Umpqua Shooting

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/01/us/oregon-college-shooting/

Terrible. Thoughts?

ColeTrain: There needs to be more guns in society, not less. Excuse my arrogance but here is one of my favorite sayings I made up: "God made man, Man made Smith & Wesson, and the Smith & Wesson made man equal." Simply put, many people couldn't defend themselves on a good day without a weapon. Others like many women are physically weak compared to their male counterparts. If more people had guns, people would fear for their own lives more. There would be a sharp decline in aggressiveness. Fear is one of the strongest emotions.

True Capitalist Acolyte: I have a sincere question that I've wanted to ask somebody like you for a while now.

Suppose somebody would never shoot at anyone, even at the cost of their own lives. Do you think it would be good policy to force-arm them anyway, to provide that fear?

ColeTrain: My thoughts are with the families, with the injured students, and with their friends. Terrible is a good call.

admin: In the short term it wouldn't be an efficient policy since those people have lived most of their life with that fear. It would be a good policy in the long term. People would be reconditioned if they were forced to carry guns. I would think the policy wouldn't be at its peak until two generations has passed. Great cultural changes such as everyone carrying a firearm would require a significant amount of time to see those changes embraced by society.

True Capitalist Acolyte: Just saying, I'd feel considerably less safe if mentally ill people are carrying firearms. Along with everyone else, regardless of how trigger happy they all are. If the culture shifts to one where it's ok to shoot somebody if you feel threatened, well, I think if anything the bulletproof clothing industry would explode.

It's just crazy the US doesn't see any correlation between gun ownership and these kinds of shootings.
I'm so thankful not to have to live with such paranoia.

admin: Admin, the topic you brought up wasn't related to mentally ill people until you brought it up now. You can't move goal posts. Mentally disturbed people are another matter altogether. We were discussing people who are fearful of shooting someone. Either way, America does have a culture where it's ok to shoot somebody if you feel threatened. That is why we have Stand Your Ground Laws and Castle Doctrine.

nzlockie: Correlation has nothing to do with causation. Mexico and most of America's Latin American neighbors have stricter gun control laws and there is far more gun violence and higher rates gun related homicides. Point to any country where gun control laws work, I will point to a place with no history of high crime.

True Capitalist Acolyte: Well until then you hadn't said "everyone" either. Everyone should have a gun is an extreme position that I think is extremely difficult to rationally defend.

My point is though, I don't think you recondition anyone by making them more fearful. You just teach them to buy armor. That American culture is, probably in and of itself, the thing I like least about America. The only other contender is the common American idea of "if you're poor it's probably your own fault".

admin: I didn't think I was writing legislation here. "Everyone" under your assumed definition would include blind people, all other people who are unfortunately handicapped, and even children. All of whom are incapably of optimizing the use of a firearm. My general concept, to be clear, was that all men and women of legal working age who are physically and mentally capable should be required to carry a firearm.

Of course there will be those who can't be reconditioned. That is why I said the changes would not be effective until a generation or two has passed. The newer generations will have far more experience with a firearm as opposed to the previous generations at the beginning of the policy who had little to no experience.

I also reject the premise to your last statement. Being born poor is arbitrary and normal. Becoming rich takes effort and is abnormal. But that is something that can be disputed in a different thread because it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

True Capitalist Acolyte: If so, then your own definition wouldn't solve the problem. You're actively promoting the safety of a few by allowing them to tyrannize others, but so long as that safety is not broadly ensured, you have no guarantee of safety, do you?

admin: Tyrannize others? Which others? The mentally handicapped, the blind, and children? I reject your premise. What makes you think they are not tyrannized now?

True Capitalist Acolyte: Fear implies something to be afraid of. In the USA, there's a culture of fear right now. Power is inherently asymmetric. The notion that if everyone had guns, power would not be asymmetric, is refuted to me by the fact some people wouldn't use them. And this you've confirmed because in your view everyone excludes many groups. So yes, I think in much of the world, including nations that have a culture of fear, there is a tyranny now. I just think that strengthening that fear doesn't solve that issue.

nzlockie: What do you mean? You think that gun ownership causes these shootings?

admin: Why wouldn't I be empowered by a gun?

It makes confrontation with others a little more even in terms of fairness.

Blackflag: If your attacker shoots you, then you're disempowered. The only way you're empowered is if you shoot first. Of course shooting first makes you the attacker. Either way it's disempowering for the person being attacked.

True Capitalist Acolyte: I personally think the majority of governments are becoming more insular, controlling, and tyrannous. Without any fight from the people and a lot of weak citizens backing the forces which are taking away freedom in our world, it is only a matter of time before people come crawling back to ideals of absolute liberty.

admin: Well it is almost impossible to kill a human being with one round from any modern civilian firearm.
Also in most circumstances, you are aware that your life is coming into danger, and having a firearm gives you the power you deserve to control your own fate.

I do not have any imposition towards people purchasing weapons, as long as the same respect is given to me when I need one, regardless of my label or social circumstances.

Blackflag: Again, regardless of label or circumstance means you want infants to have the right to bear arms. At that point the argument just becomes absurd.