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

Thinking the unthinkable

anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 462 posts

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#211

Post by gwern »

richcollins wrote: post #52
msutherl wrote: post #3

This is incredibly important. Every time I talk to people from outside of the country about the US, the first thing that comes up is the difficulty of obtaining proper healthcare.

Is there any evidence that healthcare would help with this situation?

> At least we have health insurance now. I recently accepted a position with a local college, giving up my freelance career because when you have a kid like this, you need benefits. You’ll do anything for benefits. No individual insurance plan will cover this kind of thing.

If nothing else, she probably liked her career (else why hadn't she gone to the college in the first place?)

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#212

Post by evan_ »

bambax wrote: post #161
gyardley wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know HN frowns upon any kind of "political" discussion, so I'll won't elaborate too much, but can someone please explain why a school teacher would have three guns in her house, one of them a Glock semi-automatic pistol?? She liked to go shooting? It's a lot of fun to do. I cannot understand for the life of me why the focus here is on guns. Americans have had ready access to guns throughout America's history, but m…

> She liked to go shooting? It's a lot of fun to do. She liked to go shooting with a Glock?? And she needed to keep the gun (and ammunition) in her home? It isn't true that "Americans have had ready access to guns throughout America's history"; talking about the "Second Amendment" makes it seem that nothing has changed since the 18th century, but the truth is the current situation started no earlier than the 1960s. A…

> She liked to go shooting with a Glock??

Yes??? What do you think a glock is, just out of curiosity? It's a completely boring handgun.

Semi-automatic doesn't mean what you think it does. Basically all modern guns are semi-automatic. It's a broad classification.

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#213

Post by confusedNRA »

dr_ wrote: post #79

I feel for the parent who has written the article, and whereas I agree we must do more to address the needs of kids with mental illness, I disagree with the stated premise of the article, that it's easy to talk about guns. It's actually not easy to talk about guns in this country, which has led to a lack of any serious gun control regulation. It borders on insanity when we look at the type of weaponry we allow our ci…

"It borders on insanity when we look at the type of weaponry we allow our citizens to purchase..."

"The nra is a terrorist organization."

Wow. Just plain wow. It's probably pointless to respond to your post, considering the emotions you are displaying regarding this topic, you probably won't even listen to a single thing, no matter, at least others who see this reply might understand just how perturbed you really are.

It is a founding principal of america for individuals to maintain and own weapons. Let's just start right there. Since there are many countries with the kind of gun laws you apparently want, I'd suggest moving to them. Reason being, is owning your own weapon isn't a passing fad, it's a mentality that will not be broken by you or anybody else. The best course of action for you, might be to leave america for other countries that place safety above an individuals freedom.

" the answer to preventing what happened in Connecticut from happening again is extremely strong gun control regulation."

Well then I'm sure are glad you are here to tell us the answer. I really would like to hear this, because Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control regulation in the country. The guns the kid used in the shooting were stolen from his mother. Exactly what sort of legislation on the books, beside from a complete ban altogether, would have helped?

I'm personally insulted by your insinuations that the nra is a terrorist organization, and I'm insulted by your blanket statements regarding gun ownership.

"but at least it prevents tragedies of this sort from occurring."

Yes, lets impede on the freedom of a majority, because a minority are unable to handle something. That is possibly the worst logic a person could use. That somehow everybody should be punished because a statistical fraction of users are unstable.

You sir, are part of the problem.

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#214

Post by [deleted] »

bambax wrote: post #107

> Then another tortured soul shoots up a fast food restaurant. A mall. A kindergarten classroom. There are crazy people in every country on earth, many (most) of which have worse "health care" systems than the US; yet only in the US do kids shoot other kids with automatic weapons. I very much doubt it has anything to do with mental health (nowhere else in the world are young children medicated for being kids to such…

[deleted]

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#215

Post by [deleted] »

thefreeman wrote: post #194
kamaal wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Urdu we have a proverb it translates to English as - "Treat your teachers beating, as a garland you could receive in the future". I agree corporal punishment is cruelty. But some minimal beating must be allowed to put things in order. My mom is a teacher, and back here in the past and to some extent now. Beating kids in school in India was the norm. She tells me many parents would come ask the teachers to not beat…

As I have never raised children, I can't speak from experience. But I feel like the same thing occurs in nature. Occasionally the parent needs to establish dominance. I am not advocating beating your kids, but if they are hell bent on testing the limits I think you have to show them that there is definitely a line that can not be crossed.

[deleted]

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#216

Post by confusedNRA »

eloisant wrote: post #87

It good to talk about mental illness, but the debate on guns is still relevant. Here is a similar incident in a country with no easy access to gun: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre With a truck and a knife, it's 7 deaths instead of 28.

Yes, and if there were no knives, maybe there would have been zero deaths. But for some reason a call to ban knives is never heard.

Calling for a ban on guns due to what is relatively a statistical anomaly, is kneejerk at best, and encroaching on individual rights at worst.

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#217

Post by [deleted] »

ForrestN wrote: post #196
elpachuco wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Then I’m going to kill myself,” he said. I remember doing that. > He’s been on a slew of antipsychotic and mood altering pharmaceuticals, a Russian novel of behavioral plans. Nothing seems to work. I remember that. > A few weeks ago, Michael..threatened to kill me I did that too. I wonder if a nice beating would have done you any good. I have one anecdotal story. My older brother was uncontrollable at the age of 9…

Physical abuse does not solve mental health issues. Ever. Submission is a terrible goal in raising children.

[deleted]

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#218

Post by confusedNRA »

tripa wrote: post #100
zybler wrote: post #83

Right now I can understand why it's a gun control problem rather than a health care problem. But what about when one day 3D printer is everywhere? Printing of firearms would be made possible by high-quality 3D printer and it would be next to impossible to control. Just as it is impossible to control piracy. We have to deal with this problem, before it is deemed too late.

There's still a bit of time before we can print ammo. Gun control could evolve into ammo control.

I don't mean to come off as insulting, but you do understand how incredibly easy it is to make your own ammo right?

Dye casting lead is peanuts, considering the low boiling point of lead makes for easy casts.

There is so much ammo already out there, new brass probably won't even need to be created, simply reusing all old brass that's out there would more than suffice for the needs of even a large squad.

So we have lead, and we have brass covered. Next is the explosive primer. That would probably be the weakest link in the chain, in that your average basement redneck won't be creating his own primer anytime soon, but it is possible. The problem is how little primer is actually needed per round; and you have guys that have put away in storage literally pounds of primer.

It might be possible, but I'm sure if it ever got to that point, it would be trivial to order primer online, just like how one can order not-quite-legal-drugs online and have them delivered right to your front door.

In this modern world, I don't think it is possible to regulate things like it used to be. Anyway, anything can happen, and thanks for reading.

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#219

Post by stcredzero »

philwelch wrote: post #181
ojbyrne wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the fourth amendment says that protection against unreasonable search and seizure is also a fundamental right that protects the people from their government. But that was gone in a flash.

No, it's not. You're being hyperbolic. In any case, I think you and I would agree that it's worthwhile to resist violations of the fourth amendment even if you could make a case that they would save lives. I'm just suggesting we apply the same standard to other civil rights. American liberals are a little two-faced about this kind of thing.

> You're being hyperbolic.

I wish he was being a lot more hyperbolic.

Re: Thinking the unthinkable

#220

Post by tsycho »

confusedNRA wrote: post #209
bambax wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This discussion about "semi-automatic" versus "automatic" weapons actually strengthens the case FOR regulation; automatic weapons are regulated => they're not used in mass-killings; semi-automatic weapons are not regulated => they are used in mass-killings. How one can conclude from these facts that less regulation is better, I don't know. All guns are bad, and the more automatic they are, the worse. The NRA says "gu…

You couldn't even tell the difference between a semi automatic weapon and a fully automatic weapon. Then you make a reply, glossing over the fact you haven't a clue what you are talking about, to then make another asinine post. "automatic weapons are regulated => they're not used in mass-killings; semi-automatic weapons are not regulated => they are used in mass-killings." Could you please extrapolate how semi-automa…

I think bambax's main point is summed up by - "The NRA says "guns don't kill people, people do" but the truth is that guns help people who want to kill people, kill more people."

Do you have any real points to counter that, rather than just pointing out irrelevant technicalities or calling him names? And no, it doesn't change bambax's real point at all whether its a automatic or a semi-automatic.

Post reply on HN