It's amazing how out of touch you always seem. Edison was a sociopath. He didn't accomplish shit. He lied and stole his way to wealth. We would actually be better off if he never existed.
a terrible day in Connecticut.
- Thread starter ZenPirate
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
It's amazing how out of touch you always seem. Edison was a sociopath. He didn't accomplish shit. He lied and stole his way to wealth. We would actually be better off if he never existed.
Your kidding right? Hurt and dead are pretty different. 20 kids were shot and killed. 40 parents, 160 grand parents, and countless other family and friends lost someone who was just starting out in life. All because a gun enthusiast mother didn't take precautions around her deranged son. If there were no guns it would have never happened. No would would allow some kid to walk around and stab and kill 20 children in a school full of adults. Because guns exist and are legal we need proper precautions. If people won't do it willingly, it needs to be forced. If my soon-to-be-here daughter is ever killed in a school shooting by a crazy kid. I'm going after the gun owner who didn't take precautions, not the crazy kid that doesn't know where he is or what he's doing.
It's amazing how much you missed my point altogether. Edison is credited with certain accomplishments. Period. And yes, the joker was a sociopath, but he is still heralded for his contributions to society, regardless of how he accomplished them.
Just like the Dark Knight shooter, the Newtown murderer was said to be highly intelligent. Do we roundup all males who are highly intelligent, shy, odd, and generally appear to be "creepy"? This is a much more complicated task than you want to assign. I understand your personal connection to the issue of mental health, but how would we as a society help those without taking away their Constitutional rights? How to do it in a humane way without targeting a mentally healthy person who just happens to meet a certain profile?
About one percent of the US population, for example, have schizophrenia. The vast majority of these individuals never commit any violent crimes. Then, when you factor in the number of mentally unhealthy individuals who do commit violent acts involving guns, the number is staggeringly low to the point of not being measurable on any notable scale. About 35% of these persons who experience some form of psychosis commit violent acts of any kind (not all resulting in death). There are statistically more knife related deaths overall than gun-related homicides committed by mentally ill persons.
Far more persons commit suicide by gun than all other deaths by gun combined. Would removing the gun form that equation have a dramatic or real impact? Probably not. And we have suicide hotlines and call centers available all over the country. Some of this comes down to personal responsibility, as you stated, some crazy people don't think they are crazy (or will admit to it).
The Newtown killer made a conscious choice to kill, steal, and then kill many more before taking his own life. He forced his way into the school. He showed methodologies of understanding and valid thought processes to commit his heinous acts. Crazy, or just plain evil?
I think you missed the point entirely. It proves that fatality rate may significantly decrease without a projectile weapon.
Last edited:
Several of the stabbing victims are in critical condition.
In other news...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19091840
In other news...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19091840
Last edited:
Mostly because that would have to be some seriously advanced technology to somehow read your fingerprint from the trigger. And the more advanced it is, the more things there are to go wrong.
Well... Yeah. My point is that all modern weapons are pretty damn overpowered for the average civilian.
It takes 5-10 minutes to diagnose someone by a trained professional, but it takes 10 years to lock them up even if they're dangerous. That is my whole point. We don't know if the mother ignored her son's problems or if she sought after help and didn't get it in time. From my experience it is impossible to miss when someone you've known all their life starts to act strangely so she had to know he wasn't right in the head. Either way, she had weapons he could access and she should take a lot of the blame for what happened.
I don't care about statistics. One child being killed by a crazy person is enough to do something to lower the risk of it happening again. Schizophrenia is just one of may mental health problems. My brother is severely bi-polar. He's either completely normal or manic and doesn't remember anything he's doing. He can't control it and anything can trigger the switch. If he was being normal he literally could walk into a store and buy a gun with no problem and that should be everyone's concern, not just mine. Luckily, when he's normal he knows he's sick and knows better.
I'm not against owning guns. I've fired many guns and some of my best friends are owners. If I were to purchase one, I would make it impossible for anyone else to use it by any means necessary, including family. It should be common sense for everyone. People make sure they're house don't contain carbon monoxide and other deadly gasses, but they just put deadly weapons in a glass cabinet with a cheap lock, or worse, no lock. It makes zero sense. If people don't have common sense then they need to be forced to do something if it means protecting innocent people. We force people to get a drivers license and pay for car insurance to protect innocent people. Why can't we force people to take the appropriate precautions so some 5 year old isn't shot to death when someone steals the weapon they failed to secure?
You have no idea what was going through his head. Calling him evil is a cop out. There's always a trail of accountability.
Firefly
United Kingdom is not a country.
Just got hold of a conspiracy theory that all the recent shootings are staged. It's so Obama can 'disarm america'. Some people just don't know when to quit.
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1QNTQDnoU[/M]
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1QNTQDnoU[/M]
Last edited:
Firefly
United Kingdom is not a country.
The psychiatrist speaks the truth at the end and is very relevant but will never happen.
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4&feature=youtu.be[/M]
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4&feature=youtu.be[/M]
That's exactly what I said on Facebook earlier today. I was talking with my business partners about the idea and we're gonna look into building a prototype of this kind of system. With currently-existing technology, it wouldn't be difficult to build a system that:
- Can be installed on all or most currently-existing firearms.
- Uses coded or special ammunition that requires such a system be installed (this has the potential make illegal/unregistered firearms useless in less than a year.)
- Uses cellular data to log discharges to a central database with timestamp, gps coordinates, and fingerprint information, which can then be used by police to pull up a complete dossier and firearms history of the licensed user (now it's pretty easy to find that guy that carjacked and shot your kid.)
- Is a fail-safe tamper-proof system that will not allow an unlicensed user (non-matching print) to discharge the firearm.
- Is a service-ready system that can be used by police and military agencies for long periods of time without needing a recharge.
Last edited:
Firefly
United Kingdom is not a country.
I can't believe what a terrifyingly stupid idea this is. At a time when freedoms in the United States are at a dismal all-time low and surveillance and control at an all-time high, you want to enable tracking and remote disabling of firearms? Who will manage such a system? Who watches the watchers?
There will come a time when another civil war is necessary, and I hope it's before everyone voluntarily offers up the last of their power in exchange for a little security theater.
Firefly
United Kingdom is not a country.
Man, I was in meetings all day yesterday, and didn't hear the details of this until I was on my way to pick up my kids. I hadn't seen them in a month (taking care of my ill mother).
Once I heard the news, I couldn't drive fast enough to see them so I could hug them and tell them I love them.
Once I heard the news, I couldn't drive fast enough to see them so I could hug them and tell them I love them.
A more practical mechanism to prevent others from firing your gun would be an RFID mechanism. The user would have to have some sort of wristband that the gun can recognize.
I don't think the fingerprint scanning technology and other biometric mechanisms are advanced enough to fit in a gun and scan quickly when the user needs it.
I don't think the fingerprint scanning technology and other biometric mechanisms are advanced enough to fit in a gun and scan quickly when the user needs it.
Before I answer these questions I'd just like to state that in no way would I expect such a system to completely stop gun-related crime. There's still going to be very crazy people out there. But it will help.
Which is the reason for new ammo. This kind of ammo will not fire in a conventional firearm, it will only fire in firearms that have the upgrade. It would take an act of congress to force gun shops to sell it over conventional ammo, but I bet it could be done.
Funny, I don't see you coming up with a better one.
Damn right I do. People are clamoring for politicians to start gun control talks immediately, and what way you think they're going to pick? The easy way out, of course. The one where they ban all self-defense firearms. Then, only criminals will have these firearms.
That probably won't happen, but I'm worried that it could and a lot of people share my concern. It pays to be prepared. This would offer an alternative to completely shutting down gun ownership except for hunting purposes.
Nope, just tracking, and only for the split-second when the firearm is discharged. I never said anything about remote disabling, don't know where you pulled that out of. Of course, we are against any kind of remote kill-switch. One of the conditions for an entity to use the system would be that they are not allowed to enable or add any sort of function that does this.
That's not really my concern. We'll build the system and test it. If it catches on it would be up to government to decide who manages it. But most likely it would be managed by an appointed committee of some kind, or perhaps the NSA. There's also the option of allowing police to manage the system in their own territories (but the system would be nation-wide and publicly accessible, of course. Kind of like inmate and sex offender records are publicly accessible in many states.)
The system would be designed to be a deterrent against firearms-related crime, and to help authorities catch offenders faster than they can using forensics and questioning (which often turn up very little evidence.) Just imagine how fast you could catch a murderer if he was already tagged in a database that you could cross-reference with the time and location of the crime? That data would also be admissible evidence in court. This kind of system could make it that easy for the majority of gun-related crimes.
Obviously. I say let it; the U.S. and other territories can impose much tighter restrictions on black market arms and ammunition as a result. A crackdown on these is necessary anyways so why not let it be for this cause? The impact of such a system wouldn't be apparent right away, but I am willing to bet vast sums of money that you would see an incredible decrease in gun-related crime over a ten-year period as criminals start to run out of conventional ammo and sources of conventional ammo.
Which is the reason for new ammo. This kind of ammo will not fire in a conventional firearm, it will only fire in firearms that have the upgrade. It would take an act of congress to force gun shops to sell it over conventional ammo, but I bet it could be done.
Funny, I don't see you coming up with a better one.
Damn right I do. People are clamoring for politicians to start gun control talks immediately, and what way you think they're going to pick? The easy way out, of course. The one where they ban all self-defense firearms. Then, only criminals will have these firearms.
That probably won't happen, but I'm worried that it could and a lot of people share my concern. It pays to be prepared. This would offer an alternative to completely shutting down gun ownership except for hunting purposes.
Nope, just tracking, and only for the split-second when the firearm is discharged. I never said anything about remote disabling, don't know where you pulled that out of. Of course, we are against any kind of remote kill-switch. One of the conditions for an entity to use the system would be that they are not allowed to enable or add any sort of function that does this.
That's not really my concern. We'll build the system and test it. If it catches on it would be up to government to decide who manages it. But most likely it would be managed by an appointed committee of some kind, or perhaps the NSA. There's also the option of allowing police to manage the system in their own territories (but the system would be nation-wide and publicly accessible, of course. Kind of like inmate and sex offender records are publicly accessible in many states.)
The system would be designed to be a deterrent against firearms-related crime, and to help authorities catch offenders faster than they can using forensics and questioning (which often turn up very little evidence.) Just imagine how fast you could catch a murderer if he was already tagged in a database that you could cross-reference with the time and location of the crime? That data would also be admissible evidence in court. This kind of system could make it that easy for the majority of gun-related crimes.
Obviously. I say let it; the U.S. and other territories can impose much tighter restrictions on black market arms and ammunition as a result. A crackdown on these is necessary anyways so why not let it be for this cause? The impact of such a system wouldn't be apparent right away, but I am willing to bet vast sums of money that you would see an incredible decrease in gun-related crime over a ten-year period as criminals start to run out of conventional ammo and sources of conventional ammo.
Last edited:
Here's one: Find a spine. Don't compromise. Tell them to go fuck themselves.
Regardless of what's decided upon officially, I'll have the guns and ammunition I do now and nobody is stopping me. I will literally die defending them if necessary.
The very agency currently patting citizens on the head and telling them to trust that everything is fine when asked about warrantless wiretapping? [Ars Technica]
And just imagine how quickly a freedom fighter could be taken off the field.
Thanks to everyone for having enough class to not make the very obvious Unreal Tournament related joke here.
