US: 30 shot at school, China: 22 knifed at school

"Guns don't kill people, they just make it easier to kill people"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I would like to add another perspective to this - Those who knew him said -

That sound awfully like a normal person, a friend or a classmate. Is there no way to tell if they are going to pull some shit like this before they actually do it? Both the Columbine and Virginia attackers were very troubled but nobody realised it until it was too late. Perhaps we could focus more on detecting these issues and treating them rather than on gun control? Perhaps we can merge the two and use some psych tests on those applying for a gun license AND their close relatives who might get access to the weapons and thereby selectively make smarter restrictions so that a father can defend his child against a mugger but a depressed guy cant use his father's gun and kill some kids?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So its ok if a father of a depressed adult cannot protect himself from a mugger or maybe his own son?

http://www.startribune.com/local/south/84803012.html?refer=y

How long do you take a gun away from a rape victim; someone who will likely suffer both depression and PTSD?

How long do you take a gun away from someone whos lost their job?

Do you take the guns from roomates of depressed people?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Here is a tip for the anti gun wannabes. Make laws saying mentally ill people cannot hold guns. Then transmit words and sounds into the heads of all americans for 2-3 weeks, and you got everything thinking they are mental, and have to turn in there guns.

Sounds far fetched, lol, but they have the techs too do this today.

So
1) Make laws saying all mentally ill people cannot get guns.
2) Tranmsit over lets say a month sounds and voices in all peoples heads using some high tech they have, that they used recently in gaza.
3) Then everyone in america in mental, and you have job done, everyone has no right to firearms.

If you think they cannot do this, they did this recently in gaza, transmitting sounds and words in to there heads.

So they have the techs, just need the law to pass to ban mentally ill people from holding firearms, than your good to go.

You could call it, Operation turn america mental

But heck hollywood has already done that already

You can get the fbi mind controllers, to use the techs they used on david koresh at waco, the gov got there will there didn't they?

Plus there is a difference between something talking through you and someone talking into your brain. Channelling cannot be trusted today, but it was once used alot. Today i would not trust channellers, as techs have become to advanced to not know its just not the gov.

You see all you people talking about mentally ill people have no idea what is going on, and or what the gov may be doing to you. They do not care about us, only there goals.

What i am getting at is that the american gov can turn any of you people into wrecks, and say your mentally disturbed, and i mean anyone.
If you want to label certain people unfit, the gov may one day turn it on everyone.

You see where i am going with this.
This can be done to anyone, its very easy for gov to call anyone mentally disturbed.

 

I personally care not what you believe.

I found out they used mind control weapons on kids in school in 1992, in london(yep i am saying the uk gov uses mind control weapons on kids in schools back in 1992). So the year after you telling me the waco thing, did not have those same techs being used.

If they are using techs on schools in uk back in 1992, you would think that your gov would be using them on waco a year after that.

Plus go and research this stuff if you want, there are many books on it now. I just talk about my stuff, and these people probably target like 100 kids in schools before they go and do something like school shootings.

I reckon the hit rate is small, but i reckon they destroy plenty of lifes before this people with these techs get a hit. I mean someone who will go and shoot up schools, like we have seen in the past. Take all your school shootings over last 20 years, and times the number by 100 to see probably how many lifes these people destroy with techs in schools before someone does something.

Amazing how ignorant the public are in such matters.

You can ignore what i am saying, or laugh it off, they are still doing it. Take from what i write what you want, and ignore it if you want. I am telling you what i found out. If they did this to me, they have done it to loads.

I reckon they must destroy many a life in schools, before they get a hit.

 

The reason i post this is for people who claim mk ultra stuff. Yep some of these probably where.

But i reckon there hit rate is still like 1 in 100 or so, its very low. To get people to shoot up masses of people even with mind control, still has alot of work to it.

Most people still will not harm people even if they wreck there lifes, as i assume many lifes are wrecked at schools in uk or usa.

So even though they got some hits, remember the amount of people they wrecked to get those hits is alot.

The person still has to go and do something. They are probably testing what it takes for people to go that far, and what type of person would go and do what they want, and seeing how the mob reacts. Its probably a very complicated business. But the person still has to decide and go and do these things.

This is probably what they are testing. I am posting this so people that talk about mk ultra stuff will know that they try and do this plenty of times, its just that only a small amount of people will want to do this destruction. Most people even if they are totally destroyed by mind control will still not do stuff like this, its only a minority that gives them a hit.

 

These are getting closer and closer together.

Who are these public shooters? Do these guy line up targets for certain reasons, or are they wild at it? Maybe we should round up a posse of telepath friends and read some thoughts.

 

It's a sad reflection of the times but perhaps teachers need to be added to the list of "job which requires them"...

 

I don't agree with that at all. Having a gun gives one a sense of power over other people. In the heat of the moment, during road rage or an argument with your neighbor, an available gun pushes you to take action that you wouldn't normally take. That's why I'll never own a gun. I don't want that sort of power over people.

 

Wow..I think we just heard the psychopath's argument for no gun control.

 

I suppose all those here are aware that Canada, by way of example, has a higher rate of gun ownership per capita than the USA does.

So, basically, it isn't guns... its the USA.
I mean, Asguard, Bells.... you're both Australian. So really, you have no idea what you're talking about. You're both weighing in on a debate in which you have no direct experience, other than your own proclivities.

You're both all about applying a band-aid to a case of gangrene.
So, what, you think a "guns 'r bad" argument will do, until someone else figures out what to do about it all?

You know what... most of these arguments put me in mind of a Microsoft operating system.
It's flawed, bulky, bloated and full of holes.
But hell, it's what everyone believes in. So let's patch the hell out of it and pretend it's the best thing since the wheel. they'll buy it... they always have.

Because all those with half a clue and an opinion can pretend to have answers. That's just so much easier.

 

And as for you, Magical Realist... you're certainly magical, but no realist.

 

I have to say, a gun is inanimate it doesn't have the ability to MAKE you do anything.

 

Marquis, is a omni-directional spray of ad hominems at fellow posters really constructive towards rational dialogue? So you imply there is culture of gun violence in the U.S. How is this separate from the well-nigh manic fetish so many Americans exhibit for owning guns?

 

What rational dialogue were you referring to?

 

"Constructive towards rational dialogue"...as in going to or headed for a possible state.

 

Rational dialogue leads only to a majority consensus. Usually, that consensus is based not on the logical value of dialogue itself, but is instead mostly dependent upon the charismatic value of one or more of the antagonists.

To put it simply, we know our philosophical positions before we post here. Our evaluation of any argument is entirely subjective.

To put it even more simply, if you don't like me, ignore me. Telling me to be nice will have no effect whatsoever.
I don't believe in god, I don't believe in being nice, and I don't believe in the majority of you.

 

Fine. Be a troll then. And consider yourself hereby totally ignored.