The Big and Senseless Mass Shooting Thread

[spacejunk]

Was it worth it?
I would say yes. Perhaps i'm personally biased but i don't see any intrinsic value in gun ownership.
A lot of the stateside rhetoric is fetishism at best.

 

[JessFR]

It shouldn't need intrinsic value, freedoms should need reasons to have them taken away, not provided in the first place.

 

[Droppersneck]

You wouldn't make it past customs. Just ask Chris Brown

.

qft

so you believe that hunters and people who want guns for 'protection' should not be allowed to own guns? guns should be safely locked away until you are called to action by the commander of your well regulated militia who orders you to march on washington?

seriously, in the past few years your government has lied about weapons of mass destruction to take the country to war, has carried out the most widespread assault on personal privacy in the form of warrant less wire-tapping and the 'patriot' act, has handed over millions of dollars of public money to the ceos and others at banks who broke the law and plunged the country into a massive debt crisis. the list goes on.

what's it actually going to take for all you gun-totin' 'patriots' to actually do something? or are you all talk and no action?

alasdair

lol wow arnt you the blood thirsty one here. I do not see anything that warrants a revolt. The second amendment is just a shit hits the fan back up plan.

 

[spacejunk]

It shouldn't need intrinsic value, freedoms should need reasons to have them taken away, not provided in the first place.

A horrific massacre of unarmed, innocent people isn't a legitimate "reason"? Seriously - what would it take?
This is a compromise i for one am more than happy to live with.

 

[Droppersneck]

I'm not suggesting Australia's pre-1996 gun culture is analogous to that of the USA; only that many of the seemingly unquestioned orthodoxies of US gun policy are inaccurate.

Basically nobody in Australia has a gun for 'protection'. People are more likely to keep a cricket bat or something around for that, because no two-bit burgalar in australia is going to be packing heat.
Anyone that can afford an illegal gun in Australia is obviously involved in some lucrative criminal enterprise - thus these guns (which cost a hell of a lot to procure) are generally not used for random shootings, by petty crooks or wannabe gangsters.
Illegal guns are generally owned by real gangsters, which to be honest with you, doesnt have much to do with me as i dont associate with them.
We do have hunters here - my state has banned duck season because many of our waterfowl species are under enough threat from development and habitat destruction that allowing people to shoot them for fun is not justifiable.
Other forms of hunting certainly are practiced in Australia (and other states from mine do have duck season) - but people don't seem to think they need uzis to participate.
It does seem to define "overkill" to use that kind of weapon to hunt an animal, right?

As for "bushmeat" as droppers calls it - we do have animals that are hunted for their meat (namely kangaroos) and for 'recreation' (wild pigs and the like) but many of our native species are protected by law from hunters, which still doesnt stop some people - but in terms of hunting, we don't have a lot of apex predators that are a threat to human life, or even to livestock.
A lot of farmers do have rifles to shoot foxes, feral dogs and the like, but people don't need automatic weapons for that.

We have a very different environment and ecosystem to that of North America, and a lot of threatened species - that because of introduced predators such as cats and foxes, need conservation in order not to die out.
Australia doesn't have the sort of wildlife that people proudly shoot and mount on their walls. Most of our fauna is considered a vital part of the country itself, not something that needs to be shot at and conquered. I fully understand that North America has a number of species of animal that are big, wild and capable of killing humans, and this makes a difference in people's attitudes towards gun ownership; it is a component of the wider culture. I don't think this really plays a big part in the arguments for urban gun ownership, and i'm not really trying to make a point in favour of one outcome or another - by that, i mean that i don't have an opinion about what US legislators should or shouldn't do in regards to firearm restrictions.
I'm simply offering a different perspective in relation to my own experience.
And i'm interested in discussing the issue with my stateside brothers and sisters.
I can see that some people take this personally and get defensive, but i'm not criticising america, americans or claiming my country to be some perfect, idealised place. It isn't. But i appreciate and agree with our restrictive gun laws. I'm not saying they would work in the states, but i'm interested in discussing why that might be the case.
I have a particular interest in this topic because i have immediate family that live in the states, and these massacres bother me a lot.
None of my family (here or in any other country) are gun owners. So forgive me if i don't quite "get it".


That's a very emotional argument. I thought you were all about being "objective", "impartial" and dispassionate?
And no, droppers, we don't have "deer season" because we don't have deer in Australia. Which "only predators" are you referring to?
Perhaps you don't know much about australia at all, mate?

The thing that was like a horror movie was the Port Arthur massacre that led to the gun buyback. You've been watching too much propaganda if that is your understanding of the situation here.

Your snipes about how "easy to control" Australians are seem pretty ironic to me, considering the obvious unease you have in even discussing gun control. The NRA and various other gun lobby advocates have succeeded in making this a virtually taboo subject, or one that is automatically deemed "too hard" - an impasse - so let us never speak of it again.
To me, that is being "controlled".
It is far from utopian to aim for a better, safer society. To claim otherwise is a cop-out. Plus, i am the last person to take some kind of patriotic stand on this; i see australia's faults and flaws as clearly as anyone - this is not "my country is better than yours" - it is simply someone coming from a (slightly) different culture explaining how some of the misconceptions about guns can - and have - been pretty successfully overcome here. I don't love Australia or being Australian - and i sometimes worry about friends and family that live in the US, because to me, gun culture is irrational and absurd.

For those that don't know what i'm talking about, there was a big massacre in Tasmania in 1996 by an aggrieved loner who shot dozens of tourists - families, couples, elderly people and children.
Due to public sentiment, the federal government of the day decided to ban a range of automatic and semiautomatic firearms - which was implemented via a "buyback" scheme, where the government paid people to return their now-banned guns.
Despite anger amongst some gun owners, the government pushed ahead with the plan, and the prime minister even addressed a rally of pro-gun demonstrators (in a bullet-proof vest) to argue his case.
Now, amongst people i know, that prime minister is not remembered fondly - he is pretty unpopular - but the gun buyback was one of his few political acts that is widely viewed as a brave response to what was happening. We havent had a massacre since that day.
I don't know anyone that likes John Howard, but i dont know anyone that disagrees with that policy either.
Disarming the australian public did not lead to "tyranny", disaster or catastrophe.
From what i can see, australia is less of a police state 19 years later than america is now.

Guns arent the answer to stopping tyranny - involvement in the political process is.

On the other hand, nobody seems to know what the anwer to stopping senseless massacres in the USA is.
If i suggested social welfare, and more balanced access to healthcare (particularly mental health care), education and that sort of thing might help, i'd probably get called a "commie" again.
It seems like the only people used as scapegoats in these tragic situations are mentally ill people. "Oh, well, he was crazy. We can't take guns off 'good upstanding citizens'" seems to be the refrain.
Since when did mental illness make you a bad person?

I was speaking of the Tasmanian tiger hunted to extinction in the early 1900s. I wasnt sure I thought you guys might have some sort of sizable wild ungulate outside of kangaroos. Its seems your crying about the port massacre is rooted in emotion not that there is anything wrong with that. I love how this NRA lobby idea has been pressed by the left so hard they actually believe it. The second amendment is protected by all of the above; EG many lobbies, a apathetic populace, common sense, american culture, piece of mind, fear of the unknown, fear of the an over reaching government, etc, etc. I laughed when Obama in his speech today put it on the people to vote in elected officials that were in step with their beliefs on gun control in order to make a change. Political expedient solutions are the definition of an emotional response and are not pragmatic in the least imo. Is there a crocodile season there? Ive hunted gators before but a croc would be crazy

 

[JessFR]

A horrific massacre of unarmed, innocent people isn't a legitimate "reason"? Seriously - what would it take?
This is a compromise i for one am more than happy to live with.

This is why I don't even bother arguing with Australians anymore. You don't give a shit about principles of freedom, concepts like that people should be free to do what they want unless there's a good reason to stop them. And no, I don't consider removing freedoms previously held in order to instate a law that is useful for nothing but political capital and has been shown to do little if any tangible good at all to be a good reason.

Yes, port author was horrific, but that's not an excuse to pass any legislation you want even if it doesn't work that reduces individual freedom, just so you can be seen to have done something or sent the right message.

 

[Droppersneck]

This is why I don't even bother arguing with Australians anymore. You don't give a shit about principles of freedom, concepts like that people should be free to do what they want unless there's a good reason to stop them. And no, I don't consider removing freedoms previously held in order to instate a law that is useful for nothing but political capital and has been shown to do little if any tangible good at all to be a good reason.

Yes, port author was horrific, but that's not an excuse to pass any legislation you want even if it doesn't work that reduces individual freedom, just so you can be seen to have done something or sent the right message.

I agree. It's like why not apply that argument to every other way people die in mass? Id certainly have an argument to ban sports cars, drinking, smoking, etc, etc. I will say a person not from America will not be able to have perspective on the topic as they have never experienced the same level of freedom.

Heck look at Claire prime example of how I am right. I argued with her up and down on everything from the nanny state to socialism. Now she is pro gun and more anti government than I could of ever fathomed. She got that taste of freedom and I dont she is willing to go back.

 

[spacejunk]

I see.
Australians (as a massive generalisation) don't really buy into this idea that owning weapons is a "freedom" issue. It's distinctly American.
You'd probably get the same response "arguing" along those lines with plenty of other nationalities, but like i said - its a so-called freedom i can live happily without.

 

[Droppersneck]

Well I'd like to see how you could argue it isnt a freedom in a logical non emotional way. I can go buy an ar15 carbine rifle right now with no paper work needed you probably need a license to buy a BB gun. Freedom is freedom and nobody is saying it doesn't come at a cost.

 

[JessFR]

I see.
Australians (as a massive generalisation) don't really buy into this idea that owning weapons is a "freedom" issue. It's distinctly American.
You'd probably get the same response "arguing" along those lines with plenty of other nationalities, but like i said - its a so-called freedom i can live happily without.

And because it doesn't affect you, you don't give a shit about all the Australians who were forced to turn in their hard earned property to see it destroyed. That's pretty typical of most Australians I've met too.

That this freedom is about guns is irreverent, it could be anything. The point isn't what it was, the point is it was the ability to do something, something that may not have interested you but did interest some, taken away for none of the promised benefit of doing so. The point is that ANY freedom shouldn't be arbitrarily removed just because YOU don't care and because it could make for a good political message, and nothing else.

Well I'd like to see how you could argue it isnt a freedom in a logical non emotional way. I can go buy an ar15 carbine rifle right now with no paper work needed you probably need a license to buy a BB gun. Freedom is freedom and nobody is saying it doesn't come at a cost.

Oh it's so much worse than that. In Australia, you need a license to own a paintball gun, and take a safety course to get it, and you have to store it in an approved safe. Airsoft guns are outright prohibited entirely. And a laser pointer carried in public is a prohibited weapon. Forget having a gun or knife for defense, it's even illegal to have pepper spray. The police publicly recommend women get a rape whistle and hope for the best.

And all of that is courtesy of the very same law spacejunk is defending because he doesn't care and it sent the right message.

 

[spacejunk]

And because it doesn't affect you, you don't give a shit about all the Australians who were forced to turn in their hard earned property to see it destroyed. That's pretty typical of most Australians I've met too.

That this freedom is about guns is irreverent, it could be anything. The point isn't what it was, the point is it was the ability to do something, something that may not have interested you but did interest some, taken away for none of the promised benefit of doing so. The point is that ANY freedom shouldn't be arbitrarily removed just because YOU don't care and because it could make for a good political message, and nothing else.



Oh it's so much worse than that. In Australia, you need a license to own a paintball gun, and take a safety course to get it, and you have to store it in an approved safe. Airsoft guns are outright prohibited entirely. And a laser pointer carried in public is a prohibited weapon. Forget having a gun or knife for defense, it's even illegal to have pepper spray. The police publicly recommend women get a rape whistle and hope for the best.

And all of that is courtesy of the very same law spacejunk is defending because he doesn't care and it sent the right message.

No need to attack me personally, i'm stating my views.
Are you denying me "freedom of speech" because i happen to disagree with you?
"And because it doesn't affect you, you don't give a shit about all the Australians who were forced to turn in their hard earned property to see it destroyed" - i care about lives being destroyed. Those people were financially compensated for their "hard earned" lethal weapons being destroyed. Spare me the sob story, i'll have to drop a bouquet down at my local car wrecking yard if we keep this up.
I can see this is a touchy subject. Maybe we should go back to talking about how these school shootings are all a hoax perpetrated by the government, as that seemed to upset far fewer people.

 

[JessFR]

No need to attack me personally, i'm stating my views.
Are you denying me "freedom of speech" because i happen to disagree with you?
"And because it doesn't affect you, you don't give a shit about all the Australians who were forced to turn in their hard earned property to see it destroyed" - i care about lives being destroyed. Those people were financially compensated for their "hard earned" lethal weapons being destroyed. Spare me the sob story, i'll have to drop a bouquet down at my local car wrecking yard if we keep this up.
I can see this is a touchy subject. Maybe we should go back to talking about how these school shootings are all a hoax perpetrated by the government, as that seemed to upset far fewer people.

You have no freedom of speech here, bluelight is a privately run website, freedom of speech prevents the government from censoring you. Not private owners of private services.

And no, I'm not sure you give as much of a shit about the lives lost as you claim. If you gave a shit about people losing their life, why would you support a law that the Australian government deceptively claimed had saved lives when in the numerical and statistical sense it saved none? Maybe if John Howard hadn't decided to exceed his authority and force this law on the states of australia, instead something much more productive at saving lives could have been done instead. Instead they have intentionally deceived the people of Australia and erroneously led them to believe they are safer because of it when they are not.

And putting all that aside, you still don't grasp the value of freedoms.

Like I said, I'm sick of arguing with Australians, because this is the outcome virtually every time. Don't suppose I could make you a deal, I butt out of your domestic political issues and you butt out of ours?

 

[spacejunk]

Again, it comes down to nation vs nation.
What a bore.

 

[Droppersneck]

And because it doesn't affect you, you don't give a shit about all the Australians who were forced to turn in their hard earned property to see it destroyed. That's pretty typical of most Australians I've met too.

That this freedom is about guns is irreverent, it could be anything. The point isn't what it was, the point is it was the ability to do something, something that may not have interested you but did interest some, taken away for none of the promised benefit of doing so. The point is that ANY freedom shouldn't be arbitrarily removed just because YOU don't care and because it could make for a good political message, and nothing else.



Oh it's so much worse than that. In Australia, you need a license to own a paintball gun, and take a safety course to get it, and you have to store it in an approved safe. Airsoft guns are outright prohibited entirely. And a laser pointer carried in public is a prohibited weapon. Forget having a gun or knife for defense, it's even illegal to have pepper spray. The police publicly recommend women get a rape whistle and hope for the best.

And all of that is courtesy of the very same law spacejunk is defending because he doesn't care and it sent the right message.

oh wow I knew the nanny state was powerful there but damn. Seriously a license and a safe for a paintball gun? I had to have a bb surgically removed from my leg when I was twelve bc me and my buddies had BB gun battles. I bet that would be considered a major crime there. I feel like first world societies in general are becoming too weak and soft but Aussie takes that up a notch.

 

[spacejunk]

Have you been to australia?

 

[One Thousand Words]

Laws and rules are a distinctly American problem, which is fair enough when you are a litigious culture with every second person suing the next, requiring a lawyer to protect their rights.

Australia is a country founded by convicts. If a law exists that people don't think is fair, most Australians just don't follow it.

Change your culture, protect you children. It's that easy, or not.

 

[JessFR]

Laws and rules are a distinctly American problem, which is fair enough when you are a litigious culture with every second person suing the next, requiring a lawyer to protect their rights.

Australia is a country founded by convicts. If a law exists that people don't think is fair, most Australians just don't follow it.

Change your culture, protect you children. It's that easy, or not.

I live in Australia, and that's total bullshit. First, most Australians aren't even descended from convicts, they're descendants of people who chose to come here escaping shit like famine. And a lot of the convicts were convicts of status crimes like being poor. So that's all bullshit too.

And second, I have seen piles of Australians whom are rule and law obsessed. Frequently even asserting that something is virtually morally wrong by virtue of being illegal.

I had a chick try and make me walk home once in the pouring rain because she wouldn't risk driving the 5 minutes through back roads when my seatbelt in her car malfunctioned. And she's far from the only one I've seen like that. Don't consider yourself so special, you're like everywhere else in this respect, you have straight narc types and more rebellious types.

And look at your complete and total obsession about refugee's supposedly coming to Australia illegally and "jumping the queue". So you stick them all in offshore detention centers for the crime of being refugees, as the vast majority turn out to be. Guess they aren't australian enough to break unfair rules.

And of course you don't require lots of lawyers to protect your rights, you need to HAVE rights for that.

 

[One Thousand Words]

I'm not Australian but I'm a rich white guy living in Australia mind you, not white trash. I have smoked spliffs with a copper on more than one occasion

I have never thought that the laws of the land really applied to me.

Freedom!

 

[alasdairm]

I do not see anything that warrants a revolt.

exactly. because you pay lip service to freedom.

...what would it take?

what, indeed?

alasdair

 

[StoneHappyMonday]

I don't care about elsewhere in the world, that's elsewhere in the world's problem.

Says the globalist living in Australia.

What you say here, in a nutshell, encapsulates so much about why America is viewed the way it is by the rest of the world. Insular doesn't begin to describe it.

You carry on talking up your 'freedoms' about property (ie guns) rights and how dastardly unfair and unfree it is to have them taken away.

Our countries will carry on enjoying our campuses and malls that don't need armed police roaming them. We have a word for it.

Freedom.