23 Total Votes

Improve mental health standard

12 votes

I think we should improve our mental health standard,since most of school shooter has mental illness and we should report if someone has diagnoses such as depression and social/mental disorder.Such people should be treated before their tendencies an aliments get out of their hand.


Gun control

9 votes

It has been proven that countries which has most restrict gun laws are far less violent than countries which don't have.And since in america there is so many mass shooting occur,it's better to ban all assault weapons because there is no other tool that you could massacre so many people in one day.Yes guns are the most dangerous types of deadly weapon.I believe all deadly weapon should be banned,not only guns alone.


Stop bullying

2 votes

I think we should stop bullying because bullying is an abuse.As we look at the profile of these school shooter,most of them are being bullied.For me,i think parents,teachers,or even students should take part in helping the victim of bullying.But i notice that many students refuse to help the victim or some of them even join the bully.Bullying has been establish as a culture long time ago,and this has to stop.


No more bystanders

0 votes

Yes we should not have any bystanders near our schools.They are selfish people.Remember what albert einstein says:The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil,but by those who watch them without doing anything."Bystanders could have severe psychological effect on the victim because the victim have to suffer alone and they are not able to seek help from people,because people rejected them.Bystanders are worse than bullies.


Parental discipline

0 votes

Parents are actually the one who are to blame in the first place in these case.There are lot of things that go on in families that often cause people to get into life of crime.Abuse during formative years from family members and other such acts also instigate a person into a life of crime.We should stop family violence.And parents should supervise and teach the moral value to children.Since many shooters has bad parenting ,which parents does not want to take part of being a care taker or might not raise their child so good enough.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T14:54:42.7059435-05:00
@Stefy It's NOT gun laws. If you can show me a single gun that has killed someone, I will drop my arguments and fall in line with the anti-gun crowd. You cannot simply compare other nations to the U.S., no one is like the U.S. except US. I would love to debate you on this if you would like.
rphk123 says2015-07-03T15:21:18.1620775-05:00
@MakeSensePeopleDont Your point about showing you a gun that has killed someone is irrelevant. School shootings still happen all the time along with gun murders. America's a big place and though 99.99% of guns haven't killed people, that .01% could account for thousands of guns, if you know what I mean. And yeah, you can compare the US to other countries. You can't just say "the murder rate and school shooting rate doesn't matter cause this is America!" That's just silly. We can't use "We're the greatest nation on Earth" as an excuse for what goes on in this country.
TBR says2015-07-03T15:33:49.1407339-05:00
@MakeSensePeopleDont says - How many instances of "the gun went off?" do you want?
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T16:07:39.0743421-05:00
@TBR Just one that fits the criteria. Here is an excerpt that you probably missed when you failed to actually read the article: "But authorities said in a criminal complaint that the weapon wasn't in a holster, its four safeties weren't on, there was a bullet in the chamber and a drop test indicated the gun couldn't have discharged accidentally." So, he had the pistol in his pocket instead of properly holstered, he disengaged all FOUR safeties installed on the firearm, AND he had a round in the chamber cocked and ready to go. The officers also tested the firearm determining that no accidental discharge was possible. So that's 1 count of stupidity for not using a holster as he should have, 4 counts of stupidity 1 for each safety that he intentionally switched off, 1 count of stupidity for having his firearm in the previously mentioned positions WITH a round in the chamber, 1 count of stupidity for having the firearm cocked, and for good measure 2 counts of stupidity 1 for shooting himself in the leg and the other for lying to the police about the situation. Totaling it up......And the grand total is: Man: 9 counts of stupidity for doing EVERYTHING possible wrong Gun: 0 counts of stupidity for performing exactly how it was designed Next time, read the article before you try and use it against me....Cuz I actually do read it.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T16:27:15.1965594-05:00
@rphk123 Alright, let's use your logic here guns and school shootings (assuming we are talking about teens here) cause deaths so lets ban them. Firstly, teens are NOT supposed to have these weapons, they are also not supposed to have them in school, not supposed to shoot people with them: all crimes. Cars on the other hand they are allowed to have, drive, and enjoy from the age of 16. Per the CDC at link: In 2011, about 2,650 teens in the United States aged 16–19 were killed and almost 292,000 were treated in emergency departments for injuries suffered in motor-vehicle crashes.1 That means that seven teens ages 16 to 19 died every day from motor vehicle injuries. Young people ages 15-24 represent only 14% of the U.S. population. However, they account for 30% ($19 billion) of the total costs of motor vehicle injuries among males and 28% ($7 billion) of the total costs of motor vehicle injuries among females. That's a lot more deaths/injuries each year by teen drivers, do we ban cars? Not happy? How about drowning: http://www.Cdc.Gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Water-Safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.Html Should we ban water based activities now? Still not satisfied? How about teen stabbing attacks? Here is just one example: http://www.Npr.Org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/09/300872511/many-students-stabbed-cut-at-pennsylvania-high-school Shall we ban knives now too? No? How about trains? Here are a few for you: http://www.Wral.Com/2-killed-when-hit-by-train-in-smithfield/14379299/ http://abcnews.Go.Com/US/teen-washington-struck-train-killed/story?Id=30951795 http://www.Usatoday.Com/story/news/nation-now/2014/03/25/teen-killed-saving-girlfriend-from-train/6860131/ Ban trains? I can keep going if my point still isn't made.
Kreakin says2015-07-03T16:39:19.4359984-05:00
^ Weakest arguments ever. Cars are not solely designed to kill and maim, see the difference? I don't think you will tbh. Que long copy paste NRA rhetoric reply...
TBR says2015-07-03T16:40:18.1705417-05:00
@MakeSensePeopleDont - I didn't miss it, you set no criteria other than "a single gun that has killed someone". I have, now what? You going to change? Support control, like you know, mandating better training so fools like this don't kill people?
TBR says2015-07-03T16:42:28.2665181-05:00
Not a week goes by without me reading an article that states "the gun just went off and...." Either it happens all the time, or we have way to many people running around who are irresponsible and could use more regulation to keep them from killing.
58539672 says2015-07-03T16:50:09.2865837-05:00
@TBR its the latter. Guns don't simply, "Go off" for no good reason. It went off because they pulled the trigger, even if it was accidental.
TBR says2015-07-03T16:54:11.8125825-05:00
@58539672 - According to many formally safe gun owners, you are wrong. Like I said, I find a story per week saying, "it just went off". I don't disagree that holsters, poor maintenance, poor training are at the heart of these incidents - hence the need for more gun control (training, removal from irresponsible etc).
TBR says2015-07-03T16:55:03.9537856-05:00
This asshat had shot himself in the foot PRIOR to killing this woman
TBR says2015-07-03T16:56:04.5054147-05:00
Looking now of an older story about the guns purchased for the Italian police force. Apparently they were going off with a stiff breeze, and had to be replaced.
TBR says2015-07-03T16:58:44.5640298-05:00
This one is neat too...
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T17:13:25.9787947-05:00
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T17:13:54.9199992-05:00
@TBR Let's discuss cause and effect also known as causation, causality, and the favorite of scientists everywhere: Newton's Third Law -- For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Dids & Did Nots 1) The gun did not load itself 2) It did not chamber a round in itself 3) It did not pull back its hammer itself 4) It did not turn off all four of its own safeties itself 5) It did not stick itself in its owners pocket itself 6) it did not apply force to its own trigger mechanism equivalent to or greater than the force required to complete a firing cycle 1) The owner did load the gun 2) He did chamber a round 3) He did pull back the hammer 4) He did turn off all four safeties 5) He did stick it in his pocket 6) He did apply force to the trigger mechanism equivalent to or greater than the force required to complete a firing cycle Just using the most basic data, I count 6 actions performed by the owner that directly led to the owner discharging his firearm, striking himself in the leg. Please list all actions the firearm performed that directly led to (cause) the firearm discharging (effect)
TBR says2015-07-03T17:19:10.4984679-05:00
@MakeSensePeopleDont - Sure... Lets talk causation, causality. How did the gun get in these people proximity to start with? You are just dancing around the fact that guns have some inherent danger - just being the very devices they are. That's what you wanted to dispel with your flippant post, I posted in kind. The difference is, I am right.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T17:26:45.5904195-05:00
@kreakin One could argue that guns and any other fire system is designed not only to kill and maim but also to deter further violent altercation. However, OK, not solely designed to kill and maim? How about this one, and just to make it good, I used the UK since that's apparently a "model" society for gun control: Fishing spear was "accidentally" fired through his skull. Again this was user error, if handled properly it would have never been pointed at this kid. Http://www.Mirror.Co.Uk/news/weird-news/spear-stuck-in-teenagers-skull-in-fishing-902959 How about straight malicious intent? Here you go, courtesy of New Zealand: fishing hooks designed to kill or maim only, used in a malicious manner against children no less: http://tvnz.Co.Nz/national-news/child-hurt-after-playground-laced-hundreds-fish-hooks-6318243 Any other arguments?
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T17:30:54.3444019-05:00
@TBR Gun Control, mental health evaluations, proper training, proper maintenance are all different things. Gun Control here in America and the political discussions is directly defined as restricting magazine sizes, banning specific types of weapons, banning specific types of ammunition, etc. Background checks and training are what you are referring to.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T17:37:17.3557686-05:00
@TBR I never once said or even REMOTELY alluded to fire systems not being inherently dangerous. Only a moron would state that. My argument is that the gun on it's own has 0, yes ZERO possibility of causing harm to anyone or anything. Why zero possibility? Simple, because the first thing required in order to fire a gun is a gun loaded with ammunition and a gun can't load itself, it requires human oversight and interaction to load round into the firearm. You can say that's a stupid argument all you want but IT IS FACT. Fault of these shootings whether accident or otherwise, is ALWAYS fault of the owner.
Stefy says2015-07-03T20:34:09.7349445-05:00
1) Guns dont kill people, people kill people. But people woth guns can kill more people and/or much more easily. 2) We dont ban guns because of murder just like we dont ban cars because of drunk driving. But we do enact stricter blood alcohol limits, raise the drinking age, increase education, amd make a whole buncch of other regulations to prevent drunk driving from happeningnim the first place instead of arresting people after the fact. And just like we would bam assault weapons, we dont let peoe drive tanks.
TBR says2015-07-03T20:56:13.5656556-05:00
You now say you never "REMOTELY alluded to fire systems" (GUNS) "not being inherently dangerous". That is simply intellectually dishonest. Guns are inherently dangerous, they are very efficient at killing, hence their success. That it takes ammo, some combination of failures, poor training, poor reaction or any of a million excuses for the deaths the gun a part of is obfuscation. Any NRA bumper-sticker you point in my direction cant minimize the effect they have on our society.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T21:07:06.2518581-05:00
@stefy OK, your use of tanks is actually incorrect. You can legally purchase and drive a tank down public streets. It is also a bit outlandish to compare an M1A1 Abrams Battle Tank or even a Sherman to an assault rifle. That's a terrible reason to give for banning assault rifles. Let's go through your points that could potentially hold water in an argument: 1) Having a drinking age is NOT equivalent to banning assault rifles. Having a drinking age IS equivalent to having an age in which you can purchase a firearm and ammunition; which we already have federal laws for. So that argument is invalidated. 2) You state "people with guns can kill more people and/or much more easily." As compared to what? More easily than what? Can it kill more people and easier than paying $20 to fill a propane tank, $5 for cheap 80 proof liquor, another $3 for a gallon of gasoline; dousing the outside of the propane tank in gas, dropping it wherever you want it, throwing cloth into the liquor bottle, lighting it, tossing your Molotov Cocktail near the propane tank and watching it go up in flames? That bomb just cost me under $30 to build and will kill/maim MANY more people than buying a $1,200 AR-15 plus ammo then only having 31 rounds to fire before everyone scrambles. 3) We have NEVER enacted stricter blood alcohol limits (since enacting modern DUI laws), in fact, most people don't realize this but that whole .08% BAC legal limit thing is not the law. If you get stopped by an officer and blow a .03% BAC, you can still be charged with a DUI; it is on the discretion of the officer. 4) Increase education -- Now THAT is a GREAT idea. Instead of liberals, democrats, and anti-gun lobbyists and supporters running around screaming how bad guns are and how HORRIBLE, DESPICABLE, and SELFISH people that want to keep their assault rifles are; instead of spending millions each year demonizing citizens like myself for wanting to keep my assault rifles and doing everything they possibly can to convince society to treat me differently until I give up my guns; why not spend all that money educating our youth, properly informing society, ridding the discussion of myths, and providing a safe environment where anyone can come in and learn about firearms, test a few out, and come to understand what they are and how they work...Maybe even realize you like them? Why not spend that time and effort educating society on the proper care, maintenance, storage, transport, use, cleaning, etc. Spending millions on complaining about gun owners not having safes...Take that money and buy safes, then start donating them to gun owners in need. ---- How's that for productive conversation? 5) One other fact I want to point out. Officer's used to sit outside of bars and clubs at closing hours. This was to ensure the safety of the exiting crowd and to be a deterrent to anyone wanting to drive drunk. However, those same groups convincing you that guns are bad, decided to file suit against law enforcement which resulted in this preventative action being deemed as entrapment. Since then, those drunk people have an easier opportunity to drive home drunk.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T21:23:35.1930594-05:00
@TBR I'm lost here....That's correct, I never said that guns are NOT dangerous; they ARE dangerous. So what exactly are you trying to say?
Stefy says2015-07-03T22:26:22.6897263-05:00
I didnt mean the parallels have to be that ridiculously exact. I just mean we regulate guns purchses with background checks for prevention just pile we regulate who can get behind the wheel.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-03T23:15:18.2830973-05:00
@Stefy We already do perform background checks. In fact, gun background checks are more thorough and restrictive than for driving a car. Additionally, even if a person has no license, they still drive. Here are AAA statics: Results show that 87.2% of drivers involved in fatal crashes in years 2007–2009 had a valid license, 6.7% had a license that had had been suspended or revoked, 1.1% had a license that had expired or had been cancelled or denied, and 5.0% were unlicensed. Overall, 18.2% of fatal crashes involved a driver who was unlicensed or invalidly licensed; these crashes resulted in the deaths of 21,049 people Link here: So driver's licenses aren't a very good comparison.
Renegader says2015-07-03T23:28:57.6616609-05:00
Often government tries to legislate a problem that apparently has a "quick fix" and it always creates a slew of entirely new and utterly worse problems.
Macfoo says2015-07-04T13:46:16.4559093-05:00
Life is pain princess. It's a terrible cost but without an armed citizenry no American is free. Gun control is useless unless you mean 100% gun seizure. Mental health could always use more money thrown at it but unless every citizen has regular counseling and care required it won't help much. Crazy paranoid nut jobs don't ask the gubermint for help. I view shootings in America like car deaths, sure its sad and things can be done to help but no one wants cars banned. Im surprised there isn't more shooting. It's america shoot back!
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-07-04T14:06:07.8915261-05:00
@macfoo I like your response. However, there is an inherent problem with it: America is getting too soft and "Progressive" to fight back. The further we move from our revolution and our Civil War the weaker this nation gets. These days Americans would rather be on their knees apologizing to the world for being the best and winning than fight for what is right.
JS103 says2015-07-05T05:38:09.4674987-05:00
Uh... Mexico has stricter gun laws and look at their crime rate. Stupid people...
stephannoi says2015-07-05T08:05:44.3534899-05:00
LoL....Hahaha........It seems no one vote on parental discipline.
stephannoi says2015-07-05T08:08:01.0719201-05:00
But i would say parents are to blame in the first place in these case.And if i am the voter, i would either vote on parental discipline or improve mental health standard
stephannoi says2015-07-05T08:09:32.1778129-05:00
Because,if u look at the family background of bullies and shooters,most of them have bad parenting.
stephannoi says2015-07-05T08:22:02.4081066-05:00
They are either being neglected or abused emotionally and physically.
stephannoi says2015-07-05T08:23:31.0736124-05:00
It's just like other violent criminal.Many criminal also have problem with family environment and mental health issues.
TheOpinionist says2015-07-23T11:17:11.3108362-05:00
I can do a gun control debate. I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that gun control helps
sebban468 says2016-11-13T21:37:39.3924473Z
By not allowing muslims

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.