yardbarker

OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticut

Moderators: Ben, HomoSapien, Morten Jensen, Senor Chang, KingCuban, fleet, DuckIII, alucryts, Rerisen, Tommy Udo 6 , DASMACKDOWN

Post#421 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:44 am by CalilLove89

mysticbb wrote:
CalilLove89 wrote:I have also not commited a crime owning a gun, whats your point


I suspect, you also don't plan to commit a crime. But that is beyond the point. The point is, the chances of you getting into a situation where you can really defend yourself with your gun are rather slim to non-existent.

CalilLove89 wrote:I like the whole it cant/wont happen to me arguement to, if it doesnt happen to anyone, where are these murder statistics coming from.


The point is not that it doesn't happen, it happens. But it happens way less often than you think. And, the murdered didn't save their lifes with a gun.

CalilLove89 wrote:People defend themselves with guns every day, use google.


I did not say that it doesn't happen, the question is how often AND are you really able to defend yourself with a gun, if such situation occurs? The only reasons to expect that it happens to you are that you are either a special target (criminal, police, etc.) or paranoid.


Do me a favor

The population is 320,000,000 and last year there were around 11,000 murders with a firearm in the states. What are those odds.

Can you please tell me, since you are so good at giving me my statistical probabilities of needing a gun for defense. Please tell me what are my odds of getting murdered with a gun.

.000034375

Oops i did it for you.

Again your arguement is it wont happen to me. The worst arguement known to man.

Look at the number, think about that number, is america so horrible, or do we have a weird problem with mass shootings.
CalilLove89
Starter
Posts: 2,200
And1: 98
Joined: May 3, 2011
Top

Post#422 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:10 am by jaze89

waffle wrote:
jaze89 wrote:I'm just going to do myself a favor and ignore all the insensitive **** using this event as a podium for their political ideology. F***. You.

This is a tragedy, I'm literally seething and at the same time extremely saddened. I hope the killer didn't take the easy way out, I really don't know what to say, I am literally sick to my stomach.


nice, so we don't care? Pretty ignorant of you.


Never said people like yourself didn't care about the situation, but using it as a podium for your ideology is insensitive. No, ignorance would be when people act like they have the faintest idea on how to solve gun crime and violence in general. Every time a thread like this pops up it devolves into ignoring the tragedy to focus on their own political and philosophical ideology and it upsets my stomach and core even more.

To make my views clear, I own two guns, a 9mm Sig Sauer P226 and a Remington 700 ADL 30-06 but I also advocate not just stricter gun laws but smarter ones. However, I don't think this topic is the proper one to discuss these things, I feel it diminishes the memory of those who have passed. Then again, who am I to say such things, I'm ignorant...
jaze89
Banned User
Posts: 787
And1: 59
Joined: Jan 23, 2009
Top

Post#423 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:20 am by mysticbb

CalilLove89 wrote:Again your arguement is it wont happen to me. The worst arguement known to man.


My argument is that it is very, very unlikely that you will end up in a situation in which you will be able to defend yourself with a firearm. That doesn't mean that it will for sure not happen at all.

It is just a fallacy to think that owning a gun will make your life safer and that you actually need a gun to defend yourself and your family.
mysticbb


Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 697
Joined: May 28, 2007
Top

Post#424 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:04 am by mymysql

This is really sad but it's always the anti-gun crowd's emotional kneejerk reactions that turns the attention of massacres like these quickly into gun control debates. Everyone got so wrapped up in it for 30 pages, I almost forgot the initial tragedy here. Even when people make good and valid points (which many people have), it always just feels like a lot of thoughtful bias being thrown against the wall. Like abortion and everything else, no one just changes their mind easily on these things, so debating them on places like say a basketball forum seems very futile.
mymysql
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,327
And1: 115
Joined: Nov 18, 2010
Location: Illinois
Top

Post#425 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:15 am by Morten Jensen

KingCuban wrote:Guns & drugs will exist forever so long as their is a buck to be made by someone.

You can't ban them all, but you can reduce their use to the common significantly.

The average guy who owns a weapon won't be going out to buy a gun illegally if he can go to jail for it.

Will shootings and weapons to the wrong people still exist? No question, but gun control would certainly limit the amount shootings occurring all over the world.

I'd really love to hear Morten's opinion on this and how his country has dealt with such things.


We never had to deal with it, to be honest. It's never been a problem, because owning guns means acquiring a license which is almost impossible to qualify for. At some point later in life, I would love to purchase a Samurai sword from Japan to hang on my wall. Well, tell you what, I'll have to come in and have an interview with the police first. And not an easy one. I'll have to go through testing, they'll go through my (empty) criminal history, and IF they qualify me, I can then proceed to customs, who will also interview me. If I'm granted the license, I'll have to pay a huge amount for it. I've even heard that in addition to that, I'll have to pay a specific percentage of the cost of the sword as well.

So yeah, it's very very difficult to just get my hands on things. Unlike in New York where I at one point saw a cap driver open his trunk to put a suitcase in there, and attached to the roof of the trunk was a shotgun. Seriously. A shotgun. I mean.. You just don't see that here. You just don't.

In Danish family homes (two parent and at least one kid), you'll find maybe one gun per 100,000 household. And we're about 6 million people. Sure there are enthusiasts here, too. But sane ones. If someone with a firearm does something even remotely wrong, the gun is taken away forever, his license removed and he'll spend time in prison.

Plus, we made it our business to put emphasis on people with mental illness. Without sounding like a douchebag, I've traveled around the world several times in my life due to the line of work my family is in. Two countries stand out in terms of helping each other and making economical national sacrifices to help those in need: Canada and Denmark. The US is just so different in every state/city. I've experienced cops in Chicago showing up with two cars to help an old man who had fallen on a sidewalk, and I've experienced a cop in New York telling me to "just ignore it, that happens all the time" when I saw a possible dead homeless man in an alley, when I was 11 or 12.

Fact of the matter is:

1. Guns are bad.
2. People who use them are bad.

But since you can't outlaw people, where does that leave us?
Morten Jensen
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,121
And1: 1,912
Joined: Aug 31, 2003
Top

Post#426 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:23 am by KingCuban

Appreciate the insight, Mort.

Thanks for picking up my post and adding to the debate.

I truly envy and admire your country and those with similar philosophies.
Image
KingCuban

Global Mod
Global Mod
User avatar
Posts: 65,345
And1: 9,388
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
Location: Australia
Top

Post#427 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:36 am by coldfish

@Mort:

The US invaded Iraq about 10 years ago. It came out that the prevailing thought was that after Saddam was knocked over, the locals would welcome americans as heroes, they would welcome democracy and we would be out of there in months with little blood spilled. The US administration basically assumed Iraqi's were just like us culturally. Bad assumption.

Guns are part of the US' culture. We are different than you are. Another part of American culture is deep distrust of government. The US government has no ability to take away the guns from americans and even talk about it has caused gun sales to skyrocket. As I noted before, the number of hunters outnumbers any military in the world. Even worse, most people in the military come from that culture. If a president were to order the military to forcibly seize all weapons, I wouldn't be surprised if the military turned on him.

That being said, no gun owner wants what happened yesterday. Everyone is and should be absolutely appalled. If the gun control people would just shut up for a second and think, they really could push positive change in the US. Things like gun shows are notorious for ease of access to guns. Firearm training is extremely lax. These are the type of things that could be fixed and if you approach gun owners and tell them "we don't want to take away guns from responsible people, we just want to make sure crazy people can't get them." I think it would work.

I also agree with you about the mentally ill. The US obviously isn't taking that stuff seriously. I'm not sure if its political correctness or what, but virtually all of the mass shooters over the past few years have been tagged as being dangerously mentally ill before they did something. We just didn't take action.
My rules of thumb:
1. Coaching matters.
2. Star players matter more.
3. Rookies are rarely any good at first and often not later
4. Thibodeau will play young guys and he will play bad defenders. He tries not to play people who suck.
coldfish



Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar
Posts: 38,255
And1: 3,834
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
Top

Post#428 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:03 am by Morten Jensen

coldfish wrote:@Mort:

The US invaded Iraq about 10 years ago. It came out that the prevailing thought was that after Saddam was knocked over, the locals would welcome americans as heroes, they would welcome democracy and we would be out of there in months with little blood spilled. The US administration basically assumed Iraqi's were just like us culturally. Bad assumption.

Guns are part of the US' culture. We are different than you are. Another part of American culture is deep distrust of government. The US government has no ability to take away the guns from americans and even talk about it has caused gun sales to skyrocket. As I noted before, the number of hunters outnumbers any military in the world. Even worse, most people in the military come from that culture. If a president were to order the military to forcibly seize all weapons, I wouldn't be surprised if the military turned on him.

That being said, no gun owner wants what happened yesterday. Everyone is and should be absolutely appalled. If the gun control people would just shut up for a second and think, they really could push positive change in the US. Things like gun shows are notorious for ease of access to guns. Firearm training is extremely lax. These are the type of things that could be fixed and if you approach gun owners and tell them "we don't want to take away guns from responsible people, we just want to make sure crazy people can't get them." I think it would work.

I also agree with you about the mentally ill. The US obviously isn't taking that stuff seriously. I'm not sure if its political correctness or what, but virtually all of the mass shooters over the past few years have been tagged as being dangerously mentally ill before they did something. We just didn't take action.


Here's what you're saying:

1. America has lax firearm training.
2. If the government tried to take guns away, people would turn on it.

That thought doesn't scare the living **** out of you?

Now, I get what you're saying. This presents an opportunity to invite gun owners to debate in terms of limiting access to specific people who will use the weapons for evil. All that's fair.

Here's my problem/question:

How can someone, who's received lax firearm training, be allowed to purchase a firearm in the first place? Who's judging what "proper firearm training" is? What's the criteria?

That's like someone not passing their driving exam and getting their drivers license anyway. There should have been harsher protocol years ago. Trying to inject it now - while I support the idea - is not going to be easy.

Your word "lax" seems to me, to be the most appropriate word in this debate. Rules, restrictions, criteria, control and availability seems to be a complete crap shoot.

A final series of questions, and this is something I truly have no insight in, but am curious of:

How does expensive guns find their way to the low income areas and "ghettos"? Who's providing those kids with weapons? Why do they end up there? How is it acceptable? How come nothing has changed despite people having known of this problem for decades?

That's an area, in my eyes, that seems to have NO control whatsoever. And due to the lack of control in those areas, people die. Is it because low-income families are of no significant importance to the US?

These are legitimate questions, and if I am stepping on toes here, I apologize. It's not my intention to do so.
Morten Jensen
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,121
And1: 1,912
Joined: Aug 31, 2003
Top

Post#429 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:08 am by chitownsalesmen

You either pimping the system, or gettin' pimped by the system.
We don't want a piece of the pie we want control of the kitchen.
chitownsalesmen
Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,662
And1: 264
Joined: Apr 16, 2012
Top

Post#430 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:16 am by coldfish

Morten Jensen wrote:
Here's what you're saying:

1. America has lax firearm training.
2. If the government tried to take guns away, people would turn on it.

That thought doesn't scare the living **** out of you?


I don't own a gun but I'll be honest, I know a lot of people that do. Quite frankly, I trust them more than the government.

Here's my problem/question:

How can someone, who's received lax firearm training, be allowed to purchase a firearm in the first place? Who's judging what "proper firearm training" is? What's the criteria?

That's like someone not passing their driving exam and getting their drivers license anyway. There should have been harsher protocol years ago. Trying to inject it now - while I support the idea - is not going to be easy.

Your word "lax" seems to me, to be the most appropriate word in this debate. Rules, restrictions, criteria, control and availability seems to be a complete crap shoot.

The NRA views any attempt at gun restriction as a slippery slope. Maybe its because so many people openly discuss taking away all guns. Because of that, they fight, tooth and nail, even the smallest restrictions on gun purchases and ownership.

IMO, that's why things are lax.

A final series of questions, and this is something I truly have no insight in, but am curious of:

How does expensive guns find their way to the low income areas and "ghettos"? Who's providing those kids with weapons? Why do they end up there? How is it acceptable? How come nothing has changed despite people having known of this problem for decades?


First comment, the shooter yesterday was wealthy. Very wealthy. His dad was a VP at GE.

Second comment, look at Mexico. Very poor country where guns are illegal. Despite that, gun violence is a regular occurrence. Its drug gangs illegally moving the weapons around. I certainly am not going to blame all ghetto violence on that, but its a factor and one which legislation would not impact since its already associated with illegal activity. Hell, legalizing some drugs may curtail the violence.

Third comment, poor people in the US aren't poor on a global standard. They can afford guns. Someone living on $1 per day in Bangledesh can't afford a gun. Someone living in Chicago making $15K per year is poor, but they have the cash to buy a gun and in their neighborhood, may feel its necessary.

These are legitimate questions, and if I am stepping on toes here, I apologize. It's not my intention to do so.

You aren't offending me. Not sure about others.
My rules of thumb:
1. Coaching matters.
2. Star players matter more.
3. Rookies are rarely any good at first and often not later
4. Thibodeau will play young guys and he will play bad defenders. He tries not to play people who suck.
coldfish



Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar
Posts: 38,255
And1: 3,834
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
Top

Post#431 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:36 am by Mech Engineer

There is a pattern to these things. Mentally ill young people who are not poor but having easy access to guns. Is that the only pattern. I am sure there is a lot more to it like the parents divorcing etc... Each kid is different and there has to be a family/friends/society structure to notice these things.

Also, that guy's brother hasn't spoken to him since 2010. That is one indicator of how wrong things are. In this age of cell-phones, text messaging etc.., it is really a strange thing to not speak to your own brother that too when they are still young without their own kids/jobs etc..

Finally, I don't think many of the people who are pro-gun will ever understand the point that the society is evolving and those philosophies have to be looked at a different perspective now. They have their reasons and rationalizations for that as I am seeing in multiple posts. If these type of incidents don't make them re-evaluate their thinking, I doubt anything will. IMO, gun-ownership(other than the recreation stuff) by an ordinary individual is more about a lack of trust in humanity. That is more troublesome to me as somebody who believes that most people want to do the right things or good things. The small segment of people who are disturbed have to be turned into better people by less access to things which accelerate the impact of the bad parts of their brain.
Mech Engineer
General Manager
User avatar
Posts: 7,922
And1: 944
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs
Top

Post#432 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:55 am by mysticbb

coldfish wrote:I don't own a gun but I'll be honest, I know a lot of people that do. Quite frankly, I trust them more than the government.


Isn't the government elected by the same people around you? Does the military or police not consist of the same people as well? And do you honestly trust everyone else with a gun more than the government? What makes those people more trustworthy?

coldfish wrote:Second comment, look at Mexico. Very poor country where guns are illegal.


You really want to refer to a country like Mexico here? Isn't it more useful to compare the U.S. to similar wealthy countries?
mysticbb


Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 697
Joined: May 28, 2007
Top

Post#433 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:04 am by GetBuLLish

HomoSapien wrote:
GetBuLLish wrote:How about alcohol? Surely you will agree that there are numerous deaths caused by drunk people using guns. Without alcohol in those situations, it is likely they would not have killed anyone. So do you support banning alcohol?


I LOVE to drink, and I would not lose a second of sleep if it suddenly became illegal.


That is very admirable of you, honestly. Just wanted to see if you're consistent and you are.
Rose on proving his doubters wrong: "It's going to be fun. You're going to see a lot of people change, but it will be funny."
GetBuLLish
Head Coach
Posts: 6,157
And1: 335
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Top

Post#434 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:17 am by Gregnice33

musiqsoulchild wrote:
GetBuLLish wrote:
musiqsoulchild wrote:We have age limits for driving and alcohol right?


1. Apparently the shooter took the gun from his mom. So the steeper age limit would not have affected this shooting, correct?


Not talking about this shooting. I am talking about all of the USA. Almost all the recent shootings like this have been perpetrated by younger folks.

This speaks to me about decision-making, parenting, stress levels and other issues that younger adults typically face. There is a distance from humanity that exists in these kinds of shootings.

As you grow older within your society, the idea is that the probability that you have developed meaningful connections with life and people around you is much higher than when you are a younger person.

GetBuLLish wrote:
musiqsoulchild wrote:2. Has the age limit on alcohol really stopped kids from drinking, in your experience? Personally, I can't think of one single friend that began drinking after turning 21...


Nothing can be stopped. But it can be made harder.



Age (youth) is one commonality among these mass shooters, but the factor everyone ignores is the fact thay ALL of these shooters are MALE.

Masaculinity, what is means to be a male, is too tied to violence, aggression, and not showing weakness (getting help). Add these strong gender norms with a culture that stigmatizes the mentally ill, glorifies violent acts, and makes getting weapons way too easy and we will continue to see these terrible tragedies.
When it comes to racism, people say: I don't care if they're black, white, purple or green Ooh hold on now: Purple or Green? You gotta draw the line somewhere! To hell with purple people - Unless they're suffocating - then help'em
~Mitch Hedberg
Gregnice33

Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,746
And1: 421
Joined: Apr 26, 2003
Location: Paddy's Pub
Top

Post#435 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:33 am by BIGGIEsmalls 23

Quick question for those that don't believe that focus on gun control is the answer to this problem, but believe the focus should be on the mental health/societal issues that plague this country.

Considering that a lot of you are the same posters that argue against Government spending, would you be open to the Federal Government investing $500 Billion into programs designed to tackle the mental health/societal issues that plague this country?
BIGGIEsmalls 23


RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 13,243
And1: 783
Joined: Jul 27, 2010
Location: REALITY
Top

Post#436 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:36 am by LobosJordan

BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:Quick question for those that don't believe that focus on gun control is the answer to this problem, but believe the focus should be on the mental health/societal issues that plague this country.

Considering that a lot of you are the same posters that argue against Government spending, would you be open to the Federal Government investing $500 Billion into programs designed to tackle the mental health/societal issues that plague this country?

I posted this back on like page 13 or 14. Great point Biggie.
LobosJordan




Lead Assistant
User avatar
Posts: 4,958
And1: 754
Joined: Feb 23, 2012
Location: The Buck Stops Here
Top

Post#437 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:45 am by GetBuLLish

LobosJordan wrote:
BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:Quick question for those that don't believe that focus on gun control is the answer to this problem, but believe the focus should be on the mental health/societal issues that plague this country.

Considering that a lot of you are the same posters that argue against Government spending, would you be open to the Federal Government investing $500 Billion into programs designed to tackle the mental health/societal issues that plague this country?

I posted this back on like page 13 or 14. Great point Biggie.


If it can be paid for without debt, absolutely.
Rose on proving his doubters wrong: "It's going to be fun. You're going to see a lot of people change, but it will be funny."
GetBuLLish
Head Coach
Posts: 6,157
And1: 335
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Top

Post#438 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:48 am by waffle

Obviously, gun ownership will not/should not be outlawed. That's crazy talk, at least in the US

BUT

It needs to made more difficult, the types of guns controlled, the standards by which you can be licensed need to be tightened, punishments for YOUR gun being used in a crime (someone stole it from my car!)

There is only ONE POSSIBLE bottleneck that can be leveraged here, and that is the gun itself. Everything else is prone to failure. The goal is not to eliminate gun violence but to make it really challenging.

It isn't POLITICS, and the next person who claims that is what I am stating can go bleep themselves. That suggests I don't care about THOSE kids or the NEXT kids that suffer from this ridiculous situation we find ourselves in. So if you find yourselves about to make a statement like that? Rethink it.

Face it, the only time this is even discussed is when overwhelming tragedy happens.
waffle
General Manager
User avatar
Posts: 9,090
And1: 256
Joined: Jun 6, 2002
Location: Don't question the finger and do respect the black box. That is all.....
Top

Post#439 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:56 am by waffle

in the past few weeks 2 THREE YEAR old kids in Oregon were involved in deaths involving hand guns, one killed his sister one shot himself.

We need to be proactive no reactive. Be sensible! We cannot and should not eliminate gun ownership as a right, but we sure as heck need to do whatever possible to make it really hard for guns to end up in the hands of those who have the potential to commit crimes like Conn. Will it be hard? Heck yeah. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.
waffle
General Manager
User avatar
Posts: 9,090
And1: 256
Joined: Jun 6, 2002
Location: Don't question the finger and do respect the black box. That is all.....
Top

Post#440 Re: OT: Grammar School Shooting in Connecticu
Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:01 pm by BIGGIEsmalls 23

GetBuLLish wrote:
LobosJordan wrote:
BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:Quick question for those that don't believe that focus on gun control is the answer to this problem, but believe the focus should be on the mental health/societal issues that plague this country.

Considering that a lot of you are the same posters that argue against Government spending, would you be open to the Federal Government investing $500 Billion into programs designed to tackle the mental health/societal issues that plague this country?

I posted this back on like page 13 or 14. Great point Biggie.


If it can be paid for without debt, absolutely.

The only way to pay for it without "debt' would be to cut money from other needed programs....or find ways to grow revenue via higher taxes on the wealthy and/or more "regular" people paying taxes by working (stimulus for job creation).

EDIT TO ADD: My bad, Lobos. I didn't read every page when I logged on.
BIGGIEsmalls 23


RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 13,243
And1: 783
Joined: Jul 27, 2010
Location: REALITY
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Chicago Bulls


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bulls69, dice, Gregnice33, HomoSapien, jelt2359, Keller61, kyosuke, NDave79, pipfan, siydee, theanimal23, TylerB, zmz72388