Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8872 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-17-2018 10:43 PM
216 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, Faith, marc9000, xongsmith (5 members, 211 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Son of Man
Post Volume:
Total: 842,189 Year: 17,012/29,783 Month: 1,000/1,956 Week: 503/331 Day: 86/76 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12345
6
78Next
Author Topic:   Take the state out of the schools!!!!!
gene90
Member (Idle past 1775 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 77 of 107 (28267)
01-01-2003 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Mammuthus
12-18-2002 3:23 AM


I don't know why American crime rates are so high. But I think that if we took the guns away knives would just become more popular -- and it would offend a tremendous number of people who really appreciate gun ownership, most of whom are responsible enough.

Plus I suspect that the gun culture would just encourage a huge black market gun trade, so that criminals are well armed and the average citizen isn't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Mammuthus, posted 12-18-2002 3:23 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by nator, posted 01-02-2003 9:31 AM gene90 has not yet responded

gene90
Member (Idle past 1775 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 78 of 107 (28268)
01-01-2003 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Mammuthus
12-18-2002 3:23 AM


Duplicate deleted.

[This message has been edited by gene90, 01-01-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Mammuthus, posted 12-18-2002 3:23 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 122 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 79 of 107 (28286)
01-02-2003 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by gene90
01-01-2003 8:25 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
I don't know why American crime rates are so high. But I think that if we took the guns away knives would just become more popular -- and it would offend a tremendous number of people who really appreciate gun ownership, most of whom are responsible enough.

I do not think that we should take all guns away. I think hunting rifles and the like are fine, for instance. But I do not think that handguns or other military type weapons are appropriate for civilian ownership. They are specifically designed to kill people.

It would be great if knives became popular instead of guns. It's kind of difficult to do long-distance or drive-by knifings, or to accidentally stab someone two houses over. It is also a lot more difficult to mow down lots of people with a knife.

quote:
Plus I suspect that the gun culture would just encourage a huge black market gun trade, so that criminals are well armed and the average citizen isn't.

I don't think the average citizen is very well armed now, anyway.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by gene90, posted 01-01-2003 8:25 PM gene90 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 9:57 AM nator has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 107 (28291)
01-02-2003 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by nator
01-02-2003 9:31 AM


Gun control almost seems like a good idea, except for the practical application. Who is allowed to have weapons? Who judges the capability of a person to own a gun? Ultimately I'm asking where do you draw the lines, and how far do you go to enforce them?

One of the problems I have with what Canada is doing with gun control is that, they are giving the police the freedom to search for guns in your home without a warrant! Now this is absolutely unacceptable! Maybe if (as my dad said over Christmas time) we had a justice system, instead of a legal system, I could deal with this. However it seems that justice is something we only stumble across occasionally, in the system we have in place.

How far can you go to enforce this regulation? How many freedoms would you give up?

10 out of 10 people die anyway, I don't think you'll be any safer without a gun.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by nator, posted 01-02-2003 9:31 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 12:33 AM funkmasterfreaky has responded

Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 107 (28293)
01-02-2003 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Brian
12-21-2002 3:31 AM


On the subject of education, I've heard that the US state school system is pretty crap. And i've also heard that this is because the teachers always teach to the level of the slowest members of the class. That just means that the smart minority get bored, frustrated and demotivated. Shouldn't the schools separate the smart kids from the less smart and really train them at the level that suits them best? Imagine a kid with 160IQ sitting in a class with an average of 100IQ. it just doesn't make sense! This is something that was realised in europe decades ago with great results, so why doesn't the US follow?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Brian, posted 12-21-2002 3:31 AM Brian has not yet responded

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 107 (28296)
01-02-2003 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by nator
12-18-2002 8:28 AM


Originally posted by schrafinator:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:

quote:
Sorry Schraf this seems like the cop out excuse to this problem. Personally I hate the idea of any sort of gun control. (this is a whole new thread)

So, do you think that anyone should have the right to own a rocket launcher? How about a machine gun?

I'd rather these were in the hands of civilians instead of under the command of governments who are motivated by big business.

quote:
Don't you think an educated mass should be able to teach their children that it is wrong to shoot others!?

Maybe, except that the consequences of failure to teach this lesson, combined with easy availability of guns results in tragedy.

Thet is the price you pay for being in love with guns.

So because of a few neglecting parents you will take away freedoms and any hope of self defence from the whole population?

quote:
I think these occurances have more to do with the social damage that kids are sustaining in the school system.

Kids have ALWAYS sustained damage in the school system, in their neighborhoods, in their families and peer groups. That is nothing new.

I didn't say that it was new, just that it's getting worse. So it's been going on forever anyways so who cares!? Is that what you're getting at.

quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.

And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.

So who isn't troubled?

quote:
However it was an event that was becoming inevitable, you would not believe the amount of kids in our systems who have a "hit list" of peers and teachers in their schools.

But I made mental lists of people I hated or who were mean to me when I was in school, too, and I had my fantasies of making them suffer.

I don't pretend to think that the easy availability of guns is the only reason things like this hppen, but you are wrong to think it is a new thing that kids can't cope or that they get picked on at school.

I think that lack of parental and community responsibility and supervision contributes greatly to the problem.

In the past, troubled kids brought knives to school. It's a lot harder to mow down dozens of people with a knife. Now they go buy a gun on the street or at a gun show.

Kids don't seem to have problems getting drugs on the street, even though there is legislation against them. What makes you think guns will be any different? Hiding the problem away underneath some legislation does not solve anything.

quote:
I don't think this problem is anywhere near over, though the footage from Columbine may be deterring others with the same ideas.
I know I entertained this very thought many times growing up in the public school system, I just eventually chose drug abuse instead.

EXACTLY. You entertained these thoughts, as a lot of people did.

Why are people being driven to these thoughts, isn't this the problem in the first place? Has nothing to do with wether or not you have access to a gun.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 01-02-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 8:28 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 10:06 AM funkmasterfreaky has responded

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 107 (28299)
01-02-2003 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Brian
12-21-2002 3:31 AM



Funky,

You OWE it to your kids to allow them to have a good all round education. I dont know how the eductaion system works in the USA but in Scotland high school kids get taught 14 different subjects in a weekly time table. Now funky, no one, not even you, could provide a better education than 14 teachers, if you think you can then why not become a teacher and do something about the poor education system that America must have if your argument is true.

Time and again I have stated that if you are in over your head on a subject then get some help.

Also, I DO care what you and everyone else teaches their kids, I also care deeply about EVERY child I teach, contrary to your earlier claim that teachers dont care about all their student. I work very hard in and out of school to make sure that my students get the best from me, I feel it is my duty to do that, it is part of the job.

I am glad you are a good teacher. You'll notice that in my criticism of teachers I made sure to mention that NOT ALL teachers were bad teachers.

You also claim that schools 'Force feed you knowledge screaming at you the whole time that your life depends on this.'

Funky you cannot force feed knowledge into anyone, if they aren't interested then you are wasting your time, if the child's brain goes 'reptilian' then it doesnt matter what you do.

You're right you can't force feed knowledge to anyone, however this is what the education system attempts to do. If they aren't interested it's the teachers job to make it interesting. Some children cannot handle this classroom style teaching. I know a mother who homeschools and one of her kids has to move and fidget in order to concentrate. As soon as this child is forced to sit still and look straight ahead she cannot retain any information. Each person is different and learns different, how can a national system ever meet the needs of the individual?

One thing I always remember from teacher training is that students normally take what teachers say as being the truth, so I am always very careful in everything that I say. True I am an atheist that teaches religious studies but I do not say any one faith is superior to any other, I emphasise that these are belief systems that cannot be proven or disproven.

Good.

Now teachers have to be impartial in what they teach, so funky if you were teaching your kids a lesson on Religious Studies would you be able to be impartial, would you teach your kids that Jesus might NOT be God and that Allah might be.

Teachers teaching a public school have to be impartial to what they teach. A parent raising a child does not have to be. I don't see a need for religious studies anyway, I never had religious studies in shcool.

How many creation myths would you teach?
Would you be able to tell them that there's no non biblical evidence for any of the Patriarchs, there's no evidence that the enslavement in Egypt happened, there's no evidence of an Exodus or a conquest.

I'd only teach one creation, however I would give parallels, here's what I believe, here is what others believe. This is why I believe what I do and why they believe what they do.

The problem I have with people educating kids at home is that they will not teach them from an objective stance, we then have the danger of indoctrination, the child is not given all the options. We then have the problem of the child not having a choice in their belief system, christians will promote christianity in their home lessons and the child will come to think that christianity is the only true choice, because students think that everything their teacher says is true.

Children homeshcooled or public seem to have no difficulty casting off their parents beliefs. They seem to have a much more difficult time though, casting off the belief systems (or lack of) that they are bombarded with everyday. And they say Christians are paranoid, I would argue from this thread that it is critics that get edgy about this whole thing.

You also say that 3 years at Uni doesnt qualify you to teach. Again I do not know the USA system but in Scotland you need a degree that takes 3 years (4 if its an honours) and an extra year to do a post grad certificate in Education. I studied education alongside my honours degree and have a diploma in ed, which is between a certificate and a degree.

25 years in university doesn't qualify you teach. Some people have a heart and a temperment to teach and others do not. Again, knowledge is not the equivalent of wisdom.

Now anyone that has these qualfications IS qualified to teach, whether they are an effective teacher is a different thing, maybe thats what you meant?

A person may be knowlegeble of the subject but it does not necessarily follow that knowledge of a subject is qualification to teach it.

Anyway, I do care about what you teach your kids, if you were teaching them at home you MAY be depriving them (im not saying you would)of a better education, of a better chance in life, and you may be depriving them the chance to sample the beautiful philosophies of other faiths.

If I send them to public school I WILL be depriving them. At home I can see the strengths and weaknesses of my child clearly. I can encourage these strengths and work on these weaknesses, ultimately giving them a better chance in life.

If my child were to want to know about other religions, faiths, or philosophies I would be glad to study these with them as well.

Too many people lack the encouragement and instruction in those things that they are gifted towards. Too often music/arts (eg.) are considered unimportant or useless. Well to the person who is geared to these things there is nothing further from the truth.

[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 01-03-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Brian, posted 12-21-2002 3:31 AM Brian has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by nator, posted 01-06-2003 12:22 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 122 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 84 of 107 (28428)
01-05-2003 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky
01-02-2003 9:57 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]Gun control almost seems like a good idea, except for the practical application. Who is allowed to have weapons?[/QUOTE]

Those who pass psychological and gun safety tests, and who do not have any criminal records.

quote:
Who judges the capability of a person to own a gun?

Psychologists, law-enforcement professionals, gun experts, etc.

quote:
Ultimately I'm asking where do you draw the lines, and how far do you go to enforce them?

I would suggest drawing the line at hunting firearms.

quote:
One of the problems I have with what Canada is doing with gun control is that, they are giving the police the freedom to search for guns in your home without a warrant! Now this is absolutely unacceptable! Maybe if (as my dad said over Christmas time) we had a justice system, instead of a legal system, I could deal with this. However it seems that justice is something we only stumble across occasionally, in the system we have in place.

How far can you go to enforce this regulation? How many freedoms would you give up?

10 out of 10 people die anyway, I don't think you'll be any safer without a gun.


Um, have you SEEN the gun death rate in the US compared to other industrialized nations?

How many children do you want to see with their heads blown off before you stop saying "Oh, well, everybody dies anyway?"

Damn.

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-05-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 9:57 AM funkmasterfreaky has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by achoo, posted 01-05-2003 3:15 AM nator has not yet responded
 Message 87 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-05-2003 6:37 PM nator has not yet responded

  
achoo
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 107 (28434)
01-05-2003 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by nator
01-05-2003 12:33 AM


Getting back to the original topic, isn't it disadvantageous if parents only teach the basics to their children, and then their children have to compete in college? To dismantle modern education, and only have parents teach the basics (assuming all parents know basic math, science, english, art, sociology, etc.), it would be very hard to do. Every modern, industrial nation needs physicist, chemists, biologists, engineers, doctors, etc., and I don't think basic math and science by your average parents will pass the test. Sure, there might be a few exceptional parent teachers out there, but most will either be too busy, or highly unqualified (some parents can't even add fractions).
This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 12:33 AM nator has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 122 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 86 of 107 (28441)
01-05-2003 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by funkmasterfreaky
01-02-2003 10:25 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:

quote:
Sorry Schraf this seems like the cop out excuse to this problem. Personally I hate the idea of any sort of gun control. (this is a whole new thread)

So, do you think that anyone should have the right to own a rocket launcher? How about a machine gun?

quote:
I'd rather these were in the hands of civilians instead of under the command of governments who are motivated by big business.

Holy crap, you want it to be legal for the people like those in the Michigan Militia to own rocket launchers and machine guns?

Tanks. What about tanks? Should people be allowed to own tanks with rocket launchers? Should my neighbor be allowed to own an anti-aircraft gun because he fears that the MIB will take him away?

You are painting yourself into a silly scenario, funk.

quote:
Don't you think an educated mass should be able to teach their children that it is wrong to shoot others!?

Maybe, except that the consequences of failure to teach this lesson, combined with easy availability of guns results in tragedy.

Thet is the price you pay for being in love with guns.

quote:
So because of a few neglecting parents you will take away freedoms and any hope of self defence from the whole population?

I thought that you said that lots and lots of parents were neglecting their kids, and also that most teachers didn't care about their students and that the school system subjected a lot of kids to mental stress and abuse.

First this was a huge problem, but now it is a small problem of "a few"? Which is it?

The writers of our bill of rights could not have had any idea of the killing technology that would be developed in the future. Back when single-shot muskets and long rifles and bayonetts were the personal weapons of choice, and there was quite a lot of danger of our government becoming a lot like England's, it made sense for them to keep guns legal. I don't think that the writer's intent was for rocket launchers to be available to every citizen.

I would actually have no problem with every family who wanted to own a musket or a long rifle to have one.

quote:
I think these occurances have more to do with the social damage that kids are sustaining in the school system.

Kids have ALWAYS sustained damage in the school system, in their neighborhoods, in their families and peer groups. That is nothing new.

quote:
I didn't say that it was new, just that it's getting worse. So it's been going on forever anyways so who cares!? Is that what you're getting at.

Where is your evidence that it is getting worse? Could it be that more people are talking about it and assigning blame rather than the problem actually being worse?

I never said I didn't care, so please stop putting words into my mouth. I am just suggesting that perhaps it is your preferred perception that it is getting worse.

quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.

And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.

quote:
So who isn't troubled?

Very cute. You know exactly what I mean.

quote:
However it was an event that was becoming inevitable, you would not believe the amount of kids in our systems who have a "hit list" of peers and teachers in their schools.

But I made mental lists of people I hated or who were mean to me when I was in school, too, and I had my fantasies of making them suffer.

I don't pretend to think that the easy availability of guns is the only reason things like this happen, but you are wrong to think it is a new thing that kids can't cope or that they get picked on at school.

I think that lack of parental and community responsibility and supervision contributes greatly to the problem.

In the past, troubled kids brought knives to school. It's a lot harder to mow down dozens of people with a knife. Now they go buy a gun on the street or at a gun show.

quote:
Kids don't seem to have problems getting drugs on the street, even though there is legislation against them. What makes you think guns will be any different? Hiding the problem away underneath some legislation does not solve anything.

We would need to stop producing cheap firearms, and we would have to be serious about enforcement if we wanted to be serious about reducing gun death in the US.

The NRA is evil. I do not say that lightly.

When they hold rallys in Colorado two weeks after Columbine, and in Flint right after that grade-schooler killed his classmate, I think it is safe to say that they are sick MF-ers.

quote:
I don't think this problem is anywhere near over, though the footage from Columbine may be deterring others with the same ideas.
I know I entertained this very thought many times growing up in the public school system, I just eventually chose drug abuse instead.

EXACTLY. You entertained these thoughts, as a lot of people did.

quote:
Why are people being driven to these thoughts, isn't this the problem in the first place? Has nothing to do with wether or not you have access to a gun.

No shit.

But don't you think it is stupid to risk lots and lots of people getting KILLED because it is easy for any disturbed wacko to get a gun when he can't cope?

Perhaps you are willing to trade those thousands of lives for your cozy happiness with a warm gun, but I am not.

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-05-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 10:25 AM funkmasterfreaky has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-05-2003 7:20 PM nator has responded
 Message 90 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-06-2003 1:57 AM nator has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 107 (28455)
01-05-2003 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by nator
01-05-2003 12:33 AM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Gun control almost seems like a good idea, except for the practical application. Who is allowed to have weapons?

Those who pass psychological and gun safety tests, and who do not have any criminal records.

Anyone who wants a gun bad enough can fake it through psychological and gun safety tests. How recent of a criminal record, and what type of offences would eliminate a person from owning a gun?

quote:
Who judges the capability of a person to own a gun?

Psychologists, law-enforcement professionals, gun experts, etc.

A psychologist is easily fooled, law-enforcement can be easily fooled or paid off, and what is a gun experts role in deciding who can own a gun?

quote:
Ultimately I'm asking where do you draw the lines, and how far do you go to enforce them?

I would suggest drawing the line at hunting firearms.

Hunting rifles kill people just like any other gun. A shotgun is often a weapon of choice for a criminal because of the spread shot, acts somewhat like an automatic weapon. If you ban shotguns bird hunters would be some ticked at you.

quote:
One of the problems I have with what Canada is doing with gun control is that, they are giving the police the freedom to search for guns in your home without a warrant! Now this is absolutely unacceptable! Maybe if (as my dad said over Christmas time) we had a justice system, instead of a legal system, I could deal with this. However it seems that justice is something we only stumble across occasionally, in the system we have in place.

How far can you go to enforce this regulation? How many freedoms would you give up?

10 out of 10 people die anyway, I don't think you'll be any safer without a gun.


Um, have you SEEN the gun death rate in the US compared to other industrialized nations?

How many children do you want to see with their heads blown off before you stop saying "Oh, well, everybody dies anyway?"

If you're bringing up statistics please provide them in your post I'd appreciate it.

I can't stand to see children harmed in any way, it boils my blood to a point that I can hardly control. Crime against children is the most dispicable type of offence one could commit.

People with hunting rifles are just as capable of killing children as people with automatic weapons. You can make it more difficult to get guns but you can't stop people from getting them and using them on other humans. There will always be a way to get your hands on a gun if you want them. With gun control you make the criminal even more dangerous, and the law abiding citizen even more defenseless.

[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 01-05-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 12:33 AM nator has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by mark24, posted 01-05-2003 7:34 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 107 (28457)
01-05-2003 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by nator
01-05-2003 10:06 AM


quote:
Sorry Schraf this seems like the cop out excuse to this problem. Personally I hate the idea of any sort of gun control. (this is a whole new thread)

So, do you think that anyone should have the right to own a rocket launcher? How about a machine gun?

quote:
I'd rather these were in the hands of civilians instead of under the command of governments who are motivated by big business.

Holy crap, you want it to be legal for the people like those in the Michigan Militia to own rocket launchers and machine guns?

Tanks. What about tanks? Should people be allowed to own tanks with rocket launchers? Should my neighbor be allowed to own an anti-aircraft gun because he fears that the MIB will take him away?

You are painting yourself into a silly scenario, funk.

Your scenario seems even sillier to me. How many citizens do you think can actually afford a rocket launcher and a tank? Your neighbour would have to be some rich to buy himself anti-aircraft guns.

quote:
Don't you think an educated mass should be able to teach their children that it is wrong to shoot others!?

Maybe, except that the consequences of failure to teach this lesson, combined with easy availability of guns results in tragedy.

Thet is the price you pay for being in love with guns.

quote:
So because of a few neglecting parents you will take away freedoms and any hope of self defence from the whole population?

I thought that you said that lots and lots of parents were neglecting their kids, and also that most teachers didn't care about their students and that the school system subjected a lot of kids to mental stress and abuse.

First this was a huge problem, but now it is a small problem of "a few"? Which is it?

The writers of our bill of rights could not have had any idea of the killing technology that would be developed in the future. Back when single-shot muskets and long rifles and bayonetts were the personal weapons of choice, and there was quite a lot of danger of our government becoming a lot like England's, it made sense for them to keep guns legal. I don't think that the writer's intent was for rocket launchers to be available to every citizen.

I would actually have no problem with every family who wanted to own a musket or a long rifle to have one.

You are right I did contradict myself there, because your idea of putting a control on guns so angers me, I wasn't thinking. Wasn't gun control one of Hitler's first courses of action in controlling the people. Yes the educations system and the family unit are flawed and disfunctional. It is a large problem not the problem of a few.

You can make all the legislation you want and you won't change one thing. Legislation does not solve problems, laws do not change peoples actions. It's already illegal to shoot people, alot of good that law does in stopping people from killing others.

Got to go pick up pizza finish this post later.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 10:06 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by nator, posted 01-06-2003 12:07 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

mark24
Member (Idle past 3147 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 89 of 107 (28458)
01-05-2003 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by funkmasterfreaky
01-05-2003 6:37 PM


All,

I think the salient point is that murders due to gun crime is at least five times greater per capita in the US than the UK. Why is there still an argument? Do people love the guns they profess never to use in anger so much, that they are prepared to accept thousands more dead / annum than would occur if they were banned? Seems like it to me. If people have them, a proportion will use them. It's true that it's people that kill, not the weapon, but they still present an easy tool for people to use if they are present. If a gun is present it may be used, if it isn't, it won't.

In short, no guns = fewer murders.

I agree my argument may well be simplistic, since the guns used are often illegal anyway, this is certainly true in the UK where most weapons held by youths are converted replicas & air rifles. There was a change in the law recently banning handguns to calibres off 0.22 maximum. The only people who legally hold handguns are club members who are never the problem anyway. The flip side is that the criminals recourse is to convert other non-firearms, & they usually do such a bad job that the guns are extremely low powered. A man survived two direct shots to the head at point blank, to give an example. The problem the US faces is that it is routinely possible to get large calibre weapons illegally, & there is a huuuuuge gun culture. Killing is easy & trivial when you have a gun on your person, not so easy otherwise, why allow people the "red mist"/act-in-anger option?

Ban guns. Are people really that selfish that they will accept thousands of unnecessary deaths per year for the sake of "a right to bear arms"? It seems a case of a constitution not working for the benefit of the people, to me.

Mark

------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-05-2003 6:37 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 107 (28468)
01-06-2003 1:57 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by nator
01-05-2003 10:06 AM


The writers of our bill of rights could not have had any idea of the killing technology that would be developed in the future. Back when single-shot muskets and long rifles and bayonetts were the personal weapons of choice, and there was quite a lot of danger of our government becoming a lot like England's, it made sense for them to keep guns legal. I don't think that the writer's intent was for rocket launchers to be available to every citizen.

I would actually have no problem with every family who wanted to own a musket or a long rifle to have one.

Weapons are weapons, people who want to kill will kill. If all they had was a musket that's what they'd use.

quote:
I think these occurances have more to do with the social damage that kids are sustaining in the school system.

Kids have ALWAYS sustained damage in the school system, in their neighborhoods, in their families and peer groups. That is nothing new.

quote:
I didn't say that it was new, just that it's getting worse. So it's been going on forever anyways so who cares!? Is that what you're getting at.

Where is your evidence that it is getting worse? Could it be that more people are talking about it and assigning blame rather than the problem actually being worse?

I never said I didn't care, so please stop putting words into my mouth. I am just suggesting that perhaps it is your preferred perception that it is getting worse.

I guess I don't know that things are getting worse it's maybe just more public now. I believe it's getting worse from discussions with older people, from comparing stories and experinces with them.

Schraff I wasn't putting words in your mouth I was asking a question.

quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.

And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.

quote:
So who isn't troubled?

Very cute. You know exactly what I mean.

No I didn't know exactly what you meant or I wouldn't have said anything. It seems to me that everyone is troubled. Any person is capable of losing control, not just a select few. Quite often it seems that "very well adjusted" people commit the most vicious and dispicable crimes of anyone.

quote:
However it was an event that was becoming inevitable, you would not believe the amount of kids in our systems who have a "hit list" of peers and teachers in their schools.

But I made mental lists of people I hated or who were mean to me when I was in school, too, and I had my fantasies of making them suffer.

I don't pretend to think that the easy availability of guns is the only reason things like this happen, but you are wrong to think it is a new thing that kids can't cope or that they get picked on at school.

I think that lack of parental and community responsibility and supervision contributes greatly to the problem.

In the past, troubled kids brought knives to school. It's a lot harder to mow down dozens of people with a knife. Now they go buy a gun on the street or at a gun show.

quote:
Kids don't seem to have problems getting drugs on the street, even though there is legislation against them. What makes you think guns will be any different? Hiding the problem away underneath some legislation does not solve anything.

We would need to stop producing cheap firearms, and we would have to be serious about enforcement if we wanted to be serious about reducing gun death in the US.

The NRA is evil. I do not say that lightly.

When they hold rallys in Colorado two weeks after Columbine, and in Flint right after that grade-schooler killed his classmate, I think it is safe to say that they are sick MF-ers.

I don't know anything about the NRA, probably because I'm not from the states. I don't give a rats ass about the states we've got enough problems here.

Strict enforcement meaning what? I hope that doesn't mean forming a police state, giving the police unlimited power.

quote:
I don't think this problem is anywhere near over, though the footage from Columbine may be deterring others with the same ideas.
I know I entertained this very thought many times growing up in the public school system, I just eventually chose drug abuse instead.

EXACTLY. You entertained these thoughts, as a lot of people did.

quote:
Why are people being driven to these thoughts, isn't this the problem in the first place? Has nothing to do with wether or not you have access to a gun.

No shit.

But don't you think it is stupid to risk lots and lots of people getting KILLED because it is easy for any disturbed wacko to get a gun when he can't cope?

Perhaps you are willing to trade those thousands of lives for your cozy happiness with a warm gun, but I am not.

I can see by your language in this post that you take this problem seriously. Which is a good thing, I just don't think that more laws will change anything. A "disturbed wacko" is going to find a means to kill no matter what laws are in place.

Schraf I know you think I'm unintelligent and medeival, but these problems with kids and guns make me so sad I can't stand it. I can't stand to see kids in such distress that they resort to the kinds of things like the columbine shooting. You know when I saw the news reports on that particular incident, I felt more for the kids with the guns than those who were victims and bystanders. Not to say that I did not grieve for those young people who lost their lives in that tragic event. There are so many in the last few generations who are so lost and hurting. (not saying that previous generations have not been hurt) Something needs to be done this is why I started this thread saying we need to be closer to our kids and know what is going on. We need to play bigger roles in their lives, even if it is at the expense of our time, and our own carreers/goals. I know that I would never want to go through that time in my life ever again. Being a young person is so incredibly difficult, with so many pressures and expectations. The world is so big and scary, so heavy and oppressive on your shoulders, that it seems impossible to cope. We as adults need to remember how hard it was growing up and come alongside our young people and, uplift and encourage them. We need to do more than we are doing, and we need to make changes to ease the pressure they are feeling.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by nator, posted 01-05-2003 10:06 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by nator, posted 01-06-2003 11:36 AM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 122 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 91 of 107 (28496)
01-06-2003 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by funkmasterfreaky
01-06-2003 1:57 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]
The writers of our bill of rights could not have had any idea of the killing technology that would be developed in the future. Back when single-shot muskets and long rifles and bayonetts were the personal weapons of choice, and there was quite a lot of danger of our government becoming a lot like England's, it made sense for them to keep guns legal. I don't think that the writer's intent was for rocket launchers to be available to every citizen.

I would actually have no problem with every family who wanted to own a musket or a long rifle to have one.

quote:
Weapons are weapons, people who want to kill will kill. If all they had was a musket that's what they'd use.

Freaky. You are missing my point entirely.

A musket shot is a SINGLE SHOT RIFLE, and it isn't very powerful and it isn't very accurate. It takes several minutes to reload. You have to have some skill at loading this gun or it won't fire properly or at all. It fires buckshot or lead balls. It is quite possible to survive being shot with a musket, and it is pretty difficult to conceal a weapon that is several feet long.

A semi-automatic, military-type weapon is very powerful, very accurate, and can shoot off dozens of rounds in a matter of seconds. It takes no skill to load and is quick to reload. It can be hidden easily.

I understand full well that people who are bent on killing will find a way to do it. But I also think it is completely INSANE to defend a gun culture in which we make it as easy as possible for anyone who wants to, to kill the maximum number of people possible.

quote:
I guess I don't know that things are getting worse it's maybe just more public now. I believe it's getting worse from discussions with older people, from comparing stories and experinces with them.

Schraff I wasn't putting words in your mouth I was asking a question.


Right. Like everybody thinks that violent crime is so prevalent and on the rise, when actually it's at it's lowest rate in 30 years.

quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.

And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.

quote:
So who isn't troubled?

Very cute. You know exactly what I mean.

quote:
No I didn't know exactly what you meant or I wouldn't have said anything. It seems to me that everyone is troubled. Any person is capable of losing control, not just a select few. Quite often it seems that "very well adjusted" people commit the most vicious and dispicable crimes of anyone.

You have been watching too many movies. There are signs of sociopathic tendencies that can be detected from an early age.

Everyone is not troubled to the level where they actually want to kill someone. That is rare.

quote:
Strict enforcement meaning what? I hope that doesn't mean forming a police state, giving the police unlimited power.

Oh yes, that's exactly what I mean. (rolls eyes)

quote:
I can see by your language in this post that you take this problem seriously. Which is a good thing, I just don't think that more laws will change anything. A "disturbed wacko" is going to find a means to kill no matter what laws are in place.

Yes, I agree that he will kill.

I am suggesting we make it an awful lot harder for him to do so.

quote:
Schraf I know you think I'm unintelligent and medeival,

Not at all. I just think that you don't always think your arguments through to their logical conclusions.

quote:
but these problems with kids and guns make me so sad I can't stand it. I can't stand to see kids in such distress that they resort to the kinds of things like the columbine shooting. You know when I saw the news reports on that particular incident, I felt more for the kids with the guns than those who were victims and bystanders. Not to say that I did not grieve for those young people who lost their lives in that tragic event. There are so many in the last few generations who are so lost and hurting. (not saying that previous generations have not been hurt) Something needs to be done this is why I started this thread saying we need to be closer to our kids and know what is going on. We need to play bigger roles in their lives, even if it is at the expense of our time, and our own carreers/goals. I know that I would never want to go through that time in my life ever again. Being a young person is so incredibly difficult, with so many pressures and expectations. The world is so big and scary, so heavy and oppressive on your shoulders, that it seems impossible to cope. We as adults need to remember how hard it was growing up and come alongside our young people and, uplift and encourage them. We need to do more than we are doing, and we need to make changes to ease the pressure they are feeling.

I am 100% with you here, Freaky. I felt awful for the Columbine shooters, too. I was somewnat of an outcast in school, too, and I certainly had a pretty sad home life as well.

I just don't understand how you say you want the killing and the pain to stop at the same time you are basically endorsing the gift of an AK-47 to anyone who wants it.

Part of the reason the world bears so heavily on kid's shoulders is because we live in a culture where we value the easy availbility of guns over the safety of the children we say we love and want to protect, and they know it.

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-06-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-06-2003 1:57 AM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
Prev12345
6
78Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018