|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| comm wrote: |
| 12ax7 wrote: |
Trained and armed individuals, like that Zimmerman guy? No, you need to do something to lower crime rates further than they've already been dropping in the US (or so I've heard). Really, arming citizens? Recipe for disaster.
And any schmo can carry a concealed firearm? That's absurd. |
Remember that "police" are trained and armed citizens. Most are high-school educated and are far less accountable for mistakes than armed citizens of other job titles.
And your opinion on concealed weapons is pretty irrelevant compared to the opinion of the court, but I'm still looking forward to your practicable solutions. Are you in the "Constitutional amendment or bust" camp? |
In other words, you want more cops, or something similar to cops. Yes, a police state, that's exactly what you need to combat crime.
And to think the NRA argues that gun control infringes on freedom.
Sure, if a constitutional amendment is what you need. They obviously dropped the ball if they did indeed make that decision on concealed weapons. |
What a massive and obvious strawman you're putting up. Who the hell said anything about a police state??? A police state is what would be required to enforce the type of gun ban you are suggesting on a totally unwilling population. There would be thousands of shoot outs all over the country if gun seizures were ever attempted. An armed population, on the other hand, would dramatically reduce the need for police around the country.
As for you pretending to be some kind of expert on guns, give it a rest already. Your "credentials" are hardly impressive. You "come off" (as you like to say) as some kind of ex-military macho type who fantasizes about engaging in gun confiscation against the public, and your saying that the public shouldn't be allowed to be armed is truly the pinnacle of arrogance and hypocrisy. You're not any better or any more responsible than anyone else. You don't get to determine who should or shouldn't be allowed to have guns. Anyone can be trained - it doesn't take a navy seal to learn how to responsibly use a small pistol or rifle, or most other guns for that matter (it isn't rocket science, no pun intended). So get off your high horse already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
EDIT:
Do note that since concealed-carry handguns have been ruled as Constitutionally protected by the Second Amendment, a Constitutional amendment would be required to ban them. |
That is incorrect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Quote: |
| America has a serious problem with gun violence. It just does not compare to other countries. |
This is the wrong way to put it. You should say: America has a serious problem with organized crime and gang violence. And it does compare to other countries, like Mexico, Brazil, or Russia. Except that they are even worse and more dangerous places to live and have tighter gun control.
|
Yes, but organized crime and gang violence were not responsible for this latest tragedy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
| comm wrote: |
EDIT:
Do note that since concealed-carry handguns have been ruled as Constitutionally protected by the Second Amendment, a Constitutional amendment would be required to ban them. |
That is incorrect. |
My mistake. Though the D.C. ruling does specifically list handgun ownership and possession in one's home as being protected.
Fun to see that the NYC law basically guarantees that the wealthiest citizens are able to get concealed carry permits while the general population cannot.
| Privateer wrote: |
| Yes, but organized crime and gang violence were not responsible for this latest tragedy. |
Right, but neither was a rifle, high capacity magazine, unregistered weapons, or concealed weapons permits. Which means that, short of a Constitutional amendment, no one has suggested anything on this thread that would have prevented or influenced this tragedy in any way.
And that makes all of this anti-gun talk sound like a lot of knee-jerk hand wringing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| Which means that, short of a Constitutional amendment, no one has suggested anything on this thread that would have prevented or influenced this tragedy in any way. |
Counterfactuals are always hard, but my suggestion to limit gun ownership to militia members in good standing (which is a licensing requirement, not a categoric weapons ban) may possibly have stopped this depending on how it was implemented.
| comm wrote: |
| And that makes all of this anti-gun talk sound like a lot of knee-jerk hand wringing. |
Hey, those are my rhetorical pejoratives! Get your own buzz words. How about cockamamie? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Quote: |
| America has a serious problem with gun violence. It just does not compare to other countries. |
This is the wrong way to put it. You should say: America has a serious problem with organized crime and gang violence. And it does compare to other countries, like Mexico, Brazil, or Russia. Except that they are even worse and more dangerous places to live and have tighter gun control.
|
Yes, but organized crime and gang violence were not responsible for this latest tragedy. |
Yes, but this latest tragedy was a relatively very rare occurrence. It was a despicable act that has unfortunately garnished a lot of attention in the media (which is exploited by shameless fanatics like ghostrider), but to be totally realistic about it, it can hardly be said that it's a "serious problem in the United States". I think more people year die from bee stings than in mass shootings like these. Gang-related homicide accounts for much higher body counts (although the murder of innocent children is certainly more abhorrent when it does occur, fortunately it isn't nearly as often). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, sickening details that you shameless exploit to further your propaganda aims, and yet none of which even remotely show that high capacity magazines were to blame. It takes like 3 seconds to change a regular hand gun clip (holding 10 or less rounds). Hell, he could've just gone in with a duffle bag full of loaded guns and smaller clips and had the exact same results. So quite spreading more of your lies and exploiting the death of children to advance your anti-constitutional, pro "victim disarmament" agenda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
So what's your take on the NRA exploiting this to get guns in
schools? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
Yes, sickening details that you shameless exploit to further your propaganda aims, and yet none of which even remotely show that high capacity magazines were to blame. It takes like 3 seconds to change a regular hand gun clip (holding 10 or less rounds). Hell, he could've just gone in with a duffle bag full of loaded guns and smaller clips and had the exact same results. So quite spreading more of your lies and exploiting the death of children to advance your anti-constitutional, pro "victim disarmament" agenda. |
3 seconds? In a situation like that seconds matter. An adult male is capable of covering a distance of at least 40 feet in 3 seconds. In the 2011 Tuscon shooting, the killer was tackled to the ground when he ran out of ammo and attempted to reload. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
| 3 seconds? In a situation like that seconds matter. An adult male is capable of covering a distance of at least 40 feet in 3 seconds. |
This is asinine. Who was going to tackle this killer, hm? A small child? Just admit that your point is bunk. He could have carried a dozen smaller clips, or even 3-4 pistols for that matter. We can get as hypothetical as you like, but nowhere in that scenario do you get a good chance to tackle him. Nowhere in that scenario are you even looking at what the killer is doing, since you're hiding or trying to get away (since you have no means of defending yourself).
The only practical way to stop a killer like this is to shoot him. The odds of successfully tackling him are miniscule, and require extreme luck. If several of the teachers had been armed they could have either shot him, or forced him to take cover (thus stopping him from killing). It is 100% obvious that firearms are empowering, and that being disarmed leads to ridiculously high death counts as the killer takes his time.
All of ghostriders propositions are to turn us into defenseless victims to be more easily murdered. Put plainly, his agenda is one of victim disarmament, and nothing more.
| Quote: |
| In the 2011 Tuscon shooting, the killer was tackled to the ground when he ran out of ammo and attempted to reload. |
That shooter was not in a school setting, and anyway he was also using a handgun with 33 round clips! That's a standard high capacity magazine, the exact same as the one used by the Sandy Hook shooter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
So what's your take on the NRA exploiting this to get guns in
schools? |
I don't really care about the NRA that much. I think their suggestions make a lot more sense than banning guns for everyone (which is the most ridiculous and irresponsible idea ever).
I think a better idea than armed guards would simply be to train and arm all teachers who are willing and able. I bet most of them would be. And if we can't trust teachers with guns, then who can we trust? While not a perfect solution (no such solution exists) it would make schools safer than any other suggestion you or anyone else in the gun-grabber crowd has made on here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Double post
Last edited by Leon on Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/24/us/new-york-firefighters-shooting/index.html
We already have our next mass shooting. Guy shot 4 firemen, killed two, while they were responding to a fire. Because of the shooter they couldn't stop the fire so 7 houses were destroyed. The guy set his own house on fire to ambush the firemen. Earlier the guy had been convicted of killing his grandma. The guy was a felon, yet had several guns. It seems like this year has been especially bad for this sort of thing with the theater shooting, sheikh temple shooting, school shooting, mall shooting, and this. It's almost as if its just becoming a part if our culture, and the outrage and tragedy has become diminished as compared to what it was back during columbine.
I read an account of the Chinese school attack. There was a guard, he was playing video games. The students tried to fight him off with broom sticks, yet afterwards the Chinese talked about how they were thankful that there were no guns, rather than talk of arming the teachers. They are having similar debates about school safety, and guards, so that's interesting. I wouldn't want to be that guard from that school.
One thing that strikes me as an idea that everyone could get behind is making people responsible for giving guns to people who shouldn't have them. I doubt even visitorq believes that a man who killed his grandmother should have easy access to guns. Any if these shooters couldn't get their own guns, so if we hold the people more responsible that give them to them it might help set a precedent. There is always going to be gun trafficking, but it could help stop people from buying it for friends, or if they live in the same house as someone with issues it could encourage them to keep them more securely. I'm curious about what visitorq and comm think about punishing people who give or sell guns to felons or other unstable people who can't get it on their own. I know the guy who sold the guns in columbine got time, but I wish it had been a bigger story to help discourage it from continuing to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/24/us/new-york-firefighters-shooting/index.html
We already have our next mass shooting. Guy shot 4 firemen, killed two, while they were responding to a fire. |
This was not a mass shooting. 4 people shot on the killer's own property does not a mass shooting make. It was also an ambush that was planned in advance, and there's a multitude of other conceivable ways he could have killed them besides guns. He was just a crazy guy engaging a senseless act of murder. Not much to say about it really, except that it's terrible.
| Quote: |
| I read an account of the Chinese school attack. There was a guard, he was playing video games. The students tried to fight him off with broom sticks, yet afterwards the Chinese talked about how they were thankful that there were no guns, rather than talk of arming the teachers. They are having similar debates about school safety, and guards, so that's interesting. I wouldn't want to be that guard from that school. |
You know there's something wrong with our culture when we are looking towards China as some sort of shining example for the future...
| Quote: |
| One thing that strikes me as an idea that everyone could get behind is making people responsible for giving guns to people who shouldn't have them. I doubt even visitorq believes that a man who killed his grandmother should have easy access to guns. |
I definitely don't think someone who killed his grandmother should be allowed to have guns. I think he should locked in prison for life. Problem solved. No need to punish the rest of society for his criminal acts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
