[achtung]

Trust me on this, knives and guns are dangerous.

Guns in the US kill more people by mistake than they do on purpose.

Citation please.

[castor]

Trust me on this, knives and guns are dangerous.

Guns in the US kill more people by mistake than they do on purpose.

You obviously arn't very bright, are you. Who pulls the trigger? the gun doesn't fire itself.

Sure, but anyone can kill a man with one shot. Not so many with one punch.
The problem: people can shoot faster than they can think.

[karajorma]

You obviously arn't very bright, are you.

Says the man who just got himself monkeyed for the day for flaming.

[Mars]

Trust me on this, knives and guns are dangerous.

Guns in the US kill more people by mistake than they do on purpose.

Citation please.

I'm sorry you are correct, suicides are the leading form of firearm death in the US, followed by homicides, accidental makes up a relatively small proportion.

 I have had a couple of bad experiences with firearms I've never really gotten over, and I tend to have very muddled and outrageous opinions about them that mean nothing at all. I apologize. I posted in a topic I really shouldn't have touched.

Trust me on this, knives and guns are dangerous.

Guns in the US kill more people by mistake than they do on purpose.

You obviously arn't very bright, are you. Who pulls the trigger? the gun doesn't fire itself.

However, I see no reason why a personal attack was necessary. And it's "aren't" not "arn't"

[Mika]

...and then you have some societies where carrying a rifle is a must. I recall all students going to Svalbard are actually required to carry a gun rifle and it is mandatory to participate in the gun training (that's the first course in the University). Guns Rifles are left on stands in the University when attending to lectures. Here, I'm not sure if that is really a University or actually a research station.

Then again when you only have some 3000 people problems probably never get that big you couldn't get out of them by talking. Small communities are not that vulnerable to gun crime.

One could see parallels between ban of carrying knives & swords (& puukkoja) in public and banning guns. If someone is really interested in here, he could check out the statistics of those times when that ban was enforced.

On the other hand some US people are correct: guns and idiots don't mix (well). But it is also a good point that the US Army itself is bordering the line of unconstitutional, US militia was supposed to be the answer for foreign invasion. This would be worth of another thread, like "Is US constitution timeless or does it really depend on the time it was enforced?" My guts tell me that this discussion will never happen here, simply because it is too difficult topic.

Killing people by hand, well, it depends: sometimes it could be ridiculously easy if person doesn't protect himself properly, sometimes not. But it definetely needs more work than killing a person with a gun (accidentally). Knowledge of human anatomy is required if that is to happen, other than getting lucky I guess (bad luck if you are a bouncer).

I would never run away from my home if someone is about to break in. Reason being that it makes a psychological statement that criminal has to work for it, when he sees me one meter away handling some really sharp thing, or some other pleasingly bone-crushing object. There are apartments you cannot run away from, front door being the only accessible door.

Bear in mind there are different kinds of criminals also, those who actually have some old-school ethics behind them (minority) and those who don't. Those who actually have it don't break in the houses where people are sleeping; they tend to steal material goods, rather than lives. But I was also taught in the old-school way, thinking that home is the safe place where no-one should be able to get in without my permission.

I'm not sure of the killing side of the people either. What is meant by that research actually? Is it that most of the soldiers couldn't pull the trigger when they saw the enemy soldier, or that they didn't have good enough reason for it? Some older books say that if you have a moral upper hand, killing can be more easily justified. I tend to think all people have that dark side (especially men) but society is quite effective in suppressing it, so it is channeled to somewhere else. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it causes problems when you are confronted by an individual who doesn't really care about the society.

One interesting trial would be to change the law in a way that killing or murder would get extra-ordinarily heavy penalties (worst being death, only in absolute confidence of actual happenings) and simply stealing from home would net less jail time, especially if there isn't violence involved. Then they say that criminals working in the economy aren't criminals in the real sense of the word; it's more of a question whose fortune is gathered with less law-abiding means.

F*cktoolongpostnoonesgonnareadit

Mika

[BengalTiger]

"Student fails exam and heavily injures the teacher and 3 students with an axe"
-That happened a couple years ago in Poland (I doubt I'd find a source, but I remember it). If you have a 'reason', you'll take the most dangerous object you could find, no matter if that object is a gun or a kitchen knife, and you will be a deadly weapon.

The problem is if the victim has a way to defend himself/herself, and a gun ban certainly doesn't help law abiding citizens. It does help the bad guys, because they have a safer job, whether it's robbing people on the street, breaking into houses, stealing cars, raping or any other criminal activity.

[Snail]

The best thing is to just get lots of police officers out there with guns. In Singapore, the first thing you see at the airport is a load of police officers carrying assault rifles. And it's relatively safe here because of that.

[BengalTiger]

I think it's common for airports to have cops with (sometimes) big guns everywhere.

It's just that they can't be on every corner, contrary to criminals and their victims.

[Nuke]

why does every school shooting thread disintegrate into a political debate over the 2nd amendment? its sorta sucks to see the same **** discussed every time some mental reject decides to go berserk and kill people.

[karajorma]

Because the 2nd Amendment is why you have so many of them. That and the fact that unlike the Swiss or Canadians, Americans obviously can't be trusted with guns.

[Grizzly]

The best thing is to just get lots of police officers out there with guns. In Singapore, the first thing you see at the airport is a load of police officers carrying assault rifles. And it's relatively safe here because of that.

If I see an army of police officers with G36C's at Schiphol, it doesn't really help in letting me feel safe, although it is supposed to be terrorist prevention, I always get the feeling that I am going to be shot when I say some laws should be changed...

What I keep thinking is: Why would someone go to school, pull out a gun, and then randomly shoot people? It ain't a faster way to get a girlfriend. It ain't get you money, it ain't helps in the balance of the world, etc.

[Snail]

If I see an army of police officers with G36C's at Schiphol, it doesn't really help in letting me feel safe, although it is supposed to be terrorist prevention, I always get the feeling that I am going to be shot when I say some laws should be changed...

Well, they weren't carrying G36C's, I think they were carrying either G3s or MP-5s (which isn't an Assault Rifle anyway). But your point still stands.

What I keep thinking is: Why would someone go to school, pull out a gun, and then randomly shoot people? It ain't a faster way to get a girlfriend. It ain't get you money, it ain't helps in the balance of the world, etc.

The same reason people commit suicide. They're either sick of life, want to try something different (!) or just think it'd be fun. The only difference is, they want to do something big and bring a few people down with them when they commit suicide.

[BloodEagle]

Because the 2nd Amendment is why you have so many of them. That and the fact that unlike the Swiss or Canadians, Americans obviously can't be trusted with guns.

I find that insulting. Furthermore, I demand that you monkey yourself. 

[karajorma]

I'm from the UK so you don't have a leg to stand on. We obviously don't trust ourselves with guns so we banned them.

[BloodEagle]

We obviously don't trust ourselves with guns so we banned them.

 

[Hellstryker]

thecooki3m0nster (6:37:24 PM): of course, americans are petty hair savages that live in rocks and live in a constant state of tribal warfare.
thecooki3m0nster (6:37:42 PM): And the Canadians and Swiss are like imperial gods that sip tea at their coffee shops in peace and harmony

[BengalTiger]

What I keep thinking is: Why would someone go to school, pull out a gun, and then randomly shoot people? It ain't a faster way to get a girlfriend. It ain't get you money, it ain't helps in the balance of the world, etc.

Why school?
Because it's gun free. You are the god, the superior being, and no one's there who could offer any resistance. You can do whatever the hell you want. (read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekka-Eric_Auvinen#The_perpetrator , quote from Auvinen himself: "I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection.")

Why pull out a gun?
Because the axe is less spectacular and requires more effort to kill someone. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Ann_Spencer , "It was just like shooting ducks in a pond" and "[The children] looked like a herd of cows standing around; it was really easy pickings.")

Why randomly shoot people?
To have fun deciding who lives and who dies. (read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Harris_and_Dylan_Klebold#Motivations , quote from there: "On the day of the massacre, Harris wore a white t-shirt with the words "NATURAL SELECTION" printed in black.", also the quote from Auvinen fits here just nice too)

P.S.

Ever see a psycho go to a police station, gun shop, airport or gun show and start shooting?
And why not?
Because he wouldn't be the almighty with 50 other people who have guns within reach and know how to use them a lot better than he/she does.

Why do they usually commit suicide at the end of their killing spree?
Because the cops surrounded the building and he ain't the most powerful anymore.

Sometimes to understand a psycho you have to look at the problem from a totally different perspective (read: totally crazy) than you usually do, and it starts making sense (even though it sounds nuts, but hey, we are discussing the motives of total whackjobs, stranger than The Joker in "Dark Knight", aren't we?).

[castor]

Why school?
Because it's gun free. You are the god, the superior being, and no one's there who could offer any resistance

Or because the guy had been bullied there for years? The place associated with hardship of some sorts.

Why do they usually commit suicide at the end of their killing spree?
Because the cops surrounded the building and he ain't the most powerful anymore.

Or because they had decided on it long before going in.

[NGTM-1R]

Ever see a psycho go to a police station, gun shop, airport or gun show and start shooting?

Uh, yeah, it's been known to happen. There was a rash of incidents where people walked into police stations and started shooting four or five years ago. (Perversely, a few of them lived.) I can't recall any specific occurances for airports but have a nagging feeling it's been attempted.

[Nuke]

Because the 2nd Amendment is why you have so many of them. That and the fact that unlike the Swiss or Canadians, Americans obviously can't be trusted with guns.

the second amendment merely makes their berserk rampage more efficient, so they don't have to stab people with an ice pick really fast. the real problem perhaps is untreated mental illness and possibly a lack of discipline.