Excellen Browning Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Try passing some gun ownership restriction laws on the federal level. Good luck. Republicans will go ape shit, even more that they are going right now. Anyway lifey, I had expected a better situational analysis from you. I am disappoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehab Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I heard an NPR article a couple days ago that claimed many Democratic officials, particularly those that were around in the Clinton era, are convinced that pushing gun issues in the 90's cost them so much political capital that it's effectively what cost them a ton of seats around then. Even if I were to disagree or call them stinkin' cowards over it (less than totally convinced myself, I'll admit), I can see what their angle might be, concerning their reluctance to unite in pushing gun control. When she last visited, my Canadian aunt talked about how Canadian politics was going way south and starting to look like it was getting ideas from US politics, actually, but with the added caveat that voters don't directly pick the President. That side of my family is, however, nothing if not anti-conservative, and I doubt I got the whole story from one dinner. I'll have to talk to them about stuff more when I visit in a weekish. aside: Dude I haven't read that full Harper story yet but the title is giving me some Dubya vibes. Bad vibes, man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Life Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Try passing some gun ownership restriction laws on the federal level. Good luck. Republicans will go ape shit, even more that they are going right now. It's a shame that American politics works that way. If one side proposes something, the opposite oppose it without reason. Just to spite side A. Anyway lifey, I had expected a better situational analysis from you. I am disappoint. It's more people here are turning anti-Life because of my whole stance on Israel/Obama. dondon and Anouleth mostly. I don't like Obama. I think he postures way too much. Maybe I vent a lot more bile than I should but I seriously didn't like the address to the nation he made because it felt like he was also trying to make supporters of guns not worry about future gun control laws. He tries too hard to please everyone which bothers me because that tactic was a joke during November. There was a cartoon in the Israeli paper of Israeli planes bombing Gaza while they shoot back rockets and in the foreground, Hilary Clinton's talking to Obama and tells him that "negotiations are smoother than ever". This administration believes that it has the power to please both sides in any given conflict and here's a great example for you. A little more on topic though. I don't think gun control is necessarily the answer. If most shootings like these were gang related, I would agree that gun control would solve the problem. However, when you have a 20 year old kid that shoots up a kindergarten class for no apparent reason, taking a look at guidance programs and the state of mental institutions (and care delivered within them) would do a lot more than just having to register for a gun. Gun registry won't actually stop these mass murders. Especially not with a shooter that offs himself afterwards. He doesn't care about being caught because he's already planning on killing himself by the end of the show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 It's a shame that American politics works that way. If one side proposes something, the opposite oppose it without reason. Just to spite side A. It's more people here are turning anti-Life because of my whole stance on Israel/Obama. dondon and Anouleth mostly. I don't like Obama. I think he postures way too much. Maybe I vent a lot more bile than I should but I seriously didn't like the address to the nation he made because it felt like he was also trying to make supporters of guns not worry about future gun control laws. He tries too hard to please everyone which bothers me because that tactic was a joke during November. There was a cartoon in the Israeli paper of Israeli planes bombing Gaza while they shoot back rockets and in the foreground, Hilary Clinton's talking to Obama and tells him that "negotiations are smoother than ever". This administration believes that it has the power to please both sides in any given conflict and here's a great example for you. A little more on topic though. I don't think gun control is necessarily the answer. If most shootings like these were gang related, I would agree that gun control would solve the problem. However, when you have a 20 year old kid that shoots up a kindergarten class for no apparent reason, taking a look at guidance programs and the state of mental institutions (and care delivered within them) would do a lot more than just having to register for a gun. Gun registry won't actually stop these mass murders. Especially not with a shooter that offs himself afterwards. He doesn't care about being caught because he's already planning on killing himself by the end of the show. I think the specific proposal is on banning assault rifles and high-capacity ammo magazines rather than gun registration. In this case, the killer did use an assault rifle with a 30 round magazine, which was owned by his mother perfectly legally. Democrats are also seeking to remove the "gun show" loophole, where guns can be bought without a background check if done in a private sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Life Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I think the specific proposal is on banning assault rifles and high-capacity ammo magazines rather than gun registration. In this case, the killer did use an assault rifle with a 30 round magazine, which was owned by his mother perfectly legally. Democrats are also seeking to remove the "gun show" loophole, where guns can be bought without a background check if done in a private sale. I can back that but I still don't think it's going to change anything. A gun on its own cannot kill. A human being needs to aim it at someone and pull the trigger. Therefore, the problem starts with the person, not the weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 A gun on its own cannot kill. A human being needs to aim it at someone and pull the trigger. Therefore, the problem starts with the person, not the weapon. I believe controlling the weapons available to the public is an easier effort than attempting to help every person with mental health issues who may or may not be a danger to the public. That's not to say I don't believe more effort shouldn't be put into helping people with mental issues, because that should be a big priority for any first-world country like the USA. The way I see it, don't pick only one issue (either gun control or mental illness), but focus on dealing with both. That way, the likelihood of this happening again would (should) decrease a lot more than if only one issue is worked upon. After all, a person can kill others with more than just guns. Although guns, aside from explosives (a favourite for terrorists) and lethal gases (that terrorist attack that happened in an underground train station in Japan in the 90's comes to mind, can't remember the specifics), are one of the best methods for mass killings I know of. Trying to argue which method would be best to stop such tragedies is pretty redundant when both issues can and should be improved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtSmilies Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Therefore, the problem starts with the person, not the weapon. And the problem is continued with the weapon. Saying that really doesn't change anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aere Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I live right next to Newark, New Jersey. I guarantee a large percentage of the people owning guns and committing murders there do not have a license. As a 16 year old high-schooler, I could contact a friend and have myself a new handgun before the week is out, for a couple hundred dollars. If one really wanted to, they'd have no problem simply walking into my school and massacring multitudes of people. I don't believe gun regulations will stop anybody who really wants to commit a crime. The black market is readily accessible, and a criminal won't care about breaking the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenlord Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Since everyone is still talking about guns, let's add science in to the mix: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulina Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I believe controlling the weapons available to the public is an easier effort than attempting to help every person with mental health issues who may or may not be a danger to the public. This. I don't believe this has been stated more succinctly or concisely here. If anyone thinks this is not the most direct and pragmatic route, they're hallucinating. Regardless of the direction the USA takes in mental health policy, ease of access to firearms is the biggest wildcard. Anyone who denies that is shady, and I would assume have some personal stake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Tarrasque Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) "No no no, let's continue with our interpretation of the 2nd amendment because we're the elite and we're totally right about it. What we need to do now is look for something to pin the blame on to quell down the tension from these gun control liberals and get everyone to agree with us that drugs are more dangerous to keep around than having guns as easily accessible to these morons as they currently are. Guns are the LAST thing we wanna look into to avoid these shootings because the correlation between the gun control and lower rates of gun homicides in other countries is complete bullshit. OH, I KNOW, LET'S BLAME VIDEO GAMES AGAIN AND FORGET THAT RESEARCH DURING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONTRADICTED US!" - A good number of politicians in the US. Reason? Probably money. It's amusing and sad how the US is supposed to be the "greatest country in the world" and yet the leadership here is composed of such fools. What sucks even more is that these shootings seem to kill innocent people and never the scum that make this country's leadership suck. I don't believe gun regulations will stop anybody who really wants to commit a crime. The black market is readily accessible, and a criminal won't care about breaking the law. It won't stop anyone who really wants to try but it WILL stop the easy possibility of guns ending up where they don't belong, IE the common man that gets so easily upset, loses rational thought and has to take it out on something OR, get this, an 11-year old who was given a handgun by his mother and pulled out said gun on recess threatening to kill if some kids told anyone. Why was the gun given to this kid? Because the idiot mother thought he should have it for protection because of this particular shooting. Now where's the logical consideration of whether or not this kid actually has the maturity and judgment to use this for proper self-defense instead of just killing the first kid that teases him? The use of this black market argument in this thread has been pitiful at best. Black Market != Grocery store in plain sight. Edited December 20, 2012 by Sirius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Reggie Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) People aren't using videogames as a scapegoat for gun control, that's ridiculous. Barring gun control issues, People truly think that violent video games (hell, ANY video games with a semblance of violence in it, ala DW3 of all things) influenced these tragedies. It's a serious issue that shouldn't be made fun of, because video games are simply a medium of art. To blame that a medium influences people like Adam Lanza to do what they do is saddening. There needs to be a breakthrough where the mainstream media will finally treat video games as seriously as movies, or books, and not jump the gun on them when they find out that the supposed Adam Lanza "liked" Mass Effect. Edited December 20, 2012 by Constable Reggie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrightBow Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) The whole "blame video games" routine is for all it's predictability still depressing but it's not like it ever leads to anything. And now that games are a lot more mainstream, those accusations will meet less and less approval anyway because people do not want to consider something they like to be evil or harmful and will go to great lengths to defend it. This time around I'm really more worried by the media's attempt to link the crime with Asperger Autism. For example the German tabloid newspaper and nothing short of the biggest newspaper in general "Bild" had an article online under the headline: "The crazy Amok-Killer from Newtown Cold as Ice. No Empathy. No Pity. Bild explains the Asperger-Syndrome" What was particular disheartening about that article was that the article itself wasn't even such a big pile of crap. Saying that there is no connection between Asperger and violence was essentially the first thing written in the article. Of course like all the other articles on the topic, they had no reliable source for the assumption that the killer had Asperger in the first place. I'm very disgusted that a group of people are being baseless accused of being potential killers when communication is the very thing they struggle with. I think that's kinda unfair. Edited December 21, 2012 by BrightBow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excellen Browning Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 People aren't using videogames as a scapegoat for gun control, that's ridiculous. Barring gun control issues, People truly think that violent video games (hell, ANY video games with a semblance of violence in it, ala DW3 of all things) influenced these tragedies. It's a serious issue that shouldn't be made fun of, because video games are simply a medium of art. To blame that a medium influences people like Adam Lanza to do what they do is saddening. There needs to be a breakthrough where the mainstream media will finally treat video games as seriously as movies, or books, and not jump the gun on them when they find out that the supposed Adam Lanza "liked" Mass Effect. The funny thing is that humans often feel that randomly punching(or something similar) a guy is more cooler and more justified than normal after they've seen a moive like commando. In that sense, you could extrapolate that to video games. ("real" or animated creates the same stimulus, basically the same thing to the mind) The problem being that in those games violence is usually not glorified but a means to an end, a way to beat a game, and when it is, it's so unrealistic you should be aware it's not real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundus64 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Extreme Hell awaits for this murderer, but still I am surprised how he managed to get inside the school. What happened to the murderer anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Extreme Hell awaits for this murderer, but still I am surprised how he managed to get inside the school. What happened to the murderer anyways? He shot himself (as criminals in these kinds of massacres often do). Edited December 21, 2012 by Anouleth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone2Ground Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) The NRA just did their press conference about the shootings earlier today. ... I don't care what your stance on gun control is, their attempts to redirect the blame and then get ARMED GUARDS inside all schools is a bit disgusting. They actually want a man with a gun inside all schools across the nation every day. Because, y'know, having a trained gunman armed and inside the building will really calm the parents down. People aren't using videogames as a scapegoat for gun control, that's ridiculous. Barring gun control issues, People truly think that violent video games (hell, ANY video games with a semblance of violence in it, ala DW3 of all things) influenced these tragedies. It's a serious issue that shouldn't be made fun of, because video games are simply a medium of art. To blame that a medium influences people like Adam Lanza to do what they do is saddening. There needs to be a breakthrough where the mainstream media will finally treat video games as seriously as movies, or books, and not jump the gun on them when they find out that the supposed Adam Lanza "liked" Mass Effect. NRA are. Edited December 22, 2012 by Gone2Ground Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) The NRA just want to blame everything but guns, and suggest that more guns is the only workable solution. If that means they have to blame 20 year old video games and recommend turning every school in America into a fortress, so be it! Edited December 22, 2012 by Anouleth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Reggie Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) The NRA just did their press conference about the shootings earlier today. ... I don't care what your stance on gun control is, their attempts to redirect the blame and then get ARMED GUARDS inside all schools is a bit disgusting. They actually want a man with a gun inside all schools across the nation every day. Because, y'know, having a trained gunman armed and inside the building will really calm the parents down. It may be a bit outlandish, but having guards in school isn't that bad an idea. My high school had police officers stationed there, and it "calmed the parents down", even if they didn't really do much. NRA are. It's understandable that the NRA does it, but the NRA isn't "a good number of politicians". It doesn''t explain why idiots like David Axelrod or Joe Lieberman think violent video games are the crime, because they sure as hell aren't trying to deflect blame off gun control problems. Edited December 22, 2012 by Constable Reggie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) It's understandable that the NRA does it, but the NRA isn't "a good number of politicians". It doesn''t explain why idiots like David Axelrod or Joe Lieberman think violent video games are the crime, because they sure as hell aren't trying to deflect blame off gun control problems. What the NRA think, politicians think. As George Stephanopoulos said, "Let me make one small vote for the NRA. They're good citizens. They call their Congressmen. They write. They vote. They contribute. And they get what they want over time." And this situation, is exactly what the NRA want. When shootings occurred in the UK, in Australia, swift bans on handguns were implemented. In the US, it's unlikely that even an assault rifle ban will go through. And what you need to know about politicians and their attitude towards video games, you can learn from LaPierre's speech. He talks about Mortal Kombat, and the movie Natural Born Killers: which came out 20 years ago. These people are old, white men who are completely insulated from any knowledge about video game culture: the only game he can name, was the game that caused a big moral panic 20 years ago among politicians. Edited December 22, 2012 by Anouleth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 It's all about the money. It's just business for the NRA. Truly disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Reggie Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) Blame on video games isn't just limited to the US. US politicians may decry video games, but at least they're not the ones banning advertisements for them.The US Supreme Court stands behind video games as an art form, it's just the individual idiots who still try to pin the blame on them. That's not the case in the UK. Also, so what if the NRA lobbies politicians for their views? The AMA, National Right to Life, AFB, all groups lobby for their interests. Just because you disagree with the NRA's opinions doesn't mean it's wrong for them to try and lobby for them, when it's fine for every other interest group to do the same. edit: Lapierre didn't JUST cite a 20 year old game (gee, it's even possible he was referencing the new MK, titled Mortal Kombat), he mentioned Bulletstorm (2011), Grand Theft Auto (2008), and Splatterhouse (2010). To cherry pick a title that can be mistaken for the older one to try and prove that US politicians are out of the loop is pathetic. Edited December 22, 2012 by Constable Reggie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Blame on video games isn't just limited to the US. US politicians may decry video games, but at least they're not the ones banning advertisements for them.The US Supreme Court stands behind video games as an art form, it's just the individual idiots who still try to pin the blame on them. That's not the case in the UK. Also, so what if the NRA lobbies politicians for their views? The AMA, National Right to Life, AFB, all groups lobby for their interests. Just because you disagree with the NRA's opinions doesn't mean it's wrong for them to try and lobby for them, when it's fine for every other interest group to do the same. Of course they have the right to lobby for their interests: I never said they didn't. But that doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that the reason why gun-control legislation is impossible to pass in the US, while it's quite easy in other developed countries, is due to the influence of the NRA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Reggie Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) It's not just the NRA that opposes gun control.They're simply the most famous (or infamous however you want to look at it) interest group about it. The NRA alone isn't what influences gun control issues. And to try and discredit them by laughable means is ridiculous. Edited December 22, 2012 by Constable Reggie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 When shootings occurred in the UK, in Australia, swift bans on handguns were implemented. In the US, it's unlikely that even an assault rifle ban will go through. What constitutes an assault rifle is nebulous at best. Aside from the fact that the majority of the time shootings are performed with pistols, most of the time bans of these sorts are aimed only at weapons that simply look menacing, rather than being any sort of genuine problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.