LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   School shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/school-shooting-in-sandy-hook-elementary-school-4175441468/)

penguinator 12-14-2012 12:17 PM

School shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School
 
As anyone seen this

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/...oting-in-conn/

Only a gutless coward would do this

jefro 12-14-2012 03:36 PM

Another scum sucking whimpy punk person who's only wish in life was to have the media go ape over his chicken actions. Start hanging these creeps up in the town center for everyone to spit upon. Stop the media from reporting how sweet these punks are. I'd ban violent movies, music and games. I'd teach what it means to be a good human in school instead of how to use a condom.

Only a di%#less whimp would do such a thing. If ever I wanted one to burn in hell, there is one there.

penguinator 12-14-2012 03:54 PM

It's a sad day :(

I was watching the news and two more kids passed away from the shooting for a total of 20 kids.

sycamorex 12-14-2012 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jefro (Post 4849506)
I'd teach what it means to be a good human in school instead of how to use a condom.

If such scum sucking whimpy punk people are not taught properly how to use contraceptives, there is a great risk that soon there will be many, many more scum sucking whimpy punk people out there.

gnashley 12-15-2012 01:25 AM

Any minute now we'll be hearing how this would never have happened if everyone there at the school had been carrying a gun...

mlangdn 12-15-2012 11:13 AM

The problem lies with people - always has and always will.
How many guns did McVeigh use at the Federal Building?
How many guns did the 9-11 terrorists use to bring down 4 planes?
If we made heroin and meth illegal, could we get it off the streets?

DavidMcCann 12-15-2012 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlangdn (Post 4849902)
The problem lies with people - always has and always will.

Typical US gun enthusiast. Yes, one could run amuck with a knife, but that would harm a lot fewer people before one was overpowered.

If someone wants to hunt, a rifle with a small magazine is good enough. If they want to defend their home, a pistol will do; a shotgun is even better. No-one needs an automatic handgun or rifle.

The gun-lovers should have the guts to say they value their "constitutional rights" more than human life. The real trouble is that they aren't clear-headed enough to realise that this is their position.

TobiSGD 12-15-2012 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann (Post 4849933)
The gun-lovers should have the guts to say they value their "constitutional rights" more than human life.

Warning, personal opinion: I really don't think that the gun lovers really care about constitutional rights. Those rights made sense when the king of England literally was able to invade the country. Nowadays the US of A has the best army in the world, they are a military superpower. It does not make sense anymore for anyone besides soldiers and law enforcement officers to carry a gun.

They have a totally different motivation for not wanting to give their guns away. A gun gives you power, you suddenly have might, you can fire deadly shots with a single pull to the trigger. People like the might and they don't want to give it away. But this attitude leads to situations like that: http://gunsandcrime.org/highs.html

Keep in mind that a) this is my personal opinion, and b) I am generalizing when I speak of gun lovers, there may be some responsible of them.

Nbiser 12-15-2012 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TobiSGD (Post 4849980)
I really don't think that the gun lovers really care about constitutional rights.

I am a gun owner and I do care about my constitutional rights, and so does almost every other gun owner that I know.

Quote:

Those rights made sense when the king of England literally was able to invade the country. Nowadays the US of A has the best army in the world, they are a military superpower. It does not make sense anymore for anyone besides soldiers and law enforcement officers to carry a gun.
The fact that the US is a military super power is enough to make me want to hold onto my guns. After all, when there is a military superpower the government is strong; when the government is strong tyranny often comes. After all, England was a military super power and she tyranized over her colonies.Thus, I am defending my freedom and the freedom of others when I have a gun. Also, ancient Rome was a superpower, and she fell, overrun by enemy armies.

Quote:

They have a totally different motivation for not wanting to give their guns away. A gun gives you power, you suddenly have might, you can fire deadly shots with a single pull to the trigger. People like the might and they don't want to give it away. But this attitude leads to situations like that: http://gunsandcrime.org/highs.html
No gun lovers don't all like the power that a gun gives you; well, maybe they do, the power to save lives.

Quote:

Keep in mind that a) this is my personal opinion, and b) I am generalizing when I speak of gun lovers, there may be some responsible of them.
Yes, most gun lovers are responsible people. It is the few that aren't responsible.

Finnally, even if gun control laws were implemented the bad guys would still have guns, whereas those of us who are the good guys won't have guns and thus won't be able to defend others.

TobiSGD 12-15-2012 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nbiser (Post 4850161)
The fact that the US is a military super power is enough to make me want to hold onto my guns. After all, when there is a military superpower the government is strong; when the government is strong tyranny often comes. After all, England was a military super power and she tyranized over her colonies.Thus, I am defending my freedom and the freedom of others when I have a gun.

So, are you? Since 9/11 your government is taking your rights away, is illegally starting wars, kidnaps people from all over the world, ... . Yet I still have to see an American citizen standing up to fight against the tyranny, despite their claims that they would do it and that their weapons are for that purpose.

Quote:

Also, ancient Rome was a superpower, and she fell, overrun by enemy armies.
Really? You need a gun because ancient Rome was not able to sustain their empire? I don't see any logic in that.

Quote:

the power to save lives.
Quote:

the good guys won't have guns and thus won't be able to defend others.
So you really think that it is enough to own a gun and once a week shoot some rounds at the shooting range? Man, all that training for law enforcement officers and soldiers that enables them to hit moving targets, keep an overview in dangerous situations, keep calm (master the adrenaline rush, fighting the tunnel vision, ...) must clearly be a waste of tax money in your eyes, since the average citizen seems to be able to do all that without training. Imagine a situation like the Aurora shooting (James Holmes, by the way, bought his automatic rifles the legal way), a dark cinema, suddenly filled with smoke and you hear shots. The trained person knows how to react, the untrained person will be shocked. Now imagine most of the people in the cinema were carrying a gun. What would be their first reaction? Shooting at the persons they see carrying a gun, because they weren't rained to get themselves an overview of the actual situation? Which would be almost everyone?

By the way, most of the shootings that happened in the last time in the USA were not done with illegally purchased weapons.

Quote:

Finnally, even if gun control laws were implemented the bad guys would still have guns, whereas those of us who are the good guys won't have guns and thus won't be able to defend others.
Ah , this explains the high rate of violent crimes in your country, much higher as in any western country with gun control. Because we can't defend ourselves against the bad guys.

kooru 12-16-2012 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jefro (Post 4849506)
I'd ban violent movies, music and games.

Do you think that music/movies/games are the problems? Must I listen only Katy Perry?
Psychopaths will found another "justification" as the word of a politician, bullying suffered or even only a wrong look in the wrong place in the wrong moment.

nobuntu 12-16-2012 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kooru (Post 4850237)
Do you think that music/movies/games are the problems? Must I listen only Katy Perry?

<personal opinion>

They are, without a doubt, a part of the problem - actually, quite a significant part of the problem. If I were in charge, I would not want to ban everything that isn't candy-coated mainstream pop... only this (why).

commandguru 12-16-2012 02:43 PM

I disagree. When I was a teen I had watch movies, played games and heard music that had violence and I didn't go out and kill nor injured anyone. It is BS. The problem resides in the individual because they're freakin' lunatics.

TobiSGD 12-16-2012 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by commandguru (Post 4850539)
I disagree. When I was a teen I had watch movies, played games and heard music that had violence and I didn't go out and kill nor injured anyone. It is BS. The problem resides in the individual because they're freakin' lunatics.

Right, I beheaded my first enemy back in 1988, when I was 11 years old, I played shot'em-ups, egoshooters (still are) and other "violent" games, I love horror and splatter movies, I listen to Punkrock and Death Metal music (well, I assume that that is what is referred to as violent music, I have problems to imagine violent music) and guess what: still a totally non-violent person. Most of my friends are also gamers, like such movies and music and none of them is violent.

If you look at the history of school shootings in the USA you can see that many of them took place long before those things even existed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_..._United_States

If you look at the statistics which guns were used in the shootings that happened in the last 30 years it is very clear that more than three quarters of the guns were purchased legally, including assault rifles and semi-automatic handguns.

Now tell me the problems are violent games, not the easy availability of weapons for everyone.

Nbiser 12-17-2012 08:04 AM

Quote:

TobiSGD;4850189]So, are you? Since 9/11 your government is taking your rights away, is illegally starting wars, kidnaps people from all over the world, ... . Yet I still have to see an American citizen standing up to fight against the tyranny, despite their claims that they would do it and that their weapons are for that purpose.
Yes, the government has been taking away our rights and has been engaging in illegal wars. What is this about kidnapping people from around the world? I have never heard of that before. However, thus far the government hasn't been tyrannical enough to warrant our standing up and fighting; at leas for a while, we gun owners will continue the legislative fight for gun rights.

Quote:

Really? You need a gun because ancient Rome was not able to sustain their empire? I don't see any logic in that.
I was pointing out that just because my country, the US is a major super power doesn't mean that it will not fall. Rome was also a major military super power, but it fell as well.

Quote:

So you really think that it is enough to own a gun and once a week shoot some rounds at the shooting range? Man, all that training for law enforcement officers and soldiers that enables them to hit moving targets, keep an overview in dangerous situations, keep calm (master the adrenaline rush, fighting the tunnel vision, ...) must clearly be a waste of tax money in your eyes, since the average citizen seems to be able to do all that without training. Imagine a situation like the Aurora shooting (James Holmes, by the way, bought his automatic rifles the legal way), a dark cinema, suddenly filled with smoke and you hear shots. The trained person knows how to react, the untrained person will be shocked. Now imagine most of the people in the cinema were carrying a gun. What would be their first reaction? Shooting at the persons they see carrying a gun, because they weren't rained to get themselves an overview of the actual situation? Which would be almost everyone?
Don't forget, many gun owners in the US hunt (I hunt) and the animals we hunt don't stand still and say 'shoot me' they are running or flying to get away from us. Thus we hit moving targets. I don't think that all of the training that our police receive is a waste of tax dollars; most of the gun owners in the US aren't allowed to carry their guns around which means that the police need training; even if we were allowed to carry our guns around we might not be at a scene of a shooting.

Quote:

By the way, most of the shootings that happened in the last time in the USA were not done with illegally purchased weapons
.

They may have been legally bought, but they weren't being carried legally, I highly doubt they had concealed carry permits.

Quote:

Ah , this explains the high rate of violent crimes in your country, much higher as in any western country with gun control. Because we can't defend ourselves against the bad guys.
This does indeed explain the high rate of violent crimes. We gun owners can't carry our guns to Walmart or the movie theater, so the bad guys are made more bold. They know that they can kill many people before the police get there. If we were allowed to carry our guns around with us the bad guys would get shot down before they could kill very many people. I've read very many stories that go along these lines: ' There was a man at an armed bank robbery that had a concealed carry permit. This man pinned the armed robber down until the police got there."


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:42 AM.