Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut • Hacker News Board

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#121

Post by jwco » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:09 PM UTC

here is a way to combine technology and transparency to make it more difficult for someone to do this:

guns owned in America have mandatory geolocation installed. guns lock if geolocation is disabled or hacked, an alert is autosent to local people and authorities with the last known location, and law enforces speedy investigation of the guns whereabouts and reinstallation of the geolocator. i'd like an app that tells me where the nearest guns are to me and some info about who they belong to, i.e. police, citizen, military etc. if a gun is brought near public spaces, schools, theaters, etc., it should tweet, sms, or otherwise alert local police and anyone who would like to know. i'd like to also set my own alerts, such as alert me if a non-police gun is within a few hundred feet of my location, or my kid's location, etc. the constitution says there is a "right of the people to keep and bear arms," but does not use the word "right" to defend privacy.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#122

Post by bcoates » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:10 PM UTC

nwh wrote: post #78

grkballer44 wrote: post #39

Within a couple years this exact scenario will play out. A gunmen will talk in a crowded place loaded to the gills. Assault rifles, bullet proof vest, explosives hid around the building. He will pull out his gun and kill the poor unsuspecting first soul. After that initial shot someone with a concealed weapons permit is going to blow his brains out cutting his rampage short ( I truly hope the person who plays the her…

Then someone blows the old ladies brains out thinking that she is the shooter. Nice plan.

I always hear people worrying about this, but it doesn't sound likely at all. Has it ever happened?

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#123

Post by JagMicker » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #59

untog wrote: post #4

I can't wait until the part where we all don't talk about gun control and carry on as usual. Sigh. EDIT: I see my post is being downvoted. I know that it may come across as insensitive to immediately leap to the gun control debate, but frankly I'm more angry than upset by this news. How many times does it have to happen? We have a good 48 hours of emotional outpouring and then everyone forgets it ever happened.

Gun control is the easy answer. I want to know how we as a society can figure out why people get frustrated, depressed, or angry to the point that shooting up a kindergarten enters into the picture. We don't know the backstory here, but usually these events are all about someone whose life is spinning out of control for any of a dozen reasons, and either nobody has a clue that anything was wrong or everyone thought t…

It's easy to blame the person --- the offender. But when you think about the way society works, often times the most effective solutions to risk are a combination of social campaigns to educate the masses, as well as physical controls or barriers to prevent bad things from happening.

For example: think about speed bumps. Sure, we could just blame any drivers who crash into pedestrians in parking lots, but by adding speed bumps, we are reinforcing what people already know --- that speeding through parking lots can be dangerous.

Same thing with seatbelts --- you know that annoying chime that won't stop until you've buckled your seatbelt? Why do we need that? Why not simply blame any drivers who crash? Because it reminds people to do what they already know they should be doing. It reinforces safe behavior. It helps to reduce a burden on society --- the negative effects of fatal car accidents.

So I have a hard time whenever I hear someone say 'the problem isn't guns, it's the people who use them', because I think that's only part of the solution. Should people be allowed to purchase firearms "same-day" at gun shows? Should people be allowed to purchase and own as many guns and as much ammo. as they please? Is there something wrong with at least discussing possible reforms to make it more difficult for people to buy guns?

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#124

Post by habosa » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

marknutter wrote: post #58

malkia wrote: post #12

Horrible news. Also in China someone this morning stabbed 22 children at elementary school - wtf... http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2012/12/14/man-stabs-...

When are we going to start talking about knife control in a serious way?

Really not the time for jokes.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#125

Post by redthrowaway » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

purplelobster wrote: post #98

jacquesm wrote: post #56

The psychology behind the kind of people that could do a thing like this baffles me completely. Insanity doesn't begin to describe it. Parents should not have to worry about whether or not their children are safe in school. At the same time armed guards at school are not a solution either, then you might as well turn it into a mini prison. What a sad sad day. Even countries with gun control have instances like this (…

Can pro-gun people please stop using Switzerland as their go to argument? Do you know why they have so many guns? Because people who have done military service are required to keep a rifle locked up in their house. These are trained people who have gone through psychology tests and military training. That is very very fucking different than the situation in the US.

I'm Canadian, so my insight into the US' situation is limited, but the reason pro-gun people keep bringing up Switzerland is that it puts the lie to the idea that more guns, or even "scary" guns like assault rifles, leads to more crime. Switzerland has huge gun ownership by responsible, trained adults. In addition, it has incredibly low poverty, excellent social services, very low crime rates, and a very high GDP/capita. The argument among pro-gun liberals like myself is that it is the latter factors which affect gun crime far more than the mere prevalence of guns.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#126

Post by protomyth » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

untog wrote: post #92

protomyth wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would really rather we talk about mental health and brain chemistry. Objects are easy to vilify, but we are ignoring mental health in this country and this is the result. The number of people walking around with untreated Schizophrenia is seriously problematic. The shooter in NM set off so many warnings that were ignored by people in power that it should have been seen. When the dust settles, I would expect a simil…

While I agree with everything you've just said, I'm not sure what the answer is. You have to go and purchase a gun, it's extremely difficult to manufacture one yourself. So, there's a point of control, where we can check people (including, yes, for mental illness). But mental illness itself has no check point. How can we ensure that people do not have untreated Schizophrenia? Mandatory checks for everyone once a year…

It is increasing less difficult to manufacture a gun or really anything else that can do mass damage. 3D printers will become a reality and any lockouts won't last any longer than the DRM on a DVD.

We haven't put the money into brain research to figure out if there is a test we could do. Checkpoints are the easy part. Look at all the places we test for drugs (employment, school sports). If we figured out the mythical dipstick that tells if your brain chemistry is broken, I would imagine it would come up in a lot places that drug testing does now and probably be part of peoples regular checkups. We just don't have a clue and no amount of dealing with the how will fix the problem, we need to get the courage to look at the why.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#127

Post by InclinedPlane » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

DannoHung wrote: post #34

TallGuyShort wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say the same thing when people in oppressive regimes are silenced with no recourse because the government has no reason to fear it's own citizens. Sigh. I did not downvote your post, but frankly I'm angry that you just assume everyone who is pro-2nd amendment just isn't as enlightened as you are.

The weapons needed to resist a regime are not weapons we allow people to generally have in America at any rate. If we really believed in the 2nd Amendment, people would be allowed to own serious weapons of war but not be allowed to own concealable personal firearms.

Hardly. Just because the public doesn't have nuclear weapons doesn't mean that they are incapable of resisting an oppressive regime. Ordinary firearms are for more than sufficient for that purpose. A populace doesn't need to be able to defeat conventional armies on an open battlefield in order to resist oppression. What would be the likely result of, say, an American insurgency against an oppressive government? You wouldn't see militias fighting against tanks, that's just stupid. You would see widespread assassination. You'd see guerrilla attacks on police forces and so forth. You'd see guerrilla forces with ordinary firearms making targeted attacks to gain access to more powerful weaponry. You'd see the public at large making life more difficult for the forces of the regime while giving support to the forces of the insurgency.

A mass of civilians aren't going to be able to stand up to a column of tanks easily, but just a hundred civilians armed with AR-15s are going to be able to stand up even to massed police forces. And if an insurgency is supported by the public at large then life is not going to be easy for the police and the military. This is the way that all guerrilla wars go, and there are many examples of successful insurgencies when they have widespread popular support, even against very well armed government forces.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#128

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

sukuriant wrote: post #89

nollidge wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, because everybody with a concealed weapons permit is James Bond with perfect aim and cool nerves. Reality is a little bit messier than your fantasies.

The point was that "he with the gun holds the power" in those situations. And I'm sure the person with the gun feels like that. Make the odds of him having his tables turned on him by respectable law abiding citizens, and suddenly he'll be more afraid to do harm. Ideally. As a side note, she shouldn't shoot for the head anyway, especially if the bullet is going to go propelling out of the man. That's a great way to h…

> Make the odds of him having his tables turned on him by respectable law abiding citizens, and suddenly he'll be more afraid to do harm.

Uh, we're talking about people who are frequently suicidal and are mentally ill enough to shoot up a kindergarten. I suspect they're not weighing odds in a logical manner, somehow.

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#129

Post by JoeCortopassi » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:12 PM UTC

Listen, there are two parts to this: 1. The horrible tragedy, and 2. The hopes to prevent this from happening again. If we are going to talk about this, we need to all fall under the assumption that we agree that this is both a very tragic act perpetrated by someone who is obviously disturbed/mentally ill, and that it is all of our desires to do what we can to make sure senseless acts of violence like this never happen again.

So where do we go from here? How do we prevent this from happening again? It seems that there are two schools of thought (generalizing obviously): 1. Disarm everyone, and 2. Allow everyone to carry weapons. Regardless of which side you fall in, neither work perfectly unless they are complete (i.e. all weapons are gone thus criminals don't even have access, or everyone is armed and no one has the upper hand). The problem with both absolutes, is a deranged person will always find a means to carry out their ill will, whether that's a gun/knife/driving a car into a crowd.

The safest computer is encased in concrete, and buried 6 feet underground. Much in the same way, the safest society would have each of us locked in a room, with no interaction. What we have to figure out is this: How much liberty do we all give up, to limit the devastation of the senseless acts of a few?

Re: Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

#130

Post by jarcoal » Fri, Dec 14, 2012, 7:12 PM UTC

purplelobster wrote: post #77

bstewartny wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gun control cant and wont solve these problems. These are societal problems. Anyone insane and evil enough to kill children would get guns on the black market or use some other weapon such as a bomb. Schools need to able to have armed guards and better locked/secured entries IMO.

You make the logical fallacy that just because they CAN still get a gun, that it's equally likely that they will get a gun. It's not. Having to go through hoops to find a gun will result in fewer insane people having guns, it's that simple. It won't prevent all shootings, and certainly wouldn't work very well in the US, since you guys have been flooding the country with guns for a century. In other countries it works…

Couldn't agree with this more, but I'm not sure it's a valid argument in most people's eyes.

The Clackamas shooting was a perfect example of an incident that gun control likely would've prevented. It was not premeditated, it was a bad kid on a very bad day that found a gun easily. If he didn't find it, I think it's safe to wager he wouldn't have done it.