xaeris
Apprentice of Rant
Posts: 462
|
Post by xaeris on Jan 12, 2013 13:18:27 GMT
@cheryl: Throwing around the language certainly doesn't make you look any better, especially not when it is every-other-word. It makes you look more like some highschooler who just recently discovered the "big kid" words. jingles: I was starting to like what you were saying until you started accusing people of "not caring" about the CT massacre and such. That's going a bit too far. I understand that gun control and gun ownership are both passionate hot subjects, but are personal attacks REALLY necessary to discuss the topic? I honestly don't think so, IMO. This is the type of arguing you see on Fox News, O'Reilly, etc. You don't want to be like THOSE guys, do you? |
|
|
|
Post by jingles on Jan 12, 2013 14:31:10 GMT
@cheryl: I was starting to like what you were saying until you started accusing people of "not caring" about the CT massacre and such. That's going a bit too far. you know why I believe that ? Because most if not all of their proposals have zero to do with keeping guns out of the hands of criminal and everything to do with making it more difficult and expensive for law abiding citizens to own a gun They also express zero interest in finding out why this surge in rampage killings in the last few years and scream increased gun regs ignoring that this phenomena was relatively unknown prior to 1980 and even back in the early 60's and 50's when gun laws could be counted on one hand. Sorry but using these kids deaths to promote a political ideology is shameful while ignoring what needs to be done is finding out why and stopping the people who wan to go out and kill large numbers of innocent people for their claim to fame. Will anything come out of this to help the mentally ill who do these things and prevent them from doing it in the future? I doubt it unless Obama sees a photo op in it. All he and the libs who support him are interested in are their political ideologies and using this as a chance to get their political power increased Nothing will be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminal simply becasue that is not their goal and they will over reach instead of making proposals which both sides could agree on such as better background checks and enforcing the laws already on the books |
|
xaeris
Apprentice of Rant
Posts: 462
|
Post by xaeris on Jan 12, 2013 15:02:42 GMT
@cheryl: I was starting to like what you were saying until you started accusing people of "not caring" about the CT massacre and such. That's going a bit too far. you know why I believe that ? Because most if not all of their proposals have zero to do with keeping guns out of the hands of criminal and everything to do with making it more difficult and expensive for law abiding citizens to own a gun They also express zero interest in finding out why this surge in rampage killings in the last few years and scream increased gun regs ignoring that this phenomena was relatively unknown prior to 1980 and even back in the early 60's and 50's when gun laws could be counted on one hand. Sorry but using these kids deaths to promote a political ideology is shameful while ignoring what needs to be done is finding out why and stopping the people who wan to go out and kill large numbers of innocent people for their claim to fame. Will anything come out of this to help the mentally ill who do these things and prevent them from doing it in the future? I doubt it unless Obama sees a photo op in it. All he and the libs who support him are interested in are their political ideologies and using this as a chance to get their political power increased Nothing will be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminal simply becasue that is not their goal and they will over reach instead of making proposals which both sides could agree on such as better background checks and enforcing the laws already on the books I think everyone posting in this thread wants the same outcome: They want gun violence to stop. However, we are disagreeing on how exactly to bring this outcome to reality. Obviously, your views are different than Cheryl's, and Cheryl's are different from yours. But I think that essentially, you both want the same thing to happen. You both want to get to Point B, but neither of you can agree whether you take Road #1 or Road #2. The sad truth of it is, it simply isn't possible to stop gun violence. The best we can do, is curb/lessen it as best we can. And I can't help but to admit that making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to get/use guns for their own protection is the worst possible way to try to do this, as it doesn't really solve the real problem: Nutjobs/Criminals getting guns. Yes, we need to figure out why people want to do this sort of thing in the first place and try to put a stop to that, OR, detain mentally insane people instead of letting them walk around amongst the public where they can do some real damage. Yes, we need to find ways to allow law-abiding citizens to have guns and make it harder for criminals/whackos to get them. All of that is very true. However, claiming that any sane/normal/decent person is willfully using such a horrendous tragedy as a means/excuse/whatever to further their own agenda is a bit preposterous. It is just as preposterous as saying that they don't "care" about such a tragedy. |
|
|
|
Post by jingles on Jan 12, 2013 15:10:27 GMT
However, claiming that any sane/normal/decent person is willfully using such a horrendous tragedy as a means/excuse/whatever to further their own agenda is a bit preposterous. It is just as preposterous as saying that they don't "care" about such a tragedy. Just my opinion but seems like they are wasted no time firing up the music to dance in the blood chanting no guns while ignoring that these incidents have steadily increased along with increased gun regulation |
|
xaeris
Apprentice of Rant
Posts: 462
|
Post by xaeris on Jan 12, 2013 15:18:59 GMT
However, claiming that any sane/normal/decent person is willfully using such a horrendous tragedy as a means/excuse/whatever to further their own agenda is a bit preposterous. It is just as preposterous as saying that they don't "care" about such a tragedy. Just my opinion but seems like they are wasted no time firing up the music to dance in the blood chanting no guns while ignoring that these incidents have steadily increased along with increased gun regulation Well, obviously, when a horrible event like this happens, their first thought would naturally be "OMG WE MUST STOP THIS! THIS IS TERRIBLE!" and they're right. We DO need to act. However... they seem to think that attaching all kinds of gun laws is suddenly going to stop criminals from using guns they already have, or illegally obtaining guns, or any of the other myriad of issues involved with this. That doesn't mean, however, that they're in this solely to push their agenda. I mean, let's use some common sense here: What do they have gain by pushing anti-gun rhetoric? They don't gain anything at all. They're simply speaking their mind (something we all have a right to do, well, until the government takes that away) about how they think is the best way to solve the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by sheral on Jan 12, 2013 16:28:07 GMT
@cheryl: Throwing around the language certainly doesn't make you look any better, especially not when it is every-other-word. It makes you look more like some highschooler who just recently discovered the "big kid" words. . When I'm annoyed, I use words like fuck. It's something I've done all my life and I'm not going to censor myself for people who are sensitive to those words, unless I'm around children, and if people are letting their kids read this board, that's their fault, not mine. Perhaps I used a few more than I usually would, but tell me, how would you react to some moron who accused you of being glad that those poor little kids were dead? It has nothing to do with maturity or intelligence. This is a rants forum. People rant. I didn't swear before because we were having a discussion. But instead of attacking my ideas, mr shortbus over there decided to attack me. And yes, I let some shmuck on the internet piss me off and I unloaded that anger on him. It happens. I got it out of my system and promptly got over it. As for the rest of what he was saying, well if he sticks around you're going to have to get used to it, because this is how he 'discusses' things and this is how he reacts to people who don't agree with everything he says. He doesn't try to explain why he thinks you're wrong, he just tries to make out that you're what's wrong with society. It has to do with him having the brain of a retarded chimp. |
|
|
|
Post by sheral on Jan 12, 2013 16:45:42 GMT
I see you have drank the liberal kool aid on the "gun culture" Cheryl and are regurgitating the rhetoric. That would be funny if it weren't so tragically ironic. Because as I read what you're saying to me all I can think is that you're channelling Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. It has nothing to do with politics. I am neither a liberal or a republican. However, my dislike of guns comes from me, not my politics. My husband's family like to go out hunting. I have no problem with that, don't dislike them for that and I don't even mind when my husband goes with them. I won't pick up a gun, ever, but that's my decision. All I'm doing in this thread is giving my opinions. My opinions won't change anything. I don't have an agenda. I don't want to take your precious. What I want to do is make it less easy for your precious to get into the hands of people who use it for evil. What's so wrong with that? The insurance idea started half in jest. It came from the repetition throughout this thread of the mantra 'cars kill more people than guns do'. Which is true, but you have to take a test to drive a car, and you have to have insurance. And a car wasn't designed for killing, it's just a side-effect. You have none of that with guns. Show me where I mentioned nazis, fuckwit. Are you talking to yourself again? Because that's pretty much what you're doing. You're the one bringing politics into this. You're the one who doesn't give a shit about those kids, because you're the one who isn't willing to discuss any kind of compromise or solution, you're just flinging out personal insults and Godwinisms. And it's no use telling me you hope I burn in a place that doesn't exist. Idiot. |
|
|
|
Post by jingles on Jan 12, 2013 18:04:22 GMT
Just for the record for the most part I dislike Glen Beck and Rush limbaugh and can count the minutes I have listened to either one of their shows during the last 10 years on two hands a nd have a finger or two to spare but what the fuck even if I did I could accuser you of channeling the MSNBC nutballs
What I want to do is find out and stop the violence...period . The violence that is committed with guns, knives , fists and now even subway trains. I am also in 100 % agreement that we need to keep guns out off the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. However that being said we have to tread a fine line between adequate checks and infringing on the peoples rights. I am sure that if this conversation was about making someone indergo a menatl stability check before being allowed to play a violent video game a lot of people here would be screaming their heads off. Keep in mind the old "first they came for the Jews" saying
Don't know about when and where you went to school Cheryl but where I grew up bulling was daily part of school life. Bug difference was we knew life was not fair unlike today where even the last place loser in the spelling bee gets a trophy. Sorry but life ain't fair, there are going to be strong people and weak people, smart people and dumb people, people whose parents have money and people who were born poor. Most of us fall in the middle of the curve on most aspects and just play the cards that are dealt to us.
I swear if I had to point to one thing that has started this slide down hill it would be the TV Show mash and the portrayal of Alan Alda as the example of what the average man in America is supposed to be like. In other words the feminine metro sexual guy who is so into touch with his inner wimp.
Anyway most of these kids and people who have committed these rampage killings have one thing in common over the years, they feel inadequate and powerless so they attack those who made them feel inadequate and powerless. Not being a psychologist, sociologist or any other type of "ologist" what can be done to address this.
My suggestions for curbing gun violence is simple though, 100% background checks and enforcement of the laws already present. Holding people responsible for their actions and shutting the revolving door on our justice system. I would be perfectly at ease if their was a automatic death penalty for anyone using a gun or other deadly weapon in a crime instead of the "poor soul it wasn't his fault" he was born poor/black/ brown/ small/ etc.
Now while I seriously doubt the video game violent movie connection I did get a kick out of Biden this morning on the video game/entertainment meeting when he stated that the president had no legal authority to enact any laws or regulations pertaining to the entertainment industry. Interesting since Biden feels Obama does have the authority to fuck with the Constitution. Just ihis authority just hinges ion who is donating to his re election funds
BTW Cheryl on these hate propaganda , ever hear of those little groups like the Nazi Party, the KKK, The John Birch Society, the Black Panthers, the Weathermen and others that were around long before the internet or even ARPANET.
BTW Hell does not have to be lake of fire as described in the Bible, it could be a state of consciousness where you reflect on your actions in life after you shed the confines of your physical body. Something to consider when you spread your hate and lies
|
|
|
|
Post by sheral on Jan 12, 2013 18:37:40 GMT
Again, threatening someone who doesn't believe in an afterlife with hell, in any form, is a bit pointless. It has the same effect as telling me Santa is going to give me coal.
And you brought the hate and the lies first, Akuma. Now you have to deal with the consequences of that, which is the fact that I now believe you are exactly like all the propaganda says you are, because you have shown yourself to be so.
I don't take propaganda seriously, from either side, but you are a prime example of the stereotypical right-wing, white Christian male bully. I wouldn't be surprised if you were racist and homophobic too, judging by the drivel you posted above. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then yes, it probably is a duck, right? Don't want people to think of you that way? Don't act like it.
For the record, before anyone else here takes offence to what I've said. I don't think all white Christian men are bullies, nor do I think all conservatives are bigoted or gun-happy. I also don't think all gun owners are any of those things, or that home schooled people are retarded. Even though most of the home-schoolers I know are evolution deniers who fail at basic spelling and who are, you know, passing that illterate nonsense onto their kids. It still doesn't mean I think all homeschoolers are like that. When I said those things to Akuma here, I was talking about him and those like him, who seek to shut down any opposition to their view by othering those who disagree. It's a typical bullying tactic.
|
|
|
|
Post by jingles on Jan 12, 2013 21:46:23 GMT
you just proved you know nothing about me at all but that's ok. I would not want to shatter your prejudices. Suffice to say I am a libertarian and intrigued by the Tao and Sikh religions My impression of you is that you are just a sheep who has never had a original thought in her life, who feels like her her every problem is someone's fault other than yourself, has no self confidence, was probably the fat ugly chick in school and is now determined to get back at a ll the cool kids that picked on her. all or none of the above may or may not be true however from my experience with progressive liberals I would say at least 2 or 3 of the above are dead on the money as far as your religious beliefs I could really give a shit what you believe in or do not believe in and I am not even sure why you keep dragging it into the conversation. I do feel sorry for you though if you really think death is the end of your life energy ior soul or whatever term you choose to use or not us. No wonder you seem so unhappy. Edit and offtopic but remembered a article I read some time back on happiness www.nytimes.com/2012/07/08/opinion/sunday/conservatives-are-happier-and-extremists-are-happiest-of-all.html?_r=3&anyway back to topic bottom line is this we have a second amendment for a reason and Obama was not elected king, if he tries to overreach the consequences could be devastating for all of us. This country may not mean shit to you but I for one don't want to see it ripped apart. Just sayin this could destroy the USA as we know it. Sometime I wonder if that is not the plan though.... |
|
|
|
Post by sheral on Jan 12, 2013 22:08:25 GMT
you just proved you know nothing about me at all but that's ok. I would not want to shatter your prejudices It's nothing to do with prejudice, it's to do with the vile, hate-filled crap you've written in every post in this thread. That's where my opinion comes from. Since I don't have anything to do with guns, or violence, I'm pretty sure none of what we're talking about is my fault. However, get it right. I was the skinny chick with no boobs, who got on just as well with the cool kids as I did with the nerds. It was the bullies I couldn't stand, and I stood up to them then, just like I'm standing up to you now. And for the umpteenth time. I'm not a liberal. I've never voted liberal. I have no political affiliation whatsoever. I've yet to find a politician who isn't a lying sack of shit in any party. So, again, fuck you with your liberal bullshit. You were the one who brought religion into the conversation, twice, by talking about hell. Or don't you remember the crap that comes out of your brain? Don't feel sorry for me. I enjoy my life for what it is. It's much better, IMO than wasting it waiting for some imaginary world to come after I die. When you believe this is the only life you have, you make the most of it. You should try it sometimes instead of wallowing in your 'everybody's out to get me' shit. See what I mean. Paranoid conspiracy theory bullshit. If anything's going to destroy the USA it's the hatred people like you are spewing. |
|
|
|
Post by jingles on Jan 14, 2013 8:24:39 GMT
Fuck you. You ignorant, stupid dumbassed fuck. If you think that I was anything less than heartbroken by the fact that those kids died you can just go and fuck yourself with your stupid fucking guns. How many fucking times do I have to fucking say that I don't fucking want to take your fucking guns away before it gets through to your shrivelled, addled little oxygen-starved fucking brain, fuckwit? Here's a solution I know you'll love: let's have barbed wire and armed guards in schools instead, so you can protect their 'freedoms'. What a fucking joke. I'm done. Talking any kind of sense to your kind is like pissing in the wind. Dumb fucking cunt. vile hate filled crap ? try looking in the mirror |
|
|
|
Post by FrithRae on Jan 14, 2013 20:36:34 GMT
well..we were having a good discussion...
|
|
|
|
Post by tantalyr on Jan 14, 2013 20:46:13 GMT
Getting back to the queries in my original post, a couple of questions (directed mostly to Frith given her expertise) . . . .
The legal definition of insanity is as simple as it is old--the inability to determine that one's conduct is wrong. Is there an accepted clinical definition of insanity? If so, what is that definition?
Are there any genetic markers or other physical clues that can be examined to determine whether or not someone may be prone to bouts of insanity in the future?
|
|
|
|
Post by FrithRae on Jan 14, 2013 21:07:14 GMT
Hrm tough one..
There is no clinical definition of insanity because its totally not a psychological term - it is, as you know, a purely legal term. There is no "insanity" diagnosis or state of being we can give someone.
Clinically, we just have various diagnosis and IQ determinations. Having problems determining right from wrong could fall into a pretty good number of diagnosis - including things like moderate or more mental retardation, active psychosis/schizophrenic states, and perhaps some personality disorders (like Antisocial which would be the one a criminal would have...).
As for genetic markers or physical clues; that's where things are up in the air right now. Genetics gives the predesposition or "odds" of you developing something, but environment is normally decided as the determining factor of expression of ones' genes. Same with physical clues.
So granted, while early studies have shown say the pre-frontal cortex development/damage is there for serial killers and a few other classes of criminals; you can no way show a causality wiht it. Because there are plenty of people who have similiar lack of development/damage in that area of hte brain who don't go out killing and being violent.
Right now, with the state of our technology -we're just not that good. It would be a huge slippery slope that we would be very much premature in inacting if we say, tried to predict or ban or bar or make rules for people who have XYZ genetic profile or XYZ brain/chemical problems. Much like the enforced sterilization of the 40s-60s of MR or people with certain diagnosis; it would just be a bad idea and making a huge leap off of a baby science.
Right now, if I'm called on to make an assessment of the potential of violence - I have to assess mood, mental state, how the person feels about violence, etc. and even then whatever opinion I give is heavily weighted in the "I just met witih this person for an hour, this could be wrong" opinion.
The best predictor we have right now of future behavior, is past behavior. Not necesarily directly "a mass murderer can't be predicted if he hasn't mass murdered before"; but more of a "has this person shown problems with judgement int he past - has this person shown a perchance for any acting out behavior before, any narcissim or lack of empathy?"
Its getting people to REALLY pay attention to that "past behavior" that is the catch here, IMO.
There was a show this weekend on Animal planet that talked a lot about the first kills of several serial killers; having to do with animal abuse and torture. Law enforcement at th eend talked about how the shift of awareness of just how serious animal abuse is now taken (as opposed to the past) in identifying people who have serious mental health, and possibily violent, tendences and issues. Its no longer just a "oh he fried a cat we fine him and let him go" but now police in even backwater parts of the country identify and target people who are involved in animal abuse/death as people to keep an eye on - to get mental health assessments - and treated as the serious marker that it can be.
That's an example I think of what needs to happen on a national level in order to defend this country against such violence. On a National level where people raise their awareness of mental health issues in general; warning behaviors, etc. So that people aren't just looking away and not paying attention. Much as what was done on child abuse in the 80s with the stars coming out; the same would have to happen here for warning-signs-of-violence and seriousl mental illness for this to start to really make a difference. I think.
|
|
