http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...ing/index.html
:(
Printable View
Very sad! The families and students must be devestated. :mad:
Sad indeed.
That's why you need gun control laws (which they were going to tighten)
Guns should be in the hands of trained and licensed people. The rest should keep their hands off it period.
I thought we Americans had a monopoly on this sort of craziness.
BTW: Gun control does not stop this sort of nut. It might stop other types of tragedies, but not criminals or crazies.
I thought Germany had strict gun control laws, and not many guns in the hands of private citizens.
damn, and i thought only we had people dumb enuff to go in a school and kill a bunch of teenagers....
I'm from Brunswick, it's in northern Germany and I was right in school while it happens. We're all scared.
I never thought that this may happen. :mad:
I'm very sorry for all relatives of the killed pupils, teachers and the police officer.
This sucks :(
Noone should be allowed guns.
But it does reduce access to it. The US has more gun murders than every other country in the world (and probably a few other worlds) put together and yet still they argue a lack of causality.Quote:
Originally posted by Guv
BTW: Gun control does not stop this sort of nut. It might stop other types of tragedies, but not criminals or crazies.
Guns dont kill people. Losers and cowards with guns kill people.
There's always a way, but imagine if he'd needed another couple of days to find a gun - he may well have calmed down, who knows?Quote:
Originally posted by Guv
BTW: Gun control does not stop this sort of nut. It might stop other types of tragedies, but not criminals or crazies.
I concur with BB. Cowards do it - cowards often don't spent the effort to put a revenge plan in place. They lash out with the first, most devastating thing they can find.
Australia dwalt with this problem a few years back -why is it so hard for evry1 else to do the same?
Guns don't kill people, bullets do. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by beachbum
Guns dont kill people. Losers and cowards with guns kill people.
How did Australia deal with it, rj?
Guns and knifes aren't the worst type of weapons, people are.Quote:
Guns dont kill people. Losers and cowards with guns kill people.
I mean we have only got ourselves to blame for bad things that happen in society.
which is why people shouldn't have access to things like guns that can kill a lot of other people easily and quickly. I'm sorry, but the morons in the states who hide behind their constitutional right to bear arms are usually the same people who get killed with their own guns. There are a lot of responsible gun owners. But no matter how you look at it, there is no reason for anyone to own a gun. No one in the US has to hunt their own food, so they kill for pleasure, not for necessity.
Sick. :mad:
What's that saying...When owning a gun is a crime, only criminals will own guns.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
which is why people shouldn't have access to things like guns that can kill a lot of other people easily and quickly. I'm sorry, but the morons in the states who hide behind their constitutional right to bear arms are usually the same people who get killed with their own guns. There are a lot of responsible gun owners. But no matter how you look at it, there is no reason for anyone to own a gun. No one in the US has to hunt their own food, so they kill for pleasure, not for necessity.
Imagine if regular people couldn't own guns. How would they protect themselves from criminals who easily get them from the black market.
I'm not a big gun fan, but I see no reason for responsible people to own them.
Why doesn't the government in te US change the gun laws over there. In Australia, we have a no guns law for a number of years.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
which is why people shouldn't have access to things like guns that can kill a lot of other people easily and quickly. I'm sorry, but the morons in the states who hide behind their constitutional right to bear arms are usually the same people who get killed with their own guns. There are a lot of responsible gun owners. But no matter how you look at it, there is no reason for anyone to own a gun. No one in the US has to hunt their own food, so they kill for pleasure, not for necessity.
I never hear about "responsible people" fending off criminals with guns. It never happens. Responsible people have their guns locked up and can't get to them in the course of the crime. Again... there is no reason for ANYONE to have a gun.
I've never owned a gun and never needed one. I don't expect I ever will. In fact, no one in my family has a gun. Common sense will keep you out of a lot of trouble.
They don't because the US is huge and there are a lot of people who like owning guns. It's the same reason alcohol is legal and pot isn't.Quote:
Originally posted by Nightwalker83
Why doesn't the government in te US change the gun laws over there. In Australia, we have a no guns law for a number of years.
Politicians aren't going to take on the gun laws. I mean look at what's happened over here in the past couple years. We have presidents getting shot at, which is ok, but there are also school children getting killed in droves. There are also people with jobs like you've got getting killed at work by someone who has no self-control and no healthy ways of dealing with his problems which is why he probably got fired in the first place.
The laws need to be changed, but apparently having a few hundred kids killed in schools isn't important enough to worry about.
How about a convience store clerk as an example. A criminal comes in with a gun that he got from the black market. The clerk may have been able to scare the criminal away with the shotgun he has under the counter, but, WHOOPS, he's not allowed to have a gun becuase its illegal. And the poor bastard loses his life because he lost his right to defend himself.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
I never hear about "responsible people" fending off criminals with guns. It never happens. Responsible people have their guns locked up and can't get to them in the course of the crime. Again... there is no reason for ANYONE to have a gun.
You're watching too many movies. Look at the statistics and I think you'll see it doesn't happen very often. Like never. I've never heard a single story outside of the movies of someone fending off someone else because he had a gun. I've heard a lot of stories about a criminal getting access to a person's gun before the person could and then killing him.
It's a messed up situation because we didn't handle it when it would have been simple. now if the laws change, there are millions of guns floating around and it will take a very, very long time to get rid of them all.
And, there's another point. Some jobs are inherently dangerous. Like in the priest's thread where it was said it was their choice to become a priest. I would never choose to work in a convenience store. It's not like a convenience store is a necessity.
And, I'm not sure about this, but I think in reality convenience stores can't keep shotguns under their counters. Maybe certain states, but I think it's generally illegal.
So you are saying that anything and everything that is beyond necessity should be done away with? :confused:
And your arguments may be somewhat valid and justified, but it still doesn't change the fact that people need to have the right to defend themselves.
I'm not sure either, but it was just an example ;)Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
And, I'm not sure about this, but I think in reality convenience stores can't keep shotguns under their counters. Maybe certain states, but I think it's generally illegal.
What about the ppl was a medical background (like crazy ppl)?Quote:
Originally posted by crptcblade
So you are saying that anything and everything that is beyond necessity should be done away with? :confused:
And your arguments may be somewhat valid and justified, but it still doesn't change the fact that people need to have the right to defend themselves.
You can't just let them gain access to guns.
Notice that I did mention responsible people in a previous post ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Nightwalker83
What about the ppl was a medical background (like crazy ppl)?
You can't just let them gain access to guns.
Well, responsible people are responsible people and aren't the ones you hear about.
The problem with mental disorders is that you may not know someone has one until it's too late.
If it were up to me, you'd have to qualify to own a gun through a series of very demanding and stressful tests to see how you hold up under pressure and your general mentality. They would also be indepth enough to bring your true value of life to the surface.
This is off the subject, but I think there should be basically the same types of tests to be a parent. I mean what could be more dangerous to someone than bad parenting? Too many people want babies, but a lot of them don't want kids.
Yeah but they could still get their hands on a gun on the black market.Quote:
Originally posted by crptcblade
Notice that I did mention responsible people in a previous post ;)
cafeeman - you're treading on dangerous territory when you start talking about controlling who's allowed to have children and who is not.
NW - That's kind of the whole basis of my argument. Criminals/The irresponsible will still find a way to get guns legal or not.
:)
They still won't be able to stop these ppl because they could just import guns from over seas.Quote:
Originally posted by crptcblade
cafeeman - you're treading on dangerous territory when you start talking about controlling who's allowed to have children and who is not.
NW - That's kind of the whole basis of my argument. Criminals/The irresponsible will still find a way to get guns legal or not.
:)
Yes they will. But I think that's a really lame argument. Essentially you're saying that they're going to do it anyway, so let's not do anything about it. We need to make it as difficult as possible for a criminal to own a gun. And our legal system, which is a joke, needs to be revised so that the penalties for violent crimes are actually a deterent. Three strikes is two strikes too many if you ask me.
I only have a couple points. After that we're just stating the same things back and forth.
1) Responsible people who own guns, ultimately aren't protected by them because the guns aren't available quickly enough.
2) There is no reason to own a gun. Not one. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
3) If a gun were a necessity to protect one's self, as you make it seem, then everyone should have one like any other utility.
For the rest of us, a little common sense goes a long way. Don't aggravate dangerous people.
The point about the convenience store WAS NOT that they shouldn't exist because they aren't necessary. The point was that the people who choose to work in them have chosen a risky occupation.
These stores are not necessary. The people who work in convenience stores are not engaged in professions that we really need someone doing (medical, for example). If there were no convenience stores then our society would not be affected much. And yes, I understand it was just an example.
OkQuote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
Yes they will. But I think that's a really lame argument. Essentially you're saying that they're going to do it anyway, so let's not do anything about it. We need to make it as difficult as possible for a criminal to own a gun. And our legal system, which is a joke, needs to be revised so that the penalties for violent crimes are actually a deterent. Three strikes is two strikes too many if you ask me.
I only have a couple points. After that we're just stating the same things back and forth.
1) Responsible people who own guns, ultimately aren't protected by them because the guns aren't available quickly enough.
2) There is no reason to own a gun. Not one. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
3) If a gun were a necessity to protect one's self, as you make it seem, then everyone should have one like any other utility.
For the rest of us, a little common sense goes a long way. Don't aggravate dangerous people.
The point about the convenience store WAS NOT that they shouldn't exist because they aren't necessary. The point was that the people who choose to work in them have chosen a risky occupation.
These stores are not necessary. The people who work in convenience stores are not engaged in professions that we really need someone doing (medical, for example). If there were no convenience stores then our society would not be affected much. And yes, I understand it was just an example.
Actually, I was responding to cryptblade. :) But your point is well taken too. I agree that criminals will be able to get guns. I have no doubt in my mind that is true.Quote:
Originally posted by Nightwalker83
Ok
Oh okQuote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
Actually, I was responding to cryptblade. :) But your point is well taken too. I agree that criminals will be able to get guns. I have no doubt in my mind that is true.
You seem very stuck on the idea that only things that are necessary should exist. There's no need for us to have computers, and yet no one is gonna take them away.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
Yes they will. But I think that's a really lame argument. Essentially you're saying that they're going to do it anyway, so let's not do anything about it. We need to make it as difficult as possible for a criminal to own a gun. And our legal system, which is a joke, needs to be revised so that the penalties for violent crimes are actually a deterent. Three strikes is two strikes too many if you ask me.
I only have a couple points. After that we're just stating the same things back and forth.
1) Responsible people who own guns, ultimately aren't protected by them because the guns aren't available quickly enough.
2) There is no reason to own a gun. Not one. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
3) If a gun were a necessity to protect one's self, as you make it seem, then everyone should have one like any other utility.
The fact of the matter is, these things do exist, and just because someone chooses a "risky" profession, it doesn't mean that they have less of a right to protect themselves.
Anyway, I'm not used to all this serious discussion :rolleyes:
I'm going to bed.
A few years back, some nutjob did a number in Tasmania, and killed a stack of people, for absolutely no reason that I ever heard about. It was a tourist spot, and he just went crazy. He's locked up now - they got him before he could do himself in.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
How did Australia deal with it, rj?
Anyway, not long afterwards, a massive amnesty came into place. Automatic weapons are completely illegal. No one is allowed to own one for any reason. This even goes for paintball-guns. Noone is allowed to bear arms in public. There are very strict licensing laws, where only farmers and the like are allowed to own a gun, and then, only 1, I believe. I'm not sure about semiautomatics, I think they are legal to the farmers and what not. Also, carrying any sort of weapon in public is illegal, of course the police have very little power in regard to searching someone for an illegal weapon. Shops are not allowed to sell knives, of any kind - that includes box-cutters, and pen-knives, to anyone under 16 years of age.
When the gun amnesty came into place, heaps of people had the ****s, but the government bought their guns off them, and destroyed millions of guns. (Well, when I say millions, I don't know how many, but most of them.)
So there you have it. The only problem is that for some stupid reason, ppl are more interested in freedom than true safety...:rolleyes:
As someone mentioned - no responsible person ever manages to defend themselves with a gun. Only criminals do.
You're playing semantics here. I didn't ever say that things shouldn't exist because they are unnecessary. I said that nobody is needed to do unnecessary things. If it's dangerous then it's their choice to do it.Quote:
Originally posted by crptcblade
You seem very stuck on the idea that only things that are necessary should exist. There's no need for us to have computers, and yet no one is gonna take them away.
I agree that people have a right to defend themselves. But I disagree with your rationale of how to do it. Are we going to put gun racks in every school room so that the kids are in a position to return fire? I think that's what you're saying when you say everyone has a right to protect themselves from gunfire with gunfire.Quote:
The fact of the matter is, these things do exist, and just because someone chooses a "risky" profession, it doesn't mean that they have less of a right to protect themselves.
Well, if we would stop electing nutless politicians things never would have gotten to this. I think your country has struck a really good balance. Guns for those who need them and others will have to work very hard to get them. Then they have to do everything they can to stay out of harm's way. I don't really have a problem with guns. I have a problem who defend them to the point of irrationality and never admit to the problems caused by guns. They're the ones who really scare me.Quote:
Originally posted by rjlohan
So there you have it. The only problem is that for some stupid reason, ppl are more interested in freedom than true safety...:rolleyes:
As someone mentioned - no responsible person ever manages to defend themselves with a gun. Only criminals do.
Out here, there are still shootings, and stabbings quite often. But you'll find that a large proportion of those are gang-related. Not someone running into a shop with a gun and killing the owner. Unless the owner tries to fight back, which is stupid. You can't beat a man with a gun. Well, not without significant training and experience anyway.Quote:
Originally posted by crptcblade
NW - That's kind of the whole basis of my argument. Criminals/The irresponsible will still find a way to get guns legal or not.
:)
But the point of this thread in the first place was a school shooting. In my opinion, the sorts of people who 'snap' and lay waste like this aren't generally criminals. They are 'normal' ppl who do stupid things. These people don't have the connections or the time to go find a gun on the black market. They snap, and they find the first thing they can to unleash their anger. If that weren't so easy to find, then this sort of tragedy wouldn't happen.
The way to stop criminals getting/using guns is to give police more power I reckon. *Someone* just proposed police be given the right to randomly search ppl on the street, following a pretty psycho stabbing a week ago. And the ****wits in the 'civil liberties' groups are 'outraged' because it's an invasion of privacy or some such. Arseholes - I hope they or someone they know gets attacked like this, and see how they feel about their 'freedom' then...:mad: :rolleyes:
I for one, would support such a move, i've no problem being searched. Of course, I don't carry a gun, a knife or drugs in my pockets...:rolleyes:
cafeenman - your point about ppl choosing to work in convenience stores - I would argue against that. I agree with crptc that ppl should be able to defend themselves, and that runing a shop like that may not always be a choice a person gets to make. Some people can do no better, and have a family to support. What, I think needs to be done, is something along the lines of a metal detector in the doors of these shops, police-call alarms (and more police to respond to these alarms), video-surveillance, and insurance. Not guns.
I just take exception to the 'they chose to work there' line - I disagree with that.
:)
OK. Well, I admit, it is kind of a hard line comment and I don't even really agree with it myself. I was really trying to make a point and I'm not doing a very good job tonight for some reason.
But I think you just made it for me. Guns aren't the answer. That's really my point - not where people choose to work. Thanks for the back up :)
After 9/11 we had no privacy in Germany. long lines waiting to get searched going on post. Basically it was annoying, but if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about. I mean, I understand some things you have might be personal and embarassing in nature, but still legal. But a little embarassment when a cop finds a dildo in your pocket is not nearly the sacrifice a person makes losing their life to someone.Quote:
Originally posted by rjlohan
I for one, would support such a move, i've no problem being searched. Of course, I don't carry a gun, a knife or drugs in my pockets...:rolleyes:
:confused: I thought you were a seppo? :confused:Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
After 9/11 we had no privacy in Germany.
I am. I was stationed in Germany from 98 until this January.
Ahhh.... I see....
But you're right - a little inconvenience is worth it I reckon. :)
I cannot vouch for the truth of the stories, but I have heard it said that in certain states (Colorado & Texas, for example), mugging is an almost nonexistent crime.
In those states, a large percentage of the population carry guns. A criminal who makes a living by mugging requires two or more victims per week, since he can only average $50 to $100 per victim. This means 100 or more muggings per year. In less than a year he runs into an armed victim and that is the end of his career.
According to the stories I heard when traveling in those states, other violent crimes occur at about the same per capita frequency as in other states, but street muggings are way below the national average.
True? I do not know. Plausible? Pehaps.
BTW: A major problem with our gun laws is lack of enforcement. Not too long ago, a Chicago investigative reporter discovered an individual buying guns and importing them into Chicago for sale at huge profits to criminals. The reporter had no trouble getting the data for his story, but the law enforcement people never tried to interfere with this type of activity.
It has bothered me for a long time that inability to deal with criminals and pranksters causes encroachment on my rights.
When I was a teenager, I and all my friends had firecrackers. The first 3-4 cars I owned had a spot light, which was a handy accessory. I also had a WW2 carbine and a German Luger. I used to have a Bowie Knife in a sheath, which I used for whittling and as a tool. I never took a gun to school, but nobody objected to the Bowie knife.
Due to stupid people who injured themselves and others, fireworks are no longer legal without a permit and scads of red tape. Due to irresponsible teens, spot lights are no longer legal. It was easier to pass a law against them than to bother catching the teens who pointed then at oncoming cars and into picture windows. As an adult, I would probably be in trouble carrying a Bowie knife, and no way could a student take one to school. I do not own a gun anymore, because the red tape is too much of a hassle to bother with.
Another pleasure I miss is feeding bears in Yellow Stone Park. There was a time when animals were allowed near the areas frequented by tourists. Mainly due to idiots who got injured, the animals are now kept far from most tourists.
They keep passing laws to make the world safer, but it just is not as much fun as it used to be. I wish they would allow fools to suffer for their folly, and do a better job of enforcement to stop activities harmful to others. Instead we get more and more laws cutting down on the activities allowed to responsible people.
I guess I haven't really been clear. If the vast majority of people were level headed and rational then just about everything should be legal because there would be no need for laws. All we would need are warnings to protect people from unforeseen dangers.
Unfortunately, the average person isn't all that bright.
Here are a few things to think about:
* I don't remember who said it, but it makes a lot of sense. "By definition, half the population is dumber than average." Scarey, huh?
* We pay whiney athletes millions of dollars, but a teacher gets $30,000/year. Some make a more, but it's not much.
* Alcohol in involved in a large number of crimes and fatalities, is a mind-altering substance, yet is legal. People continually get killed by other people who are under the influence of alcohol.
We do not live in a rational world.
guv, what the hell do you need to carry guns and knives around for any way? Surely the life of an innocent person is more valuable than your hunting trips? :rolleyes:
I'm all for giving people access to nuclear weapons as long as they promise not to destroy small cities. :rolleyes:
We have gun control laws over here. No-one is allowed to have guns without a government dispensed license.
You have to take several tests (including one at the firing range).
It's similar to getting your drivers license.
The number of people dying from gunshots is almost zero (on a population of over 10 million people)
The only accidents that occur are organised crimes gangs, the rest of us can't even get to a gun and certainly not schoolgoers.
If a store gets robbed police is alerted and they commence the chase. No-one in his right mind is going to fight the robber armed with a gun or knive.
As someone here said: common sense is the keyword.
Oh good- wouldn't want the crazies missing their target now, would we? :rolleyes: :pQuote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
You have to take several tests (including one at the firing range).
Well, you have to remember. In Belgium, if they shoot at you and miss, they'll hit some other country. :)
very droll :p
The point is that you can't buy or own guns that easily in Belgium.
Virtually no-one has a gun in the house and those who have, have a permit.
With gun fatalities of less than 5 a year on a population of 10 million I think we are doing a pretty good job, dontcha think ?
Sounds like you're doing better than a fine job. I still couldn't resist making the comment though :) Just playing.
Just to hold this thread on-topic:
I just heared on news that the gunman was member of a shooting club and so legal owner of riffles. They also said that he had more than 500 rounds of ammunition. It's the worst school massacre in our country and I can't imagine what had happend when he has not shot himself.
At all:
Owning a gun means using this gun -- maybe against human beings. And I don't think that a gun for protection is an advantage. When you try to protect yourself and aim at the "bad guy" he had surely shot at you because he knows better than you how to use a gun.
Since we have had strict gun control (including gun clubs) in the UK there have been no incidents of this sort in the UK. Serveral with Samuri swords (who are generally disarmed within minutes with little harm to anyone) etc but no guns massacres.Quote:
Originally posted by Guv
I thought we Americans had a monopoly on this sort of craziness.
BTW: Gun control does not stop this sort of nut. It might stop other types of tragedies, but not criminals or crazies.
I thought Germany had strict gun control laws, and not many guns in the hands of private citizens.
The point isn't to protect society from you Guv - its to protect society from the tiny number of marginalized individuals (crazies) that do this sort of thing. I don't believe that we are at a stage where we can distinguish these from normal citizens prior to their crimes.
I see it says
"People wanting to buy a hunting rifle must undergo checks that can last a year, while those wanting a gun for sport must be a member of a club and obtain a license from the police. "
These are the sort of gun laws that we used to have and still get this sort of problem. Now that our gun laws are stricter and there are no problems.
I speak as a former gun club member who thinks that gun clubs have forfeited their right to use fullbore firearms by their inability to take responsiblity as organizations for their actions (including securing weapons, controling/selecting their members in a way that avoids disaster etc.)
I read some time ago that almost 10 million Germans are allowed to carry weapons. I can hardly believe it! Is this true?Quote:
Originally posted by Kzin
I speak as a former gun club member who thinks that gun clubs have forfeited their right to use fullbore firearms by their inability to take responsiblity as organizations for their actions (including securing weapons, controling/selecting their members in a way that avoids disaster etc.)
Germany already has very strict gun laws, and possession of pump guns will still be possible, even after the new law.
They were often used in competitions with clay pigeon shootings.
But even if you would forbid all these sorts of weapons it would be no problem at all for someone who really wants it to get an
AK assault riffle, grenades or even worse weapons because there is a hell of a flood of illegal weapons. I imagine it it harder to smuggle weapons to the uk because it is an island, but in Germany gun trafficking is just impossible to control.
It's like with knives, you can forbid certain types of them but could also simply take a large kitchen knife...
My other opinion is that kicking someone from school who attended it for such a long time just before the final exams because he faked a doctor's certificate is too exaggerated,
the teachers must see the trouble that they cause.
Some of them too often play the mighty rulers. :rolleyes: . Nevertheless it was terrible and there is no excuse for it. I just think that the very demanding pressure of modern society is not taken into account too often. If you want to shoot someone you can get a weapon in not time, there should be done more to solve depressions. Every school must have a teacher that you can talk to if you have problems to avoid ignorance.
I joined the rifle club at work, and had to wait 3 months for the checks to go through before I could even TOUCH something (bear in mind that I've had TA training with considerably more powerful weapons).
At present, I'm back to the .22s so that they can get an idea for my abilities. Am I likely to get a gun and go rampaging round killing people? No. Why? Because:
a) I have no access
b) I have a BRAIN!
sure about that last part mike ? :p