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.

(WPXI.com)   Reports that 20 students have been hurt after multiple stabbings at Franklin Regional High School near Pittsburgh   (wpxi.com) divider line 742
    More: News, Franklin Regional High School, Pittsburgh, Westmoreland County  
•       •       •

8401 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Apr 2014 at 9:57 AM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-09 12:38:28 PM  
My favorite quote from this whole scenario was "20 children were wounded with four flown out by helicopter, but none with life threatening injuries." This was from WTOP. How stupid do you think your readership is? You don't stick a kid on a helicopter because he broke a bone, got stabbed but not too bad, or given themselves a mild concussion. You stick em on a helicopter when a local hospital is incapable of proper treatment and that the kid will most likely die by the time a ground transport gets them to the hospital that can. That, by definition, is an exceptionally life threatening injury.

farking doublespeak.
 
2014-04-09 12:39:41 PM  

FullMetalPanda: vpb: And I'll bet that most (if not all) survive.

It's almost as though you have a better chance of surviving if you aren't attacked with something that is designed specifically to kill people.

I'm pretty sure it's the other way around.

Knife stab wounds tend to be lethal while shootings are survivable depending on the ammo, shot placement.


This is a leftist nutjob thread about guns. Facts aren't allowed here.
 
2014-04-09 12:39:49 PM  

doglover: GnomePaladin: doglover: Would you not accept as fact though that there is a higher chance of inflicting a fatal wound, both accidentally and intentionally, with a gun than with a knife?


Absolutely not. Knives are way scary.

Which is, of course, why the knife is the preferred weapon for soldiers.

Are you seriously arguing that a kid in a school with a knife is likely do to more damage than a kid in a school with a gun?  Is this real or am I being punked?

Physics, how the hell do they work?

Projectile weapons are the preferred of any warrior. In ancient times, archers did terrible damage and almost every royal who fell in Europe was struck down by arrows, because no one with a sword could reach them through their bodyguard. As time marched on guns came in to play and have advanced to the point where they are superior to the bow. Of course you do more damage at a distance than close up.

That said, the trauma from a bullet isn't somehow more deadly just because a bullet caused it. It's just trauma, and any of it is bad. And to compare a high powered rifle to a kitchen knife is disingenuous. Those rounds are designed to blow though deer and elk. You have to compare them to swords and pole weapons. A knife is more like a .22. And given the choice, I'd take the .22.


Ok, you addressed my throwaway joke, how about the second part?  Let me reframe the question:  If your (real or hypothetical) child was in a school that someone decided to attack, would you prefer the attacker to have a knife or a gun?
 
2014-04-09 12:40:07 PM  

Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.


And some people will use any excuse to biatch about it.

So Fark you all.
 
2014-04-09 12:40:21 PM  

Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.


Are you high? The thread is like 85% arguing AGAINST banning guns, pre-emptively.
 
2014-04-09 12:41:12 PM  

Frozboz: Kid with a knife = 20 kids with serious, but non-life threatening injuries.
Kid with a gun = 20 dead kids


I guess the doctors at the hospital are just lying about the conditions of the injured then? I'm sure you know better than they do. I mean, you read about it on the internet. That totally trumps firsthand knowledge and a medical degree.
 
2014-04-09 12:41:26 PM  

Mobutu: Even a 1" blade can kill. Or a spoon.



A spoon?
ic.pics.livejournal.com
 
2014-04-09 12:41:39 PM  

AngryDragon: EdNortonsTwin: AngryDragon: EdNortonsTwin: If the security guard was armed with a firearm, there would have likely been far fewer injured students - just one knife wielding maniac on the slab.

[www.wpw-lock.net image 555x741]

God these are a stupid idea.

They can't get a biometric sensor to unlock a phone or laptop reliably in one try if you're lying comfortably in bed.  I'm going to rely on a fingerprint reader on a firearm in a self-defense situation where adrenaline has shot my fine motor skills?

What retards come up with these ideas?

The conditioning and training neccessary to manage these tools and weapons aren't for everyone - especially panic prone, fumble fingered cowards.

Panic prone, fumbled fingered cowards.

Like police officers?
Survival Stress in Law Enforcement - Traverse City Police Department

Why are gun grabbers such dumbasses when it comes to statistics?



Look AD, baby, it's best to leave violence to people who enjoy it and can readily manage high reliability occupations.


Some people just shouldn't be cops, or armed - gun grabbers and gun fumblers be damned.

.
 
2014-04-09 12:42:22 PM  

Shan: Everything you have said is quite true; but for me personally there is something scarier about being cut / stabbed than shot. Not being an ITT or anything; but I've been in both situations before and while I wasn't happy I was being shot at; I didn't have the same primal fear ask when a guy went to stab me. I don't freak out over blood and guts in general; so I don't think it's the whole "being cut" aspect of it; I think it's more the fact that even with a polearm or such your attacker is likely to be much closer to you. It's more personal; even if the attack itself is one of opportunity.


I agree completely.  I'm much more careful around razor blades than I am around live wires, even though a razor blade can do little more than blood-gushy finger slicing, and a live wire can kill me.  There's something about slicey things that induces a visceral, personal dread.

That being said, I'd much rather be scared than killed, and our public policy should focus on preventing deaths rather than freakouts.
 
2014-04-09 12:42:28 PM  

LasersHurt: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Are you high? The thread is like 85% arguing AGAINST banning guns, pre-emptively.


Such reactionary people are the type of people I want to have a gun.
 
2014-04-09 12:42:43 PM  

Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.


Comparing all people that believe in sensible gun control to the few that actually want to ban guns is like comparing all Christians to members of the WBC.
 
2014-04-09 12:43:26 PM  

JK47: Johnny Texas: I never said that they weren't but it's a bit ridiculous to say that 20 shot people = 20 dead people.   The dude at Fort Hood was a trained soldier and only killed 3 people with 35 shots fired.


Hardly ridiculous and you're using a distorted comparison in order to support your own beliefs.  The recent shooting at Fort Hood resulted in 3 dead and 16 wounded.  The victims were, to one degree or another, trained in how to respond to 1) an armed gunman and 2) followed proper protocols in response to the shooting.  One would expect that, of all possible victims, active duty soldiers wound be the most likely to rapidly and properly respond to a mass shooting.  As a result, the fact that there were fewer deaths (or a higher ratio of killed to wounded) is a perfectly reasonable result.

Even so, that's not always the case.  For instance, look at the Washington Navy Yard shooting.  In that case, the shooter killed 11 and wounded 8.  Most of the wounds were shots to the head at close range (but not hand-to-hand range) which accounts for the very high ratio of killed to wounded.

Then there's the 2009 Fort Hood shooting.  Of 214 rounds fired there were 13 fatalities and 29 wounded.  So he wasn't as accurate or efficient as the shooter at the recent Fort Hood shooting but it shows that lack of ability or efficiency with a weapon can be overcome by plentiful ammunition.  In terms of burden though, the difference between 80 rounds of .223 and 240 rounds of .223 is only a few pounds...which isn't an insurmountable burden for any shooter.

However, the proper comparison that should be drawn in this case, if one were interested in accuracy, would be between this case and other school shootings.  The Sandy Hook shooting is a recent and apt example given the proximity between victims and perpetrator.  At Sandy Hook, the shooter Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 at extremely close range and only left 2 wounded.

Therefore, it's not unreasonable to assume that the perpetrator ...


To be fair -  Fort Hood I and II used semi-auto handguns whereas the the Navy yard guy used a shotgun.

Shotgun's gonna make a mess at close range.
 
2014-04-09 12:43:49 PM  

TNel: Johnny Texas: Frozboz: Kid with a knife = 20 kids with serious, but non-life threatening injuries.
Kid with a gun = 20 dead kids

So a kid with a gun suddenly becomes Rambo and only makes kill shots?

No but bulletts tend to punch nice sized holes in people that if they don't die from the hit, bleeding out is a very real happening, or they get hit in very important organs.

Knive wounds can be severe depending on the location but the thing a knife wound has going for it is that it's usually a clean slice that can be sewed/glued shut.


So your level of expertise is what, comic books?

That isn't how it works in real life.
 
2014-04-09 12:43:56 PM  

Bullseyed: FullMetalPanda: vpb: And I'll bet that most (if not all) survive.

It's almost as though you have a better chance of surviving if you aren't attacked with something that is designed specifically to kill people.

I'm pretty sure it's the other way around.

Knife stab wounds tend to be lethal while shootings are survivable depending on the ammo, shot placement.

This is a leftist nutjob thread about guns. Facts aren't allowed here.


Actually this tread was started and dominated by the pro gun farkers.
 
2014-04-09 12:44:15 PM  

Frozboz: Kid with a knife = 20 kids with serious, but non-life threatening injuries.
Kid with a gun = 20 dead kids


The vast majority of shooting sprees have 1 or 0 fatalities, and the '1' is usually the shooter.  People aren't  that easy to kill, man.  Hospitalization is the bulk of the damage in the vast majority of attempted mass murders.

The first world does have an issue with aggravated violence, but it's a matter of crime-related violence and targeted murders of passion... while they're not unknown, spree killings really aren't a significant enough issue that we can or even should make large systemic changes to try to suppress them.
 
2014-04-09 12:44:21 PM  

nekom: BigNumber12:
And it was shocking precisely because it was unheard-of at the time. It's been downhill ever since, to the point that these situations are now "ho-hum, how can I use this to score political points?" events anymore.

To hell with political points, how do we solve the problems?  Problem #1:  People go on rampages.  How do we make that less frequent?  Problem #2:  Not in this case, but in many cases those people get their hands on a gun.  How can we prevent this in the future?


Don't worry, I get it. My point was only that these events are far more common now than they were back then. I firmly believe that the media/fame/copycat aspect is contributing strongly, but even so, it seems like it would take more than that to be causing these numbers. I'm wondering if kids (in general) today are just less mentally healthy than they were a generation or two ago.
 
2014-04-09 12:45:27 PM  

brokendownyota: Frozboz: Kid with a knife = 20 kids with serious, but non-life threatening injuries.
Kid with a gun = 20 dead kids


Right, that's why people shot by cops, who are supposedly professionals and thus trained and proficient in firearms manipulation and shot placement, never, EVER survive.

Guns = killmachines.  No wounding shots, ever.  Especially when used by wigged out, untrained, pre-pubescents who's only exposure to pulling the trigger involved clicking a mouse while badmouthing others on the internet.

/pants-on-head retarded statement is retarded
//unless that was a troll
///in which case, well done.


Would have been with you in this, but there is zero correlation between video games and violence, so you can go fark yourself.
 
2014-04-09 12:46:16 PM  

LasersHurt: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Are you high? The thread is like 85% arguing AGAINST banning guns, pre-emptively.


No, I just read the first page and a bunch of reddit posts and got so frustrated with people getting a hardon about it that i commented before thinking.
 
2014-04-09 12:47:57 PM  

Naesen: My favorite quote from this whole scenario was "20 children were wounded with four flown out by helicopter, but none with life threatening injuries." This was from WTOP. How stupid do you think your readership is? You don't stick a kid on a helicopter because he broke a bone, got stabbed but not too bad, or given themselves a mild concussion. You stick em on a helicopter when a local hospital is incapable of proper treatment and that the kid will most likely die by the time a ground transport gets them to the hospital that can. That, by definition, is an exceptionally life threatening injury.

farking doublespeak.


I pointed out in a recent gun-grabber thread that doublespeak now applies to the term "carry". There are at least two types of "carry" but you wouldn't know it from the anti-gun-grabbers.

Open carry and CCW are not the same thing. But doublespeak makes it so.
 
2014-04-09 12:48:13 PM  

Kit Fister: LasersHurt: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Are you high? The thread is like 85% arguing AGAINST banning guns, pre-emptively.

No, I just read the first page and a bunch of reddit posts and got so frustrated with people getting a hardon about it that i commented before thinking.


Thats the kind of reactionary person I want to have a gun!
 
2014-04-09 12:48:14 PM  
What's on the blame calendar this month? Guns, gays, environment, pagans, libruls, republicans, aliens, drugs....? I never could keep track.
 
2014-04-09 12:49:38 PM  
Mobutu:

Even a 1" blade can kill.  Or a spoon.

static.comicvine.com
 
2014-04-09 12:50:16 PM  

AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.


Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.
 
2014-04-09 12:51:27 PM  

The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.


Pretty much why I can't stand them.
 
2014-04-09 12:52:56 PM  
img.tapatalk.com
 
2014-04-09 12:53:42 PM  

The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.


The gun nut set is not all or even majority paranoid loon, but almost all paranoid loons are, by their nature, going to be gun nuts.

Such cases.
 
2014-04-09 12:54:05 PM  

Hal5423: HawgWild: And just where was the good guy with a knife? HUH?!

Dammit!! I was about 200+ comments too late to make this exact joke!


files.gamebanana.com
 
2014-04-09 12:54:33 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Open carry and CCW are not the same thing. But doublespeak makes it so.


Open carry. Concealed carry. Yes, not the same at all. Not like they both mean to carry a firearm on your person. Not like the difference is as simple as a tucked in shirt. Nope, completely different animals.
 
2014-04-09 12:55:13 PM  

Ned Stark: The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.

The gun nut set is not all or even majority paranoid loon, but almost all paranoid loons are, by their nature, going to be gun nuts.

Such cases.


Doesn't help that the most vocal ones are the paranoid ones.
 
2014-04-09 12:55:22 PM  

d23: bongmiester: TheShavingofOccam123: devilEther: This is a false flag operation by the NRA.

I don't think so. I think this is a real knife attack and the NRA just dodged a bullet.

Wait, wut?

countdown to the NRA claiming that this could have been prevented if teachers and students were packing heat ...

I love how the exact same group of people biatch about teachers being "overpaid," and yet they want them to carry and they want them to add yet another high-paying skill to their resume.  At some point any good teachers you have left become brain surgeons or rocket scientists because that's the level you have to be in order to do the job well.


When I was in elementary school, there was a science teacher (not just a regular teacher) who said that CD players work by vibrating the CD and those vibrations travel down the cord to your headphones and that is how you hear the sound.

The fact that we let morons be teachers is the problem. Basically everyone who fails out of their theater/English/history/etc degree becomes a teacher.
 
2014-04-09 12:56:15 PM  

Baz744: thefatbasturd: Gun, knife, it doesn't matter.

Gun, knife; it matters because guns have a much higher lethality rate than knives. Guns are objectively more dangerous than knives. To deny this conclusively proves you are stupid or evil.

thefatbasturd: Face it. If you are focusing all your fear and energy on whatever tool a school assailant is using, you are part of the problem.

No. People concerned about firearms safety are in no way part of the problem. Stupid or evil people who deny that guns are objectively more dangerous than nearly all other commonly used instruments of murder, however, are part of the problem.

This is doubly true because the people most likely to support compassionate, progressive mental health policy cross over heavily with the people concerned about firearms safety; while the people who support draconian or judgmental responses to assorted abnormal behaviors which may be predictive in these cases (thereby encouraging affected individuals to hide their abnormalities rather than seek support to address them) cross over heavily with the stupid and evil people who say guns are no more dangerous than pillows.

Moreover, those who support generous public funding of mental health support cross over heavily with the first group; those who believe public funding for anything other than the military and police constitutes tyranny cross over heavily with the second group.

Enhanced gun safety laws may or may not be part of the solution to the problem of mass violence in schools and public places. But those who favor them are far less likely to be part of the problem than are the stupid and evil people who maintain that guns are no more dangerous than pillows/knives/milk/a bag of walnuts.


Wall of anti-gun rhetoric, opinion about correlation between pro-mental health beliefs and pro-gun control beliefs stated as fact, and personal attacks. Yep. You are not part of the problem at ALL.

You act like there is absolutely no gun control already. There are. Background checks are already there. What makes you think that NEW legislation is going to be any more effective than what is already in place? It won't be. Because you CANNOT legislate this country to zero gun deaths. Someone planning to use a gun to break the law against killing people is not going to be stopped by breaking another law or two. Even if you outright banned all goes ns tomorrow because it will NOT make them disappear. Sucks but it is true. And when any NEW legislation proves to be ineffective the answer from the anti-gun side will be "Well we just need a little MORE control..." and the process will start all over. If closing the gun show loophole makes you somehow feel a little safer when you go to sleep at night, hey, go right a head. I have no problem with that. But after you find that it has done FARKALL to actually make anyone safer, you don't get to come back asking for more.
 
2014-04-09 12:57:05 PM  
I'm bookmarking this thread to refer to anytime I start to think that I miss fark, and forget how derpy it's become.
 
2014-04-09 12:58:29 PM  

NightOwl2255: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Comparing all people that believe in sensible gun control to the few that actually want to ban guns is like comparing all Christians to members of the WBC.


Bolded is the official position of the Democrat party, CNN and MSNBC, so...
 
2014-04-09 12:58:46 PM  

Deece: I'm bookmarking this thread to refer to anytime I start to think that I miss fark, and forget how derpy it's become.


www.hogdb.com
 
2014-04-09 12:59:33 PM  

Bullseyed: NightOwl2255: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Comparing all people that believe in sensible gun control to the few that actually want to ban guns is like comparing all Christians to members of the WBC.

Bolded is the official position of the Democrat party, CNN and MSNBC, so...


Citation?
 
2014-04-09 01:00:02 PM  

trappedspirit: So we should ban knives now?  Because we've learned how fantastically great prohibition works, right dip shiats?



I'm glad you agree that abortion and drug laws are stupid and unnecessary.
 
2014-04-09 01:02:16 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Thats the kind of reactionary person I want to have a gun!


Meh.
 
2014-04-09 01:03:18 PM  

NightOwl2255: TheShavingofOccam123: Open carry and CCW are not the same thing. But doublespeak makes it so.

Open carry. Concealed carry. Yes, not the same at all. Not like they both mean to carry a firearm on your person. Not like the difference is as simple as a tucked in shirt. Nope, completely different animals.


Maybe these people can help explain the difference

http://www.opencarry.org/
 
2014-04-09 01:03:37 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Ned Stark: The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.

The gun nut set is not all or even majority paranoid loon, but almost all paranoid loons are, by their nature, going to be gun nuts.

Such cases.

Doesn't help that the most vocal ones are the paranoid ones.


Oh? We seem to have pretty decisively won the issue. It certainly hasn't hurt.
 
2014-04-09 01:06:12 PM  

Ned Stark: Mrtraveler01: Ned Stark: The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.

The gun nut set is not all or even majority paranoid loon, but almost all paranoid loons are, by their nature, going to be gun nuts.

Such cases.

Doesn't help that the most vocal ones are the paranoid ones.

Oh? We seem to have pretty decisively won the issue. It certainly hasn't hurt.


Nah, Congress is just spineless when it comes to dealing with the NRA.
 
2014-04-09 01:07:11 PM  

Ned Stark: Mrtraveler01: Ned Stark: The Bestest: AngryDragon: I don't really consider "panic prone, fumble-fingered coward" to be countering an argument, but OK.  Thanks for proving my point though.

Wasn't referring to that (or any particular argument) specifically. I was commenting on the trend I see in every. gun. thread and on every talk show when guns come up.

The average "vigilant defender of the 2nd Amendment" has the optics of a paranoid loon, even if they start out with saying something rational. I'm not at all saying they ARE paranoid loons, but yeah, that's the perception.

The gun nut set is not all or even majority paranoid loon, but almost all paranoid loons are, by their nature, going to be gun nuts.

Such cases.

Doesn't help that the most vocal ones are the paranoid ones.

Oh? We seem to have pretty decisively won the issue. It certainly hasn't hurt.


Unless you attend a certain Newtown elementary school, Columbine High School, etc....then it kind of hurts...eternally.
 
2014-04-09 01:07:14 PM  

Bullseyed: NightOwl2255: Kit Fister: some people will use any excuse to argue for banning guns, I guess.

Comparing all people that believe in sensible gun control to the few that actually want to ban guns is like comparing all Christians to members of the WBC.

Bolded is the official position of the Democrat party, CNN and MSNBC, so...


The majority of the Democratic party self-identify as being Christian. So, that doesn't make a lot of sense. Or any sense. Hell, it's just plain ol stupid.
 
2014-04-09 01:08:01 PM  

enry: nekom: Now they're saying 7 victims sent to hospitals and the suspect in custody is a male student.

Must have spent the night playing Grand Theft Kitchen.


WHY can't someone attack their school with a 3 foot dildo-bat instead?
 
2014-04-09 01:08:10 PM  
When I was bouncing, the thing we were most worried about were knives. Guns in crowded spaces is bad news, no question, but knives turn my stomach to watery queasiness instantly. In the hands of even someone with no skills, they can do a fair amount of damage, fair quickly, and training for disarms is messy--no, really, the training leaves your hands, arms, legs, and chest with all sorts of ink marks, or welts from the dummy blades--and in the hands of someone who does have skill, they are absolutely terrifying.

Knives are quiet, they don't need to reload, and in the hands of someone with skill, a knife is deadly and fast. There's a reason that police are trained to NOT go for their guns when faced with an assailant with a blade if they're under 21 feet. Because in the time it takes to draw and fire, a person with a knife will be on you and cutting things, or putting sharp steel in places that just aren't designed to accommodate. A drawn gun, versus knife? That's a whole different question, but if you happen upon someone with a blade, and you are close, it's a bad situation. And knives are sneaky like that in that they can be hidden damn quickly.

We trained to deal with knives, and it's absolutely no fun.

That aside: this particular debate again comes down to addressing NOT the tools used, because any tool can be used as a weapon if you hold it right. The question is: why are folks turning to violence? And with frequency.

It's not about gun control. Gun control is a false debate. It's a bait and switch, because what BOTH sides really are talking about is safety. No gun control measure is going to do a damn bit of good, unless we talk about the reasons that folks turn to violence in the first place. Japan, the UK, they didn't cut out murder, they just changed the tools used in the commission of the crime--and in Japan, they skew their statistics a bit since they classify a LOT of their cases as "missing persons" as opposed to homicide investigations, which has prompted a lot of the organized criminals to disappear their victims into foundations, out to sea, or other creative methods to just make the bodies disappear so that the police aren't shamed with having all those murder investigations open. That doesn't address the real question: why are folks turning to violence?

We want to cut down on violence, we need to address hard questions. Mental health, economic and social mobility--which happens to fit into questions in our justice system as well, as folks without much hope economically, they tend to take chances to get ahead if they don't have many other options--and questions of education, which likewise fit into those issues of economic and social mobility. These aren't as easy to answer as "strap on and get some." These aren't as easy as "take all the dangerous stuff away and people won't have anything to use against one another." Those are both NOT solutions to the real issue. The real issue is why are folks turning to violence in the first place. Until we address issues of mental health, social and criminal justice, and economic reasons for turning to crime--and seeing crime as a viable option when faced with economic disparity--we aren't going to do much to really address violent crime. We can just talk about flavors of violence.

Until we, as a nation, take a hard look at why so many of our citizens feel that violence IS a viable option, then we're not really going to make any headway. Don't get me wrong: keeping weapons out of the hands of folks who are not well mentally isn't a bad idea. Actually getting these folks substantive help, and not stigmatizing them for looking for help in the first place is a better solution in the long run. Outlawing weapons in public, mandating folk have weapons, these aren't real solutions, until we look at what is causing folks to turn on one another, and actually do something to address these issues, we're just going to keep having problems with violence, and none of the "common sense" solutions are going to do a damn thing until we deal with the underlying causes.
 
2014-04-09 01:08:54 PM  
maybe the math teacher posted season 3 game of thrones spoilers on the board.
 
2014-04-09 01:09:15 PM  

Bullseyed: So your level of expertise is what, comic books?

That isn't how it works in real life.


You are really going to tell me with a straight face that bullets just pass right through things and the holes are the same on the way in as they are on the way out?
 
2014-04-09 01:10:10 PM  

vonmatrices:


Heh. I'm going to hell for laughing at that.
 
2014-04-09 01:11:07 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: NightOwl2255: TheShavingofOccam123: Open carry and CCW are not the same thing. But doublespeak makes it so.

Open carry. Concealed carry. Yes, not the same at all. Not like they both mean to carry a firearm on your person. Not like the difference is as simple as a tucked in shirt. Nope, completely different animals.

Maybe these people can help explain the difference

http://www.opencarry.org/


Ah, so you were referring to the legal difference, not the practical difference. Because those are two very different animals. Almost doublespeak different.
 
2014-04-09 01:12:23 PM  

Bullseyed: That isn't how it works in real life.


fc09.deviantart.net
 
2014-04-09 01:12:33 PM  

d23: The_Sponge: Baz744: Enhanced gun safety laws may or may not be part of the solution to the problem of mass violence in schools and public places.


And what enhanced "gun safety" laws do you want to see passed?


Let's diagram this argument out.

1) We don't know exactly the best way to write a "gun safety" law.
2) Therefore, lets not do it.

I am glad the Apollo program didn't take the same approach.


Really? A perfectly logical and reasonable question is asked and you jump to that kind of hyperbole instead of at least an attemptat an actual answer? Gee! It's clear any gun control plan people like you might come up with would be COMPLETELY reasonable.
 
Displayed 50 of 742 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report