school shootings

M

Modderrhu

New member
Originally posted by MarkusTay
I also remember seeing a video of a Thai(?) Congressional meeting where the delegates got up out of there seats and beat the crap out of each other. As much as I would enjoy seeing our politicians do that, I don\'t think it would happen here.
Click to expand...
No, they\'d shoot each other in hunting accidents. lol
 
M

MarkusTay

New member
touche\'

lol

I said I\'d trust them to have respectful meetings, I never said I would walk out in a field in the middle of nowhere while they were armed... :rolleyes:
I also wouldn\'t let my kid become a Washington Intern either. :eek:
 
Avelorn

Avelorn

Sven Jonsson
Well. I think it\'s pretty obvius the number of handguns around being around can affect the number of killings (and as well the relation to and culture around guns). This is of course a more complicated issue than that. But the availability guns around is one significant factor. I might quote Eddie Izzard on that.. :) I think when discussing pro or againts tougher legislation we must also take into account the gun related accidents.

Originally posted by spazzy
Americans don\'t murder because they have guns. If an individual decides to murder somebody, they will do it with or without a gun. There are a hundred and one different ways to end a life without the use of guns, including but not limited to strangulation, suffocation, poisoning, drowning, and blunt force trauma.
Click to expand...

If it was so that every gun related homicide was well thought out murders, it would indeed be true. But it\'s not.
 
S

spazzy

New member
This thread started as an issue with school shootings. The discussion has turned toward issues on the control of firearms, or the lack there-of. This is a bunny trail that I really don\'t mind skipping down. What is bothering me is that I am seeing several posts that are making religious refrences. Many people who have religious prefrences are very strong in their convictions, and I am no exception. I do not wish for this thread to take a turn down that road. I hope that I am not being premature with this, but I am convinced that the discussion of religion here could be rather volatile and an easy way for us to offend each other. I am not pointing any fingers at anybody, and I am not saying that what has been said is or could be considered offensive. I just don\'t want us to reach that point.
 
M

matty1001

New member
Well i think my signature quote kind of sums this thread up for me, no guns - no (or less) gun killings, and that IMHO is the best way to stop it.
 
Avelorn

Avelorn

Sven Jonsson
@Supervike: oh.. thanks. :redface: I absorbe praise like a slug in a desert

I personally only use the phrase \"hasta la vista, baby\".
 
V

vincegamer

Active member
Originally posted by Avelorn
. . . but note that the homicide rates in US (per capita) are going down and are as low as in the 60\'s now. The number of policeofficers killed in the line of duty is also going down etc. There are positive trends! :) Hopefully this will continue and people will feel less scared.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately even this statistic is skewed. A study of the City of Baltimore a few years ago showed that the number of homicides was dramatically dropping. The police chief and mayor shouted it from the roof tops - they were making Baltimore a better place.
Then someone noticed something else that changed right at the same time homicide rates began to drop: Baltimore\'s new trauma center had opened. They studied the number of gunshot wounds reported in the city and found that it was rising.
Basically, in Baltimore, homicides were decreasing not because there were fewer attempts, but because more people were surviving due to better medical care.
 
V

vincegamer

Active member
Originally posted by Wren
My college history professor relayed an interesting theory related to the possible causes for the different national characters of the US and Canada, which are on the same landmass, were founded in roughly the same time period, and with influences from many of the same European nations.

The theory is that the US was founded by people who chose to leave their homes or were pushed out - people who wanted more space, or to discover new places, or the freedom to practice religions or politics considered fringe where they were from - type A trail blazer types and rebels.

Conversely, the initial crop of Canadians were company men, people hired by the European nations to map out the land, catch or trade for fur pelts, start communities mainly for the purpose of laying claim to land ownership or trading with the natives and so on. So more type B, law abiding, live and let live sorts.
Click to expand...
My theory is it\'s because Canada is colder.
 
D

dauber22

New member
@spazzy - by \"imitation\" guns, I assume he meant things like AirSoft guns and the like. They look very much like \"real\" firearms and could easily be mistaken for such in a crime situation. Because of that, here in NY (where the state motto is: \"If it isn\'t required, it\'s forbidden\" :rolleyes: ) AirSoft guns have almost as many restrictions on them as real firearms.
 
M

Mr.S.Marbo

New member
Aaaah I posted and then lost it all dunno what happened.

Anyways...Finn... Whoop\'s I was a bit wrong there :) I read it again and a prohibited firearm is:
\"any self-loading or pump-action rifled gun
other than one which is chambered for
.22 rimfire cartridges.\"
\"any self-loading or pump-action smoothbore gun which is not an air weapon or chambered for .22 rimfire cartridges and
either has a barrel less than 24 inches
in length... or less than 40 inches overall.\"

I take it then your gun is \"chambered for .22 rimfire cartridges\" (whatever that means lol) and is over 40 inches long and has a barrell of over 24 inches... I was totally wroing about the calibre too :)

Spazzy: an immitation gun (using the definition used by the staistics I used) is meant to look like a real lethal firearm, but either cannot fire anything, or if it does fire, then it is not capable of lethal force and generally doesn\'t cause serious injury.
 
P

paintingploddy

New member
Perhaps instead of right to bear arms it should be the privilege to bear arms. Instead of being assumed to be responsible and safe until you do something stupid, perhaps you should be rewarded for being responsible and safe.
 
Sand Rat

Sand Rat

New member
I have spent the last few days debating weighing in on this issue, and decided to go ahead.

Everyone is making the assumption that guns are the root cause here so I did a little digging - according to the US Department of Justice, in 2005, 28% of all Murders, Robberies and Aggrivated assaults involved guns. 28% - hmm seems to indicate that the remaining 72% of those crimes were done by other means. But hey, a guy walking into an office with a sawed off shotgun killing 7 people makes the news, while the same guy walking in and bludgeoning 7 people to death with a Louisville Slugger might make the news, but doesnt have the same ring, does it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back To Top
Top