Another school shooting in the US

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 14:31

Like Bill Maher said, today's government have nuclear wepons, F22 fighter jets, laser guided missiles etc. Jeez they'll have laser guns soon if reports are to be believed.

I somewhat doubt 'Vern & Earl' are going to be able to take over the government with their shotguns.

cymatty · 15 Dec 2012 at 14:38

estebanrey said:
Like Bill Maher said, today's government have nuclear wepons, F22 fighter jets, laser guided missiles etc. Jeez they'll have laser guns soon if reports are to be believed.

I somewhat doubt 'Vern & Earl' are going to be able to take over the government with their shotguns.

You presume that they would need to defeat the entire military and that the military would wholly side with the government. The military is only 3m in number including reserves whilst there are 73m men between 18-49. The best weapons do not always win, you only need to look at vietnam or Afghanistan to prove that.

LOAM · 15 Dec 2012 at 14:42

They should start by restricting ammunition sale, the fact that you can buy unlimited rounds from a supermarket is quite litteraly insane. I can't see any change ever happening though due to the way state law works and they will never change gun mentality in states like Texas, its just not ever going to happen.

Sankari · 15 Dec 2012 at 14:53

cymatty said:
You presume that they would need to defeat the entire military and that the military would wholly side with the government.

No such assumptions are required.

The military is only 3m in number including reserves whilst there are 73m men between 18-49.

You presume that every single one of these males would be armed, competent, and prepared to fight. That's a poor assumption.

Incidentally, a bomber can kill literally thousands of people in less than 30 seconds. Jed, Seth, Hoss and Jim-Bob will find their hunting rifles aren't quite so effective.

The best weapons do not always win, you only need to look at vietnam or Afghanistan to prove that.

The USA is not Vietnam or Afghanistan.

In order to make any kind of headway the hypothetical American revolutionaries would need to adopt the same tactics used by the Taliban and foreign insurgents (e.g. IEDs, targeting civilians, etc.) This would quickly turn public and international sentiment against them. That's a fast track to failure right there.

hurfdurf · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:00

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/AnderN/2011/AnderN20110112_low.jpg

No hotlinked images. Thank you.

Allnamestaken · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:03

Fluttershy said:
LOL

http://www.facebook.com/masseffect?fref=ts

HAHA The Mass effect supporters are OWNING them aswell.

cymatty · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:04

Evangelion said:
No such assumptions are required.

You presume that every single one of these males would be armed, competent, and prepared to fight. That's a poor assumption.

I would like to bet that a large proportion of the military are the Jed seth etc that you comment on, and that theses people would more than likely side with the people and be trained and prepared to fight

Evangelion said:
The USA is not Vietnam or Afghanistan.

In order to make any kind of headway the hypothetical American revolutionaries would need to adopt the same tactics used by the Taliban and foreign insurgents (e.g. IEDs, targeting civilians, etc.) This would quickly turn public and international sentiment against them. That's a fast track to failure right there.

And you think when the army started shooting its own people that this would not lead to an international sentiment downturn or solidify the peoples will to remove the government?

kwerk · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:08

estebanrey said:
Like Bill Maher said, today's government have nuclear wepons, F22 fighter jets, laser guided missiles etc. Jeez they'll have laser guns soon if reports are to be believed.

I somewhat doubt 'Vern & Earl' are going to be able to take over the government with their shotguns.

Worked alright for sinn fein.

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:24

kwerk said:
Worked alright for sinn fein.

Did it? Last time I checked Northern Ireland was still part of the UK.

Besides you can't really compare a campaign of terrorism in order to secure an offshore [to GB] territory to a civil uprising/war.

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:33

cymatty · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:41

estebanrey said:
Hmm seems someone (from the NRA I suspect) has edited the wiki page for school shootings...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Notable_school_shootings

Now there is a shorter list than Europe for 'notable school shootings'. Last night the Norther America list was huge! I wondered who's been playing with it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:43

Yeah cymatty just noticed that, they've given it it's own page now!

Says it all.

Third Opinion · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:46

estebanrey said:

Truly shocking when you put it in perspective. Ok you can take population into account but it is still a horrific figure.

Twirlywoos · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:49

As they say "same **** different day"

Also there is no point having a discussion as it's all been said before.

Lunatic Dreyfus · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:55

Nowt will change. The American's will hold on to "Muh freedoms" no matter how many kids get blown away.

Laughable really.

Dist · 15 Dec 2012 at 15:57

I'm still in the middle of the article http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/ but it does look like the guy has researched it a bit.

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 16:15

Dist said:

I don't understand this? The wording looks like it is saying that 18.25 people are killed when arrested by the police (over what time frame I don't know as it's not mentioned) and 2.2 people are killed when 'stopped by civilians' (as in citizens arrests?)

Also what country or countries are these figures from?

Gideon Lorr · 15 Dec 2012 at 16:20

norm said:

I think of that video every time one of these horrific incidents occurs.

The US networks have a lot of gall to be interviewing children from the school at the centre of this. Anything for breaking news though, right?

Dist · 15 Dec 2012 at 16:25

estebanrey said:
I don't understand this? The wording looks like it is saying that 18.25 people are killed when arrested by the police (over what time frame I don't know as it's not mentioned) and 2.2 people are killed when 'stopped by civilians' (as in citizens arrests?)

Also what country or countries are these figures from?

Looking at the data in the linked article, it seems to be all in the US. When there is a mass shooting the the police have to take time to arrive and then either try to negotiate a surrender or have to kill the person then 18.25 people are killed on average, but when a civilian tackles the gunman to the ground or they are armed themselves and can shoot back only 2.2 people are killed on average. read the article to see where the statistics are obtained from.

estebanrey · 15 Dec 2012 at 16:25

I have an overnight solution to this which circumvents the 2nd amendment issue...

Stop selling bullets.

The constitution said they had the right to bear arms, it did not say they had the right to bear the gunpowder to go with it, or bullets which are the modern day equivalent.

Another school shooting in the US

Wise Guy