Don't even know what a good title is......

[Mexican Kerry]

I have no new ideas, I have nothing to say that hasn't been said a hundred times already. I'm just plain old sick and tired of the debate over gun control. I'm not up in arms about a recent incident where a firearm was used against innocent people. I'm not trying to use sensational phrasing to stir emotion.

Whenever a criminal shooting occurs, the knee jerk reaction is to discuss banning that particular firearm, firearms that are "similar", or at least magazine capacity with the (laughable) justification that criminals in the future wouldn't be able to kill as many people if the gun didn't have as many bullets in it.

There is a perception that semi auto pistols, rifles and shotguns are dangerous and that their mere existence causes people to use them to harm others. We've all heard the "scary black gun" talk, as well as the label "assault rifle."

I own firearms that span several brands, styles, configurations. I hunt, I shoot at informal target matches, I collect interesting (to me) firearms, and I enjoy the company of like minded enthusiasts of the shooting community. Neither I nor any of my firearms have ever been involved in any criminal activity, nor have I ever had the inclination to even consider such a thing.

A firearm isn't the cause of a mass shooting, its a mis-used tool. The firearm is not the reason that person did what they did. If that firearm wasn't available would the shooter have simply gone on with his/her life in anonymity? I can't give a definitive yes or no answer to that question, I'm certainly not an expert on the human psyche.

There are checks and balances in the system to try keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals but there is no perfect system. There will probably always be exceptions. The answer to people who advocate stricter gun control often involves the word "ban." Gun control is a broad subject that can mean many things but the usual path seems to focus on paring down the list of firearms that people can legally own/use.

With the upcoming federal election in Canada there is renewed talk of bans, confiscations, etc. As a gun owner this concerns me. My particular area of greater interest happens to be Colt pistols. Old and new, I've collected them for years and at the risk of sounding like I'm bragging, I've invested a fairly healthy amount of money in this hobby.

One of my concerns is that in the event of laws changing to a state that requires me to give them up, I'm not only unable to continue the pursuit of my interest, but I'm going to suffer considerable financial loss with no gains to society.

Does that sound cold? I don't think so. I sympathize with anyone who has lost a loved one due to a criminal taking a life. Their loss and grief is beyond imaginable to me.

My firearms being turned in/confiscated will have zero positive effect in the attempts to curb criminal activity. A person wishing to do harm to others will do it whether they can buy a gun or not. As has been said before by others, there is a deeper problem than the existence and availability of firearms.

The gun laws between Canada and the US are very different but there are common threads in places. As well, we as gun owners do face similar challenges at times.

Just wanted to express some thoughts, maybe start a discussion about them.

[jackalo626]

Your on point. My guns have never committed an act of violence and I can't be held liable because someone else I never met used his gun for bad. I have my guns for that exact reason, bad guys will try to terrorize the weak and I will not be a victim.

[Gunsmokin]

Nothing the gun ban cabal could ever think of to do will ever, EVER, take the gun out of the hands of a criminal. EVER! Then, emboldened with the knowledge that their potential victims are most certainly unarmed and defenseless, they will rob and murder unabated. I, also, will not be a victim.

[Niceguy]

A lot of uninformed anti's down here already think you all are a gun free utopia with zero shootings or violent crimes...

[Mexican Kerry]

A lot of uninformed anti's down here already think you all are a gun free utopia with zero shootings or violent crimes...

Canada is neither a gun-free nation, nor a crime-free utopia. There is maybe LESS gun-related crime, but I believe that is merely a result of a "per-capita" type of statistic. All things being equal, there is crime here. Numbers may seem low but you have to remember that our national population is a fraction of what yours is.

A link to a stats-Canada page.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidie ... 1a-eng.htm

[Mexican Kerry]

There were 131 firearm-related homicides in 2013, down 41 from 2012. This resulted in the lowest rate of firearm-related homicide since comparable data became available in 1974. Despite the decline, shooting was the cause of death in about one-quarter (27%) of homicides.

While firearm-related homicides decreased in 2013, the number of fatal stabbings grew. There were 195 fatal stabbings, 31 more than in 2012. Stabbings accounted for 40% of all homicides in Canada in 2013.

Maybe we should look at a registry for knives.

[Mexican Kerry]

If you go by these statistics (given out by the Gov't, I know), in 2013 there were 505 homicides in Canada. 131 of those were committed with a firearm.

85 of the 505 were supposedly committed in "gang related" activity but the report fails to mention how many of these involved firearms, so unfortunately I can't use criminals in my case at this point.

[Toddstang]

School attacks in China (2010–12)


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to: navigation, search


A series of uncoordinated mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks in the People's Republic of China began in March 2010. The spate of attacks left at least 25 dead and some 115 injured. As most cases had no known motive, analysts have blamed mental health problems caused by rapid social change for the rise in these kinds of mass murder and murder-suicide incidents.[1]

As the Chenpeng school attack was followed by the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in the United States hours later[2][3] comparisons were drawn between the two. The difference in gun control laws between the two countries was used to explain the disparity in casualties of the school attacks by journalists and politicians, including U.S. Representative Jerry Nadler,[4][5] and an article in the Associated Press noted that despite the different outcomes, an underlying commonality between the attacks was the increased frequency of school attacks because, "attackers often seek out the vulnerable, hoping to amplify their outrage before they themselves often commit suicide."[6]
March 2010[edit]

Main article: Nanping school massacre

On March 23, 2010, Zheng Minsheng (郑民生)[7] 41, murdered eight children with a knife in an elementary school in Nanping,[8] Fujian province;[9] The attack was widely reported in Chinese media (called 南平实验小学重大凶杀案),[7] sparking fears of copycat crimes.[9] Following a quick trial, Zheng Minsheng was executed about one month later on April 28.[8] Media reported a history of mental health issues, but police stated that Zheng had no history of mental illness, contradicting earlier reports. Zheng said that he performed the attack after being turned down by a girl and suffering "unfair treatment" from the girl's wealthy family.

April 2010[edit]

Just a few hours after the execution of Zheng Minsheng in neighboring Fujian Province,[10] in Leizhou,[11] Guangdong another knife-wielding man named Chen Kangbing, 33 (陈康炳)[12] at Hongfu Primary School wounded 16 students and a teacher.[9] Chen Kangbing had been a teacher at a different primary school in Leizhou, but was on sick leave due to mental illness[12][13] He was sentenced to death by a court in Zhanjiang in June.[14]

On April 29 in Taixing,[8] Jiangsu, unemployed 47-year-old Xu Yuyuan went to Zhongxin Kindergarten[15] and stabbed 28 students and two teachers after stabbing the security guard;[9] most of the Taixing students were 4 years old.[16] The attack was the second in China in just two days.

On April 30, Wang Yonglai used a hammer to cause head injury to preschool children in Weifang,[8] Shandong, then used gasoline to commit suicide by self-immolation.[9]

May 2010[edit]

An attacker named Wu Huanming (吴环明), 48, killed seven children and two adults and injured 11 other persons with a cleaver at a kindergarten in Hanzhong, Shaanxi on May 12, 2010;[8] early reports were removed from the internet in China, for fear that mass coverage of such violence can provoke copycat attacks.[8][17] The attacker later committed suicide at his house; he was the landlord of the school,[18] Shengshui Temple private kindergarten, and had been involved in an ongoing dispute with the school administrator about when the school would move out of the building.[18]

On May 18, 2010 at Hainan Institute of Science and Technology (海南科技职业学院), a vocational college in Haikou, Hainan, more than 10 men[19] charged into a dormitory wielding knives around 2:30 am;[20] after attacking the security guard and disabling security cameras, 9 students were injured, 1 seriously.[20] The local men attacked the dorm in an act of revenge and retaliation against college students following conflict the previous day at an off-campus food stall in which 4 students were injured, for a total of 13.[21]

August 2010[edit]

On 4 August 2010, 26-year-old Fang Jiantang (方建堂) slashed more than 20 children and staff with a 60 cm knife, killing 3 children and 1 teacher, at a kindergarten in Zibo, Shandong province. Of the injured, 3 other children and 4 teachers were taken to the hospital. After being caught Fang confessed to the crime. There was no known motive.[22] Since the start of the year, a total of 27 people had died and at least 80 were injured in various knife attacks.

August 2011[edit]

Eight children, all aged four or five,[23] were hurt in Minhang District, Shanghai when an employee at a child-care centre for migrant workers slashed the children who were 3 to 4 years old with a box-cutter.[24] The woman had worked there for years, but was thought to have psychiatric problems.

September 2011[edit]

In September 2011, a young girl and three adults taking their children to nursery school were killed in Gongyi,[25] Henan by 30-year-old Wang Hongbin with an axe.[26] Another child and an adult were seriously wounded but survived.[27] The suspect is a local farmer who is suspected of being mentally ill.[28]

December 2012[edit]

Main article: Chenpeng Village Primary School stabbing

On 14 December 2012, a 36-year-old villager in the village of Chenpeng, Henan Province, stabbed 23 children and an elderly woman at the village's primary school as children were arriving for classes.[29] The attacker was restrained at the school, and later arrested.[30] All of the victims survived and were treated at three hospitals, though some were reportedly seriously injured, with fingers or ears cut off, and had to be transferred to larger hospitals for specialized care.[31]

Causes[edit]

Prof. Joshua Miller, chair of Social Welfare Policy at Smith College, attributed the attacks to stress caused by "rapid social change, mass migrations, increasing disparities in wealth and weakening of traditions."[32] Some sociologists believe some of these attacks may be due to the PRC government's failure to diagnose and treat mental illness.[20] The perpetrators may feel victimized by stress due to the rapid social changes[20] in China during the last 10 years caused by the privatization and decreased social security of China's reform and opening period. During this time, more and more migrant workers from rural areas have moved to cities such as Shanghai to find jobs. However because they do not have social security (because of the hukou system), many of them do not have health insurance. Because of the financial crisis of 2007–2010, some have lost their jobs, which is stigmatized in China, and have had to return to their native villages jobless and unemployed. The choice of schools for most of the attacks means they could be copycat crimes.[20][32]

Another factor is China's male-based gender imbalance cause by the one child policy. Where there are a lot of single men frustrated at the dating market in China and their low prospects that they are likely to resort to violence. [33]

Reaction and response[edit]

Since the recent spate of attacks, many parents are now worried about their children's safety in schools and have since asked local officials and school governors to step up security at the schools. The education ministry has formed an emergency panel to tackle the violence and some local police authorities have distributed such instruments as steel pitchforks and pepper spray to security guards in schools. However not all schools increased their security because of lack of funds to hire extra security. The state media has also been keeping news of these attacks quiet by deleting forum entries on the internet and releasing few facts on the incident for fear of copycat crimes and mass panic. In May 2010 Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao commented on the school attacks and said that the 'social tensions' in China must be addressed. He also said society was changing rapidly and that subsequent changes in policy were needed. Why these attacks have been specifically targeted at young school children is not entirely explicable, however.[34]

Following the Chenpeng school attack, the Chinese government began posting security guards in schools throughout the country. It is planned that all schools will have a security guard by 2013.[35]

[Gunsmokin]

So many words!!

[Toddstang]

So many words!!

LOL!

Yea, just pointing that a psycho will kill with what ever means possible.

Timothy Mc veigh didn't pull a trigger at all.

[Toddstang]

The USA was born out of a fight against authoritarianism and asserted its spirit of freedom and individual rights in it's written Constitution in order to keep that spirit alive - and it persists today throughout our culture and psyches.
We will not have our asses handed to us by a corrupt government or foreign enemies.

[WLJ]

So many words!!

LOL!

Yea, just pointing that a psycho will kill with what ever means possible.

Timothy Mc veigh didn't pull a trigger at all.

And 3,000 people were killed on 9-11 by guys armed with box cutters.

[Mexican Kerry]

Toddstang's long-worded post is an example. Guns aren't the issue, knives aren't the issue. No inanimate object is the issue. The way we structure our society is the issue, the way we treat people is the issue.

The idea that homicide and the brutalizing of others is a result of some person feeling hurt due to:

unrequited love or being rejected by someone you're interested in

sore feelings from a tenant/landlord relationship

butthurt from social media as a result of being an awkward, socially inept human being

is a bullshit excuse, but it is a result of us as a society.

Unacceptable. We (Western culture) are a society of people who walk on eggshells and tiptoe around in order to avoid political incorrectness. Whether you are Canadian or American you are a part of it. You can say "from my cold dead hand" all you want but the problem isn't solved by beating spears against shields. We are all voting members of our nations, we are responsible for what is now, and for what may come.

I'm not saying these people shouldn't be accountable for their actions. I'm not saying we should be nicer to people so they won't want to do bad things.

I'm saying maybe being nicer is the problem. Gonna go out on a limb here, might be getting a little too "Old Testament". "Spare the rod, spoil the child."

Too often Scripture gets wrapped up in extremist literature (left and right), I don't want to open that can of worms. It is used and abused by both sides. But there is a ring of truth to it isn't there?

Now that might be construed as a sort of "make people do what you want" thing, not my intention. I'm all for freedom, as long as its not infringing on others' freedom. By that I mean the freedom to draw breath. Not to harm others.

Media is quick to jump on anyone who quotes religious script. Anyone who does is vulnerable to being labeled a "religious wacko". This is accepted fact. But if one took the time to contemplate religious writings (I don't care what flavor), the basic theme is this:

Be a good person. There is nothing more to it. The Bible phrases it as "Do unto others as you would have done to you." At risk of causing ill will toward myself, the TRUE Islamic teachings are very similar.

[jackalo626]

Well the "true" or not teachings are all thrown out the window when that book tells of it not just being ok but being expected to eradicate infidels if they don't believe in the teachings and Allah. That is paraphrasing of course and I didn't go quote the passage while typing on my phone. I agree with spare the rod spoil the child and all of the other things you say about stop being so nice and call a spade a spade because when you don't and you coddle people their whole lives, they can't take it when a common sense person let's them know they are being an ass hole and are wrong so they kill people. Hearing the word participation trophy sends chills through my body and makes me nauseous. I am a live and let live guy as well and don't give a shit if you are a homosexual coke snorting Muslim donkey fucker who is a Cowgirls fan as my neighbor until you tell me what I should follow or how I can live.

[Toddstang]

Well the "true" or not teachings are all thrown out the window when that book tells of it not just being ok but being expected to eradicate infidels if they don't believe in the teachings and Allah. That is paraphrasing of course and I didn't go quote the passage while typing on my phone. I agree with spare the rod spoil the child and all of the other things you say about stop being so nice and call a spade a spade because when you don't and you coddle people their whole lives, they can't take it when a common sense person let's them know they are being an ass hole and are wrong so they kill people. Hearing the word participation trophy sends chills through my body and makes me nauseous. I am a live and let live guy as well and don't give a shit if you are a homosexual coke snorting Muslim donkey fucker who is a Cowgirls fan as my neighbor until you tell me what I should follow or how I can live.

I agree 100%

[jackalo626]

Steelers fan mod.....

[Mexican Kerry]

I should revise my statement. Actually, what I should have done is kept my mouth shut regarding religion haha. All I'll say now is that in religious teaching there is interpretation vs literal meaning. I shouldn't have said "True Islamic teachings" because that wasn't strictly correct.

There are certainly passages that promote violence against non Muslims. There are Muslims who say these passages have no context in today's world, and choose not to follow those teachings. Unfortunately, there are others who still take it literally.

I'm in waaay over my head here and I went pretty far off topic. Not even sure how it ended up here but I was actually just trying to illustrate a point about people treating each other with respect. I'm not a religious wacko, honest. I'm also done speaking about Islam because I'm no expert on it, and I don't want anyone thinking I'm defending the violence done in its name.

[ChopperDoc]

There were 131 firearm-related homicides in 2013, down 41 from 2012. This resulted in the lowest rate of firearm-related homicide since comparable data became available in 1974. Despite the decline, shooting was the cause of death in about one-quarter (27%) of homicides.

While firearm-related homicides decreased in 2013, the number of fatal stabbings grew. There were 195 fatal stabbings, 31 more than in 2012. Stabbings accounted for 40% of all homicides in Canada in 2013.

Maybe we should look at a registry for knives.

This is exatly right.

When someone who is for gun control says "gun violence" or "gun crime" or "Gun deaths" you automatically know that they are either full of shit or completely ignorant.

If you take away one tool but the overall rate of murder or violent crime does not go down then what have you accomplished?

I always wonder if people who believe this garbage, should they be attacked, actually think "well at least he is not going to kill me with a gun."

Is murder somehow morally okay to them as long as a gun is not used?

[WLJ]

Knife Attack at Xinjiang Coal Mine Leaves 40 Dead, Injured
http://www.rfa.org/english/news/uyghur/ ... 50820.html

[jackalo626]

I should revise my statement. Actually, what I should have done is kept my mouth shut regarding religion haha. All I'll say now is that in religious teaching there is interpretation vs literal meaning. I shouldn't have said "True Islamic teachings" because that wasn't strictly correct.

There are certainly passages that promote violence against non Muslims. There are Muslims who say these passages have no context in today's world, and choose not to follow those teachings. Unfortunately, there are others who still take it literally.

I'm in waaay over my head here and I went pretty far off topic. Not even sure how it ended up here but I was actually just trying to illustrate a point about people treating each other with respect. I'm not a religious wacko, honest. I'm also done speaking about Islam because I'm no expert on it, and I don't want anyone thinking I'm defending the violence done in its name.

I am not saying you are a wacko nor do I believe it. I didn't write the Koran but I have a grasp of it and as you say ALL religion is interpretation and not literally taken as burning bushes talking seem pretty far out there for a person who sides with proven science. Faith is just that, faith. You believe or you dont. For some people religion makes them a better person and for others it makes them kill better people. My grandma was a very religious catholic that would pray for us and go to church all the time and donated money thinking it it what God wanted and the other side is some religious Muslims who drive car bombs into crowds thinking it is what God wants also.

[Mexican Kerry]

Well, election day. I shut down the site at 430 so the crew would get their legal 3 hr window of opportunity to vote before the poll stations close. I went and put my X on a piece of paper, I hope its enough because its all I can do.

Three choices:Liberal Party, New Democratic Party, Conservative Party. Only one choice as far as I'm concerned.

I can't vote Liberal cause of all the obvious reasons. This party is literally everything the gun community fights against. Their power and interests lie in eastern Canada, with no thought for the west. And they are led by the son of one of Canada's worst pm's in history. Some of you may remember him. Trudeau is a name that means entitled and self-serving.

NDP is a socialist party, they want to increase tax to small business and make everything "fair for all." I work my ass off, I should benefit from it, not those who wait with their hand out.

Conservatives led by Stephen Harper aren't perfect, nobody is. But his party understands the importance of business, and also the fact that the west is a huge potential for national success. And they are the least likely to try making me turn over my guns and everything else I've worked for.

Wish me (us) luck.

[baknblack]

Good luck. These days we need more than our luck. It has just about ran out. He who has the most money wins.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Mexican Kerry]

The Liberal vote is what I'm worried about. "The Turd" is slick, he appeals to the masses. But he's bad news.

[baknblack]

Down here the Democrats take your money and your guns. The Republicans take your money but, you get to keep your guns.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Mexican Kerry]

Ahh, they all take money.