Gun free zone

[cunicula]

I don't have a strategy of begging for mercy and hoping for the best (psychopaths aren't really good listeners to mercy pleas). In a rampage, I would try to escape and help others escape, if I find myself trapped, I would gather whatever weapon I can find and hide as best as I can. If found, I'll use them until incapacitated or dead.

Now, wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to go hunting for a weapon?

You definitely don't see the big picture, do you?
I don't want to be the safest I can be in a rampage situation. I want to be safe which means not having to be in a rampage situation at all.

Where I live we don't have the right to bear guns. We have 7 murders for 1_000_000 people each year. Among these murders there are 2 by guns. In the US this is around 60 to 65 deaths with 35 by guns each year (for the same amount of people). I simply don't understand why people think having more guns is a good thing.

I can understand needing guns in some places. I might even agree that guns in the hands of trained professionals in school might be a good thing in the current US situation, but allowing nearly everyone the right to bear something designed to kill just blows my mind. If your society can't protect you just change the society don't ask for more personal destructive power. Or at least plan to have it only temporarily as a lesser of two evils until your society catches up on the safety of its members.

You know, for the entirety of the Renaissance, people ran around with swords. Not a lot of "School stabbings" or "sword rampages."

You are getting your data from where? Or is it deductive reasoning based on the 'axioms' of Natural Law?
I am not aware of data for Renaissance Italy, but the conclusion you suggest seems highly unlikely given the experience of other countries for which data is available.

Homicide rates fell as countries developed stronger states with standing armies under the ruler's control. The leading authority is Tilly (1990).
The following quote is from "Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1990"

As the world has grown more warlike, interpersonal violence outside of the state's sphere has generally declined (Chesnais 1981, Gurr 1981, Hair 1971, Stone 1983). At least that seems to be true of Western countries, the only ones so far for which we have long series of evidence. Although the reports of murders, rapes, and collective violence in our daily newspapers may suggest otherwise, the chances of dying a violent death at some other civilian's hand have diminished enormously.
Homicide rates in thirteenth-century England, for example, were about ten times those of today, and perhaps twice those of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Rates of murder declined with particular rapidity from the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries.

[cunicula]

The Osaka School Massacre took place on June 8, 2001, at Ikeda Elementary School, an elite primary school affiliated with Osaka Kyoiku University in Osaka Prefecture, Japan.

At 10:15 that morning, 37-year-old former janitor Mamoru Takuma entered the school armed with a kitchen knife and began stabbing numerous school children and teachers. He killed eight children, mostly between the ages of seven and eight, and seriously wounded thirteen other children and two teachers

This week there was also a school attack in China too. A knife-wielding maniac slashed 22 children at a kindergarten. Not a single child died. Do you really think that upgrading the tools available to killers is a good idea?

I also don't think you want to bring up Japan (Japan has very strict gun control, though not as strict as Singapore). In 2006, there were 2 gun related deaths of any type in Japan, a country of about 130 million. By contrast, in the US, there were 642 fatal firearm accidents in 2006. In addition, there were about 30,000 homicides involving gunshot wounds.

[gyverlb]

From this account there are 21 known death over 2 years in a country with more than 4 times the population of the US. So in a single rampage in a school guns made the equivalent damage of 8 years worth of knife attacks in school in China.

So China (a nation that brutally represses protests) has about 0.016 school massacre deaths per million people.  So if we use your mathematics,

Mathematics are mathematics I don't have my own kind, I simply illustrated that the China knife rampages aren't really useful to compare China and US (especially if you want to make the US look good). Anyway you were the one to bring China up.

China isn't a civilized country by my standards (there's a set of personal freedom I believe to be mandatory and China doesn't enforce them and actively suppress them). If you want to make the situation better in a civilized country I believe looking at how others with common goals for their society get better results do it can shed some light on the subject, bringing China as an example doesn't seem relevant to me even without maths involved.

Do you agree that banning all guns would not end rampages that kill children?

Of course I agree. This is only a mean not a global solution.

[myrkul]

From this account there are 21 known death over 2 years in a country with more than 4 times the population of the US. So in a single rampage in a school guns made the equivalent damage of 8 years worth of knife attacks in school in China.

So China (a nation that brutally represses protests) has about 0.016 school massacre deaths per million people.  So if we use your mathematics,

Mathematics are mathematics I don't have my own kind, I simply illustrated that the China knife rampages aren't really useful to compare China and US (especially if you want to make the US look good). Anyway you were the one to bring China up.

China isn't a civilized country by my standards (there's a set of personal freedom I believe to be mandatory and China doesn't enforce them and actively suppress them). If you want to make the situation better in a civilized country I believe looking at how others with common goals for their society get better results do it can shed some light on the subject, bringing China as an example doesn't seem relevant to me even without maths involved.

Do you agree that banning all guns would not end rampages that kill children?

Of course I agree. This is only a mean not a global solution.

Do you agree that it would not even stop all firearms-using rampages that kill children?

[cunicula]

From this account there are 21 known death over 2 years in a country with more than 4 times the population of the US. So in a single rampage in a school guns made the equivalent damage of 8 years worth of knife attacks in school in China.

So China (a nation that brutally represses protests) has about 0.016 school massacre deaths per million people.  So if we use your mathematics,

Mathematics are mathematics I don't have my own kind, I simply illustrated that the China knife rampages aren't really useful to compare China and US (especially if you want to make the US look good). Anyway you were the one to bring China up.

China isn't a civilized country by my standards (there's a set of personal freedom I believe to be mandatory and China doesn't enforce them and actively suppress them). If you want to make the situation better in a civilized country I believe looking at how others with common goals for their society get better results do it can shed some light on the subject, bringing China as an example doesn't seem relevant to me even without maths involved.

Do you agree that banning all guns would not end rampages that kill children?

Of course I agree. This is only a mean not a global solution.

Do you agree that it would not even stop all firearms-using rampages that kill children?

Is there any issue in the world for you that is not completely black and white?

[myrkul]

Is there any issue in the world for you that is not completely black and white?

When you are a proponent of freedom and liberty, issues are surprisingly simple and straightforward.

Yup. Call it Rothbard's Razor.

[cunicula]

Is there any issue in the world for you that is not completely black and white?

When you are a proponent of freedom and liberty, issues are surprisingly simple and straightforward.

Yup. Call it Rothbard's Razor.

Love how simple-minded you guys are. And you're happy to remain that way.

[TheButterZone]

Is there any issue in the world for you that is not completely black and white?

When you are a proponent of freedom and liberty, issues are surprisingly simple and straightforward.

Yup. Call it Rothbard's Razor.

Love how simple-minded you guys are. And you're happy to remain that way.

show/hide

Happy? Far from it. Facing staggering amounts of categorically evil tyranny, organized and 100% self-immunized under the banner of "U.S. federal, state, and local government", defined by any non-sociopath's dictionary, puts me in a state of constant disgust and fury. Maybe I'll be happy when I'm dead (if I can make it through life without getting summarily executed while naked and unarmed, then written off as a suicide like the creeping incrementalism towards bloody empire we're now obviously headed toward, with the UNPatriotIC Act and everything else), since obviously those who have committed capital offenses that every genocidal dictator throughout history couldn't be more proud of, are self-immunized and will never suffer one IOTA of punishment or civil penalty for their categorical evil. Ever notice how evil people never have to worry about getting killed in the U.S. if they join the government? The good, on the other hand, if you become inconvenient for the evil, enjoy your dirt nap.

[myrkul]

What he said.

To that end, this woman's name was Victoria Soto:


She died a true hero. I will resist speculation on what might have happened had she been armed and trained.

[Equilux]

What he said.

To that end, this woman's name was Victoria Soto:


Assuming the story about her is true (you know how these things get inflated on the 'net), she died a true hero. I will resist speculation on what might have happened had she been armed and trained.

But in mentioning this in the way you did, you really outdone yourself. Just couldn't resist pushing your own agenda, even after posting a very sincere and fundamental message by Morgan Freeman, pointing to the very core of the problem. And you, in a most sickening way, used this piece of information in another sad attempt to get your pathetic and flawed point across.

With every post you make you reveal yourself to be the most insidious of fundamentalist there is.

[stochastic]

The Osaka School Massacre took place on June 8, 2001, at Ikeda Elementary School, an elite primary school affiliated with Osaka Kyoiku University in Osaka Prefecture, Japan.

At 10:15 that morning, 37-year-old former janitor Mamoru Takuma entered the school armed with a kitchen knife and began stabbing numerous school children and teachers. He killed eight children, mostly between the ages of seven and eight, and seriously wounded thirteen other children and two teachers

This week there was also a school attack in China too. A knife-wielding maniac slashed 22 children at a kindergarten. Not a single child died. Do you really think that upgrading the tools available to killers is a good idea?

I also don't think you want to bring up Japan (Japan has very strict gun control, though not as strict as Singapore). In 2006, there were 2 gun related deaths of any type in Japan, a country of about 130 million. By contrast, in the US, there were 642 fatal firearm accidents in 2006. In addition, there were about 30,000 homicides involving gunshot wounds.

The point is that banning of weapons will not stop these kinds of massacres.  We live in a dangerous world and taking away a person's right to self defense will not make it safer.

I don't see how anyone can tell a victim of a crime that they do not have the right to protect their body's using the most efficient method possible, a firearm.  For example, I don't see how anyone can tell a woman that has been raped that she does not have the right to carry a firearm.

Where do you get your 30,000 homicides from gunshot wounds in 2006?  In 2009 there were only 11,493 firearm homicides according to the CDC.

I like the WSJ's database on homicides in the United States.
http://projects.wsj.com/murderdata

----- Edit ------

You know Singapore is very interesting.  It has a civilian homicide rate 0.3 per 100,000 people of but a state homicide (execution) rate of 1.4 per 100,000.

[TheButterZone]

But in mentioning this in the way you did, you really outdone yourself. Just couldn't resist pushing your own agenda, even after posting a very sincere and fundamental message by Morgan Freeman, pointing to the very core of the problem. And you, in a most sickening way, used this piece of information in another sad attempt to get your pathetic and flawed point across.

With every post you make you reveal yourself to be the most insidious of fundamentalist there is.

Yeah, fucking fundamentalists, wanting to protect innocent life using the most effective tool to do so in existence...

[Equilux]

But in mentioning this in the way you did, you really outdone yourself. Just couldn't resist pushing your own agenda, even after posting a very sincere and fundamental message by Morgan Freeman, pointing to the very core of the problem. And you, in a most sickening way, used this piece of information in another sad attempt to get your pathetic and flawed point across.

With every post you make you reveal yourself to be the most insidious of fundamentalist there is.

Yeah, fucking fundamentalists, wanting to protect innocent life using the most effective tool to do so in existence...

Oh yeah keep on pushing that agenda, couldn't care less, but I'm just making sure that the twisted irony of using a quotation about the media using a tragedy for their own end, and simultaneously using a tragedy as a means to shove those flawed ideals in someones face once more, is not lost on you.

And I'm sure you'll have another semi-clever reply exactly missing this point and focusing on something that happens to suit your agenda.

[laughingbear]

If you tried to take away guns in this country, it will start civil war. It would be bloody on a scale you couldn't imagine... for peace of course.

 No one will be taking away my property or right to defend myself, with out force.

[myrkul]

But in mentioning this in the way you did, you really outdone yourself. Just couldn't resist pushing your own agenda, even after posting a very sincere and fundamental message by Morgan Freeman, pointing to the very core of the problem. And you, in a most sickening way, used this piece of information in another sad attempt to get your pathetic and flawed point across.

With every post you make you reveal yourself to be the most insidious of fundamentalist there is.

Yeah, fucking fundamentalists, wanting to protect innocent life using the most effective tool to do so in existence...

Oh yeah keep on pushing that agenda, couldn't care less, but I'm just making sure that the twisted irony of using a quotation about the media using a tragedy for their own end, and simultaneously using a tragedy as a means to shove those flawed ideals in someones face once more, is not lost on you.

And what flawed ideal is that? That instead of getting shot, she could have defended not only the students she did save, but also all the ones he killed after her, to say nothing of her own life?

I'd have been happy to leave it at what I said before. But you took it personal, I'm guessing because you did speculate on what might have happened, and it was exactly what I've just said, that she would have been not only a hero, but a living one, and the students and teachers shot after her would also have been unharmed. This puts the lie to your fantasy of an unarmed populace being somehow magically protected from bullets by laws saying that you can't take guns into schools, and you're afraid. Afraid that you've been wrong all this time, and that you have been unwittingly assisting these killers in their grisly task. So you get defensive, and pissed off. This is actually a good thing. It shows you have a conscience. Because when you see this, your conscience screams "Nooooo!" in true Skywalker fashion. "It can't be true!" and you recoil in horror, rage and shock. I forgive you for lashing out in this confused state. Suffer no guilt for past actions. Instead, act to make amends. Do as Sv. Freeman says, and forget the shooter's name. I already have. Remember Victoria Soto, and the actions she took. Reflect on the actions she could have taken, had she not been prohibited. Act to make those actions possible.

[TheButterZone]

But in mentioning this in the way you did, you really outdone yourself. Just couldn't resist pushing your own agenda, even after posting a very sincere and fundamental message by Morgan Freeman, pointing to the very core of the problem. And you, in a most sickening way, used this piece of information in another sad attempt to get your pathetic and flawed point across.

With every post you make you reveal yourself to be the most insidious of fundamentalist there is.

Yeah, fucking fundamentalists, wanting to protect innocent life using the most effective tool to do so in existence...

Oh yeah keep on pushing that agenda, couldn't care less, but I'm just making sure that the twisted irony of using a quotation about the media using a tragedy for their own end, and simultaneously using a tragedy as a means to shove those flawed ideals in someones face once more, is not lost on you.

And I'm sure you'll have another semi-clever reply exactly missing this point and focusing on something that happens to suit your agenda.

My "agenda" is saving INNOCENT lives, rather than CRIMINALS' lives. No more, no less.

Here's what even the most insane of violent criminals sees when he looks at a school in the U.S. and almost the whole rest of the world except Israel=A DEFENSELESS KILLING FIELD.

The sky must be orange in your perverse world, where up is down, back is front, and evil is doubleplusgood.

[fornit]

i would just like to add that bringing up the winnenden massacre as an example that this kind of situations can also occur when private firearms are prohibited is extremely weird. the shooter used one of his fathers  legally owned firearms, who could obtain it legally as a member of a gun sports club.
there where several killings with very similar circumstances in germany over the years and the fact that gun sports is still a bit of a tradition in parts of the country is basically the only reason the laws are not stricter by now.

[myrkul]

Yes, this most recent incident was perpetrated using his mother's legally obtained weapons. CT laws prohibit people under 21 from possessing firearms. He was 20.

Shame that laws aren't magic, isn't it? Telling someone "no" only works if they're willing to listen.

[fornit]

but not having any firearms in the house would have worked in both cases.

btw: did you really advocate that the kids in school themselves should carry firearms for protection?

[myrkul]

but not having any firearms in the house would have worked in both cases.

btw: did you really advocate that the kids themselves should carry firearms?

I don't know where you got that from, I really don't. Typical fornit logic, I guess. I say, "Oh, look, this 20 year old broke a law that was supposed to keep him from having guns. Shame laws only work if you're law-abiding." You hear, "We should give the kids guns." LOLWUT?

Yeah, her not having guns would have meant he didn't get her guns. Would it have meant he didn't get any guns? No. And if you think he couldn't have gotten guns somewhere, think again. If you want a gun, you can find one, and the dude behind the convenience store doesn't do background checks.