Thread: Pondering......

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

Look at the rest of the world, statistics show fewer people are killed per year, per population when firearms are rescinded.

This story was brought up during the discussions that was shut down "Knife-wielding man injures 22 children in China"

Key words here INJURED, not killed. There is evidence all over the place, you just don't want to see/believe it.

That was but ONE of several instances of attacks on children in China. I don't recall the exact numbers, but it was around 90 kids that have been killed in China by attacks with knives, samurai swords, and gasoline. I would think that is relevant to the discussion but the media thinks otherwise.

The INJURED children in the story you mentioned had ears cut off, fingers cut off, and stab/slash wounds. Yeah, they'll live. They'll be scarred physically and emotionally as will all the kids in that school.

What that kid in CN did was as low as it gets. That POS ruined a lot of lives and dreams. Any number of things could have stopped it. He tried to buy a rifle and was refused. The system worked. He broke over 30 laws to accomplish his chosen goal. I wonder how many kids and teachers he could have killed with a sack full of molotov cocktails.

While we're lamenting the loss of innocent children, does anyone have a good head count of those that have been killed in drone attacks in Syria and Pakistan sponsored by our government? I'd bet it's a HELL of lot higher than 20. Maybe it's because those kids are half a world away so they don't count.

Post #67 Bang on Wullie. What happened in CN is not about guns its about a Mentally ill person who was pissed because his mother was trying to get him commited. The system failed. We truly need to........... Well its a big problem and i swing a wrench for a living.

Our system in Canada allows police to enter your home without a warrant if you have firearms period, not just handguns. That is ostensibly to ensure you are following the safe storage regulations among other things. Even with all the regulations surrounding firearms in Canada we still manage to raise our own idiots and import a few too that still are willing to and have committed murders with firearms. There have been any number of incidents in such places as Toronto and Vancouver, to name a few, and every time the hue and cry is instantaneous for more gun control. Does it all sound familiar? Passing more and ever restrictive gun laws are a pacifier for the general public that allows everyone to feel good but does nothing to address the other underlying causes that contribute to people committing murder with guns. Not a well rounded approach to problem solving. IMHO we are at or past the point of diminishing returns that gun laws alone can provide. I am not saying it is bad here, there are plenty worse places, but paradise it ain't either.

Bob

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I've not read anything except the OP in this thread and so that is what I am responding to here.

It is my belief that violence begets violence. It is also my belief that defeating violence with another kind of violence is still just violence.

Arming teachers and principals at primary schools is certainly one way to go about "protecting" children while at school. However, is this really the kind of society you want to create in the US? One based on mutual fear? Or perhaps you are already at that point, and are now just owning up to it?

Did you know that teachers (of all kinds: primary, secondary, tertiary and miscellaneous) as a group suffer extremely high levels of stress and related mental health issues? Would you implement 3-monthly psych evaluations to assess whether they should still be allowed to have a gun? How would your idea go down if even one teacher blew a fuse and mowed down their class-room with the gun issued to them for the purpose of protecting that class room?

And what do you do if an educator, based on their principles, refuses to accept a gun? I would. Do you then sack them? Will it be part of the job contract? Will shooting practice need to be incorporated into University degrees for teachers? Will professional development days for your child's teacher be spent at the shooting range?

It's your country and you can do what you want with it. But I surely hope that, for the sake of your children, more pondering is taking place because to my mind this is an ill-conceived, hasty, and potentially disastrous suggestion that would do tremendous damage to the mind set of Americans and their poor children.

James.

Some types of people only understand violence. If that is what it takes to keep them from being violent towards me , so be it. I can flip an internal switch and go full rage mode without much provocation when/if needed.

Nobody is saying to forcibly arm a teacher, but as a citizen why are they denied the right to defend themselves the moment they get out of the car?

"Think of the children" is a liberal mantra.
I find it to be hollow and meaningless, because it's used like the race card. Seems it only applies when the progressives/liberals want to restrict us further.

Originally Posted by Pithor

Thank you!

That and abuse by adding conclusions and suggesting causal relationships seems more rule than exception, at least in popular media. I tend to take (most) statistics with a huge grain of salt. Methodology for gathering information, study and interpretation is key. I take ALL people using statistics in an argumentative discussion with a huge grain of salt. Just because you can rattle off statistics by heart that SEEM to speak in your advantage (plus a personal conclusion) doesn't necessarily mean you know how to make a well argued point.

"Just look at the facts", followed by a bunch of naked statistics just makes my brain hurt.

83% of statistics are made up on the spot. Lol

9 times outta ten that's true....just sayin.

Originally Posted by gugi

But these two arguments are mutually exclusive

That would argue that Europe has had a bit too much violence, and despite all the guns US hasn't had enough yet. May be another war over guns? I have a hunch it would be won by those with the bigger guns, which won't be the liberals. Unless the liberals who have much fewer private guns happen to be in charge of the government ones. I think I've already heard this somewhere

Most in the military are conservatives from the south. So the libs only have the UN foreign soldiers if they wanted to get froggy.

Originally Posted by TrilliumLT

But it is less likely for a person to just grab the fire arm and commit a crime.

I would wager that most crime is premeditated vs spontaneous and the disposition of the guns availability has little to do with it.

Here are some interesting stats Firearms and Violent Crime to show you what very restrictive gun regulations get you. They are a little stale but I don't think there have been huge changes. Seems as regulations tightened up the use of knives and other cutting devices increased to the point where it is now a 50/50 proposition on whether you will be shot or knifed here in a crime of violence. Anyway it is not all roses.

Bob

Innocents Betrayed ~ The History of Gun Control - FULL LENGTH - YouTube