Live data from Hacker News

Mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

news.blogs.cnn.com

281–290 of 336 posts

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

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people are carrying guns though, and yet overall violent crime has been falling. It's not the gun. Guns are tools, they aren't the problem. We need to be better at being able to detect these individuals who are likely to go on these rampages. But more than that we need to have a society that is better able to defend itself. If even 1 in 20 or fewer teachers at a school were people who were responsible and traine…

I work under the assumption that there aren't any "bad guys," there are just people who wake up one day and snap. If somebody snaps, I would rather they not have a gun, even if they originally bought it for self-defense. But yes, I agree that guns are only a tool, and that the underlying cause is psychological and/or cultural. No matter what we do with guns, it won't prevent future incidences; I just don't see how pe…

If wishes were horses... Why stop at merely hoping that someone not have a gun when they snap? Why not hope that they are in a jail cell when they snap?

As far as arming teachers, it's not a perfect solution, nor is it going to "make everything alright". When you have people like this who end up being so bent on destruction and violence things are not going to be alright, it's a matter of degrees. However, there have been several incidents of teachers and civilians putting a stop to mass shootings, likely saving many lives. These often don't get as much news coverage precisely because the body count is lower and thus the events are less newsworthy. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting

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

#282
Here is an interesting infographic from the National Post:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/28/guns-ownership-aroun...

"In 2007, the U.S. had the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. But the U.S. does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the U.S. is well down the list with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people. Below is a list of countries with available firearm data from 2007 starting with countries where firearms are most common."

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

#283
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with gun control. Guns exist, that can't be stopped any more than preventing alcohol from existing (prohibition), and some bad guys will always have access to guns. Or knives, or diesel fuel, or explosives. Was the Oklahoma-city bombing a wake-up call for "explosives control"? Was the 2009 Chengdu bus-fire ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Chengdu_bus_fire ) a wake-up call for diesel control?…

Take this argument to its logical conclusion and we should just be handing out firearms to all U.S. citizens, since it's not the guns, it's the people.

No it's the bullets. But in order to get the bullets out of the guns, a human is required.

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

#284

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!

This argument is silly. The only reason why the US has trouble against small guerrilla forces is because the world is watching. The US has the military power to literally take over the world if it could get away with it (barring nukes). War is hard in modern times because of moral outrage, not because of some intrinsic power of a firearm against an oppressive government

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

#285
post #186

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".

This video needs more attention.

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

#286
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.

This has nothing to do with gun control. Guns exist, that can't be stopped any more than preventing alcohol from existing (prohibition), and some bad guys will always have access to guns. Or knives, or diesel fuel, or explosives. Was the Oklahoma-city bombing a wake-up call for "explosives control"? Was the 2009 Chengdu bus-fire ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Chengdu_bus_fire ) a wake-up call for diesel control?…

Guns are the problem. Yes a gun is a tool, one that is specifically created to multiply the efficiency of killing. It's purpose is inherently one of magnifying violence. The technology itself deserves condemnation.

Note that I am not advocating getting rid of all guns. But we need to have an honest discussion about them, and that starts with being truthful with ourselves about their very nature.

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

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're right. The spoons argument isn't any better. Thank you for being level-headed enough to see that instead of arguing.

People are understandably upset about what happened and emotions are getting the best of people. I guess today isn't a good day for rationale debate.

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

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems that there are two schools of thought (generalizing obviously): 1. Disarm everyone, and 2. Allow everyone to carry weapons. I think these are actually two extreme positions to which almost nobody seriously subscribes.

It depends whether "disarm everyone" is meant to include exceptions government law enforcement and legitimate hunters. If so, then I do think most people (in the USA, at least) subscribe to one of those schools of though.

Not if you trust the available data: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/g...

From that, a huge majority supports some new restrictions on gun ownership (background checks, no guns for felons or the mentally ill, require gun registration) but almost nobody supports "no guns, period".

(source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/n...).

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

#289
post #251
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> history of gun control being used to enable racism and genocide Reference? (Genuine question.)

Here are a few. Racism: http://constitution.org/cmt/cramer/racist_roots.htm http://www.guncite.com/journals/gun_control_wtr8512.html Genocide: http://www.davekopel.com/2a/Foreign/gun-bans-and-genocide.ht... http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm

Ah, interesting, it does seem that gun control can be a tool for racism and genocide.

However, I'm only willing to take those as anecdotal evidence for promoting less gun control: they are all written by people and groups who are heavily invested against gun control, i.e. a very high risk of motivated thinking, research and writing.

(Sure, one might point at all the references and evidence they provide, but what are they not saying? What about a discussion of the countries around the world with gun control that has (as far as I can see) no racist or genocidal purpose (e.g. most of modern Europe, Australia, New Zealand)?)

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

#290

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".

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.
Post reply on HN