# So how do we stop the mass shootings?



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Should we even attempt it?

Should we accept that the price of freedom is the occasional slaughter of kindergarteners by madmen? 

Or do we need to do something about it?

If so, what?

This one's kinda got me stumped. Let's hear your ideas.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Outlaw mass gatherings... No more than three people to a 100 foot space..


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

As far as mass shootings in schools go, I really believe the idea of arming willing school staff and teachers with training and firearms has great merit. 

An alternative would be to place a LEO in every school. Pay him with the money saved by removing the school breakfast programs and discontinuing the sex education and social enginnering & diversity appreciation curriculums.

And, for other public places, make it illegal to prohibit concealed carry - or open carry, for that matter - by law abiding individuals.


----------



## steff bugielski (Nov 10, 2003)

It is a horrible thing for children to have this as their reality.
Not sure what *can* be done but certain that if we do nothing it will continue.
An interesting comparison here
http://politicalviolenceataglance.o...inequalitys-strange-relationship-to-violence/
A strange pattern recently caught our eye. Numerous studies about murder rates have found that on average countries with high income inequality also have high murder rates. People are more likely to kill their fellow citizens as the gap between rich and poor increases.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

Privatize schools and arm teachers (or homeschool).


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

If banning guns is the solution, we should start with the Secret Service.:heh: Lead by example, as the military teaches.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

steff bugielski said:


> It is a horrible thing for children to have this as their reality.


When I was a kid we had duck and cover drills... They were to practice for when Russia sent their missiles our way... 

There was more reality in that happening, than there is in a kid having a shooter in his or her school.... 

Reality bites... times change, but the world is still an ugly place no matter what the threat... 

I'd say the kids are better off today than we used to be.... unless you want to start talking about all the rights they will have lost by the time they are adults... .


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

simi-steading said:


> Outlaw mass gatherings... No more than three people to a 100 foot space..


The BLM here in Kalifornia requires a permit for a gathering of 3 or more. They call it an "event".


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

My high school had a shooting range in the basement!


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

Reality is bad things are going to happen regardless of how much we try to legislate good, let all who want armed be armed. An armed society is a polite society.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Do you mean in Norway or at US Army bases, Switzerland?

Where specifically?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Count them. We all agree, one is too many. I say there is less agreement on how to stop them.

A gunman at a Connecticut elementary school killed more than two dozen people, including children, on Friday. It is among the world's worst mass shootings. Here is a look at some others:
â July 20, 2012: Twelve people are killed when a gunman enters an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, releases a canister of gas and then opens fire during opening night of the Batman movie "The Dark Knight Rises." James Holmes, a 24-year-old former graduate student at the University of Colorado, has been charged in the deaths.
â March 11, 2012: Sixteen Afghan villagers, including nine children, are killed during a predawn attack in which Army prosecutors have charged Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, 39.
â July 22, 2011: Confessed mass killer Anders Behring Breivik kills 77 in Norway in twin attacks: a bombing in downtown Oslo and a shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the capital. The self-styled anti-Muslim militant admitted both attacks.
â Jan. 8, 2011: A gunman kills six people and wounds 13 others, including then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, in a shooting spree outside a grocery store in Tucson, Ariz. Doctors say Jared Lee Loughner, who has been sentenced to life in prison, suffers from schizophrenia.
â Aug. 3, 2010: Omar Thornton shot 10 people, eight of them fatally, within three minutes at the Hartford Distributors warehouse in Manchester, Conn., before killing himself in what was the worst mass shooting in Connecticut before Friday's school shootings in Newtown.
â Nov. 5, 2009: Thirteen soldiers and civilians were killed and more than two dozen wounded when a gunman walked into the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Texas, and opened fire. Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
â April 3, 2009: A 41-year-old man opened fire at an immigrant community center in Binghamton, N.Y., killing 11 immigrants and two workers. Jiverly Wong, a Vietnamese immigrant and a former student at the center, killed himself as police rushed to the scene.
â April 16, 2007: Seung-Hui Cho, 23, kills 32 people and himself on Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg, Va.
â Sept. 27, 2001: A 57-year-old Swiss man armed with weapons including a SIG-Sauer pistol and an assault rifle killed 14 people in a cantonal parliament building in the Swiss city of Zug. Friedrich Leibacher killed himself following the shootings, which also wounded 18 others. Leibacher had been angry over perceived mistreatment by government officials.
â April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before killing themselves in the school's library.
â April 28, 1996: Martin Bryant, 29, bursts into cafeteria in seaside resort of Port Arthur in Tasmania, Australia, shooting 20 people to death. Driving away, he kills 15 others. He was captured and imprisoned.
â March 13, 1996: Thomas Hamilton, 43, kills 16 kindergarten children and their teacher in elementary school in Dunblane, Scotland, and then kills himself.
â Oct. 16, 1991: A deadly shooting rampage took place in Killeen, Texas, as George Hennard opened fire at a Luby's Cafeteria, killing 23 people before taking his own life. Twenty others were wounded in the attack.
â July 18, 1984: James Oliver Huberty, an out-of-work security guard, kills 21 people in a McDonald's restaurant in San Ysidro, Calif. A police sharpshooter kills Huberty.
â Aug. 1, 1966: Charles Whitman opened fire from the clock tower at the University of Texas at Austin, killing 16 people and wounding 31.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

The way I average that list, we're not doing so bad.. that's less than one a year...

How many people are killed a year on purpose by people using a car as a weapon?

Bet they didn't do a background check on this lady before she bought her car.. 
http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-woman-drives-crowd-injuring-dozens-174606893.html

Maybe we need to outlaw old people who can drive into crowds since we're too dumb to outlaw the real problem.. cars...


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

How about teaching social and personal responsibility to our children? How about teaching them consequences follow all actions? How about teaching them how to deal with disappointments in life without falling apart? What about teaching them morals and values, right and wrong? Or maybe that the sun does not revolve around them and that other people have just as many rights as they do? 

It might take awhile but the problems with our society did not evolve overnight nor will they be repaired in a single generation. Adding rules and laws is not the answer to a civil society, adding responsibility and morals is.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

nostawmama said:


> How about teaching social and personal responsibility to our children? How about teaching them consequences follow all actions? How about teaching them how to deal with disappointments in life without falling apart? What about teaching them morals and values, right and wrong? Or maybe that the sun does not revolve around them and that other people have just as many rights as they do?
> 
> It might take awhile but the problems with our society did not evolve overnight nor will they be repaired in a single generation. Adding rules and laws is not the answer to a civil society, adding responsibility and morals is.


How about starting each school day, and every day with a prayer.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Frankly we have spent decades making heros of sorts of foul minded individuals. Instead of portaying murderers as sleazy good-for-nothings, we have spent hours on talk shows and media "investigatations" on giving attention to pathetic failures.
On the other hand, we have made fun of productive people who work hard and take care of their families- it is seriously not cool to be normally decent. 
We have also spent way too much time pandering to children- from taking them everywhere to their events to portraying parents who expect their children to work at home as denying them a "childhood." We seem to think that children should not be dragged kicking ans screaming to school when they don't like it and jump to the conclusion that every child is special and should get what they want.
This results in permanent semi-adults who do not know in their gut what is right and what is wrong, who truly feed abused by not being given what they want when they want it. 
Not everyone is born with empathy enough to keep them from using people like kleenex.
At my advanced age, I still hear my mother's voice in the back of my head saying "that's wrong- don't ." It is not all warm and fuzzy but it kept me out of trouble till my own brain grew up and could make those choices on their own.
So children should be made aware of the sacrifices their parent's make and should be raised to expect that their behavior will have consequences. Instead of Dr. Phil moments of crying 20 year toddler tantrums, children need to be raised more resilient to be able to avoid evil simply because they have be brainwashed since infancy that they are not as important at todays kids seem to think themselves. That work is hard and that is why it is called work. 
So don't play mindless video games where death is dealt out with impunity, don't go to movies where it is impossible to tell who is the good guy and who is the bad. Express admiration for those who do raise decent children to your children.
And never hesitate to make evil behavior the source of loud and vigorus scorn. Make it clear that the idiot in a bullet proof vest shooting unarmed people is ungly, useless and pathetic- if you can find anything laughable about people who express interest in such behavior, laugh at them to their face. Make it cool to be a Dudley Dooright rather than 
the Joker. Do not be pursuaded by the apologists for violence that drug addiction or mental illness makes a person not responsible and nothing should be said. If it makes someone who has a mental problem feel worse about this behavior, then good- maybe they will hesitate in acting it out.


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

HDRider said:


> How about starting each school day, and every day with a prayer.


How about parents take responsibility for their children and start each day with prayer at home. Morals and responsibility do not have to come from religion, although I feel it a good teacher it is not the only teacher. But it is not the responsibility of schools and government to teach us morals, values, and responsibility. This is what is happening now and see how it is turning out? Schools might reinforce some of these concepts but they should not be the primary teachers of it.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

HDRider said:


> How about starting each school day, and every day with a prayer.



mmmm... no... that's forcing a belief of religion on people who may be present who don't believe in religion.. 

A quiet respectful moment to reflect would be acceptable though..


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

The media bags on these shootings 24 hours a day for weeks, the shooter's name becomes a household word.
Nuts like the idea of being famous and going out in a hail of bullets, it makes them feel manly.
The media gives them the stage they crave, and the infamy they don't deserve.
They are the same as terrorists, they need to be noticed in a big way


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

nostawmama said:


> How about teaching social and personal responsibility to our children? How about teaching them consequences follow all actions? How about teaching them how to deal with disappointments in life without falling apart? What about teaching them morals and values, right and wrong? Or maybe that the sun does not revolve around them and that other people have just as many rights as they do?


This would absolutely be a step in the right direction!!!!!!

Keep in mind that over 32,000 people die in motor vehicle crashes every year, many of them children. Yet surprisingly enough, nobody is shouting "Let's ban cars and go back to walking everywhere! Our children will be sooooo much safer if we don't strap them into those death traps!"

Yes, even one mass shooting is too many. I think allowing teachers/staff who take an approved course to carry a gun at school is a solution that should be looked into. I think that people target areas where they know they will not find armed resistance to go on their rampages, so if we reduce the number of easy targets that will help.

I think we need to address the way we treat the mentally ill in this country, as many of these mass shooters had mental health conditions that IMO as a trained counselor were not being adequately addressed.

I do NOT think that banning guns is the answer for anything, and quite honestly we would save WAY more lives banning vehicles than we ever would by banning guns.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

nostawmama said:


> How about parents take responsibility for their children and start each day with prayer at home. Morals and responsibility do not have to come from religion, although I feel it a good teacher it is not the only teacher. But it is not the responsibility of schools and government to teach us morals, values, and responsibility. This is what is happening now and see how it is turning out? Schools might reinforce some of these concepts but they should not be the primary teachers of it.


Where did I say any where about schools or goverment leading or requiring the prayer. Your hypersensitive reaction speaks volumes?


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

bluemoonluck said:


> This would absolutely be a step in the right direction!!!!!!
> 
> Keep in mind that over 32,000 people die in motor vehicle crashes every year, many of them children. Yet surprisingly enough, nobody is shouting "Let's ban cars and go back to walking everywhere!


I'll one up you... Alcohol.. 

_Teen alcohol use kills about 6000 people each year, more than all illegal drugs combined._

So why don't we do background checks every time someone walks in to buy a bottle of liquor or 6 pack of beer?

(http://www.madd.org/statistics/)


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Re open all of the massive state mental hospitals that were shut down under Reagan. This coincides exactly with a massive spike in drug abuse, homeless, and these types of violent crimes commited by all those mental patients who were integrated back into society. Their families won't ake care of them because they are a danger and emotional and financial suicide to their caretakers.

They let all the whackos on the streets and replaced all the mental hospitals with privately run out patient drug rehabs - what does that alone tell you? I don't know why people cannot see the issue here.


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

HDRider said:


> Where did I say any where about schools or goverment leading or requiring the prayer. Your hypersensitive reaction speaks volumes?


I will concede that I misread. I read: How about starting each and every school day with prayer.
I assumed you meant the school would start the day with prayer.

However it does not change the fact that religion is the not sole teacher of morals and values. I will stand by my post as it is. 

And yes I am hypersensitive. I believe that parents have done a huge disservice to our children by relying on the government schools to be the only education they receive.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

nostawmama said:


> I will concede that I misread. I read: How about starting each and every school day with prayer.
> I assumed you meant the school would start the day with prayer.
> 
> However it does not change the fact that religion is the not sole teacher of morals and values. I will stand by my post as it is.
> ...


You added a not in there. I just get tired of atheists and agnostics being so holier than thou.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

nostawmama said:


> How about teaching social and personal responsibility to our children? How about teaching them consequences follow all actions? How about teaching them how to deal with disappointments in life without falling apart? What about teaching them morals and values, right and wrong? Or maybe that the sun does not revolve around them and that other people have just as many rights as they do? ...


How about instead of background checks and training as a prerequisite for a firearms purchase, how about background checks and training prior to giving birth to a child? Only allow parents who can do what you've recommended above have children. Their isn't enough parents - REAL PARENTS - in this country.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

I don't think the Fed would go for that, CF. 

They've spent the last 50 years seeing to the realization of the problem you reference.


ETA.....

As for the OP, just ask Hitler. He handled the problem fairly succinctly. 

Take everybody's weapons and then you can help yourself to mass killings innumerable.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Taking a wrong OT turn here- this is too important to get into a personal side discussion.


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

HDRider said:


> You added a not in there. I just get tired of atheists and agnostics be so holier than thou.


I am just a touch confused at what you believe my position to be and what your position is.

To clarify for the sake of my sanity:

I believe in God and prayer. I believe that they are good teachers of morals and values- the best I have found. 

I do NOT believe that religion is the only way to teach morals and values. I do not need the Bible to teach my children honesty, responsibility, and work ethic.

I do NOT feel the need for anyone that is not me to subscribe to a religion.

I do feel that everyone should subscribe to moral behavior and values.

To make sure that I am answering the OPs question to the best of my ability: I think that the best way to stop the mass shootings is to instill morals and values, whether from religious teachings or not, into the people that will be inheriting this society.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I'm not going to debate religion... It's all personal preference.. but lemme just say, some of the most immoral and hypocritical people I've ever met proclaimed loudly to be devout Christians... Just like the guy last night in a church van that cut me off and almost hit me because he must have felt he was more important and had to get to where ever he needed to be.. 

Some of the best people I've ever met in my life didn't have a religious bone in their body... 

Some of the even better people I've know were religious as all get out... but you would never know it, because they didn't feel the need to share that fact or their beliefs with anyone...

Just sayin'.....


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

HDRider said:


> How about starting each school day, and every day with a prayer.


Sorry, but to which God?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> Sorry, but to which God?


I will leave that to you.

People are reading what I ain't writing.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

HDRider said:


> I will leave that to you.
> 
> People are reading what I ain't writing.


Or perhaps you are not writing what you meant since more than one person has jumped on it.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> Or perhaps you are not writing what you meant since more than one person has jumped on it.


I have meant every single word I wrote exactly the way I wrote it.

You and others read things into what I wrote, and that was no accident.


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

So far the schools have been gun free zones. Cowards love people that cant fight back.
I believe CF 's ideas would pretty well put a stop to that. I also believe the anti -gun people just don't get it. Its about unarmed potential victims. 

One question I have for the anti -gun folks is, how are you going to disarm the criminals?
How are you going to make sure they cant obtain weapons?

------------------------------------------------



> As far as mass shootings in schools go, I really believe the idea of arming willing school staff and teachers with training and firearms has great merit.
> 
> An alternative would be to place a LEO in every school. Pay him with the money saved by removing the school breakfast programs and discontinuing the sex education and social enginnering & diversity appreciation curriculums.
> 
> ...


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

Let retired veterans come in as armed security at our schools. A lot of them would love to be of service especially to our children. I know a lot of them would volunteer and be happy we asked, however I do think we should pay them. Let them do what they are trained to do....protect and serve.


----------



## dkhern (Nov 30, 2012)

with respect to the op im not in favor of forcing school employees to be armed. i have no problem if the employee wants to be armed and receives training. i dont like the idea of a teacher carring on themselves. (i had several teachers in hs i could have disarmed) i would like for there to be a drawer or wall safe in every room w/push button locks. it should be unknown which rooms contained guns. 
we need to evulate each school for safety. we do for fires. furniture is virtually unburnable. walls ceiling floor non combustable. sprinklers, extinguishers, alarms, perodic drills. we need to assess security, risk, play ground security it is apparent to me that this has to be done on a one by one basis because one size will not fit all.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Cabin Fever said:


> As far as mass shootings in schools go, I really believe the idea of arming willing school staff and teachers with training and firearms has great merit.
> 
> An alternative would be to place a LEO in every school. Pay him with the money saved by removing the school breakfast programs and discontinuing the sex education and social enginnering & diversity appreciation curriculums.
> 
> And, for other public places, make it illegal to prohibit concealed carry - or open carry, for that matter - by law abiding individuals.


IMO, these are, hands down, the most realistic solutions that have any chance of preventing gun violence deaths.

**************

Folks need to understand......not only is the administration pushing to restrict 2nd amendment rights, they're now going to start using healthcare against us under the guise of preventing gun violence. NOW it makes sense why doctors are asking people if they own guns. 

Rush was right; control healthcare and you can control every aspect of peoples' lives.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

IIRC and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the _first_ instance of a shooting in an elementary school???? 
Yes, high schools, colleges (Kent State included), employers but never before an elementary school? How do you predict this kind of thing could happen? The only way to have prevented it would have been for Lanza's mother to have shot him first in self defense. (provided the conspiracy theories are wrong and he was the only shooter)
The big question is _Why did this happen????_ Unless we can find that answer (which died with Lanza) we will never know how to prevent another similar situation.

But one possible deterrent would be to put steel doors at each and every school entrance.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Lanza's mother was apparently well-armed and skilled at using guns. The fact that she is dead shows us how well she was able to protect herself against a shooter...


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

You can never prevent all shootings .But the ones that commit murder and don't shoot their self should be hung on the court square at noon. Don't tell me this won't make others think about being a criminal . Fire up that old electric chair again some folks are afraid of electric already .


----------



## Roadking (Oct 8, 2009)

willow_girl said:


> Should we even attempt it?
> 
> Should we accept that the price of freedom is the occasional slaughter of kindergarteners by madmen?
> 
> ...


 
Easy, be able to shoot back. PERIOD!

Matt


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

willow_girl said:


> Should we even attempt it?
> 
> You can minimize them only.
> 
> ...


I wish we knew an answer.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Re open all of the massive state mental hospitals that were shut down under Reagan. This coincides exactly with a massive spike in drug abuse, homeless, and these types of violent crimes commited by all those mental patients who were integrated back into society. Their families won't ake care of them because they are a danger and emotional and financial suicide to their caretakers.
> 
> They let all the whackos on the streets and replaced all the mental hospitals with privately run out patient drug rehabs - what does that alone tell you? I don't know why people cannot see the issue here.


I tend to agree with this assessment. 

In order for a crime to take place, there must be intent and opportunity. Removing guns from thousands or millions of citizens with no intent of wrongdoing isn't a very effective way to prevent the misdeeds of the few. Better to try to identify the few and eliminate their opportunity ...

Besides, guns aren't the only vehicle for mayhem. Small consolation if a gun ban forces the next whacko to use a bomb instead ...

One thing of which I'm pretty certain is that a blanket solution isn't realistic. Rather, decisions should be made as close to the local level as possible. One community might have a pool of responsible armed volunteers willing and able to provide public protection... another might not. 



> IIRC and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the _first_ instance of a shooting in an elementary school????


Off the top of my head, I believe the Amish school shooting a few years ago involved some elementary-aged victims.


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

HDRider said:


> I just get tired of atheists and agnostics being so holier than thou.


And how do we do that?

While you are all about your second amendment rights, some of us believe just as strongly in the separation of church and state.

Somehow, I think that atheists and agnostics being "holier than thou" might be a bit of an oxymoron. Don't you? lol


----------



## FarmboyBill (Aug 19, 2005)

The next attack might not be in a school, BUT on a bus fulla kids. Think how vulnurable they are.

I went to watch the Gangster Squid. A shootist would have had a ball in there when the gun battles started


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Face it, the only thing that will stop a loon with a gun is ....
A. Another law.
B. A Gun free zone.
C. Occupy Wallstreet folks singing Kumbaya.
D. A good guy with a.... wait for it... A gun.

Believe D is the only answer. When a gun hater gets in trouble with an evildoer, they call 911, hoping (praying) some good guy with a gun shows up.

Allow teachers, administrators, heck, even the janitors, to carry concealed, or even open, and the problem will go away. There will still be shootings, but only one or so will be wounded or killed, before they're themselves shot.

Paper (laws, writs, restraining orders) always get trumped by hot lead.

Don't believe it? When seconds count, 911 is (if your lucky) minutes away. Want to get robbed, beaten, raped or killed? Or your wife, or children? Or, would you rather do the 'right' thing, and dispatch the human garbage that want's to deny you life and liberty?


----------



## whodunit (Mar 29, 2004)

Our schools absolutely require ALL visitors to check in at the office when they arrive on campus.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Zilli said:


> And how do we do that?
> 
> While you are all about your second amendment rights, some of us believe just as strongly in the separation of church and state.
> 
> Somehow, I think that atheists and agnostics being "holier than thou" might be a bit of an oxymoron. Don't you? lol


Nowhere did I imply commingling of church and state. You read that in there because of your perspective. That perspective is exactly what I meant when I said holier than thou. And, by holier than thou by an atheist, every time someone exhibits Christian faith they come out of the woodwork to say how we are forcing it on them. You make your choice, say what you want and I will do the same, and what I say is effected by faith in God. 

Let me have my beliefs and I will let you not have yours.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

whodunit said:


> Our schools absolutely require ALL visitors to check in at the office when they arrive on campus.


 
So did Newtown and he just shot out the front door


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Sawmill Jim said:


> You can never prevent all shootings .But the ones that commit murder and don't shoot their self should be hung on the court square at noon. Don't tell me this won't make others think about being a criminal . Fire up that old electric chair again some folks are afraid of electric already .


I think capital punishment would be a good detterent. Not the secretly held injections but public hangings or stoning. Have the schools take field trips (in middle school or so) to the punishments to show them what happens. If parents don't want to teach their children consequences the government can. 

I once attended a "scared straight" program and we had to "pull the plug" on a drunk driver (really was already a corpse) It's the same concept you drink and drive you could end up dead, you commit murder you could end up dead. Except this would be a real thing and not a made up corpse.

Maryland is trying to get rid of their death penalty (it has been put on hold for quite a few years)
http://www.daggerpress.com/2013/01/...hat-a-capital-punishment-remedy-is-necessary/


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

Haven said:


> Lanza's mother was apparently well-armed and skilled at using guns. The fact that she is dead shows us how well she was able to protect herself against a shooter...


Protect herself from a shooter? He bashed her head in when she was sleeping. If he shot her at all, it was alter, after she had died from blunt force trauma to the head.

I simply don't know how "protect herself from a shooter" fits in in this case.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

My point was that she had a house full of guns and still died. A shooter can kill 20 people before 1 armed guard has time to get to him and react. Half of these people are on a suicide mission, which makes them even more unstoppable.

Armed guards in schools are worthless. Shooters will just rain down bullets at football games, or on the bus, at soccer practice, or outside on the playground.

People that sick should simply not be allowed on the street to begin with.

Lets think realistically.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Haven said:


> My point was that she had a house full of guns and still died. A shooter can kill 20 people before 1 armed guard has time to get to him and react. Half of these people are on a suicide mission, which makes them even more unstoppable.
> 
> Armed guards in schools are worthless. Shooters will just rain down bullets at football games, or on the bus, at soccer practice, or outside on the playground.
> 
> ...


More reasons for capital punishments. If we eliminate the defunct genes in the gene pool there would be less defunct people.

Survival of the fittest. We need to let evolution take charge again and stop "protecting" people against themselves.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

HDRider said:


> Count them. We all agree, one is too many. I say there is less agreement on how to stop them.
> 
> A gunman at a Connecticut elementary school killed more than two dozen people, including children, on Friday. It is among the world's worst mass shootings. Here is a look at some others:
> â July 20, 2012: Twelve people are killed when a gunman enters an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, releases a canister of gas and then opens fire during opening night of the Batman movie "The Dark Knight Rises." James Holmes, a 24-year-old former graduate student at the University of Colorado, has been charged in the deaths.
> ...


Let's not forget the shooting and tragedy at the Amish school:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_school_shooting


----------



## SteveD(TX) (May 14, 2002)

Haven said:


> My point was that she had a house full of guns and still died. A shooter can kill 20 people before 1 armed guard has time to get to him and react. Half of these people are on a suicide mission, which makes them even more unstoppable.
> 
> Armed guards in schools are worthless. Shooters will just rain down bullets at football games, or on the bus, at soccer practice, or outside on the playground.
> 
> ...



I'm afraid that YOU are the one who isn't thinking realistically. Armed guards at schools is just one step. They are a deterrent and potentially a solution in some instances. But armed guards need to be supplemented by closed circuit surveillance systems, strict control of exactly who gets in, and perhaps even arming willing highly trained teachers and admins as well. Couple this with a common sense program for the mentally ill. To say armed guards are "worthless" is crazy. They are a vital piece of the puzzle, but yet only one piece.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

HDRider said:


> Count them. We all agree, one is too many. I say there is less agreement on how to stop them.
> 
> A gunman at a Connecticut elementary school killed more than two dozen people, including children, on Friday. It is among the world's worst mass shootings. Here is a look at some others:
> â July 20, 2012: Twelve people are killed when a gunman enters an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, releases a canister of gas and then opens fire during opening night of the Batman movie "The Dark Knight Rises." James Holmes, a 24-year-old former graduate student at the University of Colorado, has been charged in the deaths.
> ...


You know, if you study the dates on these mass murders, you'll notice how many have happened in recent history.

It would be interesting to graph the introduction of violent video games (and their sales) against the wave of these crimes.

I believe that the greatest training ground in the history of the world is video games. They teach a person what gun to use, how to use it, that the weapon can achieve a goal, that you need to be mindful of your rounds left in a clip, and how to be deadly accurate.

The problem is that high capacity, fast firing weapons and 10,000 rounds of ammo are available to anyone possessing a credit card or a pile of cash, and you don't have to be mentally stable to buy either. 

We definitely have a problem in our society with violent video games, mental illness, high capacity clips, and easy access to high power weapons to anyone who wants one.

I would feel wildly different if these crimes were attempted with grandpa's 3 shot Mossberg.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

clovis said:


> You know, if you study the dates on these mass murders, you'll notice how many have happened in recent history.
> 
> It would be interesting to graph the introduction of violent video games (and their sales) against the wave of these crimes.
> 
> ...


HUH???? 

That's like saying The Three Stooges caused a massive eye poking epidemic. 

Bad parenting, yes. Lack of punishment, yes but video games? are you serious?


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

Haven said:


> Armed guards in schools are worthless. Shooters will just rain down bullets at football games, or on the bus, at soccer practice, or outside on the playground.
> 
> 
> Lets think realistically.


I agree with you on these points.

At our local high school, it is so big that a single armed guard might help in a mass shooting...but what if the shooter stalks and kills the armed guard first?

How many armed guards do we need per school? 2? 10? 25? How about we hire an army, outfit them in the latest military gear, and set up West Point style defensive perimeters around the school with Claymore mines, barbed wire and 50 cals, mounted on tanks.

This argument of armed guards by the NRA is just plain stupid.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

blooba said:


> HUH????
> 
> That's like saying The Three Stooges caused a massive eye poking epidemic.
> 
> Bad parenting, yes. Lack of punishment, yes but video games? are you serious?


Yes. 

Have you ever played any of them? 

How on earth could you think that I am wrong?


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

blooba said:


> HUH????
> 
> That's like saying The Three Stooges caused a massive eye poking epidemic.
> 
> Bad parenting, yes. Lack of punishment, yes but video games? are you serious?


I am not talking about games like Sports Resort for Wii, or Barbie Princess on horseback.

Walk into any high school, and ask any male teenager about _Call of Duty, WWII_, and they can tell you how many rounds an M1 clip holds, and how many rounds the German weapons hold, when to use a grenade....

And this isn't teaching our kids about how to be powerful with guns???


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Face it, the only thing that will stop a loon with a gun is ....
> A. Another law.
> B. A Gun free zone.
> C. Occupy Wallstreet folks singing Kumbaya.
> D. A good guy with a.... wait for it... A gun.


It may be more expedient to keep the loon from getting a weapon in the first place.



> It would be interesting to graph the introduction of violent video games (and their sales) against the wave of these crimes.


On the flip side, I think it's possible that video games absorb some excess aggression that might otherwise be exhibited in real life. No?


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

clovis said:


> I am not talking about games like Sports Resort for Wii, or Barbie Princess on horseback.
> 
> Walk into any high school, and ask any male teenager about _Call of Duty, WWII_, and they can tell you how many rounds an M1 clip holds, and how many rounds the German weapons hold, when to use a grenade....
> 
> And this isn't teaching our kids about how to be powerful with guns???


Yes, i like playing these games, and I know a properly placed RPG round can take out a stryker although if you hit it broadside it will absorb the impact.

That doesn't mean I'm gonna go around shooting at the Military. They shoot back!!!!!....lol (maybe if we armed normal people these guys would have the logic to think of the same)

Consequences are what deters these things. Placing someone on prozac and letting them live in a plush mental facility for the rest of their lives is not a punishment.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> It may be more expedient to keep the loon from getting a weapon in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> On the flip side, I think it's possible that video games absorb some excess aggression that might otherwise be exhibited in real life. No?


And is there any evidence that either ideas hold water? Over 40 years ago I was shown a room that was floor to ceiling guns- all four walls, every cubic inch. The owner was not to all outward appearances a "gun nut." 
If you could keep every single American (or immigrant or terrorist) from getting a new gun, I bet we could still have more than a gun for every man, woman and child in the US. For deccades.
Then I imagine that guns would still find their way into the country from outside.
It is the attitude towards using guns that need to change and scaring the populace with more control has the opposite effect. They more desperately want guns to protect them from the dangers of intrustive government.

And about taking out aggression with video games- any evidence at all that there is even a chance that could be true? It is much more likely that routine involvement in fantasy violence provides a false sense of invuneralbility and control in people who have difficulty dealing with reality anyway.

The idea of removing guns from the hands of the mentally ill while providing treatment for their ills is such a warm and fuzzy feeling for liberals. Saying this makes them feel superior so that when another mass killing happens, they can shake their heads over the foolishness of others who won't take their advice. However it has no possiblity of working- there is no mystical therapy that can catch mentally ill people before they do damage, can overcome resistance to treatment and be affordable.

A whole lot less grand but more effective actions could be done but will not because it offends the liberal's ideals while the constant emphasis on removing guns will frighten the other side into more extreme positions.


----------



## bjba (Feb 18, 2003)

The human race has been trying to stop murder since ugh slew ooga with a fallen tree branch. No laws, bans, hand wringing, whining or crying has stopped or even slowed murder down. What are the human actions most exploited by all forms of entertainment? Easy answers, sex and violence. Go to the movies what do you see death and destruction glorified and glamorized (is that a word?) followed closely by sex. TV the same thing, seems to me every program revolves around crime in some form or other and the more violent the more popular. Why would anyone think games (which are after all entertainment) would follow any other formula. 
What will have to happen is human nature must change, good luck with that.
I wonder if there is an answer.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> It may be more expedient to keep the loon from getting a weapon in the first place.


If only you could identify the loon, and keep him from getting the gun without impeding the rights of the rest of us, you'd be on to something.

Unfortunately, every plan seems to center on taking guns from all of us. Do you see it somehow different?


----------



## SteveD(TX) (May 14, 2002)

Home Harvest said:


> If only you could identify the loon, and keep him from getting the gun without impeding the rights of the rest of us, you'd be on to something.
> 
> Unfortunately, every plan seems to center on taking guns from all of us. Do you see it somehow different?


BINGO.

The shooter in Newtown got his mother's guns. She was apparently law abiding, and quite possibly her natural love for her son clouded her judgment about keeping guns around.

Maybe the state should have taken her guns??


----------



## Amadioranch (Jun 18, 2011)

The simple answer is that no one will stop gun violence or any sort of violence. To even use use such a absolute term in connection with anything to do with humans suggests childish thinking. Violence has been and will always be part of the human experience. Tragedy can not be solved ever. Common sense dictates that we could see a slight reduction by locking up the insane as we used to and raising better more moral children. But thats it, you arent ever going to stop it. There is no solution, grow up America.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

SteveD(TX) said:


> BINGO.
> 
> The shooter in Newtown got his mother's guns. She was apparently law abiding, and quite possibly her natural love for her son clouded her judgment about keeping guns around.
> 
> Maybe the state should have taken her guns??


Unfortunately, that's their plan. Enhanced background checks will look at other members of the household. She might not be entitled to purchase a gun under the new rules. 

And that's only IF they don't outlaw the guns completely, which seems to be their preference.

No infringement of my rights there, now are there?

How to stop potential school shootings? Not by taking guns from law abiding citizens! That much I can assure you. Millions of us who legally own guns will never use them to kill school children, yet Obama doesn't trust us. Hmm!


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Amadioranch said:


> The simple answer is that no one will stop gun violence or any sort of violence. To even use use such a absolute term in connection with anything to do with humans suggests childish thinking. Violence has been and will always be part of the human experience. Tragedy can not be solved ever. Common sense dictates that we could see a slight reduction by locking up the insane as we used to and raising better more moral children. But thats it, you arent ever going to stop it. There is no solution, grow up America.


/\Worth repeating /\

We are never gonna stop tragedies from happening. Not just violence but all kinds of unfortunate accidents, etc. We just need to take reasonable precautions and get on with life.


----------



## 6e (Sep 10, 2005)

I've only skipped through comments, so I don't know what all has been said. I've noticed that a big chunk of the mass murderers have been on some sort of drug and I think they need to start by studying what these drugs are actually doing to people. 

The next thing is I think we, as a society, need to go back to honoring the sanctity of life. Being taught that we came from nothing and will go back to nothing is part of the problem. We see people as just another animal. We don't freak when we shoot a deer, so why freak if they shoot a person? After all, they're just another animal. Rather, they need to be taught that people are made in God's image and are therefore set apart and special. They need to be taught that all life is precious. Taught empathy for the people around them. Compassion for other people and how they feel. Not having violent, very graphic movies and games that desensitize people to death and gore and doesn't glorify it.

I agree with another post I read that kids need to learn they are not the center of the universe and that life is not all about them. To put others ahead of themselves.


----------



## 6e (Sep 10, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> /\Worth repeating /\
> 
> We are never gonna stop tragedies from happening. Not just violence but all kinds of unfortunate accidents, etc. We just need to take reasonable precautions and get on with life.


I agree with this too. It never will completely stop no matter how many laws you pass. You cannot legislate morality into the hearts of people.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

Haven said:


> My point was that she had a house full of guns and still died. A shooter can kill 20 people before 1 armed guard has time to get to him and react. Half of these people are on a suicide mission, which makes them even more unstoppable.
> 
> Armed guards in schools are worthless. Shooters will just rain down bullets at football games, or on the bus, at soccer practice, or outside on the playground.
> 
> ...


These two certainly contradict each other!


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

"You know, if you study the dates on these mass murders, you'll notice how many have happened in recent history.

It would be interesting to graph the introduction of violent video games (and their sales) against the wave of these crimes."

It would be interesting to graph the introduction of cellphones(and their sales) against the wave of these crimes.
It would be interesting to graph the introduction of Ipads(and their sales) against the wave of these crimes.
Using that "logic" the blame could be placed on any new thing. :whistlin:


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

blooba said:


> Yes, i like playing these games, and I know a properly placed RPG round can take out a stryker although if you hit it broadside it will absorb the impact.
> 
> That doesn't mean I'm gonna go around shooting at the Military. They shoot back!!!!!....lol (maybe if we armed normal people these guys would have the logic to think of the same)
> 
> Consequences are what deters these things. Placing someone on prozac and letting them live in a plush mental facility for the rest of their lives is not a punishment.


We probably agree on this topic more that you might guess.

There is a certain disconnect among some people though, and the video games are training them how to use a weapon, how to shoot it, how to be accurate, and how to stay calm in an array of situations.

FWIW, I was visiting a family, and the kids somehow acquired a similar game of Grand Theft Auto where you steal a car and shoot a gun at someone.

"No, not that one!!!! Use the Beretta!!!!! It has nine shots, and that one only has six!!!!" the twelve year old screamed at his 9 year old brother, who was now playing the game.

"You ain't going to kill anyone with that gun, idiot!!!!" he added.

I've met a bunch of mature 12 year olds capable of handling a firearm, and who act more mature than many adults I've met.

At the same time, this particular 12 year old is a very troubled boy, has some mental wellness issues, and was recently kicked out of school for bringing a Swiss Army knife to a fight he picked with another student.

There is a serious disconnect with some kids, and the video games are teaching them that a gun means power, and they can how to kill at will.


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

It has been said here and i will say it again. Open carry and concealed carry if people could carry guns there wouldn't be any were as many robberies and shootings.

The good people need to be able to protect themselves. The bad people will learn very soon that shooting and robberies don&#8217;t pay.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Haven said:


> Re open all of the massive state mental hospitals that were shut down under Reagan. This coincides exactly with a massive spike in drug abuse, homeless, and these types of violent crimes commited by all those mental patients who were integrated back into society. Their families won't ake care of them because they are a danger and emotional and financial suicide to their caretakers.
> They let all the whackos on the streets and replaced all the mental hospitals with privately run out patient drug rehabs - what does that alone tell you? I don't know why people cannot see the issue here.


Umm, it wasn't Reagan that closed mental institutions. You need to go back and see what really happened instead of listening to ubber liberal talking heads!


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Haven said:


> Lanza's mother was apparently well-armed and skilled at using guns. The fact that she is dead shows us how well she was able to protect herself against a shooter...


The same can be said everytime a LEO gets shot and killed..

So what are you saying we should make LEO's do without a firearm?

Sorry that kind of thinking only gets more people killed by lunatics and corrupt Governments


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> If only you could identify the loon, and keep him from getting the gun without impeding the rights of the rest of us, you'd be on to something.
> 
> Unfortunately, every plan seems to center on taking guns from all of us. Do you see it somehow different?


As I said earlier, it seems counterproductive to remove guns from law-abiding citizens who have no intent of wrongdoing. Not only does it do nothing to solve the problem; it reduces their ability to protect themselves and, perhaps, others. 

A caveat to the above is the possibility of guns stolen from law-abiding citizens falling into the hands of the deranged, as was the case with the Newtown shooting. 

Hmmm.


> The idea of removing guns from the hands of the mentally ill while providing treatment for their ills is such a warm and fuzzy feeling for liberals.


I'm less concerned with providing treatment -- not sure you can cure a sociopath or psychopath! -- as with making sure they can't harm others. 

But to what extent should society be able to lock up mad dogs who haven't actually bitten anyone yet? Thought crimes, etc. ...

If someone is, for instance, posting pictures on Facebook of himself holding various weapons and declaring his intent to shoot up a school, do we need to wait until he actually commits a crime to take action?


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> It may be more expedient to keep the loon from getting a weapon in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> On the flip side, I think it's possible that video games absorb some excess aggression that might otherwise be exhibited in real life. No?


And pray tell how do you expect to stop them?

It was already illegal for the latest sicko to beat his mother to death (note no gun), It was already illegal to steal said guns. 

Unfortunately bad things happen. We will never be able to stop bad things from happening, we can only prepare ourselves the best we can by being armed ourselves..

Limiting the law abiding people doesn't stop a single lunatic from doing what they want in fact it actually helps the bad people do more bad things...

So now we have a Cowardly Socialist, and those who support him, who wants to limit the law abiding people even more. Thus helping the evil people do even more evil things without anyone being able to stop them...


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> But to what extent should society be able to lock up mad dogs who haven't actually bitten anyone yet? Thought crimes, etc. ...
> 
> If someone is, for instance, posting pictures on Facebook of himself holding various weapons and declaring his intent to shoot up a school, do we need to wait until he actually commits a crime to take action?


People get locked up all the time for plotting or declaring their intent to commit a terrorist act. 

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8955556

DOYLESTOWN, Pa. - January 15, 2013 (WPVI) -- A Bucks County teenager will remain locked up indefinitely for making terroristic threats against his high school.

http://wnep.com/2012/08/21/man-locked-up-for-threats-against-judge/

KINGSTON &#8212; A man is in jail in Luzerne County charged with threatening to kill a magisterial district judge.

It seems that no new laws are needed to accomplish this goal.


----------



## Fowler (Jul 8, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> Should we even attempt it?
> 
> Should we accept that the price of freedom is the occasional slaughter of kindergarteners by madmen?
> 
> ...


Get back to parenting, that's how we stop mass shootings.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

whodunit said:


> Our schools absolutely require ALL visitors to check in at the office when they arrive on campus.


Including those with guns bent on killing people??

Criminals don't follow laws -- that's why all the gun laws in the world will not protect you from a criminal with a gun (or a bomb, or a knife,or a car, or anything else)


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

clovis said:


> I agree with you on these points.
> 
> At our local high school, it is so big that a single armed guard might help in a mass shooting...but what if the shooter stalks and kills the armed guard first?
> 
> ...


Voluntary and Trained school personal (teachers, admin staff, janitors, lunch ladies)with concealed carry.


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

Anybody who thinks playing computer games makes you an expert with weapons either doesn't know weapons or doesn't know computer games, or both.:nono:


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

Eliminate all Gun-Free Zones except for Govt offices/Court (they can have armed security). *All *law abiding Citizens should be able to carry concealed firearms 24/7 everywhere they else they go. Watch the crime plummet, down, down, down, and then experience the biggest exodus of illegal (as in non-citizen) criminals ever in the history of our Country! In addition, let's address the root of mass shooters:

The SHOOTERS themselves! There are a lot of mentally ill people free; these individuals are ticking time bombs. The mentally ill (prone to violence) need to be removed from society, supervised, and treated (with respect, kindness, but to keep them from hurting the rest of society). They should not be homeless, roaming the streets. They shouldn't be living with their over burdened parents, who currently have no where to turn. We don't have a firearm crisis, but a MENTAL crisis! In addition, all criminals should be facing much harsher punishments, get rid of the cushy prison life, back to working to pay for their expenses (not on the backs of the US Citizens). I am for Capital Punishment, also, but I won't debate my views with any one. There is proof what I am suggesting would actually work. Lots of stats out there to prove it.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

FourDeuce said:


> Anybody who thinks playing computer games makes you an expert with weapons either doesn't know weapons or doesn't know computer games, or both.:nono:


I didn't say that they make you an expert. 

I am saying that the violent shooting games teach kids that it can be done, and how to do it.

:nono:


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

clovis said:


> There is a serious disconnect with some kids, and the video games are teaching them that a gun means power, and *they can how to kill at will*.


Its not the video games fault that the kids are disconnected with the real world. Its the parents fault if the kids think they can kill at will. Lemme guess, these kids just have to moan and cry and they will get the latest greatest thing that they want no matter how they have disobeyed their parents. CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR ACTIONS!!!!! 

Want to steal? chop off a finger
Want to kill? you will be killed.
I think you get the drift.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> Voluntary and Trained school personal (teachers, admin staff, janitors, lunch ladies)with concealed carry.


I'm not trying to be smart...just trying to understand your viewpoint:

What happens when a school punk takes a teacher's loaded gun from their possession?

What happens when a some weirdo with a teacher's certificate and gets a hand gun permit, and decides they can use it as a tool to get a classroom's attention? I went to school in a small high school, and remember a few teachers that had no business working in a school, let alone have a gun on their person.

What about the teacher that is adamant about being able to carry a gun, but cannot physically use the weapon?

Don't get me wrong. I know we had teachers that could easily handle a gun. I also remember even more that would make me nervous to know that they were carrying a loaded weapon.


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

clovis said:


> I'm not trying to be smart...just trying to understand your viewpoint:
> 
> What happens when a school punk takes a teacher's loaded gun from their possession?
> 
> ...


Where public schools are concerned? My concern is for the safety of other folks' children. My DS and DD wouldn't sent their pets there. They were homeschooled for ten years, then went to public school... I respect everyone has their own take; that is simply mine. As a society, we should all care about our Nations' children, no matter where they live, play, and get their education.

It is a proven fact, most crime, violent and otherwise, occurs in gun-free zones! We need to eliminate them.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

lorichristie said:


> Where public schools are concerned? My concern is for the safety of other folks' children. My DS and DD wouldn't sent their pets there. They were homeschooled for ten years, then went to public school... I respect everyone has their own take; that is simply mine. As a society, we should all care about our Nations' children, no matter where they live, play, and get their education.
> 
> It is a proven fact, most crime, violent and otherwise, occurs in gun-free zones! We need to eliminate them.


Why are you taking me to task over a question that I asked another forum member?


----------



## ChristieAcres (Apr 11, 2009)

clovis said:


> Why are you taking me to task over a question that I asked another forum member?


I was just responding to that post, not on behalf of the other member. 

You weren't being "taken to task," since I respect your viewpoint. We don't all agree on these issues, but we don't all have to. 

So, I apologize if you felt I was in some way not being respectful in sharing my opinion. That was not my intention.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

lorichristie said:


> I was just responding to that post, not on behalf of the other member.
> 
> You weren't being "taken to task," since I respect your viewpoint. We don't all agree on these issues, but we don't all have to.
> 
> So, I apologize if you felt I was in some way not being respectful in sharing my opinion. That was not my intention.


You are a good person, LoriChristie!!!

I too am trying to understand another person's viewpoint.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

clovis said:


> I'm not trying to be smart...just trying to understand your viewpoint:
> 
> What happens when a school punk takes a teacher's loaded gun from their possession?
> 
> ...


What happens when there is a gas leak in the building?
With the rash of natural gas explosions happening lately, shouldn't we outlaw gas furnaces, boilers, water heaters?

I mean "think of the children"

Yea we all can come up with excuses/ hypothetical reasons as to why something shouldn't be done..


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

clovis said:


> I didn't say that they make you an expert.
> 
> I am saying that the violent shooting games teach kids that it can be done, and how to do it.
> 
> :nono:


If you think playing computer games teaches somebody how to shoot real weapons, you should go try it. Play CoD or any other "violent shooter game", then go run an IDPA course. If that doesn't convince you there is NO comparison, you can't be convinced. Yeah, CoD might teach them a few minor details, but none of those games are realistic training for actually shooting guns.
BTW, violent movies and books also teach people that it can be done and how to do it. Wanna outlaw them, too? You know violent movies and books have been around even longer than games.

"they can tell you how many rounds an M1 clip holds, and how many rounds the German weapons hold, when to use a grenade...."

Great training. There are a lot of M1s, German weapons, and grenades used in shootings, aren't there?


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

clovis said:


> I didn't say that they make you an expert.
> 
> I am saying that the violent shooting games teach kids that it can be done, and how to do it.
> 
> :nono:


Painting with too big a paintbrush is dangerous. I'm not saying you are wrong in every single case, but your statement implies that kids are going to learn to kill by playing video games, then go out and do this in real life.

I've never restricted either of my kids from playing any video game, period. I play most of them with them. I also taught my kids to shoot, and how to hunt. I also taught them how to sharpen a knife. Both my kids are black belts, as am I. Yet I can count the fights my kids had on one hand. And that's both kids combined. 

Both kids know better than to ever point a gun in a dangerous direction. Both have gutted deer, and don't exactly enjoy that part of the process. The guts and gore don't translate well from a TV screen to real life.

My kids certainly know HOW to go out and kill people, but neither one ever would. That's what separates normal from crazy.

I'm sure my kids are just like the millions of other normal healthy country kids out there. My point is not that you are wrong. It's just that, like gun control, any law intended to protect us from a few unstable people will have a greater impact on the rest of us.

I wish it was as simple as banning a game.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

Home Harvest said:


> Painting with too big a paintbrush is dangerous. I'm not saying you are wrong in every single case, but your statement implies that kids are going to learn to kill by playing video games, then go out and do this in real life.
> 
> I've never restricted either of my kids from playing any video game, period. I play most of them with them. I also taught my kids to shoot, and how to hunt. I also taught them how to sharpen a knife. Both my kids are black belts, as am I. Yet I can count the fights my kids had on one hand. And that's both kids combined.
> 
> ...


We actually agree more than what you would ever guess.

I commend you on being a parent who has raised kids to know how to shoot, and be responsible. If every gun owning family acted as real parents like you have in raising their kids, this world would be a vastly different place.

As a whole, 98% of kids are probably alright playing violent shooting games like Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto. It is the 2% that we have to worry about, who have issues with mental wellness, or have parents who have not raised their kids to be responsible, like you have.

As a nation, and with all these killings with assault rifles with high capacity clips, I'll never be convinced that violent shooting games aren't at the root of this problem.

I'll rest my case with Adam Lanza. Something, somewhere, had to plant the idea that he could kill as many people as he could with the assault weapons that his mother owned. 

You have to be 18 to buy a pack of Winston's, and 21 to buy a cold beer. These laws are to protect our youth's health and our society as a whole from the harms that big tobacco and big alcohol can bring...but we can't have rational discussions on the effects of violent shooting games on certain people in society???


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

FourDeuce said:


> If you think playing computer games teaches somebody how to shoot real weapons, you should go try it. Play CoD or any other "violent shooter game", then go run an IDPA course. If that doesn't convince you there is NO comparison, you can't be convinced. Yeah, CoD might teach them a few minor details, but none of those games are realistic training for actually shooting guns.
> BTW, violent movies and books also teach people that it can be done and how to do it. Wanna outlaw them, too? You know violent movies and books have been around even longer than games.
> 
> "they can tell you how many rounds an M1 clip holds, and how many rounds the German weapons hold, when to use a grenade...."
> ...


I have played many of the violent shooting games, many times.

What on earth does running an IDPA course have to do with walking into a school with two assault rifles and a 1,000 rounds of ammo? 

And about the movies...Hollywood is part of this argument too. They have perpetrated the 'look cool, shoot cool' mentality that is part of today's society. Nothing wrong with having guns in movies, but they are glorifying a message that was never seen on film or TV until the 1980's or later.


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

Anybody who can walk into any place with 2 assault rifles and 1000 rounds of ammo will have to be built like Arnold and have a titanium skeleton. Good thing you're trying to keep this thread firmly rooted in reality.

"What on earth does running an IDPA course have to do with walking into a school with two assault rifles and a 1,000 rounds of ammo?"

I have no idea. I didn't make that comparison. YOU did. Not sure why you're asking me about your comparison. I compared playing computer games with running an IDPA course.

"Hollywood is part of this argument too."

Are they? That's strange. I don't see anybody trying to outlaw violent movies or tv shows or books.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

beowoulf90 said:


> What happens when there is a gas leak in the building?
> With the rash of natural gas explosions happening lately, shouldn't we outlaw gas furnaces, boilers, water heaters?
> 
> I mean "think of the children"
> ...


I figured I'd get my head kicked in by someone here. Didn't figure it would be you.

I was seriously asking a question to understand another person's point of view, and it is funny that no one has answered the questions I asked in a calm and rational manner.

It's either "our way *only*, or no way", but never is it about teaching or sharing.

Not a one of you have even asked if I own gun(s), hunt, shoot, or believe in the Second Amendment.

The "our way, or no way" mentality is going to get all assault weapons banned, magazine capacities limited, mandatory registrations enacted, etc.

Keep on kicking and bashing, everyone. Don't spend a minute trying to teach and share in a rational manner. We'll see how this all works out for you and the NRA...


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

FourDeuce said:


> Anybody who can walk into any place with 2 assault rifles and 1000 rounds of ammo will have to be built like Arnold and have a titanium skeleton. Good thing you're trying to keep this thread firmly rooted in reality.
> 
> "What on earth does running an IDPA course have to do with walking into a school with two assault rifles and a 1,000 rounds of ammo?"
> 
> ...


I don't even know what an IDPA course is...YOU are the one that brought that into an argument. Can you tell me what an IDPA course is, and how it compares to computer games?

Hollywood should definitely be part of this discussion, and how they portray guns and violence on TV and movies.

But keep kicking pal. We'll see how this all works out...and in the mean time, since you decided to kick me instead of rationally share your thoughts, I'll keep believing the same things I thought before this thread ever started.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

FourDeuce said:


> Great training. There are a lot of M1s, German weapons, and grenades used in shootings, aren't there?


Nice smart comment, which was taken out of context. Real nice.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

clovis said:


> We actually agree more than what you would ever guess.
> 
> I commend you on being a parent who has raised kids to know how to shoot, and be responsible. If every gun owning family acted as real parents like you have in raising their kids, this world would be a vastly different place.
> 
> ...


I support your intent. If we could identify that one thing that triggers violence in society, we could conscientiously eliminate it. But for every example of something causing violence, we find million of examples of the same thing causing no harm.

Let's have the rational discussion you desire. No, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm willing, but skeptical. Video games are big business. Virtually every household has at least one game system. A very quick google search provided these figures:

Xbox games that have sold or shipped at least one million copies.
Title	Release Year	Copies sold
Halo 2	2004	8 million[17]
Halo: Combat Evolved	2001	5 million[18]
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell	2002	3 million[19][20][21]

The above is from a very quick search, and the data is old. I'm sure the figures are much higher today. How many mass murders occur each year? Not even one a year, on average? 

The numbers just don't seem to add up.


----------



## defenestrate (Aug 23, 2005)

The root of the problem, IMO is primarily a combination of a society that glorifies violence (I'm not for banning video games or movies or music, but consuming entertainment with violence does not make most of us violent) and the very human (but problematic) tendency to want to single out those who are different.

If we look at most American mass shootings of our generation, they are committed by people who fear and hate society and were shunned or abused by peer groups and authority figures (teachers, parents clergy, etc. - maybe not all but usually enough that combined with already being ostracized by peer groups leads to an intense feeling of isolation and mistrust of others). A great many in recent memory have been on psychiatric medications that have rare but devastating side effects for some takers. Most of these people are more likely to take their own lives than those of others (and, indeed, people who are mentally ill are in general less violent than average), but a rare group either plan a kind of revenge on the people they justify as being somehow at fault, or snap and lash out at the people in their lives who have offended or in some cases seriously mistreated them.

So what do we do? Banning firearms that look like military weapons does not teach children, teachers, parents etc. not to mistreat people for being different. Putting people with certain mental issues or on certain medications on "watch lists" is not only highly prejudicial against people who are different but often precludes the possibility that those people will ever become well-adjusted productive (or at least basically functional) members of society.

The only way to really stop the vast majority of events like these is to take a good look at our society and what elements/traits about it create monsters.

People are not born homicidal. There is no clear genetic link to these kinds of behaviors. The only way they get the idea to kill a bunch of people is that the idea that they don't belong and are not accepted is beaten into them physically, mentally, etc. If we want to feel safe from monsters, we need to make an effort to stop making them.

There are a great many factors that go toward creating these kinds of people. Neglectful or abusive parents are a large factor, as are ignorant teachers, community/church figures etc. People who look or act different are often singled out, and this is somewhat instinctive as mostly preferring the company of people who look or act you helps to preserve the characteristics that created you. That does not make it ethically or even genetically effective. 

In my own case, I have a rare but mild form of Tourette Syndrome, and I was generally the shortest kid in almost any class until high school. Naturally, I was picked on by peers, but teachers shared in the abuse by singling me out as a bad seed despite my showing academic prowess. As a result, I grew to mistrust and for a time hate most folks around me. Despite my parents and therapists' best intentions I was quite maladjusted, and I still get singled out and treated differently to this day, in the form of being accused of being on drugs when I have a tic going on or in the form of authority figures like police officers thinking that I am "on something" or "gesturing in a suspicious manner". This kind of ignorance nearly led to the end of my life at the hands of a young untrained deputy and I am hobbled and dealing with pain and traumatic memories to this day. I'm not going to climb a clock tower, but I will probably never feel normal or like I belong. I have made some good friends and have a great fiancee who is not judgmental and is supportive. I could have been one of these monsters at one point in my life, and it was nearly entirely due to feeling like I could never be accepted as a regular member of society.

By the time I received any treatment for depression/teenage angst (I also have ADHD and OCD and did receive some helpful treatment as far as being able to focus in school better), I already had terrible thoughts in mind relating to the people who mistreated me. No amount of compassion on the part of outside parties will make someone feel accepted by their class, community, sometimes even family. We need to educate our society from the ground up to be less exclusive and that it is okay for people to have different strengths and weaknesses - indeed it is the varied mix of traits and experience we possess that make it interesting to get to know each other as well as to have different ideas to solve problems. Most of these young shooters have been considered bright and often talented in ways that could very easily lead to promising futures if they believed they had futures at all.

We feed the tendency to exclude and bully by the actions of our society in larger groups. Our society is constantly barraged with "Us vs Them" type indoctrination. The prohibition of alcohol and nonprescription drugs were pushed using racist, exclusionary means and are still used in the "War on Drugs" which constantly puts out releases about how taking recreational drugs makes you a criminal with no future, and then ensures that this is true by imprisoning people for nonviolent drug offenses. Since WWII, we have had the Cold War, the War on Terror, near constant martial action against nations who rarely have the means to threaten us directly (I'm not making any arguments about 9/11 or terrorists, just that our government is constantly "stabilizing/liberating" some nation or other in a way that without justification looks a heck of a lot like bullying. Our politics are increasingly polarizing: "gun nutters" vs "gun grabbers" - "baby killers" vs "committed sexists" - "bitter clingers" vs "communists", "greedy sociopaths" vs "parasitic anarchists" - I can go on and on. I can't think of one problem that has been solved by excluding everyone who has a different opinion in this society. Bigotry runs rampant and is encouraged by political parties and even communities/churches/figures of authority. This ignorance hurts far more people than it protects. When I was in school, the popular kids on organized sports did whatever they want including the shunning and physical/mental abuse of people outside their circles. I understand things have not changed much though there does seem to be better communication about this issues; this makes me hopeful that we can learn and work on these issues. If we don't, miserable people will occasionally do seemingly unthinkable things because they don't know what else to do.

It is okay to shun certain behaviors - intolerance, violence, ignorance, the tendency to make oneself look bigger by picking on someone smaller or weaker, etc. These traits and actions create mass shooters, and rapists, and murderous thugs, and a great many of the other ills in our society. Economic factors count for something, but they too will improve if we appreciate the character rather than outward appearance or personal preferences of others.

Nobody is perfect; I certainly am no exception. But if we accept each others' imperfection as the spice that makes society interesting, and at least tolerate the existence of people who disagree with us, we will eventually thwart the tendency to make monsters. This is hard work and everyone needs to make an effort if we want to see real results happening in our lifetimes. There are other factors, and we are still a society that is growing at a great rate in terms of understanding our innate diversity, so there will be improvements by necessity as we continue to have the conversation about these problems and at least intend to do better. But if we don't wait for necessity and simply try our best to tolerate and cooperate with the people in our lives when possible, we will accelerate this growth and the naturally self-defeating homicidal and misanthropic elements of our society will lose as they serve no one in any sane useful way.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

I don't think it's the video games, per se, but kids' disconnection w/ normal life because of the video games. IOW, they spend so little time experiencing real life.......and death.......that they have no concept of the realities of life and death. 

Kids are so sheltered these days that they're not even allowed to experience life or see death or learn that actions have consequences....some good, some bad.

We watched 'violent' TV shows as kids.....war movies, cowboys and indians.....people killing and being killed. It didn't give us the idea that we should go kill people.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

Home Harvest said:


> I support your intent. If we could identify that one thing that triggers violence in society, we could conscientiously eliminate it. But for every example of something causing violence, we find million of examples of the same thing causing no harm.
> 
> Let's have the rational discussion you desire. No, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm willing, but skeptical. Video games are big business. Virtually every household has at least one game system. A very quick google search provided these figures:
> 
> ...


You make a compelling argument. 

Not sure that I can agree with this way of thinking right now, but let me ponder it.

FWIW, which I probably did not state in any earlier post: I am not wholeheartedly against violent shooting games, but I think we need to discuss them as a society. 

Nonetheless, thank you for sharing and teaching. It is a whole lot easier to understand another person's point of view when they aren't trying to take you to the woodshed and back because you don't agree with them 100%.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

Txsteader said:


> I don't think it's the video games, per se, but kids' disconnection w/ normal life because of the video games. IOW, they spend so little time experiencing real life.......and death.......that they have no concept of the realities of life and death.
> 
> Kids are so sheltered these days that they're not even allowed to experience life or see death or learn that actions have consequences....some good, some bad.
> 
> We watched 'violent' TV shows as kids.....war movies, cowboys and indians.....people killing and being killed. It didn't give us the idea that we should go kill people.


Another good argument.

I would respectfully disagree about the war movies and westerns though. There was a point in time that all TV and film showed death and dying by shooting, but the blood, guts and gore were not shown. For instance, a cowboy in a western might get shot in the arm, and little or no blood was shown.

And then, at some point, violent fighting, filled with lots of blood and gore, became the norm in both TV and film. I am sometimes shocked by what I see. I am not wholeheartedly against guns and or violence in film, but I believe that Hollywood crossed the line sometime ago, chasing the almighty dollar because it has sold so well.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

clovis said:


> And about the movies...Hollywood is part of this argument too. They have perpetrated the 'look cool, shoot cool' mentality that is part of today's society. Nothing wrong with having guns in movies, but they are glorifying a message that was never seen on film or TV until the 1980's or later.


Don't know how much you know about old tv shows or movies but I guarantee lots of shows (especially the old westerns) perpetrated your "look cool, shoot cool mentality".
_Wagon Train
The Rifleman
Bonanza
Gunsmoke
Star Trek
The Lone Ranger
_every John Wayne movie
Guns are a huge part of the United States history and culture.

When was it that it became politically incorrect for children to play with guns or have pretend shoot-outs? IIRC about the early to mid 80's.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

clovis said:


> Another good argument.
> 
> I would respectfully disagree about the war movies and westerns though. There was a point in time that all TV and film showed death and dying by shooting, but the blood, guts and gore were not shown. For instance, a cowboy in a western might get shot in the arm, and little or no blood was shown.
> 
> And then, at some point, violent fighting, filled with lots of blood and gore, became the norm in both TV and film. I am sometimes shocked by what I see. I am not wholeheartedly against guns and or violence in film, but I believe that Hollywood crossed the line sometime ago, chasing the almighty dollar because it has sold so well.


Thats what ratings are for.

You cant just go into a game store and buy a Call of Duty game, they are rated Mature (17+) 

Same with movies and television, notice they dont show graphic shows or allow cussing on cable channels until after 9pm or whatever time. 

It all falls on parenting, if your child cannot handle graphic stuff dont buy them the video game and dont let them stay up watching tv past 9pm. Simple as that, why should I be punished for bad parenting?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

> And then, at some point, violent fighting, filled with lots of blood and gore, became the norm in both TV and film. ........ *I believe that Hollywood crossed the line sometime ago*,...


In 1967 - The movie Bonnie and Clyde. That was what kicked it off and crossed the line, it swiftly gained momentum with more graphic stuff through the 70's like the Exorcist, The Godfather, Apocalypse Now, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Alien, etc., etc. and just spiraled on from there.

.


----------



## defenestrate (Aug 23, 2005)

clovis said:


> FWIW, which I probably did not state in any earlier post: I am not wholeheartedly against violent shooting games, but I think we need to discuss them as a society.


I think if anything it would strongly behoove us to discuss the increasing immersion into our modern gadgets and entertainment devices. If you play so much of a violent game that it screws up your sleep and you dream heavily about it, your head is in that space and you can be a step closer to considering the depicted violence "normal"- same with movies, etc. but the interactive nature of video games means that you are training your sensory and motor nerves to a sort of simulated violence.

Would banning violent video games fix some folks' tendency to become desensitized? Not likely, but encouraging them to get outside and turn the game off regularly couldn't hurt.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> It is a whole lot *easier to understand* another person's point of view when they aren't trying to take you to the woodshed and back because you don't agree with them 100%.


It would also be easier if you'd *educate yourself* on things beforehand.

You've made some really *naive* claims about people "learning" to shoot from video games, and the comment about "2 assalut rifles and a 1000 rds of ammo" is FANTASY.

It's hard to "agree" when you're not stickng to *just facts*


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It would also be easier if you'd *educate yourself* on things beforehand.
> 
> You've made some really *naive* claims about people "learning" to shoot from video games, and the comment about "2 assalut rifles and a 1000 rds of ammo" is FANTASY.
> 
> It's hard to "agree" when you're not stickng to *just facts*


Thanks for the shout out about being naive. That always helps a lot. 

Perhaps I mistakenly said "learn to shoot" instead of "these violent video games show what is possible with military style weapons."

While you may define "learning to shoot" as being properly trained to handle a weapon, and fire it accurately on a shooting range, and putting all 30 rounds of a magazine on the target, I define it in this discussion as anyone who picks up a weapon and pulls the trigger.

Keep kicking on the "two assault weapons and a 1,000 rounds". You got me on that one. Two assault weapons are easy to carry. A 1,000 rounds is a real stretch, but 200 is not.

And, BTW, what are the *"just facts"* are you referring to?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

blooba said:


> Thats what ratings are for.
> 
> You cant just go into a game store and buy a Call of Duty game, they are rated Mature (17+)
> 
> ...


I think you missed the point. That stuff isn't aimed at kids anyways, it's aimed at more mature audiences who have the money to buy it and it's the mature audiences that lap it up. Young adults and older can be just as desensitized or influenced as kids can be by the graphic glorification of violence, blood and gore. Consumers of all ages have been getting inundated with it increasingly for nigh on to 50 years and keep on demanding more from the entertainment industry. 

Why is it that adults find that kind of graphic violence entertaining? Do they get some kind of high off it, get turned on by it?

.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

willow_girl said:


> Should we even attempt it?


We can cut back on them, yes, and we should do all that we can to minimize.



> Should we accept that the price of freedom is the occasional slaughter of kindergarteners by madmen?


We should accept the fact that there is evil in this world and we are powerless to eliminate all of it.



> Or do we need to do something about it?


We do what we can do. 



> If so, what?
> 
> This one's kinda got me stumped. Let's hear your ideas.


*It starts at home. (Change the culture)
* Faith
*Loving others as we love ourselves.

That would bring about radical change, but it would not "solve" the problem, because there IS evil in the world.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

naturelover said:


> I think you missed the point. That stuff isn't aimed at kids anyways, it's aimed at more mature audiences who have the money to buy it and it's the mature audiences that lap it up. Young adults and older can be just as desensitized or influenced as kids can be by the graphic glorification of violence, blood and gore. Consumers of all ages have been getting inundated with it increasingly for nigh on to 50 years and keep on demanding more from the entertainment industry.
> 
> Why is it that adults find that kind of graphic violence entertaining? Do they get some kind of high off it, get turned on by it?
> 
> .


I find them entertaining because i can outsmart them on tatics. Some people like to use tatics on chess, i like to use it on video games.

So since they don't fit your form of "ideal" entertainment they should be banned? I think the Bible should be banned for portraying murder,rape and torture, see where this can take us?

Ok, so by using your argument how do you explain Columbine,Jonesboro, Red Lake Massacre, and the Trolley Square shooting? all shooters were under the age of 18. So they were not allowed to go buy "violent" games. IF these kids have even played these "violent" games their parents had to buy them for them. So we're back to BAD PARENTING!!!!


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

clovis said:


> I figured I'd get my head kicked in by someone here. Didn't figure it would be you.
> 
> I was seriously asking a question to understand another person's point of view, and it is funny that no one has answered the questions I asked in a calm and rational manner.
> 
> ...



What does it matter if you own guns, hunt or say you believe in the 2A?

I've seen plenty of folks here say they did all of the above, yet propose and are willing to accept more limitations on the 2A. Thus proving they don't support the 2A, they support control..

Americans who support the 2A have given up many of their Rights every time there is a new gun ban or restrictions added, starting in the 1930's to present day..

So I'll ask you when is enough, enough?

I say now! I've had enough! 

I have enough of being attack and criminalized by the Government and folks who say we should "compromise" (read as surrender)..

The assault weapons ban from Clinton had no effect except to raise the cost of said weapons.. Now we are supposed to accept another ban which goes even further then the first one..

When does it stop?


When our Right to keep and bear arms is gone completely?

I say it stops now!

Why should I be calm anymore? 
The scum trying to make me a criminal isn't calm.. In fact they are hyping the people up with the media and the lies..

We've tried to be calm in the past and what did it get us?
Nothing, in fact it made our 2A Right position weaker, because the entire time we were being calm, they were sensationalizing the issue.. They swayed more uninformed people to their Anti American agenda, thus making our work to save the 2A harder and making it a bitterer fight...

So enough is enough!

If you say you support the 2nd Amendment and add a "but" after you say it.. 
You don't support the 2nd Amendment!

It's really that simple!
Compromise is "surrender on the installment plan" and we've already done that!


----------



## bjba (Feb 18, 2003)

I see "change the culture" repeated over and over as part or all of the solution to murder and mayhem in our current society. Is that an answer or just another palliative? The culture has changed and much of that change has exacerbated the decay of what is laughingly called our "culture".


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Danaus29 said:


> Don't know how much you know about old tv shows or movies but I guarantee lots of shows (especially the old westerns) perpetrated your "look cool, shoot cool mentality".
> _Wagon Train
> The Rifleman
> Bonanza
> ...


We were the mid 1950 after boomers. Peace, love, stock market is for idiots who want corporations to flourish. Our Marine was born in 1980. We let him have army men but NO guns. He made himself guns from Legos. We gave up and let him enjoy play weapons of NON-destruction. So far he hasn't killed any American Citizens, and our Military crafted him to be a killing machine.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I don't think that "practicing violence" through video games would make a person a mass killer but I do think it contributes to the person who is already feeling powerless and isolated looking to the fantasy of violence and retribution as a solution for their internal misery. Repeated playing of roles where the person eliminates his problems with killing them in a relatively sanitized way will create a pattern of thinking that will spill over to real life. 
Someone mentioned above that people are not born homicidal but they are. At least many are. The only way to manage this tendency is to teach what empathy you can and, failing that, at least implant taboos at early as you can.
The difference between the violence in an old western TV show or even Star Trek was that it was accompanied by nod at the least to principles- the "good" guy versus the "bad guy." 
Some of definitions of good and bad would not hold up today but the point is that, along with the violence, came a way of thinking that encouraged people to want to be the good guy. The bad in the bad guy was clearly defined.
You can not keep every poor soul who sees himself as abused by society from wanting take revenge but you can condition a thought about what revenge shouldn't be.


----------



## dkhern (Nov 30, 2012)

not really how or if it applies but when we played cowboys n indians neighbor hood kids all played we were outside hide in shrubs, yelled and screames, picked sides, if one side was being beaten too much repicked. in other words we were interacting w/others. tv shows everyong watched only 3 channels. talked about it the next day. (interaction)

with video games i keep hearing about loners who sound obsessed w/them. no interaction

folks learning how to play well w/others is important imo


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Rick, I want to thank your family and especially your son for serving our country and protecting it's citizens.

I didn't mean to imply that kids who aren't allowed to play with toy guns become maniacal killers. And truthfully the "forbidden fruit" theory holds up under scrutiny no better than any of the others presented. And if a person is determined to kill a bunch of people, they will manage it somehow. There are better ways to commit mass murder than going in and shooting people. 

It all comes back to the original problem. How do we prevent this from happening again? Simple answer is that we just can't. No one could have known that this was going to happen or how it would play out. Would vigilance and armed security guards have prevented Sandy Hook? Maybe, maybe not. There simply is no way of knowing how or what could have been done.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

I don't see how watching a video or movie provides motivation. I can see that it would be motivating to become the most famous person in America instantly by going and shooting up a school or theater, like the last person did.

As I said in the other thread, seems we need to focus on the media and how they reward these guys.

Endless coverage, and the government and all the country get turned upside down over one brief act of violence.

Exactly what the psychos want, and we are giving it to them.

But the media doesn't want to sacrifice the money they make to save the children. And quite frankly, we all demand such tragic news. In a sick way, we enjoy it.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Business spends billions - many billions on advertising to influence your thinking, your wants, your 'needs', your beliefs. If what you see or hear didn't have an effect, they would not be spending that money.

Does it not have an affect on children and society - I don't know how anyone could say it doesn't.

Did it influence these crazies - we may never know. You can bet the media isn't going to tell you.

Taking guns is not the answer. Laws the government puts in place is not for the benefit of society, national security, for the children. It is usually to limit freedoms.

But if we are going to be so firmly entrenched in our own beliefs and not be willing to listen to others and at least consider them, we won't do anything. The bad part about that is - the government will do it for us - and we won't like what they do.

To compare Bonanza to the violent video games - is just - well no words for that.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

bjba said:


> I see "change the culture" repeated over and over as part or all of the solution to murder and mayhem in our current society. Is that an answer or just another palliative? The culture has changed and much of that change has exacerbated the decay of what is laughingly called our "culture".


Think in gardening terms when you thing "change the culture".

If you have a plot of soil that is useless, void of any nutrients, hard packed clay, nothing can flourish much less grow.....and it's PACKED full of weeds:
What do you do?
Mow down the weeds and throw some seeds in?
Heck no.
You gotta go deep.
Get those weeds out by the roots.
You're gonna have to tear the ground up to get down deep to get those roots out or you will just have another weed patch in 3 months.
So: Remove the bad.
Turn the soil. Add compost, work it in with your hands, or gently with a device that will make sure it's mixed in well.

It's the time, attention, removal of bad, hands on nurturing that makes good things grow in a garden.
Ditto in families.

We are too tolerant, non-judgemental and so dang open minded our brains fell out. And look where it's gotten us.....




Trixie said:


> Business spends billions - many billions on advertising to influence your thinking, your wants, your 'needs', your beliefs. If what you see or hear didn't have an effect, they would not be spending that money.
> 
> Does it not have an affect on children and society - I don't know how anyone could say it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Preach it sister!!


----------



## J.T.M. (Mar 2, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> Should we even attempt it?
> 
> Should we accept that the price of freedom is the occasional slaughter of kindergarteners by madmen?
> 
> ...


I haven't read all the post so forgive me if it was already suggested , but maybe banning " progressives " on the left would be a place to start . :shrug:


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Yeah yeah. And the worst American school killing of all time was perpetrated by a guy upset about paying too much in taxes. :shrug:


----------



## bjba (Feb 18, 2003)

Every society and culture for the last 5000 or so years have looked for the answer to violence among its' citizens. I can't find any culture which had any great success in stopping murder among its' citizens. In our own culture there are states (semi autonomous political subdivisions) with oppressive laws concerning the ownership of firearms and states with liberal laws concerning ownership of firearms. Texas, which seems to be the stereotypical example of a violent society with liberal gun ownership laws has a lower murder rate than California with oppressive gun ownership laws, Illinois with Draconian gun ownership laws, Maryland again with Draconian gun laws and Delaware with oppressive gun laws. The murder rates in New York and New Jersey are similar to Texas and the gun ownership laws are by comparison Draconian. Washington DC with perhaps the most oppressive gun ownership laws in the USA has a murder rate 5 times that of Texas. Seems to me the anti gun groups are great examples of the adage, "doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result is the definition of insanity". A fresh new approach is necessary.


----------

