- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
She also claimed to have read Donald Trump's book to him while he was still in the womb.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...d-son-and-gun-rights/articleshow/49239048.cms
Study shows gun control would prevent mass shootings
- Thread starter CatParty
- Start date
She also claimed to have read Donald Trump's book to him while he was still in the womb.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...d-son-and-gun-rights/articleshow/49239048.cms
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
Who knows? I'm not a child psychologist.
But as a counterpoint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting Germany has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world, so it seems pretty clear that gun control alone isn't an absolute preventative.
But just to repeat my earlier point, lest anybody think I'm a gun advocate, even if gun control would simply reduce the number of American school shootings, it would be worth doing.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2015
Nah mate, what they should do is ramble on about ancillary issues, motivations, what else to blame, rather than actually implementing practical solutions that may have a positive affect.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
"Expert: Woman shouldn't have fired gun at shoplifter"
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...er-opens-fire-shoplifter-home-depot/73468588/
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...er-opens-fire-shoplifter-home-depot/73468588/
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
I have a grim question for the thread. Let me know if I'm OT but my question is related closely enough to the thread topic that I thought it best to ask Deep Thoughts here instead of starting a whole new thread.
We see a lot of mentally unstable shooters coming from the MRA mindset and community. The motivating factors in old and recent shootings are often to the psychotic tune of "Why can I get laid? I'm such a nice guy." Or "All these sluts need to die." At the end of the day not much changes for those unaffected by the shooting, MRAs keep on keepin' on, and nobody addresses the issue after the hype dies down .
My question is: Lets say the product of stochastic terrorism, one day, comes from the other end of the horseshoe and an SJW shoots up a University. Perhaps someone agrees wholeheartedly with the #KillAllMen hashtag and takes a bullet to every privileged, male, white cishet she sees. Do you think the aftermath, politically or socially, would be any different?
I'm a pessimist who thinks it may be only a matter of time before we see this as a reality and get the answers, but I'd like to hear the analysis of this scenario from an audience that only the kiwi gun-knowledgable can provide. Would a killer, and copycats, who target the "privileged" affect the aforementioned Sandy Hook cycle enough to see action? Has this happened before?
Disclaimer: I don't want anybody innocent to be shot for any reason. Do not misconstrue this as a wish for violence, just as a politically-rife question. In b4 dank "trigger warning" jokes.
We see a lot of mentally unstable shooters coming from the MRA mindset and community. The motivating factors in old and recent shootings are often to the psychotic tune of "Why can I get laid? I'm such a nice guy." Or "All these sluts need to die." At the end of the day not much changes for those unaffected by the shooting, MRAs keep on keepin' on, and nobody addresses the issue after the hype dies down .
My question is: Lets say the product of stochastic terrorism, one day, comes from the other end of the horseshoe and an SJW shoots up a University. Perhaps someone agrees wholeheartedly with the #KillAllMen hashtag and takes a bullet to every privileged, male, white cishet she sees. Do you think the aftermath, politically or socially, would be any different?
I'm a pessimist who thinks it may be only a matter of time before we see this as a reality and get the answers, but I'd like to hear the analysis of this scenario from an audience that only the kiwi gun-knowledgable can provide. Would a killer, and copycats, who target the "privileged" affect the aforementioned Sandy Hook cycle enough to see action? Has this happened before?
Disclaimer: I don't want anybody innocent to be shot for any reason. Do not misconstrue this as a wish for violence, just as a politically-rife question. In b4 dank "trigger warning" jokes.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
As stupid as it sounds, if we studied this, we could probably find some kind of correlation (and causation) between the gun violence and sexual frustration. If this were the case, it'd even be somewhat justified if firearm licenses could only be given to non-virgins. I cannot stress how stupid this is though it's definitely something to think about.
Although it wouldn't stop the other types of gun violence that involve domestic violence and the like, this stupid hypothetical could probably prevent a lot of school shootings.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
In practice, though, how would one be able to prove that the applicant is a virgin or not?
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
I've been thinking about this since you posted it and, while the thought is hilariously effective at first (I actually laughed out loud, thank you), the above poster is right: this opens a 50-gallon drum of worms.
How do we prove that someone is not a virgin? Would this lead to an increase in prostitution? Would this lead to the invention of gun ownership motivated rape and rape allegations? Would this villainize the "virgin with a gun" image and make virginity something to FEAR about someone?
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
@Duke Nukem @Moogsy The other problem with this is that it would only work in a 1984-esque society. Excessive surveillance would have to be the norm, since the act is rather private otherwise.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
I understand this is a satirical proposal (I believe?), but it's fun to think about. You get into other issues though, like how to properly define virginity inclusive of homosexuals, and the discriminatory impact on well-balanced people who either cannot or choose not to have sex.
Your proposal would work better fine-tuned to people without friends as this would likely be an equivalent (possibly stronger) correlator, although this still would discriminate against people with social disabilities.
The Tea Party mantra of "More Guns!" probably isn't going to fix school shootings, but slightly fewer guns would. I propose stricter standards to own guns; reasonably-priced testing, registration, and licensure on-demand to all who successfully complete required hurdles to gun ownership. This isn't the same as "may issue" models in some states; if you complete the tests and registration, the guns are yours. This would retain the right of qualified people to defend their property with deadly force, while ensuring guns land in fewer hands of the mentally deranged.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
This does sound better, actually. Just have about five people who can vouching for the soon-to-be gun owner's mental state by having them sign some kind certificate. On top of that, maybe all of the people involved would have to go through some kind of psychiatrist to be allowed to sign, just to make sure that they're not crazy. The only non-social problem with this is with expense and time, though if I remember correctly buying a gun in the US has the person wait a week anyway and I assume that other countries have similar waiting periods.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2013
I don't really know what my stance is, the gun owners I have met, never went out and shot anyone, I think a lot of guys feel sexually frustration, but most don't go on shooting sprees. And I always hear people say that violent crime is actually going down, so what is the deal?
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
You appear to hang out with with well-adjusted, sane people who also want to own a gun. Congrats.
As for statistics vs news coverage, we all know fear is a business model. That's all OT. The goal of both sides of the gun debate is "stop mass shootings." I don't think any side is "Pro Mass Murder"
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
Violent crime has been on a downswing since the early 90s. This particular type of violent crime, however, seems to be holding steady.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
It's still vastly overemphasized and from a statistical standpoint, barely happens at all. Policy shouldn't be made based on the most extreme outlier phenomena, no matter how spectacular they may be.
Either having or doing away with concealed carry because of events like this makes no rational sense.
If you had, for instance, concealed carry on college campuses, most of the people carrying would be college students, i.e. stupid fucking morons.
You'd be vastly more likely to be shot accidentally in class by one of the tens of thousands of dipshits out there with permits, who left the safety off while scratching his balls, than by a mass shooter.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2015
Once you've made the decision, born of mental illness or personal rage, to shoot up a place, I don't think the presence, or absence, of any gun law, one way or another, is going to dissuade you. And, spree shootings are nothing new, they even happened back in the 50's before gun control was even a thing... the idea that arming the entire populace of a town or the entire facility of a public institution would dissuade a crazy person from shooting it up is a fantasy.
They may go for "safer" targets, I can't deny that, that they may deliberately start with an area they know is enforced gun-free, but, the ABSENCE of any gun free zone will NOT deter them from just walking out the door and opening fire. They simply go where there are likely to be masses of people not prepared to fight back, malls, schools, churches, they're linked by easy public access to LOTS of potential casualties, that's what makes them appealing, the fact there isn't likely to be an armed presence of any magnitude (before first-response) is a contributing factor, but not the cause. Eliot Rodger shot up his home town, the fact he didn't start at a school, or a "gun free" mall, or if he chose his starting point based on any gun laws at all, doesn't make anyone he killed any less dead.
The argument over who has final say whether the teacher has a gun in their top desk drawer "just in case" is a pointless exercise in political ideology that angers many and solves nothing. No disrespect to those who have lost loved ones to the actions of a mass shooter, but, you're more likely to be killed by a drunk driver in this country, and nobody seriously proposes arming everyone else on the road with a breathalyzer and allowing them to pull over their fellow citizens for a sobriety check anytime they feel threatened..... somehow, crazy people with guns are seen as morally and ethically worse than irresponsible normal people who end up killing a lot more of their neighbors every year.
They may go for "safer" targets, I can't deny that, that they may deliberately start with an area they know is enforced gun-free, but, the ABSENCE of any gun free zone will NOT deter them from just walking out the door and opening fire. They simply go where there are likely to be masses of people not prepared to fight back, malls, schools, churches, they're linked by easy public access to LOTS of potential casualties, that's what makes them appealing, the fact there isn't likely to be an armed presence of any magnitude (before first-response) is a contributing factor, but not the cause. Eliot Rodger shot up his home town, the fact he didn't start at a school, or a "gun free" mall, or if he chose his starting point based on any gun laws at all, doesn't make anyone he killed any less dead.
The argument over who has final say whether the teacher has a gun in their top desk drawer "just in case" is a pointless exercise in political ideology that angers many and solves nothing. No disrespect to those who have lost loved ones to the actions of a mass shooter, but, you're more likely to be killed by a drunk driver in this country, and nobody seriously proposes arming everyone else on the road with a breathalyzer and allowing them to pull over their fellow citizens for a sobriety check anytime they feel threatened..... somehow, crazy people with guns are seen as morally and ethically worse than irresponsible normal people who end up killing a lot more of their neighbors every year.
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid
This will all end in tears, I just know it.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2015
Problem is that anybody who really wants a gun is just gonna get it off the black market like everything else that's illegal.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2015
I don't really believe that personally. Unless your from that world how is someone else going to know how to get a gun? Who to speak to and where to go?
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
Not really, most people are lazy and take the path of least resistance. Making almost anything slightly harder deters a lot of people.
A good example is suicide railings on bridges. Putting up the railings doesn't lead to an increase in suicides by other methods - a good proportion of suicidal people just don't bother if the "easy" option is removed.