Yikes! Man Planned Mass Shooting at "Twilight: Breaking Dawn" Screening

The_Misplaced_Gypsy said:

Where there is a will there is always a way. Yes that is a quote. You are blind if you think that gun-related suicides would not simply happen without a gun.

Click to expand...

Yes, somebody without access to a gun could find other ways to kill themselves or others... but many don't. The simple fact that most mass murderers choose guns (where available) should be a hint that the psychological barriers against pulling the trigger are weaker than the barriers against most other forms of violence.

http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/2/462

"In 1997, Australia implemented a gun buyback program that reduced the stock of firearms by around one-fifth (and nearly halved the number of gun-owning households). Using differences across states, we test whether the reduction in firearms availability affected homicide and suicide rates. We find that the buyback led to a drop in the firearm suicide rates of almost 80%, with no significant effect on non-firearm death rates. The effect on firearm homicides is of similar magnitude but is less precise. "

The_Misplaced_Gypsy said:

You might as well outlaw people getting rope, or a belt, or lets even outlaw shoe laces.

Click to expand...

All those things are very useful for other, important, non-lethal purposes, and have no reasonable substitute - unlike, say, semi-auto longarms. (I remember when the '97 gun ban came in here; professional hunters were contemptuous of the folk who claimed they needed a semi-auto weapon to shoot roos. If you can't drop an animal cleanly with one shot from a bolt-action rifle, you've got no business blasting away at it.)

Cruel2BKind said:

Y'know that very large number that Stella gave? What was it?

29,569 for 2004

A large chunk (about half) was suicides and then about forty percent were homicide. Of the percentage that's left, I wonder how many are dumb rednecks who get the gun out when they hear a robber, only to find out that it was Junior or hubby once the smoke has cleared?

Click to expand...

Probably more than a few.

But the Gypsy didn't have a gun that day. I came home early and was making noise outside. When I walked into the front door she was in the living room with my katana drawn, in stance, and going into motion!

I took two steps back and she stopped the blade after about a foot when she saw it was me.But in thirteen years of marriage I've never seen her so disappointed to see me.

We lived in a very bad area of town. Shrug.

I find it funny in a quirky sort of way that people always want to add the word dumb to the word redneck.

Believe me I'm not trying to say they are the brightest bulbs in the box but when everything goes to shit...they can keep going forward. When everyone else is sitting around waiting for the government to come help, rednecks? They can feed their family, defend their homes, and take on everything nature has to throw at them.

I've seen it. They're the ones with the skip loader and the chainsaw helping clear the trees to get the power crew to your home. With the big pot going over the fire feeding half the neighborhood soup when no one has a way to cook.

Maybe not truly smart people...but not dumb either.

Believe me I'm not trying to say they are the brightest bulbs in the box but when everything goes to shit...they can keep going forward. When everyone else is sitting around waiting for the government to come help, rednecks? They can feed their family, defend their homes, and take on everything nature has to throw at them.

Click to expand...

And when everything else is moving forward, what are they doing? Nothing but waiting for everything to go to shit so they can once more show off their survival skills?

I mean, there are a lot of things we humans do in the context of a complex society.

BTW, "dumb" and "redneck" are actually separate epithets. Orthogonal, my new favorite word.

MSTarot said:

Probably more than a few.

But the Gypsy didn't have a gun that day. I came home early and was making noise outside. When I walked into the front door she was in the living room with my katana drawn, in stance, and going into motion!

I took two steps back and she stopped the blade after about a foot when she saw it was me.But in thirteen years of marriage I've never seen her so disappointed to see me.

We lived in a very bad area of town. Shrug.

I find it funny in a quirky sort of way that people always want to add the word dumb to the word redneck.

Believe me I'm not trying to say they are the brightest bulbs in the box but when everything goes to shit...they can keep going forward. When everyone else is sitting around waiting for the government to come help, rednecks? They can feed their family, defend their homes, and take on everything nature has to throw at them.

I've seen it. They're the ones with the skip loader and the chainsaw helping clear the trees to get the power crew to your home. With the big pot going over the fire feeding half the neighborhood soup when no one has a way to cook.

Maybe not truly smart people...but not dumb either.

Click to expand...

I was referring to rednecks (who have lots of guns) who are dumb enough to shoot their family.

Though we aren't as famous for them as west virginia, or some of the red states, minnesota has quite a few rednecks. All of the ones I know are going nowhere at best, backwards backwoods racists at worst.

I know the subject of the thread is not funny. But on a lighter note, I let my step daughter drag me to this thing and.....

It would have been more merciful if they let this guy go, but set him on the directors.

Ugh, please don't let there be anymore of these movies.

TheNewKatt said:

I know the subject of the thread is not funny. But on a lighter note, I let my step daughter drag me to this thing and.....

It would have been more merciful if they let this guy go, but set him on the directors.

Ugh, please don't let there be anymore of these movies.

Click to expand...

Soon, you will be dragged to the 50 Shades films, you lucky thing!

Stella_Omega said:

Soon, you will be dragged to the 50 Shades films, you lucky thing!

Click to expand...

God no! I'm sorry! I'll buy all the Twilight DVDs I promise!

Stella_Omega said:

Soon, you will be dragged to the 50 Shades films, you lucky thing!

Click to expand...

I've already seen 50 Shades. I was a Lowes...it was kind of boring so I went over to the lawn and garden section. Got a good deal on some fertilizer....for the lawn of course.

Grin.
M.S.Tarot

I would love it if the 50 Shades movies were made to be porn. But... they won't be.

Stella_Omega said:

I would love it if the 50 Shades movies were made to be porn. But... they won't be.

Click to expand...

Well that is for the same reason the books were soft by erotica standards, because they would want mass appeal.

I did read them- well okay I really kind of skimmed the last one and if someone hadn't bought me the set wouldn't have read them at all-and I know they will milk it, but I can't see three of these movies, just not enough plot.

But then again when has that stopped Hollywood.

Stella_Omega said:

I would love it if the 50 Shades movies were made to be porn. But... they won't be.

Click to expand...

Maybe an enterprising porn directer will do it. I saw 'twinklight' on one of my go-to websites.

The low budget gay porn with WAYY to many soft grey filters was a lot more enjoyable than the hollywood version.

TheNewKatt said:

I know the subject of the thread is not funny. But on a lighter note, I let my step daughter drag me to this thing and.....

It would have been more merciful if they let this guy go, but set him on the directors.

Ugh, please don't let there be anymore of these movies.

Click to expand...

You may enjoy this:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/donnad/no-one-hates-twilight-as-much-as-robert-pattinso

Bramblethorn said:

You may enjoy this:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/donnad/no-one-hates-twilight-as-much-as-robert-pattinso

Click to expand...

Poor boy!

An actor being forced to conform to a role not written with his masculine ideals in mind, but created as an xpression of a woman's fantasy.

Female actors everywhere are saying; "Welcome to our world!"

I think the evidence is fairly irrefutable that if guns were made illegal, or their ownership controlled much more tightly, the total number of homicides (let's not go into suicides because the right of someone to take their own life is a very different moral argument) would go down by a significant amount.

However, it's also true that:

1. A large number of gun homicides would still take place
2. A large number of homicides that would have taken place will now take place with other weapons instead.
3. A lot of people who use guns completely responsibly would have their individual freedom curtailed by gun control laws.

So in short, the core arguments made by both sides are true (or at least contain strong elements of truth). The question really becomes what extent are you prepared to curtail individual freedom in order to save lives? This is a value judgment there is absolutely no right or wrong answer. And it is one that doesn't just apply to guns and where public opinion is not always supported by logic. In the US, 550 children died in residential swimming pools in 1997, but as far as I'm aware there has never been a serious political movement to ban private swimming pools, even though it would almost certainly save a significant number of lives. Banning swimming pools would seriously curtail the individual rights of responsible swimming pool owners who... bleh, I'm sure you know where I'm going with this.

Long story short, the issue of gun control is far more complicated than people on both sides of the argument make it out to be and constantly strawmanning each other's arguments does not make it any simpler.

1. A large number of gun homicides would still take place.
2. A large number of homicides that would have taken place will now take place with other weapons instead.

Click to expand...

Actually, the number of homicides DO go down when guns are harder to get. It's a very well documented phenomenon.

3. A lot of people who use guns completely responsibly would have their individual freedom curtailed by gun control laws.

Click to expand...

How do completely responsible people use AR-15s ? And what do they use them for? What individual freedom would be curtailed by not letting people easily buy high speed semi automatics?

In the US, 550 children died in residential swimming pools in 1997...

Click to expand...

I;ll bet you a few of those deaths were murders, too. however;

Dateline: 07/27/00

A Health and Human Services report released on Monday, July 24, 2000, indicates the number of children and teens killed with guns in 1998 declined by 10 percent from 1997 and by 35 percent from 1994. The report shows 3,792 children and adolescents under age 20 died in 1998 from firearms compared to 4,223 in 1997 and 5,833 in 1994.

Click to expand...

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa072700a.htm

See... guns are supposed to kill. That's what they are made for. You don't kill something with your gun, you aren't using it. Swimming pools are not built to be weapons of death. They are built to swim in.

Long story short, the issue of gun control is far more complicated than people on both sides of the argument make it out to be and constantly strawmanning each other's arguments does not make it any simpler.

Click to expand...

You mean, like comparing guns to swimming pools?

Stella_Omega said:

Actually, the number of homicides DO go down when guns are harder to get. It's a very well documented phenomenon.

Click to expand...

What the... did you even read my post? The very first thing I said, the very first was that it was that the evidence was almost irrefutable that the number of homicides would go down if guns were banned/controlled.

Sorry Stella I mostly like your posts on this forum, but here you're just ranting on a soapbox rather than actually reading and responding to arguments.

SevenSquared said:

What the... did you even read my post? The very first thing I said, the very first was that it was that the evidence was almost irrefutable that the number of homicides would go down if guns were banned/controlled.

Click to expand...

Well, that's true. however, you added a bunch of caveats after that, and each one of those can be answered and discussed. Although you said that nice thing about how gun deaths would go down, you then said that gun deaths would still occur.
Well, we all know that. That's a thing everyone knows.

And then you said that homicides that would have been shootings would still be carried out except not with a gun-- and in fact, that point is debatable. Statistics seem to point to an overall cessation of homicides, period. As in, people who kill with guns don't kill with something else.

Thirdly, and I'm not trying to get you all emotional about this, but-- what, exactly is a lawful and responsible use for an AR-15? What right, really would be abridged by making the sale of those weapons more difficult?

Sorry Stella I mostly like your posts on this forum, but here you're just ranting on a soapbox rather than actually reading and responding to arguments.

Click to expand...

You have responded to only one thing in my rather long post, which was chock full of responses to your arguments. So neener neener.

Stella_Omega said:

You have responded to only one thing in my rather long post, which was chock full of responses to your arguments. So neener neener.

Click to expand...

I didn't respond to anything else because most of the rest of the post seemed to be based on the assumptions that:

a) I thought that gun control would not reduce homicides (I don't think that) and
b) I'm against gun control (I'm not)

Then you went on to call my comparison between gun deaths and swimming pool deaths a straw man, which was clearly just trying to be clever, unless you actually don't know what a straw man is. So in all honesty I didn't really have much to respond to. But if you really like point by point breakdowns...

Stella_Omega said:

Well, that's true. however, you added a bunch of caveats after that, and each one of those can be answered and discussed. Although you said that nice thing about how gun deaths would go down, you then said that gun deaths would still occur.
Well, we all know that. That's a thing everyone knows.

Click to expand...

They weren't supposed to be caveats as such, more an illustration of how the arguments of both sides had foundations in truth. I would hope everyone would know that some people will still kill people with guns even if guns were completely illegal, but to hear some 'anti gun' people rant (I'm not necessarily talking about you or even people in this conversation) you could easily believe that some people don't. And besides, I don't see any harm in stating both sides of an argument before you start, even if some of the points should be obvious.

Stella_Omega said:

And then you said that homicides that would have been shootings would still be carried out except not with a gun-- and in fact, that point is debatable.

Click to expand...

Actually I didn't, I said that 'a large number' would. That's not the same as saying all. I never even said a majority.

Statistics seem to point to an overall cessation of homicides, period. As in, people who kill with guns don't kill with something else.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'overall cessation'? I'm not sure if it was intentional, but that sounds like doublespeak to me. I'm certain that some homicides committed with guns would not have been committed if the murderer didn't have a gun. But if you're saying that this applies to all gun homicides then... well, let's just say I'm not believing that unless you actually link me to these alleged statistics. In most of Europe guns are very tightly controlled, but about 15,000 people under 30 are killed with knives in Europe every year. It's hardly a stretch to say that if guns were legal, a lot of those murders would have been committed with a gun instead.

Thirdly, and I'm not trying to get you all emotional about this, but-- what, exactly is a lawful and responsible use for an AR-15?

Click to expand...

I don't know what an AR-15 is. I don't own a gun, nor am I a gun enthusiast. Nor am I likely to get emotional about something that doesn't even affect me.

SevenSquared said:

In the US, 550 children died in residential swimming pools in 1997, but as far as I'm aware there has never been a serious political movement to ban private swimming pools, even though it would almost certainly save a significant number of lives.

Click to expand...

But note that throughout Australia - and I understand in several US states - there are legal requirements for child-resistant fencing around residential pools, which is almost as effective in preventing those drownings.

lovecraft68 said:

I think in the world we're living in they need to adjust that number.

Click to expand...

Ugh. I agree!

Stella_Omega said:

Thirdly, and I'm not trying to get you all emotional about this, but-- what, exactly is a lawful and responsible use for an AR-15?

Click to expand...

Competition.

Collection

Is this a Midwest problem?

Weird Harold said:

Competition.

Collection

Click to expand...

Thank you.

Weird Harold said:

Competition.

Collection

Click to expand...

She said lawful and RESPONSIBLE

Bramblethorn said:

But note that throughout Australia - and I understand in several US states - there are legal requirements for child-resistant fencing around residential pools, which is almost as effective in preventing those drownings.

Click to expand...

Yep, here in Virginia the requirements were so stringent and the liability so great that we tore our pool out.