AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!

Elementary School Shooting In Connecticut

  • ** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **
    Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
Status
Not open for further replies.
SoTxBob said:
why is our country in particular so much more violent statistically than other first world countries?

Thats a thesis in and of itself....

but a few quick :twocents-02cents: thumbnail guesses...
~parenting is broken.
~self indulgence.
~'kids' have to much freedom and the consequences are really not feared by them.
~personal responsibility and common sense is lacking.

added too many adults/kids arent dealt with and medicated instead to modify some behavior.
And those, in turn can be summed up in the nature of how kids are raised today--it's not "bad parents" per se, it's more about how most people want to have kids and yet turn them over to baby sitters and day care during a good portion of their waking hours. How can one have a tight-knit family, when the family is absent. But it's not the parents' fault in all cases...it's the nature of survival. In order to live a decent life and rear kids in a secure home with food and shelter, it's necessary for both parents to work. This adds the dimension of economics.

It gets more complicated, and I'm no sociologist.
 
http://shanghaiist.com/2012/12/15/the_lower_death_toll_in_chinese_sch.php
On December 14th 2012, two schools on different sides of the world were attacked by men wielding weapons. In one, 22 children were injured but none died; in the other, 27 young boys and girls were killed*. The difference? The second killer had a gun, the first didn't.
A spate of attacks on schools in China began in March 2010 and carried on into 2011. Given the recent attacks in Guangxi and and Henan this year, I think it's fair to say the 'spree' has continued. However, in all those attacks, knives or other edged-weapons were used. As Andrew Sullivan points out, there were a total of 21 fatalities in all of the Chinese attacks over a two year period (24 if you include the attacks in 2012). The recent shooting in Newtown, Connecticut alone left at least 27 people dead.
The root causes behind such attacks or rampages are largely the same in both China and the US: stress, depression, anxiety, and, most of all, shamefully poor mental health care. All of these factors should and must be treated, but we can't get away from the fact that the vast difference in the respective deaths toll is based on one factor alone, gun control.
Commentators in the US and elsewhere will hold up the tragedy in Henan and use it to say "See, these attacks happen everywhere", and indeed, the potential for massacres, attacks, and rampages of the sort that happened in Henan and Newtown is inherent in every society. But societies which allow their citizens easy access to firearms, of any type, are placing their citizens at a far higher risk of death and injury than those that do not.
*Figures as of 6am, 15th December.

Sums up my thoughts on gun control.

That being said, did you know there was another mass shooting earlier in the week? I notice there was no mention or thread started here about it. Why? Because only 2 people died? What body count is needed for the same outrage and news coverage? I have a feeling that it can only get worse in the future. These psychopaths/sociopaths notice the coverage given and the social media outrage that happens with each incident. If it is a game to them to become infamous only higher death tolls or targeting children will get them more coverage. :crybaby:
 
So sad :(

Cried when I read the article, I'd been avoiding it.

I really agree with the posts above basically saying if guns were harder to get hold of it'd be much more difficult.

I will also point out, that although if America made guns illegal unless you have a license for shooting etc, you'd get a black market, it might be a big deal at the beginning, but things would eb away. Why do you need a gun for protection? Incase the other person has a gun. No guns? No guns needed. Mass shootings like this... well, perhaps having guns around all the time makes it seem more acceptable, but essentially it was planned, he had a bulletproof vest on! What having guns in the house would reduce is people in arguments/having emotional trauma grabbing their gun and shooting someone in a moment of madness.
I live in the uk, I knew a lot of people involved in crime growing up, I know many people who go shooting, yet besides my air rifle I've had next to no contact with guns (real ones). I've never even thought about it. People act like it's a big deal that people will get guns from the black market! Well they're currently buying them off the shelf which is much easier and safer for them.
We should not need things like guns to feel safe in our own homes. If you're scared, get a bat. Much safer.

I wonder what relationship these two kids had with their parents and other brother (if that is the real story) to hate them so much :(
 
Double post-was too late to edit to add, just watched the video with that reporter. God, how unfazed could he sound??! He might as well have been talking about the weather! Jeeze, at least act as though you're a bit upset!
 
SoTxBob said:
You all seem to have left out one small detail... no matter the country or the control, if the person has the cash, he/she will always be able to find whatever he/she is shopping for. That includes everything from tiny .22 caliber midnight special pistols to machine guns and grenades. The thing about 'mental health' is that it can change at a moments notice with untold numbers of triggers.....
:dontknow:
Well I did try to make that point actually...do you know where to get a black market gun? I wouldn't know where to start. I certainly wouldn't buy one weeks or years before I mentally snapped (if I were to do so). Putting them out of easy legal reach is itself a barrier to this sort of event occurring. Why, for instance, are the quoted attacks in China carried out with knives? I would suggest that it's because while it's possible to get a gun (hell the chinese military has MILLIONS of assault rifles, and I'm sure plenty end up on the black market) when some regular joe who hasn't actually shot anyone before suddenly goes off the deepend he reaches for the nearest, most lethal weapon at hand, not goes downtown to whisper to total strangers if they know where he can get a piece.
The fact his mother had the guns is exactly the point - it's the simple fact that law-abiding citizens have guns in and around their homes that makes it possible for some nutbag to pick it up and go out in a 'blaze of glory'.
HOW MANY LIVES does it take before you realise you're the only country in the WORLD that consistently has this problem, more and more frequently, I mean if 20 kids murdered doesn't convince you maybe guns aren't a great idea then seriously NOTHING is going to.

And not to be insensitive, but it's really easy to say how much of a tragedy it is blah blah blah it's all friggin talk, if you really give a shit then ask yourself whether even half of these massacres would have occurred if semi-automatic guns weren't able to be purchased over the counter.
 
As far as massacres go, gun control in Australia was a complete success. It's too late for those kids, and those teachers, what Americans need to ask themselves is: who's next?
This is an excerpt from an article following the Aurora shooting, you know, the one before the Newtown one which is, of course, before the next one to happen - the kids or innocents not yet killed but whose names might as well be out there engraved on bullets.
In 1996, a man shot and killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania. If degrees of abjectness are assignable in such cases, for a massacre to unfold at Port Arthur was, for Australians, doubly awful. As Robert Hughes wrote in The Fatal Shore, his superlative history of the country’s origins as a penal colony: “Port Arthur has always dominated the popular historical imagination in Australia as the emblem of the miseries of transportation, ‘the Hell on Earth.’” Since the late 1970s, the ruins at Port Arthur, once the British Empire’s most pitiless labor camp, had been treated on the model of the European death camps; as a secular holy place, a site to wander in while meditating on how human beings subjugate and deform and generally thieve the dignity from other human beings. One of the first victims of the Port Arthur massacre, facing the barrel of the gun, said simply: “Not here.”
As a nation in no small part ancestored by convicts, Australia has a sober relationship to criminality, and the country’s response to the Port Arthur massacre was magnificent in its sobriety. The federal government enacted strict gun control laws and initiated a massive firearms buyback program. (In the 18 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre, Australia experienced 14 mass shootings; in the subsequent 16 years, there have been none.) But the reaction to the Port Arthur tragedy went beyond legislation and into a serious attempt to understand the causes of the “civil massacre,” as it’s labeled in the literature, an effort that began more or less immediately. The Port Arthur perpetrator had been assigned a defense psychiatrist named Paul Mullen. When Mullen first interviewed the shooter, he was struck by his repeated queries about the death toll: He wanted to know if he had exceeded the body count of the Dunblane massacre in Scotland, which had occurred six weeks earlier.
Mullen had a suspicion about his client’s repellent one-upmanship, and his research confirmed it: that civil massacres were by their nature copycat crimes, “modeled,” as Mullen has since written, “on Rambo-like images and informed by knowledge, and occasionally study, of prior massacres.” While it is true that civil massacres occurred throughout the 20th century, they were rare until the mid-1960s, when the phenomenon took a grimly familiar shape with the so-called “tower sniper.” The incident at the University of Texas, in which a former Marine held the Austin campus under siege from a bell tower, received massive media attention and was even turned into a well-known TV movie. It provided, according to Mullen, a kind of ritualized script (Mullen’s word) that civil massacres have followed ever since.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_we_need_to_cure_our_addiction_to_evil_.html
 
Look, it really boils down to this: crazy people do crazy shit. This kid was mentally unstable and his family knew it. His brother, who hadnt been in contact with him for 2 years, knew it. Do you think there's any way the mother who he lived with didn't know it? And yet she still left dangerous weapons within his grasp? This has nothing to do with guns and everything to do with personal responsibility. Let's say she didn't have the guns, but had a huge SUV. What if instead of going to the school and shooting kids, he waited until they were out on the playground and ran them all down? Would all you people screaming that guns are the problem start crying for big trucks to be banned?

I certainly have no intention of justifying my rights as a US citizen to someone from another country (or anywhere else) who says they don't get it.
 
JoeEmGee said:
Look, it really boils down to this: crazy people do crazy shit. This kid was mentally unstable and his family knew it. His brother, who hadnt been in contact with him for 2 years, knew it. Do you think there's any way the mother who he lived with didn't know it? And yet she still left dangerous weapons within his grasp? This has nothing to do with guns and everything to do with personal responsibility. Let's say she didn't have the guns, but had a huge SUV. What if instead of going to the school and shooting kids, he waited until they were out on the playground and ran them all down? Would all you people screaming that guns are the problem start crying for big trucks to be banned?

I certainly have no intention of justifying my rights as a US citizen to someone from another country (or anywhere else) who says they don't get it.
I'm not aware of an epidemic of kids being run over by crazed truckdrivers in countries where there's gun control
 
JoeEmGee said:
I certainly have no intention of justifying my rights as a US citizen to someone from another country (or anywhere else) who says they don't get it.
Nor is anyone asking you to, but do you at least understand that we in other countries, with gun laws, where these things don't happen, find it a bit odd that you simply cannot connect the epidemic of mass shootings with the availability of weapons capable of committing them?
 
Nice attempt at deflection and way to show you are completely missing the point. When you can figure out that guns aren't the problem, but instead, lack of access to proper mental healthcare and people's unwillingness to be responsible citizens, then maybe you'll understand. I guarantee you, if all guns disappeared from US soil tomorrow, there would still be massacres in this country. Some crazy person would snap and still find a way to take as many people with him as possible. He could've just as easily carried a home made bomb into the school and wiped out all those kids. The only thing that would have stopped him is if someone who knew him and knew he was having mental problems stopped and made sure he got the care he needed.
 
No, you're right, guns are not the problem. The problem is . . . the DESIRE to have guns.

I have an idea! Make the government pay for FREE PENILE ENLARGEMENTS! Problem solved!
 
  • Like
Reactions: bob and Jupiter551
JoeEmGee said:
Nice attempt at deflection and way to show you are completely missing the point. When you can figure out that guns aren't the problem, but instead, lack of access to proper mental healthcare and people's unwillingness to be responsible citizens, then maybe you'll understand. I guarantee you, if all guns disappeared from US soil tomorrow, there would still be massacres in this country. Some crazy person would snap and still find a way to take as many people with him as possible. He could've just as easily carried a home made bomb into the school and wiped out all those kids. The only thing that would have stopped him is if someone who knew him and knew he was having mental problems stopped and made sure he got the care he needed.
No, it takes time to build a bomb. Time he might have been noticed, a bomb that might have been seen, expertise he might not have been capable of and MOST IMPORTANTLY these crimes are almost always committed in the heat of the moment after some traumatic mental or social disconnect - without guns in easy reach there's time to cool off. Worst case scenario I guess he might pick up a knife or get in his SUV. He's still not going to kill 26 people.

Did you not read what I posted above? Australia used to have gun massacres, in the 18 years leading up to the Port Arthur massacre (35 killed, 23 wounded) we had 14 gun massacres. Directly after Port Arthur gun control laws were enacted and in the sixteen years since there has been NOT ONE SHOOTING MASSACRE, and no massacre of any kind that compares with any of the ones you guys have every couple of months. You can talk all you like about whether it's the gun's fault or the mother's fault or the mental health system's fault but the fact remains, if you had sensible gun laws most if not all of those children would be tucked up in bed right now.

WHY are you not simply asking yourselves which is more important - innocent lives or having lots of guns? Is it because the conclusion you come to is too difficult to deal with?
 
Jupiter551 said:
if you had sensible gun laws most if not all of those children would be tucked up in bed right now.

WHY are you not simply asking yourselves which is more important - innocent lives or having lots of guns? Is it because the conclusion you come to is too difficult to deal with?

We do have sensible gun laws. What law would you enact that would have stopped today's tragedy?
 
This is all I will post on this, today. It's what I just posted on Google+ after seeing all the politicking going on in my twitter feed. When things have calmed down, if people want to have a rational discussion on pro or anti-gun control topics, then I will oblige. Today is not that day.

UncleThursday said:
The amount of politicking over this tragedy today has been sickening.

Celebrities have been some of the worst offenders. Nearly every tweet I read from the few celebrities I follow was about gun control or retweeting other people calling for gun control.

Could any of you, who are ranting about pro or anti gun control even wait for the bodies to be cold? Could any of you have any respect for the families that just lost loved ones, most of them young children? Families that are now going to be burying their loved ones this holiday season, instead of celebrating it with friends and family?

No, you couldn't.

You just had to get up on your soapbox and let the world know that what you think is right and that you know all the answers that would ensure this never happens again. And you placed your soapbox on the still wet blood of those who died.

If you're religious, then you offer your prayers to the victims and their families that they get through this. If you aren't, then you silently or publicly offer your condolences in what should be a joyful time of year with friends and family; not a time to mourn the loss of young children.

You. Do. Not. Start. Politicking.

I don't care if you want stricter gun control laws or less strict laws pertaining to firearms. I'm pretty sure the last thing on the minds of the families that lost loved ones today is YOUR views on what is right and wrong with the gun laws in the United States. It doesn't mater if you're +Wil Wheaton or +Alyssa Milano or if you're David Keene (president of the +National Rifle Association ) or +Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance members.

Keep your goddamn politics to yourself until things have calmed down and more facts have rolled in. Let the families mourn. Let them bury their dead. Let the authorities piece together as much as possible on why this happened. Then you can discuss your views on gun ownership in America.

To get into politicking practically before the first body hit the floor is ludicrous, shameful and disrespectful.

Offer your condolences and/or prayers. And. Then. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
 
Today was my 30th birthday. Waking up to this news hit me like a ton of bricks. My prayers go out to the families that have suffered today. It really really sucks that this date will forever be linked with such a terrible event. I don't really believe in the death penalty, but In this case I would make an exception. What is this world coming to?
 
Bocefish said:
Nordling said:
No, you're right, guns are not the problem. The problem is . . . the DESIRE to have guns.

I have an idea! Make the government pay for FREE PENILE ENLARGEMENTS! Problem solved!

The mother could have really used some of those I'm sure. :roll:
We have no idea why she bought the guns.
 
UncleThursday said:
This is all I will post on this, today. It's what I just posted on Google+ after seeing all the politicking going on in my twitter feed. When things have calmed down, if people want to have a rational discussion on pro or anti-gun control topics, then I will oblige. Today is not that day.

UncleThursday said:
The amount of politicking over this tragedy today has been sickening.

Celebrities have been some of the worst offenders. Nearly every tweet I read from the few celebrities I follow was about gun control or retweeting other people calling for gun control.

Could any of you, who are ranting about pro or anti gun control even wait for the bodies to be cold? Could any of you have any respect for the families that just lost loved ones, most of them young children? Families that are now going to be burying their loved ones this holiday season, instead of celebrating it with friends and family?

No, you couldn't.

You just had to get up on your soapbox and let the world know that what you think is right and that you know all the answers that would ensure this never happens again. And you placed your soapbox on the still wet blood of those who died.

If you're religious, then you offer your prayers to the victims and their families that they get through this. If you aren't, then you silently or publicly offer your condolences in what should be a joyful time of year with friends and family; not a time to mourn the loss of young children.

You. Do. Not. Start. Politicking.

I don't care if you want stricter gun control laws or less strict laws pertaining to firearms. I'm pretty sure the last thing on the minds of the families that lost loved ones today is YOUR views on what is right and wrong with the gun laws in the United States. It doesn't mater if you're +Wil Wheaton or +Alyssa Milano or if you're David Keene (president of the +National Rifle Association ) or +Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance members.

Keep your goddamn politics to yourself until things have calmed down and more facts have rolled in. Let the families mourn. Let them bury their dead. Let the authorities piece together as much as possible on why this happened. Then you can discuss your views on gun ownership in America.

To get into politicking practically before the first body hit the floor is ludicrous, shameful and disrespectful.

Offer your condolences and/or prayers. And. Then. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
If the discussion on Google+ bothered you, why did you post? Practice what you preach?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IsabellaSnow
Sdog1982 said:
Today was my 30th birthday. Waking up to this news hit me like a ton of bricks. My prayers go out to the families that have suffered today. It really really sucks that this date will forever be linked with such a terrible event. I don't really believe in the death penalty, but In this case I would make an exception. What is this world coming to?

One of the girls in the school turned eleven today. I lost it Again when I heard that. That same girl also asked her mommy if this was her 9/11. I can't even begin to imagine the road ahead for some of these kids and their families. Damn allergies!
 
UncleThursday said:
This is all I will post on this, today. It's what I just posted on Google+ after seeing all the politicking going on in my twitter feed. When things have calmed down, if people want to have a rational discussion on pro or anti-gun control topics, then I will oblige. Today is not that day.

UncleThursday said:
The amount of politicking over this tragedy today has been sickening.

Celebrities have been some of the worst offenders. Nearly every tweet I read from the few celebrities I follow was about gun control or retweeting other people calling for gun control.

Could any of you, who are ranting about pro or anti gun control even wait for the bodies to be cold? Could any of you have any respect for the families that just lost loved ones, most of them young children? Families that are now going to be burying their loved ones this holiday season, instead of celebrating it with friends and family?

No, you couldn't.

You just had to get up on your soapbox and let the world know that what you think is right and that you know all the answers that would ensure this never happens again. And you placed your soapbox on the still wet blood of those who died.

If you're religious, then you offer your prayers to the victims and their families that they get through this. If you aren't, then you silently or publicly offer your condolences in what should be a joyful time of year with friends and family; not a time to mourn the loss of young children.

You. Do. Not. Start. Politicking.

I don't care if you want stricter gun control laws or less strict laws pertaining to firearms. I'm pretty sure the last thing on the minds of the families that lost loved ones today is YOUR views on what is right and wrong with the gun laws in the United States. It doesn't mater if you're +Wil Wheaton or +Alyssa Milano or if you're David Keene (president of the +National Rifle Association ) or +Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance members.

Keep your goddamn politics to yourself until things have calmed down and more facts have rolled in. Let the families mourn. Let them bury their dead. Let the authorities piece together as much as possible on why this happened. Then you can discuss your views on gun ownership in America.

To get into politicking practically before the first body hit the floor is ludicrous, shameful and disrespectful.

Offer your condolences and/or prayers. And. Then. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
Actually, I suspect the question of how this monster got his hands on weapons to do this is quite pertinent on the minds of the bereaved. It has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with the fact that this sick shit happens over and over and over, and nothing ever gets done about it because apparently it's a taboo subject, so it happens again.

I'm really disturbed that you think questioning and trying to understand why such things occur in your country more than twice as much as the other 95% of people in the world COMBINED is a political discussion. Glossing over and ignoring that and continuing with the way things are going and just waiting for the next mass murder to occur - that's the disrespect to the victims, both past AND future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nordling
Jupiter551 said:
No, it takes time to build a bomb. Time he might have been noticed, a bomb that might have been seen, expertise he might not have been capable of and MOST IMPORTANTLY these crimes are almost always committed in the heat of the moment after some traumatic mental or social disconnect - without guns in easy reach there's time to cool off. Worst case scenario I guess he might pick up a knife or get in his SUV. He's still not going to kill 26 people.

Did you not read what I posted above? Australia used to have gun massacres, in the 18 years leading up to the Port Arthur massacre (35 killed, 23 wounded) we had 14 gun massacres. Directly after Port Arthur gun control laws were enacted and in the sixteen years since there has been NOT ONE SHOOTING MASSACRE, and no massacre of any kind that compares with any of the ones you guys have every couple of months. You can talk all you like about whether it's the gun's fault or the mother's fault or the mental health system's fault but the fact remains, if you had sensible gun laws most if not all of those children would be tucked up in bed right now.

WHY are you not simply asking yourselves which is more important - innocent lives or having lots of guns? Is it because the conclusion you come to is too difficult to deal with?

It doesnt matter what worked for Australia. You cant say what works for one country will work for another. Also, you continue to show how ignorant you are of the US, its history, culture, and laws. We have plenty of gun laws on the books. They dont do a bit of good if people dont practice responsible gun ownership. This woman knew she had a mentally unstable person in her home, yet she still allowed him access to firearms. Thats her fault. No gun law ever written would have prevented that. Also, we do not have these sorts of incidents every couple of months. They are actually quite rare. You're exaggerating because you dont know what youre talking about. That line at the end is just completely ridiculous. You cant equate the two. Its not a 1:1 comparison.

Look, I get that you feel strongly about this and that you have some sort of emotional connection to this issue, but its exactly that emotional response that you have thats clouding the issue for you. Youre not seeing the whole problem. You are clearly focusing all your anger and frustration on a piece of technology. I'd say try making a difference by doing something about the real problem, but you're not even a citizen of the US. Youre neither part of the solution or the problem. Youre just background noise. You cant effect change in the gun culture of this country any more than I could in Australia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyLuna
And I might add...

Different people have different ways of dealing with tragedy. Anyone who's ever been to a wake probably has noticed this. Some of it may seem "disrespectful" or even crazy...but really, it's just how different folks react...and it's all valid.
 
JoeEmGee said:
Jupiter551 said:
No, it takes time to build a bomb. Time he might have been noticed, a bomb that might have been seen, expertise he might not have been capable of and MOST IMPORTANTLY these crimes are almost always committed in the heat of the moment after some traumatic mental or social disconnect - without guns in easy reach there's time to cool off. Worst case scenario I guess he might pick up a knife or get in his SUV. He's still not going to kill 26 people.

Did you not read what I posted above? Australia used to have gun massacres, in the 18 years leading up to the Port Arthur massacre (35 killed, 23 wounded) we had 14 gun massacres. Directly after Port Arthur gun control laws were enacted and in the sixteen years since there has been NOT ONE SHOOTING MASSACRE, and no massacre of any kind that compares with any of the ones you guys have every couple of months. You can talk all you like about whether it's the gun's fault or the mother's fault or the mental health system's fault but the fact remains, if you had sensible gun laws most if not all of those children would be tucked up in bed right now.

WHY are you not simply asking yourselves which is more important - innocent lives or having lots of guns? Is it because the conclusion you come to is too difficult to deal with?

It doesnt matter what worked for Australia. You cant say what works for one country will work for another. Also, you continue to show how ignorant you are of the US, its history, culture, and laws. We have plenty of gun laws on the books. They dont do a bit of good if people dont practice responsible gun ownership. This woman knew she had a mentally unstable person in her home, yet she still allowed him access to firearms. Thats her fault. No gun law ever written would have prevented that. Also, we do not have these sorts of incidents every couple of months. They are actually quite rare. You're exaggerating because you dont know what youre talking about. That line at the end is just completely ridiculous. You cant equate the two. Its not a 1:1 comparison.

Look, I get that you feel strongly about this and that you have some sort of emotional connection to this issue, but its exactly that emotional response that you have thats clouding the issue for you. Youre not seeing the whole problem. You are clearly focusing all your anger and frustration on a piece of technology. I'd say try making a difference by doing something about the real problem, but you're not even a citizen of the US. Youre neither part of the solution or the problem. Youre just background noise. You cant effect change in the gun culture of this country any more than I could in Australia.
This is a discussion. I doubt that any of the postings of ANYONE in this thread will alter nor "fix" the problem. But anyone has as much right to their opinion as anyone else, no matter WHERE they come from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyLuna
Airwolfe said:
Nordling said:
My right to own an assault rifle is not worth the possibility of one child to lose his or her life.

Everyone that was murdered today by a crazy evil bastard was killed with a handgun.

Hardly.
Now none of these events warranted a thread on ACF despite double digit death tolls and many attacks killed children also but here is some headlines over the last few weeks we collectively seemed to miss.
"A suicide bomber blew himself near a mourning procession in Dhok Saeydan, Rawalpindi late on Wednesday night, killing 13, and injuring at least 27 people – including children"
"Two separate car bombings near Damascus on Thursday (December 13th) killed at least 22 people, including women and children, AFP reported. "
"Two suicide bombers detonated their explosives-packed vehicles near a cluster of commercial buildings in a suburb of Damascus on Wednesday, killing at least 34 people and covering the street with pools of blood and debris."
"At least 11 people were killed and about 30 injured when twin car bombs hit a Protestant church in a major military establishment in northcentral Nigeria, officials said Sunday, a month after a deadly church bombing in the same state."
"Rescue official says suicide bomber kills 23 people near Pakistan’s capital"


Gee not a gun involved in these senseless acts of violence, but plenty of cars, explosives and vests. Come to think of it most improvised explosive devices, use a cell phone as triggering device maybe we should restrict access of cell phones to adults who pass background checks. McVeigh and Nichols killed 168 people with their bomb that is a years worth of high profile mass murders using guns.

What we really need to do is to figure out how to identify mental ill people with the potential for violence and figure out how to keep dangerous stuff, especially guns but also explosives, fertilizer and trucks out of their hands.

We have a 2nd amendment and some very clear SCOTUS decision that say the right to own guns just like, freedom of speech, or religion is not something the government can take away. If we want to change that then we need to repeal or modify the 2nd amendment anything else is a waste of time.
 
Jupiter551 said:
Actually, I suspect the question of how this monster got his hands on weapons to do this is quite pertinent on the minds of the bereaved. It has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with the fact that this sick shit happens over and over and over, and nothing ever gets done about it because apparently it's a taboo subject, so it happens again.

This monster, it appears, may have had a long standing problem with some form of mental illness. Is everyone who suffers from a mental illness a monster?

Jupiter551 said:
I'm really disturbed that you think questioning and trying to understand why such things occur in your country more than twice as much as the other 95% of people in the world COMBINED is a political discussion. Glossing over and ignoring that and continuing with the way things are going and just waiting for the next mass murder to occur - that's the disrespect to the victims, both past AND future.

There was no questioning in what I read today. It was all 'my views on gun control (for or against) are right and I'm going to shout it at the top of my lungs!'

Even in this thread, the very first reply mentioned gun control. Any time anything happens with a firearm, the very first words out of many people's mouths is 'gun control!' No real discussion on what that means, or how to enact safe and legal ownership of guns as protected by the Constitution, without labeling anyone who owns a firearm as a potential murderer and psychopath waiting to be let loose upon the world.

CT has the 4th or 5th most restrictive gun laws in the nation, and this happened.

Most of the gun control preachers won't be satisfied until it is illegal to own a firearm. Then there's the opposite side of the coin, where some of the most outspoken 2nd Amendment lovers practically want it to be legal to have tanks and mortars at their beck and call.

Is there a middle ground? Millions of Americans, and Canadians, own firearms and never use them to harm another person. In fact, most of the gun violence that happens takes place with illegally gotten firearms. Do the gun control preachers think the criminals will give up their guns? Even Great Britain, with its restrictive ban on firearms, has gun violence. Not as much as the US, but the ban hasn't stopped criminals from obtaining guns.

The old saying holds true, in that respect... If guns are illegal, then only criminals will have guns. With the exception of the military and police, that's very true in the UK: Only criminals have guns.

The answer isn't 'ban all guns!' or 'put automated machine guns everywhere!' But that's essentially what the back and forth turns into. Not a discussion on realistic ways to prevent these sorts of things from happening, but a single minded 'my opinion is all that matters! the rest of you are wrong!'
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyLuna
HiGirlsRHot said:
Gee not a gun involved in these senseless acts of violence, but plenty of cars, explosives and vests. Come to think of it most improvised explosive devices, use a cell phone as triggering device maybe we should restrict access of cell phones to adults who pass background checks. McVeigh and Nichols killed 168 people with their bomb that is a years worth of high profile mass murders using guns.
.

And Australia has significant controls on the purchase of both mobile phones and large amounts of fertilizer. Look, no car bombs or suicide bombers either.

Make up al the excuses you want. Prevention is the key element, so better metal health screening, better gun controls, and control of components used in IEDs means you will have less deaths.

We require all firearms to be locked in gun cases attached to the structure of the house. If the mother had left the guns in the safe or paid any attention to how fucking nuts her son was, this would not have happened.
 
tumblr_mf1o5g5goA1rntkqgo1_1280.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyLuna
Status
Not open for further replies.