HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6730
This is about all I'm going to say on this subject until the board moves on, since it's pretty much degenerated into a whole lot of "You psycho gun nuts just want everybody to be armed" from one side and "You socialist Eurofags just want to castrate all of us like you are" from the other, with occasional bursts of sanity from people like KenJennings which are duly ignored by both sides.

First and foremost, this was not all about the guns. This kid had a documented history of being unstable, of being a stalker and generally being fucked up in the head. Pretty much no one who knew him was surprised by what he did. Yes, maybe without a gun the body count would have been smaller. Or maybe he would have built some explosive devices and leveled the entire place before anyone could have lifted a finger to stop him. The body count is not the fucking point. The machinery he used is not the fucking point. He was a ticking time bomb and everyone who knew it dropped the ball. The system set in place to supposedly protect the students did and is doing more to cover its own ass than to protect any student.

Let me make it perfectly clear here, I am 100% for the right of responsible gun owners to own firearms, whether it be for self-defense, collecting or shooting sports. But honestly folks, the NRA and their ilk are out of control. They refuse to listen to anything even remotely like a reasonable proposal regarding gun control; not banning firearms of any kind but sensible restrictions that would prevent people who have a documented history of mental illness, violent behavior, stalking, or anything else that should raise screaming neon red flags during the process of a firearms sale. Honestly, what the fuck is the problem with that? This kid skated right through the current background check process even with the history he had without a single peep of alarm from the system. Forget the bullshit "waiting periods", slapping even more onerous cost on top of what it all ready costs to purchase a firearm or restricting certain firearms based on nothing more than cosmetic appearance. What we need is a background check system that takes this information into account. Everyone knew this kid had problems except the most important person: the one who sold him the guns. I can't blame the seller too much, he's not psychic and sometimes people with even grave mental illnesses can hide it very well when they feel the need. But this is what could have saved a lot of lives. Not total gun bans, not arming every third person on the frickin' campus or any of this other all-or-nothing bullshit I keep seeing. He could have been stopped and the people who needed to know he was trying to arm himself could have known about it but both the pro- and anti-gun sides are too busy wallowing in their own scare propaganda and locking antlers with each other to see it.

That's my peace on it folks. Discuss amongst yourselves.
HOLLYWOOD=_=FTW=_=
Member
+31|7002
Wait you said mental illness? you do realize probably like 35-50% of the united states can be classified as having some sort of mental illness. Im assuming you mean they meet both criteria having mental illness and a history of violence?
Snake
Missing, Presumed Dead
+1,046|7016|England

Its all very well looking back with hindsight, however, all of this is only coming to light after this atrocity has taken place.
Yes, they might improve the current system. However, human nature is lazy - especially in the modern era.
And unfortunatly, it takes something such as this to wake people up and realise there are holes in the system.

Then the system will be fixed. Somebody else will get around it, the authorities realise and amend the system, and so on...
davidonbf2
Banned
+19|6672
another thread, plz delete
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6979|Global Command
+1
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7186|Salt Lake City

I agree...+1.  Part of the problem stems from legislators like we have here in Utah.  They had a bill this year that would have taken the penalty for animal torture to a felony.  I'm not talking about neglectful pet owners, I'm talking about people that outright torture animals.  One of the leading legislators voted no on the bill because the felony would prevent them from every owning a firearm.

WHAT!?!?!?!?!  These are exactly the type of people that we don't want owning weapons, and it has been well documented that people that tortured animals often move on to do the same to humans.  I can't believe shere stupidity of some of the people that get voted into office!

Last edited by Agent_Dung_Bomb (2007-04-18 10:44:59)

Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6895|The Land of Scott Walker
Good post, HunterofSkulls.  The problem is the government would have to rely on hearsay to prevent certain people from having weapons.  This guy broke no law, so law enforcement could do nothing.  It would've saved lives to have something in place that this guy was red flagged in some way and tracked.  But do you really want a society like that?  Someone reports that you wrote a scary, violent story and suddenly you have black cars following you and your phones tapped?  I'm not sure how we could implement that level of control in a free society without shredding the Constitution to ribbon.
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|7099

Stingray24 wrote:

Good post, HunterofSkulls.  The problem is the government would have to rely on hearsay to prevent certain people from having weapons.  This guy broke no law, so law enforcement could do nothing.  It would've saved lives to have something in place that this guy was red flagged in some way and tracked.  But do you really want a society like that?  Someone reports that you wrote a scary, violent story and suddenly you have black cars following you and your phones tapped?  I'm not sure how we could implement that level of control in a free society without shredding the Constitution to ribbon.
That's an amazingly contradictory attitude, considering how fine and dandy you all are about the Patriot Act.
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6972|...

Well put. I have noticed the national news outlets saying, "How did he get the guns?".
The local news outlets (in Richmond, VA) said it like "Where did he buy the guns?".

Legal or not an individual like this would have found the guns one way or the other. You are blind if you think making guns illegal changes anything.

Last edited by jsnipy (2007-04-18 12:33:14)

DoobyScoo
Banned
+3|6671
But, it's about cost / benefit.

A future shattered for so many, for what?

I think it's time we gathered all these things into a pile and send them off to the scrap collector.

Is the right to own a gun so important to you that you are willing to stomach a periodic slaughter?

A compromise would be the allowance of hunting rifles. Bolt action only. Double barrel shotguns.


There is no rational reason whatsoever why people need high cap magazines, unless they want to kill a bunch of people.
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6804
When we had no gun laws at all we had alot less crime, Gun laws don't and never will acomplish anything.
You have no grasp at all about the NRA its message or Mission I think you mean the ILA Institute for Legislative Action.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2007-04-18 14:15:58)

Volatile
Member
+252|7154|Sextupling in Empire

DoobyScoo wrote:

But, it's about cost / benefit.

A future shattered for so many, for what?

I think it's time we gathered all these things into a pile and send them off to the scrap collector.

Is the right to own a gun so important to you that you are willing to stomach a periodic slaughter?

A compromise would be the allowance of hunting rifles. Bolt action only. Double barrel shotguns.


There is no rational reason whatsoever why people need high cap magazines, unless they want to kill a bunch of people.
There will always be alternative methods to slaughter people. The mental illness is the problem, not the peice of metal they used.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

Yes, maybe without a gun the body count would have been smaller. Or maybe he would have built some explosive devices and leveled the entire place before anyone could have lifted a finger to stop him.

Last edited by Volatile_Squirrel (2007-04-18 14:24:36)

Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6895|The Land of Scott Walker

Volatile_Squirrel wrote:

There will always be alternative methods to slaughter people. The mental illness is the problem, not the peice of metal they used.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

Yes, maybe without a gun the body count would have been smaller. Or maybe he would have built some explosive devices and leveled the entire place before anyone could have lifted a finger to stop him.
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6804
Happyland Disco Fire. 86 people die when a disgrunteld patron who was asked to leave returns with a gallon of gasoline.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2007-04-19 16:23:20)

Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6804
Is the right to own a gun so important to you that you are willing to stomach a periodic slaughter?
Is your personal fear so strong that you are willing to stomach the perodic Genocides that can only occur when the populace is disarmed ?
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7125|Canberra, AUS

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Is the right to own a gun so important to you that you are willing to stomach a periodic slaughter?
Is your personal fear so strong that you are willing to stomach the perodic Genocides that can only occur when the populace is disarmed ?
Funny, we have had any genocides since our population was disarmed...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
blisteringsilence
I'd rather hunt with Cheney than ride with Kennedy
+83|7152|Little Rock, Arkansas

DoobyScoo wrote:

But, it's about cost / benefit.
...
Is the right to own a gun so important to you that you are willing to stomach a periodic slaughter?
Hell, I'll be the asshole here.

Yes.

There is no freedom that comes without a cost. Cost/benefit wise, I see my right to own firearms as more important than the costs that are associated violence.

There will never be an effective ban in this country. Those who legally possess weapons will not willingly give them up as long as those who are going to use weapons to committ crimes (criminals) can illegally acquire them.

And that's where I stand.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard