Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sun News Network)   Six schools shut down due to gun threats on Friday. These were CANADIAN schools   (sunnewsnetwork.ca) divider line 19
    More: Scary, Canadians, The Sun News, school massacre, elementary schools, St. Dominic Catholic High School  
•       •       •

4877 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:30 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-22 10:01:51 PM  
2 votes:

vpb: Well, you don't have as many of them either. If we shut down schools every time some tea bagger or gun nut threatened to start killing people they would be closed permanently.


You're a moron. The Tea Party is not a threat to anyone or anything except the liberal agenda. Which is why you're behaving as if they're some sort of group ready to shoot...

And just to demonstrate how completely stupid you are? Whom do you think wants to put armed guards or teachers at schools to protect kids... the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street? Think hard now.
2012-12-22 09:39:14 PM  
2 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: BronyMedic: tenpoundsofcheese: when was the last time a "tea bagger" threatened to start killing people?

[restoretheconstitution.files.wordpress.com image 278x400]

nice picture.
now can you answer the question?

or do wet your pants whenever you see a gun?  do you get scared at Civil War reenactments too?


Didn't you get the Fark memo?

Conservative label+Liberal made up right wing stereotype= fact

The Tea Party rallies I've been to locally were a lot more peaceful and cleaner than the OWS rally I also visited. I also saw no signs inciting shootings, violence, and racism at one and nothing but that at the other, can you guess which one was which?

Back to your regular Fark programming.
2012-12-22 09:36:40 PM  
2 votes:

Man On Pink Corner: This silliness isn't going to stop until we have armed TSA officers in every public school, is it?


Pff. Those six 'threats' were just teens wanting the last day of school before Christmas vacation off. RCMP investigates these to a) be sure, and b) dissuade teens from ever getting similar 'ideas'. It wasn't the end of the world.
2012-12-22 09:32:25 PM  
2 votes:
Alberta. Canada's Texas.
2012-12-22 09:08:06 PM  
2 votes:

BronyMedic: tenpoundsofcheese: when was the last time a "tea bagger" threatened to start killing people?

[restoretheconstitution.files.wordpress.com image 278x400]


nice picture.
now can you answer the question?

or do wet your pants whenever you see a gun?  do you get scared at Civil War reenactments too?
2012-12-22 07:22:56 PM  
2 votes:

vpb: Methadone Girls: They shut down 4 of the 6 schools and found no evidence of any danger and 1 for a low risk incident.  Also fark you for making me read a Sun article.

Canada takes things seriously when it comes to threats and we stop and investigate.  Crazy notion eh?

Well, you don't have as many of them either.  If we shut down schools every time some tea bagger or gun nut threatened to start killing people they would be closed permanently.


when was the last time a "tea bagger" threatened to start killing people?
2012-12-22 11:31:40 AM  
2 votes:
They shut down 4 of the 6 schools and found no evidence of any danger and 1 for a low risk incident.  Also fark you for making me read a Sun article.

Canada takes things seriously when it comes to threats and we stop and investigate.  Crazy notion eh?
2012-12-23 07:44:32 PM  
1 votes:

Keizer_Ghidorah: Well then, Kit Fister, what do you suggest we do? Better mental health care and prison reform to rehabilitate and help prisoners is always dismissed because of monetary reasons, too much profit being made off of how it is now, or "Fark the retards and criminals". Regulating and better tracking of weapons is dismissed because of the Second Amendment and "They'll just mass-murder people with cars or bombs or cars or rabid dingoes, so why bother?", along with "GOVERNMENT OPPRESSION AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!". Mandatory police-level training in use and mentality of firearms? Regular check-ups on people with kids to ensure they're keeping the weapons where the kids can't get them?

Something NEEDS to be done, actually several somethings. This problem has a lot of roots and every root needs to be addressed. A fundamental shift in America's gun and violence culture, better mental health care, reformatting the prison system to actually rehabilitate and help prisoners, addressing the causes of crime like poverty, some regulation and better tracking of weapons, a greater effort in getting weapons away from criminals, mandatory police-level training in guns for all owners, and better education in firearm safety all sound like a good start to me.


Well, what do I suggest. First, a 5% tax on firearms and ammunition sales, with the revenues collected mandated to go to publicly available mental health care, including inpatient treatment, plus reforms of the laws involved in how we treat the mentally ill and reporting of same.

An obvious and oft' suggested, as well as badly needed, change is the improvement of the NICS system for better, more accurate screening at time of purchase. Include medical judgements and commitments, restraining orders, and all pertinent criminal details in the system. To make it fair, make the system open for review and make false information or mistakes challengeable in court to be vacated by court order.

Police-level training for all gun owners? Neither needed nor warranted. Increased training for those who carry concealed and intend to use their weapons in self defense is only prudent, to ensure that the person is well aware of any legal issues and how to properly react to certain situations. Police level training suggests specialization in offensive capabilities, which no person carrying concealed, even myself, would advocate, despite the fact that most advanced firearm handling and law enforcement training is available now for private individuals from both military veterans and police veterans.

Regulating and tracking firearms...A nice idea in theory. The problem with this is the elephant in the room: An already established and active trafficking system. Right now, importing through smuggling of weapons into the US is a fairly rare occurrence, compared to the willingness of some to break established laws and limitations to purchase firearms on behalf of a criminal, the acquisition of weapons through theft or bribery, etc. In theory, regulating firearms here would make guns harder to get. In practice, weapons would be no harder to get here than they have been, simply through different channels. Don't believe this could happen? A determined element can always find firearms, as proven by the IRA in Ireland and England despite restrictive gun laws, and in many other countries. Further, as proven in other nations, corrupt police officers and military personnel can and do make hefty profits by making items disappear out the back door. Again, it's a trivial matter.

However, I do agree in part with the idea of better regulation of firearms, insofar as establishing an easy and available method for sales not normally requiring a background check be made to now require the same, whether by requiring an FFL to process a transaction, or to conduct the transaction with a background check done in the form of a purchase permit issued by state or local law enforcement. Stiffer penalties on straw purchasers and license holders that violate the law would be equally welcome, making it a far more daunting thing to do.

I won't proselytize about so-called "Assault weapons" and so on, I think that subject's been beat to death.

I have also no compunctions with requiring basic safety training before purchasing your first firearm, requirements for safe storage, etc.

None of that would've helped Adam Lanzer, however, or the guy in Aurora, or Arizona, etc. etc. This kind of crap has been occurring for the past hundred years, all for different reasons, all over the globe. It is not, contrary to popular belief, an american-only phenomenon, historically.

What would have helped him, is the same thing that would have helped millions of Americans: ready access to mental health care. More stringent standards on how we handle people who show signs of violent behavior or being a threat to society. I propose in that regard, an upgrade to the ACA to include MDs be given basic training in understanding and identifying mental health issues, and perhaps include a provision giving them incentives to hire and keep mental health professionals on staff, to include a yearly mental health screening as part of your physical. I would also go so far as to include a provision requiring insurance companies to include coverage for mental health services and medications, as a lot of them right now do not cover this.

Mr. Lanzer, unfortunately, was failed by more than his own mind, however. If reports are true, his father provided money to cover the cost of medications and treatment, however his mother didn't allow it.

Thousands of other American families struggle with fear both for what their disturbed children might do and the stigma of mental illness and what it means in our society. That is a major hurdle.

The rest of my suggestions are merely ancillary:
- Legalize and regulate drugs, cutting off a large portion of violent crimes in relation to this criminal enterprise.
- Increase and improve awareness of and available resources for the prevention and treatment of suicidal individuals (It's a sad state of affairs that people become suicidal at all, but that very little awareness is given or resources made available to individuals, who often struggle with it because of the stigma attached to it or lack of available, affordable options for treatment. This alone would vastly reduce our number of firearms-related deaths.
- Create laws requiring, with stiff penalties, those who know or have reason to know about intended attacks on others or those who pose a danger to others be reported to police so that they may be detained and evaluated. The Secret Service conducted a study and discovered that in a vast majority of cases, people close to the perpetrator were aware of, or told, in advance of their intentions. Holding those people accountable for not stepping forward if they know of a potential threat is a necessity.
- Enacting social programs that improve the lives of those most susceptible to criminal activity. Give people alternatives to gangs and crime, and reduce the level of abject poverty many feel, and crime diminishes.
- Encourage community activism and self-policing. Would this have stopped any number of crimes? Probably. Encouraging and training people for better awareness and how to better handle situations, as well as to improve their situational awareness and ability to react to a crisis would help a LOT in many different scenarios.

It's easy to blame guns and gun owners for their misuse. It's easy to see them as tools of death and fear them or loath them and by connection those that see no issues with them. But it is unreasonable to believe that the 2nd Amendment and the availability of firearms alone is responsible for this, any more than it is reasonable to believe that a youtube video published freely and protected by the first amendment is responsible for the reaction and behavior, including the deaths of many people, a world away by religious fanatics.

The process by which we obtain and use firearms is far from perfect. As I stated, briefly, a major overhaul of the NICS system, required training in the proper use of firearms and perhaps increased training for those who carry for self defense, background checks for ALL purchasers, increased punishments for crimes such as straw purchases and providing firearms to criminals, and the criminalization of failure to report stolen firearms with stiff penalties involved are good advances. The increase in penalty for the use of firearms in the commission of a crime (and a push to actually PROSECUTE people for these crimes), the increased enforcement of laws on the books, increased scrutiny on dealers and creating a file for bulk purchases is also not untoward. Hell, if i'm buying lots of guns and ammo in a short period of time, someone should ask WHY, and I DO buy lots of ammo in fairly short periods of time given how much I shoot. Having a friendly ATF or FBI guy call and say "hey Kit, I noticed you bought 5,000 rounds of .45 ACP last night, what's up?" and checking up on people that do this isn't a bad thing either. I maintain pretty good relationships with my local ATF, FBI, and other law enforcement just in case anyway.

I don't think a license, unless it's shall issue and not done in such a way to restrict people, to purchase and own certain kinds of firearms, etc, is necessarily a bad thing, either.

All in all, I don't think bringing Firearms to a level equal with vehicles, with better federal and interagency reporting would hurt, although that doesn't stop fairly high rates of auto theft in the US.

Bottom line, though, after all of that (Stream of consciousness and all), is that there is no simple answer that is going to solve this. You might blunt the sword by changing and restricting and banning, but you're not going to stop the truly determined, or those who openly flout the law anyway. I don't have the answers. If you listen to people that actually do research on these topics (and I'm not talking about the biased organizations on both sides of the argument), the things they recommend don't even begin to look like the kind of action being screamed for in the media. Pity that we pay these people who actually look at these situations in depth, analyze and research and investigate and come up with solutions that would make a difference, and then blatantly ignore them because their findings don't mesh with the popular narrative.

Then again, if the same reaction were taken seriously on other topics, I would expect that my cellphone would have given me a brain tumor by now, wireless networks cause cancer and other problems, GM foods are killing me in a million different ways, fluoride is being used to poison us, Nuclear Power Plants are going to explode any minute, Yellowstone is about to blow in 26 minutes on its way to the gym, etc. Hype and hyperbole don't make for logical debate and discussion on either side, especially when both sides have pertinent data, both sides are both right and wrong, and neither side is willing to listen to the other and look at the data as a whole, with a willingness to shift and address the social and cultural ills.

Maybe if we went back to the way our founding fathers actually wanted this country to run (stay out of the affairs of other nations, not keeping a standing army, and expect the public at large to step up and provide for their own safety and security), maybe we'd have the money to invest in social programs and improvements to our nation instead of bankrolling, bailing out, defending, and conquering other nations, and we'd be a far different nation today.
2012-12-23 05:45:40 PM  
1 votes:

Kit Fister: The weapons in those pictures are clearly unloaded, with their bolts open and empty chamber flags installed.

What you're telling me is that the mere presence of a gun -- one that is unloaded and made safe with obvious indicators that they are unloaded -- are a threat to you? Jesus H. Christ. That's like freaking out because you saw an empty hypodermic needle.


No, you're missing the point completely.  The presence of a gun has nothing to do with it.Put down the Pro- and Anti- gun crap that's plagued fark for the past few weeks, and use some Goddamned common sense, Kit.

No one's coming for your personal stockpile, and I'm sure not supporting anyone who does so.

It's the mentality of a person who believes that waving that gun in the face (or just shooting them) of those who disagree with them politically (We came unarmed this time!) as a viable solution to their perceived problems in the functional, constitution-upholding Government of the United States, and the mentality of someone who finds it perfectly okay to insinuate the advocacy of violence as a result.

Think about that for a moment. It's not the fact they own firearms. It's the fact they're willing to parade them around to back their political beliefs, and threaten their opponents with them.


I seem to remember you being all about responsible gun ownership, and their use for self-protection of their owner's families. What about that screams responsible or even rational, Kit?

The funny thing is, even with all the FUD about how the Tea Party was nice, and OWS was not, you never saw an OWS protester flaunt a firearm as a means to promote their ideals or problems with society.
2012-12-23 02:17:32 AM  
1 votes:
Alberta can eat my ass.
2012-12-23 12:04:48 AM  
1 votes:
Mounties said they arrested a 17-year-old male student in Ponoka, about 200 km north of Calgary, after he allegedly uttered threats and was found in possession of firearms. Police said ammunition, a .22 calibre and a high-powered rifle were found at the house where the teen lives.

Well in his defense if you search any random house north of Calgary you'll find the same thing, those elk aren't going to shoot themselves ya know..
2012-12-22 11:01:24 PM  
1 votes:

clowncar on fire: Man On Pink Corner: This silliness isn't going to stop until we have armed TSA officers in every public school, is it?

Single access point, metal detector and an armed guard when the school is first opened. Limited access after that- single entry point only.

Doesn't prevent sniper- style attacks. Or attacks on other public places.

There are no economic/practical approaches to prevention. As long as the crazies are given access to weaponry, these incidents will continue.


The flaw in that logic is that, as proven in other nations, you take away guns, people use knives or clubs or other weapons.

Just changing the tool doesn't change the behavior, and it's extremely stupid to ignore the behavior and simply take away the tool.

We could recognize that people become addicted to gambling and ban casinos. However, how does that stop people addicted to gambling from finding other ways to act on it.

Even better, people like recreational drug use, for whatever reason. Control and bans on drugs and the materials used to make drugs hasn't made a dent in use, it's simply opened up black markets for people to indulge, and forced people to find new drugs/sources.

So, you don't stop violence from happening just by banning guns, and what will you do then? Follow britain's lead and keep banning things in the name of protecting society?

As Thonas Jefferson once said, "I prefer dangerous liberty to safe tyranny."

I much prefer living in a world where I face risks but do not require others to protect me and dictate what is and is not acceptable. I am afraid I will never accept a world where I have traded my freedom to own, do, and go what and where I please for the illusion of safety.

Thankfully for the people who wish to live in a society where they can exert their world view on others, there are places like that.

So, get back to me when you're ready to face the harder task of stopping humanity's violent nature and how to stop the mentally ill in a way that doesn't treat me like a criminal or suspect for being a law abiding citizen with different tastes and hobbies and beliefs than you.
2012-12-22 10:48:08 PM  
1 votes:

Wayne 985: Kit Fister: randomjsa: vpb: Well, you don't have as many of them either. If we shut down schools every time some tea bagger or gun nut threatened to start killing people they would be closed permanently.

You're a moron. The Tea Party is not a threat to anyone or anything except the liberal agenda. Which is why you're behaving as if they're some sort of group ready to shoot...

And just to demonstrate how completely stupid you are? Whom do you think wants to put armed guards or teachers at schools to protect kids... the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street? Think hard now.

What's amusing is that almost every kid at the school where my office is says they feel safer and like having the two police officers in the building, and would feel safer if they had people permanently there to patrol and keep an eye on things. Crazy, I know.

Ideally, there really needs to be a three-pronged attack: security in schools, tightening of gun restrictions in general, and vast improvement on the availability of mental health care.


I don't think restrictions will work, because the type of guns people want to restrict are used in only a handful of crimes. Improving the NICS system and putting in place processes that control storage and requirements to obtain to a reasonable level (in line with getting a driver's license), might make more of a difference, but shootings happen even in places with strict gun control. Unless or until we fix the mental health problem and we find ways of being more successful at identifying and treating people with illnesses, as well as collectively take responsibility to intervene when the signs of trouble first come up and not ignore them, we won't get very far.

Guns or not, too, we as a species tend to be violent towards each other, and no nation yet has solved the problem of preventing people from exercising violent tendencies. Realistically there are a whole host of things that we could do that would help address the root of the problem, but we'll never eliminate it.
2012-12-22 10:19:10 PM  
1 votes:
We Canadians watch way too much American media.
2012-12-22 10:14:02 PM  
1 votes:

Man On Pink Corner: This silliness isn't going to stop until we have armed TSA officers in every public school, is it?


Nobody seems to address the real problem with this solution. Namely that there is nothing preventing the same mentally ill people who are committing these mass murders now from becoming one of those people who is hired to carry guns in the school. The same processes by which the mentally ill are supposed to be screened out of getting jobs in schools and screened out of beign able to obtain guns are the very same processes which will be in place if this idea is implemented.

Unless we first address the issue of mental illness and the treatment of the mentally ill in this country, it won't matter what laws are enacted, mass murders will continue at the same (or at a greater) rate at which they now occur.
2012-12-22 10:06:07 PM  
1 votes:
Does anyone remember a time when kids didn't shoot up their schools, people didn't feel the need to demand the police and government handle every aspect of everything, and we stood up to bullies who tried to rule us through fear?

What's more, we've stopped giving a shiat about each other, so the whack job who is clearly crazy who even tells someone that they're going to do something bad (and the Secret Service did a study of school shooters and the like, finding out that people knew well in advance something was going to happen and in most cases what was going to happen) just either gets ignored because people don't want to get involved, or the people are unwilling to ruin the person's life.

Lets face it. If we stopped being a nation that ignored each other and started actually giving a shiat, how much of this crap would stop?

It doesn't take a gun to stop some of the violence and misbehavior, just people paying attention and willing to actually DO something to intervene.

As a rugged individualist, I like the fact that around here I have neighbors I know, trust, talk to, and whom I know would help out if need be. Sure they're nosey and anything you do is All over the neighborhood five minutes after it happens. But when the local white trash kid of someone started dealing, we had him busted and out within a day of his starting that shiat.

Guess what I'm trying to say is that if we each actually cared for one another and did more to build community, the rate of this crap would go way down, too.
2012-12-22 09:43:51 PM  
1 votes:
headline should have read Canada just saved 156 children from being killed
2012-12-22 07:28:17 PM  
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: when was the last time a "tea bagger" threatened to start killing people?


restoretheconstitution.files.wordpress.com
2012-12-22 07:24:14 PM  
1 votes:

vpb: Methadone Girls: They shut down 4 of the 6 schools and found no evidence of any danger and 1 for a low risk incident.  Also fark you for making me read a Sun article.

Canada takes things seriously when it comes to threats and we stop and investigate.  Crazy notion eh?

Well, you don't have as many of them either.  If we shut down schools every time some OWS person to start killing people they would be closed permanently.


ftfy.
 
Displayed 19 of 19 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report