NewsBiscuit : US child killings - my view on the subs and postings

Quick links: NewsBiscuit Home • Chat Room • Writers' Room • Top Ten

US child killings - my view on the subs and postings

(43 posts) (22 voices)

Started 5 months ago by antharrison
Latest reply from waylandsmithy

Tags:

No tags yet.

12 Next »

antharrison

offline
Member

I know that this is a satirical site and can test the boundaries of acceptability and taste. That said I would be disappointed if NB turned into Sickipedia or its equivalents (which I do not read BTW, but catch the drift).

That the US finds itself in an impossible position in relation to the right to bear arms and the right to shoot anyone is most sad. The tactical answer is to ban guns and change ammunition so that it will no longer work, but this may take 50 years to work-through. And anyway there will always be someone able to access such things and kill loads of people out of spite, love or terror.

In the meantime, please can we not make jokes about it.

Happy Christmas.

Ant.

Posted 5 months ago #
The All New Jeni B

offline
Member

Ant, I agree wholeheartedly, and, to the best of my knowledge, no-one's been so crass as to attempt anything related to those kids.

Not even dvo.

Posted 5 months ago #
antharrison

offline
Member

Yep, agreed, but also not refer to it in any way. So far as I am concerned it is off-limits even to mock the stupid lawmakers responsible for it. And DVO wouldn't do that. But please, even in the most light-hearted way - don't.

Posted 5 months ago #
Dick Everyman

offline
Member

Hi Ant

Agree with your sentiments but note you end on Happy Christmas. According to biblical texts Christ himself would have perished if he had not escaped Herod's 'slaughter of the innocents'. 2000 years later and look at where we are.

Surely we need to explore every kind of commentary to make sense of it all - jokes, satire, observation, philosophy - words don't hurt but bullets do...

Good debate!!!

Dick

Posted 5 months ago #
antharrison

offline
Member

I mean 'Happy Christmas' in a mild and inclusive manner, along with a happy snowman and a glistening tree, but do recognise that the most of the gross inflictions of servitude, violence and death in history are the responsibility of the Christian church in its various guises.

Happy Crusades.

Ant

Posted 5 months ago #
dvo4fun

offline
Member

@Jeni: "no-one's been so crass as to attempt anything related to those kids.

Not even dvo. "

True - if I could have worked up a real rant about the whole situation I might have tried something but it's all so bloody sad and so obvious.

Posted 5 months ago #
The All New Jeni B

offline
Member

dvo, I know.
I apologise, it was crass of me.

Posted 5 months ago #
antharrison

offline
Member

Agree DVO - but please as I did - resist, and especialy the incredibly funny nickb who took an alternate view but would never wish to hurt anyone and is very, very funny, but as I said is off-limits to me.

Posted 5 months ago #
dvo4fun

offline
Member

Not offended in slightest Jeni

OK ant - we've got a deal

Posted 5 months ago #
Carter

offline
Member

I don't think any subject should be declared off-limits for a sub. I haven't got any gags to make about the recent school shooting at the moment but if I did I'd make them here and hope that they'd be judged fairly.

If certain topics are deemed to be too sensitive to sub about where does that end? If the aim of subbing on NewsBiscuit is not to cause offence to anyone then the material will become weaker and weaker and let's be honest on bad days it can be pretty tame and twee around here with some people just recycling the same old toss again and again.

Jokes will be made about the school shootings and whatever becomes the next horror of the moment. So why shouldn't contributors here find an angle and confront tragedy with mirth?

Posted 5 months ago #
Idiot

offline
Member

Carter's assessment is spot on in my opinion.

Posted 5 months ago #
Perks

offline
Member

In with carter. It's very difficult, but good satire should make a point. Trying a subject just to shock I agree is wrong but most of what I have seen is about the pro gun stance, which to most seems silly.

Jokes for the sake of joking can be wrong, but with some thought and a clear point it becomes good satire that makes people think.

I think we should steer clear of a ' let's not do anything on...' Instead work on the basis we are adults, so anything done on the topic needs to be well judged. If it tries but misses the mark, helpful criticism may help, and if it is just offensive then I am sure people will say so

Posted 5 months ago #
Sinnick

offline
Member

It's an awful situation, and we all know there will be more incidents like this in the US and elsewhere, but mostly in the US.

I think targetting the NRA and Republicans on issues like this is fair game - it's in support of the school. But, it needs to be done with sensitivity to the victims. Catastrophes such as tsunamis are not human-caused, so there can be no valid target.

I think it's very healthy to speak openly about these things - certainly better than a moratorium on talking.

Posted 5 months ago #
Scroat

offline
Member

What Sinnick said. The US attitude to weaponry is the real target, but a suitable interval needs to have elapsed, out of respect for those who died. Christmas is often a difficult time for lots of people, but in Sandy Hook it will be forever blighted for the whole community. Words don't really cover it.

Posted 5 months ago #
Nowherefast

offline
Member

No dissent here. I will add though, 22 people (including many children) stabbed by a mentally deranged man at the gates of a primary school in China last week yet very little said in the news about it, No public scrutiny, follow up or debate as a consequence. My mention of this isn't intended in anyway to undermine the horror and my inadequately expressed sorrow at the evil slaughter of children in Sandy Hook. I'm not exactly sure of the point I'm trying to make here, other than to provoke thought, but it does seem that when a human inflicted tragedy of this nature occurs in America or close to home we get collectively worked up about it and start wearing hair shirts. When a similar event, often equally as horrendous in intent and traumatic in consequence to those involved, occurs elsewhere in the world it becomes second page news and we acknowledge it's awfulness, shrug, and go back to our cornflakes. Isn't it a kind of hypocrisy? (and I acknowledge my own guilt in this regard)

Posted 5 months ago #
Dickens or Shakespeare

offline
Member

This website is supposedly aimed at "providing a daily dose of humour". Can't see any humour in the events that have unfolded at Sandy Hook and believe we should keep well away.

That includes the recent NiB.

Posted 5 months ago #
waylandsmithy

offline
Member

I'm with Carter. It would be hard to take the piss out of a deadly hurricane. It's actually pretty easy to find an angle on this, with whacko nut jobs claiming the answer to these tragedies is MORE GUNS.

The news claimed gun sales were at a 20 year high in the US yesterday. I don't think we're doing a good job if we don't try and tackle hard issues, but you have to be really careful about being precise in who you ~~target aim your si~~ criticise.

Posted 5 months ago #
Tripod

offline
Member

One Yank (or Brit) = ten Belgians = a thousand Afghanis.

Hypocrisy is alive and well in the western world. Personally, I thought the 21-gun salute in Newtown last night, "for the children" was going too far, but, well, sometimes the American way of life is beyond parody.

I don't much care for lone gunmen, or serial killers, or kids being shot, or guns being freely available to all-comers, or the sight of Americans trying their damndest to reconcile the 'right to bear arms', in a supposedly civilised democracy in 2012.

There is room for satire, of course there is, and the target is big... and, anyway, I don't much care, either, for being told that a subject is "off limits". But anyone who does post a sub will have to make sure the target is hit, and isn't just 'friendly fire' (my least favourite US phrase, along with 'collateral damage')...

Posted 5 months ago #
Perks

offline
Member

I would argue that even natural disasters have an angle. For example 'Superstorm Sandy' had a devestaing effect on lives and killed. But the reaction of the media when it was going to hit NY was far from the lack of reporting when it hit the carrabian, where I believe it killed many more.

The actual event may be off limits, but the issues it throws up arguably need to be satirised to make a point.
If you make the points about the NRA in a month, I think you would lose the point.

Posted 5 months ago #
Vertically Challenged Giant

offline
Member

A sub that mentions an incident like this is very different to a sub mocking an incident like this.

Some people will get as far as reading a reference to Sandy Hook in a comedy article and instantly feel that it’s “over the line”, with no real interest in what the sub says or what point it is trying to make.

People often take the piss out of Wikipedia, but the first paragraph of its definition of satire is pretty good:

“Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.”

Nobody is ridiculing the actual events, people are ridiculing the reaction of certain sections of society, i.e. those more concerned that somebody may now try to take their guns off them in the wake of this tragedy than they are about those that lost their lives. Personally I think those people are a fair target.

Posted 5 months ago #
Perks

offline
Member

Spot on. The NiB highlights the stance of "if the teachers had guns, this would not have happened". The NiB takes that ridiculas idea to the limit for the sake of ridicule. Would be interested on the views of the professionals who work on the site?

Posted 5 months ago #
Gerontius

offline
Member

To be fair, most sane, intelligent, level-headed Americans only use their guns to go out killing wild animals in the woods.
It's only the mentally deranged who turn their guns on fellow humans.

Posted 5 months ago #
Squudge

offline
Member

I'm not sure about the 'killing wild animals' part either. But maybe that is just me

If you live in Alaska and need a rifle for food, or self defence from bears ...that is not quite the same as 'sport'.

Posted 5 months ago #
The All New Jeni B

offline
Member

I agree Squudge. I have a slight problem with concept of shooting any other living thing for 'sport'.

Food, as a necessity, yes. For fun? No.

Having said that, I found myself getting a bit crazed when I went paint-balling, I was rolling around like Rambo.

Posted 5 months ago #
Gerontius

offline
Member

Er...it was meant to be ironic
Clearly not....or nor clearly not in this case.

Posted 5 months ago #
waylandsmithy

offline
Member

what if you shoot animals out of necessity, but you also enjoy it? Is that OK?

We live in a very sanitized world, I have nothing against most hunting. But hunting doesn't need rapid-fire assault weapons.

Gun control is a slightly greyer area than the press would have it, but it's ridiculous to let people own military grade weaponry.

Posted 5 months ago #
Username

offline
Member

I had too much time on my hands yesterday, so I went to wikipedia and looked up two things:
- the number of guns per person in a whole lot of countries, and,
- the number of gun-related deaths in those countries.

but then didn't know what to do next.

The ratio between these numbers tells you roughly how dangerous is a gun is in any poarticular country), but this figure is pretty much the same for America and most traditional European countries, which surprised me, to say the least.

Posted 5 months ago #
dvo4fun

offline
Member

So (extrapolating wildly) it's not that US chaps are more likely to shoot each other, rather that it's the availability of guns which is the important factor.

Digging in the recesses of the mind I seem to recall being told that when UK moved over to 'North Sea'/ 'Natural' gas the incidence of suicide dropped; the shiny new stuff being nicely explosive but not noxious.

Limit the availability, limit the 'quick choice' to kill oneself or others.

I understand that vets have amongst the highest suicide rates due to the easy access to death rays - or something like that. Is that right ironduke?

Ironduke ... ?

Posted 5 months ago #
Tripod

offline
Member

Ironduke ... ?

I shot him. He begged for a merciful release.
Right... I'm off to strangle a squirrel. I'll try to enjoy it...

Posted 5 months ago #
Ironduke

offline
Member

Just like the movies, Tripod...the good guy is only winged, back up for the next episode.

Dvo, you're right, Vets do have the highest suicide rate which includes an old friend of mine. I suspect dark thoughts cross many people's minds, but not all are as experienced at delivering a swift and comfortable end as we are- so no hunting for a bridge or a train, its actually a lot simpler and immediate to perform. We also work shite hours for moderate income with a very demanding public who think we're a bunch of robbing bastards and it does get you down.

I took a girl on a date to Hyde Park, feeding the squirrels (not a euphemism). Imaginative and thoughtful, I felt, and coincidentally cheap (1 pack of monkey nuts). One of the little buggers bit her finger. There were tears. Make it slow, Tripod, make it slow....

Posted 5 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.