guns don't kill people, malls kill people....

[mike_c]

Oh wait a minute-- if everyone else at the mall had been packing, this tragedy would have been averted, right? Perhaps while people shot one another over access to the last items in the bargain bin.

We REALLY need to reexamine the basis for needing an armed populace, especially in light of the ease with which armed individuals can harm the rest of society. If the right to bear arms doesn't convey the right to kill innocent people, to escalate otherwise normal disputes to murderous rampages, or to take out one's frustrations by squashing the lives of strangers, then how can these tragedies be prevented? All the good intentions of everyone owning guns responsibly, all combined, won't stop a single person from losing control if that's where their lives lead them, and when firearms are added to the mix, the results are often terrible.

Very few people genuinely NEED to possess or carry guns-- not for self defense or any other purpose. Even recreational use of fire arms, i.e. hunting and target shooting, don't require that people carry weapons for more than brief periods, and certainly don't require guns stored at home, etc.

I understand why the second amendment was included in the Constitution. I support it. But too many innocent people are being killed needlessly in defense of Joe Shmoe's right to bear arms without any truly compelling reason other than his self-perceived need for fire power.

[wtmusic]

1. .

:thumbsup:

[NightWatcher]

2. are we gonna have 'the gun debate' everytime someone gets shot?

Hasn't this all been fought out before? Haven't we come to the realization that we will never solve this problem.

Oh well, let the gun debate/war/whatever commence, again.

[slackmaster]

6. Of course we are

This is DU, a nexus of knee-jerk reactions.

[mike_c]

8. more than 30,000 people are killed by gunshot annually in America....

That's what, about 80 per day? No, we don't talk about the "gun debate" everytime someone gets shot. Perhaps we should, though.

[PVnRT]

42. Of course - gotta make political hay out of something! (n/t)

[October]

89. I hope so. /nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

133. So we are going to just accept people getting shot?

Are you willing to volunteer to be the next vixtim?

[qdemn7]

166. Yes, as a matter of fact we are

We accept 50k people getting killed on our roads very year. Half of them due to drunk driving. Are you OK with retrofitting every vehicle in the US with a breathalyzer interlock? At YOUR own expense? Doesn't matter whether you even drink or not. You are still are presumed guilty and have to prove your innocence by blowing into the thing every time you want to start your car.

[proud2BlibKansan]

175. I have no problem with those devices on cars of drivers

who have been found guilty of DUI.

Now my second question which you didn't answer - Are you willing to volunteer to be the next victim of a shooting rampage?

[qdemn7]

176. Nope sure not n/t

[qdemn7]

179. I didn't say "Guilty of DUI"

I said EVERYBODY, and that means you personally.

[proud2BlibKansan]

180. No only those guilty of DUIs

No reason to make me do a breathalizer before I start my car since I don't drink.

[qdemn7]

183. Hollow Laugh

It's OK for you to presume my guilt and infringe on my rights, even though I don't commit crimes.

[proud2BlibKansan]

184. Big difference of opinion

I don't believe you have the right to carry a gun anywhere you choose. Not because I think you are guilty of anything (actually I don't know enough about you to know if you are) but because I don't believe the second amendment gives you that right.

So I am not infringing on your rights since IMO, you don't have this right.

[Mike Daniels]

177. Hell, let's just ban alcohol

Alcohol consumption is directly or indirectly responsible for x number of abused children or spouses, auto accidents, murders and suicides.

Since it's obvious that a certain percentage of people can't use this drug responsibly perhaps we ought to just ban it outright.

It seems to be pretty much the same argument that the gun-grabbers use regarding firearms.

[qdemn7]

178. Yes

And we all know just how well that worked the first time around. It just proves that no matter how many people want to save other people's souls, OR save the world, that other people or the world don't agree they need saving, nor do they want to be saved.

[proud2BlibKansan]

182. I don't believe guns should be banned

I just believe they should be more carefully distributed. And you can make the same argument about alcohol.

[madeline_con]

153. We simply MUST have it everytime some tool flips out.

No one needs a firearm because some idiot lost his job/house/wife/mind and flipped the fuck out!

Surender your arms! Joe Shmoe went of the deep end! :eyes:

[Tesha]

162. We ought to. We especially ought to when it's a mass shooting like this. (NT)

[OzarkDem]

3. No accountability or responsibility

No one should have rights to such a deadly weapon without stringent restrictions.

Its more difficult to get a drivers license and a car in this country than to get a gun.

[DonP]

17. Really?

Do you have to get clearance from the Federal, State and possibly your local government before you are allowed to buy a car?

Do you have to wait from 3 to 10 days to pick the car up after you pay for it?

Are there types and colors of cars you are not allowed ot buy in your particular state?

Do you have to wait 6 months or more and get pre-approval from your local police chief and pay an extra tax to buy a high perfomance car?

Are the traffic laws different in every state and are you subject to a felony conviction if you drive the wrong kind of car across a state line?

A lot of gun owners would love to have "car like" laws apply to firearms, I sure would.

To me 22,000+ existing gun laws are already a lot of "stringent restrictions".

It might be a good idea to not jerk at the kneee until we find out if this guy was a legal gun owner who went nuts or a criminal to begin with. Usually everyone gets all excited, calls for another gun ban, (and that last ban worked so well for us). Anyone remember what hit us in Congress in 1994, after we passed the last AWB? Then two weeks after the shooting we find out that liike Columbine, and pretty much every other incident, the shooter had already broken about eight laws.

But the answer is always "we need more gun laws now". Well that, and the Brady group sending out fundraising letters and e-mails before the bodies are even cold.

Besides, every weapon is deadly in the wrong hands from a single shot .22 to an 80 year old pump action 12 guage.

And for folks that keep evoking "Deer Hunting" and AK-47's don't be ignorant. Only about 20% of the more than 90 million gun onwers in the US are hunters and we're not all right wing nuts either. Besides the AK line of rifles are too LOW powered for legal deer hunting in most states. It's primarily a collectible and a cheap target rifle for most folks.

[mike_c]

33. does it really matter whether the shooter was "a legal gun owner..."

...or not? He had guns. He killed people in an act that might have been simple battery instead, had he not been armed.

It seems utterly clear to me that the simplist way to prevent these sorts of events is to make it much more difficult to possess fire arms. If the guy at the mall were not armed, he might have screamed his anger and frustration, maybe acted like an ass, possibly attacked and punched a few people until he was subdued. I don't know anything about his motives at this point, but I do know that his methods were wholly dependent upon his ability to acquire guns, whether legally or illegally. Personally, I don't think it matters WHY or HOW he had the weapons, only THAT he had them, and used them for their intended purpose.

[razors edge]

47. He might have built a car bomb

and blown up fifty people, Of course it could be even worse, he could have gotten a degree in medicine and helped out with killing 120,000 Americans each year, only there you seldom go to jail, you just move to a different hospital.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

59. It's about 200,000 Americans who die as a result of medical errors every year...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php

An average of 195,000 people in the USA died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of 37 million patient records that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company.

[razors edge]

64. I was going to say

200K, but I had not seen a recent report, and I was hoping it had improved from last year.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[razors edge]

91. Duck, and cover....

You have stumbled your way into a place that doesn't take lightly to the simple assertions that a zygote is a viable person.

Simple science does tend to side with that fact as you never meet too many people who survived on their own from being delivered as a zygote.

See Ya, wouldn't want ta be ya.

[proud2BlibKansan]

137. LOL Welcome to DU!

Enjoy your stay! :hi:

[DonP]

56. Yeah, it matters a hell of a lot.

I'm glad it's utterly clear to you. I guess the simplist way to prevent one of the leading casuses of childhood death is to ban swimming pools and 5 gallon buckets.

So what specific law do you really think will either keep mentally ill people and criminals from buying a gun on the street or make it harder for them to buy one?

Your answer to a problem that hasn't even been defined yet is to call for more restrictive laws, enforced by a criminal administartion, that will only impact on people like me and a lot of other law abiding gun owners. So it matters a whole lot to us.

Make it harder to possess firearms? Do you have any clue as to how many hoops you have to jump through already? What do you want? To keep piling more laws on like they did in D.C. or the utopia of Chicago where all guns are banned and the murder rate soars higher every year?

That whole idea sounds way too much like a "Bushit" response. "Well, does it really matter if we just listen in on just a few conversations with people that we think are terrorists, after all it's for the good of everyone to find 'em and lock 'em up, right?"

Most of us would be open to any real world ideas that could keep the mentally ill and criminals away from firearms, but most of the ideas only impact the law abiding and make self appointed do-gooders feel all warm and fuzzy ... until the next shooting and clamor for more laws..

[mike_c]

63. what do I want?

I want to be able to walk down the street, or ride the bus, or go to the mall, and be confident that NO ONE around me is carrying a gun. That no one can shoot and kill me because they're having a bad day. That's what I want.

[razors edge]

66. Germany 1938

would be a good place and time for you to have lived, just don't let them know your a liberal.

[mike_c]

71. good lord, that is crazy....

Are you seriously suggesting that an armed and dangerous populace is the only thing keeping fascism at bay in America, today? Notwithstanding that fascism ISN'T kept at bay in America, what other possible reason is there for that logic? One might just as easily say, "Sweden, 2007," where the issue is protecting society from gun violence rather than conflating responsible gun control with state fascism.

[razors edge]

86. Not as crazy as thinking

the only reason people are killed in America is because there are guns. If there was not a single gun in this country and the same socio-economic situation were in place, killings would not drop, and would most likely increase.

Switzerland has compulsory gun ownership for military age males, yet it has a far lower murder rate than the U.S. But Switzerland also has far stricter gun control laws. Even so, Switzerland has the second highest rate of handgun ownership and handgun murders in the industrialized world, after the U.S.

Maybe it isn't the guns, maybe its us.

[mike_c]

92. while that might be true, it still follows that removing the guns...

...removes an easy way for people to kill one another, just like clicking a remote control. I am not so naive as to suggest that without guns, people won't find other ways to do violence and mayhem to one another. If everyone walked around wearing swords, the murder rate by edged weapons would be off the charts, just like it once was in much of the world. So yes, maybe it's us-- but "we" still respond to opportunity or the lack of it, and even if the real problem is the folks WITH the guns rather than the guns themselves, one part of the solution remains preventing folks from having easy access to those guns.

[razors edge]

110. I believe people act without thinking

of the consequences for anyone involved, we don't manage anger very well.

When I was younger and first out of the Marines, I owned a shotgun and nothing more, I didn't want the responsibility of securing the weapon while I was away at work. Thirty years later I understand the consequences of using my well secured eight guns for anything other than target practice, or home defense. I don't care to CC personally but I have no problem with it for others.

My reason for not wanting to CC is not that I'm afraid something bad would happen while doing so, quite the contrary, I don't want to be on a list of houses to visit first on a round up order should people like you succeed in initiating one, one that would be doomed to failure, and then my being left unarmed as the country descended into revolution.

If you live in a big city, thats your deal, it ain't mine, so deal with the possibility of being shot in the city or move out to the country and deal with snakes and bears and such.

As an aircraft mechanic/ machinist, I can build almost any gun if I had to, I already reload pistol and rifle at home, so even if they were all rounded up, there would still be more coming out for sale, and the price would be driven through the ceiling making it so profitable those with little or no skills would fab them up to turn a buck. They might even sell one of these to someone you care about who could end up having it blow up in their face.

Watch out what you ask for, you might just get it.

[mike_c]

120. then why is the gun violence rate so much lower in most other...

...industrialized, first world countries? Can they not make their own weapons too? Ultimately, all these arguments about how "people could get guns anyway," or "only the criminals would have guns," and so on are belied by other countries' experiences. The per capita gun violence rate in the U.S. is astronomically higher than in Europe and Asia (these figures are out of date, but I don't think they've gotten any better):

"...gun-related deaths were five to six times higher in the Americas than in Europe or Australia and New Zealand and 95 times higher than in Asia.

Here are gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994: United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05."

Brazil is still largely a frontier country that has dramatic social justice problems, as do Mexico and Estonia. After that-- you're more likely to be shot in America than in Northern Ireland, or Israel-- both countries rocked by violence. But not by gun violence, at least not by American standards.

"If you have a country saturated with guns -- available to people when they are intoxicated, angry or depressed -- it's not unusual guns will be used more often," said Rebecca Peters, a Johns Hopkins University fellow specializing in gun violence. "This has to be treated as a public health emergency."

http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html

[razors edge]

124. Drugs. Race. Culture.

How many of these countries have a drug war?

How many of these countries have the long standing racial inequality issues we do?

How many would rather have their children see a man killed on TV than a bare breast?

[wtmusic]

126. Pretty far-fetched to suggest American culture is to blame.

If anything, American culture is the result of easy access to handguns -- not the other way around.

[razors edge]

134. Pretty short sighted to

miss the fact that we teach our kids how to shoot with a game station but let them learn about real life relationships on the streets, but hey it's not our fault, were busy people.

[qdemn7]

168. American Culture IS to blame

It IS Repression.... American Repression

America is the largest producer and consumer of pornography in the world.

In America we once banned the sale and consumption of alcohol. It was a miserable failure and led directly to the rise of a new class of gangsters.

Americans are also the largest consumers of street drugs in the world. In America we have had a 80+ year-long "War on Drugs" that has been another miserable failure and has led directly to rise of other new classes of gangsters. In addition America’s demand for street drugs has led to political and criminal problems in other places in the world.

The real problem is right here in America. We have a repressive belief system, based on an archaic belief system.

[mike_c]

128. ok, but all that points to the greater NEED for gun control in the U.S....

I mean, all of those circumstances undoubtedly contribute to gun violence in America, but how does that argue that we should continue to make guns available to nearly anyone who wants one? The only truly meaningful gun ownership filter in this country is economic-- some people can't afford guns. Most can, and America is saturated with deadly weapons.

Besides, every one of those countries has drug, social justice inequity, and culture problems, too.

[razors edge]

145. Don't you find it ironic

that you support the economic filter of gun ownership that disproportionately affects Blacks and Hispanics, sounds a bit racist to me, but I understand how someone who is advocating for the removal of something from society will ignore such things if they feel if it is for the greater good.

Tens of millions of safely built guns were not used today. Punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is just not going to work.

[mike_c]

149. no no-- don't misunderstand me....

I was noting the existence of that "economic filter" as an observation only.

[DonP]

70. Good luck with that fantasy

But you better stay out of every major city on the planet and specifically avoid places with total gun control like Chicago and Washington DC, those are the ones with the highest murder rates.

[wtmusic]

112. That "fantasy" is a reality in pretty much every major city on the planet

outside the US.

[razors edge]

119. They aren't mostly inhabited by

Americans, there may be a connection.

[qdemn7]

167. Really?

I want to be able to fly like Superman. We both have about the same odds getting what we want.

[billbuckhead]

52. There are cars you can't buy by law and in many states they have taxes on cars

Ever buy a Chinese, Indian, Russian car? They still don't pass our regulations. Know what a "gray market" car is?

Ever have a gun not pass state safety inspection?

Ever paid ad valorem tax or impact fees on your precious firearm?

Ever been required by law to have insurance on your firearm?

Ever had to pass an eye test for your firearm?

Ever buy a firearm on credit and have the bank put on a GPS tracking device?

I could go on.

[October]

95. Some answers to your questions

Interesting.

I don't feel sorry at all for anyone who has to WAIT to purchase a gun. No tears shed here.

Teens in PA can't just get a car license, btw. They go through hours of driving with a parent/adult first. They have to pass a test.

Traffic laws are different in every state. You can be arrested on the spot in some states for certain violations. In other states you better have cash on hand to pay your ticket, or you'll go to jail.
(There was a guy tasered in Texas recently when he was stopped for doing 70 in a 65 MPH zone.)

Yes, there are luxury taxes on vehicles, too!

And not all cars are sold in all areas.

Sheesh, why do gun owners think they're so persecuted?

[Flora]

142. Taser for speeding??

Traffic laws are different in every state. You can be arrested on the spot in some states for certain violations. In other states you better have cash on hand to pay your ticket, or you'll go to jail.
(There was a guy tasered in Texas recently when he was stopped for doing 70 in a 65 MPH zone.)

The tasered guy, was that his punishment for speeding?? Did he have no cash on hand?? Is is normal payment for speeding in Texas, or were there circumstances other than speeding that led to the taser?

[madeline_con]

154. Did you see the video?

For some reason, the guy thought he could just walk away, saying, "What's wrong with you?" to the cop, and the whole incident would be forgotten, no ticket.

He put his hand in his pocket, and was walking back toward his car. The cop could legitimately believe he might have had or was on his way to get a firearm. So he tased the guy. Absolutley understandable under the curcumstances.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Sure, nobody really needs guns.

But then again, nobody really needs free speech.

But then again, it's not really about "need."

For the last six years, the Bush administration has been taking away freedom in the name of "security." Because a widely publicized incident killed some people, and everybody jerked their knee, and figured freedom for security was a bargain.

I really don't see how this is any different than that.

[slackmaster]

5. IBMTG

In Before Move To Gungeon.

[BOSSHOG]

7. Everybody from the age of six up should be heavily armed at all times

It is what the founding fathers intended. Just "interpret" the second amendment. Automatic weapons for all, grenades in every back pack. Just interpret. Disposable fully loaded handguns at the Walmart checkouts with no backgrond checks. Just interpret. Every American has the right to blow the fuck out of however many Americans he or she wants to. Its right there in the constitution. Just "interpret." The second amendment is one sentence, how hard can it be to "interpret" it? All of my neighbors and their children should be heavily armed, FOR SAFETYS SAKE.

[Demobrat]

10. Of course. We must all be armed to the teeth at all times

in order to defend ourselves and our families against bogeymen with guns .

[Oeditpus Rex]

14. And gorillas

Don't forget gorillas. :scared:

[Demobrat]

107. And the government.

When they come to take our guns away.

[AlinPA]

12. Plus you need to defend yourself and get them before they get you.

[wtmusic]

18. Yep, "preemptive self-defense". Look how well it worked with Saddam. nt

[bluestateguy]

9. I know I trust the federal government "decide" if I'm "allowed" to own a gun...

"Very few people genuinely NEED to possess or carry guns-- not for self defense or any other purpose."

Please take that elitist drivel back to the Georgetown cocktail party where it belongs.

[mike_c]

11. would you feel differently if strict gun control were instituted...

...by referendum rather than by "the federal government?" If your friends and neighbors decided that your gun ownership threatened their collective safety more than your individual "rights" warranted?

[bluestateguy]

16. No I would not.

If your utopia of "strict gun control" and "gun free zones" in public places became a reality, law-abiding people would be forced to turn in their guns, leaving them defenseless against violent criminals.

Call me a little nutty, but I don't forsee the hardened criminals of this country complying with a government mandate to turn in their guns.

The Virginia tech campus was also a "gun free" zone. Mr. Cho I Can't Pronounce His Annoying Name chose to violate that policy. Maybe someone should have walked up to him and said "Excuse me sir, but this is a gun-free zone and you'll have to take that elsewhere."

[mike_c]

21. so your objection to gun control is strictly selfish and has nothing to do...

...with the motives of the government. It is all about bluestateguy and his self-perceived need to carry deadly weapons. Or that's the way you're making it sound.

I think that is irrational. Why are you so afraid?

[bluestateguy]

30. Actually that is a big part of it

Gun control is a government policy. It is administered by government. As such, I think I have every right to question the motives of government if we are going to ask government to confiscate or ban 200 million guns in the US.

[wtmusic]

35. Motives of government?

We're talking about referenda. That is motives of the people around you. In the case they don't agree with you, it turns into a government conspiracy?

[karlrschneider]

31. The idea is to be prepared, NOT afraid. You really aren't very bright, are you?

:eyes:

[mike_c]

41. perhaps folks who cannot discuss matters of importance...

...without insulting others have more need to be afraid-- or simply prepared for violence-- than the rest of us have.

I've never carried a gun in my 52 years of life. I have been robbed. I've been mugged. I've been the victim of numerous crimes. Nonetheless, I don't feel the least bit "unprepared," at least not in the sense that you're alluding to. Frankly, being robbed was not the end of my world. Being mugged was ultimately more embarrassing than threatening. No one needed to die or be injured to preserve me from fear, or to demonstrate that I was "prepared" to protect myself.

I say you are a coward if you are afraid to face the normal threats of daily existence with nothing more than your wits and your ability to beat feet. Even if that means you are simply afraid to face the possiblility of your own mortality.

A coward and a danger to the rest of society.

But I'm not very bright, am I?

[karlrschneider]

51. Nobody is saying you cannot enjoy being a martyr or even a masochist...

I do hope there are not others who depend on your unswerving dedication to self-preservation...they might be sorely disappointed (or simply dead) if a less-accomodating mugger happens upon your other-cheek-turned personage with mayhem in mind.

No, not very bright. Lucky, though.

[Ghost in the Machine]

57. BWAAAAAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH BWAAAAAAAA HAHAHAHA

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Frankly, being robbed was not the end of my world.

No, but it very well could have been

I say you are a coward if you are afraid to face the normal threats of daily existence with nothing more than your wits and your ability to beat feet. Even if that means you are simply afraid to face the possiblility of your own mortality.

So you think it's better to run like a chickenshit and give in to some pathetic little cretin who's too lazy to work for what he wants or needs?? And *you* have the NERVE to call *someone else* a coward??

Again,

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[mike_c]

61. how many people do you think it's OK to kill...

...over what "could have been," but wasn't?

[Ghost in the Machine]

79. Every fucking one of them....

Because you don't know *how* it will end until it's over, do you? How many times have you read about people complying with the demands of an armed robber, only to get killed anyways?? It happens every fucking day.

When you threaten *my* life and/or well being, you'd damn well better be prepared to defend your *own* life. I've put one of these sorry fuckers in the ground already and have NO remorse about it and didn't lose any sleep over it and I'd do it again in a fucking heartbeat if I *had* to.

You better believe that if you put me in the position where it's "you or me", I'm going to do everything in *my* power to make sure it's YOU... even if I have to die trying. I don't run from lottie dottie nogoddamnedbody. Never have, never will. You pull a gun or a knife on me, you'd better know how AND be prepared to use it or I'll take you out of this world. PERIOD.

[mike_c]

85. get angry much...?

Damn, 'bro. I sincerely hope you don't hurt anyone just to save your self esteem from having "run from lottie dottie nogoddamnedbody."

[Ghost in the Machine]

100. Angry? No.... but I do get a little touchy on this subject....

I don't cave in to criminals. Maybe it has something to do with being brought up in an environment where I was basically being taught self defense from the time I was able to walk. I was also taught responsible gun ownership and marksmanship. I had my first BB gun when I was 5, and my first .22 rifle when I was 7. I wasn't allowed to take the .22 out by myself until I was 13, but I knew what to shoot at and what not to shoot at. My 14 year old son is being taught the same way.

As for self esteem, it has NOTHING to do with self esteem, period. It has to do with the "fight or flight" reaction. I've been trained to fight. You made the statement about "beating feet" (running = flight), which may be *your* first reaction, and that may work well for you and for others, but not for me. Running is not an option for me. Turn and run so you can be shot in the back?? I don't *think* so. I want to see if you've got guts enough to look me in the eyes and pull a trigger... If that isn't "facing my own mortality", what is??

Angry?? No.. I'm a peace loving creature by nature... very easy-going and would rather burn one with you and make you laugh and make you a friend than have to kick your ass or kill you. I'm the nicest person you'd ever want to meet in the world... until you cross me... then I *can* become your worst nightmare come true.

PEACE!

Ghost

[Paladin]

99. Better An Occasional Burglar In My Neighborhood Than You.

n/t

[Ghost in the Machine]

109. Yeah, good luck with *that*... maybe one of those "occasional burglars"

might turn out to be some crazed killer that'll kill you and your whole family without thinking twice about it.... that would be *much* better than having me around, huh? :eyes:

Some of you people would serve yourselves better if you just learned to keep your inane thoughts to yourself. You know the old saying... "it's better to remain silent and be thought of as a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt"... it certainly applies in this case.

[karlrschneider]

118. The occasional burglar might occasionally kill your occasional ass.

The poster you're (unsuccessfully) baiting won't.

[wtmusic]

121. Pretty scary shit.

I better go out and get me a gun.

:rofl:

[Kingshakabobo]

148. Ooooooooo, that's hot. Stop it.

[karlrschneider]

98. There are some truly amazing people hereabouts, aren't there?

WTF doesn't even come close to apropos. Sheesh.
:D

[Ghost in the Machine]

102. And people wonder why Democrats are thought of as the "party of wimps"

I try to break that myth as often as possible. I have nothing against a pacifist and I'll be glad to be one of the ones to help defend them when it all breaks down....

Is today "opposite day" or something? I am truly shocked at some of the threads I've seen today. People wanted to ban guns, call cops on kids smoking a joint... hell there were some the other day wanting to call cops on noisy neighbors and another wanting to turn a hose on noisy neighbors... have we been infiltrated by fascist authoritarians?

:hi:

[karlrschneider]

105. Like Will Rogers, I belong to no organized political party...

I'm a Democrat. :D

[billbuckhead]

60. Personally insulting those individuals for the gun regulations the EU and Commonwealth enjoy

America out of step with the rest of the world on the most basic of human rights issues? Imagine that. The UN's wrong and the neoCONS are right once again.

[qdemn7]

170. Two things I don't give a shit

What the rest of the world thinks. Guns and the Death Penalty.

[qdemn7]

169. I'm afraid of people like you

With mentalities like yours.

[wtmusic]

23. Or maybe...

someone "would have" made it a little harder for crazy Mr. Cho to buy a gun in the first place.

Law-abiding people couldn't be forced to turn in their guns any more than violent criminals would. Here's what would happen: when violent criminals got pulled over, detained, or searched, they'd have their guns taken away. All the "law-abiding citizens" (are there any?) would have them tucked safely in their gun cabinets and we'd all be better off.

[Flora]

80. Gun control would work

just as well as drug control. Crack cocaine is illegal, and look at the success that law.

Guns and drugs would only be in the hands of the bad guys.

[qdemn7]

171. How about if your friends and neighbors

Decided they didn't want you in their neighborhood because of the color of your skin? Or your religion? Or your sexual orientation? Yeah let's just put ALL our rights to the whim of the mob.

[BOSSHOG]

15. I would like to see

the second amendment (I guess in some other form) brought forward to the 21st century. You and I have the right to own weapons for the purpose of defending our country. That is what the second amendment says. No interpretation necessary. This incessant interpreting is dumb for lack of a better word. The solution would be to repeal, rethink and rewrite the amendment to fit the realitys of today, not the 19th century.

[fascisthunter]

13. I Never Bought the Need to Carry a Gun in order to Feel Safe

I believe if one feels the need to carry, they should look into a bit of therapy , unless it's your job. Living in fear is not good for anyone's health nor security. I understand those who live in violent neighborhoods... fear is natural, so is the need to feel safe, I grew up in a rough neighborhood. But not feeling safe constantly, to the point where you need to carry the gun around with you, is a bit extreme.

The need to carry in a city=gangs/thugs

paranoia

[DonP]

27. Have any fire extinguishers at home?

Or does that mean you are "paranoid" about having a fire in the kitchen?

A spare tire in your car mean you're paranoid about a breakdown, or prepared just in case?

Don't want to own or carry a gun? Then don't, but don't tell the rest of us what we are allowed to do or how we may feel.

That's best left to the Fundies, they are already really good at directing the lives of other people.

[fascisthunter]

37. nope.... actually I don't, and I should

but extinguishers can't blow the cap of someone's head off just by pulling a trigger.

[mike_c]

49. guns = fire extinguishers and spare tires-- a new pinnacle in twisted logic....

"Don't tell the rest of us what to do" is a terrible argument, IMO. We live in a SOCIETY, where your actions affect the safety and health of others. In societies, individuals often need to sacrifice their personal desires for the collective good.

How about a compromise? In the spirit of seeking consensus, I'll leave fire extinguishers and spare tires alone if you'll help us limit the number of guns killing people in America.

[DonP]

67. Great idea!

Since we've already thrown a big chunk of the first and fourth amendment out the window to this adminstration, why not just trust them with more control over gun ownership too and toss the second in the pot. How about gun registration and give the Bushie Feds a complete list of every gun owner in the US? After all it's for the public good? Kind of like the library book list they want.

Sorry I guess I just don't have the same high level of trust and faith in the people running the Federal govenrment as you seem to.

Gun owners have been compromising for the last twenty plus years and gun restrictions have been expanding with a growing crime and murder rate to show for it. DC and Chicago have had complete gun bans fsince 1976 and fat lot of good it does them and thei crime rate.

I'm open to any idea that will affect criminals with guns, but not a single new restriction on law abiding citizens. But hey, there are only 90+ million of us out here that vote like clockwork, so no candidate should really give a crap what we think.

Besides, it's not about my "personal desire" it's about my inalienable right, just like that free speech thing, according the what's left of the constitution.

[Joe Fields]

116. You have an "inalienable" right to shove doorknobs up your ass.

You going to do that, too? You talk about law abiding citizens. But you fail to even address domestic violence murders by guns, which account for a whopping one third of all women murdered in the U.S. And so I suppose every woman that is murdered is by the hand of a criminal loved one?

Guns are much to easy to access, and it is all too easy to grab one and point it at someone, in the heat of the moment. Once a bullet is discharged from the chamber of a gun, you cannot take it back.

I hear people talk about owning guns for protection. But how many people have armed robbers announce to them that they are coming to rob them? The robbers always sneak up on their prey, which would nullify any edge of owning and carrying a gun. How many gun owners have had handguns stolen? My brother-in-law did. He had a collection of guns and rifles stolen. They didn't do him much good. But they sure helped out the criminals.

Well, it's my inalienable right to own a dog, which I do, and I'm 51 years old, and I've never had my house burglarized, my car broken into, and I've never been mugged. I have had martial arts training, am totally aware of people in my surroundings, and don't place myself in dangerous situations or dangerous areas of town. I have never felt the need to own a gun.

[karlrschneider]

122. Fine. You don't want a gun, don't fucking GET one. Don't get an ABORTION either if you don't

want one....and don't you fucking DARE tell everybody else they have to run their lives just exactly like you think you're running yours.


IOW, FOAD

[Joe Fields]

138. Go play with all the guns you want, Karl, but don't insult my intelligence

by shoveling shit about how much safer America would be if everyone owned a fucking gun.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joe Fields]

146. Go stroke your gun, Karl.

That's exactly what you inferred.

[wtmusic]

123. No kidding? Which amendment was that?

I may have rights that I don't even know about.

[Joe Fields]

131. Not sure that applies in Alabama....LOL

[The Magistrate]

19. One Weakness of This Whole 'Armed People Would Stop It' Line, Sir

Is that responding police arrive on the scene with very little knowledge of who is who.

In a similar instance a couple of years ago, there was an off-duty policeman present, who of course drew his weapon and attempted to intervene, though unsuccessfully. There was some very interesting video that emerged, showing the tense few moments it took for him to convince arriving police he was not the gunman shooting up the place: they were in no mood to listen, and came damned close to shooting their colleague....

[karlrschneider]

28. A rare happenstance given the abysmal lack of alacrity of most police response.

I could call the sheriff and cook supper before anybody would show up out here.

[The Magistrate]

36. There Is Some Truth, Sir

To the contention that rural conditions do necessarily throw people more onto their own resources, in many spheres. Were my residence out in the boondocks, you may be sure it would be equipped with a couple of fire-arms, and family members practiced in their use....

[karlrschneider]

43. There appears to be a similar situation in Detroit according to some reports.

...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=3090357

[malaise]

20. Great post n/t

[alarimer]

22. I make no apologies for being in favor of gun control

I have no ides if it would have helped in this case. But I have to wonder why so many nutcases (apologies to non-violent nutcases) are allowed or somehow contrive to get access to weapons? How on earth does that happen?

In addition, I think concealed-carry permits need to be revoked everywhere. If you want to carry a weapon, it needs to be out in the open, where we can all see and stay they hell away from you.

I admit, I do not trust people who feel the need to be armed at all time (and I generally do not trust the police either).

[karlrschneider]

24. Way to carry the rightwinger Brady Bunch's water there.

I'll keep my 2nd amendment rights AND my guns and there's not a fucking thing you can do about it.

[billbuckhead]

69. Those Reichwingers like the Congressional Black Caucus and George Clooney

Here's the link to the rest of the NRAenemies list.
<http://www.nrablacklist.com/>

[-..__...]

25. No thanks... I'll pass

I think I'm quite capable of deciding what I may or may not "need" without others deciding for me.

(Thanks for the offer though).

[wtmusic]

29. Others have already decided many things you don't need.

Living in a society can be a real bitch.

[-..__...]

62. Oh, okay, that changes things.

Might as well roll over on my back and accept my fate then... not.

[wtmusic]

103. You've already accepted it

so don't act like it's a matter of principle.

[karlrschneider]

127. You've already conceded defeat to the assholes and you have the colossal nerve to

mention principle?


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


That's the funniest and saddest fucking thing I've heard this year.

[wtmusic]

130. Conceded defeat to....whom?

:shrug:

[karlrschneider]

132. The people who want to decimate your Constitution. Were you sleeping?

:eyes:

[wtmusic]

139. IMO there's enough breathing room in A2

to tighten controls without doing away without gun ownership completely. I don't believe it's a slippery slope, or that anything in the Constitution was meant to entitle anyone to own any weapon. Again -- this is not a matter of principle, unless you believe individual citizens should be allowed to construct nuclear weapons.

[karlrschneider]

141. I think existing controls are enough but need to be better administered...however I wonder:

Although I've never asserted the right to build a nuke, I'd be interested to hear why (or if) you think the proposition is intrinsically more absurd than the right of a nation (in itself a concept subject to considerable definitive debate) to do so.

There is plenty reason to believe one person (the President) has the very real ability to use nuclear weapon(s) pretty much on his own initiative...in Bush's case, this fact does not particularly make me happy that "regular" people don't.
If I have to trust somebody, I can think of several million others, most of whom I don't even know, who would be every bit as acceptable.

[wtmusic]

161. Hmm.

I would have to say that at least in the case of nations building/using nuclear weapons it would likely be a collective decision. That using something with this destructive force would not be entrusted to the judgement of one very subjective individual, who could be having a bad day. Also, that that individual has withstood public scrutiny enough to be elected to their position and is not certifiably insane.

Although there is no guarantee of either, and I certainly will not vouch for *'s sanity.

Would the world be safer if everyone had firearms, or no one did? You can bet if no one did, someone is going to pick up a bigass stick and start robbing others. If everyone had firearms, and powerful ones, what are the chances that a relatively minor incident could induce mob psychology/mayhem? Weighing the relative merits/disadvantages and invoking the precautionary principle I see less danger in the former.

It's interesting to note that in pre-invasion Iraq nearly everyone was armed, and it did nothing to challenge the reign of a brutal dictator.

onedit: I always thought Howard Dean's position on guns made sense. Leave it up to states -- let people living within the scope of a policy (local) determine that policy.

[-..__...]

135. No, it's a matter of drawing the line somewhere.

Just because I've (we), allowed our "needs" to be compromised in the past, doesn't mean I (we), should willingly allow it to continue.

[The Straight Story]

26. People kill people. simple enough.

While we debate about guns, humans are still killing each other via various means.

[wtmusic]

32. Yeah, but people with guns tend to kill a lot more. nt

[karlrschneider]

40. Yeah. Like Timothy McVeigh.

:eyes:

[wtmusic]

101. Curious -- how many people have died from handguns vs

fertilizer bombs in the last 12 years? That's what I thought.

[Pavulon]

104. Vs cars..

90 a day every day..

[wtmusic]

106. We depend on guns to survive as much as we do cars, do we? nt

[Pavulon]

111. Take the bus..

yo have no right to a car. Survival is not the issue.

[wtmusic]

113. You're the one who brought up death rates

so apparently you do think survival is the issue. Can't have it both ways.

[karlrschneider]

115. Oh, I get it! It's a NUMBERS game! And here I am with my fucking abacus in the shop.

:eyes:

[wtmusic]

117. You bet it's a numbers game

Safety is all about numbers. Enough people die, and the law gets changed. It's a good thing, too.

[karlrschneider]

129. That is bullshit and you know it. Only when those numbers translate into DOLLARS

does it become a matter for consideration. Maybe not in your little world but it's for sure true in the real one.

[wtmusic]

136. Ralph Nader got seat belts put in cars

on statistics and perseverance. Saving how many lives around the world since the '60s? Must be in the millions. They weren't all rich people, either.

In retrospect, only a blathering idiot would argue against mandatory seatbelts, safety glass, and airbags in cars. But back then IIRC some considered it a major infringement of their rights and an added expense they shouldn't need to bear.

Not against gun ownership, but I believe things need to be tightened and enforced better.

[karlrschneider]

143. I don't recall any "regular people" being against them being -installed- but a lot were averse to

being told they -had- to use them (this is an ongoing discussion with motorcycle helmets - which are not yet mandatory here in Oklahoma)

It was a monetary concern for the manufacturers, not for affected citizens.

And yes, there are too many nutballs running around with guns...law enforcement hasn't just dropped the ball on this, they never even picked the damn thing up.

[mudesi]

34. Give me a break

Look up the gun murder rate in

Norway
Sweden
France
The UK
Canada
The Netherlands
Japan

ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC

[The Straight Story]

38. Is it the guns?

Or the people using them?

[PVnRT]

46. What's the rate of gun ownership in Canada?

Hint: Watch "Bowling for Columbine" to find out.

Oh, and you can own firearms in the U.K. And Sweden. And Norway. And France. Oops.

[mudesi]

48. THEY HAVE REGULATIONS AND CONTROLS

And no idiotic "right" written into their constitutions.

[karlrschneider]

54. Damn that idiotic constitution. Let's just burn the fucking thing.

Right?

[mudesi]

55. I'll continue this with you in the near future when this happens again (nm)

[The Straight Story]

76. So you don't trust people here with guns?

Are the guns the issue or the people with them?

Do you trust the president of Iran with nukes? Do you want to keep him from getting them?

[mike_c]

58. and yet they have MUCH lower gun violence rates-- so perhaps...

...those countries are doing something right that America is getting wrong. Can you tell us WHY they have such lower gun violence rates, despite being able to own firearms? Might it have something to do with their very much tighter controls on gun possession in everyday life? On gun possession in the home?

I think the U.K, Sweden, Norway, et al have got the right idea about responsible gun ownership, and the U.S. has got it all wrong. The evidence certainly supports that perspective!

[PVnRT]

83. Or maybe it has something to do with culture

The problem is complex, and distilling it to "we need more regulation" as if that is the magic cure-all is naive.

[mike_c]

96. I don't think we need "more regulation...."

I think it should be illegal to possess a gun-- on your person or in your home-- except under very strict circumstances. Hell, I'd say we need far fewer regulations, just more effective ones. Trying to balance peoples' self-identified needs for fire power with our collective need to be safe from gun violence is clearly NOT working. I think the best alternative is preventing most people from possessing guns most of the time.

[PVnRT]

159. How will tightening restrictions on ownership prevent criminals

from getting their hands on guns? They tend to ignore niceties like that.

There are millions of gun owners across the country who have never killed anyone. Are they all to be treated as potential criminals?

[qdemn7]

172. Good, you get to ban guns

Then you can bet your ass I'm going to take something away from you that you value very, very much.

[TZ]

164. As someone who has friends in other countries

Can I say the rates of gun ownerships in those countries seems MUCH lower than in this country. And the gun violence rates in places like the UK and Australia ARE lower. I can't tell you how many times my international friends have talked about how much they cannot understand the love affairs that americans have with guns. Yes, our culture is considered gun obsessed by our allies.And I do think our culture is overly obsessed with the macho gun toting image. Personally I think regulation is all the good. I have yet to see one example of where MORE gun regulations has hurt anyone except the NRA.

[Stump]

50. Don't forget...

Washington D.C. :sarcasm:

[-..__...]

65. Well boffo for them!

No, I really mean it.

Whatever else those countries may have to offer, they, you and the other gun control freaks will just have to face the reality that the foreign model of gun control laws will be the last thing this country will embrace.

[mike_c]

75. and gun owners will continue to be the core of the lethal violence problem...

...in this country, too.

[-..__...]

84. All 60 - 80 million of us?

That's an awful heavy burden we have on our shoulders... having to bear the blame and responsibility for lethal violence in this country.

I'll hold my head in shame the next time some miscreant, gang-banger or thug feels that life and society is screwing them over and decides to even the score by settling it with bullets instead of brains.

:sarcasm:

[mike_c]

88. me too, because without access to guns, their victims might not be killed....

No sarcasm needed.

[-..__...]

94. You're one of those Perfect World types... huh?

Sorry, but in a perfect world no one would be a victim and no one would be killed.

In a perfect world there would be no crimes and no criminals.

Until that happens... myself and others will keep our guns, thank you.

Well.... actually we'd still keep them, but with fewer worries. :smoke:

[madeline_con]

155. How does outlawing my legal firearms curtail criminal access

to weapons?

I've never heard that one explained.

[joshcryer]

97. I imagine alcoholic drivers will always be ahead of gun owners.

Or just young irresponsible drivers. Just to put things into perspective a bit.

[mike_c]

108. true, but by and large drunk drivers aren't so adament...

...about their "rights" to drive drunk as gun owners are about their rights to possess deadly weapons-- and use them. That's the crux of the issue in my mind. All of those responsible gun owners who never kill anyone needlessly notwithstanding, 30,000 Americans ARE killed and 65,000 maimed annually by gun owners. What about them? What about their rights?

[beevul]

151. Conversely...

Folks like you, and people who favor a complete ban on gun ownership in America, aren't so adamant about banning alcohol.

Alcohol accounts for over 200 deaths per DAY in America.


"All of those responsible gun owners who never kill anyone needlessly notwithstanding, 30,000 Americans ARE killed and 65,000 maimed annually by gun owners. What about them? What about their rights?"

Not quite.

How many of those are suicides?


Dont drink the brady kool-aid.

[mike_c]

152. interestingly, you've touched on the ONE justification I fully accept...

...for widespread gun ownership, which is suicide-- the right to determine when and how to end ones own life. But there are MUCH more enlightened ways for society to facilitate death with dignity than munching the barrel of a handgun, despite the undisputed efficacy of doing it that way. Still, that's just about the only reason I can imagine ever buying a gun myself-- just about the only need for one that I can imagine, short of civil war in America.

As for alcohol, I think we are more in agreement than you seem willing to admit. Banning alcohol-- it's probably not possible, but there isn't any doubt in my mind that EtOH is America's greatest and most destructive drug problem. What to do about it? I don't really know. I do think that dealing with gun violence could be much more straightforward than dealing with alcohol abuse, if only we had the will to do something about it.

[beevul]

156. I actually agree, regarding suicides in general...

However...

"Still, that's just about the only reason I can imagine ever buying a gun myself-- just about the only need for one that I can imagine, short of civil war in America."

Thats illustrative of the problem. For starters, there are 80 million+ gun owners. that own (the last estimate I read) some 280 million guns. While you might not see any reason to own one, one heck of a lot of people do. I for example, live somewhere that would take law enforcement a good 30 minutes to get to, and have coyotes in my yard on a nightly basis. Lost dogs and cats to them. Also had a mountain lion sighted within 5 miles of my place. More times now than I can count I have had to go out back and fire a few rounds to get the coyotes out of the yard...until they get brazen enough to come back in a day or 2.

"As for alcohol, I think we are more in agreement than you seem willing to admit. Banning alcohol-- it's probably not possible, but there isn't any doubt in my mind that EtOH is America's greatest and most destructive drug problem. What to do about it? I don't really know. I do think that dealing with gun violence could be much more straightforward than dealing with alcohol abuse, if only we had the will to do something about it."

The point I was trying to make, is that alcohol is responsible for 3 times as many deaths as firearms, yet there are no organized "alcohol grabbers" like there are gun grabbers. People for whatever reason learned that prohibition didn't work with alcohol, yet think it will on firearms (and drugs for that matter).


The problem with "having a will" to do something about it, is that when something happens such as this shooting in Omaha today, the first response from the usual suspects is "ban them all". "Reasonable" restrictions. The usual suspects (that dont want, own or like guns/or the "ok for me but not for thee" types) want to define for everyone that DOES own and like guns, what constitutes "reasonable". When the response to a shooting like the one today is to ban the firearms that the 80 million plus people that didn't commit that crime own , of course, that isn't going to sit well with them.

When dealing with gun violence becomes a thing that by default, no longer means dealing with guns first and foremost, no longer includes things like bans, common ground can and will be found.

And before anyone writes me off as a gun nut, I own 3 rifles, all 22 caliber or smaller, and 1 handgun. I do not own and have no desire to own any "military style" firearms, but I don't presume to tell anyone else they can't.

[MichaelHarris]

39. Pete Husmann had his gun

"MOSCOW — Armed with a .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol, Peter Husmann ran out of his apartment in answer to a rain of gunshots in his neighborhood.

The 20-year-old University of Idaho senior and longtime Coeur d'Alene resident was hoping to help those injured by the shooter's bullets early Sunday morning.

Instead, he became a victim himself. Husmann was shot three times by 36-year-old Jason Hamilton,"
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=9960

Good News gun guys, he's able to walk!! He's almost ready to defend his second amendment again, well after many months of rehab. He still has a little trouble getting around.


Yup, I was there that day. I saw what assault weapons can do, I saw what vigilantes think they can do.

[uppityperson]

44. People with under-treated mental health problems kill people.

Increase funding for mental health care, decrease stigma of seeking help. Increase affordable availability of decent mental health professionals. It is going to get worse, when the PTSD'd people in military return home again.

[Gregorian]

53. I like that thinking.

I think you've absolutely nailed it.

We do not care about each other in this society. And I mean it in a very different way. You said it. Care. When someone has a problem, they need to have a place to go. This should be the foundation of our society. Not funding munition factories. I just don't get it. How can Americans be so stupid. We should all be demanding this.

[goodgd_yall]

140. Absolutely

And some people thrown into jail need mental health care, not incarceration. Our society has a long way to go before the mental health needs of its people are begun to be addressed.

[mudesi]

45. KICKED AND RECOMMENDED (nm)

[mainegreen]

68. Personally, I think we should ban peanuts.

[Initech]

73. What happened? Did I miss something here?

[mitchum]

74. Mike, are you tenured?

And if so (or even not), maybe we really need to reexamine the basis for retaining an outmoded nineteenth century practice. Just saying...

[mike_c]

77. LOL, touche....

You can have my tenure when you pry my cold dead hands away from the door to the faculty lunch room....

Full disclaimer: we don't actually have a faculty lunch room, but I wish we did!

[Xenotime]

78. Wasn't there a shooting in a mall this time last year?

[Dawggie]

81. Thank you.

You are so right. Don't let the bastards get you down.

[Liberal In Texas]

82. And if was legal to own heat-seeking missiles, planes would be falling from the sky.

The only thing anyone can know for sure is that as long as firearms are as easy to get as they are, this will keep happening.

[joshcryer]

87. Chris Rock, "If bullets were $5000..."

Guns are pretty easy to make. I have the plans for a fully automatic machine gun that I downloaded off of the internet (the plans are legal to have, the gun is not). If you ban guns then, as the old adage goes, only criminals will have them.

Frankly I like Chris Rock's view. ;)

[conspirator]

165. Please give me that plan. where is it? nt

[qdemn7]

173. Funny you should ask

The guy is in the UK. http://www.thehomegunsmith.com/

[progressivebydesign]

90. If you recall the mall shooting in tacoma, someone DID pull a gun.. and..

got shot. It didn't fucking work. Unless you're a military person or trained law enforcement, there are very few people that will just walk behind someone like that and take them out, the way it should be done. The guy that got shot in tacoma pulled a gun on him and was doing the 'stop or i'll shoot' thing, but the guy had a bigger gun and just shot him (he lived btw).

Arming citizens doesn't stop these things apparently, but having access to guns lets murderers like those do their killing more easily. Perhaps someone will start asking why these young men feel the need for attention so badly that they have to kill innocent strangers to do it. Or maybe someone will get a clue and figure out that a steady diet of violent movies and games makes a society violent, and start looking at what they're bringing into their house for their children to watch or play. Millions of kids are growing up without any empathy. The age in which their brains develop empathy is the age when parents start allowing violent games and movies into their lives... just a tragedy.

What a senseless tragedy. Why can't people like that just kill themselves first?

[Liberal In Texas]

93. Even cops get shot with their own guns.

This isn't the bloody frontier anymore.

[ManiacJoe]

150. And he put it back into the holster and continued unarmed

into the kill zone and proceded to get shot. Very bad tactics, even admitted by the "armed civilian".

[liberal renegade]

114. just start charging $100 for every bullet.

[Dukkha]

125. well fortunately for us it's not a Bill of Needs

nor do we take the right wing approach and pick and choose which amendments appeal to us and abolish those pesky inconvenient ones like Habeas Corpus.

[EFerrari]

147. I never bought one toy gun for either of my sons

(they made them out of Leggos!) but I honestly don't think gun control is the answer. Maybe it would be, in a "harm reduction" sense, mitigating.

There's a bigger, cultural imperative sort of thingy at work here. "I can shoot you because you're not me and I'm what matters". The cult of the individual, locked and loaded.

[iamthebandfanman]

157. dont worry, theyll put metal detecters in malls now

kinda suprised they hadnt already... seeing as almost every place that holds alot of people has (stadiums n such)...

[benEzra]

163. Since he walked in dressed in camoflage toting a 4-foot-long rifle...

I doubt security would have needed a metal detector to notice he had a gun.

[iamthebandfanman]

185. i would hardly

call what he was wearing "camoflage" but yeah, youd think someone woulda noticed the rifle...unless there was a gun/sports store in the mall....

[Irreverend IX]

158. I would rather be free than safe.

In the 20th century, about 260,000,000 people fell victim to democide (murder by their own government). The chances of falling to a madman's bullet are negligible in comparison. I would rather know that the government has reason to fear the people than have the people give up their firearms out of hope for a false sense of security.

The only real answer to the problem of "gun violence" is to legalize drugs, since the illegal drug trade is connected to most of the violent crime in the US, and make mental health care available to all. You correctly assume that only a massive and sweeping campaign of gun restrictions could make any kind of dent in US gun crime. If the Democrats embarked on such a campaign of restrictions, the West and southeast would turn red forever.

Face it: gun control is a guaranteed loser. Any new federal restriction that gets passed will be a Pyrrhic victory, since it will immediately trigger another 1994-style Republican revolution. If Democrats take control of the government, they can expand mental health care, help to remedy the culture of greed and alienation that produces these mass murders, and maybe take steps toward legalizing drugs if they have the courage. But gun control proposals will only help ensure Republican rule for the forseeable future.

[LanternWaste]

160. Doesn't the bumper sticker read...

Doesn't the bumper sticker read, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will accidentally shoot their children..."?

Or, "Guns don't kill people, but the bullets do"

Too many people getting shot. That's all I really know about this stuff.

[AlCzervik]

174. Wayne La Pierre just called, you've got the job!

[jmg257]

181. There are over 1.4 Million reasons why you are wrong.*

*An estimated 1,417,745 violent crimes occurred nationwide in 2006.
(including approx 448,000 robberies, 92,000 forcible rapes & 17,000 murders.)


THAT is why we NEED access to guns for self-defense. Some don't like taking on the responsibility involved, OK. Some would prefer to be unarmed victims, OK. Some would like to think they can depend on the State to keep them secure. OoooKkkkkk.

But many, many others refuse to be helpless victims, and so NEED to enjoy the right of self-defense, and so NEED the means to accomplish that right (otherwise it is not a right at all).

YOU don't want or think you need to take advantage of your rights, no problem - your choice. I choose otherwise. I choose not to fear criminals imposing their will on me & mine, but instead to be prepared to confront it.



(and that's just the individual right to keep and bear. We can discuss the "protection of our liberties" issue too, and these days it should be a given that THE PEOPLE employ the intent & the security of the 2nd more then ever.)