24 Hours, No MI School Shooting Topic?

Author: ludofl3x

Posts

Total: 70
#31
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Athias
'Demobilize' is as ridiculous as thinking the 2nd Amendment really is about fighting the government anymore.

The reason it hasn't worked before is the US never did proper brute force sting operations and programs such as paying people for their guns (yes, really it worked largely in Australia's anti gun campaign some years ago).

The US has to first have its populace to hate the weapons and not react to tragedies like this by saying 'OHHH WE GIVE MORE PEOPLE THE MORE GUNS AND THE SHOOTER WILL DIE QUICKER!' because that mentality, in practise, rarely comes to be the main way it gets used.
#32
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Hunting and shooting at targets. 

I have not seen a single if we gave the students guns there'd be less shootings comment once other than yours at least in this topic.
#33
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
it's your core stance, otherwise who fights back? You want allteachers carrying at all times? they'd just get hit first.

#34
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
It’s sad. Mental health is a big problem in the United States, especially after the pandemic.
I love how concerned the political right gets about mental health in the aftermath of every mass shooting. If only they cared about it at any other time.
#35
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Obviously it's not my core stance or  I would have said so. Do you want to be pissed off about guns be pissed off but don't make up s*** about me thanks.
#36
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
I love how concerned the political right gets about mental health in the aftermath of every mass shooting. If only they cared about it at any other time.
Uh I think I do. Depression, Anxiety, Alcoholism, and Drug Use have gone up during the pandemic. All of those are mental health related issues. 

But hey more lockdowns are on the table right?
#37
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
So when has the U.S. ever seriously attempted to regulate firearms?

There are no real comparisons to be made.

And for sure, if someone is intent on killing you, they will do so.

Murderous intent isn't the issue though.
#38
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
Uh I think I do. Depression, Anxiety, Alcoholism, and Drug Use have gone up during the pandemic. All of those are mental health related issues. 

But hey more lockdowns are on the table right?
I’m talking about as a way to stop mass shootings, but you know that. Of course the right will care about drug use when people in rural America are dying from opioids.
#39
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
I’m talking about as a way to stop mass shootings, but you know that. Of course the right will care about drug use when people in rural America are dying from opioids.
People everywhere are dying of drug use. I literally live in an inner city for half the year and the amount of drug use is insane. I have zero ties with rural America. Drug use is bad either way.

And to stop mass shootings, identification is most important. His parents, friends, teachers, and peers didn’t know. It’s why I always reach out to people who I think may be having a tough time. Even a little thing can go a long way.
#40
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
So when has the U.S. ever seriously attempted to regulate firearms?

There are no real comparisons to be made.

And for sure, if someone is intent on killing you, they will do so. 

Murderous intent isn't the issue though.

Are you advocating for the banning of all guns?
#41
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@ludofl3x
Discuss it, if it's a topic that interests them. As no one including you seems to be interested in discussing it, I conclude it's not that interesting a topic, which is another way to say "no one here cares about this." Maybe I should have posted in current events. 
But we are discussing it. I'm just not grasping that which you want said in this discussion. Do you want to discuss how you feel? It's not that the others aren't interested (though I couldn't tell you for sure,) it's just that the usual cast of members tend to discuss these topics frequently, and it's pretty clear what positions everyone has taken, so I can only presume that the lack of discussion is an attempt to avoid redundancy. It's unfortunate what happened to those children. However, I'm of the opinion that expressing my emotions on a social media platform does nothing for them or their families. So let me ask this: what do you believe the national response to these unfortunate murders should be?
#42
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
So when has the U.S. ever seriously attempted to regulate firearms?
So, by which standards would you have the U.S. seriously attempt to regulate firearms?

And for sure, if someone is intent on killing you, they will do so.
Unless you stop them.

Murderous intent isn't the issue though.
What is the issue?

Topic's author
#43
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Athias
 What's the deal, are we just indifferent, or do we not want to discuss it? 
That's the original question. You've answered it from your perspective: you're not indifferent but since this topic doesn't directly do anything for the victims, what's the point, you've said whatever you have to say in some other topic. 

Got it, you think this is a suitably substantive discussion of the topic, it's just not something you find useful. Next time I'll wade through all the pages of topics to find out what everyone thinks about school shootings, there's probably going to be another one next week, so that'll come in handy. 

 what do you believe the national response to these unfortunate murders should be?
Outrage, but that's just my opinion, and I'd settle for not forgetting about it after a few days. 
#44
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@ludofl3x
Next time I'll wade through all the pages of topics to find out what everyone thinks about school shootings, there's probably going to be another one next week, so that'll come in handy. 
You'd first have to figure out what it is you're looking for. If you're seeking to vent your frustrations, then you can simply state as much. Perhaps there's something you want to state, but are avoiding because it would trivialize your stated intentions. (I'm just guessing.) Whatever it is, just remember: no one here stated that they didn't care. That is a prejudicial statement which laces every sentence of your O.P. You resent that a topic wasn't created within 24 hours of the event--the solution simply would've been to create one yourself, and you did--but rather than invite discussion on the matter, you levied an accusation which would naturally provoke a defensive response. And rather than confront your issue with this presumed complacency you accuse the members here of indulging as it concerns school mass-shootings, you placed the onus on the members here to demonstrate to you that they care. In a discussion centered on emotions, here's a bit of advice: you can't control how people feel, much less, "how" they feel it. [It's protocol in any debate venue, at least as far as I'm concerned, to avoid discussions over emotions.]

Outrage, but that's just my opinion, and I'd settle for not forgetting about it after a few days. 
And what is it that outrage and remembrance will accomplish?
Topic's author
#45
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Athias

This is the entirety of my OP:

Just strikes me as strange, it's like we don't even care. I heard someone say "it was only three kids," which is disheartening as a parent. What's the deal, are we just indifferent, or do we not want to discuss it? 


but rather than invite discussion on the matter, you levied an accusation which would naturally provoke a defensive response. And rather than confront your issue with this presumed complacency you accuse the members here of indulging as it concerns school mass-shootings, you placed the onus on the members here to demonstrate to you that they care. 
Where's the accusation levied in those two sentences, explicitly? Where's me placing the onus on anyone to demonstrate that they care?

In a discussion centered on emotions, here's a bit of advice: you can't control how people feel, much less, "how" they feel it. [It's protocol in any debate venue, at least as far as I'm concerned, to avoid discussions over emotions.]
Cool, thanks for the unsolicited advice. Can I offer some in return? Suck my dick. 
#46
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
Where's the accusation levied in those two sentences, explicitly?
ludofl3x:

24 Hours, No MI School Shooting Topic?

Just strikes me as strange, it's like we don't even care.

Cool, thanks for the unsolicited advice. Can I offer some in return? Suck my dick. 
I'll pass; it didn't turn out well for the last guy you asked.

Next topic: "Fathers soliciting fellatio online. Should we care?"

Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.

#47
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@RationalMadman
I discuss it regularly. Takes real idiots to go IF ONLY ALL THOSE KIDS HAD GUNS TO KILL DA SHOOTA instead of realising the issue is that guns aren't difficult to get hold of.
Both arguments miss the point. There are plenty of places with high guns per capita and yet really low amounts of gun violence. 

Number of guns might have a tiny impact on school shootings, but it isn't the biggest or main impact. 

I Don't think anybody seriously suggests arming students as a solution either.  I heard some thought experiments about arming teachers, but nothing seriously suggested.

Some liberals are blaming guns, as just a convenient thing that appeals to voters, but the actual solution to these problems would involve  oth unpopular measures and also policies too complicated to appeal to the masses,  so you get politicians parroting shit like.


"Derp, make all guns illegal"

Or the less retarded, but still stupid take of

"Every kid should be monitored by the FBI, and the fact they shit posted online proves there were warning flags"


Topic's author
#48
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Wylted
What about the argument "we cant stop all gun violence, so why bother stopping any at all?"

We can trade strawmen all day. 
#49
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,613
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

The mother of a sophomore student accused of opening fire inside his Michigan high school previously wrote an open letter to former President Donald Trump praising his support for the Second Amendment. Well, as long as the Second Amendment includes mentally ill children.
#50
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
Nice but impossible.

Humans aren't programmed to be that sensible.
#51
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
As I said to ILikePie5....Nice but impossible.....You've got what you've got and no collective will to do any different.


Shared intent then....Guns just make it easy.....Though unpremeditated defence would be more luck than judgement, even for the best gunslinger.....Though my previous comment was with regard to any method of murderous intent, in relation to homicide rates.....And of course, random killings is random killings and guns make this modus operandi very easy.


But as I said the issue isn't intent per se.....The issue is guns.....Devices designed with specific outcomes in mind.


And of course the psychological effect that the handling of weapons induces, especially guns......Known as the weapons effect.....Seemingly a day to day aspect of the collective U.S. consciousness......Guns make you feel powerful and therefore safe.....Same as the other person though......A false sense of security as it were, based upon an acquired sense of insecurity.


So you survive and John Doe cops it....So what....Same difference as far as the neutral observer is concerned.....And there's millions of  people in the U.S that won't give either you or John Doe a second thought.

#52
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Wylted
Making guns illegal worked almost everywhere else in developed nations, especially for school shootings, surveillance is a very good idea when it comes to spotting dangerous individuals.
#53
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Nice but impossible.

Humans aren't programmed to be that sensible.
It’s interesting that no one ever talks about the positive uses of guns. Turns out guns can save lives too. But hey, whatever can be used for state propaganda right?
#54
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
As I said to ILikePie5....Nice but impossible.....You've got what you've got and no collective will to do any different.


Shared intent then....Guns just make it easy.....Though unpremeditated defence would be more luck than judgement, even for the best gunslinger.....Though my previous comment was with regard to any method of murderous intent, in relation to homicide rates.....And of course, random killings is random killings and guns make this modus operandi very easy.
To facilitate is not the same as to act. While guns make it easier to kill, so does a knife, a rope, bleach, etc. The "making it easier" argument adds little to nothing as far as justifying regulation or prohibition because if we were to take the rationale "easier = more dangerous" and apply it to another context, for example: "getting drunk makes it easier to 'date rape' therefore alcohol should be stringently regulated and/or prohibited, we'd see not only how ridiculous these conclusions are but also how impractical they are.

But as I said the issue isn't intent per se.....The issue is guns.....Devices designed with specific outcomes in mind.
Guns are designed to fire small aerodynamic projectiles from a clip and/or chamber. The target is subject to the decisions of the individual wielding it.

And of course the psychological effect that the handling of weapons induces, especially guns......Known as the weapons effect.....Seemingly a day to day aspect of the collective U.S. consciousness......Guns make you feel powerful and therefore safe.....Same as the other person though......A false sense of security as it were, based upon an acquired sense of insecurity.
And what about the psychological effect of projection? I have handled firearms. I haven't felt a sense of "security" as a result of an inner insecurity. Aren't you being presumptuous about a subject you couldn't possibly understand personally?

So you survive and John Doe cops it....So what....Same difference as far as the neutral observer is concerned.....And there's millions of  people in the U.S that won't give either you or John Doe a second thought.
It's interesting that you say that given that an overwhelming majority of registered firearm owners in the U.S. have never used their firearms in a violent act. In fact, most firearm related deaths are self-inflicted.


#55
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Guns can't decide or do anything.....Someone does or doesn't pull the trigger. 


Guns can save lives too.
But hey whatever can be used for the gun lobby propaganda, right? 
#56
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
A. You can't kill someone from a hundred meters away with a rope, and you'd be damn lucky to do it with a knife. Similarly you would need to be damn quick to run away from a gun.... Guns are designed to be effective remote killing machines.


B. "The target is subject etc"......Obviously.


C. I have handled firearms in a military capacity.......I can remember the first time I fired live rounds from an SLR. I certainly experienced a  sense of power, fear and an intense need for self control.

The weapons effect is a known psychological phenomena, which we will all be subject to. How an individual manages such emotions will depend upon a variety of factors.


D.
Most firearm deaths are self inflicted.
That's all right then?
#57
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
You can't kill someone from a hundred meters away with a rope, and you'd be damn lucky to do it with a knife. Similarly you would need to be damn quick to run away from a gun
And how often do firearm related homicides happen from 100 meters away?

Guns are designed to be effective remote killing machines.
And baseball bats were designed to hit baseballs, but that doesn't mean one cannot bludgeon another over the head with one. "Design" submits to intentions. 

B. "The target is subject etc"......Obviously.
Is it? Because then what is the relevance of your reference to "design"?

I have handled firearms in a military capacity.......

I can remember the first time I fired live rounds from an SLR. I certainly experienced a  sense of power, fear and an intense need for self control.
And how many of those you allege experience this weapons effect have handled firearms in a military capacity like you? I'm not stating that it's impossible for individual firearm owners to experience this "weapons effect," which I don't believe you're describing accurately, only that it's presumptuous of you to assume it's relevant or plays a key role in firearm possession.

The weapons effect is a known psychological phenomena, which we will all be subject to.
I've just told you that I've never experienced this effect. So which one of us is right?

That's all right then?
I reserve affirmation and negation, since suicide can be its own detailed discussion. But is the crusade to regulate and/or prohibit firearm ownership really about suicides? It's not even a little bit about suicide.
#58
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
But hey whatever can be used for the gun lobby propaganda, right? 

or Kyle Rittenhouse. Gun saved his life. No lobbyist needed.
#59
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Well...It's undeniably a presumption that Rittenhouse's life was in danger.

But Rittenhouse's gun undeniably took two lives.

Your argument is undeniably false.
#60
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Your argument is undeniably false.

That's also a presumption. Let's undeniably measure the amount of fight or flight chemicals in your body when you get hit with the sharp edge of a skateboard on a undeniably vital area on your body.


Lets measure those undeniable levels. Or you can undeniably huddle behind your keyboard as well.

12 jurors undeniably thought his life was in danger. Which is now an undeniable court record due to double jeopardy protections in the USA.

Your opinion is undeniably false.