West Baltimore

[Headhunter]

Republicans making this about video games, what a shocker. Shameless NRA whores.

There's a point to be had about people who virtually kill hundreds of people every day and their level of desensitization relative to others though. That's something I find undeniably true, and also something that nothing should be done about.

[zombie]

Guns are where the "prohibition theory" falls short but it's the argument everyone tries to make. It's really one of those simple things where we can pretty definitively say less guns = less deaths and move on to how you can make that happen.

yeah, you can say less guns = less deaths. treating everyone like we're children who can't be trusted because of some broken fuck is still never gonna sit right with me. but i guess that's where we are. it's either guns or fictional violence in our entertainment but the approach and intent looks to be the same. *shrug*

I mean, it's true, we can't be trusted and I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting that. I'm much more comfortable living in a world where people don't easily have access to guns. Except for the muskets needed to form a respectable militia for when the British come riding into town, as per the Constitution.

fair. maybe we will be better off to all be treated like children, under our parent government, who can't be trusted with anything that we could cause harm with, or that may influence us, in some way, to cause harm

That's typically how it goes when you show you're not responsible enough to handle something. Should there be no sense of accountability in our lives?

individuals prove that they can't be trusted, narrow or restrict their freedoms. why narrow or restrict freedoms for everyone else based on those individuals?

or maybe we should. if enough freedoms are narrowed or restricted, if enough things are taken away, eventually we'll have to actually look at the real problem and not how we can shift and dance around it, for whatever scapegoat thing we can focus on instead.

[Headhunter]

Guns are where the "prohibition theory" falls short but it's the argument everyone tries to make. It's really one of those simple things where we can pretty definitively say less guns = less deaths and move on to how you can make that happen.

yeah, you can say less guns = less deaths. treating everyone like we're children who can't be trusted because of some broken fuck is still never gonna sit right with me. but i guess that's where we are. it's either guns or fictional violence in our entertainment but the approach and intent looks to be the same. *shrug*

I mean, it's true, we can't be trusted and I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting that. I'm much more comfortable living in a world where people don't easily have access to guns. Except for the muskets needed to form a respectable militia for when the British come riding into town, as per the Constitution.

fair. maybe we will be better off to all be treated like children, under our parent government, who can't be trusted with anything that we could cause harm with, or that may influence us, in some way, to cause harm

That's typically how it goes when you show you're not responsible enough to handle something. Should there be no sense of accountability in our lives?

individuals prove that they can't be trusted, narrow or restrict their freedoms. why narrow or restrict freedoms for everyone else based on those individuals?

or maybe we should. if enough freedoms are narrowed or restricted, if enough things are taken away, eventually we'll have to actually look at the real problem and not how we can shift and dance around it, for whatever scapegoat thing we can focus on instead.

Because as society we're part of a collective where our individual decisions affect the world and people around us, not some fairly tale libertarian utopia?

Why so dramatic when we're talking about common sense ways to mitigate a problem? Are we really going to pretend it's some great tragedy that you can't get your hands on an assault rifle or need to pass a universal background check, things that never should have been up for debate? The gun nuts will whine and cry, but fuck them. Their ability to stockpile war arsenals aren't more important than the well being of the whole.

[Jason]

You clearly don't understand the process of purchasing a firearm. Clearly...

[zombie]

Guns are where the "prohibition theory" falls short but it's the argument everyone tries to make. It's really one of those simple things where we can pretty definitively say less guns = less deaths and move on to how you can make that happen.

yeah, you can say less guns = less deaths. treating everyone like we're children who can't be trusted because of some broken fuck is still never gonna sit right with me. but i guess that's where we are. it's either guns or fictional violence in our entertainment but the approach and intent looks to be the same. *shrug*

I mean, it's true, we can't be trusted and I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting that. I'm much more comfortable living in a world where people don't easily have access to guns. Except for the muskets needed to form a respectable militia for when the British come riding into town, as per the Constitution.

fair. maybe we will be better off to all be treated like children, under our parent government, who can't be trusted with anything that we could cause harm with, or that may influence us, in some way, to cause harm

That's typically how it goes when you show you're not responsible enough to handle something. Should there be no sense of accountability in our lives?

individuals prove that they can't be trusted, narrow or restrict their freedoms. why narrow or restrict freedoms for everyone else based on those individuals?

or maybe we should. if enough freedoms are narrowed or restricted, if enough things are taken away, eventually we'll have to actually look at the real problem and not how we can shift and dance around it, for whatever scapegoat thing we can focus on instead.

Because as society we're part of a collective where our individual decisions affect the world and people around us, not some fairly tale libertarian utopia?

Why so dramatic when we're talking about common sense ways to mitigate a problem? Are we really going to pretend it's some great tragedy that you can't get your hands on an assault rifle or need to pass a universal background check, things that never should have been up for debate? The gun nuts will whine and cry, but fuck them. Their ability to stockpile war arsenals aren't more important than the well being of the whole.

i'm not being dramatic. restrict or remove all of the tools you want, or the influences in fictional entertainment. it's not really addressing the issue. and it's treating everyone like they did the crime that led to the restriction or removal.

like i said, let's do it. take the guns away. we'll see how it goes. and it will be one less thing to use to dance around the actual problem.

[Headhunter]

Guns are where the "prohibition theory" falls short but it's the argument everyone tries to make. It's really one of those simple things where we can pretty definitively say less guns = less deaths and move on to how you can make that happen.

yeah, you can say less guns = less deaths. treating everyone like we're children who can't be trusted because of some broken fuck is still never gonna sit right with me. but i guess that's where we are. it's either guns or fictional violence in our entertainment but the approach and intent looks to be the same. *shrug*

I mean, it's true, we can't be trusted and I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting that. I'm much more comfortable living in a world where people don't easily have access to guns. Except for the muskets needed to form a respectable militia for when the British come riding into town, as per the Constitution.

fair. maybe we will be better off to all be treated like children, under our parent government, who can't be trusted with anything that we could cause harm with, or that may influence us, in some way, to cause harm

That's typically how it goes when you show you're not responsible enough to handle something. Should there be no sense of accountability in our lives?

individuals prove that they can't be trusted, narrow or restrict their freedoms. why narrow or restrict freedoms for everyone else based on those individuals?

or maybe we should. if enough freedoms are narrowed or restricted, if enough things are taken away, eventually we'll have to actually look at the real problem and not how we can shift and dance around it, for whatever scapegoat thing we can focus on instead.

Because as society we're part of a collective where our individual decisions affect the world and people around us, not some fairly tale libertarian utopia?

Why so dramatic when we're talking about common sense ways to mitigate a problem? Are we really going to pretend it's some great tragedy that you can't get your hands on an assault rifle or need to pass a universal background check, things that never should have been up for debate? The gun nuts will whine and cry, but fuck them. Their ability to stockpile war arsenals aren't more important than the well being of the whole.

i'm not being dramatic. restrict or remove all of the tools you want, or the influences in fictional entertainment. it's not really addressing the issue. and it's treating everyone like they did the crime that led to the restriction or removal.

like i said, let's do it. take the guns away. we'll see how it goes. and it will be one less thing to use to dance around the actual problem.

You've alluded to it enough times, so what's the actual problem?

[Jason]

People who pull the trigger, rather than the trigger itself.

Simplesimple.

[Headhunter]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

[zombie]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

i put them together as examples of things used to dance around the problem. not as comparable to each other. even said as much in my first recent post about the issue.

the real problem (as it relates to mass killings) is the shooter or potential shooter. the red flags along the way that were ignored or overlooked. and what drove those individuals to plan or to carry out an attack. work on understanding the problem and curbing it as much as you can. that's the answer. but it would take work. restricting things and punishing unrelated people is easier and more flashy. it's akin to building a wall along the border, rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

[Jason]

Timothy McVeigh didn't seem to need a gun. He was perfectly happy to utilize fertilizer and a rental truck.

Ban rental trucks.

[Jason]

rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

A different debate entirely, but in simple terms: America > Mexico.

Mexico is causing a flood and won't fix it. So we're building our own levee and essentially making them pay for it. P. cool stuff.

[Headhunter]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

i put them together as examples of things used to dance around the problem. not as comparable to each other. even said as much in my first recent post about the issue.

the real problem (as it relates to mass killings) is the shooter or potential shooter. the red flags along the way that were ignored or overlooked. and what drove those individuals to plan or to carry out an attack. work on understanding the problem and curbing it as much as you can. that's the answer. but it would take work. restricting things and punishing unrelated people is easier and more flashy. it's akin to building a wall along the border, rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

It's not much like the immigration issue, as there are definable ways we can address different things there like streamlining the immigration process, influencing migration patterns and discouraging illegal employment. Is there an actual solution here, or just "understand people more"?

[Jason]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

i put them together as examples of things used to dance around the problem. not as comparable to each other. even said as much in my first recent post about the issue.

the real problem (as it relates to mass killings) is the shooter or potential shooter. the red flags along the way that were ignored or overlooked. and what drove those individuals to plan or to carry out an attack. work on understanding the problem and curbing it as much as you can. that's the answer. but it would take work. restricting things and punishing unrelated people is easier and more flashy. it's akin to building a wall along the border, rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

It's not much like the immigration issue, as there are definable ways we can address different things there like streamlining the immigration process, influencing migration patterns and discouraging illegal employment. Is there an actual solution here, or just "understand people more"?

A mexican broski of mine that pumps concrete got his citizenship in ten months. Prouda him.

[zombie]

Timothy McVeigh didn't seem to need a gun. He was perfectly happy to utilize fertilizer and a rental truck.

Ban rental trucks.

this is also kind of dumb... hands are used to hold and fire guns and thus they cause harm (or threat of harm) but that is not their designed function. a car or truck can b made into a bomb, but that's not it's designed function or purpose. a gun is designed to cause harm. that is it's function. whether it's for protection or otherwise, or just even threat of harm. it's still the function. let's don't further cloud the issue or dance around it.

[Jason]

Timothy McVeigh didn't seem to need a gun. He was perfectly happy to utilize fertilizer and a rental truck.

Ban rental trucks.

this is also kind of dumb... hands are used to hold and fire guns and thus they cause harm (or threat of harm) but that is not their designed function. a car or truck can b made into a bomb, but that's not it's designed function or purpose. a gun is designed to cause harm. that is it's function. whether it's for protection or otherwise, or just even threat of harm. it's still the function. let's don't further cloud the issue or dance around it.

A gun is designed to protect, in my opinion. :mrgreen:

But seriously, trucks are designed to travel, but people have decided to run others over with them. An airplane is designed to travel, but people have decided to hijack them and fly them into buildings. People use knives far more often than they use guns and are responsible for 19x more violence than any firearm. The underlying issue isn't the object, it's the person using it.

[zombie]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

i put them together as examples of things used to dance around the problem. not as comparable to each other. even said as much in my first recent post about the issue.

the real problem (as it relates to mass killings) is the shooter or potential shooter. the red flags along the way that were ignored or overlooked. and what drove those individuals to plan or to carry out an attack. work on understanding the problem and curbing it as much as you can. that's the answer. but it would take work. restricting things and punishing unrelated people is easier and more flashy. it's akin to building a wall along the border, rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

It's not much like the immigration issue, as there are definable ways we can address different things there like streamlining the immigration process, influencing migration patterns and discouraging illegal employment. Is there an actual solution here, or just "understand people more"?

did the attackers carry out their attacks out of the blue? or were there indications as to the potential of them carrying out an attack? or even investigation by authorities and then not taking it seriously? did they purchase the guns that they used in their attack?

[Headhunter]

Also, putting the tools that make it possible to kill 20 people in a minute in the same basket as some entertainment we consume, is way off the mark. The guns themselves are a serious problem, seems pretty unrealistic to understate that.

i put them together as examples of things used to dance around the problem. not as comparable to each other. even said as much in my first recent post about the issue.

the real problem (as it relates to mass killings) is the shooter or potential shooter. the red flags along the way that were ignored or overlooked. and what drove those individuals to plan or to carry out an attack. work on understanding the problem and curbing it as much as you can. that's the answer. but it would take work. restricting things and punishing unrelated people is easier and more flashy. it's akin to building a wall along the border, rather than looking at the actual reasons for the immigration issues.

It's not much like the immigration issue, as there are definable ways we can address different things there like streamlining the immigration process, influencing migration patterns and discouraging illegal employment. Is there an actual solution here, or just "understand people more"?

did the attackers carry out their attacks out of the blue? or were there indications as to the potential of them carrying out an attack? or even investigation by authorities and then not taking it seriously? did they purchase the guns that they used in their attack?

What real preventative methods are we talking about here? What "freedoms" would be restricted to make them happen?

[zombie]

Timothy McVeigh didn't seem to need a gun. He was perfectly happy to utilize fertilizer and a rental truck.

Ban rental trucks.

this is also kind of dumb... hands are used to hold and fire guns and thus they cause harm (or threat of harm) but that is not their designed function. a car or truck can b made into a bomb, but that's not it's designed function or purpose. a gun is designed to cause harm. that is it's function. whether it's for protection or otherwise, or just even threat of harm. it's still the function. let's don't further cloud the issue or dance around it.

A gun is designed to protect, in my opinion. :mrgreen:

But seriously, trucks are designed to travel, but people have decided to run others over with them. An airplane is designed to travel, but people have decided to hijack them and fly them into buildings. People use knives far more often than they use guns and are responsible for 19x more violence than any firearm. The underlying issue isn't the object, it's the person using it.

they can be used to protect, by way of harm or threat of harm. it's not like how a shield or body armor is designed to protect.

"the underlying issue isn't the object, it's the person using it." i never said otherwise.

[Jason]

I know. You are sane, zomb.

[Headhunter]

Zombs you may have missed how many times I've railed against the threat of white supremacy growing online among young people (I've consistently stated this would lead to acts of terrorism), but I'm not sure what the solution there is. So you have people being radicalized online. What are you going to do to curb their influence?

I know one thing that can have a real tangible effect on these events: making it harder for these people to get guns.