People are killing People !

[Jim]

Hi,

What is going on these days...People are on a killing spree.

Why can't they just kill themselves, WHY do they have to take others with them. It is no longer safe to leave your home, this is NUTS.

Firefighter, Gunman Dead and 5 Injured in Shooting at Wendy's Near West Palm Beach, Fla.

"This was not a robbery. He didn't demand anything," said Paul Miller, a Palm Beach County sheriff's spokesman. "Looks like this was just another random shooting like we've seen around the United States."

http://phoenix.cox.net/cci/newsnational/na...validatearticle

[Bolty]

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

I'll be back after the first 100 posts of the argument I just started.

-Bolty

[ShadowHM]

I'll be back after the first 100 posts of the argument I just started.

-Bolty

:blink: You finally ran out of hornet nests to whack and fire ant nests to stir? What is The Lounge coming to?

[--Pete]

Hi,

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

Yep. I remember from Sunday school how Cain shot Able.;)

--Pete

[Tris]

[quote name='King Jim' date='Mar 4 2008, 03:15 AM' post='144740']
Hi,

What is going on these days...People are on a killing spree.

People have always had a thing for killing other people. The inquisitions, Crusades, Jihads, WWI and II, <insert country's name here> Civil War,


Why can't they just kill themselves, WHY do they have to take others with them. It is no longer safe to leave your home, this is NUTS.

I've often times wondered that myself ... with the likes of Hemmingway:P (Kill yourself already and be done with it:P)


Also, consider this: How many Wendy's, McDonald's, Burger King's, Jack in the Box's, etc. are there in the U.S. Out of all these locations, we had the one incident in West Palm Beach. While it's sad, and shouldn't have happened, it's not like locations are being shot up all across the country. (Same thing with the periodic school violence issues). I'd still put money on being more likely to be in a fatal automobile accident than being shot up at a fast food place. (Unless the fast food joint is in downtown Camden or Detroit:P).

Remember... If it Bleeds, it Leads ... regardless of how representative of things it is.

[Jester]

Murder rates, and violent crime in general, in developed countries are pretty much at a historical low. "These days" are overall better, not overall worse.

But nothing stops one person from going bonkers and shooting people. That's not going to stop, no matter how understanding we are, how vigiliant we get, or how armed to the teeth we make ourselves.

-Jester

[eppie]

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

I'll be back after the first 100 posts of the argument I just started.

-Bolty

Don't count on another 100 posts Bolty; on this issue we agreed to disagree a long time ago here on the lounge.;)

......but to be correct....guns don't kill....bullets do.

[Jester]

Don't count on another 100 posts Bolty; on this issue we agreed to disagree a long time ago here on the lounge.;)

......but to be correct....guns don't kill....bullets do.

You can pistol-whip someone to death. Or use a long gun as a club.

Just to be correct. :whistling:

-Jester

[Kevin]

Hi,
Yep. I remember from Sunday school how Cain shot Able.;)

--Pete

Ah I think once again you are the winner.:) You cover all my thoughts so well with this. People have been killing people ever since there have been people. I'm pretty convinced they will continue to kill people as long as there are other people.

And the gun isn't the first weapon to be looked at like it is either. Flatware was invented to keep people from caring knives (which they used to eat with and if they got pissed generally from too much alcohol, kill each other at the same table). There are proclamations from years past about short bows, crossbows and other weapons because if people just didn't have them they wouldn't be killing each other. Humans are clever and have been clever ever since there have been humans and one of the ways they apply that cleverness is to find more inventive ways to kill other things and other people.

Tragic? Yes Unexpected and new? No. Something to be aware of? Yes.

But as Jester said society seems to be going in the right direction as far as keeping murder rates and violent crimes down (though if you classify war as a crime that may skew things).

Oh well. I had to post because well I need to try and help get to that 100 posts that Bolty wants. :) See it was tough to tell that I was spamming to feed the troll wasn't it. :):D

[Sir_Die_alot]

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

I'll be back after the first 100 posts of the argument I just started.

-Bolty

Is it still trolling when its YOUR forum on YOUR website?

[Taem]

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

From John McCain's official website:

Protecting Second Amendment Rights
John McCain believes that the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is a fundamental, individual Constitutional right that we have a sacred duty to protect. We have a responsibility to ensure that criminals who violate the law are prosecuted to the fullest, rather than restricting the rights of law abiding citizens. Gun control is a proven failure in fighting crime. Law abiding citizens should not be asked to give up their rights because of criminals - criminals who ignore gun control laws anyway.

Notice the BOLD area I highlighted. I'd like to reference this "proven" fact against data collected from other countries that ban citizens from carrying weapons and see if they are more lawless than America. For some reason, I honestly doubt that.

For those arguing Guns don't kill people, people kill people, then can you explain to me why we have so many mundane laws to protect ourselves, such as the seatbelt law here in America? You don't give a homicidal maniac a knife while talking to his psychiatrist, nor would you leave a lighter in children's reach. Some activities things are just plain incorrect, and others are so-so, such as the seatbelt law. In the case of guns, it seems logical that removing guns from citizens hands might not stop all violence, but would definitely prevent a lot of senseless murders, especially from gang-bangers and the like. How to these gang-members get guns anyhow, much less illegal guns like fully-automatics?

There's another can of worms, if criminals have access to guns rather they are legal or not and normal citizens do not, how is one suppose to protect oneself? Still, I think making guns illegal (a Felony) for citizens would reduce the sheer amount of weapons dramatically entering this country and eventually not be so much of a problem for only criminals possessing them.

Just my 2-cents.

[Ashock]

Guns don't kill people, ...oh wait, they do.

I'll be back after the first 100 posts of the argument I just started.

-Bolty

Easy there, tiger. This is too obvious an attempt to drum up some posts in here. I mean, yeh... it's pretty dead here and has been for a while now, but sheesh, this is sad..... so sad..... Admins will need to notified.

[kandrathe]

What is going on these days...People are on a killing spree.

We used to lock away psychotics. Now we just give them medications and hope it works too. Now, I'm not for locking people away in padded cells for the rest of their days either, but we've swung the pendulum pretty far over to the ridiculous as well. For example, the latest VaTech shooting, and the NIU shooting both involved individuals who were known to be psychologically disturbed and on medications, and even with background checks and no prior felony convictions to prevent it these guys bought guns and murdered a bunch of people. You can point at the guns if you like, but society would be safer if we made sure that the psychotic people are cared for. Take away the guns and they'd use a 5 gallon can of gasoline. We can't just set them loose on society and hope for the best. In the VaTech shooting, a prominent professor went to the administration and point blank told them that unless THIS KID is removed from his class he wouldn't teach it. That is how scary he was, so why was he just left to continue on this collision course without intervention?

Homework assignment: http://www.michaelgurian.com/ I would recommend "The Good Son" I read this when I found out we were pregnant with our first son. Couple our natural human propensity for tribalism, and barbarity with the current cultures moral ambiguity and detachment and it is no mystery of why we are beset on all sides by monsters.

Editorial review of that book; From Publishers Weekly
Gurian (A Fine Young Man), one of today's premier writers on the subject of male development, moves beyond the realm of sociological and psychological analysis (offered in Eli Newberger's fine The Men They Will Become, see p. 71) to provide a timely and practical parenting guide. Focusing specifically on the subject of moral development, a matter of hot debate in the wake of such tragedies as the Columbine High School shooting, Gurian writes from his own experience as a family therapist. Citing an "increase in ethical numbness, moral distraction, and spiritual emptiness among boys and young men," he examines the roots of potential problems, such as the abandonment of our children's moral development to "potentially toxic" visual media, and then lays out a well-organized blueprint for ushering boys into adulthood. Gurian discusses such topics as biological and neurological development as well as building spiritual life and dealing with media influence (for example, he notes that a boy of nine or 10 should not "see images he cannot or should not experience with his own body and soul at this time in his life"). Gurian concludes with a list of age-appropriate books and movies that "stimulate moral growth in boys." Parents and caregivers will welcome the direction and reassurance of this outstanding book in their efforts to guide boys "toward loving, wise, and responsible manhood, and the compassionate life."

One line from the book that still resonates with me was when he described how he found himself in his early 20's realizing he was not a good citizen, and not a man.

[Jester]

I read this when I found out we were pregnant with our first son. Couple our natural human propensity for tribalism, and barbarity with the current cultures moral ambiguity and detachment and it is no mystery of why we are beset on all sides by monsters.

Why, then, are we experiencing lower rates of violent crime than previous ages, where moral ambiguity and detachment were viewed with suspicion, if not met with an angry mob?

Seems to me that the trend goes rather the other way, and that the occasional nutcase is just the odd exception, blown out of proportion both by the media and in contrast to our ordinarily placid lives.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

Why, then, are we experiencing lower rates of violent crime than previous ages, where moral ambiguity and detachment were viewed with suspicion, if not met with an angry mob?

Seems to me that the trend goes rather the other way, and that the occasional nutcase is just the odd exception, blown out of proportion both by the media and in contrast to our ordinarily placid lives.

-Jester

The totals are lower and the statistics look better, but the number of incidents of certain types are increasing. In the city were I live, you can attribute most murders to three sources; a. Drug turf wars, b. Domestic violence (esp. under the influence of drugs), and c. sociopathic violence. I see that categories a. and b. are decreasing, but c. seems to be increasing. We can disrupt the drug trade and target the trafficking of substances that are most lethal to the community(eg. Meth) which has a dual impact on violence. I believe that as long as our society embraces intoxication as entertainment we will have a built in level of violence, and also deaths due to driving while intoxicated. Anecdotally, I sense there is an increase in the last two years in robbery and burglary.

So, we are talking about the incidence of sociopathic violence randomly directed which would include some gang murders (like cold blooded initiation killings), school shootings, rape, and other random murders by seemingly detached or insane people. There was a double murder here in Minneapolis a couple years ago, where three young adults robbed two men at gunpoint having them kneel, then shot them in the back of the head. It was just cold. That qualifies in my book as deranged.

Here is a site I just googled looking at trends in violent crime over time; Josephson Institute - Center for Youth Ethics

[Delc]

From John McCain's official website:
Notice the BOLD area I highlighted. I'd like to reference this "proven" fact against data collected from other countries that ban citizens from carrying weapons and see if they are more lawless than America. For some reason, I honestly doubt that.

link

Banning guns would be pointless imo. One only has to look at the stunning success of the war on drugs to see how good the US government is at keeping people away from things they want.

[Jester]

The totals are lower and the statistics look better, but the number of incidents of certain types are increasing. In the city were I live, you can attribute most murders to three sources; a. Drug turf wars, b. Domestic violence (esp. under the influence of drugs), and c. sociopathic violence. I see that categories a. and b. are decreasing, but c. seems to be increasing. We can disrupt the drug trade and target the trafficking of substances that are most lethal to the community(eg. Meth) which has a dual impact on violence. I believe that as long as our society embraces intoxication as entertainment we will have a built in level of violence, and also deaths due to driving while intoxicated. Anecdotally, I sense there is an increase in the last two years in robbery and burglary.

So, we are talking about the incidence of sociopathic violence randomly directed which would include some gang murders (like cold blooded initiation killings), school shootings, rape, and other random murders by seemingly detached or insane people. There was a double murder here in Minneapolis a couple years ago, where three young adults robbed two men at gunpoint having them kneel, then shot them in the back of the head. It was just cold. That qualifies in my book as deranged.

Here is a site I just googled looking at trends in violent crime over time; Josephson Institute - Center for Youth Ethics

Interesting, especially for its harsh indictment of the spread of firearms. They clearly believe that guns are bad, and their prevalence accounts of a huge number of deaths in the US relative to other countries.

However, only one of those statistics has a comparative component showing a worsening over time. (There are a couple that say "have not declined since", but that means things are staying the same, not getting worse.) That would be the claim that, in 1933, 75% of deaths between 15-19 were natural causes, whereas in 1993 80% of deaths for that bracket were murders. The rest of the statistics would have to be compared to an equivalent series of data to support a claim that these numbers are up from earlier times.

There are a few issues with that. First is the timing: 1933 was during the depression, and 1993 was during the crack boom. So, in the first instance, "natural causes" like disease and starvation would be up, whereas in 1993, murders would be way up. The 10 years after 1993 were not as violent.

The other issue is that the data is presented as a % of deaths. It is possible to move from the first number to the second with no change whatsoever in the murder rate, simply through improvements in the survival of youth. The polio vaccine would be one such applicable example, I suspect there are others. Perhaps that does not account for all of it, but it would be interesting to know how much it does account for, which is not said.

I don't buy the case. You're right that letting people out of institutions for the insane has had a negative impact, but that's not a morality issue, but a problem with how we deal with insanity, which I agree is a problem. Alcohol abuse is also a serious problem leading to an inflated rate of violent crime, but then, it has always been a serious problem. I don't think it's getting worse. I'm also not terribly convinced of the power of moral crusades to reduce these problems. Prohibition leads to speakeasies, and education programs that emphasize abstaining from drugs and alcohol don't seem to have much impact. People like their vices, always have, and probably always will.

Edit: Interesting set of numbers for the youth element. Also, shows the flip side of using the early 1990s as a baseline for murder rates: comparisons made with later dates show strong declines.

http://www.safeyouth.org/scripts/facts/statistics.asp

-Jester

(Tom Selleck, nice!)

[Artega]

Removing civilian rights to own guns would do nothing but make it even easier for the criminals. Criminals will have access to guns whether they're legal or not. At least you can fight back or even prevent it from happening if you have a gun of your own.

[Kevin]

Removing civilian rights to own guns would do nothing but make it even easier for the criminals. Criminals will have access to guns whether they're legal or not. At least you can fight back or even prevent it from happening if you have a gun of your own.

I'm not actually for gun control. I don't have a problem with people owning guns and while your argument is correct, it should be noted that it is only correct for a certain time frame. I can't say how long it will take, especially since guns and ammunition do have a relatively long life span if cared for properly. But if you don't let citizens have guns, market forces will cause some gun manufacturers to go out of business (any of them that don't have a contract with a government). If the government collects and removes existing firearms (something I don't want to happen) then the supply dwindles. The hardcore criminals are still going to have and be able to get guns but the sources for them to get them from will be fewer, they will be easier to track, eventually, and you may be able to dry them up.

As others mentioned some of the shootings that have been reported recently very well may have happened as a gallon of gasoline being exploded, it may have no impact at all on the crime that happened to cause this thread. But there are crimes that happen because of guns that would stop. My feeling is many of them would be replaced by other crimes in many cases.

But in the long view, if there is no legit marker to sell guns too, it would be harder for the criminal element to get them, but in the short view things get easier for the criminal, I agree. But again I don't actually agree with this policy. I'm fine with citizens being able to arm themselves. I used to be able to say and I don't even own a gun, but I keep forgetting I actually do. I was given one by my father in law, an old .22 caliber pistol that was used on their farm for shooting pest animals. It's currently in it's fairly decent case at the bottom of a closet and I've never even fired it. I was in the military though I do have weapons training and I've done enough sport firing of rifles to be sure of myself around fire arms but I don't feel the need to have one easily accessible and I don't see the need to prevent others from having them accessible if they like. I think the issues that cause the use of guns for violent crimes should be addressed differently and I also am willing to put up with the price of human lives that will still be lost to guns even if better methods of addressing the roots issues are implemented.

[kandrathe]

Removing civilian rights to own guns would do nothing but make it even easier for the criminals. Criminals will have access to guns whether they're legal or not. At least you can fight back or even prevent it from happening if you have a gun of your own.

If the focus is on the most expedient way to kill people and to conceal such a weapon, then I would admit that the best accessible tool is a handgun. A steak knife is a better weapon than a butter knife, and Mac 10 is a better weapon that a .38 special. Focusing on and making scarce the chosen tools of violence does not remove the violence and the socio and psychopathic behavior. When you see violence statistics for the US compared to other nations that show a 10x higher per capita violent crime rate, it is not the presence of weapons that makes people violent. The easier access to weapons may contribute to the success of the violence, but I don't have the relevant data to know that for certain. I don't believe that focusing on the tools will affect crime rates, except to change mass shootings into mass machete hackings, or mass arson murders.

For Jester, in response to: "You're right that letting people out of institutions for the insane has had a negative impact, but that's not a morality issue, but a problem with how we deal with insanity, which I agree is a problem. Alcohol abuse is also a serious problem leading to an inflated rate of violent crime, but then, it has always been a serious problem. I don't think it's getting worse. I'm also not terribly convinced of the power of moral crusades to reduce these problems. Prohibition leads to speakeasies, and education programs that emphasize abstaining from drugs and alcohol don't seem to have much impact. People like their vices, always have, and probably always will."

I agree that the mental health issues are not necessarily morality issues, other than the increasing trend of detachment or disassociation leading to socio or psychopathic behavior. Dylan Klebold stopped after shooting each victim to taunt them as they died. One girl who knelt before him was asked "Do you believe in God?" before he shot her. He was a remorseless killer that our society produced, and I don't believe this was a freak incident or that his parents necessarily did anything to create him. We have decided as a society to accept a certain level of insanity to be mainstreamed, and we are living with the consequences of that. As for substance abuse, and societies helplessness to affect change; I'm unwilling to merely surrender the cause. I too believe that regulation is not the answer, and the early and often education for everything has also been a failure and a big joke. To me, as you look at statistics, it should be very clear that intoxication and substance abuse is related to a very many social ills. Here are the statistics for the state where I live. In many ways I think the problem lies in the pandemic of purposelessness and the generations raised by the mantra of "If it feels good, do it." Ask most people, "Why are you here?" and the answer will be "To have fun." I'm not against fun mind you, but it is a pretty shallow reason to exist.