Consentus

Clan Forum => Debates => Debates archive => Topic started by: Aaron on December 17, 2012, 17:13:11

Title: Gun Politics
Post by: Aaron on December 17, 2012, 17:13:11
What's everyone's opinions on all the 'recent' gun crimes in America? Do you think they should change the gun laws?

Since Barack Obama has been in charge, there has been 4 major incidents much like the other day involving shootings.


I think what Morgan Freeman allegedly said sums up my feelings.




"Morgan Freeman's brilliant take on what happened on Friday:

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single *victim* of Columbine? Disturbed
people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news."
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Krazy Golf on December 17, 2012, 17:29:41
Just to jump on the Facebook bandwagon.

(http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/14486_442957932435489_639840615_n.png)

But yeah, the gun laws probably should be tightened. It won't stop the circulation of unregulated firearms however, America has a prominent 'gun culture' and I doubt they would be willing to give up their weapons.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Aaron on December 17, 2012, 17:30:45
Is that taken from U WOT's page? :p
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Krazy Golf on December 17, 2012, 17:31:17
Quote from: Aaron on December 17, 2012, 17:30:45
Is that taken from U WOT's page? :p

Yes. :P
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Aaron on December 17, 2012, 17:34:56
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/380727_462581067112283_169605566_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Redtunnel on December 17, 2012, 17:48:00
I'm normally a liberal person, but when it comes to guns, I really prefer strict laws. In essence, I consider the self-defence argument imprudent. You can't really predict when you will be a victim of crime, e.g. a robbery, and if I can easily get a hold of a gun, so can the perpetrator; chances are he will also have a gun. If the perpetrator is already aiming his gun at me, what are the odds I will have time to draw my gun and shoot him before he pulls the trigger on me? I know guns aren't the cause of crime, but they sure make it more violent and simpler to conduct.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 17:52:02
How come we don't take cars away because people are killed in car accidents?

I can see the day where we have to bike or walk to a store just to get out food cut up or prepared for us because they take knives away from us to.

What happened in CT was awful, don't get me wrong. But if someone wants to get a gun, they'll get it. According to some, rules are meant to be broken and laws fall into that category. As I said before, if a person wants to honestly have a gun, even with extremely strict gun control laws, they'll get it.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Redtunnel on December 17, 2012, 17:53:27
Quote from: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 17:52:02
How come we don't take cars away because people are killed in car accidents?
Cars aren't weapons. It may be a tragedy, but it's rarely an accident when someone pulls the trigger. :P
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 17:55:37
They can sure as hell easily be used as one and they have been. I know not as often as a gun, but you get my point. You can honestly use anything as a weapon.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Runar on December 17, 2012, 17:58:38
I am against allowing everyone to have guns.

People say they want it for self defence, but if there were strict rules to get guns, not a lot of people would have it, which would mean less crime, but then they would result in weapon smuggling and such.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Daggo on December 17, 2012, 18:01:22
The Constitution gives people the right to own guns. Everyone should be able to own one. I am getting my gun license soon. There are at least 10 firearms in my own house.

Guns are NOT the issue. People are the issue.

There are already restrictions on guns here. And as for the most recent accident in Connecticut, they were stolen from his mother as they were not properly stored. Also, he had a personality disorder.

So rather than blame our 'lax' gun laws, I suggest you take a look at what all the people have had in common.

Quote from: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 17:55:37
They can sure as hell easily be used as one and they have been. I know not as often as a gun, but you get my point. You can honestly use anything as a weapon.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Redtunnel on December 17, 2012, 18:11:24
Those of you who believe guns make no difference, why do you think that the US is overrepresented in massacres, intentional homicide etc? Do you really believe that the socio-economic situation and whatnot is so much worse in the US?
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Winter on December 17, 2012, 21:08:39
The whole "self-defense" argument I call bullshit on. The reason why Americans say they want one for self defense is because they know guns are legal in their country and that most people own at least one. In the UK, it is illegal and I know I already feel safe without having a gun or a weapon to show for it. Why? Because I don't feel threatened that the next person I see is going to be armed with a weapon they could more than easily use against me. In America, it's a cycle of fear.

What happened in Connecticut is awful and I am deeply disgusted, as well as saddened to hear of it but I do agree with Daggo on the point of people being the problem and not the guns themselves. However, being in possession of a gun can change people - it gives them a feeling of power and protection. Some people take advantage of that and use it to commit harm, fear or intimidation within others. Majority of the time, guns are used to commit harm with the intention of committing harm, not as a means to protect yourself or people around you.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Greg on December 17, 2012, 21:14:58
Guns for self defense... naw.

In my opinion, you wouldn't need a gun for self defense if you can are defending against somebody doesn't have one, so just take them all away.

Ban them all. I don't see guns having any purpose apart from an easy way for idiots to go on a killing spree.

Guns are pointless, and it is a power that nobody should have, as in in the wrong hands at any moment can lead to disastrous things.

Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 21:49:36
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Amy on December 17, 2012, 22:10:02
I know the in laws are quite strict already however, I agree they should be tightened.. And this has aleady been suggested by Obama. If it wasn't a gun it could have been a knife? I think guns are okay, but on the other hand how can it make America feel safe knowing they need a gun in their own house for protection? Its probably to do with their culture but I believe people take advantage of the access they have to own a gun, and let's face it the media love a new story! At the moment imo America is a capitalist country, and the media don't help that at all.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Redtunnel on December 18, 2012, 01:16:07
Quote from: Ignite on December 17, 2012, 21:49:36
(click to show/hide)
The rest of the world doesn't really have that problem. Perhaps I shouldn't speak for the world, but here in Sweden (and judging by other countries' statistics with stricter gun control laws), it is fairly uncommon.

Guns are simply too powerful weapons to be so easily accessible by everyone. Let me depict it with two short stories:

John

It all began in 4th grade. Jacob, the new guy in class, felt a need to prove himself. He was often rough and mean to the smaller guys. John was one of these smaller guys. One day, Jacob pulled John's pants down in the schoolyard, "for fun." Everyone laughed, except for John and his two best friends. John had never felt so humiliated before. "Let's tell the teachers", John's friends encouraged him. Said and done. John's teacher called Jacob to his office. John felt afraid and ashamed as he sat outside the office with his two friends, waiting for the issue to be resolved. After all, Jacob was a fairly big guy and he had already gained some popularity among the tough guys. "What if there will be retribution?", he contemplated. When the door opened and Jacob came out, John knew. There was no mistaking Jacob's look in the eyes. John nearly cried in fear. John ran home from school that day. He cried.

The next couple of days, Jacob and his "gang" were throwing glances at John. It was plain enough what they meant: "When the teachers aren't around to protect you, you are dead, kid." The silent bullying had begun. John's friends were afraid too. They didn't want any trouble. Gradually, they started to avoid John's company, in fear of becoming victims as well. John had never felt more alone. Whenever the teachers would look away, Jacob and his gang would push John into the wall, hit his arm or conduct other quick fouls. John became a loner. A helpless victim. After two years, John despised school more than anything. He had little energy for studying and he was rapidly falling behind. "Everyone hates me and I'm stupid", he thought. If anything changed over the years, it was for the worse. Even his family started to question John's behavior. "Why can't everybody just leave me alone?", he wondered. "I didn't ask to be born into this world" and "I wish I was dead" were recurring thoughts. John hated life, himself and everybody else. One day, John had had enough. He had decided to end this misery they call life. "If I'm going to die, I may as well take as many of those bastards with me", he thought, before he went to carry out his deed.


Mason

Mason loved cars, football and, of course, girls. Despite growing up in a poor neighborhood, he felt pretty content with life. He had the most awesome friends, he was doing all right at school and his part-time job at Burger King brought in the extra needed money for the family. Mason's father had suffered a back injury years ago, leaving him unable to work. More than Mason liked to admit, his father resorted to the bottle. His father was easily angered while drunk and his mother was often away at work. Mason felt responsible for his siblings. Luckily, he had the most amazing friends. They were like a second family and would often look after his younger brothers and sisters. One Saturday, his father was yelling and his mother sobbed. Something about a baby and no money. "Is mom pregnant?", Mason wondered. His youngest brother was 8 and he was certain his parents weren't going to have more kids. The mood had tensed a lot at home. Mason soon found his mother was in fact pregnant, and with the baby coming, she was going to lose her job. Mason was the only one of age to work. With his mom not working and an extra mouth to feed, Mason knew it would be tough. "Social safety nets and welfare don't apply to us", he knew. He had always felt mistreated by authorities. "Don't worry man, we'll get through this", his second family assured him. They weren't tight either, and they had families to feed, but most importantly to Mason, they always did their best to keep the spirit up.

What Mason dreaded eventually became a reality. He had to get more hours at work, on the expense of school and his mood. Rough times passed and rough times laid ahead. The little money he made from his job wasn't enough. "I don't know if I can do it", he told his friends. They discussed ways of making some extra cash. "You can be the modern Robin Hood", one of his friends said, and explained how it wouldn't be so wrong to take from the rich and give to the poor. Mason never wanted to hurt anyone. He hated violence and didn't want any of that. "It's all about intimidation", his friends told him. "You don't actually have to hurt anyone. All you need to is frighten them. You point the gun towards them and they will give you the money, in fear." Mason thought that it sounded reasonable enough. He still didn't like the idea of doing it one bit, though, but he saw no other way, and after all, no one would actually get hurt. He tried to choose his victim with care, since he didn't want an already poor person to suffer. "Give me your money", he screamed at the man. The man, albeit frightened, was at his senses and obviously didn't want to be gunned down by some villain. Instead of taking his wallet out, he drew a gun. Mason pulled the trigger before the stranger's gun was completely out. The man died instantly. When Mason was arrested, the explanation was simple enough: "I didn't want to die."


While these stories are pure fiction, they are probably part reality for a lot of people. If guns weren't easily accessible to these individuals, the outcome would most likely be different. When people feel trapped, be it by material reasons (e.g. being broke) or by mental obstacles (e.g. strong depression), they may act impulsively. Guns are only tools. Tools that are used to act on certain feelings. Assuming you even have the opportunity without risking your own or a victim's life, are you confident that the wisest decision is to gun a mugger down?
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: nbates93 on December 18, 2012, 01:22:10
2 things:
1. reality of violence not needing a gun and how gun control wouldnt aid anything:
(click to show/hide)

and

2. Morgan Freemans view on issues related to shootings:
(click to show/hide)

Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Whether they have a gun or not wont make the difference. If as a society we wish to lower the amount of tragedies like recently happened we need to stop making these tortured minds so infamous.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Aaron on December 18, 2012, 14:36:55
Great to see everyone having a good debate.



I can relate and agree to both sides of the argument. I see where people are coming from with the fact that a gun or a weapon gives someone the sense of power, but to use that power for 'evil' is completely up to the person themselves. Again, I think it's mainly the people who have access or to guns that are the problem.

I think that the way in which people can obtain a weapon should be at least 50% stricter. In some states I'm sure that you can go on a lesson every day for a week and at the end of it come out with a pistol. I think the people judging on who can have a weapon should take a lot more into consideration other than - No record of crime, they look fine and don't seem weird.

Even saying that, one of the owners of one of the stores where the 'Batman' killer got his weapons even said that guy was weird, and didn't seem like a friendly person, yet there was nothing stopping him obtaining a weapon.

It's a very tricky subject I think. I don't agree with completely banning any type of weapon 100%, but again, I think something needs to be done.

Although saying all of this, in rougher areas of America, the 'ghetto', or whatever you may call it, there is a constant flow of gun crime, yet we rarely hear about anything being done to solve that. It's disgusting we need something as tragic as this to happen over and over for our empathy to finally kick in.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: Only Lilly on December 19, 2012, 10:11:56
Recently read this, I thought it was relevant to this debate 





By now, Americans are virtually unshockable. When we hear of the latest workplace shooting, the latest school shooting, the latest loner who snapped and took others with him to his final rest, we are saddened, certainly, but not shocked. It has happened so often that we've long since lost count of the shooters and the victims, long since forgotten which towns bear the indelible marks of random violence. So it is difficult for us to understand the horror to which Americans were introduced by Charles Whitman on August 1, 1966. Until Whitman undertook his shooting spree in Austin, Texas, public space felt safe and most citizens were utterly convinced they were comfortably removed from brutality and terror. After August 1, 1966, things would never be the same.

Whitman's story stands out for many reasons, not the least of which being that it features a co-star-the University of Texas Tower, from which he fired almost unimpeded for 96 minutes. The Tower afforded Whitman a nearly unassailable vantage point from which he could select and dispatch victims. It was as if it had been built for his purpose. In fact, in previous years Charlie had remarked offhandedly to various people that a sniper could do quite a bit of damage from the Tower.

Charles Joseph Whitman (June 24, 1941 – August 1, 1966) was an engineering student and former Marine who killed 13 people and wounded 32 others in a shooting rampage located in and around the Tower of the University of Texas in Austin on the afternoon of August 1, 1966. Three persons were killed inside the university's tower, with 11 others murdered after Whitman fired at random targets from the 28th-floor observation deck of the Main Building. Whitman was shot and killed by Austin Police Officer, Houston McCoy.

Prior to starting the shootings at the University of Texas, Whitman had murdered both his wife and mother in Austin.

After murdering his mother and his wife, Whitman wrote in his letter:

"I do not quite understand what it is that compels me to type this letter. Perhaps it is to leave some vague reason for the actions I have recently performed. I do not really understand myself these days. I am supposed to be an average reasonable and intelligent young man. However, lately (I cannot recall when it started) I have been a victim of many unusual and irrational thoughts."

"I imagine it appears that I brutally killed both of my loved ones. I was only trying to do a quick thorough job [...] If my life insurance policy is valid please pay off my debts [...] donate the rest anonymously to a mental health foundation. Maybe research can prevent further tragedies of this type."

"8-1-66. I never could quite make it. These thoughts are too much for me."

He requested an autopsy, to determine if there was an organic reason for his actions and increasing headaches.

End of the massacre

Stepping outside the south door at approximately 1:24 p.m., [Police Officers] Martinez, McCoy, proceeded north on the east deck, while [Officers] Day, followed by Crum, proceeded west on the south deck, with the intention of encircling Whitman. Several feet before he reached the southwest corner, Crum accidentally discharged the borrowed rifle. As Whitman sat crouched with his back positioned on the north wall, and looking in the northwest corner area of the observation deck where Crum's shot was heard, Martinez jumped around the corner into the northeast area and rapidly fired all six rounds from his .38 police revolver from a distance of approximately 50 feet (15 m) at Whitman - all of which missed. As Martinez fired, McCoy jumped to the right of Martinez and fired two fatal shots of 00-buckshot with his 12-gauge shotgun, hitting Whitman in the head, neck and left side.

Autopsy

An autopsy conducted upon the body of Charles Whitman—approved by his father—was performed at the Cook Funeral Home on August 2. The autopsy discovered a glioblastoma (a highly aggressive and invariably fatal brain tumor) in the hypothalamus (the white matter located above the brain stem). This tumor would have proven fatal by the end of the year in which Whitman died.

Although Whitman had been prescribed drugs, and had Dexedrine (dextroamphetamine) in his possession at his death, the autopsy was unable to establish if he had consumed any drugs prior to the shooting. Whitman's bodily fluids had been removed and his body embalmed prior to the autopsy; therefore, no urine was available to test for traces of amphetamine having been consumed.

Connally Commission

In the days following the shootings, Texas Governor John Connally commissioned a task force of professionals to examine the physical autopsy findings and material related to Whitman's actions and motives.

Their report also said this lesion "conceivably could have contributed to his inability to control his emotions and actions." Forensic investigators have theorized that the tumor may have been pressed against the nearby amygdalae regions of his brain. The amygdalae are known to affect fight/flight responses. Some neurologists have since speculated that his medical condition was in some way responsible for the attacks, in addition to his personal and social frames of reference.
Title: Re: Gun Politics
Post by: I Eat Sub on December 20, 2012, 04:58:57
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/c21.0.403.403/p403x403/430941_308241069286111_1789522181_n.jpg)

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/374051_286633548113530_1022353363_n.jpg)

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/312788_306999552743596_1302847907_n.jpg)