QueenZone discussion #1081928

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: I think it pretty much amounts to the same thing - with similar levels of sincerity. It's simply a matter of how the supportee will respond to the particular choice of words. A person like yourself obviously would not respond well to prayers and blessings, whereas to other people, it may well be all they would respond to. Both are quite understandable. Different strokes for different folks, you know?

Micrówave wrote: Sounds like you were expecting "I won't let this happen anymore". Now, how exactly do we go about doing that?

HistoryGirl wrote: But I'm a bit different than most people...I don't think words mean crap unless you back them up with actions. If someone around me suffers a loss of some kind, I don't just tell them that I feel sorry for them...because 50 people have said the same thing, and in the end of the day when you are alone and dealing with the emotional aftermath the "thoughts" and "prayers" of 50 people doesn't make a lick of difference. I'm a person who is there with you whenever you call them (and even when you don't)....I'm the shoulder you cry on...I'm the one who does anything that you need without asking. I can't tell you how many movies I've been to in the last week, how many "girl talk" times I've had with a girlfriend of mine who was recently dumped, and with another one who recently lost her grandmother...I've put myself behind in my school work to be there for her without giving it a second thought. But then again, that's the kind of person I am.

Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: You know,you can nip all these shootings in the bud by making it illegal to buy guns.Any country who supports the right to bear arms is pretty much lining themselves up for something like this. If you want to argue against that,try telling that to the families of the people who were killed. Its those poor folk who have to live with the actions of one deranged unhinged maniac.

magicalfreddiemercury wrote: When there's bad news of any kind - a bleak prognosis, a school shooting - or some other kind of difficulty, how many of you have had people say to 'say a little prayer' or that they'll pray for you? GW Bush does it all the time - and while this is not about Bush, it IS about the propensity of some people to say they’ll pray for you, rather than offer real words of support. For example, regarding yet another US school shooting (where, apparently, it was just a person who killed others, not the rifle or handgun the guy carried, because if he were intent on killing he could have done so with a knife, a car, or a very sharp pencil... but that's a subject for another thread), Bush had this to say - == President George W Bush said he had spoken to Peters and told him "that a lot of folks today will be praying for the families of the victims and for the Northern Illinois University community. Obviously a tragic situation on that campus and I ask our citizens to offer their blessings, blessings of comfort and blessing of strength." == I don’t know how any of you read that, but I see little to no comfort offered there. There are no ‘fatherly’ words of wisdom and there’s no personal connection. To me, they are empty words offering no sense of support or guidance. So my question is, when you or others you know have been in a difficult situation, what REAL words of support have you received or given? And... were actual words of support more readily offered, or were prayers?

YourValentine wrote: Publicly speaking about prayers is a very American thing, I think. I have never heard a German politician offering a prayer, that would sound very weird in our ears because religion is a private matter. You have to make a difference between an official representative like Bush or Guiliani and private words of support - which can be very helpful if you genuinely care. The Bush statement is just lip service, he made a statement because it goes with the job. I don't think he gives a toss about the families who lost their children. Guiliani was in New York when the WTC collapsed, so he was affected and found the right words. For a stranger there is really nothing you can say to make things any easier for the families who lost their children.

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: You're oversimplifying the issue (TQ). For every statistic which emphasises the effectiveness of gun control legislation, there is a statistic emphasising how such legislation is either ineffective or counterintuitive. For instance, the high rate of gun ownership in Finland vs. the low rate of gun violence.

Treasure Moment wrote:

YourValentine wrote: Publicly speaking about prayers is a very American thing, I think. I have never heard a German politician offering a prayer, that would sound very weird in our ears because religion is a private matter. You have to make a difference between an official representative like Bush or Guiliani and private words of support - which can be very helpful if you genuinely care. The Bush statement is just lip service, he made a statement because it goes with the job. I don't think he gives a toss about the families who lost their children. Guiliani was in New York when the WTC collapsed, so he was affected and found the right words. For a stranger there is really nothing you can say to make things any easier for the families who lost their children.

wow are we naive here or what? guiliani not only doesnt care about 9/11 victims, he is part of the gang who planned 9/11

Treasure Moment = the gang that planned 911

YourValentine wrote: You have to make a difference between an official representative like Bush or Guiliani and private words of support - which can be very helpful if you genuinely care. The Bush statement is just lip service, he made a statement because it goes with the job. I don't think he gives a toss about the families who lost their children. Guiliani was in New York when the WTC collapsed, so he was affected and found the right words.

YourValentine wrote: Publicly speaking about prayers is a very American thing, I think. I have never heard a German politician offering a prayer, that would sound very weird in our ears because religion is a private matter.

pow wow wrote: Just because something is part of the Constitution does not make it right, things move on. I feel this thread is going to go on and on again and frankly there's more chance of Jehovah Witness turning up on my doorstep talking sense than there is some of you blinkered lot.

<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: 'National psyche' is not an issue here; in fact, I daresay it is a fiction. The low gun-related violence in Finland can be (and has been) accounted for by the low concentration of the population. Worldwide, gun-related violence concentrates in areas of popualation concentration (i.e. cities, especially larger ones). It is to be noted that the correlation is exponential in nature (i.e. there is much more than just a linear connection population increase -> violence increase)

Zebonka12 wrote: Words of support & a promise to pray = both as useless as each other. Actions speaking louder than words, it's better to just shut up and do whatever it is you were about to 'pledge' to do.

HistoryGirl wrote: Incidents like this will never be prevented; you cannot predict when someone will just go crazy and snap (which is ALWAYS what happens in these cases). To prevent the issue, you can't just take away the weapons they use, you'd have to know who it is and prevent them from snapping. It's the snapping that kills people, after that it's merely a matter of how many and by what method. Since you cannot go inside the psyche of people, determine that they are going to snap and lock them away, things like this will always happen. The best we can do is try to limit the damage they can cause, and if they give signs of being at risk we can try to prevent it, but they have rights and freedoms just like everyone else; we cannot take that away from them just because we "think" they are a risk.

magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Yeah, it's the snapping that kills people but you said right here that the best we can do is limit the damage they can cause. The best way to limit the damage is to take away the weapons that can cause the most damage. Guns vs. knives, for example. Chances are, a guy with a knife will be tackled and stopped before too much damage is done, while a guy with a gun will do as we've seen done too often on school campuses and elsewhere.

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: But if guns were more prevalent, odds are the assailant would also be suppressed before too much damage had occurred.

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: The only difference is that if guns were illegal, there's still a chance that the assailant would have access to a gun.

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: And I apologize for contributing to the derailment of your thread.

HistoryGirl wrote: OK..I'm done derailing now. Sorry Magical!

HistoryGirl wrote: @ Magical of course I expected nothing less from you :-) You are one of the intelligent people on the thread I truly enjoy conversing with and I'm never offended by anything you say or take issue with.

Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: You know,you can nip all these shootings in the bud by making it illegal to buy guns.

Micrówave wrote:

Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: You know,you can nip all these shootings in the bud by making it illegal to buy guns.

That's right!!! Thank God drugs are illegal, or we could have a serious problem there, too!!

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Now, what happened to this thread?

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Now, what happened to this thread?

HistoryGirl wrote: ^^ There was just a shooting not too long ago in Finland; while shootings may not be frequent around the world, violence in schools and universities does seem to be a growing trend.

HistoryGirl wrote: ^^ There was just a shooting not too long ago in Finland; while shootings may not be frequent around the world, violence in schools and universities does seem to be a growing trend. On that note...guess what I found when I walked into my classroom today to teach my two sections? A huge white sticker stuck to the teaching podium (where only the instructor can see it) giving codes and numbers to call in the case of "disruptive students" or "threats of violence". Talking to the profs and GA's who had classes in other buildings today, they appeared this weekend and are in ALL the academic building classrooms now. Pretty sad commentary on society; though as my co-GA Marko pointed out "Why do they think you'd call these numbers? Guess who would be the first one shot if you stood in the front of the room to use the phone on the podium to call? Oh wait, Mr. Shooter...I have to call this 5 digit number because I have a classroom disturbance." Of course I pointed out to him that we'd likely be the first one shot anyway since we are the ones standing at the front of the classroom, which doesn't necessarily make either of us feel great about handing back student exams Wednesday that are....well...they are total shit is what they are.

magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Interestingly, I just found this (and it sort of pertains to what I was saying above)... === TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED the 1930's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's!! First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant. They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes. Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-based paints. We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking. As infants & children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, booster seats, seat belts or air bags. Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat. We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.. We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this. We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank Kool-aid made with sugar, but we weren't overweight because, WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING! We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on. No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K. We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem. We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD's, no surround-sound or CD's, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or chat rooms........ WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them! We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents. We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever. We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes. We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them! Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!! The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law! These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever! The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas. We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL! === The above is so true, and yet it makes me wonder how the generations who grew up like that created the technology-dependent, sit-on-your-ass, school-shooting, politically correct society in which we live today.