Police responding to shooting at Aztec High School - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Talvy;52958447]I feel like restricting access to guns might have the same effect as restricting access to suicide methods, where deaths reduce despite other methods being available. Nobody can give 1 right answer to whether guns should be a privilege or a right. Culture alone means so much.[/QUOTE] I would say nobody could give you the "right answer" if in you're mind there isn't a "right answer." The simple fact of the matter is the 2A was made so the government couldn't remove what the founders of this country considered a natural right (this being a right government did not grant and can never take away). And that is being able to defend yourself from whatever threats you may face. Be it from criminals or foreign or domestic governments itself. So the question becomes, do you have a right to self-defense using the most effective means? [editline]8th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Trebgarta;52955251]Neither "solves" the issue and doing both is more effective than doing one. Throwing out 4th and 5th would let cops be the criminals themselves, so no not really comparable.[/QUOTE] If the 4th and 5th amendments didn't exist the cops wouldn't be considered criminals when they do warrant-less searches and seizures. Just like if the 2A didn't exist it'd be considered legal for the government to remove all the guns. For example, the 4th amendment itself prevents our cops from doing the types of searches and seizures that cops in the UK can do legally right now.

Honestly I wonder about something like mandatory seasonal medical appointments for stuff like driving and firearms licenses in order to judge whether someone should be handling devices.

[QUOTE=AnnieOakley;52958768]Honestly I wonder about something like mandatory seasonal medical appointments for stuff like driving and firearms licenses in order to judge whether someone should be handling devices.[/QUOTE] we should definitely have like, 10-20 year re-evaluations of driving ability. Especially when you get old, they should become more frequent

i actually knew the shooter on another forum and steam, he was always had a facination with school shooters and nazi stuff [url]https://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=315327.0[/url]

Thank you, snot for posting that. I was going to do this. And yes, that does mean i had contact with a school shooter. If you want proof its him, take this: [url]https://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=174807.msg4501711#msg4501711[/url]

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52958379]People aren't going to be unable to travel, thus significantly economically hurt, without easy access to a gun. Not a good analogy, thought you really shouldn't need to hear that in the first place.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Talvy;52958447]I feel like restricting access to guns might have the same effect as restricting access to suicide methods, where deaths reduce despite other methods being available. Nobody can give 1 right answer to whether guns should be a privilege or a right. Culture alone means so much.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Trebgarta;52960505]It'd be legal for the government to ban guns and most likely compensate gun owners, just compensation. But if you removed the 4th and the 5th, government would be able to arrest you, hold you in detention indefinitely, confiscate all your property and not compensate you. How are the two comparable at all? I guess you have a point if Soviet Union had less crime than USA, but I don't know about that. [editline]9th December 2017[/editline] I'd want less cars on the road if they weren't crucial tools that drove the economy, especially in the USA.[/QUOTE] Maybe because in many rural places and under many circumstances guns are an actual necessity for a lot of people? The United States is a HUGE place where police response times can take over 30 minutes in some areas. Also what about all the people who own farms or ranches who need firearms to protect their animals and property from natural predators? My parents didn’t like having guns around the house, but still had them anyway because it was practical to have around when you lived on a ranch and had to care for the wellbeing of your animals and yourselves. Also all the people in Alaska where not having a gun is detrimental to your safety and livelihood just because of how remote most of that place is. In places like Alaska which are logistical nightmares or in times of disaster/unrest anywhere else in the country, guns allow people to be more self sufficient. Then there’s all the people in the firearms industry who would be without jobs. A good portion of the people I worked with in this field were also military vets who wouldn’t take kindly to any efforts to disarm the civilian population. For many people it’s a way of life more than just some hobby; but even if it was just a hobby, the only thing a blanket banning solution would accomplish is creating a second prohibition era centered around gunrunning. That and pissing off all of rural America.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52965318]Good? Let them have a handgun or a hunting rifle. Let even prolific gun collectors and hobbyists have their guns. That is how it is here in Germany, pass some bureaucratic hurdles and with a good reason, you get whatever it is you want. A boilerplate argument for any industry. Imagine how many people lost their jobs in countries where cigarette consumption rates dropped. Imagine all the jobs you could lose if people were smarter about gambling, drinking etc. So not really a concern - people will adjust. It won't be a massive revolution like mechanization of agriculture or factories shutting down smaller shops after all. Blanket banning is not the only option available and you should know that. A system less stringent than Germany and more than USA, designed to reduce high rates of gun proliferation, legal and illegal, in the long term is probably a good option, maybe an actual expert can come up with something better - but proliferation is on problematic levels in USA and it better should be reduced, which is very complicated to do under 2nd Amendment.[/QUOTE] Proliferation implies the quantity of guns in the US is the cause of gun violence in the US, which is an extremely weak argument, and has a counter-argument that is much more acceptable considering there are other countries with high amounts of "gun proliferation" and low gun violence. The US is large, our government sucks at managing remote locations, and our government sucks at managing downtrodden and socially-inadequate areas. I would be willing to bet everything that if you addressed the underlying causes of crime, which other countries do not have because they have much more effective social welfare, that you would drastically reduce gun violence than by literally any other means, sans waving a magic wand that removed the thought of a firearm from every person in America.

A mod should change the name from Developing to ended or whatever cause I see it on the front page and think something happened again.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;52955238]No guns seems to work for almost every other country in the world... [editline]7th December 2017[/editline] Guns ought to be licensed and not a right. Amend the constitution to reflect this and require a mental health evaluation (and not just a background check; you must SEE a psychiatrist). Additionally, you must provide a valid reason for owning the gun. Additionally, no semi-automatic weapons (handguns, many rifles, etc.) I think this is about how it works in Europe.[/QUOTE] America is not almost every other country in the world. It's an extremely large country with many rural communities that depend on guns for self preservation. Stop comparing us to Europe because our situations are vastly different. Also, taking away the 2nd amendment as a right is akin to taking away every other right in the context of the bill of rights. I'm sure it's just as simple as you describe it, though. Surely no resistance will be put up. Just take away our rights! After all, we're totally comparable to European countries in terms of population, landmass, culture, amount of guns present, and emulating them is absolutely the best course of action!

How many fucking times does this shit need to happen?

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;52965360]How many fucking times does this shit need to happen?[/QUOTE] how many fucking times does someone need to pretend to take the moral high road by bringing up this shit "argument"

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;52965360]How many fucking times does this shit need to happen?[/QUOTE] To what? Continue with a decades long argument that consistently fails to stop the next tragedy from happening?

[QUOTE=butre;52965532]how many fucking times does someone need to pretend to take the moral high road by bringing up this shit "argument"[/QUOTE] It's almost like this problem happened in other 1st world countries and they solved it yet the US just can't seem to no matter how many times it happens. His question is very valid.

You guys should come to Australia, I regularly don't get shot by the local crazed gunman OR the police.

[QUOTE=archival;52965672]You guys should come to Australia, I regularly don't get shot by the local crazed gunman OR the police.[/QUOTE] Nice try Mr. Spider.

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;52965598]It's almost like this problem happened in other 1st world countries and they solved it yet the US just can't seem to no matter how many times it happens. His question is very valid.[/QUOTE] its almost like the us isn't other first world countries

[QUOTE=butre;52965768]its almost like the us isn't other first world countries[/QUOTE] You're right at this point with all the shootings, and cops shooting innocent civilians, not to mention the party in power, its turned into 3rd world.

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;52965598]It's almost like this problem happened in other 1st world countries and they solved it yet the US just can't seem to no matter how many times it happens. His question is very valid.[/QUOTE] No it didn't and no they haven't and no it isn't. Other countries are wildly different beasts from the U.S. on many levels. Socially, culturally, demographically, economically. Europe has faced entirely different problems from those the U.S. has. Further, there are countries that have similar laws as the U.S. and don't have our problem. Switzerland's regulation of firearms is closer to the U.S. than anywhere else, but they lack the problem we have.

I have been thinking and wouldn't introducing a bill that forbides news outlets to reveal the identiy of the attacker help to get rid of the whole thing of attackers wanting attention and to be remembered after they are gone?

[QUOTE=BANNED USER;52955039]The problem isn't (just) guns, it's rampant bullying and abuse that gets overlooked or ignored by those who have the power to do something about it. Oh well, here comes the media firestorm about how guns need further regulation, rather than teachers and parents being held accountable for their childrens and students actions. [editline]7th December 2017[/editline] More kids are going to die because we keep dodging the actual problem, it pisses me off to no end.[/QUOTE] Guns are fucking cancer and they are the root of all evil. You think the Las Vegas massacre would have happened if he just had a knife? Wake the fuck up America.

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;52965788]You're right at this point with all the shootings, and cops shooting innocent civilians, not to mention the party in power, its turned into 3rd world.[/QUOTE] I haven't set foot into America once but come on, compared to actual 3rd world countries America has a long way to go.

[QUOTE=Oblivion470;52966236]Guns are fucking cancer and they are the root of all evil. You think the Las Vegas massacre would have happened if he just had a knife? Wake the fuck up America.[/QUOTE] Guns are inert pieces of metal, they are not good or bad, it's the obsession America has with firearms and their right to own them with conflicting rules that change per state that is dangerous.

[QUOTE=_Maverick_;52966311]Guns are inert pieces of metal, they are not good or bad, it's the obsession America has with firearms and their right to own them with conflicting rules that change per state that is dangerous.[/QUOTE] "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a completely braindead argument that ignores the fact that firearms were created, from the concept and up, with the [I]express purpose[/I] of killing. Fucks sake, one of the main rules of common weapon etiquette is "Don't point your gun at anything you don't want to destroy". Does that sound harmless? You can't make that same argument with vehicles or knives because they were created as tools. Anything can be a weapon if you want it to be, sure, but guns were literally [I]created[/I] as weapons. It was their [I]prime purpose.[/I] Yeah yeah, you have gun enthusiasts and hobbyists who just want to go out on the firing range once in a while to shoot some rounds - bless you. I like airsoft, I collect replicas. I get the appeal. I like guns too. They're cool. But not recognizing them for what they are, and that their easy accessibility is a problem, is in [I]itself[/I] a fucking problem.

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;52966335]"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a completely braindead argument that ignores the fact that firearms were created, from the concept and up, with the [I]express purpose[/I] of killing. Fucks sake, one of the main rules of common weapon etiquette is "Don't point your gun at anything you don't want to destroy". Does that sound harmless? You can't make that same argument with vehicles or knives because they were created as tools. Anything can be a weapon if you want it to be, sure, but guns were literally [I]created[/I] as weapons. It was their [I]prime purpose.[/I] Yeah yeah, you have gun enthusiasts and hobbyists who just want to go out on the firing range once in a while to shoot some rounds - bless you. I like airsoft, I collect replicas. I get the appeal. I like guns too. They're cool. But not recognizing them for what they are, and that their easy accessibility is a problem, is in [I]itself[/I] a fucking problem.[/QUOTE] I do visit a shooting range from time to time and I love guns but I do see the whole topic problematic and it concerns me how unobjective and narrowly minded some people are argumenting in this case. You do have an emotionally greater blockade of cutting someone's throat open with a knife or stab a person than shooting someone in the head.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;52958771]we should definitely have like, 10-20 year re-evaluations of driving ability. Especially when you get old, they should become more frequent[/QUOTE] My grandma has to take a test every year to get her license renewed, so that's already a thing in New Mexico at least.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;52965828] Switzerland's regulation of firearms is closer to the U.S. than anywhere else, but they lack the problem we have.[/QUOTE] Well here you're required to keep your gun in a safe, and you can only really go fire it at a range (as far as I know, I'm not going to do the army service so all info I have to go on are my friends that did.)

[QUOTE=_Maverick_;52966311]Guns are inert pieces of metal, they are not good or bad, it's the obsession America has with firearms and their right to own them with conflicting rules that change per state that is dangerous.[/QUOTE] Lets be real though, bullets aren't exactly very inert considering they explode and get shot out of a barrel at lethal speeds

Most bullets don't explode though??

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;52966552]Most bullets don't explode though??[/QUOTE] Hyperbolic wording. to actually explain though, I'm all for people owning guns but this idea that they they should be held to this standard of absolute neutrality is totally alien to me. Stating that they are 'inert hunks of metal' doesn't respect the fact that they're dangerous on their own. It goes a little beyond just how people respect them, this is why gun ranges have maximum safety rules. [editline]11th December 2017[/editline] and no doubt, generally bullets [I]shouldn't [/I]explode, I don't think [editline]11th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=MILKE;52966226]I have been thinking and wouldn't introducing a bill that forbides news outlets to reveal the identiy of the attacker help to get rid of the whole thing of attackers wanting attention and to be remembered after they are gone?[/QUOTE] tbh this really needs to become law if its actually 100% confirmed by police and there is a manhunt going on and police depend reports I can see it but when they openly address attackers, and we've seen this, [URL="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVQXxOOU4AAEO-z.jpg"]they occasionally fuck up and get it wrong and someone else is blamed[/URL]. News outlets jump to really idiotic conclusions some times and that alone can get someone hurt.

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;52966335]"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a completely braindead argument that ignores the fact that firearms were created, from the concept and up, with the [I]express purpose[/I] of killing. [/QUOTE] But thats true? Guns are a tool. They are not sentient, they are not capable of acting, they're like a power drill or a hammer except they're good at making other things no longer move. They are an instrument in the act of killing which is perpetrated by a person, its tantamount to insinuating knives or bombs are the root cause of the act they're being used to perpetrate. Its reasonable to think of them in regards to being just objects, no matter how efficient, than being something inherently sinister if you want to go about trying to fix this problem or whatever. Like, if this isnt sarcasm, its a ridiculous statement: [QUOTE=Oblivion470;52966236]Guns are fucking cancer and they are the root of all evil. You think the Las Vegas massacre would have happened if he just had a knife? Wake the fuck up America.[/QUOTE] I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but i'm getting tired of every time this happens it just devolves into everyone pointless bitching about gun rights, whether it be anti-gun or pro-gun, because it doesnt lead to anything productive happening, never has, never will. Every time this happens, its always the same debate, always the same argument, always the same things being discussed, and then the next shooting happens and nothing changes and people still die and it keeps happening. Some guy goes nuts and kills some people and it immediately devolves into people going "ban guns" and "dont ban guns" and then it fizzles out and then the next guy goes nuts and kills some people and the cycle restarts.