Another day, another school shooting

[Barbarella]

I think the answer to all this is both gun safety regulations AND improvements to the mental health system. Otherwise, it's just a band-aid.

[Barbarella]

Apparently this whole thing happened because this kid had a beef with the school librarian.

Which makes me ask. Why not "talk it out"?

A lot of this stuff could be avoided if they just "talked it out".

But noooooo....THESE ARE "MEN" AND TALKING IS FOR SISSIES AND IT'S BETTER TO DO I THE "MAN WAY" & BLOW STUFF UP! BLAMO BLAMO! YEEEEEEEEHHHHAAAAH!

Why will these insecure boys ever learn that it's okay to see the Guidance Counselors & therapists?! I HATE THIS MACHO CULTURE!!!

Another frustrating thing....why do they always kill themselves? We can't question or learn from them! Is that the reason? To annoy us & make us live with a mystery & riddles? If they're angry about life and want to kill, why don't they just kill themselves only?

[chitoryu12]

Please provide actual evidence that introduction of gun control into a country that lacked it caused a long-term decrease in crime.

Why would anyone bother? Every time Australia is mentioned as an example of gun control successfully reducing violent crime, the gun nuts just stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU".

That's because it's barely even evidence. The first restrictive gun laws came into place in 1996 (less than 20 years ago), and new laws in 2002 (barely over 10 years ago). Not only is it almost impossible to actually prove that these laws caused a drop in violent crime, violent crime rates in many countries are known to have noticeable fluctuations over a 10 year period even when no new gun laws are introduced. For all we know, it's statistical fluff that's being falsely correlated with the new laws.

To make it even worse as "evidence", Australia historically had low levels of violent crime and the laws were introduced during a sudden short-term upsurge. It's extremely possible that the rise in violent crime was unrelated to firearms laws or availability whatsoever and would have simply gone down on its own without the new laws.

[Mantorok]

In other words:

LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

[rageaholic]

You know, I really hate this world some times. 

[chitoryu12]

In other words:

LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

.....wait, hang on.

You literally just did the "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" tactic yourself by accusing me of doing it to you.

What the fuck?

[Cerim Treascair]

In other words:

LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

.....wait, hang on.

You literally just did the "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" tactic yourself by accusing me of doing it to you.

What the fuck?

Wait a tic, Chit, I think Mantorok meant that anybody that might claim that it's statistical 'proof' one way or the other, fuzzy as it might be considering the short time span, is that the detractor's reactions are the "I can't hear you" tactic.

[QueenofHearts]

Kind of, Chit asked for one specific example, was given a very solid one, and then came up with a bunch of ad hoc "problems" with the case study. That is the problem with case studies, anyone can say "but-for this element, the result would be different, it proves nothing" no matter how strong the link is, anyone can create an ad hoc problem.

In other words, Mant could post anything and Chit would find a problem with it. Such are the rules of the board. That isn't examining the evidence objectively, that's "I want my penis compensators and will manipulate the facts I accept to get the result I wish."

[chitoryu12]

Kind of, Chit asked for one specific example, was given a very solid one, and then came up with a bunch of ad hoc "problems" with the case study. That is the problem with case studies, anyone can say "but-for this element, the result would be different, it proves nothing" no matter how strong the link is, anyone can create an ad hoc problem.

In other words, Mant could post anything and Chit would find a problem with it. Such are the rules of the board. That isn't examining the evidence objectively, that's "I want my penis compensators and will manipulate the facts I accept to get the result I wish."

All of the things I pointed out are why it's NOT solid evidence. There's a huge amount of glaring flaws with using Australia as an example of successful implementation of gun control; if I point out flaws in the evidence, the burden of proof is on THEM to patch up the holes. You can't simply ignore flaws in evidence by just handwaving them away as "ad hoc problems" and accusing anyone who points out the flaws of just being obtuse.

When it comes to actually determining the effects laws have on crime, proving that the laws actually had the effect being touted is the MOST IMPORTANT PART.

[The Illusive Man]

I've got a better idea than arguing this argument for the 10th time. How about we find what's causing people to do this. What makes someone think it's a good idea?

Lol, look at this deflection complete with ignorance of biopsychosocial causes. The best part is the assumption that there are rational motives. Here let me summarize this for you:

PSYCHOPATHS ARE DETACHED FROM REALITY. Empathic dysfunction cannot be taught, it has biological causes such as amygdale abnormalities. Such biological causes alter a person’s ability to cognate, learn and communicate. Psychosis cannot be cured because medical technology cannot perform drastic brain reconstruction. Thank the Republicans for holding back avenues of research that could accomplish this.

Last I checked it didn't happen a few decades ago. Is it because of the media's obsession with violence? Is it because there seems to be little other way to solve some problems other than violence? What's changed since the 1980s? It isn't gun laws, those have gotten stricter.

You just willfully ignored Columbine, a textbook example of 'psychopath shoots up a school'.

[Mantorok]

In the last major gun debate thread, chitoryu12 was the one who posted the NRA propaganda video from 2000 that declared the 1996 gun reforms a failure due to a spike in violence in 1997-98. So two years was long enough for him to declare gun control a failure, but 17 years is too short to declare it a success. This is the kind of bullshit we used to call skyfire out on.

[Cerim Treascair]

In the last major gun debate thread, chitoryu12 was the one who posted the NRA propaganda video from 2000 that declared the 1996 gun reforms a failure due to a spike in violence in 1997-98. So two years was long enough for him to declare gun control a failure, but 17 years is too short to declare it a success. This is the kind of bullshit we used to call skyfire out on.

On an unrelated note, good to see you back, Mant.  You've been missed.  How have you been?

[Stormwarden]

*sighs* Here we go again.

You wanna know why he did what he did? Because he was benched. He was a member of the debate team, and he was gunning for his debate coach, proving that he was a failure at debate. Is it a stupid motive? Absolutely, but I've seen dumber motives for criminal acts.

My source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523676/Arapahoe-High-School-yoga-class-interrupted-girl-15-injured-shooter-Karl-Pierson.html

Gotta ask Illusive (when he isn't being a husk, anyway) : Were there any prior actions of his that would indicate a psychological break? Was there cause to believe he'd be this stupid?

We act all too often on the assumption that people know what's going on when they don't. Wish he didn't take himself out, but glad so few people got hurt for his stupidity.

And also, you guys need to calm the fuck down. If I were you, I'd be asking how he got the gun, because 99 times out of 100 for crimes like this, it was stolen or otherwise obtained illegally. Beyond this, I'll wait for more facts to come out, lest I get dragged into this flamefest.

By all means, continue said flamefest, my smores aren't ready yet.

[kefkaownsall]

pops in im just gonna say for once tim is right since there are cases of people who just are bad they lack the ability to feel empathy trying to teach empathy actually is BAD since it makes the psychopath more manipulative

[chitoryu12]

In the last major gun debate thread, chitoryu12 was the one who posted the NRA propaganda video from 2000 that declared the 1996 gun reforms a failure due to a spike in violence in 1997-98. So two years was long enough for him to declare gun control a failure, but 17 years is too short to declare it a success. This is the kind of bullshit we used to call skyfire out on.

I'm no longer using that video as evidence, as I looked closer at it and saw the mistakes (willful or otherwise) that were made in producing the video.