WE: After school shooting in Connecticut, Piers Morgan blasts America’s ‘gun madness’

[Koala]

I can't WAIt for Christmas. I asked for three hunter drones, a tomahawk missile (De-LUXE tactical nuke package!), and an Abrams tank.

I hope i get 'em!

~Bang.

You dont need tanks or nukes to form a militia. Just training, organization, and assault weapons. Forming militias that rival the U.S. government is probably not the best way to put the framer's intent for th 2nd amendment, more like having enough power to make the prospect of armed rebellion a possibility, if needed. .

You wont get those things, not because its illegal but becuase its impractical. You dont have enough money to convince Lockheed Martin to back out of its exclusive contract with the U.S. military so it can sell you an F-35. The only people with nuclear weapons tech, or M1A1 Abrams tanks, is the US military, and the not selling that.
.
Like I said, it seems like a flat out stupid idea. Until you look at Syria. Or Iraq, for that matter, where the formation of neighborhood militias with sizable weapons caches (not tanks or planes, but assault weapons) has actually stemmed violence there and limited abuse of the Shia-led government over its once-unarmed Sunni populace.

Anyhow, my personal view is that the Constitution was written for 18th century America. A modern America needs a modern Constitution, and this is seen by considering the original intent of the 2nd amendment. The amendment should be repealed, but until it is, we are stuck with it.

[Destino]

The violent video games argument falls apart when you realize that Japan, Europe and Australia have access to as much as if not more violence than we do.

It's the guns, stupid. Anything else is a red herring at BEST, and a cynical ploy at worst.

Yes... Clearly. Everyday I'm bombarded by advertisements for guns and I can't go into a mall without being accosted by gun salesmen. It's like you can't get away from guns and once you use one you just can't stop. You need more and more guns and soon you find yourself at a firing range just to feel normal. The reason we distrust our neighbors, if we even bother to think of them? Guns. The reason people think violent rimes are more common when the opposite is true? Guns. It's the guns, stupid!

[Elessar78]

Maybe this is modest proposal-esque but maybe it's time that teachers are a bit more militarized. I may be exaggerating but don't citizens in Israel have a turn at military duty? They can handle themselves, they know Krav Maga, etc—the stuff that comes from being surrounded on all sides by people that want to kill you.

I think arming teachers is a stupid idea. One second you're not paying attention and some derelict kid grabs your firearm or gets access to it, and we're into a whole diff. ball of wax. As I've said before, what is an armed civilian going to do once the swat teach shows up? Declares himself "not the bad guy"? What if in the firefight with the bad guy his stray bullet hits a kid? Just the price of doing business? Just the collateral damage to make sure the gov't doesn't put you in a police state?

[stevemcqueen1]

The violent video games argument falls apart when you realize that Japan, Europe and Australia have access to as much as if not more violence than we do.

It's the guns, stupid. Anything else is a red herring at BEST, and a cynical ploy at worst.

The guns are the tools no doubt and the biggest factor.

But there is something ****ed up about our culture. It's one of the most violent cultures in the world but has a strong sense of justice. Our media glorifies violence and desensitizes us to it. It ****s with our heads. There is no empathy. You can read a Cormac McCarthy book that's violent as all hell and it rips your guts up because you empathize and feel the horror of the violence acutely. With CoD it's how awesome did that feel to just blow thirty ****ers' heads off in that match?

It's bad for our society and our game industries can do better and should be expected to do so. As should our television, movies, music, etc. Violence can be important to a real work of art. But mostly it's used as a cheap, tawdry thrill to appeal to our basest, most appetitive desires to shill cultural junk to the masses and it's bad for our society.

[OU_skins]

I heard "Pumped up Kicks" on the radio today...I would be in favor of retiring that song. I know this is not a huge deal, but anything involving kids outrunning bullets is not something I want to hear ever again. Sorry.

[Special K]

I heard "Pumped up Kicks" on the radio today...I would be in favor of retiring that song. I know this is not a huge deal, but anything involving kids outrunning bullets is not something I want to hear ever again. Sorry.

I read somewhere that a lot of radio stations are taking that song off their playlists. As well as the Kesha "Die Young" or "Gonna Die Young" or something like that, song.

Don't know why we glorify those types of songs, the words in the "Pumped Up Kicks" are extremely messed up...but didn't they win awards for that? People seriously need to stop supporting that crap and buying those songs if they want that out of our entertainment industry.

---------- Post added December-21st-2012 at 02:28 AM ----------

Well, if i may offer some advice.. I'm a dad who's kid has been playing many of these games for a long time. (I was a singIe dad.. it's tough to be on top of everything,, and the fact is, something that will sit him there quietly while i cook dinner is a blessing. BUT, I always ALWAYS have been in touch with him on these topics.. the way to stem desensitization is the explain that it IS only a game, and why these things in real life would be bad,.. Granted, i would not let him play GTA or other highly violent games when he was younger, but a great many games have aspects of them that could confuse a young mind.
Communication is absolutely key. Always explain WHY to your kid. explain it again and again. I use so many things during the day as a 'teaching moment"... all the time. On many topics.
My son is 16 now, and I still do that. Constantly talking with him, constantly advising... and not so much leaning on him.
I've been lucky,, in doing this i've also trusted him to make the right decisions. I'm not naive and know he'll do things he won't tell dad, but typically, the things he knows are important,, he heeds.

knock wood.

~Bang

You sounds like a good dad

I think your post brings up a very important part in this whole debate about society in that there seems to be a massive breakdown in parental/child/homelife relationships. I'm only 31, so I don't have a ton of years of observation under my belt, but it seems like as time passes by, more and more kids are growing up without the close counsel from their parents. It may be from both parents having to enter the work force more and more to make ends meet, parents being too stressed with other issues to pay attention to their children, and a variety of other reasons I suppose. But, this, IMO, has been a horrible detriment to our society's development and I only see it getting worse.

Keeping kids on the straight and narrow starts and home, but unfortunately that seems to be becoming and increasingly dysfunctional environment for a lot of children and kids are running around, unsupervised, going apecrap and creating chaos. My mom has been a volunteer teacher for approximately 30 years and she says the kids she deals with now days are very different from the children she worked with just a few decades ago. Kids today are more unruly, more "ballsy" about publicly defying authority, and their antics are more destructive than they used to be. Obviously not all kids are like this and there are a ton of great kids out there who have involved parents and some who are great even without heavy parental involvement.

That said, I truly think we are experiencing a degredation of our society and I think irresponsible, uninvolved parents bear a lot of the blame for this.

Like you have displayed, I don't think some of these violent video games are necessarily going to create a violent child if this kid is supervised and the parent maintains a close, supervisory, open communication relationship with a kid. The problem tends to develop, IMO, when a kid goes unsupervised and is allowed to play these types of games 24/7 and a parent is too busy to care about that or even take the time to inquire about the kid's life and develop a close, positive mentoring relationship with the child.

Anyway, those are just my thoughts. And I don't have kids, so you can take my thoughts with a grain of salt, but I think you're doing a bang up job...ha ha

[twa]

I think arming teachers is a stupid idea. One second you're not paying attention and some derelict kid grabs your firearm or gets access to it, and we're into a whole diff. ball of wax. As I've said before, what is an armed civilian going to do once the swat teach shows up? Declares himself "not the bad guy"? What if in the firefight with the bad guy his stray bullet hits a kid? Just the price of doing business? Just the collateral damage to make sure the gov't doesn't put you in a police state?

there are holsters designed to prevent that,as well as the ability to keep the clip or speedloaser separate,which enders it as dangerous as a stapler.

as far as until the police arrive (in 20 minutes ???) teachers can practice zone defense as the easiest/safest tactic. in a lockdown,they would simply cover the locked door from a acute angle, eliminating most risks and requiring no great skill and largely removing risk from SWAT mistaking them
The drawback there of course is not every teacher will be (or should be) armed , and a designated rover would be best (office staff or maintenance personnel)

[FletchLives]

The violent video games argument falls apart when you realize that Japan, Europe and Australia have access to as much as if not more violence than we do.

It's the guns, stupid. Anything else is a red herring at BEST, and a cynical ploy at worst.

FYI "Almost 3,500 children under the age of 15 die from maltreatment
(physical abuse and neglect) every year in the industrialized world.
Two children die from abuse and neglect every week in Germany and
the United Kingdom, three a week in France, four a week in Japan,
and 27 a week in the United States" UNICEF

Still thinks it's the guns?

[PeterMP]

You dont need tanks or nukes to form a militia. Just training, organization, and assault weapons. Forming militias that rival the U.S. government is probably not the best way to put the framer's intent for th 2nd amendment, more like having enough power to make the prospect of armed rebellion a possibility, if needed. .

You wont get those things, not because its illegal but becuase its impractical. You dont have enough money to convince Lockheed Martin to back out of its exclusive contract with the U.S. military so it can sell you an F-35. The only people with nuclear weapons tech, or M1A1 Abrams tanks, is the US military, and the not selling that.
.
Like I said, it seems like a flat out stupid idea. Until you look at Syria. Or Iraq, for that matter, where the formation of neighborhood militias with sizable weapons caches (not tanks or planes, but assault weapons) has actually stemmed violence there and limited abuse of the Shia-led government over its once-unarmed Sunni populace.

Anyhow, my personal view is that the Constitution was written for 18th century America. A modern America needs a modern Constitution, and this is seen by considering the original intent of the 2nd amendment. The amendment should be repealed, but until it is, we are stuck with it.

Its illegal to get all sorts of things because of the harm that could be done to harm the general population, but would be mighty useful in armed insurrection.

I could easily afford the things to build a radioactive "dirty" bomb and carry it out. However, it would be illegal for anybody to sell me some of the required material without the approval by the NRC (which is run by the federal government).

Heck, you can't guy certain a certain amounts of things like ammonia (which isn't even radioactive) without filling out government forms.

[Bang]

FYI "Almost 3,500 children under the age of 15 die from maltreatment
(physical abuse and neglect) every year in the industrialized world.
Two children die from abuse and neglect every week in Germany and
the United Kingdom, three a week in France, four a week in Japan,
and 27 a week in the United States" UNICEF

Still thinks it's the guns?

Why on earth do you think any of those things apply to this discussion?

I like lasagna. therefore guns can't be the problem.

Makes about the same amount of sense.

~Bang

[endzone_dave]

The guns are the tools no doubt and the biggest factor.

But there is something ****ed up about our culture. It's one of the most violent cultures in the world but has a strong sense of justice. Our media glorifies violence and desensitizes us to it. It ****s with our heads. There is no empathy. You can read a Cormac McCarthy book that's violent as all hell and it rips your guts up because you empathize and feel the horror of the violence acutely. With CoD it's how awesome did that feel to just blow thirty ****ers' heads off in that match?

It's bad for our society and our game industries can do better and should be expected to do so. As should our television, movies, music, etc. Violence can be important to a real work of art. But mostly it's used as a cheap, tawdry thrill to appeal to our basest, most appetitive desires to shill cultural junk to the masses and it's bad for our society.

Amazingly though, the violent crime rate in the US has seen a steady decline since 1990 and it is still declining. My son is 10 and loves to play Halo but he's never been in a fight in his entire life. I have no idea how it all fits together but violence is going down in this country, not up. Maybe because all the baby boomers are getting old and that's skewing the statistics. Who knows.

Letting your socially inept kid play Call of Duty eight hours a day is stupid. Letting your well adjusted kid play Halo two hours per week doesn't cause a kid to be violent IMO.

[Elessar78]

There's multiple aspects but for the most part it IS the guns. Without the guns Cho, Lanza, Tucson, aurora, columbine are just sad, young guys that are mentally unstable. Is it easy to make a bomb? Not really, you have to learn to make it... Basically it takes a sequence of conscious decisions. A gun is a gun.

Other industrialized nations have liners and mentally unstable folks but they don't seem to shoot people up at the rates we do. Their govts aren't turning into police states. It's just whack job excuses as to why we don't have tighter controls on semis and assault rifles and ammo.

[Redskins Diehard]

Why on earth do you think any of those things apply to this discussion?

I like lasagna. therefore guns can't be the problem.

Makes about the same amount of sense.

~Bang

I think the fact that when we are comparing "bad things that happen here with greater frequency than other parts of the world" his post is a lot more relevant than your particular dinner choices. Whether it is directly correlated or not is worthy of discussion

---------- Post added December-21st-2012 at 09:22 AM ----------

There's multiple aspects but for the most part it IS the guns. Without the guns Cho, Lanza, Tucson, aurora, columbine are just sad, young guys that are mentally unstable. Is it easy to make a bomb? Not really, you have to learn to make it... Basically it takes a sequence of conscious decisions. A gun is a gun.

Other industrialized nations have liners and mentally unstable folks but they don't seem to shoot people up at the rates we do. Their govts aren't turning into police states. It's just whack job excuses as to why we don't have tighter controls on semis and assault rifles and ammo.

Tighter controls on "assault rifles" does not do anything. Well in the traditional definition of "assault rifle" they are actually extremely controlled. You could not go out and legally buy a weapon with "burst" or "auto" as an option. What you could do is buy something that looks similar to a military weapon but does not operate like one. The "assault weapon" controls that were in place did nothing to restrict functionality of weapons. It restricted what weapons were allowed to look like. This is relevant because when you introduce the terminology "semi automatic" you are talking about just about every handgun out there.

[Corcaigh]

I think the fact that when we are comparing "bad things that happen here with greater frequency than other parts of the world" his post is a lot more relevant than your particular dinner choices. Whether it is directly correlated or not is worthy of discussion

I think it's a very legitimate point of discussion. From this immigrant's perspective, and simplifying, if you compare the USA to other large western democracies you have both much more of the good, and much more of the bad. The USA is not a great place to be if you are not successful, or just plain unlucky, in life.

[Bang]

I think the fact that when we are comparing "bad things that happen here with greater frequency than other parts of the world" his post is a lot more relevant than your particular dinner choices. .

And i think such comparisons are a complete waste of time, a distraction from our own problems, particularly this one.
we have a problem, a big one that isn't getting better. Patting ourselves on the back because other countries have big problems does nothing to solve anything. Pointing out that they have problems doesn't sdolve anything.
Minimizing our problem because they have problems too? What is the point?

~Bang