Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum

Why hasn't anyone asked why an elderly woman, working at at a kindergarten and with a mentally ill son, was in possession of a gun?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 114 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 2 Jan 2013 15:26:36 GMT
"First train yourself by buying a shooter and a gun-shaped controller. Then, knowing how to handle a firearm"

Oh dear Spin, that's poor even by your standards. Which do you think is a better way at training how to shoot people, buying a gun shaped controler (which while it might be the same shape is a different weight and has no kickback) and shooting people on a game (which don't accurately model gun balistics), or going to a firing range, and shooting targets with a real gun?

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Jan 2013 18:50:15 GMT
Pipkin says:
Happy New Year SZJ,
Sorry, should I have said ''between what is right and what is wrong?''

The terms sociopath or psychopath often bring to mind images of sadistically violent individuals such as Ted Bundy or the fictional character of Dr. Hannibal "The Cannibal" Lecter in the book and movie The Silence of the Lambs. But I believe the defining characteristic traits of sociopaths actually cover a much broader spectrum of individuals than most of us would ever imagine.
The sociopath is that truly self-absorbed individual with no conscience or feeling for others and for whom social rules have no meaning.
I believe that most all of us know or have come in contact with sociopathic individuals without even knowing it. [Wendy Koenigsmann]

What is A Psychopath?
Psychopaths cannot be understood in terms of antisocial rearing or development. They are simply morally depraved individuals who represent the "monsters" in our society.
They are unstoppable and untreatable predators whose violence is planned, purposeful and emotionless. The violence continues until it reaches a plateau at age 50 or so, then tapers off.
Their emotionlessness reflects a detached, fearless, and possibly dissociated state, revealing a low-state autonomic nervous system and lack of anxiety.
It's difficult to say what motivates them - control and dominance possibly - since their life history will usually show no long-standing bonds with others nor much rhyme to their reason (other than the planning of violence).
They tend to operate with a grandiose demeanor, an attitude of entitlement, an insatiable appetite, and a tendency toward sadism. Fearlessness is probably the prototypical (core) characteristic (the low-fear hypothesis). It's helpful to think of them as high-speed vehicles with ineffective brakes.
Certain organic (brain) disorders and hormonal imbalances mimic the state of mind of a psychopath.
There are four (4) different subtypes of psychopaths. The oldest distinction was made by Cleckley back in 1941 between primary and secondary.
PRIMARY PSYCHOPATHS do not respond to punishment, apprehension, stress, or disapproval. They seem to be able to inhibit their antisocial impulses most of the time, not because of conscience, but because it suits their purpose at the time. Words do not seem to have the same meaning for them as they do for us. In fact, it's unclear if they even grasp the meaning of their own words, a condition that Cleckley called "semantic aphasia." They don't follow any life plan, and it seems as if they are incapable of experiencing any genuine emotion.

SECONDARY PSYCHOPATHS are risk-takers, but are also more likely to be stress-reactive, worriers, and guilt-prone. They expose themselves to more stress than the average person, but they are as vulnerable to stress as the average person. (This suggests that they are not "fully psychopathic." This may be due to distinctive genetic variations.)
They are daring, adventurous, unconventional people who began playing by their own rules early in life. They are strongly driven by a desire to escape or avoid pain, but are unable to resist temptation. As their anxiety increases toward some forbidden object, so does their attraction to it. They live their lives by the lure of temptation. Both primary and secondary psychopaths can be subdivided into:

DISTEMPERED PSYCHOPATHS are the kind that seem to fly into a rage or frenzy more easily and more often than other subtypes. Their frenzy will resemble an epileptic fit. They are also usually men with incredibly strong sex drives, capable of astonishing feats of sexual energy, and seemingly obsessed by sexual urges during a large part of their waking lives. Powerful cravings also seem to characterize them, as in drug addiction, kleptomania, peadophilia, any illicit or illegal indulgence. They like the endorphin "high" or "rush" off of excitement and risk-taking. The serial-rapist-murderer known as the Boston Strangler was such a psychopath.

CHARISMATIC PSYCHOPATHS are charming, attractive liars. They are usually gifted at some talent or another, and they use it to their advantage in manipulating others. They are usually fast-talkers, and possess an almost demonic ability to persuade others out of everything they own, even their lives. Leaders of religious sects or cults, for example, might be psychopaths if they lead their followers to their deaths. This subtype often comes to believe in their own fictions. They are irresistible.

Sociopaths have always existed in varying form and to various degrees. They have been known by various titles. They have been studied using various techniques, and through the years their ailment has been blamed on various causes. But one thing never varies: all sociopaths share three common characteristics.
They are all very egocentric individuals with no empathy for others, and they are incapable of feeling remorse or guilt.
[The Sociopath Rebecca Horton (April 1999)]
While the psychopath has likes and dislikes and fondness for the pleasures that human company can bring, analysis shows that he is completely egocentric, valuing others only for their enhancement of his own pleasure or status. While he gives no real love, he is quite capable of inspiring love of sometimes fanatical degree in others.
He is generally superficially charming and often makes a striking impression as possessed of the noblest of human qualities. He makes friends easily, and is very manipulative, using his ability with words to talk his way out of trouble. Many psychopaths love to be admired and bask in the adulation of others.
With the lack of love, there is also a lack of empathy. The psychopath is unable to feel sorry for others in unfortunate situations or put himself in another's place, whether or not they have been harmed by him.
Complete article.....


In reply to an earlier post on 2 Jan 2013 19:14:33 GMT
Pipkin says:
Characteristic Traits of a Psychopath

Look for glibness and superficiality in interpersonal relations. Psychopaths can be charming and appear to be likable. They often have good verbal skills; they can be entertaining, funny and witty. They tend to use these skills to make themselves look good and to manipulate others to their own advantage.
Look for egocentric and grandiose behavior. Psychopaths are extremely self-centered and may greatly overestimate their importance and sometimes their abilities. This narcissism and exaggerated sense of self-worth appears to contribute to their tendency to live by their own rules and to ignore commonly accepted concepts of right and wrong.
Look for signs of an inability to feel remorse or guilt.
Lacking a conscience, a psychopath cannot "feel bad" after hurting someone. He cannot relate to your pain but may rationalize his actions or make excuses for it if he has to.
A psychopath might just as easily deny an action or dismiss it as unimportant no matter how much trouble it has caused others.
Look for lack of empathy. A psychopath cannot relate to the feelings of other people. Others' suffering, hardship, despair, or pain does not elicit sympathy. In place of empathy is a cold indifference to the feelings and suffering of others. The intense interest a psychopath has for herself is never extended to others.
Look for signs of deceitfulness and manipulative behavior. There is no reason for a psychopath not to lie and they do whenever they think it will help them. In fact, Hare reports that they often seem to lie with pride. If a lie is uncovered, the psychopath will simply change his story or lie more in an attempt get away with the original deceit.
Look for shallow emotions. Just as they lack consciences, psychopaths lack deep and true feelings. They may fake superficial feelings to manipulate others but they can't relate to them on an emotional level. Unable to experience the depth of emotion most people feel, psychopaths can appear cold, like a predator surveying its surroundings looking for prey.

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Jan 2013 20:23:45 GMT
Spin says:
Sweet: Kids are not allowed on firing ranges. The nearest threy can get to a firearm, until they are older, is shooter games. By "train" I meant "condition ones mind and body" towards the use of firearms, not develop marksmanship. Many video games contain explicit violence, blood and gore. There are also driving games, in which one can buy a chair that replicates the driving seat. These games , including shooters, simulate the real experience; asimulation based on the demand for realism.

Posted on 3 Jan 2013 07:47:05 GMT
Interesting reading about the psychopaths - trouble is though imo that at some time or another just about everyone will fit in, at least in part, to one or more of the subcategories. Personally, I can fit part of me into all four headings or vise-versa, whichever makes more sense. And I am almost 100% sure that if everyone here looked at themselves and that subcategories they'd be at least one.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 09:16:14 GMT
Spin says:
Kodo: I used to suffer from a multiple personality disorder, but we're alright now. =)

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 09:40:14 GMT
I'd agree with that ME, you might want to check out the Hare Psychopathy Checklist which is the criteria usually used by the courts in the US or UK. There are a number of criteria and each is scored 0-2 (0 no match, 1 partial match, 2 good match), a score of 30 out of a possible 40 indicates a psychopath (25 in the UK).

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 10:31:04 GMT
>>> says:
My son used the following weapons while he was in his school's Combined Cadet Force: Lee-Enfield .303, Sterling 9mm SMG, and a Bren Gun (LMG). All live rounds, all on the Army firing range at Bisley.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 10:35:59 GMT
Spin says:
Helen. First, how old is your son? Second, there is a difference between a soldier or cadet being trained in firearms for military purposes and a civilian paying for such training simply because of the personal thrill of it.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 10:37:33 GMT
"Sweet: Kids are not allowed on firing ranges."

Wrong Spin, you have to be 18 to attend a firing range on your but if you're with a guardian it's down the the individual ranges policy.

Posted on 3 Jan 2013 10:53:45 GMT
>>> says:
He was 13 or 14 at the time I think, Spin. Of course he also used weapons at home from when he was 7 years old, first a .177 air rifle, then a .22 rifle. In the cadets the youngsters learn to handle weapons as safely as possible and they are made aware of the serious damage that can be done to a human body by even a blank round. I have no objection to civilians paying to go on military training for excitement.

Posted on 3 Jan 2013 10:56:55 GMT
One of my brothers mates lived on a farm and used a rifle to shoot rats, he was around 13-15 at that time. I imagine he used it before and after that age as well.

Posted on 3 Jan 2013 13:34:47 GMT
Instead of full blown wars and such. It would be more cost effective to create a massive server where soldiers could battle it out on call of duty. The winning team will then get whatever they set out to get EG, palestinians get Isreal if they win. No religion oppses the use of video games so I think its a good platform for war to take place. Plus it would be fun to go to war, so we could do it alot more. More army jobs for the IT industry to soak up. Lots of players to recruit. A better world to live in. instead of trying to achieve world peace by going to war. Any thoughts?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 15:37:11 GMT
Pipkin says:
Hi Ko,
I thought the same :) Seriously though.. I do think that we can all portray some aspects at times.
Mags x

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 15:42:20 GMT
Last edited by the author on 3 Jan 2013 15:42:49 GMT
Pipkin says:
Hi Pop, Happy New Year....
What a good idea....
Too easy a solution though, and not enough profit for the Military Industrial Complex? And what would we do with the population explosion?
Mags x

Posted on 3 Jan 2013 15:44:35 GMT
Spin says:
Guns are designed and used for only one purpose. To kill. Any adult who encourages a child to train in gunmanship or to shoot other species (when there are less violent and more effective methods of pest control) is an irresponsible, immoral parent. Only those with a love of guns, or the "power" guns provide, teach thier children to love them too. This creates a vicious circle that leads to gun-related crime and violence. Educate your kids in methods of destruction, and they will pay the price.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2013 17:34:57 GMT
>>> says:
Both my children used weapons to kill vermin, neither of them grew up to become involved in gun-related crime and violence.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jan 2013 08:32:41 GMT
Spin says:
Helen; First, people manage to kill vermin without firearms. Second, one does not own a gun unless one ios prepared to use it. And such use is dependent on the subjective and fallible opinion of what, and whom, one considers to be "vermin". Such is human nature that the potantial for the misuse of firearms is always present. Indeed, from shooting rats to shooting burgalurs to shooting strangers in a public area; all involve a belief in the fantasy that a gun can resolve any issue. I teach my kids to resolve issues through reason not violence; an ideology proven to be more advantageous to the self and society than that advocating a mythical "wild west" attitude towards life and its experiences...

Posted on 4 Jan 2013 11:11:15 GMT
I'm not sure that a gun is unkind in terms of killing rats. Have you seen the size of some of them? They can be about half the size of a cat. If you used poison you would have to use a lot, with the danger that it would also kill a cat or dog, or heaven forbid a child.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jan 2013 12:13:41 GMT
>>> says:
If only a burglar would try his luck at the business end of my husband's Webley & Scott! He's been a user of firearms most of his life and has not yet set about strangers in a public area. My children have used weapons but neither of them have (so far) been moved to employ them murderously against our fellow citizens.

I enjoyed ratting with guns and terriers and would do so again provided the activity were still legal. At the moment there is no legal definition of vermin. A medical definition would include lice and fleas and I would certainly not advocate trying to shoot them. I am not sure how I would follow your example and reason with them in order to resolve any health issues arising from their presence on a pet or human.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jan 2013 18:32:57 GMT
Spin says:
Helen: Not only have you completely missed my point but, by saying "if only a burglar would try his luck...", you have also verified my arguments that the term "vermin" is subjective ( you would treat a burgalar as you treat a rat) and that gun-users are potential murderers. You seem to await the opportunity to use a firearm on a human. And, just as shocking is the fact that you see no shame or fault in expressing such an attitude.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jan 2013 20:27:46 GMT
>>> says:
A burglar is most definitely vermin, Spin. If one chooses to break into our home they do so at their own risk. Were an armed burglar shot to death in the commission of a crime I do not think a jury would see that as murder. I would call your attention to a recent case where three armed rats broke into a house and were met with a discharge of shot from one of the residents under attack. The judge told the criminals they got what they deserved - I second his observation on their injuries. If your argument is valid then it will be an easy thing for you to demonstrate how every gun user has ended up 'shooting strangers in a public area'. I look forward to your evidence.

In reply to an earlier post on 5 Jan 2013 02:32:28 GMT
Last edited by the author on 5 Jan 2013 02:34:37 GMT
Charlieost says:
Thumbs up for you on that one Helen.

A few years ago while I was visiting a friend in the UK, a person who I subsequently found out had been at a party I was holding the previous Saturday, broke into my cottage through a panel in the front door and stole amongst other things, my grandfathers First World War medals and my partner of the times fathers binoculars, (her father had died a couple of years before of cancer and her sisters hoovered most of his posessions up but this was just one thing she managed to get). This piece of trash had heard that we were going to the UK and staying for a week on Anglesey when he came to the party accompanying a womwn I knew. So not only did he drink my wine and eat my food and I presume dance to the music I was providing but he repaid me by stealing from me.

If I could go back in time to the moment that he stuck his head through the hole he had made in the door I would happily score a home run on his head with a baseball bat I used to keep around for the occasional game of rounders on the acre. More than happily, absolutely joyfully and tingleing in anticipation. And then through the door and beat the daylights out of him in the lane. :)

Housebreakers are scum. Shooting them saves others misery. Good luck with the gun. I hope you bag one and if by odd coincidence (since in pursuit of him once I found out who had done it, he had moved back to the UK) then you could plug the one who stole my stuff. What a bonus that would be.

Best wishes and straight shooting. C

In reply to an earlier post on 5 Jan 2013 21:44:07 GMT
D. Murphy says:
As you must know Americans are fanatical about being allowed their guns. And to most of them the ongoing slaughter of innocents is irrelevant to the argument. They are addicts of guns. The NRA answer is to ensure all schools have armed guards or teachers given guns, as they can then kill the miscreants. They hate real facts on this subject as well : such as Britain is every bit as violent and criminal as the US - except their murder rate is more than 5 times ours, and their gun crime rate several hundred times ours. yet they pity us lacking guns and fondly think we suffer more crime as a result.

In reply to an earlier post on 5 Jan 2013 21:45:23 GMT
D. Murphy says:
I broadly agree, but there are almost as many guns in circulation as people, so I think even if the will was there (it isn't) its almost impossible to bring guns back under control.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Discussion in:  politics discussion forum
Participants:  16
Total posts:  114
Initial post:  16 Dec 2012
Latest post:  26 Jan 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions