• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

School Shootings~

SFG75 said:
The real flaw is that this loony was out in society for so long. His mental condition(or the lack thereof) is the cause of this mess, not the gun.
Click to expand...

His mental condition is certainly the cause, but the gun was the means. With such weaponry you can kill from a distance. He had knives with him - if he had no access to guns he would no doubt have used the knives, but then everyone has a better chance of escape from this as he can't just stand from one vantage point and gun people down. Plunging a knife is more personal than pulling a trigger, and no doubt harder to do.

Same thing when someone mows down a bunch of pedestrians with his car. Are we going to restrict the sales of cars or sue GM?
Click to expand...

That's response is irrelevant, and you know it. Cars are designed for transport and that is their sole aim. Guns are designed for killing and that is their sole aim. There is no comparison to be made.
 
Stewart said:
That's response is irrelevant, and you know it. Cars are designed for transport and that is their sole aim. Guns are designed for killing and that is their sole aim. There is no comparison to be made.
Click to expand...


Rightful killing-hunting rifles are for hunting game and other sporting rifles are for that-sport. Assault weapons are indeed for killing as you have typed and I suppose are alluding to, that is their expressed purpose. On that point, I agree. On restricting other arms, I would not agree.

Here's a good solution, arm the teachers!.:)

"Now class, pay attention!"....click...click.:eek:

At any rate, if the guy knew teachers were armed, that would be the last place he would try and enter.
 
SFG75 said:
Rightful killing-hunting rifles are for hunting game and other sporting rifles are for that-sport. Assault weapons are indeed for killing as you have typed and I suppose are alluding to, that is their expressed purpose. On that point, I agree. On restricting other arms, I would not agree.

Here's a good solution, arm the teachers!.:)

"Now class, pay attention!"....click...click.:eek:

At any rate, if the guy knew teachers were armed, that would be the last place he would try and enter.
Click to expand...


If only we could be trust ALL the teachers. I'm not being funny at all here. Given the number of teachers arrested for sexual misconduct, I have to shudder at the thought of those types of individuals given a gun.
 
Watch the news...you want to know why I lack basic trust in most humans:



Justin,

This makes my point for me! The instinct to defend is primitive, basic, and can be pushed past if we want to move our species further. We all have the innate desire to defend and protect. But when we make the decision, both individually and collectively, to take defensiveness off the table, we take a great big evolutionary step forward. When a person or society loads up on guns, we all move backwards. When one person at a time says no to all that, could the effect eventually be seen? I'm hopeful because I choose to be.
 
abecedarian said:
If only we could be trust ALL the teachers. I'm not being funny at all here. Given the number of teachers arrested for sexual misconduct, I have to shudder at the thought of those types of individuals given a gun.
Click to expand...

O.K., we'll arm the students too.
 
Stewart said:
Your media raves about terrorism threats as if there is actually much need for concern, when the biggest threat to the safety of American citizens is their antiquated constitution. (And obesity; but that's another thread. ;) )
Click to expand...
What an excellent point.

I'm with Stewart on this one. I find the average American's need for guns to be both confusing and disturbing - what need is there for a gun if you don't live on a farm, or something of the sort? Gun control needs to be far better, there's no doubt about that.
 
It dates back to a time when, in the absence of a military, the American people could bear arms for the defence of their own country. Of course, fast forwarding two hundred years or so, and the threat of invasion is no longer likely.

The original point, I believe, was the belief that no nation would attack one in which the civilians were fully armed. But now, since America has such hi-tech weaponry in which they could probably blow up another nation from the comfort of their homeland, there's no longer a need for the civilians to bear arms. Any nation fancying a swipe at America would suffer quick and effortless retaliation from the tools of modern warfare.

As I've said before, there seems to be some huge misconception (or defence for) around the Second Amendment, people saying that it's part of the constution as such and can't be changed. The very fact that it is an amendment details that it was a change that made it possible, therefore it is within reason that it can be changed again.
 
SFG75 said:
hunting rifles are for hunting game
Click to expand...

ie killing, as Stewart said.

SFG75 said:
Here's a good solution, arm the teachers! if the guy knew teachers were armed, that would be the last place he would try and enter.
Click to expand...

"Tongue firmly in cheek" or not, SFG, this is really what a lot of Americans believe: that having more guns will make the place safer. The UK, with strict gun control laws, has 25 times fewer gun murders per head of population than the US.
 
Also, regarding arming teachers. There's no way all teachers would have the resolve to actually pull a trigger and harm someone, no matter what.
 
Shade said:
ie killing, as Stewart said.
Click to expand...

That ignores a crucial distinction though. Hunting game and sport shooting does not constitute unlawful killing. Rifles used in the military also constitutes lawful killing as they are used in a nation's self-defense(though the case could be made that this isn't true under Bush, who is "pro-life" but whose policies have led to the deaths of thousands, but that has do with leadership and moral flaws as opposed to guns causing the problem) There is a huge difference between shooting fowl and shooting a children full of school. Surely you wouldn't argue that they are one and the same?


"Tongue firmly in cheek" or not, SFG, this is really what a lot of Americans believe: that having more guns will make the place safer. The UK, with strict gun control laws, has 25 times fewer gun murders per head of population than the US.
Click to expand...

Our population is much larger than yours. On top of that, a lot of these problems are due to complicated cultural factors. Gun ownership is more dense in rural areas. I've passed kids with shotguns on the street. The school were I used to teach at had kids show up at 7:00 a.m. guns in tow, for hunter-safety courses taught by an instructor. For the most part, rural areas do not have a problem with gun violence. The vast majority of problems are in areas like East St. Louis, Prince Georges County, and other urban areas were the break down of the family and local economy are quite rampant. Just as in this case, there are other factors, much more important factors than the gun, that are in play.
 
SFG75 said:
There is a huge difference between shooting fowl and shooting a children full of school. Surely you wouldn't argue that they are one and the same?
Click to expand...

Of course not. I was raising the point because you made the asinine comparison of guns with cars. Stewart said "guns are designed for killing, cars aren't." You then drew a distinction between killing and hunting, as though hunting did not involve killing. Stewart's original assertion - he can correct me if I'm wrong - did not say "guns are designed for unlawful killing." Guns are designed (and more significantly, were invented) for killing, be it animals or humans.

SFG75 said:
Our population is much larger than yours.
Click to expand...

I said per head.

I do love it when gun nuts get themselves so self-tied by their own arguments that they effectively say, "No, with fewer guns, there would not be fewer gun killings." :rolleyes:
 
*cough*...*cough..cultural factors....cough*

And can we leave titles such as * gun nuts* or *asinine* out of it?, it really detracts from the conversation and only serves to invite negativity.
 
I see from the news today that another possible school massacre was thwarted in Missouri, this time when a thirteen year old dressed in a trenchcoat and mask took a rifle to school, pointed it at students, and fired a shot into the ceiling before the weapon jammed.
 
Stewart said:
I see from the news today that another possible school massacre was thwarted in Missouri, this time when a thirteen year old dressed in a trenchcoat and mask took a rifle to school, pointed it at students, and fired a shot into the ceiling before the weapon jammed.
Click to expand...


My first thought, besides "Thank God no one one was hurt this time," were 'Where did he get the gun?' If he got it from his parents, I wonder why he had such easy access..The paper said this boy had a fascination with the Columbine case; the police told the priniciple..why didn't anyone else notice this and have their eyes on this kid?
 
SFG75 said:
there are other factors, much more important factors than the gun, that are in play.
Click to expand...

No guns, the factors won't play out in the same stupid ways. All of the ills can't be fixed. The expression of them could be mitigated with some sensible controls.

Shade said:
Guns are designed (and more significantly, were invented) for killing, be it animals or humans.
Click to expand...



Stewart said:
I see from the news today that another possible school massacre was thwarted in Missouri, this time when a thirteen year old dressed in a trenchcoat and mask took a rifle to school, pointed it at students, and fired a shot into the ceiling before the weapon jammed.
Click to expand...

I work in MO (a "right to carry" state) and each day read the signs posted all over our building "No concealed weapons permitted in this building." Well, jesus mary and martha, how would we know if a concealed weapon came into the building!? Would SFG75 arm nurses as well as teachers? We've just gone mad here. This area of the country is spiraling toward some bizarre redneck fantasy of what life should be: Huntin' & teachin' junior to hunt, pickup trucks that get 8miles to the gallon, magical thinking all over the place and a healthy dose of "American Idol" for mental stimulation. They're all related. Yet there are people here who want better for the region and are working to that end. Just wish there were more of the good guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top