Geology Lecture
Pages
| Author | Topic: Geology Lecture |
|---|---|
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 14:34
Profile
I'm sure most of you are aware that some folks were murdered today at a school in Illinois. I don't know the details, but I believe that at least 10 died. It's as good an excuse as any for a poll. Edit - This is from a NPR news report. Reuters is saying 18 injured. Who the hell knows. Apparently the police report that the gunman is dead. [ Thursday, February 14, 2008 14:40: Message edited by: Jumpin' Salmon ] Poll Information This poll contains 2 question(s). 41 user(s) have voted. You may not view the results of this poll without voting. function launch_voter () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=vote;pollid=hDuXGUHsxiNO"); return true; } // end launch_voter function launch_viewer () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=view;pollid=hDuXGUHsxiNO"); return true; } // end launch_viewer function launch_window (url) { preview = window.open( url, "preview", "width=550,height=300,toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status,menubar=no,scrollbars,resizable,copyhistory=no" ); window.preview.focus(); return preview; } // end launch_window   -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 6754
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 14:55
Profile
I like question two. To be fair, I very much doubt anyone is well-versed in even their local legislation. What I do know is, I can walk into Wal-Mart any day, and walk out with a gun. I don't like it. -------------------- "Write a wise saying and your name will live forever." - Anonymous Posts: 284 | Registered: Tuesday, January 31 2006 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 15:02
Profile
quote:I'm sure the Walmart employees get a little nervous seeing you come in every day to buy a gun. I hope you get beer as well. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 15:45
Profile
Homepage
I always thought gun control was a bit pointless. People who want a gun for illegal activities will get one wether or not it's legal. Only law abiding citizens who want guns would have trouble getting one if control was stricter. Look at how prohibition worked... or rather, how it didn't work. Banning anything really just leads to a rise in organized crime. Marijuana us America's number one cash crop, you know. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 4574
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 16:10
Profile
ET, that's not necessarily true. Guns can kill a man, and it's is very hard for alcohol to kill a man directly. Also, since guns are relatively easy to get at this time, making it harder to get one would help reduce violence. Tormented teens would not have to just steal their folk's gun to kill his demons, drunkard men would not be able to simply buy a gun to kill their abused wife, gang violence would dip due to guns being more expensive to get illegally, et cetera. At the very least, it might buy enough time to resolve the issues before they get lethal. Besides, the gov't could make a tidy profit from taxing guns more heavily. -------------------- "I'm happy I'm the mentally disturbed person I am." -Nioca "Yes, Iffy is a demon." -Iffy Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 16:35
Profile
Homepage
Please, alcohol kills way more people than firearms each year. As for those gangs not being able to afford illegal guns... didn't I just mention marijuana was the number one cash crop in the US? Those guys are making a killing, pun intended. Your point about buying time to resolve issues is really your only valid point, and I admit it is a good one. Really, guns should be available to citizens should they ever need to protect themselves from the government. It's the American way. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 16:38
Profile
Homepage
The death toll appears to be smaller than the original estimates. News article. (That doesn't matter for this discussion, but is still good to hear.) quote:FYT More briefly, "locks stop only honest people", but everybody uses them anyway. [ Thursday, February 14, 2008 16:41: Message edited by: Zeviz ] -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 16:40
Profile
Homepage
You wouldn't need to lock your door if you had a gun. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 16:58
Profile
For me, what it boils down to is that a person who is committed to making an act of violence will do so . The level of violence may differ according to means, but not necessarily. The guy in this instance could just as easily brought a 5 gallon can of gasoline and poured it down the auditorium floor, and then lit a match. I'm sure the overall impact would have been greater in that situation. [Insert standard speech about not mentally abusing someone beyond normal standards, and making sure that they are capable of mentally receiving such abuse without going all nuts on you.] As far as locked doors go, I don't. But then again my dog would eat you if you broke in and threatened me. If you weigh over 100# then she would make two meals of you, no more. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 17:02
Profile
Not true. I knew someone whose house was robbed while they were out. The police officers were shocked at the arsenal of guns and rifles stolen from a locked gun cabinet that were in the house. There was enough to outfit a small gang. Having a gun only helps when you are ready and don't accidently shoot the wrong person because you aren't able to distinguish a criminal from an innocent person at the time. After all if everyone had guns and a few where shooting them, would you know coming on the scene who started it? Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 17:10
Profile
More news. quote: -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 17:37
Profile
Homepage
Yes, making guns illegal would mean they end up only in the hands of criminals. But gun violence falls into three types: accidental, passionate, and intentional. Make acquiring a gun difficult enough and dangerous enough and you'll cut down the first two categories of violence immensely because those aren't the people who feel an urgent need to carry a gun around, really. The number of crimes stopped by someone having a gun is small. The number of crimes committed by someone having a gun is large. —Alorael, who recollects something Jeff Vogel once said about software protection. Piracy is inevitable, and trying to prevent it isn't going to work. You just need to make it irritating enough that most people consider a few dollars spent a better value than time wasted. You don't make guns impossible to acquire, just really inconvenient. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 18:22
Profile
Homepage
No reasonable person would deny Alorael his sniper rifle! [ Thursday, February 14, 2008 18:23: Message edited by: Excalibur ] -------------------- Decca Records - "We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out." Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 18:38
Profile
Tim, do us a favor, and *think* about what you're going to post for a good 10 seconds before you hit "Add Reply." Please. 1. Regardless of whether the kid was going to commit an act of violence, a lack of access to guns probably would have (a) prevented him from having the "guts" to walk into a classroom of 150 people and commit the act, and (b) limited the scale of the damage he could inflict. Walking into a classroom with the same intent but only armed with a knife is a different story, and thankfully, these people aren't quite so demented that they're building suicide bombs here yet. 2. ET: unlike guns, alcohol is surprisingly easy to make in your own home, and this was a large part of the problem during Prohibition. Supply, in the case of firearms, could be much more easily controlled. 3. Why are murder rates so much higher in this nation than any of the others in our "class"? What are the distinguishing factors? Of course there are many, but a big one is the wide availability of guns. [ Thursday, February 14, 2008 18:45: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 27
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 19:17
Profile
Unfortunately, we're never going to be able to prevent people from harming others. I don't know how many of us are really that qualified to talk about gun control. I live in a relatively peaceful suburban region and go to a private school, so I am clueless about the dangers of guns and city life. From what I understand (which is little), the laws here seem to do a good enough job of keeping guns out of my school. That's not to say that a determined individual couldn't carry a gun into my school and start shooting up the place, but kids aren't carrying guns around in their pockets and so there are no accidents waiting to happen. Unfortunately, nothing we can do will ensure every law-abiding citizen a happy and long life. I'm all for stricter social control. My opinion: mandatory military service. Teach kids to respect their country, their fellows, their bodies, and the power they're each capable of. -------------------- Enraged Slith's Blades of Avernum Website Kill Them Dead - Rate it now at CSR! Posts: 1233 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 19:26
Profile
Homepage
I don't think gun availability should be restricted, mainly due to the second amendment. However, Germany , for example, has a homicide rate a fifth that of the United States., providing strong evidence that gun restrictions do have a correlation to murder rates. The second amendment plainly says people have the right to bear arms, but it doesn't imply a specification on certain kinds of arms. I'm sure Jefferson had guns in mind when he wrote that, but does his reasoning behind it mean anything? In addition, the wording seems to imply a necessity for arms due to a need for a militia. In a country where individuals theoretically represent the people in a whole, the "people" in the document seems to be in relation to the "militia." I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but the Supreme Court could deliver a modern verdict on the exact meaning on the second amendment. (Well, I think they have, but nonetheless) quote:It's as if using my actual name is going to intimidate me. You're getting upset over a stupid joke. [ Thursday, February 14, 2008 19:37: Message edited by: Excalibur ] -------------------- Decca Records - "We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out." Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 4574
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 19:47
Profile
Ex, no one here is saying that we should repeal the second amendment, or make it illegal to own a gun. We're talking about restrictions on guns. Tests, waiting periods, fees, taxes, character witnesses, phasing out certain arms (rocket launchers, for example), and other things. ET, I said alcohol directly. Like drinking yourself to death, or something. The extent of the deaths caused indirectly from alcohol is immeasurable, with things that one would or wouldn't do if sober making up a large gray zone. So I'll stick to direct alcohol deaths. ER, I don't like that. I mean, mandatory military service? That's the only way to give back to your country? I like Obama's idea better, making kids do charity work for the Peace Corps, Elderly Death Houses, et cetera. That's something I could get behind more than mandatory military service. Alorael and Drew, I agree most whole-heartedly. -------------------- "I'm happy I'm the mentally disturbed person I am." -Nioca "Yes, Iffy is a demon." -Iffy Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 19:51
Profile
Homepage
quote:Sorry about the misconception. I was trying to say that the second amendment could possibly be interpreted differently to allow for tighter gun laws. -------------------- Decca Records - "We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out." Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Thursday, February 14 2008 20:43
Profile
Tim, I'm not trying to intimidate you; I'm asking you to show a little respect and class. I don't think that's too much to ask, and it would certainly help stop you from coming across as a horse's rear (1) specifically here in a topic concerning the issues around why some nut job was able to go on a shooting spree, and (2) generally every other time you post. Also, if you don't want people to use your real name, you should take it out of your profile. [ Friday, February 15, 2008 11:02: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 27
|
written Friday, February 15 2008 21:01
Profile
quote:My school has community service requirements in order to graduate. It's not like there are a ton of problems you can just go outside and "fix" when you feel like it. You have to find opportunities and hope to hell that you'll actually do something useful for the hours you're earning. There isn't as much "save the world" to it as most would like. I never said that military service was the only way to serve your country. My idea is based primarily on positively changing the mentality of this country's citizens. -------------------- Enraged Slith's Blades of Avernum Website Kill Them Dead - Rate it now at CSR! Posts: 1233 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Saturday, February 16 2008 00:59
Profile
Homepage
Given the nature of our armed forces, I think compulsory service would have a lot of effects. We'd probably go to war less, but we'd also have a very different military for better or for worse. I am seriously suggesting that we repeal the Second Amendment, or at least look seriously at what it means. The difference in equipment between military forces and militia is now unreasonably large for militia to protect the people against the government, and it is not any militia's job to protect the people from anything else now. We have a very mobile army. We no longer have frontier, brigands, or other likely needs for firearms. Besides the largely specious claim of self-defense, guns can be used to kill animals and to kill people. The former may deserve some protection, but the latter does not. Amending the Constitution is a big deal, and altering the Bill of Rights is almost as big a deal. If the Second Amendment can be fixed by the courts, I'm all in favor. But if a bad law is on the books, no matter how important it is or how hard it is to change it it is the duty of legislators to fix it. —Alorael, who would be satisfied by giving all citizens the right to bear nonlethal (or at least less lethal) arms. Rubber bullets and tasers should be more than enough for any private citizen. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, February 16 2008 11:30
Profile
quote:I fully realize you have some curious ideas about meat, which I will pardon on account of your outstanding service to the fluffy turtles. But I will alway prefer wild game over feed lot slaughterhouse meat, with grass raised beef a fairly close second. I guess what I'm saying is that no one should think that meat comes wrapped in cellophane and sits in a handy styrofoam tray with a clever flat tampon underneath to hide any unsightly bodily fluids. As far as that bandit thing, I live an hour from police protection. I could expect a response time of 30 minutes if there was a fire. I make my own contingency plans to deal with things that would otherwise be considered 911 situations. It is part of the tradeoff for living in a rural area. If you suggest that it is okay for me to own guns, but not someone who lives in a suburb, then you are creating classes of people. Some citizens will have some rights, and some have others. Unfortunately we created this principled land under the assumption that we were all created with the same rights. A step toward partitioned rights is a step toward slavery and eventual total erosion of property rights. Sort of what the last eight years did to privacy laws. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Saturday, February 16 2008 13:35
Profile
Homepage
quote:I know they call it "firefighting", but a gun won't help you do it. quote:Oh, don't be precious. By the same logic you may as well rail against zoning regulations. [ Saturday, February 16, 2008 13:37: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, February 16 2008 13:37
Profile
quote:Hur. You can do better than that. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Saturday, February 16 2008 13:46
Profile
Homepage
quote:Any comment on my edit about zoning regulations? Since you believe that if it's okay for a rural dweller to own a gun, it should also be okay for a city dweller, do you also believe that if it's okay for someone to build a skyscraper on land in the middle of a city, it should be okay for someone else to do the same in the suburbs? According to actor network theory, one of the foremost philosophical methods of analysing technology, objects do not exist in isolation but are "hybridised" with the people, places and objects they interact with: the gun-in-the-city is not the same object as the gun-on-the-farm, even if they're the same model of gun. It's perfectly reasonable to ban one but not the other. It's not about giving different rights to different people, but about acknowledging that some objects have a different nature depending on when and where they're used. [ Saturday, February 16, 2008 13:52: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |