School shootings

[Farmer Br0wn]

They will continue to pick soft targets and your solution will eventually be to put a gun in the hands of every able-bodied American citizen and turn them into a potentially first responder.

Nothing will stop a determined active shooter other than another armed individual.

Nothing.

Let that sink in.

When you understand that, you will understand why an armed citizenry is the only solution to this, and many other problems like it.

the problem is that there are too many places in society that aren't equipped to deal with an active shooter. That's reality.

Fixed for you friend.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Maybe some people appreciate these kind of posts, but I find them cowardly and egocentric. If you think my argument was compelling, give me my props and concede. But a lot of guys around here do this shit were they refuse to tap and instead make some irrelevant post so that they can recycle their same weak argument later in another thread. It's a very feminine form of confrontational escape/ego preservation.

@Byron Carter counter was objectively factual.

Your response didn't refute Byron Carter's argument in any way, and you proceeded to name call him.

 

[Leagon]

Nothing will stop a determined active shooter other than another armed individual.

Nothing.

Let that sink in.

When you understand that, you will understand why an armed citizenry is the only solution to this, and many other problems like it.



Fixed for you friend.

We're not friends. Your reality is myopic and barbaric. If you want to live in a reality where violence is around every corner and the only way to prevent it is a state of constant warfare, go live in Fallujah. One benefit of a nation having a professional military is that civilians don't have to spend energy or paranoia worrying about being murdered. Any modern government that can't ensure civilian life is a failed state. America is not a failed state. If you want to live in one, I can recommend a few places.

 

[Leagon]

@Byron Carter counter was objectively factual.

Your response didn't refute Byron Carter's argument in any way, and you proceeded to name call him.

The sky is blue.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

We're not friends. Your reality is myopic and barbaric. If you want to live in a reality where violence is around every corner and the only way to prevent it is a state of constant warfare, go live in Fallujah. One benefit of a nation having a professional military is that civilians don't have to spend energy or paranoia worrying about being murdered. Any modern government that can't ensure civilian life is a failed state. America is not a failed state. If you want to live in one, I can recommend a few places.

The government can do very little to prevent your murder in the face of a determined actor.

The United States Supreme Court has already ruled that law enforcement has no obligation to protect you. The protection of yourself and your family is your responsibility alone.

There are those who wish to do harm to others. This has always been the reality of living within humanity. This will likely continue to be the reality of living within humanity. No amount of you fantasizing about how the world ought to be is going to change that.

 

[Gregolian]

We're not friends. Your reality is myopic and barbaric. If you want to live in a reality where violence is around every corner and the only way to prevent it is a state of constant warfare, go live in Fallujah. One benefit of a nation having a professional military is that civilians don't have to spend energy or paranoia worrying about being murdered. Any modern government that can't ensure civilian life is a failed state. America is not a failed state. If you want to live in one, I can recommend a few places.

There's only really two options to keep violence from finding it's way to a soft target (like a school in this example.)

1.) Make it no longer a soft target with like cops on the property at all times at different entrances and such

2.) Disarm the entire populace.

The first is too damn expensive especially with most law enforcement agencies that are below the federal level suffering cutbacks due to funding issues OR the LEOs are being forced through the academy with lesser training than guys got even 5 years ago. It's like the end of WWII with how the "replacement" troops couldn't keep up with the guys that survived from D-Day to 1945.

The second, in a country like the US will never happen. There's too many guns in circulation and there's too many unaccounted for ones that are illegal held by felons and other criminals. Plus, you wouldn't have someone like me willingly turn over my firearms in a gov't buyback unless I get every penny back that I invested into the gun.

I have one bolt gun worth $1500 and another, when finished, that would probably be worth near $3000 if I put all the parts in it I want. Government would never buy those two guns back for just shy of 5 G's....

 

[Byron Carter]

The government can do very little to prevent your murder in the face of a determined actor.

The United States Supreme Court has already ruled that law enforcement has no obligation to protect you. The protection of yourself and your family is your responsibility alone.

There are those who wish to do harm to others. This has always been the reality of living within humanity. This will likely continue to be the reality of living within humanity. No amount of you fantasizing about how the world ought to be is going to change that.

And our job here is done.

 

[Leagon]

There's only really two options to keep violence from finding it's way to a soft target

Incorrect. There are dozens of options, probably hundred. It just depends on one's resources and willingness.

I understand where you're coming from, but it's an outdated form of thinking. I'm going to assume you're in your 40s or so. For a long time, intellectual though was as you present it. It was based on understanding why bad things happen and how we prevent them. For the last few decades, though, that has shifted to a more open approach of "How do good things happen and how do we replicate it?" It's a more scoentific position, imo, and gets better results.

For example, why do men commit more violence than women? Let's assume it's only testosterone. We know different foods and behaviors and even colors that can decrease testosterone levels. Now the issue is not "can we make men less violent?" but "are we willing to?"

That was just an example, but the principle holds. You assume that there will always be individual lunatics who want to commit violence. It's a baseless assumption. It's like a 1840s doctor assuming there will always be widespread lupus. The world doesn't have to continue being the way it currently is, especially when an alternative already exists (in plenty of other places with very low crime rates, especially lone wolf violence).

 

[Leagon]

The government can do very little to prevent your murder in the face of a determined actor.

The United States Supreme Court has already ruled that law enforcement has no obligation to protect you. The protection of yourself and your family is your responsibility alone.

There are those who wish to do harm to others. This has always been the reality of living within humanity. This will likely continue to be the reality of living within humanity. No amount of you fantasizing about how the world ought to be is going to change that.

You lack an understanding of history and the benefits of the nation-state.

Human beings are nasty, brutal creatures and life is a rough process. But modern civilization doesn't even slightly resemble natural human life. We've made unreal progress because there are people who know what is possible.

I'm not even talking sci fi here. There are currntly countries on this same planet that have done an incredible job in reducing violent crime, especially among young males. You seem to think that America isn't as good as those places. I disagree.

 

[Gregolian]

I'm going to assume you're in your 40s or so.

You couldn't be more off on this one buddy.

I'm not even 30 yet you asshole... implying I'm "too old for this shit" like Murtaugh from Lethal Weapon.

That was just an example, but the principle holds. You assume that there will always be individual lunatics who want to commit violence. It's a baseless assumption. It's like a 1840s doctor assuming there will always be widespread lupus. The world doesn't have to continue being the way it currently is, especially when an alternative already exists (in plenty of other places with very low crime rates, especially lone wolf violence).

Do you see the make up of those low violence area? You ever notice how very, similar, the entire populace is?

Do you also see how low violence areas like say, Switzerland, are super SUPER strict on who they let in and for how long and my understanding is even people that over-stay a student visa the government is pretty, well.... not forceful but very much the "hey, you've overstayed your visa, get out and reapply" about it.

I'm not even talking sci fi here. There are currntly countries on this same planet that have done an incredible job in reducing violent crime, especially among young males. You seem to think that America isn't as good as those places. I disagree.

Don't a lot of those countries (say, Switzerland, Korea, or Germany as examples) have compulsory military service and that essentially beats it out of them/drains it out of them.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

You lack an understanding of history and the benefits of the nation-state.

I just cited a Supreme Court case to help bolster my argument. Your claims in this statement are little more then baseless insults in an attempt to make yourself feel better.

Human beings are nasty, brutal creatures and life is a rough process.

This actually proves my arguments.

But modern civilization doesn't even slightly resemble natural human life.

How would you define this overly broad statement? What exactly is "natural" human life?

We've made unreal progress because there are people who know what is possible.

This statement is so broad and vacuous that it really can't be addressed one way or another.

I'm not even talking sci fi here. There are currntly countries on this same planet that have done an incredible job in reducing violent crime, especially among young males.

Such as? Be sure you've researched these locations well before you post them. Location-based arguments are usually fairly easy to retort.

You seem to think that America isn't as good as those places. I disagree.

America is better than any other place you could list, because it respects the right of the individual to repel threats to themselves and their families. This is an absolutely necessary condition to one's proper existence.

 

[Leagon]

You couldn't be more off on this one buddy.

I'm not even 30 yet you asshole... implying I'm "too old for this shit" like Murtaugh from Lethal Weapon.


Do you see the make up of those low violence area? You ever notice how very, similar, the entire populace is?

Do you also see how low violence areas like say, Switzerland, are super SUPER strict on who they let in and for how long and my understanding is even people that over-stay a student visa the government is pretty, well.... not forceful but very much the "hey, you've overstayed your visa, get out and reapply" about it.


Don't a lot of those countries (say, Switzerland, Korea, or Germany as examples) have compulsory military service and that essentially beats it out of them/drains it out of them.

Lol...my bad. Bad guess at your age.

You ignored the main point of my post, which is that we can typically isolate the main cause of a lot of behaviors and know how to replicate good behaviors. You're not as violent as school shooters and we can figure out why. Why not spend effort duplicating men like you instead of spending similar effort training an endless supply of security guards to put at ice cream shops and churches?

Also, not all non-violent countries are homogenous. I wasn't even thinking of Scandanavia. I was thinking of Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore, three extremely diverse countries with a fraction of America's violent crime. Indonesia is so diverse that they had to essentially invent a new language so that people in their country could even talk to each other. The top two ethnic groups combined only equal 60% of the population. To compare, America's single biggest ethnicity is about 72%. We're way more homogenous and they have less than a tenth of our violent crime.

 

[Prutfis]

Unless you have an actual retort, my argument still stands:

"Nothing is going to stop a determined shooter, other than another armed individual."

Since you're opening reply was an appeal to emotion, I suspect you may lack the capacity to actually formulate a retort to my argument.

No, you made the retarded argument. deal with it. Moar guns are the solution.

 

[Gregolian]

Lol...my bad. Bad guess at your age.

You ignored the main point of my post, which is that we can typically isolate the main cause of a lot of behaviors and know how to replicate good behaviors. You're not as violent as school shooters and we can figure out why. Why not spend effort duplicating men like you instead of spending similar effort training an endless supply of security guards to put at ice cream shops and churches?

Also, not all non-violent countries are homogenous. I wasn't even thinking of Scandanavia. I was thinking of Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore, three extremely diverse countries with a fraction of America's violent crime. Indonesia is so diverse that they had to essentially invent a new language so that people in their country could even talk to each other. The top two ethnic groups combined only equal 60% of the population. To compare, America's single biggest ethnicity is about 72%. We're way more homogenous and they have less than a tenth of our violent crime.

Have you ever seen the laws of Singapore? They fucking cane people in the street for chewing gum or spitting saliva. And it isn't like a set number either ie "10 lashes for spitting 15 for chewing gum". They fucking go until the person holding the cane thinks you've learned your lesson. There's a reason ECW and WWE when they used kendo sticks in matches where the stipulation was to beat someone else with it was called a "singapore cane" match.

Bring in even ground up pot residue? Pretty sure the penalty is death.

Singapore is how they are cause of how heavy handed they are in punishment, something I thought a ton of people in the US wanted to move away from. In the US the argument is to not criminalize drug use (ie no prison time and such). Singapore... all those people would be dead even on a first offense.

And didn't Indonesia just get done with some political revolts and rioting?

I don't know enough about Malaysia to comment but I would imagine their penal system is also pretty harsh, not sure why I feel that way but I feel like I've read once they modeled their criminal justice system pretty close to Singapore.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

That was just an example, but the principle holds. You assume that there will always be individual lunatics who want to commit violence. It's a baseless assumption.

Baseless? The world is and always has been full of violence, rape, and murder. You isolate a few places with less of it, tout science that doesn't really exist, theorize measures with ethical implications, and claim that reasoning to be superior to factoring in all of human history. Come on dude. It's far more your pie in the sky view that's baseless. But I like your optimism.

 

[Leagon]

Have you ever seen the laws of Singapore? They fucking cane people in the street for chewing gum or spitting saliva. And it isn't like a set number either ie "10 lashes for spitting 15 for chewing gum". They fucking go until the person holding the cane thinks you've learned your lesson. There's a reason ECW and WWE when they used kendo sticks in matches where the stipulation was to beat someone else with it was called a "singapore cane" match.

Bring in even ground up pot residue? Pretty sure the penalty is death.

Singapore is how they are cause of how heavy handed they are in punishment, something I thought a ton of people in the US wanted to move away from. In the US the argument is to not criminalize drug use (ie no prison time and such). Singapore... all those people would be dead even on a first offense.

And didn't Indonesia just get done with some political revolts and rioting?

I don't know enough about Malaysia to comment but I would imagine their penal system is also pretty harsh, not sure why I feel that way but I feel like I've read once they modeled their criminal justice system pretty close to Singapore.

You went from "There are only two ways to prevent mass shootings" to "Homogeny maybe helps too, and also more strict laws."

That's my point. I agree that implementing consequence is a way to avoid mass shootings. My problem is that you, and a lot of the conservative base, seem to think the only possible consequence for shooting up a school must be getting shot in the attempt. I was only trying to get you to understand that there are plenty of other ways. For example, I don't think the punitive laws of those countries has much to do with their lack of shootings. I think there other socioeconomic factors we could employ. But as long as you can agree that there are alternatives, and that there are probably many great alternatives we haven't thought of yet, then I'm fine letting my other points drop.

 

[Leagon]

Baseless? The world is and always has been full of violence, rape, and murder. You isolate a few places with less of it, tout science that doesn't really exist, theorize measures with ethical implications, and claim that reasoning to be superior to factoring in all of human history. Come on dude. It's far more your pie in the sky view that's baseless. But I like your optimism.

Not all vioence is equal. The world has not always been full of lone lunatics carrying out mass public attacks. In fact, America hasn't even always been full of such things.

I don't want to deny the brutality that may be inherent in human nature. I'm just stunned by the lack of creative problem solving that the right exhibits on this. Infant mortality is also a very real part of humanity and we've pretty much conquered that. Much of the human animal is designed to seek and secure food and now I can eat for a year wothout leaving my house. We've solved so many fundamental struggles of nature and yet the right thinks that a problem that just popped up 30 years ago is simply beyond our greatest minds. It's retarded thinking.

 

[Gregolian]

You went from "There are only two ways to prevent mass shootings" to "Homogeny maybe helps too, and also more strict laws."

That's my point. I agree that implementing consequence is a way to avoid mass shootings. My problem is that you, and a lot of the conservative base, seem to think the only possible consequence for shooting up a school must be getting shot in the attempt. I was only trying to get you to understand that there are plenty of other ways. For example, I don't think the punitive laws of those countries has much to do with their lack of shootings. I think there other socioeconomic factors we could employ. But as long as you can agree that there are alternatives, and that there are probably many great alternatives we haven't thought of yet, then I'm fine letting my other points drop.

I'm probably just a cynic but I don't think you will ever get away from having violent people. There are always going to be those people out there that just don't care and are going to harm people.

The biggest thing with school shootings though? Fucking go after bullies properly. Love to see how many of these kids that brought a gun to school were bullied.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Not all vioence is equal. The world has not always been full of lone lunatics carrying out mass public attacks. In fact, America hasn't even always been full of such things.

I don't want to deny the brutality that may be inherent in human nature. I'm just stunned by the lack of creative problem solving that the right exhibits on this. Infant mortality is also a very real part of humanity and we've pretty much conquered that. Much of the human animal is designed to seek and secure food and now I can eat for a year wothout leaving my house. We've solved so many fundamental struggles of nature and yet the right thinks that a problem that just popped up 30 years ago is simply beyond our greatest minds. It's retarded thinking.

We really have no way of knowing how prevalent mass attacks on the public have been throughout history. Since violent crime rates are historically low overall why be myopic about one form of it?

As for creative problem solving, there's nothing terribly creative about banning weapons and that's what we get from the left. What else has come from that side of the aisle with any vigor?

Infant mortality in the US is 6.5 per 1,000 live births. Firearms homicide rate is 3.6 per 100,000 people. Dividing the first number by the second number respectively, we get percentages of .0065 for the births and .000036 for the gun murders. Let's say there's 4 million babies born each year. 4 million multiplied by our percentage is 26,000 dead infants. Using a population of 350 million and multiplying it by our percentage we get 12,600 gun murders. We know that less than 1% of gun homicides are mass shootings. That gives us like 100 mass shooting deaths per year. Interesting how minuscule number is some huge epidemic and the far greater one is a problem that's been "conquered".

 

[Byron Carter]

Have you ever seen the laws of Singapore? They fucking cane people in the street for chewing gum or spitting saliva. And it isn't like a set number either ie "10 lashes for spitting 15 for chewing gum". They fucking go until the person holding the cane thinks you've learned your lesson. There's a reason ECW and WWE when they used kendo sticks in matches where the stipulation was to beat someone else with it was called a "singapore cane" match.

Bring in even ground up pot residue? Pretty sure the penalty is death.

Singapore is how they are cause of how heavy handed they are in punishment, something I thought a ton of people in the US wanted to move away from. In the US the argument is to not criminalize drug use (ie no prison time and such). Singapore... all those people would be dead even on a first offense.

And didn't Indonesia just get done with some political revolts and rioting?

I don't know enough about Malaysia to comment but I would imagine their penal system is also pretty harsh, not sure why I feel that way but I feel like I've read once they modeled their criminal justice system pretty close to Singapore.

Leagon strikes me as someone who has never had a real job, or traveled.

America is awesome. Most of the world is shit. You have no fucking idea.