Noliving's past comments

  • 0

    Noliving

    How about Australia? Not exactly the same as the US, but they also had a large vocal population that opposed gun restrictions. While it's debated what effect it had on crime in general, we don't really hear about mass shootings over there.

    @MrBum: Mass shootings were never a big problem to begin with in Australia, they made up less than 0.03 per 100,000 in the homicide rate, in the USA it is around 0.01 to 0.02 per 100,000 are murdered in mass shooting. Reducing your death toll on average by 4 or less people each year out of a population that has grown from 17 million to well over 25 million is not that impressive. Then you also have to factor in that the shooter at Port Arthur had acquired his firearms illegally at the time and if he had attempted to acquire them legally most likely the system would have rejected him from his past documented behavior. Australia could easily reduce their death toll by 4 or less people by just simply raising the minimum drinking age to 21; imagine if the USA was bragging about how they reduced their death toll from Alcohol by 4 people for the entire year by raising the minimum drinking age. Do you think anyone would be really impressed by that figure in Australia?

    Mass shootings get a lot of exposure and are sensationalized but the truth of the matter is that they are not anywhere near the threat level that people think they are.

    Actually, most on your side say "guns are not a big issue" and go on to list every other problem in America, most of which are shared by other countries.

    Well it isn't is it? I mean if you take all of the gun deaths it is one one hundredth of one percent of the total USA dies each year from firearms, and if you include physical wounds you are talking about a combined casualty of three one hundredths of one percent of the USA population are killed or wounded annually in the USA.

    The point of listing every other problem is to show that those issue are bigger/more serious and yet the people claiming that guns are this serious of an issue don't even consider those other issues at all because they consider the numbers from those other problems to be so trivially small to not even be worth considering, and yet firearms which have an even smaller number should be considered.

    If you don't think guns are at the heart of the gun violence issue, I don't know what to say.

    How are you defining heart of the issue? Are you claiming it is the most significant cause of gun violence? That believe it or not is debatable, one could argue that if guns were the very heart of the issue then gun violence should be much more equally distributed among all demographics in the USA. The fact that gun violence is not anywhere near close to being evenly distributed among all demographics would suggest that there are other factors at play that have a greater impact on gun violence then just simply the gun existing.

    It's just that a lot of pro-gun people (not you necessarily) tend to repeat weak arguments like cars killing people and guns for crime deterrence

    The primary reason for why they bring up car deaths is because they object to what they believe is unwarranted over generalizations.

    Most of the time people will claim that because guns kill this many people it is a major problem and therefore there should be a blanket bans of some type. Well if the argument is that because something kills this many people therefore it should be banned then that is a very weak argument; all you have to do show is show that cars kill the same amount of people, Alcohol kills two to two and half times as many people as firearms do on a per capita basis pretty much in the entire developed world when compared to gun deaths in the USA. Heck you could even argue that casual sex should be more heavily controlled considering STDs/STIs kill nearly the same amount of people as firearms or cars in the USA, in fact HIV alone kills more people in the USA than all homicides by every weapon type each year in the USA.

    These same people who just claimed that when something kills this many people that it should be banned will back track and come up with a list of excuses for why something that kills that many people if not more people should not have a blanket ban of some type.

    There is a lot of hyperbole on both sides, you have anti-gun people greatly exaggerating the threat from firearms and you have pro-gun side greatly exaggerating the likely hood of being a victim of a crime, whether it be property or violent crime.

    What is it going to take for America to wake up and realise they have a MAJOR problem with guns.

    @Nicholas Tee - Why is a one one hundredth of one percent of the USA population dying from firearms on an annual basis a MAJOR problem? Three one hundredths of one percent if you include those wounded.

    Are they going to tell me that they also continue to shave with cuthroat razors?

    Believe it or not but a lot of people around the world still do, in fact a barbershop near me advertises their use of cut-throat razors as a selling point.

    How long before those people realize they are simply being manipulated by the National Rifle Association because they make money every time a gun is sold?

    You give the NRA to much credit/power, the issue is more of principle. A lot of Americans believe in using violence for self-defense in principle, a firearm represents that principle. Also if they make money every time a gun is sold it is because the gun buyer has voluntarily agreed to round up to the nearest dollar the bill and have the difference between nearest dollar and the actual grand total after tax go to the NRA.

    Posted in: Fired reporter kills 2 former co-workers on live TV in Virginia

  • 1

    Noliving

    usa needs to learn from japan and ban guns, do you really think japan will be safe at it is now if guns were legal

    Short answer is yes and no Japan doesn't ban all firearms from civilian ownership.

    Posted in: Fired reporter kills 2 former co-workers on live TV in Virginia

  • -2

    Noliving

    whack of guns shows that they're not regular people. Regular people don't do that.

    If you are into the recreational sport target shooting yeah you would be considered normal for owning multiple firearms.

    Nothing wrong with owning multiple firearms as a collector or as a person who enjoys the sport of target shooting.

    Posted in: Fired reporter kills 2 former co-workers on live TV in Virginia

  • -2

    Noliving

    Getting drunk is a very real purpose. So much so that almost every culture in the world developed a way to do so. When alcohol is used as intended, people get drunk. When guns are used as intended, things get killed. That's their sole purpose. I'd tell you to find a better comparison, but I don't think there are any.

    Target shooting a very real purpose, so much so that almost every culture in the world has developed a way to do so.

    When Alcohol is used for its intended purposes people lose control, the reason why you get intoxicated is because you like the effects of losing control of your impulses. The result of that is that people die, whether it be crimes of passion and or accidents.

    Perhaps you can explain how the intended use of Alcohol in and of itself means that you are not saying the lives of people who die from Alcohol are not an acceptable cost so that you can get intoxicated for recreation?

    When can we expect the argument of not intended to kill will by itself result in less deaths than firearms?

    Posted in: Fired reporter kills 2 former co-workers on live TV in Virginia

  • 0

    Noliving

    Maybe it is just me but if I want Halloween music I will listen to the soundtrack Nightmare before Christmas, especially the song This is Halloween.

    Posted in: New Kyary Pamyu Pamyu video 'Crazy Party Night' makes Halloween cute and colorful

  • 0

    Noliving

    All, or nearly all, elementary, junior, and senior high schools in this country have pools. They have better water education here than in any other country in which I've lived.

    So? Just because they have pools doesn't mean they are learning how to swim.

    I didn't say that, and I feel horrible for the families. But the fact of life is that people will swim, and people will drown. Nothing is 100% avoidable. People who think that all death can be eradicated are kidding themselves. The law of diminishing returns kicks in - to reduce deaths to zero would cost more than any society could afford. And not just in monetary costs, but also in the fact that you end up with cold, boring nanny states where people don't have the freedom to do anything.

    Completely agree with this sentiment...Especially on a different topic.

    Posted in: 1 dead, 2 missing in water-related accidents on Sunday

  • 1

    Noliving

    This is way too early to begin a presidential election campaign, personally me I think launching a presidential campaign nearly a year and a half before the election is disrespectful to the Office of the Presidency.

    Posted in: Republicans face uncertainty in White House race

  • 1

    Noliving

    A standing room only pool? No thanks. The thought of wading through all that urine doesn't appeal to me.

    But urine is sterile.....

    Posted in: Packed pool

  • 0

    Noliving

    You asked the wrong question and answering it would be a waste of our time.

    No I'm not asking the wrong question, I am asking for a nation that has a population of 310+ million people what is considered an isolated frequency? You said you were defining isolated different from me, I am asking you how you define isolated?

    This is just another mistaken question! The obligation of governments is to do what is best for its citizens even if that means copying others. Its not about what others do. Its about principles. And if others prove principles true, well so be it.

    No it is not a mistaken question, you said the USA has decided to ignore other countries examples, so is the USA obligated then to do as those other nations? Which principles?

    Here let me put it to you this way, USA raised the minimum drinking age to 21 and the result is thousands of lives saved. Is the rest of the world obligated to raise their minimum drinking age laws to 21?

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • 0

    Noliving

    As far as I know, neither Roof, nor the guy who killed all the kids at Littleton had a history of violence. Neither did the guy who shot up all the people in the movie theater in Colorado. Nor the kids at Columbine.

    I think you are confusing littleton with newtown, littleton is Columbine.

    Posted in: The gun control debate: Do you support the right of citizens to own and bear firearms?

  • -2

    Noliving

    Differently from you apparently, Noliving. Rarity does disprove a connection between events. These people who grab a gun and start shooting innocent people they never even met is not something that each perpetrator thought of independently. Its obvious they are inspiring each other. Its also obvious it need not even be mass shootings inspiring individual shootings. Both inspire the other.

    You didn't answer the question, what is the number/frequency that we should consider isolated in a nation that is over 310+ million people?

    To put it another way there is around 38 people each year out of 310 million that will commit an act of mass homicide each year in the USA. That is extremely rare when considering the size of the population. Yes there is some evidence to suggest as much as 20 or even as high as 30% of all mass shootings in the USA are copycats.

    And one of the many reasons its happening is clear to anyone with half a brain who decides to argue this honestly; its because America has decided to ignore the examples of other countries who have made their citizens safe with gun restrictions even while still maintaining a well armed populace.

    Is it wrong for Americans to say ~152 people each year is an acceptable cost?

    Here maybe you can answer the question I asked SenseNotSoCommon:

    Is a country or a state, or a city or a population or whatever obligated to pass similar laws/rules/restrictions when another country or state or city or a population passes a law/rule/restriction that has some type of impact, especially if it reduces deaths?

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • -1

    Noliving

    However, this latest American gun massacre is a pretty freaking far cry from an isolated incident. Surely you can realize that? Or are you just hell bent to twist this any way you can?

    How do you define isolated incident? The issue with having a population the size of the USA is that very rare events will give the appearance they are very common when in fact they are rare when compared to the size of the population. Mass shootings make up around 0.02 to as high as 0.05 per 100,000 homicide rate, which means if you used the FBI/Australia formula of a mass shooting being 4 or more people being killed in a single incident that would equal to around 38 incidents in the USA or basically one every one and half weeks but that is still ~152 people being killed out of 310 million or 0.000049% or to put it another way four one-hundredth and ninety thousandth of one percent of the population is killed annually in mass shootings. That is an incredibly small number,

    To further put that into perspective the mass shooting homicide rate of the USA is one sixth the overall homicide rate of Japan, you are six times more likely to be murdered in Japan than you are to be killed in a mass shooting incident in the USA.

    So in a population the size of around 310+ million people what frequency do we consider an isolated incident?

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • 0

    Noliving

    Needle's stuck in the same old record. taken on a deaths per billion km basis, it's the same as Spain and sedate Slovenia. Statistically you are safer on the roads in the USA than in Belgium, Japan or New Zealand.

    Right which is why I said when compared to the UK and western Europe, at least most of western Europe. Statistically you are safer on the roads in the UK, Canada, France, Australia, Austria, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Finland, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway when compared to the USA.

    So is the USA obligated to pass the same driving requirement as say Denmark or Norway?

    Previously we've even had drownings in bathtubs presented to show how statistically unextraordinary gun deaths are. How many people ever bought a bathtub or automobile to be able to kill some

    That is beside the point/question I'm asking. The question I'm asking is if something is shown to have this effect is a country or a population or a state or whatever obligated to do the same thing, especially if it is shown to reduce deaths?

    Also if the goal is a public health issue/is to save lives it is irrelevant if something is designed to kill or not seeing as a premature preventable death is a premature preventable death regardless of the circumstances. Also do you think it helps your argument that something that is not purchased/designed to kill people is killing just as many people if not more people as something that is claimed to be primarily purchased for the purpose of maliciously killing people?

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • 0

    Noliving

    The quantity doesn't mean quality.

    What is your problem with SuperLib's comment?

    Posted in: Obama returns to Kenya; reunites with father's family

  • -2

    Noliving

    In case you didn't notice, we don't have this problem in other countries.

    Well Canada seems to be having a similar problem for the past couple of years, they have had a recent spike of mass shootings, domestic and public for the past couple of years it seems.

    That begs the question does the fact that other countries don't have this problem, mass shootings, mean the USA is then obligated to follow those other countries in passing similar laws? And how severe is the problem in the first place? Mass shootings currently make up around 0.01-0.02 per 100,000 homicide rate, is a 0.01 or a 0.02 per 100,000 homicide rate by mass shootings really that bad?

    Take for example Cars, the USA has much high death rate from cars, especially when compared to the UK and Western Europe, is the USA obligated to pass similar restrictions on getting a drivers license as them?

    Another example: The south eastern states of the USA have much stricter alcohol laws and have lower rates of Alcohol death when compared to the rest of the nation, is the rest of the nation, heck other countries, obligated to follow south eastern states of the USA in passing similar laws to bring down their alcohol death rate?

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • -4

    Noliving

    Motor vehicles are more regulated than firearms,

    Debatable, the manufacturing and selling of firearms is more regulated then the manufacturing and selling of cars in a lot of ways when compared to cars.

    You do realize that the reason why you register your vehicle is to generate tax income, not for safety reasons or crime fighting reasons. In fact there is very little evidence to support the argument that car registries are a cost effective way to fight crime, especially motor vehicle crimes or make people drive safer; there is very little evidence that the sex offender registry does anything to reduce sexual assaults, in fact some states like California are now seriously thinking about repealing the sex offender registry as it is just a money sinkhole. If registries were as effective as people claim they are then we would have had a DNA registry a long time ago of every person born a long time ago.

    With that being said I do agree that the chant of they are taking away our guns any time some very tiny law is change regarding firearms is tiresome.

    Posted in: Suspect in Louisiana theater shooting had history of mental illness

  • 0

    Noliving

    Sad to hear that Justin Bieber is the best known Canadian (sigh)

    Could have been worse, they could have said Chad Kroeger

    Posted in: Video asks young Japanese adults what they know about Canada

  • 0

    Noliving

    So what do you do? Pull your gun on the aggressor?

    Up to you on what you want to do. If you want to engage the aggressor you can, if you don't want to engage the aggressor and just witness what is going on you can do that and if you want leave the area you can do that as well.

    Posted in: Jury finds Colorado theater shooter guilty of murder

  • -4

    Noliving

    The shooter was not the only one 'dressed up' - other members of the audience had dressed up for the screening. Before he started shooting he threw a canister that emitted a gas or smoke, causing eye irritation and obscuring visibility. One witness said all she could see was a silhouette. Others said they thought it was a prank, part of the screening, people didn't realise what was going on.

    Yes other members had dressed up but not as tactical gear to make them look like a soldier or SWAT member. All had dressed up in very obvious costumes related to batman. Not a single one of them walked into the theater from the emergency exists half way through the movie, which are next to the screen by the way and lead directly outside the building, meaning everyone saw him walked in, nor were they standing in the very front of the movie theater throwing gas canisters into the crowd for a few seconds and then firing a round into the ceiling while sanding in front of everyone in the center front of the theater.

    No one in your article claimed they had trouble identifying the person/silhouette as the threat just that at first some of them didn't realize that what he was doing was lethal but they all knew right away when they realized what was going on that it was that person. Meaning if your in row 8-25 and you see someone in row 7 stand up with a firearm stretched in their hand aiming at the center front of the the theater where the silhouette is standing throwing gas canisters into the crowd and firing into the crowd, you're not going to think to yourself gee I bet it is the person in row 7 killing us at random and not the silhouette. Nor are people in row 1-6 going to turn around and say hey it is the person in row 7 that is killing us and not the person standing right in front of us who we just watched walked in from the emergency exits half way through the movie throwing gas canisters and firing a gun into the ceiling and then lowered the gun at the crowd level.

    Uh, Noliving, do all of your scenarios include a gunman wearing a bandana or otherwise having a massive arrow pointing to him being the threat?

    No not all scenarios but the scenarios you are most likely to encounter are those.

    How about this: you walk into a restaurant and two men have their guns out and pointed at each other. Solve that for us.

    OK, one is threatening to verbally kill or is taunting the other while the other party is asking for people to call 911 or asking for help from the public. One is advancing on the position of the other and the other one is most likely retreating while still pointing the firearm at the person advancing on them. In other words when you see two people in normal civilian clothing aiming guns at one another, usually one is retreating and one is advancing on the other and making verbal threats/taunts against the other one, it is a good bet that the one retreating is the more 'innocent' party while the one following the other person around with a firearm in public is probably the 'aggressor'.

    Posted in: Jury finds Colorado theater shooter guilty of murder

  • -2

    Noliving

    Not so much 'very different' as 'very many more fatalities' as in the confusion the concealed carriers pull their weapons and start shooting at all the other concealed carriers who have pulled weapons. Who's to know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?

    Well lets look at the situation - You have the shooter in the very front of the theater all dressed up in 'tactical gear' shooting first and up into the crowd and at random. It wouldn't be exactly difficult to determine, if you are carrying in the crowd a weapon, who to shoot at or assault with your weapon. The idea that people carrying weapons for the purpose of self defense would just at the drop of a pin just start firing in all directions is just well a myth.

    Gun nutters come up with some pretty crazy fantasy scenarios where a shooting suddenly starts and everyone is armed yet on the exact same page as to where the danger is coming from.

    Well lets run through some scenarios shall we, you have a person in the very front of the theater dressed up in 'tactical' gear and is firing at random people, regardless if they are armed or not. You would honestly have trouble identifying who the threat is?

    Lets say you are in a gas station a person walks in with a mask or a bandana covering their face or a balaclava points a weapon at a clerk demanding money you have five other customers in the station all dressed up in normal civilian clothing and all armed and they all pull their firearms. You are telling me those five would not be able to determine it is the person pointing the weapon at the clerk who the threat is?

    It is usually very easy to determine who the threat is by how they are dressed and also their behavior.

    In a dark theater, with lots of people, gimme a break.

    How dark do you think the theater is? Pitch black? The screen with a movie playing usually lights up the room enough to easily tell what color clothing people are wearing, etc. Look at the below links and tell me you would have trouble identifying who shooter is in those conditions because it is too dark.

    http://boiseclassicmovies.com/about/the-experience/

    https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAANrAAAAJGUxY2NhNGYyLWM3NGUtNDA3Mi05Y2FiLTM1ZTZhN2E2YWZjMw.jpg

    https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrinknp800800/AAEAAQAAAAAAAALMAAAAJDYzODJmNWVjLTYyNDQtNDdiNS1iNDFjLWYxY2U2ZDBjYjAxNQ.jpg

    Posted in: Jury finds Colorado theater shooter guilty of murder

View all