School Shooting in Tusby, Finland

[Jerome Scuggs]

wait so you guys are saying that more guns in a society will increase the number of gun related deaths? This is brand new information to me :shock1:

Increased car sales led to increased car-related deaths, increased drug sales led to increased drug-related deaths. In England, the banning of guns simply led to an increase in knife sales which lead to increased knife-related deaths. What people seem to seriously not understand is that yes, people die.

The problem is there's an emphasis on the cause of murder rather than murder itself. Yes, trying to be pro-active is valiant but the inevitable conclusion will be that the masses need to be robbed of any potentially fatal weapons and perhaps straight-jacketed. Free speech will have to be limited and media will have to be censored and cameras will have to be installed but people still die, and what are you going to do, ban death? Maybe Bill Hicks was not being sarcastic, but ahead of his time. And besides, if the government hasn't forced those kids to be corralled into a public institution, the shooter wouldn't have had such an easy time of it. Should we ban public schools, too? There's some pro-active government legislation I could vote for.

Still, my condolences to the victims. In any case their deaths were unjust and without reason.

[royCE]

prime example of effects of sub space on the finnish...

[Nycle]

Increased car sales led to increased car-related deaths, increased drug sales led to increased drug-related deaths. In England, the banning of guns simply led to an increase in knife sales which lead to increased knife-related deaths. What people seem to seriously not understand is that yes, people die.

The problem is there's an emphasis on the cause of murder rather than murder itself. Yes, trying to be pro-active is valiant but the inevitable conclusion will be that the masses need to be robbed of any potentially fatal weapons and perhaps straight-jacketed. Free speech will have to be limited and media will have to be censored and cameras will have to be installed but people still die, and what are you going to do, ban death? Maybe Bill Hicks was not being sarcastic, but ahead of his time. And besides, if the government hasn't forced those kids to be corralled into a public institution, the shooter wouldn't have had such an easy time of it. Should we ban public schools, too? There's some pro-active government legislation I could vote for.

Still, my condolences to the victims. In any case their deaths were unjust and without reason.

So what you're basically saying is that death rates have a constant value, that cannot be influenced in any way other than vigorously limiting what we might call our human, constitutional or whatever rights or values?

That is seriously rubbish and excessive. There are plenty of ways governments can prevent or (significantly) reduce things like this (let me stress that what I'm saying here is out of proportion with the situation in Finland though, which to my memory has only seen this kind of shooting twice in its modern history).

I need to be careful not to draw any comparisons that could trigger nationalistic feelings here, but let's have your assumption as a basic one. Then how do you explain that some Western European countries for example are socially equally or even more permissive than the US in terms of what can be said in speech or shown in the media while still maintaining significantly lower homicide rates? Because what other important (relevant) variables other than the gun abundance/possession rate are significantly different between those two regions? It seems quite conflictive to me.

As for putting an emphasis on the cause of death rather than death itself... well it seems pretty obvious to me that guns can do massive "damage" in a short period of time compared to other "methods", so of course this very fact deserves to be emphasised so that appropriate measures can be thought of. Seems only logical to me.

[Da1andonly]

prime example of effects of sub space on the finnish...

You are retarded.


On topic: metal detectors is not the way to go. Instead, the money that was taken away from "youth helping", terapeuts, curators etc should definitely be reinstated. It's very easy to see a disturbed kid and thus help in time.


I am seriously happy he died.

[Deductable]

Fucking idiots.... And honestly you can't always blame it on the parents... blame the fucker who got the gun and started shooting. He was a weak weak person who has no meaning to anyone and was a piece of shit and will always be remembered as one hopefully. I just hope that this won't lead to the fear of everything as seen in the US and sadly also in England... soon our idiotic country will be asking for tracking chips on ppl and metal detectors in schools just so some could feel safe... Do things like our grandfathers did if you feel like killing someone and that there is no reason to live because you are a sad loser then fucking put the bullet through your own head and leave others to live their lives!

P.s

I truly hoped that he would have lived so then he could be tortured every single day for the rest of his miserable life.

[Displaced]

obviously blame is on him, but if you're fucked up enough to do something like that and plan on doing it since 2002, look at the parents..
Effectively hes started planning at age 16, under the "watchful" eye of his parents.
6 years hes been planning this bullshit and noone in his immediate family has noticed anything?
More likely, they didn't give two shits. (like a bunch of young finns today, out on the town on saturday night, drunk as fuck, doing drugs at the tender age of 10... but i guess that in no way reflects on the parents?)

Or what about this for an example, I was at a hockey game in Helsinki last week, during one of the breaks I went outside for a smoke. Out comes a dad in his early 30s with his kid. (kid is 8 years old MAXIMUM) Dad lights up, gives the cig to his kid, lights up a smoke of his own. Then he decides its also a good idea to get his kid a drink, so he gives his own cig to the kid to hold while he goes inside, buys two pints of beer, and hands the other to the kid.
The kid starts moaning some shit about it being crappy beer and starts swearing and acting like a little shit, the dad slaps him in the face and tells him to shut the fuck up or he wont buy him smokes anymore.
Thats fucking wonderful parenting right there... (but yeah, lets blame videogames for our youth being humungous fuckups later on in life)

had he not died, and (for the sake of argument) not had any major brain damage, he wouldve been sent to some psyche ward for a while, then released onto the open treatment system.. yay, gets away "scott" free.

had he survived with massive brain damage, hed be sent to some other facility to be taken care of for the rest of his life on my dime, yay!

[Ayano]

Another reason for concealed carry.

[Kolar]

True Ayano, we could work it up to 100 per tragedy at some point in the future.

[Jerome Scuggs]

So what you're basically saying is that death rates have a constant value, that cannot be influenced in any way other than vigorously limiting what we might call our human, constitutional or whatever rights or values?

No, I am not 'basically saying' anything. You can derive false implications and proceed to question them but seeing as it's not what I said, it's just a waste of analysis.

That is seriously rubbish and excessive. There are plenty of ways governments can prevent or (significantly) reduce things like this (let me stress that what I'm saying here is out of proportion with the situation in Finland though, which to my memory has only seen this kind of shooting twice in its modern history).

You're right about the fact that governments can do something about it - but incorrect to say completely. Do I believe that these governmental interventions are justified? Not at all. Do I believe that a majority, if not all, of such government intervention produces more problems than solutions? Absolutely.

I need to be careful not to draw any comparisons that could trigger nationalistic feelings here, but let's have your assumption as a basic one. Then how do you explain that some Western European countries for example are socially equally or even more permissive than the US in terms of what can be said in speech or shown in the media while still maintaining significantly lower homicide rates? Because what other important (relevant) variables other than the gun abundance/possession rate are significantly different between those two regions? It seems quite conflictive to me.

There are perhaps an infinite number of variables, all of them relevant. "Importance" is a subjective term. But that is exactly what I'm saying - guns are only one of many variables, and banning them yet ignoring the hundreds of other potential causes is perhaps more "conflictive".

As for putting an emphasis on the cause of death rather than death itself... well it seems pretty obvious to me that guns can do massive "damage" in a short period of time compared to other "methods", so of course this very fact deserves to be emphasised so that appropriate measures can be thought of. Seems only logical to me.

Considering the largest cause of death in history is government intervention itself, I would have to agree with your logic but insist on different appropriate measures with which to deal with our problem.

[Soilderz]

Effectively hes started planning at age 16, under the "watchful" eye of his parents.

...

[Vatican Assassin]

Blame the hypnotists who mind fuk'd him into it so they can take our guns and monitor our e-mails, come on people go watch some will smith movies.

[Money]

lol emo finns

[The Unliked One...]

lol emo finns

Out emos actually do something instead of just sit in a corner muttering about their pathetic lives they have.

[royCE]

shows that emos are more gangsta then gangstaz

[Da1andonly]

lol emo finns

columbine
v-tech
...
..
.