This is a discussion on We're smarter than this situation that we're reacting to. within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by cmdrdredd I'd say a good many things the school does is preaching rather than teaching. A buddy of mine failed some political ...
Reading that post again sounds like me tooting my own horn, but I guess I just wanted to get the point across that we're not ALL losers.
If you're talking responsibility.......nobody wants to be there. Obviously it's self explanatory now. What do you think of your fellow man right now?
Here is a CNN report on the recent New Mexico shootings of a boy of his family; it's title sets the tone: New Mexico teen accused of gunning down family 'lost sense of conscience'. It goes on to quote the family as not wanting this shooting to be used in the gun control debate; I say, "too bad", as a group you have no moral authority to approve or disapprove. The article (link below) includes
"Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston said Griego was "involved heavily" with violent video games and that he "was quite excited as he got the opportunity to discuss that with our investigators." He said that the boy planned the shootings for at least a week. That he told investigators he was frustrated with his mother. That he contemplated killing his girlfriend's parents. That he hoped to continue his killing spree at a Walmart "with mass destruction" and die in a shootout with police. The teen's demeanor, as he shared all this, was "stern, very unemotional". After the slayings, Griego "spent the majority of the day with his girlfriend," Houston said. He even sent his girlfriend a picture of his slain mother, Houston said. Authorities arrested the teen after he attended his family's church with his girlfriend, and a staff member called deputies.
I think anyone with both common sense and a conscience can see that a sociopath, such as a narcissist who had dehumanised others, combined with violent video games which reinforces that others are literally "in the game" only to be killed, could combine guns into the mix and kill simply for fun. The games rewarded them for this; why wouldn't real life?
I haven't called for the "banning" of anything, either guns or video games. Instead I ask that we grasp the negative contribution of media, because it is not guns and the right-wingers who glorify violence, it is the left-wingers who make violent films and video games who literally glorify violence. By giving them credit for this (they certainly take credit for what they believe to be the positive effects their products have on society) (and some here would say "blame"), we can then visualise what should be done next. New Mexico teen accused of gunning down family 'lost sense of conscience' - CNN.com
William Bennett's article on CNN yesterday states the obvious, though his methods are different to the above: "Play offense -- In politics, as in sports, you're either on offense or you're on defense. Be on offense. This is a simple maxim, but one too often neglected. He who initiates sets the terms of debate and forces the dialogue on his terms." GOP, play offense in Obama's second term - CNN.com
Related news story from Cameron Diaz led 'cannibal cop' to dark fantasies -
A New York policeman dubbed the "cannibal cop" was inspired to explore dark areas of sexuality after seeing a bondage scene with Cameron Diaz in the movie "The Mask".
Gilberto Valle was a high school student when he first saw the 1994 movie scene and was so aroused by it that he began looking at pornographic internet sites and bondage images, his lawyer Julia Gatto said.
Mr Valle was arrested in October and accused of plotting to kidnap, rape, cook and eat several women, NY Daily News reports.
The police officer's fantasies of abducting and tying up women "appeared to have originated" with the “Mask” scene in which Cameron Diaz is abducted and bound, Ms Gatto said in court papers filed today.
Ms Gatto said her client had told his psychiatrist, Park Dietz, that his interest in cannibalism did not develop until he saw a roommate's pornographic DVDs while at college.
Those DVDs led him to darker websites that were his “gateway into cannibalism pornography", she said.
Mr Valle is accused of boasting on online forums about his plans to kidnap, kill and eat New York women. But Ms Gatto will argue that he never planned to act on his fantasies and was just playing them out online.
While it has been often suggested that violent moves, music, now games may be what pushes some over the edge, I want to suggest an alternative perspective.
First, I'd like to disclaim that no matter what we do, I think some people will still commit violence both on a small and large scale. It's just always going to be a statistical possibility and with so many people in the world, it is going to happen. Always. The best we can do in those cases is to protect ourselves the best we can and contain the damage.
But I think it is possible to reduce violence, not just here in the US, but everywhere and using the same simple concept. Basically the idea is you reduce violence by making people not want to commit violence.
No, that isn't a joke. So, how do you do that? First, we have to get a feel for why people feel the need to burn the world down.
My take on it is that our society is like a pressure cooker and emotional blender all wrapped into one. We have too much expectation, too much stress, too much uncertainty, too little control over our lives and too little purpose in our lives.
A lot of people committing these atrocities are young. This pressure-cooker-blender world is the one they are entering. And for some, it is just too much, especially combined with hormones, maybe bad parents or a bad relationship, whatever.
If you put everyone in a pressure cooker, some will fail. Some violently so. We need to turn down the pressure. Make the world small, but not small minded. We need to get perspective and we need to create economic stability and safety. We need to provide opportunity an purpose.
We need our young people to have a relatively safe world -- economically and socially. We need to provide the opportunities for them to have purpose.
But you can't legislate yourself into a healthy society. You can't mandate it. You have to provide the circumstances and lead.
Just a little thought. Kennedy challenged us to go to the moon. We did it. I submit we need a new challenge and I'll even offer one. US energy independence by 2023 and US 80% powered by clean energy by 2043.
It doesn't matter if you believe in global warming or not. It would be good for our country not to be beholden to other countries. It would ensure jobs for the foreseeable future. It would provide purpose. Something we are all working towards.
And... having cheap and plentiful power will provide new opportunities we just can't envision now.
A vision, a purpose, security. We'll all benefit.
Instead of focusing on what we differ on, let's find the common win and build a happier society.
Last edited by bzdog; January 31st, 2013 at 01:10 PM.
up, down, left, right, A, B, A, B, select, start. Name the game and what the code does. I grew up on this game and I dont run around like I got 30 lives. Ok, thats the first hint. But in all seriousness, its difficult not to take a reactionary stance when the other side paints us to like knuckle dragging sociopaths who subscribe to a doctrine written out by a bunch of racist slave owners. The best we can do is try to open dialogue between ourselves and those who are on the fence about gun rights.
I was at Starbucks the other day when I over heard a group of ladies talking about gun rights. One was for it, one was on the fence and the other three may have been related to Joy Behar. I joined them in conversation and I played my cards right, at the end of the talk the three dissenters still hated me, only because ran circles around them in logic and the one on the fence sided with me. What was most important that I put a lasting image in their heads of normal (depends on who you ask) upstanding citizen who chose to exercise his rights. The problem is not us, we got all our ducks in row. This fight was started by elitist mentalities who see us as "feral humans"-I made that up not long ago, its mine, you cant have it-who reuse to go along with the program being set for the rest of the country. Guns are the last step in crushing dissenting opinions. We cant just abandon who we are because of a need to placate liberals and hope they have mercy on our rights. If you think thats how this is going to be resolved, then you might as well get in line for the gun buy-back.
Speaking of which, the next time there's a buy back in Minneapolis, Im open carrying with my AR slung on my back, and Im telling them, "oh, Im only turning in my old Henry .22 because nobody else is stupid enough to pay me $200 for it. Im keeping all these"
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.--->Herbert Spencer
Springfield xd 45, Sig Sauer SP2022(9mm),Remington 700(.308), Yugo M10 variant w/IZH Kobra optic,...and lots of ammo for all of 'em.
Seriously, guys. You know how much you hate it when people blame guns for violent crimes? Don't be that guy. Don't blame video games, movies, books, and music for the actions of psychopaths and sociopaths. If we really want, we could correlate just about anything. Correlation is NOT causation. I'm sure I could correlate Sesame Street to causing kids to be a violent sociopath just as easily as I could correlate violent video games. Don't buy into the propaganda.
But yes we need to stop trying to push blame elsewhere. This is just like people who won't care about an awb because they only have a couple revolvers and a shotgun. Doesn't affect them so they just say "go bother that guy".
Sent via telepathy on a Galaxy S3
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Laws are restrictive but sometimes necessary to maintain a civil society. Rights are nonrestrictive but are always necessary to maintain a free society.
This comment above "Basically the idea is you reduce violence by making people not want to commit violence" is on point, whether or not the poster meant it the way I'm taking it. Violent video games, and violent films, create a notion that violence is a real choice within a lifestyle. It's why, for example, suicide can be "catching" within a family: once it has entered the consciousness of a family, it moves from being unimaginable to a choice, like being the first to go to uni, so the rest of the family assumes they will go, too.
My point is not about shifting blame, so that we know who to punish; it's about knowing what we can control, so we know how to prevent.
If walking down a dark alley is dangerous, there are several things I could do: organise that the local council install lighting in the alley, for example. Or I could work with local law enforcement to eliminate drug dealing, so that the dangerous part of the dark alley isn't even there. But in the meantime, I stay out of dark alleys, because THAT'S the part I can control.
I have a healthy fear of sharks, and here in Oz "death by shark" is fairly common among surfers. How do I deal with that? By "blaming" the shark? No. By "banning" the shark? No. I stay the hell out of the waters off Western Australia. I understand that "blame" isn't relevant; it's eliminating opportunity, which is the part I can control.
I've been a Reacher book fan since 2010 but when I saw that they'd chosen "One Shot" for the first film I was aghast; especially when the school shooting took place. So aghast that at that point I wrote to NRA urging them to focus on the film's negative impact on society with its putative mass shooting of innocents (which turns out to be a masking of the assassination of a single member). It even has a scene involving a celebrated sniper at a rifle range, much like the one who was just murdered.
So I was pleased to see that the public voted with their feet on this film, perhaps (I like to think) smart enough to realise that this is not "entertainment":
Fighting for a franchise: Poor box office results mean ?Jack Reacher? sequel not likely to happen | Wide Screen - Yahoo! Movies Canada
With the books I could skip over the truly repulsive parts; with a film it's all in our faces.