Dealing with mass shootings

To solve world problems

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

Dealing with mass shootings

Post #1

Post by otseng »

We've heard about the mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary today.

What can be done to curb mass shootings in the US?

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #31

Post by Dantalion »

Armed Citizen wrote:
Dantalion wrote: and as a personal note, I must say that having a happy gun toting smiley in your posts after loads of kids have been massacred is pretty disturbing.
I'm all for your 2nd amendment rights but maybe a little taste and tact is in order here.
I appreciate the idea that u are offerin. Howevers. I didn't shoot no kids. Nor have I. Nor will I.

I am still a proud owner of guns. I will remain a proud owner of guns. I am a law abidin citizen who owns and buys his guns legally. I will remain proud, I will remain outspoken.

I have no reason to be changin who I am cause some nut job went haywire and used a firearm to go an do an unspeakable act.

I am sorry if you be findin it disturbin but I have no regrets and am not plannin ta change.



:2gun:
Fair enough, thx for replying in this mature way.
It's just that, I'm no American so I don't have this 'it's my constitutional right' opinion when it comes to guns, and so having a gun smiley in your post right after a massacre is pretty much like I would post a smiley holding Sarin gas right after lots of kids were murdered that way.
I know I didn't kill these kids, but still my conscience would like t have a word with me lol.
But I understand the national differences at play here ofc, so I won't bring it up again :-D .

(Don't really agree with your defender though, there's a line at which principles must be put aside for let's say a sense of moral responsibility, like when a Hindu uses his principles to proudly display and wear the swastika)

Also, that partial responsibility thing Otseng brought up, couldn't agree more, and I also agree with Armed Citizen's notion of the psychological effect of armed guards on would be mass murderers.

User avatar
Fuzzy Dunlop
Guru
Posts: 1137
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:24 am

Post #32

Post by Fuzzy Dunlop »

Darias wrote:
Fuzzy Dunlop wrote: It seems to me that the stabbing example works against your point. In a country with strict gun control like China, people (criminals included) have a harder time getting guns. Aren't mass stabbings preferable to mass shootings?

Also, you can grow marijuana in your back yard without much effort. Making your own guns is not quite as simple. As a result, the regulation of firearms is much easier to achieve than the regulation of marijuana.
My point was that laws do not stop people from doing what they want to do, even if laws may make it difficult.
Laws will not stop everyone, but they can stop a lot of people from doing what they want to do. Someone who suddenly snaps and goes on a rampage is likely to do less damage in an environment where the most dangerous weapon they can immediately access is a knife. Laws are capable of creating such an environment. They can't stop everyone but I'd say the Chinese examples show they are capable of reducing harm.
Darias wrote:You say that growing marijuana is easy. Well, I have no desire to, but if I did, I wouldn't know where to start. I wouldn't know who to call or where to buy. But if I were determined enough, I could. It may be hard for the government to regulate this, but it doesn't mean it's easy to grow or obtain.

But this argument isn't about ease of breaking the law. People who obtain weapons illegally do not build them in their garage; they purchase them on the black market or they steal them.
The argument presented was that gun regulation won't work because marijuana regulation doesn't prevent people from getting marijuana. But marijuana is easy to get your hands on because it's easy to produce. You can gradually reduce the number of guns in a country through various methods. But no matter how many pounds of marijuana get taken off the street or at the border, people can grow more as long as they have access to seeds and dirt. Regulating a plant presents significant challenges that don't come into play when you're dealing with relatively complex mechanical devices.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

Re: Dealing with mass shootings

Post #33

Post by otseng »

McCulloch wrote:
otseng wrote: - Curb culture of violence in movies, TV, games, entertainment.
Is there any real evidence that censorship reduced violence? We watch a whole lot of American television and American movies in Canada, yet our gun problems are miniscule compared to our southern neighbors.
Studies provide converging evidence that exposure to media violence is a significant risk factor for aggressive and violent behavior.

Studies provide converging evidence that violent video games are significantly associated with: increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased prosocial (helping) behavior.

High levels of violent video game exposure have been linked to delinquency, fighting at school and during free play periods, and violent criminal behavior (e.g., self-reported assault, robbery).

Furthermore, the fact that so many youths are exposed to such high levels of video game violence further increases the societal costs of this risk factor.
http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/20 ... erson.aspx

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24886
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Post #34

Post by Goat »

otseng wrote:
Darias wrote: The purpose of the right to own a gun was to make sure the citizenry was as well armed as the military, as to prevent tyranny by a future government in this country.
Yes. And I believe gun ownership is also correlated to distrust of the government and the size of its military. So, I think an additional step that can be done is to dramatically decrease the size of our military.
I'm not a huge fan of guns, but if I don't exercise my rights I will lose them. We've already lost enough freedoms in this country and I'm tired of it. I want to be able to defend my family from criminals anyway so I see no harm in gun ownership.
I think a lot of people are thinking that now.

Do you really think that the guns people have will deter the US military

Image
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

Post #35

Post by otseng »

Goat wrote: Do you really think that the guns people have will deter the US military
I think some Americans thought the same of the British military.

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #36

Post by Dantalion »

otseng wrote:
Goat wrote: Do you really think that the guns people have will deter the US military
I think some Americans thought the same of the British military.
I think a modern military has a myriad of ways to conquer/subdue/oppress/defeat without ever coming near your house/gun range

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #37

Post by Dantalion »

high levels of violent video game exposure ?

I give you Japan, a country where violence in cartoons and games is on a whole other level, has very strict gun laws, and has an average of 2 (!) gun related homicides a year.


Also, you should take 15 minutes of your time to reflect on this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uwAo8lcAC4

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

Post #38

Post by otseng »

Dantalion wrote: I give you Japan, a country where violence in cartoons and games is on a whole other level, has very strict gun laws, and has an average of 2 (!) gun related homicides a year.
Of course if one has very strict gun laws, then it would decrease the number of guns and likewise decrease the number of gun deaths.

But, the assertion that violent movies, TV, games, and entertainment have a role to play in violent behavior still remains true.
The results of this study revealed that early childhood exposure to TV violence predicted aggressive behavior for both males and females in adulthood
http://www.apa.org/pi/prevent-violence/ ... lence.aspx

I will add that watching violent entertainment does not guarantee violent behavior for any particular individual, but will statistically increase the odds for violent behavior.

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24068
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Dealing with mass shootings

Post #39

Post by McCulloch »

otseng wrote:
McCulloch wrote: If you really want to reduce mass shootings in the US wouldn't a reasonable place to start would be to look at other countries where gun related deaths are orders of magnitude lower than the US rate? What are we doing that is different from what you are doing?
Can you give some examples?
http://www.nationmaster.com /graph /cri gun vio hom fir hom rat per 100 pop-rate-per-100-000-pop
United States #8, 3.6 firearm homicides per 100,000 population.
Canada has about 0.42
UK: 0.02
Germany: 0.4672
Rather than taking a stab in the dark with regard to how to solve the American gun violence problem, look at what is being done in those countries with a significantly lower gun problem. Perhaps gun control.
otseng wrote: This is done in schools in my area. If a mass killer wanted to target a school, more than likely he would avoid our schools and go to one where there is no armed police officer.
Great! Armed guards in the schools, mass killers will go to the churches, the playgrounds or shopping malls. Unless you want to create a police state with armed officers anywhere that someone might decide to kill a bunch of folks, this solution is not really all that good.
otseng wrote: But, I cannot believe that playing first person shooter games and watching people constantly shoot guns in action movies have zero effect on contributing to gun violence.
Your opinion on this matter has been noted.
otseng wrote: Are you suggesting that only the government can have guns and citizens cannot?
Yes, that is one of the defining attributes of civilization. We relinquish to the collective authority of the state, our right to take revenge on wrongdoers.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
Armed Citizen
Site Supporter
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:21 pm
Location: Midwest Jupiter

Post #40

Post by Armed Citizen »

Goat wrote:
Do you really think that the guns people have will deter the US military

Image
In general, I be agreein with ya. When it comes down to it there ain't much we can be doin as civilians against the likes of an ole' M1A2, AH-60 or a A-10.

However, how many pilots and tank commanders ya think will remain on the side of the government should a second revolutionary war be findin itself imminent? How much of that equipment might be findin itself in the hands of the private citizen sides new and robust militia?

Should most or all our troops decide the government is right, then we be findin ourselves with a ton of fast paced and short lived skirmishes where the military grade weapons we private citizens now have would be put ta use. We would make several deadly strikes in retaliational defense but obviously wouldn't be able ta withstand the military might of the U.S. Armed Forces.

There would be some (those with tax stamp weapons and Class 3 items in stock) that would be the most affective but also they be the first known targets.

This very fact be at the heart of the 2nd Amendment debate. We civilians should never be without the ability to wage effective war on our own government. That fear always ta be there as an additional constitutionally provided ability ta be keepin Washington in check. When Federal powers no longer have to fear there populace, that’s when we be findin ourselves quickly under the boot of tyranny. Look at history fer all the proof ya might be needin on that lil fact.

This is something too many have turned in to nuttin more than a miniscule an oft times scoffed at unlikelyhood. Well, I sure hope they be right. But what I seen from the last two presidents… tyranny is live an well and it be waitin in the wings. I hope I be wrong.



:2gun:
:2gun: :usa: Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.
- George Washington :2gun: :usa:
Image

Post Reply