Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo in 2013!!
The plan to try and get Scott Brown re-elected to the US Senate from Massachusetts is well under way, as Susan Rice dropped from consideration to be Sec of State. This opens the door for John Kerry to leave the Senate and a special election - which the Republican scum will try and weasel Brown back into office.
And I get to see a million TV election ads because I'm in the Boston media market, and because the Koch Bros and Co. heart TV ads.
Oh, and taking bets on there NOT being any discussion on improving mental health services and on gun control?
Mar 14 Sheepdogs/Fitz & The Tantrums/City & Colour (Austin)
Mar 15 Jim James (Austin)
Apr 26 Jim James (Boston)
May 4 Clutch & The Sword (Portland ME)
Jun 8 DMB (Hartford)
Jun 21 Jim James (Northampton MA)
Jul 27-28 Newport Folk
Oct 25-27 MOEMS
I've been having these discussions with people since yesterdays incident. What do you (the collective you) have in mind that could have honestly realistically prevented what happened the other day? What kind of gun control? And I keep hearing about mental health reform, but no one will explain what exactly that would entail. What kind of mental health reform could have prevented this incident?
The system we have now is useless. Even in states with "gun control" it's pretty lackluster. And having guns everywhere doesn't work either. I honestly don't have an answer to that.
Nor am I any sort of mental health expert, so I can't comment in depth on that. But mental health issues are still quite a bit stigmatized, and I'm certainly there's not enough funding to address the issue nor any real desire to actually fix it (more like containing it as it does now.)
Mar 14 Sheepdogs/Fitz & The Tantrums/City & Colour (Austin)
Mar 15 Jim James (Austin)
Apr 26 Jim James (Boston)
May 4 Clutch & The Sword (Portland ME)
Jun 8 DMB (Hartford)
Jun 21 Jim James (Northampton MA)
Jul 27-28 Newport Folk
Oct 25-27 MOEMS
I'm not big on guns. I support the right to bear arms pretty much only because it IS the second amendment in our bill of rights, and I really don't think our bill of rights should be something fallible that can be struck down. They're our guaranteed rights given since the founding of this country. So we can talk gun control, and I'll support any kind of reasonable regulations that are thrown out there. Sure let's ban assault rifles. you can try and ban semi-autos too, and ill be behind it. But that would be a hell of a battle to pass that in this country, and you know what? It's hardly worth the effort The fact of the matter is there are presently HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of guns in this country. There is approximately one gun for every person living here. we can ban certain types, and yeah, it will make it harder to get. But there's already a f#ck-ton out there, and if anyone is really determined to get their hands on something, they will. If we out-lawed handguns tomorrow, I bet I could pick one up within a few days at least as easy as it would be for me to buy a gram of coke. And even if there were no assault rifles available it would have been hand guns. And if not hand guns he could have bought a goddang shot gun at wal mart. And even if we ban all guns, psycho mother f#ckers will go build explosives.
I hate to say it, but theres nothing realistically that could have been done to stop this. We can blame gun control and the government and the media, but the only real blame lies on the sick f#ck who lies dead today in CT
I hate to say it, but theres nothing realistically that could have been done to stop this.
Thing is, this just really isn't true. First, the idea that there are already too many guns in the public sphere is more of an obstacle than a barrier. First they take upkeep to remain operational, so overtime the number of guns in private ownership would dwindle. And in the past governments have been successful with gun buyback programs, similar to like a "cash for clunkers" type thing.
Next, the whole "a determined person could still get a gun" argument is a red-herring. The fact is, gun restrictions prevent deaths. If there were no guns would there be no murder? Of course not, there has been murder for all of human history. But would gun control in almost any form lower the murder rate? Yes. Statistics have shown that in states or countries with more guns, there are more homicides. The reverse is true as well; in states with gun control laws there are fewer homicides. Because really it's not the "determined person" you're trying to keep a gun away from, it's the unstable person, or the temporarily scared or angry person. Yes there will still be murders and terrorists, but there will be significantly fewer. (source www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.htmlwww.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/)
Finally, the constitutional argument is baloney. This is the same constitution that gave only white men the right to vote. And gave those same white men the right to OWN black men (and guns) and called those same black men only 3/5ths a person. If you think owning a gun should be a guaranteed right, then do you think owning a black man should be a guaranteed right? (of course you don't, but you see my point).
I laugh whenever I see someone mention the constitution. Yeah, because while the founding fathers waited around for hours while it was written they had the foresight to see a point in their new country's future where any random schmuck with an ID and a clean record can get a weapon so advanced that one man with a good vantage point could wipe out hundreds of their soldiers.
That amendment was written in a time when there was a very real possibility that a pissed off neighbor, a foreign military force, the Brits or your own gov't could try to bust down the door and take your hours. And you had a musket that took 20 seconds to load. Making sure that every American has the right to assemble their own arsenal probably wasn't what they had in mind.
If the bill of rights is fallible, that opens the doors to other freedoms being eroded. I really just don't like the idea of "hey... You know that right we guaranteed you at the founding of this country? about that..." If we can suddenly dismiss our guaranteed rights, how long before the first amendment is also dismissable, and it's "oh yeah, you can have freedom of speech, unless..." Thats a dangerous road.
By the way, slavery was NOT a right in the constitution. It wasn't mentioned in the constitution or bill of rights, slavery laws were handled at the state level
Also, if we suddenly out lawed guns, do you really imagine people would just give them up? Have you ever heard a gun nut talk about his guns? I think we'd be more liable for a violent rebellion then a peaceful cash exchange.
We can be idealists and wish the guns away, but the reality is they're not going anywhere
Post by iamthehorn on Dec 15, 2012 23:48:04 GMT -5
I'm not saying fixing our gun problem wouldn't involve changing the Constitution (rather than simply choosing to ignore the 2nd amendment), although I'm of the opinion there are many common sense restrictions we could put on gun ownership that wouldn't violate interpretation of the 2nd amendment.
And again, your "have you met gun nuts" argument might make some logical sense, but it doesn't hold true in reality. It's not really the "gun nuts" who are killing people, it's the mentally unstable ones. Again, restrictions on gun ownership lowers the homicide rate. It is a fact.
I've been having these discussions with people since yesterdays incident. What do you (the collective you) have in mind that could have honestly realistically prevented what happened the other day? What kind of gun control? And I keep hearing about mental health reform, but no one will explain what exactly that would entail. What kind of mental health reform could have prevented this incident?
SPECIFICALLY on what happened Friday... I don't think there's anything you can do to stop that. The guy TRIED to buy guns and got denied (for what reason, I'm not sure has been released or will be known). Clearly he got the guns elsewhere (reports say they were his mother's). Furthermore, he forced his way into the school.
Raise the "security" at schools you say? In a time of budget-cutting this is realllly unlikely to occur for the long-term. It may occur in the short-term as an over-reaction, but it won't stick, nor is it really sensible for elementary schools. Let's face it, if crazy people want to go crazy, they will find a way, a school, a mall, theater, they have plenty of targets. I simply don't think this sort of thing can be prevented. We just want to have a sense of control after such a senseless act. Control, though, is the least of things we have in this world.
Imho, public shootings have hit a near meme-like effect. People, when they decide to go postal, just figure they might as well imitate what others have done and take out as many other people as possible, while gaining post-mortem "fame". Is there any way to diminish this effect? I doubt it. We could ignore all these mass shootings, but that is extremely unlikely to ever happen.
Hope to not derail the thread by focusing on what happened at Sandy Hill, but I have to respond about it, Well said kiko, Morgan Freeman mentioned exactly what you are saying. These shootings happen because these sick quacks see a chance to be famous. The media plays a big role in this. A very BIG role, as do we. I bet we can name the shooter in every tragic event like this, that has happened in our life time, but we can not name one of the ones killed by these quacks. Read this: www.examiner.com/article/morgan-freeman-on-sick-Quack
Other countries offer a road map. In Australia in 1996, a mass killing of 35 people galvanized the nation’s conservative prime minister to ban certain rapid-fire long guns. The “national firearms agreement,” as it was known, led to the buyback of 650,000 guns and to tighter rules for licensing and safe storage of those remaining in public hands.
The law did not end gun ownership in Australia. It reduced the number of firearms in private hands by one-fifth, and they were the kinds most likely to be used in mass shootings. In the 18 years before the law, Australia suffered 13 mass shootings — but not one in the 14 years after the law took full effect. The murder rate with firearms has dropped by more than 40 percent, according to data compiled by the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, and the suicide rate with firearms has dropped by more than half.
I've been having these discussions with people since yesterdays incident. What do you (the collective you) have in mind that could have honestly realistically prevented what happened the other day? What kind of gun control? And I keep hearing about mental health reform, but no one will explain what exactly that would entail. What kind of mental health reform could have prevented this incident?
SPECIFICALLY on what happened Friday... I don't think there's anything you can do to stop that. The guy TRIED to buy guns and got denied (for what reason, I'm not sure has been released or will be known). Clearly he got the guns elsewhere (reports say they were his mother's). Furthermore, he forced his way into the school.
Raise the "security" at schools you say? In a time of budget-cutting this is realllly unlikely to occur for the long-term. It may occur in the short-term as an over-reaction, but it won't stick, nor is it really sensible for elementary schools. Let's face it, if crazy people want to go crazy, they will find a way, a school, a mall, theater, they have plenty of targets. I simply don't think this sort of thing can be prevented. We just want to have a sense of control after such a senseless act. Control, though, is the least of things we have in this world.
Imho, public shootings have hit a near meme-like effect. People, when they decide to go postal, just figure they might as well imitate what others have done and take out as many other people as possible, while gaining post-mortem "fame". Is there any way to diminish this effect? I doubt it. We could ignore all these mass shootings, but that is extremely unlikely to ever happen.
Sorry, this is bullsh*t. First of all, do you really think the "media-fame" effect is really unique to this country? The "media" is basically the same in England and Japan, and guess what, no mass-shootings. And Australia is an even better example, being the home country of the world's biggest media titan Rupert Murdoch.
Look, I understand why the "there's nothing we can do" argument makes logical sense, but it's just not true. Restrictions on gun ownership work.
Its true that less guns equates to less gun related deaths, but that's like saying less cars on the road will result in fewer automobile deaths. Yeah obviously, but gun restrictions will not prevent people intending to do harm to others in a horrific way like this. These tragic events have more to do with our violent culture and mental health than accessible fire arms.
Last Edit: Dec 16, 2012 14:58:51 GMT -5 by pmo - Back to Top
Well said kiko, Morgan Freeman mentioned exactly what you are saying.
I just thought I'd point out that it wasn't Morgan Freeman who said that and it was a hoax, written by someone else.
Though, that doesn't mean what was written is wrong. I thought the quote/passage made great points. I just wanted to debunk the "Morgan Freeman" quote because I keep seeing people post it on Facebook and it's a pet peeve of mine to correct misinformation.
Yeah obviously, but gun restrictions will not prevent people intending to do harm to others in a horrific way like this.
Again, NOT TRUE. People in states or countries without easy access to guns are less likely to kill someone.
I get that it's somewhat comforting to say "there's nothing we could have done" but there is something we can do - restrict gun ownership.
And blaming "our culture" doesn't work either. There is NOTHING fundamentally different about our culture vs. other rich industrial nations EXCEPT GUN OWNERSHIP. Would we be better off with a more responsible media or better mental health care? Absolutely. But guns are the core problem.
You can't sit there and tell me that if we had stricter gun laws, none of these horrific events would have happened. You don't have any evidence to support that. If someone wants to harm, they will find a way to do so. Wether its with knives, explosives, guns, or any thing else that can inflict damage.
Last Edit: Dec 16, 2012 15:46:58 GMT -5 by pmo - Back to Top
I find it odd that no one is reporting that in China, on the same day that the tragedy at Sandy Hook occurred, a man walked into a school and assaulted 22 people, I believe 19 of which were children. All of them survived, because he had to use a knife since he couldn't purchase a gun due to China's incredibly strict gun laws.
You can't sit there and tell me that if we had stricter gun laws, none of these horrific events would have happened. You don't have any evidence to support that. If someone wants to harm, they will find a way to do so. Wether its with knives, explosives, guns, or any thing else that can inflict damage.
First, I've been very clear about saying yes, this sh*t will still happen, as it always has since long before the advent of guns. But states and countries without "gun rights" are safer. And there is proof. From my post above:
[/u] If there were no guns would there be no murder? Of course not, there has been murder for all of human history. But would gun control in almost any form lower the murder rate? Yes. Statistics have shown that in states or countries with more guns, there are more homicides. The reverse is true as well; in states with gun control laws there are fewer homicides. Because really it's not the "determined person" you're trying to keep a gun away from, it's the unstable person, or the temporarily scared or angry person. Yes there will still be murders and terrorists, but there will be significantly fewer. (source www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.htmlwww.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/)
[/quote]
Do you have any evidence that gun restrictions DON'T save lives?
SPECIFICALLY on what happened Friday... I don't think there's anything you can do to stop that. The guy TRIED to buy guns and got denied (for what reason, I'm not sure has been released or will be known). Clearly he got the guns elsewhere (reports say they were his mother's). Furthermore, he forced his way into the school.
Raise the "security" at schools you say? In a time of budget-cutting this is realllly unlikely to occur for the long-term. It may occur in the short-term as an over-reaction, but it won't stick, nor is it really sensible for elementary schools. Let's face it, if crazy people want to go crazy, they will find a way, a school, a mall, theater, they have plenty of targets. I simply don't think this sort of thing can be prevented. We just want to have a sense of control after such a senseless act. Control, though, is the least of things we have in this world.
Imho, public shootings have hit a near meme-like effect. People, when they decide to go postal, just figure they might as well imitate what others have done and take out as many other people as possible, while gaining post-mortem "fame". Is there any way to diminish this effect? I doubt it. We could ignore all these mass shootings, but that is extremely unlikely to ever happen.
Sorry, this is bullsh*t. First of all, do you really think the "media-fame" effect is really unique to this country? The "media" is basically the same in England and Japan, and guess what, no mass-shootings. And Australia is an even better example, being the home country of the world's biggest media titan Rupert Murdoch.
Look, I understand why the "there's nothing we can do" argument makes logical sense, but it's just not true. Restrictions on gun ownership work.
He stole the guns apparently from his mother, a law abiding, sane citizen. Even if he just took a couple of her everyday glock handguns, the damage is still done. Look, I'm all for restricting high-powered weapons, I think selling them is just absurd. What I am saying is these things will likely still happen because any insane kid can still steal his mother's handguns and go do this.
To be honest, I don't know if the media is the same abroad, I've never lived there. Have you? You may be right or may be not. I am just saying it is quite clear in this country it has become such a norm that people about to go postal don't think twice about it. They think what kind of body count they can rack up to outdo all the other crazies and die in infamy.
Post by wannaberoo'ing on Dec 16, 2012 19:00:52 GMT -5
There are lot of differences between all cultures. To say that there is nothing fundamentally different between American society and other comparable societies is absolutely positively wrong. I lived in Ireland and Canada and my husband has lived all Europe. We are anthropologists with 15 years of training and fieldwork and we have both worked side-by-side with professionals who have studied societies from all over the world. There are tremendous monumental differences between all cultures, some of them blatantly obvious and many much more subtle but all significant to how a particular group of people exist, live, think, react, and create. If there were no differences, than fields like sociology and anthropology and linguistics wouldn't even exist.
This is an incredibly multifaceted issue. Not one thing and one thing only will be the end-all be-all solve-all. You are all right in your reflections on this matter. Everyone is going to feel strongly discussing such a horrific event but let's not get aggressive toward one another. There is truth to just about everything everyone feels at this moment.
There are lot of differences between all cultures. To say that there is nothing fundamentally different between American society and other comparable societies is absolutely positively wrong. I lived in Ireland and Canada and my husband has lived all Europe. We are anthropologists with 15 years of training and fieldwork and we have both worked side-by-side with professionals who have studied societies from all over the world. There are tremendous monumental differences between all cultures, some of them blatantly obvious and many much more subtle but all significant to how a particular group of people exist, live, think, react, and create. If there were no differences, than fields like sociology and anthropology and linguistics wouldn't even exist.
This is an incredibly multifaceted issue. Not one thing and one thing only will be the end-all be-all solve-all. You are all right in your reflections on this matter. Everyone is going to feel strongly discussing such a horrific event but let's not get aggressive toward one another. There is truth to just about everything everyone feels at this moment.
And if you need a pick-me-up during this rough weekend, just think.... we are halfway to ROO
Post by wannaberoo'ing on Dec 16, 2012 19:36:44 GMT -5
Yes! I need a good laugh and a pint too. Thanks for the smile kiko.
Alot of times in Ireland, all disagreements were easily diffused over a pint and a good laugh. I never once heard of an act of violence while living there. Not a single thing, no muggings, no stabbings, no shots fired, nothing was ever reported or talked about concerning violence. I think the pints and the laughs and a good sod fire always kept people peaceful and calm. Fundamental difference between Ireland and America? Quick wits and Guinness? Here in the States, I hear about a shooting, a stabbing, a case of road rage that ends with someone bloodied. I don't get how we as a people can live every day with such horror, such violence. We need to start examining what we value here. What binds Americans together? What does it mean to be American? What common denominators do we share and want to protect and honor?
There are lot of differences between all cultures. To say that there is nothing fundamentally different between American society and other comparable societies is absolutely positively wrong. I lived in Ireland and Canada and my husband has lived all Europe. We are anthropologists with 15 years of training and fieldwork and we have both worked side-by-side with professionals who have studied societies from all over the world. There are tremendous monumental differences between all cultures, some of them blatantly obvious and many much more subtle but all significant to how a particular group of people exist, live, think, react, and create. If there were no differences, than fields like sociology and anthropology and linguistics wouldn't even exist.
This is an incredibly multifaceted issue. Not one thing and one thing only will be the end-all be-all solve-all. You are all right in your reflections on this matter. Everyone is going to feel strongly discussing such a horrific event but let's not get aggressive toward one another. There is truth to just about everything everyone feels at this moment.
I was responding to the comment about news agencies in particular. I'd agree that there are vast cultural differences between the US and many other countries that are being used for comparisons right now.
Post by wannaberoo'ing on Dec 16, 2012 19:46:43 GMT -5
No, twasn't you I wrote that for. It was horn. He said that there are no fundamental differences between us and other rich industrialized nations.
I feel that this problem in America right now, these random shootings, is definitely a reflection of American society. We are an incredibly violent culture as evidenced by the countless violent acts that are committed every day in this country, with or without guns. I go round and round in mind about how much or how little will tighter gun control laws have an affect on this problem. I am all for tighter controls, even a ban, whatever, I just think the fundamental problem is American culture in general. Some malfunctions going on in our system. Serious malfunctions. To want to even have this many guns speaks volumes about Americans' propensity for violence; I think I heard 300 million guns? The highest per capita rate of gun ownership in the world, yes, 9 guns for every American! What the hell is wrong with us? Why do want/like guns so much? It speaks volumes about the desire to inflict harm and the irrational fears of Americans.
There are lot of differences between all cultures. To say that there is nothing fundamentally different between American society and other comparable societies is absolutely positively wrong. I lived in Ireland and Canada and my husband has lived all Europe. We are anthropologists with 15 years of training and fieldwork and we have both worked side-by-side with professionals who have studied societies from all over the world. There are tremendous monumental differences between all cultures, some of them blatantly obvious and many much more subtle but all significant to how a particular group of people exist, live, think, react, and create. If there were no differences, than fields like sociology and anthropology and linguistics wouldn't even exist.
This is an incredibly multifaceted issue. Not one thing and one thing only will be the end-all be-all solve-all. You are all right in your reflections on this matter. Everyone is going to feel strongly discussing such a horrific event but let's not get aggressive toward one another. There is truth to just about everything everyone feels at this moment.
Right obviously there are major social and political differences all around the world. Having lived in Sweden and London and traveled quite a bit this is obvious. But does being born in country a or country b really make someone fundamentally more or less violent? I just hate all these "we have to change our culture" arguments because the person making it almost never means "we need to change our gun culture."
You can't sit there and tell me that if we had stricter gun laws, none of these horrific events would have happened. You don't have any evidence to support that. If someone wants to harm, they will find a way to do so. Wether its with knives, explosives, guns, or any thing else that can inflict damage.
First, I've been very clear about saying yes, this sh*t will still happen, as it always has since long before the advent of guns. But states and countries without "gun rights" are safer.
If this is what you're really trying to say, then you and I pretty much totally agree. What it seemed like you're trying to say though, was that the incident friday could have been avoided with tighter gun control. from what I understand CT does actually have very strict gun control laws, and relatively less guns per capita than most states. The perpetrator (whose name I refuse to learn) was actually unable to purchase guns, but was able to obtain them else where.
Yes, gun control can reduce crime, and should be pursued. I agree. But this incident likely would not have been avoided. This is, I suppose, where we may disagree
