News Us politics - read first post before comment

[Anarchy]

One of the implicit ideas that gets used as justification for the existence of governments is;

Humans are falliable and flawed, therefore government is necessary to maintain order and protect them from each other.

Or as Thomas Hobbies put it, without a mIghty power to hold all in awe, there would prevail a condition of war of all a upon all, and human life would be nasty, short and brutish.

Just as a thought experiment. If men (of all genders!) were "angels" who were created perfect, government would be composed of angels, and perfect, but it would also be unnecessary, as the population is already perfect.

Government in our world must be composed of the inherently falliable, flawed, humans.

Having falliable flawed humans in the position of a "mighty power to hold all in awe" isn't going to somehow make them perfect. To believe that gaining power could make a human entirely good, would be a very dangerous kind of magical thinking.

What sort of humans go seeking power over other humans?

Err, yeah, just look at what you have in power at the moment.

Don't think that it was any better in the past either. There never was a golden age of wise or good government.

Now, who thinks that it's a good idea to make a population defenseless in front of such a fundamentally flawed institution?

How has that gone in the past?
Civilian disarmament may not be a sufficient step to cause a genocide, but it has always been a necessary step.

 

[Fadeaway]

@lostforgottensoul I don't live in that state anymore, but I just looked up the rules so I could link it here and I guess they have done away with it since I was last on food stamps. I thought it was still in place and was common everywhere, I stand corrected.
Governments Abandon Fingerprinting for Food Stamps

 

[Neverthesame]

@ShikibuZ please disregard any apparent frustration on my part in this post, it has nothing to do with you. I will respond to you separately. I'll also do my damnedest to not drag you back into a topic I know is very upsetting for you.

If enough people speak up,

Ok.....
Actually read please.

I think we should be looking at why these lunatics kill groups of people, at least as much as how they do it.

I can't think of a simpler way to phrase this. It's even bolded for emphasis.

Doesn't automatically mean that I think gun control in the US is adequate,

Look see? Read. That drives me absolutely batty, being asked to explain the same thing several times to the same person, who keeps asking me to speak despite not appearing to be listening to what I'm saying.
This is exactly the reason why I don't speak much in real life.

It all starts with talking about it.

That's what I am doing. I made three separate posts on that other thread, all pertaining to this topic.
I freely admit I wasn't concise enough with the first one.
The last one I thought was pretty bloody straightforward, highlighting why I think the {Why people do this} is as important as the {How people do this} By demonstrating that could make a chemical weapon, capable of killing several people in under 5 minutes. Using common otherwise benign household items. No guns, bullets or super secret recipes required.
So easy a five year old kid can do it, using the things found in most American homes.
Even if every gun on earth magically disappeared tomorrow, it would not prevent an improvised weapon such as I described.

One last thing.
Seeing as I am not a citizen of the United States of America. I cannot vote for any proposed gun control measures in that country.
I have zero sway in a foreign government. This particular websie, is not a U.S. government website. So one Canadian repeating "gun control, gun control, gun control, gun control" over and over again isn't going to change the way the Government of the United States of America manages firearms within it's sovereign borders. It just isn't.
This will be the third time now I have stated that I agree with the idea of tighter gun control laws. This is the second time I have stated that since I cannot affect such changes within a foreign country from my keyboard, I don't see the point of chanting it over and over again.

My goal was to join into a discussion about the recent shooting in a school. Repeating the same statement over and over, is not a discussion.
Several people have already made the point that United States gun control laws are inadequate. I have agreed with this point several times. Why is this not sufficient?

Why must I parrot the same sentiment over and over again ad nauseum? That does not make for helpful discussion.

Were I marching in an organised protest, or signing a petition. I'd be happy to shout "gun control, gun control" all bloody day. In such a situation, solidarity does indeed make a difference when the target audience are those responsible for enacting such policies.

A discussion on a web forum for mental illness, is not a place where American laws are passed.

I can't think of any other way to explain this. If it not good enough for you, I cannot make it clearer.

I will not respond to anyone else asking why I don't support gun control reform. As I have now repeatedly stated that I do, across several threads. I just don't want to shout "gun control, gun control".

The real irony being I've actually chanted the two stupid words more than anyone else has as far as I can tell.

 

[Neverthesame]

I'm not sure I understand your perspective as you live in a country where gun control laws are set firmly in place thus mitigating the degree of carnage that happens.

My perspective is from seeing that our gun control policies while certainly more restrictive than those in most U.S. states, isn't really helping.

Two years ago a man working at one of the distribution centres which supplies the company I work for, went on a stabbing spree through the warehouse. He killed two people and wounded several others.

Just last year, a man who lived literally 200 yards from my house, took his gun out to a busy bus terminal I pass by everyday to and from work. He then opened fire on the people there using a semi automatic pistol he purchased legally.
He did this just after school let out for the day. There were hundreds of children in crowding that terminal.

The only reason it didn't make the world news was because he was a poor shot, missed everyone he shot at.
He wasn't using blank rounds, or warning shots. There was a hole in the drivers side window of a city bus, literally inches from where the driver's head was. The driver was also the worst injured person, with bits of glass peppered in his face.

When police arrived, there was a brief standoff, which resulted in the gunman being killed by police.

Over the last several years, there have been several fatal serial arsonists, stabbing sprees, heavy goods vehicles driven into crowds, ect ect.

While Calgary is one of the largest cities in this country it still only has a population of just over one million people.

There aren't fewer homicidal maniacs per capita, just fewer people per capita.
The lack of available firearms has honestly only made them more creative, not less dangerous.

This is why I am saying what I am.
I promise I am not trying to be contrarian or looking looking to stir up drama. The grass really isn't greener on this side of the fence.

Better gun control is not a bad thing by any means, but it's only one of many things needing to change, in order to effect real significant change to combat spree killings such as what happened in florida.

I hope I articulated that correctly. I don't want to upset you further.

 

[Deleted member 541]

Yes, gun control isn’t the fix all, but it’s a start. Teachers need to pick out students that fit the profile, so the teachers need more training. Parents need to step up to the plate and if they feel their child is in need of help, then they MUST find a way to get that help. Someone suggested therapist need to be part of the school, I agree.

I also believe that gun shops and gun shows need to be more acccountable. Is it really ok for them to sell a semi automatic gun with hundreds of rounds of ammo to a 18 or 19 yr old without questioning the actions??? Personally responsiblity of shop owners and gun shows need to be more aware and not so concerned with the sale.

The government needs to start somewhere, and talking about the issue would be a place to start, instead of hiding behind the second amendment. JMO!!!

 

[Deleted member 41765]

Better gun control is not a bad thing by any means, but it's only one of many things needing to change, in order to effect real significant change to combat spree killings such as what happened in florida.

Completely agree, and this was meant to be my initial point before I went off the deep end. Your consideration is much appreciated, and no, you didn't upset me further. I've managed to rally a bit. Thank you.

 

[Deleted member 541]

It’s a hard subject for many people to hear or write about, never mind trying to figure out how to stay safe. As I’ve said before though, I really believe that for the government to actually DO something, I’m afraid that it’s going to have to become personal with one of their children being affected. It wasn’t bad enough when one of their own was shot playing baseball, I guess a shooter will have to walk into one of their kids schools before they take things serious.....

We can have all the empathy we want, but until we actually go through something we can not imagine how it is, and only then do we scream loud enough to be heard!!!!!!

 

[Anarchy]

Err, guys,

You do realise that you have only ever received a totally biased and distorted picture from the lamestream and politicians?

Appalachian Law school, 2002.
Students who had concealed carry permits retrieved their pistols from their cars, and confronted a student who was on a shooting spree in which 3 people were killed . Disarmed and subdued him.

Of 218 unique news stories covering the event, only 4 mentioned the defensive use of guns.

Pearl, Mississipi.
A head teacher confronted a school shooter, with his own carry gun and disarmed the shooter, ending the shooting spree.
This does not get reported.

Florida has one of the longest histories of concealed carry. Long term stundies reveal a lower rate of offending amongst the concealed carriers than amongst serving cops (when was the last time you heard of cops doing one of their own? Even with that bias in place, the concealed carriers still had lower recorded rates of offending).

Estimates for defensive gun use in the united state are between 1.5 and 3.4 times a year. At least Three times the rate of criminal misuse.

In 95% of those, the gun isn't fired, brandishing the gun is sufficient to end the confrontation.

These are almost never reported in the media. John R Lott has studied the bias, and published, both in peer reviewed academic journals and as a referenced semi academic book for an interested readership.

This is a link to a talking John Lott gave at Hillsdale College, which provides a quick intro to the gross under reporting bias
Media Bias Against Guns Analysis by John Lott

In the wider research, study of the gradual spread of concealed carry permits, and of full de restriction of carry, at a county level of resolution, shows statistically significant reductions of all crimes,

both confrontational such as robbery, homicide, mugging, and rape,

And non confrontational, such as burglary and arson.

Multiple public shootings are incredibly rare, so conventional statistics with Bell curves, means and standard deviations, don't work very well on them (this is my caveat) .

However, what appears to happen is multiple public shootings decline drastically in areas where an armed person is likely to be encountered.

The would be multiple murderers seek out areas where their intended victims are not likely to be able to resist
Public schools and gun free / defenseless victim zones are just such places.

It's been noted that mass shootings, even by inexperienced and barely functional individuals, have a ratio of casualties to number of shots fired that put elite special forces to shame. Port Arthur in Tasmania is often cited in this regard

While the comparison has appeal to conspiracy theorists (and I'm not going to dismiss that). There is another very credible explanation.

Special forces are typically having to take account of their opponents returning fire.

In a situation where some of the intended victims might be armed, but the assailant doesn't know which ones. The effectiveness of their attack will drop drastically. The comparison between Port Arthur and elite special forces shows that very clearly.

More later
@

Estimates for defensive gun use in the united state are between 1.5 and 3.4 times a year. At least Three times the rate of criminal misuse.

That should be 1.5 to 3.4 million times a year

@

 

[Justmehere]

When it comes to "gun control"....

Most sources indicate there are more than 300 million guns in the US. What gun control plan is going to reduce that? Let's get specific and practical. What kind of gun control plan would reduce that number without ending the second amendment?

How about controlling the guns in the hands of criminals? We can do all the background checks in the world, but Criminals Steal 237,000 Legal Guns From Americans Every Year.

50 maps show how guns are trafficked into every state - Business Insider

2,000 Illegal Weapons Cross the US-Mexico Every Day

The practical reality is the guns in the US are simply not going away soon.

The media uses the term "gun violence" - and this depersonalizes the problem. But when someone attacks others with a knife, no one talks about "knife violence." They talk about the human behind the knife, and what to do about the PEOPLE. When someone attacks with pretty much any other weapon, from box cutters to pipe bombs, no one talks about "box cutter" violence or "pipe bomb violence." They focus on people and reasons and motivations and treatment and etc.

That's where I think we can have a lot greater practical success in the short and long term.

 

[Justmehere]

For practical solutions:

I believe we need armed guard or other staff at every school to protect the school. The guns are not disappearing anytime soon. People with a desire to kill are not going anywhere. Mental illness, poverty, strife, etc. None of that is going anywhere anytime soon.

So let's prepare for it. Let's have staff, a guard or whatever each local area decides for their own schools, and get staff in place that are able to protect all the kids at our schools in the U.S. We do it at many courthouses, hospitals, and other places of public gathering. Will it prevent or reduce every shooting? Maybe not. But it could help, and it could be done much more quickly than any other solution I have seen proposed.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

How about controlling the guns in the hands of criminals?

Uh huh. The black market is going no where. What happens when a criminal breaks into your home with a gun (because the black market will always be there no matter what we do. Wish police were more intrested in the deep web and darknet as thats where a ton of it happens) and you have nothing to defend yourself with as you aren't allowed to have a gun. Nothing else comes close to defence against a bullet.

I hate guns but common sense says criminals will always find a way and the black market will always be there. Instead of focusing on "gun control", focus on how to get the guns out of criminals' hands and attacking the black market. But lets not take the guns out of non-criminal responsible gun owners hands and stop their ability to defend themselves and their families.

 

[Deleted member 541]

So if there are 300 million guns in the US, and we don’t do some kind of gun control, then there will be 600 million guns. Does that make sense to anyone???????