Originally posted by marwash22
that seems to be the way most people feel.I guess I'm weird because it wouldn't have been any less disgusting or heartbreaking to me if it were 40 year old adults who were the victims.
The easy answer would be "you're not a parent,so you don't have the 'must protect' instinct", but I don't necessarily think that is the correct all encompassing answer.
Originally posted by Mindship
It would be an interesting experiment in biological, technological and societal evolution, to see what (if anything) is selected for as the population whittles itself down.
I agree.
Originally posted by Robtard
http://25.media.tumblr.com/bcf3a9edb08df4d25f715a1c4efb64e5/tumblr_mf1fki5TTR1ri2mfro1_1280.jpg+
http://25.media.tumblr.com/d673aaf08740c931b5d75cbef4235bfa/tumblr_mf1ejo3Hgm1r2pghbo1_400.png
LolZ
Oh good God. I hope that dude gets a fat paycheck from Fox or CNN. He's going to be receiving death threats and hate mail within the hour.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You were getting angry and accusatory about the possible motives you though he might have.
I was? I thought I was wondering why he didn't try to stick it to the system by storming a police station? It seems to get more to the point, don't you think?
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What if his point was "education has turned our children into mindless slaves and by killing them they are set free"?
Could be...but since he had a student there, seems less likely than: he was just trying to stick it to a system he was extremely angry with.
Originally posted by Digi
...actually, even that equation isn't quite right. Because we're looking at this after the fact where something bad DID happen. So, like, 27 deaths vs. the potential risk of deputizing a teaching force in this school...the "giving them guns" argument wins handily. But let's take a particular county. You give each teacher a weapon and some training. At this point, it's not accident risk vs. 27 deaths, but accident risk vs. a potential shooting. And, much as these things seem more common, the chances of NOT facing an attack are far greater than of facing one.So accident risk vs. the easily < 1% chance of this happening (we'll say in a 10-year span for simplicity), at which point any single death as a result of teachers having guns is much more than enough to swing the argument in favor of not providing them.
It's not a locktight argument, but it's why there's debate on this subject.
Consider the following:
A handgun exists that only fires when the owner of the handgun is holding it correctly.
I can think of 2 technological methods that this could work and a 3rd which already exists (which I obviously did not think of).
Does that change the equation you had even a little?
Originally posted by marwash22
I guess I'm weird because it wouldn't have been any less disgusting or heartbreaking to me if it were 40 year old adults who were the victims.
Well...kids and animals (yes, I went there) are seen as more innocent and pure than 40 year old adults. Also, the kids have not gotten to live a life, yet. Most 40 year olds have experienced life with an adult mind. I must say that if given the choice between a complete 8 year old stranger and my own life, I'd logical chose the kid's life: I've lived quite a long time the kid should have a chance to at least live as long as I have. But I'm placing value on experience and knowledge that comes from that which is technically an extension of the ontological argument for the existence of God: to exist is better than not to exist. I'm just adding a time-frame in there: to exist longer is better than not to exist.
Edit - I think most people are thinking the same thing, but just not in those exact words, when they are saying that dead kids are worse than dead adults.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting
Originally posted by Robtard
Could very well be that this guy is certifiably insane and he did it because he thought God was speaking to him and telling him to. Who the hell knows right now.
NOTE: I understand many of you will look at my post with a "What the heck?" kid of look. Now that we've gotten that out of the way...
It could also very well be that this guy is demon-possessed to the toenails and he did it because Satan (or some other demon) posing as God was speaking to him and telling him to. Who the heck knows right now?
In the occult, the highest sacrifice one can make is a child. I'm not saying he was an occultist, but you don't have to be an occultist to be possessed. And nothing makes Satan happier than defiling innocence.
Originally posted by Digi
I agree.Oh good God. I hope that dude gets a fat paycheck from Fox or CNN. He's going to be receiving death threats and hate mail within the hour.
Heard it was his brother using his ID.
Anyway, why not just have an undercover, armed and trained "school marshal" (similar to an air marshal) in schools? I'm feeling that in any area where masses of civilians are common, there should be someone armed and trained who can at least out a stop to these things.
I know that the local police/city government would never be able to all the bases, but maybe if you let the parents, customers, etc foot some of the bill, you'd at least be able to pay for the salary of at least one trained/armed marshal.
In my country, every place has an armed security guard (usually a pistol or rifle) schools would havd a few, cinemas several and malls would have literally dozens and, to my memory, there has been zero incidence of school/mall/cinema/etc shooting like ever. Tho, I'm not using that as an indicator of anything.
Has there been ANY instance where a shooter went berzerk in an area where there was at least the immediatr risk of an armed response?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Connecticut Elementary School Shooting
Originally posted by Bat Dude
NOTE: I understand many of you will look at my post with a "What the heck?" kid of look. Now that we've gotten that out of the way...It could also very well be that this guy is demon-possessed to the toenails and he did it because Satan (or some other demon) posing as God was speaking to him and telling him to. Who the heck knows right now?
In the occult, the highest sacrifice one can make is a child. I'm not saying he was an occultist, but you don't have to be an occultist to be possessed. And nothing makes Satan happier than defiling innocence.
I'd drop that in the "certifiably insane" bucket too, but that's just me.
A better solution that giving teachers guns is for parents of children that attend schools to get together and hire security with their own money. If they truely care about the safety of their children.
Teachers can snap.
I wish I saw this much outrage over the kids we're killing with our forieng policy. But americans will care about the americans.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Consider the following:A handgun exists that only fires when the owner of the handgun is holding it correctly.
I can think of 2 technological methods that this could work and a 3rd which already exists (which I obviously did not think of).
Does that change the equation you had even a little?
Of course it does. It's a good point. And my "equation" wasn't perfect to begin with. It was essentially just a series of variable, for which we don't have exact values.
But it doesn't change the central debate. The point was: the instinctual tendency to believe that putting a gun in the teachers' hands is a good thing, is flawed. Or at least, it's only looking at the side that supports doing it without considering everything else. You're clever enough to realize this, but the way you presented the argument is the way MANY people present the argument, and it's not a fair assessment of the issue.
I don't really have a stance on gun control, much as this may seem that I'm advocating for more of it. I just dislike talking points that aren't comprehensive enough to be balanced.
