Starker on 20/3/2018 at 01:50
Quote:
(
https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/local/2018/03/18/video-game-argument-shooting/436364002/)
A 13-year-old girl is dead in Monroe County after authorities say she was shot Saturday by her 9-year-old brother.
Sheriff Cecil Cantrell said the girl would not give up a video game controller when her brother wanted it.
[...]
Authorities don't yet know how the child had access to the weapon they say he used to shoot his sister. It's also unclear how much knowledge the boy had of the dangers of guns.
"He's just 9. I assume he's seen this on video games or TV," Cantrell said. "I don't know if he knew exactly what this would do. I can't answer that. I do know it's a tragedy."
Apparently, this tragedy might have been avoided if only the child didn't have access to video games and TV.
LarryG on 20/3/2018 at 02:55
TV and video games don't kill ... 9 year old criminals kill.
Tommyph1208 on 21/3/2018 at 09:59
So, yet another school shooting yesterday... This time, appartly the shooter was stopped quickly by an armed guard at the school:
(
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/20/us/great-mills-high-school-shooting/index.html) https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/20/us/great-mills-high-school-shooting/index.html
Now obviously, something like that is fuel to the fire, in the debate about armed teachers, guards etc.
While obviously, I am relieved that the shooting was over quickly... No shooting at all would be preferrable, but it seems you guys in the US are waaaaay past that, man... I dont even know what to say to that.
However, Im bummed out that the solution in this case ended up being an armed guard shooting the shooter...
What do you guys think?
Starker on 21/3/2018 at 10:51
Having armed guards protect children and hoping that they react fast enough and shoot the right people might limit the number of victims in some cases (it didn't in Stoneman Douglas), but this is really only just the tip of the vast iceberg of gun violence in the US, which is an entire order of magnitude higher than in other developed countries.
nickie on 21/3/2018 at 10:59
Quote Posted by heywood
I don't think we should have a death penalty, but I don't really have strong feelings about the issue. If we're going to have it though, shouldn't it be reserved for the most dangerous individuals who have committed the most egregious crimes? If you can't apply it to a mass murderer who shoots up a school full of kids in cold blood, what is it for?
I was thinking legal angle, not moral.
PigLick on 21/3/2018 at 13:07
you guys talk and talk and consider, then talk some more, but we all know nothing aint gonna change. Heres to 2021 upcoming gun thread, I salute you.
PigLick on 21/3/2018 at 13:09
that is if ttlg is still around in 3 years cos you know, guns
Renzatic on 21/3/2018 at 19:05
You do know that dividing people up into convenient left/right groups isn't going to do shit for anybody, right? Right now, you have loads of angry people vs. loads of angry people. Without any serious dialog between these two groups, all we're going to end up with is a perpetual see-saw application of reactionary, kneejerk laws that serves to do nothing but antagonize those with a vested interest in the issue.
As long as discourse is relegated to a bunch of meaningless memes, and people self-righteously shouting freedom and security into their respective wind tunnels, all you can expect are an ever escalating set of useless, feel-good gun laws placed right alongside an ever rising school kid body count.
Tomi on 21/3/2018 at 19:11
Why have any laws at all when you can just give everyone a gun? :confused: