Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Saskatchewan school in lockdown after shooting.


taxi

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, chon derry said:

lets hope that the feds and provincial govt. levels enact a  corporate  local hiring policy across this country there,s way to much exclusion happening not only with aboriginal communities but across the board.resource extraction unopposed with no inclusivity ,this is what happens. in the north west corner of b.c. the province has put in a 25% aboriginal hiring policy for all mega projects bold and highly successful move by christy ,albeit to quicken the pace of development.  with all the big projects happening in p.r. kitamat this type of thing will never happen. lessons to be learnt from the least understood corner of our province.  then maybe just maybe hasting and main would,nd have so many people leaving there towns being fooled into thinking they left for a better life.  ps our own canucks owner siding with eagle spirit development co.  smart guy!!

good post. People getting hung up on the gun thing, and really this has got nothing to do with the logic of whether guns kill people or not. Its about what drove him to it to beginning. This hopelessness coupled with addiction/depression/abuse. This is normal life for first nations kids 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

talk about the the problem ,not the end result of a problem. the only reason youth steal or deal is because there,s no opportunity for them ,end result socioeconomic problems. end of. talking about availability of weapons or bomb makin skirts the issue at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Blackberries said:

 

 

5 minutes ago, Blackberries said:

good post. People getting hung up on the gun thing, and really this has got nothing to do with the logic of whether guns kill people or not. Its about what drove him to it to beginning. This hopelessness coupled with addiction/depression/abuse. This is normal life for first nations kids 

this is a huge unrecognized problem ,  this incident will be a catalyst for change long over due .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to post a well thought out comment on how effective Canadian gun laws and gun owners mentalities are in preventing these events but I feel said post would get lost in the mess that this thread is turning into.

I leave you with two thoughts instead

1- A gun's sole purpose is to propel a projectile or projectiles with potentially lethal force in the direction in which it is pointed . What the gun is pointed at is only up to the person holding it

2- well done RCMP for taking him down without having to shot him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

Mass shootings went down...how many mass killings did Australia have?  Has the increase in individual violent crime off-set that?

 

1 hour ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN

 

 

Thanks for your response. I didn't quote your entire second post because to me in the scope of this debate it's entirely irrelevant.

You asked if the increase in violent crime after the gun ban off-set the positives from having zero mass shootings. I am completely astounded that someone could actually ask this question.

In a mass shooting the perp has one goal. To murder as many people as possible. They are dead, finished, life over.

In a violent crime, take for example an armed robbery, home invasion, brutal assault, or rape. The goal is not to kill, sure sometimes the violence can lead to death but in the overwhelming majority of the cases the victim survives. They can rebuild their lives and still be a parent or grandparent, have a fulfilling career, sit on the porch and drink a beer, have a conversation with a friend, enjoy a sunset etc.

Would you rather be the victim of an armed robbery or murdered in a mass shooting?

Would you rather be violently assaulted or murdered in a mass shooting?

Would you rather be raped or murdered in a mass shooting?

There can be no comparison. No amount of assaults or rapes equal/off-set a murder.

Dead is dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, chon derry said:

 

this is a huge unrecognized problem ,  this incident will be a catalyst for change long over due .

I hope so. 

I didn't grow up on reserve, but I spent last few teenage years there , and still seeing how its affected my younger brother and sister today. Sobriety is pretty much impossible. 

 

Culturally we need that togetherness, to continue to be proud of ourselves, and our histories, but all the negative stuff gets so magnified due to the isolation and that very same togetherness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Blackberries said:

good post. People getting hung up on the gun thing, and really this has got nothing to do with the logic of whether guns kill people or not. Its about what drove him to it to beginning. This hopelessness coupled with addiction/depression/abuse. This is normal life for first nations kids 

Don't quote me on this but I heard on the radio that La Loche has a population of 2400 and in the last 3 years there has been 18 suicides. That is an astounding number and speaks to much greater issues beneath the surface. Hopefully we get at those issues and stop arguing over nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Don't quote me on this but I heard on the radio that La Loche has a population of 2400 and in the last 3 years there has been 18 suicides. That is an astounding number and speaks to much greater issues beneath the surface. Hopefully we get at those issues and stop arguing over nonsense.

i agree. 

Hunting is a way of life up there. The fact this kid had a gun is not a failure with the gun system here aside from it being locked up or having a trigger guard. 

These kids dont have alot of positive role models to look up to, the ones that do make it out off the reserve normally dont come back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Don't quote me on this but I heard on the radio that La Loche has a population of 2400 and in the last 3 years there has been 18 suicides. That is an astounding number and speaks to much greater issues beneath the surface. Hopefully we get at those issues and stop arguing over nonsense.

there has to be inclusion in the job market ,for perhaps this boys father who could,nt afford a dirt bike or enrolment into hockey..whatever. but when u provide little hope excluding them from participating in what people in larger places take for granted and you,ve grown up with not so much the future is bleack.not to mention how much it cost just to put a normal meal on the table. things get a little blurry when u have to resort to dealing stealing or what ever gets u something. i,m not gunna be to surprised to hear it was all over some petty drug deal ,obviously this kid reacted in a way he thought there was no getting back what ever it was he lost. the next time u see a native blockade understand they had no chose since they were,nt included what chose did they have>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

 

Thanks for your response. I didn't quote your entire second post because to me in the scope of this debate it's entirely irrelevant.

You asked if the increase in violent crime after the gun ban off-set the positives from having zero mass shootings. I am completely astounded that someone could actually ask this question.

In a mass shooting the perp has one goal. To murder as many people as possible. They are dead, finished, life over.

In a violent crime, take for example an armed robbery, home invasion, brutal assault, or rape. The goal is not to kill, sure sometimes the violence can lead to death but in the overwhelming majority of the cases the victim survives. They can rebuild their lives and still be a parent or grandparent, have a fulfilling career, sit on the porch and drink a beer, have a conversation with a friend, enjoy a sunset etc.

Would you rather be the victim of an armed robbery or murdered in a mass shooting?

Would you rather be violently assaulted or murdered in a mass shooting?

Would you rather be raped or murdered in a mass shooting?

There can be no comparison. No amount of assaults or rapes equal/off-set a murder.

Dead is dead.

My point was that if the number of people killed in violent crime after the ban off-sets the reduction in mass shootings, what is gained? As you say, dead is dead.  I am sure the victims of violent crime (includes homicides) are not comforted by the fact they were not part of a mass shooting. 

You also seem to assume that violent crime does not include homicide or attempted homicide.  Often death results in such actions.

As for your questions...perhaps you should ask the victims of increased violent rape, aggravated assault .

Your solution seems to be for everyone to be passive and acknowledge the bad guys will be more aggressive in their behavior but we should just put ourselves at their mercy and hope they only beat us up or raped us.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

My point was that if the number of people killed in violent crime after the ban off-sets the reduction in mass shootings, what is gained? As you say, dead is dead.  I am sure the victims of violent crime (includes homicides) are not comforted by the fact they were not part of a mass shooting. 

You also seem to assume that violent crime does not include homicide or attempted homicide.  Often death results in such actions.

As for your questions...perhaps you should ask the victims of increased violent rape, aggravated assault .

Your solution seems to be for everyone to be passive and acknowledge the bad guys will be more aggressive in their behavior but we should just put ourselves at their mercy and hope they only beat us up or raped us.   

 

 

You never made your point clear. Now that you have, I'll respond. Homicide or attempted homicide almost overwhelmingly involves two people who know each other. Couple getting divorced, and ex-friend, a former boss, a relative, someone with a beef with someone else etc. Those episodes are almost always 1 on 1. 

A mass shooting almost always involves people who are virtual strangers. Like Sandy Hook, Colorado movie theater etc.. Sure sometimes 1 victim is known to the shooter the rest were just there at the wrong time.

I fully acknowledge violent crime can include homicide. Didn't think that needed to be stated as it's plainly obvious. In any case the post of mine you quoted I clearly said violent crime can include death. How much more clear can I make it?

As for the bold, Do you really need to ask those people the answer? Would a parent rather be murdered than stay alive to raise their children?

Your assumptions are incorrect. I am not in favor of people being passive and letting criminals do whatever they wish. I favor common sense approached to get at root causes of crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

You never made your point clear. Now that you have, I'll respond. Homicide or attempted homicide almost overwhelmingly involves two people who know each other. Couple getting divorced, and ex-friend, a former boss, a relative, someone with a beef with someone else etc. Those episodes are almost always 1 on 1. 

A mass shooting almost always involves people who are virtual strangers. Like Sandy Hook, Colorado movie theater etc.. Sure sometimes 1 victim is known to the shooter the rest were just there at the wrong time.

I fully acknowledge violent crime can include homicide. Didn't think that needed to be stated as it's plainly obvious. In any case the post of mine you quoted I clearly said violent crime can include death. How much more clear can I make it?

As for the bold, Do you really need to ask those people the answer? Would a parent rather be murdered than stay alive to raise their children?

Your assumptions are incorrect. I am not in favor of people being passive and letting criminals do whatever they wish. I favor common sense approached to get at root causes of crime.

I'll ask again, if the gun ban led to  an increase in violent crime (including individual homicides, though fewer  mass murders what was gained?  As you say, Dead is Dead.

How do you propose to get to the root of the problem to stop what happened in Sask?  Despite so many instances of atrocities, we are no closer to being able to read the signs of when someone like the kid in Sask will snap. 

I just don't see a gun ban as the solution, which is usually where the conversation ends up after events like this.  Humans are creative and adaptive.  They will find other ways.  Certainly in La Loche, a machete could have been used and resulted in at least 4 deaths...how much less violent is that than a gun?

Your gun ban argument seems to be along the lines of "all Men are potential rapists" except in this case it is "all gun owners are potential mass murderers". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nuckin_futz said:

Don't quote me on this but I heard on the radio that La Loche has a population of 2400 and in the last 3 years there has been 18 suicides. That is an astounding number and speaks to much greater issues beneath the surface. Hopefully we get at those issues and stop arguing over nonsense.

the core issue is economics lt costs a lot to live in the north ,if you don't have an equal opportunity at jobs, no training, no apprenticeship and out right denial to a job, everything starts to fall apart, going into phase 2 of the argument which i,ll only touch on, is the money on the table for refugee,s. the money on the table for small northern towns is real simple, include local people with accessible jobs and training for jobs, that simple. end of. by the way if you did,nt know the refugee thing is vey contencous in the north. but thats only slightly related ,and a whole different argument. inclucivity it works , it certainly is in rupert  terrace kitamat. thats the answer to the issue!!!!!   end of story!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

I'll ask again, if the gun ban led to  an increase in violent crime (including individual homicides, though fewer  mass murders what was gained?  As you say, Dead is Dead.

How do you propose to get to the root of the problem to stop what happened in Sask?  Despite so many instances of atrocities, we are no closer to being able to read the signs of when someone like the kid in Sask will snap. 

I just don't see a gun ban as the solution, which is usually where the conversation ends up after events like this.  Humans are creative and adaptive.  They will find other ways.  Certainly in La Loche, a machete could have been used and resulted in at least 4 deaths...how much less violent is that than a gun?

Your gun ban argument seems to be along the lines of "all Men are potential rapists" except in this case it is "all gun owners are potential mass murderers". 

I actually sat here and answered your questions then got to your last paragraph and figured why am I bothering? If that's what you've got out of all I have conversed with you, why bother?

Your last paragraph is straight out of Loony Tune land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biggest issue with guns is mental health crisis that has been going on,

Lack of proper care for mentally ill, breakdown in family structure, media obsession with crime, lack of accountability, no personal responsibility are fueling some of these shootings.

U.S has always been heavily armed, yet these mass shootings mostly started after Columbine.

 

There are countries with heavy gun ownership but low shooting crime rates ex. Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, island, Norway  etc.

Mental illness, substance abuse, lack of hope are all contributing factors to violent crime.

 

People that have decided to murder people will use anything from cars, fire, knives, pressure cookers etc. to achieve their goal.

Mcveigh built a bomb using amongst other things ammonium nitrate to murder 168 people.

He did not need any guns to achieve his horrible goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i fb, ed  ,some of the names of the victims, survivors.  looks to me like this town is riff with gang mentality, pretty sad.  being so close to fort mac . inevitable i guess.  like a big vortex sucking everything into it.  by product/victim of fast change .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, CBH1926 said:

Biggest issue with guns is mental health crisis that has been going on,

Lack of proper care for mentally ill, breakdown in family structure, media obsession with crime, lack of accountability, no personal responsibility are fueling some of these shootings.

U.S has always been heavily armed, yet these mass shootings mostly started after Columbine.

 

There are countries with heavy gun ownership but low shooting crime rates ex. Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, island, Norway  etc.

Mental illness, substance abuse, lack of hope are all contributing factors to violent crime.

 

People that have decided to murder people will use anything from cars, fire, knives, pressure cookers etc. to achieve their goal.

Mcveigh built a bomb using amongst other things ammonium nitrate to murder 168 people.

He did not need any guns to achieve his horrible goal.

Yup, people who are planning to kill will find a way.  I'm wondering about the snap decision to hurt others.  If a firearm is not available, although the person will still hurt others, the damage to human life should not be as extreme.  It's the people going "postal" that are the issue.  The sociopathic killers will find their weapons.  The ones who snap, if there is no gun, will still do harm, but its affect will be less.  

We are mostly all male here, and I expect we all got into a few fights as young teens/ young adults.  We most likely got really spittin' mad too.  It's at those times (moments) where we don't want firearms around.  IMHAO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Yup, people who are planning to kill will find a way.  I'm wondering about the snap decision to hurt others.  If a firearm is not available, although the person will still hurt others, the damage to human life should not be as extreme.  It's the people going "postal" that are the issue.  The sociopathic killers will find their weapons.  The ones who snap, if there is no gun, will still do harm, but its affect will be less.  

We are mostly all male here, and I expect we all got into a few fights as young teens/ young adults.  We most likely got really spittin' mad too.  It's at those times (moments) where we don't want firearms around.  IMHAO. 

I would bet that none of us even considered for a second, using a gun in a rage moment.  A fight was just a fight.  A lot of times you were buds after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...