gun control

[shukle]

No Shukle the fact that you did not know your own laws makes you ignorant, the fact that you came here representing them as something they clearly aren't makes you stupid. Secondly its America, not america. You stated more than once now that guns are "worshiped" in America, this is a stupid statement and inaccurate. Maybe what you are saying is being lost in translation, but your English has been quite good so far so I tend to believe you actually feel that way, which is "stupid" to use your word.

We value our freedoms here and we value our rights, when they are trampled on we do get upset and we do fight for them. You literally have no dog in this fight, and the fact that we differ in opinion has nothing to do with this, you have yet to to contribute this thread in an accurate meaningful way. I should have just stuck by my guns ( pun intended) and just ignored you. I asked if you were trolling because your just throwing shit against the wall, inflammatory shit at that.

I laid out a well written factual post and all you came back with was, "Oh those are our laws, I didn't know." and "Why would your 13 year old daughter need a rifle" I answered your questions and then you come back talking about the NRA and KKK and how we worship guns AGAIN.

I feel like I am completely wasting my time even engaging you, I must be a glutton for punishment right now.

I stand by what I am saying, guns are worshipped in america, compared to the rest of the world. Now worshipped might be a strong word, but you get the point. I take for exemple you buying your 13 year old daughter a gun. I don't think there is another country in the world where this would happen (at least, not as much as in the US). I would NEVER do that. I have travelled to many places in the world, and I have never seen a place where guns were loved as much as in the US, that is just a fact. If you can't stand the fact that my opinion is different than yours, I don't know what to tell you. The whole point of a forum is to share a point of view right? I am not coming here saying I have the truth, I said multiple times that Europe is a mess right now and that I don't agree with pretty much all of our politicians, I didn't insult you saying you were trolling or that I was loosing my time with you. But my opinion is that buying a riffle to a kid is just like : hey, look this is cocaine, take it with me, so you know how to do it. This is my opinion, you have yours, the argument is therefore pointless.

As for the laws of my country, I didn't know them. As I told you, I have never seen a gun at anybody's place, nor have I heard about anybody owning one. The laws might look the same, but I guess the background check or the license has to be different. The simple fact that I didn't know the laws about gun shows the fact that nobody cares about them here. You went to the army, you know more about guns than I do, that's a fact. But I have my opinion on the matter, because I have lived with a pro gun american family during one year and I learned a lot, I am not completely ignorant, thank you.

I actually acknowledged the fact that I was wrong on our laws, but when we bring up the Iraki Oil war or the NRA/KKK matter, you simply ignore it. I encourage you to dig into it a little. I have plenty of respect for you, fighting for your country and risking your life as a soldier. However, as Jack said, you just did your job, you weren't the one taking the decisions. I am not trying to say soldier are idiots, I am trying to say they were misled, just like the rest of the world, and you aren't responsible for it, so you should be able to have a critical point of view on the matter.

But as you said, we aren't going to keep polluting this topic with our arguments, you have voiced your opinion, I have voiced mine.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

There is definitely some interesting debate going on in this thread, and cases to be made from both sides of the fence. I think, overall, I'm a bit surprised by the vantage point of some that do not see the self/home-defense argument.

Just some background...I own guns. I have grown up in a family of hunters as well as military men. I can't speak of pre WWI involvement(as I have not done the research), but I have family members who have served in each and every single war this country has been a part of it. We have also been trained to hunt for our food, and appreciate the ability to cut ourselves off from the rest of the hustle and bustle for a week to go deer hunting, duck hunting, etc. A good portion of our family has farmed for generations, as well. I work on my own vehicles, do my own repairs to my home, etc. In other words, we have always prided ourselves in some sort of self-preservation and dependancy. Do we grocery shop? Of course(although part of that is misleading as most of you would probably puke if you saw what the govt requires most farmers to do to our food sources that are otherwise considered "healthy" foods).

Now, I do not necessarily believe my govt is about to become some tyrannical force at this point or at anytime in the near future. But, if it did, my family would be ready. I do not necessarily believe the world as we know it is about to self-implode, although if it did my family would be more likely to make it through than most. I am no conspiracy theorist, but I am also not so naive to completely dismiss the coruptness of the minority that dictates so much for the majority someday getting out of hand. I am a very firm believer in Darwin's Theory. I believe that the world, and everything in and of it, cleanses itself on a daily basis, and sometimes that cleansing is done on a fairly large scale.

How this all ties to gun control? Well, I suggest those of you who have never saw the TV series "The Colony" take a good look. Yes, it is made for TV, and definitely is drama based. But, the message in it is very clear. Society, as a whole, is extremely dependant upon what technology has given us(and I love it, too). We(and I only use this term to describe the majority...can't even include myself in many cases) have a reliance upon an inordinate amount of man made/discovered/harnessed luxuries. And by luxury, I mean clean water, electricity, fuel, food sources, etc. When these things we consider to be life necessities become endangered in any way, we see panic. It is in time of panic, where people doubt their natural capabilities to survive, that we see the onslaught of desperation. Desperation invokes an innate self preservation that is inside of each and every one of us. But, what happens to the people who no longer have the capability to survive without what the modern day world has afforded them in such easily accesible means? As humans, our number one function in life is survival. Without a grocery store or the local McDonalds, how do we eat? Without a stove, how do we cook? Without electricity/fuel, how do we stay warm? Without clean water, how do we drink? And with the ensuing desperation that is bred when are survival is in doubt, what means will most otherwise sane and "normal" people go to to stay alive? In such a desperate environment, people will go to extremes they may have never before considered. What will a CEO do when faced with the reality that is his starving daughter? The answer? Anything, and by any means necessary.

Like I said, I'm not living paranoid over here about my govt, the Mayan apocolypse, or some goofball conspiracy theory that says our govt orchestrated Sandy Hook as a means to gun control. I am, however, prepared more than most to do what it takes to preserve my family. And part of that is the responsible possession of arms to defend and feed my family against a million different possibilities that can hinder the modern day, normal way of life. Some of you may laugh at the possibilities presented in "The Colony" and that's fine, as it may never happen in your lifetime. But, in an age of global economic/financial crisis, disease, tyranny, terrorism, etc it's not hard to imagine a catastophe contaminating our standards of living. Ever seen the damage a single car accident can do to miles of electricity? Ever seen the health effects of one single contaminated food source? I could go on. It's not hard to fathom the effects a chemical terrorist could have on NY's water supply, and just how easily it could be carried out and the damage that could ensue. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that power grids spaning several state lines could be disabled with one swift, contrived action.

I'm not paranoid, but I am ready. Doesn't mean I have a bomb shelter with 10000 cans of beans piled up. But, I am prepared with knowledge and the ability to put it to use. And if I am threatened by those more desperate than me, I hope they don't bring a knife to my gun fight.

 

[RonG]

Here is a White House-provided fact sheet listing his "executive actions."

Gun Violence Reduction Executive Actions

Today, the President is announcing that he and the Administration will:

Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
Nominate an ATF director.
Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...-battle-gun-violence-165956859--politics.html

 

[InBoobieWeTrust]

My point was, many bring up that citizens need guns to protect themselves vs an invading army or a tyrannical home government. Sorry to use the wrong phrase but the point remains, a militia stands no chance vs the weaponry of sophisticated armies.

If something like this ever actually happened, it wouldn't just be a rowdy gang of citizens forming a militia to battle the U.S. military. You would like see a lot of current military personnel defect from their military titles to fight against the tyrannical reign. It would be pure guerilla warfare.

If we accept that the government has all of the weapons so they always have all the power we're only setting ourselves up to get our rights trampled on. Never trust somebody with unchecked power.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Parenting and mental health are by far the most important factors in the topic at hand. Violent games, movies, music and other forms of media are so far down the list, but they do serve as an easy target for blame.

The reason no one ever wants to blame parenting is that would require some form of accountability, and we are very much a "pass the buck" culture. And, as was often the case in history, older generations blame all of the problems in the world on things they don't understand rather than looking inward. It must have been listening to rock and roll that led to this tragedy. It couldn't have been parenting. It must have been the heavy metal, because it couldn't have been the parents. Today, it must have been playing Doom or Call of Duty, because it certainly wasn't absentee parenting and a poor healthcare system.

As you said, games, movies, music, and even books are a much easier target because they don't require us to actually examine ourselves and address our own faults as both individuals and as a society. Most other first-world countries (particularly Europe) consume the same violent media that we do, but basically none of them experience the same amounts of violence and massacres that we do in the United States. So maybe instead of using a scapegoat like violent games or movies, we should actually try to figure out why the above is true.

No Shukle the fact that you did not know your own laws makes you ignorant, the fact that you came here representing them as something they clearly aren't makes you stupid. Secondly its America, not america. You stated more than once now that guns are "worshiped" in America, this is a stupid statement and inaccurate. Maybe what you are saying is being lost in translation, but your English has been quite good so far so I tend to believe you actually feel that way, which is "stupid" to use your word.

It's actually the United States of America. America is one of two continents, either North or South. Perhaps you shouldn't correct people unless you're correct yourself?

Here is a White House-provided fact sheet listing his "executive actions."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...-battle-gun-violence-165956859--politics.html

Those all seem pretty reasonable. Is it enough? Time will tell, I guess.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

It's actually the United States of America. America is one of two continents, either North or South. Perhaps you shouldn't correct people unless you're correct yourself?

Dude. Seriously? The word was being used in a context which each and every single, literate person understood. It was the lack of capitalization that was seen as disrespectful, not the physical spelling out of the entire name....right, jack?

 

[Tlyons]

Jesus Christ. NRA commercial asks why the presidents children are protected by armed guards but not YOUR children. I'll let someone else post the ad because I'm on my iPhone right now. Just wow.

 

[The Oi]

The executive actions all seem like a bunch of fluff...which should probably appeal to gun owners. Doesn't really look like he's achieving anything with those.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Dude. Seriously? The word was being used in a context which each and every single, literate person understood. It was the lack of capitalization that was seen as disrespectful, not the physical spelling out of the entire name....right, jack?

Pretty sure the winky face implied that I was being sarcastic. That's what the winky face is for, after all.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

Pretty sure the winky face implied that I was being sarcastic. That's what the winky face is for, after all.

Fair enough. Seemed more like a pot shot at someone you seem to disagree with. I think it was the subject matter that had me a little fired up. shukle rubs me the wrong way and that definitely carried over a bit.

 

[David.]

If you can't see a massive difference between children watching an actual person in real life do things and a polygonal model in a video game, I really don't know how I can have a legitimate conversation with you. The fact is that studies have been done numerous times on violent video games and their effect on kids, and the results were that there is no real effect.

Dont be dense. Its widely accepted by the psychology community that what we see influences our behavior in terms of aggression and violence. If you dont look at the stuff that the kids in colombine were into or lets say, the entire premise behind the fuckign guy who shot up a batman theatre, then you're right, it will be difficult having a legitimate conversation with you. Polygonal vs. real is a strawman argument. A blowup bobo doll is about as real a human being as a polygonal figure. The aggression displayed and the behavior that is mimicked to an inordinate extent (which is the experiment that sets the precedent in this field of study) is. The kids reeneact what they see exponentially more than if they hadn't seen the video.

Youre smarter than this, I hope. This isn't even debatable.

 

[shukle]

Dont be dense. Its widely accepted by the psychology community that what we see influences our behavior in terms of aggression and violence. If you dont look at the stuff that the kids in colombine were into or lets say, the entire premise behind the fuckign guy who shot up a batman theatre, we're very far apart. Polygonal vs. real is a strawman argument. A blowup bobo doll is about as real a human being as a polygonal figure. The aggression displayed and the behavior that is mimicked to an inordinate extent (which is the experiment that sets the precedent in this field of study) is. The kids reeneact what they see exponentially more than if they hadn't seen the video.

Youre smarter than this, I hope.

I don't think it's video games who make these kids go crazy. They have a deep psychological issue before that, video games just gives them ideas... They need help to be helped and cured. I don't think banning violent games, movies and everything isn't going to change anything, they would find other ways, just as violent, to be noticed.

First, we should stop talking about these shooters on the media all day, showing pictures, saying there names. All they want is to get famous. The media shouldn't talk about them, they should just talk about the victims.
Then, we should think about why they did that and try to solve it.

As for SmokingJoe and RonG, I don't get why you feel so offended. I am just trying to have a debate here. I learned english as a senior in highschool, so maybe I have like a teenage vocabulary, I don't know, but I don't feel aggressive at all. My political views might sound extreme, but that doesn't mean I can't talk.

If something like this ever actually happened, it wouldn't just be a rowdy gang of citizens forming a militia to battle the U.S. military. You would like see a lot of current military personnel defect from their military titles to fight against the tyrannical reign. It would be pure guerilla warfare.

If we accept that the government has all of the weapons so they always have all the power we're only setting ourselves up to get our rights trampled on. Never trust somebody with unchecked power.

Looks like I am going to make some more friends on this one...

First, I don't think most military men would defect. It has been proven by studies that when somebody else takes responsibility for your acts, you are ready to do just about anything (once again, Hitler and the death camps, the recent massive demonstrations in Europe and in the US where so many police men charged the crowd, harming women and children,...) Some of them would, for sure, but the majority would "do their jobs", especially in the US, where the army is such an important part of the culture.

Second, I have another solution : why not abolish the army? Some countries have done it (Costa Rica for exemple) and nothing has happened to them. No army, no threat.

 

[MRMsix6]

Dont be dense. Its widely accepted by the psychology community that what we see influences our behavior in terms of aggression and violence. If you dont look at the stuff that the kids in colombine were into or lets say, the entire premise behind the fuckign guy who shot up a batman theatre, then you're right, it will be difficult having a legitimate conversation with you. Polygonal vs. real is a strawman argument. A blowup bobo doll is about as real a human being as a polygonal figure. The aggression displayed and the behavior that is mimicked to an inordinate extent (which is the experiment that sets the precedent in this field of study) is. The kids reeneact what they see exponentially more than if they hadn't seen the video.

Youre smarter than this, I hope. This isn't even debatable.

The bobo doll experiment was conducted with young children (5 & under) who were found to mimic adult behavior. Straight from wiki: "Broughton, Buttross, Corrigan, et al. (2001) explained that the underdeveloped frontal lobe of children below the age of 8 causes them to be unable to separate reality from fantasy. As an example, children up to the age of 12 believe that there are monsters in their closet or under the bed. They are also sometimes unable to distinguish dreams from reality."

That is a profoundly different situation the discussion at hand, and really doesn't support your argument at all.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Dont be dense. Its widely accepted by the psychology community that what we see influences our behavior in terms of aggression and violence. If you dont look at the stuff that the kids in colombine were into or lets say, the entire premise behind the fuckign guy who shot up a batman theatre, then you're right, it will be difficult having a legitimate conversation with you. Polygonal vs. real is a strawman argument. A blowup bobo doll is about as real a human being as a polygonal figure. The aggression displayed and the behavior that is mimicked to an inordinate extent (which is the experiment that sets the precedent in this field of study) is. The kids reeneact what they see exponentially more than if they hadn't seen the video.

Youre smarter than this, I hope. This isn't even debatable.

1. What exactly were the kids from Columbine into? Marilyn Manson? So were millions of other, perfectly balanced kids. Some of them probably still are. Is he still around? Doom? Yeah, about fifty million people have played that game. Is there something I'm not seeing here? Were they into some things that millions of other kids weren't into? Their problems clearly went much deeper than the games they played and the music they listened to, and it's a total joke to blame what they did on music or games.

2. The "guy who shot up a batman theatre" (well said) was a mentally disturbed individual. People like that can't be measured by the same standard as the rest of us.

3. I wasn't referring to the bobo doll. I was referring to the adults these kids watched interact with the bobo doll. Kids mimic parents, siblings, and other adults. That's what they do. Especially young kids. That's how they learn to talk, walk, communicate, and do many other things. It's the same reason that kids with abusive or violent parents have a tendency to grow up to be abusive and violent themselves. So when kids see an adult play with a toy, it's no surprise that they would play with it in a similar manner. It's worth noting that the study you quoted used children in the three to six age range, making them less likely to think for themselves as an older child would likely do.

4. And again, I think there is a huge disconnect with watching an adult play with a toy and mimicking it and playing a violent video game and mimicking it. For one, in the bobo doll experiment, the people were real. There was no disconnect as there is when you play a video game or even watch a movie. Mentally healthy individuals play a game or watch a movie and realize that it isn't real, and people with mental illness, as I mentioned above, can't be measured by the same criteria as the rest of us. And aside from all that, there is still a huge difference between a kid beating up a toy and a kid beating up a real person. Did anyone here not play rough with their toys at times when they were kids? I know I did, in addition to watching R-rated movies and playing M-rated games. I also never transferred any of that over to real people because, you know, I wasn't an idiot.

5. And yes, it is debatable. You're linking a study from sixty years ago that utilized children in a room with real people and trying to relate it with older children playing violent games. There is very little actual comparison between the two scenarios.

6. I would also argue that the bigger threat to children who play games like Call of Duty is not the game itself, but the jackass people you inevitably interact with when you play those types of games. As I said, children naturally mimic adults and other people, so when they get into a game with obnoxious idiots swearing, spouting racist comments, and making threats, it's no surprise some of that might rub off on them. Once again, it all comes back to people.

 

[Randolphkeys]

It would be nice if we debated the actual list released by the White House instead of the rumors about automatic firearms and video games. The list RonG produced seems more in line with the concerns I've listed for the past month, especially the overarching theme of Sandy Brook being a mental health issue with a minor in firearms problems, not the other way around.