SnakeswithLasers
Member
Amen. If you aren't going to commit a crime, it shouldn't bother you.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Shooter with AR-15 at Houston's Bush Airport (suicide, no other deaths)
- Thread starter jmdajr
- Start date
- Status
Amen. If you aren't going to commit a crime, it shouldn't bother you.
BattleMonkey
Member
SnakeswithLasers
Member
You joke, but last week I saw someone clearly eating outside food in a theater. If it's that easy to smuggle in a Whopper, how can I say we're any safer than after Aurora?
GoldenEye 007
Member
Security checks bother a lot of people at airports even though they're not going to commit a crime - it usually results in crimes and abuse being committed against the passenger if anything.
If this check at the door constitutes the check for the overall airport, then that's fine. If you mean to put a check at the entrance, then again at the gate, then no way.
Baller. PhD
Banned
So I guess we should inconvenience everyone who buys any dangerous product with a psych eval every now and then, since it would save at least one life in the long run? Buying a new car? Time for a psych eval! Heading to the pharmacy for some Aspirin? Don't forget your psych eval paperwork! Oh, I'm sorry, sir. We can't sell you this alcohol without an up to date psych eval.
Get real. Having freedom means sometimes bad things will happen. It's worth it.
They're going to enjoy working those adult movie theaters.
Goro Majima
Kitty Genovese Member
Compared to LAX, ATL, DFW, and O'Hare it sure is. Houston is the fourth or fifth largest city in the US so it's not outlandish to expect something better.
I think the thing that makes it feel the most rundown is the paint and lighting inside the terminals. It doesn't feel modern at all.
edit: to be clear, it's not an unsafe airport or anything. It's just something you would expect from Tulsa but not Houston.
Suicide attempts by firearm have a mortality rate of over 90%.
The mortality rate of all reported firearm injuries (accidental or non-accidental) is ~30%. The number of people dying from firearms is staying relatively constant, though the # of people getting shot has been increasing. This is because of increased medical care.
Bottom line, if you acquire a gun, and you use it on someone, be it yourself or another person, there's a 30% chance of death, and who knows what the chances are of permanent damage or chronic medical issues as a result if you happen to survive (Can't find any figures on that).
I think that, considering the dangers and responsibilities involved, making sure that you are in a sound psychological state should be a prerequisite for gun ownership, and regular mental health check ups should be necessary, not just to protect others, but also to protect yourself, and you should be embracing such standards if you understand the dangers involved.
That's how most of Scandinavia views it, from what I've read. And they have a high gun ownership rate and a huge hunting culture, but few firearm violence incidences. If you own a gun, and on your regular check up you're found to be suffering from signs of depression or schizophrenia, or some other issue, you temporarily lose your guns, and once you receive treatment/medication and have your issues under control, you get them back. Most people are thankful for this since it's seen as a matter of personal safety and an extension of health care, not as a matter of property rights.
Joel Was Right
Member
No. I've never posted anything from info wars. And my above post was sarcasm - which I need to evidently improve! :/
Baller. PhD
Banned
So then we'll have people lie during their check ups and have potentially serious conditions go untreated, or they'll simply turn to the inevitable booming black market gun trade. Or what if someone doesn't want to attend regular check ups at all? You can't be serious with this shit.
Don't get me wrong, I hate guns more than anyone and look upon those who enjoy them with much judgement. It doesn't matter. This is a problem that can't be solved with stricter regulation. Especially now that you can 3D-print a lower receiver that's good for like 10 shots. That tech is only going to get better... what then?
If it's too much of a hassle (or flat out illegal) for people to get the guns they want through conventional channels then they'll simply get them elsewhere. Just like they currently do with drugs. The last thing the U.S. needs is to empower the drug trade even more with another illegal cash cow to exploit.
One of my primary issues with Toomey-Manchin was due to it preventing one of the "gun culture" versions of what you just mentioned.
Anytime I or some of my friends request the person called will arrive at their house, ask no questions, collect all their firearms, and put them in our own safe until they have dealt with whatever makes them feel unsafe around firearms.
Lots of individuals who own guns have this standing agreement with other friends.
I wonder of this guy was trying to make the point, in his depressed and irrational way, that you can be suicidal and a gun owner and NOT go on a rampage.
Or he was 2 shots into his rampage and his rifle jammed, he got resistance, so he offed himself to avoid capture.
Did he even have a real rifle? Was this an airsoft replica? I wonder if he just wanted some publicity for his suicide.
Or he was 2 shots into his rampage and his rifle jammed, he got resistance, so he offed himself to avoid capture.
Did he even have a real rifle? Was this an airsoft replica? I wonder if he just wanted some publicity for his suicide.
many places
Member
Seriously, that guy has no idea what he's talking about. I wouldn't say it is fancy but it is no where near ghetto.
Various Artists
Banned
Neither will making laws that don't solve what the issue is. The glorification of violence in America.
1/10
Angelus Errare
Banned
Can't say I feel bad, nor is empathy kicking in at the moment.
If you approach guns with the mindset that they are more important than life itself, well, yes, I suppose that will happen.
We need a cultural shift to stop deifying firearms (which stems from our deification of the constitution), most importantly. That's preventing us from requiring background checks, gun safes, psychological evaluations, any sort of regulation whatsoever. Our view of firearms is completely warped and messed up.
I want a TSA checkpoint before i enter my house. and before I use the toilet to poop.
This is how you create jobs, Obama!
Al-ibn Kermit
Junior Member
I'm guessing this is a case of attempted suicide-by-cop. You walk into an airport shooting a gun, you'd expect to get shot quickly. I'm assuming he wasn't actually aiming at anybody.
This story says more about how a suicidal person may react when they have a gun. Maybe when the air Marshall missed him, he just decided to do it himself.
Obviously, it's not realistic to do periodic psyche checks for all gun owners so there's not really anything that could have been done about this incident (not even having air Marshalls around).
This story says more about how a suicidal person may react when they have a gun. Maybe when the air Marshall missed him, he just decided to do it himself.
Obviously, it's not realistic to do periodic psyche checks for all gun owners so there's not really anything that could have been done about this incident (not even having air Marshalls around).
Dat defeatist attitude :/
Deified Data
Banned
Nope, only guns. Unless you're saying cars are anywhere near as dangerous as guns, then we can have that conversation. There's no way you'd make such a futile argument, though.
Freedom is nothing without responsibility.
Pass a Constitutional amendment. If it is so universal and common sense it should fly easily.
I gotta become a TSA agent.
"Ma'am, if you're not hiding any weapons under your bra and panties, you shouldn't be worried about this inspection."
Deified Data
Banned
It's not that easy. Universal background checks are overwhelmingly popular, common-sense solutions that still failed to pass.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Congress is completely dysfunctional. And has been for awhile. This latest bill failure was unfortunate for sure.
Choke on the Magic
Banned
Sounds like you could use a coffee enema.
I refuse to accept an interpretation of the 2nd amendment that puts firearms on the same level as individual expression. I'm sorry, but this is not a problem with the constitution, but our mindset and, as I said, our warped view of firearms.
The constitution didn't have to be changed to make segregation unconstitutional. People's mindsets did.
Furthermore, Ireject the notion that we can not solve matters of policy without amending the constitution. We call the constitution the "supreme law of the land," but it is meant to be approached as framework for how our society operates. It's conceptually different than the U.S. Code of Laws.
Choke on the Magic
Banned
Just so we're clear, are you against outside food in a movie theater?
Don't worry, the day isn't over. One irresponsible owner out of the number of irresponsible gun owners will kill something -unrelated to the government stealing their freedoms, or crime - soon.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Well the right to own a gun came from God himself so...yeah, they're very important.
TheKaeptain
Banned
ALEX JONES WAS RIGHT!!! THE GOVERNMENT SET THIS UP JUST LIKE HE HAS BEEN SAYING THEY WOULD!!!
GoldenEye 007
Member
Well the only interpretation that matters is that of the US Supreme Court. And before that it became to be understood over time decades and decades ago. The court wouldn't have defied that understanding anyway. So although you reject it, that does not align with reality here. Any modifications on the definition will need to go through the amendment process. A court isn't going to touch it and any legislation defying that understanding will be thrown out by the courts.
Also, although the Civil Rights Acts were not amendments, there were plenty others that went to define individual rights right in the constitution. That and a combination of Supreme Court rulings.
"Well derp, too bad. They said otherwise"
That is not a response with any level of nuance. And I'm extremely sick of hearing it. It's a hand waive.
And I was specifically referencing how the court's mindset changed from "separate is fine as long as it's equal." to "separate but equal is inherently unequal."
It's a complete reversal, but the correct one. And it wasn't the constitution that changed it, it was our society and how we viewed not only the constitution, but the worth and status of an indiv,dual at the most fundamental level, regardless of skin color.
It's a product of the times, not of the letter of the law. Women required the 19th amendment to be able to be guaranteed the right to vote because the courts at the time did not view voting equality as something the states had to respect under the privileges and immunities clause. But if you magically made the 19th amendment vanish from history but people had the same exact philosophical views today as they do otherwise, i doubt you'd find that the courts would not view a ban on women voting as a violation of the 14th on this day.
It's a cultural shift, not a constitutional one, that's needed. But it may result in a constitutional shift depending on whether the cultural/popular mindset shift makes its way to the bench or not.
Baller. PhD
Banned
How would you like to measure "dangerous?" Because cars kill more people than guns do every year.
This is like saying, "We need to stop people from using illegal drugs. If nobody bought illegal drugs, the drug cartels wouldn't have any clients to sell to!" No shit. Unfortunately we do have a culture that deifies gun ownership, and you're not going to fucking convince people to change their minds by shoving even more regulation down their throats. In fact, you'll only be encouraging them to own more firearms.
Phoenix
Member
What's to sneak? People don't really get checked when they go inside a movie theater. People go in with bags of shit all the time, same for flasks or even entire bottles of alcohol.
Deified Data
Banned
People can't buy a car at a show without permit or ID and use it to kill 20 people in 5 minutes.
You know that, though. Why obfuscate stupidity?
Well there's certainly no getting through to you since you're still stuck in talking point "shoving ____ down their throats" mode.
Baller. PhD
Banned
Sure, gun shows are ridiculous and should have to adhere to the same selling procedures as standard gun shops. What does that have to do with requiring American citizens to subject themselves to ongoing regular psychological evaluations in order to have the privilege of retaining ownership of their legally-obtained property? GTFO with that nonsense.
Were you not suggesting that American citizens should be forced to attend psychological evaluations at regular intervals in order to retain ownership of their property? Because "shoving ____ down their throats" is labeling that mildly.
Deified Data
Banned
Now read the second half of the sentence.
Baller. PhD
Banned
...and?
Deified Data
Banned
Welp, we're done here.
TUROK
Member
You're not for gun control. You're for banning all firearms. Strict gun control would not have prevented what happened here.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Well I'm sorry that you're getting sick over it. But I don't know what you want me to say. That is the reality. Can it change? Maybe. Who knows. There is no way to speculate a future court ruling on a case that has yet to be presented to the Supreme Court. The only thing is the current reality.
This DC Heller case was very recent. Pretty sure history shows a court isn't going to all of a sudden reverse itself so soon after such a ruling. And before that, that was the understanding for quite a long time - since the country's inception.
Maybe it does change. But I personally hope it does not. Not in favor of a ban. I think there can be stronger regulations before that.
I don't think gun nuts see ANY Situation where gun control would prevent something.
Deified Data
Banned
That's an awfully baseless assumption.
- Status