Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Coffeetalk. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The World in Numbers; Random stats
Topic Started: Mar 29 2007, 02:41 PM (1,292 Views)
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
False Lessons from an Atrocity

Quote:
 
It may seem obvious that when an atrocity is committed with a gun, we should respond by revising our gun laws. In fact, what we know suggests that if there is a way to prevent mass killings, it will have to be found someplace else.


One thing we know about mass killers is they're fucking whacked. I have read for the last 24 hrs, off and on, about mass murderers and I have several conclusions, they are crazy and if you are ever in such a situation run or fight. The last conclusion is these events may appear random to the general public but they rarely cause surprise to those familar with the individual and the individual is in many cases known to the authorities. In some case, the individual may have an organic brain defect.

tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Coffea Canephora
Drew
Apr 29 2007, 09:12 PM
No. Only semi-automatic pistols that have at least two of the following features:

* Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
* Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
* Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
* Unloaded weight of 50 oz or more
* A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

Okay, so...how many of the pistols used in firearm deaths fall under that categorization?
In the shadow of the light from a black sun
Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb
Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection?
I'm freezing
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Krazy
Member Avatar
I haz powah!
Well the thing is Reg, in my simplistic view, if people don't routinely have guns, and it is next to impossible to get one because you should need a very good reason for having one, whack jobs don't get the guns in the first place.

America now is a very different place to when the 2nd Amendment was written in to the Constitution and I don't know, maybe there has been a review as to whether the Amendment is still relevant now, but maybe there should be a review. I guess the NRA would have too much political power to prevent the 2nd Amendment ever being revised though.

But even if you didn't revise it make bullets a controlled commodity, $5k a bullet and sell them in controlled shops as alcohol is in some states with mandatory ID with each purchase. Might make people less trigger happy.

In that article,

Quote:
 
Nationally, your chance of being a murder victim has plunged by 44 percent since 1991.... The number of gun murders has dropped by 38 percent since 1993, and the rate of nonfatal gun crimes is one-third what it was then.


Sounds impressive but those percentage figures don't mean jack squat. Dropped 44% from what? 20 million, 1 million , 10,000 , 100 or even 5 a year? What?

My $0.02 (as it is from a non-American, I know)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eral
Kopi Luwak
What Krazy said.

At what point are these incidents going to be recognised as NOT isolated and one-off and a sad accident? How many times does a nut job have to get a gun before things change?

That conspiracy article on Martin Bryant is horribly sad and in the worst possible taste. The descriptions of the death wounds are disgracefully inaccurate, and distorts the horror that was experienced that day.
How people can make that stuff up amazes me. Bryant's mother can be forgiven for not dealing - but I very much despise the people exploiting her grief.
It is true that Martin Bryant does not understand what he did, and he should be in a hospital, not prison: but the fact is, our old gun laws enabled the tragedy. Now the Martin Bryants of Australia can't get a gun. Same for Dunblane and handguns.
It's a way better idea.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
You would be surprised by the pages and pages of Martin Bryant conspiracy sites, I was surprised. It's an interesting response. With the exception of Timothy McViegh, 911 and a bit with Dunblane, (the government has put quite a few relevant papers in the Dunblane case under a 100 yr gag rule. They say to protect the names of juveniles. :unsure: ) mass murderers usually don't spawn conspiracy theories.

Again the US does have gun laws on both Federal and State levels (States vary considerably). Many of the federal laws mirror many of your laws, an example, modified short barreled shotguns. I don't know why sawed off shot guns are so bad but it seems to be a universal restriction (where there are restrictions). Another example, machine guns and their ilk (I'm not a gun person), the rat a tat tat type guns have been under legislation since 1934.

At least one of the guns involved in VT shootings was .22 caliber gun (which is allowed in the UK and Australia) and the other a 9mm which according to gun people is an unexceptional gun I don't know whether its banned in any of your countries.

A mass murderer is someone who kills a least five people by any type of method. I know Australia has said that since they implemented new policies after Port Arthur there have been no Port Arthur type shootings.

In 2002, Australia had a very similar incident comparable to the Cho mass murder, however, due to a fast and aggressive response by a college teacher and a student only two people were killed. In 2006, Montreal had another university shooting in which 19 people were injured (An aside, Marc Lepine was also in French Canada.)

Whether there have been any other mass shootings or murders in any of your countries, I don't know, I haven't specifically searched. I would be surprised if there were no mass murderers.

The biggest mass murderers in history have used bombs (Timothy McVeigh and a man in 1927 who bombed a school and 45 were killed and 38 were children.) and fire, 87 were killed in a fire by a man trying to kill his girlfried who survived.

Re: Martin Bryant: IMO, not only did MB plan the Port Arthur massacre but it is also probable he was a serial killer. What is indisputable is that MB showed classic signs of becoming a killer; cruelty to animals, extreme bullying of his sister, diminished capacity, bestiality, etc., etc. On top of that it has been alleged that he had shot at people earlier and that at one point he asked whether or not he had acheived the record in mass murder.

Now MB was known to the authorities and the state, due to his diminished capacity he received a pension from the Aus. government, he was also under suspicion from authorities but and this is nub of the argument in a free society we all have rights (or purported rights) and suspicion is not enough to condemn a person. The Dunblane killer had also garnered the attention of police but a case of pedophilia couldn't be proven. He also showed signs of cruelty to weaker beings.

According to what I've read about Australian gun laws, and as with any controversial subject it's difficult to find unbiased report, Australia has spent over a billion dollars over ten years to remove 10% of guns from circulation and more money is needed.

In my opinion, and to my surprise diverse (Libertarian to Left) others are also talking about this as a potential solution, I would rather see this money spent on mental health.

Again, doesn't mean I don't think there shouldn't be gun controls, it simply means I believe the issue is more about mental health than guns.

Edit: I wanted to add one note on the Dunblane Massacre, it is probable that the killer planned the murders for almost two years.
tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drew
Member Avatar
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person
Joe
May 1 2007, 05:13 AM
Okay, so...how many of the pistols used in firearm deaths fall under that categorization?

Not too many in recent history. They've, uh, been banned for the last 10 years......and are still illegal in most states. The main problem with the banned weapons is that they are actually better than what our police carry. The assault weapons ban is, in my opinion, better than having our peace officers carry sub-machine guns on duty just so they can be as well armed as the average gang-banger. No one needs an Uzi.

Joe, I'd also like to point out that the Assault Weapons ban was actually passed by a Republican controlled house and senate. Clinton may have been the one who signed it, but he didn't write the legislation. The Republicans did.

Regullus
May 1 2007, 01:26 PM
Timothy McVeigh and a man in 1927 who bombed a school and 45 were killed and 38 were children.
1927?
Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
Drew
May 1 2007, 05:31 PM


Regullus
May 1 2007, 01:26 PM
Timothy McVeigh and a man in 1927 who bombed a school and 45 were killed and 38 were children.
1927?

Bath School Disaster

Andrew Kehoe

Hell Comes to Bath

He was also known to be exceptionally cruel to animals.
tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Coffea Canephora
Quote:
 

Not too many in recent history.  They've, uh, been banned for the last 10 years......and are still illegal in most states.  The main problem with the banned weapons is that they are actually better than what our police carry.  The assault weapons ban is, in my opinion, better than having our peace officers carry sub-machine guns on duty just so they can be as well armed as the average gang-banger.  No one needs an Uzi.


I don't disagree with you, but I think it's silly that all these people are whining about the Assault Weapons Ban when most of these atrocities happen with weapons that aren't even covered by that legislation.

Quote:
 
Joe, I'd also like to point out that the Assault Weapons ban was actually passed by a Republican controlled house and senate.  Clinton may have been the one who signed it, but he didn't write the legislation.  The Republicans did.


Why did you want to point that out?
In the shadow of the light from a black sun
Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb
Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection?
I'm freezing
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lara
Member Avatar
Kopi Luwak
So... according to the Canadian embassy in Washington, D.C.'s web page, Canada had an estimated 2.3 million firearm owners in 2000. We had a population of 31 million in 2001. That's well under one in 10 people owning a gun.

This is for anyone interested in gun laws/stats in Canada.

From this page (the Canadian embassy in Washington, D.C.):

With the passage of the 1995 Firearms Act, Canada established a national registry of all firearms and their owners.

The Act required Canadian gun owners to apply for a license by January 1, 2001, from the Canadian Firearms Centre, a branch of the Justice Department, and register their guns with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) by the beginning of 2003. Associated amendments to the Criminal Code in 1996 increased the penalties for using firearms to commit crimes and for the illegal trafficking and smuggling of guns.

The registration of all handguns has been required by federal law since 1934, and since 1968 permits to carry them have been restricted to a few specific circumstances, for example, use in target practice or competition, protection in extreme cases where police protection isn't adequate, and in certain jobs, such as transporting large amounts of cash or other valuables. Fully automatic weapons have been banned since 1977. The new law extends the registration requirement to unrestricted long guns such as shotguns and rifles and adds short-barrelled handguns and those discharging 25- or 32-calibre cartridges to the list of prohibited weapons.

Gun Ownership and Crime

A national survey commissioned by the Canadian Firearms Centre in 2000 found an estimated 2.3 million firearm owners.

More than 1,000 Canadians die every year from gunshot wounds, most of them by their own hand. In 1996 the total firearm deaths amounted to 1,131, of which 815 were suicides, 45 were accidents and 156 were homicides.

The violent crime rate has been steadily declining in Canada over the last two decades, and progressively fewer crimes are being committed with firearms. In 1978, Canada recorded 661 homicides, a rate of 2.76 per 100,000. Of these, 250, or 37.8%, were committed with guns. In 1998, Canada had 555 homicides, a rate of 1.83 per 100,000. Guns were involved in 151 of the homicides, 27% of the total, the lowest proportion since statistics were first collected in 1961. Robberies using firearms accounted for 18% of all such crimes in 1998, down from 25% in 1988 and 37% in 1978.

"All guns are capable of being used in crime. All guns pose a threat to public safety."

— The Supreme Court of Canada
June 15, 2000
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lara
Member Avatar
Kopi Luwak
Wikipedia says "About 59.1 million adults in the United States personally own a gun. Roughly 93 million adults, or 49% of the adult U.S. population, live in households with guns." So, at least according to those stats, there's a way higher proportion of gun owners in the U.S. - at least 25%, as opposed to our less than 10%.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eral
Kopi Luwak
Regullus, that you find all this info on dial-up leaves me in awe of your patience. :admin:

Information on MB suggests that he is not so much a sociopath, but is more intellectually disabled, and like an autistic person, is unable to understand emotional responses. He was eager to know if he had got a lot of attention, and if he had killed the most people ever: but it was also clear to guards, doctors etc that he did not understand the real effect of his actions. When his father committed suicide by drowning himself when Bryant was 13 or so, he displayed only curiosity.
He is reportedly beginning to understand the consequences, as he is constantly attacked by other prisoners and experiences regular severe injuries. It is generally accepted he should be in a mental institution, and that his prison term is more to soothe the desire for revenge.

The fact that this is a mental health issue is undeniable: but, as Drew said, the availability of guns exacerbates the number of injuries and fatalities.
Had Bryant been living in a community house/institution, having been recognised as requiring such management, Port Arthur would never have happened. The media correctly identified Bryant as having been failed by the mental health system (geez, who isn't?) but that only made it more important to change our gun laws.
No guns for loonies. It's really simple. Since it's really easy to go loony, the sad fact is, that means hardly any guns for anyone.

The killing Regullus reports was at Monash University: the man was dealt with quickly, which I understand to have been possible because he did not have multiple weapons and had to reload his gun himself. Direct result of our gun laws.

And don't diss the buy-back. The only waste of money that was a good idea of Johnny's. It was a very good publicity stunt.

Quote:
 
... and this is nub of the argument in a free society we all have rights (or purported rights) and suspicion is not enough to condemn a person.

Absolutely true. But should the right to have a bloody big gun be on the list?

Joe, the point we are discussing is the availability of guns. We have already agreed that assault weapons are completely unneccessary in daily life, and are trying to decide if the right to bear arms is really a central tenet of American democracy, or whether you might paddle on quite nicely without it.
Drew is mentioning that Republicans brought in gun control because they always seem to be in favour of guns, and I for one was very interested to hear they have completely forgotten this. It kind of suggests that this is a matter of political expediency, not public benefit.

Good work Drew. :)

*10%? :o 25%? :blink: I must look up Australia.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
Five loaded handguns.

Monash University Shootings

tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bex
puppet dictator
lara
May 1 2007, 09:03 PM
So... according to the Canadian embassy in Washington, D.C.'s web page, Canada had an estimated 2.3 million firearm owners in 2000. We had a population of 31 million in 2001. That's well under one in 10 people owning a gun.

And that would be heavily skewed away from city-dwellers.
I belong to one of those families that does not speak to or see its members as often as we should,
but if someone needed anyone to fall on a sword for her, there would be a queue waiting to commit the deed.
-Min Jin Lee
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
Yet more murders occur in urbanized areas. I think. :unsure:
tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bex
puppet dictator
Edmonton tends to favour stabbings over shootings, insofar as individual violent crimes go.
I belong to one of those families that does not speak to or see its members as often as we should,
but if someone needed anyone to fall on a sword for her, there would be a queue waiting to commit the deed.
-Min Jin Lee
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Coffea Canephora
Quote:
 
Joe, the point we are discussing is the availability of guns. We have already agreed that assault weapons are completely unneccessary in daily life, and are trying to decide if the right to bear arms is really a central tenet of American democracy, or whether you might paddle on quite nicely without it.


People bring up the assault weapons ban after tragedies like this as if it would have made a difference in that particular incident. That is what I am criticizing.

If you don't believe the right to bear arms is a central tenet of American democracy, then a constitutional amendment should be proposed.

Quote:
 
Drew is mentioning that Republicans brought in gun control because they always seem to be in favour of guns, and I for one was very interested to hear they have completely forgotten this. It kind of suggests that this is a matter of political expediency, not public benefit.


I still don't see why this was pointed out.

Did you guys know that the sun is actually a star?
In the shadow of the light from a black sun
Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb
Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection?
I'm freezing
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
They point it out to you, Joe, because they think you are a Republican and I think the reason why they have that impression is due to several statement dating back to PPG. I could and am probably wrong but that is my guess. Probably also your stance on abortion but that doesn't really make sense because Drew has, iIrc, the same pov.

I, on the other hand, don't think of you as a Republican. I don't think (and I hope ) your political philosophy is crystalized at 21 ( more accurately 19?).

Or was it a rhetorial question? :rolf:
tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drew
Member Avatar
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person
Joe
May 2 2007, 11:43 PM
I still don't see why this was pointed out.

Did you guys know that the sun is actually a star?

OK. Joe. It seemed you were making a partisan attack on the assault weapons ban, so I brought up the fact that it was Republicans who drafted the legislation in the first place. If you weren't making a partisan attack or, perhaps, weren't making an attack at all and were merely curious, than I'm sorry for bringing it up.

Regarding the reason that these atrocities haven't been committed with assault weapons.....well, that would just indicate that the assault weapons ban has been working, wouldn't it? Remember, most states already ban assault weapons, and have done so for a long time. That said, the reason that congress felt the assault weapons ban was important is because most states rather clearly implies that some states weren't banning assault weapons.


Joe
May 2 2007, 11:43 PM
People bring up the assault weapons ban after tragedies like this as if it would have made a difference in that particular incident. That is what I am criticizing.


I have yet to have heard any arguments that the repeal of the assault weapons ban actually had anything to do with the shooting sprees that we've had.....or that it would have anything to do with preventing them. I was never trying to say that, either. That said, gun control is about a lot more than just preventing disturbed students from going on killing sprees. On the other hand, since none of the school shooting sprees have been done with firearms that were acquired illegally, it stands to reason that, if assault weapons are legal, we may start seeing assault weapons used in such shootings. The best way to keep assault weapons out of the hands of criminals is to make their sale and possession illegal. Banning assault weapons just makes sense.
Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eral
Kopi Luwak
Regullus, my bad. :sorry: Handguns, not a shottie. But, they weren't automatics and I stand by my assertion that the gun laws prevented a wider tragedy. And that nobody should have guns in case they go crazy. :t2: Seriously, to rely on one system to prevent occurences like this is a surefire way of having it happen again. Especially given the crap funding mental health gets.

I was going to repeat that Republicans are always going on about Democrats being anti-gun and therefore anti-America and Democrats don't like to be seen as anti-gun and the fact that Republicans introduced a bill supporting gun laws shows that the issue is not one of principle, but what sells to voters but I really couldn't be bothered.
Joe:you tiresome prat that is the question: is gun ownership a central tenet of American democracy, which if removed would cause the entire collapse of the country? Constitutions can be changed: especially when out moded principles cause harm. As I have said, I can see why no-one wants to muck around with the Dec of Independence, but is the Constitution the same? Ours isn't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Coffea Canephora
Regullus
May 2 2007, 05:30 PM
They point it out to you, Joe, because they think you are a Republican and I think the reason why they have that impression is due to several statement dating back to PPG. I could and am probably wrong but that is my guess. Probably also your stance on abortion but that doesn't really make sense because Drew has, iIrc, the same pov.

I, on the other hand, don't think of you as a Republican. I don't think (and I hope ) your political philosophy is crystalized at 21 ( more accurately 19?).

Or was it a rhetorial question? :rolf:

I'm 22, and while I have been registered as a Republican since I was 18, I am not actually a Republican. I was then, but now I remain registered simply to vote in primaries.

Just because I have some conservative views doesn't mean that I have any loyalty whatsoever for a group of people who are only interested in keeping themselves in power. It is quite possible to be a full-blown conservative (though I am not) and not give Republicans any allegiance whatsoever.

Politicians are politicians. They are all due our loathing, regardless of party.
In the shadow of the light from a black sun
Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb
Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection?
I'm freezing
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Coffea Canephora
Quote:
 
Joe:you tiresome prat that is the question: is gun ownership a central tenet of American democracy, which if removed would cause the entire collapse of the country? Constitutions can be changed: especially when out moded principles cause harm. As I have said, I can see why no-one wants to muck around with the Dec of Independence, but is the Constitution the same? Ours isn't.


No one has argued that removing the right to bear arms will collapse the country. Hyperbole. It's not necessary to remove that right, anyway.

"Mucking around with" the Constitution is very serious business. It takes 75% of all state legislatures to ratify an Amendment before it can come into effect.


Stupid bitch.
In the shadow of the light from a black sun
Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb
Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection?
I'm freezing
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Regullus
Member Avatar
Reliant
Quote:
 
Montreal holds the terrible distinguished record for having the most school shootings in the same city; no other city on Earth has had more than one.


I thought that was pretty interesting. Anyone (Canadians or others) have thoughts on the cause?

Joe
 
I'm 22...


We obviously missed your birthday. Have you listed your birthday in your forum info?
tempus_teapot
 
I'd like to add that at this point I have taken my Spider Jerusalem action figure and tied his wrist to my Cassidy (from Preacher) action figure just so I can work out which positions are feasible with them and which aren't.

Read that and weep, internet. Weep!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lara
Member Avatar
Kopi Luwak
Regullus
May 3 2007, 10:07 PM
Quote:
 
Montreal holds the terrible distinguished record for having the most school shootings in the same city; no other city on Earth has had more than one.


I thought that was pretty interesting. Anyone (Canadians or others) have thoughts on the cause?

I have no evidence to back it up and I don't remember where I read this, but I read a very interesting article suggesting that it is very easy to feel like an outsider in Montreal, and concurrently, relatively acceptable to blame your problems on an identifiable group, and that those two things contributed to both of the shootings.

The first guy was half Quebecois, half - uh - Lebanese? something like that. He had his name legally changed to match his mother's last name (she was Quebecois) as an adult and stopped using his - uh - Lebanese? names. He was apparently filled with self-loathing, and loathing for his non-Quebecois background. Many Quebecois are very nationalistic - view, for example, the Parti Quebecois, who don't consider themselves Canadian and consider the province and the Quebecois their own nation. In my experience, racism is also less censured in Quebec than in the rest of Canada, although I have to admit I have never lived there, outside a two-week exchange in high school. They also tend to be touchy to an extent that makes the rest of Canada go "What the fuck?" Currently, the captain of Team Canada has been vilified in the Quebec press for, two years ago, referring to a team of Quebec referrees after a losing game in Montreal as "Fucking French." He has said that if he'd been in Calgary with Western Canadian refs, or California with Californian refs, the response would have been the same, with "Westerners" or "Californians" in the place of "French." However, this tiny comment has been blown up into a national news-making incident.

Oops. Sorry. Got off on a tangent rant.

Anyway, that guy blamed women in men's trades for all of his problems (including not getting good enough grades to get into the college of his choice). He chose to kill women and only women at an engineering college while ranting about feminists. (Shivers yet, Eral?) He picked a target that was the target of hateful words by some other men in similar situations. He was wrong in the head and used guns instead of words.

The second guy was Middle Eastern and apparently also filled with self-loathing. He apparently was huge on Columbine and seriously disturbed. They think he chose the biggest school in the area in hopes of killing more people.

Apparently neither of them fit in, in a society where being part of the correct language/cultural group is so important they have created governments around maintaining that language/cultural group.

The implication of the article was that not only were they mentally unhealthy, they hated themselves for being different, and probably also for wanting to fit in, in a culture where the "laine pur" - Pure Blood, a common term to refer to Quebecois in Quebec - is the ideal. My memory gets a little muddy here, but the writer implied they picked targets - women, mainstream happy students - to blame their problems on, perhaps in part because they lived in a society that likes to barricade itself in, an isolationist society that looks at those outside as people to be feared, people to protect yourself from, people who want to take what is yours and destroy it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Krazy
Member Avatar
I haz powah!
I would like to see gun controls relaxed in favour of cute kittens

Seriously, urban crime seems more likely for shootings to occur. The recent development here, which as you know does in many ways seem like an adopted State if not an actual one, in the way we embrace American culture is the rise of gang related crime. Shooting people just because they are in the wrong gang.
The black-market guns are coming in from Eastern Europe, as we have relatively porous borders when it comes to these things.

As for mass killings, yes I remember one guy went nuts with a samurai sword a few years ago.

Edit: Shocking grammar!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eral
Kopi Luwak
Summing up guns:
-loony sad people shoot people they do not know.
-Everyone has had incidents like this occur, whether they have gun laws or not.
-The sad loony people in Montreal shoot people in schools, while in America they shoot people at school, work, the shops and petrol stations.
-America has an awful lot of shootings reported in the media, oh look, another one yesterday. :(
-If the right to own a gun was denied to citizens who did not need them, America would still be a democracy
-It is possible to change the Constitution, but it would require a national consensus
-Regullus, Joe, Drew and Underdog cannot explain to the rest of us why American gun laws won't be changed.
-More cute kittens, less guns for America would probably be acceptable to many people.

I am interested whether urban areas have higher rates of loony behaviour due to a sense of disconnection/disenfranchisement than rural areas. I read a very interesting article a few years ago saying adolescents are less likely to use drugs/engage in anti-social behaviours/get depressed if they have a strong sense of connection to community. Generally, it would seem that rural areas promote a strong sense of community because they are small: and a sense of anonymity is more likely to occur in large urban areas.

I personally believe that both a sense of belonging and of having either goals for the future or a present sense of fulfillment re. income and job are the critical factors.

People here are always saying we embrace American culture to such an extent we could be the 53rd state: I think it's the push me-pull you of small groups to larger ones: identifying similarities yet resisting/fearing being submerged.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Table 32 · Next Topic »
Add Reply