Seriously thoughtful The three mass shootings this month - are they related to the recession?

[zerospinboson]

My 'fascination' has to do with not allowing myself to be a victim if at all possible. I believe in 'live and let live'. Don't bother me, and I won't bother you.

Sure, so do I. Only I live in a society where guns are not the norm, neither among criminals nor among civilians. As such it puzzles me why they are in other countries.

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Or just die peacefully, knowing you didn't contribute to this 'fascination' with guns.

No, I'm probably not going to die, I'm going to happily continue living in Europe, where gun crime (esp. with deadly results) statistically just doesn't happen.
Which, NOFI, was pretty much the whole point I was referring to. Sure, guns might come in handy if you live near a drug cartel, or if you live in a low SES neighborhood, but they're hardly a solution, and I doubt that the fact that you need to carry them around in order to feel safe makes you feel safe.
The problem isn't really that criminals might resort to violence; the problem arises from the types of violence criminals consider acceptable, and how large the desire/need to become a criminal is.

Given that income disparity (between the richest, the rich and the poor) in the US is the largest in the world, and that you have a substantial amount of people living near, on or below the poverty line (somewhat higher than in western Europe (the UK excepted)), and the myth notwithstanding, fairly little by way of actual social mobility (due to the relatively high costs associated with getting a good education), I'd say fixing that would do more to lower crime rates than either giving everyone mandatory gun training or trying to outlaw them.
That said, this apparently goes against the whole "everyone has equal chance to make it, and if you don't make it it's your own fault" notion that is seemingly spoon-fed to everyone from birth, keeping people from supporting more equality of access to healthcare, schooling, etc., so it probably won't happen.
But it really isn't "socialism" to prefer creating or even paying for living conditions in which there is less reason for people to become disaffected with society as a whole..

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

No, i'm happily going to continue living in Europe, where gun crime (esp. with deadly results) statistically just doesn't happen.
Which, NOFI, was pretty much the whole point I was referring to. Sure, guns might come in handy if you live near a drug cartel, or if you live in a low SES neighborhood, but they're hardly a solution, and I doubt that the fact that you need to carry them around in order to feel safe makes you feel safe.

The problem isn't really that criminals might resort to violence, it's more a question of which types of violence they consider acceptable, and how large the need to become a criminal is.
And with the income disparity (between the richest, the rich and the poor) in the US being the largest in the world, as well as having a substantial amount of people living below the poverty line (somewhat higher than in western Europe (the UK excepted)), and less social mobility (due to the relatively high costs associated with getting a good education), I'd say fixing that would do more to lower crime rates than either giving everyone mandatory gun training or trying to outlaw them.
That said, this would go against the whole "everyone has equal chance to make it, and if you don't make it it's your own fault" notion that is seemingly spoon-fed to everyone from birth, keeping people from supporting more equality of access to healthcare, schooling, etc.

excuse me? You are kidding, right? We should "fix" the disparity HOW? Living in Europe gives you no insight to the problems here.

Personally, I was raised to pay my own way. This is something people can't understand nowdays.

Lets start with the free breakfasts and lunches at school. If you cannot afford to feed your kids, by golly I sure as heck won't. What does oatmeal and a peanutbutter/jelly sandwich cost? Kids won't eat it? My heart breaks. Have you any clue to the waste incurred each frakin' day at just one school because kids are allowed to choose what they want? Disgraceful!

Can't afford health insurance? Don't get it, but sure as hell don't depend on anyone else (except possibly family) to bail you out. lts not a god given right.

Can't afford a house? Don't buy one. It isn't a "right" Bought a house and now are losing it due to no fault of your own? Sorry, thats tough. Pull up your big girl panties and start over like our forebears did. I do NOT own you a bailout! Does no one remember the 30's? Who bailed out who then? No one, and we came back a stronger, more reliant society.

Can't afford a college education? Bull hockey. Go to work, take out loans, and do like anyone who really wants something does.....sacrifice until you get what you want. You may graduate with horrendous debt, but where is it written higher education should be free? My daughter and son both did this.......and they are now debt free, and have a decent job.

I believe the saying is "You have the right to PURSUE happiness", not happiness is guaranteed. That goes for wealth, homes and everything else you might want in this life.

I"m sure I'll be blasted for my views. Tough. Someone has to finally stand up and say "enough".

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

And, looking at it from the other side of the spectrum, I simply do not understand this fascination with (having the "right" to own/)owning guns.

I fear that's a peculiarly English view (maybe other parts of Europe also). I've only ever fired a gun once in my life - a rifle at Sea Scouts as a youngster and it scared the living crap out of me. Since then I have never held, handled, fired or had the opportunity to fire a gun. I have seen them carried by the police, but never in the hands of a private citizen. In the UK you're far more likely to be attacked with a bottle or a pint glass than a loaded gun anyway (no data on this, but it's been my experience that these are the weapons of choice. The scar above my left eye is my proof for this). We have a completely different reaction to guns than our American counterparts, and a separate cultural heritage. It is no wonder that the gun is alien to us, as it's not part of that culture.

I don't like guns either, but I wonder how my opinion would be if I were an American citizen living in a gun culture? I'm not too fond of pint glasses either.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

excuse me? You are kidding, right? We should "fix" the disparity HOW? Living in Europe gives you no insight to the problems here.

Personally, I was raised to pay my own way. This is something people can't understand nowdays.

Lets start with the free breakfasts and lunches at school. If you cannot afford to feed your kids, by golly I sure as heck won't. What does oatmeal and a peanutbutter/jelly sandwich cost? Kids won't eat it? My heart breaks. Have you any clue to the waste incurred each frakin' day at just one school because kids are allowed to choose what they want? Disgraceful!

Can't afford health insurance? Don't get it, but sure as hell don't depend on anyone else (except possibly family) to bail you out. lts not a god given right.

Can't afford a house? Don't buy one. It isn't a "right" Bought a house and now are losing it due to no fault of your own? Sorry, thats tough. Pull up your big girl panties and start over like our forebears did. I do NOT own you a bailout! Does no one remember the 30's? Who bailed out who then? No one, and we came back a stronger, more reliant society.

Can't afford a college education? Bull hockey. Go to work, take out loans, and do like anyone who really wants something does.....sacrifice until you get what you want. You may graduate with horrendous debt, but where is it written higher education should be free? My daughter and son both did this.......and they are now debt free, and have a decent job.

I believe the saying is "You have the right to PURSUE happiness", not happiness is guaranteed. That goes for wealth, homes and everything else you might want in this life.

I"m sure I'll be blasted for my views. Tough. Someone has to finally stand up and say "enough".

No offence meant but everything you have said is antithetical to the majority opinion in Europe. I fear it's a cultural rift that will never bridged. But (on the whole) we do think that health insurance should be for everyone, that education should be available to all, and not dependent on means, that a child should not go hungry because of their parents and that everyone should have an equal footing, whether state funded or by some other means.

When I see statements such as yours I feel greatly saddened, and that is probably because of my cultural surroundings. But it always brings to mind what my English teacher told me once when he found me with sweets that I refused to share with the rest of the class. It has stuck with me for a very long time:

I care not for thee jack, for I am in the lifeboat.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

No offence meant but everything you have said is antithetical to the majority opinion in Europe. I fear it's a cultural rift that will never bridged. But (on the whole) we do think that health insurance should be for everyone, that education should be available to all, and not dependent on means, that a child should not go hungry because of their parents and that everyone should have an equal footing, whether state funded or by some other means.

When I see statements such as yours I feel greatly saddened, and that is probably because of my cultural surroundings. But it always brings to mind what my English teacher told me once when he found me with sweets that I refused to share with the rest of the class. It has stuck with me for a very long time:

I care not for thee jack, for I am in the lifeboat.

You cannot ensure equality by giving to all equally.

Who will work to pay the debt? Why should anyone work if everything is out there for the asking?

People unfortunately value nothing that is not worked for.

Look at what we call section 8 housing.

Subsidized, yes, moms are free to breed at will, no accountability required. Walk into any apartment at your own risk.

Personally, I am glad we haven't, as yet, become a socialist country like Europe. But its coming, oh yes, its coming.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

You cannot ensure equality by giving to all equally.

Who will work to pay the debt? Why should anyone work if everything is out there for the asking?

People unfortunately value nothing that is not worked for.

Look at what we call section 8 housing.

Subsidized, yes, moms are free to breed at will, no accountability required. Walk into any apartment at your own risk.

Personally, I am glad we haven't, as yet, become a socialist country like Europe. But its coming, oh yes, its coming.

Please, don't be so crass as to use a word like 'breed', that reduces those people to nothing more than animals. They are human beings, whatever your prejudices against them may be.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Please, don't be so crass as to use a word like 'breed', that reduces those people to nothing more than animals. They are human beings, whatever your prejudices against them may be.

Prejudices? You bet. When you have child after child thru sheer lack of caring, expecting others to support you, you are breeding.

Sorry if the term offends you but it fits.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Prejudices? You bet. When you have child after child thru sheer lack of caring, expecting others to support you, you are breeding.

Sorry if the term offends you but it fits.

You're assigning motivations to a whole swathe of people. You couldn't possibly know that they do not care, that they expect others to support them. I fear you see these people not as human beings, but as something less. That's very dangerous and always has been throughout history. And yes, it does offend me, greatly.

I come from one of these 'projects', as I believe you call them in America. We call them Council Estates. Where you see 'breeders' I see human beings, struggling, fighting, loving and living even for the smallest of dreams. To reduce them to animals is quite sickening to me.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

You're assigning motivations to a whole swathe of people. You couldn't possibly know that they do not care, that they expect others to support them. I fear you see these people not as human beings, but as something less. That's very dangerous and always has been throughout history. And yes, it does offend me, greatly.

I come from one of these 'projects', as I believe you call them in America. We call them Council Estates. Where you see 'breeders' I see human beings, struggling, fighting, loving and living even for the smallest of dreams. To reduce them to animals is quite sickening to me.

While I never lived in one, we were poorer than poor, so don't think I have no clue what you speak of.

Dangerous? Whats dangerous is the thought that humanity needs to be cared for from cradle to grave.

And this is becoming all too common.

[RickyMaveety]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Please, don't be so crass as to use a word like 'breed', that reduces those people to nothing more than animals. They are human beings, whatever your prejudices against them may be.

Huh .... never thought about it. I have always referred to myself as a "non-breeder" ... it just never occurred to me that I was reducing myself to animal status. Or maybe it's partly that I consider "man" and "animals" to be on the same level in all regards.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

While I never lived in one, we were poorer than poor, so don't think I have no clue what you speak of.

Dangerous? Whats dangerous is the thought that humanity needs to be cared for from cradle to grave.

And this is becoming all too common.

Why shouldn't it be? Why should we let someone starve when we have the ability to feed them? Why should the homeless not be given shelter? A child with no education, be given an education? Why let people suffer when we can alleviate that suffering?

There's another quote that comes to mind, also from my English teacher (Thankyou Mr. McIntyre for everything)

No man is an island.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Why shouldn't it be? Why should we let someone starve when we have the ability to feed them? Why should the homeless not be given shelter? A child with no education, be given an education? Why let people suffer when we can alleviate that suffering?

There's another quote that comes to mind, also from my English teacher (Thankyou Mr. McIntyre for everything)

No man is an island.

Why shouldn't self reliance be instilled from birth?

Why shouldn't people realize they MUST earn their bread?

That to live of those who work is shameful? When did that change?

That if they choose to have children, they MUST be responsible for their support?

Giving birth is not a 'right', regardless of what you've been taught. Its an awesome responsibility, and way too many abuse it.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

Huh .... never thought about it. I have always referred to myself as a "non-breeder" ... it just never occurred to me that I was reducing myself to animal status. Or maybe it's partly that I consider "man" and "animals" to be on the same level in all regards.

Breeder or breed has been used in the pejorative for a long time. The term 'breed' when in conjunction with human beings is used to reduce said individuals as nothing more than cattle, without will or control. And also has cultural significance when paired with earlier assumed roles for women in society. Barefoot and pregnant, etc..

The phrase 'Non-breeder' is a direct reaction to the assumption that women should bare children. I think, but not having studied feminism for many years, the term gained popularity in the late 60's and early 70's during first wave feminism.

Someone who's more in touch with feminist history might give you more insight into this.

[desertgrandma]

Human beings do not always deserve the term applied to them.

Charles Manson, women on crack/heroin, whatever drug you want to name, who birth babies, pedophiles, abusers of the elderly, none of these qualify as 'human beings' in my book.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Why shouldn't self reliance be instilled from birth?

Why shouldn't people realize they MUST earn their bread?

That to live of those who work is shameful? When did that change?

That if they choose to have children, they MUST be responsible for their support?

Giving birth is not a 'right', regardless of what you've been taught. Its an awesome responsibility, and way too many abuse it.

And if you're handicapped, mentally impaired or challenged, if you can't be self-reliant, then what? You must die? You must be consigned to a terrible life without any support? What you're suggesting is a 'fittest survive' kind of world. That is not a world I would want to live in or be part of. If I can help my brother or sister in whatever way, I will help them. What was instilled in me from a very early age was that there are those less fortunate and you should never forget them. That helping and sharing what you have is far better than hoarding and being greedy.

Earn their bread is quite a quaint notion, and would have fitted maybe a society that existed in the late seventeen hundreds, but not anymore. We don't live in a society where that choice is always available. Hundred percent employment in a mass-produced age is impossible. Those who can't find work should starve, maybe? Well, they're not human after all are they? Not if they don't have a job.

Giving birth is a right of every animal and human being on this planet. It's not only a right, its a biological necessity. You would have children punished for the temerity to be born to irresponsible parents? You would see them starve and suffer when you have more than enough to give?

I'm making a guess here, but you're an Ayn Rand reader aren't you?