Gun control

[185248]

Isis has a nice arse ...Crappy hair though and no shoes...............................

 

[10silverdollars]

Those who have died by gunshot not of their choosing need to be heard. Those that wish to sick their hea



Where did I mention "acts of God"?

I will, probably, and can prove a comet or meteorite which wiped out the dinosaurs or prior life which we dig up the bones of on this wee planet which led to our humble beginnings.

We have lived here on this little planet that is about 5 billion years old, give or take, (it's only a human technological estimate). Humankind is about 200 thousand of those years, give or take.

We have not evolved a great deal in the past 5,000 years...why is that?

By the way ISIS for me is this...way before some submental terrorist group. You must be very young to be so ignorant......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

Get back on your meds--your posts are erratic and incoherent.

 

[185248]

Answer the question I have asked. Did I mention as you have said "acts of god"? It's quite simple you know.

 

[temptotalk]

temptotalk,
the Chattanooga killer was an engineering school graduate; my scenario would a call for a microbiology student smart enough to teach himself or avail himself of timed gas propellant release, plus access to virulent pathogens.
For binary nerve agent attacks, just pick up Frederick Forsythe's The Devil's Alternative.
Russia never did destroy its weaponized smallpox, and who knows where that might have gotten to after the disorganized collapse of the USSR.
Some bioweapons could be deployed just by inoculating fomites (touched surfaces).

I don't think you understand my point. Sure, it's possible. But they didn't decide to do as you say, mainly because it's easier to shoot someone in the face than it is to read a book, use engineering skills, use microbiology skills, learn a new skill or anything like that. Getting your hands on and retaining a weapon is much much easier than any of the things you mentioned. Even when you've displayed hatred for another group. Even when you've displayed mental health issues. Even when you've shown aggression towards a spouse.

We aren't talking bio-weapons because no matter which way you look at it, it still calls for effort (that and this is the gun control thread). A gun is the most lazy and frankly least masculine way to kill someone. Hell even video games take more effort to use. Thats the point. And thats why they use guns. It's the lowest investment with the highest outcome.

 

[Fuzzy_]

Then you go right ahead and walk peacefully into the concentration camp/reeducation camp/gas chamber. If you don't want a "pew pew stick" don't get one.

Apparently you haven't visited the Police Misconduct thread. Fuzzy would be the first wuzzy to step out of a crowd to denounce abuse of state authority.

You willfully, and Fuzzy must say ignorantly, conflate guns and freedom.

Washington didn't defeat the agents of tyrannical royal crown, the most powerful military in the world, with speech. He killed them...with "pew pew sticks".

Whether or not England could have destroyed the colony is another debate. But one thing is certain: talk of tyranny is vastly overblown by the Right -- especially by gun nuts. The colonists had a very high standard of living and there is very little evidence of "tyranny."

Who started to Boston Massacre, and how many people died?

BO thinks "pew pew sticks" are effective tools for folks facing a regime that doesn't represent them...

Fuzzy never stated that guns aren't effective in warfare. Infantry rifles are very effective at killing people. The question is, why do people want an infantry rifle (or similar rifle) in their homes?

 

[10silverdollars]

I don't think you understand my point. Sure, it's possible. But they didn't decide to do as you say, mainly because it's easier to shoot someone in the face than it is to read a book, use engineering skills, use microbiology skills, learn a new skill or anything like that. Getting your hands on and retaining a weapon is much much easier than any of the things you mentioned. Even when you've displayed hatred for another group. Even when you've displayed mental health issues. Even when you've shown aggression towards a spouse.

We aren't talking bio-weapons because no matter which way you look at it, it still calls for effort (that and this is the gun control thread). A gun is the most lazy and frankly least masculine way to kill someone. Hell even video games take more effort to use. Thats the point. And thats why they use guns. It's the lowest investment with the highest outcome.

temptotalk,
I agree with every point you make. Let me just make mine again because I don't find our points contradictory. We have gotten accustomed to gun crime. Even with the latest Alexandria shootings, the press is more concerned with sentimentalizing the victims and exploring the shooter's psychopathy than with the murders. Another shooting, ho hum. But there are dead beautiful young women who had so much to live for, let us elegize them.... Let us look past the murders and dwell poignantly on youth who had so much to live for.... (ah, the media--don't get me started).

But just let someone magnify the terror by CBW attack, and they will get lots more attention, and that's what a mass murderer wants. Can you imaging an epidemic of small pox or anthrax or ebola? Can you imagine 150 people killed in a singe theater with stolen M687 or sarin? It would take more effort, but wouldn't the terror be greater? I'm even tempted to think that the repeated instances of norovirus on cruise ships may indicate that someone may be experimenting... You can get norovirus from an infected person, contaminated food or water, or by touching contaminated surfaces (fomites, as mentioned above).

Japan experienced sarin terrorism back in 1995--it's here already.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

It can happen here, and let's not underestimate the opponent.

 

[temptotalk]

temptotalk,
I agree with every point you make. Let me just make mine again because I don't find our points contradictory. We have gotten accustomed to gun crime. Even with the latest Alexandria shootings, the press is more concerned with sentimentalizing the victims and exploring the shooter's psychopathy than with the murders. Another shooting, ho hum. But there are dead beautiful young women who had so much to live for, let us elegize them.... Let us look past the murders and dwell poignantly on youth who had so much to live for.... (ah, the media--don't get me started).

But just let someone magnify the terror by CBW attack, and they will get lots more attention, and that's what a mass murderer wants. Can you imaging an epidemic of small pox or anthrax or ebola? Can you imagine 150 people killed in a singe theater with stolen M687 or sarin? It would take more effort, but wouldn't the terror be greater? I'm even tempted to think that the repeated instances of norovirus on cruise ships may indicate that someone may be experimenting... You can get norovirus from an infected person, contaminated food or water, or by touching contaminated surfaces (fomites, as mentioned above).

Japan experienced sarin terrorism back in 1995--it's here already.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

It can happen here, and let's not underestimate the opponent.

Yes lets not underestimate the opponent. That i can agree with. Underestimating an opponent usually means thinking they are less important or less blank. With that said you are underestimating mass shooters just by way of paying more attention to other forms of terrorism instead of trying to find out why they both happen. Your focus is squarely on the how instead of the why. I would imagine that either you're big on fear mongering or have been highly susceptible to it. Either way the laziness of mass shooters should get more attention. If only to point out the flaws in gun laws and what not.

 

[tncentaur]

Answer the question I have asked. Did I mention as you have said "acts of god"? It's quite simple you know.

OK, demanding brat, here you go.
In a previous post you mention 'earth quakes, tsunamis, floods, famine, tornadoes, cyclones'
a quick reference to act of god in Wikipedia defines acts of god as events 'outside human control, such as sudden natural disasters, for which no one can be held responsible.'
Asked and answered--take your meds! And I'm putting you on 'ignore'.

 

[10silverdollars]

Yes lets not underestimate the opponent. That i can agree with. Underestimating an opponent usually means thinking they are less important or less blank. With that said you are underestimating mass shooters just by way of paying more attention to other forms of terrorism instead of trying to find out why they both happen. Your focus is squarely on the how instead of the why. I would imagine that either you're big on fear mongering or have been highly susceptible to it. Either way the laziness of mass shooters should get more attention. If only to point out the flaws in gun laws and what not.

Well, gee, I don't think of myself as a fearmonger and would never consciously do that. And susceptible? Well, I don't think that I am. I simply adduced proof that bioterrorism is already here. I am very interested in forensic psychology as well. But can you tell me what we learned from Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner,

 

[10silverdollars]

Well, gee, I don't think of myself as a fearmonger and would never consciously do that. And susceptible? Well, I don't think that I am. I simply adduced proof that bioterrorism is already here. I am very interested in forensic psychology as well. But can you tell me what we learned from Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner,

sorry, I hit the post button by accident.
and other mass murders that can be assembled into a prophylaxis for such crimes? The laziness of shooters does't concern me at all. I am trying to limit the possibilities of my being a victim as much as I can. You are free to do as you wish.

 

[10silverdollars]

temptotalk,
Now that I am at a keyboard and not a tablet, let me reset.
The problem I have with forensic psychological analysis of mass-murder shooters is that it hasn't led to a prophylaxis (a means of prevention). The psychopathology of individuals can be so different that we can't come up with a way to prevent a first occurrence. We simply react to shooters, and try to discover why they did what they did. The motivations are ideological, religious, political, pathological, economic, and what have you. Understanding it is not the same as preventing it. I honestly don't see where profiling has resulted in prevention of a first occurrence: it is used to prevent subsequent recurrences and identify and apprehend the terrorist, shooter, what have you.
What did we learn from Charles Whitman, Jared Loughner, Nidal Hasan, James Holmes, Adam Lanza, Aaron Alexis, Mohammed Abdulazeez, et al. that could have prevented the latest killing by John Russel Houser? Explaining what happened doesn't constitute prevention. They were male and they owned a gun (like so many of us...).
I never suggested that no one go to the movies. All I'm saying is that I won't be shot in a theater, and I'm also saying that theaters have been twice-proven in three years to be venues for mass murder.
I am concerned about bioterror because I have the training to understand how easily it could be done. It may not be as easy as shooting a 'pew pew stick', but there are those who would rather play chess than checkers--have a taste for the complex rather than the simple (what you call 'lazy').
I don't want to quarrel with you. I think you're getting personal by calling me a fear-monger and being susceptible. I never engaged in such with you. I want to preserve comity in the exchange.

 

[temptotalk]

temptotalk,
Now that I am at a keyboard and not a tablet, let me reset.
The problem I have with forensic psychological analysis of mass-murder shooters is that it hasn't led to a prophylaxis (a means of prevention). The psychopathology of individuals can be so different that we can't come up with a way to prevent a first occurrence. We simply react to shooters, and try to discover why they did what they did. The motivations are ideological, religious, political, pathological, economic, and what have you. Understanding it is not the same as preventing it. I honestly don't see where profiling has resulted in prevention of a first occurrence: it is used to prevent subsequent recurrences and identify and apprehend the terrorist, shooter, what have you.
What did we learn from Charles Whitman, Jared Loughner, Nidal Hasan, James Holmes, Adam Lanza, Aaron Alexis, Mohammed Abdulazeez, et al. that could have prevented the latest killing by John Russel Houser? Explaining what happened doesn't constitute prevention. They were male and they owned a gun (like so many of us...).
I never suggested that no one go to the movies. All I'm saying is that I won't be shot in a theater, and I'm also saying that theaters have been twice-proven in three years to be venues for mass murder.
I am concerned about bioterror because I have the training to understand how easily it could be done. It may not be as easy as shooting a 'pew pew stick', but there are those who would rather play chess than checkers--have a taste for the complex rather than the simple (what you call 'lazy').
I don't want to quarrel with you. I think you're getting personal by calling me a fear-monger and being susceptible. I never engaged in such with you. I want to preserve comity in the exchange.

If you're talking 100% prevention then of course not. When it comes to prevention though, i think better gun control is a good start. The reaction is the same for all terrorist acts. And that is to prevent or cull it from happening again. I can imagine that many more mass shootings have been prevented. That isn't something that can be proven with evidence but i'm sure more guys out there have wanted to but have not for a whole host of reasons. Understanding it isn't the same as preventing it but how can you prevent something you don't understand. Sure many of their motivations does seem to be ideaology but everyone on this planet has ideology ideas. Yet only a certain number of people take them to extremes. To me that screams a lack of full understanding.

The parts you're missing when it comes to the understanding aspect of these things are the economical aspects, the isolation aspect, the lack of dealing with masculinity aspect, the susceptibility to extreme views, the lacking of world knowledge and history, the lack of emotional connections with everyday people, the lack of skills with regard to rejection and etc.

It's more to it then that but apply everything i just said to every last mass murderer and i'm sure you'll find that most of those points are to a certain degree accurate. The issue though, is those things largely haven't been addressed in america. I do agree that profiling doesn't always work. When a profiler has a bias then all it'll do is make more issues and make matters worse. Bias. It keeps certain individuals in darkness and others in the spot light.

So much so that some no longer want to be in the darkness. They want to see their name in lights like they have been told it was all their life. And when they hit low points, for whatever reason, they'll do anything to get into that light.

I don't want to quarrel with you either but i still have no idea why bioterror is so important that it needs to be talked about in the gun control thread. Two completely different things. Which made me wonder why you were so insistent. My conclusion, and i very well could be wrong, was that either you were trying to scare the shit out of people or someone scared you so bad with regards to biowarfare that you now couldn't tell the difference between gun control and bioterrorism. Both assumptions of your actions still meaning we are off of an important topic.

 

[Boobalaa]

I'm interested in the Public Health issues aspect, since bio-terror was interjected into a "gun control" discussion. "Gun Control"happens to be the label affixed to this issue by the Gun Lobby, framing it as a control issue. From a public health aspect, The questions raised about the benefits vs. the detriments of firearms depend on regional/cultural preferences.
Using the example of going to the movies when one has a cold, or the flu, unbeknownst to the other movie-goers, how many catch the flu or cold depends a many many variable. With public health issues, just because a part of society chooses habits that risk their health, the rest of society is entitled to protections from the effects of these habits under the law.

 

[185248]

Well, gee, I don't think of myself as a fearmonger and would never consciously do that. And susceptible? Well, I don't think that I am. I simply adduced proof that bioterrorism is already here. I am very interested in forensic psychology as well. But can you tell me what we learned from Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner,

Wow, you can use google really, really good. How about you speak for yourself instead of using google for an excuse or reason when you place your foot in your mouth.

Are you able to multiply numbers in your head without google or a calculator?

 

[185248]

You shirk responsibility for what you say on to anything or anyone else instead of just saying I said that. Forensic Psych, good for you. Make sure you put your name to what you deduce.

 

[10silverdollars]

Above, you say think 'better gun control is a good start'. I tried to access your profile page to see if you live in the US. Do you, and what do you propose as better gun control specifically in the US?

 

[tncentaur]

YEither way the laziness of mass shooters should get more attention. If only to point out the flaws in gun laws and what not.

Wrong focus: the laziness of mass shooters doesn't need any attention: the crime and motivation for it do, as well as prevention.

And how the laziness of a mass shooter points out flaws in gun laws? It can't, and you know it.

 

[tncentaur]

. My conclusion, and i very well could be wrong, was that either you were trying to scare the shit out of people or someone scared you so bad with regards to biowarfare that you now couldn't tell the difference between gun control and bioterrorism. /QUOTE]
The poster to which you reply doesn't deserve the either/or fallacy you indulge, viz. 'either you were trying to scare the shit out of people or someone scared you so bad with regards to biowarfare that you now couldn't tell the difference between gun control and bioterrorism'. He may be way off topic, but that isn't grounds for your argumentation error and condescension.

10silverdollars, why not open a thread on cbw-terrorism? I found what you had to say interesting but off-topic in this thread.

 

[temptotalk]

Wrong focus: the laziness of mass shooters doesn't need any attention: the crime and motivation for it do, as well as prevention.

And how the laziness of a mass shooter points out flaws in gun laws? It can't, and you know it.

So you don't think the ease with which mass shooters not only got a hold of guns and the ease with which they used these guns has anything to do with gun laws?

Brother of Louisiana Theater Shooter: 'We Saw No Sign of This'

Authorities said John Houser was once denied a concealed weapons permit in Alabama in 2006 because of a domestic violence complaint and a previous arrest in the arson plot. The Hi-Point .40-caliber handgun he used to fire 15 shots in the Lafayette theater Thursday night was bought legally in Phenix City, Alabama, in 2014, police said.

And now a little about his background.

A divorce filing showed that John Houser had made threats to family members, had been hospitalized for mental conditions and had a history of "extreme erratic behavior." He was also arrested in 1989 in a plot to burn down a lawyer's office, and the judge ordered a mental evaluation.

I don't know about you but i would like for there to be laws in place to keep guys like that from getting their hands on weapons.

Just so we're clear.

He had extreme views toward others.
Was known for having mental issues.
Threatened his own family members.
He was arrested.
Was still able to get his hands on a gun.

So, tell me. Why can't i? What exactly is it that i know again? His background was quite literally screaming where he was headed or could have been heading. Yet and still he easily got his hands on a weapon that he could then easily kill others with. I know hide sight is 20/20 but i can imagine this sort of thing happens all the time. If at first you don't succeed. Try another gun shop. Thats the knowledge that could help prevent these things from happening. No one with a history of violence should be let near a weapon. And no one with a history of threatening their family or spouse should be let near a weapon. And those with extreme views should be looked at way more closely then they are now and possibly not let anywhere near a weapon.

Everything he did speaks to his motivation. And it also speaks to how to prevent it.

 

[tncentaur]

So you don't think the ease with which mass shooters not only got a hold of guns and the ease with which they used these guns has anything to do with gun laws?

Brother of Louisiana Theater Shooter: 'We Saw No Sign of This'



And now a little about his background.



I don't know about you but i would like for there to be laws in place to keep guys like that from getting their hands on weapons.

Just so we're clear.

He had extreme views toward others.
Was known for having mental issues.
Threatened his own family members.
He was arrested.
Was still able to get his hands on a gun.

So, tell me. Why can't i? What exactly is it that i know again? His background was quite literally screaming where he was headed or could have been heading. Yet and still he easily got his hands on a weapon that he could then easily kill others with. I know hide sight is 20/20 but i can imagine this sort of thing happens all the time. If at first you don't succeed. Try another gun shop. Thats the knowledge that could help prevent these things from happening. No one with a history of violence should be let near a weapon. And no one with a history of threatening their family or spouse should be let near a weapon. And those with extreme views should be looked at way more closely then they are now and possibly not let anywhere near a weapon.

Everything he did speaks to his motivation. And it also speaks to how to prevent it.