I'm disappointed you don't see the value in loss of life and the reason not to make fun of it and this event.

There is a difference between the above statement and what you are saying and want to do. Make fun of religion, if you must. Make fun of spelling/grammatical errors as well.

Yep, I can't really think of anything funny to say about dead children. That's why my jokes were only aimed at hellbender, who is sadly alive.

I appreciate that you are over-sensitive about this right now but there's no need for hysteria. And again, if you think what happened is so abhorrent, you will do better to direct your feelings towards making sure it doesn't happen again, rather than over-reacting to people who aren't being mournful enough.

There is no reasoning with you x. Are you even capable of seeing it in this case or do you simply want to mock someone?

Every single post in this thread you have made in this thread is disconnected from the post you are responding to.

It saddens me that some are able to take merriment in the face of tragedy. But hope this event does not occur to you, or any of your loved ones.

My aim in responding to you is to try to get you to see the difference between making fun of people, things in contrast to the loss of life in the face of tragedy. I'm sorry that I have failed.

-------
The issue you are trying to argue (in what I assume is gun rights) is separate from this tragedy, and my thoughts in relation will remain separate.

This is my lost post to you in regards to this event.

X, you don't joke about or hold political stances over a crisis the day of, especially one involving the death of a classroom of 5 year olds. I believe that if you have the balls to try joking about this on this forum, then I should give you the number of a victim's father so you can try joking about it to them.

Nobody deserves to die, obviously something like this is terrible.

However, i will not pray for them as i am not religious. Nor will i mark this as being any more significant than the people who die in africa or syria (or other places) every day, to do so is unfair on them.

Also, x does have a point, you should prevent it happening again rather than crying that is happened.

How do you not see the sadness in this x/ tacticus ? This is a national tradgedy. Im not putting less value on the lives of those lost across the world but this is honestly, more important you are a real peace of work to not feel bad about a class of honestly, babies being mercilessly executed for no reason they cant defend themselves and gun laws have nothing to so with it CRIMINALS dont follow gun laws, ok! They could gove a shit less about a law tht says they cant have a gun, 27 people are dead ad you care about a stupid gun law, i understand your not religious tacticus and i understand that but dont you at leaat feel bad for them? They lost their babies today some lost froends family and parents but noooo all you guys care about is stupid gun laws. I put up this thread because i had faith that the warlight community would join together in a moment of tragedy but i was obviously wrong, i dont know how youre going to sleep tonight. I cried when i heard ill admit it im a grown ass man and i cried when i heard that children died because some madman wanted to kill himself but hebhad NO right to kill children OR adults innocent lives were taken and i see you dont care, i really wonder about the people on this game sometimes i really do.

victims'* btw from my first post. I might have to slap myself, but for once Hell bender has posted something that I agree with.

If your stance on this is: '100s die in Africa, and all you're doing is crying about 27 lives' then consider that no amount of care, prayer, or money will prevent this from happening (hilariously, if I do the 3rd it could exasperate the issue since most aid winds up in the wrong hands anyways). The only reasoning you have of taking such stance is to make yourself seem morally/philosophically superior. Arrogance is at its height to those whom try to seem morally/philosophically superior. (I would also like to note that you probably don't personally donate to Africa either. If you do though, congrats. I really do hope it doesn't end up in the wrong hands, but it seems that's the usual case.)

If your stance on this is: 'Well, if America just had gun control laws...' then consider the fact killing a room full of people can be done in a multitude of ways. Using household items, I could create a pipe bomb or a makeshift frag grenade. I could legally buy enough chemicals to not only kill the room, but the entire school by simply getting gasses ventilated. Probably could do it through household items too, make it untraceable. To buy assault weapons (automatics, the ones most commonly used by crimes of this sort) I require a license. To get a license I must take a class, and sometimes go through psych screening. I'm tracked by state and fed governments. Out of all the options I've described, the automatic gun takes the longest amount of time, is the most expensive, and the easiest to track.

You think that controlling the weapon is the answer? Can you definitively say that without these guns that this madman would go on this spree? You can't. As I've said, crime will occur no matter the means.

Your logic is that if you enact gun laws, that criminals won't use guns. Criminals break the law, so what stops them from breaking that law? True, it may be harder for them, but will that stop the madman? Then how do you also ignore the statistics of how many crimes guns PREVENT? It's.. hard to say that in this case a person could've prevented this. (I mean, why bring a gun to an elementary school?) However, had the teacher had a gun and surprised the madman, the story would be completely different, wouldn't it?

Your last ditch rebuttal, the only one left available. 'In my country, we control guns, and crime rates went down.' Your country is not my country. My country is a diverse country involving a great blend of races, ideas, and governments. We're basically 50 different countries, whose origin is from different countries. I'm a German-Scottish-Irish blend living in Texas which is a state of America. How can you say that your ideas will work, when the environment, people, and ideologies are completely different?

I would say that we have the least restrictions on guns in Texas (don't quote me on this, I'm just assuming), or at least the most gun owners. Guns are more so restricted in Illinois, and specifically Chicago. There are less people in Chicago and more gun restrictions. You'd expect less crime. There's more crime in Chicago than there is in Houston, Houston having more people, and less gun restrictions.

How can you tell me your logic applies everywhere, when it fails somewhere?

So now that there's no more plausibility in your debate, your only method of continuing the discussion is to attack me personally. If you choose to do so, note that I haven't attacked you unless you consider being called arrogant to be offensive. (In which case, I'm glad to have pierced your paper-thin skin.) ((Also, if you find it arrogant that I claimed there is no more plausibility in my debate, note that I mean logical plausibility. I'm sure you could find some emotional reason to discard my reasoning, and in which case grow up and learn how to accept what is right, and not what 'feels' right.))

---

This is a sad event entirely. The parents sent their kids off to school, some forgetting to give them their daily hug, and suddenly the kid doesn't come back from school and they're burying their 5 year old kid. To look at this event and say: "Well, if you just voted in gun control 20+ kids wouldn't have had to die today" or "Why are you mourning the death of 27 over 100s?" Then kindly keep your self-loathing out of this thread.

Your logic is that if you enact gun laws, that criminals won't use guns. Criminals break the law, so what stops them from breaking that law? True, it may be harder for them, but will that stop the madman? Then how do you also ignore the statistics of how many crimes guns PREVENT? It's.. hard to say that in this case a person could've prevented this. (I mean, why bring a gun to an elementary school?) However, had the teacher had a gun and surprised the madman, the story would be completely different, wouldn't it?

Forgive me, I am wrong.

The only thing we can do to stop things like this happening is to arm pre-school teachers.

I bow down to your superior logic, Lolo.

X, you don't joke about or hold political stances over a crisis the day of

um

The only reasoning you have of taking such stance is to make yourself seem morally/philosophically superior.

wait

If your stance on this is: '100s die in Africa, and all you're doing is crying about 27 lives' then consider that no amount of care, prayer, or money will prevent this from happening (hilariously, if I do the 3rd it could exasperate the issue since most aid winds up in the wrong hands anyways).

Hahahahahahaha yes, the inevitibility of violent and painful death for millions of people is hilarious. Unless it happens to American children of course.

There is always a time in wich jokes have to stop, in wich you have just to respect other people's pain, and in wich you should understand that trying to be philosophically superior when the tragedy is not yours is nothing but a proof of philosophical inferiority.

Regarding to me I've prayed for those families and (even if it is a thing that was said too many times) I am serene for those children because I do believe that they now are in a better place.

Anyway even if in front of such a tragedy any discussion is absolutely irrilevant, I still want to make some considerations.

---

---

I don't know if it is just a cultural difference, but I am always annoyed when people want to force other people to pray.
A pray is an inner activity of the soul that doesn't need to be stimulated or externalized, the thing that must be imposed is only the respect.
For this reason it is always better not to force other people to pray because as this thread proovs your good intents are usually reversed.
Anyway since you intentions were good I can't blame you after all.

---

Saying that syrian victims or the 17.000 african children who die every day is less important than american children is absolutely wrong, a life is always important, no matter who was the owner of that life.
You can say that this particular tragedy is more important for you, and sadly is more shocking, but if you want to pretend respect, you must give respect to other people as well.

---

About guns, of course I am not so stupid to think that if you abolish them you will have no crime, because Lolowut was right: criminal will always be able to use other weapons, but I do believe that tragedies like that could be avoided if just 1 people out of 10.000 have a gun as it is in Europe.
Why?
Because a madman is not a criminal, a madman is a madman.
When a person do a thing like that, he is always in a absolutely crazy state of mind, in wich he wouldn't be even able to create or go to buy other weapons.
What I am trying to say is: try to imagine yourselves in a situation like that, if something in your mind breaks, wouldn't it be safer not to have a gun near to you?
Especially in cases like those it is something practical that can avoid a person do such a thing, infact it is likely that this man had just a mad moment, that could have passed in a more peaceful way if he wouldn't have had a gun.
Anyway what happened with Breivik proovs that I am wrong if you take my opinion as a radical one, but I am not saying that without guns madman won't occur any harm to other people, I am just saying that it is difficult to deny that at least there would be a reduction of these facts, and in my opinion if there is the possibilty of preventing that just one tragedy occurs, it must be done everything to make that this possibility becomes true, no matters how less you feel safe, life is always more important than safety.

I think we should end this argument right here, because it's becoming disrespectful. It's for the best.

I agree with lolowut on restricting access to weapons is proved to be in no way a solution to this problem. I really don't think america being "a diverse country involving a great blend of races, ideas, and governments" is the reason of such things happening.. I think it goes much deeper, and i find the problem in it being a society not focussed on helping individuals deal with their problems, so they escalate to extremes. Furthermore, the US is one of the biggest countries, and while there is probably the same percentage of psychopaths as in the other regions, for sure there are more in case of absolute numbers due to population. I see no other explanation really - no mentally healthy person, regardless of how big problems he would have or how severely his child would get bullied in school does go there to kill a classroom of kids. I don't think it should be considered a national tragedy either, but it for sure is a clue, that there is something wrong with the nation.. Or at least that there is a serious problem that has not yet been solved.

---

Im not putting less value on the lives of those lost across the world but this is honestly, more important you are a real peace of work to not feel bad about a class of honestly, babies being mercilessly executed for no reason they cant defend themselves

You have to be extremely ignorant to compare it to third world's problems like that. Starvation aside, the problem of children being raped, murdered, enslaved and tortured is far bigger there. I'm not saying any of that cases is worse, but you must understand there are regions where everyday life looks like that "national tragedy" of yours, and i don't even mean regions at war. This happens every single day where it's theoretically peace.

---

ill admit it im a grown ass man and i cried when i heard that

nothing bad in crying when you hear such news, it just proves you are not an insensitive asshole, but trust me, you are not a "grown ass man" yet Helli...

@Lolowut

If your stance on this is: '100s die in Africa, and all you're doing is crying about 27 lives' then consider that no amount of care, prayer, or money will prevent this from happening (hilariously, if I do the 3rd it could exasperate the issue since most aid winds up in the wrong hands anyways). The only reasoning you have of taking such stance is to make yourself seem morally/philosophically superior. Arrogance is at its height to those whom try to seem morally/philosophically superior.

100.000 deaths a day, minimum, more than half of them children, dying directly or indirectly on malnutrion . You claim it to be inevitable here and at the same time school X in morality. Using the correct adjectives to describe that would probably get me banned.
But let me tell you this:
Either you are A, totally naive and ignorant about the real reasons behind the underfeeding in the forgotten continent Africa. (which I expect to be true)
or B, totally biased making distinctions in humans, valueing the life of a USAmerican more than the life of someone else, particularily some faraway lobbyless Africans (which i also expect to be true)
or C, you are aware of either of one and hypocritically campaign against X for not mainstreaming with you on this topic. (which I hope is at most only partly true)

I will try to enlighten you all on that topic in easy comprehensible words. Africa's kids don't die because they can't be fed by Africans. They die because we dont let them be fed by Africans. We (the industrialized countries), simply don't allow them to feed themselves. The only sector in which third world countries can compete with our highly developed industries is the agrarian sector. Now what i want from you is too google the amout of subsidies that are put in that sector each year by the industrialized countries, you would be surprised. If you have only average intelligence and logic to add together what that means, your conclusion should be evident, if not i will help you out:
Those subsidies lead to low prices for mass produced staple food. On african markets, european or US produced food will be cheaper (thanks to subsidies), than the local competition for the African buyer. The African buyer therefore will tend to their produce and ignore the local. What does that mean for the African farmer now?
He can not sell his produce since he has to compete with price dumping, so he has to change his produce. Now what is he going to produce next? He is going into cash crop. That means luxury articles for industrialized markets, above all coffee, but lately also biofuel (yes, a new pervesion, we drive on what other people can't afford to eat)
Now i want you to google again, which product on earth has the second highest global revenue, just right after oil. Again I am sure you a highly surprised.
The interest we (industrial countries) have in the African continent is solely exploitational. Ressources and cash crop, shipped out leaving almost nothing for the local markets.
Justifying this monetarian gain with "inevitablitly" is the outrageous act.
So next time you pour a hypocritical tirade of outrage upon X for rightly disagreeing on this collective hysterical dismay upon the death of a two dozen people, just because you people aren't able to get gun control laws straight once and for all, think first and inform yourself.
Don't misunderstand me, what happened is tragic in its own, they all have been inoncent victims of the psychological disorder of another, but they lived in a country where they had more options to change the fate of themselves more than the average African.

If your stance on this is: 'Well, if America just had gun control laws...' then consider the fact killing a room full of people can be done in a multitude of ways. Using household items, I could create a pipe bomb or a makeshift frag grenade. I could legally buy enough chemicals to not only kill the room, but the entire school by simply getting gasses ventilated. Probably could do it through household items too, make it untraceable. To buy assault weapons (automatics, the ones most commonly used by crimes of this sort) I require a license. To get a license I must take a class, and sometimes go through psych screening. I'm tracked by state and fed governments. Out of all the options I've described, the automatic gun takes the longest amount of time, is the most expensive, and the easiest to track.

I could argue with you with you about the necessity of gun control solely with your logic. If you don't think that gun control is necessary, because it wouldn't change a thing (which is absurd), I will ask you this:
Why not make nuclear weapons or material accessible for everyone? Everyone willing to buy it should require a license and a class and and psych screening.
I am sure that you believe gun accesibility is some secret divine right for the US citizen and you would be less hypocritical in arguing that way "Yes i know guns kill people, I know we would have far less violent deaths than without them, but i like to shoot my guns, its makes me feel great"
I would have less problems with that point of view, it would be at least coherent.
So in case all that went past you and you doubt that stricter gun laws will lead to less violent deaths read some more studies like this one: http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/publications/WhitePaper102512_CGPR.pdf , since i don't want to chew through all that again.

Finally to return to the topic I give you a picture since it worth more than 1000 words.



or



or to be more in your christian indoctrinated logic

I couldn't agree with you more myhand.. By the way - I did not make myself 100% clear in the last post.. I do agree that strict gun control policy is a must, i just don't think it's a solution to THIS particular case - it only changes the nature of assault from trigger-happy berserk to stabbing or sexual abuse. Of course the first one leaves more victims, but let's not get into discussion which would be more damaging to kids' psyche. Determining which is the worst just doesn't matter.

I repost the first image myhandisonfire posted for the lazy ones:

Guys we are lucky warlight is a site that does show care we could not possibly compare x's comment to those on places like 4chan and reddit.

Actually Ironheart, 4chan seems to be with lolowut on this one. http://boards.4chan.org/pol/res/8282375

I knew we would get a large discussion out of this, and I posted that I'd stay out of it. Well, I guess it didn't help.

So if my neighbor dies or the guy next to me on a bus, I would be foolish to have an emotional response, or even wish their families well? Instead I should immediately consider the plight of Africans and think "It's really not that bad that my neighbor is dead. The value of human life comes down to simple arithmetic."

Piggy actually the new members of 4chan are getting a thrill out of this while the old ones are offended.http://boards.4chan.org/b/res/443774250 <---- example of a person worse than x is the Op.

http://boards.4chan.org/b/res/443774250

As usual I agree with Gui.


Anyway myhand about the first image (the one who Fridge linked):

Since it is not possible for you to fix everything, praying God to help those people is not pointless at all, and I doubt that not praying but still don't do anything is any better.
Once again this is the problem with religion arguments, atheists criticize the christian behavior because they analyze it, taking for granted that God doesn't exist, the same reversed problem is when christians criticize atheists of course, but from a smart guy I expected a deeper and less demagogical analysis.


About the second image:

Praying doesn't exclude working for improving the world.
As not praying doesn't mean working for improving the world.
The 2 things are not related at all.....


About the third image:

It is logically wrong, because since everything is in the plan of God, also the fact that you will pray is in His plan, so praying is not irrilevant at all.
Plus as I said for the first image if you don't even suppose that Heaven exists, you can't understand the deep importance of prayers: infact prayers are not made to impose God something you want (as your image stupidly and superficially assumes), but to put your hopes and your confidence in His divine action, and if He won't act as you wished, the prayer is still not irrilevant, infact if your prayers are not satisfied but you continue to pray, and continue to trust, you will be glorificated much more in Heaven.