Re: German school spree killer kills 15
The usual counter-example is Finland where a lot of people have arms (mainly hunting rifles AFAIK), but they still don't shoot each other as happily as US citizens.
Hunting rifles yes, but do notice that shotguns (for most bird species - rifle is pretty useless in a forest made up of 200-year spruces as you're probably close-ish to your target if you can see it) are prevalent also and that many a Finn is an avid gun collector, so pistols and, say, assault rifles with dismantled burst switches, are somewhat common household items.
The reason for us not shooting each other is that we're used to stabbing each other while drunk or kill ourselves (one of these years we were more suicidal than the Japanese famous of their
karoshis, I wonder if we still top them). Oh, and we drink ourselves to death too, so we can't shoot straight at those times either.
To each their own.
I'm sure no innocents died that day.
The eye witnesses all agreed he seemed not to be choosing his victims, so obviously you would be referring to original sin or something, because there seems to be no direct connection between the dead and the teasings.
Does anyone believe that before the modern communication, tragedies such as these didn't occur?
You mean like if a school massacre happens in a wood, and there's no-one there to hear the gunshots, do they make a sound?
I don't think killings are not enough tied to media to make them disappear. Your point is not without a merit, though, all the cases I know are media-smooching attention whores who want to be glorified in death.
The point is not at all about intent. It about kids dying.
While I still think it was apples and oranges (the other was someone else acting on kids' lives, the other one the kids endangering themselves), I became interested. If your point wasn't "there are more dangerous stuff around, there should be no arms restrictions for the sake of them being a low priority" - which I falsely assumed it to be - what, then, is the point you're trying to make? I'm not saying you don't have a point, I'm trying to communicate that I missed it to my own misconception and would like to understand your argument better.
Those who are responsible for the safety of our children should have the tools necessary to protect them.
I agree. I also think a firearm is by no means a relevant tool outside law enforcement agencies, but our worlds and frames of reference are markedly different, so I had better just leave it there.
