• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

20 children, 6 Adults dead in Connecticut elementary school shooting

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
I'm disturbed by several things:

- This shooting in general.
- The fact that, despite it depressing me, I can't cry about it.
- How depressing it also is at how predictible the response to this is (i.e. " WE WANT MORE GUN CONTROL)
- The possibility of that letter being real.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm torn on the gun issue. On one hand, there needs to be better restrictions on what type of weapons the average person is allowed to have. On the other hand, the idea of taking weapons away from a population frightens me for some reason, because despite the fact that if you give the right to bear arms to the average person there will always be situations like this, I can't help but feel taking away guns from the population makes them more vulnerable to corrupt governments and criminals who'll find ways to hurt people anyway, obtaining the means legally or not.

In other words, lack of gun restrictions isn't the only problem here. People are a problem as well. At least, people who lack the fundamental understandings of responsibility and the value of treating others with respect.
Why does "gun control" mean taking away weapons? It's restricting the kind of weapon and controlling who can have weapons. You don't need military grade weapons. And any weapon shouldn't be in the hands of the mentally ill. Deadly weapons shouldn't be as simple to get as walking into a Wal-Mart or opening a bank account.

You can address all of that without striping weapons from a populace. It's called "control" for a reason.
 
14,092
Posts
14
Years
So... mass murderers aren't criminals? That's what it sounds like you're saying. Just re-read what I said, and you'll see that I'm talking about premeditated murder. Its not like someone's going to spend months going through regulations just to kill some people, unless they plan on facing the consequences. (I'm referring to if there was tighter gun control.)

That being said, who would want an extra charge of illegal possession of a firearm on top of first-degree murder if they plan on living?

They (the specific killers I mentioned) weren't criminals before they decided to kill people. Obviously, they are now. Nice strawman there.

What regulations? Successful lobbying efforts from the likes of the NRA keep loopholes alive and well. 40% of the guns in this country, legally bought, were purchased without some kind of background check, which is usually required by law. So obviously, they regulations need beefing up if people can evade them on technicalities. So people like this shooter, Jared Loughner, the Aurora shooter, etc., can easily acquire deadly firearms they have no business owning. I find that sickening and outrageous.

'Gun Control' isn't taking away any weapons or guns from ordinary people. Any normal joe schmo can waltz into Walmart and buy one. If you're a normal person, someone who isn't a delusional sociopath, gun control laws do not effect you whatsoever. You can still have your weapon if you so choose. They are designed so that people with criminal records and people who have 'red flag' personality traits, mental instability, etc, cannot get them. If you don't fall into that category, then it does not apply to you. End of discussion.
 
Last edited:

Sir Codin

Guest
0
Posts
Why does "gun control" mean taking away weapons? It's restricting the kind of weapon and controlling who can have weapons. You don't need military grade weapons. And any weapon shouldn't be in the hands of the mentally ill. Deadly weapons shouldn't be as simple to get as walking into a Wal-Mart or opening a bank account.

You can address all of that without striping weapons from a populace. It's called "control" for a reason.
Yeah, you are right. Control isn't the same as taking away. And I can understand where you're coming from and I find it somewhat agreeable.

But I'm just saying restrictions make me feel a little uneasy, that's all. Don't know why, it just does.
 
Last edited:

Alexander Nicholi

what do you know about computing?
5,500
Posts
14
Years
They (the specific killers I mentioned) weren't criminals before they decided to kill people. Obviously, they are now. Nice strawman there.

If they have the intent to commit a crime, why do you think they'd bother following all of the other laws? That's my question.

Anyway, this is kind of off-topic. Let's just stop it here. This is sad enough already for us to be arguing about gun control of all times.
 

Sir Codin

Guest
0
Posts
That's just it. They don't have to bother with the laws because all you have to do is walk into a damn Walmart to get one. There's your answer.
I don't know about you, but every Wal-mart I've walked into here in California so far, the closest things to guns they sell are paintball guns and air rifles.

Of course, I live near Salinas and I hear gun crime is particularly bad there, so maybe I haven't been looking in the right places. Not that I need to, though.
 

Sableye~

Back to PC~
4,016
Posts
11
Years
  • Seen Jan 4, 2018
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "gun control".
By changing laws involving guns (i.e. banning magazines that hold so many bullets), it just allows the people who do things like this (what the original post says) and stops people from defending themselves.

Though I'm very biased on the matter, so I probably shouldn't be getting into this discussion. T:
 

The Amazing Justin

The Original Player
164
Posts
11
Years
  • Age 26
  • Seen Oct 28, 2016
Sometimes, I get down with the blues. Sometimes, I felt no man cared if I was alive. Then, I see a story like this and realize how lucky I really am. I could never begin to believe how traumatic this situation was and how it will scare these children for the rest of their lives. They'll be better than me for sure.
 

Sableye~

Back to PC~
4,016
Posts
11
Years
  • Seen Jan 4, 2018
Since when have criminals followed laws?

My answer to gun control. If a crazy person wants to kill someone, what makes you think murderers (read: criminals) are going to legally obtain a gun if it's too complex to obtain? They plan on breaking the law, and most of them kill themselves after shooting up the place. What makes you think that they care?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Seriously, if someone is messed up enough to kill people, what's to stop them from obtaining guns illegally?
 
14,092
Posts
14
Years
Yep, because Wal-Mart just sells guns illegally and 'doesn't bother with the laws'. What has the world come to!?

Why take the risk of going about it illegally, getting involved in illegal activities that are closely monitored by the Feds/ ATF, when you can walk into a store and buy one, no questions asked. What do we not understand about that?
 

TrollShammy80

Loved all Pokemon Since 98'
297
Posts
13
Years
This is such a heartbreaking day, my thoughts and prayers go out to all those familys and staff. This is just horrible...these kids didn't deserve this at all, heck no one does
 

Bluerang1

pin pin
2,543
Posts
14
Years
I can't deal. It's a demon. No other way to explain it. And he killed his mum not in the school? Then why'd he go to the school?
 

droomph

weeb
4,285
Posts
12
Years
Since when have criminals followed laws?

My answer to gun control. If a crazy person wants to kill someone, what makes you think murderers (read: criminals) are going to legally obtain a gun if it's too complex to obtain? They plan on breaking the law, and most of them kill themselves after shooting up the place. What makes you think that they care?

Since never. That's why they are criminals.

Let's see, a reason to a law being in existence is a promise to their citizens that the government will protect them. Whether or not the citizens are actually being protected is up to the citizens to decide. This is a law that will protect them in theory, so it might as well be tried out. Even though this is such a cliché, I think this can relate to the "better late than never" phrase. It might as well be tried out, because people are going to die and be hurt either way. Better to take the chance that it might solve the problem rather than to say a definitive hypothesis of "no f you" and then walk away.
 
50,218
Posts
13
Years
I remember seeing this on the news when I woke up, it was terrible and I was mourning all the dead victims.

Especially the children, they died a terrible death. Not even I would ever use a gun after seeing this.

May they rest in peace.
 

Riku

Who cares to know, eh Bubbles?
419
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Feb 22, 2021
First off, my condolences and deepest feelings for those involved and who've suffered today/yesterday. What has happened can not ever be put into words, and I'm sure that you've all lost something dear. I hope though that one day, and hopefully one day soon, you will all be able to smile again wholly and without the pain/feelings of what you are enduring now.

Second, getting back on topic, the name and photos that spread throughout the major news networks are apparently wrong. However, the damage has already been done as the name of the person given was incorrect. Additionally, the photo of the guy was apparently wrong as well, as they were supposedly of another person sharing the same name. Now, the person completely innocent is being accosted by the masses.
http://mashable.com/2012/12/14/ryan-lanza/

Just going to also state here that this whole reporting as it happens thing really needs to be more careful before jumping the gun because when improper investigation and sensationalized reporting leads to bad things like this happening. My feelings and apologies on behalf of anyone I may know doing it also go out to this poor person who got pulled into this whole mess as well. I wish you well sir, and hope for your safety too.
 

Ho-Oh

used Sacred Fire!
35,992
Posts
18
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jul 1, 2023
In relation to banning guns: tbh... I'd be a fan of removing guns outright from the world, and not just gun laws. Without guns the worst people could really do is STAB someone, and mass "anything" wouldn't happen as there wouldn't be any way for someone to quickly STAB 20 people without someone calling the police or stopping them. Even still, guns anywhere aren't necessary and sure you may argue it's needed to kill animals, but there are other ways that they can be killed other than being shot, and to stop criminals, well, police have tasers but they're less of an issue due to police having them for the most part and while they're sometimes misused, there's never any mass tasering murders. I just don't really like the idea of guns in anyone's hands because anyone could just make the wrong move easily. Sure it'd be a long and complicated process but if we wanted a safer world, why not? There's other ways to protect yourself other than grabbing a gun (and even so you could aim it at someone and it misfires onto you idk). I just see it as people having them just so they can seem powerful when really they're not. ;( I just can't think of a logical use for guns. If you say because of war, well, world peace. If we were all better human beings and all didn't fight with each other so damn easily over stupid things like oil and didn't work as a world "community" then hey maybe guns wouldn't have existed in the first place and this could've been avoided. And nuclear bombs too, ugh. Everything, it's all so unnecessary.

As for the actual event, it's very unfortunate and sad that it happened and I hope the families of those involved can find a way to get through this. :(
 

Ivysaur

Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
21,082
Posts
17
Years
Seriously, if someone is messed up enough to kill people, what's to stop them from obtaining guns illegally?

a) Money: buying an illegal gun is more expensive than buying a legal one.
b) Effort: buying an illegal gun is not as easy as going into your local shop. You have to know who sells them, where and how to contact those people.
c) Time: a legal gun can be obtained as soon as you want if every shop sells them. An illegal gun, on the other hand, forces the criminal to wait and think twice about it. You can't just grab the gun you keep in your drawer and go shoot everybody in a moment of insanity, you need to patiently and purposedly go to the black market, make a deal and spend a sizeable chunk of money before you get to hold the gun. If it's a "spur of the moment", chances are it will be over by then.
d) Control: illegal dealings are, well, illegal, and can be prosecuted. If the police catches a crazy would-be gunman trying to obtain illegal weapons before the deal is done, they can stop him on his tracks and make sure the shooting never happens. On the other hand, a "free guns for everyone" policy means you can't possibly aspire to stop the criminal before a tragedy happens, as he has done nothing wrong until then.

Of course, professional hitmen will probably have enough time, money and effort to go through all this procedure, but almost all these massacres happen because of crazy individuals, not mafia members. Lil' John, who was bullied at school and hates the world, will have a much tougher time to get hold on a gun if there is a much stricter control.

And I keep hearing the "if everybody has gns, everybody can stop the criminals", and yet all these massacres (at least once a year) usually end up with the criminal commiting suicide after killing dozens of people. Something doesn't quite work here.
 

Zet

7,690
Posts
16
Years
In relation to banning guns: tbh... I'd be a fan of removing guns outright from the world, and not just gun laws. Without guns the worst people could really do is STAB someone, and mass "anything" wouldn't happen as there wouldn't be any way for someone to quickly STAB 20 people without someone calling the police or stopping them. Even still, guns anywhere aren't necessary and sure you may argue it's needed to kill animals, but there are other ways that they can be killed other than being shot, and to stop criminals, well, police have tasers but they're less of an issue due to police having them for the most part and while they're sometimes misused, there's never any mass tasering murders. I just don't really like the idea of guns in anyone's hands because anyone could just make the wrong move easily. Sure it'd be a long and complicated process but if we wanted a safer world, why not? There's other ways to protect yourself other than grabbing a gun (and even so you could aim it at someone and it misfires onto you idk). I just see it as people having them just so they can seem powerful when really they're not. ;( I just can't think of a logical use for guns. If you say because of war, well, world peace. If we were all better human beings and all didn't fight with each other so damn easily over stupid things like oil and didn't work as a world "community" then hey maybe guns wouldn't have existed in the first place and this could've been avoided. And nuclear bombs too, ugh. Everything, it's all so unnecessary.

As for the actual event, it's very unfortunate and sad that it happened and I hope the families of those involved can find a way to get through this. :(
Funny you should mention that, a mentally ill man in China went to a school and attacked 22 kids(and 1 adult was also wounded) with a knife(no one died).

As for tasers, you can kill people with heart conditions so they're out of the question. And getting rid of guns won't help thanks to the black market, the world is filled with greed and power no matter where you look. :/



I also feel sorry for the kid who was falsely labeled as the shooter, and the families of kids who news stations wanted to interview about what happened.
 
Back
Top