'MERICA
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
- Status
I know a good ointment for that.
whew, I know I feel safer
Well you're in TX and he's in FL so you really should.
Wait, you mean hyperbole, absolutes, and hysteria AREN'T the way to win arguments? I must be on the wrong internet.
More like he was 'defending' himself against an unarmed salesman who probably never meant him any harm. According to the article, he never told the salesman to "get off my property!" or something, but rather just opened fire.
Unfortunately, prohibition rarely works. If a criminal or a psycho wants to get a gun, they'll get a gun, regardless of the legalities of the matter. And it seems here we have some kind of a paranoid psycho obsessing about threats to his property. He'd likely have a gun regardless, so I'd say the little that a gun prohibition would have done in this case is not worth it to deny the constitutional rights of law-abiding and responsible gun owners.
I mean, Re: that previous thread.
Well, what ever else it may be, it is also occasionally a good way to get a discussion going.
On a serious note, as I said in the other thread, the issue isn't even firearms themselves as much as the culture surrounding them.
Though, having them readily available doesn't help, either.
Though, having them readily available doesn't help, either.
Am I reading things wrong in that (one page of the) study, or does it indicate that weapons inhibit aggressive behaviour? That would be a good thing, wouldn't it?
Sorry, the full article goes into how the initial Berkowitz effect may not be supported, but there are additional cultural factors at play. It basically means that though the inital findings may have looked good in a laboratory, they may not hold true in real life. In essence, the mere presence of firearms may not cause aggressive behiavior as original posited by Berkowitz, but a wider look at the presence of voilent stimuli is needed in more real world settings.
What I would find interesting is how the ratio of firearms pulled vs firearms discharged and if those ratios have changed. Some previous studies looked at the fact that in general people who pull firearms had no intent of actually using them, but I would wager in the decades or so since then, that ratio may have gone up. But that's simply a postulation.
What I would find interesting is how the ratio of firearms pulled vs firearms discharged and if those ratios have changed. Some previous studies looked at the fact that in general people who pull firearms had no intent of actually using them, but I would wager in the decades or so since then, that ratio may have gone up. But that's simply a postulation.
This guy was the "law abiding gun owner" that politicians, pundits, etc. drone on about...right up until he shot an unarmed person trying to sell him some food. This kind of story is, in my view, actually pretty important when it comes to the gun debate. The fact that this man's reaction to "I'd like to sell you some steak" was "Mother fucker has to die", and that he was licensed to carry 14 different concealed weapons raises some questions as to effectiveness of current licensing procedure in the state of Florida. He killed a human being for being an annoyance on his property, then claimed he feared for his life. He's either a murderous asshole or tremendously paranoid, both of which should disqualify you from a CCL.
A CCL should be at least as difficult to get as a driver's license (which, given the proper tools and funds, is pretty easy) on top of the current background checks. Give out a little booklet explaing the current gun laws, take a little test on it, demonstrate reasonable competancy in the weapon's operation down at the gun range, etc. Shotguns and rifles, being (1) Less easily concealed (2) Necessary for hunting (3) Much more in line with what the founders had available when the drafted the Bill of Rights, should remain at current. My opinion.
Conceal carrying 14 firearms? That's impressive.
The number of firearms he owned really isn't relevant to the story. He's not licensed to carry 14 firearms on his person. He has a conceal carry permit, -and- owns 14 firearms, these are seperate things. In the state of Florida, I'd say it is about as easy (or difficult, depending on how you're looking at it, I guess?) to get a conceal carry permit as it is to get a drivers license. You fill out the paperwork, pay a fee, take and pass a required gun safety course, and you get your permit.
The fact that he shot the guy isn't really relative to the action. This guy is a paranoid, murderous asshole. He could have just as easily run the salesman over with his pickup truck and killed him that way, but people wouldn't then be talking about how important it is to tighten control on drivers licenses and car ownership. Although, come to think of it, I'd be all for that.
I'm not saying that gun laws don't need to be looked at. The batman shooting is proof enough of that. I'm just saying that this isn't a particularly good example of why. The guy committed murder, which is already against the law.
Okay, so guns aren't the problem, the problem is irresponsible use of them (what I understood you meant by gun culture). Would it be accurate to compare guns to, say, alcohol? Most people act responsibly about them, but irresponsible use by a few can lead to harm and loss of life.
The culture I'm referring to is the glorification of gun violence. It pretty much permeates every aspect of our culture and media. I've actually become really introspective lately about my culpability in perpetuating that culture with the media that I choose for my entertainment. I grew up on action movies, video games, etc... I was actually playing boarderlands when I kind of had this realization. Even though it's fake, I'm having fun shooting someone in the face... I'm definitely not saying that all violent media is bad, but I'm starting to really pay attention to how much gun violence is glorified and it's kind of disconcerting if you think about it.
Mental Health System? We don't have one.
Not since Reagan anyway. He shut down all the government funded asylums and mental health clinics. It's one of the reasons why homelessness skyrocketed after his years in office.
Necronic
Staff member
He shut down the federal stuff, there still is state stuff. Of course....it's currently being gutted. Houston is home of the MHMRA (Menal health and mental retardation administration....which is a terrible name btw because it sounds like they hand out retardation.) There are also grants out there to help people that are dealing with a disabled or mentally ill child.
It's still insufficient. The old asylum system wasn't exactly a walk in the park either. There were many cases of abuse and neglect. Some of which were flat out horrifying (there was a set of photos from the 40s that is terrifying.)
A lot of this has to do with how new a science psychology is, and how psychiatry has dominated the industry for so long when it is such a questionable field. Psychologists are taking over again though, which may go a long way towards reinvigorating those systems.
It's still insufficient. The old asylum system wasn't exactly a walk in the park either. There were many cases of abuse and neglect. Some of which were flat out horrifying (there was a set of photos from the 40s that is terrifying.)
A lot of this has to do with how new a science psychology is, and how psychiatry has dominated the industry for so long when it is such a questionable field. Psychologists are taking over again though, which may go a long way towards reinvigorating those systems.
Sorta like MHMRA sounding bad, I knew a lady who's title was Sexual Assault Coordinator.
GasBandit
Staff member
Somebody should stop her!
E
Ermac
I've always thought there should be a mental health evaluation before purchasing a firearm. But then again, he could have gotten a gun illegally anyways.
They have all that stuff every where else and they don't kill each other as much as Americans do.
Oh they do.They just dont use guns.
E
Ermac
No, they don't. Whether they have firearms or not.
Whelp, I'm convinced.
- Status