Shooting Amish People

[King Zarathu]

You mean *testosterone....

[vashti]

No, I don't.

[jurupa]

I will concede the car bit, but come on! Home made bombs? That requires planning. People won't be impulsively blowing up people with home made bombs, but they WILL be shooting impulsively.

Yes a home made bomb would take planing, but fire or burning people doesn't. For example a pissed off person could go to a gas station and light something on fire with a ligher or match real easy as a lot of gas stations sell such things.

[vashti]

Yes a home made bomb would take planing, but fire or burning people doesn't. For example a pissed off person could go to a gas station and light something on fire with a ligher or match real easy as a lot of gas stations sell such things.

No. i think that would require some forethought, too. I mean, what would you say: "Please come with me to buy gasoline so I can set you on fire"?

[Junket]

The most realistic thing in this case would be beatings, stabbings.

But lets consider reality.

Even though we have to some extent lax gun laws depending upon the state, most people don't have the permit to carry. So even when some whack job does come in with a gun and hold everybody up, rarely does anybody have a weapon on them to do anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does Texas has a law that they may carry, but not into restaurants or public places, so the firearm must stay in their car or truck, which is just as good as not having in the event somebody does decide to hold the place up.

Speaking of hold ups. I think hold ups would either stay the same in consistency or increase if guns were outright banned. I know that I wouldn't be comfortable holding up a little convenient shop, some of those guys carry guns too. Plus, when you walk into a bad neighborhood, does getting shot cross your mind? Yes. Does getting mugged or jumped cross your mind? Yes. Does getting raped cross your mind? Yes. Either way, those areas are gonna be best avoided, guns or not. I wouldn't feel confident struttin' into those areas simply because guns were banned, plus a gun ban wouldn't mean there wouldn't be guns in those areas...the situation would simply be best avoided. In that aspect, I really don't believe much would change.

[jurupa]

No. i think that would require some forethought, too. I mean, what would you say: "Please come with me to buy gasoline so I can set you on fire"?

I was more thinking along the lines of a pissed of dude buys gas for his car and looses it and starts to pour gas all over the place and then light the place on fire or if the propane gas tank is close by light that and you got your self a bomb. Impuse action, even tho there seems to have a plan when you look at the events that took place.

Take a look back at this shooting. The guy came in with no plan, but as the situation develope he made one on impuse.

[vashti]

Jurupa, my darling, which side are you arguing? For or against gun control?

[King Zarathu]

Jurupa, my darling, which side are you arguing? For or against gun control?

XD I know!

[jurupa]

Jurupa, my darling, which side are you arguing? For or against gun control?

Vashti, my sweety, I am for gun control, but not to the point to where it basically defeats the right to own a gun. Basically what we have now is okay by me as we have serial numbers on guns, and background checks. But I am sure you see what I am saying is take away something and people will find a way around it.

For example look at areas where schools teach abstinence and the teen pregency rate verus areas where schools teach ex ed. The primary reason is that as humans we are curious about things and when no one teaches us what we need to know we tend to go off on our own and end up doing stupid things. The same thing with guns. I bet if we did the same thing we did for sex ed less people would own hand guns. Becuase they would be less interested as most peoples curiousity would be taken care of thru education and not first hand experience.

Also most people that go on shootings like this have/had problems in their past. It being unstabled house holds, experiences that have changed who the person is (war is a good example of this), etc. So instead of going after what they use to unleash their problems, go where the problem is that makes the person to pick up a gun to shoot other people. I am not saying release all gun controls, as we still need them, but go after the people that are prone to picking up a gun and using it. We have more than enough data to see who are the most likely people to use guns that have problems of some kind, so why not use it.

[vashti]

So instead of going after what they use to unleash their problems, go where the problem is that makes the person to pick up a gun to shoot other people. I am not saying release all gun controls, as we still need them, but go after the people that are prone to picking up a gun and using it.

But isn't that essentially what we have now? (I am thinking of laws barring criminals access to guns.) Do you really think our current system is effective? How specifically would you improve it?

[jurupa]

But isn't that essentially what we have now? (I am thinking of laws barring criminals access to guns.) Do you really think our current system is effective?

I think the system could improve, but how much its hard to say tho.

How specifically would you improve it?

I would have in health classes in high school (I believe this is a required course, at least it was in my high school), educated teens on guns. Like how they work the various types of guns, why people use them etc. I would try and seek out unstabled house holds and emotionally unstabled people, but that would be way to difficult to carry out, and the only way to stop these type of people is to have them to do a psychological test so screen for them and deny them access. But then this would defeat the right to bear arms, and you get a Catch 22. Allow them to get a hand gun and they have the protentail to shoot and kill, but to better protect citizens from such a thing you have to deny them their right to bear arms.

[vashti]

Hahaha! Mandatory gun safety classes for ALL teens? ahahahhahaa! Maybe we can get the schools to replace calculus classes with gun safety!

As far as the psychological testing goes, people who are clever know how to fool the tests, so I don't think widespread testing would be helpful.

[jurupa]

Hahaha! Mandatory gun safety classes for ALL teens? ahahahhahaa! Maybe we can get the schools to replace calculus classes with gun safety!

As far as the psychological testing goes, people who are clever know how to fool the tests, so I don't think widespread testing would be helpful.

Most people that go on berserk shooting sprees tend to have IQ's not high enough to fool such tests. I mean how many geeks and people with high IQ's have you read about that have gone on shooting sprees of some kind?

[Gigabitch]

Most people that go on berserk shooting sprees tend to have IQ's not high enough to fool such tests. I mean how many geeks and people with high IQ's have you read about that have gone on shooting sprees of some kind?

No, they specialize in letter bombs.

[jurupa]

No, they specialize in letter bombs.

Really now? I thought the high IQ nut cases go for dirty nukes, planed out actions, ect. But then what I do I know, its not like I know how to make such things.