Cooler heads are speaking out

Status
Not open for further replies.
Alaska, your statement assumes that these people don't know they're doing anything wrong. Barring a complete break from reality in which they do not even realize what they are actually doing, people know that killing a bunch of people in cold blood is wrong.

Attacks like this can't really be blamed on anything but the evil of the individual. It has nothing to do with society as a whole or anything you'd like to blame it on. Evil exists in this world, and it will do what it wants to do unless it is stopped.

Like I said, I'm not going to try to get into a religious debate, but Christians are not immune to immorality. You're welcome to believe what you want, but please don't tell me that 2A is important if you believe that 1A (specifically freedom of religion) is not.
 
Gym, I rarely socialize outside of work, and I spend hours a day playing violent video games. I have no girlfriend. So am I likely to go out to my local school and commit an attack?

No. Because I know right from wrong, and I don't want to do wrong.

Wanting to break 1A (freedom of speech) because of that 1 unstable person is as bad as wanting to break 2A because of that 1 unstable person.
 
Public safety first responders & military who have listened to Lt. Col. (ret) Dave Grossman speak about the subject of teaching someone to be able to kill, and a desensitization to acts of violence, may make the influence presented by ultra violent video games and movies not so easy to dismiss when it comes to its potential effect.

Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence, Grossman, D., and DeGaetano, G.

And, for a slightly different perspective which briefly references Grossman, this is available online ... http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html

I suspect we're going to be hearing significantly more on this subject and it's possible influence in our modern society as the weeks and months pass.
 
You should never, EVER ban content. Period.

Look guys, here's the thing. Video games already have a voluntary and pretty well-enforced age rating system. They're practically a controlled substance. Even if violent games can affect kids negatively, parents already have the tools necessary to keep them out of their kids hands.
 
Obviously there is no one single issue that is at the heart of these horrific attacks. I read one article talking about the effect of media with copycat killings as another factor as well. Certainly there are some who have sought the "glory" given to these mass murderers.

Mental health issues must be at the top of the list since folks with a stable mental outlook do not fit the profile of these creeps.

Someone took issue with the WWII data not shooting back, but it is actually true. I had one patient who told me that is what he did himself and others he knew did likewise. I also heard it in Army lectures at Camp Bullis Tx during my own training in the Combat Casualty Care Course.

Another factor is rampant bullying of these kids. When combined with all of the social factors, it is not surprising at all to me that folks seek the darkside more and more instead of the repentance that Christianity taught but is now rejected. I am not at all surprised, but deeply saddened.
 
You should never, EVER ban content. Period.

Look guys, here's the thing. Video games already have a voluntary and pretty well-enforced age rating system. They're practically a controlled substance. Even if violent games can affect kids negatively, parents already have the tools necessary to keep them out of their kids hands.
I banned content in my house even though the kids NEVER had video games that I bought them. They did just fine with legos. Not sure why any parent would buy their kids such horrible "games." I didn't allow horrible movies either. Shucks, my kids never complained to me that I had prevented them exploring such trash, sorry, just my opinion.
 
Alaska, your statement assumes that these people don't know they're doing anything wrong. Barring a complete break from reality in which they do not even realize what they are actually doing, people know that killing a bunch of people in cold blood is wrong.

Attacks like this can't really be blamed on anything but the evil of the individual. It has nothing to do with society as a whole or anything you'd like to blame it on. Evil exists in this world, and it will do what it wants to do unless it is stopped.

Like I said, I'm not going to try to get into a religious debate, but Christians are not immune to immorality. You're welcome to believe what you want, but please don't tell me that 2A is important if you believe that 1A (specifically freedom of religion) is not.
Who told you killing is wrong? We are getting to areas in our society where there are no rules, but you are the ruler of your own universe. With no absolutes any longer as the societal norm, what is right and wrong is subject to your own moral system which you create for yourself.

Is that a bit extreme, absolutely, but these events are quite extreme.

Nevertheless, we should not in any manner over look the mental health issue and the complete lack of mental health for available to a large portion of our society. The role that this played with the latest tragedy is self evident and it appears that the mother was in the last in denial and perhaps was an enabler.

Once again, there is not one single entity that you can point to as a sufficient cause.
 
I banned content in my house even though the kids NEVER had video games that I bought them. They did just fine with legos. Not sure why any parent would buy their kids such horrible "games." I didn't allow horrible movies either. Shucks, my kids never complained to me that I had prevented them exploring such trash, sorry, just my opinion.

Banning content in your home is up to you to decide, not the government and not me. I shouldn't be able to say that I think Legos are evil so you are evil for letting your kids play with Legos, and the government shouldn't ban Legos. I watched violent movies when I was a kid and I'm an upstanding citizen.

Alaska, there are some things that are universally regarded as wrong, and others that are up to the individual. The way I look at it is this (and I think the libertarians do as well): are your actions directly impacting another individual? I don't know any athiests that will say "yeah, we should be allowed to steal groceries" or "it's okay to murder."

I was raised Christian and see where you're coming from, but at the same time what you're saying is that if our country doesn't all agree with YOU that tragedies will continue to happen.
 
"We also need to allow the teachers in the schools, who are charged with the daily care of our children, to defend those children against physical attacks."

I wish, but having spent over 30 years in the public schools, I don't see this happening. The teachers get their marching orders from the Department of Education, the National Teachers Association and their local associations. All are far left and adamantly opposed to GUNS!!
 
"We also need to allow the teachers in the schools, who are charged with the daily care of our children, to defend those children against physical attacks."

I wish, but having spent over 30 years in the public schools, I don't see this happening. The teachers get their marching orders from the Department of Education, the National Teachers Association and their local associations. All are far left and adamantly opposed to GUNS!!

Then they'll have to change or accept events like these as the "status quo".

Columbine occurred during the '94 AWB and the reinstatement of a similar or greater ban will have no effect- even if reinstated tomorrow, we'd still see events like this for a very long time. Unfortunately, these groups have substituted fantasy for reality and will likely never see the error of their immovable position.

That's the fault of the liberal mindset in cases such as these- they blame the instrument, not the actor.
 
Indeed, the gun control mentality is that guns are in control of situations, and when we see unfortunate examples like those in Newtown, we shouldn’t see human beings who have gone off the right moral road because their consciences and self-discipline have not been properly developed. Instead, we should see guns in control of the situation, and then we should react against the guns. “Gun violence” should be called human violence, leaving us at least the dignity of being responsible for our own sins.
 
There is always something to demonize. Horror comics in the 50's, Metal in the 80's, and now video games. In the end, while they may be blamed for a few things, not everyone who comes into contact with them becomes jeff dahmer of Dylan kleibold.
 
My challenge was to point out that I believe that a small segment of humanity, for some reason(s) I don't understand can just randomly murder totally innocent strangers and apparently not be bothered by this. Not the domestic violence flare-up or some other momentary rage situation without pre-meditation ... not the case where the individual is clearly incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. No, I'm refering to those cases of cold-blooded murder.

My point at pushing aside video games as a cause is based on my speculation that it is not the video game which creates the monster. No, I believe that the individual is already disturbed and damaged and is attracted to these video games, possibly for reinforcement, certainly for gratification. (Not that I suspect all or most or many of you players are this type individual. I fly combat flight simulators and still play the OBL Liquor Store shooting game).

I'm sure the Army changed it's training because what it had wasn't working effectively. I didn't have video-based training, but shot silhouettes instead of bullseye targets. How much of that played a part in my combat experience, I cannot say. What I can say is that I was not then, nor to this day, bothered by my killing VC and NAV soldiers ... and I did not knowingly do harm to any civilians. It was simply WAR ... them or me and I wanted to come home alive. That said, I have also not had, before Vietnam or after, any inclination to murder my fellowman. As I said, I understand that to be immoral and forbidden, both by God's law and by human convention. Other nations, other cultures, other religions embrace this same philosophy ... but others clearly do not.

So, back to where I started. What makes a 20 year old kid spiral down so far out of control that he brutally and in a disgusting display of cold-blooded lust, murders the most helpless and innocent amongst us? Before we have a debate on banning certain firearms or restricting certain magazines, I demand that our leaders finally refuse to take the broad and easy road of banning an inanimate object and instead, finally take the narrow and difficult road of finding out why only certain individuals engage in these horrific examples of inhuman behavior. That to me would be progress toward making not only our schools, but our society as a whole, safer for all of us.
 
WardenWolf,

Asperger's Syndrome is part of the autism specturm, correct? There are varying severities as well, right? If so, could that mean that some with Aspergers function at a high enough level to responsibly use guns while others might be unfit?

While true, it is no different than any other aspect of the population. One thing about people with autism and Asperger's is that they become heavily fixated on a particular area of interest. If their special interest happens to be firearms, they will not only learn about them in extreme depth, but also how to use them safely, and will, on average, be safer with them than the vast majority of the population.

Generally a person who is severe enough to not be safe with guns will have no interest in them anyway. Many people on the spectrum have sensory issues. That is, they tend to be overly sensitive to light, sound, touch, taste, and / or smell. More severe individuals tend to be worse-affected. Someone overly sensitive to bright light or loud noises would normally stay away from guns, for example. And plenty simply limit direct human interaction as much as possible. They tend to be recluses, but they really are just seeking shelter from the stress of going out and dealing with people and all the bright lights and sounds. Once you understand why an autistic person behaves the way they do, you understand why it is in no way connected to violence.
 
Going off on a tangent

I have just read the OP's post and some of the replies....what bothers me here is the OP's reference to some others as "idiots, etc." Are we the High Road. Can we disagree with others opinions in some less disrespectful way? Okay, you do not respect them but I get very tired of reading such prose. We are 300 million people in the USA who will have 300 million opinions. Many of us will strongly disagree with one another. But I lose a lot of respect for a writer, and his/her credibility, in my eyes, drops a great deal when preferred terms are such names as "idiots." Can we have a dialog about guns and gun laws and the 2nd amendment in some manner more in keeping with our name...THE HIGH ROAD.
 
One thing about people with autism and Asperger's is that they become heavily fixated on a particular area of interest. If their special interest happens to be firearms, they will not only learn about them in extreme depth, but also how to use them safely, and will, on average, be safer with them than the vast majority of the population.

This is EXACTLY what happened to me. I fixated sharply on firearms when I was 8 years old. I had watched the original Star Wars trilogy for the first time in my life at the time (it was freshly remastered on VHS cassette!). My father noticed my interest and bought me a book at Barnes and Noble titled 'Star Wars: The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology'. It had a picture of the dressed up Sterling SMG that was used in the movies on the cover.

Next time I was in Barnes and Noble with my dad, he was in the golf book section (he still plays golf 3 times a week), and on the shelf right across, was the gun book section. I was looking over the various books without any interest, until I came across one that was 'Military Small Arms of the 20th Century' by Krause publications. It had a picture of a Thompson SMG on the front, which I didn't care about, but then I turned it over, and there was a picture of a Sterling SMG on the back. I bought it with my own allowance money right then and there.

A month later, I bought Janes Guns Recognition Guide. A couple weeks after that, 'Encyclopedia of Modern Weapons', which is actually how I learned about Cold Steel knives. Then I started getting Guns Digest annual publications, and a couple big-blue-books of guns.

I could field strip an AR-15 or an AK-47 by age 13, and I never even handled one until I turned 22. To this day, I'll field strip and inspect guns at the FFL before a transfer, without reading the manual in the box. The guy at the counter has learned by now not to bother asking 'have you had one of those before?'

Many people on the spectrum have sensory issues. That is, they tend to be overly sensitive to light, sound, touch, taste, and / or smell. More severe individuals tend to be worse-affected

I actually had the severe sensory reaction. Well, I still do, but it's more under control. As a child, my hearing was sensitive enough that being inside a vehicle that was driving over grooved pavement was painful, a teacher popping a paper bag full of air would send me running out of the room. When I started playing airsoft at age 15 in Taiwan, people quickly started asking me where everyone was, because I could tell exactly where each team was by the sounds of their footsteps in the jungle.

I am also overly sensitive to physical touch. My girlfriend gleefully and mercilessly exploits this, because it means I am ticklish over ALL of my body.

I don't know if smell was ever an issue with me, but taste definitely was. As a child, even a mint flavored lifesaver was incredibly painful.

As for light? Well, I still wear a pair of sunglasses around my neck whenever I go out, even at night time. I normally leave them off to make eye contact with people (as an aside, eye contact isn't a naturally obtained behaviour for some people with Aspergers, I had to continuously practice it), but sometimes those supermarkets put in way too many light bulbs alongside the misters!

Nowadays though, I shoot, I enjoy fireworks on 4th of July and Chinese New Years, and I have a certain enjoyment of buffalo wings with labels like 'suicide' or 'atomic'. Go figure.
 
I have just read the OP's post and some of the replies....what bothers me here is the OP's reference to some others as "idiots, etc." Are we the High Road. Can we disagree with others opinions in some less disrespectful way? Okay, you do not respect them but I get very tired of reading such prose. We are 300 million people in the USA who will have 300 million opinions. Many of us will strongly disagree with one another. But I lose a lot of respect for a writer, and his/her credibility, in my eyes, drops a great deal when preferred terms are such names as "idiots." Can we have a dialog about guns and gun laws and the 2nd amendment in some manner more in keeping with our name...THE HIGH ROAD.
Normally I agree, but there's something else going on here.

The fact is that all of the statistical, scientific, and sociological info out there agrees with us. All of the anti-gun rhetoric can be and has been debunked. No matter what info we put out out there in an effort to educate, they just question talk in much the same way that Moon Hoaxers or 9/11 truthers do ("What about this? Or this?"). They're Kool Aid drinkers and pretending that they're anything else doesn't help us.

The way I see it, there comes a point in every one-sided discussion where it moves beyond a mere difference of opinion. Where it moves from ignorance to stupidity. Where I don't have to respect their opinion because it's not an opinion. They're just lying to me.
 
Some empirical evidence for a positive correllation: http://www.takethechallengenow.net/
"ABOUT TAKE THE CHALLENGE

Delta-Schoolcraft Intermediate School District (DSISD) began developing the Take the Challenge • Take Charge program in 2003. The program is designed to reduce the amount of time students and families spend using media and reduce exposure to media violence. The program includes curriculum from preschool — high school.

Stanford University Prevention Research Center developed the Student Media Awareness to Reduce Television (S.M.A.R.T.) curriculum for 3rd or 4th grade students to reduce the negative effects of excessive Television, Movies, and Video Game Use. The S.M.A.R.T.curriculum has shown:

• Reduction in student aggression
• Decrease in obesity and weight gain
• Increase in academic achievement"

Results:

"The DSISD has implemented Take the Challenge in over thirty schools and conducted playground observations in nine schools. The average decrease in student aggression onthe playground was 55%. There was also a 48% decrease in negative classroom behavior. Schools that were implementing the curriculum during the state assessment saw an increase in math and writing achievement at the elementary level. A Youth Correctional Center implemented the program and saw a 43% decrease in aggressive incidents. "
 
WardenWolf and RX-178:

I will reiterate my point again: "...while Aspergers itself might not be cause for alarm, associated conditions could be dangerous."

I'm not attacking people with Aspergers! I am merely stating something that is held as fact by the medical community; that people with Aspergers are at a risk for other problems that could be dangerous.

From my observations, I would assume both of you had parents or people around you growing up that wanted to help you, and you wanted to help yourself. I'm not so different-I had hearing problems and speech impediments early in life. Like yourselves, I had parents and teachers who cared and wanted to help me work past my impediments. I am blessed to have the parents I do, and thankful that I don't have to live with those problems today. I am sure both of you would probably have similar things to say, do you not? If someone has Aspergers and they've found a way to deal with it and live happily, great! I'm not worried about them. I'm worried about the troubled ones like the young man in CT who hadn't found a way to deal with it, and possibly had other issues that were bigger than his Aspergers.
 
"blaming video games"....
I don't think video games are "to blame"
but I don't think that people in general are socially influenced in a positive manner by practicing how to target, hunt, and assasinate other people via. online gaming and first person shooters, for hours and hours at a time.
I can guarantee you the average gamer spends more hours a week "killing" his online buddies than he does actually socializing in face to face meetings with their peers.
I think it is time to take a long look at what we as a society are being sold, and how we want media in our lives.
To follow up on this train of thought. David Grossman (author of On Combat and On Killing) has written about violence in video games and anecdotal evidence in shootings. He's a legit author and he sees a connection. Read up on him and it may change your mind. He changed mine about violent video games and some other things.
 
Actually, it wasn't anywhere near that simple for me.

Asperger's Syndrome wasn't well known, even by psychological professionals until less than a decade ago. I was misdiagnosed as having ADHD, and put on ritalin. Then instead of revisiting the diagnosis, they just started adding on the other symptoms as 'complications' or 'additional disorders'.

At one point in my life, I was on Ritalin, Tofranil and Catapres all at once. I was a kid, I'd never taken the time to make notes about my own behavior or to look at myself introspectively, so I honestly didn't FEEL any different. My parents thought that I was behaving better, and I believed them when they told me.

Well, when I was 15, I was living in Taiwan, and at that time I was on Effexor, I think. I came down with a SEVERE case of the flu, and stopped taking it because it might have side effects with the cocktail of flu medications I was just prescribed.

At that point, I had become mature enough to analyze my behavior analytically, and it turned out... I was doing better WITHOUT the medication. I went off medication then, and never went back on it.

It wasn't until two years AFTER that, that my early symptoms were re-evaluated and they came to the conclusion that I actually had Asperger's Syndrome this whole time. So, it actually took psychological professionals 13 years (from age 4-17) to figure out what I actually had, and they'd been medicating me for other things for 11 of those years.

So, the bottom line is, I REALLY don't trust a determination on the 'autism spectrum' to be applied to the right to keep and bear arms in ANY way shape or form.
 
@Sheepdog I have not read Grossman, but I do know video games can affect people in both positive and negative ways.. (here is a summary an author did about a year ago about some of the things we're discovering) but how is that different from anything else in the world? There has to be something inside the person that makes them snap.

And is it something intrinsic in males? I am unfamiliar with any instance that a woman has gone on a shooting rampage like this. Can you all think of any? There is a huge population of women who play violent video games, and listen to gangster rap, enjoy violent movies and have social/psychological disorders and have guns available to them.
 
Banning content in your home is up to you to decide, not the government and not me. I shouldn't be able to say that I think Legos are evil so you are evil for letting your kids play with Legos, and the government shouldn't ban Legos. I watched violent movies when I was a kid and I'm an upstanding citizen.

Alaska, there are some things that are universally regarded as wrong, and others that are up to the individual. The way I look at it is this (and I think the libertarians do as well): are your actions directly impacting another individual? I don't know any athiests that will say "yeah, we should be allowed to steal groceries" or "it's okay to murder."

I was raised Christian and see where you're coming from, but at the same time what you're saying is that if our country doesn't all agree with YOU that tragedies will continue to happen.
Dear Scribs, I never said I expect everyone to agree with me. Being in agreement with God is enough for me and that is my main purpose in life today, living according to His purpose.

The point I was making about no absolutes is that what is right and wrong is decided by individuals today which is in my opinion, one of the contributing factors to much of the evil that permeates our nation today. America continues to march decidedly against the laws of God as written in the Bible and I personally believe that is our biggest fault.

On the day we all stand before the Lord and give account of everything we have done in our body whether good or bad, that will likely be an almost universal fault of our current generations. I personally cannot dissociate the rejection of the Bible and Christian values from the happenings we see around us. If God is real, and I truly believe He is, then that will be His view as well since we have the historical record of Israel.

Like I said, just my opinion, and no, I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I believe God does.
 
RX-178 said:
So, the bottom line is, I REALLY don't trust a determination on the 'autism spectrum' to be applied to the right to keep and bear arms in ANY way shape or form.

Did you get all the way though my post, or just cherry pick it to argue? I have already acknowledged that having Aspergers does not automatically mean you're a looney! But there is no denying that if went untreated or un-helped, someone with Aspergers could pose a threat because of other compounding issues such as depression or schizophrenia.

RX-178 said:
Actually, it wasn't anywhere near that simple for me.

Asperger's Syndrome wasn't well known, even by psychological professionals until less than a decade ago. I was misdiagnosed as having ADHD, and put on ritalin. Then instead of revisiting the diagnosis, they just started adding on the other symptoms as 'complications' or 'additional disorders'.

But there were at least people around you who cared enough to try and get you the help you needed. That's all the bigger the point I'm trying to make; Identify people who might be at risk for violent behavior and make sure they are getting help if they need it. And don't give them access to resources to carry out their malicious and evil thoughts! Unfortunately, there is still much research to be done concerning things such as Aspergers and we don't have all the answers. And sometimes people are put on meds that don't need to be on them. I am in no way implying that getting someone help means putting them on meds or not putting them on meds. It's more about taking the time to make an attempt to communicate with them and analyzing what comes out of that communication to make solid and informed decisions that help that person.
 
I'm not disagreeing with the intent of your post, Screamin' Eagle, not at all. If people need help, they definitely should try to get it, and people should be there to help them.

But restricting their rights so that they don't have 'access to the resources to carry out malicious and evil thoughts', leaves MANY people who will be caught up in misdiagnosis, medication or otherwise.

We already KNOW what a nightmare the Lautenberg amendment was. People who took a plea bargain to a misdemeanor, rather than fighting a battle in court suddenly lost their gun rights.

Taking the same approach to those with mental illness would be many, MANY times worse. Imagine if I had to suddenly fight every one of the previous misdiagnosis as if I were trying to expunge something from my record!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top