# Another School Shooting



## Saiyan Lusitano (May 1, 2019)

So this time it's at UNCC and I'm just speechless. This shit keeps happening but seems no one cares anymore and that it's "normal". No, banning guns wouldn't be the solution because crooks can buy them from back of a dudes van just as easily so.. more security? Wtf. Do something!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uncc-active-shooter-reported-today-live-updates-2019-04-30/

This is frustrating that innocent people keep dying and "life goes on" (as if).


----------



## Xzi (May 1, 2019)

Saiyan Lusitano said:


> No, banning guns wouldn't be the solution because crooks can buy them from back of a dudes van just as easily so.. more security? Wtf. Do something!


"Criminals would still get guns through obscure means, so we should just make sure the process stays easy for them instead."

We might as well open more gun shops near all school campuses if we're just gonna throw up our hands in resignation even before trying common-sense solutions.


----------



## Superbronx (May 1, 2019)

I'm very horrified this keeps happening. Eventually people are going to become desensitized.What's even more horrifying is I think all of these separate shootings are not random. I think they are all connected. Someone
behind the scenes is orchestrating all of this in an attempt to convince the public we will be safer if they take our guns away. It's all in an effort to disarm us and they don't care who has to die to achieve their objective. This all started long before the current administration took office.


----------



## Xzi (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> What's even more horrifying is I think all of these separate shootings are not random. I think they are all connected. Someone
> behind the scenes is orchestrating all of this in an attempt to convince the public we will be safer if they take our guns away. It's all in an effort to disarm us and they don't care who has to die to achieve their objective. This all started long before the current administration took office.


I don't mean to sound harsh, but a lot of these shooters probably believe the same things.  It's easy to justify atrocious acts in retaliation when you believe yourself the victim of some vast conspiracy.


----------



## Captain_N (May 1, 2019)

This has nothing to do with politics. These losers are mad because of some reason and they decide to take it out on others. There are many different reasons. Moat of them have shit upbringings. The decay of the nuclear family takes it toll. The only way to prevent such things is to have future knowledge. aka minority report.


----------



## Xzi (May 1, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> This has nothing to do with politics.


Well, this is also the 'current events' subforum, but saying all shootings have "nothing to do with politics" is disingenuous.  It's almost always motivated by an extremist-terrorist mindset, regardless of the shooter's skin color.  That mindset can be bred through religion, politics, the internet, a person's environment, or other factors, but white nationalism is undeniably playing an increasing role among those factors in America.  Calling out anyone who claims to be a socialist for committing violent acts is great, as long as you're willing to do it for the "other side" too, aka neo-nazi terrorists.


----------



## Superbronx (May 1, 2019)

Xzi said:


> I don't mean to sound harsh, but a lot of these shooters probably believe the same things.  It's easy to justify atrocious acts in retaliation when you believe yourself the victim of some vast conspiracy.


I respect your view on this and you make a valid point. I just wonder, if a man feels himself the victim of a huge conspiracy and it brings him to that point where he feels he has no alternative but to act, wouldn't his cause be better served to walk into a room full of men whom he feels may be responsible either directly or in directly and unload on them instead of a school full of innocent students?


----------



## Viri (May 1, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> This has nothing to do with politics. These losers are mad because of some reason and they decide to take it out on others. There are many different reasons. Moat of them have shit upbringings. The decay of the nuclear family takes it toll. The only way to prevent such things is to have future knowledge. aka minority report.


They want their 30 seconds of fame, and they get it.


----------



## lolboy (May 1, 2019)

What if we all moved to another planet and did not tell the bad guys? They would stay behind and finish off each other.


----------



## notimp (May 1, 2019)

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html

This is over a period of 10 years.

I'd say change your education systems, youth culture and ban automatic rifles. But thats just me.

The back of the truck guy, will have less available for 16 year old kids, if they are banned, because of supply and demand. But then you cant have your dudes riling up 300 mexicans at gunpoint at the border without any authority anymore - so, its up to you.

On the other hand, lets say those are 10 victims per school shooting on average, thats 300 victims a year. You could also say its negligent. Which is apparently what happened.

edit: Longer list:





edit:

9/11 btw was 3000 victims, and another one hasnt happened in 10 years, so...
Every year 100 americans are killed by bee stings - so thats your baseline. 

Fun with statistics..


----------



## VartioArtel (May 1, 2019)

Let's be real: there's no reason weapons should be so common place, especially anything more than a handgun.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The 2nd amendment doesn't specify anything more than the right to "Keep and Bear Arms". This is for the sake of a **well regulated militia**. But the word militia itself means basically "soldiers" from Latin when you go back far enough, but itself means "military".

Militia itself is defined as
"a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency."

Here's the thing: a Militia *has to be raised* from the civil population. What counts as a Militia officially? Well, using Wikipedia, sinful scourge as it is, which does provide a source for its choice of wording:

"Today, as defined by the Militia Act of 1903, the term "militia" is used to describe two classes within the United States:[8]


*Organized militia* – consisting of State militia forces; notably, the National Guard and Naval Militia.[9] (Note: the National Guard is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States.)
*Unorganized militia* – composing the Reserve Militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age, not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.[10]"

So what does this mean? Well, The only ORGANIZED militias (ergo as, quote unquote: "well regulated") are *State forces, IE: the National Guard*. As such the only groups that have a *right to bear arms* according to a very strict understanding of the law.

I understand that in the ratified version it lacked the , after "militia" and "arms". HOWEVER, this does nothing as it still clarifies it must be a "well regulated militia". To ignore the first two words I have quoted is to attempt to capitalize on a subsection for personal while ignoring the rest, as it ignores that a Militia IS the "people" upon which have the right to bear arms.

________________________________________________________

So now back to the point here. I don't know WHAT weapon this guy used, but the fact it was taken or obtained should be tracked down, the license revoked, and jail time, period.

If he used anything more than a pistol, it goes back to how I started. You do not need more than a handgun for self defense, and it is my personal belief that hunting weapons should be restricted to hunting organizations and carefully watched and managed by the government (seeing as wildlife management IS a national, if not international, issue to prevent overhunting).

________________________________________________________

I do honestly feel bad for all the families involved, but I won't deny I am indeed desensitized to the whole issue. It's stupidity. The only reason this keeps happening is greed, and pure stupidity. Stupidity of sellers not doing proper checks. And if they don't do any checks because they aren't mandated by law, they still deserve the flack. If the guy got it from his family, then it begs into question what's the point of a license if you could just hand it over. Etc etc. Ugh.


----------



## notimp (May 1, 2019)

edit: Context: https://www.esquire.com/entertainme...son-22-episode-1-review-school-shooting-stan/


----------



## arianadark (May 1, 2019)

A huge problem is that its way to easy to get guns illegally.


----------



## Xzi (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> I respect your view on this and you make a valid point. I just wonder, if a man feels himself the victim of a huge conspiracy and it brings him to that point where he feels he has no alternative but to act, wouldn't his cause be better served to walk into a room full of men whom he feels may be responsible either directly or in directly and unload on them instead of a school full of innocent students?


Paranoid/delusional minds don't typically work like that.  School shootings usually give the shooter the most infamy, and therefore they probably "strike the biggest blow" against the Illuminati/etc in their mind.  Or it's simply the best way to get noticed by the world in general.

It's a decay of America's education system coupled with a complete lack of effective mental health treatment systems in this country.  Add in high drug addiction rates, insanely high gun ownership, this is the result.


----------



## Superbronx (May 1, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Paranoid/delusional minds don't typically work like that.  School shootings usually give the shooter the most infamy, and therefore they probably "strike the biggest blow" against the Illuminati/etc in their mind.  Or it's simply the best way to get noticed by the world in general.
> 
> It's a decay of America's education system coupled with a complete lack of effective mental health treatment systems in this country.  Add in high drug addiction rates, insanely high gun ownership, this is the result.


I would like to add to that. It's also a moral decay. As America turns further away from the family, it also turns further away from stability. On average, children are not being brought up with wholesome values. I don't have any statistics but I think it would be safe to say that at least 75% of today's children lack the guidance and direction they require to become stable, functioning adults. They do not receive that guidance in a one parent household. If either the mother or the father are left alone to raise the child, that child grows up at a disadvantage. (A 50% deficit) Without a strong family, you begin to see your foundation erode until eventually the house crumbles.


----------



## AkGBA (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> I would like to add to that. It's also a moral decay. As America turns further away from the family, it also turns further away from stability. On average, children are not being brought up with wholesome values. I don't have any statistics but I think it would be safe to say that at least 75% of today's children lack the guidance and direction they require to become stable, functioning adults. They do not receive that guidance in a one parent household. If either the mother or the father are left alone to raise the child, that child grows up at a disadvantage. (A 50% deficit) Without a strong family, you begin to see your foundation erode until eventually the house crumbles.



So, divorced, gays, and immigrants families are the cause ?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

You know each other country in the list has as much of those ? Yet quite not the same amount of mass shootings.


----------



## Superbronx (May 1, 2019)

AkGBA said:


> So, divorced, gays, and immigrants families are the cause ?


Not speaking against any particular group that you listed other than divorcees as they are a single parent household and you can extend that to unwed mothers. Although they are not divorced they are still a single parent household.


----------



## notimp (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> I would like to add to that. It's also a moral decay. As America turns further away from the family, it also turns further away from stability. On average, children are not being brought up with wholesome values. I don't have any statistics but I think it would be safe to say that at least 75% of today's children lack the guidance and direction they require to become stable, functioning adults. They do not receive that guidance in a one parent household. If either the mother or the father are left alone to raise the child, that child grows up at a disadvantage. (A 50% deficit) Without a strong family, you begin to see your foundation erode until eventually the house crumbles.


Daddy, is it you?

This is an example of amazon 4/5 star'ism.
I've done it so/bought it. So it must be good. 4 stars.

(Here are some statistics on amazon reviews:





src: https://minimaxir.com/2014/06/reviewing-reviews/

The average product on Amazon is not a 5 star product. Yet half of the people on amazon believe it is, because they bought it. About 75% of people think every product is 4 or 5 stars - because they bought it.

There is a lesson in this about humanity and believes. )

Stability and attention mostly is enough. You dont have have to reproduce values, or give proper direction, thats just something you do.  Also americans are 144 times worse parents than canadians? Fun with statistics.  (edit: Oh, I understand, only some - are..  )


----------



## Clydefrosch (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> I would like to add to that. It's also a moral decay. As America turns further away from the family, it also turns further away from stability. On average, children are not being brought up with wholesome values. I don't have any statistics but I think it would be safe to say that at least 75% of today's children lack the guidance and direction they require to become stable, functioning adults. They do not receive that guidance in a one parent household. If either the mother or the father are left alone to raise the child, that child grows up at a disadvantage. (A 50% deficit) Without a strong family, you begin to see your foundation erode until eventually the house crumbles.



that nonsense is true in every other western nation and only your shithole has this stuff happen all the time.

also, what the fuck do you people think is the source of 'out of a van' blackmarket guns?
if you stop throwing guns out there like it's candies, you also stop the endless flow of weapons to the blackmarket. the second these supplies are limited, prices rise. and the higher those rise, the fewer 'crooks' get to just buy them.

stop acting like anything that wouldn't instantly stop any problem is no solution.


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 1, 2019)

Imagine a world where having police in schools was actually useful. Where they didn't beat up kids for being "disrespectful". Imagine a world where the supreme court hadn't ruled that police have no duty to protect anybody. A world where they didn't hide in their squad cars while a shooting was happening. Makes you wonder why they even exist besides to extort revenue from victimless crimes.

The government and regulations we have now are completely useless for everything, what makes anyone think that adding more will "totally work this time"?



VartioArtel said:


> So what does this mean? Well, The only ORGANIZED militias (ergo as, quote unquote: "well regulated") are *State forces, IE: the National Guard*. As such the only groups that have a *right to bear arms* according to a very strict understanding of the law.


If that were true, it would read the right if the militia to keep and vear arms, instead of the word people. Why would they have a different definition of people in one amendment than in the rest of the Constitution?


----------



## Hanafuda (May 1, 2019)

VartioArtel said:


> Let's be real: there's no reason weapons should be so common place, especially anything more than a handgun.



There were fewer gun control laws in the past, and these school shootings weren't happening then. At my highschool in the 80's, it was common to see several pickup trucks in the parking lot with rifles hung in the window. And school shootings weren't happening then. Columbine started this, and ever since it has become a thing created by media driven hysteria. More spotlight equals more copycats.

Understand I'm not talking about "gun crime" generally. Gun crime in the US was worse in the past. Worse in the 60's and the 90's in particular. I'm only talking about "school shootings" as a phenomenon. The guns have always been around. Criminals have always been around. But juveniles with murderous intent willing to shoot up a school full of innocents is a fairly new thing.




> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
> 
> The 2nd amendment doesn't specify anything more than the right to "Keep and Bear Arms". This is for the sake of a **well regulated militia**. But the word militia itself means basically "soldiers" from Latin when you go back far enough, but itself means "military".



Yeah at the time of the Revolutionary War, those "arms" included cannons. Including private citizens owning ships with cannons. So it's true they didn't strictly define the term. But the Supreme Court did, in 1939. See US v. Miller. Per the US Supreme Court, the 2nd Amendment protects the peoples' right to keep and bear, "ordinary military equipment." And per the Heller decision in 2008, the Court found that the 2nd Amendment also protects firearms that are, "in common use."




> Here's the thing: a Militia *has to be raised* from the civil population. What counts as a Militia officially? Well, using Wikipedia, sinful scourge as it is, which does provide a source for its choice of wording:
> 
> "Today, as defined by the Militia Act of 1903, the term "militia" is used to describe two classes within the United States:[8]
> 
> ...




If the 2nd Amendment was intended only to protect the military forces of the State, why does there even need to such an amendment? The Bill of Rights is a listing of protections of the people's rights AGAINST the government, not a listing of further ways the government has privilege and power over the people.





> I understand that in the ratified version it lacked the , after "militia" and "arms". HOWEVER, this does nothing as it still clarifies it must be a "well regulated militia". To ignore the first two words I have quoted is to attempt to capitalize on a subsection for personal while ignoring the rest, as it ignores that a Militia IS the "people" upon which have the right to bear arms.



Again, nope. Do a bit of research on the meaning and usage of the phrase "well-regulated" in the 18th and early 19th centuries. It doesn't mean loaded down with lots of government rules. It means kept in good working order.

Also, your suggestion that the only people the 2nd amendment applies to are people in a State militia is just about silly. "The people" in the context of any article in the Bill of Rights means ALL the people. The Bill of Rights is all and only about the collective citizenry being secured rights against government action. Not securing rights only to people who do the government's bidding.

Remember, the people who wrote the Declaration, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights ... they were Revolutionaries. They were "Fight the Power!" kind of people. They went to war over high taxes and an attempt by British soldiers to confiscate privately-owned weapons. They didn't intend the government they founded to even have a standing fulltime army, or a "National Guard."


----------



## x65943 (May 1, 2019)

Eventually the gun grabbers are going to win this fight. Mostly through demographic change over the next 10-20 years.

The younger generation does not feel nearly as strong about gun rights.

However when that day comes, there will be blood. People aren't going to willingly give up their guns in a nation with more guns than people. 

I could even see this issue leading to secessionist movements in more conservative states.

I understand people are upset about these shootings. But you have to understand giving humans rights is always double edged.

A glimpse into the future. Car accidents are the number one cause of death among young Americans (orders of magnitude higher than guns). AI is going to get so good that car accidents could be eradicated if we ban manual driving. There will be countries that do - and I have a hunch America is going to again be the one nation that doesn't (at least at first). MSM is going to put deadly car accidents on the news every night showing how reckless this country is. Driving will be banned.

Rights are easily taken, and won back only through blood and steel. 

I understand European nations have done well with weapon bans. And I think the system can work. But I am decidedly against taking away the rights the framers of the Constitution gave us as American citizens, and I think you should all be wary of giving up those rights too.


----------



## Superbronx (May 1, 2019)

notimp said:


> Daddy, is it you?
> 
> There is a lesson in this about humanity and believes. )
> 
> Stability and attention mostly is enough. You dont have have to reproduce values, or give proper direction, thats just something you do.  Also americans are 144 times worse parents than canadians? Fun with statistics.  (edit: Oh, I understand, only some - are..  )


It seems many people take offense and are more focused on whether my comment about family decay is accurate or not instead of expressing their concerns for the victims. Be that as it may.


x65943 said:


> Eventually the gun grabbers are going to win this fight. Mostly through demographic change over the next 10-20 years.
> 
> The younger generation does not feel nearly as strong about gun rights.
> 
> ...



Very well stated. Richard Henry Lee said: "A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves... and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms."
and
Richard Henry Lee: "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."


Thomas Jefferson said: "
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
and "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
and "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
and "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

John Adams said: "But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

Samuel Adams said: "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!"

Benjamin Franklin said: "I think with you , that nothing is more important for the public weal, than to form and train up youth in wisdom and virtue. Wise and good men are in my opinion, the strength of the state; more so than riches or arms..." and
*“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”*


----------



## Cylent1 (May 1, 2019)

notimp said:


> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html
> 
> This is over a period of 10 years.
> 
> ...


The whole time even before these numbers were released, they been tyring to take our guns friom the get go!  The democrats KNOW DAMN WELL they will never amount to any power as long as the patriots stick to their constitutional rights.  and that is even been and is still being trampled on!  NWO WILL NEVER SUCCEED IN THE UNITED STATES!


----------



## BiggieCheese (May 1, 2019)

Awful that this keeps happening.
Man, sometimes this part of GBAtemp feels like I just walked into either an anonymous image board, the ramblings of a  Russian bot or a whiny Baby Boomer’s Facebook feed


----------



## Harumyne (May 1, 2019)

Be a real parent and teach your children yourself, the state will rot their brains and fill their minds with propaganda to make sure they're well adjusted members of society who desire no more than a cage to live in and a cage to move them to their cage that they will slave away most of their lives in all to pay for their sleep cage, dead food and distraction toys.


----------



## RandomUser (May 1, 2019)

Instead of taking rights away for firearms or banning guns, the technology needs to improve, where DNA pairing is required for such weapons, and that it cannot be deleted or reset at least conveniently. If the person holding the gun who DNA is mismatched to the the weapon, it will not fire. That I can see it in the future perhaps, and still kinda preserve the right to boot.


----------



## tooknie (May 1, 2019)

@Ssuperbronx

I'm afraid I don't subscribe to your argument that single parent families are the root of moral decay.  A single mother probably has a far better chance of bringing her kid up with decent moral values than a two parent family where the father gets drunk and beats her in front of the kids (obviously just as one most common example of domestic abuse).

Also, quoting prominent historical american figures makes no sense as a representation of today's values and circumstance.  What they said at that time was in the context of those values which are very different to the more liberal values of society today and were often said at times of conflict  - they were meant to incite patriotism for that purpose.  It's like me saying that Henry VIII had six wives a number of which he divorced and executed - and that I should therefore treat women in a similar fashion.

I believe that there is moral decay in society but that it is more likely to be as a result of unscrupulous media spin on current issues, both for sensationalism and for political agendas.  Personally I think to move toward solving the issue we need to both tackle this issue and at the very least curb gun ownership that would facilitate rapid fire mass killings.


----------



## notimp (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> It seems many people take offense and are more focused on whether my comment about family decay is accurate or not instead of expressing their concerns for the victims. Be that as it may.


It has actually crossed my mind - that by not mentioning the actual incident this time around (I'm not familiar with it at this point), it has freed up the discussion to be of a more general nature, and not focus in on "oh so sad" rituals off the bat. This also was the reason, why I posted the south park videos, f.e. - which I wouldnt have done otherwise.

What follows mass shootings are essentially public and media rituals at this point that help the victims and their families to cope with the situation a little better. Public denouncements, shame narratives, shared grief (the entire nation griefs with you), those are important. But then, so is a general discussion on the matter.

In terms of "this is how you raise a child correctly" - I was raised for part of my youth by a choleric father that talked about voting for political candidates because of their "values", and then couldnt name them when I mistakingly asked once. It wasnt good.  So the bickering in this case wasn't just trolling. To me it is important to voice, that you dont instill the "proper values and morals in your children", and the issue for school shootings is, that some people dont - and now society suffers because more people dont "do like you do". I know that talk. Its bogus. 

If you go into the motivation of school shootings it has to do with being denied recognition and acceptance. Having the teen know, that shooting up people is bad - even if instilled in them, does nothing in that instance because they dont care about a positive societal image of them at that point.

So everything the comment was - was just "this is my style of raising my kids - everyone should do so, because strict morals are important", coated with another fake moral reasoning for having to do so. It simply was not true.

End of me opening up in that instance.


----------



## SonowRaevius (May 1, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> Eventually people are going to become desensitized.


That's kinda already happening. 

I know a lot of people that will just say "Oh, that's a shame" and nothing more like someone just dropped a gallon of milk on the floor....

Can't really say I blame people either though, it does kinda happen often and nothing really comes of it, like it is just something that IS expected as a part of living here.


----------



## Superbronx (May 2, 2019)

tooknie said:


> @Ssuperbronx
> 
> I'm afraid I don't subscribe to your argument that single parent families are the root of moral decay.  A single mother probably has a far better chance of bringing her kid up with decent moral values than a two parent family where the father gets drunk and beats her in front of the kids (obviously just as one most common example of domestic abuse).
> 
> ...


Actually, I agree that single parent homes are not the ROOT of moral decay BUT they do play a significant role. 
 Also I again agree with you that a child would fare better in a home without a drunken abusive father or mother. Plain and simply put, a child MUST have a father to serve as an example and to be a guiding hand. Yes I admit that an abusive father will not serve those roles but in a household where the Father AND Mother both were raised and given wisdom and virtue, then those parents will be able to effectively raise children that have a far smaller possibility to grow up to become a mass murderer.
 You just admitted the problem yourself when you said modern values have changed (and for the worse) As is evidenced by the mass school shootings. Thank you for making my point for me. I wish every forum interaction could be so easy. 
 Now that we have established that today`s values have changed, it is evident that if people still adhered to the teachings of old from the aforementioned historical American figures there would be much less raping, killing and murder. Of course you are still gonna have some truly disturbed people out there who have REAL mental problems but the incidents would be MUCH less frequent.


----------



## Viri (May 2, 2019)

Spoiler










This is Riley Howell, the 21 year old who tackled the UNCC shooter yesterday, he got shot and killed in the process.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (May 2, 2019)

Viri said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He was the hero who saved countless lives.

The thing about buying guns from a van is true or I'd not bring it up. My uncle knows someone who has that kind of access and the prices of the "products" aren't even expensive but it's illegal so you never know where that was or who used it before. The dark web isn't even necessary.


----------



## Superbronx (May 2, 2019)

I am very thankful for the men and women out there who are willing to give it all in the defense of the helpless. He didn't for one moment hesitate or stop to think what may happen if he challenged that gunman.


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 2, 2019)

Saiyan Lusitano said:


> So this time it's at UNCC and I'm just speechless. This shit keeps happening but seems no one cares anymore and that it's "normal". No, banning guns wouldn't be the solution because crooks can buy them from back of a dudes van just as easily so.. more security? Wtf. Do something!
> 
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uncc-active-shooter-reported-today-live-updates-2019-04-30/
> 
> This is frustrating that innocent people keep dying and "life goes on" (as if).



Speechless?

It is going to be here forever. It isn't getting better at all.

If you believe in God, sin exists in us because of hatred. If you don't believe in God then how does that happens ? I can't answer that.

Do Something? Never and it won't resolve at all. Never was as evidently in the past and never will during present time and future time..



notimp said:


> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html
> 
> This is over a period of 10 years.
> 
> ...



Not surprised.


----------



## leon315 (May 2, 2019)

notimp said:


> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html
> 
> This is over a period of 10 years.
> 
> ...


there was a bomb set up in the proximity to an Italian school and there was one or 2 students killed.

just cen't remember where happened...


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 2, 2019)

leon315 said:


> there was a bomb set up in the proximity to an Italian school and there was one or 2 students killed.
> 
> just cen't remember where happened...



Yeah but bomb doesn't counts.. shooting counts. Thats what it is all about.


----------



## leon315 (May 2, 2019)

azoreseuropa said:


> Yeah but bomb doesn't counts.. shooting counts. Thats what it is all about.


wait wut? wtf is this bomb doesn't count?


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 2, 2019)

leon315 said:


> wait wut? wtf is this bomb doesn't count?



@notimp posted about CNN news mentioned :Shooting: so it is about the guns in America is worse than anywhere else.. not about the bombs.


----------



## leon315 (May 2, 2019)

azoreseuropa said:


> @notimp posted about CNN news mentioned :Shooting: so it is about the guns in America is worse than anywhere else.. not about the bombs.


yep, now next murican school they shall use bomb next time, so they can move from all the attentions from gun's restrictions to scream there need more ammonia control.... --_--


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 2, 2019)

leon315 said:


> yep, now next murican school they shall use bomb next time, so they can move from all the attentions from gun's restrictions to scream there need more ammonia control.... --_--



Control ? LOL! Impossible. They can increase the stricter licence, increase the control and anything else. It is not going to stop people from killing anyway. Zero. None. Hatred existence and it is going to stay for a long time until one day ... hint -- Jesus is coming (if you believe) (If you don't believe then it is not going to have a peace at all.


----------



## JaapDaniels (May 2, 2019)

azoreseuropa said:


> Control ? LOL! Impossible. They can increase the stricter licence, increase the control and anything else. It is not going to stop people from killing anyway. Zero. None. Hatred existence and it is going to stay for a long time until one day ... hint -- Jesus is coming (if you believe) (If you don't believe then it is not going to have a peace at all.


you forget mohammeds (sorry for misspellings) return after Jesus (for those who believe it's kind of a difference).
and that for some it's elliah that will return...
i don't believe in any of these fairytales, but still, you should at least consider there's more than one religion here.


----------



## cots (May 2, 2019)

Did anyone ever consider that maybe the perpetrator was being bullied and the people that got shot deserved it?


----------



## Doran754 (May 2, 2019)

2012: Venezuelans lost their right to own guns. Their socialist president declared a goal of disarming all citizens. He said crime would go down and they'd be safer.

2019: Venezuela is shooting defenseless citizens in the streets and running them over in tanks. Yeah, guns are the problem.


----------



## JaapDaniels (May 2, 2019)

cots said:


> Did anyone ever consider that maybe the perpetrator was being bullied and the people that got shot deserved it?


gotten bullied? everey single person i've met in my life got bullied at some point, that doesn't give anybody the right to kill... but when i read you, someone sure missed someone we all could miss.


----------



## air2004 (May 2, 2019)

Quiet the media , quiet the violence.


----------



## cots (May 2, 2019)

JaapDaniels said:


> gotten bullied? everey single person i've met in my life got bullied at some point, that doesn't give anybody the right to kill... but when i read you, someone sure missed someone we all could miss.



I dunno. If you bully or abuse someone to the breaking point and they snap then it's also your fault. The "right to kill"? How can you put a limit on something as natural as killing someone? It's human nature and you can't take the bite out of the tiger, per say. I don't solely blame an inanimate object or the perpetrator - that's unrealistic. I blame everyone involved.


----------



## JaapDaniels (May 2, 2019)

air2004 said:


> Quiet the media , quiet the violence.


nope shootouts will continue, schools specially since it's the perfect combo.
1. being restless, for either using drugs to get higher or lower grades (depending on the drug you like).
2. people trying to get you to do things you don't feel like doing.
3. people bullying for they don't wanna have to understand your point of view.
4. getting dumped by the one you love.
5. easy to get guns.
whoohoo you gotta love the USA.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



cots said:


> I dunno. If you bully or abuse someone to the breaking point and they snap then it's also your fault. The "right to kill"? How can you put a limit on something as natural as killing someone? It's human nature and you can't take the bite out of the tiger, per say. I don't solely blame an inanimate object or the perpetrator - that's unrealistic. I blame everyone involved.


then get shooting yourself, cause your part of the problem here.


----------



## notimp (May 2, 2019)

azoreseuropa said:


> It is going to be here forever. It isn't getting better at all.


Dont say that.  Part of it has to do with US hegemonial culture, in my (poetic..  ) mind.

So as the US removes itself militarily from the world stage (this is not me suggesting, that it should, its what the US curretly does, slowly at the current time), the society may change a little (significance of weapons), and the number might decline. 

This is lateral thinking on my part (not entirely sound logic  ). Could happen though. 

Culturally - parts of the US are basically "Sparta" for the world stage.
Its pax americana, that leads to this kind of symbolism (weapons still are culturally important to you) - I think.

h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufCxLjBi97M&feature=youtu.be&t=195
edit: Watch the video a little until you hear the pastors speech and the cadets commentary. Dub track is german, sadly - but you can still make out the english original lines. This is a culture thats still very much part of the american ethos.


----------



## Doran754 (May 2, 2019)

JaapDaniels said:


> nope shootouts will continue, schools specially since it's the perfect combo.
> 1. being restless, for either using drugs to get higher or lower grades (depending on the drug you like).
> 2. people trying to get you to do things you don't feel like doing.
> 3. people bullying for they don't wanna have to understand your point of view.
> ...



You just told someone to kill themselves, you've just lost the moral highground. You're part of the problem.


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 2, 2019)

RandomUser said:


> Instead of taking rights away for firearms or banning guns, the technology needs to improve, where DNA pairing is required for such weapons, and that it cannot be deleted or reset at least conveniently. If the person holding the gun who DNA is mismatched to the the weapon, it will not fire. That I can see it in the future perhaps, and still kinda preserve the right to boot.


Like the ID-tagged weapons from Metal Gear Solid? It would be impossible to retrofit all what? 500 million guns (a rough estimate) that already exist here.


----------



## Virtual-Wii-noob (May 2, 2019)

Xzi said:


> "Criminals would still get guns through obscure means, so we should just make sure the process stays easy for them instead."
> 
> We might as well open more gun shops near all school campuses if we're just gonna throw up our hands in resignation even before trying common-sense solutions.



let me show you a quote from a game just replace "straws" with "guns" "I cant outlaw straws then only outlaws will have straws" instead we need to improve the schools if they are so bad kids go on murder sprees we need to fix them almost got expelled just because someone else call me a school shooter great system america


----------



## SG854 (May 2, 2019)

AkGBA said:


> So, divorced, gays, and immigrants families are the cause ?
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> You know each other country in the list has as much of those ? Yet quite not the same amount of mass shootings.


Majority of School shooters comes from Fatherless Broken homes. Having a father absent is the greatest predictor of crime. 

Kids learn a lot of self control and empathy from their father. Fathers are more likely to be stricter at discipline with their kids and punish them if they step out of line.

Empathizing too much with someone doesn’t create empathetic kids, it creates narcissistic kids with the focus mostly on them. Disciplining them makes them think about their actions towards other people. And tells them hurting others is bad. 


Overall who’s more likely to be stricter and the kid to be more afraid of when they do bad, the Father or Mother?


----------



## Deleted_413010 (May 2, 2019)

notimp said:


> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html
> 
> This is over a period of 10 years.
> 
> ...



Okay...Britain doesn't get any school shootings because they literally banned guns. Its the dumbest thing any country can do. Why? Because then the general public can't protect themselves from criminals so they'll die. More deaths will happen in America if we ban guns then if we don't. We should instead completely lock down our country. We need retina scans, we need everybody who buys a gun to be chipped...it will all work out in the end.


----------



## Superbronx (May 2, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Majority of School shooters comes from Fatherless Broken homes. Having a father absent is the greatest predictor of crime.
> 
> Kids learn a lot of self control and empathy from their father. Fathers are more likely to be stricter at discipline with their kids and punish them if they step out of line.
> 
> ...


Yes you are correct. Example from my own family. My wife and I were separated for several years. She is a very loving and very dedicated mother and wife. During the time we were apart she devoted the entire time to providing for and making sure our son lacked nothing. However, she was very lenient with him. 
After we remarried and had been back together for some time, my son came to me privately and said that every child needs a parent who is more lenient and one who is more strict. 
He needed to have that balance, he said he needed my stern guiding hand. I was so proud and thankful to hear him say that. 


TheTechWiz25 said:


> Okay...Britain doesn't get any school shootings because they literally banned guns. Its the dumbest thing any country can do. Why? Because then the general public can't protect themselves from criminals so they'll die. More deaths will happen in America if we ban guns then if we don't. We should instead completely lock down our country. We need retina scans, we need everybody who buys a gun to be chipped...it will all work out in the end.


 Yes, and I would go a step further by stating the framers intent. They wanted us to have arms necessary to defend ourselves, our liberties and our freedoms against our government in the event it becomes tyrannical. They meant for us to have the means to overthrow tyranny if and when it presents itself.


----------



## HamBone41801 (May 2, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> Plain and simply put, a child MUST have a father to serve as an example and to be a guiding hand.


But why tho? If you're gonna spew shitty opinions, at least TRY to back them up.


----------



## SG854 (May 2, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> Yes you are correct. Example from my own family. My wife and I were separated for several years. She is a very loving and very dedicated mother and wife. During the time we were apart she devoted the entire time to providing for and making sure our son lacked nothing. However, she was very lenient with him.
> After we remarried and had been back together for some time, my son came to me privately and said that every child needs a parent who is more lenient and one who is more strict.
> He needed to have that balance, he said he needed my stern guiding hand. I was so proud and thankful to hear him say that.


I’m still young myself and don’t have any kids so I never had experience of raising any, but it’s common sense kids need discipline. 

I was always more scared of my Dad then my Mom. And I know plenty of people that say their Dads are extremely scary when mad when they do something bad. I hear a few people who are scared of their Moms but most of the time it’s the Dad.


Both Moms and Dads are needed for balance. Dads enforce discipline to follow rules and it helps with also teaching empathy, while Moms are more lenient and empathetic which makes the kid care and think about themselves. You don’t want to be too much of a yes man always following orders from a higher up like a mindless robot. You want to question things and go against the tide when needed.


----------



## Superbronx (May 2, 2019)

HamBone41801 said:


> But why tho? If you're gonna spew shitty opinions, at least TRY to back them up.


Really my friend, your question has already been answered in this very thread. SG854 sums it up very nicely and to the point. I could not have stated it any better. FROM the link provided BY SG854 :

"Among the 25 most-cited school shooters since Columbine, 75 percent were reared in broken homes. Psychologist Dr. Peter Langman, a pre-eminent expert on school shooters, found that most came from incredibly broken homes of not just divorce and separation, but also infidelity, substance abuse, criminal behavior, domestic violence, and child abuse."

AND

  " After the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, scholar Brad Wilcox called attention to the work of criminologists Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi, which found the absence of fathers to be one of the “most powerful predictors of crimes .” He explained that fathers are role models for their sons who maintain authority and discipline, thereby helping them develop self-control and empathy toward others, key character traits lacking in violent youth."

Also 


" The  late rapper Tupac Shakur said, “I know for a fact that had I had a father, I’d have some discipline. I’d have more confidence. Your mother can’t calm you down the way a man can. You need a man to teach you how to be a man.” Shakur, who was murdered in 1996, started hanging out with gangs because he wanted to belong to a family."

There is much more in SGs article.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (May 2, 2019)

Xzi said:


> I don't mean to sound harsh, but a lot of these shooters probably believe the same things.  It's easy to justify atrocious acts in retaliation when you believe yourself the victim of some vast conspiracy.



Columbine happened YEARS before the current political climate became as heated as it is today, as well as the others before the New Tens. If anything, that one Country Music Fest shooting in California's (if I remember all of the deets) perp, even after examining all of the footage of the guy, they couldn't put a finger on the man's motive. He wasn't poor, he acted friendly to those around him, he didn't go screaming things that make you roll your eyes and go..."OW THE EDGE!"

I don't think the people who perpetrate these actions are thinking rationally. Not that you need a pHD in Psychology to figure that one out.


----------



## notimp (May 2, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Empathizing too much with someone doesn’t create empathetic kids, it creates narcissistic kids with the focus mostly on them. Disciplining them makes them think about their actions towards other people. And tells them hurting others is bad.
> 
> Overall who’s more likely to be stricter and the kid to be more afraid of when they do bad, the Father or Mother?


Yes, but also partly wrong imho - because mass shooters may be narcissistic, but first and foremost they are social outcast loners, who were refused to matter at all in their social cicles. This then turns into grief and anger. If you discipline them on top of that, guess what...

So instead of bringing the narcissism down, how about preventing the other side?

Also disciplining children is something that may be needed for them to think about action/reaction of their behavior, but disciplining - never produces empathy for the victim.

(Show me that study.)

Look at the result of what boarding schools produced as human material. conscienceless, self centered alphas, that have learned only one thing in life, and that is - that to go forward, they have to beat everything and every one in their way - in a very real sense.

Reason. Punishment first and foremost produces anger. Anger then gets channeled by those institutions into action in a competitive environment, winner gets rewarded, then very quickly the only thing you are reproducing are sadists, and broken people.

To produce empathy, you actually need social learning experiences. So mixed schools, engagement, people recognizing, that different characters can bring in a different valueset. Thats how you produce leaders.  The running joke is, that boarding schools usually are where the dentists son meets the lawyers daughter - but thats about all.  If you want to do your child a favor, dont just discipline them, teach them how to be a liberal thinker and interact with different sets of people. Even if he/she later might end up at Yale, that will benefit them more, than what discipline might have given them.

Usually a parent thats quite into the discipline game, isnt bright enough to really gage different social interactions. Their mindset usually centers around "in public smile more, and be more polite.. " 

That said, dont let your child end up as a narcissistic brat either. Please.. 

And yes, some mass shooters might be narcissistic, some might not, what they all have in common though... is not first and foremost a lacking sense of values... Thats not what makes you develop the rage.


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 2, 2019)

notimp said:


> Dont say that.  Part of it has to do with US hegemonial culture, in my (poetic..  ) mind.
> 
> So as the US removes itself militarily from the world stage (this is not me suggesting, that it should, its what the US curretly does, slowly at the current time), the society may change a little (significance of weapons), and the number might decline.
> 
> ...



I understand your point. I don't want to say that but it is the truthful. It is not getting better anyway. Even in 1500 or less before we born.. Same hatred and killing existence. Nothing's new. Right now, it is much worse than ever before. 



JaapDaniels said:


> you forget mohammeds (sorry for misspellings) return after Jesus (for those who believe it's kind of a difference).
> and that for some it's elliah that will return...
> i don't believe in any of these fairytales, but still, you should at least consider there's more than one religion here.



I respect your belief. No problem.


----------



## HamBone41801 (May 2, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> Really my friend, your question has already been answered in this very thread. SG854 sums it up very nicely and to the point. I could not have stated it any better. FROM the link provided BY SG854 :
> 
> "Among the 25 most-cited school shooters since Columbine, 75 percent were reared in broken homes. Psychologist Dr. Peter Langman, a pre-eminent expert on school shooters, found that most came from incredibly broken homes of not just divorce and separation, but also infidelity, substance abuse, criminal behavior, domestic violence, and child abuse."
> 
> ...



you've given me data on broken homes, not data on why kids need fathers (no, a quote from tupac doesn't count. especially when that quote says something as dumb as "You need a man to teach you how to be a man." you wanna know what makes a man? being a goddamn decent human being, and last time I checked, you don't need a dick for that). what about kids with two moms? are they more likely to become killers than kids with hetero parents? kids need to be raised right. I have nothing wrong with that statement. What I DO have an Issue with is this narative you've been trying to create that only one type of family can do so.


----------



## RandomUser (May 2, 2019)

Subtle Demise said:


> Like the ID-tagged weapons from Metal Gear Solid? It would be impossible to retrofit all what? 500 million guns (a rough estimate) that already exist here.


You have a point there. Perhaps maybe changing the bullet sizing standard would be needed, not sure if it is possible. So that all new shells being sold will not fit existing guns and thereby rendering most existing guns obsolete. However that may not be practical either, because some people can either import them in or make their own bullets.
I don't think guns are going away anytime soon, because the state government gets annual revenue for hunting license and what not.



TheTechWiz25 said:


> Okay...Britain doesn't get any school shootings because they literally banned guns. Its the dumbest thing any country can do. Why? Because then the general public can't protect themselves from criminals so they'll die. More deaths will happen in America if we ban guns then if we don't. We should instead completely lock down our country. We need retina scans, we need everybody who buys a gun to be chipped...it will all work out in the end.


Subtle Demise, pointed out that would be impracticable as my idea is almost similar.


----------



## Superbronx (May 2, 2019)

notimp said:


> Yes, but also partly wrong imho - because mass shooters may be narcissistic, but first and foremost they are social outcast loners, who were refused to matter at all in their social cicles. This then turns into grief and anger. If you disciplin them on top of that, guess what...
> 
> So instead of bringing the narcissism down, how about preventing the other side?
> 
> ...


Your whole theory revolves around discipline causing the child's anger but actually the exact opposite is true. Unless the father in question is abusive. Proper discipline, when tempered with love and guidance produces very effective results. A paper flimsy excuse for a father who only attempts to beat his lessons into a child, may very well produce the anger you mention but a REAL dad has many things to offer his son. Only a few of which are Instruction, guidance, patience, love, kindness helping them to develop a sense of self worth and yes discipline.
With those ingredients in balance a child will be able to control their anger and also will not fall prey to bullying. When and if they are subjected to bullying, they have that solid family foundation to rely on. My own son had his run in with bullies but because his mother and I were there he was able to bounce back nicely and move beyond it.
@HamBone41801, when you said all you need is to be a decent human being, the methods I have described to you are overwhelmingly effective in producing that result.


----------



## SG854 (May 2, 2019)

notimp said:


> Yes, but also partly wrong imho - because mass shooters may be narcissistic, but first and foremost they are social outcast loners, who were refused to matter at all in their social cicles. This then turns into grief and anger. If you disciplin them on top of that, guess what...
> 
> So instead of bringing the narcissism down, how about preventing the other side?
> 
> ...


Fatherless kids has lower educational attainment, poorer social outcomes (likely the cause of outcast you are talking about), higher risks of depression and substance abuse, more likely to be poor, and be criminal.


So i’ll give you an example of learning empathy. Fathers are more likely to engage in ruff and tumble play then mothers are. His ruff and tumble play teaches cooperation skills, to better work with people, to think of their actions towards others by enforcing rules and playing fair eg. don’t cheat or hurt others to get what you want, and to develop social skills. Animals also engage in this type of play for the same reasons for learning to cooperate and hunt together. Kids also learn empathy from mothers but in a different way from a father. And having two people to dedicate attention to a kid is always better then one.



Dads push kids to take risks, moms more likely to protect the kid from harm, both beneficial in different ways, and social engagement can sometimes be risky.

https://www.childandfamilyblog.com/child-development/social-skills-friends-fathers/


----------



## cots (May 3, 2019)

Traditional family values taught by proper parenting by both a loving Mother and Father are rare these days. I suggest if you grew up in such a situation you should be thankful, but not everyone does. My mother died when I was under the age of 10 and I know a lot of parents that see their own kids as distractions, put an iphone in front of their face and leave the responsibility of teaching them right vs wrong up to a bunch of liberal lunatics who not only taught them this is the proper way to parent, but also teach at the kids local schools.

I suppose if you had two mothers or two fathers and one had more traditional feminist attributes and one more traditional masculine attributes that might work, but I highly doubt it. Society is taking a shit-dive and this problem will only get worse (with or without guns).


----------



## Superbronx (May 3, 2019)

cots said:


> Traditional family values taught by proper parenting by both a loving Mother and Father are rare these days. I suggest if you grew up in such a situation you should be thankful, but not everyone does. My mother died when I was under the age of 10 and I know a lot of parents that see their own kids as distractions, put an iphone in front of their face and leave the responsibility of teaching them right vs wrong up to a bunch of liberal lunatics who not only taught them this is the proper way to parent, but also teach at the kids local schools.
> 
> I suppose if you had two mothers or two fathers and one had more traditional feminist attributes and one more traditional masculine attributes that might work, but I highly doubt it. Society is taking a shit-dive and this problem will only get worse (with or without guns).


 You bring up an excellent point. A significant number of parents are too busy trying to enlarge their friends list on fb to bother with raising their children. It's an addiction almost as bad as those mothers you hear about who are addicted to meth and drive all the way across the country because they met someone on social media who is willing to hook them up with their next fix in exchange for intimacy with her 5 year old daughter


----------



## cots (May 3, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> You bring up an excellent point. A significant number of parents are too busy trying to enlarge their friends list on fb to bother with raising their children. It's an addiction almost as bad as those mothers you hear about who are addicted to meth and drive all the way across the country because they met someone on social media who is willing to hook them up with their next fix in exchange for intimacy with her 5 year old daughter



That's sort of extreme. Neglecting a child is bad enough.

I deal a lot with people who are basically failing in life and I see a lot of common traits among them such as lack of education, abuse, neglect, one or no parents or parents that can't figure out their own gender, using drugs or selling themselves to make a living. It's sad.


----------



## Superbronx (May 3, 2019)

That's rough, I don't think I would be cut out for that line of work. 
I would feel so helpless if I couldn't do anything to help them. Thank you for the work you do. It's a blessing knowing there are people in this world who try to make a difference.


----------



## notimp (May 3, 2019)

SG854 said:


> So i’ll give you an example of learning empathy. Fathers are more likely to engage in ruff and tumble play then mothers are. His ruff and tumble play teaches cooperation skills, to better work with people, to think of their actions towards others by enforcing rules and playing fair eg. don’t cheat or hurt others to get what you want, and to develop social skills. Animals also engage in this type of play for the same reasons for learning to cooperate and hunt together. Kids also learn empathy from mothers but in a different way from a father. And having two people to dedicate attention to a kid is always better then one.


Explanation doesnt sound counter intuitive. You notice, that the word "disciplining" them (which I dont disagree with on some level ) is missing from it.. 

Also, depends on the kind of person the father is in this case. Animals usually engage in this type of play with fellow 'same age' peers, which kind of - was may way of describing learning social skills and empathy (empathy usually develops, if something goes wrong with "the other" in your groups. And the more diversified those groups are (not in a SJW sense of "lets keep tabs"), the more it also includes a sense of different social backgrounds).

Also - listing real studies would be better than referring to examples in the animal kingdom..  But then I didn't do that either.

Also I agree, that a child needs access to both of their parents to learn a varied set of social skills, ideally.


----------



## notimp (May 3, 2019)

Ssuperbronx said:


> Your whole theory revolves around discipline causing the child's anger but actually the exact opposite is true. Unless the father in question is abusive.


Agree partly - first the difference is, that the person disciplined has to be able to conceptualize a connection between their action and the result, and they have to see some kind of ('so unfair... ') logic in it. If discipline comes in erratically, or very regularly - with 'expected' results (on the parts of the behavior of the child), outcome will be very different from a learning effect.

Just make sure, that you dont fall over the edge into abusive, and we are good.  Also a child thats also granted some space to learn on its own - also has plenty of learning opportunities, outside their own home. If it becomes troubled in regards to something, catch that - have a basis, where you both can talk things out. But dont try to overly imprint values, be a rolemodel instead.

Also children need to get away with some stuff. Otherwise they would start to think that life is fair..  Just slap their heads a little once in a while (Imho) when they deserve it. And dont let them get away with stuff thats disrespectful to the core of other human beings.

But its really a balance. So be more  X Y Z, isn't correct in the absolute sense.

Anna Freud (daughter of Sigmund and famous early psychoanalist) messed up quite a few children in her life, so - again, keep it light on the imprinting values stuff.. 

Also I don't have children. So dont take advice from me. 
I'm just empathic, and sometimes filled with anger (even rage) - so lets say - I know the extremes. 

Also, I don't think that americans are 144 times worse parents than canadiens, and I dont think the high school shootings number is a statistical fluke, so it must be societal in some sence (access to weapons, glorification of violence, that stuff).


----------



## SG854 (May 3, 2019)

notimp said:


> Explanation doesnt sound counter intuitive. You notice, that the word "disciplining" them (which I dont disagree with on some level ) is missing from it..
> 
> Also, depends on the kind of person the father is in this case. Animals usually engage in this type of play with fellow 'same age' peers, which kind of - was may way of describing learning social skills and empathy.
> 
> ...


It depends on what study you are looking at. But there is some that looks at discipline. Like when you look into why ADHD develops some of it has to do with how differently people enforce rules and boundaries.

Kids hanging out in ruff and tumble is a good way to develop social skills. But if they are bad at socializing to begin with they need guidance, from a Mother and/or Father.

It of course depends on what kind of Father or Mother they are. You can be sure that there is some kids that have 2 parents at the house, but a Dad that’s not at all attentive kids won’t get the same positive benefits. So often times they say more likely since it’s not every case.


Looking into the Animal Kingdom and making comparisons is something researchers do all the time since we all evolved from a common ancestor.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (May 3, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Majority of School shooters comes from Fatherless Broken homes. Having a father absent is the greatest predictor of crime.
> 
> Kids learn a lot of self control and empathy from their father. Fathers are more likely to be stricter at discipline with their kids and punish them if they step out of line.
> 
> ...


As someone who was raised by a single mother i have to heavily disagree. You can be scumbag even when you have a father in your life and much more so if your father is a bad influence. At the end of the day people choose who they want to be. As somebody who came from a poverty stricken family in a poor neighborhood and have worked my butt off to have a decent paying salary job after studying to the bone for a job i can tell you a big part of who you end up being is yourself

also:
"Kids learn a lot of self control and empathy from their father. Fathers are more likely to be stricter at discipline with their kids and punish them if they step out of line." you obviously do not have a latina mother.


----------



## Deleted User (May 3, 2019)

Title is clickbait, it's just a University.


----------



## notimp (May 3, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> As someone who was raised by a single mother i have to heavily disagree. You can be scumbag even when you have a father in your life and much more so if your father is a bad influence. At the end of the day people choose who they want to be. As somebody who came from a poverty stricken family in a poor neighborhood and have worked my butt off to have a decent paying salary job after studying to the bone for a job i can tell you a big part of who you end up being is yourself


Also agree.

And then there is this stance I came by a few days ago and found oddly joyful. 

"I differenciate four kinds. There are bright, hardworking/diligent, dumb and lazy officers. Most often two characteristics apply. There are the ones who are smart and hardworking/diligent, they have to end up in the generals staff. The next ones are dumb and lazy; they make up 90% of every army and are usefull for routine jobs. But whoever is lazy and bright, is qualified for the highest leadership positions, because they bring with them the mental clearness and strength of nerve for really difficult decisions. Be on your guard though for those who are dumb and hardworking/diligent, you cant lay any responsibility on them, they will always produce harm."
(Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord (German Anti Nazi resistance within the army leadership  ))

I usually dont quote millitary "wisdoms", but this at least gives you an insight, that its the mixture of character traits, that makes a human being, and that "it takes all kinds.." 

Original quote in german:


> „Ich unterscheide vier Arten. Es gibt kluge, fleißige, dumme und faule Offiziere. Meist treffen zwei Eigenschaften zusammen. Die einen sind klug und fleißig, sie müssen in den Generalstab. Die Nächsten sind dumm und faul; sie machen in jeder Armee neunzig Prozent aus und sind für Routineaufgaben geeignet. Wer klug ist und gleichzeitig faul, qualifiziert sich für die höchsten Führungsaufgaben, denn er bringt die geistige Klarheit und die Nervenstärke für schwere Entscheidungen mit. Hüten muss man sich vor dem, der dumm und fleißig ist; dem darf man keine Verantwortung übertragen, denn er wird immer nur Unheil anrichten.“ (Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord)


----------



## SG854 (May 3, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> As someone who was raised by a single mother i have to heavily disagree. You can be scumbag even when you have a father in your life and much more so if your father is a bad influence. At the end of the day people choose who they want to be. As somebody who came from a poverty stricken family in a poor neighborhood and have worked my butt off to have a decent paying salary job after studying to the bone for a job i can tell you a big part of who you end up being is yourself
> 
> also:
> "Kids learn a lot of self control and empathy from their father. Fathers are more likely to be stricter at discipline with their kids and punish them if they step out of line." you obviously do not have a latina mother.


You have to be careful with anecdotal experiences. And I do know a few people who are afraid of being disciplined by their mothers.

I am Latino myself. And I know all about the hitting with the spoon or a cinto or chanclas.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (May 3, 2019)

"cinto".... latino....
did you mean portuguese?

its "cincho" also getting hit with a spoon aint even a stereotype.
I know that Anecdotal evidence is usually no good but you seemed to be talking in absolutes in your statement(which is not a good thing to do either) which is why i pitched in.


----------



## spinal_cord (May 3, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> Okay...Britain doesn't get any school shootings because they literally banned guns. Its the dumbest thing any country can do. Why? Because then the general public can't protect themselves from criminals so they'll die. More deaths will happen in America if we ban guns then if we don't. We should instead completely lock down our country. We need retina scans, we need everybody who buys a gun to be chipped...it will all work out in the end.



The problem with that way of thinking is that it is wrong. We haven't had a major shooting in this country since 1996. BECAUSE it's more difficult for most to get guns. Here's the other logic fail - criminals will still have guns so why bother? - You see, if owning these guns is illegal, those who are caught with them WILL BE ARRESTED AND THE GUNS REMOVED. Or do you all think that police will turn a blind eye and simple LET the criminals keep their guns?
Simple logic, if you ban guns, you will have less shootings simply because there will be less guns. That's how math works.
Look at every country that has banned guns, are they all overrun by criminal gun toting gangs? No, no they aren't.

The problem with all arguments on this subject are as follows, America does not understand the rest of the worlds point of view. You can not grasp that having less guns is safer for everyone from school children involved in shootings to people getting accidentally shot by their toddlers.
On the other had, the rest of the world simply can not grasp the idea that a population can love owning a gun more than the safety of their own children.

This discussion will keep happening because America will keep having mass shootings. Before anyone says "gun control isn't the problem, -something else- is the problem", if there is indeed a different problem, why would would want that problem to own a gun and allow them to shoot someone?


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (May 3, 2019)

spinal_cord said:


> WILL BE ARRESTED AND THE GUNS REMOVED.


The problem is that this sentence gives cold sweats and Triggers a good chunk of people out there thus getting rid of even the slightest chance of honest discussion. Usually said people only recommend that everybody should get a gun (lol) so these type of incidents decrease.

I personally believe in responsible ownership( I am not a gun owner but sensible self defense discussion would be interesting to hear for once), but that would entail people not owning something that is used in a warzone or battlefield.


----------



## SG854 (May 3, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> "cinto".... latino....
> did you mean portuguese?
> 
> its "cincho" also getting hit with a spoon aint even a stereotype.
> I know that Anecdotal evidence is usually no good but you seemed to be talking in absolutes in your statement(which is not a good thing to do either) which is why i pitched in.


My family is Mexican. I’ve always spelled it cinto like how they spell it in this video or like here where you can buy one. Or like how they spell it in this book about Mexicans. I don’t know, i’ve always spelt it that way.


I wasn’t making absolutes though. That’s why I said more likely. I carefully worded it like that to try to avoid a comment such as yours from happening.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (May 3, 2019)

Cinto is still from portuguese origin. The proper word is "cincho"atleast from when refered to in spanish. It looks like a lot of people are mispronouncing it. I will stop from venturing into this though.



SG854 said:


> That’s why I said more likely. I carefully worded it like that to try to avoid a comment such as yours from happening.



ok. even if you say you were not speaking in absolutes, how is a comment "such as mine" even a bad thing in the context of this discussion either way? differing points of view are still a good thing my friend.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (May 3, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> I personally believe in responsible ownership( I am not a gun owner but sensible self defense discussion would be interesting to hear for once), but that would entail people not owning something that is used in a warzone or battlefield.



I do believe in that myself


----------



## AkGBA (May 3, 2019)

About the fatherless mass killers... Is there a less politically tainted study than the Heritage Foundation one about it ?
I tend to avoid their publications, not really neutral.
God, let's hope one day the CDC will once again be able to study gun mortality.


----------



## SG854 (May 3, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> Cinto is still from portuguese origin. The proper word is "cincho"atleast from when refered to in spanish. It looks like a lot of people are mispronouncing it. I will stop from venturing into this though.
> 
> 
> 
> ok. even if you say you were not speaking in absolutes, how is a comment "such as mine" even a bad thing in the context of this discussion either way? differing points of view are still a good thing my friend.


I won’t go too deep into it anymore but didn’t the Portuguese travel to South America. There are many Latinos including Mexicans with last names of Portuguese origin. Cultures and languages and words mix all the time. Spanish itself is a European Language. And we have many words in English of Japanese origin, Sushi and Tsunami. Even if English speakers aren’t of Japanese origin they still use Japanese words because language travels fast.



It’s not a bad thing. And I always know there is exceptions. But when talking about overall and trying to figure out what’s going on and if there is an underlying theme, that’s why I even mentioned those posts at all. Especially in a topic about school shootings and there seems to be a pattern of Fatherless homes. Or even on Black on Black violence.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (May 8, 2019)

Another one. I'm guessing folks are like "just another day" because this has been normalized.


----------



## CodyWGamer (May 8, 2019)

before i read this article im gonna take a million dollar guess that they are blaming video games


----------



## cots (May 9, 2019)

So it seems the recent STEM School shooting was perpetuated by a drug user and a he-she transitioning into something they aren't. Legalize drugs and encourage mental illness. Seems their policies are working!


----------



## notimp (May 9, 2019)

Slow down Nancy. 

People having the notion that they are born in the wrong body, arent the stablest mentally - while going through their "process". If they are on legal drugs because of it, or related issues - dont turn this into a "and thats really the issue" issue.

Also, dont take an isolated case, and pitch it against an entire group of people. Or you are not a single bit better than the "its videogames fault" folks, or the ones that blame it on judas priest. 

Cause, effect - legal drugs usually shouldnt trigger psychosis. (Not an expert on that stuff, but I assume). Aside from alcohol, that is.. 

And again, the reason that you are seeing more of those people around, probably is, that we have gotten rid of privacy as a concept, and now are trying out other methods of letting them integrate into society. You are seeing more of them, thats all. Its not "spreading" if thats your fear...


----------

