Seven dead in Wisconsin after Deputy Sheriff opens fire.

[Chaossaber314]

And your point? Does he drop his "oath to support the Constitution" at the time the uniform comes off? Did you know Sheriffs take that oath to support the Constitution? How does this in ANY WAY affect the point I was making?

You're arguing that his career is the causal focal point of this incident that needs to be defended against and not his mental state. Anyone, doctor, piano teacher, carpenter, and yes even police officer can have a mental illness and if they are armed as we all have the right to do, they can become dangerous because of this illness. Not because of their career.

[ruksak]

To be fair, the kids were eating pizza and watching movies. Even if they were armed and trained, it would have made no difference in this particular case. They were ambushed.

That being said, kids are capable of defending themselves, and they have a right to do so. My eight year old daughter has a damn fine shot with her .22 Marlin rifle. I would think if she was a teen and at home alone and had the opportunity, she would be something to be dealt with.

[Osborn F Enready]

Chaos said: You're arguing that his career is the causal focal point of this incident that needs to be defended against and not his mental state.

Firstly, no, I am not.


One of the main reasons I started this thread, was to point out to some of the posters, not all people who wear a uniform are "protectors". I was pointing to the fact that ALL people are fallible, and can be overcome by, for lack of better words, issues, emotion, etc.

But, since you brought up that issue:
Without the career, would he have had "that" gun? Was it his duty gun?

Chaos said: Anyone, doctor, piano teacher, carpenter, and yes even police officer can have a mental illness and if they are armed as we all have the right to do, they can become dangerous because of this illness. Not because of their career.

So now, this is an illness?

[Osborn F Enready]

ruksak said: To be fair, the kids were eating pizza and watching movies. Even if they were armed and trained, it would have made no difference in this particular case. They were ambushed.

Well, I reserve the right to disagree.

Not all people pull their pants around their ankles when they relax, regarding defense, and trained people do it even less.

ruksak said: That being said, kids are capable of defending themselves, and they have a right to do so. My eight year old daughter has a damn fine shot with her .22 Marlin rifle. I would think if she was a teen and at home alone and had the opportunity, she would be something to be dealt with.

I don't doubt teens can defend themselves, if they have the opprotunity, and are brought up with that state of mind.

[ruksak]

Quote by: OZ Well, I reserve the right to disagree. Not all people pull their pants around their ankles when they relax, regarding defense, and trained people do it even less.

Well, I'm a "gun nut". I've carried a sidearm for 15 years. I shoot at a makeshift range almost weekly, and have for years and years. Avid hunter and all that jazz. However at home, I rarely keep a sidearm at arms length anywhere but in my bedroom.

Just saying, in this case specifically, they had no chance. For or against, I just don't see this as being in any way a gun control issue.

An unrelated story; several years ago I was taking a dump and heard my window break mid-terd. I hopped up and, well lets just say it was ugly. Turns out it was just a neighbor kids baseball. For months, I took my glock into the commode with me. Paranoid........

[Jack]

I hope you never invite me over to shoot the shit with you, 'cause I ain't comin'.

[ruksak]

Quote by: Isherwood I hope you never invite me over to shoot the shit with you, 'cause I ain't comin'.

The pun was inevitable.

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: Osborn One of the main reasons I started this thread, was to point out to some of the posters, not all people who wear a uniform are "protectors".

Which is irrelevant as he was not in uniform.

I was pointing to the fact that ALL people are fallible, and can be overcome by, for lack of better words, issues, emotion, etc.

Which ironically is also not a further argument for increased armament of the public.

But, since you brought up that issue: Without the career, would he have had "that" gun? Was it his duty gun?

As I already brought up. This man has no "duty gun" as he is not old enough.

So now, this is an illness?

Yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that if someone seemingly randomly kills off seven people, they are pretty much guaranteed to be mentally ill.

[ruksak]

Quote by: Chaossaber314 Yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that if someone seemingly randomly kills off seven people, they are pretty much guaranteed to be mentally ill.

Not necessarily.

People of sound mind can just "snap" and go all devil without prior notice. He was crazy for long enough to do this, but not in a clinical sense. Or at least I haven't seen any evidence of this. Lacking compassion and acting violently irrational in a fit of rage and passion, does not necessarily mean he had a clinical diagnosable mental illness.

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: ruksak Not necessarily. People of sound mind can just "snap" and go all devil without prior notice. He was crazy for long enough to do this, but not in a clinical sense. Or at least I haven't seen any evidence of this. Lacking compassion and acting violently irrational in a fit of rage and passion, does not necessarily mean he had a clinical diagnosable mental illness.

If someone "snaps" it's an indication of some form of repressed or deep seeded mental illness that has finally surfaced. Or at least that's what I gathered from my abnormal psych course last year.

I'm not saying that it's necessarily schizophrenia, but you don't have to be out of touch with reality in order to have something like Antisocial Personality Disorder.

[Zeebadee]

I can just see Oz eating pizza - a slice in one hand and his magnum, loaded and cocked, in the other. Which does he set down when he wants a sip of beer?

[BugsBunny07]

So was this 20 year old kid was totin a tool and shield? Thats interesting in itself...

This is a good illustration of the fact that nobody is 100% trustworthy. I believe this shows that just because you go to a police academy or military boot camp, does not make you "trustworthy" with a gun. It shoots down any logic for only letting the police and military have guns based on being "trustworthy".

I doubt the kids could have helped themselves, but if someone like me had been next door there probably would have been fewer casualties, and the shooter might have gone down a lot sooner.

In any case, this kid wins the award for biggest d-bag of the year, considering he apparently shot up a bunch of teenagers over a teenage girl and then shot it out with his own cop buddies. How big of a douche can you be?

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: BugsBunny07 I doubt the kids could have helped themselves, but if someone like me had been next door there probably would have been fewer casualties, and the shooter might have gone down a lot sooner.

Dream on, Sgt. York. I think the shooting would have been over before you could have even figured out where the shots were coming from. And if the shooter had anticipated your intervention and been waiting, you'd have been number 8.

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: BugsBunny07 So was this 20 year old kid was totin a tool and shield? Thats interesting in itself... This is a good illustration of the fact that nobody is 100% trustworthy. I believe this shows that just because you go to a police academy or military boot camp, does not make you "trustworthy" with a gun. It shoots down any logic for only letting the police and military have guns based on being "trustworthy". I doubt the kids could have helped themselves, but if someone like me had been next door there probably would have been fewer casualties, and the shooter might have gone down a lot sooner. In any case, this kid wins the award for biggest d-bag of the year, considering he apparently shot up a bunch of teenagers over a teenage girl and then shot it out with his own cop buddies. How big of a douche can you be?

As has already been established, he couldn't own a handgun legally anyway.

[donfie]

Because one cop killed some kids while off-duty, out of uniform, and illegally possessing a firearm, we should train kids to defend their homes with firearms just in case another off-duty, out of uniform, and illegal possessor of a firearm cop happens to go nuts one day. The kids need to learn how to outdraw trained cops for the eventual dual at High Noon. Does that approximate your point?

I think that's the nail on the head.

Arguing that removing guns solves anything, is just not in the realm of possible reality.

But arguing that everyone from kindergardeners to octaganarians have their own personal arsenal strapped to their sides and firearms training just after finger painting is?

Get a grip, pal.

[ruksak]

Quote by: Chaossaber314 If someone "snaps" it's an indication of some form of repressed or deep seeded mental illness that has finally surfaced. Or at least that's what I gathered from my abnormal psych course last year. I'm not saying that it's necessarily schizophrenia, but you don't have to be out of touch with reality in order to have something like Antisocial Personality Disorder.

According to psychiatrists, we are all mentally ill.

[Osborn F Enready]

Chaos said: Which is irrelevant as he was not in uniform.

Uh, didn't I make the point.

It doesn't matter if he was IN uniform when he went postal, he still wore one as a job, took the oath, and THAT was my point.

Chaos said: Which ironically is also not a further argument for increased armament of the public.

It is an argument that the nanny-staters who only want cops, military and national guardsmen to have guns, are using flawed logic.

NO person is 100% reliable, in ANY given circumstance.

Why trust others to protect you (which logically they couldn't unless they literally lived with you, and did everything with you) when it is much easier simply to take the training, purchase your own firearms, and ACCEPT the responsibility for yourself?

Chaos said: As I already brought up. This man has no "duty gun" as he is not old enough.

That has now been verified, that it wasn't a duty gun, saw it this morning.

Chaos said: Yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that if someone seemingly randomly kills off seven people, they are pretty much guaranteed to be mentally ill.

I disagree.

It may not be normal, but it doesn't mean there is evidence of mental illness.

Zee said: I can just see Oz eating pizza - a slice in one hand and his magnum, loaded and cocked, in the other. Which does he set down when he wants a sip of beer?

That is what I was talking about Zee, and why I am losing respect for you pal..... painting out of your imagination, attempting to marginalize and distract from the points being made.

Too bad.....

donfie said: But arguing that everyone from kindergardeners to octaganarians have their own personal arsenal strapped to their sides and firearms training just after finger painting is? Get a grip, pal.

Show me where I posted that donfie?

Can you please quote the words and post number from where I said exactly, verbatim, what you just typed?

I didn't say that donfie, and as many of the other anti-gunners, you are painting textual pictures from the dark corners of your imagination, trying to marginalize points you don't have answers for.

Nice attempt at debate shift, but obviously intellectually lacking.

[donfie]

Of course I can't state verbatim where you said that and it's a very weak attempt at debate on your part to say that only actual verbatim quotes can be used and not highlight of the inference.

You did say (in post #6)

Since I was 12 years old, I have had access to a loaded gun, and since I was about 8, I have known how to handle, maintain and properly use a gun. I can only wish more people would do the same, to prevent situations like this that happened in Wisconsin.

Ok. It wasn't kindergarden but, in the above, you have clearly stated that all 8 year olds should be trained to use a gun and that all 12 year olds should have access to one.

Stop badgering people about the way they debate things and talk about what they are saying.

You're not answering points or even debating. Your making statement after statement and discounting everything else anyone else says as "imagination".

If you want to make a statement and don't want people to debate it with you (in whatever style of debate they see fit) then go write a blog.

You won't allow anyone to use humour. No one can stretch a point to show the fundamental lunacy of the original.

But you can have it your way:

Shooting rampages plague America and DO NOT plague countries with strict gun control. That shows clearly that the argument in your post #31 is simply wrong (and I'll quote you so it meets your requirements):

Arguing that removing guns solves anything, is just not in the realm of possible reality.

Finally, I shall meet you on your high horse and ask you to answer some of the statements and questions that have been put to you or for the other side of the argument and that you have chosen to completely ignore:


1.

I know the police I have talked to have trouble even dealing with the concept of the naieve thinking "police are protectors", since they are not.

Then why is it their motto?

2.

Police, military, national guard, security personnel, private guards all carry guns, for a good reason.

They do not ALL carry guns in the UK which has a vastly lower gun crime rate than the US.

3.
Zeebadee (post #12)

You both seem to be making the point that these kids had no way to defend themselves. So how would they have, if they weren't armed themselves? Should all kids at these kind of parties be armed?

You nicely sidestepped this in your post where you suggested (twice) "A better question would be..." and "More importantly..."

You accuse everyone of not sticking to the point but you ignore what people say, or dismiss it because of the way it was phrased or because it had some humour in it or any other avoidance technique you can think of (marginalising, immagination, etc.) but you are more guilty of these things than anyone else here.

I don't want to get into a debate about how to debate but you started it.

[Osborn F Enready]

donfie said: Of course I can't state verbatim where you said that and it's a very weak attempt at debate on your part to say that only actual verbatim quotes can be used and not highlight of the inference.

I would agree it would be weak, if the inference you made WAS CORRECT, but it was not, hence my request for clarification.

donfie said: Ok. It wasn't kindergarden but, in the above, you have clearly stated that all 8 year olds should be trained to use a gun and that all 12 year olds should have access to one.

So, "wish" and "should" are interchangeable words to you?

I suggest you stick to what was said, and not tangle up the debate with misperceptions, that occur on your end.

donfie said: Stop badgering people about the way they debate things and talk about what they are saying.

LOL....

So, what are you "actually saying"?

donfie said: You're not answering points or even debating. Your making statement after statement and discounting everything else anyone else says as "imagination".

Please reference a post by number, and/or clarify which points I am not addressing, and I will be glad to address them.

donfie said: Shooting rampages plague America and DO NOT plague countries with strict gun control. That shows clearly that the argument in your post #31 is simply wrong (and I'll quote you so it meets your requirements):

That is laughable, has no concrete examples or cause and effect explanation, nor is it accurate.

Several nations that have "strict gun control" have mass shootings, and mass killings.

If you want to debate gun control, start a thread, and I will shred your arguments in your own thread for you, so you can set the debate.

donfie said: Then why is it their motto?

In some places, it still is, but in most places those words have been removed from their official documents, mottos, patrol cars, etc.

Do a little research, you will find out for yourself.

donfie said: They do not ALL carry guns in the UK which has a vastly lower gun crime rate than the US.

The UK also has less individual freedom than the U.S., which is one of a long list of reasons we REVOLTED using ARMS, FROM ENGLAND.

donfie said: You nicely sidestepped this in your post where you suggested (twice) "A better question would be..." and "More importantly..."

Thats because the question is bs, and made in the form of an "allegation", as if I said that. I didn't say that, or alledge that, so I didn't address that.

donfie said: You accuse everyone of not sticking to the point but you ignore what people say, or dismiss it because of the way it was phrased or because it had some humour in it or any other avoidance technique you can think of (marginalising, immagination, etc.) but you are more guilty of these things than anyone else here.

Really? Please, show me some examples.

donfie said: I don't want to get into a debate about how to debate but you started it.

I can finish it too, if you wish to continue.

[BugsBunny07]

Quote by: Zeebadee Dream on, Sgt. York. I think the shooting would have been over before you could have even figured out where the shots were coming from.

If gun shots are going off in your next door nieghbors house or yard, and you dont figure it out (a) its gun shots and (b) it's next door you either:

(a) are not familiar with the sound of gun fire
(b) have a serious inner ear problem and probably cant walk and chew bubble gum at the same time
(c) you have some serious loud stuff going on at your location
(d) you have thicker walls than Ive ever lived behind.

And if the shooter had anticipated your intervention and been waiting, you'd have been number 8.

I hate to get into hypatheticals here but if I anticipate someone giving me that sort of trouble I would eliminate them first. If someone other than a roommate comes barging in without knocking and waiting at the door, they will see the wrong end of gun before they see me. Plus, if it's a Sunday morning I'm sure I'll probably be in a pissy mood.