MASSIVE Elementary School Shooting in CT *12-24 Maybe be dead

[Locutus of Bored]

All that makes me think is "If only guns had been invented then, those medieval German babies could have shot their grandmas first." Won't someone think of using time travel to arm the medieval children?

[beamMe]

gturner wrote:

---

I saw a bizarre and disturbing statistic that was uncovered from medieval German death records. Researchers were sifting through the old data looking for child mortality predictors, and the leading indicator that popped out was whether the baby's paternal grandmother lived in the home. After much head scratching, they realized that the father's live-in mothers must've been killing the babies, probably if they suspected that their son wasn't the real father. Grimm's Fairytales had old German ladies pegged.

You'd do anything to shift this discussion away from the US and the actual topic, don't you?

[Hound of UIster]

gturner wrote:

---

I saw a bizarre and disturbing statistic that was uncovered from medieval German death records. Researchers were sifting through the old data looking for child mortality predictors, and the leading indicator that popped out was whether the baby's paternal grandmother lived in the home. After much head scratching, they realized that the father's live-in mothers must've been killing the babies, probably if they suspected that their son wasn't the real father. Grimm's Fairytales had old German ladies pegged.

One, the study set the authors derived wasn't from "medieval Germany", it was from 17-18th century Germany and what was then the Kingdom of Hanover. Two, if you actually read the paper, you'd know that mass infanticide was never a conclusion made by the author. Their suggestion was rather that it was due to pressure, stress and conflict between the in-law and the mother, the same effect which latter papers has also observed in several countries including Japan and Canada

[MacLeod]

gturner wrote:

---

In political discussions, the Western Hemisphere almost always excludes old world countries. Sometimes it's even defined to start at 20 longitude for clarity, though it really should be smaller than a half-sphere for that to work out right.

But if you do include those countries, the US would rank about 12th lowest out of around 40 countries.

Depending on which list you go by, I don't think we're ever at the top. Which list are you using? OECD?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere

In geographical terms any places west of the Prime Meridian, up to the International Date line are in the Western Hemisphere.

Now the wikipedia article does say in political rhoteric it is used to apply to the Americas,

Lets look at one of the more commonly used definitions of Rhoteric

1.(in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetoric

[MacLeod]

gturner wrote:

---

How much would you want to bet that the European possessors of those islands do NOT include the islands' homicides in the home county's murder statistics?

They need to count somewhere, which is probably why they're listed seperately, along with other countries.

Perhaps you don't understand how overseas territories work, they are basically self-governing, but allow another nation to act on their behalf at an International level.

[gturner]

Hound of UIster wrote:

---

One, the study set the authors derived wasn't from "medieval Germany", it was from 17-18th century Germany and what was then the Kingdom of Hanover. Two, if you actually read the paper, you'd know that mass infanticide was never a conclusion made by the author. Their suggestion was rather that it was due to pressure, stress and conflict between the in-law and the mother, the same effect which latter papers has also observed in several countries including Japan and Canada

That might be the same study I was thinking of, or a different analysis of the data. What I'd read was from the Economist back in 2002. Your take seems more in line with this blog post from 2005 talking about perhaps the same study, or perhaps a subsequent one, where other reseachers were dismissing some of the author's conclusions, which seemed to be more about the maternal mother-in-law's role, though that was an aspect in the first article, too.

But it definitely wasn't medieval as I had thought. I must've spent too many years studying medieval German violence and now it's sticking in my head.

[cooleddie74]

gturner wrote:

---

I must've spent too many years studying medieval German violence and now it's sticking in my head.

What's the definition of "too few years" ?

Wait. Wait. You know what....I do not want to know.

[beamMe]

gturner wrote:

---

But it definitely wasn't medieval as I had thought. I must've spent too many years studying medieval German violence and now it's sticking in my head.

I applaud you. You managed to completely derail this threat.

Bravo.

[Data Holmes]

beamMe wrote:

---

You'd do anything to shift this discussion away from the US and the actual topic, don't you?

I thought the actual topic had evolved from a blow by blow reporting of the event and speculation of motive, into an argument between one side wanting to ban guns as an answer to events like this, and people pointing out that mental illness and society are the driving factors and that weapons bans do not change/have little effect on that.

In that sense, his posts are right in line with the discussion.

[beamMe]

NightmareB4Holmes wrote:

---

weapons bans do not change/have little effect

Only gun-nuts are saying that.

[MacLeod]

And I don't think any one is saying that other factors shouldn't be looked at, but just because there might be other factors doesn't mean gun control shouldn't be looked at as well.

Other nations have issues with health care of people with mental health problems, and have their own socital issues to deal with. These issues exists in all countries to various degrees now they may not be exactly the same or even directly comporable with each other.

So what would be wrong,

In requiring to register all weapons sales (be they at a shop or gun show)?
Perform a Federal background check in order to purchase a weapon?
Having to provide a medical certificate that you are mentally fit to own a weapon (annually at your cost)?
If you die the state takes ownership of any weapons until the benefactors have passed a Federal Background check and proided a medical certifciate?

Other more extreme measures would be to limit the amount of ammo you can prchase in a year, i.e 100 bullets for a handgun, however if you police your brass you can replace that upto the maximum ammount of bullets allowed.

True you would need a national database.

[Data Holmes]

We looked at gun bans in the 90's. You know what they found? Had such a massively minuscule effect on crime and murder rates that the FBI said they were totally worthless. Did nothing to stop mass causality incidents as demonstrated by the columbine highschool shooting, as well as others.


And anyone who complains about normal capacity magazines, do you realize how dumb an argument that is? A person, with as little practice time as a weekend, can learn to effect a tactical magazine change, one where you use your primary or trigger hand to activate the mag realese allowing the empty to drop free while getting the fresh mag with your week hand, inserting it, and racking the slide/receiver, in as little as 1 to 2 seconds. That is a total of 3 to 6 seconds added to the total time to fire off 30 rounds, assuming a ten round limited copacity magazine. That is effectively pointless in a mass shooting attack.

[Squiggy]

NightmareB4Holmes wrote:

---

We looked at gun bans in the 90's. You know what they found? Had such a massively minuscule effect on crime and murder rates that the FBI said they were totally worthless. Did nothing to stop mass causality incidents as demonstrated by the columbine highschool shooting, as well as others.

Oh, you mean that high school that had armed guards? That one?

"But Squiggy, they were ordered to stand down."

I don't give a fuck. They had armed guards, just as the NRA is suggesting. The failure of the armed guards FOR WHATEVER REASON is ample evidence that your idea is idiotic.

Now, blame 20 year old video games as your masters tell you.

[Data Holmes]

It's funny that Clinton's 2000 $120 million expansion of cops in schools as part of the aniversary of columbine is so conviently forgotten by liberals today. And that was while the assault weapons ban was still in full effect as well. Why did we need more armed cops in school if the scary black guns were banned? http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323

[MacLeod]

NightmareB4Holmes wrote:

---

We looked at gun bans in the 90's. You know what they found? Had such a massively minuscule effect on crime and murder rates that the FBI said they were totally worthless. Did nothing to stop mass causality incidents as demonstrated by the columbine highschool shooting, as well as others.


And anyone who complains about normal capacity magazines, do you realize how dumb an argument that is? A person, with as little practice time as a weekend, can learn to effect a tactical magazine change, one where you use your primary or trigger hand to activate the mag realese allowing the empty to drop free while getting the fresh mag with your week hand, inserting it, and racking the slide/receiver, in as little as 1 to 2 seconds. That is a total of 3 to 6 seconds added to the total time to fire off 30 rounds, assuming a ten round limited copacity magazine. That is effectively pointless in a mass shooting attack.

So we agree, that a gun ban would have an impact on the murder rate, even if it was miniscule.

Guess what if that miniscule effect was even saving one life, it would be worth it.