Mass Shooting, Dark Knight Rises, 14 dead

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

Its likely the school offers free counseling (my school does, its a way for psychology PhD students to get work), and he was a neuroscience PhD student, if anyone understands why stigma is wrong, it would be him. I know society at large has a stigma but I've found its something universities take very seriously (studies show grades can crash based on mood alone), we have mental health awareness week, eating disorder awareness week, and the counselling centre gets out there and makes sure everyone knows that its an option. I don't see how he could make it to the PhD level without it getting hammered into his head.

And this is all assuming he's mentally ill, it could very well be he's not. ABC News reports most mass murderers are not mentally ill: http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...perts-say?lite There isn't any illness that makes you do this, and among the killers who do have mental illness, the illnesses vary from schizophrenia to anti-social personality disorder.

Kid's grades were suffering and he dropped out of school. Guess its kinda hard to benefit from a school program when you're no longer a student. I'm not sure what sort of point you're getting at, as ones moods and thoughts are a big factor in the actions one takes. Being a student of neuroscience doesn't exempt one from suffering mental or emotional issues and being in denial of them. Apparently at some point he thought it was a good idea to plan some horrible shit and carry it out, there had to be some reason for that.

Please, don't think I'm trying to excuse his actions, I don't think that's possible. I'm just saying that better mental health in Colorado might go a long way towards insuring that our people quit fucking snapping and shooting people.

To be fair, part of this is that I'm tired of the whole tired gun-control debate that happens EVERY fucking time some one does this shit. The thing is, that a person did this, a person had some sort of motivation, a person put everything together and made it happen. I'm trying to suggest that instead of arguing about some bullshit to do with inanimate objects, we could step up efforts to address the human factor, without which, this wouldn't have happened.

[Versus]

Do you think it's intellectually lazy to address gun control because of this, rather then mental health?

Guns are not inanimate objects. They are vehicles that take people to purposes not otherwise possible to such a signicant degree. Nobody has ever personally killed close to a hundred people in a few hours with anything less then a gun. If there were sweeping changes to gun restrictions but mental health care stayed the same, people could be expected to snap just as frequently as now, but what happens when they do snap could be substantially reduced. I feel that an immediate and measurable effect is a higher priority when exclusively trying to less the damage of shooting sprees.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

Kid's grades were suffering and he dropped out of school. Guess its kinda hard to benefit from a school program when you're no longer a student. I'm not sure what sort of point you're getting at, as ones moods and thoughts are a big factor in the actions one takes. Being a student of neuroscience doesn't exempt one from suffering mental or emotional issues and being in denial of them. Apparently at some point he thought it was a good idea to plan some horrible shit and carry it out, there had to be some reason for that.

Please, don't think I'm trying to excuse his actions, I don't think that's possible. I'm just saying that better mental health in Colorado might go a long way towards insuring that our people quit fucking snapping and shooting people.

To be fair, part of this is that I'm tired of the whole tired gun-control debate that happens EVERY fucking time some one does this shit. The thing is, that a person did this, a person had some sort of motivation, a person put everything together and made it happen. I'm trying to suggest that instead of arguing about some bullshit to do with inanimate objects, we could step up efforts to address the human factor, without which, this wouldn't have happened.

He still got all the way to a PhD level, and would still be covered until he officially dropped out (and probably given a grace period to find alternative coverage thereafter). While bad grades can be a result of illness, bad grades does not mean you're ill and is no way to diagnose him. It could have been for many reasons, perhaps he already had this all planned (and he's been planning this a while) and didn't care about school anymore. Perhaps its why he decided to take revenge on society, we don't know yet.

It is giving him a kind of excuse in that we like to clinicalize violence when we're not celebrating it and encouraging it, when its done by a citizen and not the state. There are circumstances in which we can understand violence, like if a man lives in poverty and tries to rob a bank. But on this kind of senseless level we can't deal with it. The fact remains is that many serial/mass murderers are pretty privileged members of society who feel entitled to more, and lash out violently. And many of them are mentally well.

[ape descendant]

I don't think that addressing gun-control is intellectually lazy. I've just noticed that the way it's being addressed, especially in my general area, has been rather black and white.

There's been a lot of "don't take mah guns", no real dialogue about what sorts of laws would actually be helpful. Part of my bias against taking up the topic, myself, is that I'm woefully ignorant about gun-control laws. I do know there are some pretty heinous weapons that are legal to own by the average citizen.

The extent of my understanding is pretty much that there are plenty of people who legally own guns, yet don't go on shooting sprees. As with just about anything that people really want to have, regulation can be incredibly helpful to lessen the availability to means to do heavy damage and take several lives at once. However it only works to the extent that one is willing to obey the law and only use legitimate sources for one's weaponry.

While I do think that there could be good to come of a thoughtful discussion of the topic, I've noticed that many people seem to have troubles being thoughtful and explore options regarding gun-control. Since there's always a human behind the trigger, I figure whatever is going on inside that human to be the root cause. I find treating the root problem to bring more lasting results than treating a symptom, though, there's merit in working on both.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

He still got all the way to a PhD level, and would still be covered until he officially dropped out (and probably given a grace period to find alternative coverage thereafter). While bad grades can be a result of illness, bad grades does not mean you're ill and is no way to diagnose him. It could have been for many reasons, perhaps he already had this all planned (and he's been planning this a while) and didn't care about school anymore. Perhaps its why he decided to take revenge on society, we don't know yet.

It is giving him a kind of excuse in that we like to clinicalize violence when we're not celebrating it and encouraging it, when its done by a citizen and not the state. There are circumstances in which we can understand violence, like if a man lives in poverty and tries to rob a bank. But on this kind of senseless level we can't deal with it. The fact remains is that many serial/mass murderers are pretty privileged members of society who feel entitled to more, and lash out violently. And many of them are mentally well.

Mental illness =/= excuse.

I'm not trying to diagnose shit. I'm just saying that humans are fucking human and don't do shit without motivation. Personally, I don't see a rational motivation for what happened. I'm suggesting that we try to figure what motivates people to pull this shit and do our best to address it, to help prevent further attacks in the future.

I can vaguely seen how a sense of entitlement could vaguely play into such a situation, however, it hardly offers anything meaningful to this conversation.

Mental issues (illness, disorders, whatever) are pretty damned rampant. I don't know a single person in my personal life who isn't dealing with something. I'm not saying that mental illness causes mass murders directly, I'm saying that dealing with some shit like depression, anxiety, feelings of hopelessness or a desire to die, which for the most part are ignored and down played can contribute greatly to the overpowering of one's rational mind and inhibitions against deadly violence.

Please, enlighten me as to "the many" serial killers/ mass muderers who didn't have some sort of mental issue. I'm dying to read your list, as all the one's I've ever read about, did.

[Versus]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

I don't think that addressing gun-control is intellectually lazy. I've just noticed that the way it's being addressed, especially in my general area, has been rather black and white.

I think that's pretty synonymous of the dialogue that I've been hearing here, too. It's even made it's way to g.net. XD

There's been a lot of "don't take mah guns", no real dialogue about what sorts of laws would actually be helpful. Part of my bias against taking up the topic, myself, is that I'm woefully ignorant about gun-control laws. I do know there are some pretty heinous weapons that are legal to own by the average citizen.

I understand. Gun control laws are kind of funny, really. Some are focused on availability, while others are focused on strictly lethality.

As an example, there was such a thing called melting point laws where guns couldn't be sold if they melted at or before a certain tempature. It forced the manufacturers to only sell guns of a certain quality, which were typically more expensive because of the materials they needed. Basically, the poor couldn't buy them. And then there are laws that ban the sale and ownership of guns with certain characteristics such as barrel length, overall length, magazine capacity, operating mechanism, and so on. It's basically an effort to reduce the lethality of guns. A California legal version of the weapon that the shooter used, in this instance, would only be able to shoot 10 times consecutively without reloading, which is process in and of itself because the magazine release has to be pressed with a special tool for it to detach the ammo box. Compare that to the variant that the shooter had in Aurora where he was able to shoot 100 times without reloading, which would be a simple process of pressing a button and sticking a fresh box in. Additionally, fully automatic weapons, where you just depress the trigger and it shoots as fast as it can on it's own (like a machinegun) are usually illegal without a license, semi-automatic weapon, like the rifle he had or the handgun he had, is a lot more dangerous then a bolt-action rifle or a single action pistol. In semi-auto weapons, you just squeeze the trigger and it shoots without any further action necessary from the shooter, where as in bolt-action, lever-action, or single action guns, you need to manually cycle a new round through whatever mechanism that gun uses. Canada, for example, allows you to own long-guns like rifles as shotguns, but not handguns because they typically have larger magazines and are more concealable.

Basically, it comes down to who should be able to get guns and what kind. If Colorado only allowed bolt-action rifles, the guy wouldn't have been able to hurt or kill nearly so many people. Unless you have an overactive imagination like Deadman. What people basically mean when they defend their constitutional right is "I don't give a shit what happened, I would NEVER do that." They refuse to acknowledge that ANYBODY can snap, even themselves. And then they say "Well, I like to target shoot" or "I like to hunt" as if that is somehow more important then public safety. And sometimes they will say "Well, I have a right to defend myself" as if it's somehow impossible to be safe without a gun in a society without legal guns. They'll say "People will just get guns illegally" as if less guns available doesn't translate to less gun violence. And my absolute favorite argument is "Well, people will can use ANYTHING to kill people! Outlaw kitchen knives and fast cars, why don't you!" as if a kitchen knife could ever enable somebody to kill a hundred people in a few hours. None of the arguments hold up logically at all, and it's ridiculous that this country feels that the ability to wantonly slaughter people is a right.

The extent of my understanding is pretty much that there are plenty of people who legally own guns, yet don't go on shooting sprees. As with just about anything that people really want to have, regulation can be incredibly helpful to lessen the availability to means to do heavy damage and take several lives at once. However it only works to the extent that one is willing to obey the law and only use legitimate sources for one's weaponry.

The extent that it works, however, is significant. In another thread, I posted that Japan has on average only 200 gun-related deaths a year.

While I do think that there could be good to come of a thoughtful discussion of the topic, I've noticed that many people seem to have troubles being thoughtful and explore options regarding gun-control. Since there's always a human behind the trigger, I figure whatever is going on inside that human to be the root cause. I find treating the root problem to bring more lasting results than treating a symptom, though, there's merit in working on both.

And mental health is something I am woefully ignorant of.

[AshleyO]

So how 'bout them Yankees?

[Andrias]

Aparently the killer is trying to go with the insanity plea:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...6pLid%3D183661

God help us if he manages to get off on the grounds of "mental instability"

god help us all...

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

Mental illness =/= excuse.

I'm not trying to diagnose shit. I'm just saying that humans are fucking human and don't do shit without motivation. Personally, I don't see a rational motivation for what happened. I'm suggesting that we try to figure what motivates people to pull this shit and do our best to address it, to help prevent further attacks in the future.

I can vaguely seen how a sense of entitlement could vaguely play into such a situation, however, it hardly offers anything meaningful to this conversation.

Mental issues (illness, disorders, whatever) are pretty damned rampant. I don't know a single person in my personal life who isn't dealing with something. I'm not saying that mental illness causes mass murders directly, I'm saying that dealing with some shit like depression, anxiety, feelings of hopelessness or a desire to die, which for the most part are ignored and down played can contribute greatly to the overpowering of one's rational mind and inhibitions against deadly violence.

Please, enlighten me as to "the many" serial killers/ mass muderers who didn't have some sort of mental issue. I'm dying to read your list, as all the one's I've ever read about, did.

I already linked you to a source that points out that most serial/mass murderers are not mentally ill. A mentally ill person is also far more likely to be the victim of violence, not the perpetrator. A "mental issue" is not a mental illness, and many may feign mental illness, such as Berkowitz or Wayne Gacy, to avoid the death penalty. Hunting Humans by Elliot Leyton was a textbook that referenced this in an anthropology course I did on War and Aggression. The course also pointed out that pretty much anybody, sane or insane, can learn to kill and kill needlessly and senselessly. One doesn't need to be mentally ill to be trained by others to be killers (such as troops in Vietnam who were encouraged to massacre Vietnamese civilians, needlessly!), it stands to reason that a person in a corrupt violent society such as ours that glamourizes the violence we perpetuate can find themselves tempted to take that course.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Andrias

Aparently the killer is trying to go with the insanity plea:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...6pLid%3D183661

God help us if he manages to get off on the grounds of "mental instability"

god help us all...

Its speculation, its just that it might be his only way out of the death penalty should they aim for that, because in Colorado you can't execute anyone who is mentally ill or disabled. But if its just a life sentence they're going for, the standard is that he must not know the difference between right and wrong to qualify as criminally insane and the defense would have to prove that.

[Renatus]

Christian Bale seems to be filling the role of a British Gentleman quite nicely making visits to the survivors, all the while asking for no publicity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB3bH...eature=g-all-u

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

I already linked you to a source that points out that most serial/mass murderers are not mentally ill. A mentally ill person is also far more likely to be the victim of violence, not the perpetrator. A "mental issue" is not a mental illness, and many may feign mental illness, such as Berkowitz or Wayne Gacy, to avoid the death penalty. Hunting Humans by Elliot Leyton was a textbook that referenced this in an anthropology course I did on War and Aggression. The course also pointed out that pretty much anybody, sane or insane, can learn to kill and kill needlessly and senselessly. One doesn't need to be mentally ill to be trained by others to be killers (such as troops in Vietnam who were encouraged to massacre Vietnamese civilians, needlessly!), it stands to reason that a person in a corrupt violent society such as ours that glamourizes the violence we perpetuate can find themselves tempted to take that course.

You mean this? http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/20/12858757-mass-murderers-often-not-mentally-ill-but-seeking-revenge-experts-say?lite

All it does is state "Those who commit mass murders are often angry and isolated, but usually aren't mentally ill", it doesn't say much about the issue beyond that.

Berkowitz and Gacy were trying to plea "insanity" which is hardly a legitimate medical term, last time I checked "insanity" wasn't a specific disorder or illness. It is used legally to indicate that one is not mentally stable enough to be held legally responsible for one's actions.

I am not arguing for any sort of dismissal based on legal insanity. I AM arguing that there are plenty of mental illness that can factor into irrational behavior, and this sort of thing is pretty fucking irrational. My point, is that working towards removing the stigma people suffer from being open about and getting help for mental illnesses (which range widely in severity) and making treatments and therapies more widely available could help to reduce the chances of this sort of tragedy happening in the future.

On that point, being trained to kill as a soldier does not factor into this discussion, as there's understandable motivation, just as with your example of the bank robber in an earlier post.

My suggestion, that a movement towards better emotional and mental health would reduce the chances of irrational violence, is obviously too late to do any one in this situation very much good.

I do think that these sorts of tragedies speak to a wider societal/ cultural problem, I have to start somewhere.

***
On a side note, I vehemently oppose the death penalty.

[ape descendant]

@Versus - Which regulations do you think would work in Colorado? How well do you think that'd go over with the general population out here?

[Versus]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

@Versus - Which regulations do you think would work in Colorado? How well do you think that'd go over with the general population out here?

I'm at work so I might take a minute to respond.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

You mean this? http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/20/12858757-mass-murderers-often-not-mentally-ill-but-seeking-revenge-experts-say?lite

All it does is state "Those who commit mass murders are often angry and isolated, but usually aren't mentally ill", it doesn't say much about the issue beyond that.

Berkowitz and Gacy were trying to plea "insanity" which is hardly a legitimate medical term, last time I checked "insanity" wasn't a specific disorder or illness. It is used legally to indicate that one is not mentally stable enough to be held legally responsible for one's actions.

There's two legal claims to insanity that a criminal might go for, which is why Andrias's link speculates Holmes will try to plead as such. To prove he can't be held responsible for his actions at all, he has to prove that he can't tell the difference between right or wrong. To avoid the death penalty, he just has to have a diagnosis that proves he's mentally ill or disabled to avoid the death penalty, so you would need to have a specific disorder for that to work, which is what Wayne Gacy was trying to do. I can't remember what the law was like back in the Berkowitz case (it used to be the prosecution had to prove the defendent knew the difference between right and wrong) but in any case he pleaded guilty but was trying to prove he wasn't mentally competent to stand trial.

I am not arguing for any sort of dismissal based on legal insanity. I AM arguing that there are plenty of mental illness that can factor into irrational behavior, and this sort of thing is pretty fucking irrational. My point, is that working towards removing the stigma people suffer from being open about and getting help for mental illnesses (which range widely in severity) and making treatments and therapies more widely available could help to reduce the chances of this sort of tragedy happening in the future.

The problem is there is way more at hand that simple mental illness getting overlooked, in this specific case I doubt it but also, there is A LOT more mass murders going on in America than the news reports. Maddow did a segment on it but I don't know how to narrow it down, but this article makes the point: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/op...-the-slog.html

In our country, the mass shootings come so frequently that most of them go by virtually unnoticed. Did you catch the one last week in Tuscaloosa? Seventeen people at a bar, hit by a gunman with an assault weapon.

On that point, being trained to kill as a soldier does not factor into this discussion, as there's understandable motivation, just as with your example of the bank robber in an earlier post.

It has a lot to do with it. I don't always agree with Michael Moore but I think he can articulate it better than I can.

1. We Americans are incredibly good killers. We believe in killing as a way of accomplishing our goals. Three-quarters of our states execute criminals, even though the states with the lower murder rates are generally the states with no death penalty.

Our killing is not just historical (the slaughter of Indians and slaves and each other in a "civil" war). It is our current way of resolving whatever it is we're afraid of. It's invasion as foreign policy. Sure there's Iraq and Afghanistan – but we've been invaders since we "conquered the wild west" and now we're hooked so bad we don't even know where to invade (bin Laden wasn't hiding in Afghanistan, he was in Pakistan) or what to invade for (Saddam had zero weapons of mass destruction and nothing to do with 9/11). We send our lower classes off to do the killing, and the rest of us who don't have a loved one over there don't spend a single minute of any given day thinking about the carnage. And now we send in remote pilotless planes to kill, planes that are being controlled by faceless men in a lush, air conditioned studio in suburban Las Vegas. It is madness.

2. We are an easily frightened people and it is easy to manipulate us with fear. What are we so afraid of that we need to have 300 million guns in our homes? Who do we think is going to hurt us? Why are most of these guns in white suburban and rural homes? Maybe we should fix our race problem and our poverty problem (again, #1 in the industrialized world) and then maybe there would be fewer frustrated, frightened, angry people reaching for the gun in the drawer. Maybe we would take better care of each other.

Our society loves violence, we can't get enough. We're more outraged to see two gay people kissing on prime time cable than we are at women getting mutilated graphically on things like Criminal Minds. If you're bullied at school, you need to beat the shit out of them so they learn not to do it, no adult will help you find a peaceful solution. Police are killing black people left right and centre and it never makes the news. A scary amount of white people are probably fine with it or thinks it was perfectly justified because you know all black kids are thugs. You can buy Trayvon Martin shooting targets and Zimmerman manages to blow through 200, 000 dollars racists have donated to him and said it was all in God's plan and he wouldn't do a thing differently. Holmes is described as "boyfriend material" in one article, surely mentally ill and must be pitied, but Texas recently executed a mentally disabled black man and no one gives two shits. Something is rotten. The problem is a lot more complicated than mental health access, tv, gun control, war, or racism alone, but it all comes together to allow this kind of violence to happen and celebrate it when it does. In thirty years time, will Holmes be featured in a Mass Murderers trivia game? Will he marry a female fan in prison like Richard Ramirez? In a movie adaptation will he be celebrated as a criminal mastermind, like Ted Bundy in Green River?

[ape descendant]

I've already said "I do think that these sorts of tragedies speak to a wider societal/ cultural problem, I have to start somewhere." Of course the problem is an interlaced web of fucked up shit, and a sick society is going to produce sick people.

For the record, mental illness, isn't simple. When one suffers from one it factors in to everything one faces, how one sees and interacts with other people and the world. While some have an illness that impairs their ability to live independently, there are plenty of people who manage to make it on their own, it's just a bit easier when one has an understanding of what's going on and good coping strategies.

Now, if all you want from me, is to acknowledge that the problem is more than a lack of decent, affordable mental health care, I am more than willing to do so.

There is a sickening amount of hatred and violence for minorities. Personally, I don't think that has so much to do with violence on TV, as a systematic dehumanization and othering of said minorities. Such a process creates a lack of empathy as the othered people aren't really people and what one does to them doesn't matter, fostering an environment that sanctions cruelty.

[Versus]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

@Versus - Which regulations do you think would work in Colorado? How well do you think that'd go over with the general population out here?

Any regulations would not go over well, here. I've only lived here 5 years, but what I can gather is that it's a very pro-gun state. It's mostly rural, there is a thriving hunting community, it has a high concentration of military, it's even an open carry state. I sincerely doubt the majority of gun owners would be able to see beyon themselves and their immediate surroundings to recognize how dangerous it is in the urban areas.

What would I do? I'd ban all firearms. Period.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

I've already said "I do think that these sorts of tragedies speak to a wider societal/ cultural problem, I have to start somewhere." Of course the problem is an interlaced web of fucked up shit, and a sick society is going to produce sick people.

For the record, mental illness, isn't simple. When one suffers from one it factors in to everything one faces, how one sees and interacts with other people and the world. While some have an illness that impairs their ability to live independently, there are plenty of people who manage to make it on their own, it's just a bit easier when one has an understanding of what's going on and good coping strategies.

Now, if all you want from me, is to acknowledge that the problem is more than a lack of decent, affordable mental health care, I am more than willing to do so.

Again, you're assuming he's mentally ill and the problem is a lack of decent affordable mental health care, which he had access to even if he was mentally ill. People who are not mentally ill have done this and even more violent things before. We do not know jack shit about his mental state.

There is a sickening amount of hatred and violence for minorities. Personally, I don't think that has so much to do with violence on TV, as a systematic dehumanization and othering of said minorities. Such a process creates a lack of empathy as the othered people aren't really people and what one does to them doesn't matter, fostering an environment that sanctions cruelty.

No, TV doesn't create these problems, TV and film reflect these problems. For example, whitewashing characters of colour reflects shadeism and whites' desire for segregation (whites mostly segregate themselves, live in white neighbourhoods, have only white friends, while minorities are more likely to desire integration and do so.) TV does not cause shadeism (although it can exasperate the problem if media presents only light skin as beautiful and desirable and sell skin bleachers) but it does show we have a problem with dark skin.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

Again, you're assuming he's mentally ill and the problem is a lack of decent affordable mental health care, which he had access to even if he was mentally ill. People who are not mentally ill have done this and even more violent things before. We do not know jack shit about his mental state.



No, TV doesn't create these problems, TV and film reflect these problems. For example, whitewashing characters of colour reflects shadeism and whites' desire for segregation (whites mostly segregate themselves, live in white neighbourhoods, have only white friends, while minorities are more likely to desire integration and do so.) TV does not cause shadeism (although it can exasperate the problem if media presents only light skin as beautiful and desirable and sell skin bleachers) but it does show we have a problem with dark skin.

If you're going to present a counter argument, at least argue with what I actually said. "Personally, I don't think that has so much to do with violence on TV, as a systematic dehumanization and othering of said minorities."

If you're not going to take the time to actually read what I have to say, its not much of a discussion.

***
Versus- Yeah, getting every one else to go along with you is always the hard part. I also would have to disagree with the banning of all firearms, at least in rural areas where one's fire arm really is for protection as well as a useful tool. Especially when one works on a ranch with a lot of unpredictable livestock or one lives out in the woods with mountain lions and bears.

[Versus]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

Versus- Yeah, getting every one else to go along with you is always the hard part. I also would have to disagree with the banning of all firearms, at least in rural areas where one's fire arm really is for protection as well as a useful tool. Especially when one works on a ranch with a lot of unpredictable livestock or one lives out in the woods with mountain lions and bears.

I'm not being exclusive. Anybody can buy bear spray for 12 to 40 dollars and carry it on their person, and it works just fine for self defense from large animals. This is, of course, secondary to avoidance and respecting an animal's natural environment. I think it goes without saying that people shouldn't fuck with the wildlife, gun or no gun.

[Versus]

And by anybody, I mean people who would otherwise not be able to own a gun.

Long guns are a lot more expensive then handguns, so Canada's rule is kind of exclusive.

People convicted of felonies or the lautenburg amendment cannot legally own any guns.

And even people, like me, who have a personal problem with guns, can feel comfortable with a 9 oz. bottle in their pocket.

Though I'm sure I missed a few.

[ape descendant]

To be perfectly honest, I don't support disarming the general citizenry. Before I could really discuss it, I'd have to take some time to understand why, as for the life of me, all I can come up with are the usual arguments that I'm sure you've already heard from dozens of other people.

I have been taking a lot of time to re-examine a lot of ideas and stances that I was raised with and had taken for granted, I just haven't gotten around to this one yet.

[Versus]

Oh, geeze, tell me about it. I fucking love guns and it took me a really long time to understand why.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

If you're going to present a counter argument, at least argue with what I actually said. "Personally, I don't think that has so much to do with violence on TV, as a systematic dehumanization and othering of said minorities."

If you're not going to take the time to actually read what I have to say, its not much of a discussion.

I'm clarifying what I meant when I brought up TV.

[AshleyO]

https://watertowermusic.moontoast.com/estore/embed/1336

Relevant.