Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
A Topic About Gun Control.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: [qb] No way would anyone with a sword/knife/whatever have been able to kill 32 people: anyone tossing a chair would have stopped Cho: that argument does not hold water.[/qb][/QUOTE]Tossing a chair? I think a problem here is that people are viewing guns from a point of view of what we might call "gun-fear", instead of what would be more the case of a generic "psycho-weapon-fear". Tossing a chair at a gun-wielding Cho could've been as effective [i]in certain scenarios[/i] as tossing a chair at a sword-wielding Cho in [i]those same certain scenarios[/i]. Recall that in the case of many of his victims, which were largely clustered in three or four classrooms, he walked right up to them and used the .22. In some cases simple barricades were effective at blocking entry into the room, though he was able to fire through the windows . . . using a sword or other object to break the glass could've worked also, allowing him to injure the nearby barricaders just as effectively. In other case, an ROTC student tackled Cho from behind, but still got fatally wounded. I'm sure the gun helped there, but a sharp object could've been as effective. [QUOTE][qb]Nothing points to Cho having the ability to make an explosive- no points there either.[/qb][/QUOTE]Ability? Making an explosive requires no special ability. The only reason the IEDs in Iraq are effective is because (a) they're frickin' huge and (b) in many cases they are highly developed military-grade items of Iranian manufacture featuring staged explosive penetrator devices. Again, Cho could probably have killed more people simply by chaining the doors, setting off the fire alarm, waiting for people to get stuck at the doors, and then setting off explosives or simply Molotov'ing everybody. A loon is a loon, and if he's dead set on mass murder he does not need a gun to make it happen. (9/11 didn't feature a single firearm.) [QUOTE][qb]Even the airline passengers during the 9/11 attacks- in a confined space and against [i]several[/i] well trained aggressors (armed with box-cutter knives) managed to mount an effective offense- something they'd probably never have attempted against someone with a gun.[/qb][/QUOTE]And an armed pilot . . . not to mention passengers not trained to be passive . . . could've halted the terrorists pretty quick. It was only the fact that the Flight 93 folks had learned of what was afoot that day that gave them the impetus to launch their counterattack, and I daresay that move would've been made whether there had been guns or not. [QUOTE][qb]it's a hell of a lot tougher to kill someone with a blade, and they fight back. [/qb][/QUOTE]A .22 is one of the least lethal firearms to something man-size. People often have this Hollywood image of people dying immediately from any gunshot (unless they need to have some cool last words or reveal some plot point), but the reality is that a small calibre shot to something non-vital kills primarily by bleed-out. There is more of a psychological aspect to being shot, and a difference inasmuch as the compression producing a bit more shock to the area, but you could do the same and worse with a swung blade. Cho shot people (especially the injured) repeatedly to achieve more kills, while other injured parties ran or, in some cases, tried to draw him away from finishing others. People who'd been seriously stabbed or chopped upon would've fared no better in such a scenario. A wall of people bum-rushing him would've been as effective against him in a gun scenario or a machete & knife scenario, but I rather doubt anyone was in that mindset other than the ROTC guy at the time. I am [i]not[/i] saying Cho should've been allowed to purchase firearms . . . he was a known nutcase. But taking away everyone's self-defense options just because they can be misused by others isn't going to stop a damn thing. That's why the UK has its new Violent Crime Prevention Act in the works, despite an existing gun ban . . . the new legislation tries to curb knives. But what people don't understand is that violent crime is a cultural phenomenon and must be controlled through cultural means. Humans are industrious, and if they have murder in their mind they're going to do it with whatever tools are available. You can outlaw fire, sticks, pointy things, and nasty chemicals all you like, but people are still going to keep murdering other people so long as a corrupt culture with no respect for others is in place. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3