Was he able to beat 17 people to death?
School Shooting At Maryland High School; Shooter Reportedly Engaged By Armed Resource Officer
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
Was he able to beat 17 people to death?
PeoplesElbow
Well-Known Member
He only wanted to do one. I see this as very similar to what happened today.
How we are failing is making these boys and young men believe that they have to do something that will not only end lives but destroy their own in the process. Whether it is 1 or 17 thinking that this was a solution to what is causing their pain , not being able to deal with the pain is the problem.
This_person
Well-Known Member
No, I'm absolutely happy to have a conversation. But, understand that comparing people speeding in zones where speed is controlled (which is virtually every road in the United States upon which people can drive) to killing people in gun free zones (which are very limited areas) is not a conversation, it's stupidity.
If you wish to engage in conversation, make points that have an actual, you know, POINT.
It's not one or the other. I am VERY concerned with gun rights, mostly because of children's futures. I simply have a workable solution that does not violate common sense or the limitation on government to restrict every law-abiding citizen's right to own a weapon of choice.
If you have a solution that does not violate common sense or the Constitution, please share.
I agree it is not possible to take the firearm out of the equation. That is one of the things that makes that attempt at a solution not in line with common sense.
There are several things you can do.
- You can arm more people who have been verified as reasonable gun owners, and pay them to guard your children (of course, that comes at a cost).
- You can put metal detectors on the doors and man those doors 24/7, ensuring that no unknown piece of metal enters the schools (of course, that comes at a cost).
- You can teach kids the value of discipline (self- and outside-imposed), the value of life, coping skills, firearm safety, and skills in dealing with opposing points of view without becoming violent (of course, that needs to be done in the home, and parents have decided the latest iPhone, a cool SUV, and a McMansion are more important than their children's lives)
- We could offer firearms courses to any adult that wishes them, and provide TANF-style help for defenseless people to stop being defenseless
- And on, and on, and on, and on.
But, if you are concerned about people's lives, you should look at the things that challenge people's lives in comparison with others, and put time and effort into the things that are actually larger concerns first.
As I've shown before, roughly 19 kids are killed per year by bus accidents, the same as by mass shootings in schools. In the United States, ALL homicides (including firearm related and all other kinds) is about 6.16/100,000, or 0.00616%.
Heart Disease is 165.53/100,000, or 0.1655%. That means heart disease kills 27 times the number of people. And, most heart diseases are preventable, if we just put the money into the research.
don't like that one (and, you shouldn't because it flies in the face of your point)? Ok, how about suicide rates? Suicide kills 13.47/100,000. That's more than twice homicide!! Why not work on putting your money and time into just helping people who would rather end their life than fix it?
But, no. You are not interested in helping people's lives. You are interested in controlling guns, which have never killed anyone without being in someone's hands to do so and are therefore blameless (blame the shooter, not the weapon). Firearms-related deaths account for 11.8/100,000 - and that takes into account the suicides by firearm. That means the suicide-by-firearm rate is so low (or the homicide by firearm rate is so low), that it is lower than suicide rate and homicide is about half of teh firearm death rate even figuring in deaths by firearm.
If you want to have a conversation, my friend, let's have it. Your solution solves nothing, and leads to deaths of tens of millions (see: Stalin, Moa Tse Tung, Hilter, etc.).
This_person
Well-Known Member
How about killing 29, injuring 130 with knives?
How about 4 killed by being intentionally run over by a car?
And the hits just keep on a comin'.
Grumpy
Well-Known Member
Good stuff, but the ignorance is strong with Sappy, I applaud your perseverance.
:Well I certainly agree with you there.
No, I'm absolutely happy to have a conversation. But, understand that comparing people speeding in zones where speed is controlled (which is virtually every road in the United States upon which people can drive) to killing people in gun free zones (which are very limited areas) is not a conversation, it's stupidity.
If you wish to engage in conversation, make points that have an actual, you know, POINT.
It's not one or the other. I am VERY concerned with gun rights, mostly because of children's futures. I simply have a workable solution that does not violate common sense or the limitation on government to restrict every law-abiding citizen's right to own a weapon of choice.
If you have a solution that does not violate common sense or the Constitution, please share.
I agree it is not possible to take the firearm out of the equation. That is one of the things that makes that attempt at a solution not in line with common sense.
There are several things you can do.
- You can arm more people who have been verified as reasonable gun owners, and pay them to guard your children (of course, that comes at a cost).
- You can put metal detectors on the doors and man those doors 24/7, ensuring that no unknown piece of metal enters the schools (of course, that comes at a cost).
- You can teach kids the value of discipline (self- and outside-imposed), the value of life, coping skills, firearm safety, and skills in dealing with opposing points of view without becoming violent (of course, that needs to be done in the home, and parents have decided the latest iPhone, a cool SUV, and a McMansion are more important than their children's lives)
- We could offer firearms courses to any adult that wishes them, and provide TANF-style help for defenseless people to stop being defenseless
- And on, and on, and on, and on.
But, if you are concerned about people's lives, you should look at the things that challenge people's lives in comparison with others, and put time and effort into the things that are actually larger concerns first.
As I've shown before, roughly 19 kids are killed per year by bus accidents, the same as by mass shootings in schools. In the United States, ALL homicides (including firearm related and all other kinds) is about 6.16/100,000, or 0.00616%.
Heart Disease is 165.53/100,000, or 0.1655%. That means heart disease kills 27 times the number of people. And, most heart diseases are preventable, if we just put the money into the research.
don't like that one (and, you shouldn't because it flies in the face of your point)? Ok, how about suicide rates? Suicide kills 13.47/100,000. That's more than twice homicide!! Why not work on putting your money and time into just helping people who would rather end their life than fix it?
But, no. You are not interested in helping people's lives. You are interested in controlling guns, which have never killed anyone without being in someone's hands to do so and are therefore blameless (blame the shooter, not the weapon). Firearms-related deaths account for 11.8/100,000 - and that takes into account the suicides by firearm. That means the suicide-by-firearm rate is so low (or the homicide by firearm rate is so low), that it is lower than suicide rate and homicide is about half of teh firearm death rate even figuring in deaths by firearm.
If you want to have a conversation, my friend, let's have it. Your solution solves nothing, and leads to deaths of tens of millions (see: Stalin, Moa Tse Tung, Hilter, etc.).
Wrong as usual. Take guns out of the equation and you solve gun deaths.
It’s as simple as that.
Now you may argue that is not possible or desireable but it’s absolutely true
To your second point you can’t regulate or outlaw accidents. Which is why they are accidents. School shootings are not accidents
Last edited:
Grumpy
Well-Known Member
This_person
Well-Known Member
It is absolutely true. It is absolutely not possible, and it is far beyond not desirable, but if we could imagine a fantasy world in which magical things happen by whim, it would work great.
glhs837
Power with Control
And it's true that extinguishing the sun would remove the risk of melanoma, which is expected to kill over 9,000 people in 2018. And yes, "removing the guns" has about as much chance as extinguishing the sun of happening. So, back in the real world, whats your solution.
That is your opinion becuase you believe people are inherently not willing to prioritize the lives of children over guns. And by saying that you are saying it is more important to exercise a right to own guns over the lives of children as well given that you admit not having guns would solve the problem
Has anyone ever told you that you're a fruit?
Anyone told you that you are a moron as evidenced by your insults when you are proven wrong?
glhs837
Power with Control
Sure you can. Just gotta get past the pesky ol Constitution. So, which laws do you want? Spell it out. Because even if somehow you manage to ban all future gun sales right now, there are 300 million guns that your law needs to address. Your plan, sir? No magic wand BS, you get to pass say three laws. What are they?
This_person
Well-Known Member
How would you remove all guns from existence?
This_person
Well-Known Member
Given that we can't enforce the laws we have, we can make all the gun laws we want. If immediately ban the sale and manufacture of all guns - worldwide - it would only take several centuries to remove all guns from all people.
In the meantime, the people who still have the guns will rule the world.
Such as?...be very specific.
1. All new guns must have serial numbers engraved that are tied to their owners just like the title of a car. Sell the gun and the title transfers with it. These serial numbers are tracked by the Feds.
2. Buy back programs just like Australia enacted.
3. No assault rifles for anyone other than police or military.
4. Mandatory gun safety classes, waiting periods and registration for all new gun purchases.