Please sign up or log in for the best forum experience!

avatar! Dec 27, 2015 (edited Dec 27, 2015)

Since in another thread Rein "asked" for it, here is my thread about the many failings of humankind, of which there are, well, many!

Here is a man arrested at McDonald's after shooting someone because (apparently) he was upset that his order was ready??? It's unclear exactly why this shooting happened, but what's clear is that it's a typical "Now I'm angry, now I shoot you" story. Also, for some reason the UK dailymail has more info on this story than other US news agencies although the shooting happened in the USA (I'm sure you're all just shocked that a shooting would happen in the USA)...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … ready.html

Amazingu Dec 28, 2015

raynebc wrote:

And I'm shocked that stabbings happen in places where guns are banned.

And I'm shocked by the stupidity of people who keep using that as an excuse to not enforce stricter gun control, but let's not go down that route again.

Jay Dec 28, 2015 (edited Dec 28, 2015)

Dude, seriously. The Daily Mail? You're lapping up this rubbish. This is a failing of humankind right here.

raynebc Dec 28, 2015

Amazingu wrote:

And I'm shocked by the stupidity of people who keep using that as an excuse to not enforce stricter gun control, but let's not go down that route again.

Violence happens because of people, not inanimate objects.  The presence of guns is more of a coincidence.

Jay Dec 28, 2015

A coincidence remarkably great at killing and injuring lots of people, which should be no surprise given that's their primary function.

Ashley Winchester Dec 28, 2015

Jay wrote:

A coincidence remarkably great at killing and injuring lots of people, which should be no surprise given that's their primary function.

Thank you. I swear if I hear one more person make that idiotic straw-man argument that if we outlaw guns we should outlaw automobiles because they kill people... ugh. Cars weren't made with the intent to kill things; it's just inevitable side effect and not their primary function. When people make that argument they're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

avatar! Dec 28, 2015

I'm not in favor of outlawing guns in the USA. I don't think there's any feasible way you could anyway. Frankly, it's in the 2nd Amendment and so forget it. However, that doesn't mean that there should be no "gun laws".  For one thing, fully automatic machine guns are not for sale. You could argue "Well, the bad guys don't care they will purchase it illegally". To an extent that argument is true, but it doesn't hold water. If fully automatic weapons were purchasable by anyone there would be MANY MANY more on the streets, and I am certain many more innocent people would be killed. Look, there are lots of arguments that can be made on both sides. Another example, I have a friend from Brazil who tells me that the strict gun control laws there do not work. Evidence clearly shows that to be the case

http://www.latitudenews.com/story/what- … e-newtown/

However, every country is different and there are pluses and minuses to both arguments. I think compromises need to be made. Again, I'm speaking for the USA, not for other countries.

raynebc Dec 28, 2015

avatar! wrote:

I think compromises need to be made. Again, I'm speaking for the USA, not for other countries.

Criminals will obtain weapons one way or another, whether they end up with a gun or otherwise.  At what point is gun control infringement on the right to have them?  Even just a comprehensive list of all legally owned guns can be and has been misused.  In the wake of hurricane Katrina, New Orleans' illegal confiscation of civilian weapons prompted almost half of the States to put into law that the government can't blanket confiscate legally owned weapons during a state of emergency.  But with the stroke of a pen, an executive order might allow history to repeat itself and the legality would ultimately have to be sorted out after the damage had been done.

avatar! wrote:

"A 28 year-old Russian man is suing Bethesda Softworks and its localization studio for what he claims is a life-ruining experience with Fallout 4"

That is pathetic.  I should hope that the Russian courts aren't dumb enough to allow this get anywhere.

Ashley Winchester Dec 28, 2015 (edited Dec 28, 2015)

avatar! wrote:

"A 28 year-old Russian man is suing Bethesda Softworks and its localization studio for what he claims is a life-ruining experience with Fallout 4. In the three weeks after release, he claims he was so addicted to the game that he managed to lose both his wife and his job."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/ … addictive/

I guess asking for some personal responsibility is too much...?

avatar! Dec 28, 2015 (edited Dec 28, 2015)

Ashley Winchester wrote:
avatar! wrote:

"A 28 year-old Russian man is suing Bethesda Softworks and its localization studio for what he claims is a life-ruining experience with Fallout 4. In the three weeks after release, he claims he was so addicted to the game that he managed to lose both his wife and his job."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/ … addictive/

I guess asking for some personal responsibility is too much...?

It does make me feel "happy" to know that assholes, idiots, and morons are not strictly confined to the USA. Granted, that is obvious, but you know sometimes it's nice to hear about such things internationally since I get so much of it in local news yikes

rein Dec 28, 2015

I guess this is a continuation of what I said in the other thread, but stories like this one about the guy suing Bethesda make me feel pity and sadness more than, dare I say, the voyeuristic glee and superiority that you feel, avatar.  Certainly it's wrong for this guy to blame Fallout 4 and to sue Bethesda, but he must be in a really bad place emotionally to be so desperate to bury himself in a sandbox.

God, I'm getting old.  And soft.

GoldfishX Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

On guns...I consider myself a moderate on them and agree that common-sense laws (background checks, proper training and permits mostly) should be in place and be enforced, as well as severe punishment for friends/family members that allow misuse of one. Basically, I would treat a gun like a car. In this current environment however, I just can't get behind a group of people that choose to deflect blame to guns over the individuals. The anti-gun rhetoric was firmly established well before the San Bernadino shootings were confirmed as a terrorist attack, in many cases, hours after the attack itself. And as has been established, "proper gun laws" won't magically make the millions of firearms disappear, so it is little more than a political talking point.

On frivolous suing...It's the American* way and a large reason for PC culture. There really should be a fine in place for people found guilty of wasting taxpayers dollars and people's time on this crap.

*Okay, okay, the guy's in Russia, but still, my point stands.

raynebc Dec 29, 2015

As conservative as I am on guns, I would fully support a required training/safety course to own a gun.  Just like hunters (that are young enough) in my state have to complete a hunter's education course.

Jay Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

Bottom line is that, whatever your stance on guns, your current system isn't working. Well, except for arms companies. It's working very well for them.

GoldfishX Dec 29, 2015

Jay wrote:

Bottom line is that, whatever your stance on guns, your current system isn't working. Well, except for arms companies. It's working very well for them.

True, I just think that message could be delivered with a little more tact and less political mumble jumble than it has been (I will give Bernie Sanders credit, at least his position has been more realistic than Clinton/OMalley). So moderates like me aren't completely repulsed by the people that are supposedly trying to do the right thing and end up siding with the "open carry 4 all" crowd, in a "lesser of two evils" kind of thing.

Jay Dec 29, 2015

Looking at it as an outsider, your ridiculous amount of gun deaths don't seem to warrant much tact. They warrant change. Any change, as much change as possible and change right now until you find a way of reducing them. Resistance to change today from anyone makes them complicit in the gun maimings and deaths of tomorrow because the pattern is blindingly clear. People will be shot and killed today or tomorrow. You'll have another newsworthy mass killing in a matter of months, if not weeks, and many more mass shootings in the meantime which have become so normal they barely warrant comment. How that can be seen as acceptable is just insane to anyone outside looking in.

Zorbfish Dec 29, 2015

For every newsworthy shooting by one or more individuals there are hundreds of responsible users and owners of firearms. And in most instances these shootings are carried out by mentally sick individuals. We try to always take the easy fix and instead solving the overall problem: we have inadequate mental health treatment and prevention in our country.

A mentally unstable person doesn't need a gun to kill you, it just makes it easier. And if they really want to kill just because they can't get a gun isn't going to stop them.

Jay Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

Easy fix? Doesn't look like you're applying any fix whatsoever, easy or otherwise. Not convinced this is a mental health issue but if it is, wonderful - apply the fix now and watch gun deaths drop dramatically. When that doesn't work in 6 months, do something else. At least that way you'll eventually arrive at the obvious by process of elimination.

Edit: Some news articles for your entertainment.

From 2014: The Perfect US Gunman Just Years Away, Claims Media - http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2014/0 … ims-media/
One from the middle of the year: POLL: What Is Your Favourite US Mass Shooting So Far This Year? http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/0 … this-year/
And this from early December: America Stuck On Repeat - http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/1 … on-repeat/

Note - this website is satire, not actually news, but it does give a sense of how it looks from out here.

avatar! Dec 29, 2015

rein wrote:

I guess this is a continuation of what I said in the other thread, but stories like this one about the guy suing Bethesda make me feel pity and sadness more than, dare I say, the voyeuristic glee and superiority that you feel, avatar.  Certainly it's wrong for this guy to blame Fallout 4 and to sue Bethesda, but he must be in a really bad place emotionally to be so desperate to bury himself in a sandbox.

God, I'm getting old.  And soft.

I strongly suggest not putting words in other people's mouth. You're just assuming things left and right. You're assuming he's in a "bad place emotionally" and "desperate". Perhaps that is where you are at or have been, but who says this guy is like you? What do you know about this guy? Also, who determines what a "bad place" is? "Gee, I didn't get what I want for Christmas! OK, now I'm in a bad place emotionally and I'm feeling desperate!"  Secondly, your hyperboles "voyeuristic glee and superiority" are obnoxious. You're entitled to your own opinion, but frankly it seems to me that your self-righteous attitude is what I would call a superiority complex.

avatar! Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

Jay wrote:

Bottom line is that, whatever your stance on guns, your current system isn't working. Well, except for arms companies. It's working very well for them.

I honestly don't know if violent crime rates are directly related to firearms or not. At any rate, there are statistics that show that the UK has significantly more violent crime than the USA. Some studies claim the UK, per capita, has up to 5 times as much violent crime. Other studies claim it is less, only about twice as much. Regardless, it is interesting. Of course, some people claim you can't compare the UK to the USA in terms of violent crime, which makes me wonder: if you can't compare violent crimes across countries than why are we comparing gun deaths across countries? Unfortunately it seems like just about all these studies get manipulated by some group with an agenda... SIGH. Anyway, point is some claim the "higher violent crime in the UK" is because in the US people are allowed to have firearms and defend themselves. Whether this is true is highly speculative, although you can't outright dismiss it.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter … violent-c/

Also, an interesting statistic is that the majority of homicides with firearms are gang related. Mass shootings are of course horrific, and I'm not saying there shouldn't be background and mental checks. However, it is a fact that despite the media coverage they get, they are very rare. Secondly, what exactly constitutes a "mass shooting"? Technically it refers to an incident with more than one victim. Thus, if three gang members shoot it out that is technically a "mass shooting". Probably not what most people think of when they hear the words "mass shooting". Anyway, this is interesting to discuss. I'm honestly not convinced that other countries handle guns AND violence better than the USA. However, I'm always interested in hearing opinions and discussing things.

Jay Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

Did you read the link you posted? Skip to the end.

avatar! Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

Jay wrote:

Did you read the link you posted? Skip to the end.

Yes, I did. The end is of course their opinion. They are very left-leaning, so I honestly think their conclusion is flawed because they have an agenda. However, what I thought was particularly interesting is that they found: violent crime in the UK is 775 while in the USA it is 383 per 100,000. Then they try to argue "oh well, you shouldn't compare the UK to the USA because..." and yet they compare gun deaths in the UK and the USA! Rather a double standard no? Regardless, I thought the pure statistic 775 to 383 is noteworthy. Also, there are other studies that show it is actually much higher. Anyway, point is you can just read the end and agree with it if it makes you happy. Myself, I think that statistic speaks for itself.

Jay Dec 29, 2015 (edited Dec 29, 2015)

The initial source in question is an Internet meme. Seriously, an Internet meme.

But if you're genuinely curious and want to compare like with like, below are figures on violent deaths by country. The US ranks at 85 with plenty of countries ahead of it, at 5.56 people per 100k. The UK sits at 165 with 0.63 people per 100k. Quite a drop and lower than my own home country of Ireland, up there at 155 with 0.89 per 100k.

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/caus … y-country/

Edity edit: Actually, had the figures in the UK or anywhere else turned out to be much worse, the very basic bottom line would still remain. Saying Mexico has a worse violent death problem (it does) won't save a single life. If you have an ongoing problem such as a gun death problem, you have to actually change something in order to make a difference. If that doesn't work, you've got to change something else and keep doing it until you actually help. By all means start with mental health - boost Obamacare or any other program that can get people in front of health professionals then go from there if that doesn't make a dent until you eventually tackle the root. But that assumes your citizens feel the stream of deaths and injuries are actually a problem. I do but I'm an outsider so this is pretty much the sum total of what I have to offer on the subject.

Board footer

Forums powered by FluxBB