China School Knife Attack - Over 20 injured, including children

Originally posted by phillyhemp
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

The other common link for all of these people is a mental illness coupled with being prescribed anti-depressants without proper supervision or treatment. These drugs are known to cause these types of incidents in a very small portion of people. The guy in China used a knife so banning guns isn't the solution.

In PA, we no longer have state hospitals, the ill are out in the general public. However, we changed our law to allow deadly force for an intruder of a residence and it caused the burglary rate to drop significantly. I want the ability to protect my family from the crazies and my government!

Exactly!!!!!!!! he used a knife due to the fact guns werent readily available to him like they were the shooter in the US. Knife 20 injured, Gun 27 dead!!!!!!
Do you see the difference?

When you say the government I assume you mean the army, isnt the army made up of Americans?
Do you really think that you will ever be in a position where you need to defend yourself from your own army?

As for protecting yourself from crazies, the vast majority of the world does just fine without guns.

I wish you would all just drop the BS excuses and pretenses and admit you like guns coz they make you feel big and strong and safe.

Pretty piss weak in my opinion, sorry

Too bad for China they do not share the same lax gun rules and attitudes towards weapons of death as the US do or they would have certainly won this latest showdown, too!

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
Exactly!!!!!!!! he used a knife due to the fact guns werent readily available to him like they were the shooter in the US. Knife 20 injured, Gun 27 dead!!!!!!
Do you see the difference?

If he saw the difference, the term 'Idiot America' would never have needed to be coined.

WAAAAAA?! Knives Kill people?! They should be banned unless they are plastic and less than 2 inches in length. This is how my mind works when I'm scared and I am going to pass my fear onto everyone else til we're all terrified. Then knives will be banned and no one will ever kill anyone again. If we ban them then all the law abiding citizens will follow the rules and not have them, and of course all the criminals will feel the peer pressure and also not have them. It will be a paradise...

reply to post by Vilhelm


Another sad instance where people commit acts of violence on Children.


Ive said this a few days ago. You will see more of this, as we end this month.

Too sad.

reply to post by Vilhelm


The operative word being "injured", not "dead"...

It's a good job the Chinese don't have the right to bear arms, otherwise this could have easily been another 20 fatalities today...

shanghaiist.com...

My thoughts go out to the families. Such a horrible day today. I hope all the children have a full recovery. There definitely doesn't need to be any more children dying today.

I see many people have pointed it out...but since some don't seem to get it.

INJURED vs DEAD.

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


What I'm seeing by your posts in this thread is that you hold a position that ALL guns should be removed from the hands of regular citizens, in an effort to make everyone safer. Am I correct?

If so, then might I ask how you would mandate a law such as this, and 100% insure that NO ONE, even those who don't care anything about your law, would be prevented from attaining any weapons? If you cannot stop those who disregard your "law" from getting weapons, then all you have reasonably done is disarmed the only true defenders you had against such atrocious acts. I find this line of thinking to be totally without merit, and to be totally honest, self-destructive. We CANNOT allow people like this, who in my opinion are the definition of the word "terrorist" to dictate how we live our lives. If we do, then they have won.

If however, you are not saying that all guns should be removed from the hands of citizens, then I ask you, why restrict the ownership of firearms from those citizens who exhibit the rational thinking skills to properly handle one? To be honest, the reason more people don't carry firearms is because of the ever increasing and ever restricting laws on where one can carry. All that these laws do is give the criminals (the only ones with guns by the rationale of the gun-rights activists) the ability to walk into the areas with guns that are off limits to law abiding citizens, and proceed to shoot to their heart's content.

To be totally honest, in an Utopian world, no one would need to have a firearm. Unfortunately, we don't live in such a world. We live in a world where bad things happen because good people do nothing. Not because they don't want to, but because other people prevent them from doing so by putting laws in place that prevent them from doing what they should have been doing all along.

TheBorg
ATS Member and Moderator

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


There's a direct correlation between gun laws and gun related violence. Stricter gun laws, means a higher crime rate. Period.

Rhetoric will not be accepted in a reply to this if you should choose so. I want to see numbers. Otherwise your argument for more gun control is null.

Originally posted by ManjushriPrajna
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

There's a direct correlation between gun laws and gun related violence. Stricter gun laws, means a higher crime rate. Period.

Rhetoric will not be accepted in a reply to this if you should choose so. I want to see numbers. Otherwise your argument for more gun control is null.

How about you start by giving me some numbers and a link to where you got your info?

reply to post by TheBorg

What I'm seeing by your posts in this thread is that you hold a position that ALL guns should be removed from the hands of regular citizens, in an effort to make everyone safer. Am I correct?

You are correct, I believe ALL guns should be banned and illegal. As youve pointed out criminals dont follow laws so Law enforcement should carry firearms

If so, then might I ask how you would mandate a law such as this, and 100% insure that NO ONE, even those who don't care anything about your law, would be prevented from attaining any weapons? If you cannot stop those who disregard your "law" from getting weapons, then all you have reasonably done is disarmed the only true defenders you had against such atrocious acts.

Criminals in the UK and Australia manage to get hold of guns (although not as easily as they do in the US) yet we all survive somehow.
True if guns were banned criminals wouldnt hand them in with the law abiding citizens but if you made it a mandatory jail sentence if you posses a gun and confiscated them when you found them within a generation they would be considered as unacceptable over there as they are in pretty much all of the western world.
As for "being defenders against such atrocious acts" where were these defenders when all these atrocities took place? your argument is void unless your advocating everyone carrying a gun at all times.

I find this line of thinking to be totally without merit, and to be totally honest, self-destructive.

Funny you say that, most members of civilised societies outside America find the fact guns are so easily accessible there to be without merit and EVIDENTLY self destructive.
How many other countries have a school massacre a couple times a year?

If however, you are not saying that all guns should be removed from the hands of citizens, then I ask you, why restrict the ownership of firearms from those citizens who exhibit the rational thinking skills to properly handle one?

Because a guns only purpose is to kill, no one who is rational and living in even a semi rational society wants to own a gun. Either admit your not rational or that your country is seriously messed up.

To be totally honest, in an Utopian world, no one would need to have a firearm. Unfortunately, we don't live in such a world. We live in a world where bad things happen because good people do nothing. Not because they don't want to, but because other people prevent them from doing so by putting laws in place that prevent them from doing what they should have been doing all along.

So your solution is to put more guns into circulation thereby making it even easier for criminals or psychos to access them

I can see that like your other gun loving friends you really thought that one out well

Now if it was a gun instead of a knife.... how many would be 'dead' ?

No....guns don't kill people, people do.... well this guy couldn't because he didn't have access to what?

A gun !!!!!!

Now if it was a gun instead of a knife.... how many would be 'dead' ?

No....guns don't kill people, people do.... well this guy couldn't because he didn't have access to what?

A gun !!!!!!

There is a special place in hell reserved for these monsters that harm innocent children

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


The burden of proof is on you. You're the one making the claims that we need more gun control, and that would solve these sorts of problems. I don't have to provide anything.

Again, show evidence that your claims are valid and that gun control would be justified, otherwise your argument is null and void.

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

You are correct, I believe ALL guns should be banned and illegal. As youve pointed out criminals dont follow laws so Law enforcement should carry firearms

But law enforcement is never in place in time to prevent violent acts from taking place. As you have no doubt seen, there were plenty of police present at this most recent event, AFTER the gunman had already entered the school, killed everyone, HIMSELF included. Where were the police when all of this was happening? My point is clearly illustrated here. If the teachers had had a firearm, maybe they could have stopped this lunatic before he killed those 20 kids. Not allowing guns in the hands of teachers, in this case, cost 20 students their lives. It's that simple. You can argue that the absence of guns is a good thing, but the truth of the matter is, that in this case, the absence of guns was a terrible thing.

If you want there to be a law that prohibits all guns in all citizens hands, then you'll need to have every home and every institution outfitted with a law enforcement officer to amply protect the people. Based on this logical line of thinking, I assume that you're a proponent of Big Government, am I right?

Criminals in the UK and Australia manage to get hold of guns (although not as easily as they do in the US) yet we all survive somehow.

So what would you have people do in the event that a violent crime is committed? Call the police, and pray to whatever God they believe in, hoping that He won't take their lives today? Self defense will have been removed from the equation when guns are removed from the citizens.

As for "being defenders against such atrocious acts" where were these defenders when all these atrocities took place? your argument is void unless your advocating everyone carrying a gun at all times.

That's exactly what I am saying. More people SHOULD carry firearms. I have already asked you a similar question: Where were the police while this was going on? No where to be found. They didn't even fire a shot, as the crime had already been committed, and the shooter had already committed suicide. So much for police being able to defend the people!!

How many other countries have a school massacre a couple times a year?

Fair point. But how many of these would be prevented if more people carried? It's all part of the mindset that in this country, there's no accountability for anything because no one can stop you. If the teachers had all had firearms available to them, it may have given this individual a second thought about going through with it.

Because a guns only purpose is to kill, no one who is rational and living in even a semi rational society wants to own a gun. Either admit your not rational or that your country is seriously messed up.

You're correct in that a gun's sole purpose is to kill. Typically, we use it to kill animals for food. Some people, namely military and crazy people, use them to kill people. MY sole reason for being a gun owner is to protect myself from someone trying to take my life before the police can get here to save me(AKA one of those crazy people). Would you have me lie down and die when a criminal who disregards the law shows up with the intention of killing me?

This however makes me neither crazy or irrational. It makes me responsible. I have to have the right to self defense. By your own admission, you would have that right rescinded. I'm sorry, but I will NOT subscribe to that line of thinking. That's both self-defeatest and irrational, by definition.

So your solution is to put more guns into circulation thereby making it even easier for criminals or psychos to access them

I can see that like your other gun loving friends you really thought that one out well

Yes. However, there are laws in place to prevent mentally unstable people from accessing them. If those who issue guns were more attentive to the law, then some of these events could be prevented. Owners of guns need to be responsible too, in order to keep the firearms out of the hands of those mentally unfit to possess them.

And to be fair, I don't call myself a gun-loving friend. I call myself a realist. The reality of our world is that we cannot be safe when we rely on others for our own protection. To do so is to sign our own death certificate.

If you want to sign yours, be my guest. I however, will more than likely still be alive, albeit with a smoking gun in my hand. Freedom is never free. If you cannot see that logic, then I think you've lost touch with American society, or society in general.

TheBorg
Forum Member and Moderator

P.S. All this being said, I want to send my condolences to all those in China that were injured. I'm grateful that a gun wasn't used there. My best to you all!!

Originally posted by ManjushriPrajna
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

The burden of proof is on you. You're the one making the claims that we need more gun control, and that would solve these sorts of problems. I don't have to provide anything.

Again, show evidence that your claims are valid and that gun control would be justified, otherwise your argument is null and void.

OK how about it would make it harder for students to get guns and shoot up their schools??
Reason enough?
Were not talking about hardened criminals who know black market suppliers, were talking about children and lone nutjobs.

You said that gun crime is proportionate to stricter gun laws, can you point me in the direction of this piece of data? Every piece of info Ive looked at in the course of these discussions Ive found have been misquoted or cherry picked to fit the gun lovers arguments.

You quoted a hard fact (allegedly) so the burden of proof is actually on you

Originally posted by Vilhelm


Eerily reminiscent to a similar attack in China about six years ago. Saw a brief mention of this on NBC before it cut back to the Newtown, CT shooting.

So far I can't find any confirmation of fatalities - hopefully there aren't any!

Just goes to prove that people don't need access to guns to commit heinous crimes. If somebody wants to do something like this, they'll find a way.

www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I think the "fatalities" part is the difference in the two stories so you didn't prove someone wielding a knife could also kill 20 people so fast. The difference between a gun and anything else are a few....and they are significant.

1) The number of people you can kill with a gun is greater and faster than any other weapon so potential for mass casualties from one deranged lunatic is disproportionately large.

2) With anything other than a gun people can step in and stop the crime, at least they have a better chance of subduing the suspect before too many lives are taken.

3) Without some easy way to kill themselves after I don't think people would go through with these rampages and a gun provides them an easy way out - to escape facing what they've done.