60 pages guaranteed

[BlackHeart]

And I'm a little tired of you insinuating that I'm not telling the truth.

[brownbomber]

Boys, fellas, guys....
Let's not get this locked. Some real good back and forth here.

[220swifty]

Originally Posted by wags

Then I would ask why there are not a proportionally equal amount of these events occurring in Canada?

I am going on the assumption that we have our share of mentally disturbed individuals.

I wish I could answer that, as do thousands of psychologists, lawmakers and justice officials. It's much deeper than access to firearms. It's entirely a cultural issue. Could it be a lust for 15 minutes of fame? A desire to stand out in modern US society? Could it be the increase in violence and the glorification of violence in media, while making 'schoolyard scraps' a police matter, and entirely taboo?

Another thought... Could it be generational? What's the average age of these killers? Late teens and early twenties, it seems. Why is it that people of that age group seem to be more likely to commit mass murder than others? Not just shootings either, don't forget the Boston bombing. To build on that, wouldn't it actually debunk the 'access = shooting' theory, for financial reasons? You would think that the average 20 something would be a lot harder pressed to scrape together thousands of dollars to kit up for a mass shooting, whereas a disgruntled 40 something might not mind burning up his savings for his final stand. Remember, these guys all seem to be using thousand dollar plus weapons, and are on the heavy side with ammo. They aren't getting the 'SKS and 1250 rds for $450' deal that any PAL holding Canadian can get.

I'm not sure what exactly it is, but my common sense tells me that accessibility to firearms is way down the list.

I have some cousins with an unsavory background that assure me a Glock isn't too hard to obtain on the street either, you just need to realize it will be a bit higher than retail. So in other words, access isn't a big hurdle in Canada either, unless you are into following laws. Murderers tend to ignore those things, especially when they plan to end the party by eating a bullet.

[220swifty]

Originally Posted by wags

Then I would ask why there are not a proportionally equal amount of these events occurring in Canada?

I am going on the assumption that we have our share of mentally disturbed individuals.

Here's my shortened answer......

What does an uninsured American pay out of pocket for a week of psychiatric care?

How about a Canadian?

[wags]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Lepine and Taber come to mind. That's 2 for Canada should be around 20 in the states in that time frame. Tough to make comparisons between Canada and USA...or any other countries as I suspect culture among many other things play a huge role.

I agree the culture is one of the key differences between the two countries. To that point, the gun culture specifically.

I was able to find a site listing school and mass shootings dating to 1996. It's a worldwide collection, however, the focus seems on more developed countries. It's as current as the recent murders at Fort Hood. While I cannot personally verify the information as being all inclusive with respect to Canada and the United States, I think it's fair to say that it's probably a fair representation.

My count has the United States at 62 events, with Canada having 2.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html

I've mentioned earlier that stats can easily be argued by both sides of a debate, however, this is simple math. None-the-less, it does support my concerns.

Cheers

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by 220swifty

I wish I could answer that, as do thousands of psychologists, lawmakers and justice officials. It's much deeper than access to firearms. It's entirely a cultural issue. Could it be a lust for 15 minutes of fame? A desire to stand out in modern US society? Could it be the increase in violence and the glorification of violence in media, while making 'schoolyard scraps' a police matter, and entirely taboo?

Another thought... Could it be generational? What's the average age of these killers? Late teens and early twenties, it seems. Why is it that people of that age group seem to be more likely to commit mass murder than others? Not just shootings either, don't forget the Boston bombing. To build on that, wouldn't it actually debunk the 'access = shooting' theory, for financial reasons? You would think that the average 20 something would be a lot harder pressed to scrape together thousands of dollars to kit up for a mass shooting, whereas a disgruntled 40 something might not mind burning up his savings for his final stand. Remember, these guys all seem to be using thousand dollar plus weapons, and are on the heavy side with ammo. They aren't getting the 'SKS and 1250 rds for $450' deal that any PAL holding Canadian can get.

I'm not sure what exactly it is, but my common sense tells me that accessibility to firearms is way down the list.

I have some cousins with an unsavory background that assure me a Glock isn't too hard to obtain on the street either, you just need to realize it will be a bit higher than retail. So in other words, access isn't a big hurdle in Canada either, unless you are into following laws. Murderers tend to ignore those things, especially when they plan to end the party by eating a bullet.

great post V . well thought out and presented. Why do the yanks have the market on loonies sewn up ??

[220swifty]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

great post V . well thought out and presented. Why do the yanks have the market on loonies sewn up ??

See my short answer.

Combine that with the pressure to 'chase the American dream' in a sputtering economy, and you've got trouble.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by BlackHeart

Is it slagging if it's true. And used to prove a point?

Didn't know this was a "politically correct only" thread. But if it is, I'll stop posting on it.

Please don't stop posting (on subject),, but perception, current affairs as of recent and such isn't good posture. It's also not political correctness, just respect.

I understand the point you were making but that can also derail into another thing altogether.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by 220swifty

I wish I could answer that, as do thousands of psychologists, lawmakers and justice officials. It's much deeper than access to firearms. It's entirely a cultural issue. Could it be a lust for 15 minutes of fame? A desire to stand out in modern US society? Could it be the increase in violence and the glorification of violence in media, while making 'schoolyard scraps' a police matter, and entirely taboo?

Another thought... Could it be generational? What's the average age of these killers? Late teens and early twenties, it seems. Why is it that people of that age group seem to be more likely to commit mass murder than others? Not just shootings either, don't forget the Boston bombing. To build on that, wouldn't it actually debunk the 'access = shooting' theory, for financial reasons? You would think that the average 20 something would be a lot harder pressed to scrape together thousands of dollars to kit up for a mass shooting, whereas a disgruntled 40 something might not mind burning up his savings for his final stand. Remember, these guys all seem to be using thousand dollar plus weapons, and are on the heavy side with ammo. They aren't getting the 'SKS and 1250 rds for $450' deal that any PAL holding Canadian can get.

I'm not sure what exactly it is, but my common sense tells me that accessibility to firearms is way down the list.

I have some cousins with an unsavory background that assure me a Glock isn't too hard to obtain on the street either, you just need to realize it will be a bit higher than retail. So in other words, access isn't a big hurdle in Canada either, unless you are into following laws. Murderers tend to ignore those things, especially when they plan to end the party by eating a bullet.

Rugs post on culture on the previous page and this is a really good summation of things stateside. We - canucks - have the benefit of actually climbing out of the hole so to speak, whereas stateside one can get lost in a nowhere place, a project or a worn out factory town,, then population. Even what those we consider ill-educated amongst us are still leaps and bounds ahead of those stateside leaving high school.

The age of homicide/manslaughter is highest in the age group 18 - 24,, the **** and vinegar years of bravada.

[rugatika]

For me it appears to be roughly two chains of thought (give or take, plus or minus a tweak here or there). One that feels people have the right to use guns as they see fit so long as they do not use them to harm others (without justification) and that other individual's criminal use or misuse (ie: either moronic or accidental) should not impinge on my right to use that tool as I see fit.

The other camp feels that the greater good of the community as a whole should govern the laws of use. That is to say, if people using guns for crime or suicide or accidents outnumber the "good" uses then their use should be restricted.

I don't think that others misuse of something should govern my liberty. Or put another way, I don't think a woman (for example) should be rendered defenceless against a rapist because Joe Blow robbed a bank with a gun, or Ted Schmoe killed himself with a gun, or Bill Munster left a loaded gun in his nightstand with kids running around. If you want to fix these go after the root cause and NOT the tool.

And yes...I know in Canada this is basically a thought game based on principle, as I personally have never felt the need to carry a gun for self defence save for the odd walk through bear country. Be that as it may, I shouldn't be lumped in with the Marc Lepines of the world for wanting to have a 20 shot magazine for my mini14.

In the states we have seen that as they increase the incidence of guns in the public via CCW laws etc, there has NOT been a corresponding increase in gun deaths as was predicted by so many. This would seem to indicate that it is not simply a matter of legal gun presence that affects gun death rates AND that most people who are armed in public are using this right responsibly.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by marxman

Not bad but for a truly exhaustive dose of worthless drivel check out wild n frees jon c right link, if anyone can get through more than 20 percent of it they are a moron.

Originally Posted by marxman

Sanctimonious pride and self rightousnous back at ya take the beam out of your eye

Nice to see someone else actually checked the source of the quote to see the light of where it was coming from. His use of pseudo philosophy without fact was making my eyes bleed and my brain go numb.

You're welcome for the out to btw Ruga.

The whole gun registration thing I find Ironic in a way. We register our children and our vehicles with the government, yet not a single person bats an eye at this. Registration is the first step to confiscation and my child... well that's something to seriously ponder. You give the government the ability to come and take your child away from you yet when it comes to a tool many get frothy at the mouth over such an absurd piece of legislation.

The whole, what would you do if someone broke into your house with a gun. For me, my first thought from in front of my PC is how did he get the gun in the first place, and what's his motivation to break into my home?
Crime can be broken down into 3 types. Passion, greed and necessity. Crimes of passion cannot be eliminated, but can be curtailed with proper social and emotional development of our children and young adults, something that's not taking place on a large scale. Crimes of greed can also be curtailed to an even larger extent by increasing opportunity and access to those opportunities. Crimes of necessity can be wiped out all together, 30% of all food is thrown out in Canada, in the US there are areas with more vacant homes then there are homeless people by a ratio of 7:1 or greater. Factor in technological unemployment and automation and the scale at which we can accomplish things (think wwII production metrics from 1936-1944) No one needs to be hungry, no one needs to go without a home and no one needs to steal anything, from anyone. In fact, a 20 hour work week across most of the industrialized world is over working most people, if as a society we were capable of utilizing all that we know and have come to understand using the scientific method.

a hundred years ago 40% of people worked in agriculture providing food for the nation, that's less then 1% now. 50 years ago 40% of the nation was working in manufacturing producing goods for the nation, today that numbers is closer to 15% or less. Today, there are more people working in the service industry then at any other point, and well with automated check outs, kiosk ordering stations in restaurants, and robotics and more powerful computers the service industry is in decline. Creation is the new savior of the labor force, but games and apps and art and music don't have the same driving force as food, shelter and goods/services as the price of created goods is not tied to anything beyond the requirements of the creator to survive (basic food and lodging).

This whole gun debate is just a distraction IMO. The current direction of most western governments is more akin to what Orwell wrote about then what the founding fathers and libertarian and enlightenment philosophers had in mind when talking about the future. So long as service to the state in the form of violation of another persons rights is a viable route for survival, vs service for the people and oneself the real issues we're facing can never and will never be addressed.

[expmler]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

No you share the right to be judged guilty by a court of law.

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[roper1]

Originally Posted by BlackHeart

And I'm a little tired of you insinuating that I'm not telling the truth.

I'm glad you finally called him on it. I was getting ticked just reading it

[Redfrog]

"In the states we have seen that as they increase the incidence of guns in the public via CCW laws etc, there has NOT been a corresponding increase in gun deaths as was predicted by so many. This would seem to indicate that it is not simply a matter of legal gun presence that affects gun death rates AND that most people who are armed in public are using this right responsibly"

Isn't it odd then that some thing that Canadians who are much more polite and reserved than our southern neighbours would suddenly turn into random killers?

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

"In the states we have seen that as they increase the incidence of guns in the public via CCW laws etc, there has NOT been a corresponding increase in gun deaths as was predicted by so many. This would seem to indicate that it is not simply a matter of legal gun presence that affects gun death rates AND that most people who are armed in public are using this right responsibly"

Isn't it odd then that some thing that Canadians who are much more polite and reserved than our southern neighbours would suddenly turn into random killers?

The oddness of it dissipates when you consider that the USA skews to the right and Canada skews to the left. Liberals have a general distrust of the citizenry (although, perplexingly they seem to have faith in criminals to obey gun laws) and a trust in government. Conservatives are the other way around.

Having said that, it is fun watching liberals spinning merrily away doing their level best to avoid this fact.


And I know your comment was partly tongue in cheek, but I'll just add my two cents worth, that any Americans I have met have been equally if not more polite than Canadians...albeit somewhat less reserved.

[Burglecut83]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

awe G why'd have go and find the facts .
Read that one finding very carefully I would like to yell at the top of my lungs 4:1 killed vs saved or 300% more people are killed by lawfully owned firearms than protected. Well how many times have suggested this as a truth and been call down . thankx G .now the retort lolololololol . Left wing anti gun study ill go first lolol.

There you go with your biased FATCS!!! lol Gummer how many people do you think weren't robbed or didn't have their houses broken into because the criminals knew the owners were armed? Do you think those numbers were added to these FACTS and STATS? Guns protect, and kill.... so do swords and baseball bats.

[Redfrog]

According to this, it's Democrats that are the problem.

"In 1863 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan.
In 1984 James Huberty a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherril a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 23 people in a Luby�s cafeteria.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.
In 2003 Douglas Williams a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech .
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people in a school."

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Burglecut83

There you go with your biased FATCS!!! lol Gummer how many people do you think weren't robbed or didn't have their houses broken into because the criminals knew the owners were armed? Do you think those numbers were added to these FACTS and STATS? Guns protect, and kill.... so do swords and baseball bats.

Doesn't matter anyway. As FG correctly pointed out, the study was done by the UN. A bunch of baby touchers and dictators that would like nothing more than to see every (publicly held) firearm twisted up in a knot as is evidenced by the giant firearm they have twisted up in a knot in front of their building...

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rugatika

The oddness of it dissipates when you consider that the USA skews to the right and Canada skews to the left. Liberals have a general distrust of the citizenry (although, perplexingly they seem to have faith in criminals to obey gun laws) and a trust in government. Conservatives are the other way around.

Having said that, it is fun watching liberals spinning merrily away doing their level best to avoid this fact.


And I know your comment was partly tongue in cheek, but I'll just add my two cents worth, that any Americans I have met have been equally if not more polite than Canadians...albeit somewhat less reserved.

You equate carring a fire arm as liberty ??

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

According to this, it's Democrats that are the problem.

"In 1863 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan.
In 1984 James Huberty a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherril a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 23 people in a Luby�s cafeteria.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.
In 2003 Douglas Williams a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech .
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger a disgruntled Democrat shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people in a school."

The answer is simple. Ban liberals.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

You equate carring a fire arm as liberty ??

Me and Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Adams ("Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense."), Patrick Henry, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Samuel Adams, and hundreds of millions of other people.

I know there are lots of people that would disagree with me though...Hitler, Mussolini, Kim Jung Il, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong (“The Communist party must control the guns.” ), Robert Mugabe and you and many others I'm sure.

[brownbomber]

Rug
We all should be the same?

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by brownbomber

Rug
We all should be the same?

How do you mean?

[brownbomber]

Ban liberals? Lol
Plus your second group ( hitler etc) liked to ban groups as well. I usually expect your arguments better thought out

[fish gunner]

This comes down to simple numbers imo . Canada's total homicides this year will run to abought 1000+/- . The fire arms deaths In US Alone will run abought 30k +/- . If one multiplies the total homicides in canada by 10 to give an equal population comparison we still end up with a drastic differance. Its not made up its not bias its the truth if the study G posted is correct . 21k of those deaths are wrongful and +/- 7 k are justified . If one reads BB paper the truth starts to come out 1:1800 firearms owner actually drew a firearm for protection. If one ccorrelates this to Canada's homicides . One death in canada per year as the result of protection of self . Which rings true . Therfore the us contains 200,000,000 firearms of which 7000 will doubtfully used for protection at the cost of 210000. Folks actually being killed unjustly by firearms. Yep its all down to cultue.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by brownbomber

Ban liberals? Lol
Plus your second group ( hitler etc) liked to ban groups as well. I usually expect your arguments better thought out

Should have added a "jk". To that. I was totally not serious about banning liberals. Just having fun with those that think because a small percentage of something causes problems we need to ban the whole lot.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Should have added a "jk". To that. I was totally not serious about banning liberals. Just having fun with those that think because a small percentage of something causes problems we need to ban the whole lot.

Why histories far right wingers do exactly as you stated .

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

Why histories far right wingers do exactly as you stated .

Of course they do. I outlined them already. The far right Mao, and Stalin, Pol Pot, damn conservatives.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Of course they do. I outlined them already. The far right Mao, and Stalin, Pol Pot, damn conservatives.

You missed the rights shining star.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Me and Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Adams ("Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense."), Patrick Henry, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Samuel Adams, and hundreds of millions of other people.

I know there are lots of people that would disagree with me though...Hitler, Mussolini, Kim Jung Il, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong (“The Communist party must control the guns.” ), Robert Mugabe and you and many others I'm sure.

Hmm whole bunch of terrorists and enemys of canada. Wierd eh .