[Ulrik]

From central european POV...its sometimes strange for me how...again sometimes (!) US citizens worship their right to gun... I dont mean it in critical way - our countries have different history, developement, whole culture block etc. So, just from my point of view... in Czech republic, you have to make a licence for holding a gun - and without special type of licence for police, security and military forces, you cant walk with gun...for example holstered at your belt visibly. Getting licence isnt hard (Im lazy bastard so Im promising it myself over ten years), but it requires psychical evaluation, knowledge of law test and basic test of manual ability (so you wont shoot guy twenty meters from your target and then yourself to foot).

But - because its harder to get and requires your time, some money...only fans, professionals and people who want it for self defense will buy a gun. I guess, in our city block you would find about two short guns and maybe one long weapon (for hunting). Now, when I realize that Im depressed/ angry/ really mad teenager, even 20 years old guy and I want to shoot someone...hell, I wouldnt know where got the damned gun! Its not probable my (his) parents got one . Black market probably exist, but its really for hardcore underground criminals only (I´ve got few cop friends and they said to get a gun from black market is for some newbie impossible...heck Brevik went to Prague wanted to buy Kalashnikov and only thing he got in week was recommendation to go fuck himself) - which results you have to take a knife or baseball bat and...that is completely different story. For victims and for attacker too.

Yeah, I know we have laughable ten millions of people so its different story than USA. But I see status of gun in society - and its respect. Average person will see gun in about ten years once (except those with military service of course). And when people see gun, they are...well...scared, because this shit can spit fucking bullets. And put that damned thing away before you hit someone.

Im not saying we have better gun laws Those countries are different. And Im not for banning of guns. But... getting harder to buy them IMO helps a lot. Just because one disgruntled guy will have to take a lot of steps to obtain a gun - and if he is underage, he wont be able at all (of course, black market in USA is bigger...much bigger...but its also made by fact that there is sooo many guns running around). So, Im not saying this is beteer than this, just like it works here (and as far as I know in big part of Europe).

(if you cant understand something, its because of my wife, who is constantly talking to me and I cant think in tho languages in one time...aaaargh!

This post has been edited by Ulrik: 15 December 2012 - 05:14 PM

[Gnaw]

Ulrik, on 15 December 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

From central european POV...its sometimes strange for me how...again sometimes (!) US citizens worship their right to gun... I dont mean it in critical

I'd rep you but out for the day.
A big part of the problem here is that affinity for guns that Americans have.
I haven't read much other than bare basics of yesterday's tragedy, but this article from Slate is interesting.
http://www.slate.com...tors_picks=true

Quote

Speed Kills

What's the lesson of the Connecticut school massacre? The faster the weapon, the higher the body count.

[nacht]

Banning guns is easy to say but hard to do. The criminals are obviously not going to return their guns. If you catch them with a gun and put them in a prison for it, who will take care of all that expense.
Ultimately, a gun might be the last line of defense for me and my family. The government is not always there when you need help (It is a big country and it takes time to respond even if you were able to dial 911)
Mexico has gun control and the only people who suffer are the people who don't have them to defend themselves. The death count in the drug wars there is horrific. Pull out a gun in USA to threaten somebody and you are liable to get yourself killed. That is why they are often hidden by the people.

There are a lot of potential alternatives we could look at.

Defend the school.

1. Setup a system so the sections of the school can be closed when under attack (Maybe one floor can be closed, similar to how firewalls act)
2. Have a guard (This is a big deterrent)
3. Parents volunteer to guard their school


Glorify nonviolence (and dont glorify the killers).

The sad truth is that most people want to know how many, who and why. This feeds the news channel which plants suggestions in the young impressionable minds.
Dont disclose the killers name (for ex. in most rape cases news agencies dont disclose the victims name to protect the person). Extend this protocol so as to not glorify the killer.

Ultimately a strong nuclear family is what makes children mature. Don't divorce that easily and raise your own biological kids.

Be on watch for psychiatric problems. Have an early warning system. Involve parents, professionals, friends, community. Something to control these impulses.

Culturally we have to not create an economic demand for violence in movies and games.

[worry]

Thank you for collecting every non-China-stabbing Fox News talking point in one easy to read post.

[worry]

Though I'm not sure even Fox News has ever suggested schools should be designed like Fort Knox, or should make space for standing all-volunteer armed militias. Those are new to me.

[nacht]

worrywort, on 15 December 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

Thank you for collecting every non-China-stabbing Fox News talking point in one easy to read post.

You got that wrong.. I dont watch Fox news but I will disclose the source

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

(All you need to read is this one paragraph). In the interest of full disclosure, I dont own a gun nor am I religious, but the concept of natural rights is independent of whether god exists or not.

Life Is a Gift from God We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life — physical, intellectual, and moral life.

But life cannot maintain itself alone. The Creator of life has entrusted us with the responsibility of preserving, developing, and perfecting it. In order that we may accomplish this, He has provided us with a collection of marvelous faculties. And He has put us in the midst of a variety of natural resources. By the application of our faculties to these natural resources we convert them into products, and use them. This process is necessary in order that life may run its appointed course.

Life, faculties, production — in other words, individuality, liberty, property — this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

What Is Law? What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

[nacht]

worrywort, on 15 December 2012 - 10:24 PM, said:

Though I'm not sure even Fox News has ever suggested schools should be designed like Fort Knox, or should make space for standing all-volunteer armed militias. Those are new to me.

It it saves lives! why not?

[D'rek]

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

Mexico has gun control and the only people who suffer are the people who don't have them to defend themselves. The death count in the drug wars there is horrific. Pull out a gun in USA to threaten somebody and you are liable to get yourself killed. That is why they are often hidden by the people.

Not a very reasonable example. What gun control there is on paper in Mexico is not necessarily very well enforced, especially in the areas that are practically run by the drug cartels.

Better examples would be, say, Japan where gun control is extremely strict and there are around 0 to 20 gun-related deaths per year, rather than the hundreds of the U.S.

Or even compare to Canada - arguably the most similar culture to the U.S. - where there is some gun control but it is still pretty easy to get a gun if you want to (basically you just need to go through the process of getting a license, but almost anyone can). With just the basic control of needing to get a license for your guns, the homicide rate per 100 000 capita in Canada is 0.76, rather than 2.98 in the US.

[worry]

I did not say you got it from Fox News, only that it matches their nonsense almost word for word (except where it's even crazier as mentioned above), starting with talking about guns generically as if they're all the same. Assault rifles are designed for offense, not defense. It's even in their name. Then there's a blanket non-specific fear of "the criminals". Cuz you know, if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns hyuk hyuk. The answer to the drug war isn't to stop the stupid war on drugs, it's to arm every citizen to fight fire with fire, since it's not like that became an idiom describing ultimate futile stupidity.

And besides your school/militia/bunker hybrid idea, your last three points might be the most insulting of the bunch. I'd prefer it if you took your nuclear bio-family garbage, stuff it in a sack, and drown it in the nearest river. Likewise with that naive mental illness neighborhood watch program, and the baseless Mortal Kombat-made-me-do-this preachery.

[Ulrik]

@nacht Because you are curing symptom, not disease. Making schools into reverse prison or even put some guy with another gun to serve as preemptive hitman is IMO a little bit sick and more importantly - ineffective. Your guard can lower bodycount (or add himself to it)...its not deterrent to attacker who intends to kill himself in the end.

For the Bastiat article - its absurd for me- "Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property" - its not from God, its from human nature, from society and from political concensus in some cultures or rather subcultures. In truth, early Christians were acting in exact opposite of the statement. But...people usually use God as some wretched banner for their opinions, regardless of teaching. But its not important and not topic.

What is IMO more importat is fact, that you are using french extreme liberal politician from first half of 18th century. Its completely same problem with US Contitution garanting right for a gun. Its opinions, laws and most importantly circumstances completely different from our situation. There is no danger of tyranis in USA. We are not fighting aristocrat elitism and protectionism or extreme mob socialism (which has nothing to do with socialism as we know these days) when France was torn in series of revolts and riots and battles on barricades.

If we are suppose to use old arguments belonging to old sociopolitical situations, with resources of today - we are doomed. We need our own argument, our modern analysis and our modern actions to make our society better/ safer. Yeah, we must learn from history - but learn, not repeat it without critical analysis. Using old argument to solve modern problems is way to hell.

This post has been edited by Ulrik: 15 December 2012 - 11:15 PM

[nacht]

worrywort, on 15 December 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

I did not say you got it from Fox News, only that it matches their nonsense almost word for word (except where it's even crazier as mentioned above), starting with talking about guns generically as if they're all the same. Assault rifles are designed for offense, not defense. It's even in their name. Then there's a blanket non-specific fear of "the criminals". Cuz you know, if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns hyuk hyuk. The answer to the drug war isn't to stop the stupid war on drugs, it's to arm every citizen to fight fire with fire, since it's not like that became an idiom describing ultimate futile stupidity.

And besides your school/militia/bunker hybrid idea, your last three points might be the most insulting of the bunch. I'd prefer it if you took your nuclear bio-family garbage, stuff it in a sack, and drown it in the nearest river. Likewise with that naive mental illness neighborhood watch program, and the baseless Mortal Kombat-made-me-do-this preachery.

What is offensive about it? Could there potentially be a correlation?

Quote

Ultimately a strong nuclear family is what makes children mature. Don't divorce that easily and raise your own biological kids"

http://www.slate.com...sandy_hook.html

Quote

Peter and Nancy Lanza divorced in 2009 after 28 years of marriage due to "irreconcilable differences," according to court records. Adam Lanza was 17 at the time.

http://www.cnn.com/2...file/index.html

Quote

A residential booklet in the Bennetts Farm Area states that Adam Lanza's hobbies are soccer, skateboarding and video games

http://www.nydailyne...ticle-1.1220752

Quote

This was a deeply disturbed kid," a family insider told the Daily News. "He certainly had major issues. He was subject to outbursts from what I recall."

http://www.usatoday....meline/1771625/

timeline
9:40 - gunman reported in school
10:23 - police enter school

perhaps a volunteer watch would have responded earlier if nearby
perhaps the presence of a guard would have stopped the killer

This post has been edited by nacht: 15 December 2012 - 11:41 PM

[Gnaw]

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 10:29 PM, said:

worrywort, on 15 December 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

Thank you for collecting every non-China-stabbing Fox News talking point in one easy to read post.

You got that wrong.. I dont watch Fox news but I will disclose the source

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

If you're going go with the the appeal to authority and base your argument on the rights of man, might I suggest Hume, Rousseau, Payne, Locke? Thomas Hobbes as well.

[Gust Hubb]

I feel that things should be put in perspective in all these topics before seeing this shooting as the symptom of a degenerating society with school shootings spiraling out of control (not saying this whole topic is founded around this view, but I still wanted to put it out there).

Timeline of Worst School shootings since WWII in America, as according to CNN

I was talking to my wife the other day about this incident, how close it hits to home with us having a youngin' of our own. The thing that helps keep my panic down is the fact that these happen even less frequently than airline crashes as far as I can tell. It's one of those newsworthy incidents that gets headlines, making it seem far more common than it actually is.

[worry]

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 11:27 PM, said:

What is offensive about it? Could there potentially be a correlation?

It is offensive to suggest that hetero-normative nuclear bio-families are the best possible type of family, and by implication that all other families are worse (even if you place them in a hierarchy of degrees to pretend you aren't degrading all of them). You didn't say stable families are better than unstable families, you made a particular affirmative claim about one single type of family.

I'm not going to pretend I have patience for any conclusions you're drawing from the Lanza family in particular, since as far as anyone here knows, these details bear nothing on his actions. And while I can't believe that anyone has to say it to anyone else yet again, we are living in perhaps the most peaceful time in human history, you'd be hard-pressed to find a kid in ANY developed nation whose hobbies don't include sports and video games, and just as Ulrik states, your school volunteer civilian militia idea treats none of the problem and may even make things worse. If Trayvon Martin hadn't been murdered by one such volunteer, he may have something to tell you about vigilante justice.

[Gust Hubb]

Illuyankas, on 15 December 2012 - 12:58 AM, said:

Held, on 15 December 2012 - 12:33 AM, said:

Let's not forget to ban knives too. In China today, 22 children were injured and some may yet die from a man wielding a knife. The lives of these Chinese children are just a relevant as the American children. When someone seeks to commit murder, a gun or knife ban will not dissuade them. The Connecticut shooter is a young man with mental health issues. This seems to be fairly common. We should consider locking up all of these people who have been diagnosed with mental illness as they could be potential killers too. The shooter allegedly is autistic. Maybe we should lock up everyone with Autism.

When are we going to stop ignoring the real issue which is why people will kill others? Maybe we could induct them into the armed forces where this is a valued skill.

We cannot afford another Boston Strangler, we must ban arms and hands. Yours especially, to prevent you posting again.


Interesting word choice there, 'dissuade'. Not like having to go to the black market or past countless security checks will deter the vast majority of desparate people considering such terrible actions, oh no. But what can I expect from someone too dim to understand the concept of range?

Very tempted to negative rep you Illy (you notice I restrained myself unlike others). You didn't catch the tongue in cheek? I agree with Held that the larger issue is the people themselves and the breakdown of mental health care in the USA. While we can debate about weapons and their range of action, the point is people are going to great lengths to kill other people and the question is why and what can we do to be proactive rather than reactive.

[HoosierDaddy]

You aren't going to stop people from snapping and killing people no matter how fantastic your mental health system and awareness is. What you can do is minimize the damage.

[EmperorMagus]

Restraining guns won't do a thing to stop these things,I will give an example: a month ago a meth addict pushed a razor(!) in a butcher's neck, took a couple of his knifes and entered the adjoining store killed 5 people and came out and entered another store.He continued doing so until he fainted.He killed 15 people with a couple of knifes and a razor and only 3 of them were children,there were adults who had nothing to defend themselves with...
mentally unstable will do what they want to do and people are as helpless in face of a knife as in face of a gun.Now if you guys in U.S can buy assault rifles that's quiet another thing(and quiet foolish IMO,what need is there for assault rifles in hand of civilians?) but simple handguns should be available to public so that people can defend themselves against such attacks.
but I don't believe in free guns for all, registration should be part of the process.what I say is that banning guns is not a good option because the crazy guy will do his thing whether with a knife in the neck or a bullet in the gut.

[nacht]

worrywort, on 16 December 2012 - 12:15 AM, said:

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 11:27 PM, said:

What is offensive about it? Could there potentially be a correlation?

It is offensive to suggest that hetero-normative nuclear bio-families are the best possible type of family, and by implication that all other families are worse (even if you place them in a hierarchy of degrees to pretend you aren't degrading all of them). You didn't say stable families are better than unstable families, you made a particular affirmative claim about one single type of family.

I'm not going to pretend I have patience for any conclusions you're drawing from the Lanza family in particular, since as far as anyone here knows, these details bear nothing on his actions. And while I can't believe that anyone has to say it to anyone else yet again, we are living in perhaps the most peaceful time in human history, you'd be hard-pressed to find a kid in ANY developed nation whose hobbies don't include sports and video games, and just as Ulrik states, your school volunteer civilian militia idea treats none of the problem and may even make things worse. If Trayvon Martin hadn't been murdered by one such volunteer, he may have something to tell you about vigilante justice.

Ah, In that case I apologize. I had no intention to imply any particular superiority nor do I have any desire to manifest any change in the social order especially by statist decrees. The world is what it is.

The topic started off like this.

Quote

Connecticut shooting, guns, and wtf to do
I'm a huge 2nd amendment person. As in 1) it specifically meant armed citizens and 2) was meant as a bulwark against the government.

I added by 2 cents to give some alternative suggestions of how we can preserve both the 2nd ammendment while protecting our children. Personally I dont think rescinding the 2nd ammendment is possible, practical or desirable.
The reason I chose to enunciate these alternatives is because I respect the members of this forum (where do you find people who read 15+ hard to read books) and we choose to brainstorm potential solutions to this issue.

Ulrik,

It is hard to understand the gun culture in the US. I myself am not a US citizen but I came to understand what it stands for. It is the last line of defense to protect their life, liberty and property. It may very well be the reason why petty dictators like saddam hussein, bashar assad etc. never existed in the US.

Imagine you live in a remote area, and some stranger is furiously knocking on the door. Are you thinking

1). I am glad there is gun control in my country and hopefully that guy does not have one or
2). Where the fuck is my shotgun

There is a misplaced notion that government is a benign big brother. Tell that to the syrian rebels.
If people want to be sheep, somebody will want to be the shepherd.
On the other hand, imagine Udey hussain going to Appalachia and telling somebody what to do. That shit is not going to happen.

The fucked up decision by Adam Lanza was a series of events. He did not wake up one day, decided to grab a gun and go to the school.
In the warped up human mind, there is a series of events that led to this trigger. My proposition is that breaking that chain at any point would have prevented this disaster.
Just 2 days back there was a shooting in Oregon. It was everywhere in the news. That guy had psychiatric problems, his father left the family, it seems his mom was staying home either because she did not have a job or choose not to work. He tried to buy a gun and failed so he might have killed her to get access to them.

Ultimately, it's true that the gun was the instrument and preventing access to it would have mitigated the disaster.
But can you imagine the "not so visible benfits". how a gun might have helped a lady from getting raped, maybe helped a father take care of his children without dying while they were still young.


Anyways...

[Gust Hubb]

HoosierDaddy, on 16 December 2012 - 01:04 AM, said:

You aren't going to stop people from snapping and killing people no matter how fantastic your mental health system and awareness is. What you can do is minimize the damage.

Fair enough, but I think a lot of problems stem from things not being noticed. As nacht just mentioned, this guy probably was stewing for quite a while. There should have been ways to catch this earlier than it was.

[HoosierDaddy]

Gust Hubb, on 16 December 2012 - 01:17 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 16 December 2012 - 01:04 AM, said:

You aren't going to stop people from snapping and killing people no matter how fantastic your mental health system and awareness is. What you can do is minimize the damage.

Fair enough, but I think a lot of problems stem from things not being noticed. As nacht just mentioned, this guy probably was stewing for quite a while. There should have been ways to catch this earlier than it was.

Possibly he was. You know what would have made him continue to stew and not act? Not having easy access to the three guns he used to murder his mother, 20 children, and 6 other women.