Jump to content


Photo

Dayton shooting


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#21 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:47 PM

Per wiki - and it shows CAN is the least restrictive. And CAN is very restrictive in my personal experience and talking to Canadians when I lived in both MI and ME. You have to apply for register any firearm you bring across the border and use for hunting. You get caught crossing the border without the paperwork, they take them away and charge you. It's not hard to own shotgun, rifles have significant restrictions, and pistols are really hard to own there.


He said freedom, not guns.
  • 0

#22 Chips O Toole

Chips O Toole

    Comptroller of King Richard V

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33536 posts
  • LocationThe Galaxy

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:48 PM

Well duh! Guns= Freedom :D
  • 0

#23 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:50 PM

https://en.m.wikiped...List_by_country

http://worldpopulati...eest-countries/
  • 0

#24 AspenLeif

AspenLeif

    Comptroller of Gingerliness

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19992 posts
  • LocationAspen, CO

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:52 PM

He said freedom, not guns.

It's a rather important data point when you say.  "Well, these freedom loving countries don't have such high killing rates."  Their freedoms =/= our freedoms.  


Since that list was created, New Zealand banned gun ownership, and in Hong Kong you have the government actively quelling a protest.  I'd say there would be some changes if that were current.  


  • 0

#25 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:54 PM

It's a rather important data point when you say. "Well, these freedom loving countries don't have such high killing rates." Their freedoms =/= our freedoms.

Since that list was created, New Zealand banned gun ownership, and in Hong Kong you have the government actively quelling a protest. I'd say there would be some changes if that were current.


Per the CATO link above the US is the 17th freest country. Turns out guns aren't super high on the list of things that are considered when you classify whether or not a country is "free."
  • 0

#26 BrewerGeorge

BrewerGeorge

    His Royal Misinformed

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33030 posts
  • LocationIndianapolis

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:55 PM

Forget the 2nd. 

 

Give another example of a country approaching 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections.



#27 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:55 PM

Forget the 2nd.

Give another example of a country approaching 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections.


Moving goalposts.
  • 0

#28 BrewerGeorge

BrewerGeorge

    His Royal Misinformed

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33030 posts
  • LocationIndianapolis

Posted 05 August 2019 - 01:56 PM

Per the CATO link above the US is the 17th freest country. Turns out guns aren't super high on the list of things that are considered when you classify whether or not a country is "free."

Dude.  Singapore is 1st in that link.  It's illegal to chew fecking gum in Singapore.


Moving goalposts.

Sure, I'm making them more permissive to see if you can give an example.



#29 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:01 PM

I've given 2 links and another was posted, all of which contain lists of free countries. Pick any of the examples you like. I'd personally put Australia and Canada pretty high on my personal list of free countries.
cato:

The jurisdictions that took the top 10 places, in order, were New Zealand, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark (tied in 6th place), Ireland and the United Kingdom (tied in 8th place), and Finland, Norway, and Taiwan (tied in 10th place). Selected countries rank as follows: Germany (13), the United States and Sweden (17),
  • 0

#30 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34782 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:21 PM

Is it more reasonable to say that mass shootings in the US just comes with the scenery? I've posted about this before and have had conversation with many people... why so many mass shootings here?  Or should I say 'mass killings'?  If someone with a mental health issue (in say, France, Russia, Turkey or Spain) decided that it was time to listen to the voices in their head and go on a killing spree, why don't they get behind the wheel of a car and roll over pedestrians in a crowded part of town?  I realize there have been terrorist attacks that looked that way but I'm not talking about that kind of terrorism.  Even someone walking down a busy street with a knife could easily take out a dozen people before they were apprehended but you don't hear that.  Is it just our culture and if so, what about it makes people do this?



#31 the_stain

the_stain

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79497 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:30 PM

I'm generally pro-gun myself but this chart is kinda telling IMO:

https://en.m.wikiped...pita_by_country
  • 0

#32 Vagus

Vagus

    Just had an organism

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40712 posts
  • LocationThere

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:31 PM

Is it more reasonable to say that mass shootings in the US just comes with the scenery? I've posted about this before and have had conversation with many people... why so many mass shootings here?  Or should I say 'mass killings'?  If someone with a mental health issue (in say, France, Russia, Turkey or Spain) decided that it was time to listen to the voices in their head and go on a killing spree, why don't they get behind the wheel of a car and roll over pedestrians in a crowded part of town?  I realize there have been terrorist attacks that looked that way but I'm not talking about that kind of terrorism.  Even someone walking down a busy street with a knife could easily take out a dozen people before they were apprehended but you don't hear that.  Is it just our culture and if so, what about it makes people do this?

Maybe other countries don't ignore their mental health issues.


  • 0

#33 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34782 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:35 PM

Maybe other countries don't ignore their mental health issues.

Maybe.  But are mental health issues always obvious?  Some of these mass shooters had legal guns, no prior record and no obvious cry for help.  Others were clearly cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.  Maybe other countries don't endlessly cover the event on TV for days and weeks afterward although I'm sure they would.  



#34 Kremer

Kremer

    Comptroller of MS Paint Diagrams and other vague unspecified stu

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8593 posts
  • Location38.362783, -85.311367 (Louisville, KY area)

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:37 PM

Is it more reasonable to say that mass shootings in the US just comes with the scenery?


Comes with the scenery of constant diversion of addressing real problems and allowing people to be mentally broken and refusing to seriously put together a system of support, pride, and endowment of personal responsibilities.

Last time my daughters and I went to the range we ran through about 600rnds of .22, was only a small dent in my basement stash.
  • 0

#35 Vagus

Vagus

    Just had an organism

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40712 posts
  • LocationThere

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:42 PM

Maybe.  But are mental health issues always obvious?  Some of these mass shooters had legal guns, no prior record and no obvious cry for help.  Others were clearly cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.  Maybe other countries don't endlessly cover the event on TV for days and weeks afterward although I'm sure they would.  

Might be more obvious to a society that doesn't ignore them.  Hard to know, i think gun culture also has an impact.  To normal people not thinking about creating mass death, gun culture is a sport, or something fearful and removed. To psychos, it might be the only way they know to kill everyone.


  • 0

#36 Kremer

Kremer

    Comptroller of MS Paint Diagrams and other vague unspecified stu

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8593 posts
  • Location38.362783, -85.311367 (Louisville, KY area)

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:52 PM

Might be more obvious to a society that doesn't ignore them. Hard to know, i think gun culture also has an impact. To normal people not thinking about creating mass death, gun culture is a sport, or something fearful and removed. To psychos, it might be the only way they know to kill everyone.


Much truth here, not many movies and shows that don’t somehow feature gratuitous firearm use.
  • 0

#37 thool

thool

    Comptroller of Great Pendulous Videos

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3656 posts
  • LocationRochester, NY

Posted 05 August 2019 - 02:56 PM

Think about it. Before social media, you may interact with 50 people about white supremacy, and you probably wouldn't get any support, or maybe a very small number. While you might still cling to the idea, there wouldn't have been enough support to motivate too much more (except in extreme cases). But with social media that can reach out to millions, there wouldn't be too much effort to get enough people to agree with a cause, so that it can go to the next phase.

 

We need to be careful about suppressing bad ideas. Free speech allows society to measure value, and bad ideas should naturally wither away and die on their own. I think we've lost a little ground on the natural decay path white supremacy had been on in. Some leadership from all those in power can help restore that path.


  • 0

#38 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34782 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 03:39 PM

Think about it. Before social media, you may interact with 50 people about white supremacy, and you probably wouldn't get any support, or maybe a very small number. While you might still cling to the idea, there wouldn't have been enough support to motivate too much more (except in extreme cases). But with social media that can reach out to millions, there wouldn't be too much effort to get enough people to agree with a cause, so that it can go to the next phase.

 

We need to be careful about suppressing bad ideas. Free speech allows society to measure value, and bad ideas should naturally wither away and die on their own. I think we've lost a little ground on the natural decay path white supremacy had been on in. Some leadership from all those in power can help restore that path.

Watching The Great Hack and also the Frontline episode on FB, you can see that many people (especially in other countries) used FB in ways that the FB designers never intended.  FB just wanted to get their platform out to as many places as possible without understanding the culture, speaking the language, etc. and in some cases there were some wild results.  



#39 Genesee Ted

Genesee Ted

    yabba dabba doob

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 36465 posts
  • LocationRochester, NY

Posted 05 August 2019 - 04:13 PM

Think about it. Before social media, you may interact with 50 people about white supremacy, and you probably wouldn't get any support, or maybe a very small number. While you might still cling to the idea, there wouldn't have been enough support to motivate too much more (except in extreme cases). But with social media that can reach out to millions, there wouldn't be too much effort to get enough people to agree with a cause, so that it can go to the next phase.

We need to be careful about suppressing bad ideas. Free speech allows society to measure value, and bad ideas should naturally wither away and die on their own. I think we've lost a little ground on the natural decay path white supremacy had been on in. Some leadership from all those in power can help restore that path.

Whoa! Nice to see you around Joe!

#40 dagomike

dagomike

    Comptroller of CrapPapples

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11033 posts

Posted 05 August 2019 - 04:19 PM

Think about it. Before social media, you may interact with 50 people about white supremacy, and you probably wouldn't get any support, or maybe a very small number. While you might still cling to the idea, there wouldn't have been enough support to motivate too much more (except in extreme cases). But with social media that can reach out to millions, there wouldn't be too much effort to get enough people to agree with a cause, so that it can go to the next phase.

 

We need to be careful about suppressing bad ideas. Free speech allows society to measure value, and bad ideas should naturally wither away and die on their own. I think we've lost a little ground on the natural decay path white supremacy had been on in. Some leadership from all those in power can help restore that path.

 

It's not just people seeking out extreme content, the discovery algorithms promotes increasingly extreme content. This not only put kooky ideas into people heads, but it also created audiences for people who never before would have gain any traction beyond meetings in basements.


  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users