0
NewGuy2005

School Shooting - Northern Arizona

Recommended Posts

wmw999

friggin' children!



so very tired - on the first glance, I saw that as

"chicken friggen" for some reason

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
champu

Re-scoping your concern that there are "too many firearm related deaths and injuries [that occur in a wide variety of events]" as one big "it is too easy to get a gun" problem is not something I agree with doing because then your proposed actions are evaluated against whether they make firearm ownership harder instead of whether they make it safer in any kind of reasonably direct and statistically significant fashion.

We could make everyone do 20 pullups and then explain what an eigenvector is before they're allowed to buy a gun. That would make it harder to buy a gun, but that doesn't make it a good or defensible idea. It's a bad way to approach problems.



Sorry, your logic is way off here.

You are right that simply and arbitrarily making it harder to purchase a gun will not solve the problem.

That still doesn't take away that the easy availability of guns is a large contributing factor.

Honestly, I have more respect for people saying that pretty much has to be true, however that shouldn't change for the US due to the 2nd Amendment, therefor we may try to look at some other possible solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>It is too easy to get your hands on a vehicle, and that is why there are so
>many traffic deaths.

Actually traffic deaths are going down. These are due, in part, to tougher drunk driving laws, laws requiring inspections and vehicle registration, laws requiring licenses (and driver testing) laws requiring retesting of elderly drivers, laws requiring insurance, and a LOT of effort by the NTSB and the NHTSA going into determining causes of traffic fatalities. That research has resulted in new laws requiring design changes in cars, changes in traffic enforcement and changes in highway design.

So that's an example of adding laws that have an overall beneficial effect on safety, and has nothing to do with "BAN CARS!" Indeed, it shows what can happen when an industry is open to improvement.



FACTS again! Are you trying to make his head explode?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rushmc

******I get pretty tired of people nay-saying, attacking individuals, asking what they would do, then picking that apart, going from mass-shootings to gang shooting to individual shootings to mental illness and such.

First you either ACCEPT that the gun violence in this country is a problem and then we decide collectively to try and improve it, or you DENY that gun violence is a problem in this country in which case, you are OK with the tens of thousands of people that die at the hands of guns every year.



No, I don't have to do one of those two things, and I'm not going to.

Gun violence in this country is not a (emphasis: singular) problem. Children getting their hands on firearms and hurting others and themselves is a problem. People shooting each others when drug deals go bad is a problem. Jilted lovers murdering their ex at their place of work and injuring other people in the process is a problem. People with CCWs deciding to be vigilantes and shooting bystanders is a problem. People committing suicide with firearms is a problem. People flipping out and going on shooting sprees (intentionally trying to distinguish this from toxic arguments about the term "mass shooting") is a problem.

The distinction is important because neither the scope of these problems nor the kinds of steps we can take to try to help some of them even remotely resemble one another.

Banning high capacity magazines absolutely will not do shit to prevent firearm suicides. Waiting periods will not do shit to prevent toddlers from finding guns and hurting themselves. Assault weapon bans and trigger locks aren't going to do shit to prevent gang or drug related gun violence. Making CCW permits harder or nearly impossible to get isn't going to do shit to stop shooting sprees nor jilted lovers.

You are demanding that totally distinct issues be conflated so that we can "get to the other side of the argument" where people trot out ideas with no deference to a cost/benefit analysis but only to the fact that "hey, at least it's something, and gun violence, the homogeneous blob that it is, is something we've agreed is a problem... no takebacks."

Best post of the thread

No it's not.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That is a result
Not the problem




There is a problem with thinking that result is not a problem. (Is that twisted enough for you to understand?)
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kallend

*********I get pretty tired of people nay-saying, attacking individuals, asking what they would do, then picking that apart, going from mass-shootings to gang shooting to individual shootings to mental illness and such.

First you either ACCEPT that the gun violence in this country is a problem and then we decide collectively to try and improve it, or you DENY that gun violence is a problem in this country in which case, you are OK with the tens of thousands of people that die at the hands of guns every year.



No, I don't have to do one of those two things, and I'm not going to.

Gun violence in this country is not a (emphasis: singular) problem. Children getting their hands on firearms and hurting others and themselves is a problem. People shooting each others when drug deals go bad is a problem. Jilted lovers murdering their ex at their place of work and injuring other people in the process is a problem. People with CCWs deciding to be vigilantes and shooting bystanders is a problem. People committing suicide with firearms is a problem. People flipping out and going on shooting sprees (intentionally trying to distinguish this from toxic arguments about the term "mass shooting") is a problem.

The distinction is important because neither the scope of these problems nor the kinds of steps we can take to try to help some of them even remotely resemble one another.

Banning high capacity magazines absolutely will not do shit to prevent firearm suicides. Waiting periods will not do shit to prevent toddlers from finding guns and hurting themselves. Assault weapon bans and trigger locks aren't going to do shit to prevent gang or drug related gun violence. Making CCW permits harder or nearly impossible to get isn't going to do shit to stop shooting sprees nor jilted lovers.

You are demanding that totally distinct issues be conflated so that we can "get to the other side of the argument" where people trot out ideas with no deference to a cost/benefit analysis but only to the fact that "hey, at least it's something, and gun violence, the homogeneous blob that it is, is something we've agreed is a problem... no takebacks."

Best post of the thread

No it's not.

What parts do you disagree with specifically? "No it's not" to a seven paragraph post is not a counter argument it is lazy commenting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***Re-scoping your concern that there are "too many firearm related deaths and injuries [that occur in a wide variety of events]" as one big "it is too easy to get a gun" problem is not something I agree with doing because then your proposed actions are evaluated against whether they make firearm ownership harder instead of whether they make it safer in any kind of reasonably direct and statistically significant fashion.

We could make everyone do 20 pullups and then explain what an eigenvector is before they're allowed to buy a gun. That would make it harder to buy a gun, but that doesn't make it a good or defensible idea. It's a bad way to approach problems.



Sorry, your logic is way off here.

You are right that simply and arbitrarily making it harder to purchase a gun will not solve the problem.

That still doesn't take away that the easy availability of guns is a large contributing factor.

Honestly, I have more respect for people saying that pretty much has to be true, however that shouldn't change for the US due to the 2nd Amendment, therefor we may try to look at some other possible solutions.

If you mean that it's too likely that someone will pass a background check despite there being disqualifying information out there because the systems are set up inefficiently, or you mean you can get a friend or family member to buy a firearm for you and give it to you because penalties for straw purchases are too weak and they go unenforced too often, or you mean that there should be a five question quiz (e.g. "A toddler has enough thumb strength to activate a trigger. true/false?") you have to pass to walk out with the gun, or you mean all of those things then say that. Those are areas with room for improvements that can be made that aren't about making it harder to buy a gun.

If you mean you want to give county sheriffs absolute authority to decide if someone is allowed to own a firearm and they can be as arbitrarily selective as they want, then say that. That's just about the only thing the second amendment will prevent you from doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

This isn't about what I want to do. This shouldn't be about what anybody else wants to do.

This should be about honestly defining the problem and then trying to come up with things that can be done to help reduce the problem.



Make the penalty harsher.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I largely agree, and what I'm espousing is keeping the problems broken up in order to make it easier to stay focused when evaluating proposed measures. You could even make a table with "ways people are getting killed by guns" on one axis and "proposed and enacted gun control measures" on the other. In each cell write an estimated probability of that measure helping prevent that type of injury/death. Multiply and add up against how many of each type of injury/death and you get your potential value of each measure.

That's what I would have us do.

But here's the thing when someone says, "it's not about what I want": It is about what people sponsoring and voting in favor of city ordinances and state laws want. They want your vote. If you give them your vote when they do stupid crap and you don't tell them otherwise, then don't tell me, "it's not about what I want."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

***This isn't about what I want to do. This shouldn't be about what anybody else wants to do.

This should be about honestly defining the problem and then trying to come up with things that can be done to help reduce the problem.



Make the penalty harsher.

The penalty for what?

If the death penalty doesn't deter murder, not sure that will really help much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

******This isn't about what I want to do. This shouldn't be about what anybody else wants to do.

This should be about honestly defining the problem and then trying to come up with things that can be done to help reduce the problem.



Make the penalty harsher.

The penalty for what?

If the death penalty doesn't deter murder, not sure that will really help much?

It does, by and large, do that. Just enforce it.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piisfish

there has also been a sword attack in a Swedish school. 2 dead and several wounded.

Last school attack in Sweden was in 1962.



Holy shit, the school attacks just went up by like 99%!
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0