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.

(The Indy Channel) NewsFlash Shooting reported at Purdue University. One person in custody, police continuing to search area   (theindychannel.com) divider line 296
    More: NewsFlash, Purdue, Twitter, shelter in place  
•       •       •

5121 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jan 2014 at 1:06 PM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

296 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-21 04:31:16 PM

TeaEarlGreyHot: Dimensio: TeaEarlGreyHot:
Identify a single targeted homicide that was committed without use of a firearm. Explain how this homicide could possibly have occurred if this nation had passed sensible firearm regulation laws, such as an assault weapons ban or a repeal of "shall-issue" based concealed carry.

Homicides such as this are a result of a refusal for gun nuts to compromise on such simple ideas.

Are you a troll?


I have him favorited as  (favorite: Rational Pro-Gun).  And he's pretty consistent about it.  I'm guessing he's being sarcastic.  But I don't quite get the joke.  You're not at your best today, Dimensio.
 
2014-01-21 04:34:00 PM

TeaEarlGreyHot: Not really going to get into the whole gun debate, but here's the thing:

We live in a free and open society.  You can pass stricter gun laws.  You can check backgrounds, register, license people, whatever.  Someone wants to kill someone else, they're going to find a way to get a hold of a firearm, with enough determination.  There's no guarantee of safety, unless you want to live on permanent lockdown.

And I consider a society in which the government and law enforcement has firearms, and citizens can't have them, to be a society on permanent lockdown.

All accounts so far indicate this was the murder of an individual, not a nutjob mass shooting.  Murders aren't peculiar to the United States, but because this happened on a college campus in a building full of undergrads, it's going to get lumped in with all of the other "school shootings."


Finally... someone reasonable about things.  

This was not a school shooting.  This was a shooting that took place at a school.  There IS a difference....


And either you want to be free, or you don't.  Cost of freedom, or else go on lockdown.  


I'll take freedom please.
 
2014-01-21 04:37:09 PM

DarwinianReject: TeaEarlGreyHot: Dimensio: TeaEarlGreyHot:
Identify a single targeted homicide that was committed without use of a firearm. Explain how this homicide could possibly have occurred if this nation had passed sensible firearm regulation laws, such as an assault weapons ban or a repeal of "shall-issue" based concealed carry.

Homicides such as this are a result of a refusal for gun nuts to compromise on such simple ideas.

Are you a troll?

I have him favorited as  (favorite: Rational Pro-Gun).  And he's pretty consistent about it.  I'm guessing he's being sarcastic.  But I don't quite get the joke.  You're not at your best today, Dimensio.


I lack coffee.
 
2014-01-21 04:49:04 PM

skozlaw: TeaEarlGreyHot: There's no guarantee of safety

Nobody believes otherwise.

TeaEarlGreyHot: ...citizens can't have [guns]...

Good thing pretty much nobody is trying to do that, huh?

TeaEarlGreyHot: ...it's going to get lumped in with all of the other "school shootings."

That's because it is one. That's how datasets work. It's a shooting at a school, therefore it's a school shooting. If you want to differentiate between mass and singular killings, that's an extra, separate criteria.

TeaEarlGreyHot: Murders aren't peculiar to the United States...

Murders in the U.S. are double the average for OECD countries and murder by firearms is behind only Mexico - you know, that country currently involved in a long-waged drug war between the military and multiple massive cartels - as far as OECD countries go.

Murder isn't just "not peculiar" in the U.S. We're world leaders in murders and gun violence when it comes to developed nations. Those actual, hard numbers are part of the reason some of us tend to think maybe there's a bit more we could do to curb the problem without unduly restricting anybody's rights.

But, alas, gun ownership is the one and only right in the U.S. that apparently is absolute, so here we are and here we'll stay.

Yee-frickin-haw.


These videos directly refutes some of your points.  Please try again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCzCJzTRtPc
 
2014-01-21 04:52:32 PM
Mr.BobDobalita:
This was not a school shooting.  This was a shooting that took place at a school.  There IS a difference....

At the same time, as my wife (full disclosure: she's a Purdue grad, was in another building) pointed out, this isn't just like he tracked the guy down off-campus and shot him on some side street.  He did this in a very public place, where people have an expectation of being safe.

There are lesser victims: the students who went through the traumatic experience of seeing someone they knew violently ended in front of them, and they will need to go through counseling.  It's not just some guy shooting some other guy.
 
2014-01-21 04:54:32 PM
lennavan:

This my friends, is how bad gun violence has gotten.  A kid murders someone at a public University and it's so commonplace it should only make the local news.

How do you figure?  "How bad gun violence has gotten"?  Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years.  The murder rate is near a historic low.  

The 24 hour news cycle is what makes things feel more violent or worse.  IF it bleeds it leads.    But if you actually look at the stats, we are at 20 year lows for both violent crime and murder.
 
2014-01-21 04:55:15 PM

skinink: Who would commit such a fowl act?


Psycho Chicken, natch.

/he's got a grudge against Frank Perdue
 
2014-01-21 04:56:04 PM

TeaEarlGreyHot: Mr.BobDobalita:
This was not a school shooting.  This was a shooting that took place at a school.  There IS a difference....

At the same time, as my wife (full disclosure: she's a Purdue grad, was in another building) pointed out, this isn't just like he tracked the guy down off-campus and shot him on some side street.  He did this in a very public place, where people have an expectation of being safe.

There are lesser victims: the students who went through the traumatic experience of seeing someone they knew violently ended in front of them, and they will need to go through counseling.  It's not just some guy shooting some other guy.


Well they have the "gun free zone" to thank for that.

I somewhat see your point, however, but how is this different from any other "very public place"?
 
2014-01-21 05:02:34 PM

mister aj: Sure, this is tragic, but I'd say it's better than the alternative of gun-grabbing. It's the price we pay for a society in which gun owners are able to overthrow a tyrannical government but never will based on past experience.


people attempting to overthrow a tryrannical gov't in this country are 1-0 or 1-1 depending on your thoughts on the civil war.
 
2014-01-21 05:03:18 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.


Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

www.washingtonpost.com
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?
 
2014-01-21 05:09:33 PM
I get that it happened at a school, but there is a drastic difference between a person shooting up a school full of children, and a person shooting a specific person at a school, or on campus.  Hell, Purdue's campus is so big, that you could kill a guy behind a bar and not realize that you're on campus, then the media is gonna have a school shootingasm.

This killing is absolutely no different than any other murder that takes place every day across the country.  A person with an axe to grind with a specific other person kills them.  The difference only being that it happened at a "school" and not in a house, or in the street, etc.  The only reason it happened at a school, was because the shooter knew where to find the victim.

Yes, it's traumatic that he walked into a classroom full of other students and shot one of their classmates.  I get that those people are going to require stress counseling and what not.

There needs to be a distinction between what happened today at Purdue, and what happened at Newton, Virginia Tech, Columbine, etc.  Those were legitimate school shootings (i.e. indiscriminate killings, large body count goals, etc), this was a murder where the opportunity to commit said murder arose on a school campus.
 
2014-01-21 05:10:57 PM

lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?


bbbbut guns good
 
2014-01-21 05:14:30 PM

GardenWeasel: [i.embed.ly image 600x1065]

[i.embed.ly image 600x1066]


That was a plain clothes cop. Or so the rumors are going right now.

The story as I have it right now is that some kid came into his lab section and put one into the lab TA's head. Turned around and surrendered to police when they got there.They were searching a house I passed around when I was going to pick up the fiance from campus.

Rumors of the 2nd shooter were on account of a kid running through a parking garage after the incident. Possibly running from the sound of gunfire?
 
2014-01-21 05:31:50 PM

jaybeezey: mister aj: Sure, this is tragic, but I'd say it's better than the alternative of gun-grabbing. It's the price we pay for a society in which gun owners are able to overthrow a tyrannical government but never will based on past experience.

people attempting to overthrow a tryrannical gov't in this country are 1-0 or 1-1 depending on your thoughts on the civil war.


Actually, you could consider it 2-0. I see the North as overthrowing the tyrannical gov't in the South.
 
2014-01-21 05:34:54 PM
Instead of resetting the counter, why not just glue the button down? Save everyone the trouble.
 
2014-01-21 05:35:00 PM
Mr.BobDobalita:
I somewhat see your point, however, but how is this different from any other "very public place"?

I'd venture to guess that the media circus would be much the same if this had happened in a crowded shopping mall or movie theater.  Especially if it happened at a large place of business, and the victim was at work doing his job. Though the university angle has the added factor of (adult) students involved.
 
2014-01-21 05:37:24 PM

lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?


Right where the long slide begins in your graph through to today 20 million concealed permits have been issued and 48 states have relaxed their ownership regulations.

And gun crime has fallen 50%.

Do I believe this is what caused gun crime to fall?  No  In fell despite a massively greater availability of firearms.  Ergo, firearm regulation either lax or strict has NO EFFECT ON GUN CRIME.  Therefore, passing tighter gun control regulation is only a hardship to law abiding citizens.

Why is this so hard to understand?
 
2014-01-21 05:43:06 PM

AngryDragon: lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?

Right where the long slide begins in your graph through to today 20 million concealed permits have been issued and 48 states have relaxed their ownership regulations.

And gun crime has fallen 50%.

Do I believe this is what caused gun crime to fall?  No  In fell despite a massively greater availability of firearms.  Ergo, firearm regulation either lax or strict has NO EFFECT ON GUN CRIME.  Therefore, passing tighter gun control regulation is only a hardship to law abiding citizens.

Why is this so hard to understand?


I think you quoted the wrong person.
 
2014-01-21 05:53:45 PM

HeadLever: Actually, a good number of folks are doing that. If you want to know who, just look at all the folks that disagree with the individualist interpretation of the Heller Decision and instead want this to be a collectivist interpretation.


A "good number", huh?

Sounds legit.

Mr.BobDobalita: refutes some of your points


Unless there's a mathematical proof on the other side of those links which redefines humanity's millenia-old understanding of basic arithmetic, no, they don't.

If you have some alternate, batshiat-crazy interpretation of the data you'd like to put forward, or you have some well-sourced and studied proof that the data itself is wrong, feel free to continue, but the numbers aren't going to change solely because you don't want to hear them.
 
2014-01-21 06:05:47 PM

AngryDragon: lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?

Right where the long slide begins in your graph through to today 20 million concealed permits have been issued and 48 states have relaxed their ownership regulations.

And gun crime has fallen 50%.

Do I believe this is what caused gun crime to fall?  No  In fell despite a massively greater availability of firearms.  Ergo, firearm regulation either lax or strict has NO EFFECT ON GUN CRIME.  Therefore, passing tighter gun control regulation is only a hardship to law abiding citizens.

Why is this so hard to understand?


To a large extent, it fell because a lot of poor urban kids were aborted.  And the ones that were born didn't have pollution from leaded gasoline and paint chips, which totally screw up the brain - especially impulse control.
 
2014-01-21 06:27:20 PM
back to the Purdue shooting...  identify the shooter as Cody Cousins 23, EE major and the victim as Andrew Boldt from Wisconsin (the TA).

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/01/21/1-in-custody-following -p urdue-shooting/4720301/
 
2014-01-21 07:07:09 PM

Dimensio: Identify a single targeted homicide that was committed without use of a firearm. Explain how this homicide could possibly have occurred if this nation had passed sensible firearm regulation laws, such as an assault weapons ban or a repeal of "shall-issue" based concealed carry.

Homicides such as this are a result of a refusal for gun nuts to compromise on such simple ideas.


lol what?  Somebody seriously wronged me a long time ago, completely farked my life over.  I very seriously considered murdering them... and while a firearm would have made it easy, I determined that hitting them with a taser, handcuffing them, and putting a plastic bag over their head, and then disposing of the body was a much cleaner way of going about it.

Guns dont kill people.  People kill people.
 
2014-01-21 07:15:17 PM
This is definitely the worst Purdue thread on Fark.  Why did Robbie Hummel have to tear that ACL again?

/also sad Boiler.
 
2014-01-21 07:29:00 PM

skozlaw: A "good number", huh?

Sounds legit.


as opposed to "pretty much nobody"?

At least I explained who would be included in my numbers, which directly refutes your assertion.
 
2014-01-21 07:39:13 PM
I can't believe we live in in a society where even chickens are expected to acquire a bachelors to "graduate".
 
2014-01-21 07:40:47 PM
This is why we need gun control...and more guns...also abortion.
 
2014-01-21 08:05:24 PM

lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?


Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico, the entire middle east, South America,most of asia, and all of Africa.  Quit cherry-picking your data.

Here's one from the same guy who claims he discounted some countries "on the ground of useful comparison"

img.fark.net
 
2014-01-21 08:07:43 PM

haws83: Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico


Excluding Mexico because there is a huge war with the drug cartels there that would skew the data is hardly arbitrary.
 
2014-01-21 08:12:09 PM

lennavan: haws83: Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico

Excluding Mexico because there is a huge war with the drug cartels there that would skew the data is hardly arbitrary.


You mean you want to discount violent nations from a discussion of violent nations?

Shall we take out all drug-related assaults out of the US statistic and see where we rank?
 
zeg
2014-01-21 10:59:28 PM

TeaEarlGreyHot: Mr.BobDobalita:
I somewhat see your point, however, but how is this different from any other "very public place"?

I'd venture to guess that the media circus would be much the same if this had happened in a crowded shopping mall or movie theater.  Especially if it happened at a large place of business, and the victim was at work doing his job. Though the university angle has the added factor of (adult) students involved.


Bear in mind also that it took a couple hours before any significant details were confirmed. For a significant part of the time between the event (noon) and the press conference (2:30pm), various rumors about additional shooters were floating around without much to differentiate them from the reports that turned out to be true.

Perhaps the national news outlets could have held off on reporting until the story was known, but nobody wants to be late to the game if it turns out to be a major headline. As a local (my office is two buildings over, connected by tunnels) who was watching the littlest one at home when this unfolded, I was grateful that the local news outlets provided some real-time coverage. (Especially because, aside from their text-message alerts, Purdue did a pretty poor job making information available---their website didn't mention the event until about 20 minutes after the text alert went out, and the page they linked to was non-responsive for another hour after that.)
 
2014-01-22 12:04:06 AM
zeg:
Bear in mind also that it took a couple hours before any significant details were confirmed. For a significant part of the time between the event (noon) and the press conference (2:30pm), various rumors about additional shooters were floating around without much to differentiate them from the reports that turned out to be true.

Perhaps the national news outlets could have held off on reporting until the story was known, but nobody wants to be late to the game if it turns out to be a major headline. As a local (my office is two buildings over, connected by tunnels) who was watching the littlest one at home when this unfolded, I was grateful that the local news outlets provided some real-time coverage. (Especially because, aside from their text-message alerts, Purdue did a pretty poor job making information available---their website didn't mention the event until about 20 minutes after the text alert went out, and the page they linked to was non-responsive for another hour after that.)


I don't know what the press is supposed to do when you have a campus SMS go out at 12:15, and the twitsphere and facepalm all abuzz by 12:20.  What would you do?  Ignore it all and wait two hours for the press conference, or try to be a voice of sanity and known facts in a sea of social media rumors and chaos?  Everyone is going to flip on the TV to see what the hell is going on.  Kudos to channel 6 for having SOMETHING on the air.
 
zeg
2014-01-22 07:10:55 AM
TeaEarlGreyHot:
I don't know what the press is supposed to do when you have a campus SMS go out at 12:15, and the twitsphere and facepalm all abuzz by 12:20.  What would you do?  Ignore it all and wait two hours for the press conference, or try to be a voice of sanity and known facts in a sea of social media rumors and chaos?  Everyone is going to flip on the TV to see what the hell is going on.  Kudos to channel 6 for having SOMETHING on the air.

Exactly.
 
2014-01-22 08:27:46 AM
While we all argue about gun control and gun laws, let's continue to ignore mental illness and the stigmatization of seeking help for mental illness in the United States.  Mentally stable people don't kill other people, regardless of the weapon of choice.

The gun control debate may have a place, but I believe that open discussion about mental illness and lack of constructive conflict resolution skills are a much larger issue and they absolutely apply in situations like this.
 
2014-01-22 08:53:07 AM
Aaaaand the shooter is from my neck of the woods.  Springboro HS graduate - that's a suburb on the south edge of Dayton, OH.  Lovely.
 
2014-01-22 09:53:59 AM

katanakahn: While we all argue about gun control and gun laws, let's continue to ignore mental illness and the stigmatization of seeking help for mental illness in the United States.  Mentally stable people don't kill other people, regardless of the weapon of choice.


First of all, anyone is prone to a crime of passion, which this probably was, just as anyone is prone to suicide.  This issues are sociological as much as they are psychological.  I doubt that more violence happens in densely populated areas because there are more mentally ill people in those areas.  What we most likely have here is a young man who acted before checking himself and talking to someone about whatever his problem was.  Purdue could have all the conflict resolution and counselling resources available in the world, but it's still on Cody Cousins to seek that help.

Second of all, our current level of psychiatric science is, frankly, medieval.  We don't really have a good understanding of the human brain, at least not enough to form a reliable model to predict what people are simply troubled or generally ill (meaning they have some level of distress or difficulty functioning in life), and what people are going to snap and turn violent.

Third, say we do have a reliable model, something that can predict what people are more likely to become violent.  What do we do then?  Take away their rights to privacy and due process?  Put them under constant surveillance?  For something that haven't done, but  might do?  We're treading into Minority Report territory.

Fourth, what if that is our policy?  Screening people who are in danger of being violent, or simply barring anyone diagnosed bipolar, borderline, schizophrenic, or what have you, and keeping tabs on them, or keeping them from owning a weapon?  Don't you think that would give anyone who  does need treatment for mental health issues, so they can function in life, serious pause when considering seeking help?

I think the idea that our mental health treatment infrastructure is the primary problem in gun violence isn't well thought out.  And this coming from someone who is Bipolar I and agrees that our mental health treatment infrastructure sucks.
 
2014-01-22 11:23:36 AM

lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: How do you figure? "How bad gun violence has gotten"? Violent crime as well as murder have LITERALLY been reduced by 50% in the last 20 years. The murder rate is near a historic low.

Why would you choose "the last 20 years?"  Seems like an arbitrary number to select.  The point I was making is we are now desensitized to gun violence.  Here you are, proclaiming how terrific things are, while others are saying a gun shooting is no big deal.  Look how awesome the US is doing!

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]
You realize you're just supporting my point, right?


What exactly are "assault deaths"?   Note there are countries excluded in order to make the chart more ominous.  Who made this chart?  Seems like someone cooked the books.
 
2014-01-22 11:24:02 AM

TeaEarlGreyHot: katanakahn: While we all argue about gun control and gun laws, let's continue to ignore mental illness and the stigmatization of seeking help for mental illness in the United States.  Mentally stable people don't kill other people, regardless of the weapon of choice.

First of all, anyone is prone to a crime of passion, which this probably was, just as anyone is prone to suicide.  This issues are sociological as much as they are psychological.  I doubt that more violence happens in densely populated areas because there are more mentally ill people in those areas.  What we most likely have here is a young man who acted before checking himself and talking to someone about whatever his problem was.  Purdue could have all the conflict resolution and counselling resources available in the world, but it's still on Cody Cousins to seek that help.

Second of all, our current level of psychiatric science is, frankly, medieval.  We don't really have a good understanding of the human brain, at least not enough to form a reliable model to predict what people are simply troubled or generally ill (meaning they have some level of distress or difficulty functioning in life), and what people are going to snap and turn violent.

Third, say we do have a reliable model, something that can predict what people are more likely to become violent.  What do we do then?  Take away their rights to privacy and due process?  Put them under constant surveillance?  For something that haven't done, but  might do?  We're treading into Minority Report territory.

Fourth, what if that is our policy?  Screening people who are in danger of being violent, or simply barring anyone diagnosed bipolar, borderline, schizophrenic, or what have you, and keeping tabs on them, or keeping them from owning a weapon?  Don't you think that would give anyone who  does need treatment for mental health issues, so they can function in life, serious pause when considering seeking help?

I think the idea that our mental he ...


Mental health is a wide spectrum, and most people who suffer forms of mental distress are otherwise normal and capable, they just don't have the proper coping mechanisms.  I am not suggesting that we predict behaviors, rather, that we have an opportunity, even a responsibility, to provide better support for all people and stop treating mental illness like something that should put you into an asylum.

I suffer from depression and generalized anxiety disorder.  I take citalopram to help me cope.  I am married, I have three well adjusted children, I work full time and I am also taking 6 credit hours a semester to get my degree, because I was not mature enough to finish it when I was first in college.  It is difficult to admit that publicly, because there is a stigma associated with such treatment.

Part of my studies deal with conflict resolution and mediation.  There are opportunities to integrate conflict resolution processes in our education system, but it is a hard sell.  Social sciences are difficult to quantify effectively, and that makes it hard to convince people of the efficacy of such programs.  This is not the solution, but, I believe that it could be part of a set of solutions.

My point is not about mental health treatment, rather, it's about that fact that more people likely suffer from a form of mental illness than don't, but seeking treatment or admitting the fact is frowned upon and stigmatized.  I am simply advocating a dialogue, a discussion.

In situations like this, gun control is the convenient discussion to have.  Many people love to jump on this bandwagon, and many of those people do not do anything to further their platform at any other time, they simple jump on the opportunity to join the rally cry at times such as this.  Whatever your stance, I'll respect you a lot more if you take an active role.

I would love it if it were truly as simple as making guns illegal to own.  I'm just positive that it wouldn't make this issue go away.  It's deeper than the weapon of choice, that's my point.  We want an answer that prevents something like this from happening because it is illogical and frightening.  There is no simple cure, it is complicated and interrelated.
 
2014-01-22 11:31:46 AM

haws83: lennavan: haws83: Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico

Excluding Mexico because there is a huge war with the drug cartels there that would skew the data is hardly arbitrary.

You mean you want to discount violent nations from a discussion of violent nations?

Shall we take out all drug-related assaults out of the US statistic and see where we rank?


Exactly.   It's pretty well known a very high percentage of gun deaths is drug and gang related.  Lennavan uses the excuse of removing mexico because of their drug cartel war... well guess what, IT SPILLS OVER TO HERE TOO.  Many people say the cartels are a direct reason there's so much murder in Chicago currently as they try to take over with their people and use it as a hub for distribution.  They're killing a lot of the existing dealers and what not to replace them with their own.

Some say if you took out gang and drug related murders, the total would be reduced 75%.  So how about since it's ok to remove mexico wholly because of their "drug war" let's do the same with the US statistics.

Also, as the videos I showed talked about, most of the violence in teh US comes out of the big cities.  Lumping the rest of the country with that and calling the whole country violent is less than honest.
 
2014-01-22 11:53:15 AM

Mr.BobDobalita: haws83: lennavan: haws83: Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico

Excluding Mexico because there is a huge war with the drug cartels there that would skew the data is hardly arbitrary.

You mean you want to discount violent nations from a discussion of violent nations?

Shall we take out all drug-related assaults out of the US statistic and see where we rank?

Exactly.   It's pretty well known a very high percentage of gun deaths is drug and gang related.  Lennavan uses the excuse of removing mexico because of their drug cartel war... well guess what, IT SPILLS OVER TO HERE TOO.  Many people say the cartels are a direct reason there's so much murder in Chicago currently as they try to take over with their people and use it as a hub for distribution.  They're killing a lot of the existing dealers and what not to replace them with their own.

Some say if you took out gang and drug related murders, the total would be reduced 75%.  So how about since it's ok to remove mexico wholly because of their "drug war" let's do the same with the US statistics.

Also, as the videos I showed talked about, most of the violence in teh US comes out of the big cities.  Lumping the rest of the country with that and calling the whole country violent is less than honest.



Remember how this discussion began?  You arbitrarily chose 20 years as your metric.  When I posted a graph that showed more than 20 years, rather than explain why you chose 20 years, you showed everyone your bright shiny new red herring.

I get it, you're terrified someone is going to take your guns away and you'll be left crying in the corner, all alone and that's why we can't have an adult conversation.  I'll let you two cuddle each other.
 
2014-01-22 12:15:20 PM
katanakahn: My point is not about mental health treatment, rather, it's about that fact that more people likely suffer from a form of mental illness than don't, but seeking treatment or admitting the fact is frowned upon and stigmatized.  I am simply advocating a dialogue, a discussion.

In situations like this, gun control is the convenient discussion to have.  Many people love to jump on this bandwagon, and many of those people do not do anything to further their platform at any other time, they simple jump on the opportunity to join the rally cry at times such as this.  Whatever your stance, I'll respect you a lot more if you take an active role.

I would love it if it were truly as simple as making guns illegal to own.  I'm just positive that it wouldn't make this issue go away.  It's deeper than the weapon of choice, that's my point.  We want an answer that prevents something like this from happening because it is illogical and frightening.  There is no simple cure, it is complicated and interrelated.


All very valid points, and I agree.  As someone with Bipolar, I think where it ruffles my feathers is where people start talking about mental health being the root of our violence problems, with the implication that if we just "screen out" all the mentally ill, we'll somehow "crack down" on all these "crazy people with guns."  I'm not implying that that's what you're saying, but that's the implication of a lot of the discourse.

And you can have counseling services available, support for those in distress, conflict mediation, and any number of services, as well as the removal of stigma, but the onus is still on those in crisis to seek help.
 
2014-01-22 12:33:32 PM
TeaEarlGreyHot:

All very valid points, and I agree.  As someone with Bipolar, I think where it ruffles my feathers is where people start talking about mental health being the root of our violence problems, with the implication that if we just "screen out" all the mentally ill, we'll somehow "crack down" on all these "crazy people with guns."  I'm not implying that that's what you're saying, but that's the implication of a lot of the discourse.

And you can have counseling services available, support for those in distress, conflict mediation, and any number of services, as well as the removal of stigma, but the onus is still on those in crisis to seek help.


I agree.  I do also believe that some do not seek help simply because of the stigma and lack of open discussion.  That, and treatment options are indeed still immature.  Kind of a catch 22, the more people who seek treatment, the more money will be put into making them better, the better the treatment, the more people who will seek it...

In the end, we're all our own special brand of crazy.
 
2014-01-22 01:11:17 PM

lennavan: Mr.BobDobalita: haws83: lennavan: haws83: Speaking of arbitrary, your graph there excludes such peaceful places as Mexico

Excluding Mexico because there is a huge war with the drug cartels there that would skew the data is hardly arbitrary.

You mean you want to discount violent nations from a discussion of violent nations?

Shall we take out all drug-related assaults out of the US statistic and see where we rank?

Exactly.   It's pretty well known a very high percentage of gun deaths is drug and gang related.  Lennavan uses the excuse of removing mexico because of their drug cartel war... well guess what, IT SPILLS OVER TO HERE TOO.  Many people say the cartels are a direct reason there's so much murder in Chicago currently as they try to take over with their people and use it as a hub for distribution.  They're killing a lot of the existing dealers and what not to replace them with their own.

Some say if you took out gang and drug related murders, the total would be reduced 75%.  So how about since it's ok to remove mexico wholly because of their "drug war" let's do the same with the US statistics.

Also, as the videos I showed talked about, most of the violence in teh US comes out of the big cities.  Lumping the rest of the country with that and calling the whole country violent is less than honest.

Remember how this discussion began?  You arbitrarily chose 20 years as your metric.  When I posted a graph that showed more than 20 years, rather than explain why you chose 20 years, you showed everyone your bright shiny new red herring.

I get it, you're terrified someone is going to take your guns away and you'll be left crying in the corner, all alone and that's why we can't have an adult conversation.  I'll let you two cuddle each other.


I didn't arbitrarily choose 20 years....  the dude in the video I posted did... guess you didn't watch it.

And we already talked about your graph... and how it purposely excludes info...   and how it also doesn't define what "assault deaths" is.  

The last time the number of murders that took place in 2011 was matched, was in 1969 when we had 110 million less people in the US.  So we've got the same number of murders ~14,500 and 110 million more people...  but people like you want to trumpet like there's some sort of violent crime wave.

You're just wrong.  

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm 

Also, then you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks to boot.  I'm certainly not terrified.  Crime is down.  However, crime IS REAL... and I don't fancy being beat by 4 guys with crow bars, which actually happened to me.  Also, now that I have small children, it is my RESPONSIBILITY to be able to protect them from such random attacks and violence.  Am I terrified and paranoid that it will happen?  Of course not.  Do I admit it's a possibility and know such first hand?  Yep.  Therefore, I've taken precautions to attempt to ensure I can better defend myself and my loved ones in the future.  

Looks like I win.
 
2014-01-22 01:18:09 PM
katanakahn:
I agree.  I do also believe that some do not seek help simply because of the stigma and lack of open discussion.  That, and treatment options are indeed still immature.  Kind of a catch 22, the more people who seek treatment, the more money will be put into making them better, the better the treatment, the more people who will seek it...

Nearly everyone has a support system around them of some sort.  Friends, roommates, colleagues, clergy if they're religious.  He didn't necessarily need to go to a counseling center.  Simply going to someone he trusts and talking things through, before they escalated in his mind to the point of no return, could have prevented this.
 
2014-01-22 01:23:55 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: I didn't arbitrarily choose 20 years.... the dude in the video I posted did


Oh well then I guess that makes it okay.

Mr.BobDobalita: And we already talked about your graph... and how it purposely excludes info


On the contrary, we were comparing different years in just the United States.  My graph does not exclude any information for that argument, it includes extraneous information (other countries).

Mr.BobDobalita: The last time the number of murders that took place in 2011 was matched, was in 1969 when we had 110 million less people in the US. So we've got the same number of murders ~14,500 and 110 million more people


My graph is per 100k people.  Do you know what a rate is?

Mr.BobDobalita: Also, now that I have small children, it is my RESPONSIBILITY to be able to protect them from such random attacks and violence. Am I terrified and paranoid that it will happen? Of course not. Do I admit it's a possibility and know such first hand? Yep. Therefore, I've taken precautions to attempt to ensure I can better defend myself and my loved ones in the future.


Well, if you own a gun, your kids are more likely to die by a firearm than if you got rid of it.
 
2014-01-22 03:40:04 PM
lennavan:

Oh well then I guess that makes it okay.

It doesn't change my point that violent crime in the US is waaaaaaay down.  So what's your point?


On the contrary, we were comparing different years in just the United States.  My graph does not exclude any information for that argument, it includes extraneous information (other countries).

Your graph is unsourced and as valid as a crayon drawing done by a 2nd grader.  It admits it purposely omitted information.

My graph is per 100k people.  Do you know what a rate is?

Of course.  And do you see that per-capita, our rate has gone DOWN since 1964?  You remember the 50s and 60s.. yeah, those are the times when everyone thinks of how violent the united states was....

You also fail to address the information in the video showing the US isn't as violent as all the haters like you say.  UK, the holy grail for anti-gunners is nearly 4x more violent than the US in terms of rape/assault/robbery/etc.



Well, if you own a gun, your kids are more likely to die by a firearm than if you got rid of it.

Poppy cock.   Anti-gun make believe, unsourced, complete and utter bull crap.   We'll require a citation on that on...and not from Motherjones or other hysteria manufacturer.
 
2014-01-22 05:50:31 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: lennavan:

Oh well then I guess that makes it okay.

It doesn't change my point that violent crime in the US is waaaaaaay down.  So what's your point?


On the contrary, we were comparing different years in just the United States.  My graph does not exclude any information for that argument, it includes extraneous information (other countries).

Your graph is unsourced and as valid as a crayon drawing done by a 2nd grader.  It admits it purposely omitted information.

My graph is per 100k people.  Do you know what a rate is?

Of course.  And do you see that per-capita, our rate has gone DOWN since 1964?  You remember the 50s and 60s.. yeah, those are the times when everyone thinks of how violent the united states was....

You also fail to address the information in the video showing the US isn't as violent as all the haters like you say.  UK, the holy grail for anti-gunners is nearly 4x more violent than the US in terms of rape/assault/robbery/etc.


Well, if you own a gun, your kids are more likely to die by a firearm than if you got rid of it.

Poppy cock.   Anti-gun make believe, unsourced, complete and utter bull crap.   We'll require a citation on that on...and not from Motherjones or other hysteria manufacturer.


They don't want to hear it. They WANT people to die to push their agenda.
 
Displayed 46 of 296 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report