Uni slaughter in the U.S.A

[Liverpool]

Agree in part, it's the actions of a few that affect the responsible majority.

However gun ownership can prompt severely stressed or unstable individuals to take a course of action they would not otherwise consider.

Same with a car LeeRaines:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/murdersuicide-revenge-of-a-jilted-husband/2007/03/31/1174761817961.html

Point taken, many things can be used as weapons: vehicles, baseball bats, kitchen knives - the list is limited only by human ingenuity. But when was the last time any of these things were used for mass murder?

A few airliners got used in 2001 for mass murder.
Do we ban planes?

Irrational thinking...

Johnno,
Maybe....but the point is, whether a plane or a gun kills multitudes of people, why is it only after a gun is used to massacre people, that everyone is up in arms about guns?
"Lets ban guns"..."We need to tighten laws", etc....but all that does is tighten laws for the legitimate users out there, not the criminals or psychos who can buy an illegal weapon if their intent is to kill someone.

The sole intent of the terrorists that day, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using planes as their weapon.
The sole intent of the Asian student, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using a gun as his weapon.

 

[jayfox]

You really need to relax on the name calling Jayfox, really does degenerate from your whole religious persona...

It's not 'name calling' as such Johnno, it's just a bit of fun with people's nicknames. I don't discriminate who I do it to, it is not a form of insult, and there are many of us who do this in every post such as Redford, Evo, JB03, MB64 etc. etc. We are all just having a bit of fun and have done for the 3 or so years I have posted on here and pretty much everyone knows that. I'm sorry if it upsets you and I will not use such nickname variances for yourself.

 

[mld]

Johnno,
Maybe....but the point is, whether a plane or a gun kills multitudes of people, why is it only after a gun is used to massacre people, that everyone is up in arms about guns?
"Lets ban guns"..."We need to tighten laws", etc....but all that does is tighten laws for the legitimate users out there, not the criminals or psychos who can buy an illegal weapon if their intent is to kill someone.

Laws and security were tightened for aircraft travel though, much to the inconvenience of legitimate aircraft travellers.

 

[Liverpool]

Johnno,
Maybe....but the point is, whether a plane or a gun kills multitudes of people, why is it only after a gun is used to massacre people, that everyone is up in arms about guns?
"Lets ban guns"..."We need to tighten laws", etc....but all that does is tighten laws for the legitimate users out there, not the criminals or psychos who can buy an illegal weapon if their intent is to kill someone.

Laws and security were tightened for aircraft travel though, much to the inconvenience of legitimate aircraft travellers.

Yes, but they weren't banned from flying.

My uncles weren't "inconvenienced" when they HAD to hand-in their autos....that had what they had done for years, taken away.
Yet what did that do:

The Federal Government's gun buy back scheme cost $500 million and yielded more than 600,000 long arm guns, yet gun control groups estimate there are more than 300,000 hand guns among Australians, most of them illegal.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2003/s1015505.htm

I don't see too many criminals out there "inconvenienced" though.

 

[mld]

Hmm, I sympathise with you point, but not your way of making it.

 

[Rosy]

Of course crims have ways and means of getting guns still but it's certainly a lot harder to get them and would remove the chances of a spur of the moment kind of massacre by someone not quite so well endowed with contacts.

We had to hand in several guns and don't regret it in the least. I'm happy to not have them lying around. We've still got a couple locked away for use on the farm.

Guns are too instant and too fatal to have everyone carrying them around at will. There's very little room for mistakes with them,

Besides I got the money from the buy back and had a shopping spree. I wish we had a few more to cash in.

I feel for all affected in any way by the recent massacre.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

A few airliners got used in 2001 for mass murder.
Do we ban planes?
...
the point is, whether a plane or a gun kills multitudes of people, why is it only after a gun is used to massacre people, that everyone is up in arms about guns?
...
The sole intent of the terrorists that day, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using planes as their weapon.
The sole intent of the Asian student, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using a gun as his weapon.

Laws and security were tightened for aircraft travel though, much to the inconvenience of legitimate aircraft travellers.

Yes, but they weren't banned from flying.
...

Security is in place to prevent anyone gaining control of a plane.

By your logic, if somebody hijacks a train tomorrow and runs it off a sharp bend at high speed in order to kill people, we should ban trains because guns are banned.

...
"It was a very unremarkable sale," Mr Markell, who did not handle the sale personally told AP. "He was a nice, clean-cut college kid. We won't sell a gun if we have any idea at all that a purchase is suspicious." "

How can you have gun shop owners, who have a vested interest in making the sale, judging whether or not the buyer is a fit and proper person to own a gun? Crazy. And how would a government regulator be able to make a better decision?

Keep deadly weapons out of the hands of civilians,what need in a city do people have for a gun FFS?

Summarises my viewpoint nicely.

 

[newyorktiger]

Unless you live on a farm or you're a cop, firing a gun is a crime in just about any situation. What's the point of letting people carry them?

I was more talking about in America....things are a little different over there, compared to here.

Plus its in their constitution:

http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

The complete meaning of the 2nd Amendment has never been fully tested in the US Supreme Court. Once those dudes make a judgment, the amedment will have true definition.

There is still some some debate as to what the terms "to bear arms" and "militia" actually meant to the original writers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

 

[RemoteTiger]

Geoff Pryor - the political cartoonist in the Canberra Times did IMO an excellent cartoon in yesterday's Times.

As it would be a breach of some law to replicate here and thus get PRE in the poo - I will describe it instead

It is a stark picture of a small part of a large wrought iron fence with a white cement crowned brick pillar as its support - on the brick pillar is a sign "Virginia Tech" - attached to an upright of the wrought iron fence is a single large bouquet of flowers. The card on the bouquet of flowers reads -

"From the citizens of Baghdad"


Here is a link to the web site that displays his cartoons - Wednesday 18 April has not been displayed as yet - but will be over the next couple of days......... http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/display.asp?class=Your%20say&subclass=General&category=Opinion%20Cartoon

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Geoff Pryor - the political cartoonist in the Canberra Times did IMO an excellent cartoon in yesterday's Times.
...

Some of the work by cartoonists in this country is sheer bloody genius, but I reckon it's drawing a long bow to connect what's happening in Iraq with Virginia Tech.

 

[Anduril]

Geoff Pryor - the political cartoonist in the Canberra Times did IMO an excellent cartoon in yesterday's Times.
...

Some of the work by cartoonists in this country is sheer bloody genius, but I reckon it's drawing a long bow to connect what's happening in Iraq with Virginia Tech.

Not really. Ask the people of Bagdad who see/experience this type of violence daily.
Most likely a comment on the hypocrisy of a President/govt who doesn't blink an eyelid at the bloodshed he unleashed in Iraq.

 

[Michael]

I agree
Many people are oblivious to death when it relates to war or civil or border conflicts.
Afgahnistan, Iraq, Isreal, Zimbabwe.

Thankfully we have removed the Irish from this list

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Not really. Ask the people of Bagdad who see/experience this type of violence daily.

Unfortunately much of the violence in Baghdad is sectarian in nature.

Most likely a comment on the hypocrisy of a President/govt who doesn't blink an eyelid at the bloodshed he unleashed in Iraq.

Fair enough.

 

[Liverpool]

Not really. Ask the people of Bagdad who see/experience this type of violence daily.
Most likely a comment on the hypocrisy of a President/govt who doesn't blink an eyelid at the bloodshed he unleashed in Iraq.

What a load of garbage Anduril...

What bloodshed did Bush unleash on Iraq?
The sectarian violence that we see everyday on TV now is happening, because in the past, such violence between the two groups had been quashed, because of a spell of fear Hussein and his henchmen had cast over Iraq.
Any opposition to his way of thinking, was quickly halted, usually through torture and executions.

I'm sure if you asked the thousands of people affected first-hand from the bloodshed unleashed on Iraq by Sadaam Hussein and his sons, then they would tell you that it wasn't all ice-cream and lollipops before the Americans went in there anyway.

It annoys me when people take cheap shots at the Americans and Coalition forces over there about the violence we see on TV daily, when violence in Iraq has been happening well before you and I were even born, but was ignored just like the violence in so many African countries.

 

[Anduril]

Ah well, each cheap shot to his own.

 

[Knighter]

Ah well, each cheap shot to his own.

;D

 

[RemoteTiger]

Geoff Pryor - the political cartoonist in the Canberra Times did IMO an excellent cartoon in yesterday's Times.
...

Some of the work by cartoonists in this country is sheer bloody genius, but I reckon it's drawing a long bow to connect what's happening in Iraq with Virginia Tech.

Without going into the why's and wherefore's of both Baghdad's and Virginia Tech's situations - I interpreted the cartoon as the Baghdad general citizen saying "hey we feel for you - for we know exactly what you are feeling right now!"

Plus

"your campus shooting is horrendous - but that is a daily event here"

IMO it is not what causes the sad loss of life it is the actual sad loss of life.

I have a son attending Uni in Melbourne - I would be devasted if something happened to him like this - I feel for the Dads (and the Mums) of the Virginia Tech victims for they have lost their loving children - children they were obviously proud of and very much cared for.

Plus for those Dads and Mums it was their contribution to continuing the human race which is one of the reasons why we all exist (not the only reason). To know that your family will live on long after you are gone is one of the true values in life IMO......Cheers RT

 

[Johnno_84]

Johnno,
Maybe....but the point is, whether a plane or a gun kills multitudes of people, why is it only after a gun is used to massacre people, that everyone is up in arms about guns?
"Lets ban guns"..."We need to tighten laws", etc....but all that does is tighten laws for the legitimate users out there, not the criminals or psychos who can buy an illegal weapon if their intent is to kill someone.

The sole intent of the terrorists that day, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using planes as their weapon.
The sole intent of the Asian student, was to kill as many people as possible, to make a statement, by using a gun as his weapon.

Couldn't agree more mate, this bloke wouldve of got his hands on a gun regardless... However in many other instances - like when a 5yo took his oldman's gun into school and shot a fellow student - its due to the regularoty of guns..

Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" carefully instructed Americas veiws on guns, and the reason for why there are so many gun involved issues...

 

[AngryAnt]

Well, the report is in.

Turns out the gun control buy-back scheme has save lives in Australia - around 2500 actually since 1996 when the laws were introduced.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/gun-laws-credited-as-lifesavers/2007/04/22/1177180487704.html

Gun death is also connected to cultural context of course - Canada and some European countries have high rates of gun ownership and low rates of gun death but it would seem that rate of gun ownership and rate of gun death in Australia is clearly correlated.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Well, the report is in.

Turns out the gun control buy-back scheme has save lives in Australia - around 2500 actually since 1996 when the laws were introduced.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/gun-laws-credited-as-lifesavers/2007/04/22/1177180487704.html

Gun death is also connected to cultural context of course - Canada and some European countries have high rates of gun ownership and low rates of gun death but it would seem that rate of gun ownership and rate of gun death in Australia is clearly correlated.

Interesting. Thanks for the article antman.