GostHacked Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/multiple-people-stabbed-at-western-pennsylvania-high-school/ So this is more proof that guns are not the problem. It is the will and intent. People here said in a mocking kind of way that 'what we gonna ban knives now' ?? Maybe not, but you will see more security and metal detectors to try and prevent this from happening. Turning the schools into a prison like environment. MURRYSVILLE, Pa. - Multiple people were stabbed at a high school in the suburbs east of Pittsburgh, officials said. Emergency management spokesman Dan Stevens said four students were believed to be seriously injured when a student with a knife stabbed or slashed others, injuring as many as 20. Stevens said not all of the 20 injured were cut by the knife, though most were. Some suffered scrapes and cuts in the mayhem that ensued at Franklin Regional High School on Wednesday morning. Stevens says it doesn't appear any students suffered life-threatening injuries. While Stevens said all the injured are between 14 and 17 years old, hospital officials told CBS Pittsburgh the patients they were taking in from the incident range from 15 to 60 years old. The suspect, a male student, was taken into custody and being questioned. Jeff Dahlke, who works for the company that provides security for Franklin Regional High School, told CBS Pittsburgh that the suspect was armed with two knives. At the same time we had an incident in Toronto. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/as-many-as-5-stabbed-in-yonge-york-mills-office-in-toronto-1.2603977 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 So this is more proof that guns are not the problem. It is the will and intent. If you have the will and intent to kill a lot of people, guns make your job that much easier. Put another way: if the guy in PA had a gun, we wouldn't be talking about just four serious injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 If you have the will and intent to kill a lot of people, guns make your job that much easier. Put another way: if the guy in PA had a gun, we wouldn't be talking about just four serious injuries. That still does not take away from the point I am making. If they have the intent to kill/harm, then they will find a way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 That still does not take away from the point I am making. If they have the intent to kill/harm, then they will find a way. And....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 If you have the will and intent to kill a lot of people, guns make your job that much easier. Put another way: if the guy in PA had a gun, we wouldn't be talking about just four serious injuries. Unless somebody else had a gun to stop him. Anyways, unless you're going to change the 2nd amendment, your point is moot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 If somebody really has the will and intent, driving a car through a crowd can really do some damage. Ban cars! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Unless somebody else had a gun to stop him. Which almost never happens. Anyways, unless you're going to change the 2nd amendment, your point is moot. My point has nothing to do with the second amendment. If somebody really has the will and intent, driving a car through a crowd can really do some damage. Ban cars! What makes this real tasty is, if you tried to put the kinds of restrictions we have on car ownership on firearms in the U.S., all the gun fetishists would scream blue murder. At least cars have an actual purpose in society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 That still does not take away from the point I am making. If they have the intent to kill/harm, then they will find a way. Yes, they found a way to injure a bunch of people. No deaths! No guns = everyone is alive!! No one has ever said that gun control eliminates homicidal maniacs. But the maniacs may have to make do with a knife! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Yes, they found a way to injure a bunch of people. No deaths! No guns = everyone is alive!! No one has ever said that gun control eliminates homicidal maniacs. But the maniacs may have to make do with a knife! So why are we not getting to the root of the issue? Why is the reaction to ban something instead? I get the reasoning behind multiple murders, but criminals don't register their weapons. So a ban on guns or even knives might save lives, but they still do not get to the root of why these events keep happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 So why are we not getting to the root of the issue? Why is the reaction to ban something instead? I get the reasoning behind multiple murders, but criminals don't register their weapons. So a ban on guns or even knives might save lives, but they still do not get to the root of why these events keep happening. Even if we put a greater focus on mental health and treatment, there will always be people who, for whatever reason, want to kill. There's no reason not to "get to the root of the issue" while also making it harder for the people who slip through the cracks to kill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Why is the reaction to ban something instead? Is this a serious question? You don't know why it would be better if homicidal maniacs had to use knives instead of guns? Really? Guns have the capability of killing a lot of people in a short time with hardly any effort. Gun control isn't about banning all guns. There are many countries that have plenty of guns and stricter gun control that don't have nearly the mass killing problems of the USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Which almost never happens. My point has nothing to do with the second amendment. What makes this real tasty is, if you tried to put the kinds of restrictions we have on car ownership on firearms in the U.S., all the gun fetishists would scream blue murder. At least cars have an actual purpose in society. It almost never happens, because this type of stuff almost always occurs in "gun free zones". Only the perps are the ones that violate the rule. So the only one with a gun is the killer. There are already a ton of restrictions and regulations regarding firearms. How many gun laws to you need shooters to disobey before you realize the laws aren't the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 (edited) It almost never happens, because this type of stuff almost always occurs in "gun free zones". Only the perps are the ones that violate the rule. So the only one with a gun is the killer.Wrong again. There was an armed security guard at Columbine, Virginia Tech had police on campus, Fort Hood was a military base... Edited April 9, 2014 by BubberMiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Wrong again. There was an armed security guard at Columbine, Virginia Tech had police on campus, Fort Hood was a military base... Facts are not conducive to Shady's theories... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Wrong again. There was an armed security guard at Columbine, Virginia Tech had police on campus, Fort Hood was a military base... Nope. Virginia Tech is a gun free zone. Gun free to people who actually follow that rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 Fort Hood is a gun free zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSS- Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Hopefully everyone survives, not least because then it is likely that this guy will be sent to psychiatric institution, where he clearly belongs, instead of being sent to prison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 It almost never happens, because this type of stuff almost always occurs in "gun free zones". Only the perps are the ones that violate the rule. So the only one with a gun is the killer. Gun free zones? Crazy nuts with guns have charged into police stations and onto army bases. What has guns in the hands of 'honest citizens' accomplished? Well, we had the crazy old man who shot a guy on the phone in a theater, and a crazy middle aged man who shot some black teenagers who wouldn't turn down their music, and a crazy young man who shot a guy walking through his neighborhood. National homicide rates have been declining over the last few years, but not in Florida. They WERE declining until the 'stand your ground' law was passed. Since then they've been going up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 What makes this real tasty is, if you tried to put the kinds of restrictions we have on car ownership on firearms in the U.S., all the gun fetishists would scream blue murder. At least cars have an actual purpose in society. I've heard the gun vs car comparisons many times. Very strong debate style/tactic there!!! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 So why are we not getting to the root of the issue? Why is the reaction to ban something instead? I get the reasoning behind multiple murders, but criminals don't register their weapons. So a ban on guns or even knives might save lives, but they still do not get to the root of why these events keep happening. I agree with you very much GH! For someone to want to go out and kill other people, something's very wrong with that person! Society has to step in and actually picture/visualize the perpetrator as someone who needs help. And for a country like the US, where their main solution to criminals is longer sentences upon conviction coupled with the desire to shrink government and social activity/help/spending, don't expect the problem to vanish WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Unless somebody else had a gun to stop him. Anyways, unless you're going to change the 2nd amendment, your point is moot. Sounds like typical NRA mentality. Charlton Hestonisque, especially after dimentia set in. Oh and BTW, the NRA has already changed the 2nd. Read what it says on their head office building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Looks like a stabbing at a Toronto office today as well. Luckily no guns were involved or it could have been far worse. No one died. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/chuang-li-former-employee-charged-in-toronto-office-stabbings-1.2603977 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 I agree with you very much GH! For someone to want to go out and kill other people, something's very wrong with that person! Society has to step in and actually picture/visualize the perpetrator as someone who needs help. And for a country like the US, where their main solution to criminals is longer sentences upon conviction coupled with the desire to shrink government and social activity/help/spending, don't expect the problem to vanish WWWTT In each case we have seen evidence of mental issues due to various reasons. Why do we have this many unstable people? What is causing it all?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 (edited) 20 - 25% of us will suffer a mental illness in our lifetime. Getting sick on occasion is just part of being human. Not recognizing mental illness for what it is has also been a big part of being human. That's slowly changing resulting in more awareness of it which might lead to the perception there is more of it. Mental illness can and often does just strike right out of the blue with no apparent cause at all OTOH stress is clearly a trigger that can cause an unstable person to become sicker and lets not kid ourselves, we live in a stressful world. What's causing that should be of even more importance if there is any reason to believe that reducing it might help reduce outbreaks of mental illness. We certainly know from experience that numbers of mentally ill people increase in places of extreme stress like Syria and even in our own society when there is a sharp downturn in the economy the numbers of people who suffer depression for example go up. Treatment of mental illness involves placing a patient in as stress free an environment and setting as possible so it seems the relationship with stress is pretty clear. Edited April 10, 2014 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 In each case we have seen evidence of mental issues due to various reasons. Why do we have this many unstable people? What is causing it all?? I think eyeball makes a good point here. I think maybe you are looking at it from an odd angle. The US environment may in some areas cause more stress on people(but I don't know, don't live there). But I know fore sure that health treatment in the US is not as readily available to lower income people, so maybe you are only witnessing the untreated people's health problems. Maybe this gives an illusion that there are more mental health issues there. Whereas in a country with better access, people with health issues are tended to before their problem becomes more severe. How the society in a country perceives health issues is a big factor as eyeball pointed out. But I still believe that access to deadly weapons is still an issue to not belittle. Nothing wrong with checks and balances. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.