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

321–330 of 336 posts

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

#321

Post by lostlogin »

yozmsn wrote: post #290
jlgreco wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have missed the point. The US DoD, with all of its nukes, drones, intelligence, and cash is having trouble with a "fourth-world dictatorship".

This! nukes are not a serious weapon of war, their only use is deterrence because they completely rape any place where they're used so that that area is altogether off limits for the remaining life of humanity.

I get your point (weapon is too destructive). But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now.

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

#322

Post by lostlogin »

dbaupp wrote: post #236
gnu8 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

That's a ludicrous argument. There is a fairly good correlation with gun control and welfare states - I wonder if gun control is a communist plot.

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

#323

Post by opinali »

jlgreco wrote: post #275
opinali wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge difference between some fourth-world dictatorships, and the US with its nukes, drones, intelligence, $700B/year budget.

I think you have missed the point. The US DoD, with all of its nukes, drones, intelligence, and cash is having trouble with a "fourth-world dictatorship".

Exclusively due to the political costs of waging real war. Modern first-world countries have become too "soft" for war. (Which is a good thing of course.)

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

#324

Post by jlgreco »

opinali wrote: post #323
jlgreco wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have missed the point. The US DoD, with all of its nukes, drones, intelligence, and cash is having trouble with a "fourth-world dictatorship".

Exclusively due to the political costs of waging real war. Modern first-world countries have become too "soft" for war. (Which is a good thing of course.)

Yeah, I don't think we are going back to strategic/firestorm/nuclear bombing anytime in any foreseeable future.

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

#325

Post by jlgreco »

lookACamel wrote: post #319
jlgreco wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is sanity really a possibility here? Sure, we don't have a diagnosis, at least yet, but I would say by definition this person was not sane. A mass shooting is no crime of passion. It seems to me that there are two problems here. The first is that we suck at finding/handling the mentally ill. These mass shootings are rare, but the connection between crime and mental illness in this country is anything but. The second…

In order for someone to be considered "insane" in court they have to have a mental illness so severe it prevents them from comprehending the nature and consequences of their actions. Serial killers in general are perfectly aware of what they are doing, they just don't care about the judgement imposed by society on such actions and at the same time the personal payoff is too great to ignore.

Court smourt, the law can do as it pleases, though the guy is dead so that doesn't really matter here.

What we should be concerned with is how we as a society handle mental health as a medical condition, not as a legal defense. I am talking about early detection, treatment, and if necessary preemptive detainment, not about how we handle the people we who have already gone Rambo.

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

#326

Post by potatolicious »

lostlogin wrote: post #321
yozmsn wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This! nukes are not a serious weapon of war, their only use is deterrence because they completely rape any place where they're used so that that area is altogether off limits for the remaining life of humanity.

I get your point (weapon is too destructive). But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now.

> "But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now."

This is literally the most callous justification for nuking someone I have ever seen.

"It's not that bad guys. It's habitable now, 70 years later! If you didn't know better you would swear 80,000 didn't get instantly incinerated in nuclear fire, with over 125,000 more who died in slow agony over a few weeks of burns and radiation poisoning!"

I know Stalin said that a million deaths is just a statistic - but you weren't supposed to take Stalin to heart. Just sayin'.

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

#327

Post by jlgreco »

potatolicious wrote: post #326
lostlogin wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your point (weapon is too destructive). But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now.

> "But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now." This is literally the most callous justification for nuking someone I have ever seen. "It's not that bad guys. It's habitable now, 70 years later! If you didn't know better you would swear 80,000 didn't get instantly incinerated in nuclear fire, with over 125,000 more who died in slow agony over a few weeks of burns and radiation poisoning…

I don't think he is trying to justify anything...

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

#328

Post by lostlogin »

wlll wrote: post #186
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…

Option 3. Prevent widespread news coverage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4 Though that seems about as likely as "1.Disarm everyone".

Is it France that has some kid of law like this? Here in New Zealand papers have some kind of thing where suicides aren't usually reported where young people are concerned. I believe this relates to something the Ministry of Health organises.

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

#329

Post by lostlogin »

benjohnson wrote: post #311
eik3_de wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some data: In the US, there are about 3.45 homicides with firearms per 100,000 population per year. In Germany (where I live), this figure is 0.19, that is roughly factor 18.

I would counter that you need to go back 70 years to see how well a disarmed German population.

How well what? And why does one have to go back? Compare now to now.

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

#330

Post by lostlogin »

absconditus wrote: post #225
jcromartie wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Chicago is neighbors with cities and states where handguns are easy to obtain, and you don't need a passport to enter or leave Chicago.

Or the problem has nothing to do with access to guns.

I think your phrasing that wrong. If gun deaths are the problem, then guns are, by definition, going to be part of the problem. However their may be contributing or even bigger problems involved.
Post reply on HN