![]() |
Ten killed, seven others injured at Oregon community college shooting
Just when you think things can't get worse, they do. Yet another school massacre took place today, this time at a community college in Oregon. Ten people were killed, including the gunman, and seven others were injured.
To make matters worse, a school principal in South Dakota was shot and injured by a student yesterday as well. Of course, everybody will be taking this latest opportunity to push stringent gun control, including President Obama. From http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/umpqua-community-college-shooting-what-we-know-so-far : Quote:
|
Stricter gun control wouldn't logically have much of an impact on school shootings in particular unless there is an epidemic of gun stores selling firearms to children of which I am unaware. An outright ban on guns would probably have a significant effect, but it would also have quite a few other negative effects, as professional criminals (who obviously aren't about to hand their guns over to the government) now no longer have to worry about encountering citizens with the means to defend themselves. It would also require a constitutional amendment to overturn the existing one guaranteeing our right to keep and bear arms.
|
The great tragedy is that most "common sense" gun control measures don't go far far enough, and any meaningful acts of legislation that would curb gun violence would be too close to a true infringement of personal liberties, and nobody would go for that either, which is the real reason you see things like this repeatedly happen, it's a vicious cycle. The one way to make meaningful change is through a hardcore targeted PR campaign, similar to the ones you grew up with targeting "big tobacco", which could help necessitate a big culture change in the U.S. But even then, that would be a generational shift, something that would be a decade or two in the making before you would see any potential results or changes in attitudes, thinking, etc. But the american people will one day have to reconcile with, and come to terms with the fact that our nation has a dark obsession with gun culture and that our congress has refused to act to make any attempts to try and save lives.
|
You'd think that by now they really should reconsider the gun control laws in 'murica.
I mean dude, how many more school shootings do you need for goddamn sakes. |
It's getting pretty bad when none of us are surprised, shootings are becoming too common and I do think they need stricter gun laws. Though I'm not sure if it would help because people could probably still get guns if they really wanted, they do so here.
My condolences to the families. |
"Of course, everybody will be taking this latest opportunity to push stringent gun control, including President Obama."
You say that like it is a bad thing. A stronger push towards more stringent gun control is exactly what the US needs. It baffles me that people somehow cannot work out that guns not being easily obtainable = less crazy people with guns = less shootings. Quote:
If there's better gun-control then it becomes less likely that adults will attack schools and if their parents don't have a gun, how exactly is a child going to steal it? Quote:
|
Just to repeat what I said the last time we talked about shootings in the US (which was in August):
Quote:
Part of the reason why nothing ever happens is that America is a culture that generally finds weapons to be quite fine. Which probably sounds bizarre as fuck to anyone who's a pacifist and/or doesn't live in the US, but hey, I find it bizarre that the Brits insist on putting the letter u into words like armor and favor and calling fries chips. But if you want stricter gun laws and such in this country you need, like Live said, a change in culture to where America is more like Europe or something when it comes to guns. But g'luck with that because this country will cry and kick and scream and resist change as much as it can, not to mention what I said before about people not giving a shit until it affects them personally. But what I really wanna say is that, regardless of whether or not you think stricter gun control/much less guns will really help the situation, it's not as if that will just magically fix everything. Yes, less guns will probably result in less frequent shootings and less dead people per shooting, but it doesn't change the fact that....people still want to go out and publicly murder people anyway. And while I'm certain that we will never have a time where no one is killed by another, there's more that can be done than just limiting gun access. I just feel like a lot of times people look at certain issues too simplistically (ty spellcheck) when most things are rarely so simple, or at least it seems that way to me. |
Quote:
You're right in saying that there is definitely more that could be done, but better gun-control is definitely the biggest step towards a safer future for the US and it should be the first one taken. |
So many shootings in the news, I know they are going to push to have guns outlawed. It is basic fear tactics. Most wont see it that way. The problem with outlawing guns is the criminals will still have them and the ones who own a gun for protection of their home will be defenseless. Guess I am buying a Katana.
|
Quote:
Firstly, there's not going to be a push for the compete outlawing of guns. There's going to be a push for laws that reduce the number on the streets and make it hard to get one if you don't have a legitimate reason for owning one (self-defence is not a legitimate reason). The second part of that, is the assumption that owning a gun makes you any safer. It doesn't. If anything it makes you more likely to get shot but besides that, you're not going to carry the thing 24/7 with you. You will not be sleeping with your holster, and nobody with children (and a brain) is going to have a guns somewhere easily accessible. So if someone with a weapon, say a gun, breaks into your house at two in the morning, you're just as screwed as if you didn't own a gun should they actually be planning to kill you - which most of them aren't (they just want to scare you so you don't get in the way of them stealing your wallet and iPad or w/e). |
Quote:
Certainly people with kids will have their guns in a safe place. But what about outside of the home? You can't have the bullets with in so many feet of the gun while in a car. So really, what is the point of having one outside of the home. They do offer protection when you are smart about it but a lot of people aren't. I for one don't want a gun and no one can convince me to owning one. I would much rather have a few trained dogs. |
Quote:
|
What this article forgot to mention is that the shooter was an anon from 4chan, more specifically from /r9k/, where he made a thread discussing his plan to start a shooting at the community college (warning: link contains strong language).
Regardless, much like every article on certain subjects, I feel that this is going to be yet another article that spark another gun control debate, only to die down a few weeks later and never to be brought up again until the next school shooting happens. If you really are that serious about gun control, then don't news like these die into obscurity. |
Quote:
|
The same pattern that emerges after every other mass shooting will happen:
Someone with a gun kills a bunch of people, the nation mourns, every subsequent attempt to have a conversation on reasonable gun control measures will be shouted down by the gun lobby/people fooled by gun lobby propaganda, Congress does nothing, and everyone will forget about this until the next school/movie theater/church/etc. shooting. Rinse and repeat. Meanwhile, other developed nations will get to enjoy the privilege of not having this happen once every two months or so. It’s not even worth getting sad about anymore. So long as we refuse to address national gun laws and work towards a solution (which, contrary to what the NRA will have you believe, does not mean taking everyone’s guns away), it’s just going to happen again and again. |
Quote:
Controlling them would be ideal but there will always be unmarked/registered guns on the streets and with the 3D printers, anyone with good money (say a drug lord) can make them. |
Quote:
With that said, someone intent on committing a violent crime is going to do so regardless of whether mommy or daddy has a gun. Guns can readily be obtained through the black market or even 3D printed these days. Further, there are other ways to kill large numbers of people; homemade explosives or chemical bombs can be just as effective. The person who committed this seemed to have religious reasons for doing so; religious extremists are often able to rely on each other to obtain weapons. Also, may I point out that this took place in a so-called "gun-free zone?" These zones are usually the first targets for criminals because they know they won't be opposed. Fat lot of good the "no-gun" restriction does to people who plan to actually commit a crime. I guess it could help a bit in places where alcohol may be a factor, like residences or bars. Quote:
Quote:
Guns are the ultimate means of self-defense. A well-armed and well-trained population is a population that can defend itself against criminals. Reasonable restrictions on firearm sales are supported by almost everyone except the most die-hard NRA supporters and libertarians, and I personally support more comprehensive safety training and training for how to securely store firearms. However, many of us oppose unreasonable restrictions because the process to acquire a firearm should not be unreasonably burdensome for a responsible, competent individual. Criminals can often already get a gun if they want to on the black market, it should not be more difficult for law-abiding citizens to do so. Banning guns is even more ridiculous. It would result in law-abiding citizens turning their guns in and criminals refusing to do so. This would empower criminals, who still have guns and now know their targets do not, and strip responsible citizens of a powerful means of self-defense. Pepper spray versus gun, gun wins. Stun gun versus gun, gun still usually wins. There is no practical defense against a criminal with a gun except a trained citizen with a gun. And, of course, it would strip the citizenry of the means to protect themselves against tyrants or foreign invaders, which was arguably the most significant reason behind the existence of the Second Amendment. Quote:
Most of the nation outside the NRA and radical libertarians is in agreement that certain restrictions on guns are worthwhile; that's why we currently have such restrictions. This has nothing to do with NRA propaganda or ideologues or any of that; no sane person would suggest that, for instance, young children should have ready access to rocket-propelled grenade launchers. The point of contention is at what point these restrictions become unreasonable. Generally speaking, I believe the existing restrictions on guns are adequate, but if you have specific suggestions as to what further restrictions might be helpful, I think most people on either side would be open to discussing those. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, let's not pretend "the majority want all the guns" is a valid defence. There was a time when the majority of people supported slavery too. The fact that there's a lot of people who oppose stricter gun-control just means there's a lot more people who need a serious wake-up call. Quote:
Suggesting that having a well-armed and well-trained population is going to prevent gun-violence is honestly quite ridiculous. You're assuming the only people with the capacity to pull the trigger are people already engaging in illicit activities. Each and every person on this Earth has the capacity to kill under the right (or wrong depending how you look at it) circumstances. S good idea, let's arm and train the population so that when life goes south for some poor guy - he looses his job, his wife leaves him, his kids hate him and he's about to be kicked out of his apartment he can unleash "vengeance" upon the cruel, cruel world that screwed him over better. Arming the population isn't going to reduce crime, it's going to mean more potentially crazy people are really good at killing other people who could potentially go crazy. More guns and more gun training is never going to result in a peaceful society, it's going to result in more and more innocent people dying because a bunch of stupid and foolish people are clinging to out-dated traditions and amendments because GOD DAMN IT THEY LIKE GUNS. Quote:
The second amendment is not valid in modern society, not even remotely. Back in the old days when everyone was walking around with revolvers or muskets or whatever it made sense but in the twenty-first century the tyrants and foreign invaders have tanks, rpgs, drones, air drops, remote missiles, nukes so on and so forth. We are quickly approaching an era when human presence on a battlefield will be practically zero. Making needless bloodshed easier and, quite frankly, much more likely for the sake of what is essentially the equivalent of a toddler's security blanket from hiding from evil is not a valid argument against anything anti-gun - be it gun-control or and unreasonable total ban. |
Quote:
And what America do you live in where people have ever been open to actual discussion on gun control (i.e. one without the fear-mongering)? I still remember two years ago, when a moderate gun control bill that actually had the support of a majority in the country (this being after the Sandy Hook massacre) failed to pass through Congress. That kind of thing wouldn’t happen in a nation where people are open to discussion. As far as reasonable gun control measures go, here are just two that I’d be happy with at this point – for starters: More thorough background checks: top of my list, personally. If you’ve ever been convicted of a felony, have a history of violent and abusive behavior, or are part of a hate group, you should never be allowed to have a gun. That’s just common sense. Mandatory firearms training: If you need to prove that you’ve been educated on how to drive a car, then you need to demonstrate that you’ve been educated on how to use a gun. They’re both dangerous weapons, and it’d be reckless to allow people to own one without showing they can use them properly. These would be enforced at a federal level, not the state. And you’ll notice that neither involves taking people’s guns away. Another measure I think should be done is renewing the assault weapons ban. Other countries have actually been pretty successful with that. But that’s not a fight I think is winnable in a climate where we can’t even get more throughout background checks passed through, so I wouldn't press for it. |
It's so tragic how this keeps on happening. America should just ban school shootings.
|
I don't understand why Americans feel that just because a gun ban won't eliminate all gun violence, such a ban shouldn't be enacted. With that kind of logic you might as well say that we shouldn't fund cancer research, because it won't save everybody suffering from cancer. Does reduced violent crime even mean anything?
|
Quote:
Overall, I don't think any gun restrictions will have a positive affect on public shootings. American society is filled with hate, selfishness, and aggression. Even a debate on things like gun laws can turn people against each other (not that a healthy debate is bad, but some people can take things a bit far). I think the main focus should be on families and raising up children in a health environment. Much of my sense of morals stem from what my parents taught me and the respect and love I have for them in order to listen to what they had to say. Sure there were times where I have been hurt by others and wished to hurt them back, but I always had family to encourage and embrace me. I don't know how much this may factor into things like school shootings, but I have seen many families with broken relationships, some with children falling into the same trouble with drugs, alcohol, and the law as their parents do. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I've been making the point that a constitutional amendment is the correct way to repeal an existing one, and it is, but I'll admit that it would be difficult even with popular support given the ongoing failure of Congress to do their job of representing the people. Perhaps it would be better to adopt a system of referendum for constitutional amendments rather than leaving it to Congress. That said, you're conflating politicians with people. I still believe most people are open to having a discussion about the issue, even if most people aren't interested in overturning the Second Amendment altogether. Quote:
History of violent behavior: Agree History of abusive behavior: Depends on your definition of abusive Part of a hate group: I don't trust the government to make a fair assessment as to whether a certain group is a "hate group" or not. I can almost guarantee they would broaden the definition to the point of ridiculousness. If someone has advocated for violent action against a group of people based on some factor like skin color, then yes, they shouldn't be able to own a gun. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
This has gotten ridiculous. This morning I found out about the shooting in Arizona and was lamenting how it only took 8 days for the next school shooting to happen. And then I cynically said that someday it would become a daily thing...but my heart just broke when 30 minutes later the Texas shootings happened. It's...it's just I don't really know anymore.
I feel that some people just don't have empathy if these things have become so routine as President Obama frustratingly said last week. And then what? This comic was made last month in response to the previous massacre: http://images.dailykos.com/images/161512/lightbox/TMW2015-09-02color.png It's just...Americans have become numb to this. I really do fear for otherwise good people have become utterly desensitized to violence and are slowly losing their common humanity. I just...can't anymore... |
What do the parties think of further gun control measures? How would it play out in Congress?
inb4 gun control = ban all guns |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:52 AM. |
![]()
© 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.
Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.