Worried about Connecticut shootings

Post Reply New Topic

Which is exactly what Martin Bryant did, and it's funny how no one who talks about that when they mention the greater restrictions on semi-automatic rifles following said massacre in Oz. He wasn't legally entitled to own such (he couldn't buy them legally), so he acquired them illegally from a dealer (I'm sure lots of money changed hands).

The most ironic thing is: the same firearms are imported all the same nowadays for civilians (one must work in feral animal control or something to acquire a semi-automatic rifle) and the government, so one can steal or buy such from either of them illegally.

So, what exactly has changed, other than forcing recreational shooters to manually load each round? Nothing.

Knife rampages tend to have far fewer fatalities than gun rampages. A significant part of the real problem is the accessibility of firearms. Yes, someone could illegally obtain firearms even with stricter controls, but most of the illegally obtained firearms now were originally legally obtained.



How many car rampages have there been in the past 20 years? How many gun rampages?

Martin Bryant is one guy who is responsible for one incident. How many rampages have there been in Australia? I can find nine listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ra ... heast_Asia

This page lists 98 in the United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ra ... :_Americas

So, about that equivalency you're setting up to prove that stricter gun control wouldn't prevent these things, is there any particular explanation for why the US has had so many rampages and Australia so few? Real world data shows that rampages are more frequent in nations in which firearms are easily accessible and that rampages conducted with other weapons tend to be less deadly.

The argument that people could break the law to obtain firearms is not compelling, any more than arguing that we should make murder legal because some people commit murder anyway.

As for the original post. I find it severely disturbing and everyone knows people are just going to use this crap against those of us on the spectrum, we may not want to admit it, but when there are associations like that between a shooter and society, people remember that because they instantly think that all people with said trait is like that (who would go crazy), this isn't going to just "blow over", and this sure as h*** isn't going to just go away. We have to make people understand that they're wrong, otherwise we'll be looked down upon further than we already are, and potentially hated by society.

As for the gun control stuff:
I don't care one way or the other, but if people in society have to wear a legally conceiled weapon just to feel protected anymore, then I hate to say it, but enough is enough, it's not our job to do what the police are supposed to be doing and if it comes to that, then it's better to get rid of them entirely because clearly their skills are severely lacking and the job isn't being done.

For both:
When are we, as members of society, going to take a stand against all of the crap and say "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"? When are we going to finally defend our rights, our freedoms, our views and stand up to people who don't know jack?
I for one have had enough, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm through playing people's games. It's time that the rules changed. It's time we showed them how wrong they are and let them know we won't take it anymore.

p.s. sorry for the rant, but that's just how I feel.

No idea. Why weren't they more frequent prior to Martin's in Oz when the laws were laxer (almost none, barring one in a mall car-park, which started all of the registration)? Why have they ceased since then (barring one small one in a university which led to banning handgun calibers over 9mm/.357 apart from select sporting events)? Why weren't they as common in Oz as the US prior to Martin's? Why are there more in the US in comparison to other countries with similar availability of firearms? Lots of questions without answers when just looking at the availability of firearms.

I would hazard a guess that a massacre with a sword would be similar to a firearm in regards to mortality. Which was generally correct going by the Japanese army in China during WW2, for example (knives tend to be less effective due to a lack of sufficient penetration and difficulty in inflicting a lethal wound in one strike. A sword doesn't have these drawbacks). No need to mention explosives.

I'll add, these things are statistical outliers that really have no reason to be in any political and ethical debate, whether Asperger's, firearms, medications, mental illness and other single entities that people blame because they can't see past their emotions. Even murder, as bad as it is, isn't a problem (even 30 killed per 100,000 people yearly is so rare as to be of literally no concern to the majority).

I don't blame the majority for getting emotional over these things though; they can't help it. They feel and think it happens to them (empathy), even though it hasn't.

knife rampages and bombings tend to kill lots, on the same day as the shooting a man in china went to a school with a knife, killed 21 children 1 teacher and put 13 other children in the hospital. china has a pretty long history of knife rampages, over 13 in the last year with more than 10 kills.


guns are just a means to an end.

The father of Newtown Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza who is a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial. The father of Aurora Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes is Robert Holmes, the lead scientist for the credit score company FICO. Both men were to testify before the US Sentate in the ongoing LIBOR scandal. The London Interbank Offered Rate, known as Libor, is the average interest rate at which banks can borrow from each other. 16 international banks have been implicated in this ongoing scandal, accused of rigging contracts worth trillions of dollars. HSBC has already been fined $1.9 billion and three of their low level traders arrested. think about it

Switzerland is a country with high gun ownership and low crime.

If we don't look beyond the issue of gun control, nothing will change.

There is A LOT we can do to make ourselves safer.

Banning guns is not one of those.

the difference between knives and guns is that guns primary purpose is to kill wheras knives have lots of other uses.

To kill someone with a knife is a whole lot more personal than to kill someone with a gun. Its much easier to pull a trigger from afar than to get in close enough to do the same amount of harm with a knife or sword. Also most of them kill themselves at the end, it takes a lot longer to kill yourself with a knife by slashing wrists or whatever than to shoot yourself in the head, so there would be more chance of them surviving long enough to be captured which would be enough to dissuade most pople from even trying.

Just because there are other ways in which someone could kill people doesnt mean you should be so apathetic as to not even try to take some form of action to stop things like this happening. Britain banned handguns in 1996 after the Dunblane massacre, and low and behold nothing has happened like that since.

if the LIBOR is an average and driven by algorithyms, and although direct testimony was not the tie-in here,
what if the fathers both had mathematical abilities and could handle complex formulas just short of the lead
character in the television series "NUMB3Rs" that is seen on ION TV in syndication? i found this youtube on
a rightwing forum that has libertarians sometimes posting in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdCTqY8TYIo

this indeed begs a question, if either Mr. Holmes or Mr. Lanza are undiagnosed "aspies" and had
jobs contingent on their ability to understand mathematics, then what went wrong with their sons?

I didn't realise this. That's interesting. I wonder what exactly makes it so different; I know they're very different places, but I mean key fundamental differences exactly in people's mentality. It should be obvious I suppose

Well, criminals don't want to get shot while they're doing whatever they're doing, and not knowing who does and doesn't own a gun is a great deterant. I personally don't think guns are a good idea but, if it ever came down to it, I'd get one just to make sure.

I have been diagnosed with everything from autism to Aspergers as the dsm creeps along.

I lived in Sandy Hook and went to Newtown CT High School.
I feel deeply saddened by the tragedy they suffer and will suffer for the rest of their lives.

The fact of the matter is Asperger's may be indirectly responsible!
The High IQ he had may have masked the problem that hid beneath.

What you may not understand is that IDEA/Childfind obligates schools and physicians to evaluate and get help for these children.
From ages 3-21, and this boy was 20.

What you may not know is that Newtown was the home to one of CT's largest Psychiatric facilities Fairfield Hills housing over 4000 patients and 20 miles away was home to New Yorks Largest Psychiatric facility Harlem Valley housing 7000 patients and 5000 staff. Both were closed in 92 and 94 in favor of mainstreaming.

Where do you think everyone went? no where
Where are they going now? no where

These facilities house those that were harmful to themselves and others and allowed professional the chance to learn and at the same time were an excellent resource to those of us that just need a little help coping now and then.

I am in no way claiming Asperger's or autism is responsible.
I am claiming it is highly possible for this boy to have had other problems that nobody paid attention to.
because nobody knows what they are looking at nowadays.

There is any evidence that he really had Asperger, or he "had" Asperger like Bill Gates, Thomas Jefferson, Einstein, etc "have"/"had" Asperger ("that guy is intelligent but weird at social level; he sould have Asperger!")?

[At the first look, I imagine that something in schizophrenia spectrum is much more expectable from a mass shooter - IMO, you should have distorted thought processes to decide to kill innocent people]

This.

Australia banned guns in 1996 after the Port Arthur massacre. No massacres since.

However, the government just blessed gun groups to shoot animals in our national parks.