Ernie00 Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 This is what happen today at the college where I work / coach... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/13092006/2/national-twelve-people-injured-montreal-shootings-recall-1989-massacre.html I wasn't there, I decided to do my training elsewhere today for some reason then I was heading there for practice. I'm just speechless about this. Ernie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyYT316 Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Yeah, I heard about that eariler. You're lucky that you went somewhere else for your training instead of going there. Crazy stuff happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartron Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Hey Ernie, I'm really glad to see you're weren't hurt. I just heard on the news, that the police have confirmed that one student has died. I haven't been involved in any of the shootings that happened in Montreal, but I know people who have been involved in each of them. In 1989 I was a student at Dawson College when the Universite de Montreal massacre happened. A girl I was working with during a summer job was at the university during the shooting. She was uninjured. My brother was a student at Concordia during the Fabrikant shooting in 1992. He was also uninjured. A former classmate of mine at Dawson and Concordia is currently teaching Electronics at Dawson. I don't know what's happened with him, since we lost contact with each other several years ago. I hope he's alright. This has got to stop. 'later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 That is quite horrible. I heard it on the radio while at work today. These news always seem surrealist, just like September 11th. When I heard the news, it was like the Polytechnique and Fabrikant massacres all over again. My sympathies to those involved and those who know people involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie00 Posted September 14, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 The worse in all of this is that we will never know why exactly. I've talked to most of the athletes / friends on the team and looks like everyone is All right. I was watching the news last night and it felt so weird. Ernie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 what a sad, sick world. wonder what was in the shooter's heads... seems like school shootings are...common...in Canada? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Not necessarely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting It's just that it's the third in Montréal in 17 years... Polytechnique 1989 Fabrikant (Concordia) 1992 (a teacher shot 4 colleagues) Dawson 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Shootings don't happen in Canada, Michael Moore told me so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 They don't happen very often in general, but we have our share of wackos same as anywhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Not necessarely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootingIt's just that it's the third in Montréal in 17 years... Polytechnique 1989 Fabrikant (Concordia) 1992 (a teacher shot 4 colleagues) Dawson 2006 I guess naming them all in one news article made it sound worse than it is. yup, "wackos everywhere. plague and madness" sad. hopefully your govt wont respond the way ours does, with more force for "prevention" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 I guess naming them all in one news article made it sound worse than it is.yup, "wackos everywhere. plague and madness" sad. hopefully your govt wont respond the way ours does, with more force for "prevention" Hard to prevent more than they do already...If I remember right Canada's already got some pretty strict gun laws Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Eh, they're making noises about it already according to the news. They introduced the long gun registry more or less as a response to the Ecole Polytechnique shootings. Like most Canadians I'm ok with our handgun and automatic weapons restrictions - it's a different culture than the US. But the longgun registry has been a dismal, costly failure that nobody seems to be able to prove has any results other than gut feelings. The nutbar in this latest shooting was using an automatic weapon which is already illegal so I don't get the logic behind stricter rules for shotguns and deer rifles. Ultimately no amount of legislation is going to stop a truly dedicated lunatic from doing some damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Hard to prevent more than they do already...If I remember right Canada's already got some pretty strict gun laws which only goes to show that LAWS do not fix or even prevent in most cases Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 which only goes to show that LAWS do not fix or even prevent in most cases That does not logically follow - you need more than one data point. There is all sorts of room for arguments about whether there are more non-firearm-related deaths in countries with fewer firearms, or whether the tradeoff in individual rights is worth more safety, or whether or not the different firearm death rates are due to something completely unrelated to gun rights or ownership rates, etc., etc., but Canada definitely has significantly lower firearm homicide and suicide rates than the USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 That does not logically follow - you need more than one data point.There is all sorts of room for arguments about whether there are more non-firearm-related deaths in countries with fewer firearms, or whether the tradeoff in individual rights is worth more safety, or whether or not the different firearm death rates are due to something completely unrelated to gun rights or ownership rates, etc., etc., but Canada definitely has significantly lower firearm homicide and suicide rates than the USA. I wonder how the arrest / conviction rates would campare in the two countries. Here in the good ole USA you can pretty much be assured if you commit a crime you can get off with a hand slap. For example - look at a car theft by someone 16- 25 yr old and see how many times he has been arrested for that crime. Or a guy robbing a bank for the 3rd time - he is not supposed to have a gun but he gets one anyway but he is 98% of time not tried or convicted of that crime. We are much to soft on crime in this country and we desperatly need more prisons and fewer rights and luxuries while the Perp is in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 more prisons? whoa. There already a hell of a lot of prisons. They are overcrowded, of course, for various reasons. sorry, but...laws do not deter, prevent, or fix crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 more prisons?whoa. There already a hell of a lot of prisons. They are overcrowded, of course, for various reasons. sorry, but...laws do not deter, prevent, or fix crime. I entirely agree with you on this one. It is exactly what I have heard reagrding the American prisons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartron Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 seems like school shootings are...common...in Canada? I wouldn't say it's common, but it is happening more and more often. You can see a list of school shootings in north america here: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/09/13/1834545-cp.html 'later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartron Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Shootings don't happen in Canada, Michael Moore told me so. Yeah, that's almost as ridiculous as when he said '...and this is a Canadian slums' (or ghetto, I don't remember) and pointed to some very clean, well kept rows of housing. I can easily show you parts of Montreal that are as bad as the slums I've seen in the U.S. Sometimes I wonder if that guy is getting paid by the Canadian government. 'later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartron Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 The nutbar in this latest shooting was using an automatic weapon which is already illegal so I don't get the logic behind stricter rules for shotguns and deer rifles. Ultimately no amount of legislation is going to stop a truly dedicated lunatic from doing some damage. From the info I've read, he was carrying 3 guns: Baretta CX4 Storm semi-automatic Glock handgun 12-guage shotgun (which I thought was considered a longgun) He obtained them legally and had all the legal required papers to own the guns. I agree, no law will stop anyone who's truly determined to do damage. 'later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartron Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 sorry, but...laws do not deter, prevent, or fix crime. I disagree on the deterrence part. I think it does deter crimes, but you just don't see it. In order to know how much of a deterrent a given law is, you would have to know how many people wanted to perform an act that violates the law, but didn't perform it because it was against the law. I think that would be hard to find out. I guess you could ask people if they've ever been so angry that they want to kill someone and why didn't they go through with it. But I doubt that would be even reasonably accurate. 'later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 more prisons?whoa. There already a hell of a lot of prisons. They are overcrowded, of course, for various reasons. sorry, but...laws do not deter, prevent, or fix crime. Whoa yer self there big guy-- are you saying we do not need prisons? If not at what number do you think we should stop. 2 per state, 3 , 4??. So if we then fill them up with criminals do we then just open the back door and as new recruits go in the front the ones that are half way thru their sentence go free out the back door? What cha saying here? Laws do prevent crime - imagine if we did not have any laws. What you have to do is enforce them then and only then will they prevent crime. And if we do not start enforcing the small crime like breaking into ones car for a radio or whatever, then we only have ourselves to blame for the bigger crimes that actually hurt or kill people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 So if we then fill them up with criminals do we then just open the back door and as new recruits go in the front the ones that are half way thru their sentence go free out the back door? already do. largely due to the imprisonment of the "perpetrators" of victimless crimes. Laws do prevent crime - imagine if we did not have any laws. I spend a lot of time "imagining" this, and my only response is: what would you do if there were no laws except say "do not steal" and "do not kill" which are the only two that are truly necessary? My guess is you would live your life the same way you do now, was would I, and the vast majority of humanity. What you have to do is enforce them then and only then will they prevent crime. nope. enforcement rarely stops crime. enforcement punishes those who commit crimes (which are often only crimes because someone decided they should be, like smoking pot or paying a someone to have sex with you). And if we do not start enforcing the small crime like breaking into ones car for a radio or whatever, then we only have ourselves to blame for the bigger crimes that actually hurt or kill people. now youre making a connection between stealing a stereo and murder. That is a big, big leap. Im not endorsing crime, but I feel that we have been shown time and time again that more enforcement, more laws do not solve the problems of society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 I disagree on the deterrence part. I think it does deter crimes, but you just don't see it. In order to know how much of a deterrent a given law is, you would have to know how many people wanted to perform an act that violates the law, but didn't perform it because it was against the law. I think that would be hard to find out. I guess you could ask people if they've ever been so angry that they want to kill someone and why didn't they go through with it. But I doubt that would be even reasonably accurate.'later... me personally, I have never felt the true desire to end someones life. Never, not once, and I am quite certain that I am in the majority. There is nothing special or unique about me. Yes, there are people who may want to kill someone, and a percentage of them might refrain from doing so because they are aware of the possible consequences, but I would argue that, again, the majority do not simply because they know it is wrong. So, again, for those people, laws are not necessary, and except for a likely small group, the existence of law is not what keeps things from happening. Murder, rape, assault, theft...all of these things still happen, quite regularly, despite thousands upon thousands of laws against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Im not endorsing crime, but I feel that we have been shown time and time again that more enforcement, more laws do not solve the problems of society. Lets get real D-Sub -- You have an idealistic vision of society. Sure it would be nice if we only had 2 laws - do not steal or kill but the real world is here and there are a lot of bad guys out there. We have a much screwed up society now days - even our public school system is screwed up due to restrictions of all types and very low funding. If we could improve our education system we might improve our crime laden society but as long as we continue to degrade our education system we will have more and more crime and yes low level crime does propagate to higher level crime. Check it out --for 1st and 2nd offenders they are generally lower level break-in, burglary, 7-11 hold-ups and stealing cars. Do you think these guys stop here? We just may have to agree to disagree here but I will say in closing that the criminals are damn lucky I did not become a judge or Prosecuting attorney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.