Juice, have you talked to your neighbors? Are others experiencing this kind of crap? Not that I think Dogtown is immune from crime like this, but I wonder if it's someone in the area messing with you.
- 11K
innov8ion wrote:Here's the alternate link for information on the, "Broken Windows" theory: http://is.gd/AJJMStokes wrote:innov8ion wrote: This is a more fun and snarky method: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22broken+windows+theory%22
I clicked expecting a Rick Roll. I'm not sure if I was disappointed or not.
You know the rules . . . and so do I . . .
- 3,429
More Mass killings around the country.
I'm tired of the press asking "Why did he do it?" the Question needs to shift to "How was he able to do this, and how can we protect ourselves?"
There will always be angry people who would be happy to take out everyone in the world if they had the power as they commit suicide. And guns give them a start towards that end with simple point-and-click power over life and death of innocent people.
Since the gun lobby will always be too powerful to allow any kind of gun restriction, we have to look at other options. Indeed, the gun lobby advocates arming everyone as the solution.
Ironically, the most powerful weapon lately has been the cell phone. People trapped in the buildings have been able to call 911 from cell phones to get police there fast.
But I think it is time for architects to start looking at how they can build buildings that can address this problem, just like they do for fires.
Building standards and laws can be created such as:
1) Near-360 egress from any portion of a publically accessible building that housed over, say, 8 people. In other words, every room and office must have a second door that can lead to the outside where people can escape a madman.
2) If 360 egress is not pratical, metal detectors could be required for all publicaly accessible buildings in an area outside the main entry. Architects would need to modify buildings to accomodate an anteroom away from the front door, just as airport wings accomodate scanners. If a gun is found, the front door could be locked electronically so the gunman could never get into the main building.
3) Sensors that detect gunfire could be installed to directly signal the police. Like a fire detector. Maybe foam or water or halon gas could be dispensed to hinder the gunpowder when an alarm is pulled.
Any other ideas? I realize this may sound extreme, but if anyone had a better idea, these killings wouldn't keep happening. So I'm going for the long term solution. I have to say, the only place I have 0 concern about a madman is inside airport security.
I'm tired of the press asking "Why did he do it?" the Question needs to shift to "How was he able to do this, and how can we protect ourselves?"
There will always be angry people who would be happy to take out everyone in the world if they had the power as they commit suicide. And guns give them a start towards that end with simple point-and-click power over life and death of innocent people.
Since the gun lobby will always be too powerful to allow any kind of gun restriction, we have to look at other options. Indeed, the gun lobby advocates arming everyone as the solution.
Ironically, the most powerful weapon lately has been the cell phone. People trapped in the buildings have been able to call 911 from cell phones to get police there fast.
But I think it is time for architects to start looking at how they can build buildings that can address this problem, just like they do for fires.
Building standards and laws can be created such as:
1) Near-360 egress from any portion of a publically accessible building that housed over, say, 8 people. In other words, every room and office must have a second door that can lead to the outside where people can escape a madman.
2) If 360 egress is not pratical, metal detectors could be required for all publicaly accessible buildings in an area outside the main entry. Architects would need to modify buildings to accomodate an anteroom away from the front door, just as airport wings accomodate scanners. If a gun is found, the front door could be locked electronically so the gunman could never get into the main building.
3) Sensors that detect gunfire could be installed to directly signal the police. Like a fire detector. Maybe foam or water or halon gas could be dispensed to hinder the gunpowder when an alarm is pulled.
Any other ideas? I realize this may sound extreme, but if anyone had a better idea, these killings wouldn't keep happening. So I'm going for the long term solution. I have to say, the only place I have 0 concern about a madman is inside airport security.
I don't live in that much fear. Frankly, your suggestions are rather impractical and I would not want to live in a place where you have to go through metal detectors to get anywhere.
yes, we could have metal detectors on every single place imaginable... what is the chance one would experience a madman shooting? you're probably more likely to get struck by lightning.
- 11K
Gary Kreie wrote:More Mass killings around the country.
I'm tired of the press asking "Why did he do it?" the Question needs to shift to "How was he able to do this, and how can we protect ourselves?"
There will always be angry people who would be happy to take out everyone in the world if they had the power as they commit suicide. And guns give them a start towards that end with simple point-and-click power over life and death of innocent people.
Since the gun lobby will always be too powerful to allow any kind of gun restriction, we have to look at other options. Indeed, the gun lobby advocates arming everyone as the solution.
Ironically, the most powerful weapon lately has been the cell phone. People trapped in the buildings have been able to call 911 from cell phones to get police there fast.
But I think it is time for architects to start looking at how they can build buildings that can address this problem, just like they do for fires.
Building standards and laws can be created such as:
1) Near-360 egress from any portion of a publically accessible building that housed over, say, 8 people. In other words, every room and office must have a second door that can lead to the outside where people can escape a madman.
2) If 360 egress is not pratical, metal detectors could be required for all publicaly accessible buildings in an area outside the main entry. Architects would need to modify buildings to accomodate an anteroom away from the front door, just as airport wings accomodate scanners. If a gun is found, the front door could be locked electronically so the gunman could never get into the main building.
3) Sensors that detect gunfire could be installed to directly signal the police. Like a fire detector. Maybe foam or water or halon gas could be dispensed to hinder the gunpowder when an alarm is pulled.
Any other ideas? I realize this may sound extreme, but if anyone had a better idea, these killings wouldn't keep happening. So I'm going for the long term solution. I have to say, the only place I have 0 concern about a madman is inside airport security.
I'm much, MUCH more concerned about traffic "accidents" and health concerns such as cancer. I've known way too many people to die of each. And the chances that my life will end in a vehicle or in a hospital bed due to cancer is much higher than it should be. Let's fund health research and create safe roads and cities where people do not have to drive as much. I fly regularly, but think it's ridiculous after every airline accident that everyone calls for millions upon millions of dollars in new safety equipment, regulations, etc. Airline travel is one of the safest things we can do. I wish we could focus on the real threats to our safety.
- 3,429
I think you are all missing my point. I do not fear for myself from death by gunman. And I don't think I'm going to die in a fire either. But now when someone builds a building that doesn't provide fire alarms and fire exits, they can be held liable for anyone killed in a fire.
I think soon the family of a mass shooting victim will ask a jury to hold a building owner partially liable if he hasn't done basic things to protect people from this type of threat also. Especially in a case where the building owner is rich, and the gunman took his own life.
So, what kind of prudent things should a responsible architect consider to make his building not so mass-murder friendly? When do we expect those things to become the norm? At one time architects were resistant to making buildings accessible to the disabled, because it could compromise design.
I think just daily mass murder stories on the evening news will drive us to this kind of consideration.
I think soon the family of a mass shooting victim will ask a jury to hold a building owner partially liable if he hasn't done basic things to protect people from this type of threat also. Especially in a case where the building owner is rich, and the gunman took his own life.
So, what kind of prudent things should a responsible architect consider to make his building not so mass-murder friendly? When do we expect those things to become the norm? At one time architects were resistant to making buildings accessible to the disabled, because it could compromise design.
I think just daily mass murder stories on the evening news will drive us to this kind of consideration.
I'm all for building codes which enforce public access and safety, but ultimately you can only do so much. Buildings do need to have a good way of being reasonably evacuated in a timely manner, but building codes for fire safety already insure this. More could always be done to prevent people from being trapped by fires, earthquakes, gunmen, etc., but in most cases if you go beyond the codes we already have you get diminishing returns. I don't see current buildings as being any more mass murder friendly than they are fire friendly and fire is still much more common. We are nowhere near daily mass murders. You could put in gunshot alarms, but I'm not really sure if there would be a good procedure to follow if the alarm went off. Unlike a fire where you can at a minimum feel its heat if it is anywhere near you, a person wouldn't know the gunmen's location and thus whether to hide, get out, or etc. Mostly though, it just remains a rare event.
- 3,429
So, it sounds like the answer to my original question asking if anyone had any ideas on how we can address mass murder is -- no, we don't. Not worth it. Can't be changed.
I'm kind of surprised given that St. Louis has had two attempted angry man mass murder attempts in the last year -- Kirkwood, and the Collinsville church. The argument that cancer and traffic are bigger threats (where we already spend fortunes) -- so we can't look at mass murder prevention -- is a little odd.
We spend a fortune designing planes to avoid deaths, yet more people were killed in mass murders than commercial plane crashes last year.
I'm kind of surprised given that St. Louis has had two attempted angry man mass murder attempts in the last year -- Kirkwood, and the Collinsville church. The argument that cancer and traffic are bigger threats (where we already spend fortunes) -- so we can't look at mass murder prevention -- is a little odd.
We spend a fortune designing planes to avoid deaths, yet more people were killed in mass murders than commercial plane crashes last year.
- 6,775
Gary Kreie wrote:I think just daily mass murder stories on the evening news will drive us to this kind of consideration.
Wrong. http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Fear-Amer ... 237&sr=1-5
A book written for every loser parent who won't let their 10 year old out of their sight, because "the world is different than it used to be".
Gary Kreie wrote:The argument that cancer and traffic are bigger threats (where we already spend fortunes) -- so we can't look at mass murder prevention -- is a little odd.
We spend a fortune designing planes to avoid deaths, yet more people were killed in mass murders than commercial plane crashes last year.
We do look at it and we do spend money on it. We spend on it through things like police and social services. The police investigate and respond to mass murder situations like they do any other crime. They don't stop them all, but we don't manage to stop all plane crashes either. Various social services also help people so they don't get to the point where something happens, although arguably more could be done to let people know (or people that know someone who needs help) what resources are available. I don't have an answer for how to accomplish that off the top of my head though. More to the point, we spend money on science to fight cancer, we spend money on transit planning and enforcement to fight roadway fatalities and we spend money on crime prevention to prevent crime, including mass murders. It isn't a problem that is ignored.
- 3,429
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Gary Kreie wrote:I think just daily mass murder stories on the evening news will drive us to this kind of consideration.
Wrong. http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Fear-Amer ... 237&sr=1-5
A book written for every loser parent who won't let their 10 year old out of their sight, because "the world is different than it used to be".
I think you need to read this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/ ... 0311.shtml
- 6,775
Gary Kreie wrote:The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Gary Kreie wrote:I think just daily mass murder stories on the evening news will drive us to this kind of consideration.
Wrong. http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Fear-Amer ... 237&sr=1-5
A book written for every loser parent who won't let their 10 year old out of their sight, because "the world is different than it used to be".
I think you need to read this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/ ... 0311.shtml
Actually, I don't.
- 11K
I don't know how one could design a building to help avoid mass murder. What would you do? Put an emergency exist slide out every window? Multiple exists from every room? And so what if you put metal detectors everywhere - someone just opens fire as the detector blares. And are you going to pay for people to staff these things? Should we just treat everyone as though they may put out a gun a kill a dozen people?
The last few mass murders I can remember are: Virginia Tech, some guy's home in Pittsburgh, a warehouse, an Amish School, a church, a city hall - how do you protect all of these places - or design them so that they are more safe? And anyway, it would be a massive government intrusion into our lives if businesses were made to pay more to build/design/maintain mass-murder safe buildings.
These mass murders are so few and random that there simply isn't an effective way to prevent them . . . especially in a country where it's a "right" to own sub-automatic (easily converted to automatic) assault rifles.
I think it would be more relevant to talk about how to make the finishing stretches of triathlons safe from bear attacks!
![]()
The last few mass murders I can remember are: Virginia Tech, some guy's home in Pittsburgh, a warehouse, an Amish School, a church, a city hall - how do you protect all of these places - or design them so that they are more safe? And anyway, it would be a massive government intrusion into our lives if businesses were made to pay more to build/design/maintain mass-murder safe buildings.
These mass murders are so few and random that there simply isn't an effective way to prevent them . . . especially in a country where it's a "right" to own sub-automatic (easily converted to automatic) assault rifles.
I think it would be more relevant to talk about how to make the finishing stretches of triathlons safe from bear attacks!
- 3,429
So, now that everyone agrees that we can't design structures with enough egress or systems to discourage a mass-killer from trying to corner victims, we are left with three alternatives.
1. The wilde-beast approach -- there are so many of us in the herd and so few of them, that my odds are good that the lion won't go for me. So just become numb to the reports of another mass-killing and send flowers.
2. Keep asking, why?, why? would Mr. or Ms. X do such a thing, presuming that if we could just find the reason, we could stop the next one with corrective psychological counseling.
3. Look into serious controls on point and click death sticks, to bring our murder rate down to the national average of, say, Australia or Spain. Their citizen's lives don't seem particularly limited by not having the freedom to carry what they need to wipe out a classroom of kids at any instant they choose.
1. The wilde-beast approach -- there are so many of us in the herd and so few of them, that my odds are good that the lion won't go for me. So just become numb to the reports of another mass-killing and send flowers.
2. Keep asking, why?, why? would Mr. or Ms. X do such a thing, presuming that if we could just find the reason, we could stop the next one with corrective psychological counseling.
3. Look into serious controls on point and click death sticks, to bring our murder rate down to the national average of, say, Australia or Spain. Their citizen's lives don't seem particularly limited by not having the freedom to carry what they need to wipe out a classroom of kids at any instant they choose.
- 11K
Gary Kreie wrote:3. Look into serious controls on point and click death sticks, to bring our murder rate down to the national average of, say, Australia or Spain. Their citizen's lives don't seem particularly limited by not having the freedom to carry what they need to wipe out a classroom of kids at any instant they choose.
Yes. (hey, is this where you were leading us the whole time? Love this "point and click death sticks" by the way.)
- 595
The Kirkwood and Maryville mass murders werent "angry man" murders, they were "mentally ill" man murders. Everyone gets angry, not everyone murders.
I think the answer is more attention - funding, awareness, action- into fighting mental illness. Cookie Thornton and the Maryville kid (cant remember his name) were both displaying dangerous behavior- esp Cookie with his history of causing disturbances. But its "politically incorrect" to stand up and say "Hey, this person is a threat and needs attention NOW"- we look the other way, we try to have compassion. I consider myself a compassionate person but if someone near me is clearly unstable, I am going to get the hell away from them. I am not condemning the person, I am condemning the illness. Its unfortunate the Kirkwood council couldnt have him removed from soceity and committed. Of course, who would pay for his treatment? Mental health is seriously underfunded - and unacknowledged- in this county.
Anyway, i think its high time we started paying closer attention to mental health.
I think the answer is more attention - funding, awareness, action- into fighting mental illness. Cookie Thornton and the Maryville kid (cant remember his name) were both displaying dangerous behavior- esp Cookie with his history of causing disturbances. But its "politically incorrect" to stand up and say "Hey, this person is a threat and needs attention NOW"- we look the other way, we try to have compassion. I consider myself a compassionate person but if someone near me is clearly unstable, I am going to get the hell away from them. I am not condemning the person, I am condemning the illness. Its unfortunate the Kirkwood council couldnt have him removed from soceity and committed. Of course, who would pay for his treatment? Mental health is seriously underfunded - and unacknowledged- in this county.
Anyway, i think its high time we started paying closer attention to mental health.
- 3,429
carrieocity kills wrote:The Kirkwood and Maryville mass murders werent "angry man" murders, they were "mentally ill" man murders. Everyone gets angry, not everyone murders.
OK. How would you reduce mass murders from "mentally ill" people who are walking around in public and have easy access to guns? How would you even identify them?
- 11K
^ There are an amazing number of people with mental issues. Unfortunately there's no real way to identify which ones will get a gun and shot a lot of people.
There are an amazing number of people with mental issues.
According to the NIH:
Mental disorders are common in the United States and internationally. An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.
Applied (haphazardly) to the population of registered users of this forum, that would mean 634 posters suffering from a mental disorder a year. That would explain much.
shoot.gif- 3,429
- 3,429
Public gun control is not legal in this country. But any private enterprise can ban guns. Disney does not allow guns in Magic Kingdom, for instance, and they scan you on the way in to check for weapons.
I'm wondering if Paul McKee is planning to combine his properties with other willing neighbors to create some kind of gun-free neighborhood housing enterprise in North St. Louis. Safe housing and shopping within the perimeter would increase property value.
I'm wondering if Paul McKee is planning to combine his properties with other willing neighbors to create some kind of gun-free neighborhood housing enterprise in North St. Louis. Safe housing and shopping within the perimeter would increase property value.
- 6,775
Gary Kreie wrote:Public gun control is not legal in this country.
Ummmm.....what?