Shooting in USA-thread. (20 Viewers)

[Lapa]

Legalizing weed would indeed make the world a better place.

--

I don't know what shit have you guys been smoking (if you have been smoking), but when I smoke weed I turn into a philosopher, get great ideas how to make the world a better place, how to lead a company, how to handle people who are working below me...and of course I laugh a lot. Silent laugh is my speciality.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Hust]

you didn't answer my question at all

what are you asking me? Is it cool that people have mental issue problems or is it cool that we are ignoring those problems?

 

[Martin]

what are you asking me? Is it cool that people have mental issue problems or is it cool that we are ignoring those problems?

both

think about it, you just said treq brought up good points, yes?

 

[Hust]

I'm not against procedures like background checks, which certainly help. My issue with how the media react to events like these is that they only focus on guns and no one gives a shit about why these kids commit these atrocities.

Oh if they wanna get guns they'll just get one on the black market. Banning guns won't prevent people who want to kill people from getting guns.

Background checks combined with a will to deal with mental illness and social rejection would be the way forward.

So, Martin: I already mentioned mental illness and that it needs to be dealt with as did Treq. Control the black market? I still don't get what point you are trying to get out of me

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think its right to have these mental illnesses ignored if that is what you are trying to get out of me. Handing out bottles of pills doesn't make it any better because eventually the bottle runs empty.

 

[Martin]

So, Martin: I already mentioned mental illness and that it needs to be dealt with as did Treq. Control the black market? I still don't get what point you are trying to get out of me

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think its right to have these mental illnesses ignored if that is what you are trying to get out of me. Handing out bottles of pills doesn't make it any better because eventually the bottle runs empty.

that's my point. what should be done about people having untreated mental illness?

 

[Hust]

that's my point. what should be done about people having untreated mental illness?

Good question.

 

[Martin]

glad you like it

 

[swag]

Columbine happened on the Clinton watch. V.Tech on Bush's and the rest most notable ones are on Obama's watch. What's interesting is I think de'gunning happened under Clinton when he de'gunned military bases/soliders...we all know who has been notorious for going after guns over the last 6-7 years and making it even harder to get a gun than the last decade still isn't working.

There are some serious mental illness issues in the States that needs to be addressed. All these folks have given some kind of warning signs they were not mentally stable and yet ignored or not caught in time.

I am not sure who is in the presidential office has any real bearing on this since Reagan did when he released all the mentally ill on the streets en masse. Might as well blame George Bush Sr for the Mt Pinatubo volcano in the Philippines.

That said, Enron kind of hit this right. Gun access is part of the problem, though not all of it. And the same is true for mental health.

Since most people do not have their children killed in a school shooting, it's convenient and easy to for them to resist any risk of changes to their gun ownership rights while make-pretend believing that state of armament protects them from harm. (As with the TSA, it's always about the emotional illusion of control ... rather than statistical likelihoods that might suggest they are not Arnold Schwarzenegger in a Hollywood movie.)

So any flinch to make a change comes with all sorts of bellyaching about how change always carries a risk of things possibly failing. Which is true of any change. Even if there's a real potential of making some things better. So the excuse is that since change could have potentially negative effects, let's do nothing because nothing is better and we love the status quo -- even if someone else's kids keep getting killed. Which means more dead kids in the news every month. That is not a sane response.

On the other side we have mental health. Going back to Reagan, it is misunderstood and treated suspiciously at a policy level -- and is not seen as a broad social good for everyone in society. As such, any organized attempts to validate and treat are often perceived as socialist medical programs that bloat government when isolated, privatized measures should be preferred. Add disengaged parents and a lack of your typical social nets of neighbors who know each other, people who attend churches or other community groups together, etc., and we have unsupervised loners who are time bombs. Once again, this is not a sane response.

really? thought crimes was at an all time low

They are, btw.

so.... the problem is mental. so what we should do is make sure people with mental issues don't get guns.

other than that it's cool that people have these issues or...?

I'm still with Enron in that it's both gun access and how we handle (or not) the mentally ill.

 

[JuveJay]

 

[Martin]

someone probably thinks that is offensive, at a time like this

 

[swag]

someone probably thinks that is offensive, at a time like this

Absolutely. Which is partly why I like it.

Kind of going back to what ReBeL said, too many people in this country get morally outraged when a sales clerk looks at them funny. Meanwhile they have never had their neighbor's house bombed with mortar shells. Not a coincidence.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

I am not sure who is in the presidential office has any real bearing on this since Reagan did when he released all the mentally ill on the streets en masse. Might as well blame George Bush Sr for the Mt Pinatubo volcano in the Philippines.

That said, Enron kind of hit this right. Gun access is part of the problem, though not all of it. And the same is true for mental health.

Since most people do not have their children killed in a school shooting, it's convenient and easy to for them to resist any risk of changes to their gun ownership rights while make-pretend believing that state of armament protects them from harm. (As with the TSA, it's always about the emotional illusion of control ... rather than statistical likelihoods that might suggest they are not Arnold Schwarzenegger in a Hollywood movie.)

So any flinch to make a change comes with all sorts of bellyaching about how change always carries a risk of things possibly failing. Which is true of any change. Even if there's a real potential of making some things better. So the excuse is that since change could have potentially negative effects, let's do nothing because nothing is better and we love the status quo -- even if someone else's kids keep getting killed. Which means more dead kids in the news every month. That is not a sane response.

On the other side we have mental health. Going back to Reagan, it is misunderstood and treated suspiciously at a policy level -- and is not seen as a broad social good for everyone in society. As such, any organized attempts to validate and treat are often perceived as socialist medical programs that bloat government when isolated, privatized measures should be preferred. Add disengaged parents and a lack of your typical social nets of neighbors who know each other, people who attend churches or other community groups together, etc., and we have unsupervised loners who are time bombs. Once again, this is not a sane response.



They are, btw.



I'm still with Enron in that it's both gun access and how we handle (or not) the mentally ill.

I want being sarcastic

 

[swag]

I want being sarcastic

I know that and am agreeing with what you said.

 

[Martin]

Absolutely. Which is partly why I like it.

Kind of going back to what ReBeL said, too many people in this country get morally outraged when a sales clerk looks at them funny. Meanwhile they have never had their neighbor's house bombed with mortar shells. Not a coincidence.

boom
http://www.theonion.com/article/man-cant-believe-obama-would-use-tragedy-push-anti-51455

 

[Zacheryah]

Some good reads in here

 

[j0ker]

I read some comments and replies on the Obama's facebook post about gun related deaths.

To say I was surprised would be an understatement, many seemed to think that if they give their guns away terrorists would invade US. And how US saved EU's ass many times during wars, which I would agree. But what I don't understand is how does an average joe having a shotgun or m16 contribute to any of that? How am I safe if for eg. @swag has a gun at his home? Aren't the armed forces responsible for internal and foreign security?

What a time to be alive (@bianconero_aus), from thousand miles away I could see their IQ tests came back negative.

 

[Zacheryah]

I never got this simple thinking.

America has a warbudget thats several times higher then what Russia has.

Now Russia's spending is mostly focussed on its defence, rather then offence, and has increased quite a bit past years, but still nothing close to US spending.


Is Russia getting "invaded" by terrorists ? Nope.


Simple thinking goes both ways.

 

[swag]

I read some comments and replies on the Obama's facebook post about gun related deaths.

To say I was surprised would be an understatement, many seemed to think that if they give their guns away terrorists would invade US. And how US saved EU's ass many times during wars, which I would agree. But what I don't understand is how does an average joe having a shotgun or m16 contribute to any of that? How am I safe if for eg. @swag has a gun at his home? Aren't the armed forces responsible for internal and foreign security?

What a time to be alive (@bianconero_aus), from thousand miles away I could see their IQ tests came back negative.

It's about the illusionary theater of control. Americans have watched too many Schwarzenegger movies to rely on someone else, so they all believe they can shoot the 100 bad guys with zero friendly fire targets like they're starring in a Hollywood movie.

 

[j0ker]

I never got this simple thinking.

America has a warbudget thats several times higher then what Russia has.

Now Russia's spending is mostly focussed on its defence, rather then offence, and has increased quite a bit past years, but still nothing close to US spending.


Is Russia getting "invaded" by terrorists ? Nope.


Simple thinking goes both ways.

This doesn't even matter, they were not discussing about the armies.

The problem is that many think that if they (the people) give up their guns, foreign terrorist will attack them. Like they are somekind of vigilantes above the law and everything and it's their responsibility to defend US and the world in general from isis.

It seems that most of them dont's understand their roles as civilians.

 

[Zacheryah]

In their mindset. What is the use of police, SWAT, reservists and the army ?