pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 10 dead 20 wounded in school shooting  (Read 21227 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: October 10, 2015, 12:05 »
+2
I look at the worldwide statistics. I just don't care about them. My right to self-defense is more important than preventing suicide by gun or anything else you bring up.
I guess murderers where you live must be far more polite than ours, waiting for you to go and fetch your gun for a 'fair fight'.
Or do you literally have your gun in your hand or on your hip at all times, and never go to sleep?
Who defends school kids? Do your teachers work with their guns in their hands ready to shoot?
Your argument is illogical. Unless the above are all true.
Why do you think your "right to self-defence" is more important than protecting kids in school?

I can get to my guns a lot faster than the police can get to my house to save me and mine.

There are other ways to protect kids in schools besides banning all guns. We could put full-time police officers in every school, control access and formulate safety plans. If having full-time armed security is good enough for our president, why isn't it good enough for our school kids?

Why do you think I should lose my civil rights because someone else abuses theirs? Why should I be punished for obeying the law just because someone else chooses to break it?
« Last Edit: October 10, 2015, 12:09 by robhainer »


« Reply #126 on: October 10, 2015, 12:26 »
+7
"I don't want to live in a country that gives a burglar more rights than a homeowner. "

Which country is that then?

« Reply #127 on: October 10, 2015, 14:44 »
+9
since i joined the Internet around 15 years ago I have been in maybe 20 of these discussions. School shootings and the right to bear arms..

Its a hopeless discussion. The Americans are totally brainwashed, and cannot see any argument, neither statistic nor logical.
Its all about guns and manlyhood. It could be a hormone phenomena.

« Reply #128 on: October 10, 2015, 14:48 »
+3
We could put full-time police officers in every school...

Tell that to the budget-chopping, tight-wad GOPers in our Congress who won't spend a nickel to rebuild our crumbling bridges and roads and have voted 50+ times to repeal "Obamacare" (which commits the unforgivable sin of giving low-income Americans a chance at decent health care).

Wonder how much it would cost to put full-time police officers in every single school in our far-flung 50 states. Will you, Rob, pledge to lobby personally your congressmen and senators to fund that immense expense???

If having full-time armed security is good enough for our president, why isn't it good enough for our school kids?

Hmmm. Interesting question. I guess my answer would be that there are several million more school kids than there are presidents of the United States.

See my question (above) about getting the GOP to pay for full-time armed security for **all** America's kids, not just those privileged to live in "safe" communities.

Shelma1

« Reply #129 on: October 10, 2015, 15:01 »
+4
Where I live, about 50% of property taxes go to pay for education. Our residents voted down the new school budget, which would repair our crumbling elementary school and add two much-needed classrooms, because it would require raising property taxes by about $20 per household. Imagine telling residents we needed a half million dollars more per year to pay for armed police officers at every school. And how many would you actually need? After all, the school is used by kids outside of regular school hours. They host all kinds of sports teams. You'd need cops for all those activities, too. So you're looking at multiple cops working a variety of shifts at each school. And in my particular town, we don't even have a local police force...the state police barracks are located in town, and they answer our calls.

It just makes more sense to disarm people. The rest of the world sees that.

ShadySue

« Reply #130 on: October 10, 2015, 15:10 »
+3
Why do you think I should lose my civil rights because someone else abuses theirs?
I can't answer that question because 'owning a gun' is not a right I perceive.

We have murders here, and when I read about the ones where the victim/s are unknown to the perpetrators, I very seldom (actually I can't think of any, but I could have forgotten) think, "If only the victim had had a gun, they'd still be alive".

« Reply #131 on: October 11, 2015, 02:14 »
0
..........
There are other ways to protect kids in schools besides banning all guns. We could put full-time police officers in every school, control access and formulate safety plans. If having full-time armed security is good enough for our president, why isn't it good enough for our school kids?......
I agree, that is why those lobbying for guns are also super into big government, the nanny state and 90% taxation that would be necessary for this safety planning and constant supervision of their children by government armed troops, sorry security guards.

« Reply #132 on: October 11, 2015, 02:35 »
+8
"Why do you think I should lose my civil rights because someone else abuses theirs?"

Cos my right to walk down the street as safely as practicable without risking some maniac blowing my head off outweighs your right to sit at home polishing your gun collection?

fujiko

« Reply #133 on: October 11, 2015, 04:43 »
+3
I know there is no point debating this issue. The divide is so big that perspective is lost.
But let me say one thing. There is no correlation between guns and gun deaths, unless you cook the data. And for what I read of the discussion, both sides seem to not like the other side cooking statistics. But the thing is that raw data shows no correlation.
Let me show an example:

http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/03/the-correlation-between-guns-and-homicide-rate.html

There is a step missing in the article, removing US from the data for the same reasons as South Africa. After that step it will show there is no correlation in developed countries at all.

Lies, * Lies and Statistics.

Society, culture, hatred, racial issues, poverty, mental health. Any of those factors is more directly correlated to gun deaths than guns per capita.
Guns per capita is related to gun deaths as weight scales per capita are related to obesity.

I think that because it seems impossible to remove millions of guns from the streets, then maybe schools should train kids to deal with school shootings instead. Just like fire exercises, earthquakes, storms. If school shootings are an increasing issue, let's be prepared.

Shelma1

« Reply #134 on: October 11, 2015, 05:40 »
+1
I don't get it...you linked to an article that showed there IS a clear correlation and recommended adopting gun laws like those of countries similar to ours.

fujiko

« Reply #135 on: October 11, 2015, 06:38 »
+1
I don't get it...you linked to an article that showed there IS a clear correlation and recommended adopting gun laws like those of countries similar to ours.

To reach that conclusion, the article removes South Africa for the following reasons:

Quote
Again, no correlation. But, notice the outlier, South Africa. That is a country with a history of apartheid, ethnic conflict and violence. It is obviously skewing the results. So, what happens if we eliminate South Africa from the analysis?

Tell me what happens if you apply the same criteria to US, remove it for a history of ethnic conflict and violence.
The data clearly shows US is an outlier in the data just like South Africa and if you remove it, the rest of developed countries shows there is no correlation.

That's cooking the data to get the result you want. Cherry picking.

Edit: Or to put it in a different way. Don't you notice that to reach that conclusion, the author of the article ended up removing all countries with a 'Homicide by Firearm' rate higher than the US?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2015, 06:49 by fujiko »

Shelma1

« Reply #136 on: October 11, 2015, 06:52 »
+2
When was slavery legal in the U.S.? When was apartheid legal in South Africa?

fujiko

« Reply #137 on: October 11, 2015, 07:01 »
+2
When was slavery legal in the U.S.? When was apartheid legal in South Africa?

If you are going to deny there has been a history of racial issues and violence in the US, there is not much more to talk.

Still, notice the other thing I pointed out about the author removing all countries with a higher gun murder ratio.
The thing is, in this data if only developed countries are considered, both US and South Africa are anomalies.

So, I ask you again, if you remove the US from the data, what correlation do you see?

- All world countries, no correlation.
- All developed countries, no correlation.
- Developed countries excl. South Africa, magic! Correlation!!
- Developed countries excl. South Africa and US...... no correlation.

Do you see a pattern?

« Reply #138 on: October 11, 2015, 07:03 »
+4
So maybe its just Americans that shouldn't be trusted with guns?

ShadySue

« Reply #139 on: October 11, 2015, 07:04 »
+3
When was slavery legal in the U.S.? When was apartheid legal in South Africa?

If you are going to deny there has been a history of racial issues and violence in the US, there is not much more to talk.

Still, notice the other thing I pointed out about the author removing all countries with a higher gun murder ratio.
The thing is, in this data if only developed countries are considered, both US and South Africa are anomalies.

So, I ask you again, if you remove the US from the data, what correlation do you see?

- All world countries, no correlation.
- All developed countries, no correlation.
- Developed countries excl. South Africa, magic! Correlation!!
- Developed countries excl. South Africa and US...... no correlation.

Do you see a pattern?
So the logical conclusion from what you post is that RSA and USA specifically should ban firearms.

fujiko

« Reply #140 on: October 11, 2015, 07:08 »
+1
When was slavery legal in the U.S.? When was apartheid legal in South Africa?

If you are going to deny there has been a history of racial issues and violence in the US, there is not much more to talk.

Still, notice the other thing I pointed out about the author removing all countries with a higher gun murder ratio.
The thing is, in this data if only developed countries are considered, both US and South Africa are anomalies.

So, I ask you again, if you remove the US from the data, what correlation do you see?

- All world countries, no correlation.
- All developed countries, no correlation.
- Developed countries excl. South Africa, magic! Correlation!!
- Developed countries excl. South Africa and US...... no correlation.

Do you see a pattern?
So the logical conclusion from what you post is that RSA and USA specifically should ban firearms.

Or maybe RSA and US should change their culture, society, poverty rates, racial issues, hatred, violence.

Banning guns will solve gun murder rates just like banning weight scales will solve obesity.

ShadySue

« Reply #141 on: October 11, 2015, 07:12 »
+3

Or maybe RSA and US should change their culture, society, poverty rates, racial issues, hatred, violence.

Banning guns will solve gun murder rates just like banning weight scales will solve obesity.
We have issues of inequality and poverty - worse now than for a long time - but the banning of guns was a very positive move. It is such a tiny minority who disagrees (presumably there are some) that I haven't read the arguments. (I haven't looked  for them, but the US pro-gun lobby seems unavoidable.)
« Last Edit: October 11, 2015, 07:18 by ShadySue »

fujiko

« Reply #142 on: October 11, 2015, 07:21 »
+2
We have issues of inequality and poverty - worse now than for a long time - but the banning of guns was a very positive move. It is such a tiny minority who disagrees (presumably there are some) that I haven't read the arguments. (I haven't looked  for them, but the US pro-gun lobby seems unavoidable.)

Well, I am not pro-gun and I am not from the US but I am very anti-'statistics manipulation' and the only thing I can say is that there is no correlation in raw data. The real issue is somewhere else. Banning guns will have the same effect as banning alcohol or banning drugs.

Once banned, will US law enforcement start a War on Guns campaign? I am eager to see how it goes...  ::)

ShadySue

« Reply #143 on: October 11, 2015, 07:31 »
+2
From where I'm sitting, if I look at it sensibly, I could get murdered in my own home or small town, but the likelihood is small.
Terrorists could attack my small rural town, but the likelihood is small.
However, like most people, I go out and about to cities and travel abroad, where the risk of being killed by terrorists is greater, and a gun would be of little use in most of these scenarios.
Even when I read about random people (meaning unknown in any way to the perpetrator) being shot or stabbed in cities here, it usually happens so quickly that they couldn't defend themselves (didn't know it was about to happen until it happened).
That many Americans feel that being murdered in their own home or even small, rural town is an indicator that the 'right' to own firearms is not helpful.

fujiko

« Reply #144 on: October 11, 2015, 07:34 »
0
From where I'm sitting, if I look at it sensibly, I could get murdered in my own home or small town, but the likelihood is small.
Terrorists could attack my small rural town, but the likelihood is small.
However, like most people, I go out and about to cities and travel abroad, where the risk of being killed by terrorists is greater, and a gun would be of little use in most of these scenarios.
Even when I read about random people (meaning unknown in any way to the perpetrator) being shot or stabbed in cities here, it usually happens so quickly that they couldn't defend themselves (didn't know it was about to happen until it happened).
That many Americans feel that being murdered in their own home or even small, rural town is an indicator that the 'right' to own firearms is not helpful.

I will tell you something, you are completely right.
The no correlation goes both ways. Banning guns has the same effect as legalizing them. No correlation.

« Reply #145 on: October 11, 2015, 08:30 »
+2
I agree, that is why those lobbying for guns are also super into big government, the nanny state and 90% taxation that would be necessary for this safety planning ...

Ummm. Don't you think you've got that backwards?

Those "lobbying for guns" are not the ones "super into big government, the nanny state and 90% taxation." They're much more likely to be the wild-west, shoot-'em-up, stand yer ground types who just want to get "gummint" out of their lives and keep the "gummint's filthy hands off my Medicare."

Those "lobbying for gun control" are more likely to appreciate a stronger government role in keeping us all safe.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2015, 08:32 by marthamarks »

« Reply #146 on: October 11, 2015, 08:36 »
+1
Once banned, will US law enforcement start a War on Guns campaign? I am eager to see how it goes...  ::)

Prepare to wait a long, long time, because a) there is no "War on Guns" campaign in the US and b) even if there were, a total ban on guns would not likely happen in my lifetime or yours.

ShadySue

« Reply #147 on: October 11, 2015, 09:02 »
+2
From where I'm sitting, if I look at it sensibly, I could get murdered in my own home or small town, but the likelihood is small.
Terrorists could attack my small rural town, but the likelihood is small.
However, like most people, I go out and about to cities and travel abroad, where the risk of being killed by terrorists is greater, and a gun would be of little use in most of these scenarios.
Even when I read about random people (meaning unknown in any way to the perpetrator) being shot or stabbed in cities here, it usually happens so quickly that they couldn't defend themselves (didn't know it was about to happen until it happened).
That many Americans feel that being murdered in their own home or even small, rural town is an indicator that the 'right' to own firearms is not helpful.

I will tell you something, you are completely right.
The no correlation goes both ways. Banning guns has the same effect as legalizing them. No correlation.
I don't believe that for one minute.
But even if it were true, then just ban them. What's the point?

« Reply #148 on: October 11, 2015, 09:05 »
0
« Last Edit: October 11, 2015, 09:10 by JPSDK »

fujiko

« Reply #149 on: October 11, 2015, 09:17 »
0
From where I'm sitting, if I look at it sensibly, I could get murdered in my own home or small town, but the likelihood is small.
Terrorists could attack my small rural town, but the likelihood is small.
However, like most people, I go out and about to cities and travel abroad, where the risk of being killed by terrorists is greater, and a gun would be of little use in most of these scenarios.
Even when I read about random people (meaning unknown in any way to the perpetrator) being shot or stabbed in cities here, it usually happens so quickly that they couldn't defend themselves (didn't know it was about to happen until it happened).
That many Americans feel that being murdered in their own home or even small, rural town is an indicator that the 'right' to own firearms is not helpful.

I will tell you something, you are completely right.
The no correlation goes both ways. Banning guns has the same effect as legalizing them. No correlation.
I don't believe that for one minute.
But even if it were true, then just ban them. What's the point?

You are free to believe what you want. Data says otherwise.
But I believe you are correct in that the right to own firearms is not helpful against fear of being murdered. Fear of being murdered is related to the perceived threat, not to gun ownership.

The real reason is something else as is proven by data showing gun ownership to be unrelated to gun deaths.

Teaching kids to fear neighbors, strangers, people of different races, whatever, will have much more impact in future gun murders than giving each kid a gun.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Back 2 school

Started by Dreamstime News Microstock News

0 Replies
1366 Views
Last post July 26, 2007, 11:19
by Dreamstime News
Back 2 school

Started by Dreamstime News Microstock News

2 Replies
1715 Views
Last post July 31, 2007, 17:41
by Freezingpictures
10 Replies
3718 Views
Last post January 21, 2010, 22:35
by donding
26 Replies
6322 Views
Last post June 01, 2010, 19:39
by Suljo
0 Replies
973 Views
Last post August 19, 2015, 03:18
by imagesbykenny

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results