View Single Post
Old 12-27-2012, 08:11 PM   #40
Raynian
D&A Member
 
Raynian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ruining #pickups
Class/Position: SPAWN CAMPING OH NO
Gametype: Ragequitting
Affiliations: [PMS]. [Shiney]
Posts Rated Helpful 26 Times
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innoc View Post
It's not a shitty excuse. Fact is if you have a vulnerable person you work to keep them moving in a positive direction and you minimize or work to mitigate those factors that may have a negative effect. Only a fool would permit continued exposure for vulnerable individuals. There is a demonstrable link that has already been established for this type of person. Let me make sure that you don't misconstrue what I am saying. I don't think this should be kept from everyone...only those who are at risk.

Also, I think your comment about poor living/social conditions. We're talking about a brain that is WAY outside of normal. While there may be some occasions where that is a factor I suspect you cannot show that anything but an edge case and certainly not at all true for the majority.
except poor conditions have a direct correlation to increased violence, whether it's on the street or in places like this. read Freakonomics, they have a great chapter on the subject and it shows you how places that have been hit hard end up with that generation of kids growing up to have a higher rate of criminals.

and no, it's not always "poor living conditions", but when has it ever been the fault of a video game? I mean actually because of the videogame? Even though the media points to that shit, there's never anything more than "oh well he played CoD so he became a bloodthirsty killer". No proof, anything. The closest would be Columbine, but do you think it wouldn't have happened if doom didn't exist?


Quote:
i didn't say "do it". I suggested it as a possibility and it would be up to the people living in that area whether they want to do so as they would and should be those who would pay for such changes. And frankly what you posted seems contradictory. On one hand you express that there is value to a person's life and then try to say that it's not worth spending money to save it? Really? Frankly, the idea of making the doors in a school assault-resistant so as to make it more difficult for a deranged person to blow through killing people seems like a cheap buy to reduce or eliminate future potential massacres.
The fact that you threw the idea out there suggests that you want it implemented in some way. What if I'm struggling to get by and my state/county passes a law saying I now have to pay additional taxes so my local neighboorhood, which has never had any of these issues, gets spooked by what happens across the country and now wants to spend a couple hundred thousand/million updating this shit? Now I can't afford to pay rent, so I'm living on the street.

I'm saying there's a LIMIT on how much people's lives are worth. Some people say a life is invaluable and you should spend as much as possible trying to protect it. That's a childish philosophy that breaks apart as soon as you look past the ethos in it.

And why would it matter if you make doors assault resistant? It doesn't stop someone with a couple of handguns tucked into their belt from getting someone to let them in, or, you know, the shooter just walking in while the doors are open with shotguns blazing. Pointless.

Quote:
You can stop with trying to be insulting. It just makes you look like an asshole.

How many of the school massacres have been carried out by teachers in the past 10 years? 20 years? 50 years? Fact is, most people work high stress jobs and most people are not taking arms into work to work out that stress. We can certainly go back and forth with ignorant generalizations or we can look at what history shows for this. The teacher population is not all that different from the general population and the fact is most people are not at all likely to take any weapon into a place to do harm to others like we saw with Sandy Hook. It's a person with a fucked up brain that would do such a thing. And if there isn't a program in place to remove such teachers from duty that exhibit such behavior then I'd be shocked...we could certainly go off on a tangent about how unions unfairly protect such fucked up individuals from being fired...but that deserves a different thread.

As to your second point that simply is not true. Situations where a shooter will face resistance are ones that they will avoid. They aren't looking for a gun battle. They are looking for a slaughter. Do we need to dig in to all of the statistics and articles about the correlation between gun ownership and violent crime rates declining?

The way you write seems like you think I'm shoving a gun into the hands of a teacher and then booting their ass into the classroom. If you re-read what I posted you will see that I mention those teachers who wish to carry. In order a regular to carry a concealed weapon you have classes you attend and you have to shoot a qualifying score. You also have to re-certify every so often (how long between events depends on the state). If a State goes this direction they can determine what, if any, additional qualification and check ups may be needed. Fact is...we're already seeing some movement this direction. Stop school shootings by letting teachers fire back, say Texas officials
hahaha holy shit are you seriously saying I'm insulting when you're...well, you.

whatever on to the points

We hear all about the time about teachers taking out their stress on students, and it happens a LOT more than what the media can report. Sure, they don't beat the shit out of their kids (usually), but they flip tables over, scream incessantly at them, shit like that. A lot of these cases go unreported because of fear from the students. It just takes one case where a teacher isn't thinking properly to pull out his gun and suddenly there's a dead student.

And I already said school shootings don't result in the shooter walking out alive. He knows he's going to be getting a life sentence or a bullet to the head. He doesn't plan on living, why would he care about a teacher having a gun? By the time they could react, he might've already killed a dozen or more students.

And you're putting firearms right next to kids. Seriously? It's bad enough that they're left out in the open in homes. With elementary students, if they got a hold of one that their teacher left out/in their belt/whatever, nobody knows what could happen. Middle school and high school students could use it as a weapon against people they hate. It's just asking for trouble. Can you honestly expect all these people to be responsible with their guns at a school?

also
fox news
texas

hahaha

Quote:
As I stated above this isn't something I say must be mandated. I throw it out as ideas that would be inexpensive to implement and would possible help mitigate or stop these events from happening. For you to say it wouldn't change much seems silly. Based on what? Ever spend any time in a small rural community? The concept of mutual aid is huge. Raise an alarm like this and you have the potential of many in the community showing up to help. My guess is that you'll counter this with your disdain for those that own firearms and who actually shoot. Fact is I have much more faith in my fellow countrymen with a firearm than simply relying on the Police for everything. They can't be everywhere and it is incumbent

In multiple cases what has been reported was that as soon as it seemed clear that law enforcement was nearing or was on site the shooters took their own life. We can certainly argue what the specific reason might have been in each case but it seems clear that either capture or interdiction by an armed person was part of that.
first of all, it's not guaranteed to help, and in most cases wouldn't do a god damn thing. So what if there are different doors? won't stop someone from getting into a school. there's a siren? the shooter can accomplish what he wants to in 5 to 10 minutes, which gives him plenty of time before someone else can get there.

what it does guarantee is more taxes for the community. So in the end you're getting a pointless addition that just takes more money out of others.

Quote:
No excuse except for the 2nd Amendment? Honestly, what you posted here is made up. I can post the FBI Index crime stats that show that you're wrong. I can post stats from the CDC that show that you're wrong. You're just making this up. You can also look at the trends.

I'm not sure why you have such a hard on for firearms as I don't think I've read anything here that would suggest a root cause. Frankly my general sense is that you have some incredible disdain for you fellow humans. If I am right I am sorry about that. To see your fellow citizens and such untrustworthy things is an awful way to go through life.

I have no problem being around others who are armed. I generally see them as people taking charge of their own life and circumstances and people on whom I can rely. Do not construe this to mean that I think ill of those who choose not to own or use firearms. What you do has no impact on me....unless you are trying to infringe on my rights. In which case....you're a POS... :D
OMG UR SO MEAN SCHTOP (see that? this is fortress forever related now because this is the FF forums and I've never seen you post outside of gun threads in the past 3 years) BEING SO INSULTING UR SO MEAN :( :( ;_; :( STOP MAKING FUN OF ME I'M NOT A POS :(

You can cherry pick information about gun control, but without understanding why such information is accrued for those purposes it means nothing.

Look at countries like britain and austrailia, where guns are heavily controlled.

Lower crime rates and defendants can actually DEFEND themselves. if someone comes into a store and pulls out a knife, or mugs you on the street, you can still pick anything around you up and actually fight them. This is a natural deterrent because assailants would think twice about fighting someone, because they're always putting themselves at risk.

Whereas with a gun they just have to pull the trigger and there's a nice blood splatter on the wall. If you say "well the other guy might have a gun too, so he has to worry about that!" then you're just turning this straight into a slippery slope where now we have to worry about multiple people having guns and it gets ugly real fast.

As for the 2nd amendment - this is no longer the colonial era. We don't have to worry about the redcoats coming in by force and burning down our villages anymore. If we DO suddenly have a war on our home turf, we can at least rest assured that our military is able to quickly respond because of technological advances since two centuries ago. (Do I believe our military would be perfect in defending us? No, but that's for a different discussion)

Thankfully, we haven't had a war on our own soil in a hundred and fifty years, so it's a moot point anyways because I'm not worried about anybody invading us any time soon.

Is the 2nd amendment necessary anymore? Hell no. And even though for a lot of issues I do believe the constitution is a solid document, there are definitely outdated issues on there that people need to grow up over and learn that this is the 21st century now.

ps stop being so insulting ;( ur making me hurt and feel tingly inside I'm such an awful human being

I mean all that ethos and pathos in that second to last argument you're so right I hate everybody and I'm a terrible human being :( :( :(
__________________
7:00 PM - zE: eh tbh i like some stuff in us but a lot of stuff in us messes with my nerves
7:00 PM - zE: like watching fox news
7:00 PM - zE: its like wtf
Raynian is offline   Reply With Quote


2 members found this post helpful.