Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. She wants six year olds trained to Zerg Rush people with guns? So the meat shield theory of self-defense is the best answer that libertarian thinkers can come up with?
Edit: I have occasionally fantasized about responding to a violent attacker in that sort of setting by attacking them, Assassins Creed style, but that's a fantasy. Real heroes die. I mean, in a hopeless situation, if I had the opportunity to sacrifice myself with a decent chance of saving other peoples' lives, I might try it, but a frontal charge on a man with automatic weapons is a Senseless Sacrifice taken Up To Eleven.
edited 18th Dec '12 1:48:15 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"In any case, the heads have already been rolled, as the saying goes. Four senior agents lost their jobs, several more have been disciplined
.
(and apparently, the ATF agent who publicly spoke out against the scandal was fired in a Denny's parking lot
. total class there, too.)
![]()
![]()
What is this I don't even.
edited 18th Dec '12 1:44:59 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Ok, now that I've thought about it seriously, what's truly horrible is the basic assumption that these tragedies are inevitable, and the best way to deal with them is come up with ways to minimize the casualties in routine school shootings, rather than stop school shootings.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.Indeed. The very notion of a "routine" school shooting makes me shudder. What's wrong with our society that we effectively blame students and educators for not being prepared to deal with a man walking into their classroom with a machine-gun?
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"In theory the six year olds could probably get the gun away from the guy if there were enough of them but it would probably make it easier for him to kill a bunch. Then you run into the problem of what do they do with the shooter and the gun after they've overpowered them. And of course the gunman is aiming to kill them so he's not going to play nice because he doesn't want to get sued or spend life in prison.
![]()
To prevent them you'd have to be willing to regulate the fuck out of guns. Since that's a non-starter they might as well be inevitable.
edited 18th Dec '12 1:51:24 PM by Kostya
![]()
I think it's some sort of Crapsack World mentality. Because to be honest, with media frenzy and alia the world looks like a place where such things happen normally.
edited 18th Dec '12 1:51:14 PM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanPersonally, I'm glad Wal-Mart is pulling guns. Among many other beefs with them, I really don't think that company should be selling guns in the same building as they're selling children's toys and food in. I think they should pull all their guns off the shelves. If guns are to be sold, they can be sold in a fucking specialty shop where the clerks are trained to inform you of all safety concerns and teach safety courses. Shops can make a good deal of money that way, and also remind their customers to renew their licenses whenever necessary.
Also... teaching CHILDREN to run straight at a shooter? Do they want it to be easier for crazies to kill their kids? That's absolutely fucking moronic. Every warning I've ever heard about dealing with a shooter you can't fight involves running AWAY. Also distracting them before hand. (Like if it's a mugger just throw your purse or whatever one way and then run the other.) Goddamn some people seem to think real life is run on a movie script.
The idea might work (key word, might) if we're talking about high school students but you still run into the problem of them being gigantic fucking targets that can be shot at point blank range. They could probably overpower a shooter if you got a few strong ones on him but good luck doing that without getting mowed down.
edited 18th Dec '12 1:56:07 PM by Kostya
There's no stopping crazy from being crazy if it's left alone.
The United States tried to keep guns out of schools with the idea of "Gun-Free Zones" which has so far proven unreliable at best.
(I'm also kind of okay with Walmart not selling guns - most of the employees there are not very bright. I'm okay with them selling ammunition, however, but that's because the employees don't really need to know what they're talking about in that case).
Regulating guns is one view that removing the tool would not enable someone with a violent impulse from doing so in the most efficient, effective way. The argument against this is that it would not prevent someone from trying to commit violence in another manner.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:04:37 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!@Kostya: No. I reject that absolutely.
Earlier in American history, there were not school shootings.
In other countries, even ones with lax gun laws, there aren't so many school shootings.
There has to be a reason America has as many of these as the rest of the world combined. It can't just be gun control.
It may be mental health care. It may be our media culture. It's probably our media culture, actually. But you shouldn't just blame it on "guns." That's the kind of knee-jerk response that means gun control advocates are taken no more seriously than the NRA.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:04:32 PM by Ultrayellow
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.![]()
It's unreliable because it is based around the assumption that posting a sign that says "No Guns Allowed" will stop someone who has intent to carry from doing so. The entire concept of a criminal is someone who willingly breaks a law, is it not?
The practical application of a "Gun Free Zone" to the criminal mind is that it is essentially an advertisement that law-abiding citizens there are unprotected.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Part of the problem with "get the gun in another place" is that the laws vary so wildly from state to state, and even region to region in a lot of places. A little more uniformity would actually help in this case. And not something stupid like the case of Republicans trying to make it so someone who had a license for concealed carry in the home district could violate the laws against it when they travel to another nearby district that doesn't allow it. (this came up months ago in this thread, I believe it has to do with the DC area.)
What we need is like some sort of national database that shop owners can have access to regarding individuals banned from having guns. I realize that's costly and would take time to set up, but it's not like we don't have national databases full of our information already.
Devil Take Me: That's as valid as saying that allowing guns somewhere advertises to the criminal mind that there are guns for them to steal and use.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.To sum up all of this, I don't buy that we have to concede that criminals will always be able to access guns should they wish to.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
Which is an intense mistake by those who do own firearms. Some concealed carry permit holders like to wear shirts that have guns on them, or put NRA bumper stickers on their cars. It's plain idiotic.
![]()
![]()
![]()
That's what we do have
. It's already set up that there's an instant background check, and this prevents individuals from buying firearms.
Again, the majority of firearms used in crimes are from straw purchases made by law-abiding citizens which wind up in the hands of people those guns do not belong to. There is a heavy fine and jail time for those who let their guns out of their hands.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:16:10 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Straw purchases should be made illegal, then. None of this giving an intensely deadly weapon to someone as a gift. The owner needs to be licensed and registered as that gun's owner. I believe I said straw purchases should be disallowed before, but it got buried under other things.
You want to own a gun, you can go to the damn store and get taught and registered. Attempts to skirt the law like this need to be shut down.
Also, if that's our national database right now it sucks royally at doing its job. Or sellers aren't checking the damn thing like they should.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:29:37 PM by AceofSpades
![]()
![]()
![]()
They will. I mean, look at "the war on drugs". didn't stop drugs. prohibition? Didn't stop alcohol. U.N. treaties to stop genocide? don't do shit.
Seriously, I don't see why they just do "gift-card" style purchases. buy a certificate that equals whatever gun you want to buy for them. Or bring them to the store yourself and have them do the paper work and what not. no one needs an AK under the tree or a Glock in their Stocking.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:32:17 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaack![]()
But how? Do we assign an ATF agent to follow everyone home who buys a gun? How do you stop ownership of a weapon from changing hands once it leaves a store? It's physically impossible. The only way to detect such a thing is after the weapon turns up in the hands of someone other than the buyer, at which point it's almost certainly being used to commit a crime.
If private gun sales are banned, with purchases restricted to police and military ownership only, and hunting weapons available only for checkout at licensed ranges and hunting areas, or for limited sale to people who demonstrate that they live in places where they are needed for protection against wildlife, then there would be no place for criminals to obtain them.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:33:14 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
require people to check in with their weapons at a police station for an inspection every year or so.
EDIT- please tell me your kidding. everything from tons of cocaine to people get smuggled into this country every day. plus, it ain't exactly hard to make a gun.
edited 18th Dec '12 2:35:33 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaack

Actually Pretty Funny
edited 18th Dec '12 1:43:13 PM by Ultrayellow
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.