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 12:13:02 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Where I live, there is currently a trial going on of a teen that beat his parents to death with a baseball bat. This got no press. Now had there been a gun in the house and kid used that instead...the story would be splashed all over the papers because there is this strange belief that gun crime is so much more violent and destructive.

I think that says more about the American media than adding anything significant to the debate. Violent crime happens and much violent crime is domestic but the chance of being killed by a stranger are greatly enhanced by having guns in society.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to cyberdude611)

Profile

Post #: 266

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 12:56:52 AM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Where I live, there is currently a trial going on of a teen that beat his parents to death with a baseball bat. This got no press. Now had there been a gun in the house and kid used that instead...the story would be splashed all over the papers because there is this strange belief that gun crime is so much more violent and destructive.

I think that says more about the American media than adding anything significant to the debate. Violent crime happens and much violent crime is domestic but the chance of being killed by a stranger are greatly enhanced by having guns in society.

Actually, his point has had the same if not more relevance than many posts on this thread, including some of my own. The American media and the activity of the legislature often coincide and the two together often act as a mirror of the sheeple's ignorant sensibilities.

Minority criminals shoot anybody but a cop and it's swept under the rug. A citizen fires back and it makes a 15 second piece on local news.

One disgruntled employee goes into his workplace and it's potentially covered nation wide, even if there are fewer than 3 victims. Add an assault rifle and it is guaranteed to be in the news.

It is about what sells... what glues the viewer to the TV. They have it down to a formula now

- Pitbull attack
- Assault rifle
- Soldier misconduct (American or British only)
- Celebrity dirt

The same seems to apply with the law and politics these days, particularly with respect to this issue. Sadly, I'm on the other thread explaining how the law works (in theory) requiring a reason to pass a regulation (limiting freedom) rather than an arbitrary excercise of authority, when the law (in practice) is figure out what will make the idiots think we are acting in accordance with their best interest and pass legislation accordingly.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 267

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 1:43:07 AM

cyberdude611

Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

The fundamental right is self defense from both government and crime.
The right to self defense is long standing in Common Law.
Courts have ruled many times that the State does not have an obligation to protect you or your property as an individual.
That responsibility is your own.

You are awaken in the night by a criminal in your home, they are comming down the hallway headed towards your childs room, police response time is 10 minutes. You want a gun at that moment? Or would you rather risk it unarmed?

If I was a criminal I wouldn't be heading towards a child's room I would be seeking to eliminate the adults first but these hypothetical scenarios are beside the point, just about all murders in domestic situations are perpetrated by people known to the victims.

The right to self defence is long standing in common law, we have it in Britain but excess violence in self defence is also a crime and would in days gone by put that person outside the law, hence 'outlaw'.

If the State has no duty to protect its citizens and apply justice then what is the point of the State? Is the State there just to impose an economic system on its citizens? If that is so then what is morally wrong with people rejecting that imposition of an economic system they might see weighted against them and applying their own economics at the point of a gun since the gun is also there to protect the citizen from the State.

Hmm Isn't the US state in Iraq to protect its citizens from terrorism and why is it if the State has no duty of protection or is it to protect the State's economic interests from terrorism?

The state has a right to protect the citizens, but sometimes (actually many times) the state isnt able to. It can take police 15-30 minutes to respond to an emergency call. If someone is breaking into my house, who is going to protect my family since police are the only ones allowed to have a gun?

The whole anti-gun philosophy just doesn't work. The state can't do everything for you. In the time it takes for police to get there, you are on your own. And the burgler has a huge advantage. Homeowners owning a gun evens the playing field. In fact, there is a city in the state of Georgia that has made it mandatory for every household to own a gun. Since the law was passed, burglaries and theft have plummitted. And the homicide rate did NOT increase.

Even going one step further...what if you live in an area prone to natural disasters? Say a major hurricane for instance. If you get a bad one that knocks out power, phones, and emergency services are overwhelmed... you will be on your own for sometimes a number of days. You have to have some sort of back-up for self-defense.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 268

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 3:49:08 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Even going one step further...what if you live in an area prone to natural disasters? Say a major hurricane for instance. If you get a bad one that knocks out power, phones, and emergency services are overwhelmed... you will be on your own for sometimes a number of days. You have to have some sort of back-up for self-defense.

I think there has been one thing made abundantly clear by many pro-gun Americans, they are paranoid. This preoccupation of 'what if' this happens or that happens goes beyond any rational and sensible consideration. They must be looking over their shoulders most of the time, they must viewing their neighbours with suspicion and any stranger they happen to meet they must be wondering as to what mischief they are planning. How can people live with what must be a constant suspicion that everyone they interact with or anyone just out of vision must plotting against them. Either that or they are stretching reality to fit in with their desire to possess and play with guns. I've lived in supposed questionable inner city areas most of my life because I find them much more stimulating areas than suburbia but I've never had a constant nagging fear that I need to be armed to protect myself. I just don't think the vast majority of people I meet are planning to do me down and even if they were, I'm not going to ruin my life by being constantly paranoid.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 4/20/2007 3:52:00 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to cyberdude611)

Profile

Post #: 269

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 6:25:15 AM

stef

Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

I think there has been one thing made abundantly clear by many pro-gun Americans, they are paranoid.

I think the only thing that's abundantly clear here is you cannot stop yourself from bashing anyone with whom you share a difference of opinion.

quote:

I'm not going to ruin my life by being constantly paranoid.

No, you're going to ruin it by being bitter and alone. Yes, that's so much better.

~stef

_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 270

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 6:33:31 AM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

Quite. For once I agree with the warped woman.

Presumably the cause of all this bitterness is a deep hurt?

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 271

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 6:47:21 AM

Aileen68

Posts: 6091
Joined: 8/2/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Even going one step further...what if you live in an area prone to natural disasters? Say a major hurricane for instance. If you get a bad one that knocks out power, phones, and emergency services are overwhelmed... you will be on your own for sometimes a number of days. You have to have some sort of back-up for self-defense.

I think there has been one thing made abundantly clear by many pro-gun Americans, they are paranoid. This preoccupation of 'what if' this happens or that happens goes beyond any rational and sensible consideration. They must be looking over their shoulders most of the time, they must viewing their neighbours with suspicion and any stranger they happen to meet they must be wondering as to what mischief they are planning. How can people live with what must be a constant suspicion that everyone they interact with or anyone just out of vision must plotting against them. Either that or they are stretching reality to fit in with their desire to possess and play with guns. I've lived in supposed questionable inner city areas most of my life because I find them much more stimulating areas than suburbia but I've never had a constant nagging fear that I need to be armed to protect myself. I just don't think the vast majority of people I meet are planning to do me down and even if they were, I'm not going to ruin my life by being constantly paranoid.

That's sad that you think that gun owners sit around all day wondering and fretting about all around them. I have a lot of guns in my home. I'm not paranoid in the least. In fact, just the opposite. I'm quite comfortable knowing that I have a better chance of protecting myself and my family from an intruder or an animal. I live in a rural area without a police force. We rely on the state police and their response time is fifteen minutes at a minimum due to the area they cover. A lot can happen in fifteen minutes.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 272

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 7:21:17 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

I'm not going to ruin my life by being constantly paranoid.

No, you're going to ruin it by being bitter and alone. Yes, that's so much better.

~stef

I really don't think so but you go ahead and think it. Little thoughts like that obviously make you day.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 273

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 7:22:24 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen68

That's sad that you think that gun owners sit around all day wondering and fretting about all around them. I have a lot of guns in my home. I'm not paranoid in the least. In fact, just the opposite. I'm quite comfortable knowing that I have a better chance of protecting myself and my family from an intruder or an animal. I live in a rural area without a police force. We rely on the state police and their response time is fifteen minutes at a minimum due to the area they cover. A lot can happen in fifteen minutes.

There must be an awful lot of intruders in America for people to be so concerned about them.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Aileen68)

Profile

Post #: 274

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 7:26:46 AM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Even going one step further...what if you live in an area prone to natural disasters? Say a major hurricane for instance. If you get a bad one that knocks out power, phones, and emergency services are overwhelmed... you will be on your own for sometimes a number of days. You have to have some sort of back-up for self-defense.

I think there has been one thing made abundantly clear by many pro-gun Americans, they are paranoid. This preoccupation of 'what if' this happens or that happens goes beyond any rational and sensible consideration. They must be looking over their shoulders most of the time, they must viewing their neighbours with suspicion and any stranger they happen to meet they must be wondering as to what mischief they are planning. How can people live with what must be a constant suspicion that everyone they interact with or anyone just out of vision must plotting against them. Either that or they are stretching reality to fit in with their desire to possess and play with guns. I've lived in supposed questionable inner city areas most of my life because I find them much more stimulating areas than suburbia but I've never had a constant nagging fear that I need to be armed to protect myself. I just don't think the vast majority of people I meet are planning to do me down and even if they were, I'm not going to ruin my life by being constantly paranoid.

I am glad to hear how brave wonderful and fearless you are, my what a free spirit! I do hope that you aren't so hypocritical that you have made such statements yet have purchased insurance or any other preparedness items such as an "auto survival kit", and if you have not I hope you maintain your consistency and have judged those who have in the same light.

You know it's funny... For all this paranoia running around, I have actually needed both my carried handgun (which was used against a robber) and my assault rifles (you guessed it... the hurricane) all within the past few years. So I ask you... what is wrong with spending money on a tool that has the potential to save your life and the lives of those around you as well as your property? Have you ever heard the adage, "it's better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it?" I can tell you, there is no feeling more satisfying than hearing the sheepish tone on the cell phone of the smug assholes who made fun of you for collecting guns as they humbly ask if you happen to have one extra lying around during such a disaster where such "pararnoia" materialized into concrete reality. It's nice to know that when I take my charge downtown to "crack row" at 4am to catch the bus back to New Orleans that I am equipped to handle an encounter with a drug dealer or a demented bum in an area where nobody is around to hear you scream or see you die (at least, not for another 2.5 hours).

So maybe I have this "charmed" life that is an anomally compared to the (prefferably) tame and dull lives everybody else leads, but I think I have more than earned a pass from the appellation "paranoid" seeing how that term describes one who suffers from "unreasonable" fear, and I have had more than my share of nightmarish reality. And outside of all that... we have firearms above all because we can... because it is a great way of enjoying a weekend afternoon and aleviating some stress, and because woman get so worked up seeing and feeling guns that they want to fuck your leg (literally)... at least some of the ones I know and have fun with. So have fun with your insurance-free, innocent, pastoral existance. I'm sure it's pure Utopia for you and all, but unfortunately it's just not my reality.

< Message edited by Pulpsmack -- 4/20/2007 7:30:40 AM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 275

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 7:30:54 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

You paint a wonderful picture of America.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Pulpsmack)

Profile

Post #: 276

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 7:44:28 AM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
I really don't think so but you go ahead and think it. Little thoughts like that obviously make you day.

I stand corrected. So no deep hurt. For a moment I thought that the warped woman perhaps had a correct insight...

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 277

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 8:06:47 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
I really don't think so but you go ahead and think it. Little thoughts like that obviously make you day.

I stand corrected. So no deep hurt. For a moment I thought that the warped woman perhaps had a correct insight...

Nah. I'm stuck here making loathesome CAD drawings while the sun is shining outside. CM is a periodical distraction. I really should just pack up for the day and go and sit outside a bar in the sun for an hour.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Rule)

Profile

Post #: 278

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 8:23:16 AM

cloudboy

Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

He hasn't "bashed" anyone. He's made rational argument after rational argument, and he's never gone ab hominem.

Gun ownership and saftey are tenuously connected for most people, especially homeowners. I'm with MC, given the statistics on homicides, and the increased chance of violence in a home with a gun in it, its difficult to see the saftey value in having one.

The old "evil burglar in the middle of the night scenario" doesn't really move us.

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 279

RE: Gun Control And Tragedy - 4/20/2007 8:45:37 AM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen68

That's sad that you think that gun owners sit around all day wondering and fretting about all around them. I have a lot of guns in my home. I'm not paranoid in the least. In fact, just the opposite. I'm quite comfortable knowing that I have a better chance of protecting myself and my family from an intruder or an animal. I live in a rural area without a police force. We rely on the state police and their response time is fifteen minutes at a minimum due to the area they cover. A lot can happen in fifteen minutes.

There must be an awful lot of intruders in America for people to be so concerned about them.

I have never worried about that in my life. I lived bordering the Sierra National Forest growing up... all our neighbors had guns. We had wild animals... never felt afraid of the animals either.

There are places I have felt afraid, thankfully I have never had to live in one of those places.

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 280