The Last Thing You Thought...

[yomimura]

anyway, ciao ciao, enjoy your guns.

 

[Britwitch]

nonsense. if you're going to immediately come out aggressively defending the 'right' to own firearms after 27 people have been shot you're a tactless asshole. end of. it's incredibly insensitive.

I suggest you go back and read what was written, read it aloud. Then think that statement through again.

There was no aggression. No malice.

Just as there was none in Luna's before it.

Differing opinions are part of life. If you can't give your own in a civil fashion then refrain from posting.

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

nonsense. if you're going to immediately come out aggressively defending the 'right' to own firearms after 27 people have been shot you're a tactless asshole. end of. it's incredibly insensitive.

So it's okay to defend what, yes, is a right (we have this thing called a Constitution, with this fun little things called Amendments in it) normally, but to do so right now is wrong?

Bullshit.

If it's what she believes, it's what she believes. Who the fuck are you to decide when it's right to think it and when it's wrong to?

 

[LoganDarkHolme]

Logan. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, popular or not. Stop acting like an asshole that you are accusing others of being.

...........................*biffs her with a snowball*

 

[DarkWarrioress]

you're coming across as the most ignorant type of unsympathetic asshole right now. well done.

I'm sure Luna is quite capable of defending herself. But she is neither ignorant or unsympathetic. She's a mother herself. She, like everyone on this board, yourself included, is entitled to their opinion.

 

[AmbrosiaCaress]

Let's not turn this into any personal attacks on anyone's opinions.

What happened today was shocking to say the very least. In our struggle to deal with this, let's not start spewing hatred.

I agree with SB in this is not about gun control. That nutcase would have done this no matter the gun control. If not guns, knives, if not knives, something else I am sure... perhaps drive a car thru the wall....

Point is, he took innocent lives. Lives he had no right to take. If he had an issue with his mother, and killed her, that would have been tragic yes, but the fact that he chose to kill innocent young lives, just makes it all the more horrific. But again, no matter the method, the horror here is that it happened at all.....

 

[DarkWarrioress]

...........................*biffs her with a snowball*

*ducks. He's so damn predictable*

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

you're coming across as the most ignorant type of unsympathetic asshole right now. well done.

I am coming across as a person who has lost people to firearm deaths. The gun did NOT kill them all alone. A person was needed to pull the fucking trigger.

BUT, believe what you want. Your opinion matters not a single fuck to me.

People may be the ones pulling the trigger, but it's not as if we have to help it happen.

When terrorists flew planes into buildings to kill a bunch of people, no one shrugged off the role of the plane in those attacks. Changes were made, to pre-boarding security, to the cockpit doors, to the procedure followed in hijackings. We could've just said, "Planes didn't kill people, terrorists did" and changed nothing, but we didn't.

I'm not saying get rid of all guns. Even in the European Union, where they generally have much stricter gun laws, that hasn't happened. But the EU does have stricter laws, and despite having a larger population they have fewer gun deaths per year than the US.

In 2009, there were 3 intentional homicides with a gun for every 100,000 people in the US. In the UK, that number was 0.07. In Germany, it was 0.2. People in both countries still own guns, and far, far fewer people are dying from them. Why on earth wouldn't we want to learn from their example?

Truth.

I dig what you are saying but for the most part, I don't see how one can develop stricter measures for gun control and purchase without FIRST getting rid of all the illegal firearms floating all through the continental US.

Making it harder for law abiding citizens to protect themselves isn't going to help.

*sighs*

Absolutely no need for that. If you want to make an argument, make a reasoned, evidence-based one. Ad hominem attacks just make you look like a jackass. Luna and I might disagree on this, but that doesn't mean I, or anyone else, have to start making personal attacks. Keep that bullshit in your head if you must think it.

*shrugs*

Baby boy, some people must attack without thought. Like I said that particular opinion matter s not a fuck to me.

 

[DarkWarrioress]

Agreed. This is not about gun control or the right to bear arms. This is, first and foremost, about mental health.

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

Truth.

I dig what you are saying but for the most part, I don't see how one can develop stricter measures for gun control and purchase without FIRST getting rid of all the illegal firearms floating all through the continental US.

Making it harder for law abiding citizens to protect themselves isn't going to help.

*sighs*



*shrugs*

Baby boy, some people must attack without thought. Like I said that particular opinion matter s not a fuck to me.

Yeah, it's definitely not something a single law or change can fix, but I don't think we should let that fact stop us from trying. An evidence-based, nuanced, and reasoned approach is necessary. And thankfully, that's exactly what our lawmakers are good at!

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Agreed. This is not about gun control or the right to bear arms. This is, first and foremost, about mental health.

Which was my initial POINT.

People hurt kids every day.

Kids are easy to hurt.

Shooting is neither more or less heinous (In my personal opinion) than the parent, baby sitter, child care provider who abuses, molests and neglects a child or causes said child's death. THAT was my point.

 

[palemoon2035]

I hate, hate, HATE to jump in on these conversations, but I agree with my friend Luna in that, there are such horrid acts that are committed which harm and kill children. They go unreported, as, they are not mass killings. I worked with abused children for two years, and ten years later I still have nightmares. If the media reported every act, you would all just...freak out. So, guns are not the issue in and of themselves.

Please, no need to repond to me. Nothing is ever accomplished when people dislcuss things in such an online forum. I simply wanted to say that. To argue that it is just one weapon that needs to go away, ignores the horrors that "human beings" are capable of, and, it ignores the beauty we are capable of. So, I return to my previous statement, we all need to learn how to reconnect with one another. To listen when we disagree.... I feel that, regardless of how I feel about something, I have an obligation to hear the other person out, and then, perhaps, seek to understand where they are coming from. It is only when I understand them that I can even begin to offer what I have to say. Short sighted, two sentence rebutals do nothing more than insight anger, and increase the distance between you and those who you should seek to understand.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Yeah, it's definitely not something a single law or change can fix, but I don't think we should let that fact stop us from trying. An evidence-based, nuanced, and reasoned approach is necessary. And thankfully, that's exactly what our lawmakers are good at!

*giggles hysterically*

You are a sarcastic butt head but I love you nonetheless.

I do agree that some measure of control would be better than none.
I just have an issue with being told that I have to jump through hoops to own a gun but the 50 million criminals can easily get one from the street.

 

[Light Ice]

At this point, honestly, I feel that the most practical solution to this kind of problem lays in trained and armed security presences inside all schools.

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

Which was my initial POINT.

People hurt kids every day.

Kids are easy to hurt.

Shooting is neither more or less heinous (In my personal opinion) than the parent, baby sitter, child care provider who abuses, molests and neglects and child or causes said child's death. THAT was my point.

The difference, I think, is that those people are most often connected to the kids in some meaningful way (as opposed to son of their teacher), and no one walks into a nursery and goes on a baby-shaking spree, or walks into a school and goes on a child-molesting spree. As we saw with that Sandusky asshole, a lot of kids can be hurt by one person, but it takes a long period of time for it to happen, with multiple attempts for it to stop.

Once that guy walked into that school with that gun today, there was a span of time when nothing but his own decision to stop it was going to make it end. That's not something we should see happen, and just accept that it's unchangeable.

 

[AmbrosiaCaress]

Which was my initial POINT.

People hurt kids every day.

Kids are easy to hurt.

Shooting is neither more or less heinous (In my personal opinion) than the parent, baby sitter, child care provider who abuses, molests and neglects a child or causes said child's death. THAT was my point.

I can sooo see this point...

I think what makes what happened today so horrific is...

1. the sheer number of kids killed...

2. the fact that the shooter did NOT know these kids at all....

Not that a father killing his child or children is not heinous, but again, the sheer number and the fact that they were completely unknown to the shooter...

That all makes this so much harder to even try to understand or come to grips with....

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

I hate, hate, HATE to jump in on these conversations, but I agree with my friend Luna in that, there are such horrid acts that are committed which harm and kill children. They go unreported, as, they are not mass killings. I worked with abused children for two years, and ten years later I still have nightmares. If the media reported every act, you would all just...freak out. So, guns are not the issue in and of themselves.

Please, no need to repond to me. Nothing is ever accomplished when people dislcuss things in such an online forum. I simply wanted to say that. To argue that it is just one weapon that needs to go away, ignores the horrors that "human beings" are capable of, and, it ignores the beauty we are capable of. So, I return to my previous statement, we all need to learn how to reconnect with one another. To listen when we disagree.... I feel that, regardless of how I feel about something, I have an obligation to hear the other person out, and then, perhaps, seek to understand where they are coming from. It is only when I understand them that I can even begin to offer what I have to say. Short sighted, two sentence rebutals do nothing more than insight anger, and increase the distance between you and those who you should seek to understand.

*hugs*

I still work with abused and hurt children in an unofficial capacity. I grew up as one of those nameless ones that very rarely get reported.

I have seen what so called normal people can and will do to the children they gave birth to. And I strive mightily to help whenever I am asked because KIDS have NO protection.

Not against their parents, not against society, not against a weapon.

All they have are people who want to help and are willing to intervene.

 

[Light Ice]

The difference, I think, is that those people are most often connected to the kids in some meaningful way (as opposed to son of their teacher), and no one walks into a nursery and goes on a baby-shaking spree, or walks into a school and goes on a child-molesting spree. As we saw with that Sandusky asshole, a lot of kids can be hurt by one person, but it takes a long period of time for it to happen, with multiple attempts for it to stop.

Once that guy walked into that school with that gun today, there was a span of time when nothing but his own decision to stop it was going to make it end. That's not something we should see happen, and just accept that it's unchangeable.

Are you against firearm ownership of any kind?

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

The difference, I think, is that those people are most often connected to the kids in some meaningful way (as opposed to son of their teacher), and no one walks into a nursery and goes on a baby-shaking spree, or walks into a school and goes on a child-molesting spree. As we saw with that Sandusky asshole, a lot of kids can be hurt by one person, but it takes a long period of time for it to happen, with multiple attempts for it to stop.

Once that guy walked into that school with that gun today, there was a span of time when nothing but his own decision to stop it was going to make it end. That's not something we should see happen, and just accept that it's unchangeable.

I can sooo see this point...

I think what makes what happened today so horrific is...

1. the sheer number of kids killed...

2. the fact that the shooter did NOT know these kids at all....

Not that a father killing his child or children is not heinous, but again, the sheer number and the fact that they were completely unknown to the shooter...

That all makes this so much harder to even try to understand or come to grips with....

*nods*

Point to you two.

I don't see it as being different but I do understand why others would see it as being more...hurtful.

It is somehow a bit worse when the person doing the harming knows absolutely nothing about those he/she chooses to harm.

(BUT in my heart of hearts...it still feels the same to me...my opinion, YMMV)

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

Are you against firearm ownership of any kind?

No.

But I think there are plenty of models, in a number of European countries, that we can look at and see that they simply do it better. Switzerland has some of the highest gun ownership rates anywhere, something like 2-3 million guns in private residences, for a population of about 8 million. Where the US had 3 intentional gun homicides per 100,000 people, Switzerland had less than 1. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to look at what they're clearly doing right, that we're clearly doing wrong, and try to implement it.

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

*nods*

Point to you two.

I don't see it as being different but I do understand why others would see it as being more...hurtful.

It is somehow a bit worse when the person doing the harming knows absolutely nothing about those he/she chooses to harm.

(BUT in my heart of hearts...it still feels the same to me...my opinion, YMMV)

Random violence is always harder to understand. We like things ordered and understood and predictable, and a guy walking into an elementary school and shooting a bunch of people is none of those things. It's much easier, for example, for us to grasp an office shooting where someone had just been fired. There's a clear motivation, and while it may not be one we would share, it's at least something we can partially understand. Something like this, there's just no understanding. Our brains don't like that.

 

[AmbrosiaCaress]

Random violence is always harder to understand. We like things ordered and understood and predictable, and a guy walking into an elementary school and shooting a bunch of people is none of those things. It's much easier, for example, for us to grasp an office shooting where someone had just been fired. There's a clear motivation, and while it may not be one we would share, it's at least something we can partially understand. Something like this, there's just no understanding. Our brains don't like that.

^^^
what He said.....

 

[Light Ice]

No.

But I think there are plenty of models, in a number of European countries, that we can look at and see that they simply do it better. Switzerland has some of the highest gun ownership rates anywhere, something like 2-3 million guns in private residences, for a population of about 8 million. Where the US had 3 intentional gun homicides per 100,000 people, Switzerland had less than 1. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to look at what they're clearly doing right, that we're clearly doing wrong, and try to implement it.

I think that's an intelligent statement.

The difficulty, obviously, is well beyond the numbers. We obviously have to take into consideration, for instance, the giant differences in demographics. The differences in culture. Still, firearm ownership (while a right), needs to be regulated and controlled. It frustrates me, however, that this issue is typically left to two extreme parties to hammer out. That's not the intellectual or practical way to go about anything.

I own several firearms. They are foolishly easy to get a hold of. It's always bothered me. It always will bother me.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Random violence is always harder to understand. We like things ordered and understood and predictable, and a guy walking into an elementary school and shooting a bunch of people is none of those things. It's much easier, for example, for us to grasp an office shooting where someone had just been fired. There's a clear motivation, and while it may not be one we would share, it's at least something we can partially understand. Something like this, there's just no understanding. Our brains don't like that.

*nods*

I think it seems the same to me whenever there are children involved. Anything that hurts a child, harms a child, is NOT understandable. Whether it's a random act of violence or a parent shaking their two month old into brain death.

*sighs*

So for me it all falls under the "This is fucking wrong." flag, you understand? Not that it is more wrong or less wrong...it is ALL wrong. The whole way across the board, on every friggin' level.

I think that's why it upsets me when people say "OH this is awful..." It's ALL awful.
This thing is NOT more awful than the other...judging by scale or sheer brutatlity, it's still the same~ ie innocents being hurt/killed because an adult is a fucking wanker.

 

[Scuttle Buttin']

I think that's an intelligent statement.

The difficulty, obviously, is well beyond the numbers. We obviously have to take into consideration, for instance, the giant differences in demographics. The differences in culture. Still, firearm ownership (while a right), needs to be regulated and controlled. It frustrates me, however, that this issue is typically left to two extreme parties to hammer out. That's not the intellectual or practical way to go about anything.

I own several firearms. They are foolishly easy to get a hold of. It's always bothered me. It always will bother me.

It's definitely something of a barn-door-after-the-horse-is-out situation, but I don't think that means we shouldn't try. It's just that the gun lobby is far too powerful, and the politicians far too unwilling to stick their neck out for anything different, for any of it to actually happen.