The Gun Debate

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 20th Dec, '12, 16:32

You can't help wondering can you on the gaming thing, the utter disconnect between the game and reality of violence for someone with difficulties making social connection. It's something wondered about socially in US context too, the prudishness around sex but acceptance of guns and violence representated in G and PG rated media.

Then there was the chap in Europe shooting up an island of kids on camp for his right wing white political views. And the Una bomber with issues over technology. Or the couple chaps who gave Going Postal new meaning, or Port Arthur, or a Scottish chap in a kindy...

slinky · Post by **slinky** » 20th Dec, '12, 16:33

baloo wrote:I wouldn't mind see the correlation of gun shooting massacres by youngish men and the popularity of FPS gaming.

People have been studying the effects of violent gaming and video/movies for awhile now. Most are careful to point out there isn't any 'conclusive' evidence to support that stuff being a cause for actual violence, but they do note that they can point to links between such activities and becoming generally desensitized to violence, which, if you ask me is a pretty significant problem in itself.

Lili Von Shtupp · Post by **Lili Von Shtupp** » 20th Dec, '12, 19:32

I read this article earlier, continuing Kooky's line of thought regarding gender.

http://www.alternet.org/gender/what-it- ... page=0%2C0

Morrolan · Post by **Morrolan** » 22nd Dec, '12, 01:39

T2K wrote:We don't need to force anyone to be armed at schools. Just don't prohibit teachers and staff who are licensed and willing from being armed***. Presently they, who have proven time and time again that they are willing to die in futile unarmed attempts to protect their students against armed nutjobs like the principal in Connecticut did, are forbidden from being armed. Schools are obviously a target for nutjobs all over the world. They are not going away and this is not going to stop. Even if someone "only" kills 8 kids with a knife, it's 8 too many.

Why not give teachers and staff a chance to effectively counter these attacks? Our "gun free zone" laws just make schools obvious soft targets (which is why they are so often chosen as targets). Just the possibility of resistance will be enough to deter a lot of these nutjobs, who are cowards and only select places where they know they will absolutely be the only armed person.

Interesting argument, not unlike what the NRA just proposed... Didn't Columbine have armed guards and Virginia Tech even a full on-campus police force?

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 22nd Dec, '12, 11:18

At the Columbine shootings, I believe, cops were on-site outside the school pretty quickly after the first shots were fired but, adhering to current police thinking at the time, they focused on securing the scene, evacuating people, waiting for a SWAT team and negotiators to arrive, making an entry plan, etc. So, the two whackos had an hour or more to wander around inside the school and murder people. Obviously, as schools are "gun free zones" they knew they were the only armed people inside.

All US colleges / universities of any size have their own police forces (as at Virginia Tech). But, they are like any police - there aren't many of them (my university of ~2000 students had 2 university police force cops on duty at any given time, for instance) and they come when they are called, which takes time. Virginia Tech, though, happened after the lessons of Columbine so police procedure had changed to a more effective one of immediate and aggressive confrontation of the shooter. No waiting and planning, just stop him ASAP (once confronted with any sort of resistance, they might just kill themselves). Cho only had a few minutes but that was all he needed since, of course, he knew he was the only armed person in the building (he also chained doors shut, I think, to limit access/escape). There were students and/or staff in the building that were lawfully permitted to carry a concealed weapon, I believe, but the "gun free zone" law prevented that.

In these types of situations, which are definitely not going to stop, the "first responders" are not the cops who get called - they are the potential victims who are there at the scene in the first seconds and minutes. I posted a link above about the guy in a mall in Oregon who started shooting people with a rifle (he killed two) and was immediately confronted by a guy with a legally-carried pistol. The nutjob retreated to a stairwell and offed himself. Had that not happened, who knows what would have happened.

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 22nd Dec, '12, 16:02

Columbine: one of the cops was stationed as school security on-site and managed to get a few rounds off at one of the attackers.

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 22nd Dec, '12, 17:50

Fat Bob wrote:Columbine: one of the cops was stationed as school security on-site and managed to get a few rounds off at one of the attackers.

Correct. And then he waited outside with the dozens of other cops for an hour until enough "back up" had arrived (as per their policy for such a situation). Meanwhile, in that hour...well, you know what happened. But, as noted above, police policies have changed now in the US as a result. "Active Shooters" are to be engaged right away. So, that cop today would, if following his departments policy, have chased them instead of running outside to call for help and other cops arriving would have immediately done the same. It would have been over in minutes, not an hour.

sundaymorningstaple · Post by **sundaymorningstaple** » 27th Dec, '12, 09:07

Tas wrote:I am genuinely wondering now. How many right in the middle of the action criminal activities have been stopped by a member of public with a gun? There's enough of them about to have by now an impact in places like the US surely. I've never known of any one with the training, speed of action and knowledge of how to act actually prevent something happening - it's always struck me as stuff of the movies. But that is basically what the scenario of 'someone shooting at you and your kids', has that happened to a single person anyone here knows personally? Or some genuine documented info?

I can't answer that from a generic country-wide point of view, but I can answer from a personal perspective. Date: December 1969; Place: Holiday Inn in my home town where I was the night manager; Time: 3:20 a.m.

I was held up by two Afro-Americans from Washington DC (part of a gang of 5- one of which was a black 'mod squad' Undercover DC cop). In cooperation with the Maryland State Police I was approached early in the evening by a Maryland State Trooper (who was a family friend as well) who laid out what was supposed to go down in the early hours of the morning (after the bar closed). The problem was that I had worked their 24/7 for the past year so the place had been cased a number of times and they knew who was working there all the time. As there was no way that Tommy (my State Trooper friend) or his partner could conceal themselves and still have a viewpoint of the motel lobby. Additionally, they and I knew that if somebody else was manning the hotel on the very night they attempted to hold it up, it would probably not go down. I volunteered, figuring my reflexes and training after my NAM stint, were still good. So, with binoculars on the third story of a building directly across the highway and an open line to my front desk phone. I knew where they were at all times but it was only just before the entered the lobby that I was made aware that only two were entering, the rest remained in the vehicle (which as soon as it started to go down, was locked down by other state troopers hidden around the outside of the building.) At any rate, due to the fact that I was unable to be in line of sight I was basically without protection but was given a sawed off 12 gauge double barreled shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot that I placed under the countertop just beside the cash register. Needless to say, when they came in I found myself looking down the wrong end of a shotgun and when one of them went to the end of the counter to the other cash register (only one was armed) I was ordered to open the drawer, which I did. Then I was ordered to open the other register where the gun carrying hood was standing. I was ordered to open the drawer so I approached the register with my hands down at my sides and as I brought them up I grabbed the shotgun and the same time as I hit the register took one step back, pulling out the shotgun and catching the fore-stock, fired from waist level. (you must remember I grew up on a farm shooting all sorts of wildlife from the age of 12). I caught him in the right side of the neck and he subsequently died around 20 minutes later (the doc on duty at the time said he was so drugged up he didn't feel the pain but rather bled to death). Of course the one at the other end of the bar was physically downed, as soon as the shot was fired, by the other state trooper who was just out of sight in the coffeeshop.

So, from personal experience, a private citizen, with gun training, CAN prevent an action from happening. Had I had a carry permit I would have been armed anyway, but in this scenario, I was armed by the State Police. (later when working in DC in the mid '70's I did have a concealed carry permit while working there).

My 2¢ worth as a gun owner with first person perspective.

NB: for 30 years there were 5 00 buckshot holes in the pillar separating the two big glass windows on the other side of the lobby (the other 4 pellets went through the plate glass window). They left them there in the pillar but were covered by the curtains until the place was sold to "Days Inn" and it was renovated.

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 27th Dec, '12, 13:24

SMS - I'm glad you did what you had to do and things worked out. But, this was part of a police operation with lots of cops around.

This woman, for instance, had no one to aid her and would have been helpless if not armed: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/05/justi ... index.html

avatarless · Post by **avatarless** » 28th Dec, '12, 00:01

SMS has a really good point. Just notify the teachers and staff ahead of time, make sure they are armed with shotguns, place plenty of police protection near the premises "just in case" and then,THEN you can stop a madman.

avatarless · Post by **avatarless** » 28th Dec, '12, 08:25

worth checking out:

how-helpful-are-concealed-weapons?

Morrolan · Post by **Morrolan** » 28th Dec, '12, 08:58

Lots of weapons and trained people at Fort Hood as well, still he managed to get, what was it, 13 people? as long as the US is not prepared to accept they have a problem that will not be solved with more guns and get their heads out of the 18th century, it will go from bad to worse (to worse to disastrous).

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 28th Dec, '12, 16:12

Fort Hood, like all US military bases, is a "gun free zone". Any soldier (except for the few military police on duty) carrying a gun would be court martialed.
The nutjob islamic extremist who we stupidly allowed to be an army officer knew this very well and knew he wouldn't face any armed opposition.

avatarless · Post by **avatarless** » 28th Dec, '12, 17:19

It's curious that the US military sees wisdom in keeping their bases "gun free"...

Morrolan · Post by **Morrolan** » 28th Dec, '12, 22:21

avatarless wrote:It's curious that the US military sees wisdom in keeping their bases "gun free"...

spot on, A'less. so, explain to me, if you will, T2K, the 'wisdom' behind suggesting teachers teaching 6 year olds to be armed, yet soldiers can not? and why, for F U C K's sake is an army base "gun free" yet should untrained 'rugged individual' morons be allowed to carry concealed handguns and have free access to dumbed down assault weapons?

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 29th Dec, '12, 07:44

Yes, the "gun free zone" thing is working out so well for US malls, military bases and schools - a pinnacle of political correct nonsense. "Gun Free Zones" have been purposefully selected by these nutjobs for every mass shooting in the US in the past 20 years except the one of the legislator in AZ.

Clearly, these nutjobs want no resistance and want an assurance they will be the only armed person at the location they've chosen. So, why in the F U C K do you think we should continue giving that assurance to them? Anyone with a concealed carry permit has passed classroom and range proficiency testing and should be allowed to carry. These are law-abiding citizens, they are not the ones we have to worry about. The US has millions of licensed concealed carry permit holders (including many teachers and school staff), it's been a very successful program that's spread across the US with statistically zero problems.

Meanwhile, in Obama's hometown, they just had their 500th murder of the year (no concealed carry permits for normal citizens allowed there). Chicago has the strictest "gun control" in the nation but no one is surprised that criminals ignore laws. Since 2001 we've had about 2000 combat deaths in Afghanistan. And 25% of that figure in one US city in one year!

The school that Obama's kids attend near Washington DO, though, has 11 armed guards (not including secret service, it's the normal security for that school). But, guns at schools don't make schools safer, right?

Morrolan · Post by **Morrolan** » 29th Dec, '12, 11:41

there are no guns at schools in just about any country outside the US. none, zero, zilch.

also, no shootings...
fact remains that with the possible exception of Brazil and maybe Pakistan and Afghanistan (since they are, for all intents and purposes, in a state of war, they don't count), the US has the most gun deaths anywhere and the most, by far, mass killings. more weapons is not going to solve this (it hasn't after any of the previous shootings, now has it?), nor is the moronic suggestion that registering people with a mental health problem is.

Lili Von Shtupp · Post by **Lili Von Shtupp** » 29th Dec, '12, 14:31

Q: How many NRA supporters does it take to change a light bulb?

A: More guns!!!

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 30th Dec, '12, 16:26

I always ponder in these discussions the neglected fact that the people on this forum agitating for citizens to carry guns in US actively choose to live in a society like Singapore upwards of 10 years, where it would never occur to anyone to want or need to carry a gun. Doesn't that say anything at all to anyone about the imbalance of arguments for the need to carry a gun in one country and not another - I'd be disinclined to think the proportion of nut jobbies is lower in Singapore - and there are some rather tricky neighbours close to the shores, and there is minimum controls across the Malaysian road route. It's like a head in the sand aspect to the discussions here. Are we really talking about a complete social collapse in the US that several million people are in denial over, so they focus on arming themselves like some sort of strawman focal point?

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 30th Dec, '12, 16:27

Lili Von Shtupp wrote:Q: How many NRA supporters does it take to change a light bulb?

A: More guns!!!

Very good.

T2K · Post by **T2K** » 30th Dec, '12, 22:53

M - You can't really be so ill-informed to not know of school shootings in other countries outside the US, can you? I really doubt that, you seem rather intelligent in other discussions. There's been more than one your Nederlands alone. Here's a fatal incident: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3394831.stm

Others have happened in Finland, Germany, France, Israel, Canada, etc. So, your zero, null, nada, ling, zilch, kosong guns at school argument would be correct only if you added "*except in cases of school shootings". Fatal school attacks with other weapons have happened in other countries like China and Japan, I think they're equally as troubling. Do you find them less disturbing?

Tas - I ponder your choice or the word "agitate" instead of advocate. There, now we both have something to ponder. And you used the word "people" implying a plurality of such "agitators" - who else agrees with me? Year after year, someone else starts these threads here about this subject, and I think I'm the only one disrupting the groupthink - I could use some assistance, it's very time-consuming typing the same things over and over again.

I'm in my hometown in the US right now. It's lovely and pleasant. Wait, let me look out the window and check again...nope, no "social collapse" happening that I can see from here. Some guns are at my parents house locked in the closet, as usual. As usual, they are failing to convince me to do anything murderous with them. It's just one little part of my life and that of many other normal Americans. I've got a rental car outside that has over 300 horsepower. It's also failed to convince me to drive like a maniac or crash into any crowds. People, and their intent, matter a lot more than inanimate objects and tools.

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 31st Dec, '12, 05:34

You are over personalizing T2K, there are a few on here, so maybe you've got a bit blinkered on this. And picking out a word you take personally for some reason deviates not that successfully from the point of the choices to actively choose to live in a society where gun control isn't the issue it presents in the US.

I don't personally have any major issues with guns with a specific purpose held under lock and key in the home - don't presume, nor do you know anything about my own broad family experience with hunting, or use of them in home invasions (a separate issue).

The actual issue that is horrifying is the 'advocacy' to have people wondering around armed - quite different to hunting guns under lock and key in the home. There is a separate issue again about food hunting style shot guns and war style man hunting automatic guns that can release mutliple rounds in rapid fire. There is another issue again around the licensing and purchase of guns. And there is the SIMPLEST of logic possible that more guns available leads to a proportional increase in incidents. It's basic escalation principle.

What are some of the basics to the background/source to criminal activity with guns - socio economic deprivation, drug addiction, mental health. Why can't you talk around those T2K if you want to take it personally? These are social or societal isses to address, and they are difficult.

Real nutjobbies and violent partner murders - these exist everywheret, violent psychopaths are always going to exist. A lot of them are known, but we watch them unravel like a train wreck with no-one doing anything. I have my own controversial views around blame on advocacy for the individual rights over the majority. In democratratic society everyone has such a fear of the Big Brother idea that they choose to let true psychopaths run free and let the consequences roll for innocents. Is arming every citizen above 16 the solution for that?

Morrolan · Post by **Morrolan** » 31st Dec, '12, 12:53

T2K wrote:M - You can't really be so ill-informed to not know of school shootings in other countries outside the US, can you? I really doubt that, you seem rather intelligent in other discussions. There's been more than one your Nederlands alone. Here's a fatal incident: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3394831.stm

actually, no shootings was not correct, but of course the number is so much smaller as to be insignificant; you managed to dig up one whole incident in the Netherlands versus how many in the US exactly?

the point is when there are no guns at schools there will be less chance of shootings to the point of near statistical insignificance.

the point still remains that you have more shootings because you have more guns, more guns or adding guns at schools is therefore not going to solve the problem.

as one person said: We reduced drink driving accidents without a total ban on alcohol. Then again, no one would argue that more alcohol would have been the solution.

baloo · Post by **baloo** » 2nd Jan, '13, 07:58

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/ ... FI20111019

1 in 10 Americans on anti-depressants. Woman 2.5 times more likely to be on them than men.

That's a ridiculously high figure. Not sure if its a reflection on the drug industries marketing skills, the doctors need for a quick fix or a real issue with depression in society.

Imagine how many more shootings there would be if there weren't so many people popping anti-depressants daily in the US.

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 2nd Jan, '13, 08:15

Ah, so we have several answers to mass shootings in the US:

1: Allow teachers to be armed. In actual fact, if you arm the kids, then every single individual will now be able to defend themselves should an attack occur.
2: Put everyone on anti-depressants. Sod it, to make widespread usage guaranteed, just ensure McDonalds and Burger King use them crushed up and sprinkled like salt onto burgers and fries.

The Singapore Forum

The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate

Re: The Gun Debate