His comment regarding the linked article was as follows:
"[background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]I guess because it wasnt in the US or involve guns."[/background]
Which is an attempt to further politicize the conversation and reframe it against gun-control. I actually think that's fine, although the particular article he linked serves better as an argument for stricter gun control to prevent fatalities.
Posting articles about violent attacks on a public forum is inherently political; there's nothing shameful in recognizing that this is a societal problem especially acute in the United States, and that there may exist solutions which would mitigate its severity. Better/more accessible mental healthcare, stricter gun regulations, less sensationalism are all possibilities.
Your reaction seems to be that this a normal part of a functioning, free society, and that we shouldn't do anything about it. That's fine, although I think the comparison to banning cotton candy is especially sophomoric.
I think selective reading is one of the biggest problems with the members on this forum, one of the things that never makes discussing anything worthwhile.
I said:
[background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]Let's, God forbid, not look at the root of the problem which is mentally unstable individuals![/background]
I admit it was sarcastic and may have not been easily understood by you but I think the main problem here is not guns (guns can't do sh*t on their own), its the people, especially the mentally unstable ones. The mother of this guy knew he had problems, yet she protected him. There's a whole can of worms there.
As for my comments on cotton candy being "sophomoric": That is sophomoric yet another poster saying, "Yeah he was mentally unstable but should we really blame that?! Or should we take away the guns?" I am not as polite as you so I am just going to say that idiotic statement and the like right there is the crux of the problem. People in our post modernistic BS ridden society only want to fix symptoms and not the root of the problem.
The root of the problem is that the guy needed help and never got any (at least from the stories that are coming out). The mother knew the guy was off somehow but didn't do anything. There is a stigma in the US for having children or spouses or whatnot who are mentally unstable. People feel ashamed of admitting that someone they love have a problem. People are offended if someone points it out. THAT is the problem, not the damn gun. People should be educated about mental illnesses but hey, when have the governments ever liked educated people?
Now I have never owned a gun in my life and I have lived in societies where owning guns were not allowed so my point is not one of "don't you take my weapons away!" But my point that I am making is that the moment you or anyone else here tries to "fix" these kinds of problems by "taking away the guns", that same moment you guys start to sound like those brainless idiots who suggest that the woman who got raped could have avoided it only if she was more covered--maybe put all women in those walking-tents aka burqas and you've eliminated rape.
That is f***ed up thinking and that's my problem with it.
So, sophomoric? Well the argument where GUNS are blamed and not perpetrators doesn't deserve any serious consideration anyway but still I have made an effort, an effort that I expect will meet the response, "but oh my GAWD, GUNS, EVIL!" or some sh*t like that!