Shooting at Virginia Tech

[Aliantha]

I heard a humorous send up of the 'gun crisis' in the US at the moment on a local radio station the other day. They were generally discussing it on a talk back station when one of the hosts popped up and said, "The answer to the gun crisis in America is more guns".

I thought this was interesting. Not only because it was funny to hear at the time, but also because that seems to be the general concensus. Ironic really.

[freshnesschronic]

The general consensus (that's how we spell it in the States)? That's news to me.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by freshnesschronic

The general consensus (that's how we spell it in the States)? That's news to me.

Not only is it news, it is a stupid notion.

[Aliantha]

Well, gun proponents would have us believe we'd all be safer if we all had guns right? How many times in this thread alone have we seen the argument that if someone else had had a gun the VT shooting might not have occured or at least may have been minimized?

We don't need spelling nazi's here too do we? I think you got the idea didn't you?

[Kitsune]

That doesn't sound like the Chuck Norris I know, Spexxvet.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

That doesn't sound like the Chuck Norris I know, Spexxvet.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Add two guns, and the likelihood skyrockets.

This is the part where you are wrong.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

This is the part where you are wrong.

two people are packing guns, one is a criminal. Explain how the likelihood of death doesn't increase.

[piercehawkeye45]

I am curious to see your point too Clod.

If only one person has a gun, the person with the gun obviously has the power and as long as both parties cooperate and want to get out without anyone dead, nothing with happen.

If both people have guns, a power struggle will ensue. Most criminals are only stealing out of need and do not want to get hurt, so once they see a gun they may panic and attack if they have a weapon. That goes the other way too, if someone is being attacked they may jump the gun to early and one if not both could be killed.

[freshnesschronic]

If only one person has a gun, the person with the gun obviously has the power and as long as both parties cooperate and want to get out without anyone dead, nothing with happen.

If both people have guns, a power struggle will ensue. Most criminals are only stealing out of need and do not want to get hurt, so once they see a gun they may panic and attack if they have a weapon. That goes the other way too, if someone is being attacked they may jump the gun to early and one if not both could be killed.

Where did you get your expertise in the psychology of gunpoint scenarios?

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by freshnesschronic

Where did you get your expertise in the psychology of gunpoint scenarios?

Its common sense. If you put two people with guns in the same room and one threatens the other in a stressful situation, things will usually go downhill fast.

Originally Posted by clodfobble

bullshit

Yeah, all the guys in the projects steal from people for the fun of it. Then why do they steal if it isn't for need?

You misspelled "run." At least you got the "may" part right, since you don't have a goddamn idea what they may or may not do.

What was the point of that? Do you expect me to list all the options that are irrelevant to the point?

[wolf]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Yeah, all the guys in the projects steal from people for the fun of it. Then why do they steal if it isn't for need?

The "need" for money for crack or heroin or to establish primacy in a gang territory is not the same kind of "need" that Jean Valjean had when he stole the bread to feed his family.

[piercehawkeye45]

Wolf - I can't be certain but I think campuses do a lot more for student's safety in the past because I know for a fact there are more things you can do except learning how to disable someone with a gun or a knife. The number of crimes that could have been prevented with a gun is very low because of how college crime works. If you are trigger happy and paranoid the chances of shooting an innocent horny drunk teenager skyrockets since they will tend to violate people's privacy but not go far enough to actually hurt someone.

Originally Posted by wolf

The "need" for money for crack or heroin or to establish primacy in a gang territory is not the same kind of "need" that Jean Valjean had when he stole the bread to feed his family.

Yes, there is a difference but you can not assume that all the crime is from that.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

two people are packing guns, one is a criminal. Explain how the likelihood of death doesn't increase.

The criminal is a coward, and wasn't planning on (and isn't interested in) a fair fight.

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Most criminals are only stealing out of need

bullshit

and do not want to get hurt, so once they see a gun they may panic and attack if they have a weapon.

You misspelled "run." At least you got the "may" part right, since you don't have a goddamn idea what they may or may not do.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

The criminal is a coward, and wasn't planning on (and isn't interested in) a fair fight.
...

Unfair and cowardly would be to kill your opponent before they have a chance to shoot - as soon as you see the gun. Like I said, as soon as a second gun is introduced, likelihood of death shyrockets. You may be thinking like a rational, law-abiding citizen. As Jinx said, anything can happen.