| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/17/2012 11:29:24 AM · #326 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Dood...
Out of context. I believe that photo is from Duck and Cover. If so, not an even close comparison.
Apologies if I'm wrong.
Originally posted by Cory:
Seems as though we've done this before.
 |
|
No you're quite right.
Seems that the current generation just has a new version of this old "game". |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:29:52 AM · #327 |
Yeah, possibly. Hopefully, its that there is just justified ultra-sensitivity.
Originally posted by scalvert:
Our high school is currently under lockdown after a suspicious man with a gun was spotted nearby. My daughter is there. I'm sure we'll be dealing with things like this for a long time. |
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:31:01 AM · #328 |
Hardly appropriate to compare the Cold War to a gunman killing kids.
Originally posted by Cory:
No you're quite right.
Seems that the current generation just has a new version of this old "game". |
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:31:50 AM · #329 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by PGerst:
Very poor comparison. It makes no sense to make these sort of comparisons, they are not even remotely close to each other. Hopefully, those who will be arguing over this in the legislature know better.
Originally posted by Spork99:
If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars? |
|
Why not? The monstrosity of the act and the carnage would be as great or greater, yet in one case people are willing to blame the person, in another, the tool. |
I tend to agree with Spork here (damn.)..
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:32:58 AM · #330 |
Over TWELVE THOUSAND CHILDREN are killed in the US every year in alcohol related auto accidents.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:37:32 AM · #331 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Hardly appropriate to compare the Cold War to a gunman killing kids.
Originally posted by Cory:
No you're quite right.
Seems that the current generation just has a new version of this old "game". |
|
Oh, gee. Shame on me. How dare I.
You must have one hell of a narrow mind to not see the parallels. The most obvious being that we are uselessly terrifying our children - duck and cover was unlikely to save lives, but it sure terrified the hell out of the kids. Lockdowns don't seem to me to be very effective either, given the fact that the CT shooter actually forced his way into the school anyhow.
I see this as a "safety" measure that will strongly affect the opinions of these kids when they are adults. Today's "gunman" (probably a hunter or air-soft player in all likelihood) probably wasn't any threat to anyone. Yet all of the children now feel like they've been attacked - it's personal now.
I'm sure you're pleased as pie though, given all the advocating you've been doing that this needs to happen more often, so that more people are traumatized, so that maybe it's a big enough problem that we do something..
Seems to me we're well on that path. Too bad we couldn't do it without terrorizing the kids. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:39:08 AM · #332 |
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:40:08 AM · #333 |
| Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:42:33 AM · #334 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies. |
Additionally, guns are designed to kill. That is their function. It's not even a question of necessity, it's a question of purpose.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:42:58 AM · #335 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
I remember the same drill when I went to school in the '70's. Despite the assurances of our parents and other adults, we were terrified that we would be vaporized in the flash of nuclear fire. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:43:17 AM · #336 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies. |
Cars are necessary? For what? Travel? Honestly, this is weak-sauce - cars are no more a necessity to travel, than guns are a necessity to murder someone.
Frankly, I'd rather we lived in a world without cars than a world without guns. (not that a world without both wouldn't be even better.)
Guns kill a few people (and yes, it's tragic each time...), but our fuel-burners are getting very close to making guns look harmless.
You wanna ban something that would actually make a REAL difference in the world? Ban cars. Hell, we'd probably even get to know our neighbors again. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:44:13 AM · #337 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
I remember the same drill when I went to school in the '70's. Despite the assurances of our parents and other adults, we were terrified that we would be vaporized in the flash of nuclear fire. |
And I'm quite certain that today's children are terrified that a masked crazed gunman is going to blow holes in them. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:44:30 AM · #338 |
Personally I believe that teachers should be allowed to get concealed weapons permits and carry on the school grounds. It possibly could have ended the carnage before it began
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:46:17 AM · #339 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
I remember the same drill when I went to school in the '70's. Despite the assurances of our parents and other adults, we were terrified that we would be vaporized in the flash of nuclear fire. |
And I'm quite certain that today's children are terrified that a masked crazed gunman is going to blow holes in them. |
Of course, this does mean that the gun control advocates have already won. It's just going to take a generation or so before the victory can be officially declared.
Though, as PGerst pointed out several times, a sharp increase in deaths, or at least a huge increase in lockdowns (to terrify the children, and make it really hit home so they are honestly scared for their lives), should really help this process along.
Message edited by author 2012-12-17 11:48:01. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:47:03 AM · #340 |
You are forgiven.
As for the rest of your post you are completely misinterpreting and not completely understanding things that have been said. Further more, your attempts at verbal attacks at me on behalf of those misinterpretations is just sad and really not worth any more of a response other than to say you can not compare a nuclear bomb (which wipes out a city) or a car (which is practically difficult to accomplish) to what has happened time and time again.
Originally posted by Cory:
Oh, gee. Shame on me. How dare I.
|
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:47:39 AM · #341 |
There are dozens of posts below that refute that very notion.
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Personally I believe that teachers should be allowed to get concealed weapons permits and carry on the school grounds. It possibly could have ended the carnage before it began |
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:48:55 AM · #342 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Our high school is currently under lockdown after a suspicious man with a gun was spotted nearby. My daughter is there. I'm sure we'll be dealing with things like this for a long time. |
Being your daughter, I'm sure she will have handle the events of the coming days with calm strength and an alert presence of mind. Dealing with the world exactly as it is while working towards a world as we'd all like it to be will be the truth she will share with her own kids one day. Strength of character builds generations, and the people of Newtown have that in abundance.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:49:17 AM · #343 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
I remember the same drill when I went to school in the '70's. Despite the assurances of our parents and other adults, we were terrified that we would be vaporized in the flash of nuclear fire. |
What's so sad about this,  Spork99, is that now a new generation (or more) of kids will likely be terrified
that they'll be gunned down in their seats as they try to learn their A B Cs. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:49:27 AM · #344 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
You are forgiven.
As for the rest of your post you are completely misinterpreting and not completely understanding things that have been said. Further more, your attempts at verbal attacks at me on behalf of those misinterpretations is just sad and really not worth any more of a response other than to say you can not compare a nuclear bomb (which wipes out a city) or a car (which is practically difficult to accomplish) to what has happened time and time again.
Originally posted by Cory:
Oh, gee. Shame on me. How dare I.
|
|
*shrug*
Sorry you see them as personal attacks. I just find your position indefensible. You are actually advocating for more tragedies to prevent tragedies. It's insane. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:50:20 AM · #345 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Not wrong, PGerst. Duck & Cover it is. from a 1950s School bomb drill.. |
I remember the same drill when I went to school in the '70's. Despite the assurances of our parents and other adults, we were terrified that we would be vaporized in the flash of nuclear fire. |
What's so sad about this, Spork99, is that now a new generation (or more) of kids will likely be terrified
that they'll be gunned down in their seats as they try to learn their A B Cs. |
And now, it seems that my point has been made.
Poor fricken kids. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:52:11 AM · #346 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies. |
Additionally, guns are designed to kill. That is their function. It's not even a question of necessity, it's a question of purpose. |
No. Their function is to fire a projectile. The purpose of firing that projectile may be to kill a person, more likely it would be to defend a helpless person, it might be to put holes close together in a piece of paper, it might be to put food on the table, defend crops or livestock from pests/predators... In any event, the purpose for which the projectile is fired is determined by the person with their finger on the trigger. |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:53:07 AM · #347 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Over TWELVE THOUSAND CHILDREN are killed in the US every year in alcohol related auto accidents. |
Wow! That's a crazy high number. What's the source?
According to this article there were 32,367 traffic fatalities in 2011. So you're saying nearly half of those are children and that those child fatalities were alcohol related? |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:56:01 AM · #348 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
You are forgiven.
As for the rest of your post you are completely misinterpreting and not completely understanding things that have been said. Further more, your attempts at verbal attacks at me on behalf of those misinterpretations is just sad and really not worth any more of a response other than to say you can not compare a nuclear bomb (which wipes out a city) or a car (which is practically difficult to accomplish) to what has happened time and time again.
Originally posted by Cory:
Oh, gee. Shame on me. How dare I. (post an image of duck & cover in this thread)
|
|
Seems to me that the post wasn't inappropriate at all. Other folks see the parallel between the current use of "Lockdowns" and the original "Duck & Cover" campaign. The whole point is that the response is disproportionate and will terrorize FAR more children than would otherwise be affected. These "safety" programs are more effective at making the kids feel threatened than they are at making the children safe.
Food for thought.
As I see it, intentionally, or perhaps not, this is a horrible thing to do to children - but in the end, those advocating for a NERF'd world should be pleased with the results, as the current generation will be raised to see the world as a place full of crazed gunmen who want to shoot up schools, just as the older generation sees the world as a place full of Commies ready to drop nukes on all major American Cities.
History repeats itself - it's just the minor details that change.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 12:01:15 PM · #349 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies. |
Additionally, guns are designed to kill. That is their function. It's not even a question of necessity, it's a question of purpose. |
No. Their function is to fire a projectile. The purpose of firing that projectile may be to kill a person, more likely it would be to defend a helpless person, it might be to put holes close together in a piece of paper, it might be to put food on the table, defend crops or livestock from pests/predators... In any event, the purpose for which the projectile is fired is determined by the person with their finger on the trigger. |
Oh, c'mon! That's splitting hairs. Guns were DESIGNED TO KILL. Granted, SOME guns now are intended for tamer pursuits, but... You can't eradicate the history of weaponry just by saying "the function of a gun is to fire a projectile."
|
|
|
|
12/17/2012 12:06:07 PM · #350 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Cory:
What difference is there? I see no real difference other than the tool used. Please help me to understand why 20 dead kids under a car are so different from 20 dead kids with bullet wounds? |
Cars are deemed necessary, guns not so much. That's where the major difference lies. |
Additionally, guns are designed to kill. That is their function. It's not even a question of necessity, it's a question of purpose. |
No. Their function is to fire a projectile. The purpose of firing that projectile may be to kill a person, more likely it would be to defend a helpless person, it might be to put holes close together in a piece of paper, it might be to put food on the table, defend crops or livestock from pests/predators... In any event, the purpose for which the projectile is fired is determined by the person with their finger on the trigger. |
Oh, c'mon! That's splitting hairs. Guns were DESIGNED TO KILL. Granted, SOME guns now are intended for tamer pursuits, but... You can't eradicate the history of weaponry just by saying "the function of a gun is to fire a projectile." |
I agree, but my comment wasn't really about guns and cars being the same.
It was intended as an observation that 20 dead kids are still 20 dead kids - I don't care what tool was used. |
|
