...a couple staffers had been armed?

Tags: control, gun, guns, killings, mass

Views: 8604

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Or maybe he just had a screw loose.

How convenient. Just like people who suffer from homosexuality?

I'm sorry to appear so dumb, but what is your point?

I'm dumber so it's hard for me to explain, but I'll try. What I just meant is that simply labeling these people as lunatics and psychopaths is facile.

And that in turn made me think of of clergy/homophobes like to call homosexuality a sickness instead of dealing with the issue.

Shouldn't we really care more about why these people snap instead of how (gun control topic). And if we ask why, shouldn't we have a better answer than "he was just nuts" ?

I agree that dealing with the underlying issue would be more useful and important, but i don't understand why most  people think this needs to be an either or position. Either we ban guns or we deal with the underlying problem. surely it will be more effective to do both.

Now i know the familiar argument that it is not guns that kill people it is people who kill people. But this completely ignores the psychological aspect of having a gun on you. Simply having a gun on you gives a lot of people an overwhelming sense of power and confidence, which is not something you typically want your average mass murderer to have. You will find that in nearly every single case of mass murder like this in America it is the quite people who crack and go on such a rampage. They are very often the ones who have been made to feel powerless and outcasts through bullying or being shunned and what not. Then when you take such a person and give them access to guns, which makes them feel powerful and confident, you have a perfect recipe for such a disaster. Now i know it can also be argued that if they want to kill they ca do it with a knife or baseball bat but those sort of things do not have the same psychological effect, or atleast not to such a high degree , as a gun. They are also nowhere near as effective at killing masses of people. The expression " bringing a knife to  a gun fight" is a cliche for a reason.
There is also that the same argument as " it is not guns that kill people ......" can be made for anything else like grenades, plastic explosives, scud missiles, sarin gas etc etc. Do you really think it would be a good idea to legalize all those and make them as easy to get as a gun in America. Because the basic fact remains that ,no matter how good of a job we do to treat the underlying cause of these sort of attacks, there will always be people who fall through the cracks and suffer a psychotic break that will entice them to do this sort of thing. And when that happens is it not a good idea to try and ensure that they wont have easy access to guns or explosives ? I dont know about you but if i was in the situation where someone cracked and decided to kill every one he could i would much rather he was armed with a knife or baseball bat than a variety of guns. There is also the likely hood that without access to guns and the psychological aspects they bring that this type of behavior would be somewhat less common.

Homosexuality. Illness or choice? They can't make up their mind, it seems.

I'm not sure "Why was he nuts?" is much better than "He was just nuts," because both are in the past tense.

We are largely powerless to intervene until someone actually does something.

Unseen- The point in understanding what the root cause of this is to help prevent it happening in the future.

k - you left out the Kardashians --

"It's the fucking system that breeds these people."

What system is that? The school system?

Society in general.

Which is changeable.

I don't know the answer to that.  I suspect it depends on what particular subculture you are in.

It would be useful, I think, to break down that vaunted 9000+ homicides figure by various demographic factors.  It may well be that some segments of society have rates down in the sort of range Blaine's poster from a couple pages back would consider acceptable.

As has been pointed out before, the mere presence of guns is not the issue; I point to Switzerland, and I also remind people of what Cody said (a few hours ago but a couple of pages down), that within the US the states and locales with the strictest gun laws tend to be the ones with the most crime, both firearm related and not.


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service