These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Another school shooting in Small Town America :(

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-12-14 20:38:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Elias Greyhand wrote:
I declare the USA no longer a civilized nation.

People die every day whether it's by inattention, malice, lack of sense or choice but any country where it seems it's as easy to get a gun as it is a library book doesn't get the title civilized.

And I'm going to end there before I descend in to a frothing rant at American "culture".


How very comfortable that there are now 27 persons less for you to hate...

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Elias Greyhand
#42 - 2012-12-14 20:39:25 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Restricting access to the tool that can do the damage is however not the best solution.


Except when it's a gun, then it's perfectly sensible as demonstrated by many nations.

"That which is done cannot be undone. But it can be avenged."
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#43 - 2012-12-14 20:39:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Eurydia Vespasian wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Eurydia Vespasian wrote:
horrible. and senseless. and...becoming very common.

but...the real tragedy to me, is not the shooting itself...it's that i am not shocked or surprised by it at all. living in a country where there are on average 87 violent gun deaths a day (not counting suicides) i don't see how anyone is taken aback by these occurrences.

it's practically...idk...tolerable.


A Whole 87? In a country of 300 million people and 270 million guns (we have more guns than cars)?

Put another way, 299,999,913 people don't get shot by anyone every day in America.


what exactly are you defending here? or trying to imply?

i'm not saying we should live in fear of people having guns or access to guns...i'm saying there is a problem. one that should be recognized and addressed.

87 a day might not seem like much when stuck up against the nations entire population but...87 is a lot per capita. that's 31,755 deaths a year. unnecessary deaths. considering most other nations have their fair share of whackos and have nowhere near the violence rate we have. what's different about them?

what about drunk drivers? how many do they kill a year? surely it would be a drop in the bucket compared to the national population but would you say drunk driving is not a problem?
''

Drunk driving isn't such a problem that you need to do somethig about cars and alcohol, no, that, like all things must be kept in perspective. i've made many a DUI stop, and responded to highway speed fatality accidents on highways, I still tell people to not over-react.

All I'm saying is keep things in context. When things like this happen, people want to change laws affecting 100 million gun owners owning 270 million guns, all because of 10-12 thousand criminals murdering people every year. It makes no sense to punish large swaths of people for the crimes of a few.\

As a police officer I'm 6 times more likely than the average citizen to be murdered in my life time. Keep that in context too, the chances of my dying in the line are still incredibly small. But despite that statistic, I don't want 10s of millions of law abiding citizens who own guns to be published because of 75-90 cop killers per year.

Keep.it.in.context.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#44 - 2012-12-14 20:39:36 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Eurydia Vespasian wrote:
what about drunk drivers? how many do they kill a year? surely it would be a drop in the bucket compared to the national population but would you say drunk driving is not a problem?

Sarcasm mode on...
Let's outlaw personal cars ! Let there only be public transportation ! And the license to drive a public vehicle should be a lot harder to obtain !
Sarcasm mode off.

Both are a problem. Restricting access to the tool that can do the damage is however not the best solution.



Actually, since I can be told "you don't need that high capacity magazine! It's designed to kill people", I want people to be told "you don't need to have that turbo sports car. It's designed to break the speed limit and people will get killed!".


We can go wherever we want with this.

If I have to live under tyranny over what I like, then so shall everybody.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#45 - 2012-12-14 20:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
True, people kill with knives, cars, planes & guns. One of these, however, has no purpose besides killing. Spare me the false equivalence.

Elias Greyhand wrote:
Akita T wrote:
Restricting access to the tool that can do the damage is however not the best solution.

Except when it's a gun, then it's perfectly sensible as demonstrated by many nations.


You're walking to your home late at night during winter. A starving pack of "communal" dogs chews you off. How nice that you don't have a gun that is only good for killing.
And yes, hungry "nobody's" dogs ARE a problem over here. Especially during the winter.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Anne-Louise Chasse
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-12-14 20:40:38 UTC
These children should have been armed if they wanted to return alive from kindergarten in USA. Evil

Frankly, **** all those who believe that more guns are safer. Let your child returns from school without being shot is not an issue worthy of a civilized country.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#47 - 2012-12-14 20:41:11 UTC
Elias Greyhand wrote:
Akita T wrote:
Restricting access to the tool that can do the damage is however not the best solution.


Except when it's a gun, then it's perfectly sensible as demonstrated by many nations.



Many nations that don't have what else? What does America have that those other nations do not?

Think about it.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#48 - 2012-12-14 20:42:38 UTC
Anne-Louise Chasse wrote:
These children should have been armed if they wanted to return alive from kindergarten in USA. Evil

Frankly, **** all those who believe that more guns are safer. Let your child returns from school without being shot is not an issue worthy of a civilized country.




Missing the point at usual.


It's going to be all about guns and what will be missed?


I know I know people hear of dead kids (unlike those dead kids in Gaza, like brown skin is nothing to care about) and POW: instant vaginosis.


Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#49 - 2012-12-14 20:43:11 UTC
What I fear is the truly unhinged going on binges like this next week in anticipation of the December 21st End of the World nonsense. To the mentally unsound, they can reason that there will be no consequences ever anyway if the world stops being.

In fact, it's too early to tell for sure as evidence is still being gathered, but it may have indeed been a factor here. Crazy folks can rationalize anything.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#50 - 2012-12-14 20:43:15 UTC
Akita T wrote:

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Plus, people would use them on a much more casual basis, so yes it would be a whole lot worse. They would absolutely have to be checked before entering a bar, that's for sure. Who's gonna handle that aspect?

Nobody, you would not check them out at a bar. It would be the self-selection of the most well-behaved. The rest die out in a few years when the entire bar opens up on them when they get rowdy.
Give the ones with unchecked aggressive tendencies the chance to express them as soon as possible, and get eliminated from the gene pool in the process. Yes, it will be very painful the first few years, and it would be worse for a generation or two, but it will be a whole lot better afterwards.

Lol, what a pile of steaming bullshit. Yeah sure, because aggressive and violent behaviour is some genetic disease we can root out by 'selection'. Lol, again. The violent animal is in all of us, and the only way to keep it in check is to bury it under as many layers of civilization as we can. Not carrying deadly weapons is one such layer, and very, very effective, as statistical comparison between Europe and the USA show without even the hint of a doubt.

Murders per 100k citizens:
Germany: 0.8
Sweden: 1.0
Norway: 0.6
France: 1.1
USA: 4.8

Say what you want, the facts tell their own story. More weapons flooding a country, freely available to everyone, more murders.

.
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-12-14 20:43:55 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Anne-Louise Chasse wrote:
These children should have been armed if they wanted to return alive from kindergarten in USA. Evil

Frankly, **** all those who believe that more guns are safer. Let your child returns from school without being shot is not an issue worthy of a civilized country.




Missing the point at usual.


It's going to be all about guns and what will be missed?


I know I know people hear of dead kids (unlike those dead kids in Gaza, like brown skin is nothing to care about) and POW: instant vaginosis.




It's vaginitis! X

"Little ginger moron" ~David Hasselhoff 

Want to see what Surf is training or how little isk Surf has?  http://eveboard.com/pilot/Surfin%27s_PlunderBunny
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#52 - 2012-12-14 20:44:28 UTC
Anne-Louise Chasse wrote:
These children should have been armed if they wanted to return alive from kindergarten in USA. Evil

Frankly, **** all those who believe that more guns are safer. Let your child returns from school without being shot is not an issue worthy of a civilized country.


You may choose to live in a country to coddles it's citizens, I do not.

Part of the price of our freedoms in the United States is the fact that a few (relatively speaking) criminals will do horrible things with guns. That is a price most of us are willing to accept.

As i said in a previous post, 100 million law abiding Americans should not be punished because of the actions of 10-12 thousand bad people. That's a very small fraction of our population.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#53 - 2012-12-14 20:44:44 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:



Actually, since I can be told "you don't need that high capacity magazine! It's designed to kill people", I want people to be told "you don't need to have that turbo sports car. It's designed to break the speed limit and people will get killed!".


We can go wherever we want with this.

If I have to live under tyranny over what I like, then so shall everybody.


Car isn't built to kill thingsBlink

But how about some give and take? You lose your guns and the government legalises pot, everywhere.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#54 - 2012-12-14 20:47:29 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


Part of the price of our freedoms in the United States is the fact that a few (relatively speaking) criminals will do horrible things with guns. That is a price most of us are willing to accept.




I don't think accept is the correct word here. We don't 'accept' this kind of act. Something is just wrong with your thinking.

As soon as someone tries any action both sides start losing all logic.

View this thread as example.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Anne-Louise Chasse
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2012-12-14 20:48:45 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Keep.it.in.context.


Keep.it.in.context:dead.children.are.a.fair.price.

Not in my country. Glad to be your children, not ours, those who die because they are not as important in.the.context. Evil
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#56 - 2012-12-14 20:49:11 UTC
On the other hand, I would totally support a mandatory hardware-enabled "defense only" method of operation for all guns sold to civilians, as soon as that's technologically feasible.
The guns would all come with quite a bit of electronics on them, only fire if held by the owner, and enabled to fire only if the owner's lifesigns as detected by the gun show an indication of stress/panic (or if loaded with non-lethal "practice" rounds, or if getting a "this is an authorized shooting range" encoded signal which must also match with the GPS location of authorized gun ranges).
The guns would also record both video and audio for the entire duration of the period they're enabled to fire.
As a civilian, owning any other guns that do not have THOSE safeties would be punishable by death.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2012-12-14 20:49:34 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Akita T wrote:

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Plus, people would use them on a much more casual basis, so yes it would be a whole lot worse. They would absolutely have to be checked before entering a bar, that's for sure. Who's gonna handle that aspect?

Nobody, you would not check them out at a bar. It would be the self-selection of the most well-behaved. The rest die out in a few years when the entire bar opens up on them when they get rowdy.
Give the ones with unchecked aggressive tendencies the chance to express them as soon as possible, and get eliminated from the gene pool in the process. Yes, it will be very painful the first few years, and it would be worse for a generation or two, but it will be a whole lot better afterwards.

Lol, what a pile of steaming bullshit. Yeah sure, because aggressive and violent behaviour is some genetic disease we can root out by 'selection'. Lol, again. The violent animal is in all of us, and the only way to keep it in check is to bury it under as many layers of civilization as we can. Not carrying deadly weapons is one such layer, and very, very effective, as statistical comparison between Europe and the USA show without even the hint of a doubt.

Murders per 100k citizens:
Germany: 0.8
Sweden: 1.0
Norway: 0.6
France: 1.1
USA: 4.8

Say what you want, the facts tell their own story. More weapons flooding a country, freely available to everyone, more murders.


Africa: 17.0

Go motherland! \Big smile/

"Little ginger moron" ~David Hasselhoff 

Want to see what Surf is training or how little isk Surf has?  http://eveboard.com/pilot/Surfin%27s_PlunderBunny
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#58 - 2012-12-14 20:49:36 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Akita T wrote:

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Plus, people would use them on a much more casual basis, so yes it would be a whole lot worse. They would absolutely have to be checked before entering a bar, that's for sure. Who's gonna handle that aspect?

Nobody, you would not check them out at a bar. It would be the self-selection of the most well-behaved. The rest die out in a few years when the entire bar opens up on them when they get rowdy.
Give the ones with unchecked aggressive tendencies the chance to express them as soon as possible, and get eliminated from the gene pool in the process. Yes, it will be very painful the first few years, and it would be worse for a generation or two, but it will be a whole lot better afterwards.

Lol, what a pile of steaming bullshit. Yeah sure, because aggressive and violent behaviour is some genetic disease we can root out by 'selection'. Lol, again. The violent animal is in all of us, and the only way to keep it in check is to bury it under as many layers of civilization as we can. Not carrying deadly weapons is one such layer, and very, very effective, as statistical comparison between Europe and the USA show without even the hint of a doubt.

Murders per 100k citizens:
Germany: 0.8
Sweden: 1.0
Norway: 0.6
France: 1.1
USA: 4.8

Say what you want, the facts tell their own story. More weapons flooding a country, freely available to everyone, more murders.


The problem with that is it looks terrible when it isn't.

i've been approached din the street (while in uniform) by people from other countries who told me that they were scared to come to America because of all the things they saw on TV about crime, usually complete with the kind of statistics you post here.

The real truth is the VAST majority of Americans will never be a victim of a violent crime (most won't even suffer property crime above $25 in value), and the icredibly vast majorit of America's 270 million guns will never be used to kill anyone. 12-13k murders per year means 269.9+ million guns that aren't used to kill.

I teach DARE and gun safety classes to school kids, and lots of them think they are going to get gunned down someday because of what they see on TV. It's just not bloody likely, no matter what "per capita" statistics are thrown around.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#59 - 2012-12-14 20:50:27 UTC
Anne-Louise Chasse wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Keep.it.in.context.


Keep.it.in.context:dead.children.are.a.fair.price.

Not in my country. Glad to be your children, not ours, those who die because they are not as important in.the.context. Evil


i pray for the dead, but no, 18 dead kis is not reason to victimize 100 MILLION citizens.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#60 - 2012-12-14 20:50:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Jenn aSide wrote:

You may choose to live in a country to coddles it's citizens, I do not.

Part of the price of our freedoms in the United States is the fact that a few (relatively speaking) criminals will do horrible things with guns. That is a price most of us are willing to accept.



Could you please define "freedom" for a stupid person like me?

And explain the difference between American freedom and British, French, Swedish or German freedom and why guns are so crucial for it?

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.