North Illinois University Shooting

[Humodour]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23217812-2,00.html

 

"He was aiming towards the crowd but I don't think he was aiming at a specific person," a witness named Sheila told WBBM radio.

 

"He was quiet. He just stood on the stage in front of everybody and just started shooting.

 

"I saw him holding the gun and it was huge. I thought it was fake and then I realised he was really shooting at people and I got down.

 

"I saw a lot of blood. I have blood all over my clothes."

 

Those poor kids.

 

Lecture room with over 100 students. Gunman had 2 pistols and a shotgun. 16 injured, 6 dead.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Krezack

[Humodour]

That was the 6th school shooting in the past week in America. America has something like 80% of all school shootings in the world. The country seriously needs stricter gun laws.

 

To start with, people need to be required to have a gun license for any gun.

[Walsingham]

We had a huge discussion about this sort of thing, iirc. My view shifted slightly during discussion. i can't remember my previous position, but now I'm keen

 

- gun control not being the whole answer

- in fact gun control not being the primary answer

- in most cases pastoral authorities know who is a banana boat

- restricting the access of bedbug loonies to guns is the key thing

- those same bedbug loonies also needs to be concert with better psychiatric care for all society.

[Humodour]

Of course gun control won't solve all America's problems but it's a good start.

 

As an indicator, gun-related crimes in Australia dropped over 50% once we introduced gun control after the Port Arthur Massacre.

 

It doesn't stop the people who need the guns from having them; but it helps decrease the number of guns floating around, and it helps prevent those who shouldn't have them from having them.

[mkreku]

No no, why would any sane person draw the conclusion that the (civilized) country with the most lax gun laws in the world AND the most guns per capita in the world would have the most gun-related crimes in the world? It can happen anywhere!! It just.. doesn't.

 

Of course, this could have been avoided if they only had handed out more guns. I mean, what if the teacher had a M16 on his desk?! NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED!

 

Or if every student was required to bring at least one hand grenade each to class? NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED!

 

More guns is ALWAYS the solution, because that's what's written on a 200 year old sheet of paper that's the US only "relevant" piece of historical document.

[Nick_i_am]

Waaaaaaaait, was that sarcasm?

[Shryke]

i can't be entirely sure, but i think so....

[Hell Kitty]

If he didn't have access to a gun he would have just used some other object, like an axe or a spoon or something. Random object massacres happen all the time it's just that the liberal media doesn't do reports on them.

[Tale]

Why, during my last week at college, there was a sharpened pencil massacre. The guy got into a crowded room of 100 and killed 30 people!

Edited February 15, 2008 by Tale

[Pidesco]

If he didn't have access to a gun he would have just used some other object, like an axe or a spoon or something. Random object massacres happen all the time it's just that the liberal media doesn't do reports on them.

 

It's generally a little easier to go on a killing spree with a gun than with a spoon.

[Tale]

It's generally a little easier to go on a killing spree with a gun than with a spoon.

It's the thought that counts.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

It's generally a little easier to go on a killing spree with a gun than with a spoon.

It's the thought that counts.

 

Not to mention at least SOMEONE would fight back... and fists are always better than spoons.

[Walsingham]

Mind you, I also think you'd be an idiot to deny there's a link between wanting to shoot mass numbers of people and being as mad as a pocket full of sky. Reports in the UK indicate he'd not been taking his meds. WHY IS A KNOWN MENTALIST being allowed a shotgun?

[Gfted1]

WHY IS A KNOWN MENTALIST being allowed a shotgun?

 

Because, stupidly IMO, medical information is so private in the U.S. nobody can get it and that information isnt entered into any databases normally used to check a persons background.

[Walsingham]

That's hardly fair. I mean if only mentalists are doing these shootings, why punish everyone who wants a gun? especially when the mentalists need help and control anyway.

[Gfted1]

That's hardly fair. I mean if only mentalists are doing these shootings, why punish everyone who wants a gun? especially when the mentalists need help and control anyway.

 

 

Im not following you Wals. IMO, mental conditions should be taken into consideration when doing a background check on people to determine their eligibility to buy a gun. Are you saying it shouldnt?

[Tale]

WHY IS A KNOWN MENTALIST being allowed a shotgun?

 

I fail to see the link between psychic abilities and violent behavior.

[Walsingham]

That's hardly fair. I mean if only mentalists are doing these shootings, why punish everyone who wants a gun? especially when the mentalists need help and control anyway.

 

 

Im not following you Wals. IMO, mental conditions should be taken into consideration when doing a background check on people to determine their eligibility to buy a gun. Are you saying it shouldnt?

 

I apologise for being unclear. I am rather tired today.* I mean that if we took proper care of people who needed psychiatric care then many of these incidents wouldn't happen. Indeed I would allege that doing so woud prevent more incidents than full gun banning. Not to mention the human benefit of properly caring for loons.

 

 

*Not that I'm clear otherwise.

[Meshugger]

Sad thing really, educational grounds or any other, should have to worry about matters such as these.

 

There's however two solutions:

 

1) Give everyone a gun, empower the individual. Fear and survival instinct will nurture people, and the status quo will make people think twice before pulling a weapon.

2) Love. Celebrate life in general and your own life with your friends. Love your family, neighbour and people of all ages. Teach this to the following generation, no fear or hate when there's love.

 

There was a guy actually saying something in the vein of option number 2 some time ago. Was it John, Jos

[Pidesco]

The problem is that if you go with option 1 to begin with, you'll never ever get option 2 at all. And if that's the case, you might as well kill all of mankind preemptively to save everyone the pain and the misery.

 

 

Anyway, that we haven't evolved at all during the last 2000 years is grossly inaccurate to say the least, even if we still are by and large a bunch of hateful, violent rat bastards.

[~Di]

That's hardly fair. I mean if only mentalists are doing these shootings, why punish everyone who wants a gun? especially when the mentalists need help and control anyway.

 

 

Im not following you Wals. IMO, mental conditions should be taken into consideration when doing a background check on people to determine their eligibility to buy a gun. Are you saying it shouldnt?

 

Indeed, Gfted1. It seems that this young man (like the Virginia Tech shooter) has some kind of condition, which hasn't been disclosed in detail, for which he had been taking medication for some time. He went off his meds a few weeks ago, and acquaintances say he had been acting "irractically" ever since. There has to be a way for mental condition to be assessed before gun sales are approved. The question is how to do it constitutionally.

[Gorgon]

1) Give everyone a gun, empower the individual. Fear and survival instinct will nurture people, and the status quo will make people think twice before pulling a weapon.

 

I'm sure the suicidal nutjobs will suddenly start caring about their own survival once they see everyone else has a gun.

 

It would make the gunfights more fair though, but the effects of mandatory gun ownership are incalcuable. Domestic disturbances and drunken brawls would likely wind up like the wild west.

 

I apologise for being unclear. I am rather tired today.* I mean that if we took proper care of people who needed psychiatric care then many of these incidents wouldn't happen. Indeed I would allege that doing so woud prevent more incidents than full gun banning. Not to mention the human benefit of properly caring for loons.

 

Well obviously it would help, but what do you propose practically, the resources needed would have to come from an already dismally ineffective public health care system. A gun ban is a practical solution, but it's not a sacrifice the US is ready to make. So really it's off the table as well.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Gorgon

[Sand]

Anyway, that we haven't evolved at all during the last 2000 years is grossly inaccurate to say the least, even if we still are by and large a bunch of hateful, violent rat bastards.

 

We are not more evolved than we were back then. We have more advanced technology but that is it.

[Dark_Raven]

I thought people with mental are not able to buy guns including rifles and shotguns. I know they can't get hand guns because that is part of the background check.

 

Perhaps we should go back to the Wild West mentality where people carried weapons on their person.

[Humodour]

Indeed I would allege that doing so woud prevent more incidents than full gun banning.

 

More help for the mentally ill and rational gun control would prevent more incidents than both combined.

 

Meshugger: Um. No? Lots of micro-evolution has occurred in Humans in 2000 years. I think people too often dissociate mutation and evolution.

 

Sand: Oh really? Where did you learn that? Because it's wrong. Humans are evolving in 2 ways:

1) We're evolving faster as the human population increases (not more slowly, as predicted), due to population increase increasing the chance of favourable mutations occurring.

2) Populations geologically isolated are evolving away from each other - not towards one homogeneous mass as predicted due to globalisation; globalisation is serving to introduce some novel genes and mutations to work off, not homogenise populations.