Learn
October 10, 2007A 14-year-old gunman shot students and teachers at a Cleveland high school, wounding four, and was then killed, the mayor told CNN affiliates WOIO and WKYC.
I blame Marylin Manson, legalised abortion, and Saddam Hussein for this.
Seriously now, sad stuff indeed. I guess those morons over there on the other side of the pond never learn. I said it a million times, and will keep on saying it: there is no reason whatsoever for civilians to be carrying guns in a civilised society. When are you Americans going to get the goddamn message? 300 Million people + 200 million guns [1, 2] = a whole lot of dead people. It’s that simple.
Guns are ultimately to be used in opposition to an outside invading force (be it by governments or crazed intruders) or when our own government becomes authoritarian.
...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...
Never mind that it’s in the Constitution and would be crazy-hard to change. Would you like me to point out all the people killed by drunk driving or drug over dose and then say “OMG Netherlands is full drug addicts and drunks let’s ban all drugs and alcohol !1!? ”
I don’t care what you do as long as you don’t force me to partake. I don’t own a gun and I don’t drink, but it’s fine if you do either. You go your way, and I’ll go mine. You do not know what’s best for me and I don’t know what’s best for you. The government is not a babysitter, nor our parents. In a free society sometimes people abuse the rights they’re given, and nothing will change that. In a free society they’ll be gun crime, drunk driving, and drug overdoses. They’ll also be people stopping a murder with a gun, and responsible drinkers, and responsible drug use. That’s how it works.
Comment by mikesum32 — October 10, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
In a free society they’ll be gun crime, drunk driving, and drug overdoses.
Yes. And over here, percentagewise, every possible crime figure is much, much, much lower than in the US.
So I guess our system just works a little better.
Comment by Administrator — October 10, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
Maybe your country is smaller and more homogeneous. Perhaps a comparison to an equal size chunk of the US might be more fair ?
But you do admit there is crime ? So then we have to ban everything ! Let’s change all your laws and your constitution too ! It’s for the good of civilized society ! If just one baby is saved from the hands of crack head, it’ll be worth it !
That’s what you sound like. I thought you’d be a little less authoritarian.
Comment by mikesum32 — October 10, 2007 @ 9:14 pm
But you do admit there is crime ? So then we have to ban everything ! Let’s change all your laws and your constitution too ! It’s for the good of civilized society ! If just one baby is saved from the hands of crack head, it’ll be worth it !
That’s what you sound like. I thought you’d be a little less authoritarian.
Don’t act like an idiot. Guns serve one purpose: killing people. And since killing people is illegal in this country, guns are not needed for civilians. As simple as that.
Our laws have lead to really, really low crime rates. It seems we have struck a nice balance. Could be better, seeing some Scandinavian countries have even lower figures, but we’ll get there.
Comment by Administrator — October 10, 2007 @ 9:21 pm
“Guns are ultimately to be used in opposition to an outside invading force (be it by governments or crazed intruders) or when our own government becomes authoritarian”
Obviously, that’s exactly what’s happening in Newark NJ :)
This worked 200 years ago, it is totally obsolete now. Do you really believe you can fight the gov?! You discard the power of propaganda, nobody will fight the gov because the majority will be on its side by that time. As for the “invading force” there’s nothing to comment, really, it is beyond absurd.
Comment by Stefan — October 11, 2007 @ 11:54 am
So the old saying goes:
“If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have them.”
There are already laws preventing this particular person from doing everything he did. Laws don’t stop violence; only people can.
Comment by Shawn — October 11, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
Admiral Yamamoto: “You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”
Comment by mikesum32 — October 11, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/11/student.arsenal/index.html
Q.E.D.
Comment by Stefan — October 11, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
In America, where 33 states now permit law-abiding residents to carry concealed handguns for their own protection, the inverse relationship between gun crime and gun ownership is clear. Yale Law School scholar John Lott analyzed 18 years of crime data from all 3,054 US counties, and discovered that nothing was more decisive in lowering violent crime rates than the passage of “shall-issue” or “right-to-carry” gun laws. In the biggest counties, those with populations of 200,000 or more, concealed-carry laws led to an average drop in murder rates of more than 13 percent.
Comment by Anonymous Coward — October 13, 2007 @ 7:41 pm
Mikesum, almost all of those were fake,
dumbass.Note from admin: I’m the only one using nasty words around here to designate other people. Ok?
Comment by TheDude — October 13, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
I would agree, but only if all the police were not allowed to carry guns (remember THEY ARE CIVILIANS TOO!). Not like it would actually happen anytime soon, seeing as they get automatic weapons, tanks and bazookas, full body armor, blackhawk helos!! etc. and mind you this is mil grade straight from the G.
Still believe we live in a free society, do you? Let me go ask the kid who was tortured for not having his school ID on him (tazed repeatedly while being told to stand up), I doubt he thinks so. Nothing was done to that bassturd, nary a reprimand - oh no, he was in fact proclaimed to be justified in his torturous methods.
Ever stop to ask, why did noone help him? So what has become of our society when onlookers do just that - look? Noone lifted one bloody finger to stop that injustice, and what do you think that says about the current populous?
Is it the oppressors that become vilified, in this - the current state of affairs, or is it us - the people - who vilify ourselves through our own inaction?
That is the real question. BTW, I don’t suppose you’ve ever stopped to ask yourself why it is that 60 years ago children weren’t mowing down people in their schools. You really think guns were so ‘well kept’ in the household back then? So why is it that little Billy didn’t grab ole Pa’s shotgun from the cabinet and go a-huntin?
The more force (control) you exert on a thing, the more force (backlash) you will _eventually_ recur. I blame the “soccer mom” mentality.
Do you remember how you played as a child, with other children? “So what do you want to do?” [discussion, argument, resolution, action] Those were the basic steps that usually occurred, that _should_ occur. What we have today is chaos. Put simply, they don’t know how to think for themselves.
By in large, school systems around the world no longer teach a person how to THINK - they teach how to remember. There is a very large difference between the two, and the most common misconception of this is that knowledge equals intelligence. WRONG, knowledge equals power - the ability to think and to comprehend, how to UNDERSTAND is intelligence.
When you take away a person’s ability to reason, to comprehend and understand - their INTELLIGENCE, all they can _do_ is remember (the act of recollection). So what use is a person who’s only power is that of recollection?
Their only use is that of a drone. A SLAVE. So teach how to learn, teach how to think - don’t only teach how to remember…
Comment by root — October 13, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
You’ve just identified one of many jaw-dropping stupidities of the US. We’re currently going through an “idiocracy” stage that will cement out 2nd class status for the rest of the 21st century. It’s really sad. I was born in the US, and it used to be a cool place. Now I hate this country and would give anything if I had the money to leave.
Oh wait, our USDollar is worth only half what it was five years ago. So that’s not happening either!
Comment by Zaine Ridling — October 14, 2007 @ 4:49 am
Why would banning guns lower crime. Killing is illegal. Obviously if someone is going to kill someone they don’t care about the law, and aren’t going to care if guns are illegal. They aren’t going to say: “oh crap, I cant use a gun to kill my wife because guns are illegal”. Just like illegal drugs, and with prohibition, people who want it would find a way. Your just adding illegal gun trade to the already popular illegal drug trade.
Comment by computrius — October 14, 2007 @ 5:26 am
Killing is not illegal. Murder is illegal.
Comment by Russell Jackson — October 14, 2007 @ 6:34 am
Bingo! We Americans love misinterpreting our 2nd amendment to mean that it’s our God-given right to carry guns of all shapes and sizes and under any conditions, as opposed to only carrying them in a “well-regulated militia”. We regulate automobiles which unintentionally kill 35,000 a year in the US. Why not have better regulation of firearms which intentionally kill something like 13,000 a year in the U.S?
Comment by niiler — October 14, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
You apparently trust the government more than the average American. We know that governments tend toward corruption with time, so we don’t want the government controlling weapons.
Our founding fathers understood this very well. They put in place a system of checks and balances between government branches and a requirement that the right to keep and bear arms not be infringed.
There are many, many great things about America to be proud of, but there also many sad things. One sad thing is that in spite of the constitution, there are laws that infringe the right to bear arms. A larger one is the rejection of God in public discourse. Godlessness give no reason to not murder people.
Comment by Ken Jackson — October 14, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
American was started by armed citizens and we’re still here. Large cities with social problems think banning guns will fix things and all it does is mask it because the number of murders may go down or they can blame their violence problem on the guns from the next state over that doesn’t ban guns. A good example of this is Washington DC blaming its problems on the bordering (and much safer) gun friendly state of Virginia. I think its moral cowardice of these big cities to blame their problems on guns, personally.
There’s several European countries that have more liberal gun laws than most of the US. Why don’t we hear about them? They don’t have the societal problems the large crime ridden cities in the US (and the UK) do.
niier, banning a certain type of gun won’t do anything. If you were actually informed as to the real statistics and laws, you wouldn’t be posting that drivel.
Comment by TheDude — October 14, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
The American Police forces should stop shooting the offenders. If someone wants to ‘go out in a blaze of glory’ then shooting up a school must be a simple way of doing so. If the people who are thinking about doing this know that they are likely to spend at least 3-4 years in prison, then get electrocuted, the prospect will be far less appealing.
Comment by Stephen Stagg — October 17, 2007 @ 10:45 pm