In the NIU shooting, guess what's first to blame?
- Thread starter Glitches are cool
- Start date
I remember reading something up (I'll try to find a source) Saying one of the shooters was a psychopath, who had an inherant superiority complex to the rest of the world, and the other one was the helpless victim who couldn't deal with it, and decided to take it out on them all. Plus they wanted to set off bombs in the cafeteria, and gun down the people running away. It went on to say that if they stopped them, Person B could have been successfully rehabilitated with therapy, but A was very capable of doing much, much more, if he he didn't go through with Columbine. Not to say that justifies the deaths of the people.JOE COOL said:
I suppose I did go quite a bit off topic, but hey, random trivia is awesome.
Ooh, More guns and less murder? Sounds enticing.Fire Daemon said:
They are receiving help and aid from international organizations, namely Al-Quida. Also, we were aided by the French in the American Revolution. I still don't think that even if you gave every man woman and child in America, that you could keep them safe from fascism. What you'd have to do is motivate them to fight. In the case of the Iraqis, they've got religious extremism cracking the whip over their heads. America is currently in a stressed out yet shiftless mentality.Kikosemmek said:
That alarms me as well. This country's founding was different from that of most modern European nations in that its citizens were originally free men. In Europe, states were built up from the bones of tribes, with a support system and a command hierarchy. In what would become the USA, most people arrived without that, except for their church. You had to make it on your own, and outside of the larger, settled towns people called no man king and paid no taxes. After our revolution, the desire to be without a king - that no man should have absolute power over another - and the fear of that form of government framed our constitution. In the European countries most of the founders had left behind, the state was all-powerful. Firearms and even crossbows were heavily regulated and largely prohibited to the general populace, who were therefore docile. Our constitution reflected a desire to never have our citizens put in that position again, as well as to never face invasion from an outside force. (Basically, what we did to the Native Americans, who were often quite warlike but not armed sufficiently to resist.)Kikosemmek said:
Nowadays emphasis has shifted to what the government can do for us rather than what we can do for ourselves. The Supreme Court has decided that an individual's highest purpose is to produce revenue for the state. (Kelo v. New London, where the SCOTUS held that a government may use eminent domain to seize property from one individual and give it to another individual if that individual produces more revenue for the government.) Hillary Clinton herself declared "We are in a war against individualism", and the Republicans are not much different.
Frankly, about all that remains between the USA and a return to the serfdom of socialism is that we are an armed citizenry. We are largely educated in government schools, and increasingly see government not as a necessary evil, but as a power to solve our daily problems. We even have fat people sueing McDonald's for making them fat. (If you're not responsible for what you eat, what exactly ARE you responsible for?) We have probably a majority (at least a large plurality) of twenty- and thirty-somethings who don't believe Social Security will be there for them but don't support privatization because they don't want the responsibility of providing for their own retirement. We have people who never learn a marketable skill demanding that the government support them in like manner to those who actually did learn marketable skills and are willing to work hard.
Against that backdrop, the attacks on guns and video games becomes more sensible. If we refuse to take responsibility for our own actions (or lack thereof) and demand that government run our lives and solve our problems, then government can hardly be expected to blame the shooters. Obviously some other evil (and non-voting) outside force must be the cause of evil actions, and it's notoriously hard to be seen as taking action against Satan without restricting the populace from doing things they want to do. Therefore we have the attacks on guns and video games; they are merely two facets of the same phenomenon.
I find it highly amusing that you all think you need guns to prevent the government from screwing you. Let's compare armed rebellion with unarmed rebellion (strike, sabotage)shall we.
Armed rebellion - Requires a coordinated effort by (semi-)trained people, against a force superior in number, equipment, training and information (military), over a prolonged period of time. Casualties sustained will harm the rebellion, potential decreases over time.
Unarmed rebelliion - Requires random acts by untrained people, against any vulnerable target or by simply doing nothing. Any direct governent moves taken will likely provoke more actions. Casualties sustained will harm both the rebellion and the government. Potential increases over time, as stockpiles diminish.
----------------------------------------------------
As for taking away guns, it's not going to for hundreds of years. The only reason people need a gun in the US, is because people have guns in the US. Making them illegal now would be a very bad idea.
Armed rebellion - Requires a coordinated effort by (semi-)trained people, against a force superior in number, equipment, training and information (military), over a prolonged period of time. Casualties sustained will harm the rebellion, potential decreases over time.
Unarmed rebelliion - Requires random acts by untrained people, against any vulnerable target or by simply doing nothing. Any direct governent moves taken will likely provoke more actions. Casualties sustained will harm both the rebellion and the government. Potential increases over time, as stockpiles diminish.
----------------------------------------------------
As for taking away guns, it's not going to for hundreds of years. The only reason people need a gun in the US, is because people have guns in the US. Making them illegal now would be a very bad idea.
I'm going to stop you right here and interject.A-D. said:
1. There are no parts of the U.S. that require one to own or carry a gun. You are DEAD WRONG here, and there is certainly no law requiring anyone to carry a weapon just because everyone else has one.
It is the right of every law-abiding U.S. citizen to own a firearm. it is a right and a privilege that most other nations deprive their citizens of out of fear.
I will have to continue this later as it is time for me to go to work.
I would just like to remind everyone (and tell them if they didn't know) about the blowdart killings in Washington D.C. a few years back. People drove by in a van in the evenings, and shot darts at people, that were laced with stuff. I have yet to play any blowdart games. I think the last time I saw one used was in Ace Ventura.Hengst2404 said:
Having guns is not America's problem. People thinking that they *need* them, and have to have like.. 200 of them is part of it. Lack of education is another. If everyone received the training with guns that the military received (on safety), then I bet a lot fewer kids would shoot each other on accident.
As for gangs and stuff killing other people, maybe the guys who buy/sell/ship/make guns, should not "lose" them so damn often...
I have quite a few guns, and I know that I don't need them. I collect them, and I simply shoot for fun. It's my hobby.Frizzle said:
I agree with your statement about education. A lot of people are simply not properly trained to handle a firearm in a safe manner. Do I believe in mandatory classes? No. That would just be an opportunity for an anti-gun political activist to attempt to discourage gun ownership by making them incredibly expensive. However, I believe that knowledge is power, and the more one knows, the safer one can be.
As for the problem with gangs and guns, that's actually something that can be remedied. Many guns used in gang violence are stolen from honest gun owners. After they are taken, the serial numbers are usually filed off, and the weapon is re-sold on the streets. If people kept their guns properly locked up, it would help a lot.
Not all neighborhoods in the U.S. are of they type where there are frequent murders, break-ins, and/or robberies. In fact, I can say I've been to very few areas where I can actually say I felt afraid for my life. That's just it though. A lot of people outside of the U.S. don't realize the sheer scale of this country, nor do they realize just how many people live here. With a population that large, crime will undoubtedly be a problem at one time or another. Like in every country out there, there are some cities, towns, and neighborhoods that are better than others. Sometimes I get the impression that people from other countries think U.S. cities are warzones because the civilians can carry weapons. That's hardly the case. There are just some places where there is more crime than others.stompy said:
As for calling the police, more often than not, that's what people do here. I rarely hear of someone having to shoot someone for breaking into their home, but then again, I live in a quiet part of the country where people are generally good natured.
I will be applying for my permit to carry a concealed weapon at some point. Do I intend to use it? Only if my life were to be in danger. Will that happen? I honestly can't say, but the odds are that I will never have to use it; ever. Most Americans with permits to carry weapons never even use them. The few that do, usually do so with restraint because our laws can still hold you accountable even if you were defending yourself.
My point is this:
There's nothing going on in America that REQUIRES civilians to carry weapons. It's simply a choice that many choose to make. Do they need to? Some may, but there is no way to know for sure. It's not like American cities are battlezones or anything. They are what all cities are. They are large, crowded, and they have their share of crime.
I live in a typical rural area in the North East of America. Where I'm from, its incredibly rare for a home to not own at least a bolt action rifle or modest handgun. Hunting is popular, so is target shooting and various other firearm activities.
The kicker is that a firearm is treated with a great deal of respect in this area, as is typical in most rural areas in most states, which makes up most of the U.S.
Gun crimes are so rare where I live that I honestly can't remember the last one. There have been typical Murder/Suicides in various times involving a gun, usually a husband/son having a psychotic episode on their family. Would they have done it without a gun? Obviously.
My point is this; Guns are an afterthought and gun violence is all but non-existent. You would have to be a moron to attempt a home robbery/invasion because everybody knows people own guns. The typical robbery or home invasion is in apartment complexes and places of that nature because tenants typically don't own guns just because they're not very personal and are also harder to keep locked up and safe. (Every floor plan is the same)
The kicker is that a firearm is treated with a great deal of respect in this area, as is typical in most rural areas in most states, which makes up most of the U.S.
Gun crimes are so rare where I live that I honestly can't remember the last one. There have been typical Murder/Suicides in various times involving a gun, usually a husband/son having a psychotic episode on their family. Would they have done it without a gun? Obviously.
My point is this; Guns are an afterthought and gun violence is all but non-existent. You would have to be a moron to attempt a home robbery/invasion because everybody knows people own guns. The typical robbery or home invasion is in apartment complexes and places of that nature because tenants typically don't own guns just because they're not very personal and are also harder to keep locked up and safe. (Every floor plan is the same)