Flash cartoon by the kid who shot up his school

[QUOTE=Nightrious]-Violence in movies
-Violence in video games
-Gun control
-Bad parenting
-Lack of religion
-Too much religion
-Too many kids in each class
-Too much pressure for teenagers these days
-Rap music!
-Influence by the war in Iraq
-Racism, sexism, homophobia
-Crazy hormones, what we need is school uniforms

Pick one.

There's simply too many people in the world and some of them are snapping. There is no single problem that can be resolved to stop this.[/QUOTE]
HAHAHA

[QUOTE=capitalistnihilist]Wow, strong argument. You convinced me- guns can't be tools, they are far too evil. You however are a tool (not a literal one obviously- this parenthical is needed to obviate your likely rebuttal of "How am I a tool?")[/QUOTE]
i wasn't arguing, you blowhard, i was asking 'since when is a gun a tool?', hence the question mark. it's a valid question that didn't get answered.

p.s. you're played out.

[QUOTE=Xk3zofrenik]News are just a record. A record that this stuff happened, granted that they are manipulated for other means but in the end it is just a record.

Killing is just part of human nature. You set yourself in a position that you are a threat for whatever reason to someone else and you could be killed and in turn kill as well.

The thing is that news remind us of this fact that we program ourselves to forget. Inavertedly with all the economic pressures of not only the world but locally you can see how we are killing ourselves very close to each other. It happens with less frequency from place to place, country to country but it happens. I don't think you can erase that.

Nature doesn't need to do shit. Just wait till there are less resources like oil, say about 10 years only, and lets wait and see how the world is. Probably some countries will adapt and find other ways, but if they don't there is probably going to be a lot of shit happening, and that is just one resource.

Yet we forge ourselves that everything is ok, one might even dream of how things would be when one gets old, but it is all really an illusion. The world inherited is quite a killing one.

The problem is not the news, the problem is one dreaming something that is not quite accurate with the cruel reality of the world. The news just burst the bubble.

Now back to the topic of the kids, i have read about kids very small killing out of envy because of a new born, right there is tha innate ability to kill because of envy or competition. I can assure you there are plenty of kids who would kill to think there was this foreign baby to take his/her parents love away from them in their perspective. Even out of love people kill, by lots.

I don't think there is a way to fix that, there is a way however to keep it under covers so that we don't see this ugly truth quite often, but i can assure you right about now as i type someone is planning to kill somebody or someone already is for whatever reason. that is just part of life.[/QUOTE]

you say nature doesnt need to do shit, but its human nature to kill. which is it, man? haha. im confused as to what you are trying to convey.

As far as I am concerned, we make reason. Yet, we are a sliver of intelligence, so whats makes any reasoning a good explanation or a bad one? you see? we can come up with anything and call it logic if enough people agree with it, all standing on the side of substantial and determinate evidence...in a follow-the-yellow-brick-road-kind-of-way. but, if people disagree and there are enough of them who do, it is sometimes but more often than not, considered illogical. instead of just being misunderstood due to lack of presentation or the ability to continue, whether it be inconsistant or unscientific....really? who is it up to to determine such things but the people we do not know. probably for some, if not more than half, these people we do not trust by the millions because we do not know them and what we do know isnt any good. these people behind the red curtain; the government. Im taking this post about killing instead about the fucked up government, but exactly on topic at the same time...so this organisation makes laws. These laws are to abide or break while not getting caught. To hold a territory, we go to war. We`ve been killing for all sorts of things and its only OK when the government puts you to it. And if you evade a war when the government has appointed you, they take you to jail if you get caught from being awol. So, you go to jail when you dont kill as the government tells you to, and you go to jail if you kill when they havent told you to. Im not saying it is ok to kill or that it is wrong to kill. I like red meat, but not human meat, mainly because i havent had human steak to make an accurate judgement. You cant really say for sure if killing is wrong because the only opinion we have is the one we were raised on and to break away from that makes one feel weak. So, those outside of themselves and others are called pussies when theyre pretty damn strong for not following the pristine yellow brick road and taking the mossy brick road instead.
So how do we tell if killing is wrong? Under the circumstances in which one was killed, murdered....uh....any other kind of...hm, wrongful death, I guess...?
Naturally, you would think, `yeah its wrong.`
But, Kevorkian is in prison now, for helping people with a `Planned Death` cirriculum. But people who ask doctors to take them off of feeding tubes and breathing machines...family who ask doctors to allow it to happen, either by evidence of a living will or whathaveyou... the doctors allow it, the judges allow it....and they are not in prison.

So go figure.

Whos to say what when a definition has its own meaning. They say beauty is in the eye of its beholder.

[QUOTE=cassun]not in schools, they're not. this is the worst shooting of its kind since columbine in '99, and there's only been a couple reported school shootings in the last two years, way down from the prior years. the thing is kids are getting more creative in their ways of killing, which obviously draws more attention. like when that kid stole a cops gun and shot him and three other people a little while back, claiming he was playing out Grand Theft Auto. or those kids who were dropping shit from overpasses onto the cars below, or this chick in texas who called 911 about a fake hostage situation (read the thread) who, although she didn't kill anyone, she very well could have and she wouldn't have given a shit. the thing is media--books, movies, music--they do influence kids, but that's no reason whatsoever for people to think that banning these things is the answer. did marilyn manson really cause the kids in columbine to shoot their peers? no. did it help formulate an image in their minds? possibly. but so what. every time i see britney spears on the television i want to gouge out my eyes, but that doesn't mean i think banning her from television is going to make me any better, because i'm bound to find something else that makes me want to do the same thing. whatever takes her place is probably going to be worse anyhow. so the answer isn't having the thought police rounding up people who swear on their CDs or arresting people who make violent movies. its not about taking away kids rights to play videogames or whatever. the answer lies in better parenting and people being more vigilant and thoughtful of their neighbors, classmates, coworkers, prisonmates, etcs.[/QUOTE]

Columbine killed more people than this Indian reserve redwood whatever place of 300 kids. Columbine killed less people considering the fact that it took two kids to knock off that amount of people, compared to the one kid it took to kill the people he did in the Indian place. Thats the only reference to it being the worst, considering the evaluation of numbers added and subtracted accurately. But I suck at math, so Im not entirely sure my take on it is accurate.

i agree with most of what you stated. I really hate it when bad things that happen are blamed on video games, movies, music....It is outside of those things that help or aid people into making decisions unaccpetable through minds of the majority. Some think bad parenting, no good group of friends, extracurricular activites or the lack of....
its a whole slew of things that make up theory. but we dont look in the right places for the right amount of time. Well, it seems like what is happening, is that mostly....were fucking lazy and take the first thing that sounds good because something else bad has just happened that wants attention too.

I dunno. Haha, what the hell is that all about

[QUOTE=capitalistnihilist]Wow, strong argument. You convinced me- guns can't be tools, they are far too evil. You however are a tool (not a literal one obviously- this parenthical is needed to obviate your likely rebuttal of "How am I a tool?")[/QUOTE]

sure guns are tools- tools with the express purpose of killing things. and as violence always has, and always will, lead to more violence- wtf should we keep them around for when all they do is make violence easier? i dont get it.

if you want to argue about the violence creates violence thing - look at 9/11. the jackass terrorists attacked us for having a military presence in the arab world and for abandoning afghanistan after teaching them to fight off the USSR. (i know those arent the only reasons, but they are important) so violence and militarism caused the 9/11 attacks, which in turn caused the royal shrub to decree that we should attack them. so we did (and iraq as well, but thats beside the point.) and now lots more people are dead and you are in "crapistan"

oh wow, i hope people dont htink i was arguing. that was just some elevator chit chat.

[QUOTE=Minuet]you say nature doesnt need to do shit, but its human nature to kill. which is it, man? haha. im confused as to what you are trying to convey.
haha. You are right, i guess i meant nature didn't need to do anything else then.

Well if you want to see it that way, We could dwelve into other waters: Who are We? and are We real? and all that. However what i can recall of what i know is that most of these logic follow either a betterment of the common good or something that is sold along those lines. To again appease that inner competition and kill each other slower and in different ways. A win-win situation.

However in actuality this isn't so by far, many of our lives are ruled by a handful of judges who basically determine logic in many cases. Such as what is murder and whatever. So i guess we agree? and disagree?

I know. Goverment carry the same principles of competition and killing just as normal people do to equal and in most cases worst degress. And actually the penalty for going awol during war can lead up to capital punishment if i recall my knowledge of the whatever military laws (its been a while, is funny i did have to learn it in Basic).

However you did mention something about this issue needed to be "fixed". I would say that there is a subtle negative judgement towards it.

[QUOTE=Xk3zofrenik]haha. You are right, i guess i meant nature didn't need to do anything else then.

Well if you want to see it that way, We could dwelve into other waters: Who are We? and are We real? and all that. However what i can recall of what i know is that most of these logic follow either a betterment of the common good or something that is sold along those lines. To again appease that inner competition and kill each other slower and in different ways. A win-win situation.

However in actuality this isn't so by far, many of our lives are ruled by a handful of judges who basically determine logic in many cases. Such as what is murder and whatever. So i guess we agree? and disagree?

I know. Goverment carry the same principles of competition and killing just as normal people do to equal and in most cases worst degress. And actually the penalty for going awol during war can lead up to capital punishment if i recall my knowledge of the whatever military laws (its been a while, is funny i did have to learn it in Basic).

However you did mention something about this issue needed to be "fixed". I would say that there is a subtle negative judgement towards it.

Actually i don't find killing any wronger than any of the daily stuff that happens. Only because i have this side of me that ponders the value of all things. To me the relevance of things is very small, in the end we end up to be dust, so This Moment (The thing we ONLY have), is really only relevant instantly and at the same time, that by itself doesn't have that much value. It is an existential Prison, none of us agreed to be made, we just accept things, so in essence we are already followers by birth no matter what, and then we can only do things relevant to the now then on.

So what are WE? What is getting killed? What is the loss?

In the meantime, i have to follow along with all the needs of such Prison.[/QUOTE]

how do we know though, if we didnt agree to be created?
what if we had everything to do with it.

but thats just, `what ifs` and, `oh wows.` kinda cool, i think.

[QUOTE=sacredchao23]sure guns are tools- tools with the express purpose of killing things. and as violence always has, and always will, lead to more violence- wtf should we keep them around for when all they do is make violence easier? i dont get it.

if you want to argue about the violence creates violence thing - look at 9/11. the jackass terrorists attacked us for having a military presence in the arab world and for abandoning afghanistan after teaching them to fight off the USSR. (i know those arent the only reasons, but they are important) so violence and militarism caused the 9/11 attacks, which in turn caused the royal shrub to decree that we should attack them. so we did (and iraq as well, but thats beside the point.) and now lots more people are dead and you are in "crapistan"[/QUOTE]

If only things were that simple. Ok, if we could somehow cast some fucking magical spell and remove all weapons from the planet, sure why not. Lets do it. However, that is not going to happen.

As you seem to have such a disdain for the current administration I'll ask you this. Would you really want the only people with guns to be the police and the military? Do you really want only the government to have these "tools?" I certainly wouldn't.

With guns illegal the only people who will possess them are criminals and the police/military. And as far as the police helping you in a life/death situation fucking forget about it. By the time they respond to your frantic call at 2am while a robber/rapist is in your house, you are fucked/robbed and in many cases beaten or dead.

I wish the violence creating violence thing were that easy also but it just isn't. Its the whole chicken or the egg thing. Who fucked who first? Western society and Muslim extremism don't mix and I highly doubt they can co-exist peacefully. Do you really think that if we pulled all troops from the Mid East that they would just leave us alone? Or that they wouldn't try as hard as they could to skull-fuck Israel? We are still the great satan to them regardless of what we do next.

It would be so fucking sweet if we could just leave the Middle East alone but that isn't an option either. That part of the world is just to fucking important from a strategic and economic standpoint. I am not saying that isn't a fucked up fact but it is a fact.

I am by no means a right wing NRA fanatic. I just think that this utopian society where everyone gets along and there are no guns is a pipe-dream.

sure its a scary thought that only the military/police would have guns. (though maybe the cops wouldnt need them so badly if there were less on the street) im not really saying we should should get rid of all guns- collectibles, hunting rifles, etc i think are ok, though i dont really want to collect them or hunt with them. Most of the people who collect or hunt arent planning on killing any one. But do you really need a fucking ak-47 to hunt a deer? weapons like that are fucking stupid and shouldnt be so accessible. and if my house is being invaded, theres always a baseball bat or something.
And my main concern, to add some bumper sticker wisdom to the debate, is this - "if guns were outlawed, only outlaws would accidently shoot their kids." this happens a lot more times then we hear about.

Autarchies are made in this same fashion. I take away something we necessarily don't need as a holistic society, but we'll keep them because you never know when they might come in handy. But, sorry guys you are screwed because, hey, you gave these armaments to us. This really isn't anticipatory logic on either parts, however this is how the tide flows and float your way through it, folks. Now you are left with real no self-defense mechanism besides caveman social darwinism and Eastern combat art. If everyone just had this in the world, cabals would definitely see an uprising.

[QUOTE=sacredchao23]sure its a scary thought that only the military/police would have guns. (though maybe the cops wouldnt need them so badly if there were less on the street) im not really saying we should should get rid of all guns- collectibles, hunting rifles, etc i think are ok, though i dont really want to collect them or hunt with them. Most of the people who collect or hunt arent planning on killing any one. But do you really need a fucking ak-47 to hunt a deer? weapons like that are fucking stupid and shouldnt be so accessible. and if my house is being invaded, theres always a baseball bat or something.
And my main concern, to add some bumper sticker wisdom to the debate, is this - "if guns were outlawed, only outlaws would accidently shoot their kids." this happens a lot more times then we hear about.[/QUOTE]

As far as the accidental shooting of kids- I dunno. What about the accidental killing of scores of people with automobiles? That is just as stupid a reason to ban cars as accidental shootings is for banning guns. Of course the argument could be made that cars are a postitive, utilitarian thing whereas guns are evil tools of death. Bah.

Fact is there are stupid mother fuckers on this earth that will kill and rape and torture and steal regardless of the weapons at their disposal. And there are also careless people who will harm themselves and others with guns, cars, staplers, tape dispensers, can openers or what have you.

difference between cars and guns is that cars do more then just kill things, the killing is a horrible side effect. Its like the difference between serin gas and NO2. Both can kill, but NO2 has a legitimate purpose as an anesthetic.

god this argument feels like im hitting my head against a brick wall. Its so completely pointless because both of us have valid points of view and arguments to back them up. Youd think we could figure out some kind of alternative that would actually work. maybe one day we'll all go crazy and figure it out. personally i think that if everyone would just realize that the only reason people kill each other is because they decide to, then they would just stop. Which is why i cling to my hopelessly romantic ideas about pacifisim- we arent going to get any closer to not killing each other if we just say "thats life. deal with it." or some other pedantic cliche.

Well killing things is something that is required at times wouldn't you say? Or do you think it is never right to kill?

I never did like this argument either, I usually try to avoid it. I was just feeling like a prick when I orginally posted in this thread.

im personally against killing in any situation, though i have a feeling that if i had to choose between killing or seeing a friend/family member/random stranger who could be a fucking asshole killed, id probably start shooting like a madman. thus is life.

i dont like having this kind of argument, but look forward to having it on the off chance that something actually gets figured out.

I am just happy to have the discussion with someone who actually talks to me not at me. And who also takes in what I have said and realizes that there are good points to both sides. That is extremely rare, especially on an issue such as this.