As architects our duty is to protect the health, safety and welfare of both building occupants and the public at large. We design buildings to withstand flooding and earthquakes. We can protect occupants from hurricanes and tornadoes and we can keep occupants safe from a fire as they exit the building.
What are we doing to keep our buildings occupants safe against mass shootings? Is there anything we can do? I know in general the codes get stricter as the occupants go up and unfortunately large assembly areas seem to be a target as of late. I know this is a dark and unpleasant topic and I hate to think about designing for this rare instance, but fires, earthquakes and tornadoes cause damage as well and we protect against those horrible natural disasters. What can we do to protect against equally horrible human created tragedies?
As young millennial architects who were kids when Columbine happened and grew up through the early 2000's, tragedies like this have sadly become the norm. What should we do? What CAN we do? How do we protect the health, welfare and most importantly the SAFETY of the occupants of our buildings?
How about REAL gun control. Not just background checks that do not really work.
On the other hand, I know some engineers at Qualcomm that are working on a robot that walks around campuses, "sniffing" for firearms. Dunno how exactly that works, but seems like a step in the right direction, untll we can get our head straight about gun control, or we all destroy each other.
Slippery slope. I don't believe that it's the place of building code or the architect to protect the public from people hell-bent on murder. We need to attack the disease, not provide ill-conceived relief from the symptoms.
here, posted this on TC, this it minus the "potentially political" part that will distract people from this conversation..........guns do have an architectural solution and the solutions have been developed for Airports, Banks, etc....bullet proof glass, full body scans, and so on........I thought a bit about this today, this is how you could arrive at an architectural solution as well.........The full ingredients here are 1) The Tools - guns, bombs, etc....weapons. 2) The Invidual's State of Mind - biological mental illness, or pre-disposed mental illness triggered by social events, or a totally sane person who is driven to this state of mind by society. 3) Radical Ideology - a made up set of beliefs that either encourage, confirm, justify, and even provide hope to the person who seeks destruction of their fellow human with Weapons..............................lets start with number 3. Radical Ideologies are NOT real unless someone wants to enact or believe in them or represent them through text and symbols. Architecture could provide spaces where these symbols might be read and interpreted. The most obvious version of this are murals or stained glass with illustrated stories. Less obvious are peaceful places of meditiation that "house" the ideology...............2) Architecture can affect the individuals state of mind and for the most part architects can design certain spaces that cause certain behaviors by its occupants. Good design can minimalize mental illnesses bad affects on an individual. For this see Neuro Science an Architecture, specifially retirement homes.........both 2 and 3 are indirect social controls and their affects are ultimately NOT guarenteed.............1) Architecture has many parts that can be tools against weapons. The question though is does a night club entry need to be like an Airport Security check terminal?
The solution isn't more bullet resistant glazing, more cameras, more X-rays, and concrete walls.
We have enough security and strong enough buildings.
What is needed is less religion and less war.
We need more compassion and empathy.
Not people who get their heads filled with bullshit from the Abrahmic religions or any other for that matter.
We need to stop killing people in other countries. Best way to make an enemy is kill someone's brother or sister or father or mother. That's who is being killed, not "targets", not terrorists.
Give up religious ideology and 3/4 of the world's problems will be gone.
Gun culture is dumb and I have zero respect for any one who thinks owning a firearm without just cause is acceptable. I give them as much ridicule as I do for the dumb religious ones... It's a good timesaver since the both groups occupy the same circle if I were to draw up a Ven Diagram.
Stupid children and their stupid obsession with their murderous genital enlargements.
Gun culture is dumb and I have zero respect for any one who thinks owning a firearm without just cause is acceptable...
Lol... that would be me. Some folks like to hit a little ball with a club over and over, or strap a board to their feet. I like to go up to the mountains and shoot little targets a long way off.
Buildings designed around mass-shootings.... might as well design for a possible impact by a drunk driver (which is more likely to occur; you'd be surprised how many car vs house investigations I did for insurance companies).
Didn't Tiger Woods' Swedish supermodel ex-wife attack him with his golf clubs after he cheated on her?
Ban everything!
In all honesty I get having a gun for hunting/shooting range. I don't get anyone having an AR-15 in their homes or being able to buy one. Have a shooting range where you can shoot these types of weapons like you can go test drive a Ferrari. Don't sell them to the general public, because we've proven time and again we can't handle it.
An ar-15 doesn't do anything special...it's just stylized to look scary. It a regular semi auto rifle. As far as banning large mags...lol. Any idea how easy it would be to modify a small mag....
Indiana's lax gun laws help with that second option as well. Lots of guns from Indiana shops end up here. A blanket national gun law would go a long way, but won't do a damn bit of good if we don't treat the underlying issues regarding anger/mental illness/ etc... as well. For that we need state and national legislatures willing to put money back in the budget for these items.
Personally, even though I live in Chicago I feel safe not having a gun. Then again, I don't go out looking for trouble either. I also feel that the second amendment is completely outdated and needs to be rewritten, but not going into that Constitution is a living/dead document black hole.
About 10,000 people a year are killed as a result of drunk driving...should we ban alcohol? I'm not sure responsible people would be willing to give up alcohol because of the idiots who drink and drive, and I'm not sure we would want to create another black market
let's make buying a gun like getting an abortion. get rid of all gun shops except for 1 in the entire state, make the buyer wait at least 72 hours and in the mean time get counseled by a doctor about the harm of owning a gun. make the buyer get signed permission from their parents. when the buyer gets to the shop make them walk through an angry mob of people who harmed by guns or lost loved ones to gun violence.
take a breather america and use your brain for 1/2 a second.
We should ban cars. They are scary death machines.
Bicycles too. Anything with wheels is too dangerous to be in private hands.
At the very least there should be a tax of $10,000 on every wheel of any kind.
Wheel culture is death culture, supported by silly superstitions and outdated thinking. I literally can't believe anybody still wants to endanger their lives with wheels in The Current Year.
Jun 14, 16 5:56 pm ·
·
Josh,
Geopolitics changes and sometimes changes so quick that it is literally overnight in the eyes of the public. You are far too complacent to think that your right to bear arms are obsolete. Remember, it wasn't that long ago that we had very dangerous dictators. If you didn't have the right to bear arms, you won't have the arms to defend yourself.
I'll give you a hypothetical scenario. What happens when a passionate, charismatic leader much like Hitler was, became the leader of China. Remember, Mao. China manufactures AR-15 rifles including FULL automatic versions. I'm old enough to remember the cold war and at times geopolitical conditions between the U.S. and China got a little bit hot and border line going to full declaration of war. We got close to that in a few 'games' of brinkmanship in the past.
That country alone, has a population of 1.35+ BILLION people. That is around 4 TIMES the population of the U.S. and they can a mass an armed forced out of its entire population with a military force of over 500 BILLION strong. If they were to storm the U.S. at once, would you rather have that right to bear arm and be able to own a gun and not have to go through an act of approval of the U.S. Congress to get that? Do you want to have to wait 6 MONTHS to approval when you got millions of armed enemy forces walking through your neighborhood?
I rather have the right and have the right to own a gun if I ever needed to protect myself, family, friends from enemy armies? Some of our enemies armies are borderless. This is why we can't afford to not bear arms or at least have that right. The 2nd Amendment right is what protects ALL the other rights. Remember, the military and law enforcement alone do not have enough able men and women to protect us completely. This is why we the people are the militia of the Constitution. We are the minute men. When Bush Jr. declared war on terrorism, he had put every single man, woman and child into a never ending war. We are in World War III. Whether you realize it or not.
With the right and ownership of guns comes responsibility. I am not suggesting we have to be gun toting and show boating guns but frankly Josh, I don't believe in a gun-less pacifist utopian world fantasy is ever going to happen. I don't think human beings can every be that way. It's not in the human DNA. God or Allah or whatever that created time, the universe into existence every created us living creatures to be such. This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others. There is a very thin line between a zealot and a terrorist. All terrorists are zealous. They are deeply emotionally driven with extreme conviction to their 'world view'.
The solution is not to marginalize their zeal and conviction. This is what turns them into violent enemies. Marginalizing them is what turns them violent. This is what happened that made people like the person that did the mass shooting in Florida do what he did. It is not condoning his actions but you can't fix or prevent future cases until you understand what is driving people to do this and address the issues.
You can't fix problems until you know what the problems are.
No form, you fail to see the difference between responsible gun ownership and maniacs owning guns. You are essentially asking me to feel guilt for owning a weapon that I fire at paper targets and keep in my home to defend my family against potential meth head home invaders who wish to do them harm with illegal firearms. It's not hypothetical, it happens all the time, and I live in an ok area. Do you feel guilty about owning a knife because some guy stabbed someone? The media warps perception, but I know of several local instances where people used firearms to probably save their own lives. One was a woman store owner who drew a gun on a machete wielding robber who took a few hacks at her. In a perfect world I would gladly get rid of my gun, but it's not a perfect world unfortunately. When Hillary gets rid of her armed security I'll tell my 100 pound mother inlaw who owns a shop in the ghetto that she should too.
Jun 14, 16 6:01 pm ·
·
Gun ownership isn't a matter of religion. The rest of the world has guns and they are prevalent. China manufactures them. They can manufacture as many as 1 BILLION guns and 1 TRILLION bullets in 24 hours to 48 Hours. When they can arm their entire population and conscript them to fight for their country and send them to fight the U.S. (for example).
Lets not forget terrorists. There are over a half a billion people connected or associated with terrorist groups around the world and every one of them are armed. They exist inside and outside the U.S.
We are at war with every terrorist group in the world. George Bush jr. and the Congress at the time put us at war with all of them in an open declaration of war against terrorism.
We have our own government funded terrorist group called the CIA.
"This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others."
maturity is learning how to manage your emotions and convictions so that they do not get the best of you or bring harm to someone else. our problem is that we do not spend enough time practicing this.
we practice eat pray love self-indulgence and instant gratification. guilty of it myself to a certain extent like most americans. but we are not a disciplined society that is concerned with the HSW of each other unless it is legislated.
Jun 14, 16 6:08 pm ·
·
Not only these terrorist groups and potential enemies like China or other nations. Every nation in the world can become a potential enemy of the U.S. China represents a stronger threat to the U.S. than many countries due to its shear size, scale, and capabilities.
There are other reasons for one to bear arm and I totally agree with what jla-x wrote.
No form, you fail to see the difference between responsible gun ownership and maniacs owning guns. You are essentially asking me to feel guilt for owning a weapon that I fire at paper targets and keep in my home to defend my family against potential meth head home invaders who wish to do them harm with illegal firearms. It's not hypothetical, it happens all the time, and I live in an ok area. Do you feel guilty about owning a knife because some guy stabbed someone? The media warps perception, but I know of several local instances where people used firearms to probably save their own lives. One was a woman store owner who drew a gun on a machete wielding robber who took a few hacks at her. In a perfect world I would gladly get rid of my gun, but it's not a perfect world unfortunately.
Whether or not the person is a meth head or some some other substance abuser. There are people who just steals and does harm to people because they have issues.
The right to bear arms also is a right to choose not to bear arms.
I just don't think human beings will ever reach a point where they never do this kind of crazy stuff that draws a need to bear arms, be it a gun, knife or anything else.
The right to bear arm is a human right to protect their human fundamental rights of life/limb, property and liberty.
Otherwise, you are just an inmate in a glorified jail cell.
back to architecture...the replacement for the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was over designed to withstand blasts despite from what I know just being an administrative building. It's not a bad thing to consider structural integrity in design, but often the money is better spent elsewhere. It doesn't say much about society when our social spaces end up being designed as bunkers or military complexes.
However even in Canada with it's low gun crime and rare shooting sprees schools here have considered the rare event. I was on a tour once of an elementary school designed by a professor from my program, located in a pretty safe neighbourhood. The school staff said from an evacuation perspective the fire department liked the design, however the police department did not like the clear sight lines from bushes and trees to the classrooms from which someone could attack students. The construction budget didn't allow for roll shutters on the windows, so instead the classrooms had kevlar blankets for children to huddle under.
I would feel a lot safer if the self appointed minute men had no guns at all.
The republicans in congress would not even pass a law that prevents individuals on the no fly list from purchasing a firearm. That insane individual in Orlando was on the no fly list and was able to buy those guns legally.
of course there is a difference between responsible ownership and a maniac. the 2nd amendment mentions a regulated militia. regulated. we do not have enough regulation. no one is taking away guns. we only need to regulate them further.
Jun 14, 16 6:14 pm ·
·
"This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others."
maturity is learning how to manage your emotions and convictions so that they do not get the best of you or bring harm to someone else. our problem is that we do not spend enough time practicing this.
we practice eat pray love self-indulgence and instant gratification. guilty of it myself to a certain extent like most americans. but we are not a disciplined society that is concerned with the HSW of each other unless it is legislated.
Yes, I agree with you on that point but people don't live long enough to master this art. People aren't perfect and while as long as they are happy, they are usually not pressured and stressed to the point where they may do harm but when people are not happy, oppressed (or feel oppressed), marginalized, etc., at some point people just snap. When they do, they just might do anything.
Jun 14, 16 6:16 pm ·
·
z1111,
You're not self-appointed minute men. It's your duty as a citizen to protect your country from foreign and domestic tyranny. This isn't a duty only to those in military or police force. That duty is a duty that belongs to every citizen.
The minute men means the people. The militia means every able man, woman and child. The calling isn't self-appointed but a duty called not by choice but by necessary duty. It's fighting for survival. It's fighting for your country. It's patriotism and allegiance. It's honor until death.
I'm just going to leave this here. Why in the hell did you bring up China and hypotheticals? They have nothing to do with the conversation. I'm personally anti-gun. Others aren't. I respect that opinion but point out that our supposedly civilized country has a gun and mental health problem.
I thought I heard a popping sound. Made me hungry for popcorn.
Jun 14, 16 6:49 pm ·
·
Yes, that is why individuals with a real sense of honor and duty join the military and do not serve in some imaginary militia.
The militia isn't imaginary. It is the people. By virtue of being an American citizen, you are automatically part of the militia with a duty to protect this country from domestic and foreign tyranny.
It isn't a choice except for your choice to be a citizen of the U.S. or not. You can choose to denounce your citizenship. You do have that choice. That also means you no longer have the rights of the U.S. Constitution and you no longer have the right to own property in the U.S. or live in the U.S. and have to obtain visas to stay here.
Be careful, you could end up as a man without a country.
This is what I mean when I say there's a lot of ignorance in this thread. You all sound like the dog-banner in this hypothetical conversation:
"It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.
Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers. You: So what do you propose? Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog. You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?" Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs. You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds? Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs. You: I have no idea what dogs you're talking about now. Me: You're being both picky and obtuse. You know I mean hounds. You: What the fuck. Me: OK, maybe not actually ::air quotes:: hounds ::air quotes::. Maybe I have the terminology wrong. I'm not obsessed with vicious dogs like you. But we can identify kinds of dogs that civilians just don't need to own. You: Can we?
Because I'm just talking out of my ass, the impression I convey is that I want to ban some arbitrary, uninformed category of dogs that I can't articulate. Are you comfortable that my rule is going to be drawn in a principled, informed, narrow way?
So. If you'd like to persuade people to accept some sort of restrictions on guns, consider educating yourself so you understand the terminology that you're using. And if you're reacting to someone suggesting gun restrictions, and they seem to suggest something nonsensical, consider a polite question of clarification about terminology."
The made-up person talking about attack-dogs and military-hounds in that made-up anti-rottweiler conversation sounds exactly as stupid and ignorant to somebody who knows even a little bit about dogs as you folks ranting about "assault weapons" and "miliita regulation" do to somebody who knows even a little bit about those things. Just FYI.
If you're going to advocate gun control, at least try not to sound like an idiot while you're doing it. I know that's a big challenge, but make an effort.
If you're going to advocate informed, respectful dialogue, at least try not to sound like a condescending asshole while you're doing it. I know that's a big challenge, but make an effort.
Jun 14, 16 7:28 pm ·
·
Oops.... 500 Million Strong. I was originally about to write 1 Billion but you know these Asians and their fascination with robots so 99 robots soldiers for every 1 of them..... Hey.... Chinese made terra cotta soldiers.
i don't think we can compare dogs to guns. that's a bad argument. guns need more regulation. not every gun that can be dreamed up needs to be made and owned. there should be limits. otherwise i'd like to use a MIM-104 for clay shooting. it's not for killing anyone, just casual sportsmanship.
Anyone defending gun ownership has already lost credibility and Balkarino, we already know how ignorant your views on guns are... ignorant even for you.
Your 2nd amendement and your religious attachement to it, is pathetic.
Designing buildings to protect the public from mass shootings
As architects our duty is to protect the health, safety and welfare of both building occupants and the public at large. We design buildings to withstand flooding and earthquakes. We can protect occupants from hurricanes and tornadoes and we can keep occupants safe from a fire as they exit the building.
What are we doing to keep our buildings occupants safe against mass shootings? Is there anything we can do? I know in general the codes get stricter as the occupants go up and unfortunately large assembly areas seem to be a target as of late. I know this is a dark and unpleasant topic and I hate to think about designing for this rare instance, but fires, earthquakes and tornadoes cause damage as well and we protect against those horrible natural disasters. What can we do to protect against equally horrible human created tragedies?
As young millennial architects who were kids when Columbine happened and grew up through the early 2000's, tragedies like this have sadly become the norm. What should we do? What CAN we do? How do we protect the health, welfare and most importantly the SAFETY of the occupants of our buildings?
How about REAL gun control. Not just background checks that do not really work.
On the other hand, I know some engineers at Qualcomm that are working on a robot that walks around campuses, "sniffing" for firearms. Dunno how exactly that works, but seems like a step in the right direction, untll we can get our head straight about gun control, or we all destroy each other.
Slippery slope. I don't believe that it's the place of building code or the architect to protect the public from people hell-bent on murder. We need to attack the disease, not provide ill-conceived relief from the symptoms.
The problem as I see it are military style weapons with large capacity magazines.
Use the clear and present danger exception to get rid of this shit.
here, posted this on TC, this it minus the "potentially political" part that will distract people from this conversation..........guns do have an architectural solution and the solutions have been developed for Airports, Banks, etc....bullet proof glass, full body scans, and so on........I thought a bit about this today, this is how you could arrive at an architectural solution as well.........The full ingredients here are 1) The Tools - guns, bombs, etc....weapons. 2) The Invidual's State of Mind - biological mental illness, or pre-disposed mental illness triggered by social events, or a totally sane person who is driven to this state of mind by society. 3) Radical Ideology - a made up set of beliefs that either encourage, confirm, justify, and even provide hope to the person who seeks destruction of their fellow human with Weapons..............................lets start with number 3. Radical Ideologies are NOT real unless someone wants to enact or believe in them or represent them through text and symbols. Architecture could provide spaces where these symbols might be read and interpreted. The most obvious version of this are murals or stained glass with illustrated stories. Less obvious are peaceful places of meditiation that "house" the ideology...............2) Architecture can affect the individuals state of mind and for the most part architects can design certain spaces that cause certain behaviors by its occupants. Good design can minimalize mental illnesses bad affects on an individual. For this see Neuro Science an Architecture, specifially retirement homes.........both 2 and 3 are indirect social controls and their affects are ultimately NOT guarenteed.............1) Architecture has many parts that can be tools against weapons. The question though is does a night club entry need to be like an Airport Security check terminal?
We have enough security and strong enough buildings.
What is needed is less religion and less war.
We need more compassion and empathy.
Not people who get their heads filled with bullshit from the Abrahmic religions or any other for that matter.
We need to stop killing people in other countries. Best way to make an enemy is kill someone's brother or sister or father or mother. That's who is being killed, not "targets", not terrorists.
Give up religious ideology and 3/4 of the world's problems will be gone.
LOL at the ignorance in this thread.
Now that you're here, there's ignorance to LOL at.
Gun culture is dumb and I have zero respect for any one who thinks owning a firearm without just cause is acceptable. I give them as much ridicule as I do for the dumb religious ones... It's a good timesaver since the both groups occupy the same circle if I were to draw up a Ven Diagram.
Stupid children and their stupid obsession with their murderous genital enlargements.
I think not chaining the exit doors shut to prevent people from entering without paying the cover charge might be a place to start.
We should just cut out the middle-man and design the buildings to kill people.
Mandatory Monty Python sketch below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyL5mAqFJds
Gun culture is dumb and I have zero respect for any one who thinks owning a firearm without just cause is acceptable...
Lol... that would be me. Some folks like to hit a little ball with a club over and over, or strap a board to their feet. I like to go up to the mountains and shoot little targets a long way off.
Buildings designed around mass-shootings.... might as well design for a possible impact by a drunk driver (which is more likely to occur; you'd be surprised how many car vs house investigations I did for insurance companies).
^ I don't think I've heard of someone clubbing a few dozen people to death with a 9-iron.
Didn't Tiger Woods' Swedish supermodel ex-wife attack him with his golf clubs after he cheated on her?
Ban everything!
In all honesty I get having a gun for hunting/shooting range. I don't get anyone having an AR-15 in their homes or being able to buy one. Have a shooting range where you can shoot these types of weapons like you can go test drive a Ferrari. Don't sell them to the general public, because we've proven time and again we can't handle it.
An ar-15 doesn't do anything special...it's just stylized to look scary. It a regular semi auto rifle. As far as banning large mags...lol. Any idea how easy it would be to modify a small mag....
The shit head media is the cause of this because the publicize the names of these scum bags. Fame is their motive.
^ if that were true Chicago would be safer than Montana.
Guns are illegal in Mexico too. Must be safe there.
The media is looking for an easy blame because talking about the real cause like social, moral, and mental decay is too hard.
Indiana's lax gun laws help with that second option as well. Lots of guns from Indiana shops end up here. A blanket national gun law would go a long way, but won't do a damn bit of good if we don't treat the underlying issues regarding anger/mental illness/ etc... as well. For that we need state and national legislatures willing to put money back in the budget for these items.
Personally, even though I live in Chicago I feel safe not having a gun. Then again, I don't go out looking for trouble either. I also feel that the second amendment is completely outdated and needs to be rewritten, but not going into that Constitution is a living/dead document black hole.
$20/per tax on bullets.
I am with jla-x.
Ha...
About 10,000 people a year are killed as a result of drunk driving...should we ban alcohol? I'm not sure responsible people would be willing to give up alcohol because of the idiots who drink and drive, and I'm not sure we would want to create another black market
read this on the internet elsewhere:
let's make buying a gun like getting an abortion. get rid of all gun shops except for 1 in the entire state, make the buyer wait at least 72 hours and in the mean time get counseled by a doctor about the harm of owning a gun. make the buyer get signed permission from their parents. when the buyer gets to the shop make them walk through an angry mob of people who harmed by guns or lost loved ones to gun violence.
take a breather america and use your brain for 1/2 a second.
We should ban cars. They are scary death machines.
Bicycles too. Anything with wheels is too dangerous to be in private hands.
At the very least there should be a tax of $10,000 on every wheel of any kind.
Wheel culture is death culture, supported by silly superstitions and outdated thinking. I literally can't believe anybody still wants to endanger their lives with wheels in The Current Year.
Josh,
Geopolitics changes and sometimes changes so quick that it is literally overnight in the eyes of the public. You are far too complacent to think that your right to bear arms are obsolete. Remember, it wasn't that long ago that we had very dangerous dictators. If you didn't have the right to bear arms, you won't have the arms to defend yourself.
I'll give you a hypothetical scenario. What happens when a passionate, charismatic leader much like Hitler was, became the leader of China. Remember, Mao. China manufactures AR-15 rifles including FULL automatic versions. I'm old enough to remember the cold war and at times geopolitical conditions between the U.S. and China got a little bit hot and border line going to full declaration of war. We got close to that in a few 'games' of brinkmanship in the past.
That country alone, has a population of 1.35+ BILLION people. That is around 4 TIMES the population of the U.S. and they can a mass an armed forced out of its entire population with a military force of over 500 BILLION strong. If they were to storm the U.S. at once, would you rather have that right to bear arm and be able to own a gun and not have to go through an act of approval of the U.S. Congress to get that? Do you want to have to wait 6 MONTHS to approval when you got millions of armed enemy forces walking through your neighborhood?
I rather have the right and have the right to own a gun if I ever needed to protect myself, family, friends from enemy armies? Some of our enemies armies are borderless. This is why we can't afford to not bear arms or at least have that right. The 2nd Amendment right is what protects ALL the other rights. Remember, the military and law enforcement alone do not have enough able men and women to protect us completely. This is why we the people are the militia of the Constitution. We are the minute men. When Bush Jr. declared war on terrorism, he had put every single man, woman and child into a never ending war. We are in World War III. Whether you realize it or not.
With the right and ownership of guns comes responsibility. I am not suggesting we have to be gun toting and show boating guns but frankly Josh, I don't believe in a gun-less pacifist utopian world fantasy is ever going to happen. I don't think human beings can every be that way. It's not in the human DNA. God or Allah or whatever that created time, the universe into existence every created us living creatures to be such. This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others. There is a very thin line between a zealot and a terrorist. All terrorists are zealous. They are deeply emotionally driven with extreme conviction to their 'world view'.
The solution is not to marginalize their zeal and conviction. This is what turns them into violent enemies. Marginalizing them is what turns them violent. This is what happened that made people like the person that did the mass shooting in Florida do what he did. It is not condoning his actions but you can't fix or prevent future cases until you understand what is driving people to do this and address the issues.
You can't fix problems until you know what the problems are.
No form, you fail to see the difference between responsible gun ownership and maniacs owning guns. You are essentially asking me to feel guilt for owning a weapon that I fire at paper targets and keep in my home to defend my family against potential meth head home invaders who wish to do them harm with illegal firearms. It's not hypothetical, it happens all the time, and I live in an ok area. Do you feel guilty about owning a knife because some guy stabbed someone? The media warps perception, but I know of several local instances where people used firearms to probably save their own lives. One was a woman store owner who drew a gun on a machete wielding robber who took a few hacks at her. In a perfect world I would gladly get rid of my gun, but it's not a perfect world unfortunately. When Hillary gets rid of her armed security I'll tell my 100 pound mother inlaw who owns a shop in the ghetto that she should too.
Gun ownership isn't a matter of religion. The rest of the world has guns and they are prevalent. China manufactures them. They can manufacture as many as 1 BILLION guns and 1 TRILLION bullets in 24 hours to 48 Hours. When they can arm their entire population and conscript them to fight for their country and send them to fight the U.S. (for example).
Lets not forget terrorists. There are over a half a billion people connected or associated with terrorist groups around the world and every one of them are armed. They exist inside and outside the U.S.
We are at war with every terrorist group in the world. George Bush jr. and the Congress at the time put us at war with all of them in an open declaration of war against terrorism.
We have our own government funded terrorist group called the CIA.
"This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others."
maturity is learning how to manage your emotions and convictions so that they do not get the best of you or bring harm to someone else. our problem is that we do not spend enough time practicing this.
we practice eat pray love self-indulgence and instant gratification. guilty of it myself to a certain extent like most americans. but we are not a disciplined society that is concerned with the HSW of each other unless it is legislated.
Not only these terrorist groups and potential enemies like China or other nations. Every nation in the world can become a potential enemy of the U.S. China represents a stronger threat to the U.S. than many countries due to its shear size, scale, and capabilities.
There are other reasons for one to bear arm and I totally agree with what jla-x wrote.
No form, you fail to see the difference between responsible gun ownership and maniacs owning guns. You are essentially asking me to feel guilt for owning a weapon that I fire at paper targets and keep in my home to defend my family against potential meth head home invaders who wish to do them harm with illegal firearms. It's not hypothetical, it happens all the time, and I live in an ok area. Do you feel guilty about owning a knife because some guy stabbed someone? The media warps perception, but I know of several local instances where people used firearms to probably save their own lives. One was a woman store owner who drew a gun on a machete wielding robber who took a few hacks at her. In a perfect world I would gladly get rid of my gun, but it's not a perfect world unfortunately.
Whether or not the person is a meth head or some some other substance abuser. There are people who just steals and does harm to people because they have issues.
The right to bear arms also is a right to choose not to bear arms.
I just don't think human beings will ever reach a point where they never do this kind of crazy stuff that draws a need to bear arms, be it a gun, knife or anything else.
The right to bear arm is a human right to protect their human fundamental rights of life/limb, property and liberty.
Otherwise, you are just an inmate in a glorified jail cell.
back to architecture...the replacement for the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was over designed to withstand blasts despite from what I know just being an administrative building. It's not a bad thing to consider structural integrity in design, but often the money is better spent elsewhere. It doesn't say much about society when our social spaces end up being designed as bunkers or military complexes.
However even in Canada with it's low gun crime and rare shooting sprees schools here have considered the rare event. I was on a tour once of an elementary school designed by a professor from my program, located in a pretty safe neighbourhood. The school staff said from an evacuation perspective the fire department liked the design, however the police department did not like the clear sight lines from bushes and trees to the classrooms from which someone could attack students. The construction budget didn't allow for roll shutters on the windows, so instead the classrooms had kevlar blankets for children to huddle under.
I would feel a lot safer if the self appointed minute men had no guns at all.
The republicans in congress would not even pass a law that prevents individuals on the no fly list from purchasing a firearm. That insane individual in Orlando was on the no fly list and was able to buy those guns legally.
of course there is a difference between responsible ownership and a maniac. the 2nd amendment mentions a regulated militia. regulated. we do not have enough regulation. no one is taking away guns. we only need to regulate them further.
"This is because we are emotional creatures and with strong emotions and strong convictions comes the possibility of doing great harm to others."
maturity is learning how to manage your emotions and convictions so that they do not get the best of you or bring harm to someone else. our problem is that we do not spend enough time practicing this.
we practice eat pray love self-indulgence and instant gratification. guilty of it myself to a certain extent like most americans. but we are not a disciplined society that is concerned with the HSW of each other unless it is legislated.
Yes, I agree with you on that point but people don't live long enough to master this art. People aren't perfect and while as long as they are happy, they are usually not pressured and stressed to the point where they may do harm but when people are not happy, oppressed (or feel oppressed), marginalized, etc., at some point people just snap. When they do, they just might do anything.
z1111,
You're not self-appointed minute men. It's your duty as a citizen to protect your country from foreign and domestic tyranny. This isn't a duty only to those in military or police force. That duty is a duty that belongs to every citizen.
The minute men means the people. The militia means every able man, woman and child. The calling isn't self-appointed but a duty called not by choice but by necessary duty. It's fighting for survival. It's fighting for your country. It's patriotism and allegiance. It's honor until death.
The people doing mass shootings are rogues.
Yes, that is why individuals with a real sense of honor and duty join the military and do not serve in some imaginary militia.
I'm just going to leave this here. Why in the hell did you bring up China and hypotheticals? They have nothing to do with the conversation. I'm personally anti-gun. Others aren't. I respect that opinion but point out that our supposedly civilized country has a gun and mental health problem.
shit Josh. i just dumped a whole bunch of bullets in that dumpster.
I thought I heard a popping sound. Made me hungry for popcorn.
Yes, that is why individuals with a real sense of honor and duty join the military and do not serve in some imaginary militia.
The militia isn't imaginary. It is the people. By virtue of being an American citizen, you are automatically part of the militia with a duty to protect this country from domestic and foreign tyranny.
It isn't a choice except for your choice to be a citizen of the U.S. or not. You can choose to denounce your citizenship. You do have that choice. That also means you no longer have the rights of the U.S. Constitution and you no longer have the right to own property in the U.S. or live in the U.S. and have to obtain visas to stay here.
Be careful, you could end up as a man without a country.
^Should an individual on the no fly list be allowed to purchase firearms?
"they can a mass an armed forced out of its entire population with a military force of over 500 BILLION strong."
Oh my god I nearly spit out my coffee.
i've got some marshmallows to roast over this dumpster fire.
This is what I mean when I say there's a lot of ignorance in this thread. You all sound like the dog-banner in this hypothetical conversation:
"It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.
Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.
You: So what do you propose?
Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.
You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?"
Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.
You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?
Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs.
You: I have no idea what dogs you're talking about now.
Me: You're being both picky and obtuse. You know I mean hounds.
You: What the fuck.
Me: OK, maybe not actually ::air quotes:: hounds ::air quotes::. Maybe I have the terminology wrong. I'm not obsessed with vicious dogs like you. But we can identify kinds of dogs that civilians just don't need to own.
You: Can we?
Because I'm just talking out of my ass, the impression I convey is that I want to ban some arbitrary, uninformed category of dogs that I can't articulate. Are you comfortable that my rule is going to be drawn in a principled, informed, narrow way?
So. If you'd like to persuade people to accept some sort of restrictions on guns, consider educating yourself so you understand the terminology that you're using. And if you're reacting to someone suggesting gun restrictions, and they seem to suggest something nonsensical, consider a polite question of clarification about terminology."
The made-up person talking about attack-dogs and military-hounds in that made-up anti-rottweiler conversation sounds exactly as stupid and ignorant to somebody who knows even a little bit about dogs as you folks ranting about "assault weapons" and "miliita regulation" do to somebody who knows even a little bit about those things. Just FYI.
If you're going to advocate gun control, at least try not to sound like an idiot while you're doing it. I know that's a big challenge, but make an effort.
If you're going to advocate informed, respectful dialogue, at least try not to sound like a condescending asshole while you're doing it. I know that's a big challenge, but make an effort.
Oops.... 500 Million Strong. I was originally about to write 1 Billion but you know these Asians and their fascination with robots so 99 robots soldiers for every 1 of them..... Hey.... Chinese made terra cotta soldiers.
i don't think we can compare dogs to guns. that's a bad argument. guns need more regulation. not every gun that can be dreamed up needs to be made and owned. there should be limits. otherwise i'd like to use a MIM-104 for clay shooting. it's not for killing anyone, just casual sportsmanship.
Anyone defending gun ownership has already lost credibility and Balkarino, we already know how ignorant your views on guns are... ignorant even for you.
Your 2nd amendement and your religious attachement to it, is pathetic.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.