A moment of silence for the young lives lost in Connecticut today... - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2012, 08:36:39 pm
content: It's been a very emotional day today here in the states. 27 people were shot and killed this morning at an elementary school in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. 18 were children, as young as 5 years old.I am fighting the tears writing this.I feel so sad for all of those who lost loved ones. I could not imagine the pain. I also want to know what was going on inside the shooter's mind. What was he struggling with that made him do such a terrible thing?

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2012, 09:21:36 pm
content: I was feeling good this morning till I turned the tv on too.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2012, 09:27:08 pm
content: That's terrible.Gun ownership debate in 3...2...1...

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2012, 09:42:56 pm
content: It has been a rotten day for me. Went into work and manager walked in and said she had bad news, co-worker I spoke with just last night was dead. I was thinking about how I had just told her I would see her in the morning and thinking about how quickly people can be gone when I heard about the school shooting. Christmas is going to be bad for a lot of those parents, I keep thinking about how it would feel to have presents under a tree right now for a child that had been killed. Can't imagine how that feels.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2012, 10:03:38 pm
content: I'm with you. Last night I got news a man who goes to my church committed suicide. Just terrible things happening.

author: mianchen
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2012, 08:46:24 am
content: horrible news! I'm more worried about those kids who are lucky enough to survive, they are scarred for life...

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2012, 09:25:01 pm
content: Morgan Freeman's brilliant take on what happened yesterday :"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single *victim* of Columbine? Disturbedpeople who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news."

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2012, 10:20:38 pm
content: Is Morgan Freeman an expert on human behavior? Total BS.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2012, 11:48:45 pm
content: A very touching essay here:http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.htmlIn the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.(It has nothing to do with guns.)The comments are highly worth reading too.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 12:24:23 am
content: Wow. Very humbling.In regards to Morgan Freeman. I don't know, but I do agree with his statement. Atleast partially.

author: dave_birdi
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 12:35:01 am
content: They should just ban gun ownership, anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 12:41:44 am
content: I know I introduced a semi-controversial quote by Morgan Freeman, but let's try not to make this a gun debate.

author: dave_birdi
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 12:48:31 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on December 17, 2012, 12:41:44 amNo, I agree partially with what Morgan said, I don't think you can seriously discuss the events without a gun debate. This incident could easily happen again somewhere else in the US with the current laws in place.

author: dave_birdi
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 12:51:23 am
content: What civilized 21st Century society needs to legalise gun ownership?

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 01:04:03 am
content: Gun ownership in the United States is defined under the Constitution. "Right to bear arms". It's always been legal. From that standpoint, this right is for self defense purposes which has nothing innately wrong with it. If someone intrudes your house and poses a threat, you can shoot them if you'd like.It's hard to say that gun ownership laws would do anything to prevent terrible things like this. If a man wants to do such a cruel act such as this, he will find a gun, no matter the laws in act. It is debatable, and I wish not to debate it here. But if someone wants to kill someone with a gun, he will find a gun and kill that person.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 01:12:10 am
content: Don't pretend that's the full text of the 2nd ammendment, Fender. It's not about personal ownership of guns.

author: raymohi
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 01:20:34 am
content: Even while all of you keep practicing your first amendment, I am just gonna keep quite and practice the second.

author: Shale
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 01:21:24 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on December 17, 2012, 01:04:03 amI would like to expand on this comment with out getting in to a debate. The same friday a man in China knife attacked 22 children. A fertilizer bomb was ignited below the federal building in Oklahoma City, Box cutters were used to hijack airplanes on September 11, there are suicide bombers for Islam extremists, and I am sure countless more examples of mass murder from around the world that a gun was not used in. The gun is not the issue, it is just the tool that some people choose to commit a gruesome act. To claim that a gun is the problem is the same as claiming that the car is responsible for drunk driving. The problem is the person not the tool the person chooses to use.

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 01:25:21 am
content: You can't seriously feel safe in your house without a gun. What the fuck are you gonna do if someone breaks in? Wait for the police to show up?Perhaps first world countries should start offering courses in the use of pole-arms if they decide to take guns awayWhat am i gonna do attack a burgler with a katana?

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 02:05:41 am
content: Quote from: ftransform on December 17, 2012, 01:25:21 amAnd here we have the root of the problem, and it's nothing to do with guns.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 02:06:28 am
content: Quote from: dave_birdi on December 17, 2012, 12:35:01 amGood job turning this thread into a shouting match. It's almost as if you wanted to be a troll.As it happens your suggestion has been tried in a few places, so you can look up the factual results.http://everist.org/archives/links/!_Gun_control_links.txtIncidentally some curious details of the Sandy Hook tragedy, that could seriously do with further research, are mentioned here:http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1638.htmConnecticut Massacre Blamed On Son Of Top CIA AnalystIt's not a source I rate very highly, but they do come up with some strange connections now and then. Note there are multiple links to MSM sources in the text.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 02:12:23 am
content: Quote from: ftransform on December 17, 2012, 01:25:21 amA whole lot safer than the feeling of knowing that homes of so many unstable people have firearms readily availableQuoteKnow who is most likely to get shot by your firearm during an armed conflict in the home? That's right it's you and/or your family!QuoteWell yes having yourself either dead or now on a manslaughter charge is liable to reduce police response time.QuotePerhaps otherwise intelligent people should start considering that escalation is not the best way to resolve conflict.QuoteYour best response would be to do something intelligent, pretending you're Rambo is likely not your best course of action.Back to the topic and the OPs request this not become a gun debate thread, we all need to consider the tragedy and scars these incidents inflict on the whole community. All those lives taken, all the survivors scarred by the experience.The gun debate has to be had, and I think Americas debate will be infinitely more painful than the debate (and legislation) Australia has already undergone.The debate needs to occur. changes need to be made, but that should not mask the memory and grieving for many lost lives.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 02:30:23 am
content: Quote from: ftransform on December 17, 2012, 01:25:21 amIn the US you can't, because everyone else has a gun, and that's your big problem, the gun culture.Here in Australia you feel very safe in your home (or on the street) because you know that:a) An intruder almost certainly will not have a gunb) A mugger on the street almost certainly will not have a gunThe playing field gets levelled because hardly any common criminal, or regular citizen has a gun.QuoteAre you serious?You defend yourself.Here in Australia we have home invasion laws (similar to the US I guess) that allows you to take extra measures to defend yourself in your own home.Try a baseball bat, that cool looking ceremonial sword you have on the wall, a huge kitchen knife, a crowbar, good'ol Indy style fists, or maybe just shout and act absolutely crazy and psycho. Most crooks are after money and goods, not confrontation.The majority of home invasions in Australia are unarmed.If you are seriously worried about home invasion, you live in the wrong country and/or area.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 02:39:54 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 02:12:23 amYes, and Australia is the perfect example here.In 1996 we had (at the time) the worlds worse gun massacre in Tasmaniahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)Our PM subsequently implemented very tough gun laws, and a compulsory gun buy-back scheme that was funded by the taxpayer (yes, the government took everyones guns, and no one fired back or complained much!) We paid an extra 1% tax levy (that's a lot!) that year on our tax returns for it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_programAnd guess what was at the top of the list for policies at the previous Australia federal election? - mental illness funding.I believe that Australia, along with Canada the UK spends more percentage of the health budget than does the US.Dave.

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:08:56 am
content: The USA is about 10th on the list of gun related deaths, the majority of those deaths are not homicides but suicides.Guns are not the problem, it is a symptom of a problem. Symptoms are easier to talk about and fool yourself into thinking you are fixing the problem. The problem is a lack of morality in the world population as a whole. I grew up with plenty of guns around me as did my friends, we never conceived of using guns to commit murder , things like a school shooting were even more unthinkable, and it wasn't because we couldn't get the guns. I don't get drunk every night even though I can buy alcohol anytime I want and I don't do drugs even though I could very easily. Why not? I was taught that life is sacred , that you respect your elders, that you are not the center of the world and do not deserve respect , you have to earn it.It isn't about being rich or poor, I have been poor, am not rich like others would measure it, but I have food, clothing, shelter which is more than many people. It is about getting both feet firmly on moral ground when you are young so that when you get older these tragedies are something you fear not something you consider.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:18:31 am
content: 1) stone and stick = allowed2) knife = allowed3) gun = allowed4) missile launcher = not allowed5) hand grenade = not allowed6)WMD= not allowedever wonder why those are not allowed? if we really dont want to put the blame on weapon why dont they make WMD available to public? i vote for "ban for any weapon", world will be much peaceful. that is what "industrial complex" try to avoid by spreading fear such as "end of the world" scenario etc.mental illness? you cannot cure that. some people just happily let it inside themself or they dont think they have any illness whatsoever. they even have their own logic and delusion, such as "i kill those kids because i dont want them suffer and experience painfull life in this miserable world.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:21:07 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 17, 2012, 03:18:31 amYou're a loony. How do you plan to cut up your dinner? With a finger nail?Hey, that box needs opening. CRAP! No knife!Hmm, need to cut a piece of pa- oh, I can't have scissors, I might kill someone with them.Archery better be banned, too, you all conveniently forget that one.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:27:35 am
content: Quote from: ptricks on December 17, 2012, 03:08:56 amI beg to differ:22 kids stabbed at a primary school:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/man-stabs-22-children-in-china.html?_r=022 kidssurvived.20 kids and 9 adults shot with a gun at a primary school:*pick any news page in the last few days*Onlyonesurvivor.Dave.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:29:30 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 03:27:35 amNobody denies they're easier for the ignorant, inefficient killers to use. Whether they're theproblem, however..Surely the focus should be on preventing attacks, not attempts to restrict the tools available.

author: poodyp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:32:52 am
content: Quote from: MikeK on December 17, 2012, 01:12:10 amIgnoring the Mexican, American, and French Revolution, among others. I guess Syria and Libya don't count because they're currently happening, so let's pretend they don't exist.Why should facts get in the way of a funny comic?

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:35:16 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:29:30 amSurely the focus should be on restricting the weapons available, not on the vague and very expensive ways of creating a police state.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:35:36 am
content: Quote from: ftransform on December 17, 2012, 01:25:21 am"A gun-loving survivalist who home-schooled her son, Nancy Lanza became the first victim of his shooting spree, carried out with some of her guns."The irony being she probably felt safer, right up until her son went beserk. Did her guns make her safer?http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-mother-a-gun-enthusiast-and-the-first-victim-20121217-2bi6h.html

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:37:03 am
content: Quote from: MikeK on December 17, 2012, 03:35:16 amAnd restricting or removing the ability to hunt, target shoot, perform archery, or own hand-crafted blades or anything else which might be vaguely considered weapons, is not the creation of a restrictive police state?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:40:24 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:29:30 amHow about both?A novel idea, I knowDave.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:42:39 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 03:40:24 amNovel? No.One I'm free to disagree with? Oh yes.One certain people (like my government) take to a ridiculous extreme (god forbid I leave my work knife in my pocket while I pop in the shop, I might randomly stab someone with it).

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:42:56 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 03:27:35 amI hope you are not saying that both events can be compared . Nobody knows what the outcome would be if the person in CT did not have access to a gun. Assuming that removal of guns would have saved lives is like assuming that had Timothy McVeigh not had access to fertilizer he wouldn't have blown up the federal building. All of it, including the federal building disaster, goes back to the same cause, lack of care or concern for others that the child learned and took with him into being an adult. We can ignore the child/parent causes and ban everything and there will still be people that find a way to do harm to others, or we can focus on the problem and not have to worry about making sure we have a list with everything that people might use to harm someone.

author: poodyp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:43:38 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 03:35:36 amDid her guns make her less safe? Did she also own knives? Garden tools? A car? Not live in a padded house? Not keep her son locked in a closet?

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:46:39 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:21:07 amoh my you are so right i should have thought of thathow about this?this one cant kill? (warning: possession of any kind of sharp bits is highly prohibited otherwise will result in imprisonment)ps: i was talking moving the "not allowed" a step further above, ie to number 3) only as gun cannot cut food nor tin can properlywith exception for hunting and farmers protection from wild animal, there should be a special license for that (our country got too)

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 03:49:02 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 17, 2012, 03:46:39 amSo where do you draw the line of 'weapon' at?And if you really think the world will suddenly turn cute and cuddly and pigs will fly in the clouds if every firearm ceases to exist..

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:00:01 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:29:30 amWhat do you propose? Have you found a cure for human nature and frailty?You often have to restrict availability of dangerous tools to achieve the aim. It is always a trade off between the peaceful usefulness of the tool vs the danger that tool can inflict. Some tools need restriction some are better being banned.Every community has to work out it's own balance. UK coppers aren't routinely armed, I'd hate to think of that being the case here in Australia.Our gun law revisions which came into place as a direct result of a public massacre did not ban guns, although they did ban many types of gun. Any stable adult with a good reason to own a firearm may still do so as long as they comply with some fairly strict rules of storage handling and transport.Restricting legal access to guns made no difference to the numbers of firearms in the possession of criminals, thou it does aid in the prosecution of these individuals. What was achieved was a massive reduction in gun death due to family conflict, neighbourhooddisputes. It is far less likely for weapons to be in easy reach when people have brain snaps.If Mrs Lanza didn't have a house full of guns, she, her son and a2 dozen innocent people would still be alive at least for the short term. I have no idea what brought about the brain snap in this kid. I can only surmise what drove him to his actions. Sure it was he and not the guns that did the killing,but that is little comfort to those burying their children days before Christmas.If Mrs Lanza'a guns were stored in compliance with our Australian regulations this tragedy would not have happened this way. Something that everybody with an angle on this should contemplate.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:08:14 am
content: Quote from: poodyp on December 17, 2012, 03:43:38 amOnly an imbecile could fail to deduce they did not expose her to her ultimate demise.QuoteI'm sure she did, and yes one of those could have killed her too, though it defies reality to suggest an available knife would have resulted in another two dozen fatalities.QuoteWho knows? maybe even a chainsaw, regardless refer back to the previous paragraph on knives and substitute garden tool of choice.Quotesee knife.....

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:10:41 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 04:08:14 amIt defies reality that a man in China could attack 22 kids with a knife and not achieve one fatality. I'm really not sure how he got that so wrong, doesn't make them non-lethal weapons!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:12:27 am
content: Quote from: ptricks on December 17, 2012, 03:42:56 amAre you serious?...Damn, I think you are serious...Dave.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:13:22 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 04:12:27 amOf course, we all know what the outcome would be: Nobody would've been shot!Except possibly him, by the police.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:18:35 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:49:02 amI think it's pretty obvious.For the general population, you draw the line at the level of themechanised killing machine, that wasinvented to kill, and which serves no other practical purposeIf you want to play with one, join the army or police force, or go to a gun range where you can use one in a controlled environment.Dave.

author: ampdoctor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:18:56 am
content: What we had happen over the weekend here was a horrific incident that will unquestionably leave an indelible mark on the minds of this nation for years to come. And while I would rather not have the gun conversation and just mourn the lost, the reality of the situation is that the conversations will be had, and many conclusions will be jumped to by a lot of individuals who are emotionally fragile right now. People making decisions under duress have a tendency to make bad decisions. So hopefully nobody decides to make life changing policy decisions for at least several months or longer until every body has had the chance to settle down quite bit.Having said that, I'm going to dive in and make a few comments as food for thought based on several years worth of discussion and research on the subject. If you look at the actual statistics both within the US as well as globally, there's no real conclusive evidence one way or the other that guns ownership, concealed carry laws or any other variants have any real effect on gun violence. Most of them insert a heavy bias with respect to how they weight the data in order to make it support or refute a certain set of claims. However, there is one element that does have a high confidence and that's education and poverty. It appears that gun violence per capita is directly proportional to standards of living and education. As education falls and poverty rises, gun violence also rises irrespective the number of guns per capita or regulations in place.What this tells me is that it's not so much a gun problem as it is a social problem. If we want to curb gun violence what we need to do is address poverty and ignorance in society. However, if we do that we'll most likely have to have conversations that will step on the toes of more than a few people making a lot of money and securing a lot of political power by maintaining the staus quo. As such they'd rather shoot the messenger rather than address the root causes of the problems.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:21:45 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 04:18:35 amWell, unfortunately, joining the army or police has absolutely nothing to do with 'playing', and the latter idea doesn't actually work in the current world which is shaped by kneejerk political reactions to social problems the politicians aren't intelligent enough to combat.And as such, I will continue to oppose the view of 'ban all guns, they kill your children'.

author: poodyp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:22:02 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 04:08:14 amIt's always fun having a debate with someone who chooses to insult his opponent with his opening statement, they reveal their character at the very beginning, saving you the effort of continued debate.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:23:01 am
content: "Its not the tool to blame ...."I'm so tired to hear this stupid argument, why not provide freedom for all citizen to own grenades ? gatling gun mounted at your very own car without permit ? mini rocket launcher ? cluster bomb mounted at your private plane and no permit what so ever needed to fly over anywhere ? Hey .. how about no restriction at all selling in ebay nuclear weapon grade ingredients ?Its all about the evil mind behind the tool right ?Argument about knife is again shows stupidity level ^ 2, c'mon, you don't need a gun to feed your family like in 19th century where you have to shot something for protein intake if living in the wild, while now today, you still need a knife to process your food like cutting meat or axe to chop down tree. Why so complicated ?

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:25:03 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 03:42:39 amMost likely yourself! Again when used as a form of defence the most likely weapon the surgeon/coroner will need to remove from your body/corpse.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:27:46 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 04:25:03 amWho said anything about defence? I certainly didn't.Kindly note I have never raised the issue of self defence with firearms, knives, or anything else, because I just don't care. I don't feel the need to have a knife or a gun to hand in case someone breaks into my house or attacks me, because I don't feel at risk of either occurance.

author: ampdoctor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:30:03 am
content: The REAL reason why we have the second amendment...stated with more lucidity than I ever could in a forum post.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:30:23 am
content: Quote from: poodyp on December 17, 2012, 04:22:02 amPerhaps, but then there's that awkward fact that he's actually, umm,rightDave.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:32:00 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 04:30:23 amPerhaps that particular method, but who's to say the nutjob wouldn't have just stabbed her or strangled her if there weren't any guns?Please, don't tell me you believe he'd just harmlessly sit there and whistle if the magic firearm wasn't to hand.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:38:34 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 04:21:45 amWho said ban all guns? What is necessary is control and regulation of the availability of firearms. Nothing to do with playing? Maybe that is because firearms are not playthings! If you have no workplace need for a firearm and non of what was offered appeals then you have no need for a gun and having one is only likely to cause you and others harm.

author: poodyp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:39:18 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 17, 2012, 04:30:23 amHe very well could be, but he's removed any semblance of a civilized conversation and most certainly removed any evidence he has any ground to stand on by resorting to insults. It's stopping just short of Godwin's law.

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:40:10 am
content: Listen 26 people are dead most of them innocent children. I know we disagree about what the real problem here is. But isn't what's important right now that we come together and morn with and comfort those in need of comfort. Isn't that what this thread should be about? As for me I have 3 little elementary school daughters and I cant imagine the parents pain. My heart goes out to those involved in this tragedy.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:43:27 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 04:32:00 amNobody is! There is a real opportunity that could have happened! There is however bugger all chance that it would have escalated to involve another two dozen people, mostly innocent children and their carers.QuoteSee above, and think it through....

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:44:24 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 17, 2012, 04:32:00 amI'm not saying that, and I'm sure anyone else of average intelligence would say that either.But in that case:a) she may possibly have had some sort of fighting chanceb) the other people and kids wouldn't be dead, as a matter of basic fact. If he was good, maybe he could have taken down another few people before he got pummelled by a school full of angry teachers with chairs and chalk to the eyes.QuoteNo, of course not.But the simple fact is he wouldn't have access to the the semi-automatic mechanised killing machines, that make impersonal killing incredibly easy and almost fun for some people (just like in the games!). That means he would have had to do it the old fashioned personal way, up close with a knife (or other object) as you look them in the face and they fight back.Dave.

author: etstudent
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:48:34 am
content: I tried to avoid this BS, but I have to say this. When is the last time there was a mass stabbing ending up with 26 people dead? I mean come on guys. I'm for the 2nd amendment, but I am not for assault weapons, and I am not for clips over 5 bullets. I'd like to see 1 bullet at a time.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:49:56 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on December 17, 2012, 04:38:34 amThe vast majority of people here who oppose firearms!QuoteI agree. Disagreements arise in the specifics of control and availability, the definition of firearms, the types available, and the reasons they need to be controlled. Some of those disagreements will never be solved so long as one side of the argument knows little to nothing about firearms and their usage.QuoteI wonder if you grasp the concepts or target or sport (two different things.) shooting. I'm guessing not.QuoteWell, thank you for making a judgement on my ability to safely handle a firearm and my mental stability based on precisely no knowledge of either subject nor , apparently, firearms in general. But that is what I've come to expect from anti-firearms arguments.Quote from: EEVblogPossibly, although unlikely.QuoteSpeculation.QuoteMore speculation. How do you know how they'd react?Quote from: etstudent on December 17, 2012, 04:48:34 amI'd kill you with a bolt action rifle just as easily as a semi-automatic. I'd like to see any of you rush a man while he operates that bolt.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:51:17 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on December 17, 2012, 04:40:10 amThat is important but even more important is making sure that incidents like this cannot be allowed to continue perpetually! It would be cold comfort for those who lost loved ones but also a fitting memorial if this loss could become the one that finally brings about preventative measures.

author: poodyp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:52:54 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on December 17, 2012, 04:40:10 amBut, this is the internet, and people have unsubstantiated opinions, and they're going to share them, and insult people, and burn straw men.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 04:58:17 am
content: I think the problem we are not seeing here is that...if there's a will, there's a way. If there was absolutely no guns in the USA, this terrible incident could still have occurred, except using a different weapon. Likewise, if there are guns in the USA but they are restricted to law enforcement, a person who has the mentality to kill will acquire the tools he needs to carry out his act.Surely guns made committing such a ruthless and unfathomable crime easier but the root of the problem is not with guns, but with his own problems. A gun is a piece of metal. A gun on its own does no harm. A nuclear bomb not detonated does no harm. A kitchen knife used for cutting asparagus does not harm anything. No matter how much we say guns are the problem, I think it comes down to the people using them and the people in their lives. There was something wrong with him, not the gun.I do not own any guns. I do not know anyone who owns guns.To be blatently honestly, I live in the US, and the "gun culture" as Dave likes to say is really not as prominent as you may think. Yes, we can own guns, but the amount of people who have them is really not that much. We don't pride ourselves knowing we can own guns. Again, I don't own one, but from what I can tell guns are really in the background.I think in this case, it was just a poor mixture of a mental illness, a depressed life, poor family structure, perhaps jealousy of something, and yes, the availability of guns. But it is hard to say that guns are what kill people. People kill people. I know that's cliche but that's really what it comes down to.With that being said, I believe making semi-automatic and automatic weapons available to the public is relatively pointless. Those indeed can get into the wrong hands and do serious damage, as we saw here. Can you kill 26 innocent children with a .22...yes...but high powered weapons are not necessary for civilian ownership. If you need an AK-47 to take down a deer, then you shouldn't be hunting. Again though, an AK-47 is not dangerous sitting in a closet somewhere, but those kind of weapons are just not needed. The cons just outweigh the pros.How do you draw the line? I don't know. How do you regulate it? Not sure either.It is complicated. But it cannot come from one side. Strictly saying guns is the problem is not correct. It is definitely a PART of the problem, but it is not right entirely. How about more focus on mental illness research and ensuring the welfare people's minds and thoughts at a young age, which this man seemed to struggle with. Of course, this is no utopia we live in. These are truly freak accidents. This could still have happened if we did all of the "right things". It's just a sad sad occurance and I wish it would never happen again.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 05:02:10 am
content: Quote from: poodyp on December 17, 2012, 04:39:18 amApologies if you are offended, however this desire for guns is imbecilic and I'll call it as I see it. Homes are no place for a gun, suburbia isn't either. What is happening is slaughter and for what so people can live out their rambo fantasies. That is the most pointless and imbecilic reasoning there can be.Again apologies if you feel insulted, but sorry there are much more important issues under discussion than the bruising of your ego.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2012, 05:22:23 am
content: We've flipped to 7 bits on the post counter, time to lock the thread, thanks for playing.Dave.