[Optimus Prime]

Don't mess with Texas

Doesn't America have the highest ratio of guns per people in the world? :eek:

[cerveza_fiesta]

Xander;263398 said:

I disagree. Military School? Seriously? No way. Never. I'd leave the country. If I have kids, I'd never do that to them.

And video games are NOT THE PROBLEM. It is the parent's responsibility to monitor this. I played video games like Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein, and other shooting games when I was younger, didn't ever make me think about shooting someone. Why? Because I understood it was A GAME. Also, I wasn't allowed to have those games until my parents figured I was old enough. Now, not every kid has these benefits, which is the problem. Not the games themselves. I agree that young kids shouldn't be exposed to gratuitous violence, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have games to show this.

not sure it's the games or the bad parenting themselves though. Somebody that goes off and shoots up his/her school probably has something damaged or malfunctioning in their brain that allows the person to work themselves up to the level of unreasoning blind anger that would be required to commit a mass murder. In that kind of a situation, absent parents or excessively violent media inputs would surely worsen the situation, but I doubt with the Columbine shooters that parents or video games were the "root cause".

Where the parenting would come in is identifying behaviour that indicates a fall into a murderous rampage is iminent. When they interviewed the columbine shooters' parents they were just like "WTF...didn't see that coming". They weren't necessarily bad parents, just perhaps blind to their child's actions, viewing them through a parent's eyes as perfect angels.

Could a part solution be to provide or require some state-funded psychological training for parents? Nothing overly rigorous, jsut something to help parents when their kids are getting older, so that they can identify and mitigate their kids' problems before they get out of hand. We've all been in our low teens, in junior and high school...I got teased and bullied a bit, just like everybody else, its part of that instinctual assertion-of-dominance mechanism that guys go through around that age. With me though, I had sensible parents that were perceptive enough to notice a change in my attitude and mood, ask me about it and help me deal with it in a reasonable fashion. I'm sure lots of other parents would do the same, but ignore the problem because they don't understand how to identify or have no idea how to help with their kids' emotional issues.

Anyway, some parents do attend counseling for this, but its at the parent's expense. If it were part of a free social program, I bet a lot more people would make use of it. I know there's lots of advice and help from the gov't for new parents, but kids change a shitload between infancy and adulthood. It would be cool to have help at every stage.

[Illuyankas]

@Xander: Switzerland is, actually. Unless the US have bought another million guns since the last time I checked.

@LM: I'm going to try and find that statistic about most shootings that occur in a gun-owning household being either a family member getting it and murdering another one, or the burglar getting it first.

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas;263777 said:

@Xander: Switzerland is, actually. Unless the US have bought another million guns since the last time I checked.

@LM: I'm going to try and find that statistic about most shootings that occur in a gun-owning household being either a family member getting it and murdering another one, or the burglar getting it first.

I know for a fact that the US is the biggest Arms Dealer in the world.

Anyway, no, I am not saying that video games or lack of parenting are root causes. What I am saying is that perhaps if said things were removed, such as video games de-sensatizing children to violence (just as much as music, TV, and Movies do, don't forget) and maybe if these kids thought they could talk to their parents, maybe they could have gotten psychiatric help before they decided to go to school and unload on some other kids.

I am not saying it is video games' fault, however I maintain that a 10 year old playing GTA or Hitman or Manhunt is a bad bad thing, but allowing a 10 year old to watch R, or sometimes even PG-13 movies is a bad thing.

[Skywalker]

Obdigore;263371 said:

Secondly, current American 'Life'. (PS - would like some input from our euro friends regarding this, and you south africans, shinrei, I saw someone (skywalker I think) grew up in India... I do welcome thoughts and comparisons to your local) Violent Video Games and Movies are an issue.

Hmm... lack of parenting/ lack of extended family monitoring does cause issues.

In the India of old, under a 'joint family' system, when one said 'family' that included grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, what not. Day care was unheard of because the grandparents took care of kids if the mother is working (and in most cases, she was not). Parenting advice, basic monitoring of kids up to no good, and very strong filial and familial dynamics helped nurture kids.

Of course, India too is now moving toward nuclear families - units of four essentially, with two working parents. The wholesomeness of upbringing suffers... but then there are pros and cons to both family models.

The media in India is not as pervasive as here in the US (although its getting there). Video games were almost unheard until a decade ago, and even now, the gaming consoles don't have that much penetration. Violence in movies is severely limited (or so we like to think) because India has a censorship regime that would scare the bejeezus out of First Amendment defendants like the ACLU

India also has European style gun laws. Most people can't lay claim to as much as a peashooter.

All this contributes to give India pretty low levels of gun violence, and no school shootings that I've heard of. Dunno how each individual factor contributes though...

Now, (particularly the American) readers may think of this as a repressive regime without civil liberties, but...

India has the largest functioning democracy in the world, with free and fair elections, a free press and media, and a burgeoning entreprenuerial economy (besides the ascendant service sector and middle class). And hardly any gun violence that doesn't involve criminals and terrorists.

[Cougar]

Lost Marine;263525 said:

European burglars prefer when the occupants are home because it means the alarm is deactivated.

I'm unsure on all of Europe but in EU countries (it's a couple of years ago so pre-Croatia etc) this isn't true I'm afraid old lad, I studied this as a subset of a course I took at undergrad and this is just nonsense, I'd look it up again.

Lost Marine;263525 said:

While Europeans can just shrug off not having rights.

I'll always shrug off infringements of my rights when they stop the proliferation of unecessary weapons in society, moreover I don't think anyone in Europe would regard this as a right, I mean, if no-one is allowed guns why worry about not having one, the only people advantaged by the right to bear arms (outside of a sporting club or farmers) are people who want to committ criminal acts with them. When you're raised in a society with no-guns it's impossible to understand why the US clings so tightly to the right to bear firearms. All I can say from personal experience is 2 things:

In the UK since handguns were banned after Dunblane there have been very few non-gang/drug war type deaths involving innocent people (ie: as a result armed robberies,house breaking etc) By and large those killed have been linked to gangs etc. I can only think of that kid in Liverpool; Reece something or other. A case of mistaken identity in Manchester and those two girls Laetitia Shakespeare was one, who were shot in a drive by in Nottingham (plus a few crazies and an unfortunate Brazilian shot by the police). I'm sure there were others though.The point is every one is reported as they are so exceptional. I used to live in Longsight (Manchester) which at the time had the worst gun crime in the country and the only deaths were gang members, you were never concerned that you would be the target nor did you think you would be any safer with a gun.

Also prior to Dunblane when it was legal to possess handguns I don't know anyone who possesed one or wanted to - I think the point being that there was absolutely no culture of gun ownership and the police don't carry either, it was of course, very hard to even get a gun in the first place. Moreover, whilst bans on guns wouldn't get guns out of the hands of the mafia and gangs, it would make it far harder for young kids to get them (in fact virtually impossible)

Bottom line here is that you can't convince LM and others that they shouldn't be allowed them because it's a totally chicken and egg argument (also I'm sure LM et al are the type of people you don't have to worry about possessing guns). When you normalise gun ownership to such an extent as has been done in the US, through relatively relaxed laws and ease of availability, it seems incredulous to suggest that something as simple as limiting gun ownership could reduce gun deaths. This is because it essentially suggests that members of society (and I mean all people, I'm not having a pop at the US here) are incapable of being trusted not to kill on a whim or use their guns for crimes.

Incidentally in Switzerland most men of a certain age maintain an assault rifle with I think 60 rounds as part of their national service requirements (I am recalling a conversation with a Swiss a couple of years ago here), I've no idea what their gun crime rates are like.

[Optimus Prime]

Illuyankas;263777 said:

@Xander: Switzerland is, actually. Unless the US have bought another million guns since the last time I checked.

@LM: I'm going to try and find that statistic about most shootings that occur in a gun-owning household being either a family member getting it and murdering another one, or the burglar getting it first.

I'd be very interested in those statistics, Illy.

If you own a gun and have children, you HAVE TO KEEP IT SECURED. I had a friend when I was very young that shot himself with his dad's gun.....accidentally. Awful. He still has facial scars.

[cjd262e]

I'm kind of jumping in here... but I read briefly about video game violence being a potential cause. I used to live in Japan where they play crazy violent video games, but the country itself is unbelievably safe.

In most cases, it seems like the people doing these shootings are medicated for mental disorders (or if they are young would probably be medicated in adulthood). Every country has the same people with the same mental disorders, I think it is simply a matter of accessibility to guns.

From my office (where I sit right now), there are at least 8 places within three minutes drive time where I can buy a gun. That is unheard of in 90% of the countries in the world.

I grew up with guns in my house, and have always been taught to be responsible with them. However, it doesn't really make much sense to have them so available.

The right to bear arms is in the constitution because the Brittish used to take them away from the colonials so they couldn't fight back. That philosophy may have ran it's course at this point. I haven't seen many redcoats around lately.

[Optimus Prime]

Look, if a kid is going to shoot up a place, he'll get his inspiration from something, and it won't be the video games fault. Some people are just wired wrong.

[cjd262e]

I totally agree. A good predictor of crossed wires are mental medications. Of course, not all people who take anti-depressants, etc, are going to go on a killing spree. However, it seems like a large number of the people that are doing these shootings either have been, or are being treated for some kind of a mental illness. It seems like there's always some kind of paranoia involved.

I do think, at the very least, if you are put on an anti-depressant or some kind of mental illness medication you should not be allowed to buy a gun.

[Illuyankas]

Sometimes... sometimes you just want to say "No, you're not allowed firearms anymore, you're too stupid." Fucking hell.

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas;267730 said:

Sometimes... sometimes you just want to say "No, you're not allowed firearms anymore, you're too stupid." Fucking hell.

Then I guess you have to take all knives away too?

[Illuyankas]

My kneejerk reaction aside, what's wrong with trying to keep weapons out of the hands of idiots?

[ch'arlz]

Illuyankas;267738 said:

My kneejerk reaction aside, what's wrong with trying to keep weapons out of the hands of idiots?

how do you legally define 'idiot'?

[Obdigore]

ch said:

how do you legally define 'idiot'?

And that is the problem right there.

Did you know most serial killers have an IQ higher than 150?

[Shinrei]

http://news.bbc.co.u...fic/7442327.stm


Here you go, it only took a knife to take the lives of 7 people.

Bottom line is, unless you pad the walls of society, crazy people are still going to kill others. This is no reason to punish the millions of law abiding citizens who own guns, knives, baseball bats, vehicles, rat poison etc. etc.

[Thelomen Toblerone]

There's still the argument (and a strong one in my book) that if he'd have had access to a semi-automatic firearm, then the number would have been a hell of a lot higher than 7.


Obviously you cant really makes knives illegal, as people need them to prepare food and whatnot (although in my house we only have one sharp knife, and that works fine - but that's an aside), but guns are more lethal and you simply dont need most of them.

Im not arguing farmers dont need them to shoot vermin or whatever. Im saying a 25 year old man who lives in a city doesnt need a mac10 for "protection" or whatever.

I cant really see any legitimate excuse for not banning these weapons outright (outside military usage ofc, and controls there could certainly do with some tightening).

EDIT: Im referring to banning semi automatics and the like.

[Optimus Prime]

There's no reason a person needs an automatic weapon or even semi-automatic weapon.. You want to own a weapon? Fine, submit to background checks yearly (that's right, every year you should have to pass to keep weapons). The "Right to Bear Arms" in the US was made during a time OF FUCKING WAR AND REVOLUTION.

[Obdigore]

In the US all automatic firearms are illegal. Its not hard to change an automatic that has been changed to semi back to auto, though.

[Mushroom]

Obdigore;326613 said:

In the US all automatic firearms are illegal. Its not hard to change an automatic that has been changed to semi back to auto, though.

I like your style :cool: