First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Uber driver stops mass shooting
51277 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 10/4/15

sundin13 wrote:


PhantomGundam wrote:

Yes, guns are dangerous. That's why not even a madman like Hitler was crazy enough to attack a country where any random civilian could potentially be armed (Switzerland). Most of the mass shooters you see on the news are certainly crazy, but they're smart enough to know they'll have an easier time killing people in gun-free zones.

People who advocate for stricter gun control after mass shootings are ignoring the real issue: a mental health care system that is a huge joke. Not only are you advocating for taking innocent people's rights away, you're ignoring the people that are actually crying out for help. It's sad how we live in a country where a mentally ill person can go all over the internet, announce where their crime will be, and carry it out long before anyone notices that they've already publicly announced that they were going to do this. If we want to see less mass shootings, we need to fix our broken mental health care system and put in place laws that limit people with questionable records from obtaining guns. None of which should infringe on the rights of sane law-abiding citizens. Taking away guns from regular citizens will only put them in danger of people who don't follow the law and/or are crazy.


First of all, theres no evidence that mass shooters in general pick their targets based on whether or not they are gun free. They tend to be either places the individual was personally connected to (ex: workplace, ex school etc) or the place where the ones they wanted to kill are (ex: churches).

Second of all, the most recent mass shooting didn't actually take place in a gun free zone as state laws allowed concealed guns on campus with a permit and there were individuals with concealed weapons on campus at the time.

Additionally, while mental health is certainly a problem, it is not the whole problem. However, one of the most common ways to ensure that those with mental health issues aren't able to get guns is universal thorough background checks which gun lobbyists are almost unanimously against. Whether you like it or not, even keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill is wrapped into the whole stalemate of gun control. Talking about the issue of gun control is not ignoring mental health as the two are in large parts tied together.


I know they're connected. What I'm saying is that whenever a mass shooting takes place, gun control advocates immediately ignore that connection and say "guns are bad. This is why we need to take guns away." You will never see a gun control advocate say "this is why we need to treat people with mental illnesses" If they do, it's only an afterthought, not an immediate concern. Their priority is always to turn it into a "guns are evil" argument and ignore the person who fired the gun.

As for what you said about how shooters select their targets, that's true to an extent. If a crazy guy hates Muslims, he'd pick his targets out at a nearby mosque. If he's angry at what a few kids from school did to him, he'd go to his school. Even so, do you really think someone like the Sandy Hook shooter would've been likely to still do what he did if everyone in that neighborhood was armed? Why do you think most mass shootings occur in places where there are no guns? It's not because crazy people don't exist in places like Texas or Florida (I think we all know crazy people exist in those states). It's because people like this know that they'll be stopped either before they could complete their goal or quickly after getting starting.
13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 10/4/15 , edited 10/4/15

sarteck wrote:
"Gun control" is one of those broad terms we really have to define when we talk about it.

For many people, it's "ban all civilians from owning guns." For others it's "more background checks." For others it's "address the mental health issues." and so on and so forth, etc.

When someone says, "I'm for/against gun control," we tend to think "they don't want ANY restrictions on guns" or "they want to take all our guns away!"


(Also, the campus is a gun free zone. http://www.umpqua.edu/community-workforce-training/185-about-ucc/offices-administration/400-safety-security-info The 1989 Oregon law that allows CCW to be carried anywhere does have exemptions, see http://www.usacarry.com/oregon_concealed_carry_permit_information.html under "what areas are off-limits". CCW is, in fact, NOT allowed on campus.)


"Due to recent state legislation and court rulings, 7 states now have provisions allowing the carrying of concealed weapons on public postsecondary campuses. These states are Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Utah, and Wisconsin"

On the actual grounds of the campus, it is not legal to ban licensed concealed carry weapons in Oregon (although they can be banned from buildings). On Umpqua CC, from what I can tell there are no specific bans for buildings although you may have to obtain written permission from the school (that part of the rules is a little shaky so its hard to tell if you need authorization from the school or the state). However, it would be illegal for the school to say no, and as I said, there were individuals who were legally carrying weapons on campus.


PhantomGundam wrote:
As for what you said about how shooters select their targets, that's true to an extent. If a crazy guy hates Muslims, he'd pick his targets out at a nearby mosque. If he's angry at what a few kids from school did to him, he'd go to his school. Even so, do you really think someone like the Sandy Hook shooter would've been likely to still do what he did if everyone in that neighborhood was armed? Why do you think most mass shootings occur in places where there are no guns? It's not because crazy people don't exist in places like Texas or Florida (I think we all know crazy people exist in those states). It's because people like this know that they'll be stopped either before they could complete their goal or quickly after getting starting.


Looking it up quickily using data from the Mass Shooting Tracker, I found 24 mass shootings in FLA and 18 in TX in 2013 out of 364. Heres the data from this year:



Now while this data is imperfect (Not sure the exact definition used for "mass shooting"), I don't think you can say that there is any real macroscale trend based on gun density.
9022 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/4/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

Yeah, people kill people, guns don't kill people, but that doesn't necessarily mean guns are worth the risk.

Let's talk....missiles. Let's say every person has his own personal missile silo. Missiles can be used for malicious killing or to kill someone trigger-happy to protect others. We'd probably still ban citizen ownership of these missiles for some of the same reasons we'd ban guns. Ending lives is just too easy with these sorts of weapons and their only real purpose is to cause death or great bodily injury.

Knives are tools with many uses and it takes considerably more effort and planning to kill with a knife than with a gun. Swords are tools for killing but they are conspicuous and can be used to practice certain martial arts. Both have limited range. Restraints are built in. A person doesn't need nearly as much training with a gun to be deadly and not much physical conditioning is required. Anyone can press a button to shoot a missile or pull a trigger to fire a bullet. I think that is what makes them so dangerous, much more dangerous than any bladed tool or weapon. Contrary to what is depicted in anime and movies, swinging a sword properly to cut down a man so that he can't retaliate requires a fair amount of training. Same goes for knives, which are even less lethal. Strangely, since you're not likely to get into a knife fight or sword fight nowadays, it is more effective to train people today to cut down unarmed and unarmored enemies, but I don't see martial arts focusing on that.

Although gun bans do not directly solve mass shooter issues, the fact that people kill people does not mean guns are worth the risk. It all depends how you want to do the balancing. I just see a lot of talking past the opposition in this particular controversial issue.

At the moment, I could go either way, but both sides have major potential problems to address.


In my opinion, inflicting deadly damage with most weapons is easy. Regardless of actual training, with most of the world being able to access the internet it makes only someone more able to learn what is vital beyond common knowledge/sense (head, heart, etc.), and I didn't even need to mention media (TV/movies). The other factors to me are intent and opportunity.

If anything I'd debate the actual permission to conceal weapons and of course increasing the policies of attaining and even storing them. Traditionally, weapons are still being made of metal however that is not going to be something to rely on when poly-weapons are now available, especially knives. Knives are only less lethal in my mind because of the proximity/opportunity required. A puncture wound can be deadly in more ways than one without being accurate, and even then they can be made into projectiles. There is a point that if everyone HAD one (not just the permission to have one) it would reduce minor crimes but then I believe it may increase major crimes (in some areas) but there are too many unknown factors (in America lets hope ethnic equality happens sooner than later).

As a gun owner, I've been to multiple certified trainings and it was mainly to be able to apply to conceal carry in other states beyond my own or to be a member of a sportsman's club (range). These things still do not prevent a mental breakdown (please God no...) in someone with no history or precursors. However, I do feel as someone who has been "trained" in the "laws" it helps in a small way and that we (Americans) can/should take it further to train professionally and be certified, though that leads to discussion on monitoring of activities (and I'm not a fan of that). It still comes down to the person and their intent. My intent is to protect myself, the people I find important to me, and to be proficient with the ones I own to not make an untrained mistake.

I do envy the ignorance of others that think that banning them entirely will solve the issue. I don't consider myself a criminal but I break rules all the time in person and online. I've yet to know anyone that cares about laws when they don't consider them in the first place.
20805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 10/4/15
Well that's good he defended himself......on the other hand i could never live in a country where everyone is allowed to own a concealed gun.

i would worry 24/7 about some stranger shooting me for no reason i would become a paranoid wreck.
3228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/4/15

Ryulightorb wrote:

Well that's good he defended himself......on the other hand i could never live in a country where everyone is allowed to own a concealed gun.

i would worry 24/7 about some stranger shooting me for no reason i would become a paranoid wreck.


Do you live in fear 24/7 about someone being able to stab you, now?
20805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 10/4/15 , edited 10/4/15

sarteck wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Well that's good he defended himself......on the other hand i could never live in a country where everyone is allowed to own a concealed gun.

i would worry 24/7 about some stranger shooting me for no reason i would become a paranoid wreck.


Do you live in fear 24/7 about someone being able to stab you, now?

tiny bit but because most people where i live don't conceal weapons on them and if they do get sent to jail for it.

I mean yeah if it's at night im paranoid about anyone having a knife but during the day not so much.

If they have a knife i want a gun if they have a gun well i want something stronger because i need to give them some reason to not attack me :S

Armed crimes are low where i live most criminals are unarmed so i guess im lucky but when i think about it i wouldn't be so paranoid if i was allowed to conceal my own gun and body armour.

With knives you can protect yourself and there is a lower chance of one stab killing you and they need to get close to you but with a gun anyone can just randomly shoot someone and the person can't even disarm the shooter that's why i'm paranoid i don't know how to disarm someone with a gun or protect my life from a bullet being shot at me.

Shooting them with your own gun isn't an option if you don't own one or have just been shot in the head.

Because i know i can stand a chance against someone with a knife bare handed i happily walk the streets at midnight and feel safe but guns.are a different story you can't defend against a gunshot once its aimed and shot towards a lethal point of your body you are FUCKED

That being said i don't hate guns i just think there is a time and a place and being armed with weapons in public is not the right time.
But if it does become the norm ill just go out into town with a sheathed sword as that would count as a concealed weapon and i don't like to use guns myself (not to mention there illegal where i live at the moment but even when i move to America i'm not going to own a gun rather own something i can use as a melee weapon personally.
Posted 10/4/15
I think it's bound to happen sooner or later.
27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 10/4/15 , edited 10/4/15

InSaiyanOne wrote:

In my opinion, inflicting deadly damage with most weapons is easy. Regardless of actual training, with most of the world being able to access the internet it makes only someone more able to learn what is vital beyond common knowledge/sense (head, heart, etc.), and I didn't even need to mention media (TV/movies). The other factors to me are intent and opportunity.

If anything I'd debate the actual permission to conceal weapons and of course increasing the policies of attaining and even storing them. Traditionally, weapons are still being made of metal however that is not going to be something to rely on when poly-weapons are now available, especially knives. Knives are only less lethal in my mind because of the proximity/opportunity required. A puncture wound can be deadly in more ways than one without being accurate, and even then they can be made into projectiles. There is a point that if everyone HAD one (not just the permission to have one) it would reduce minor crimes but then I believe it may increase major crimes (in some areas) but there are too many unknown factors (in America lets hope ethnic equality happens sooner than later).

As a gun owner, I've been to multiple certified trainings and it was mainly to be able to apply to conceal carry in other states beyond my own or to be a member of a sportsman's club (range). These things still do not prevent a mental breakdown (please God no...) in someone with no history or precursors. However, I do feel as someone who has been "trained" in the "laws" it helps in a small way and that we (Americans) can/should take it further to train professionally and be certified, though that leads to discussion on monitoring of activities (and I'm not a fan of that). It still comes down to the person and their intent. My intent is to protect myself, the people I find important to me, and to be proficient with the ones I own to not make an untrained mistake.

I do envy the ignorance of others that think that banning them entirely will solve the issue. I don't consider myself a criminal but I break rules all the time in person and online. I've yet to know anyone that cares about laws when they don't consider them in the first place.


Yes. just dealing damage with an object is potentially easy, but people mostly wish to do so with impunity. A firearm does this better than blade or bludgeon in most cases. And it does the same deadly damage regardless of the user's condition. The media depicts killing in an unnatural and unrealistic way. People and animals don't die immediately when stabbed or shot, giving them a chance to retaliate when you are near them unless you damage the brain. Yes, blades can leave larger wounds than handgun bullets, and bludgeons do not need reloading, but the reason it is easier to use guns is that it takes less guts while being independent upon the user's physical condition.

I'm for sensible gun control laws even if I waver at the moment about gun bans. Firearms are a powerful and deadly weapons, and monitoring their use is not only reasonable, but probably necessary. It doesn't seem good to give someone power without something to keep it in check. IMO, there should be a safety training license, a background check, and possibly a review of medical records and assessment of mental health before someone is allowed to buy a gun. Even then, it is still very possible that a certified gun owner's family member removes the weapon while not in his presence and does some damage with it. Buying a gun should not be as easy and quick as buying an Xbox or something. I understand wanting to be able to defend one's home and family but, at the same time, allowing guns to be owned so freely strikes me as a potentially unsafe practice. I'm aware there are some restrictions already in place, but I feel that enforcement is a bit lax.

When living in groups and needing to get along with others under the protection of a government, some liberties must be sacrificed for the sake of safety. Too much and you get a nanny state. Too little and you're not really being protected.
3228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/4/15 , edited 10/4/15

Ryulightorb wrote:

With knives you can protect yourself and there is a lower chance of one stab killing you and they need to get close to you but with a gun anyone can just randomly shoot someone and the person can't even disarm the shooter that's why i'm paranoid i don't know how to disarm someone with a gun or protect my life from a bullet being shot at me.

Shooting them with your own gun isn't an option if you don't own one or have just been shot in the head.

Because i know i can stand a chance against someone with a knife bare handed i happily walk the streets at midnight and feel safe but guns.are a different story you can't defend against a gunshot once its aimed and shot towards a lethal point of your body you are FUCKED


I'm not sure why you think that getting stabbed with a knife is less lethal than getting shot with a gun. It depends upon the wielder's proficiency with each. Someone that knows how to shoot can shoot you in a vital area; someone that knows how to use a knife can stab you in a vital area. Being shot through the heart or stabbed through the heart results in the same thing.

Truly, the only differences are range and (if using an automatic weapon) rate of puncture.

Hell, it wasn't too long ago there was a mass stabbing in a Chinese city that left 29 innocents dead, 4 perpetrators dead, and 140 people injured.

And that's not even including the mass murders of 2010 in China with knives, hammers, and meat cleavers.

Or the Akihabara massacre in which a guy killed three people by driving his truck into them, and then got out and stabbed and killed 12 more.

Even in your land Down Under, when eight kids were stabbed in Cairns by their crazy mom just last year.

Or the five people in Calgary last year that were stabbed to death.



Point is, knives are just as deadly.



[Edit: Misspelled some shit.]
17181 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 10/4/15
If we gave everyone pizza, violence will decrease tremendously.

Actually never mind, people will just fight over the pizza.
20805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 10/4/15

sarteck wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

With knives you can protect yourself and there is a lower chance of one stab killing you and they need to get close to you but with a gun anyone can just randomly shoot someone and the person can't even disarm the shooter that's why i'm paranoid i don't know how to disarm someone with a gun or protect my life from a bullet being shot at me.

Shooting them with your own gun isn't an option if you don't own one or have just been shot in the head.

Because i know i can stand a chance against someone with a knife bare handed i happily walk the streets at midnight and feel safe but guns.are a different story you can't defend against a gunshot once its aimed and shot towards a lethal point of your body you are FUCKED


I'm not sure why you think that getting stabbed with a knife is less lethal than getting shot with a gun. It depends upon the wielder's proficiency with each. Someone that knows how to shoot can shoot you in a vital area; someone that knows how to use a knife can stab you in a vital area. Being shot through the heart or stabbed through the heart results in the same thing.

Truly, the only differences are range and (if using an automatic weapon) rate of puncture.

Hell, it wasn't too long ago there was a mass stabbing in a Chinese city that left 29 innocents dead, 4 perpetrators dead, and 140 people injured.

And that's not even including the mass murders of 2010 in China with knives, hammers, and meat cleavers.

Or the Akihabara massacre in which a guy killed three people by driving his truck into them, and then got out and stabbed and killed 12 more.

Even in your land Down Under, when eight kids were stabbed in Cairns by their crazy mom just last year.

Or the five people in Calgary last year that were stabbed to death.



Point is, knives are just as deadly.



[Edit: Misspelled some shit.]


Oh i do agree knives are just as deadly my point with knives is you need to get into stabbing range for them to be use-able
Guns are no more or less deadly then knives however with knives you need to be in there stabbing range so if you can outrun them it's safer.

Not to mention there are classes to learn how to disarm a hostile person with a knife or a gun but both require you to be right next to them so both are useless.

The only thing that makes me worry less then guns is the fact that you need to be in range to actually kill someone (unless there throwing knives) and i make it a point to stay distanced from people when i walk at night as a rule of thumb.

3228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/4/15

Ryulightorb wrote:

Oh i do agree knives are just as deadly my point with knives is you need to get into stabbing range for them to be use-able
Guns are no more or less deadly then knives however with knives you need to be in there stabbing range so if you can outrun them it's safer.

Not to mention there are classes to learn how to disarm a hostile person with a knife or a gun but both require you to be right next to them so both are useless.

The only thing that makes me worry less then guns is the fact that you need to be in range to actually kill someone (unless there throwing knives) and i make it a point to stay distanced from people when i walk at night as a rule of thumb.



Yep, That's all true. I'm a fat-ass with no coordination and would never actually try to disarm someone with a knife unless I was absolutely sure I could overpower them, despite having rudimentary training (like, 15 years ago, lol) when i was in the Navy for exactly that, hah.

Also due to being a fat-ass, outrunning a knife-wielding criminal would likely be out of the question for me, hahaha.

So for a typical Amerifat like me, a knife-wielding criminal would probably be as dangerous as a gun-wielding one.

This brings up an interesting (if somewhat off-topic) query, though... Shooting someone in self-defense or defense of others when they only have a knife (or crowbar, sword, whatever)--would you consider that wrong?

I personally wouldn't, as long as it was clearly self-defense (or defense of others), but I have heard a lot of people that would take exception to that.
6165 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / 馬鹿外人
Offline
Posted 10/4/15 , edited 10/4/15
Take our guns, sure. Martial law is much easier without 'em.
20805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 10/4/15

sarteck wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Oh i do agree knives are just as deadly my point with knives is you need to get into stabbing range for them to be use-able
Guns are no more or less deadly then knives however with knives you need to be in there stabbing range so if you can outrun them it's safer.

Not to mention there are classes to learn how to disarm a hostile person with a knife or a gun but both require you to be right next to them so both are useless.

The only thing that makes me worry less then guns is the fact that you need to be in range to actually kill someone (unless there throwing knives) and i make it a point to stay distanced from people when i walk at night as a rule of thumb.



Yep, That's all true. I'm a fat-ass with no coordination and would never actually try to disarm someone with a knife unless I was absolutely sure I could overpower them, despite having rudimentary training (like, 15 years ago, lol) when i was in the Navy for exactly that, hah.

Also due to being a fat-ass, outrunning a knife-wielding criminal would likely be out of the question for me, hahaha.

So for a typical Amerifat like me, a knife-wielding criminal would probably be as dangerous as a gun-wielding one.

This brings up an interesting (if somewhat off-topic) query, though... Shooting someone in self-defense or defense of others when they only have a knife (or crowbar, sword, whatever)--would you consider that wrong?

I personally wouldn't, as long as it was clearly self-defense (or defense of others), but I have heard a lot of people that would take exception to that.


As long as it is self defense and they were a threat then i see it as perfectly fine.
Posted 10/4/15
You mean to tell me that Americans are still rationalizing that it's ok to murder people? That a nation created in the 18th century is stuck in the 18th century? Yeah, we can tell that it was only lower class citizens who migrated from Europe to America, and that they created their own "upper class", because that "upper class" kindergarten government couldn't possibly entertain us more.



We need mooooar entertainment, though, gah! Go have riots in the streets. Give guns to babies. None of that sophisticated boring shit we got going on here in Northern Europe with all this live-let-live, equality, peace and harmony bullshit. We're so terribly bored without you, America. You're our Colosseum.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.