for the record (re: guns thread)

In our country, perhaps. Our police and military (military is based on my dad's experience with a sorry national gaurd unit) can use more training.But in a country where the private citizen is not allowed to even have a gun, how is it a strawman?

Columbine High is in Littleton. Littleton is in JeffCo.wiki says it's the fourth most populous:
Jefferson County, Colorado - WikipediaJeffCo claims second most populous:
Jefferson County, CO | Official Websitethe demographics from 2000 census are interesting (wiki has it)

School shooting - Wikipedia
08-01-66
05-04-70
05-14/15-70
06-12-76
01-29-79
01-20-83
I hope I need not go on. don't know why there are some non-US listings in there, though.16 after columbine. 13 before columbine. (data only goes back to 1966 in this listing, columbine is 99). I'll dig up more later--tis late, and I've an exam tomorrow.so there are school shootings (and some massive) before Columbine.I don't really see how an increase in gun control has lead to more shootings and more mass shootings.

what you have is correlation. not causation. plus, those are the well known shootings in the US. also, not all of those were massive.University of Texas--13 dead, 31 wounded. (1966)
Jackson State--2 dead, 12 wounded (1970)
California State--7 dead, 2 wonded (1976)
Cleveland Elem. School--1 dead, 8 wounded (1979)
Parkway South Jr. High--2 dead, 1 wounded (1983)
Cleveland Elem. School (Stockton)--5 dead, 29 or 30 wounded (1989)
University of Iowa--6 dead, 1 wounded (1991)
Simon's Rock College--2 dead, 4 wounded (1992)
Richland High School--2 dead, 1 wounded (1995)
Frontier Jr. High--3 dead (1996)
Pearl High School--3 dead, 7 wounded (1997)
Heath High School--3 dead, 5 wounded (1997)
Jonesboro--5 dead, 10 wounded (1998)
Thurston High School--4 dead, 25 wounded (1998)
Columbine High School--15 dead, 24 wounded (1999)
Heritage High School--6 wounded (1999)
Santana High School--2 dead, 13 wounded (2001)
Appalachia School of Law--3 dead, 3 wounded (2002)
Rocori High School--2 dead (2003)
Southwood Middle School--stabbing (so don't know why it's in the shooting list)
Red Lake High School--7 dead, 7 wounded (2005)
Cambell County High School--1 dead, 2 wounded (2005)
Platte Canyon High School--2 dead (2006)
West Nickel Mines School--6 dead (2006)
Virginia Tech--33 dead, wounded unknown--2007.Now take a look at those statistics--only 3 have more than 10 deaths. 16 have 5 or fewer deaths. [abe: 4 are in the 6-9 range. in fact, after 7 dead, the next larget number is 13] What do you consider to be massive? If you take the 10+ number, one is in 1966, 1999, 2007.[abe: deaths include suicides where appropriate]Now then, how about the total number of homicides each year? Has it gone up with an increase in gun control, or are there perhaps other mitigating factors (such as increased population density)?and besides, you said "did you hear about massive school shootings back then? No!"but you did hear about massive school shootings back then.[abe2: just saw that you stated that you never claimed gun control led to more shootings. You made a statement to the effect of: well, now we have more gun control and more shootings than back then. Seemed to me you were arguing causation][abe3: the list of shootings is not exhaustive. I would think, however, that something of the magnitude of U of T could be found easily.][abe4: homicide data, only going back to 1976 unfortunatelypercentage of homicides by gun:
http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/...ate/RunHomTrendsInOneVar.cfmtotal number of homicides:
http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/...ate/RunHomTrendsInOneVar.cfmfunny thing, this. it seems to peak in the 90s (number of homicides), but the percentage done with a gun is kind of everywhere, though in many states it's going down over the years). If increased gun control is leading to more shootings, this data doesn't show that.]Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.Edited by kuresu, : fixed counting error. misread "12 wounded" for "12 dead". so that makes 3 massive shootings (over 10 dead).Edited by kuresu, : for ringo being such a pain, removed the kent state school shooting, and changed the number for shootings with 5 or less deaths to reflect its removal. happy now, ringo?

true. I'm just counting school shootings period, though. Not taking into account the disturbed. And if you'll notice--the top 3 shootings are all by "disturbed" people.petro never made any statements about the minds of the shooters. Just that back then, you didn't hear about them (shootings, that is).Edited by kuresu, : fixing the error from previous post of mine that continued into here. 3 shootings, not 4.

sheez, I'll remove it then. It's still a school shooting, though.

First, no insults to CU. Don't confuse Boulder with the student body. E-mail prof. Young at gyoung@colorado.edu for some stats as to the political orientation of his students going back about ten years. It's roughly evenly split between liberals and conservatives. And if it's a liberal socialist shithole, then why are my international affairs professors fond of realism and why do my econ professors argue for capitalism? Sure, I've had liberal professors (my writing and the one for nat. am. culture last semester), but unless you're extremely conservative, I doubt you would find the current CU a liberal socialist shithole. And before you confuse me with an ardent liberal, I'm middle of the road, leaning to the left a little.And I have been reading this thread, thank you very much. I just don't recall you making any statements as to the state of mind of the shooters in school shootings.[abe]
so you mentioned fluoxetine in message 45. the only post where you talk about the state of mind of school shootings. The quote is an excerpt of a study done on somebody on the drug but not involved in any shootings or a copycat. It does not mention whether any school shooters were on fluoxetine (nor do you, for that matter. you just suggest the possibility. up to you, now, to determine that). The other times you mentioned the state of mind of gun-owners in general is to say that you all are safer than we think. I don't see how that equals inquiring about the state of mind of school shooters more than once.
[/abe]Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

so what's wrong with a multi-pronged attack? the problems needing to be fixed to make guns no longer a concern will take some time to fix. why not limit the guns while fixing the root problem?(and yeah, you're saying that wackos shouldn't get guns. But as others have said on this board--the columbine killers didn't own any of their own guns. wackos still got guns)

actually, in a way, they are rights. As far as I'm aware, the US protects the right to own property (even if it's not directly stated in the constitution).You have the right to own property. Cars, houses, computers, etc are property. Crash actually answered that. It's call reducto ad absurdum. Which is not a fallacy. Special pleading though, is.And I love how you practically imported your PNT into this post.and as a history aside: A lot of those hesitant about the revolution were actually either neutral or pro-British.

so unless I'm mistaken, you're for allowing arms that are necessary for a free state, right?based off of this: So does this mean you're for restricting those that are not necessary? I'm going to guess yes, since you want to restrict nukes since they are not necessary for the security of a free state.By the same argument, air guns should be disallowed--they are not necessary for the security of a free state and don't stand a chance against a real gun.For that matter, handguns should be disallowed, because they are not necessary to the security of a free state. An AK-47 is much more effective at securing a free state than a handgun. Tell me which would win? A rifle or a handgun? Why are wars fought predominantly with rifles?So I guess handguns can be safely thrown away.So the point, then, is that you really wouldn't have a problem with banning bottle rockets because they aren't necessary for the security of a free state (and thus handguns, because the same is true) (and both are based on your argument against people having nukes).Is that really your position?

you know, blanket statements are dangerous. Jar shoots his guns at shooting ranges. He is not using them for murder. Statement falsified.Lynyrd Skynyrd--Saturday Night Special
"Two feets they come a creepin'
Like a black cat do
And two bodies are lyin' naked
Creeper think he got nothin' to lose
So he creeps into this house, yeah
And unlocks the door
And while a man reaching for his trousers
Shoots him full of .38 holes(Chorus)
Its a Saturday night special
Got a barrel that's blue and cold
Ain't no good for nothin'
But put a man six feet in a holeBig Jim's been drinkin' whiskey
And playing poker on a losin' night
Pretty soon, Big Jim starts a thinkin'
Somebody been cheatin' and lyin'
So Big Jim commences to fightin'
I wouldn't tell you no lie
And Big Jim done grab his pistol
Shot his friend right between the eyes(Chorus)Hand guns are made for killin'
Ain't no good for nothin' else
And if you like your whiskey
You might even shoot yourself
So why don't we dump 'em people
To the bottom of the sea
Before some fool come around here
Wanna shoot either you or me"In the bolded section, is this man's purpose murder? No.Edited by kuresu, : added lyrics from a good song

you made the statement: that implies that guns are used solely for murder.I think you're just mad I caught your flaw. I have no need to retract when you wrote your statement badly. (hint--it's that "only" bit that shot you in the foot).your statements in this post are much more logical and clear.ABE: THe focus of that song is on handguns, not guns in general. And it was a way to show you that guns are used in cases where the intent is not murder--again, your statement I quoted was badly worded, so the logic was bad. You fixed your logic in the post I'm now replying to.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

no. no. no. not weapons in general. nuggin never asserted that weapons are solely designed to kill humans.what he did claim was that guns specifically (especially the likes of handguns) are meant for killing (and killing other humans specifically).To claim he made the general statement that the only point of weapons was to kill other humans is to present his argument falsely.