|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though.
Agree with you
|
On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though.
I can tell you that a random 17 year old would have had a hard time finding a gun in a country such as France for instance. Especially if he doesn't have any criminal contacts.
|
On February 28 2012 06:40 TanTzoR wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though. I can tell you that a random 17 year old would have had a hard time finding a gun in a country such as France for instance. Especially if he doesn't have any criminal contacts.
It's the same in Canada, maybe a kitchen knife or a bolt-action hunting rifle, but those aren't quite the same. (unless you're Lee Harvey Oswald)
You need to have sympathy for all parties in a case like this 
|
On February 28 2012 06:40 TanTzoR wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though. I can tell you that a random 17 year old would have had a hard time finding a gun in a country such as France for instance. Especially if he doesn't have any criminal contacts.
And likewise for a 17 year old in the states with responsible parents. When I was a teenager my father owned several pistols but kept them locked up. I saw him put it in his pants one time when an old man that lived down the street sexually harassed my sister who was 16 at the time. He whipped the old man's ass but never pulled the gun, as it was only if he had one pulled on him.
Back on topic though is that at age 17 I had no idea where to get a gun either besides a gun store, and I was too young so I was gunless (besides my air rifle) until age 25 when I bought my first one due to an increase in gang activity between my house and the post I was stationed at at the time. I only put my hands on it once when a homeless guy approached my truck at 0300 while I was getting gas, but didn't have to pull it. Brandishing is serious, so if you pull it you better have to use it here.
Personally, I'm going to start taking my son to the shooting range in the next couple of years (age 5 currently) to shoot my guns and educate him on the dangers of them and start him learning how to operate them safely. I'll probably get him a BB gun around the same time. How many hunter's children shoot up their schools? They have access to guns almost 24/7, and probably own several rifles themselves by the time they are in high school. It's usually the city kid who's never touched one before and doesn't know how to use them that goes around shooting at people he's mad at.
What if the 17 year old does have criminal contacts? What if he decides he wants to rape your wife? Would you wish you had a gun then? Better to have and not need than to need and not have.
Think about it.
|
On February 28 2012 03:14 D10 wrote:
No, only state sponsored law enforcement should be able to use guns, what defines a government is the monopoly of legitimate violence.
If the goverment is giving guns to the people, its admiting it failed to protect them, and that its cowboy no rules land.
So imho, either control the fucking guns and only let law enforcement people use them, or go full anarchy
The government doesn't actually protect people from all crimes, nor does it purport to. Rather, the government seeks to prevent major crimes, and merely retaliates against criminals for lesser ones.
Most of the time, the police will not arrive in time to protect you from a home invader. All they can do afterwards is clean up the mess and try to stop the criminal in the future. In other words, the burden is on you to defend yourself.
That doesn't make it a failed state, just that it would take far more resources to completely protect its citizens from all crime. You're creating a false dichotomy; there are in fact many stages in between full anarchy and a 100% safe state.
|
There is a difference between a monopoly on force and a monopoly on retaliatory force. Only the latter is justified. Regular citizens should be allowed to use force to defend themselves and their property, they just shouldn't be allowed to use force to exact justice. For example, you have every right to shoot a home invader, but you don't have a right to subdue, handcuff and execute a home invader because you think he deserves it. A monopoly on retaliatory force is necessary for the most objective and consistent carrying out of justice possible. The government should not have a monopoly on all force because, it is impossible for it to protect everyone effectively, especially without massive infringements on freedoms, and there is no reason that people should not have the freedom to take their defense into their own hands.
|
On February 28 2012 06:59 Carson wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 06:40 TanTzoR wrote:On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though. I can tell you that a random 17 year old would have had a hard time finding a gun in a country such as France for instance. Especially if he doesn't have any criminal contacts. It's the same in Canada, maybe a kitchen knife or a bolt-action hunting rifle, but those aren't quite the same. (unless you're Lee Harvey Oswald) You need to have sympathy for all parties in a case like this
Why do you say these things when you have no idea of the truth? It is far easier to get an illegal handgun in Canada than an illegal bolt action. Why? Because handguns are in demand inducing a supply through smuggling. Just notice how much more handgun crime there is in Canada than long gun crime.
|
On February 28 2012 08:49 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 06:59 Carson wrote:On February 28 2012 06:40 TanTzoR wrote:On February 28 2012 05:13 NoSlack wrote:On February 28 2012 05:05 darthfoley wrote:
sigh, the kid would have had a much harder time getting the gun to shoot his classmates. sad story, but i believe more gun control might've been able to stop this tragedy. We need more context but I'm assuming the kid lived with his parents and got it from them? If so it's a case of bad parenting and the parents should be held liable for every crime commited due to their negligence. If they got it from the black market then it's something that gun control laws would have no effect on anyway. Criminals don't obey the laws. That's why they are criminals. 300+ million people something is bound to go wrong. Personally I blame the parent for every bad kid out there. When my kid does something wrong it's my fault, because I didn't teach him any better. Parenting is a whole different subject though. I can tell you that a random 17 year old would have had a hard time finding a gun in a country such as France for instance. Especially if he doesn't have any criminal contacts. It's the same in Canada, maybe a kitchen knife or a bolt-action hunting rifle, but those aren't quite the same. (unless you're Lee Harvey Oswald) You need to have sympathy for all parties in a case like this Why do you say these things when you have no idea of the truth? It is far easier to get an illegal handgun in Canada than an illegal bolt action. Why? Because handguns are in demand inducing a supply through smuggling. Just notice how much more handgun crime there is in Canada than long gun crime.
I disagree. For a random 17 year old (without criminal ties or loads of available cash) it's easier to grab a legal hunting rifle than an illegal gun of any sort. Sorry if I was unclear.
|
|
|
I don't think allowing ppl to carry a gun or even having one at home would achieve anything good for our safety overall. Criminality will never go away having everyone carry a gun would only make it more violent and agressive resulting in more deaths on boths sides, criminals and victims. Also we would indirectly make it even easier for criminals to access guns and one more reason for them to always carry one and preemptively use it aswell. In a sociey where most ppl own a gun i don't think criminals would try to rob you or break into your house with a baseball bat so what does it come to? who has the faster trigger finger? or are we expecting to stop criminality by spreading guns?
|
I think it's just a consideration of positives versus negatives. The negatives far outweigh the positives of being able to own and carry guns. I mean just having a gun for safety can be very dangerous. Guns aren't meant for safety they're meant for killing someone/something and I don't think the average decision making warrants putting that kind of responsibility in so many people's hands.
|
The simple answer to the question is yes, the right is guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. For those people that argue that guns kill people and are only used for bad, I hang that accusation on the parents of these people. My dad taught me how to properly use, care for, and respect guns and even though I don't do much shooting now, I stll maintain a healthy level of respect for guns. If people are running around using them improperly, then they weren't properly introduced to firearms. I would like to see statistics on offenders that used firearms in their crimes and how many were brought up in an environment where they were taught to use firearms correctly. As far as carrying goes, I think the permit system they have in place in most states is fine, there will always be people that don't follow the rules though. It's wrong to punish people that use firearms properly because of those few idiots that use them incorrectly.
|
If we are talking about the shooting just happen today. Its not that simple gun or no gun. That kid still can stab at least one to death with his kitchen knife or something. The kid problems are all of the three: parenting, schooling environment and freedom access to gun.
In a grant scheme, I do agree that, no people should be allowed to own a gun or obtain it easily. I asked some Americans and they told me that the traditional of owning gun came from the civil war, while people had to defense themselves. But I mean, we live in a much more modern and almost complete diffirence world compare the 200 years ago.
On the other hand, baning gun is not as easy as it seems to be. Because its a social things, unlike financial or military matter you can have a model, a study to forsee the result. Social reaction and result can only be known when you actually get there. It also depends on the thinking of Americans people, many of them still swear by gun, and Gorvernor/Presidents don't want to lose their vote to matter like this so...well I don't see banning gun happen anytime soon in the US of A.
|
Your "example" doesn't show anything. If the kid didn't have access to firearms, he would have simply stabbed someone to death with a knife instead. Would that have fixed anything? Do you want to ban all knives too? What if he used a crossbow, or scissors?
|
On February 28 2012 13:47 sunprince wrote:Your "example" doesn't show anything. If the kid didn't have access to firearms, he would have simply stabbed someone to death with a knife instead. Would that have fixed anything? Do you want to ban all knives too? What if he used a crossbow, or scissors?
Having done my 17 years of judo, taekwondo and muay thai I can stop someone with a knife. But I can't stop bullets. I'm pretty sure there would have been less victims if he went there with scissors u_u
Though guns are not the central point in this case, it's the lack of moral support and education.
|
I don't think the recent shooting has anything to do with gun control laws in that area.
There have been at least three gunmen who have gone on killing sprees in Europe in the past year alone.
It happens everywhere.
|
As long as guns exist criminals will have access to them because you don't need a gun to steal a gun. Now if you take that as an absolute fact no other question can ever be answered. Yes, No, Some, All it doens't matter. I don't even see how this can be debated.
|
On February 28 2012 14:19 Voltaire wrote:
I don't think the recent shooting has anything to do with gun control laws in that area.
There have been at least three gunmen who have gone on killing sprees in Europe in the past year alone.
It happens everywhere.
Not to mention he obtained the guns illegally anyway.
|
On February 28 2012 14:19 Voltaire wrote:
I don't think the recent shooting has anything to do with gun control laws in that area.
There have been at least three gunmen who have gone on killing sprees in Europe in the past year alone.
It happens everywhere.
Since 2000, 11 school shooting in Europe, around 70 in the US. Last year nothing in Europe, 11 in the US.
I think you don't get it since you've never lived in Europe. An average high school kid would have NO IDEA how to find a gun. No idea how to start. It's like, I've lived in a poor area most of my life and never saw a gun before going to Texas. You just don't see them.
Only big criminals have them, and they are not stupid enough to shoot for no reason.
I agree that gun just increased the number of victims and is not the original source of this tragic accident.
|
On February 28 2012 13:47 sunprince wrote:Your "example" doesn't show anything. If the kid didn't have access to firearms, he would have simply stabbed someone to death with a knife instead. Would that have fixed anything? Do you want to ban all knives too? What if he used a crossbow, or scissors?
What bad logic.
You can kill anyone with almost anything: water, pillows, even with bare hands.
What we are talking about here is guns. To simplify for you, imagine if there were no guns, the kid would or would not have done this, but we would be speculating now, won't we? In short, on an argument on guns, we talk about guns. Moreover. the scale and speed of damage done by guns are exponentially more massive that could be done by any other thing.
Think before you reply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
