Guns

[tiffanistarr]

It annoys me that government officials blame video games. With or without video games, they would commit the crimes. Well adjusted people play GTA too. It’s their life circumstances, not the games.

YES! That irks me too and they disregard the scientific data and stats that show video game violence does not make violent people. I've been playing GTA since I was a kid before I was even a teenager and I'm fine and I know there's millions more like me.

Also it's just completely asinine to me that they don't realize these games are released world-wide. These aren't US only games that get absorbed my today's American youth and gamers alike. Since they are absorbed world-wide how come the US is the only country that seemingly has a problem with these mass school shootings? I really don't think you can blame video games or Hollywood anything that compares. If we were all greatly disturbed by video games and what we see in movies we'd all be dead.

 

[John Wick]

Actually, AC is more likely to cause someone to snap.

GTA is a smooth ride!

 

[Hellfish]

It annoys me that government officials blame video games. With or without video games, they would commit the crimes. Well adjusted people play GTA too. It?s their life circumstances, not the games.

There's been numerous studies regarding video games and violence and as far as I'm aware the outcome has always been that there's no correlation between people who play video games and violent behavior. It's just the government and higher ups looking for a scapegoat

 

[vel]

Gun control is not the answer.

gun control IS the answer. guns are the only thing capable of wiping people in seconds. knives, baseball bats, whatever the hell else could kill, but so could dictionaries, scissors, shampoo, those could all kill as well if you want to go to that front. and, like it is, a public SHOOTING. large scale attacks will happen, but at least we are working toward preventing them. accessibility to guns is the problem.

 

[Hellfish]

Religion will do little to help and while teaching Morals is a good thing it's not going to change anything. The vast majority of shooters know what they're doing is bad. It's not like you go to a school and say "killing people is wrong" and the children reply "woah really?". Giving teachers means to punish is also a terribly stupid idea and would cause more shootings.

Once again if you've got the guts to pick up a gun and start shooting innocent people I doubt you'll fear the death penalty so this point is illogical...


The media surprisingly isn't the issue here. They're trying to address the situation and help stop it if anything they've helped create awareness. I live in New Zealand and we only hear about the massive shootings on the news, little did I know there had been about 4 times the number of shooting that were actually reported in New Zealand. Also it's not like someone watches the news and goes "oh look a shooting, maybe I'll do that nxt nonth"

Gun control will undoubtedly save lives but the US government is too stupid to see that...

 

[N e s s]

1. Thousands of schools in the U.S. teach morals for their students. Ever heard of Rachel's Challenge? The girl who DIED in the columbine shooting and her parents discovered her diary that held tons of lessons about helping other people? Schools are doing their best to teach morals, but that isn't going to stop some crazy man 20 years later from elementary school from walking into a school and shooting a ton of people.

2. You seem like the type of person who would agree to "All Lives Matter", what happened to that hm? The solution to killing people shouldn't be killing more people, the death penalty in my opinion is an immoral practice. Nobody, not even a scumbag should be killed. Just lock them up in prison for the rest of their lives and let them think about the **** they committed.

3. hope you realize that you just unintentionally said you support removing freedom of the press lol...we have news stations to keep us informed on everything happening in our country, the Sandy Hook shooting was a tragedy for american history and deserved to be reported on. No amount of censorship is going to stop a shooting.

4. Disagree with your notion of "the senate will never pass gun laws so they can save their seat". If enough people are backlashing a problem that is very present in our society, then the government will eventually take action on it. Thats a very "Oh my vote doesn't matter" mindset, which is in my opinion, a very arrogant thing to say, especially coming from you who is so passionate about politics.

 

[Hellfish]

1. Thousands of schools in the U.S. teach morals for their students. Ever heard of Rachel's Challenge? The girl who DIED in the columbine shooting and her parents discovered her diary that held tons of lessons about helping other people? Schools are doing their best to teach morals, but that isn't going to stop some crazy man 20 years later from elementary school from walking into a school and shooting a ton of people.

2. You seem like the type of person who would agree to "All Lives Matter", what happened to that hm? The solution to killing people shouldn't be killing more people, the death penalty in my opinion is an immoral practice. Nobody, not even a scumbag should be killed. Just lock them up in prison for the rest of their lives and let them think about the **** they committed.

3. hope you realize that you just unintentionally said you support removing freedom of the press lol...we have news stations to keep us informed on everything happening in our country, the Sandy Hook shooting was a tragedy for american history and deserved to be reported on. No amount of censorship is going to stop a shooting.

4. Disagree with your notion of "the senate will never pass gun laws so they can save their seat". If enough people are backlashing a problem that is very present in our society, then the government will eventually take action on it. Thats a very "Oh my vote doesn't matter" mindset, which is in my opinion, a very arrogant thing to say, especially coming from you who is so passionate about politics.

Sadly he may be right about the last point which I mentioned in my response above yours. The US government in its current state has no intentions of changing gun laws, hopefully if you get a new president that will change. For now it's hard to be optimistic, it's not like the shootings this year were the first and look how much change has occurred. Considering the US was going to make suppressors easier to obtain makes it seem like Americans votes don't matter.

From my limited knowledge of the country, I'm pretty sure they've tried numerous times in the past to implement regulations and nothing has ever changed (I could be wrong though)

 

[-Apples-]

1. Thousands of schools in the U.S. teach morals for their students. Ever heard of Rachel's Challenge? The girl who DIED in the columbine shooting and her parents discovered her diary that held tons of lessons about helping other people? Schools are doing their best to teach morals, but that isn't going to stop some crazy man 20 years later from elementary school from walking into a school and shooting a ton of people.

Didn't know that. Of course, I know all about the mental illness linked shootings. I remember before I suggested asylums for those that are very likely to do so, but that is an intolerant, unethical, and evil (Biblical definition) suggestion, so we're not going with that.

2. You seem like the type of person who would agree to "All Lives Matter", what happened to that hm? The solution to killing people shouldn't be killing more people, the death penalty in my opinion is an immoral practice. Nobody, not even a scumbag should be killed. Just lock them up in prison for the rest of their lives and let them think about the **** they committed.

I'm pretty harsh. I can admit that. But I have no heart for a murderer. It doesn't matter how bad the murder is. A murderer is a murderer. And since I'm very passionate over this issue, I support the death penalty.

3. hope you realize that you just unintentionally said you support removing freedom of the press lol...we have news stations to keep us informed on everything happening in our country, the Sandy Hook shooting was a tragedy for american history and deserved to be reported on. No amount of censorship is going to stop a shooting.

Interesting fact: I was about to tell people to stop bumping political discussions that have been inactive for over a month (only because bumping old threads is a forum taboo). But I decided not. My wish to stop bumping old political discussions kinda backs that point in the first sentence.

As for that suggestion, I first saw that in the news in response to the latest Florida shooting. But if censorship won't stop, then I wouldn't follow this suggestion.

4. Disagree with your notion of "the senate will never pass gun laws so they can save their seat". If enough people are backlashing a problem that is very present in our society, then the government will eventually take action on it. Thats a very "Oh my vote doesn't matter" mindset, which is in my opinion, a very arrogant thing to say, especially coming from you who is so passionate about politics.

Wanna know why it worked in the UK? It's because there were hardly any guns in the first place. But if you want to put a ban on all guns in America, you'll have to get the government to knock on everyone's doors to confiscate guns, not just ban stores from selling guns anymore. If we can't do that, but pass gun control, there can be gun smuggling, which is dangerous.

 

[visibleghost]

”nothing to get angry about” idk about you but i think that people dying due to gun violence is something to get angry about. this isnt a discussion on what pizza topping is better, it’s a discussion about if people should get to have and carry around weapons to kill people with. it can be kind of upsetting when others think it’s fine that people are dying all over due to unrestrictive gun laws.

people who commit mass shootings often commit suicide, how exactly do you think that would prevent those crimes from happening? the death penalty is a human rights violation and sucks for a number of reasons, and it would be better to prevent peopme from dying instead of killing more people.

media is a problem when it comes to many things but not reporting shootings would be really sketchy. covering things up and not letting people know things leads to conspiracy theories. a key part of democracy is an open and free media and besides with social media things like that will be spread anyway but potentionally in more harmful ways. (false reporting, conspiracies, ”oh hey reddit let’s catch the boston bomber lol” scenarios etc.)
the media needs to be responsible in how it reports these incidents but to stop reporting them isnt a responsible way to deal with it.

the senators being awful people isnt news but people putting pressure on them might help in passing soemthing lol. the government isnt or at least shouldnt be something that’s just going on without input and influence from the people. with the massive protests that have been going on hopefully some of them will change their minds. public outrage is sometimes pretty efficient in killing careers of politicians

Didn't know that. Of course, I know all about the mental illness linked shootings. I remember before I suggested asylums for those that are very likely to do so, but that is an intolerant, unethical, and evil (Biblical definition) suggestion, so we're not going with that.


I'm pretty harsh. I can admit that. But I have no heart for a murderer. It doesn't matter how bad the murder is. A murderer is a murderer. And since I'm very passionate over this issue, I support the death penalty.


Interesting fact: I was about to tell people to stop bumping political discussions that have been inactive for over a month (only because bumping old threads is a forum taboo). But I decided not. My wish to stop bumping old political discussions kinda backs that point in the first sentence.

As for that suggestion, I first saw that in the news in response to the latest Florida shooting. But if censorship won't stop, then I wouldn't follow this suggestion.


Wanna know why it worked in the UK? It's because there were hardly any guns in the first place. But if you want to put a ban on all guns in America, you'll have to get the government to knock on everyone's doors to confiscate guns, not just ban stores from selling guns anymore. If we can't do that, but pass gun control, there can be gun smuggling, which is dangerous.

removing guns will be a problem but resteicting new guns is something. in sweden there have been some weapon collection things where people can go to the police and give in weapons and guns, im not sure exactly how it works but they have gotten in a lot of weapons. maybe something similar could be done in the us. along with making certain gun ownership illegal or whatever i think it could be something to help removing guns from society. still, it’s a process and the results may not start showing immediately though i do think it will make a big difference after some time.

 

[vel]

Notice, I never used the word "argue," "upset," I only utilized capitalization to prove my opinion. I was treating this as a debate, in which the topic is something I am passionate about, so kindly do not treat this as a fun thread over jelly beans, and do not dismiss this as "anger," when I debating something I am passionate about. My perspective is based on being a student myself, and being able to relate myself to the same situations, so, of course, I am emotional when talking about these situations.

1. "Nothing can stop them," yes. I know. After so many school shootings, I know. As a student, in the same grade as some of the students that were murdered, I know. However, teaching morals does NOTHING. Same way the school believes teaching people not to do drugs, or not to bully will cause any effect on the student body. It really does nothing, the same way teaching religion doesn't do anything. I have friends attending Christian and Catholic schools who drink, do drugs, and more. They are not affected in the slightest. Additionally, morals and mental health issues are not related, same way video games are not linked to violence. Also, morals are different for everyone, so it wouldn't help much.
2. There is a difference between consequence/punishment vs. justice.
3. National news needs to keep reporting, to keep informing people, and to keep people active about this. Why in the world would you say they need to stop? You're basically saying, "These LIVES the murderer has taken do not mean anything, it's just another school shooting."

Lastly, I know nothing will happen, but people still hang on to the hope something will, and that's why people are motivated, to keep protesting for change.

 

[John Wick]

I'm pretty harsh. I can admit that. But I have no heart for a murderer. It doesn't matter how bad the murder is. A murderer is a murderer. And since I'm very passionate over this issue, I support the death penalty.

Killing people, who kill people, to show people, that killing people, is wrong. :-/

 

[-Apples-]

Killing people, who kill people, to show people, that killing people, is wrong. :-/

I know you find it shocking that there are people who support the death penalty, but I am just as shocked that people would rather keep a murderer alive. I know they would be in jail for a long time, but it's not fair to even let them live if they already killed someone. Many would call the death penalty "cruel and unusual punishment", but I don't think it is, as long as it's not involving anything more brutal than hanging or punishing people that haven't committed murder. But there are some practices that don't involve the death penalty that is "cruel and unusual". Those include, but not limited to:

- not letting prisoners have healthcare
- making prisoners work in insufferable conditions without relief
- solitary confinement for longer than a month

One of them has already been ruled "cruel and unusual", but the other two aren't ruled, but they are cruel. I'm honestly in favor of ending solitary confinement before ending capital punishment.

 

[Hellfish]

I know you find it shocking that there are people who support the death penalty, but I am just as shocked that people would rather keep a murderer alive. I know they would be in jail for a long time, but it's not fair to even let them live if they already killed someone. Many would call the death penalty "cruel and unusual punishment", but I don't think it is, as long as it's not involving anything more brutal than hanging or punishing people that haven't committed murder. But there are some practices that don't involve the death penalty that is "cruel and unusual". Those include, but not limited to:

- not letting prisoners have healthcare
- making prisoners work in insufferable conditions without relief
- solitary confinement for longer than a month

One of them has already been ruled "cruel and unusual", but the other two aren't ruled, but they are cruel. I'm honestly in favor of ending solitary confinement before ending capital punishment.

On a minor tangent, while the death penalty is to some degree justifiable, in terms of morals it's rather uncivilized. It's the whole "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" argument, where if your dealt wrong, dealing the same punishment back (while it may be fair 1/2 + 1/2 = a whole) makes you equally as bad as the person who wronged you.

In other words if someone murdered your family member, killing them would make you equally as bad as the murderer. (It doesn't matter if the killing is done by proxy)

That concept is why we don't have the death penalty.

 

[vel]

I know you find it shocking that there are people who support the death penalty, but I am just as shocked that people would rather keep a murderer alive.

Punishment vs. Justice. Justice is consequence and rehabilitation. Death row isn't justice, the idea is the person is so far gone they cannot be rehabilitated, and as a consequence, if they continue, they should be killed. If they are changed enough where they could no longer, or would no longer do those actions, or they don't remember their actions, that isn't justice, that's just killing. Stooping that low to kill someone who has killed, that makes the legal system no different than the murderer.

 

[-Apples-]

Back to the gun subject.

I see people blame video games on guns. I can see a connection, but I don't think they are the cause of shootings becoming more frequently.

 

[John Wick]

I know you find it shocking that there are people who support the death penalty, but I am just as shocked that people would rather keep a murderer alive. I know they would be in jail for a long time, but it's not fair to even let them live if they already killed someone. Many would call the death penalty "cruel and unusual punishment", but I don't think it is, as long as it's not involving anything more brutal than hanging or punishing people that haven't committed murder. But there are some practices that don't involve the death penalty that is "cruel and unusual". Those include, but not limited to:

- not letting prisoners have healthcare
- making prisoners work in insufferable conditions without relief
- solitary confinement for longer than a month

One of them has already been ruled "cruel and unusual", but the other two aren't ruled, but they are cruel. I'm honestly in favor of ending solitary confinement before ending capital punishment.

I fought with others to stop the murder of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.

What a heartbreaking waste.

They murdered those REFORMED young blokes.

End the death penalty.
Anyone involved is an accessory to murder.

I'm not going to get into a debate.
It would be pointless, as those are my thought's and nobody will change them.. just as I can't change yours, and won't attempt to.

If you have an epiphany, and realize how wrong the death penalty is, then great.

When we die, is up to God, and God alone.

Peace out.

 

[amanda1983]

gun control IS the answer. guns are the only thing capable of wiping people in seconds. knives, baseball bats, whatever the hell else could kill, but so could dictionaries, scissors, shampoo, those could all kill as well if you want to go to that front. and, like it is, a public SHOOTING. large scale attacks will happen, but at least we are working toward preventing them. accessibility to guns is the problem.

Completely agree, and this is worded very politely and concisely (as understandable as 'anger' would be, that is not present here that I can see so idk why it got the response it did..).

Over the past two decades and change, I have become ever-increasingly grateful that the Australian government at the time of our biggest mass shooting (Port Arthur) chose to value the lives of people over the wishes of a vocal minority and commercial (gun business) interests. I was 12 at the time of that shooting and followed the inquests, investigations, and political debates reasonably closely. There were many ways that the resulting gun control reforms could have been thwarted throughout that process - and there are still a few vocal proponents for overturning those reforms to this day (increasingly few, though, as more tragedies in the USA in particular occur). For all of his many (many, MANY) faults, the conservative Prime Minister at the time acted impeccably in this case.

Gun control - in some form or another - IS the answer. Just as it is the answer in literally every other instance of a hazard or risk of significant injury / loss of life, in the USA and elsewhere in the world. Poisons, medications, vehicles, other types of weapons, even some types of pets are all subject to various types and levels of regulation and control.

Every right of every human being in every country of this world comes with at least *some* form of restriction. Generally, the rule of thumb is : your "rights" stop where they infringe upon MY "rights", and vice versa. There's always room for debate over exactly where that line should fall, of course.. but then, debate over such things is a part of any healthy society in my view.

Gun control =/= banning all guns.

Guns aren't banned in my country. They are strictly controlled and regulated, and yet perfectly accessible for suitably responsible adults to purchase and own, subject to the same kinds of red tape as car owners must go through - which is an entirely reasonable situation.

 

[Jake]

Whilst the current topic is fine, I'm going to go ahead and lock this here before things get too out of hand. This thread was only bumped because a bot posted in it, and it should have stayed locked away within the pages of Brewsters.