Why has life become so cheap? The NIU shootings...

[yoopers]

I was in class at Rockford College this afternoon when the word came down about the shootings at Northern Illinois University, my alma mater and short distance down the road in DeKalb.

As hard as I try, I can't fathom the mindset that says I am so depressed or desperate or whatever that I need to take out as many lives as possible before I take my own. Every shooting, the fourth in a week in the U.S., is a tragedy. Have we lost all value of life or have we made it so cheap that it means nothing to take it away?

I have friends involved in the mess. This one hit close to home for me.

[beginnerdad]

I had to let an ambulance to pass on my way home from work at 3:00pm
Didn't find out what was up until I read about it on another forum, which quickly degenerated into a 2nd amendment debate.

Kind of eerie seeing all the hovering helicopters most of the evening. My wife was at work across the street from Kishwaukee Hospital helipad, simultaneously listening to radio news and medi-vac traffic - gave her the impression of working in a M.A.S.H. unit. My niece was in class in a next door building at the time.

Hope your friends are all safe, and dman1234 too. He's an engineering student at NIU

[wickedbob]

It amazes me how often these things seem to happen anymore. Not that I have been around to long at the young age of 15, but still. My condolences to those involved.

[john_childs]

We all wonder what the sociology and psychology is behind such a shooting. Doing something like that is beyond comprehension for the vast majority of people, but then there are the few that either snap or are driven towards such action.

There is the pop-psychology analysis that blames it on video games and/or the glorification of violence in movies (Rambo?) and the availability and glorification of guns. I don't buy into that thinking that those things must therefore be banned or regulated. That kind of pop-psychology analysis is too simplistic and can be politically motivated.

University can be stressful and things happen to you and for you in the system that are beyond your control. Maybe he felt he was unfairly treated or screwed over? But how do you go from that to wanting to shoot up a lecture and then take your own life?

[Danni]

Yes, it is a tragedy that someone can be so mixed up. I feel sorry for all that had family involved in the massacre. Anyone know any background on the shooter?

It seems that all/most of these shootings happen in the US. I think that US culture is rotten to the core. People in the US seem much more aggressive and not open to strange and new things than other countries.

[ThisGuyIKnow]

Someone made a documentary asking this same question a few years ago, he even won an oscar for it, but people tried to pass it off as political propaganda because of his later films that were more politically minded.

[kington99]

It seems that all/most of these shootings happen in the US.


I believe it's happened in Germany once or twice, never in Britain. There was the Dunblaine tragedy when i was a child, an armed man with a history of mental difficulties attacked a nursery with various armaments. It causes the outlawing of handguns in this country, and it hasn't happened since.

[uni57]

Have we lost all value of life

I think that US culture is rotten to the core. People in the US seem much more aggressive

All you have to do is hop in your car and drive down the road -- you will get a great view of how hostile and violent people really are. People will literally put your life in grave danger for absolutely no reason. Not just a few people... most! They use the roads as a racetrack and God help you if you get in their way: they will harass you, threaten you, and endanger your life. This is "normal" behavior where I live. Normal! Is there any wonder why so many people die in car accidents? Life is cheap. Dirt cheap. Civility is gone. Human decency is gone. You may think you know some nice people, but watch how they drive. Then you'll know what they're made of deep down. Courteous, friendly, gentle, and understanding? Unlikely. Try rude, violent, self-centered, and aggressive.

Not to equate pervasive aggressive driving with this tragic event, but there has to be a connection. People are out of control. And not just a little. Think I'm exaggerating? Try driving the speed limit for one week and see how many people you actually enrage. People are out of control. Something is terribly wrong with this society. Senseless killing comes in many forms and the death toll is high -- from violent crime, shooting sprees, deadly driving, US imperialism, and corporate greed (think pharmaceutical industry, for one).

Wow, that's a real downer of a post. I'm not sure if I should post it.

[Zzagg]

Someone made a documentary asking this same question a few years ago, he even won an oscar for it, but people tried to pass it off as political propaganda because of his later films that were more politically minded.Micheal Moore :"bowling for columbine". Really interesting documentary.
Though I agree with most of Moore's opinion, I wouldn't call him a journalist, mostly because of the "spectacular" ways he uses to make some points...
...But he sure makes some.

We didn't even hear the news about 4 shootings in a week around there. My thoughts go to the victims, their families and every U.S people: I think I would be shocked/devasted if it happened in my country:(

[ivan]

It seems that all/most of these shootings happen in the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_%28Australia%29


Robert Sheckley predicted these mass shootings years ago. He called the people who went on a suicidal shooting spree berserkers. You can read about it in Immortality Inc. - a great book.

[wobbling bear]

There is the pop-psychology analysis that blames it on video games and/or the glorification of violence in movies (Rambo?) and the availability and glorification of guns. I don't buy into that thinking that those things must therefore be banned or regulated. That kind of pop-psychology analysis is too simplistic and can be politically motivated.

pop-psychology of my own: if people get accustomed to the fact that killing is just a small event (as seen in video games and films) then no wonder that *real* killing is seen as a project of nearly no consequence.
mind you: I am not advocating films or games without violence or deaths. But I am annoyed by certain casual attitudes towards death.
Having witnessed some real violence I just can't stand some video games or some films: I may be a sissy but I am obliged to give up.
Now psychologists are arguing over the influence of attitudes towards death as influencing attitudes towards violent behaviour (that is it does not promote violence "as is" but minimize the projected impact of violence that becomes nearly a respectable behaviour that you can justify even for unimportant reasons).

another point: people turning berserk exist everywhere: some cultures (or sub cultures) are more prone to it because they grow a cultural justification for it ("berserk" is nordic ; "amok" is austronesian : those are linked to extreme psychological disorder but more normal people could loose contact with the real world to the point where death is no longer a terrible thing -I suspect that once you are accustomed to this notion of futility of death it is easier to act).

[Zzagg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_%28Australia%29


Robert Sheckley predicted these mass shootings years ago. He called the people who went on a suicidal shooting spree berserkers. You can read about it in Immortality Inc. - a great book.Another great book on the same subject : Stand on Zanzibar from John Brunner.

[Zzagg]

Just a thought:
Imagine you're a shy teenager, persecuted by most people at school, mentaly "weak". Imagine you really suffer from this and going to school becomes a torture because of "the others"...
Imagine one day you can't bear this situation anymore and get "mad".
Imagine you know your father owns a handgun and already showed it to you (or worst: already shot with you).

What if the situation is exactly the same but you don't have "easy" acces to handgun... Do you think the bodycount would be so high?

[ivan]

Just a thought:
Imagine you're a shy teenager, persecuted by most people at school, mentaly "weak". Imagine you really suffer from this and going to school becomes a torture because of "the others"...
Imagine one day you can't bear this situation anymore and get "mad".
Imagine you know your father owns a handgun and already showed it to you (or worst: already shot with you).


See Elephan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_(film))t.


What if the situation is exactly the same but you don't have "easy" acces to handgun... Do you think the bodycount would be so high?

No.

The anger would have to find other outlets: drinking, drugs, sadism/masochism, unicycling...

[wobbling bear]

reading the Amok article on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amok) : "Amok is often described as a culture-bound (or culture-specific) syndrome, which is a psychological condition whose manifestation is strongly shaped by cultural factors."
so I suspect that the intense emotion provoked by those events will not prevent other events of that sort ... now the question is how to gradually destroy those cultural behaviours ... any comment?

(remember: some teens thought of the Columbine perpetrators as heroes! as long as victims will be classified as "innocent passers-by" , as long as identification is more towards perpetrators than victims ... we are in trouble)

[Danni]

All you have to do is hop in your car and drive down the road -- you will get a great view of how hostile and violent people really are. People will literally put your life in grave danger for absolutely no reason. Not just a few people... most! They use the roads as a racetrack and God help you if you get in their way: they will harass you, threaten you, and endanger your life. This is "normal" behavior where I live. Normal! Is there any wonder why so many people die in car accidents? Life is cheap. Dirt cheap. Civility is gone. Human decency is gone. You may think you know some nice people, but watch how they drive. Then you'll know what they're made of deep down. Courteous, friendly, gentle, and understanding? Unlikely. Try rude, violent, self-centered, and aggressive.

Not to equate pervasive aggressive driving with this tragic event, but there has to be a connection. People are out of control. And not just a little. Think I'm exaggerating? Try driving the speed limit for one week and see how many people you actually enrage. People are out of control. Something is terribly wrong with this society. Senseless killing comes in many forms and the death toll is high -- from violent crime, shooting sprees, deadly driving, US imperialism, and corporate greed (think pharmaceutical industry, for one).

Wow, that's a real downer of a post. I'm not sure if I should post it.

US should ban firearms. Make it harder for the local loony to have one. With all the money that you sink into defending yourselves, you could pay for therapy for these sad and angry people in need.

I too drive mostly at the speed limit. I know how angry people get.

[XCcrev]

US should ban firearms. Make it harder for the local loony to have one. With all the money that you sink into defending yourselves, you could pay for therapy for these sad and angry people in need.

I too drive mostly at the speed limit. I know how angry people get.

If 3 people in the classroom would have had a weapon and the skill to use it the carnage would have been much less. The security did the best they could. two personel were there within 30 seconds of the shooting and eight were present at about two minutes after the first shot.
If 1 out of every 20 people carried a weapon people would think twice about going into a building and shooting numerous people. If the Us bans firearms the only the criminals will have guns; the law abiding citizens will be left helpless with no way of protecting themselves. this case demonstrates that even if the police respond exactly the way they should people can still get killed. If someone really wants a gun its not that hard to get
Guns don't kill people, people kill people
If the government cannot protect the people, we, the people, must learn to protect ourselves.

[Zzagg]

If 3 people in the classroom would have had a weapon and the skill to use it the carnage would have been much less. The security did the best they could. two personel were there within 30 seconds of the shooting and eight were present at about two minutes after the first shot.
If 1 out of every 20 people carried a weapon people would think twice about going into a building and shooting numerous people. If the Us bans firearms the only the criminals will have guns; the law abiding citizens will be left helpless with no way of protecting themselves. this case demonstrates that even if the police respond exactly the way they should people can still get killed. If someone really wants a gun its not that hard to get
Guns don't kill people, people kill people
If the government cannot protect the people, we, the people, must learn to protect ourselves.First I have to apologize: I think I'm guilty for the way this thread goes on the many times debated question of gun control. Sorry for that...
But I think you're wrong XCcrev:
those maniacs just want fame and fun before they die. They know they'll die as soon as they start shooting. The more people armed, the most exciting is the challenge: "How many enemies will I kill before I get shot". They'd be in a real video game!
The slaughter would be quite the same, the paranoïa would increase causing more and more accidents.

I'm all with wobbling bear (nice post BTW): even with gun control, U.S would still be in a "cultural violence spiral" and I personnaly don't see any solution for this in the short run.
I don't want to judge U.S in any way about this issue as I'm not personaly involved nor really informed, though.

[ivan]

those maniacs just want fame and fun before they die.
I think that's the exact problem. They get just what they ask for.

From the same wiki artic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_amok)le that was quoted earlier on. An extract from Encyclopedia Brittannica, 1911:
"A Malay will suddenly and apparently without reason rush into the street armed with a kris or other weapons, and slash and cut at everybody he meets till he is killed. These frenzies were formerly regarded as due to sudden insanity. It is now, however, certain that the typical amok is the result of circumstances, such as domestic jealousy or gambling losses, which render a Malay desperate and weary of his life. It is, in fact, the Malay equivalent of suicide. The act of running amuck is probably due to causes over which the culprit has some amount of control, as the custom has now died out in the British possessions in the peninsula, the offenders probably objecting to being caught and tried in cold blood."


So, maybe the security/police should be trained to kneecap/disable those who "go postal" and try them in court later on instead of killing on site.

[cathwood]

There are probably lots of contributary factors. But one thing that has been regularly noticed is how patterns repeat themselves. So big patterns (aggressive governments) lead to smaller but similar patters within the system (aggressive people who are governed).

Also it has been well demonstrated in relatively early psychological experiments that having a proximity to weapons made it much more likely that those weapons would be used. The more guns you have, the more people are going to use them. The more people who have guns, the more people are going to die by being shot. XCcrev, in your scenario probably more people whould have got killed as those who had guns shot other innocent people who got caught in the cross fire.

[Jim]

If 3 people in the classroom would have had a weapon and the skill to use it the carnage would have been much less. The security did the best they could. two personel were there within 30 seconds of the shooting and eight were present at about two minutes after the first shot.
If 1 out of every 20 people carried a weapon people would think twice about going into a building and shooting numerous people. If the Us bans firearms the only the criminals will have guns; the law abiding citizens will be left helpless with no way of protecting themselves. this case demonstrates that even if the police respond exactly the way they should people can still get killed. If someone really wants a gun its not that hard to get
Guns don't kill people, people kill people
If the government cannot protect the people, we, the people, must learn to protect ourselves.

A brilliant argument, why not extend it to all students from Kindergarten up to college and university should be issued with weapon (eg gun and knife). On average the non-nutcases will outnumber the nutcases, so if a nutcase tries anything they will be quickly shot to pieces or stabbed (the authorities might need to hush up a few accidents).
No criminal in their right mind would then attack a college knowing all the students are armed.
If the government cannot protect the paranoid, we, the paranoid must learn to take our medication.

jim

Seriously, the killings in colleges this week are a tragedy and hopefully the cause will be found and future tragedies prevented, but fighting gun-crime with more guns just leads to gun-fights.

[Borgschulze]

Guns make people think they're superior to others, makes them think they have more control.

It will take well over a lifetime to change the attitude of that kind of person in the US. It won't happen though, I can predict that American citizens would outrage that they're not allowed to (own a gun) (be patriotic) anymore.

Anyone who wants guns outlawed in the US, good luck... only Outlaws use guns in the first place.

[critter]

it reminds me of suicide bombers.

Imagine if Bin Laden could recruit these psychos. Crazies don't care what the cause is, just strap on the bomb and let it rip.

Thanks to homeland security that won't happen.:rolleyes:

[Mikefule]

I believe it's happened in Germany once or twice, never in Britain. There was the Dunblaine tragedy when i was a child,

Thomas Hamilton in Dunblane; Michael Ryan in Hungerford. Then of course the various serial killers (Moors Murderers, Yorkshire Ripper, the recent killer of five women in Ipswich) and the various mass murdering terrorist attacks committed by the IRA, and more recently by so-called Islamic terrorists...

The UK isn't free of it. We get fewer than the USA because we are only as big as one small US state. If we were 50 times bigger, we might have 50 times more.

I don't think life is cheaper than it used to be. I think we just feel it ought to be worth more than our ancestors did. We can expect to live comfortably to 80+ years old. A hundred years ago, most of us might have lived to be 40 if we were lucky.

We expect the rule of law. We are shocked and feel cheated when it fails.

In Africa, in the last few weeks, people have been hacked to death in the streets, or burned to death locked in their churches. The people doing that have "permission" (as they see it) because of tribal rivalries, civil wars, revenge, honour, etc. Their society gives an outlet for this natural human aggression.

It is because in the USA and most of Europe we live in such a peaceful society that there is no outlet for the aggressive impulses of those on the margins of society, so now and again it bubbles up and explodes in one of these "sprees", and then we're all shocked.

But this grim analysis doesn't change the fact that it's devastatingly sad for those involved.

[maestro8]

those maniacs just want fame and fun before they die. They know they'll die as soon as they start shooting
Please provide us a link to the source in which this information was published. I am curious as to how someone knows what is in the mind of these killers.

If you've made this information up, its not going to help your argument at all.

XCcrev, in your scenario probably more people whould have got killed as those who had guns shot other innocent people who got caught in the cross fire.
Again, if you're making this up, you're not helping your argument.

I'm not going to claim all weapons carriers are skilled marksmen, but most states require a basic weapons safety course before issuing a permit to weapons carriers. The first thing you're going to learn in that course is how to use your weapon safely.

I am very doubtful that "cross fire" would be a significant issue in this case. All it takes is a few well-placed rounds for the situation to come to an end... there wouldn't be bullets flying in every direction for 10 minutes, as most Hollywood films would have you believe.

[forrestunifreak]

The Campus was a gun-free zone. Funny how the only people they allow to have guns are the killers.

[James_Potter]

US should ban firearms. Make it harder for the local loony to have one. With all the money that you sink into defending yourselves, you could pay for therapy for these sad and angry people in need.

I too drive mostly at the speed limit. I know how angry people get.
The problem is that people WILL get guns no matter what. If we banned them, then only those who are willing to break the law will have them, and I believe that they are the last person we want to be armed, especially when no one else is.

An ideal world would have no guns. It would also be a castle in the clouds, called Happy Rainbow Land, and we would ride unicorns to the park to play with the elves and the fairies every day. Unfortunately, we don't live in happy rainbow land. We live in Sad Storm Cloud Land, where there are guns and murderers, and always will be, regardless of how the government tries to control it.
The best thing anyone can do, in my opinion, is to be able to defend yourself.

[yoopers]

The Campus was a gun-free zone. Funny how the only people they allow to have guns are the killers.
But they DON'T allow the killers to have guns on campus. The law goes for everyone.

[yoopers]

The problem is that people WILL get guns no matter what. If we banned them, then only those who are willing to break the law will have them, and I believe that they are the last person we want to be armed, especially when no one else is.

An ideal world would have no guns. It would also be a castle in the clouds, called Happy Rainbow Land, and we would ride unicorns to the park to play with the elves and the fairies every day. Unfortunately, we don't live in happy rainbow land. We live in Sad Storm Cloud Land, where there are guns and murderers, and always will be, regardless of how the government tries to control it.
The best thing anyone can do, in my opinion, is to be able to defend yourself.
Well said!

[forrestunifreak]

But they DON'T allow the killers to have guns on campus. The law goes for everyone.

Didn't work so great did it?

[yoopers]

Didn't work so great did it?
Nope. For some reason, this killer disregarded the policy.

[BillyTheMountain]

It would also be a castle in the clouds, called Happy Rainbow Land, and we would ride unicorns to the park to play with the elves and the fairies every day. Unfortunately, we don't live in happy rainbow land.

I'm moving to Happy Rainbow Land, a gated community! :D

[harper]

Anyone who wants guns outlawed in the US, good luck... only Outlaws use guns in the first place.

Wow. No one noticed how far this was off from the mark?

[SqueakyOnion]

Why has this thread degenerated into a gun control debate?

As far as I can see it, gun debate, in this instance, is irrelevant.

What we should be looking at here is the social and personal reasons that drove these young men to become so violent.

Guns are just one way a person can inflict violence on another. What needs to happen is to remove, or safely redirect, that violence in the first place.

I have a few ideas on what these causes are but they are just that - ideas, largely biased and uneducated. Regardless, we need to treat the sickness, not just its symptoms.

[saskatchewanian]

I just read this thread again for the first time since the first couple comments were posted. It amazes and disgusts me how many people blame the tool and not the reasons why this guy decided to go killing people.
Wow. No one noticed how far this was off from the mark?
I own more guns than unicycles. All of them are registered but yet I am still able to leave the country, fancy that.

Edit: Bruce, thanks for being the voice of reason on this thread.

[Zzagg]

Please provide us a link to the source in which this information was published. I am curious as to how someone knows what is in the mind of these killers.

If you've made this information up, its not going to help your argument at all.
I thought you where over the level of the "what sources" argument, Maestro:rolleyes: .To answer your question: No, I don't have any source on this foundment, but it's not a foundment, it's an opinion wich relies on my brain, education, experience, culture, knowledge... or lack of those, who can say?
You know, a brain can be usefull when your acces to the web is temporarily down.
So what do you expect now, you want me to find some so called specialists living in Siberia to find THE source? I won't try and get it.
At that time, given my information level, I don't remember any mass shooter who hit and ran in order not to get killed. How many mass shooters are in jail at the moment (or have been sentenced to death)? Maybe this can help my argument if I'm not totally mistaking.
All it takes is a few well-placed rounds for the situation to come to an end... there wouldn't be bullets flying in every direction for 10 minutes, as most Hollywood films would have you believe.Can you find some sources to emphasize your argument? So, how long would the bullet time last according to you (or your sources)?:rolleyes:
cheers from "pretty happy raimbow land" ;)

[James_Potter]

The University of Idaho is currently going through a thing, where some students want the right to carry concealed weapons if they have a license.
I feel it is relevant to this thread, you can read all about it here:
http://www.uiargonaut.com/

I'm moving to Happy Rainbow Land, a gated community! :D
That sounds lovely!
Is it someplace in South America, and do you get all the kool-aid you want?
I want to join!

[Mikefule]

I just read this thread again for the first time since the first couple comments were posted. It amazes and disgusts me how many people blame the tool and not the reasons why this guy decided to go killing people.


We have a similar debate going on in the UK at the moment, over alcohol. The ready availability of cheap alcohol is allegedly "causing" a wave of violent crime and random killings, stabbings and beatings as well as general anti-social behaviour.

This is strange, because I can easily afford as much alcohol as I could possibly drink,and yet I have never killed, stabbed or beaten anyone, and (with the possible exception of practising my concertina more than my neighbours would like) I don't behave anti-socially. In fact, I seldom drink heavily, and only in socially appropriate circumstances.

So alcohol doesn't inevitably cause the violence (etc.). Otherwise I'd be a thug.

Nevertheless, it is clearly observable that the availability of alcohol is closely associated with the increase in violence (etc.) in society generally.

Similarly, with the guns thing: if the guns weren't readily available, the sort of selfish idiots who go on shooting sprees would have to do something else instead. They could still glass, stab or beat people, but at least they couldn't shoot half a dozen people dead in half a dozen seconds.

Now, give me a gun to defend myself, and I would take so long to decide to use it that it would be virtually useless to me. Give it to a gung ho wannabe hero, and he might use it as a first option in a less urgent situation. Give someone a tool and they will look for a job to do with it.

"Hand gun's made for killing. Ain't no good for nothin' else."

We will never get rid of violent selfish idiots (or self-righteous wannabe heroes) but we can at least limit the damage they can do by not arming them.

[wickedbob]

Lets revoke the right to own guns to all because of a few crazies. That makes sense, eureka!

Anyways I heard of something a while back about a man who was in a college parking shooting another man, made into a mobile arsenal, walking into the school then he got in trouble for it. That's about all I heard so does this sound familiar and if so where can I read of it? I also believe this shows when guns are used the way they should be they can be an affective tool. Imagine what could have happened.

[Zzagg]

Why has this thread degenerated into a gun control debate?My bad, I'm afraid:( .
I'm all for gun control but I think that revoking the right to bare guns in the US right now wouldn't be a solution. It's much too late unfortunately.
I THINK that education and prevention should come first, so that less and less people think that handguns are the only way to protect themselves and their families... Way to go!
I much prefer believing in humankind than in the power of guns.

[Mikefule]

I was reading today (albeit in a cheap UK newspaper) that there are around 30 shooting related deaths a DAY in the USA. Your chance of being shot is allegedly around 32 times higher in the USA than in the UK.

30 a day = about 2 or 3 9/11s a year. Every year.

[john_childs]

I was reading today (albeit in a cheap UK newspaper) that there are around 30 shooting related deaths a DAY in the USA. Your chance of being shot is allegedly around 32 times higher in the USA than in the UK.

30 a day = about 2 or 3 9/11s a year. Every year.
Keep in mind that some of those are likely suicides and others are gang shootings against rival gang members. So not all will be shootings involving "normal" people.

I'm not involved in gangs or crime or drugs and I'm not going to commit suicide, so the chance of me being shot at some time is going to be less than what those numbers say.

[Brian MacKenzie]

I am very doubtful that "cross fire" would be a significant issue in this case. All it takes is a few well-placed rounds for the situation to come to an end... there wouldn't be bullets flying in every direction for 10 minutes, as most Hollywood films would have you believe.


Please describe to me the last time you were in a room full of people that had the majority of people stand up and run in a panicked frenzy, with several people now all shooting their guns from various vantage points who had the ability to take what they learned whenever it was they had their gun safety course, and turn those into a few well placed shots in a room full of mayhem, terror, and adrenaline?

If you are making this up, it's not helping your case any.

[Mikefule]

Keep in mind that some of those are likely suicides and others are gang shootings against rival gang members. So not all will be shootings involving "normal" people.


Oh that's alright then.

[cathwood]

I just read this thread again for the first time since the first couple comments were posted. It amazes and disgusts me how many people blame the tool and not the reasons why this guy decided to go killing people.


The thing is, we can probably never know for certain what causes led up to this particular individual doing what he did. Its unlikely to be one thing, but a whole lot of things all reacting together. Some explanations concentrate on the interpersonal (he was shy, depressed, unhappy or whatever), some concentrate on the intrapersonal (nobody liked him, he was socially awkward, he had difficult childhood experiences, a history of abuse, his mother died when he was 5 and so on), some concentrate on the contextual (growing up in a violent society, his brother was killed in gang shootings, he lived amonst drug addicts, his government likes to whip up hysteria regarding terrorists and interfere in world politics in a violent way, his parents were poor and he never had anything, his parents were rich and his life had no meaning, whatever). Unless we know the individual very well, we will never know, we will probably never know now he's not here to tell us. He might not have known himself.

All these things that don't make him crazy, but make him just like anybody else.

Whereas 'guns' is something we can have a really good debate over.

[john_childs]

Oh that's alright then.
Not alright at all. There is too much gun use by criminals.

But what level is too much is going to vary by society. I tend to believe that most people in the US are more open to additional risk in exchange for the freedoms we have. People from other societies are not going to see it the same way. Some may want more guarantee of safety in exchange for fewer freedoms and more restrictions. It's a tradeoff, but the US tends to lean towards the more freedoms and more risk side.

[ivan]

Please describe to me the last time you were in a room full of people that had the majority of people stand up and run in a panicked frenzy, with several people now all shooting their guns from various vantage points who had the ability to take what they learned whenever it was they had their gun safety course, and turn those into a few well placed shots in a room full of mayhem, terror, and adrenaline?

I think the other problem is that there is no way to tell the 'offender' from the 'good armed members of the public' trying to protect the others. I think the situation would end up in "see a guy with a gun - shoot". And then the security guards get to the site and start shooting everybody. I mean, how would they know the good guys from the bad guys? It's all panic, adrenaline and milliseconds to make decisions. It would possibly be worse than having no ordinary people that are armed.

It seems like the gun allowance thing relies on good and bad concept a lot. "Good guys" are gonna shoot the "bad guys" and keep the peace and safety. Doesn't work like that, does it?

[yoopers]

NIU mourns (http://www.niu.edu).

[wobbling bear]

It's a tradeoff, but the US tends to lean towards the more freedoms and more risk side.
wow surprised to hear that : so the U.S. has legalised drug use? :D

[Mikefule]

Keep in mind that some of those are likely suicides and others are gang shootings against rival gang members. So not all will be shootings involving "normal" people.

I'm not involved in gangs or crime or drugs and I'm not going to commit suicide, so the chance of me being shot at some time is going to be less than what those numbers say.

So let's get this right:


Having a gun is an inalienable right because it is an essential safeguard to reduce the risk of being shot by someone else who has a gun.
There are lots of shootings of gang members by members of rival gangs.
Gang members involved in serious feuds are far more likely to be armed than the rest of us are.
But being armed doesn't appear to work as an essential safeguard against them being shot by someone else who has a gun.
Er... back to 1. above?

[yoopers]

.

[UniBrier]

When I heard of a campus shooting an hour out of Chicago, I thought of Yoopers first.



Others area asking your question, this ran in today's opinion page.

.

[kington99]

It's a tradeoff, but the US tends to lean towards the more freedoms and more risk side.

Oh, that's why you have such a low drinking age.

My point is that while obviously different countries have different freedoms, i don't believe the US has more than many other countries, it just seems to be a preoccupation of some Americans that they live in the 'land of the free', whatever that's supposed to mean.

And I agree with Brian and Ivan, more people shooting guns in a confined space, however good their intentions, is going to result in more needless deaths. Bearing in mind the gunmen in these situations invariably shoot themselves immeadiately after I very much doubt the threat of being shot part-way through their spree by a class mate would really be even the slightest deterrent.

[GILD]

If 3 people in the classroom would have had a weapon and the skill to use it the carnage would have been much less.
...
Guns don't kill people, people kill people
If the government cannot protect the people, we, the people, must learn to protect ourselves.
Nicely recited.
Now, what are your thoughts on the issue?

The problem is that people WILL get guns no matter what.
I've been using almost the exact same argument to argue for the legalisation (and taxing) of all recre (http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?p=882054&highlight=legalise+tax#post882054)ational drugs.
Yet I doubt the guns-for-all fraternity would recognise the similarity.

Guns, as opposed to the other weapons mentioned on this thread - knives, bottles and others - allows you to inflict harm from a distance.
The violence you commit is impersonalised (is that a word).
Depersonalised if you will.
It is more akin to controlling your character to commit violence in a gaming environment.
You do something here, something to happens to X there.
Using a knife makes it very, very real and very, very personal.
There's a huge difference.

Overwhelming reaction remains one of sadness.
Bruce, is that tear going to become a fixture on the Huskie's face?

[yoopers]

Overwhelming reaction remains one of sadness.
Bruce, is that tear going to become a fixture on the Huskie's face?
The tear on the Huskie face appeared on one of the local TV stations, but does not appear on the NIU (http://www.niu.edu) website.

It does dramatically reflect the deep-seated pain and hurt of people in this area and I imagine many around the world. Although I did not know any of the victims personally and my friends at NIU are safe, I am still overwhelmingly sad and have shared tears with others who share in my grief.

[uni57]

In case people haven't noticed, Bruce has made a sister thread (http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67752) with the intent of sending it to NIU.

So please, let's be careful to keep that thread clean -- condolences, prayers, sympathy, support. Just stuff like that. I know everybody will; I'm just afraid someone might accidentally post in the wrong thread (right now, I'm double-checking where I'm posting this post). Keep in mind, we are not the only readers of that other thread.

Also, it would be nice if we had an outpouring of responses, but I'm not sure what to write. Maybe if a few more people responded, my writer's block would clear up. Thank you.

[yoopers]

In case people haven't noticed, Bruce has made a sister thread (http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67752) with the intent of sending it to NIU.

So please, let's be careful to keep that thread clean -- condolences, prayers, sympathy, support. Just stuff like that. I know everybody will; I'm just afraid someone might accidentally post in the wrong thread (right now, I'm double-checking where I'm posting this post). Keep in mind, we are not the only readers of that other thread.

Also, it would be nice if we had an outpouring of responses, but I'm not sure what to write. Maybe if a few more people responded, my writer's block would clear up. Thank you.
Thanks so much, Dave. Yes, I intend to pass this on to NIU. If you were to look at their website, niu.edu, you'd see a host of similar support pouring in from so many different places. It's a pretty amazing effort.

[johnfoss]

Keep in mind that some of those are likely suicides and others are gang shootings against rival gang members. So not all will be shootings involving "normal" people.Yes and no. Gang members are notoriously bad shots. How many small children get killed randomly each year, sometimes inside their own homes, as a result of "random shootings" (the emphasis being on the random) between rival gangs? If they had to use swords there would be a lot less collateral damage.

In other words, adding guns to the situation adds more bullets flying. Nobody's perfect. The calmest person in a shooting situation like that would be the one who planned to do it, not the armed victims. Gun training or no, a situation like that will lead to mistakes.

I think the situation would end up in "see a guy with a gun - shoot". And then the security guards get to the site and start shooting everybody.Security guards hopefully try to figure out what's going on before they start shooting. They would be less likely to shoot without first at least asking the shooter to put down their weapon. Police would be expected to be even better at this. But private citizens with their own guns would react in a much less predictable manner. In a school shooting like that, you have a pretty clear situation where it's a "good idea" to shoot the shooter before he can shoot you. Most situations are much less clear cut. Wouldn't a room full of people with tasers be safer?

My condolences to the victims and families at NIU. The neverending discussion on gun control is a moot point to them.

[digigal1]

If you were in that room, how many of you would wish you had a gun?

[Brian MacKenzie]

If you were in that room, how many of you would wish you had a gun?

how many of you wouldn't have been in that room in the first place if everyone had guns

'only' 6 people died in that room. picture how many more people would have been shot overall if everyone had guns. Certainly Dave would have been shot by now for driving the speed limit

[Nimbusnut]

Deeply disturbed person bent on killing + gun = shootings. Remove the gun and you still have the deeply disturbed person bent on killing. Maybe arson, maybe poisoning, maybe pipe bombs would replace the gun, but in any case you'd still have a deeply disturbed person or persons bent on killing, and in some cases taking a lot of time to plan the event and having other ways to kill.

Even in the top notch school system my kids went through, there was almost no effort made to eliminate or even lessen the abuse that the kids outside the loop suffered from the "popular kids". I'm sorry, but I don't believe that the guns are the cause, they are result of the US being a caste society for all intents and purposes. The poor fight the wars generally, people complain about affirmative action even though we know for a fact that a poor student who happens to be a rich white kid can network his way into the University of Michigan for example. We have a lot of serious issues that go way beyond a dumb piece of steel. Another case of putting a band aid on a sucking chest wound?

[digigal1]

how many of you wouldn't have been in that room in the first place if everyone had guns

'only' 6 people died in that room. picture how many more people would have been shot overall if everyone had guns. Certainly Dave would have been shot by now for driving the speed limit

My question stands but let me rephrase it: if you were in that room, how many of you would wish to be able to protect yourself against another person with a gun? Forget about all other arguments and answer the question.

There's no way to prove that more people would have been killed, and no way to prove less people would have been killed. Every situation would be different. I read a story about a guy who went into a church and shot 2 nuns before being killed by a female member of the congregation who was a volunteer security guard there. She wasn't issued a gun as part of her security guard service, she was a concealed carry permit holder in her personal life. How many more people would have been killed if she didn't act?

[JJuggle]

if you were in that room, how many of you would wish to be able to protect yourself against another person with a gun?
Paula,

The question is not as easy as a simple I would or wouldn't.

I deliberately choose to be unarmed all the time. So it follows that in whatever situation I find myself I prefer not to have a gun even if it means being unable to protect myself against one who has one.

That said, if a person next to me had a gun and was shot, I can't say for certain that I wouldn't pick it up and try to use it.

[BillyTheMountain]

she was a concealed carry permit holder in her personal life.

It still remains that a gun in the home is more likely to be used against (accidentally or on purpose) a member of that household, than against someone else.

So if more people had guns in their homes, more innocent people, relatives of the gun holder or the gun owner herself, would be killed.

And if less people had guns, fewer would be killed. Overall.

[1-wheeled-grape]

It still remains that a gun in the home is more likely to be used against (accidentally or on purpose) a member of that household, than against someone else.

So if more people had guns in their homes, more innocent people, relatives of the gun holder or the gun owner herself, would be killed.

And if less people had guns, fewer would be killed. Overall.
dam im stuffed then my dad has a shot gun licence and many shotguns too:( but there cool for clay disc shooting:D

[BillyTheMountain]

dam im stuffed then my dad has a shot gun licence and many shotguns too:( but there cool for clay disc shooting:D

You guys need a license for a long gun??! No such thing in the USA.

[1-wheeled-grape]

yeah laws are good in some cases, but hand guns are banned over here, people still have them.

[beginnerdad]

Good commentary (http://blogs.e-rockford.com/sat/2008/02/29/niu-should-wait-before-it-decides-cole-halls-future/) from Rockford Register Star.
I voiced my opinion to our state representative that he should reconsider his support for such a bad idea.

[yoopers]

Good commentary (http://blogs.e-rockford.com/sat/2008/02/29/niu-should-wait-before-it-decides-cole-halls-future/) from Rockford Register Star.
I voiced my opinion to our state representative that he should reconsider his support for such a bad idea.
Man, I agree. Key comment, "Tearing down Cole Hall will not erase bad memories." Why let the shooter win by getting under our skin with memories in the building? Why not create good from bad. Remodel the building and use it to promote something good in life. Let memories rise from the ashes and create beauty.

[uni57]

Certainly Dave would have been shot by now for driving the speed limitSomething so simple brings out such violence in ordinary people. I keep coming back to that. The "norm" is far from "normal". Something is terribly wrong with a society where so many people can become enraged over absolutely nothing. Our baseline has moved a few steps in the direction toward violent, aggressive behavior as everyday, common behavior. It's no wonder we have so many exceptional cases making the headlines. If being momentarily prevented from speeding is all it takes for the common person to snap and become enraged to the point where they physically threaten the life of another driver, then we should view that as a giant clue that there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.

[yoopers]

there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.
But we all agree that there are problems. Question is how to address them, or better yet, who is to address them?

We made the choice long ago to start at home. Mary and I have managed our home in such a way that we think produced two very well-balanced young men. Of course anything could happen, but it's a great foundation and a great start.

[cathwood]

Something so simple brings out such violence in ordinary people. I keep coming back to that. The "norm" is far from "normal". Something is terribly wrong with a society where so many people can become enraged over absolutely nothing. Our baseline has moved a few steps in the direction toward violent, aggressive behavior as everyday, common behavior.

Has it? Compared to when?

At which period in history have people not been violent towards each other?

And when you take into consideration how much closer packed together we are in this day and age.

Doesn't seem all that surprising to me.

[BillyTheMountain]

we should view that as a giant clue that there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.

we should view that as a giant clue that there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.


we should view that as a giant clue that there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.


we should view that as a giant clue that there are deep-seated problems that need to be addressed.

Dave,

That cannot be said enough. Got any ideas?

Billy

[digigal1]

It still remains that a gun in the home is more likely to be used against (accidentally or on purpose) a member of that household, than against someone else.

If you're including those cases of people/children coming across a loaded gun in a drawer, that may be true. If I had children, I wouldn't have a gun in my house (even though I don't have kids, I keep both my guns and ammo in separate locked locations.) Statistics can be found which show the likelihood of an intruder turning a gun on a member of the household is less than 1%.
But I'm trying to get to the basic human desire for self-protection. If someone were shooting at me, I would first wish to be somewhere else, second to have something to stop the bullets, third to have a gun.

[uni57]

Has it? Compared to when?Compared to "the good old days". I can remember when people weren't as hurried and stressed out. People were more civilized. More gentle and caring. Or is my memory faulty or selective? (maybe it is)

[yoopers]

Here we go again. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_re_us/wendy_s_shooting

[lpounds]

Micheal Moore :"bowling for columbine". Really interesting documentary.
Though I agree with most of Moore's opinion, I wouldn't call him a journalist, mostly because of the "spectacular" ways he uses to make some points...
...But he sure makes some.

We didn't even hear the news about 4 shootings in a week around there. My thoughts go to the victims, their families and every U.S people: I think I would be shocked/devasted if it happened in my country:(
Michael Moore rocks but I am offended by how stupid he thinks the American people are (his audience). The way he presents his information is so utterly biased and controlled that I find I need to take it with a grain of salt. GREAT entertainer though! Has he ever done standup?

[Divebomber]

Michael Moore rocks but I am offended by how stupid he thinks the American people are (his audience). The way he presents his information is so utterly biased and controlled that I find I need to take it with a grain of salt. GREAT entertainer though! Has he ever done standup?

Thing is, America is that stupid. A lot of people take him seriously and hang on his every word. Him and Stephen Colbert.

[maestro8]

Thing is, America is that stupid. A lot of people take him seriously and hang on his every word.
Please send us a link to the study that has made this conclusion. I'd be interested in seeing how "America" has been quantified and how "stupid" is determined.

If you're making this up, well, erm, I bet there's a job at Fox News waiting for you!

[Divebomber]

Please send us a link to the study that has made this conclusion. I'd be interested in seeing how "America" has been quantified and how "stupid" is determined.

If you're making this up, well, erm, I bet there's a job at Fox News waiting for you!

You know what? I don't have any evidence other than what I personally observe. I live in the US and come into contact with a lot of Americans everyday. I'm one myself and I've seen first hand how serious people take both Michael Moore and Stephen Colbert. Secondly, I don't watch fox news nor do I take any major news network seriously. I boycott CNN. America seems to disengage it's brain quite often. If you aren't observing that yourself, then you are an optimist. When it comes to American culture, every American has a say so because we live it. I don't need to look for statistics (which mean nothing, anyway) to prove my point on a message board. Just talk to your neighbor and you'll see how confused and double minded we are. We can't even decide if we want freedom of speach or tolerance.

For the record, I love living in this country and being able to believe what I want to believe and having the freedom to work, vote, live on my own etc. In a lot of countries around the world, that's not the case, but I'm not going to deny that America is doing themselves in and are getting their news quips, opinions and so forth from people like Michael Moore, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewert, The Onion, CNN, Fox..and so on. Not everybody, but a lot of people.

[BillyTheMountain]

If you're including those cases of people/children coming across a loaded gun in a drawer, that may be true. If I had children, I wouldn't have a gun in my house (even though I don't have kids, I keep both my guns and ammo in separate locked locations.)

It may be your wife that uses the gun on you, gal. That's also how it happens. The guns are often used purposely on members of the household, too.

[Divebomber]

It may be your wife that uses the gun on you, gal. That's also how it happens. The guns are often used purposely on members of the household, too.

They do say that the majority of murders are commited by family members or close friends. I'm not saying that your wife will go and kill you, gal, but random shootings like the UNI shootings probably happen a lot less than someone you know doing it. Again, I have no proof to back this up other than various reports I've read. So, take it with a grain of salt. :rolleyes:

[uni57]

Here we go again. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_re_us/wendy_s_shootingWow, I don't even know what to make of this. It boggles the mind. What is going on?

I don't know what makes a person do something like that. But there are a lot of people in the world. If one in a million people is screwed up enough to go on a shooting spree, then there are hundreds of people in the US alone who are capable of such an act. Maybe there are only dozens. Or a handful. But they watch the news. A new meme has been introduced into our culture over the last many years -- the shooting spree / suicide.

I wouldn't call it a copycat crime. It's simply that if you are aware of an avenue, you just might take it. Like the "suicide by cop" phenomenon (shoot at the cops until they are forced to kill you). Imagine you wanted to commit suicide. If you never heard of "suicide by cop", you might not think of it yourself. But having seen it in the news, it is now in your awareness field. You might try it. Not as a copycat act. It is simply an idea that you are now aware of.

Screwed-up people exist. Screwed-up people have always existed. But now the shooting-spree / suicide meme is out there, in full force. That's my only point, which is not saying much at all, actually. Nobody has any answers or solutions. I'm just saying that the idea has taken root, so we can only expect more and more of these tragedies.

[yoopers]

Another...http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080304/ap_on_re_us/memphis_shooting

[wobbling bear]

I recently viewed a report on Somalia on TV. Total armed anarchy.
Two things:

- people are surviving by food provided by UN organisation much of it is provided by the US. So here is something the US should be proud of!

- comment by a dispirited African "blue helmet": "with every civilian owning firearms .. with the social glue diluted then everybody can do crazy things .... they do not even need a reason!". Pick up your own interpretation of this comment.

[BillyTheMountain]

"with every civilian owning firearms .. with the social glue diluted then everybody can do crazy things .... they do not even need a reason!".

I wonder who profited (USA gun manufacturers?) in order to get guns into every civilian's hands.

[siafirede]

Compared to "the good old days". I can remember when people weren't as hurried and stressed out. People were more civilized. More gentle and caring. Or is my memory faulty or selective? (maybe it is)

It may be because you live in NJ/NYC area. I am pretty sure it is going to be way more fast paced and stressed out there than out somewhere further away from a major city. NYC is infamous for that attitude aren't they?

Where did you live in "the good ol' days"?

[spazdude222]

Life is cheap, unfortunatly. America has (sadly) tha attitude of "I want it, I deserve it" and that comes through in a variety of ways.

How can we expect people to value life when all around us we glorify and sensationalize death, destruction, and violence? I'm not saying violence should be taken out of movies and TV, but I think parents should be better parents. I don't care who you are, don't take your 10 year old to R rated movies, or rent them M rated video games, of allow them unrestricted acces to HBO.

Also, with abortion legal, how can we try to outlaw murder? If A woman can take the life of a child who "ruins" her life, why can't a tortured youth blow the brains out of a bully who wouldn't let him live the way he wanted to?

If we aren't going to teach tolerance, love, and MORALITY to our youth, how can we expect to get that out of them?

[cathwood]

Also, with abortion legal, how can we try to outlaw murder? If A woman can take the life of a child who "ruins" her life, why can't a tortured youth blow the brains out of a bully who wouldn't let him live the way he wanted to?

If we aren't going to teach tolerance, love, and MORALITY to our youth, how can we expect to get that out of them?

The same is true of having the death penalty and the country engaging in murdorous conflicts surely?

[spazdude222]

I wonder who profited (USA gun manufacturers?) in order to get guns into every civilian's hands.
Blaming the gun companies is silly. SO is outlawing guns, actually. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns. If only law enforcement agencies have firepower, how would civilians stand up for themselves if the lawenforcement became corrupt? I know it's a silly example, but the point remains, you can't disarm one side only. And you can't disarm both sides completely. Instead of getting rid of the means to commit school shootings, we need to eliminate the motives. You can argue that if the killers didn't have access to guns, they couldn't have killed anyone, or at least not as many, but I could argue, that if ALL students had access to guns, the killers could have been slayed before they could slay.

[spazdude222]

The same is true of having the death penalty and the country engaging in murdorous conflicts surely?
I'm undecided about the death penalty. I don't like the idea of killing people... but I don't like the ideas of letting them rot in prison for life, or releasing them back into the world either. As far as war goes, it's a terrible terrible thing, that unfortunatly is necessary. I firmly believe that if we weren't fighting terrorism over there, we'd be fighting it over here. I'm not condoning all actuions taken by the U.S.A. in the middle east, but I don't think that bein ginvolved is murderous. With great power comes great responsibility, and the U.S. is a great power.

[cathwood]

I'm undecided about the death penalty. I don't like the idea of killing people... but I don't like the ideas of letting them rot in prison for life, or releasing them back into the world either. As far as war goes, it's a terrible terrible thing, that unfortunatly is necessary. I firmly believe that if we weren't fighting terrorism over there, we'd be fighting it over here. I'm not condoning all actuions taken by the U.S.A. in the middle east, but I don't think that bein ginvolved is murderous. With great power comes great responsibility, and the U.S. is a great power.

So you're saying that it's ok for the powerful to kill? Yet not for relatively powerless people (like mothers)?

[johnfoss]

Michael Moore rocks but I am offended by how stupid he thinks the American people are (his audience).
Thing is, America is that stupid.
Please send us a link to the study that has made this conclusion.Not study. Lack of study. Lack of interest in studying. Lack of emphasis on knowledge. Lack of giving a crap about the rest of the world. More interest in tabloid magazine information than world events.

Random examples:
- Battle of the Jay-Walk All Stars (Jay Leno)
- Are You Smarter Than A Fifth-Grader? (no, they aren't)
- Deal or No Deal, the easiest "game show" ever, with only one question to answer, and still people eff it up.

And my best example of all, for recent history: Ignoring the details of popular vote vs. electoral votes, "we Americans" voted George W. Bush into office not once, but twice! Can we get any dumber than that?

The Wendys shooting hit a little close to home. My dad lives in West Palm Beach during the winters, and he likes Wendys...

[Mikefule]

I'm not condoning all actuions taken by the U.S.A. in the middle east, but I don't think that bein ginvolved is murderous. With great power comes great responsibility, and the U.S. is a great power.

"With great power comes great responsibility." I can't recall: is that J P Sartre or DC Marvel?:rolleyes:

Then you go and use the word "power" to mean one particular thing ("military power") and the word "responsibility" to mean one particular thing ("being prepared to use that military power").

Here's another interpretation:

Great power = massive economic resources.

Great responsibility = the willingness to share those economic resources.

The people who commited the attacks of 9/11 hated the west. You've got to hate someone a hell of a lot to train for years to be able to kill yourself and thousands of other people in a plane crash.

For everyone who hates the west that much, there are thousands who hate or despise us, but not enough to do those things.

Has bombing Afghanistan and Iraq and killing tens of thousands made them hate us less? Would helping them to build schools and hospitals have made them hate us more?

With great economic influence comes a great opportunity to do good by using it responsibly.

Unfortunately, America is a country where more people are murdered every year than were killed on 9/11 because it is so deep in the national psyche that you can shoot your way out of trouble.

[cathwood]

So you're saying that it's ok for the powerful to kill? Yet not for relatively powerless people (like mothers)?

"Personal distress and violence are opposite sides of the same coin; they are closely and often inextricably linked. Violence and distress, whatever form they take, are ultimately about power and control and both can be seen as an expression of powerlessness and a lack of control" Godsi (2004) Violence and Society p65.

[yoopers]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23504328?GT1=43001

Shooting at an Israeli seminary of high-school aged children.

Quote from the article:
"Yitzhak Dadon, a student, said he was armed with a rifle and was able to shoot one of the attackers from the roof of a nearby building. 'He came out of the library spraying automatic fire. ... The terrorist came to the entrance and I shot him twice in the head,' he said."

[spazdude222]

"With great power comes great responsibility." I can't recall: is that J P Sartre or DC Marvel?:rolleyes:

Then you go and use the word "power" to mean one particular thing ("military power") and the word "responsibility" to mean one particular thing ("being prepared to use that military power").

Here's another interpretation:

Great power = massive economic resources.

Great responsibility = the willingness to share those economic resources.

The people who commited the attacks of 9/11 hated the west. You've got to hate someone a hell of a lot to train for years to be able to kill yourself and thousands of other people in a plane crash.

For everyone who hates the west that much, there are thousands who hate or despise us, but not enough to do those things.

Has bombing Afghanistan and Iraq and killing tens of thousands made them hate us less? Would helping them to build schools and hospitals have made them hate us more?

With great economic influence comes a great opportunity to do good by using it responsibly.

Unfortunately, America is a country where more people are murdered every year than were killed on 9/11 because it is so deep in the national psyche that you can shoot your way out of trouble.
They hate us because we stand for things that their interpretation of Islam is against. We give women rights, we sell pornography, we allow homosexuality, we promote freedom of religion... They hate us because we are free. Building schools WOULD make them hate us more, because they'd rather not have US saving THEIR butts. They'd prefer to NOT have us coming in and bringing our "liberal" views on freedom and inalienable rights. And yes, i used a spider-man the movie quote, because I think it's very profound. All evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

[spazdude222]

So you're saying that it's ok for the powerful to kill? Yet not for relatively powerless people (like mothers)?
I'm saying, that if my country is being threatened by another country, I'd rather have my country's military deplored to ensure those threats never come to fruition. Killing a grown man is NOT the same as killing a child. Neither is good, but they are totally different. Children are still INNOCENT, grown men are not. And I'm saying that if the United States is the most powerful nation in the world, then she has two main responsibilities, lik eit or not 1) the responsibility to herself: self preservation
2) the responsibility to everyone else: playing police, keeping the peace. For us to keep the peace, we have to first preserve ourself. If we were suddenly thrown from power, and economically destitute, then we would NOT have the responsibility to play police, but as long as we are following our first responsibility, that won't happen and we can keep fulfilling our second responsibility.
ALSO comparing the US to a weak nation is a lot like comparing a Mother to a child. Compared to the mother, the child is the weak one. You are twisting my words to make me sound ignorant.

[siafirede]

Killing a grown man is NOT the same as killing a child. Neither is good, but they are totally different. Children are still INNOCENT, grown men are not.

When in the time span of life does a man lose his innocence?

[unisteve]

They hate us because we stand for things that their interpretation of Islam is against. We give women rights, we sell pornography, we allow homosexuality, we promote freedom of religion... They hate us because we are free. Building schools WOULD make them hate us more, because they'd rather not have US saving THEIR butts. They'd prefer to NOT have us coming in and bringing our "liberal" views on freedom and inalienable rights. And yes, i used a spider-man the movie quote, because I think it's very profound. All evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
America to the rescue! That's why.

[monkeyman]

I'd rather have my country's military deplored to ensure those threats never come to fruition.

This is the best typo ever.

[wobbling bear]

They hate us because we stand for things that their interpretation of Islam is against. We give women rights, we sell pornography, we allow homosexuality, we promote freedom of religion... They hate us because we are free.
not sure this is true :
- for instance salafists hate shias (to the point of kamikazing them) an the reverse is true...
- when you look closely at the muslim "street" there is much more sympathy to many "western" views that is generaly thought... but there is still some pathos against an abstract entity wich is the "west" : many reasons for that including imagined and real imperialistic and contradictory behaviours from countries identified with "the west" (BTW this exists in Russia too!).
- I happen to have discussed with some (former?) salafists. My impression was of a romantic and irrealistic view of the world. As with many people the support for violent action is abstract and cut off from the reality of it! -paradox: you cannot imagine the initial enormous amount of sympathy for the victims of the twin towers!- I suspect that except for a minority of real crazies there is a way to reorient their theories.

open discussion: what are "our" contradictions that lead to accusations of inconsistency? what can we do?

[BillyTheMountain]

I'm saying, that if my country is being threatened by another country, I'd rather have my country's military deplored to ensure those threats never come to fruition.

Fortunately, the USA has not been threatened by another nation since WW II.

[BillyTheMountain]

They hate us because we stand for things that their interpretation of Islam is against. We give women rights, we sell pornography, we allow homosexuality, we promote freedom of religion... They hate us because we are free. Building schools WOULD make them hate us more, because they'd rather not have US saving THEIR butts. They'd prefer to NOT have us coming in and bringing our "liberal" views on freedom and inalienable rights. And yes, i used a spider-man the movie quote, because I think it's very profound. All evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

Wow! They're just like the Christians!!!!

I hope they don't get together.....

[AlanChambers]

I'm saying, that if my country is being threatened by another country,

Please demonstrate how Iraq was a threat in February 2003, starved into submission, enforced no-fly zones, and bombed continuously since 1991. Saddam was a bastard, but an old ally of the US who would love to have been an ally again. He had nothing at all in common with al-Qaeda. I will be very interested in your response because it seems very clear that Iraq was known at the time by your administration to be no threat at all. Rather it was Step #1 of the neocon plans for world domination, planned long before 9/11, and the preferred scapegoat over Afghanistan after that sad day. It was obvious before it started that the adventure in Iraq would be an unmitigated disaster - mostly for the Iraqis.

Killing a grown man is NOT the same as killing a child. Neither is good, but they are totally different.
Children are still INNOCENT, grown men are not.

Please explain how this is so. Is it all grown men, or just the ones with a Playboy collection?

the responsibility to everyone else: playing police, keeping the peace.

What arrogance!! Who gives the US hegemon the authority to charge around the world dictating who can and cannot be in government or whatever, who can and cannot live? The US has an appalling history of destructive interventions, killing millions of civilians and assisting brutal regimes to do the same, and always erroneously claiming the moral high ground. I was once convinced of the greatness of the US - how it was a force for good and all that - but then I started reading. I urge you to do the same.

I read about Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, everywhere in South America, Palestine, Cuba, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and more. I read about the tissue of lies used to start the latest war in Iraq, and about the long wished for Middle East agenda of the armchair generals in your administration. 9/11 was a pretext for, not a cause of, this war. I read about the disgusting distortions of international conventions which allow the US to indefinitely incarcerate alleged criminals without charge, and to torture anyone they feel like. 3,000 or so people died at the WTC: how many innocents have died at the hands of US forces? If these are the good guys, I can´t imagine what the bad guys must be like.

The US needs to become a better world citizen, and stop all this murderous hypocrisy. A good start would be some honest brokerage regarding Palestine, and an end to support for Israeli military excesses. Which of the presidential hopefuls do you think would do that?


Al

[peleschramm]

I find it strange how you say why has life BECOME so cheap. Life has always been cheap, just look at history. I actually think its getting more expensive, though not fast enough.

[yoopers]

Photos of Cole Hall and the memorials taken 3/8/08.

[yoopers]

Just outside Cole Hall.

[yoopers]

One of the front doors to Cole Hall.

[yoopers]

Cole Hall.

[yoopers]

At the quad in front of the student center.

[yoopers]

Outside the student center.

[yoopers]

11

[yoopers]

12