So how about that Connecticut Elementary School Shooting; Troll at Your Own Risk

[Nephlite]

might have missed it being posted already but here you go;

6th Grader brings unloaded gun to school, claims parents gave it to him for protection in wake of Sandy Hook shooting.

http://fox13now.com/2012/12/17/west-...gun-to-school/



because clearly the answer to stopping violence is arming our 6th graders.

While the parents giving the kid a gun would absolutely not surprise me in the least, I'm banking more on the kid was aware of the shootings in Connecticut and grabbed daddy's gun that was probably kept in his nightstand because he (the kid) was scared. If the parents admit they gave the kid the gun, then humanity as a whole is fucked. If they don't admit it, kid will probably end up with a juvi record. Either way the kid is probably screwed.

I only said the second scenario because (in my experience), underestimating the level of awareness and the intelligence of a child is a common mistake of society. They are very much aware of the world (although they might not understand it) and react and feel to situations much like adults. The only difference is the responses are not always mature or well thought out because their thought processes are limited developmentally.

[Seraph]

Can you kindly stop responding until you're going to address the fact that you're trying to compare aging and shark fatality rates as if they're in some way going to show us how dangerous the two are as a whole?

My point was death risk assessment. If you want to be obtuse, go ahead. My point is there isn't an almost thousand post thread about anything else that unnecessary kills kids/adults/people. Is the attention warranted? I think it is, but I am always somewhat surprised that the level of outrage never seems to scale right. Perhaps it is just the shock value and the intense media coverage it gets.

Edit: Here: http://www.bluegartr.com/archive/index.php/t-69931.html

Less than 50 posts there. Almost twice the people died. That's my point. People seem to suddenly care if it's about guns. We are currently at almost 900 posts here.

[archibaldcrane]

It's because basically everything else can be properly regulated lol.

You do understand this right?

[Dotsudoku]

You're comparing total vehicular fatalities to gun-related deaths, and I'm being obtuse. lol

[Eurell]

While the parents giving the kid a gun would absolutely not surprise me in the least, I'm banking more on the kid was aware of the shootings in Connecticut and grabbed daddy's gun that was probably kept in his nightstand because he (the kid) was scared. If the parents admit they gave the kid the gun, then humanity as a whole is fucked. If they don't admit it, kid will probably end up with a juvi record. Either way the kid is probably screwed.

I only said the second scenario because (in my experience), underestimating the level of awareness and the intelligence of a child is a common mistake of society. They are very much aware of the world (although they might not understand it) and react and feel to situations much like adults. The only difference is the responses are not always mature or well thought out because their thought processes are limited developmentally.

If the kid took it himself out of fear, I would think he would have it loaded, and wouldn't be joking around with it as much. I'm thinking the parents are dumb and really did give it to him.

My point was death risk assessment. If you want to be obtuse, go ahead. My point is there isn't an almost thousand post thread about anything else that unnecessary kills kids/adults/people. Is the attention warranted? I think it is, but I am always somewhat surprised that the level of outrage never seems to scale right. Perhaps it is just the shock value and the intense media coverage it gets.

Society needs cars. We need cars, we need electricity. These are important things to the world despite the amount of deaths they cause. Please tell me why so many people need so many guns.

[Nephlite]

If the kid took it himself out of fear, I would think he would have it loaded, and wouldn't be joking around with it as much. I'm thinking the parents are dumb and really did give it to him.

Man I hope not (parents gave it to him). When I get home I'm so damn paranoid about my kids grabbing my gun that there isn't a day I don't double and triple check that it's locked up and safe. Hate seeing headlines where two year olds grab service weapons from police officers and shoot themselves accidentally.

[ronin sparthos]

While the parents giving the kid a gun would absolutely not surprise me in the least, I'm banking more on the kid was aware of the shootings in Connecticut and grabbed daddy's gun that was probably kept in his nightstand because he (the kid) was scared. If the parents admit they gave the kid the gun, then humanity as a whole is fucked. If they don't admit it, kid will probably end up with a juvi record. Either way the kid is probably screwed.

I only said the second scenario because (in my experience), underestimating the level of awareness and the intelligence of a child is a common mistake of society. They are very much aware of the world (although they might not understand it) and react and feel to situations much like adults. The only difference is the responses are not always mature or well thought out because their thought processes are limited developmentally.

Would it really surprise you if the parents have their kid a gun when notable politicians are on FOX spouting the argument that everyone should be armed? Shit, even pastors should be strapped with weapons under their clerical robes, never know when Satan needs a bullet between the eyes.

The fact that the kid pulled a gun on another student in the fashion he did indicates something more below the surface. Having your gun mom 'n dad gave you in a bag and pulling your gun on a fellow student are two wholly different things.

[Seraph]

Society needs cars. We need cars, we need electricity. These are important things to the world despite the amount of deaths they cause. Please tell me why so many people need so many guns.

My personal honest answer without getting into a need/want debate? The genie is already out of the bottle. People want guns to protect themselves against other guns (and other lesser threats). You can try and limit or take away the guns, but that doesn't remove the threats and could even cause new ones. You can make arguments for needing guns for hunting, or protection from the government, or other foreign military powers, and they may also be valid arguments, but personally I think it has just gotten to be a much smaller version of mutually assured destruction. Someone will want a gun because someone else has them. With technology marching on, eventually even more people will potentially have them too. Like I said earlier, I don't own any guns, but I can see why people would want to. Is that worth the cost? Hell if I know. That wasn't the point I was trying to make.

[Eurell]

We get your point. We disagree with your point. We have stated why.

If you don't want to get more into your last post, I won't. But there's plenty of reason why guns need to go in that post alone.

And again, Im not even saying that Im for a gun ban. I'm just pointing out the problems with some of the arguments going around lately.

[Aksannyi]

Would it really surprise you if the parents have their kid a gun when notable politicians are on FOX spouting the argument that everyone should be armed? Shit, even pastors should be strapped with weapons under their clerical robes, never know when Satan needs a bullet between the eyes.

The fact that the kid pulled a gun on another student in the fashion he did indicates something more below the surface. Having your gun mom 'n dad gave you in a bag and pulling your gun on a fellow student are two wholly different things.

There are some terrible parents on this planet and it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that the parents not only gave the kid the gun, but didn't give him even the smallest iota of training in how to properly handle and use the fucking thing, either. Plug & play doesn't apply to guns, parents. You don't just take it out of the plastic wrap and hand it over the way you do with the latest awesome toy.

The fact that the kid waved it in some other kid's face is proof enough that the kid was never shown how to properly handle a weapon. I was eight the first time I held a gun, under the supervision of my father (an avid hunter come from generations of avid hunters). Guns need training. Anyone who has a gun should have training first, I fully support that. In PA (where I'm from) you can't get a hunting license until you've taken a hunter safety course, which of course is 99% about guns. I don't think taking a gun safety course before being able to purchase and register a firearm is too much to ask, and if these people getting guns and taking these courses reproduce, they may even have half a fucking mind to teach their kids how to be safe, too. I'd be willing to bet this kid was never shown how to properly handle a weapon - I've never in my 31 years of life handled a weapon with anything but the utmost respect for its capabilities, thanks to the careful instruction of my father.

Fucking parents. I don't necessarily blame the kid here - unless he took it and lied about it - but even still, I blame the parents. If you're a parent and you have a gun in your house, you teach your fucking kid how to handle it. You don't just put it away and tell them not to touch it, that's just asking for them to do exactly that. 11 or 12 is old enough to understand how to handle a weapon. An hour's worth of time with the kid could have prevented gun stupidity.

[Seraph]

We get your point. We disagree with your point. We have stated why.

If you don't want to get more into your last post, I won't. But there's plenty of reason why guns need to go in that post alone.

And again, Im not even saying that Im for a gun ban. I'm just pointing out the problems with some of the arguments going around lately.

What do you propose then? I am not saying the situation isn't shitty, but I do agree that there are a lack of good solutions to this problem. I personally don't think a ban will work, and the legal experts will scream that regulation is impossible/improbable/Supreme Court/NRA/lobbyists/etc. The situation blows, the loss of life in this situation was unnecessary, pointless, and tragic. So is there a really good idea on how to keep this from happening again, or is the fact there really isn't a good solution the reason people just sit around and argue with each other?

[Nephlite]

Would it really surprise you if the parents have their kid a gun when notable politicians are on FOX spouting the argument that everyone should be armed? Shit, even pastors should be strapped with weapons under their clerical robes, never know when Satan needs a bullet between the eyes.

The fact that the kid pulled a gun on another student in the fashion he did indicates something more below the surface. Having your gun mom 'n dad gave you in a bag and pulling your gun on a fellow student are two wholly different things.

I said it wouldn't surprise me. I was just throwing out a hypothetical because i'm optimistic. And while I agree there could be something wrong with the kid for pulling the gun out in that fashion, I wouldn't discredit the fact that because he is a child and by what he may have seen in his life, he could very well think that what he did is an appropriate action because that's what he's learned. The parents probably have done nothing to educate the child in safety and awareness of the firearm in the house, and just left him to his own devices and imagination.

Edit: Aksannyi hit it on the head and there's much love flowing that way from me <3

[Eurell]

What do you propose then? I am not saying the situation isn't shitty, but I do agree that there are a lack of good solutions to this problem. I personally don't think a ban will work, and the legal experts will scream that regulation is impossible/improbable/Supreme Court/NRA/lobbyists/etc. The situation blows, the loss of life in this situation was unnecessary, pointless, and tragic. So is there a really good idea on how to keep this from happening again, or is the fact there really isn't a good solution the reason people just sit around and argue with each other?

What Archi posted in this thread (or maybe it was the gun ban one church started) would be a great start. He outlined a lot of regulations that frankly, should already be taking place.

I would also have 0 problem with a gun ban, but I understand why that may not work.

[Seraph]

What Archi posted in this thread (or maybe it was the gun ban one church started) would be a great start. He outlined a lot of regulations that frankly, should already be taking place.

I would also have 0 problem with a gun ban, but I understand why that may not work.

I agree. I could even get behind a gun ban potentially if I thought it was feasible. I have no idea how you magically make guns disappear, especially from those who really want them. Even if you can get that far, how do you keep people from making new ones, or smuggling them into the country. It's literally a logistics nightmare.

[Stanislaw]

Because RTS games where people kill aliens are totally the best answer as to why a person would massacre 5 year olds.

And the blame game on video game begins.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...chool-massacre

UK tabloids single out Call of Duty, Dynasty Warriors in coverage of Sandy Hook school massacre

UK tabloids The Sun and The Daily Express have blamed video games for the tragic US school massacre.

This morning's edition of The Sun carries the front page splash: “KILLER'S CALL OF DUTY OBSESSION”, saying Adam Lanza, who took his own life after murdering 20 children at Sandy Hook, was “addicted to controversial vid game”.

Then, in a double page spread inside the paper, titled “BLACK OPS BUNKER”, The Sun alleges 20-year-old Lanza spent hours playing “bloodthirsty computer games such as Call of Duty” in the basement of his mother's house.

The Sun's information comes from plumber Peter Wlasuk, who visited the basement while Adam and his older brother lived there.

“The boys were fans of the military. They had posters all over the wall in the basement. They had one poster of every piece of military equipment the US ever made.

“It was a huge poster with every tank ever made. The kids could tell you about guns they had never seen from the '40s, '50s and '60s. The kids who play these games know all about them.

“I'm not blaming the games for what happened. But they see a picture of a historical gun and say 'I've used that on Call Of Duty'.”

The Sun goes on to say the guns Lanza used in the massacre are “the sort of guns that feature heavily in games like Call of Duty - in which players take on the role of soldiers and shoot dead scores of enemies”.

The Sun's coverage includes a “myView” piece by child and education psychologist Teresa Bliss, who says, “There is no doubt that what children watch affects their behaviour”. “It isn't healthy for children to watch people destroying other people,” she says.

Bliss said Call of Duty “can lead children to become more immune to violence and death” and that despite Lanza's mother Nancy being described as a paranoid person who stockpiled guns, “it is unlikely that she would have been able to give him the influence he needed”.

In a news in brief piece the paper - the best-selling tabloid in the UK - mentions Call of Duty in relation to Anders Breivik, who was jailed for 21 years for killing 77 people in Norway.

The Sun does not appear to have offered Activision a right of reply. Eurogamer has contacted Activision's UK office for comment.

The Sun's coverage comes despite it praising Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 in a series of articles published over the last few months.

In a preview published in September The Sun said Black Ops 2 was “set to be the shooter of the future”.

On 9th November The Sun ran a piece plugging an Activision event in London that let Call of Duty fans play Black Ops 2 ahead of release. “Thousands will be able to do battle through Multiplayer mode, as well as checking out the arsenal of new weapons and drone attacks on offer,” The Sun said.

Then, in a report on the game's launch on 13th November, The Sun delivered its verdict on Black Ops 2, saying, “Graphically, the game is sublime, something the series' reputation is built on. It's not subtle or tactile. It's pure, unadulterated warfare.”

Meanwhile, The Daily Express has singled out Dynasty Warriors in its coverage of the tragedy.

“Chillingly, his favourite video game was said to be a shockingly violent fantasy war game called Dynasty Warriors which is thought to have given him inspiration to act on his darkest thoughts," the paper said in a report published yesterday.

The Daily Express, however, does not provide a source for this supposed link to Dynasty Warriors. Nor does it offer publisher Tecmo Koei a right of reply. Eurogamer has asked for comment.

Today's Daily Express, page nine.

In today's edition The Daily Express again mentions video games. “The killer's uncle Jonathan Lanza said his nephew had been taking an anti-psychotic drug,” it says. “He was also reportedly fixated with violent video games.”

It uses James Garbarino, an expert in child violence from Chicago's Loyola University, as a source. “When someone with a mental-health disorder becomes very isolated and at the same time is obsessed with playing violent video games, the games break down their impediments to killing,” he says.

“When the incident takes place, it is almost as if they are living out the video game. They feel rejected by society and this is their way of getting back.”

Garbarino suggests the assault rifle Lanza used “is exactly the kind of weapon they practice with in the video games”.

While UK tabloids often blame video games while covering these stories, UK broadsheets take a more considered approach.

This morning's Guardian chooses to focus on the debate about gun control in the US in a double page spread. The Times' front page carries the headline: "Americans start to question gun laws". Inside is a report on US gun ownership.

The Daily Telegraph reports Lanza was a "computer nerd", but, again, focuses on the US gun lobby.

lol, Dynasty Warriors, seriously?

[Dimmauk]

In my opinion, booby traps are a better home defense than an AR15. Afraid of intruders? Get better home security.

If Maukley can do it, we all can.

[Judai]

Maybe take a page from Australia's gun control policies they enacted after a shooting over a decade ago and if you want proof that taking guns away will lower gun related violence rates, look at their statistics that clearly show massive drops.

The only reason people feel the "need" to own guns is due to fear. They are afraid the terrible things they see in the media will happen to them and become part of the problem by rushing out to arm themselves.

[chazzyphizzle]

"unstable who play video games do things that unstable people do" riveting stuff

[Seraph]

In my opinion, booby traps are a better home defense than an AR15. Afraid of intruders? Get better home security.

If Maukley can do it, we all can.

I was going to ask if you meant paint cans from the ceiling, or just simple alarms on the doors and windows, lol.

[Churchill]

Maybe take a page from Australia's gun control policies they enacted after a shooting over a decade ago and if you want proof that taking guns away will lower gun related violence rates, look at their statistics that clearly show massive drops.

The only reason people feel the "need" to own guns is due to fear. They are afraid the terrible things they see in the media will happen to them and become part of the problem by rushing out to arm themselves.

australia also bans violent video games and fucks kangaroos