A lot of debate always goes on after an incident such as the recent school shooting. But IMHO, one of the main reasons behind those shootings is hardly acknowledged. Although western culture has given us almost everything we enjoy today, one main thing our Asian culture trumps over Western culture are family values. Whereas in the West, children are assumed as adults at a tender age and kicked out of the house to fend for themselves, it is not so in our culture. Here you have a mother who takes her son for target practice and teaches her son how to shoot. In our culture such a thing would not happen as a mother would be scared and keep her child away from guns. She would go "Abuieeeeeeeeeeee!"
Parenting should not stop at teenage, parents should always guide their children even when they are adults. Such guidance and love are missing in western culture. I am all for gun control but IMHO, they are not sole problem. The problem is absense of proper parenting.

 you've the rigtht to your opinion. In the west, parents teach their children from early age to be independent, be able to survive on his/her own. Not all parents take their sons/daughters to shooting ranges, however I don't see anything wrong with it. They also teach their children good values, morals, and be ethical. In Nepal or other third world countries, most parents don't set good examples when it comes to good morals, ethics; yes they talk about it, but not in action.

The main reason why you are hearing to much abotu gun control is because guns are the only thing that's stopping United Nations in implementing it's global agendas freely here. Once guns are gone, they will be subjects, not free citizens. Think about it.

I guess you are a Nepali and i assume you are independent too. Being independent doesnt have to go the Western way. I am independent too. Children in the West generally are assumed as adults at a tender age. At workplace, i have encountered parents getting frustrated about their son/daughter still stuck at home and not moving out. I think that is not proper parenting.
I am not saying our asian values are perfect, but some aspects of it are better. But this is slowly changing to that of the West and Nepali parents too are doing likewise.
I believe no parents should take their kids to shooting ranges and play with real guns. It just sends a wrong signal. If they can teach their kids "Stay away from drugs" why not "stay away from guns"?.
United Nations global agenda? Are you talking about NWO? That is just a conspiracy theory.
Americans are so used to guns because of their violent past. This is a remnant of their gory history. And now it has become a bad habit. I do support gun control but like i said before, that will not be the sole remedy.
Proper parenting is needed. The practice of making adults out of teenagers needs to change.

Proper parenting is definitely part of the problem but the major issue is the availability of deadly weapon.




The parenting problem you are referring to germinates from individualistic society whose foundation is built upon capitalism. Everyone's a cog in the wheel, everyone has to work and make money to feed the economy. The economy is run by the greedy bankers who need more and more so it never ends. Poor parents have to make the difficult choice, whether to get a place to live and food to eat, or spend time with kids in poverty. More affluent parents want to amass more money to provide more luxury to family. Kids are influenced by hollywood, TV , glamour and gory. They need to be in good hands. Parents have to make it a priority to be in children's life and not leave them unattended because they want to copy things that may seem cool but is wrong. They need to be guided.

Disagree.

You say bad parenting over here is a reason for this. Then why did we have the royal massacre? Every now and then you hear about a son killing his father or father killing his daughter etc in any part of Nepal; it just doesn't make it to the mainstream news media all the time. Besides, the kid had autism, bad parenting wasn't the reason that instigated him. I heard the mom wanted to take the kid to a psychiatric ward and he rebelled thinking mom loves school more than himself. I am not sure if this is substantiated yet, but the thought process of a kid with autism has more to blame than parenting. Where she went wrong was that she shouldn't have an assault rifle in home, within the reach of a mentally challenged kid.

A mother who takes her son to a gun school doesn't make her a bad mother. Just because Nepali mother are scared of kids doing that, doesn't make them the better moms. A good training school instills the idea of proper gun usage; you think the kid couldn't have operated the gun without the school?

I think the single mom didn't do any wrong raising this mentally challenged kid; except for the fact that she had an assault gun accessible to the kid.

 Kiddo, 
There is a big fallacy to your claim. Among 100,000 or so homicides or so in the united states in the last how many years, less than 4% can be attributed to mental illness (let alone autism - and by the way autism is not a mental illness, its a developmental disorder).

Kindly find the stats available:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/health/a-misguided-focus-on-mental-illness-in-gun-control-debate.html?_r=0

Whoa, don't put words in my "claim." I never "claim"ed that most of the homicides in US is due to mental illness, where did I say that? I was strictly talking about this particular incident.

When the OP pointed it to bad parenting here in US compared to Nepal to be the reason of the CT shooting, I tried to first reason that it happens back home as well (royal massacre was instigated by a son). THen I tried to reason that the kid having autism also contributed to his motive. I am not blaming autism here; autism-combined with an easy access to gun and probably few other things that we still don't know, contributed to it.

Hi Kiddo,
I never suggested that good parenting will result in Utopia. The royal massacre is totally out of place here. It did not involve shooting children. It was more of a domestic issue within the royal family. If the prince had gone berserk and killed people on the street or gone into a school of totally innocent students and killed them then we could have drawn an analogy. Patricide, Fatricide etc does happen all over the world  and yes Nepal is no different. But i have yet to see a similar type of incident like Columbine, Newtown in Nepal or in Asia. Or am i missing something?  Mind you, Asia has a lot of people with mental health issues and they do not even receive any professional help. But what i believe is that through good parenting in their youth even people with mental health issues can differentiate between right and wrong. If you think about it, getting hold of a gun is not that difficult in Nepal these days. But we do not see such incidents. Now i am not saying there are no killings. But I don't see anything that we can draw a parallel.
To sum it up, IMHO, if value of life is ingrained in you, you will never kill another human being even if you are mentally unstable. To achieve this, good parenting is necessary till the child is a proper adult say 25-30yrs od age.  But teenagers should not be considered as adults.

Freedom,
I will never disagree that good parenting could help. My issue was with the fact that it was bad parenting which lead to the incident.
One issue I have is the analogies we present. I don't know how it is different that a person kills his family and others in the room to a person who kills his mom and kills kids. Just because the former didn't involve shooting children, it becomes a completely different thing? If bad parenting is involved, the person could shoot a kid, many kids or adults-age shouldn't matter.

To me a murderer is a murderer, regardless of who (s)he kills or how many (s)he kills. Sure, this garnered media attention, but he is as guilty as any other guy who killed an innocent human being.

Very good point about the mentally unstable person not having this issue back home. I agree. They don't have an easy access to gun or assault rifle - and that's why stricter gun control is an easy conclusion here.

Trust me, just because I teach my kid how to shoot in a shooting institution, I don't become a bad parent.

Kiddo you don't have to view everything as a competition, killing is killing but you can always discuss the events that led to the killing. Killing one person who you're mad with and killing 30 innocent children is different. Killing everyone in your family because you hate your family is different from going out in public and killing random innocent people.

"Kiddo you don't have to view everything as a competition?" Didn't catch you there, please elaborate.

I see a pattern here, I present an analogy..an example to counter an argument. Then I am told that they aren't same. Ofcourse they aren't same, that's why its an analogy, not a replacement. The analogy is presented to counter a context. The context above was bad parenting prevalent in US and I said it happens back home also (e.g. Dipendra). Now you are arguing saying the killing wasn't same..ofcourse it wasn't the same. One was Nepali, another was American.

Please, please take the analogies for what they are. Try to understand why it is presented. It's like somebody says Barcelona is a great team because they have a youth soccer school and nobody else has it..and then I say, no, Bundesliga also has teams with your soccer academy and you say Nope, they aren't same as they speak a different language. Ofcourse they do!! Point is about both having youth team.

Sorry, I thought I had to clear that out.

By competition i was refering to you comment regarding who was more guiltier than other.

With regards to analogies if i remember correctly you gave the analogy that knives should be banned too if guns were to be banned. Analogy should be in the same context or at least having similar degree of comparision otherwise its like the saying goes comparing apples to oranges.

Good that you mention it. Sorry to make it a discussion on analogy, but I think I have to make myself clear.

Why I compared knives to Guns is...well again context. The context was that the reasoning that some of the posts were giving was that guns should be banned because they kill people. Well, with just that reasoning, knives should be banned, heck a lasso should be banned. Ofcourse I know a gun can be used from a distance and is much more efficient than guns..but we didn't argue on how it is done..the point was it kills people and so does Knife.

I don't know if you heard the news, I believe it was the same day, that a chinese guy slashed 22 school children. If he had used the knives in neck and if his intention was to kill them all, he could have very easily killed more than 1 kid there.

Don't focus on guns vs knives; my point was to filter out the weak arguments and discuss what's viable. I am for strict gun control and ban on assault rifle. I am still not decided on whether we should or can completely ban all kinds of guns from public hands.

I'm all for stricter gun controls, but i couldnt help pointing out the weak analogy of comparing guns and knives just because they can both kill. Even sticks and stones can kill as can many objects but you have to at least compare something on the same range. Again my point being lets not keep comparing apples and oranges.

Sandy Hook was in the Dark Knight Rises movie and you fools still think this was not a pre planned operation like 9-11 by the illuminati



look at the Left side of pic




This was also from the same movie. Remember that the James Holmes Shooting happened in Aurora, Colorado

Kiddo,
yes killing is killing as is rape is rape. But there are differences in the context though. For example, even though rape happens a lot in India, why is the present rape case making headlines? It is because the context is different. Do all murder and rape make headlines? Do all rapes and murder make for a special segment on TV dedicated to same? You are totally missing the scenario. Like i have said before, there are no similar incidents in Nepal (or Asia) like Newtown and Columbine. The royal massacre is a totally different issue.
I am not saying good parenting is the sole remedy but for me i rank it above gun control. And I will stick to my opinion that good parents should not introduce guns to their kids let alone take them for target practice sessions. IMHO guns are something to be fearful of, like drugs. Unless you are a member of a security force, there are no reasons to possess a gun. This is the way it should be. Sadly, this isnt so.

Freedom I agree with you that guns should not be placed in the hand of common citizen.

If common citizens are to be able to get guns to protect themselves then maybe they will want to have bazookas, grenades and tank in their house too after all who knows how the enemy can come to them. Maybe common citizen should also have anti aircraft missiles too just in case someone comes to attack them using a helicopter.

If each citizen has the burden of protecting themselves then there's no need for police.

Rethink,
very nicely worded and that is exactly the point. How about nuclear weapons, if it were small and portable then we all should each have one hehehe.

Enough of conspiracy theory **************. Why would illumnati killed little innconent kid? Ban the guns. As an F1 students we are not allowed to buy guns and can't defend ourselves. Many nepalese are being killed in stores shooting anyways. So ban it right away.