Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

news.blogs.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 336 posts

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

#231

Post by InclinedPlane »

jevinskie wrote: post #156
InclinedPlane wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 w…

This is precisely true. You need not look further than America's troubled middle east wars to see how devastating a small guerrilla force can be. Some of the insurgents are using Mosin-Nagant rifles, a Russian bolt-action rifle that dates back to 1891!

It's also worth pointing out that in Iraq, for example, the insurgents did not have very much popular support and yet still made things tough for the most powerful conventional army in history. In fact, it was the erosion of that small amount of popular support that turned things around, as much as it was the increased troop levels in the surge before the US finally completely pulled out.

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

#232

Post by hyperbovine »

chill1 wrote: post #95
vyrotek wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, the analogy is silly. The point really is that [Noun] Control is impossible. What about crossbows, knives and rocks? Things aren't the problem. People are the problem.

It is very easy to kill someone with a gun.. It is also very easy to imagine how impersonal an experience it can be doing so. If you have to use a knife to kill someone, you are going to have to get very close to them to do it. You're going to have to be very aware of what you're doing. With a gun.. not so much.

Why hypothesize?: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910.

_At least _ two seriously wounded.

"Guns don't kill people..."

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

#233

Post by thetabyte »

schrototo wrote: post #229
JoeCortopassi wrote: post #129

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 happ…

It is utterly fascinating to me how much discussion there is around this, here on this forum and in other places. In no other country in the world would this even be a debate... Of course you want to disarm everyone! That is the only sensible option! There is absolutely no need why anyone , save members of the executive branch enforcing the government's monopoly on violence, would ever need to carry a firearm. "Self…

I'm genuinely interested—is this the consensus opinion of most of the developed world outside of the US?

I'm a US citizen, and generally consider myself liberal and progressive. I favor much stricter gun control laws. But I'm not sure I do favor complete disarmament of the citizenship. I do believe that the knowledge—not the use—of citizen's arms does provide a reminder to the government in times of crisis.

But am I simply experiencing large cultural bias? Is there any research on this? Any evidence I can look to? I'm very curious.

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

#234

Post by dbaupp »

untog wrote: post #30
balanceiskey15 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, why don't we bring it back to technology then? Everyday on HN there's this drone about the next Instagram or 37 Signals. Or who will produce better email or flamewars regarding the next dominant mobile OS. Time wasted, honestly (Oh yeah, 'I figured out project management, again.') Where's the debate on HN on how best to handle gun control in the U.S. using technology? Can this community not produce answers for…

Well, I think this is an example of technology not being able to solve everything. Computers are logical and deal in absolutes. People are the exact opposite. Gun control is an emotional, sometimes irrational issue, and the solutions (I suspect) lie in societal changes. Gun control doesn't need advanced technology, as far as I can see. But I'd be interested to know what ideas people have.

> Computers are logical and deal in absolutes

A classic anti-technology strawman. It is like saying "Computers only use numbers, you can't do graphics or text with them".

At the very lowest level computers are entirely logical, but you can program one to deal with uncertainties and probabilities.

In fact that argument isn't quite relevant, unless you are arguing against the computers making the policy decisions, which I think was never under consideration.

Computers/technology can certainly be a strong tool to assist gun control.

One idea completely off the top of my head would be to data-mine as much info as possible about past shooting/shooters and then use this to help guide granting (or not) of gun licenses. With Bayesian this-and-that, the computer could give a number "estimated 0.000001% chance of serial killing" and refer the application to the appropriate person (e.g. a detailed analysis for people "at risk" (large probability), or a quicker check for "safer" people).

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

#235

Post by IgorPartola »

davidcuddeback wrote: post #204
IgorPartola wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So perhaps you'd like your neighbor to acquire a nuke or smallpox-based vaccine. Sure, he's a great guy and will never use these things, and besides, nukes have plenty of other purposes in a household. Their primary reason is totally not for killing people, so this is all good, right?

Let's not resort to reductio ad absurdum arguments, please. There's plenty of rationale arguments that you could have made instead. No one's suggesting that people should be allowed to keep nuclear bombs in their homes, and your metaphor is untenable.

Well, I do see someone suggesting that spoons and guns are functionally equivalent, and that if we regulate guns we must regulate spoons.

But you are right, no reason to resort to this.

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

#236

Post by dbaupp »

gnu8 wrote: post #190
dsl wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disreputable dealer? I absolutely agree, any car used in a drunk driving accident should be traced back to the dealer responsible, and they should be punished. If you can determine in advance who the "wrong hands" are, I'm sure the TSA would love to speak to you and dump buckets of money over your head.

Or cars used in any accidents. Thousands of people die in car collisions every year, accidental and intentional, whether they were drunk or sober, reckless or diligent, or just an innocent pedestrian or cyclist who happened to have bad luck that day. A few days ago someone posted a web site called http://www.banthecar.com where they laid out detailed arguments for banning all cars, because of all the problems they ca…

> history of gun control being used to enable racism and genocide

Reference? (Genuine question.)

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

#237

Post by sgarman »

habosa wrote: post #124
marknutter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Really not the time for jokes.

I think any conversation is better then no conversation be it a joke or not. The comment actually brought out some really great points on the issue.

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

#238

Post by r00fus »

baddox wrote: post #180
r00fus wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Disarm everyone, and 2. Allow everyone to carry weapons. Nice strawmen. There are obviously options in the middle, namely, increasing traceability of weapons and ammo and shutting down channels that where weapons are allowed to change hands anonymously. The proliferation of weapons is one thing, but the fact that these tragedies occur and we don't have a way to follow the chain back to the disreputable dealer wh…

I think you mean false dichotomy, not straw man.

No, they're strawmen. Extreme positions that a very small percentage of people support - so you can knock them down and look like a reasonable figure as long as you don't support the extreme.

Look at example 2.5 here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man#Structure

By reducing the argument to one extreme vs. another extreme, these are strawmen arguments... very few support either extreme, so the commenter can then knock down the arguments and look reasonable saying pretty much anything.

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

#239

Post by crazygringo »

This may seem tangential, but I swear it's not. We live in a country (US) where growth and progress is measured primarily in GDP. Poverty is measured economically. People's happiness is blithely assumed to be some kind of function of their economic well-being, especially because that can be measured.

There are alternative ideas like "Gross National Happiness" that attempt to measure what could arguably be called the end, as opposed the means (economic). This is generally presented as an alternative goal, to raise the "GNH" of a country. And it's certainly a valid one.

But what if, even more importantly, it's not the gross "national happiness", but rather its distribution?

The perpetrator in this horrible tragedy was clearly horribly unhappy, and almost certainly with severe mental problems. But this isn't a private concern, because in cases like this it becomes a national problem.

When are we going to stop concentrating so much on economic progress and GDP, and start considering how our society and institutions provide for people at the bottom rung of the "happiness" ladder? When are we going to move mental health from a "side issue" about "sick people" that "doesn't concern me", to a central national priority?

There's so much work to be done, and it's barely even a blip in the conversation.

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

#240

Post by notdrunkatall »

econnors wrote: post #230
notdrunkatall wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right to bear arms isn't some trivial notion to be tossed aside when it is no longer convenient to maintain. It is a fundamental right that was given to the people by those who founded our government that we would be able to fight back against that same government were it to ever become oppressive. Every day, we increasingly see the infringement of our civil liberties, and it seems obvious that the desire of the…

The problem with this argument is that guns would do little to counteract an oppressive government. What about the airplanes, the navy, the artillery that our military possess? Guns are hardly a "final check against the formation of a potentially oppressive regime."

Afghanistan.
Post reply on HN