Official Everybody Edits Forums

MIHB

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

I have absolutely no idea why we need anything related to guns in a 'civilized' society. Countries without guns have little risk from these stupid killing tools. Since it's obvious guns are fueling thousands of deaths, why not remove them.

Frankly, this is a much, much, much more complex argument than I can reasonably address here.   As long as you aren't arguing to eliminate guns based on a single school shooting, I have no qualms with you having those beliefs, even if I do not agree with them.

Tako

Member

From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 6,663

Website

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

The fact that the guy shooting us is more surprising doesn't make it more important.

Now I see what you're saying here.

I don't think school shootings are solely about being "more surprising". While shock-value is the immediate reason why people treat this as a more important problem, there is another more logical reason that should be in the back of their head.

Domestic safety is the most important aspect to government. The places that matter, such as schools, hospitals and churches should definitely be higher up on the prioritization ladder than subway stations, streets, and rest stops. Therefore, when a noticeable amount of people die in one of the former places, we should consider it more of a problem than if it happened in the latter places.

The general public is correct in placing these shootings at utmost importance, but for the wrong reasons. I agree with you there. But I would never say that this is an unimportant event or that this is an unimportant problem.

--

Also, we can definitely stop with the name-calling.

---

Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

Different55

Forum Admin

Joined: 2015-02-07

Posts: 16,575

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

^No thanks, I like having free meat, and without guns it's kinda hard to get. With guns it's pretty much just *wait for food* *see food* *PEW PEW PEW* *eat well*, with other weapons it's a lot harder.

I really don't think gun-free zones would work. Someone's going to sneak one in and shoot people just to send a big "SCREW YOU" to whoever's in charge.

---

"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto

Echo!

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

Why did you give me a wall of text?

Are you too lazy to read something that disagrees with you?

That's a lovely contradiction you have there. Below I am pointing out key features of your post, and you're commenting on them, then making the assumption I didn't read it. Weird.

Why are you comparing grapes with bananas? 20 is a large number of this instance, considering it can be reduced fairly easily

What, are you insane?

Not really.

Do you have any idea how money works or the cost of things?   I dare you right now to explain how those deaths could have been "easily" reduced, without requiring large-scale monetary expenditures or substantial cultural shifts.   Don't hand-wave it away and say its easy.   If its easy, explain it, or you have nothing.

What deaths are you talking about, I hope you have not jumped off the subject again, I am talking about the subject. Dare accepted, Gun laws. I guess everyone thinks that won't work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politi … ed_Kingdom

I am very aware of the death rate, actually. As I said, lawful death is as near as impossible to reduce, though unlawful death is not. You're looking at the number in the completely wrong perspective. I am sorry for the loss of your grandfather.

Are you sorry for the 20 people who died while reading this?   Or any of the other 153,000 people who are going to die today?

I have no information of these people who died or how it occurred so I can not feel much for them, unfortunately. Once again, we are talking about homicide, and not parasitic diseases, old age, cancer ect, These come under a whole new discussing. it will soon be 1% of people a year die because of homicide, it may not sound alot. Though it is, due to the nature of it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … icide_rate) The nature of it, is why I am discussing it, tragic, it is important that it is more controlled so more people do not have to face being unlawfully killed.

We cannot possibly mourn the loss of every single person who dies.   Of those 153,000 people who die today, a large number will be children the same age as those who died in Connecticut.   Are you mourning them too?   More importantly, would you mourn them if I hadn't mentioned them?   Did you mourn the children who died yesterday?   Or the ones who died every other day?

What is so hard to understand that, we are talking about unlawful deaths? Where is your link that a good percentage of them are unlawful?

You're trying to shame me for not thinking this is important.   Did you have any idea about the other children who died in school shootings, as listed in treejoe's wikipedia link?

Yes that's exactly my point.

My standards for whether or not something is important do not boil down to "is it on my TV screen".   If you were extremely concerned about school shootings before this tragedy played out, I can understand your stance even if I don't agree with it.   If in fact your concerned with it because it showed up in the news recently, you're a lemming.

I often read about many shootings actually, though there is more of a reason to discuss the subject when it is viral.

you're being childish.

Treejoe had the decency to back up his argument with statistics to show that this particular incident may actually be part of an underlying trend, which actually leads me to think it might indeed be somewhat important.   Whereas I still think you're just a fool.   Take the lesson.

What, Treejoes link just backs me up even more. You really want other people to provide a source to alter you opinion? Do it your self.

treejoe4

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

^No thanks, I like having free meat, and without guns it's kinda hard to get. With guns it's pretty much just *wait for food* *see food* *PEW PEW PEW* *eat well*, with other weapons it's a lot harder.

I really don't think gun-free zones would work. Someone's going to sneak one in and shoot people just to send a big "SCREW YOU" to whoever's in charge.

If someone is willing to shoot people to protect gun laws, it would just create more gun laws.

Last edited by treejoe4 (Dec 17 2012 3:35:41 pm)

Different55

Forum Admin

Joined: 2015-02-07

Posts: 16,575

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

^No thanks, I like having free meat, and without guns it's kinda hard to get. With guns it's pretty much just *wait for food* *see food* *PEW PEW PEW* *eat well*, with other weapons it's a lot harder.

I really don't think gun-free zones would work. Someone's going to sneak one in and shoot people just to send a big "SCREW YOU" to whoever's in charge.

If someone is willing to shoot people to protect gun laws, it would just create more gun laws.

No, they're not protecting gun laws, they're saying "screw you and your gun laws" and shooting people because they think nobody can stop them.

---

"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto

MIHB

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

What, Treejoes link just backs me up even more. You really want other people to provide a source to alter you opinion? Do it your self.

So, I'm supposed to alter my opinion on my own?   No.   You alter YOURS.

(See how silly that is?)

What is your argument, anyway?   You jumped in to say that 20 is more than a few.   It is not, and you have yet to really give any sort of decent argument why it is.   Treejoe's argument is not that 20 is a lot, his argument is that the issue affects more than 20, and gave evidence to support the argument that the issue affects more than 20, rather than saying OMG WHAT IF IT WAS YOUR KID YOU HEARTLESS JERK.

So, unless you want to actually make decent arguments, I'm done with you.

Domestic safety is the most important aspect to government. The places that matter, such as schools, hospitals and churches should definitely be higher up on the prioritization ladder than subway stations, streets, and rest stops. Therefore, when a noticeable amount of people die in one of the former places, we should consider it more of a problem than if it happened in the latter places.

The general public is correct in placing these shootings at utmost importance, but for the wrong reasons. I agree with you there. But I would never say that this is an unimportant event or that this is an unimportant problem.

I absolutely agree with you that domestic safety is an important component of government.   I don't think it is the most important, but the difference is not worth quibbling over.

However, you're going back to the fundamental problem: "noticeable".   When something noticeable happens, that does not make it important.   (Excepting wherein we change our behavior due to its noticeability, which is why it annoys me.   Those behavioral changes are usually overreactions.   The economic blowback and societal panic as a result of 9/11 was much, much worse than the event itself.)   What makes it important is if the underlying indicators suggest there is a major problem at hand.   In looking over the link treejoe posted with regards to school shootings, the school shootings listed are not even exhaustive; they appear to just be a sample.   There is no reason in looking at that list to believe that school shootings are notably on the rise, we simply don't have enough info.   (For example, look at the discussion of the 1990s.   The incidents listed in the 90s were just a sample, and in fact between 20 and 40 people died in school shootings every year.)

Is this a growing trend?   Maybe, but there isn't really enough evidence to say one way or another.   One horrible incident is not a trend, it is an outlier, and outliers happen every few years.

Last edited by MIHB (Dec 17 2012 4:08:36 pm)

Echo!

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

What, Treejoes link just backs me up even more. You really want other people to provide a source to alter you opinion? Do it your self.

So, I'm supposed to alter my opinion on my own?   No.   You alter YOURS.

(See how silly that is?)

What is your argument, anyway?   You jumped in to say that 20 is more than a few.   It is not, and you have yet to really give any sort of decent argument why it is.   Treejoe's argument is not that 20 is a lot, his argument is that the issue affects more than 20, and gave evidence to support the argument that the issue affects more than 20, rather than saying OMG WHAT IF IT WAS YOUR KID YOU HEARTLESS JERK.

So, unless you want to actually make decent arguments, I'm done with you.

There was never an argument, you was the one who just made the assumption this is an argument, and yet you can't find it? 20 is alot to be killed in one go, same location, same way.

Do you think people dying from illnesses, is the same as people being killed? There are so many reason to why people get ill, and in what way the get ill. Homicides happen because of peoples emotions, feeling, behaviour, at that time. You're extreme difficulty understand homicide, over illnesses.

MIHB

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

yadda

I think its pretty obvious you suffer from identifiable victim bias as well as the tendency to overestimate the importance of a small group while underestimating the importance of larger groups.   (That is a known effect too, although I forget the name).

Echo!

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

yadda

I think its pretty obvious you suffer from identifiable victim bias as well as the tendency to overestimate the importance of a small group while underestimating the importance of larger groups.   (That is a known effect too, although I forget the name).

Every time we try to discuss stuff, you put two different group together. No. End.

MIHB

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

yadda

I think its pretty obvious you suffer from identifiable victim bias as well as the tendency to overestimate the importance of a small group while underestimating the importance of larger groups.   (That is a known effect too, although I forget the name).

http://i.imm.io/Pv84.png

Every time we try to discuss stuff, you put two different group together. No. End.

Daily homicide rate in the US alone is about 40 people.   So, in one nasty incident of a sort that happens roughly every few years, we got half the homicides in a given day.   Spread it out over those years, and we have a death rate due to crazy gun-toting nutjob of .01 per day.   Across a school system of 55,000,000 students!

This is not a very interesting discussion.   20 people is a drop in the bucket, no matter how you slice it.

Last edited by MIHB (Dec 17 2012 5:05:30 pm)

Deetz

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

It may be a drop in the bucket, but it's like dropping red dye into it; people notice. In the scientific sense, it's of little significance, but in the psychological sense, it's very significant. That's my say.

Echo!

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

I think its pretty obvious you suffer from identifiable victim bias as well as the tendency to overestimate the importance of a small group while underestimating the importance of larger groups.   (That is a known effect too, although I forget the name).

http://i.imm.io/Pv84.png

Every time we try to discuss stuff, you put two different group together. No. End.

Daily homicide rate in the US alone is about 40 people.   So, in one nasty incident of a sort that happens roughly every few years, we got half the homicides in a given day.   Spread it out over those years, and we have a death rate due to crazy gun-toting nutjob of .01 per day.   Across a school system of 55,000,000 students!

This is not a very interesting discussion.   20 people is a drop in the bucket, no matter how you slice it.

See, 20 out of 40, is alot, but 20 out of 153,00 isn't alot, Thank you for understanding, finally. How many of them homicides are gun related? You see my point?

MIHB

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

http://i.imm.io/Pv84.png

Every time we try to discuss stuff, you put two different group together. No. End.

Daily homicide rate in the US alone is about 40 people.   So, in one nasty incident of a sort that happens roughly every few years, we got half the homicides in a given day.   Spread it out over those years, and we have a death rate due to crazy gun-toting nutjob of .01 per day.   Across a school system of 55,000,000 students!

This is not a very interesting discussion.   20 people is a drop in the bucket, no matter how you slice it.

See, 20 out of 40, is alot, but 20 out of 153,00 isn't alot, Thank you for understanding, finally. How many of them homicides are gun related? You see my point?

No.   What the hell are you arguing about?   20 out of 40 is an irrelevant statistic if that 20 only comes along once every few years.

Last edited by MIHB (Dec 17 2012 5:19:59 pm)

Deetz

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

Like I said, things like this shake up the public, but not nessesarially the extreme logicals. I take it you're one of the logical people?

Echo!

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

Daily homicide rate in the US alone is about 40 people.   So, in one nasty incident of a sort that happens roughly every few years, we got half the homicides in a given day.   Spread it out over those years, and we have a death rate due to crazy gun-toting nutjob of .01 per day.   Across a school system of 55,000,000 students!

This is not a very interesting discussion.   20 people is a drop in the bucket, no matter how you slice it.

See, 20 out of 40, is alot, but 20 out of 153,00 isn't alot, Thank you for understanding, finally. How many of them homicides are gun related? You see my point?

No.   What the hell are you arguing about?   20 out of 40 is an irrelevant statistic if that 20 only comes along once every few years.

There you go. You contradicted one of your earlier sub heated discussions.

Deetz

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

I just realized he just said "no" to your statement, then said the same thing

Shift

Guest

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

Damn, MIHB got to have all the fun owning face while I was away.

I think this warrants another topic generalizing domestic terrorism and its repercussions.

Like I said, things like this shake up the public, but not nessesarially the extreme logicals. I take it you're one of the logical people?

You make it sound like being logical is a bad thing...

Last edited by Shift (Dec 17 2012 8:01:44 pm)

Tako

Member

From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 6,663

Website

Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

[...]

[...]

I want to be perfectly clear; I've heard multiple things out of you: do you think that school shootings are a problem that should be fixed with government revenue? Or do you think we should ignore it until it becomes a bigger problem?

---

Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.