Gun Violence isn't our problem... We are.

originally posted by: gallop
a reply to: DanDanDat

I always strap on a knife, in case there is a knife fight at the local store.
I also wear my golf club, in case there is a random person hitting people with golf clubs at said store.
I try to drive my car at protests, to help stop anyone driving their car into people with intent.

No.. it's always "If everyone had a gun..."

Golf clubs are for playing golf and can be misused to hit people. Knives are for cutting carrots and can be misused to stab people. Guns are designed to kill, and have no other purpose.

Also, I can at least run away from a madman with a golfclub or a knife. I can't outrun the bullets of an automatic weapon that an idiot fires in a mall.

The problem is guns. Not people. We have plenty of people in my country too. And they are, to the best of my knowledge, not better people than American people. But we don't glorify violence, we don't glorify guns. We simply created a culture in which it is seen as uncivilised to tote a gun.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

The issue at hand here is that 100 people that now died because of guns would still be alive if Americans finally stopped glorifying guns.

Oh dear... saying it doesn't make it true. Just makes you lose all credibility for doubling down on presenting your wishful thinking as truth.

All we can know is that 100 people who are dead because of guns would not be dead because of guns. You have absolutely no way of knowing if some, all, any or every one would be dead by other means.

Say it till you're blue in the face. I don't care. Still doesn't make it true.

And still shines a big bright spotlight on your total lack of regard, respect and compassion for all the reasons that people use guns in the first place, whether on themselves or others.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: ForteanOrg

The issue at hand here is that 100 people that now died because of guns would still be alive if Americans finally stopped glorifying guns.

Oh dear... saying it doesn't make it true. Just makes you lose all credibility for doubling down on presenting your wishful thinking as truth.

All we can know is that 100 people who are dead because of guns would not be dead because of guns. You have absolutely no way of knowing if some, all, any or every one would be dead by other means.

Say it till you're blue in the face. I don't care. Still doesn't make it true.

And still shines a big bright spotlight on your total lack of regard, respect and compassion for all the reasons that people use guns in the first place, whether on themselves or others.

So since people could possibly die other ways, like the flu, a few kids at a mall or families shopping getting sprayed with bullets is just par for the course...

Well since you could die anytime, if you get caught in the cross fire of a 'patrio't', it's all good! 👍🙄

a reply to: odzeandennz

So since people could possibly die other ways, like the flu, a few kids at a mall or families shopping getting sprayed with bullets is just par for the course... Well since you could die anytime, if you get caught in the cross fire of a 'patrio't', it's all good! 👍🙄

Oh dear lordy... pretty pathetic when you have to literally ignore half of what I have said and twist my other words to come up something so deranged WHILE STILL DISPLAYING TOTAL AND COMPLETE DISREGARD, DISRESPECT AND LACK OF COMPASSION FOR THE VICTIMS!!!

I don't want anyone dying a violent death for any reason, by anyone, by any means!!! It's not bad because it was a gun, and it would be all fine and dandy by another means, which is exactly what you are saying here -- whether you know it or not.

I want to address the root causes for why anyone would even want to inflict harm upon anyone -- themselves or others -- and eliminate any desire or motivation for doing so.

I want to live in a world where there could be guns on every street corner and NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY PERSON would ever use it. Will it ever happen? Probably not. But that's the goal. No violence. Not just no guns.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: odzeandennz

I want to address the root causes for why anyone would even want to inflict harm upon anyone -- themselves or others -- and eliminate any desire or motivation for doing so.

Not many would disagree with you - how perfect this world would be if any desire or motivation to inflict harm upon anyone would be taken away. So, if you have that power, by all means, go ahead and transform human kind. And while we're waiting, and while 100 Americans die of gun related violence each day, I say that the next best thing is to stop glorifying guns, ditch the second amendmend as if it were prohibition: outserved it's well meant purpose, and remove as many guns from society as we can. Let alone allowing sick kids with worried mothers to buy an automatic gun that kills dozens of innocent people that simply were doing their shopping.

The root cause, again, in America at least, is the absurd happiness that you have when you can buy a device whose single, only purpose is to kill. I don't think it's easy to change the degraded brains of such people. But we can take away their guns. And that's the only thing that will work, as has been proven time after time and again, for example in the EU.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

But we can take away their guns. And that's the only thing that will work, as has been proven time after time and again, for example in the EU.

Um... yeah... you took away their guns and virtually removed attacks with guns. But now you have knife attacks... acid attacks... trucks driving on sidewalks.... rape and sexual assaults on women are rampant... and on and on.

Violent thugs still do what they will and their victims have little defense or recourse.

a reply to: Boadicea

But now you have knife attacks... acid attacks... trucks driving on sidewalks.... rape and sexual assaults on women are rampant... and on and on.

And you have all of the above in The U.S. also.

Added to which you also have mass shootings.

a reply to: alldaylong

And you have all of the above in The U.S. also.

Added to which you also have mass shootings.

And yet for some reason those who hate guns and want to ban guns don't give a rats patootie about any of those crimes. Somehow it's just gun violence that gets their panties in a knot.

Virtue signalling. Period.

I've had my say. Our words will stand on their own merit. I'm done.

a reply to: Boadicea

Somehow it's just gun violence that gets their panties in a knot.

Do you think that may have something to do with the high numbers of people killed in one go?

Mass shootings are carried out with the use of a gun or guns.

Obvious to everyone really.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: alldaylong
And yet for some reason those who hate guns and want to ban guns don't give a rats patootie about any of those crimes. Somehow it's just gun violence that gets their panties in a knot.

It so happens that I'm a specialist in risk analysis. My trade is to reduce risk to an acceptable level. We do this by putting controls in place. Controls can be expensive and of varying effectiveness, hence we try to determine the best controls to use. The simplest formula you can use to help you determine if you have to put some control in place is RIP (pun fully intended): Risk equals Impact times Probability.

I'd say that the impact of a gun related crime like those that happened during the last week is very high.

And given that one can buy a weapon on every street corner in the US and given that there are virtually no background checks and given that the police, when informed by a mother that her unstable son has bought an automatic killing machine is simply told that that is allright, as the Law allows it - given all that, I'd say that the probability is also very high.

By simple logic it follows that you are at high risk of being killed by some idiot with a gun. Perhaps you are willing to accept that risk, but many in your country don't want to. They want to go shopping without a rather large chance of being killed in the process.

The State, which represents the majority in your country, should hence put controls in place. The best and cheapest control is simply not allowing citizens to buy or own guns, unless they are specifically screened and need the gun to do their job, e.g. police and military. That's how we do it here in the civilised world.

But Alldaylong is probably right: you don't care about other folks risk. You live in a warped world in which idiots can simply buy a huge gun and many rounds of ammo, and bang away at innocent people. MAGA and all that.

Sorry for the rant, but come on, use da brain, please.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

The problem is guns. Not people. We have plenty of people in my country too. And they are, to the best of my knowledge, not better people than American people. But we don't glorify violence, we don't glorify guns. We simply created a culture in which it is seen as uncivilised to tote a gun.

Is it uncivilized to let children live in poverty? Plenty of the people living in your country are living in poverty.

cpag.org.uk...

There were 4.1 million children living in poverty in the UK in 2017-18. That's 30 per cent of children, or nine in a classroom of 30.

and not to make this about one country being better than another in order to make my self feel superior; here are the stats for the US:

www.nccp.org...

About 15 million children in the United States – 21% of all children – live in families with incomes below the federal poverty threshold, a measurement that has been shown to underestimate the  needs of families. Research shows that, on average, families need an income of about twice that level to cover basic expenses. Using this standard, 43% of children live in low-income families.

Yes 100 people died last weekend due to gun violence and that's horrible; but there are clearly worse problems we are collectively facing. In two of the richest countries in the world how many people die every year due to living in poverty?

I'd even argue that the reason we allow ourselves to become overtly occupied by Gun violence (which affects far fewer people than issues like poverty) is so that we can ignore the bigger issues and still feel like we are making a difference.

But the two issues are actually interrelated. Gun violence and poverty have common denominators (and its not Guns Guns Guns) one of them is the rotten way we treat each other. Starting at the utter lack of class some members of this message board and other social media treat each other, to shooting up people at a Walmart, to allowing over 30% of our children to live in poverty.

And it's not just our individual callousness and selfishness that fuels this problem; the biggest institutions in our society have become preverted to the point that they serve to agitate the problem. As demonstrated by the OP; where our news media took a story, a man, that rose above personal callousness and selfishness, at the most difficult time in his life, and rewrote the narrative to further agitate us. They took an uplifting story we should be using to grow toward fixing our problems and used it to futher agitate us.

a reply to: DanDanDat

The OP contains a particularly dangerous type of venom: you try to shift away attention from the real problem - yes, guns, guns and guns - by introducing a non-solvable bigger problem. The real problem is not human nature, nor impoliteness, let alone being an uncivilised forum member. If you were right that that IS the problem than we, here in the EU, should have frequent shootings in our streets too. But we don't. How come?

Well, we sure aren't better people here than you folks in the US. We also have raving madmen that shoot innocent people. We also have failing police and yes, we have poverty too: even in my country, 8.5 percent of children live in poverty. But we still don't have frequent shootings in our shopping malls and in our schools. Also, the risk here is FAR lower than in your part of the world. And the difference is simple: we don't glorify guns, we simply feel they are dangerous and should not be used by the common man.

So, stop detracting from the real problem. The real problem is NOT human nature, it are guns, guns and guns.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: DanDanDat

The OP contains a particularly dangerous type of venom: you try to shift away attention from the real problem - yes, guns, guns and guns - by introducing a non-solvable bigger problem. The real problem is not human nature, nor impoliteness, let alone being an uncivilised forum member. If you were right that that IS the problem than we, here in the EU, should have frequent shootings in our streets too. But we don't. How come?

Well, we sure aren't better people here than you folks in the US. We also have raving madmen that shoot innocent people. We also have failing police and yes, we have poverty too: even in my country, 8.5 percent of children live in poverty. But we still don't have frequent shootings in our shopping malls and in our schools. Also, the risk here is FAR lower than in your part of the world. And the difference is simple: we don't glorify guns, we simply feel they are dangerous and should not be used by the common man.

So, stop detracting from the real problem. The real problem is NOT human nature, it are guns, guns and guns.

Thank you for framing your opinion closer in context with to my op.


With in the context of my op I believe your argument (there is less gun violence in your country) is not sufficient, or perhaps "complete" is a better word. It assumes, with out explaining why, that Gun violence is the most important metric when discussing the hierarchy of what troubles us.

Why is gun violence the most important metric? Because their was a mass shooting last week and its on all our minds? Next week we can move on to something else that happened more recently? Perhaps a hurricane decimates Bermuda and than climate change and human pollution becomes the most important metric. Than another shooting happens and we switch back again?


Your argument also assumes that mine is an non-solvable problem with out again explaining why. I realise this is your opinion and you are welcome to it .... but I do not share it. I do think it is solvable; there are many ways to solve it.

On the individual level we can help to solve this problem by deciding to be more respectful of each other. Like a contagion such acts would spread to others. For example we can refrain from labeling other peoples opinions as venom simply because we don't agree with them. That is an excellent start. The open mindedness that such an action requires can go a long away in bringing people together rather than push them apart.

On a systematic level we can recognize and push back on the agitating influences our flawed systems are having on the debate and our society. And we even need to do this even when those systems seem to be on our side of a particular debate. Per the story in my OP it doesn't mater if the news media seems to be trying to fight gun violence and racism, which in themselves are worthy endeavors, the ends do not justify the means. Today the lying and deceit might work in one's favor but tomorrow it might not. We should demand better from these institutions ... and it is not impossible to do so.

So no I will not stop voicing the opinions I put forth in this thread. One day I hope you and others will come to agree with me and than we can really start solving problems like Gun violence and so much more.

a reply to: DanDanDat

You are of course free to say here whatever you want to say (unless it violates T&C). I, on my side, am too, and I will.

As a species we suffer from short lifespans, and little collective intelligence. We are short term driven, which is totally understandable for beings that live at best 130 years, most closer to half of that. Therefore, we keep driving our cars, therefore we keep murdering each other in stupid wars, therefore we still have cults and sects that dare say they represent the one and only God.

Improvement of our species has proven to be very difficult. Each generation makes the same stupid mistakes, over and over again. What seems to work well is enforcing a more benevolent situation which then is adapted by the next generation as something logical and natural. We did this with schools - it is now seen as normal, logical and natural that young ones go to schools. We did this with requiring strict education before you are allowed to drive a car, nowadays we simply take if for granted that you need a drivers license.

Well, similarly we can solve the problem you are referring to in the title of your OP: gun violence. It's simple and it works well: have the State enforce a strict policy for gun ownership. Make it expensive to own a gun, make sure it is only obtainable for sane, well-balanced professionals that need the gun for their work.

If we have to wait for the golden dawn of mankind, we may just as well give guns to every idiot and allow him to shoot anybody he dislikes. That, eventually, would also solve the problem, and also solve the problem that we have too many people on this planet.

If that is not what one wants, do the other thing: take away the guns, solve the problem. The result will be a better mankind.

Ugh, nough said. I'm done.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

I agree with a lot of what you have saud. I don't see anything wrong in pursuit of successive improvement over generations; each generation adopting a new way of conducting themselves and hope the next generation find the "new" way normal and natural. That can work with learning to respect others and holding our institutions to ever higher standards just as well as it can work with gun violence. No need to wait for a golden dawn of mankind; every journey starts with the first step.

However I would not agree with, and I'm sorry if I am misunderstanding you, the more militant tone of your argument. I have a hard time supporting the idea of state enforcement of cultural change; the state does not have the best record with affecting culture change. Yea we have schools and drivers driver's license; but we also have endless war, almost no support for the mentally ill and the war on drugs, to name a few things.

a reply to: DanDanDat

Oh exactly.

They have us literally between a rock and a hard place. If we argue with their agenda to ban guns, they'll simply take the alternate route and ban people. I mean, not ban people from existing but ban people from having rights at all. If they cannot remove a certain right altogether from everyone, they will settle for starting with people most people think of as subhuman (the mentally ill would fit this bill to a tee, huh?).

Anyway, slightly off track. If they can't ban guns, they can ban certain people. They can start with people nobody likes and gradually expand the parameters. Move the goalposts, so to speak. I'm sure the future will cooperate with them on this. As stuff is always going to happen and they will always be finding new people who are unworthy of having rights. In the future, you will be deemed to be dangerous if you say anything someone doesn't like and reports you to the thought police.

Wow. Why does this sound so familiar?