i did a thesis paper for history on outlawing guns...
i agree that guns shouldn't be banned. it's isn't the most idealistic thing, but at least people feel more secure and stuff... plus, it was proven by, well, the research my partner and i had done. :D well, this is for society in general though. i don't know if this would work in schools.
this is such a tragic event. :( it's just horrible.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
i have a feeling ill be editing my post to note everything i either think couldve/shouldve been done, etc.
the right to bear arms- first of all, as someone said, someone could easily kill someone with a knife, shank, lighter, pencil, nailclipper, you name it! a gun is just the easiest and quickest way to kill/hurt people while they are unarmed. it was the idiot that killed and hurt these people; not the gun itself. that gun could easily have been in the hands of a police officer, security guard, hunter (unlikely with a 9mm, but if it were a shotgun, let's say...) it couldve been used wisely.
as for the psycho who decided to do this, i cant wait to hear what his possible motives were (there is supposedly another shooter, reported alive as far as i knew, and im sure the other left evidence that he was planning something, or possibly went postal) personally, if its detected early enouhg, those who are a danger to society (i dont care who they are) should be locked up. the bullshit of letting these people walk the streets because 'they have rights too..."....sorry but no. at the point of brutally harming or killing someone else, you lose your rights.
but that is unlikely and the bleeding liberals wouldnt stand for that.
as for metal detectors: what are the odds of a shooter coming into my school and shooting everyone around? but then again, why should we feel unsafe in college or school? the problem with that is, eventually we will be as extreme as the airports with 'weapons'. as i said before, anything can be used as a weapon, so therefore, our pencils and pens and computers should be taken away as a threat that one whole person in an unlikely group could turn those into something deadly. so its hard to say, whether we should do that or not.
there should be limits to owning a gun, with the way things are going. i never hear about shootings in schools in other countries, so what are we doing wrong? well, like i said, that gun could easily end up in the wrong persons hands, i believe that unless you are using a gun for a designated purpose that is set on papers (hunters owning shotguns, police owning pistols, etc) would be the best way. even keeping a gun for security of your own home, is probably not the smartest idea especially with reports of people accidentally shooting a loved one, or a child finding it and thinking its a toy....i could go on.
again, easily tho, those people (police, etc) could also go nuts. its difficult to say on these things.
my sincere condolences to those families. i have a feeling we'll be talking about this in forensic psych tomorrow....
*also i noticed* how stupid was someone to send and EMAIL to surrounding buildings. who in any state of panic goes "wait! i gotta check my email!" ?
there are cell phones, someone wouldve somehow been aware of what was going on....i dunno its just stupid, it doesnt make sense.
the right to bear arms- first of all, as someone said, someone could easily kill someone with a knife, shank, lighter, pencil, nailclipper, you name it! a gun is just the easiest and quickest way to kill/hurt people while they are unarmed. it was the idiot that killed and hurt these people; not the gun itself. that gun could easily have been in the hands of a police officer, security guard, hunter (unlikely with a 9mm, but if it were a shotgun, let's say...) it couldve been used wisely.
as for the psycho who decided to do this, i cant wait to hear what his possible motives were (there is supposedly another shooter, reported alive as far as i knew, and im sure the other left evidence that he was planning something, or possibly went postal) personally, if its detected early enouhg, those who are a danger to society (i dont care who they are) should be locked up. the bullshit of letting these people walk the streets because 'they have rights too..."....sorry but no. at the point of brutally harming or killing someone else, you lose your rights.
but that is unlikely and the bleeding liberals wouldnt stand for that.
as for metal detectors: what are the odds of a shooter coming into my school and shooting everyone around? but then again, why should we feel unsafe in college or school? the problem with that is, eventually we will be as extreme as the airports with 'weapons'. as i said before, anything can be used as a weapon, so therefore, our pencils and pens and computers should be taken away as a threat that one whole person in an unlikely group could turn those into something deadly. so its hard to say, whether we should do that or not.
there should be limits to owning a gun, with the way things are going. i never hear about shootings in schools in other countries, so what are we doing wrong? well, like i said, that gun could easily end up in the wrong persons hands, i believe that unless you are using a gun for a designated purpose that is set on papers (hunters owning shotguns, police owning pistols, etc) would be the best way. even keeping a gun for security of your own home, is probably not the smartest idea especially with reports of people accidentally shooting a loved one, or a child finding it and thinking its a toy....i could go on.
again, easily tho, those people (police, etc) could also go nuts. its difficult to say on these things.
my sincere condolences to those families. i have a feeling we'll be talking about this in forensic psych tomorrow....
*also i noticed* how stupid was someone to send and EMAIL to surrounding buildings. who in any state of panic goes "wait! i gotta check my email!" ?
there are cell phones, someone wouldve somehow been aware of what was going on....i dunno its just stupid, it doesnt make sense.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The government's responsibility should be limited to protecting our freedoms, not taking them away to shape society in the way it deems fit. It is a gross injustice to prevent someone from living their life the way they want to, if this way of life does not infringe upon the rights of others. Throw out any statistics you like, but this principle should not waver, not ever. Perhaps it is different in Europe, but in the United States, rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness should be (but sadly aren't always) INALIENABLE.[/QUOTE]
Call my opinion absurd... but what you say doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that I can't buy a weapon, doesn't mean that I can't live my life as I want to. I actually believe that Europe is more liberal than America.
[QUOTE]Guns should also be legal because we all have the right to defend ourselves. Those 30+ people that died today could not depend on the government to protect them, but could have easily defended themselves if gun laws were not so stringent.[/QUOTE]
You really believe that it will be a better world when everybody owns a gun to defend their selves? I believe that the world will become one big mess.
[QUOTE]Finally, my arguments are proven. All the various black markets that currently exist, most notably drugs, operate in the same manner. What you mentioned, concerning accidental injury, has nothing to do with this argument at all.[/QUOTE]
Well, I think we can discuss hours but we'll never agree with each other. I just think this way.... no weapons, no need for a weapon to defend yourself.
Call my opinion absurd... but what you say doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that I can't buy a weapon, doesn't mean that I can't live my life as I want to. I actually believe that Europe is more liberal than America.
[QUOTE]Guns should also be legal because we all have the right to defend ourselves. Those 30+ people that died today could not depend on the government to protect them, but could have easily defended themselves if gun laws were not so stringent.[/QUOTE]
You really believe that it will be a better world when everybody owns a gun to defend their selves? I believe that the world will become one big mess.
[QUOTE]Finally, my arguments are proven. All the various black markets that currently exist, most notably drugs, operate in the same manner. What you mentioned, concerning accidental injury, has nothing to do with this argument at all.[/QUOTE]
Well, I think we can discuss hours but we'll never agree with each other. I just think this way.... no weapons, no need for a weapon to defend yourself.
music man.. ur an ignorant moron.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]joxerthecornishpirate wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Kiki2 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Come on just open your eyes! I live in France, guns are forbidden and tragedies like this one never happen!!! We NEVER had 30 (or even 1) students killed in a campus! Isn't it the greatest proof?!
"The right to posess a gun is the right to defend yourself" Yes right... and if nobody had a gun, you woudn't even have to defend yourself!
Instead of saying "everybody should have a gun" why don't you put it the other way? Would he have been able to kill so much persons in just a few minuts if he hadn't be armed? No! Of course not! Because no other weapon is more dangerous and "efficient" than a gun and the fact that everbody has the right to carry one frightens me. I absolutely don't feel safe...on the contrary! Every psycho,every freak has the right to buy a weapon!
Just grow out of it! Men are crazy, don't allow them to have guns! They wrote the Constitution when they still had to defend themselves against Indians but I got news!!!! Old West is over...[/QUOTE]
guns are outlawed here in the UK but that didnt stop a nutter going into a school in dunblane and killing a bunch of kids or the current spate of shootings in south london or the tragedy in Hungerford.
just because it may not of happened in France YET doesnt mean it WONT.
theres an english saying 'those in glass houses should not throw stones'[/QUOTE]
Both the Dunblane and Hungerford murders were committed by persons owning LEGALISED guns! The laws have since been changed. What does that say.
By making guns illegal, in turn means less guns out there, thus reducing the odds of a similar thing happening again. OK, you will never completely remove all guns due to the black market and any person desperate enough to own one will acquire one eventually, but surely making it more difficult saves lives!
I feel these atrocities would not have committed the day the assailants finally 'snapped' if they did not have a perfectly legal fire arm sitting at home.
The recent gangland killings is a different kettle of fish altogether. God knows the solution to that poser.
"The right to posess a gun is the right to defend yourself" Yes right... and if nobody had a gun, you woudn't even have to defend yourself!
Instead of saying "everybody should have a gun" why don't you put it the other way? Would he have been able to kill so much persons in just a few minuts if he hadn't be armed? No! Of course not! Because no other weapon is more dangerous and "efficient" than a gun and the fact that everbody has the right to carry one frightens me. I absolutely don't feel safe...on the contrary! Every psycho,every freak has the right to buy a weapon!
Just grow out of it! Men are crazy, don't allow them to have guns! They wrote the Constitution when they still had to defend themselves against Indians but I got news!!!! Old West is over...[/QUOTE]
guns are outlawed here in the UK but that didnt stop a nutter going into a school in dunblane and killing a bunch of kids or the current spate of shootings in south london or the tragedy in Hungerford.
just because it may not of happened in France YET doesnt mean it WONT.
theres an english saying 'those in glass houses should not throw stones'[/QUOTE]
Both the Dunblane and Hungerford murders were committed by persons owning LEGALISED guns! The laws have since been changed. What does that say.
By making guns illegal, in turn means less guns out there, thus reducing the odds of a similar thing happening again. OK, you will never completely remove all guns due to the black market and any person desperate enough to own one will acquire one eventually, but surely making it more difficult saves lives!
I feel these atrocities would not have committed the day the assailants finally 'snapped' if they did not have a perfectly legal fire arm sitting at home.
The recent gangland killings is a different kettle of fish altogether. God knows the solution to that poser.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]technics wrote: [/QUOTENAME]music man.. ur an ignorant moron.[/QUOTE]
Thanks. You are an objective, prudent, reasonable, and expositionally informative person yourself. I am glad we have such open-minded people as you in the world.
Thanks. You are an objective, prudent, reasonable, and expositionally informative person yourself. I am glad we have such open-minded people as you in the world.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=#CC0066 face="Bradley Hand ITC"> The Mir@cle </font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
"Call my opinion absurd... but what you say doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that I can't buy a weapon, doesn't mean that I can't live my life as I want to. I actually believe that Europe is more liberal than America."
"You really believe that it will be a better world when everybody owns a gun to defend their selves? I believe that the world will become one big mess."
"Well, I think we can discuss hours but we'll never agree with each other. I just think this way.... no weapons, no need for a weapon to defend yourself."[/QUOTE]
Your opinion is certainly not absurd. If we could effectively control the flow of guns, and effectively eliminate them from public ownership, there would hardly be any gun casualties - criminal or accidental. If this were the case, I might actually even lean toward forgoing such a liberty for the common good (and only in extreme cases will I even consider that!)
I'm not entirely sure what the ramifications of a complete lack of gun control laws are - no one really is. We've only seen what has happened in situations of stringent gun control, and while good, results haven't been great.
My main problem is not with eliminating weapons. It's the fact that it's impossible to completely eliminate weapons. If there was a situation where there was absolutely no need - and no possibility for a need - for the common person to be harmed by a firearm, then sign me up. I mean, that would be too fantastic, even for my principles of absolute negative liberty! It would be absurd of ME to deny that.
Like I've said or implied, the "why?" of the gun control argument makes sense to me; it's the "how" that eludes me and everyone else.
"Call my opinion absurd... but what you say doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that I can't buy a weapon, doesn't mean that I can't live my life as I want to. I actually believe that Europe is more liberal than America."
"You really believe that it will be a better world when everybody owns a gun to defend their selves? I believe that the world will become one big mess."
"Well, I think we can discuss hours but we'll never agree with each other. I just think this way.... no weapons, no need for a weapon to defend yourself."[/QUOTE]
Your opinion is certainly not absurd. If we could effectively control the flow of guns, and effectively eliminate them from public ownership, there would hardly be any gun casualties - criminal or accidental. If this were the case, I might actually even lean toward forgoing such a liberty for the common good (and only in extreme cases will I even consider that!)
I'm not entirely sure what the ramifications of a complete lack of gun control laws are - no one really is. We've only seen what has happened in situations of stringent gun control, and while good, results haven't been great.
My main problem is not with eliminating weapons. It's the fact that it's impossible to completely eliminate weapons. If there was a situation where there was absolutely no need - and no possibility for a need - for the common person to be harmed by a firearm, then sign me up. I mean, that would be too fantastic, even for my principles of absolute negative liberty! It would be absurd of ME to deny that.
Like I've said or implied, the "why?" of the gun control argument makes sense to me; it's the "how" that eludes me and everyone else.
I agree with pow wow.
I didn't say that it will prevent every single tragedy. I just said that there are waaaaay less tragedies like this one in countries were guns are illegals. How times did it happen in the USA during the last 10 years (at least 5 shootings that I heard of)??? And now compare to U.K.
It's a fact!
Even if it did happened in Europe sometimes, it's soooo rare.
It's like the example you gave with drugs. Of course there will always be drugs. Is it a reason to legalize it? No because when it's illegal, there are less drugs and less tragedies caused by drugs.
That is soooo logical
Condolences to the families but I wasn't surprised at all when I heard of this shooting.
PS: I just wanted to add that it's nice to have different opinions and to have a conversation like this. Even if I still do not agree with you, at least I understand your opinion.
I didn't say that it will prevent every single tragedy. I just said that there are waaaaay less tragedies like this one in countries were guns are illegals. How times did it happen in the USA during the last 10 years (at least 5 shootings that I heard of)??? And now compare to U.K.
It's a fact!
Even if it did happened in Europe sometimes, it's soooo rare.
It's like the example you gave with drugs. Of course there will always be drugs. Is it a reason to legalize it? No because when it's illegal, there are less drugs and less tragedies caused by drugs.
That is soooo logical
Condolences to the families but I wasn't surprised at all when I heard of this shooting.
PS: I just wanted to add that it's nice to have different opinions and to have a conversation like this. Even if I still do not agree with you, at least I understand your opinion.
What a fucked up country. Maybe they should evacuate some of the Queenzoners + their loved ones, and then throw a bomb on it
Flow of guns in the hands of criminals and nutcases would be worse if there was no gun control. Sure, there is a Second Ammendment that give us the right to defend ourselves, but remember that the Second Ammendment states that we have that right as long is it's based on a "well regulated militia". Therefore, people who wish to have the right to defend themselves by owning a gun must spend long months going through the process of background checking and special training to respond to emergency situations. Now, who is willing who is through all of that?
What we need is a better system to respond to emergency situations like this one. Columbine wouldn't have nearly as bad if the police wouldn't have chosen to wait outside the school while kids were still being shot inside. We need school officials and students to receive information on how to communicate with authorities faster and more effectively (given that we have the technology) in order to avoid tragedies like this one from happening. Special security units like local Police forces should be given special training to respond to situations like this, and not wait for hours and hours until SWAT teams come and put things under control.
The thought of giving the average citizen the right to own a gun "just in case shit happens" is absolutely absurd.
What we need is a better system to respond to emergency situations like this one. Columbine wouldn't have nearly as bad if the police wouldn't have chosen to wait outside the school while kids were still being shot inside. We need school officials and students to receive information on how to communicate with authorities faster and more effectively (given that we have the technology) in order to avoid tragedies like this one from happening. Special security units like local Police forces should be given special training to respond to situations like this, and not wait for hours and hours until SWAT teams come and put things under control.
The thought of giving the average citizen the right to own a gun "just in case shit happens" is absolutely absurd.
Do Americans feel safer if everybody has a gun??? That's pretty hard to believe.
I live in a city with population of 200,000. I don't remember any shooting in the past months except for a drunk guy who fired a couple of shots into his own car. Legalize weapons here and I GUARANTEE there will be at least 10 dead people every month. Bored teenagers or aggressive drunk people simply don't own any weapons - and that is one of the reasons why Europe is safer than USA.
I live in a city with population of 200,000. I don't remember any shooting in the past months except for a drunk guy who fired a couple of shots into his own car. Legalize weapons here and I GUARANTEE there will be at least 10 dead people every month. Bored teenagers or aggressive drunk people simply don't own any weapons - and that is one of the reasons why Europe is safer than USA.
The feeling of safety is derived from the fact that the individual has the ability to defend himself, rather than to depend on the government to defend him. Thirty-two innocent people died yesterday. First, the government took away their right to defend themselves. Then, the government failed to defend them. Doesn't that seem like a problem?
Well, I do understand that it's hard to rollback the current sitaution. There are so many weapons out there, that it might take years to see the result of a stricter gun law. Or they must invent a way to collect the most of them.
But I fully agree with pow wow. You can't take away all weapons. Criminals will always find a way to get weapons, drugs… whatever. But those criminals won't kill us, the 'normal citizens'. Incidents like yesterday are acts of persons who lost their mind on a certain moment because of a certain happening. If that guy didn't owe a gun, it would have been unlikely that he would have killed 30 persons.
But I fully agree with pow wow. You can't take away all weapons. Criminals will always find a way to get weapons, drugs… whatever. But those criminals won't kill us, the 'normal citizens'. Incidents like yesterday are acts of persons who lost their mind on a certain moment because of a certain happening. If that guy didn't owe a gun, it would have been unlikely that he would have killed 30 persons.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The feeling of safety is derived from the fact that the individual has the ability to defend himself, rather than to depend on the government to defend him. Thirty-two innocent people died yesterday. First, the government took away their right to defend themselves. Then, the government failed to defend them. Doesn't that seem like a problem?[/QUOTE]
From those 33 people shot yesterday, how many felt that they should have carried a gun before the incident "just in case"?
Let's see how many relatives of the victims will blame the government for not allowing them to carry guns.
From those 33 people shot yesterday, how many felt that they should have carried a gun before the incident "just in case"?
Let's see how many relatives of the victims will blame the government for not allowing them to carry guns.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
What we need is a better system to respond to emergency situations like this one. Columbine wouldn't have nearly as bad if the police wouldn't have chosen to wait outside the school while kids were still being shot inside. We need school officials and students to receive information on how to communicate with authorities faster and more effectively (given that we have the technology) in order to avoid tragedies like this one from happening. Special security units like local Police forces should be given special training to respond to situations like this, and not wait for hours and hours until SWAT teams come and put things under control.
The thought of giving the average citizen the right to own a gun "just in case shit happens" is absolutely absurd. [/QUOTE]
I agree with this completely. I would think - hope - everyone does.
I also thought this was well said. It’s from a TimesDispatch.com article titled – When will outrage lead to action?
“Of course, the gun lobby will argue that if Tech's students had been armed, lives would have been saved. But do we want to live in a society where we're all toting sidearms in holsters, and our survival depends on our ability to get the drop on someone?
That's not exactly what I'd call evolving as a civilization.
That this bloodshed is occurring at our temples of higher education, where we send our best and brightest to pursue their promise, should shed light on the folly of our comfort and denials.
Violence, and the destruction it wreaks, respects no class. How many Virginia Techs will it take before we learn this lesson?”
What we need is a better system to respond to emergency situations like this one. Columbine wouldn't have nearly as bad if the police wouldn't have chosen to wait outside the school while kids were still being shot inside. We need school officials and students to receive information on how to communicate with authorities faster and more effectively (given that we have the technology) in order to avoid tragedies like this one from happening. Special security units like local Police forces should be given special training to respond to situations like this, and not wait for hours and hours until SWAT teams come and put things under control.
The thought of giving the average citizen the right to own a gun "just in case shit happens" is absolutely absurd. [/QUOTE]
I agree with this completely. I would think - hope - everyone does.
I also thought this was well said. It’s from a TimesDispatch.com article titled – When will outrage lead to action?
“Of course, the gun lobby will argue that if Tech's students had been armed, lives would have been saved. But do we want to live in a society where we're all toting sidearms in holsters, and our survival depends on our ability to get the drop on someone?
That's not exactly what I'd call evolving as a civilization.
That this bloodshed is occurring at our temples of higher education, where we send our best and brightest to pursue their promise, should shed light on the folly of our comfort and denials.
Violence, and the destruction it wreaks, respects no class. How many Virginia Techs will it take before we learn this lesson?”