Author Topic: Newtown Massacre  (Read 18385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 6pairsofshoes

  • Homo Superior
  • ******
  • Posts: 3526
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #45 on: December 18, 2012, 08:46:12 AM »
I have not suggested banning anything.

I've only stated the obvious:  that extremely dangerous weapons need to be secured and that the owner should be responsible for their failure to see to it that they are.  They should be required to obtain liability insurance to cover their accidental misuse.

Offline bubu

  • Homo Erectus
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2012, 04:32:01 PM »
THE NEW YORKER ONLINE ONLY

« The Right Day to Talk About GunsMainWhat Obama Must Do About Guns »
DECEMBER 14, 2012
NEWTOWN AND THE MADNESS OF GUNS
POSTED BY ADAM GOPNIK
 


After the mass gun murders at Virginia Tech, I wrote about the unfathomable image of cell phones ringing in the pockets of the dead kids, and of the parents trying desperately to reach them. And I said (as did many others), This will go on, if no one stops it, in this manner and to this degree in this country alone—alone among all the industrialized, wealthy, and so-called civilized countries in the world. There would be another, for certain.

Then there were—many more, in fact—and when the latest and worst one happened, in Aurora, I (and many others) said, this time in a tone of despair, that nothing had changed. And I (and many others) predicted that it would happen again, soon. And that once again, the same twisted voices would say, Oh, this had nothing to do with gun laws or the misuse of the Second Amendment or anything except some singular madman, of whom America for some reason seems to have a particularly dense sample.

And now it has happened again, bang, like clockwork, one might say: Twenty dead children—babies, really—in a kindergarten in a prosperous town in Connecticut. And a mother screaming. And twenty families told that their grade-schooler had died. After the Aurora killings, I did a few debates with advocates for the child-killing lobby—sorry, the gun lobby—and, without exception and with a mad vehemence, they told the same old lies: it doesn’t happen here more often than elsewhere (yes, it does); more people are protected by guns than killed by them (no, they aren’t—that’s a flat-out fabrication); guns don’t kill people, people do; and all the other perverted lies that people who can only be called knowing accessories to murder continue to repeat, people who are in their own way every bit as twisted and crazy as the killers whom they defend. (That they are often the same people who pretend outrage at the loss of a single embryo only makes the craziness still crazier.)

So let’s state the plain facts one more time, so that they can’t be mistaken: Gun massacres have happened many times in many countries, and in every other country, gun laws have been tightened to reflect the tragedy and the tragic knowledge of its citizens afterward. In every other country, gun massacres have subsequently become rare. In America alone, gun massacres, most often of children, happen with hideous regularity, and they happen with hideous regularity because guns are hideously and regularly available.

The people who fight and lobby and legislate to make guns regularly available are complicit in the murder of those children. They have made a clear moral choice: that the comfort and emotional reassurance they take from the possession of guns, placed in the balance even against the routine murder of innocent children, is of supreme value. Whatever satisfaction gun owners take from their guns—we know for certain that there is no prudential value in them—is more important than children’s lives. Give them credit: life is making moral choices, and that’s a moral choice, clearly made.

All of that is a truth, plain and simple, and recognized throughout the world. At some point, this truth may become so bloody obvious that we will know it, too. Meanwhile, congratulate yourself on living in the child-gun-massacre capital of the known universe.



Offline bubu

  • Homo Erectus
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2012, 05:52:00 PM »
As Adam Gopnik isn't here, there is no point telling him how wrong he is. You can only discuss things with people if they are involved in the discussion.

But that article is flawed. Emotional, powerful, and wrong. Exactly what we don't need if we are to determine a way forward.

Clue: never ever trust someone on the internet that says that something is a simple fact.

I posted because much better than my words express my feeling. And as I already said if it was in my power i will make a big bonfire and put there all the weaponry of this world, but if the Usa doesn't do anything don't cry when something like that will happen again, and it will happens because the world is changed and violence permeate our societies

Offline smokester

  • Administrator
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 15836
  • Gender: Male
  • Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo!
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #48 on: December 19, 2012, 02:37:49 AM »
I am led to wonder what is different now. What is different in people, in behavior, in society that creates or fosters the creation of these monsters that leads to these terrible events? For approximately 100 years now, common citizens in the US have had access to semi-automatic (and for a period even fully automatic) weapons with high capacity magazines, but outbursts of this type just did not occur, especially not on the scale they do today and definitely not the seemingly endless examples of senseless, unprovoked murders of innocent people as there are now.
The information regarding theses events often puts the beginning of the trend at the Columbine massacres, but what changed suddenly prior to and along with that horrific event? What seems different is the way people handle anger or frustration. How has anger management changed? People of the past were notorious for holding in their anger, especially men, and one would think that would be lead directly to mass killings, but it didn't happen. American citizens now live in a society that accepts and encourages self-expression as the norm, presumably letting people vent more easily their frustrations in a safe and acceptable manner, but the opposite seems to be happening. These are obvious outbursts of just blind, irrational anger, but what has changed so drastically that leads so many individuals to believe the only answer left is to kill a school full of children or a theater filled with movie-goers?
Like most people, I'd like to see a stop to this madness, and like many US citizens I don't believe taking away the established rights of over 100 million law-abiding, private gun owners is the answer, but I would like someone to find out what is causing this trend, what is so often putting people into a position in life that the only way to quell their particular pain is by taking the lives of absolutely innocent victims. Like so many others, I find myself confused because it just doesn't make any sense.

Media, morality (lack of).



I posted because much better than my words express my feeling.

That's fair enough.

Adam Gopnik is a credible commentator so I won't dismiss his views too readily, if only in an attempt to make a little more sense of this inexplicable situation.
Don't put off until tomorrow, what you can put off until the day after.

There is an exception to every rule, apart from this one.

Offline 6pairsofshoes

  • Homo Superior
  • ******
  • Posts: 3526
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2012, 08:45:23 AM »
Gopnik is a gifted journalist who writes on cultural affairs and art for the New Yorker magazine.  He is not an expert on public policy or gun control.  His opinions are his own and not those of an authority on the subject.  You can accept or reject them for what they are:  the opinions of an educated and intelligent private citizen.

Our lack of commitment to a reasonable health care system that includes services for the mentally ill is, I believe, at the base of so many of these recent massacres.  But nobody wants to pay for universal health care.  The hysteria surrounding this is surpassed only by those proposals for legislation related to regulating gun ownership.  Maybe we eat too much sugar, who knows?

Offline goldshirt*9

  • Super Hero
  • *******
  • Posts: 7290
  • Gender: Male
  • Who yous looking ats
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2012, 12:17:28 PM »
The post is a very strong one sided emotional argument.

Offline 6pairsofshoes

  • Homo Superior
  • ******
  • Posts: 3526
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2012, 01:02:58 PM »
That is indisputable.  And, for the record, while  I can appreciate Gopnik's frustrations and passionate stance, I think he's hardly likely to change the minds of his opponents by calling them baby killers.

I've been thinking about this a good deal lately.  When people on here post opposing views, I listen and think about them.  Hysterical name calling is not going to change the situation.

I think about regulation and licensing and automobiles.  I construct arguments to strengthen the positions of my opponents in my head.  I think about the time I was at the DMV to get my driver's license renewed and there was someone there who had taken the test three times and failed.  And finally, the clerk bent the rules and let the guy have his license anyway.  So, the cold facts are this:  no system is perfect.  Set up rules and people will figure out a way around them.  The only real way to get at the problem is to identify its causes and try to effect a solution.  People are upset because guns make the scope of violence greater and easier.  But many people who hold to non regulation also don't want to pay taxes to take care of the Adam Lanzas in this world who end up shooting up elementary schools when they fall through the cracks of an inadequate health care system.

I don't have the answers, and I understand that both sides have great merit.  But still, something must be done.  If regulation isn't it, then what is?

Offline mishca09

  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 11386
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #52 on: December 19, 2012, 01:45:42 PM »
I'm not sure how Adam Lanza fell through cracks of health care system. he came from wealthy family, I'm sure there was no worry about health insurance at all. If he really was mentally ill (some articles suggest he wasnt) then we can't truly blame it on  health care system. maybe the school system for not educating parents that something may be a little off with their kids or let them know what warning signs to look for.

From what I've read so far and what's been reported, is that their were no medical reports of him being ill. Sure, now that this has happened everyone says "oh he was strange" "he was anti social " etc.

The only situation that I think of at the moment where the health care system could take partial blame for a shooting would be James Holmes guy were there was prior medical documentation of him being mentally ill.

 when does it end if we allow the government to control and take control of every aspect of our lives.

Offline smokester

  • Administrator
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 15836
  • Gender: Male
  • Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo!
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #53 on: December 19, 2012, 02:04:40 PM »
Something that confuses me is why guns are not allowed on aeroplanes in the U.S.?  I mean, if they are not inherently dangerous, but the owners can be, then why when you have every bit of information about the passenger would they worry about them taking guns on board?  Christ and others have suggested that people will always find a way to do evil deeds, so why the fuss?
Don't put off until tomorrow, what you can put off until the day after.

There is an exception to every rule, apart from this one.

Offline bubu

  • Homo Erectus
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #54 on: December 19, 2012, 02:32:53 PM »
A suggestion about sixpairofshoes doubts could be a firearms license, as much as you can demostrate you don't have mental illness you can carry your guns, exactly as for driving the car you need one. I know it is utopic because people there don't want regulation of any sort but why then have car regulation? Or as Smokester suggested no guns on airplaines, I can add museums and important places all around Usa and probably in the future personal searches when entering schools or kindergartens

Offline mishca09

  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 11386
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #55 on: December 19, 2012, 03:10:09 PM »
in most states in order to carry a gun on your person, you have to be evaluated and you get something filed at the police station, that gives you a right carry a gun with you. a firearms license sounds like a great idea but it won't keep mentally ill people from getting  a licenses because some mentally illness are not always diagnosed until later in life, like schizophrenia etc.  so I don't really see that as being a deterrent.

Offline bubu

  • Homo Erectus
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #56 on: December 19, 2012, 03:27:17 PM »
I don't know how it works there for driving licence, but here ,after few years you have to renew it, and it should be so for a firearms license. I don't know if that 's enough as a deterrent but could be a start

Offline 8ullfrog

  • Homo Superior
  • ******
  • Posts: 3163
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #57 on: December 19, 2012, 04:47:13 PM »
I have a safe handling certification issued by the DOJ bubu. And there is no bending in that. If you can't demonstrate safe handling, you can't get the certification, and you can't get a gun.

In fact, if you've begun purchasing a gun (They take the money first) and you fail the certification, they keep a goodly percentage of the money. I don't remember the exact percentage, but it is enough that I would not have purchased a firearm if I had any doubt about passing certification.

And yes, you do have to be re certified.

Apologies if I've posted this information here before, I've been fielding questions about this at just about every website I am a member on.

The hate has died down though, and that's nice. I really don't need to hear about what a horrible person I am for owning a gun.


This certification included a check by a licensed range master.

Offline bubu

  • Homo Erectus
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #58 on: December 19, 2012, 04:56:46 PM »
The DOJ you have ,does include a certification from your doctor about your mental balance (I don't doubt yours ) ? Sorry I really don't know all your laws...

Offline 6pairsofshoes

  • Homo Superior
  • ******
  • Posts: 3526
Re: Newtown Massacre
« Reply #59 on: December 19, 2012, 06:32:06 PM »
Most of my relatives own guns, not for target practice but for hunting.  I grew up with guns, so no, 8ullfrog, there's no way I automatically assume you are a bad person for owning one.  People have many reasons for owning guns.

I'm sure there are histrionics on both sides.  I think it's reasonable to have a discussion about what might be done to avert such tragedies in the future.  And thanks for the info about the process of certification required for you to have a gun.  What's sort of sad about this recent tragedy is that the shooter was encouraged to go to target practice with the guns by his mother.  More details are coming out about her, but he seems to have had antisocial tendencies and a diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome.  That, in itself, doesn't necessarily mean he was crazy, but it's hard for me to put my head in a place where shooting up an elementary school makes sense.  It seems like a cry of extreme rage or despair to me.  Teaching children how to cope with frustration and disappointment at an early age might help in the future.