Connecticut shooting, gun control
Voice your opinions...
Preliminary reports that a sig sauer assault rifle was used... so it's likely another ban will be up for even more serious discussion due to the 3 shooting this year involving these weapons....
I wouldn't be very surprised if the ban comes in 2013.
Yea... kindergarten class...
Troll smarter...
Anyways, with sufficient training and suprise, even people trained to shoot back will be mowed down quite easily.
Doubt it. Also he was in a bullet proof vest.
Shoot him in the gun hand or the legs or the face.Originally Posted by hkkmr
Or forget the whole gun idea. Sure-make guns illegal. And pass out hand grenades to protect children from people who have guns illegally.
Most people wish they could make a headshot under fire.. but I doubt many could.
He might drop down in pain but people can have a good deal of pain tolerance and can be fairly stout. Anyways, generally untrained individuals have a hard time doing much of anything when bullets are flying around, even people who know how to shoot. Even going to a paintball field, you will find people generally find cover, and that's just to hide from paint balls. Human instinct needs to be overcome thru training in order to respond to this sort of situation. So it would require teachers to be trained and to have them be in the right place at the right time. That's not exactly feasible either. Given this individual only killed 6 adults, it's entirely possible none of them would have guns as well.
Wut?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_fire_exercise
One big training part of live fire exercise is not the bullets coming at you, it's the noise. Anyways, with surprise, even individuals with guns may have no time to react. I seriously doubt one teacher with a 9mm will be able to take this guy down unless the teacher got lucky or is well-trained.
9 out of 10 times, I would expect a individual with a bullet proof vest and a assault rifle to steam roll any individual with a hand gun.
You kinda of proved the point.
An individual with a assault rifle and vest has a huge firepower advantage against almost anyone with a handgun. I think most cops are just going to hide behind a barrier much like any teacher with a gun. So your original point of a couple of teachers with guns is fallacious and only infrequently would any defensive individual be capable of preventing the situation.
I doubt it, the moment this individual entered the classroom, and killed his mother, the body count was going to be in the double digits.
Most individuals can't deal with paintball situations much less live fire situations unless one is acclimated and somewhat expecting it, ala combat zone.
Well this guys was going to kill his mother... so it was kinda of a personal thing...
Schools aren't really gun free zones, my high school had two police officers on staff full time.
Maybe banning guns would help, maybe not. But there are people I know who I am glad have guns and I feel safe(r) around them. Granted, they also have other qualities and skills that make them reliable and good citizens/people.
Also,
Violence starts in people's minds and hearts. I don't think there's any one simple solution (other than invasive totalitarian control, a la TSA...).
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
LMAO americans.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
LMAO EUROPEANS
Fag.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I would say banning guns wouldn't help any specific instance, but may reduce frequency. These shooters tend to attack areas of weakness where they will be able to do what they intend without resistance so it's unlikely there to be individuals who can stop them.
It's really hard to stop an assault weapon carrying and vested individual with a handgun, regardless of how skilled or capable. Also most individuals are simply incapable of responding in this sort of situation, even well trained individuals.
You've been doing a good job of making yourself unappealing lately.
Yes, which is one reason why I think this is a multi-faceted problem without any one clean solution. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to figure it out and make changes where we can, of course.
My father has a slightly racist view of it all - he notes that in the vast majority of incidences like this, it's a young white male. He thinks it's because they see guns as toys to get them attention. In contrast (according to him), young black men--who are stereotypically linked to crime and violence--don't do things like this because the are used to dealing with guns as tools.
...in case anyone's looking for yet another perspective on things...
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
Because I question something I find stupid? Ahahah, pathetic.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
American gun ownership is still the highest. The laws generally don't cover existing firearms.
IMO, gun violence is more likely to be associated with gun ownership then gun laws. I don't think laws have much effect except to reduce increase in gun ownership.
I can't help but think that people who want to shoot others will be able to get ahold of a gun somehow and I would rather have one too. I guess for me its more interesting to try to figure out why these shootings are happening... what is the psychology behind them and why can't we catch them sooner.
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
I don't think banning specific weapons is going to magic stop these types of scenarios occurring, the difficulties are deeper wound in society, idk what happened but i imagine the person murdering innocent people was a victim him/herself. The whole thing makes me very sad on a larger scale, humanity lets down humanity.
I'm not sure if i will need to explain further or if people will 'get it' but i see similarities between these (as in thread title) and these...
http://www.msf.org/msf/articles/2012...ct-in-kivu.cfm
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
Im not moving to India lol...
It's like I just expressed a little bit ago on Facebook -- guns are not the issue, people are. People who want to kill will find a way to kill. Take note of similar news. So what if we ban guns -- will we eventually have to ban butter knives and spoons because people are beginning to kill others with those?
Well that man only wounded 20 kids not killed 20 kids...
Also almost all the multi-individual knife attacks in China are against small children because knifing 20 adults is fairly difficult to accomplish.
A gun is a extremely efficient killing mechanism for multiple individuals, adult or otherwise. Range/ease of use etc, I quite like them.
Maybe he didn't want to actually kill. If he wanted to kill, I'm sure he could have. He had access to the kids long enough to wound them, I'm sure if he wanted to kill he could have aimed for the throat, slit a little harder, and killed them.
People are just generally shit with knives... also he was likely using something like a kitchen knife or a vegetable cleaver, not something like a k-bar or a knife made for killing.
Did no one read how Cain killed his brother, Abel? They didn't have guns when this happened.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I don't read fiction.
Cain didn't kill 20 kids when he killed his brother.
Anyways, gun control imo isn't about guns but about comparative firepower. A long bow and arrow could be as deadly, but would require significantly more skill to use. So would a sword. The problem is how do average citizens and police deal with this level of firepower in a reliable fashion. With a handgun, it would be a severe disadvantage still and it would be hard to take this individual out without help.
A skilled group can take on a much larger group given the appropriate tactical situation, see the movie 300. The problem with guns is it can turn a unskilled individual into a killing machine, which is the history of war for the last 100 years.
Prove it.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
Kids in the class need to be taught SWAT team kinda stuff. Throwing books (as a weapon, as moving cover, as a distraction, and as a general deterrent all at once), knocking desks over to be used as makeshift cover, just all-out bumrushing the bastard, etc.; in the end, there's twenty or so students and one gunman and those twenty need to viscerally know that they aren't totally helpless, that a gun must be aimed and shot by a mortal human being and it ain't a free pass to be superman or nothing...
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
First you need to be trained to not run and hide when the first shot goes off. It's probably easier to teach kids to do it then adults tho...
*sarcasm Maybe we just need all kids to be Sudanese child soldiers, who are brought up on rape and systematic violence...
come back when you have a real response.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
This debate repeats over and over and always with the same stupid arguments on both sides.
First of all, indeed, gun ownership increases the risk of major violence. Guns are weapons after all and are among the most sophisticated we know today. But guns still don't fire themselves, though, so the true origin of violence lies somewhere else.
Politicians are very good at sidetracking issues. They don't want to deal with them on a very deep level. Likely because they don't really care but even if if they do, they probably still don't understand them. So they like to present things that seem like relevant to the issue but that are unlikely to change things by much, if at all. And one of such things is gun ownership laws.
Why someone takes a gun and starts a killing spree escapes my mind. Surely, every incident has different motivations. But one thing that is common is that such incidents are typical in the US. It could be that there are many more guns in the US than any other place or it could be something else. And like I said, since weapons still don't fire themselves, then the problem is other than the quantity of guns.
I don't know many details about the culture over there but I surely know a few important facts. And one of them is that families are far less important there than in other parts of the world. I still can't understand the obsession of youth over there to leave their parent's home early. Or maybe is it the urge of the parents to get rid of their children as fast as possible? Otherwise you can't explain the colonies of retired in other places.
Here in Mexico students go to the university and usually still sleep in their parents house. They are in constant contact with their family. You see, in your family there is an specific reason to treat you well (at least in theory): you're sharing a blood link. But in the US it's very commonto send them to student-only dormitories. This is relevant because, from what I've observed, when you throw a bunch of people of about the same age but who have nothing in common in a place and force them to be together, problems are likely to arise. Such places do not have hard rules in reality and when you allow people to live in anarchy and make their own, they usually end up with some nasty ones product of raw force and competition. Think about it. We know socionics. If you don't filter people by types, in any large group there are big chances that you're always surrounded by people who rubs you the wrong way. But since they are strangers they have absolutely no reason to be polite toward you. So conflicts get ugly.
Being honest, I've seriously considered about killing someone who keeps rubbing me the wrong way at several points in my life. And I'm pretty sure that lots of people would say the same. But since I'm not a psychopath, I've never got past the idea. It's just a matter of finding someone with weaker inhibitions to turn such ideas into a real disaster.
But let's be concise here: shootings aren't but the tip of the iceberg. Violence starts much earlier and is far more widespread that we're used to admit. It's not a coincidence that such things happen in places I described above: school, work, etc.
[| NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)
You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life. - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.
Meh. The Nordic countries generally score low on the homicide per capita- list, and high on the guns per capita-list. However, people here leave thei parents' home roughly 10 years earlier (around the age of 20) than in some other European countries (Bulgary, Greece, Italy..) where the average age of leaving is somewhere around 30. I found a statistic on how many percent of 18-24 year olds still live with their parents in some European countries. The two Nordic countries that are included (Finland & Denmark) are the two lowest ones on the list. (the blue & red represent men&women)
EDIT: A funny fact related to the famiy-focusedness of different countries just came into my mind. My brother went to the US for a year when he was 16, and, since he was supposed to live with a host family, the organization that arranged the exchange gave him a little booklet beforehand that had all sorts of information and advice on how to deal with the decreased liberties (since most people don't have curfews or other rules at that age anymore) & family-focused culture in the USA. I guess having someone else watch after you and control what you do and when and with whom and cooking your meals and doing your laundry can be a bit of a culture shock for someone who's been doing all those things by himself for years.
What this dataset mostly shows is that in most european countries young people still live with their parents, more so when the per-capita income is low. The reason is only partially "cultural", and it has a lot to do with how much the government gives to young people who don't live at home and, say, go to college (ex. in Italy you do not get anything, you need to work; in Denmark people were getting 700-800 euros a month!!! More than most entry-level jobs in Italy).Meh. The Nordic countries generally score low on the homicide per capita- list, and high on the guns per capita-list. However, people here leave thei parents' home roughly 10 years earlier (around the age of 20) than in some other European countries (Bulgary, Greece, Italy..) where the average age of leaving is somewhere around 30. I found a statistic on how many percent of 18-24 year olds still live with their parents in some European countries. The two Nordic countries that are included (Finland & Denmark) are the two lowest ones on the list. (the blue & red represent men&women)
:
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Everyone should learn socionics. That would solve evurything.
Mexico doesn't have a lot of gun violence outside the drug shit, but mikes prices made me wanna shoot someone.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
Violent people will result to other violent means. Gun control is not the solution. Guns are just an easier way of dealing with their violence.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Personally, I think if I went psycho, guns would be a horrible way of being violent. Push button-loud noise-someone falls over wouldn't be as satisfactory as, say, knifing small animals.
(Maybe this is the wrong time to say something like that...but I'm pretty sure it's not the wrong place.)
Last edited by DirectorAbbie; 12-15-2012 at 03:54 AM.
Sorry I just had to
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
This shooting has nothing to do with gun control. Politics is generally concerned with statistics, and 20 kiddies isn't even a blip on the radar.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Leave Fabie alone. The world has every right to laugh at Americans.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
