Virginia Tech Massacre

[inferiare]

Muerte wrote:

rainichan wrote: Banning guns wouldn't do shit. Banning guns = no protection against the criminals that have them. Yeah. That's super effective right there, because a bat/knife/anything else that can be used against a gun will certainly protect me from someone who wants to rob/rape/shoot me when I don't have a gun myself. But having a gun is barely anymore protection there anyway, unless you know already that they're coming up to you and ready to do something, you're going to be caught off guard and not have enough time to react. If you try to go too fast to defend yourself with your gun then you've a bigger chance of being shot(by both you and the attacker) than just getting whatever is in your wallet taken. If somebody is trying to rob you then they're probably holding a gun or knife right up in your face or back, a sudden movement other than one which will move their aim away from you will more often than not backfire. Probably the best course of action if they're pointing it right in your face is to look completely relaxed then suddently snap both your arms out one on the inside of the attackers wrist and one of the outside of their hand, the sudden shock forcing them to lose their grip you can either send whatever they have flying or if you do it slower take control of the item. If they're behind you then you certainly wont have enough time to do anything. If somebody is trying to rape you, close quarters like that a Gun wouldn't be as effective as Mace(Pepper Spray, or whatever) or even better, a taser. Knives work there too, and they're far less likely to disarm you of the knife if the hilt is only large enough for you to grip it, since they're forced to try and take it off you by the blade, where with a gun its rather easy to grip and point away. If somebody is trying to shoot you, chances are you'll be shot before you have time to react to anything. Guns are made for mid to long distance combat, there's certainly no need to use them at a short range since there will more often than not be a far more effective way of dealing with things.

Well, hell, if they don't hear me coming in my own house, I can disarm them with a shot. Not necessarily kill them, of course.

I have no problem making it harder for people like Cho to get a gun. Apparently, he wasn't supposed to be able to get one because of how unstable he was, and he ended up getting two of them. When asked "Oh hey, you have any convictions or any other problems that would prohibit you from getting a weapon?" people can lie. They need to actually, you know, invade some privacy and check what doctors or whatever have said to make sure they're not selling someone who's insane a firearm. But banning them completely will make more people die than save them. I'll admit, we're a pretty corrupt nation, and that will just make it even worse.

[Muerte]

rainichan wrote:

Well, hell, if they don't hear me coming in my own house, I can disarm them with a shot. Not necessarily kill them, of course. I have no problem making it harder for people like Cho to get a gun. Apparently, he wasn't supposed to be able to get one because of how unstable he was, and he ended up getting two of them. When asked "Oh hey, you have any convictions or any other problems that would prohibit you from getting a weapon?" people can lie. They need to actually, you know, invade some privacy and check what doctors or whatever have said to make sure they're not selling someone who's insane a firearm. But banning them completely will make more people die than save them. I'll admit, we're a pretty corrupt nation, and that will just make it even worse.

Most people who break into houses are so on edge they watch every flicker of shadow and listen to every miniscule sound, I doubt unless you were specifically trained for silence they'd not notice.

Without some form of invasion of privacy nothing would get done, I think privacy has gotten quite ridiculous in some forms. Like the fact that evidence can't be gotten from somebody without a warrent or unless its freely given, so if some police break into a guys house and find a many a corpse, then it wont matter unless they have a warrent first (at least from what I understand) ... which is downright stupid.

I don't personally believe banning them will kill more people than save them, but I don't think it needs to go so far as banning. Just restricting the ability to get them, harder to get guns = less depressed teens/young 20's going around shooting their classmates.

[Axe Kazama]

I just read an article about the weapon shop that sold the gun to Cho (in "The Australian"). From what I've read Cho didn't seem to strike out, he never stood out of crowd. He did a short background check, that was it.

Now try looking through the salesman eyes. They can't background check every single aspect of each customers lives, they have a business to run. They can't spend months on looking at someone's profile and pick up on little things. Also I don't think they could do a viable background check without protruding into someone's right for privacy.

Anyway, point is banning guns/restricting the ability to get guns has proved to fairly successful in Australia compared to the US. Problem is the NRA has too much power in government.

Joan: You're right everyone could be a potential killer, why give them the advantage by teaching them how to use various weapons? Knowledge is power.

Straying from topic: Rights, I'm really enjoying starting to question the values of rights in my philosphy class. Here's an abstract example that my philosphy lecturer likes to use:
Imagine aliens are saying they're going to blow up the Earth so they could build a super orbital highway and we say "what about our rights?"
Do you really think an alien (or any foreign species) would care?

[Manibrandr System]

Axe Kazama wrote:

You're right everyone could be a potential killer, why give them the advantage by teaching them how to use various weapons? Knowledge is power.

Psychological impact, knowing that everyone is armed and ready to defend themselves can act as a very strong deterrent. After all, wince when if the last time you've heard of a gun store being robbed in a stick up? Also, quite a few of the disasters could have been prevented or reduced if everyone has the knowledge and ability to defend themselves adequately instead of panicking and becoming just a potential fodder for the guns of the rampaging maniac.

Muerte and Zhetty : Why do you think I said that people should be trained in the useage of self defense weapons?

[Muerte]

Joan-Michele wrote:

Muerte and Zhetty : Why do you think I said that people should be trained in the useage of self defense weapons?

If everyone were trained that would make it just as hard, because then the people wanting to commit the crimes would then also have a better idea of what they're doing. Besides, most people are far to lazy to undergo enough training to even make them adequate enough to weild a weapon. The reason so many prefer guns is because they think it easy, point and click. When in reality if you want to use it properly and actually hit something its a bit more difficult. Still fairly simple in skill compared to some weapons, but most people wouldn't even care to go through the training and practice that would be required to be able to use a gun well. They would be content not knowing what they were doing and probably end up shooting themselves or someone they didn't mean to because of it.

[Manibrandr System]

What makes you think that armed robbers have no idea what they're doing?

Also, *I* would love to be trained and given a gun. I'm pretty sure many others would too.

[Muerte]

Joan-Michele wrote:

What makes you think that armed robbers have no idea what they're doing? Also, *I* would love to be trained and given a gun. I'm pretty sure many others would too.

Most armed robbers know how to point a gun and look menacing, thats about it.

Of course many would love to be trained and given a gun, but most would just prefer to be given a gun ... and even trained people can slip up.

[Manibrandr System]

Not everything is perfect Muerte.

[SoulBlazerFan]

Muerte wrote:

Joan-Michele wrote: What makes you think that armed robbers have no idea what they're doing? Also, *I* would love to be trained and given a gun. I'm pretty sure many others would too. Most armed robbers know how to point a gun and look menacing, thats about it. Of course many would love to be trained and given a gun, but most would just prefer to be given a gun ... and even trained people can slip up.

Even if assuming 'most' armed robbers don't know how to shoot a gun properly, all you have to do is point it in the right direction, and then shoot. Even if you kick back, whereever the gun had been pointing just before you pulled the trigger, that's were the bullet is going to go. So if you got this gun aimed at someone's chest, chances are you're gonna hit them, irreguardless.

[Muerte]

SoulBlazerFan wrote:

Muerte wrote: Joan-Michele wrote: What makes you think that armed robbers have no idea what they're doing? Also, *I* would love to be trained and given a gun. I'm pretty sure many others would too. Most armed robbers know how to point a gun and look menacing, thats about it. Of course many would love to be trained and given a gun, but most would just prefer to be given a gun ... and even trained people can slip up. Even if assuming 'most' armed robbers don't know how to shoot a gun properly, all you have to do is point it in the right direction, and then shoot. Even if you kick back, whereever the gun had been pointing just before you pulled the trigger, that's were the bullet is going to go. So if you got this gun aimed at someone's chest, chances are you're gonna hit them, irreguardless.

I meant more they tend to get really close and hold the gun close to the person they're aiming at. Sure that'll make sure they hit if they get a shot off, also makes them far easier to disarm. Best distance for a handgun IMO would be about 2 or 3 meters away(erm ... 7-13feet? something like that anyway) but also to be relaxed so you can quickly adjust if the person makes a sudden move (like dropping down close to the floor to quickly dash up and disarm your), otherwise if you're tense your entire reaction speed would be decreased significantly. I generally go under the assumption most people are tense when holding a gun because for the most part are thinking of the implications if they get caught (appearing jittery or stressed, its the calm ones you have to be bareful of ).

[TerraHero]

You cant stop this kind of shit or blame it on a single thing such as drugs or alcohol.

About the firearms, banning it wont help i agree here. But it means handing them out with a box of cereals isnt okay. Its so damn easy to get a gun its stupid. How old do you have to be to even be allowed to get a gun?

And blaming it on drugs is equally retarted. Drugs such as marihuana even REDUCE the chance of someone doing something violent. And they are no more dangerous then alcohol is. Because everyone is always about "omfg drugs ruin so many lives" anyone ever stop to think how many lives are ruined by alcohol?

These are all very sensitive issues, thats why they look for another way out. Music, TV, Videogames.... All are but a pathetic attempt to shift to blame to something new, something other then themselves. Because people suck at taking responsibility! Always looking for someone or something else to blame! If you really wanna solve the problems, then people gotta stand up and take responsibility. No more "i shot him coz Elmo from sesamestreet told me to".

People that shoot people because a song used the word "gun" need to be shot themselves in order to further our species in the evolutionairy ladder.