|
I'm sure by now everyone has heard of the shooting that happened in Arizona recently. A lot of people were hurt, and a lot of people were killed. I think it's terrible that it happened.
I think it sucks that the world has become so violent that you're truly not safe. People get killed at school because of a disturbed student. People get killed at work because of a disgruntled employee. People get killed at home just because they're there when someone breaks in. Sometimes people get killed just because they're unlucky.
The people who were injured or murdered in Arizona were the victims of someone who is clearly mentally disturbed. It is not the gun's fault. It is not the gun manufacturer's fault. It is not the magazine capacity's fault. It is not a political orientation's fault. It is not the gun culture's fault.
To me, it's obvious who's at fault. The shooter is. Not the gun, not the party he votes for, but him. Just him. No one else. Nothing else. He shot those people, therefore he is at fault. Period.
Since the shooting, I've heard nothing but one stupid theory after another. The pundits, lobbyists, and politicans come out of fucking nowhere to offer up their own bullshit excuses and reasons as to why it happened. Again, it's simple. He shot those people because he wanted to or because he thought it was a good idea.
The news is on constantly where I work, so all day I get to listen to how the Glock 19's magazine held 33 rounds, and how this is so ridiculous. And then I listen to how disturbing it is that the Glock 19 has been selling like crazy after the shooting. How is any of this relevant or important?
It makes me mad that some politicians are using this tragedy as an excuse to try to further their own careers. Fuck you. People died, including a little girl, and you want to write a new law? To do what? You clearly don't represent the American people.
The media wants to sensationalize the shit out of everything. If they could make a dog shitting on the sidewalk interesting, they'd do it. They got bored of talking about how the shooter is crazy pretty quick, so now they're left with trying to appeal to the gun control crowd.
Let's be honest. The gun he used is irrelevant. So is the manufacturer, the caliber of rounds used, and the capacity of the magazine used. None of that shit matters. He could've used a Smith and Wesson and the result would've been the same. He could've use a .45 and it wouldn't have mattered. He could've used MA/CA compliant 10 round magazines and that would not have made any difference.
So like after every violent incident, some people want to ban or legislate the shit out of anything that will make them feel better. Clearly, if those 33 round magazines the shooter would've gone, "Aw, shucks. Guess I can't do it now." Either that or he'd get the 10 round magazines and just...reload the fucking pistol.
I honestly just don't fucking get it. Something bad happens and people want to blame the government, the laws, the equipment used, but never seem to just want to blame the person obviously responsible.
By the way, I own a Glock 19. It's a good gun. It's simple to use, will work always no matter what, and I trust my life with it. It's lightweight and easy to carry on a daily basis, and in the event I need it to save my life, I can count on it to go boom when I need it to. It's also cheap, which is probably why the shooter bought one.
It's no surprise Glock's sales have skyrocketed. Good for them. I hope the gun control lobby shits their pants over it.
Editing to add a good article:
NUGENT: Be prepared for evil
Rather than trying to fathom it, just be ready to stop it
Source
|
On January 15 2011 09:17 LazyMacro wrote:
The media wants to sensationalize the shit out of everything. If they could make a dog shitting on the sidewalk interesting, they'd do it. They got bored of talking about how the shooter is crazy pretty quick, so now they're left with trying to appeal to the gun control crowd.
TL;DR: Fuck the media, fuck the gun control lobby, fuck poltiicans trying to capitalize on innocent victims, blame the shooter not everything else
this is why you should generally just not watch all this bullcrap. And IF you do follow up on any current event, always take anything you see, hear or read with a big grain of "thats very probably completely overstated". The second you don't have that thought in your head anymore, you adopt the sensationalizing and start to slowly go insane (sorta)
|
On January 15 2011 09:25 MisterD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2011 09:17 LazyMacro wrote:
The media wants to sensationalize the shit out of everything. If they could make a dog shitting on the sidewalk interesting, they'd do it. They got bored of talking about how the shooter is crazy pretty quick, so now they're left with trying to appeal to the gun control crowd.
TL;DR: Fuck the media, fuck the gun control lobby, fuck poltiicans trying to capitalize on innocent victims, blame the shooter not everything else this is why you should generally just not watch all this bullcrap. And IF you do follow up on any current event, always take anything you see, hear or read with a big grain of "thats very probably completely overstated". The second you don't have that thought in your head anymore, you adopt the sensationalizing and start to slowly go insane (sorta)
What really sucks is that when I'm at work I have to listen to the news. They have it on literally all day, so all I hear all day is about Facebook's valuation, this and that about Glocks, and a bunch of other random shit that isn't really news. It's driving me nuts, lol.
|
This was reposted to BoingBoing after the tragedies. Originally written in response to 9-11 but it is in a very similar vein to your rant:
Many people will use this terrible tragedy as an excuse to put through a political agenda other than my own. This tawdry abuse of human suffering for political gain sickens me to the core of my being. Those people who have different political views from me ought to be ashamed of themselves for thinking of cheap partisan point-scoring at a time like this. In any case, what this tragedy really shows us is that, so far from putting into practice political views other than my own, it is precisely my political agenda which ought to be advanced.
Not only are my political views vindicated by this terrible tragedy, but also the status of my profession. Furthermore, it is only in the context of a national and international tragedy like this that we are reminded of the very special status of my hobby, and its particular claim to legislative protection. My religious and spiritual views also have much to teach us about the appropriate reaction to these truly terrible events.
Countries which I like seem to never suffer such tragedies, while countries which, for one reason or another, I dislike, suffer them all the time. The one common factor which seems to explain this has to do with my political views, and it suggests that my political views should be implemented as a matter of urgency, even though they are, as a matter of fact, not implemented in the countries which I like.
Of course the World Trade Center attacks are a uniquely tragic event, and it is vital that we never lose sight of the human tragedy involved. But we must also not lose sight of the fact that I am right on every significant moral and political issue, and everybody ought to agree with me. Please, I ask you as fellow human beings, vote for the political party which I support, and ask your legislators to support policies endorsed by me, as a matter of urgency.
It would be a fitting memorial.
Edit: Note: Not suggesting that you are like the hypothetical person making this statement! Just that the satire itself is in a similar vein. :p
|
An isolated event about someone with an insane philosophy and mental problems. Did you notice that obama's approval rating has jumped this week by a lot? I stopped listening to news on the tv or radio a long time ago, even google news is a little jumpy since it gets information from the AP.
It was a crime with high profile victims, nothing more.
|
On January 15 2011 09:31 LTT wrote:This was reposted to BoingBoing after the tragedies. Originally written in response to 9-11 but it is in a very similar vein to your rant: Show nested quote +Many people will use this terrible tragedy as an excuse to put through a political agenda other than my own. This tawdry abuse of human suffering for political gain sickens me to the core of my being. Those people who have different political views from me ought to be ashamed of themselves for thinking of cheap partisan point-scoring at a time like this. In any case, what this tragedy really shows us is that, so far from putting into practice political views other than my own, it is precisely my political agenda which ought to be advanced.
Not only are my political views vindicated by this terrible tragedy, but also the status of my profession. Furthermore, it is only in the context of a national and international tragedy like this that we are reminded of the very special status of my hobby, and its particular claim to legislative protection. My religious and spiritual views also have much to teach us about the appropriate reaction to these truly terrible events.
Countries which I like seem to never suffer such tragedies, while countries which, for one reason or another, I dislike, suffer them all the time. The one common factor which seems to explain this has to do with my political views, and it suggests that my political views should be implemented as a matter of urgency, even though they are, as a matter of fact, not implemented in the countries which I like.
Of course the World Trade Center attacks are a uniquely tragic event, and it is vital that we never lose sight of the human tragedy involved. But we must also not lose sight of the fact that I am right on every significant moral and political issue, and everybody ought to agree with me. Please, I ask you as fellow human beings, vote for the political party which I support, and ask your legislators to support policies endorsed by me, as a matter of urgency.
It would be a fitting memorial. Edit: Note: Not suggesting that you are like the hypothetical person making this statement! Just that the satire itself is in a similar vein. :p
Yeah, that's along the same idea. I just think it's wrong to basically be like, "Well those people died, hey look at my new idea for a useless law!" Stupid.
It's bad enough the little girl's funeral is being protested by the Westboro Baptist Church. Sigh.
|
I bet if we dropped a few of those Westboro asswipes with a Glock 19 with a 33 round clip people would thank us.
But in all seriousness. I agree with your post COMPLETELY. It truly is sad how in todays world, someone will kill multiple people and then the politicans move in like a bunch of sharks and slap down new laws, the media starts preaching the gun control crap, etc. Just because it makes them feel safer.
|
I didn't know ANY pistol could hold 30+ rounds.. wtf o_o
|
On January 15 2011 09:45 MOARpylons wrote:
I bet if we dropped a few of those Westboro asswipes with a Glock 19 with a 33 round clip people would thank us.
But in all seriousness. I agree with your post COMPLETELY. It truly is sad how in todays world, someone will kill multiple people and then the politicans move in like a bunch of sharks and slap down new laws, the media starts preaching the gun control crap, etc. Just because it makes them feel safer.
Lol at the Westboro comment. 
And your last sentence is one thing I forgot to comment on. They do that shit because it makes them feel better to be able to, "See? If we ban this it won't happen again," but they forget it doesn't happen because it's legal or illegal, but rather happens just because. The shooter was nuts; he did it because he wanted to or thought it was right.
You can legislate your feelings of safety all you want, but that doesn't make you any safer.
On January 15 2011 09:45 synapse wrote:
I didn't know ANY pistol could hold 30+ rounds.. wtf o_o
They can't. It's the magazine. It's just a longer magazine. *shrug*
|
People in the States are indeed quick to talk up all sorts of nonsense, as evidenced by the discussions related to this incident.
There is one basic concept that you seem to dispute, however, that I think is perfectly reasonable: the environment an actor is in influences its actions.
While a decision maker is the sole creator and executor of his actions, the situation he is presented with at any time builds the context and knowledge used in his decision making, unless he is a solipsist or otherwise denying knowledge. So while the gunman in this incident certainly bears the moral responsibility for the killings, it would be hasty of us to succumb to the fallacy of the single cause and write off the deaths as only the killer's responsibility.
I also feel that the attitude presented in Nugent's article is an intellectually lazy one. Keywords: "rather than trying to fathom it." Evil may surely be an idea difficult, or even impossible, to fathom. However, science and humanity's sum of knowledge does not grow and mature over history from the motivation of: avoid learning.
I'm sure Nugent is well-intentioned, because trying to gain understanding can just as easily lead to misunderstanding, which we see so rampant in discussions today. History has been plagued by titanic misunderstandings dwarfing the one we lament here, such as the geocentric worldview, or racism as a valid theory predicting human aptitude and behavior. We probably hold countless misunderstandings today, that to more enlightened folks in the future will seem comical and boorish. We will never have such laughs though, if we simply throw up our hands in the face of everything difficult to understand.
|
Right. If banning things makes people feel safer in spite of it having nothing to do with it being illegal or not, Then so be it. The worlds a scary place when you stop to look at it
And i probably would go about with the Westboro comment if i was in the shoes of someone in the family of that little girl. Im sick of them doing these ignorant things and being protected by free speech :/
|
On January 15 2011 10:04 EchOne wrote:
People in the States are indeed quick to talk up all sorts of nonsense, as evidenced by the discussions related to this incident.
There is one basic concept that you seem to dispute, however, that I think is perfectly reasonable: the environment an actor is in influences its actions.
While a decision maker is the sole creator and executor of his actions, the situation he is presented with at any time builds the context and knowledge used in his decision making, unless he is a solipsist or otherwise denying knowledge. So while the gunman in this incident certainly bears the moral responsibility for the killings, it would be hasty of us to succumb to the fallacy of the single cause and write off the deaths as only the killer's responsibility.
I also feel that the attitude presented in Nugent's article is an intellectually lazy one. Keywords: "rather than trying to fathom it." Evil may surely be an idea difficult, or even impossible, to fathom. However, science and humanity's sum of knowledge does not grow and mature over history from the motivation of: avoid learning.
I'm sure Nugent is well-intentioned, because trying to gain understanding can just as easily lead to misunderstanding, which we see so rampant in discussions today. History has been plagued by titanic misunderstandings dwarfing the one we lament here, such as the geocentric worldview, or racism as a valid theory predicting human aptitude and behavior. We probably hold countless misunderstandings today, that to more enlightened folks in the future will seem comical and boorish. We will never have such laughs though, if we simply throw up our hands in the face of everything difficult to understand.
I agree with basically all of this.
I, too, feel the way Nugent does. I'm sick of trying to understand the mind of a lunatic or a criminal. I just don't care anymore. I'd prefer that everyone could get along and live in harmony and hold hands and run through a field of daises (okay maybe not the last half of that but still), but in my experience, that's ridiculous.
What you said about how one's environment affects their life is definitely true. But how can we as a society assign blame to people who directly hold no responsibility? Let's say some lonely, depressed kid murders fellow students. Let's say his dad beat him as a kid, and his mother was cold. Are they responsible because they weren't perfect parents? While psychologists will come out nowhere to say how they contributed, and they're probably correct, his parents still didn't pull the trigger. I'm not disagreeing, just stating that there are plenty of factors, but ultimately I think fault lies with the person who exhibits the violent behavior.
Some people just do stupid shit.
|
Honestly I think its an indictment of our mental health system. Someone so obviously crazy shouldn't be out there living alone going online and getting crazier, much less purchasing weapons, they need to be institutionalized. That said, you can never expect where crazy will be but this and plenty of other acts of violence could be prevented by simply putting crazy people in places where they can be monitored and live without hurting others.
On January 15 2011 09:45 synapse wrote:
I didn't know ANY pistol could hold 30+ rounds.. wtf o_o
![[image loading]](http://www.1999.co.jp/itbig09/10097332.jpg)
|
On January 15 2011 10:24 ZeaL. wrote:Honestly I think its an indictment of our mental health system. Someone so obviously crazy shouldn't be out there living alone going online and getting crazier, much less purchasing weapons, they need to be institutionalized. That said, you can never expect where crazy will be but this and plenty of other acts of violence could be prevented by simply putting crazy people in places where they can be monitored and live without hurting others. Show nested quote +On January 15 2011 09:45 synapse wrote:
I didn't know ANY pistol could hold 30+ rounds.. wtf o_o
True, but how do we assess individuals to ensure they're getting the help others deem them to require?
The problem is that sometimes crazy people obviously aren't crazy until after they do something truly crazy like what happened in Arizona.
Sure, there's tons of warning signs, but we see that in hindsight because people go pull together their YouTube, their Twitter, and so on. When you look at all of those pieces of a large puzzle together, you see the larger picture.
But the average person that interacted with him, even on a regular basis, likely wouldn't have seen the larger picture.
So the issue is still that there's no good way to assess people to make sure they're okay. And then where do you draw the line? Who decides what is and isn't acceptable in mainstream society?
This is why I keep coming back to my usual mindset: Be vigiliant. Be prepared. If a nutjob starts shooting innocent people, do what you have to do to protect yourself, your friends, your family, and those around you who aren't capable or in a position of protecting themselves.
|
I think the media is in the right in analyzing all of these possible causes. These shouldn't be events where people just dismiss it as a crazy guy and end there. It is a chance to make changes to the system in hopes that it won't happen again and have people better prepared when it does. maybe universities should be looking at ways to improve mental health tracking/treatments or regulators should be looking at ways to keep guns out of the hands of people that will use it that way. maybe even something that involves twitter youtube and so on.
get into the mindset of: what mistakes were made and what can be done better instead of dismissing it.
|
The fact is that a guy that crazy should never have been allowed access to a gun in the first place.
There needs to be tighter laws to make sure the mentally ill cannot purchase firearms. How about requiring a psychologist to declare you sane before you can get a firearms license?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
