DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Another school shooting
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 1205, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/14/2012 10:24:51 PM · #76
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

This reaffirms my view that guns don't kill people...people kill people.

And fishing rods don't catch fish... people catch fish, rockets don't fly to the moon... people fly to the moon, blah, blah, blah. My heartbreak over this horrible event is matched by absolute outrage over vacuous arguments like that made by cowards afraid to face honest discussion of a very real concern. Does anyone dismiss North Korea's ICBM tests with, "Hey, nuclear weapons don't kill people... people kill people?" How can it be that the people who demand voter registration reform to confront an imaginary threat are often the very same ones who refuse to consider addressing gun registration reform in the face of undeniable recurring tragedy? How is it conceivable that the people who consider even a single lost embryo a constitutional crisis tend to be the same ones who take the exact opposite stance of dismissing a dozen or more murdered Facebook account holders as a threat to undermine the policies that enabled those deaths? Within the past 24 hours, another man attacked 22 students in China with a knife... and all 22 are still alive because people without guns don't kill people as easily as people with guns kill people.

This is not about wholesale repeal of the 2nd amendment, but a modern implementation to balance the right to bear arms with the right to live without fear of those arms in a post-musket world. Maybe something could have prevented this nightmare, maybe not, but failure to stop all the bad guys is a poor excuse for doing nothing at all until the next opportunity to do nothing at all. For gun lovers, it's always too early to discuss gun control. For 27 shattered Connecticut families, it's too late.
12/14/2012 10:28:56 PM · #77
Plenty of threads on gun control - this isn't going to change anyone's mind on the issue. I would rather we focus on something hopefully more people can agree on and that is: not granting any level of infamy to the perpetrator. As I've stated, I would be ALL for a law that prohibits the name and images of these people from being shown or distributed. Ban it like child pornography. In ancient Egypt, they used to destroy any reference to a Pharaoh's name to make sure they had no afterlife (or something like that) anyway, that's what we need to do with these people - erase them from existence. Fine to study them as "Case #312" or whatever, but their name and image shall be expunged. I think that would prevent more of these things than gun control.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 22:29:44.
12/14/2012 10:39:42 PM · #78
I could have been misinformed by the news but I heard that the guns belonged to the mother and that the shooter (her son) had a history of mental illness....why then were the guns NOT LOCKED UP!
12/14/2012 10:42:25 PM · #79
Originally posted by sceneit:

Outlaw guns, outlaw knives, outlaw diesel fuel and fertilizer, outlaw alcohol, outlaw cigarettes, outlaw cars, and anything else that kills large quantities of people.

Need I point out that every one of these already have existing or proposed federal restrictions for exactly that reason? In every U.S. state, your ability to drive a car requires safety training, insurance, a supervised competency test, licensing and government registration in a nationally linked computer database, while a private firearm sale requires none of the above. If ammonium nitrate bombs were involved in massacres several times a year, they would already be severely restricted.
12/14/2012 10:44:24 PM · #80
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

This reaffirms my view that guns don't kill people...people kill people.

And fishing rods don't catch fish... people catch fish, rockets don't fly to the moon... people fly to the moon, blah, blah, blah. My heartbreak over this horrible event is matched by absolute outrage over vacuous arguments like that made by cowards afraid to face honest discussion of a very real concern. Does anyone dismiss North Korea's ICBM tests with, "Hey, nuclear weapons don't kill people... people kill people?" How can it be that the people who demand voter registration reform to confront an imaginary threat are often the very same ones who refuse to consider addressing gun registration reform in the face of undeniable recurring tragedy? How is it conceivable that the people who consider even a single lost embryo a constitutional crisis tend to be the same ones who take the exact opposite stance of dismissing a dozen or more murdered Facebook account holders as a threat to undermine the policies that enabled those deaths? Within the past 24 hours, another man attacked 22 students in China with a knife... and all 22 are still alive because people without guns don't kill people as easily as people with guns kill people.

This is not about wholesale repeal of the 2nd amendment, but a modern implementation to balance the right to bear arms with the right to live without fear of those arms in a post-musket world. Maybe something could have prevented this nightmare, maybe not, but failure to stop all the bad guys is a poor excuse for doing nothing at all until the next opportunity to do nothing at all. For gun lovers, it's always too early to discuss gun control. For 27 shattered Connecticut families, it's too late.


Do you really think that gun laws would prevent people Hell bent on causing death and destruction from getting a gun and doing just that? There are laws restricting the possession of firearms on school property. That didn't seem to deter this guy in the least, did it?

12/14/2012 10:45:20 PM · #81
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by sceneit:

Outlaw guns, outlaw knives, outlaw diesel fuel and fertilizer, outlaw alcohol, outlaw cigarettes, outlaw cars, and anything else that kills large quantities of people.

Need I point out that every one of these already have existing or proposed federal restrictions for exactly that reason? In every U.S. state, your ability to drive a car requires safety training, insurance, a supervised competency test, licensing and government registration in a nationally linked computer database, while a private firearm sale requires none of the above. If ammonium nitrate bombs were involved in massacres several times a year, they would already be severely restricted.


Yet people drive cars all the time without licenses, insurance, registration etc.\
12/14/2012 10:46:27 PM · #82
Originally posted by sceneit:

I heard that the guns belonged to the mother and that the shooter (her son) had a history of mental illness....why then were the guns NOT LOCKED UP!

Because there's no law requiring that.
12/14/2012 10:48:21 PM · #83
There is a big difference between restricting and preventing.

Restricting simply means "you can't do that", but does nothing in the way to prevent it. The only way to prevent that is to remove one of the two factors, either the person or the gun. Neither on its own killed anyone, but together it did. Therefore, you must remove one of them to prevent it.

Originally posted by Spork99:

There are laws restricting the possession of firearms on school property. That didn't seem to deter this guy in the least, did it?
12/14/2012 10:50:55 PM · #84
Originally posted by Spork99:


Do you really think that gun laws would prevent people Hell bent on causing death and destruction from getting a gun and doing just that? There are laws restricting the possession of firearms on school property. That didn't seem to deter this guy in the least, did it?


No, you are right. There is no way to stop every single one of these senseless acts.

However, it would stop very many of them, at least the ones that were a spur-of-the-moment thing, because this time, he could NOT simply grab the nearest gun. It won't stop the maniac that made the effort to plan his crime, but surely it would be worth saving at least quite a number of innocent lives.
12/14/2012 10:51:23 PM · #85
Should there have to be a law requiring you to lock up firearms from your mentally ill child....
12/14/2012 10:52:17 PM · #86
Originally posted by Spork99:

Do you really think that gun laws would prevent people Hell bent on causing death and destruction from getting a gun and doing just that? There are laws restricting the possession of firearms on school property. That didn't seem to deter this guy in the least, did it?

As noted, "failure to stop all the bad guys is a poor excuse for doing nothing at all until the next opportunity to do nothing at all." Perhaps a law requiring guns to be locked up in the presence of the mentally ill would have made a difference in this case by reducing opportunity. I would certainly prefer that to the, "Cross your fingers and hope it's not your kid's school" approach. Especially since it very nearly was.
12/14/2012 10:54:20 PM · #87
Originally posted by sceneit:

Should there have to be a law requiring you to lock up firearms from your mentally ill child....

A better question is whether there's any rational reason to NOT have such a law.
12/14/2012 11:00:27 PM · #88
Well said, totally agree on this. It's human nature to be curious about what the individual looks like, family history, and what the hell is wrong with them to begin with. An 'unknown' shooter is what they should be though. I think it would help all the people involved so they won't have the image of them engraved in their minds. It would be easier for me at least.
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Plenty of threads on gun control - this isn't going to change anyone's mind on the issue. I would rather we focus on something hopefully more people can agree on and that is: not granting any level of infamy to the perpetrator. As I've stated, I would be ALL for a law that prohibits the name and images of these people from being shown or distributed. Ban it like child pornography. In ancient Egypt, they used to destroy any reference to a Pharaoh's name to make sure they had no afterlife (or something like that) anyway, that's what we need to do with these people - erase them from existence. Fine to study them as "Case #312" or whatever, but their name and image shall be expunged. I think that would prevent more of these things than gun control.
12/14/2012 11:00:29 PM · #89
Unfortunately, most people will never be able to realize these points until such an event happens in their own neighborhood. Perhaps, its a good sign that so many people don't get these points. Then again, every day, more and more people do.

Originally posted by scalvert:


A better question is whether there's any rational reason to NOT have such a law.
12/14/2012 11:02:01 PM · #90
Well said on a Facebook post: "If your first reaction to shootings is to think "Oh shit, Obama/liberals are going to try to take our guns!" your priorities as a human being SUCK."
12/14/2012 11:21:04 PM · #91
I have 3 adult children...they all drive and they all do it legally...every time I hear sirens I call or text them to make sure they are ok...does that mean that cars should be banned?...no it doesn't...it means that my kids have to be responsible and other drivers on the road need to be equally responsible...there are numerous laws governing driver and motor vehicle safety...and there are far more motor vehicle deaths each year than gun fatalities...the Federal Firearms License is obtained through a Federal screening process...to obtain a gun legally is equally if not FAR more difficult than it is to obtain a drivers license...getting behind the wheel is a responsibility we all take for granted...unfortunately owning a gun has the same pitfalls...but law abiding,responsible gun owners don't and shouldn't need laws to tell them to lock up their firearms...just like law abiding responsible drivers shouldn't have to be told not to drink and drive...there IS a law stating that and there are still DWI's...there are still alcohol related motor vehicle fatalities...basically the bottom line is you don't blame cars for motor vehicle accidents...don't blame the guns for tragedies like this...should the law be revisited?...sure...can it be tweeked?...absolutely...but the outcry for banning legally purchased firearms is absurd...
12/14/2012 11:29:24 PM · #92
I'm ready to get hammered here by the people that do not own a gun or believe that no one should. Here goes.

I carry a conceal permit license and am a very responsible gun owner. The problem with gun laws is that it takes away the rights of the law abiding citizen to carry their firearm. For example I am not allowed by law to carry into a bar or place where alcohol is served, a school, a church, any federal buildings....etc. in the state of Louisiana so I do not. These laws only make it hard for the law abiding gun owner to protect themselves or the ones around them. If guns were outlawed a long time ago and there were none on the streets we wouldn't have this issue because no one would own a gun and we would all be safer. I truly wish this were the case.

The truth of the matter is that criminals do not follow the law and responsible gun owners do. Check the stats of city's in the United states with a band on conceal carry or a ban on guns all together. The gun crime statistics are usually much higher. City like Kenneshaw, Georgia who require you to responsibly own a gun if you own a home has significantly lower gun crime and home invasions (no surprise).

How can gun laws prevent this from happening? Your not allowed to bring a gun within 100 feet of a school in most states (no sure of Connecticut's law). So some insane person broke the law and no responsible gun owner was there to combat the situation. Now, when this point is brought up then there are anti gun proponents saying, "it'll turn into a shootout with bullets flying everywhere and innocent people getting hit." This is a possibility and I do not deny that but to carry a concealed handgun you must go through a full day course and prove that you are competent to gun laws and how to handle a gun. I'd rather no one die except the shooter or at least have a chance to lower the amount a people that he is able to kill or injure. You can not deny that if a responsible gun owner was there and took this man down before he could kill anyone or at least before he could get the body count as high as he did you would be applauding him/her today as a hero.

Gun Free zones invite the criminals. Criminals aren't dumb. If they know that no one else will have a gun guess what.....that's where they are going to take out there aggressions. BTW the the Aurora theater was also a gun free zone.
12/14/2012 11:30:10 PM · #93
Excellent post!

I'm glad you kids are safe. I just realized, and I hesitate to find out tomorrow, if the kids in a Christmas card a friend sent me are ok.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Well said on a Facebook post: "If your first reaction to shootings is to think "Oh shit, Obama/liberals are going to try to take our guns!" your priorities as a human being SUCK."
12/14/2012 11:34:06 PM · #94
Originally posted by scalvert:

Well said on a Facebook post: "If your first reaction to shootings is to think "Oh shit, Obama/liberals are going to try to take our guns!" your priorities as a human being SUCK."


BTW I read this after my posting and I hope that no one thinks that I am this way. My heart truly goes out to the families in that were affected. The reason people get so hostile is because of what I stated in my post above. American's tend to go to the extreme left or the right of the issues that no one ever sees the middle ground.

Same with video games and music. Kid plays to much Halo and listens to rock music and we need to ban video games and Marilyn Manson.

This issue comes down to responsible parenting and responsible gun ownership to protect yourself against the illegal guns which you will never get rid of.

I am also not an NRA member and probably never will be one because I feel they to extreme right for me and fight blindly for absurd gun laws in some cases.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 23:38:43.
12/14/2012 11:35:08 PM · #95
Originally posted by sceneit:

I have 3 adult children...they all drive and they all do it legally...every time I hear sirens I call or text them to make sure they are ok...does that mean that cars should be banned?...no it doesn't...it means that my kids have to be responsible and other drivers on the road need to be equally responsible...there are numerous laws governing driver and motor vehicle safety...and there are far more motor vehicle deaths each year than gun fatalities...the Federal Firearms License is obtained through a Federal screening process...to obtain a gun legally is equally if not FAR more difficult than it is to obtain a drivers license...getting behind the wheel is a responsibility we all take for granted...unfortunately owning a gun has the same pitfalls...but law abiding,responsible gun owners don't and shouldn't need laws to tell them to lock up their firearms...just like law abiding responsible drivers shouldn't have to be told not to drink and drive...there IS a law stating that and there are still DWI's...there are still alcohol related motor vehicle fatalities...basically the bottom line is you don't blame cars for motor vehicle accidents...don't blame the guns for tragedies like this...should the law be revisited?...sure...can it be tweeked?...absolutely...but the outcry for banning legally purchased firearms is absurd...


A car is necessary for travel in the vast majority of cases, a gun is only necessary to law enforcement, military. Less guns means less gun deaths.

The NRA has such a lethal grip on America that they will fight every law, even those logical, legitimate laws against huge clips on semi automatic weapons.

Lets go back to six shot revolvers, why would you need more. If you can protect yourself with a smith and Wesson .38, , you need to move and change your lifestyle, not buy a Sherman tank and an rpg.

But two things scare me: 1. The casual "I'm just blowing off steam with my desert eagle and m16" this leads to the proliferation of legal guns, which ultimately get lost or stolen.
And 2. People thinking the flawed thought that "if more people had guns, less of these mass shootings would happen"

This case is a perfect example, should the principal have been armed that would have stopped this? That is absurd.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 23:38:04.
12/14/2012 11:42:16 PM · #96
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Plenty of threads on gun control - this isn't going to change anyone's mind on the issue.

...or we could just rehash it all once again to no avail. *sigh*
12/14/2012 11:42:18 PM · #97
These children and adults died at school.

School should be... outlawed. Very dangerous.

12/14/2012 11:44:41 PM · #98
Originally posted by LydiaToo:

These children and adults died at school.

School should be... outlawed. Very dangerous.


Same with the mentally ill, they should be... outlawed. Very dangerous.
12/14/2012 11:46:55 PM · #99
The stabbings in China could certainly have been avoided. WHY is there no knife control?

I am at risk every night when I cook dinner! I should NOT be trusted to use a knife. Knives are NO GOOD!

I need to give up my knives, even though I've never had a thought to use them except for cooking... The knives might KILL ME as I COOK!

Knives must be outlawed. They cannot be controlled.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 23:47:30.
12/14/2012 11:47:24 PM · #100
I do not own a gun and I have no opinion on the latter.

I have nothing to hammer you on. Everything you said has a valid point. In fact, one that could lead to a circular argument which is one of the reasons things are the way they are.

There is no simple solution, I think that is pretty clear. Society has changed and is continuing to change. Overall I don't think there is disagreement that the respect for life is different. Perhaps if there is a true understanding of why/how and what the solution is we wouldn't be having this post.

But, its clear some solution is necessary to prevent what happened today.

* It is not acceptable in any way for a parent to get a call finding out that their child had been shot dead in school.
* It is not acceptable for parents to grieve over the lifeless body of their child, that they cared for, fed, raised, is now laying in a coffin.
* It is not acceptable that every Christmas they will remember the day they were told their child is dead.
*It is not acceptable for a couple to go home after the burial to see their child's room sitting there waiting for life that will never be.

I ask, if gun laws can prevent that.....is it really all that bad?

Originally posted by SEG:

I'm ready to get hammered here by the people that do not own a gun or believe that no one should.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 11:23:41 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 11:23:41 AM EDT.