True, but I think it really BTS out of dude with gun: 17 + self, others: targets and lots of screaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
Printable View
True, but I think it really BTS out of dude with gun: 17 + self, others: targets and lots of screaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
Devine intervention?:beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Andy, Loretta, or Mickey?Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Nevermind. Please disregard.
An armed, volunteer security guard (sounds like the ushers I used to know when I was a kid), packing her legally-concealed handgun. I watched her on TV tonight. Touching and dramatic.
Was she uniformed? Was she sanctioned by the church? Or acting on her own?
The question is if this "integral part to US culture" is the cause why your criminals prefer to arm themself up and the whacky loonies going out in a blaze of glory much more often than in the rest of the Western world?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
As they come from society and if the mentality in the society is that guns are needed?
Would this be trying to choke a fire with gasoline or not? And while we're at it, why not give compulsary military training to all as well (know as draft, well conscription at least)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Besides you totally ruins CR:s arguments with this one.
:no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Don't say that, I heard that the LA ghetto inhabitants were really nasty at this time, all 2 of them. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
The closest thing you get today to the wild west is the rural areas, real crime infected areas compared to the poor parts of the major cities, aren't they?
Good job whoever shot the guy.
Don't know why this is a gun debate, it's not like schoolshooters here in Germany used bow and arrow to kill people. :dizzy2:
Again, true. But since all those involved were in fact armed citizens I'm not sure how these particular incidents help your case!Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
I hope everyone reads your post, good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
As I understand it, she was a volunteer from the congregation to act as security, and sanctioned in that she had approval from the pastor there.Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Things for the 'guns and US society are terrible!' people to think about:Quote:
As they come from society and if the mentality in the society is that guns are needed?
Back in the '60s it was much easier to get guns, and guns would be taken to school for after school activities like hunting and rifle team.
Yet we did not have this rash of school shootings. Nowadays, one motivation seems to get famous by killing others. How has society changed in its acceptance of 'raging against the machine' -rebellion against authority- and glorification of celebrity?
Better than the recent mall shooting were people weren't allowed to legally carry guns.Quote:
As far as I can see it is more of a score draw. Or rather crazy-dude with gun: 4, volunteer security guard: 1.
CR
Ah, but the question is if those guns were intended for personal defense against that nasty murdering muggar at that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Another one
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7139743.stm
I used to be able to write this off as a small percentage of wack cases but is their really something wrong with our socity if this is whats happening 3 in a week is just HUGE. Three in a year would be huge.
As for the whole aceses to guns issue. Even if the illegal ones come from legal sources that dosn't mean that banning the legal sources will fix the problem. Look at drugs and Proabation, only help to the mafias there.
I read a stastic thatQuote:
If you think Americans live in daily fear of a lightly provoked shooting incident, you just don't get it.
CR, I have yet to see you provide any evidence that less guns causes a fall in violent crime. I've only seen you provide evidence that it makes no difference. The two are very different.
I actually believe that this is correct. I think that violent crime is independent of gun ownership. A gun is a means, not a motivation. If someone is going to be violent, they'll be violent.
But what all of your statistics don't show is the number of deaths due to violent crime scaled for the national crime rate, against gun ownership scaled for population. Does anyone know a reliable (official) source where I can find that kind of data?
Here's an interesting link for you:
https://img259.imageshack.us/img259/...ationalqe8.gif
Note: this shows the "number of intentional firearm related deaths" but I still think it shows something of value, and that is that if you want to kill someone, and guns are more common place, you will choose it as your weapon of choice.
Another interesting statistic to see would be the number of attempted murder cases and the number of murder cases (scaled for the national crime rate) against gun ownership (scaled for population).
So far in these debates, I've seen nothing but empty conclusions by research groups, and unreliable claims by all sides. Seriously, if anyone can give me links to where I can find stats like those above, I'll willingly compile them all and plot those graphs. I'm interested to see what they would come out to show. Of course I know what I expect them to show, in the UK, where guns are less common, if someone broke into my house I wouldn't for one second think they have a gun, and generally if a burglar is caught in the act they try to get away, not assault the owner. In the US however, I read a statistic that a significant number (I can't remember exactly, but I think it was something like 40%) of guns were kept loaded, which shows something of a difference in attitude.
The whole thing about gun culture is a seperate issue. However effective or ineffective gun control is for regulating violent crime, I do believe that there's something special about the US that makes violence with guns disproportionately high for the number of guns there are around. What that something is however, I've no idea (again :shrug:)
So anyone know where to get official statistics for the US from?
Um...pray tell, why would I want to show that? Indeed, how could I?Quote:
CR, I have yet to see you provide any evidence that less guns causes a fall in violent crime.
The graph is flawed in several ways. It does not measure total death rates from all means. And it sounds like it includes suicide by firearms, which skews the results since countries like Japan have a firearm suicide rate a fraction of the US rate, even though the total Japan suicide rate is higher than the total US rate.Quote:
Note: this shows the "number of intentional firearm related deaths" but I still think it shows something of value, and that is that if you want to kill someone, and guns are more common place, you will choose it as your weapon of choice.
Considering we have the highest concentration of privately owned guns in the world, and our violent crime rate has been falling, and is close to other industrialized nations, I'd disagree. I don't think the gun ownership really has anything to do with it.Quote:
However effective or ineffective gun control is for regulating violent crime, I do believe that there's something special about the US that makes violence with guns disproportionately high for the number of guns there are around.
EDIT: For crime statistics, start here: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
CR
Apperantly the man died of a self inflicted gunshot wound. No save for the pro gun people though its not exactly a victory for the gun control lobby ethier.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...y_N.htm?csp=34
I think it's fair to say, though, that he killed himself much earlier than he otherwise would have had he not been stopped by the woman in the church.
CR
just think...if everyone on that bus would have been armed.....they could have fought off the attackers...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Winter
or better yet...maybe they could drive the kids to school in an Abrams tank! :wall:
surely that´s the civilized way to do things :dizzy2:
you know what?....I throw in the towel on this issue..............keep your guns.....I really don´t give a damn anymore when I see these stories on tv anyway....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
You seem to be suggesting that "civilized" = non-violent. Human history suggests otherwise, since most of the proto-cultures or aboriginal cultures were much more into ritualized non-violent interaction (inuit song duels, counting coup among the Amerind tribes, etc.). Civilization also brought with it a much greater degree of human-on-human violence and outright bloodshed as well as Socrates and the plow.
Non-violence is a moral objective not a norm of morality. Perhaps when we all get this one right, Gabriel blows the trumpet, I don't know -- but we're not there yet.
"Church guard"
"School guard"
Can anyone in Britain, or in Australia, remember seeing any of those?
I'm not really interested in arguing statistics; the very existence of the person that the pro-gun camp is now holding up as a shining example of how things should be is really a failure of their society.
The minute that I see the need for armed guards on in places of worship or education in a mostly gun-free society such as that in Britain, or here in Australia, I will concede the anti-gun case immediately.
~;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
no one is arguing for some sort of "nirvana like" state of affairs in the world...
bottom line is the state is supposed to ensure the safety of the population.....if a state fails to do so to the point that people are actually proposing everyone should go around armed to defend themselfs I say you have a problem....that´s all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1952869.stm
Old news but there are a few more. Guess the german society is a pure failure with our anti-gun laws and note how he was a gunman, not a bowman. ~;)
The result after this and some other shootings: More restrictions on "killer games", age restrictions on games should be enforced better, propositions to ban "killer games" completely and to ban importing games completely.
Long live our (gun) free society! :dizzy2:
Does anyone think it will never happen again? :juggle2:
Bah, that's the other extreem Husar, one I don't agree with either.
Gah! Stupid English. You know I meant to say the opposite.Quote:
Um...pray tell, why would I want to show that? Indeed, how could I?
I accept all that, I mentioned so myself. It doesn't prevent it from showing the attractiveness of a firearm as a method for crime where it is available.Quote:
The graph is flawed in several ways. It does not measure total death rates from all means. And it sounds like it includes suicide by firearms, which skews the results since countries like Japan have a firearm suicide rate a fraction of the US rate, even though the total Japan suicide rate is higher than the total US rate.
Sapi, well said.
Well Sapi if you expand on Britain to include the 6 then you have to concede the case ~;)Quote:
The minute that I see the need for armed guards on in places of worship or education in a mostly gun-free society such as that in Britain, or here in Australia, I will concede the anti-gun case immediately.
Some of the "School guards" are on campus cops.Quote:
"Church guard"
"School guard"
Can anyone in Britain, or in Australia, remember seeing any of those?
That makes it even worse doesn't it , education establishments are so in fear of lawlessness that they have their own police force .:inquisitive:Quote:
Some of the "School guards" are on campus cops.
So shopping centers feel the need for guards with guns , schools feel the need for guards with guns , churches feel the need for guards with guns ...why is this ?
errrrr.......because there are lots of citizens with guns so when a citizens commits crime or goes on an insane rampage there is a fair chance that he/she has got a gun .:idea2:
Yay for gun rights
No its more that they're there to deal with the drug problems and what not and just happen to have guns as part of the standard police./Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Also having a gun armed police officer to deal with can still be a detterent if the physco had to do it with a sword or crossbow or what other sharp pointy object.
The problem I tried to show is that when someone goes on a rampage in a country with strict gun laws like Germany, that person usually manages to bring a gun just as well, despite all the gun laws. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
So apart from dealing with the symptom. Is much being done to resolve the root cause?... RAND style?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Winter
Most security at malls isn't armed. They aren't for stopping attackers, they for keeping teens from loitering too much and the like.Quote:
So shopping centers feel the need for guards with guns ,
I know a lot of high schools have a police officer from the city, but the prime motivation, again, isn't to stop shooters, but deal with petty crime (minor in possession of controlled substance) - even when they do have to deal with weapons, its gang related, not some crazy guy trying to shoot up the school.Quote:
schools feel the need for guards with guns ,
The vast majority don't. This one in Colorado did after one of their missionary centers several hours away got shot up, and they have, apparently, a congregation of thousands.Quote:
churches feel the need for guards with guns
Or not, considering none of your examples support that.Quote:
...why is this ?
errrrr.......because there are lots of citizens with guns
Not surprising, considering, despite the news they make, these styles of attacks are very, very rare.
And Husar ably pointed out that such events even happen in nations with stricter gun control.
I'd recommend Lemur's War on Drugs thread.Quote:
Is much being done to resolve the root cause?... RAND style?
CR
You learn new things everyday.
For example, today I learned that ireland and australia don't have any police.
What you showed was that when someone goes on the rampage with a gun they go on a rampage with a gun .Quote:
The problem I tried to show is that when someone goes on a rampage in a country with strict gun laws like Germany, that person usually manages to bring a gun just as well, despite all the gun laws.
Last I checked, we didn't need any of those, either ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Winter
As Tribesy points out, it's an even worse symptom of some problem in your society for a bunch of kids to need armed protection, for whatever reason.
The next time I see someone wielding a sword or a crossbow wandering around my school, I'll let you know :grin2:Quote:
Also having a gun armed police officer to deal with can still be a detterent if the physco had to do it with a sword or crossbow or what other sharp pointy object.
And when someone decides to go on a rampage in the US, they always manage to bring a gun.Quote:
The problem I tried to show is that when someone goes on a rampage in a country with strict gun laws like Germany, that person usually manages to bring a gun just as well, despite all the gun laws.
Your point? ~:)
So having your crime confined to gang members makes it okay now?Quote:
I know a lot of high schools have a police officer from the city, but the prime motivation, again, isn't to stop shooters, but deal with petty crime (minor in possession of controlled substance) - even when they do have to deal with weapons, its gang related, not some crazy guy trying to shoot up the school.
Again, I haven't noticed any churches getting shot up lately in our largely gun-free society ~:)Quote:
The vast majority don't. This one in Colorado did after one of their missionary centers several hours away got shot up, and they have, apparently, a congregation of thousands.
Surely you cannot deny that the rate of such events is higher in the US, a nation with lax gun laws, than it is in a country such as Britain or Australia, with tight gun laws. Yes, it's merely a correlation, but how's this for food for thought:Quote:
And Husar ably pointed out that such events even happen in nations with stricter gun control.
http://users.on.net/~purdsa/temp/gundeaths.jpg
Homicide deaths by firearm in Australia, 1991-2001
The blue line indicates when firearm controls were enacted. I seem to see a pattern there :yes:
source