Another shooting rampage in the US
POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Monday, April 9, 2012 03:40
VIEWED: 7258
PAGE 4 of 7
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,
Obviously. As tool using humans, we have built killing machines that exceed the capacity of the knife. But since there is more than one way to skin a cat, we should broaden our gaze.
As a child, I used to get 'homework notices' for failing to do my homework. These were slips of paper explaining my naughtiness to my parents. If my parents saw these slips, I would be punished. So I used to hide them, destroy them, throw them away. To my child mind, this seemed like an adequate solution to the problem.
As it turned out, there were other methods for the teacher to reach out to my parents, and I was eventually punished anyway. The respite was temporary, and the tranquility was an illusion.
I do not mean to say that killings and homework have anything in common.
But the thought process that says removing the homework notices will solve the problem has a lot in common with the mentality that says removing the guns will solve the problem. Not to mention that once established, "Remove the tool" can go on to reach ludicrous levels. After guns, then knives, then anything that can possibly be a weapon. Till all law abiding citizens are empty handed.
Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.
In my opinion.
--Anthony
Anthony, I don't mean to get into a debate about gun laws with you. We've been over this before and we have values which differ fundamentally. I live in a society where guns are restricted and I am happy about this. You live in a society where guns are readily available and you are happy about this. We should both continue to live where laws support our values.
I was responding only to what I perceived as your argument ie guns are no worse than knives at being potential harm doers to people. I assume that is your argument, hence the links you posted. So I disagree. I agree that knives can kill, as can many other forms of weapon, but guns are a more effective weapon, and some guns/firearms are more dangerous than others. Hence they have been invented and continued to be developed into more effective killing mechanisms.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"Remember that guy who tried to go on a shooting spree without a gun and everyone just stomped his @ss?."
Remember that guy who tried to break into someones house, armed with a pistol, intent on killing, robbing, raping the owners and the homeowner shot him so full of holes?
Remember the guy that tried to go on a shooting spree but was stopped by armed civilians...no...me neither!
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually there was something that happened here, where unarmed people stopped an armed man.
Sandro De Maria says he doesn't like the fuss that goes with receiving Australia's highest honour for bravery. But he is proud of what he did.
"It feels good that I was responsible for stopping this guy doing what he intended to do."
Mr De Maria helped disarm convicted killer Peter James Knight at an East Melbourne fertility clinic in July last year.
Knight shot dead a security guard and had turned his rifle on Mr De Maria's partner Lillian Kitanov, when Mr De Maria lunged at him.
It was an "instantaneous reaction", Mr De Maria said last night, recalling that Knight was three feet away from Ms Kitanov when he tackled him, grabbing the rifle before two men came to his aid.
Knight was captured with 16 litres of kerosene, three cigarette lighters, brackets to seal doors, 30 gags, a hammer, the rifle, and a further 12 rounds of ammunition.
Mr De Maria's actions have earned him the Star of Courage, the highest award in the Australian Bravery decorations, announced today.
The 38-year-old construction worker from Reservoir is the sole Victorian and one of three Australians to receive the Commonwealth award, which is granted annually.
Mr De Maria said his first response on hearing the shot fired by Knight at the security guard in the clinic's waiting room was "just shock in trying to comprehend what had taken place".
"It all happened so fast and then when he pointed the gun at Lillian, I was just immediately stopping him because he was going to shoot her."
When Tim Anderson came from behind and helped him pin down Knight, Mr De Maria "felt relief". "I did fear for my life."
He said it took more than a year for him to stop playing out scenarios of how he might have reacted differently. "No one knew what happened in that clinic except me and my partner. "If you weren't there you don't know. You don't see someone getting shot the way we saw someone getting shot."
The experience had made them closer.
"You value life more and enjoy life more on a day to day basis because you come to the realisation that anything can happen."
"I saw that with security guard, he was just within a couple of minutes of going home and he never made it."
Mr Anderson, of Upper Beaconsfield, grabbed Knight's rifle as Mr De Maria wrestled with him. He also has been awarded a bravery medal.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/08/11/1028158047401.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I notice, as usual, this becomes an "all=or-nothing" argument. Does anyone here really want to take away people's guns? I sure don't.
Can anyone debate this on the middle ground...
Sadly, no.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
And that is OUR responsibility, collectively, as human beings and fellow travellers, not no government, not no business, OURS, each and every - and we failed it.
It ain't simpler than that.
And yet it doesn't happen - it's a beautiful sentiment but we'll all be dead and buried before our society ever reflects that kind of generosity at effective levels. There's the trope about "there's no truly unselfish act." Since I am stubborn and hell bent on being contrary at times I tried to find a completely unselfish act I could perform. I may have had it wrong but on each attempt I was thrown back, denied, and left cold. In one particular case when trying to help a relative, I was even rebuked, "you just want to gloat." I was there to help but they saw it as my taking pleasure in their pain, the exact opposite of my intentions. So I am putting "the intervening to help others" on hold.
In terms of guns making a more civilized society? So more police with guns then?
or at least police as they should be. I agree with gun advocates when they say that a large part is "the person with the gun" and I don't trust some guy who's been to the range and never had any more training to make those life and death calls, not around me. It's never that clear cut, situational training has a real purpose. Zimmerman???????Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Removing guns is a crutch that serves only to place the weak at the mercy of the strong. This is a good arrangement for the strong. Not so much for the rest of us.
Please note that no one advocates removing guns - appreciate it.
The idea that your gun will protect you from strong people who want to do you harm seems quaint since they rarely announce themselves and most of the evil you'll have visited on you will be from unarmed people.
I am glad to see that you realize how much more lethal guns are than knives at least! Imagine how many more deaths there would be in China if your average knife wielding whacko had a 9mm instead of a knife?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I notice, as usual, this becomes an "all=or-nothing" argument. Does anyone here really want to take away people's guns? I sure don't.
Can anyone debate this on the middle ground, like say, maybe people shouldn't have semi-automatic weapons with thirty-round clips or something? I know Wulf can't, his NRA-sodden mind sees any attempt to put ANY limitation on guns as a horrendous infringement on EVERYONE's gun rights, so I'm not addressing him. I'm talking about the semi-reasonable people here, and I ask: Is there not a middle ground?
That's the thing, people like Wolf want to build strawmen instead of having rational debate. No one wants to take all the guns away from people. That is why they are called control laws and not banning laws.
Letting a person with no training and no back ground check buy a AK47 with a 100 round drum is stupid. Unless your house it going to come under attack from a 30 man death squad it is over kill for home and personal defence.
The best weapon for home defence is a shot gun loaded with 00 buckshot. Good stopping power, good spread, and legal for people to buy without special permits. Even with this a person will need to know how to use it or it will be worthless.
Hand guns need even more training to be used correctly. A person with little or no training will not be able to use a hand gun, or other weapons, anywhere near effectivly in an emergency situation. If nothing else that person is going to just make the situation more dangerous.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
No one wants to take all the guns away from people.
Hello,
Actually, some people do want this. I wouldn't be so concerned otherwise. People do want this and people have stated they want this and people work to achieve this.
Even some of those who graciously allow that I should be able to own a gun admit they'd prefer if I didn't actually carry one around.
Some would prefer to limit what sort of gun I should carry, of what caliber, of what capacity, of what COLOR AND SHAPE, of what MELTING POINT, etc.
If I knew that all attempts to control my ownership and carrying of guns would end at a competency test and a license at the local DMV, then I'd be very happy with that arrangement.
In any event, the point I made when posting the knife attack articles has clearly been lost by some here.
It's to show that the problem is not the gun. It's the guy who decides to commit mass murder. It's the society where people wake up and say, "Hey, I'm going to kill as many people as I can today." And it's the idea that they can do these things because they can find large groups of people who are defenseless.
When you take away weapon X from good people, bad people will either continue to acquire weapon X or proceed to weapon Y to do their dirty deeds.
And weapon Y can be surprisingly more effective than you'd thought. The real weapon, as always, is the man with murder on his mind.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196
Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
since they rarely announce themselves
Hello,
People with weapons frequently announce themselves when planning to do a bad thing. They usually say, "Hey, look, I have a weapon, and I want to do this bad thing."
This is also true in shooting rampages, where even if they don't say the words, they still manage to broadcast their intentions quite loudly.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196
Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:Quote:
since they rarely announce themselves
Hello,
People with weapons frequently announce themselves when planning to do a bad thing. They usually say, "Hey, look, I have a weapon, and I want to do this bad thing."
They really don't. You are imaging perfect scenarios, where the evil doer brandishes his weapon and announces his evil intent. I imagine ones where they come up from behind and put the gun in your back or are suddenly with a gun in your face- neither of which would give you time to reach safely for your weapon. And in case you think you have time to reach and get off a shot who knows who might get shot in the chaos that follows?
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
This is also true in shooting rampages, where even if they don't say the words, they still manage to broadcast their intentions quite loudly.
Yet in all of these scenarios I've yet to read about an armed citizen stopping the event. Curious. I think even at G. Giffords assault there was a trained and armed citizen but he was unable to get a shot or some such thing prevented his intervention. Wasn't it an older women who jumped him? See below****
Some comments from the latest updates about the recent shooter, very wise imho and from many different vantage points:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/04/us/oikos-university-gunman-lined-up-
victims.html?ref=us
Dave K, Cleveland OH:
****"Another interesting example: During the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, there was at the scene an ex-Marine with a pistol. He never drew his weapon, much less fired at Loughner. Instead, he took cover until the shooter had to reload, and then used the opportunity to tackle and disarm. As a Marine, we can safely assume that he knew how to handle his gun, was not afraid to shoot it, and was not any sort of coward, and yet he never did what the pro-gun folks always say he would do, which is shoot the attacker.
That's the thing: People with actual training don't think that more guns solve the problem.
David St. Louis, MO:
"We live in Kirkwood, Missouri where there was a tragic killing of sever people at a city council meeting two years ago. On his way in, the Kirkwood gunman killed two armed, trained police officers. This too negates any argument that MORE guns will help. This again is tragic, and our hearts go out to the victims of this tragedy, and all gun-related tragedies."
JSB NYC:
"Every time one of these senseless massacres takes place, I think of George W Bush's comments just after the killings at Va Tech, where he led off with a reassurance that gun rights would be protected. It was the most insensitive and disgusting moment in an administration built on those, as if the invisible hand of the gun lobby had a barrel in his back. Advocates of sensible gun control can wring their hands and wax rhetorical, yet again, but unless legislators meet fire with fire - excuse the expression - "American exceptionalism" will continue to be piled high with the bodies of the innocent."
Thomas FieldDallas, Tx.
"Nothing to see here folks, just another mass shooting in the trigger happy USA. Let's go through the motions though....
1. How tragic! Why would someone do such a horrible, senseless thing?
2. The guy was mentally ill, and no one could have seen it coming or prevented it.
3. Begin standard gun debate. Cue the NRA to shout down all sane restrictions on lethal weapons, and counter-intuitively call for even more guns.
4. Shrug shoulders, wring hands, bury the dead, and return to what passes as normal (excluding the wounded and the surviving relatives of course, for whom things will never be normal again).
5. Wait till the inevitable next time and repeat steps one through four.
And there will be a next time. In this country, more and more it seems, an unstable person with a gun and a grudge equals a mass shooting. The gun is as easily obtained as the grudge.
It's supremely ironic, that whenever this happens, the shooters complain they were disrespect
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME