I think it's about time the US gets some better gun laws...
Guns don't kill people, other people do. Walk in a mall during rush hour with a simple knife and you can do same.
I would also like to know why it is always men doing the killing.
Pretty fucked up country I live in, "Screw the West, screw the East, screw our country, screw everything!" But I quess its pretty common everywere these days....with the economy in the dump and everything. :?
Guns don't kill people, other people do. Walk in a mall during rush hour with a simple knife and you can do same.
Well in my country it seems like it is more like "Screw our country, lets help everyone but our own", we get called racists because we think that it is bad that immigrants get bonuses over our own unemployed people.
Oops maybe im derailing this into a politics discussion now, been watching too much of it right now.. -_-
Its being covered in holland, keeps us updated as more info comes available.
There is a reason why guns beat knifes in a war, you kill much more with them.
Give a moron a butterknife and he might kill a man, give a moron a machinegun and he might kill 30 ppl...
I don't see how anyone would get joy from killing people (unless they keep killing you on cRPG). (JOKE)Well obv they do :P. It might be some kind of power trip they have going, being able to completely control somebody's life.
The answer to the gun question is simple: Moar guns!
Especially for children. Give them the right to carry weapons in school so that they can kill an attacker.
- with friendly greetings a typical defender of the gun-laws in America who thinks that a lot of guns mean a lot of protecion
Which country is that? How high is unemployment rate? Because I think that jobless people in countries with unemployment rate of 5% or so are lazy people who don't want to work.
I don't see how giving kids guns in elementary school could be good... or any kids AT school.Thats sarcasm mate...
Frankly if I compare my country with USA. Than its gunpolitics seem better. Simply cause in my country, you might even get sued for simply even owning a firearm. Sure the streets are safer, but the thiefs really do not give a shit. I mean, if you see someone robbing your house you would probably shoot the ass or scare him away. But oh no, not in this country. In this country we have to wait for the police for 20 min to show up and watch how the burglar robs your stuff and runs into the night with it. You cant even basically put your hands on him.How many times exactly you saw thieft robbing your home and you stand there and watch ? Do you think that your TV is worth more than theft life?
I remember I had a discussion about it with an old man I knew. He basically said, that the incredebly strict gunlaw here is bullshit. That yea, retards wont get a gun legally, but if a retard really wants a gun that bad, he can easly get it. Same as driving, if a retard really wants to drive a car, he probably gets his hands on it, wether the law premits it or not.
I don't see how giving kids guns in elementary school could be good... or any kids AT school.
Frankly if I compare my country with USA. Than its gunpolitics seem better. Simply cause in my country, you might even get sued for simply even owning a firearm. Sure the streets are safer, but the thiefs really do not give a shit. I mean, if you see someone robbing your house you would probably shoot the ass or scare him away. But oh no, not in this country. In this country we have to wait for the police for 20 min to show up and watch how the burglar robs your stuff and runs into the night with it. You cant even basically put your hands on him.
I remember I had a discussion about it with an old man I knew. He basically said, that the incredebly strict gunlaw here is bullshit. That yea, retards wont get a gun legally, but if a retard really wants a gun that bad, he can easly get it. Same as driving, if a retard really wants to drive a car, he probably gets his hands on it, wether the law premits it or not.
(...) dont have any statistics but i know (...)
No...
In that case, for best protection everyone should own an atomic bomb. To be able to defend himself :rolleyes:
Sweden, dont have any statistics but i know the unemployment is there.
This is not a bad idea, actually.
I mean, atomic bombs don't kill people, the guy who detonates them does.
:)
Well now i googled it and it says that between 15-24 years old swedes it is around 22% hmm..
Here is 80% for 15-28 years old, I think...As far as I know, people who are studying arent counted as being unemployed.
15-24 go to school and later to university. No wonder they don't work lol
Nooooo point for a civilian to own an assault weapon. In the near future assault weapons will be against the law to own.Are you Obama?
Mark my words. ;]
Well, if it's higher than 10% thats a bit alarming. In my country unemployment rate is like in Spain, 25%...
This is how I look on that issue:
In developed western countries with unemployment rate of 4-6%, economy is very healthy, offering a lot of opportunities. It's not that hard to find a place under the sun for yourself in that kind of environment. Because of that, country is able to spend money on social programs for its own citizens who are unable to work. But many abuse those programs. Because of that and current situation in the world many countries decided to give a chance to foreign people who lived in countries that are in war. To give them chance for a better life.
Now there are same social programs for both residents and immigrants. At first they are the same, living at country's expense. But those immigrants have to live like that, because they don't speak language and are unable to work. After certain period they are supposed to somewhat assimilate and start working. In theory, those people can prove to be much more useful to country than those lazy residents who want to live from money they get from state.
Problem is that many immigrants started doing the same as lazy residents. Now, some of them are no different except that resident think they are better because they are born in that country. No one likes foreigners, because they are aliens. People are generally afraid of what they don't understand.
That's definitely not one sided issue, although many residents of those developed countries believe it is. Globalization comes with a price.
Are you Obama?
its not the fact that foreign people come to our country that annoys people its the fact they come here and work for less money.Well its the goddamn companies who profit from, who wants it, who likes it. And then you blame the immigrants ;)
I'm an electrician and there are very few foreigners who come here and do that job due to qualifications but people who say do plasterboard or plastering etc are nearly now only foreigners. They used to come here for 4-5 years earning money and living in poor and cramped housing then taking it home and being better off. That's great for them :D they earn more money here and can build a house back home etc etc.
The problem comes when the native workers in those industries get priced out and have to work for much lower wages to compete while having a higher living cost. That breeds the dislike not the actual people :D
its not the fact that foreign people come to our country that annoys people its the fact they come here and work for less money.
I'm an electrician and there are very few foreigners who come here and do that job due to qualifications but people who say do plasterboard or plastering etc are nearly now only foreigners. They used to come here for 4-5 years earning money and living in poor and cramped housing then taking it home and being better off. That's great for them :D they earn more money here and can build a house back home etc etc.
The problem comes when the native workers in those industries get priced out and have to work for much lower wages to compete while having a higher living cost. That breeds the dislike not the actual people :D
I think it's about time the US gets some better gun laws...
This is pretty fucked up, and still there are people in US who think its the oppressive government trying to take their guns away that they should be afraid of, when in reality its the next door neighbour with 12 gauge and semiauto M16 who gets a bit loose in the head...
Civvies dont need guns, guns make both mentally and physically weak people feel empowered, which results in things like these.
As I said, that is called globalization. People already do those jobs for way less money in China, for example. You can't expect anyone to pay you more just because you're born there and immigrant isn't. Real and rare knowledge still is payed very well.
Even Chinese started replacing their own, cheap workforce with robots.
Do you think that your TV is worth more than theft life?Yes, I do believe my tv is worth more than the filthy piece of shit trying to take it from me, I believe my groceries are worth more than the guy trying to steal them.
Yes, I do believe my tv is worth more than the filthy piece of shit trying to take it from me, I believe my groceries are worth more than the guy trying to steal them.
Also, without guns people can do just as fucked up things, it's just slightly harder for them to do it and a few idiots might fail.
You say "people without guns" like that is possible. Even in the worst police states, like England, one can EASILY find illegal weaponry. The only ones whom the laws disarm is the law-abbiding citizens.Of course, I meant in theory, anyone who wishes to do harm to another human being, is willing to die in the process, isn't completely idiotic, and doesn't talk about it, can accomplish it, a gun is just another way to accomplish said thing.
That isn't even the real question.It's a question of proportionality. And everyone who thinks that taking a life for anything like a TV is fair game is the idiot!
The question is: does one have the right to defend the property he earned by work?
And honestly, anyone who answers "no" to that question is an idiot.
[...]Comments like: "Did Obama cry for those kids who got blown to bits by those US drones in Afganistan?" [...]Did he? Did anyone ever say sorry after a drone hit gone wild? After some soldiers pissed on dead people, piling prisoners naked on each other for a picture? Don't think anyone ever did but maybe I just missed that. If a whole country takes the moral high ground and fucks up like that... well, don't be surprised when everybody else starts to dislike you.
It's a question of proportionality. And everyone who thinks that taking a life for anything like a TV is fair game is the idiot!You're an idiot.
Did he? Did anyone ever say sorry after a drone hit gone wild? After some soldiers pissed on dead people, piling prisoners naked on each other for a picture? Don't think anyone ever did but maybe I just missed that. If a whole country takes the moral high ground and fucks up like that... well, don't be surprised when everybody else starts to dislike you.
Hearing about 20 little kids, prolly not even 10 yrs old, getting shot by some random asshole... anyone not being shocked in the first moment should get some counselling - you have some serious issues! Same for people who actually believe that shooting someone who tries to steal the TV is "O.k." - issues, lot of them, right there. Though I guess those people are just some trolls who don't grasp the idea of a serious discussion and have/had parents who failed at raising them properly.
Yes, I do believe my tv is worth more than the filthy piece of shit trying to take it from me, I believe my groceries are worth more than the guy trying to steal them.I don't agree and i believe we have guns banned in Poland cos most people thinks simmilar
an american posted this pic on facebook(click to show/hide)
he got hated on lots
Yes, I do believe my tv is worth more than the filthy piece of shit trying to take it from me, I believe my groceries are worth more than the guy trying to steal them.
You're an idiot.You just stated that you can kill for a bag of matches you earned. You are on a good way to go for a killing spree as well IMO cos you can imagine "they"(space wasters, goverment, 10 year old kids) took something you earned rightfully so its a valid reason to kill.
If I've worked for something, if I've earned something, and some waste of space comes along thinking he should leech off my labor then he can get shot for all I care, I do believe that any of the things I own, regardless of value, that I've worked for, are rightfully mine and that some parasite who attempts to take what is rightfully mine, does not deserve to exist.
Shooting someone for a bag of groceries is a bit sick. :| Maybe you could try to call the police and let them get those back, and no one would get hurt?
When someone does something wrong, the first answer shouldn't be to shoot the guy.
That isn't even the real question.
The question is: does one have the right to defend the property he earned by work?
And honestly, anyone who answers "no" to that question is an idiot.
Zlisch just adapted to the western view of money/property being more worth then human life. All our material prosperity is funded on the death and suffering of billions of people around the globe. Don't you dare steal his beloved TV, that he earned "fairly" :lol: I understand people killing other people over food and water when you're starving. But I guess its kinda the same, Zlisch soul is starving, and he thinks that more groceries, more shit, is what it needs, and he will kill to keep it.I do not believe that someone attempting to break into my private property should be allowed to, while I do not believe that a guy deserves to get killed for it then I do believe that if a guy would refuse to fuck off then yes, it makes a lot more sense to harm him than to let him wander off with whatever the hell he pleases.
Which country is that? How high is unemployment rate? Because I think that jobless people in countries with unemployment rate of 5% or so are lazy people who don't want to work.Did you really just say that if you are unemployed then you're just to lazy to work? You obviously don't know much about the real world friend.
(click to show/hide)
Taking our guns is the first step to taking our freedom.freedom to kill
we give these lives in tribute.Who? you?
that seems even worse.Is It worse an accident than a taking life of other person consciounsly? dude.
enables
-However, the states with the highest violent crime are the states with the highest gun restrictions
The right to bear arms still exists in the U.S in case revolting against our government becomes an essential and completely ideal subject again.
Thats one of the most paranoic, egocentric, megalomanic idea and reason to have a gun imo.
Like if you can win with govermental tanks with your 9mm. Not mentioning other stuff. (so its megalomanic to believe that if you have pistol in home you can rebel against goverment any time and actually do sth)
And secondly as far as i know you live in democratic country and you can change president and other stuff by voting and you are doing it for centuries now. So why it would change?( here is where your paranoic mind come alive if you tryied to answer this question, you propablyy also use a lot of "THEM" in this answer)
In Poland we rebeled against communistic goverment that was under soviet russia protectorate withouth a single gun shot from rebel side. And this is how you do a succesfull rebelion.
Let's take a look at 2009 in the United States. Gun related homicides are at around eleven thousand, with suicides bringing a further eleven thousand, and with accidents involving firearms being just under a thousand. We wind up with a total of around twenty-three thousand firearm related deaths, which is still ten thousand less than the thirty-three thousand people who died as a result of various automobile related deaths for that same year. These roadway affairs are deaths we give our consent to every time we use paved ground or operate a motor vehicle- for the convenience of our society as a whole, we give these lives in tribute.Holy shit that is some amazing bullshit.
We mourn and place flowers at the roadside, but we go on with our lives, not thinking for more than perhaps a moment to abolish the transportation system which enables (this is a key word) these deaths to happen. Unlike deaths caused by firearms, of course, most of these are not suicides or homicides but just accidents- and, in a way, that seems even worse. With homicides and suicides we can address the issue of mental health, economic struggle, and so on. With accidents we can.. try to make our tools safer, and still endorse needless deaths as necessary for American ease of living.
In Poland we rebeled against communistic goverment that was under soviet russia protectorate withouth a single gun shot from rebel side. And this is how you do a succesfull rebelion.Yeah worked perfectly in Prague in 1968 as well.
Not saying it allways work. But armed rebellions don't have higher succes rate.
Yeah worked perfectly in Prague in 1968 as well.
The right to bear arms still exists in the U.S in case revolting against our government becomes an essential and completely ideal subject again.
People in the United States don't have the second amendment to go hunting, or to kill people breaking into their house, or to protect themselves from thugs. It's in place because the US started out as what we would today call a terrorist group, the second amendment exists because American citizens were allowed to bear arms and form a militia to eliminate our own government. People like to forget that the 1776 American War of Independence wasn't AMURICA fighting against English invaders, we were fighting our own government. The right to bear arms still exists in the U.S in case revolting against our government becomes an essential and completely ideal subject again.
You say "people without guns" like that is possible. Even in the worst police states, like England, one can EASILY find illegal weaponry. The only ones whom the laws disarm is the law-abbiding citizens.
It's not the gun laws that killed those innocent 6-7 year old children and teachers. It's the mentality and mind of that autistic kid. If you got a fucked up brain like him and like the ones in Columbine, Virginia Tech, Guy in Finland who posted that youtube vid before he went on his spree. Hell even The Führer, then nothing will stop you from getting what you want.
They can take harmful acid or whatever from chemistry at school and make their own kinds of weapons. The only limit is their insane damaged brains and their own creativity.
What possible reasoning could he have killing these young innocent kids? His brain must've been severely damaged.
(click to show/hide)
The right to bear arms still exists in the U.S in case revolting against our government becomes an essential and completely ideal subject again.I really can't picture any realistic scenario in which discontent with the goverment in a liberal democratic country is going to devolve into an army versus populace struggle.
Makes sense. But in that case you guys should demand from your government to allow to purchase newest military technology. You'll need it if you want to defend yourself from your own government, guns and rifles won't help you there.I very much enjoyed reading your statements throughout this thread Leshma, keep up the good work!
I very much enjoyed reading your statements throughout this thread Leshma, keep up the good work!
Any successful revolt toward the US government can only be done with military backing.
Any successful revolt toward the US government can only be done with military backing. Unless you're willing to count on the government not shooting back.With the current democratic accountability of the government in the U.S. I am willing to count on 'the government' resigning in the case of an uprising against it. Of course legislation like the Patriot Act might be the start of a slippery slope towards becoming a totalitarian state, but I am talking about right now. These bad guy government scenario's here seem a little bit far fetched in countries with a democratic government.
With the current democratic accountability of the government in the U.S. I am willing to count on 'the government' resigning in the case of an uprising against it. Of course legislation like the Patriot Act might be the start of a slippery slope towards becoming a totalitarian state, but I am talking about right now. These bad guy government scenario's here seem a little bit far fetched in countries with a democratic government.
Russia?Yeah Russia is known around the world for its democracy. What I mean with democracies and for which countries I expect my point to be valid are the countries listed as full democracies in the Democracy Index. Russia recently got downgraded to an authoritarian regime.
Its in their constitution. The fact that its fakedemocracy already makes it a "bad guy goverment" as Teeth put it.That is the wrong order of things, I am adressing the armed revolt scenarios against the U.S. government, which I find far fetched. My point being that the government in a functioning democracy would resign before it comes to any of that. Russia not being a functioning democracy in the first place does not disprove that point by pretending to be one.
Its in their constitution. The fact that its fakedemocracy already makes it a "bad guy goverment" as Teeth put it.I think the point Teeth was making was that he thinks it unlikely for democracies to become to evil authoritarian governments.
Frankly this was the point I tried to make with my "look at my country for example" post, that some people simply didnt get. Estonia has extremely strict gun restrictions, yet somehow we still on top of the murderchart(no firearms involved). Which is wierd as hell considering we have basically no organised crime or anything here. And yes, every person in Switzerland basically owns militaryhardware. And such massacres like in the US will happen with our without strict gunregulations. Just take a look at Sweden, strict gunregulations. Somewere Brevik still gets an entire armory and shoots an island full of innocent teenagers.Sweden? Really? Am I the only one who stumbled about it? A guy bombs a city and kills a whole island of young people and you fail to remember the country it was in? It was in Norway. :|
Dont get me wrong, I wouldnt like it being 100% legal . I tought so aswell when I was younger, keep it as strict as possible, than the society will be safer. Somehow ive kinda reached the conclusion that its mostly not so simple.
Yea your own opinion is most likely your own emotions thats created by your parents and closest people around you. Not obiective reality. Ofc everybody somewhat brings his own opinion in topic even when using numbers. But numbers make stuff a bit more obivective.
Yay no gun killing spree in Poland... yet....
also
we go 111 people killed and Slovakia got over two thousands WTF Slovakia its more per capita than USA.
I fully agree with empirical facts being the only way to prove claims about guns - murders relationships and such. It's just that the link you provided does not show murder rates, but just the amount of murders, which is rather meaningless information for comparing the effects of guns legislature on the amount of murders between countries.(click to show/hide)
I fully agree with empirical facts being the only way to prove claims about guns - murders relationships and such. It's just that the link you provided does not show murder rates, but just the amount of murders, which is rather meaningless information for comparing the effects of guns legislature on the amount of murders between countries.Ya, I realized that. Hence the new sources:
Ya, I realized that. Hence the new sources:Dunno which figures you read but...
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html
http://www.gunpolicy.org/
Why am I debating this anyway. I much preferred debating religion or benefits of free education on another site :lol:
And as Kafein already wrote - I can sit down too and google some completely unrelated numbers, post them and think they are a valid argument. I can pull some numbers out of my ass and they would have the same validity. :rolleyes:
That wasn't really what I was saying. You can show me two perfectly accurate and valid graphs depicting the evolution of two things during the same time window. And if the two graphs are matching, it is natural for the brain to conclude that there is an underlying relationship between those two values. This is simply false and an extremely common error in argumentation/interpretation/logic.Which is pretty much exactly what I described w/o the "smartass" in it ;)
In Poland we rebeled against communistic goverment that was under soviet russia protectorate withouth a single gun shot from rebel side. And this is how you do a succesfull rebelion.
Which is pretty much exactly what I described w/o the "smartass" in it ;)
Dunno which figures you read but...
"Homicide by firearm rate per 100,000 population" - Finland = 0,4 (highest value is Croatia with 0,5 Europe'ish) versus USA 3,2.
Case closed.
Aunt Edith says...
...taken out of UNODC Homicide Statistics
What are the highest gun restrictions ? How many of these violent crimes were actually done with firearms, how many of those firearms were obtained legally ? Those are the real questions.In Chicago and NY, the 2 cities in the US with the highest crime rates in the US, it is essentially impossible to obtain legal firearms, unless you are a politician, and had a ban on most types of them (heck, the court had to strike down as unconstitutional like 12 laws recently in Chicago). On the other hand, states with very liberal gun laws, like Texas and New Mexico, have the lowest violent crime rates in the US. These are simple facts Kafein...you can't really dispute them.
Also, Switzerland isn't one of the countries with the lowest crime rates because the gun laws are laxist, duh. You know, I could show you graphs of the average temperature during the south african summer the same years as new rambo movie releases and make a correlation between the temperature and the size of rambo's shirt on the dvd case. Any reasonable human being would see a pattern here.
In Chicago and NY, the 2 cities in the US with the highest crime rates in the US, it is essentially impossible to obtain legal firearms, unless you are a politician, and had a ban on most types of them (heck, the court had to strike down as unconstitutional like 12 laws recently in Chicago). On the other hand, states with very liberal gun laws, like Texas and New Mexico, have the lowest violent crime rates in the US. These are simple facts Kafein...you can't really dispute them.
In Chicago and NY, the 2 cities in the US with the highest crime rates in the US, it is essentially impossible to obtain legal firearms, unless you are a politician, and had a ban on most types of them (heck, the court had to strike down as unconstitutional like 12 laws recently in Chicago). On the other hand, states with very liberal gun laws, like Texas and New Mexico, have the lowest violent crime rates in the US. These are simple facts Kafein...you can't really dispute them.
What you say might or might not be true, however it definitevely doesn't help the correlation that guns "produce" crime. You might argue that less pirates cause global warming, but the definitevely can't argue that less pirates cause global cooling since there are now both less pirates and more heat....
....I am not sure if you get my analogy, but hey, pastafarian references.
In Chicago and NY, the 2 cities in the US with the highest crime rates in the US, it is essentially impossible to obtain legal firearms, unless you are a politician, and had a ban on most types of them (heck, the court had to strike down as unconstitutional like 12 laws recently in Chicago). On the other hand, states with very liberal gun laws, like Texas and New Mexico, have the lowest violent crime rates in the US. These are simple facts Kafein...you can't really dispute them.
What you say might or might not be true, however it definitevely doesn't help the correlation that guns "produce" crime. You might argue that less pirates cause global warming, but the definitevely can't argue that less pirates cause global cooling since there are now both less pirates and more heat....
....I am not sure if you get my analogy, but hey, pastafarian references.
Are you really complaining about people who are expressing grief over a massacre of children? That's one fucked up psychology you've got there, shame on you.
I am a horrible person, I laughed
I am more complaining that people care more about some random children massacred by some psycho instead of, dunno, kids starving in Africa (cliche, but still), addicted newborns and whatnot. There is so much shit happening i just could not care anymore.
We recently had a case of methanol alcohol in regular booze killing people or making them blind in the better case. Few guys from my hometown died from getting booze off shop i walked by every day. That made me sad, cause it happened close to me. But you dont see me e-mourning, that doesnt help anyone. If my kid got shot, the last thing i would want to see is everyone talking about it. Cynical? Maybe.
Just because people have no direct connection with the victims doesn't mean they can't feel grief over the loss of lifeI can't thats for sure and I am really glad I can't. You're life is going to be shit if you are going to let people dying on the other side of the planet bring down your day. Being all whiney whiney on the internet makes you look pretty stupid, especially if you take into account way worse things happen everyday as Cepeshi's is telling you.
I am more complaining that people care more about some random children massacred by some psycho instead of, dunno, kids starving in Africa (cliche, but still), addicted newborns and whatnot. There is so much shit happening i just could not care anymore.
We recently had a case of methanol alcohol in regular booze killing people or making them blind in the better case. Few guys from my hometown died from getting booze off shop i walked by every day. That made me sad, cause it happened close to me. But you dont see me e-mourning, that doesnt help anyone. If my kid got shot, the last thing i would want to see is everyone talking about it. Cynical? Maybe.
(click to show/hide)
You guys can't read, at no pot have i been whinny, ive simply said others have the right to 'e-mourn' if they want, who thee fuck are you to tell them not too?
You've got to be a pretty heartless bastard to not be upset at the idea of a bunch of kids getting shot up. I don't loose any sleep over it and it certainly doesn't affect my day to day life at all, but i still think that its a sad thing.
I think i can do just fine without life coaching from you thanks
Sometimes its good have a bit of emotion in your lives, rather than becoming completely desensitised to the shit-hole of a world we live in. Good things are done everyday out there, just apparently not by you guys.
You guys can't read, at no pot have i been whinny, ive simply said others have the right to 'e-mourn' if they want, who thee fuck are you to tell them not too?I have the right to think mourning on the internet because people they didn't know died and it is on tv is dumb. You have the right to e-mourn if you mourn about every random death that happens, otherwise you are just shallow.
You've got to be a pretty heartless bastard to not be upset at the idea of a bunch of kids getting shot up. I don't loose any sleep over it and it certainly doesn't affect my day to day life at all, but i still think that its a sad thing.Then you are not upset at all. Of course it is a horrible event, I agree, it just does not touch my emotions and thank the lord for that.
Sometimes its good have a bit of emotion in your lives, rather than becoming completely desensitised to the shit-hole of a world we live in. Good things are done everyday out there, just apparently not by you guys.Yes, cause if you do not shed a tear over people dying on the news then you do not have any morals. Cause telling the internet that you are sad is a tremendously good deed that helps people. Getting bogged down in all the bad shit happening in the world does not help anyone. I am glad that I am able to rationalize all that and worry about fixing bad things within my reach. Feeling bad about things you had no part in is not healthy.
Hardcore gamers aren't exactly known to have much of a life and if they do they sure as hell won't show any compassion to everyone else.
Fact
There's a difference between 'every random death' and children getting shot up. Obviously there are many tragedies every day, but a massacre of children is something which should warrant some form of emotional response.Since when did you know the 'normal human' way to respond? You are taking your opinion as the norm at least as much as I am, so don't you go that way. Random children getting shot up, happens all the time, you hear nobody about that. But when it is on tv, we all need to shed a tear. That is my main problem with the drama about this.
How can you say that I'm not upset, who the fuck are you to judge someone else's emotions?Upset pretty much means disturbing the general order of things, so using your description I judge that you are not upset. Might be a linguistic point here.
Your rather missing the point i think. Having a wider moral conscious and the ability to feel emotions about things that don't directly affect us is a good thing, not bad. You can be upset by stuff and think its wrong without it being in your immediate life, why else do people fund charities and relief agencies.Because they rationally decide that it is the right thing to do, atleast I'd wish. That is not the case though, because people let emotions lead their actions, they send their money to the charity with the sad picture, instead of the one who tries to fix a less media friendly but maybe more important problem.
Having emotions and being emotionally driven are to different things, hats my point. I might feel upset by something, it doesn't mean I'll act on it.Gee, why didn't I get that.
Sometimes its good have a bit of emotion in your lives, rather than becoming completely desensitised to the shit-hole of a world we live in. Good things are done everyday out there, just apparently not by you guys.
Your rather missing the point i think. Having a wider moral conscious and the ability to feel emotions about things that don't directly affect us is a good thing, not bad. You can be upset by stuff and think its wrong without it being in your immediate life, why else do people fund charities and relief agencies.
Also go and read any psychology paper on desensitisation, it'll show you that the average human responds emotionally to violence such as that. These aren't just my opinions.I'm pretty sure the average human being responds more heavily emotionally if violence is accompanied with a picture of dead kittens, then if it comes to 80 year old males, the average human being is not that great.
If a deranged guy over here goes berserk, he does not go to the black market (as if he knew how to get anything from that), he does not get a gun license or anything, he just grabs a knife or something and goes to town with that, wounding one, two, maybe three people, possibly lethally.
And yes, that happens here and pretty much everywhere else, where guns are not as easily available. If we had the same gun laws over here, you would be hearing of school/whatever shootings from over here just as much, if not more.
If a deranged guy over here goes berserk, he does not go to the black market (as if he knew how to get anything from that), he does not get a gun license or anything, he just grabs a knife or something and goes to town with that, wounding one, two, maybe three people, possibly lethally....and it would stop at 3 or maybe 4 people dead and not 20 when equipped with a firearm.
And yes, that happens here and pretty much everywhere else, where guns are not as easily available. If we had the same gun laws over here, you would be hearing of school/whatever shootings from over here just as much, if not more.
...and it would stop at 3 or maybe 4 people dead and not 20 when equipped with a firearm...which is what i said.
That`s the whole point of the discussion: less firearms = profit.
I like how just a few hours after that incident the anti-gun lobby already started shouting "take all teh guns away durr!". It really shows that they don't give a flying fuck about the victims, they just care about their political agenda.
No one gives a fuck about victims. They are just 26 dead people, 20 of them being small children.The victims were arbitrarily picked as targets, what do you even want to read? Little Mike liked fries? Johnny hoped to become a pilot? How is any of that more interesting or important than what brought someone to doing such a thing?
Today I've read a new article. It's about the killer and his family, again...
To be honest if the guy had no guns prior to this event, a majority of the victims would have survived.
Besides, stricter gun laws isn't really an end in itself. I don't see how could people care about that as their political agenda for malicious reasons. I mean what the hell, the knife industry ? On the other hand, gun manufacturers have a lot to lose if gun laws become less forgiving, and that is an agenda.
The political agenda has nothing to do with guns, children, or any kind of statistic that the politicians throw around after a major event involving guns, but an agenda targeting the constitution that protects the guns. If you can alter one part of the constitution, you can alter every part.Well.
Now should our constitution be changed as time goes on to adapt to the new technology and circumstances of the world? That is debatable I suppose, but from the perspective of a politician, and certainly a politician in power being able to alter the constitution (the one thing stopping you from doing almost anything) you can see how something like a school shooting starts these debates.
Now grant it, it may be different in Europe, but it is not possible to truly prohibit guns in America. Anything that can fit in a shoe box is readily available here regardless of legality, and I sure every American with half a brain (could be a small number) knows this to be true.
Just like in drugs however, when the gov't cannot protect your property, (drugs) you need your own protection. How many Lives would it really cost a year to make it legally hard to own a gun?
Just like car accidents, gang wars and other drug related murders greatly outnumber mass shootings in the U.S. its nice to think of a peaceful world without shootings, but its just not going to happen.
The victims were arbitrarily picked as targets, what do you even want to read? Little Mike liked fries? Johnny hoped to become a pilot? How is any of that more interesting or important than what brought someone to doing such a thing?
To sum all the responses only pussies carry guns with themselves.Basicly half the USA and whole of Texas.
To sum all the responses only pussies carry guns with themselves.
yeahI would carry one too, if I had a license for one atleast.
i carry a gun with me when i go out because shit like this happens in my city, a lot
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/relatives-seek-justice-after-man-is-beaten-in-downtown-baltimore/
sorry for being a pussy but i dont wanna wind up like this guy
yeah
i carry a gun with me when i go out because shit like this happens in my city, a lot
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/relatives-seek-justice-after-man-is-beaten-in-downtown-baltimore/
sorry for being a pussy but i dont wanna wind up like this guy