Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
22. how insane are you?
Sat Jul 21, 2012, 04:27 PM
Jul 2012

and please entrust any guns or sharp objects to someone who can secure them from you.

One thing I know for sure... Speck Tater Jul 2012 #1
I didn't say he wasn't responsible. I said he has a condition that should have been shadowrider Jul 2012 #3
It is mistaken to conclude that people are blaming guns randr Jul 2012 #2
You're joking, right? Tejas Jul 2012 #4
I am not joking randr Jul 2012 #117
The immediate call for increased gun control tells me the gun(s) are being blamed shadowrider Jul 2012 #5
Yeah, imagine that! Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #7
Nah, knives never cause mass murder shadowrider Jul 2012 #9
yes there are other ways. So best not to do anything to make it less easy. Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #12
Sure, knives are sometimes used in murders. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #13
Hang on a second please shadowrider Jul 2012 #17
Those examples you offered don't prove knives can cause just as much damage as guns. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #23
11 killed with a homemade flame thrower? gejohnston Jul 2012 #39
LOL! Given up on the knives thing, eh? Very wise. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #42
Are dead only dead if killed with guns in your view or do other means mean nothing? shadowrider Jul 2012 #44
Oh, the dead are no less dead. There just tend to be so much fewer of them Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #45
You missed the memo on Rwanda, didn't you? n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #134
guns are not often used in hold ups and rapes gejohnston Jul 2012 #46
Holmes didn't injure 71 people and kill 12? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #47
last one I saw was gejohnston Jul 2012 #49
No. Not ten. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #53
Why does distance matter? Euromutt Jul 2012 #19
They're more dead when killed with a gun, ain't you got the memo? n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #20
They're less alive than they would be Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #26
You don't know that, and you can't know that Euromutt Jul 2012 #144
Please cite for me some examples of a single individual killing a dozen or more people within minute Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #171
they were choking on tear gas gejohnston Jul 2012 #175
Still waiting for all those examples of a single person with a knife Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #186
Still waiting to hear where he got the tear gas grenades gejohnston Jul 2012 #189
Yeah, the sale of that stuff needs to be controlled, to. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #190
it is, that was my point gejohnston Jul 2012 #192
Seems I may have answered my own question, sort of. gejohnston Jul 2012 #194
You don't think being able to kill from a distance makes killing more effective? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #25
You're moving the goalposts Euromutt Jul 2012 #102
I wish people would learn what these expressions mean before using them. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #113
Let me quote what you said... Euromutt Jul 2012 #143
Indeed. You DON'T often hear of a single person managing to kill over a dozen people... Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #167
So all K-12 schools shouldn't be gun free zones? HockeyMom Jul 2012 #8
I didn't say they shouldn't be gun free but explain to me how you enforce it? shadowrider Jul 2012 #11
We can't prevent murder so should we then decriminalize it? upaloopa Jul 2012 #28
I said nothing of decriminalizing it. I asked how you enforce a no gun zone shadowrider Jul 2012 #32
A gun free zone does not actually protect kids, does it? hack89 Jul 2012 #151
He apparently can't explain how a gun-free zone would be enforced shadowrider Jul 2012 #153
In high school I took a gun every Thursday gejohnston Jul 2012 #14
Armed cops alabama_for_obama Jul 2012 #157
No, the gunS (he had more than one) didn't do it on their own. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #6
I blame our idiotic gun culture and the absurd availability of weapons. Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #10
So the mental health aspect means nothing. Blame it on the gun. Got it. shadowrider Jul 2012 #15
Yep. Without the guns this disturbed young man would likely not have done as much damage. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #16
NOW you're getting it. Why wasn't this "unbalanced individual" treated when by all shadowrider Jul 2012 #18
Being in favor of some level of gun control Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #77
Good. Mental health services in this particular case could have averted this tragedy. shadowrider Jul 2012 #90
Coupled with effective gun control, yes, I think they could have. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #96
W/out the gun Trunk Monkey Jul 2012 #29
Dude, get the memo. You're more dead if killed with a gun. Theyz evil I say n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #33
Yes, I really think this guy would have been less likely to kill and maim the people he did Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #114
where did he set them gejohnston Jul 2012 #118
You think he used a gun because he wanted to kill FEWER people? Really? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #119
no, gejohnston Jul 2012 #120
His ability to kill a lot of people plainly was limited, because his attempt at it WITHOUT a gun Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #121
for example? gejohnston Jul 2012 #122
His booby trapped apartment killed nobody. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #123
Only because the cops knew what they were doing gejohnston Jul 2012 #125
But you see, nobody did enter and the cops knew what they were doing. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #166
that is not why gejohnston Jul 2012 #174
Well duh, he did warn the police about that. Clames Jul 2012 #156
Even if the cops hadn't known about it, there's go guarantee... Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #168
actually, gejohnston Jul 2012 #173
could he get frag grenades? Trunk Monkey Jul 2012 #127
I don't mind debating the point with you but please Trunk Monkey Jul 2012 #128
By that logic, you don't need a gun to defend yourself or hunt. ThePhilosopher04 Jul 2012 #179
We're quite willing to discuss it Euromutt Jul 2012 #31
Nonsense.. EX500rider Jul 2012 #135
It isn't though Mojorabbit Jul 2012 #63
Thanks for a clear thought. It's appreciated, truly n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #72
I'm not the sanest person in the world TrogL Jul 2012 #21
how insane are you? gejohnston Jul 2012 #22
Mild bipolar TrogL Jul 2012 #24
my bad gejohnston Jul 2012 #52
If he didn't have a gun he could be crazy as a loon and those people would have enjoyed their movie upaloopa Jul 2012 #27
Sure. And the police department has been trying for a day and a half to get into shadowrider Jul 2012 #34
Except, you see, he didn't. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #35
Because he's exceptionally unbalanced and needed help long ago n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #36
And yet, as you pointed out, unbalanced people have been known to use knives... Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #37
And yet you continue to ignore his mental problem and blame the tool n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #38
Oh, I factor in his mental health. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #40
My knives equivalence worked out just fine. You choose to discount it. shadowrider Jul 2012 #41
I chose to point out the math. As horrible as those attacks were, they did not leave as many killed Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #43
So less lethal means aren't as bad as long as there are less victims? shadowrider Jul 2012 #48
or to paraphrase Stalin gejohnston Jul 2012 #50
. shadowrider Jul 2012 #54
Are you an admirer of Stalin? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #58
no, not at all. gejohnston Jul 2012 #64
But you appear to agree with his claim Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #68
see post 70 NT. gejohnston Jul 2012 #73
Been there, done that. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #88
Your quote makes no sense in this context. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #57
no, I'm projecting gejohnston Jul 2012 #70
"Projection" is when someone ascribes his or her own attitudes and faults to others. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #82
you must be unique among gun control advocates gejohnston Jul 2012 #94
Yes, "less lethal" means that people who would have been likely killed in a gun attack Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #55
No. I'm saying you're discounting other means of mass murder and insisting guns are shadowrider Jul 2012 #59
No, I'm not "insisting guns are the cause of mass murder." Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #62
You are incorrect. Oklahoma City ring a bell or was that not mass murder? shadowrider Jul 2012 #66
Of course it was mass murder. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #74
Really? News reports say this tragedy in Aurora took 4 months to plan shadowrider Jul 2012 #81
Actually, I believe they said he was planning it as far as four months ahead. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #84
No one knows. And I agree the apartment took a lot of time shadowrider Jul 2012 #92
Yep. Building and planting an effective bomb takes time and care. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #95
Toting guns into public places takes no time and care. You already know your shadowrider Jul 2012 #99
Not when you're firing into a crowd. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #115
I've never tried, but alabama_for_obama Jul 2012 #158
He would have found another way with a much higher body count. n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #160
And yet, isn't it interesting that most of the worst mass killings in this country Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #165
Most in the world are disaffected loners. gejohnston Jul 2012 #172
For the same reason you don't march onto certain military installations or parts of Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #187
The examples given gejohnston Jul 2012 #191
It's already against the law for a person with mental issues tobuy a gun rl6214 Jul 2012 #138
Lol alabama_for_obama Jul 2012 #159
Nah, the Jenoch Jul 2012 #185
He was a smart kid 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #131
Guns don't kill people. Gun owners do. Lint Head Jul 2012 #30
Why can't I own a nuclear weapon as part of a well-regulated militia? LonePirate Jul 2012 #51
because they are not small arms gejohnston Jul 2012 #56
I want to be a fly on the wall for that one shadowrider Jul 2012 #61
Uh huh... gcomeau Jul 2012 #65
they used military terms of the time gejohnston Jul 2012 #75
The Second Amendment makes no mention of small-arms or size. LonePirate Jul 2012 #67
see the above post gejohnston Jul 2012 #78
Military and linquistic history have no bearing on the average American's feelings on the 2nd Amend. LonePirate Jul 2012 #87
Actually it might have been gejohnston Jul 2012 #91
The numbers are immaterial. They are instruments of death and both should both legal or illegal. LonePirate Jul 2012 #97
these are not high powered, but gejohnston Jul 2012 #100
Who's to say in 20 or 50 or 100 years that nukes won't be cheap and handheld? LonePirate Jul 2012 #103
let that be their problem in the future gejohnston Jul 2012 #106
Why does 1 direction and target make a difference? The Second Amendment makes no such distinction. LonePirate Jul 2012 #107
I'm not drawing the line anywhere gejohnston Jul 2012 #110
It's called the Law of Physics. Clames Jul 2012 #126
I think you are misjudging the amount of fissionable material necessary for a bomb. LonePirate Jul 2012 #129
I think you are misjudging the level of sophistication and what it exactly takes to achieve... Clames Jul 2012 #130
Compare the size and calculative power of today's computers with those from 50 years ago LonePirate Jul 2012 #133
My imagination is fine. You're understanding of the science... Clames Jul 2012 #147
You seem to be forgetting that technology shrinks and improves over time. It doesn't stagnate. LonePirate Jul 2012 #148
You've made enough assumptions and false accusations in one post... Clames Jul 2012 #149
You seem to think because it can't be done now, it can never be done. Your ignorance here is galling LonePirate Jul 2012 #150
It's because you need a certain amount of fissionable material alabama_for_obama Jul 2012 #161
If environmental impact was a cause for illegality, then millions would be without power, cars, jobs LonePirate Jul 2012 #163
I know enough to run circles around you. Clames Jul 2012 #182
Jeez shadowrider Jul 2012 #93
I appreciate your agreement with my point here. Thank you. LonePirate Jul 2012 #104
Jeez was "Holy crap, not this sh*t again", not an agreement n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #108
You only think it's sh*t because it uses your argument to defend the indefensible LonePirate Jul 2012 #109
Big difference, you just arent willing to accept it. rl6214 Jul 2012 #140
If you look at the termonology of "keep and bear arms" you need to determine what "arms" are rl6214 Jul 2012 #139
NOBODY is "blaming the gun". gcomeau Jul 2012 #60
The *availability* of legal *fertilizer* and legal *diesel fuel* enabled McVeigh to kill 168 shadowrider Jul 2012 #69
I understand perfectly. gcomeau Jul 2012 #79
There is no Federal Department of Needs. What someone can afford to buy is their shadowrider Jul 2012 #85
... gcomeau Jul 2012 #136
What do "automatic assault weapons" have to do with it? N/T beevul Jul 2012 #105
I honestly can't even think how to appropriately respond to that... nt gcomeau Jul 2012 #137
You could start by explaining how guns that weren't used in the CO shooting are relevant... beevul Jul 2012 #142
This guy did NOT have any "automatic assault weapons" rl6214 Jul 2012 #141
I'd call it trolling, wouldn't you? DainBramaged Jul 2012 #145
No, I'd call it completely ignorant rl6214 Jul 2012 #180
Bite my ass, how's that. DainBramaged Jul 2012 #181
I'll agree with you here. I am not a gun owner; for my own reasons...... wandy Jul 2012 #98
You aren't a gun owner and I support your decision shadowrider Jul 2012 #101
Disagree...he should not of had a gun or guns or explosives....but he did and we movonne Jul 2012 #71
His mom "knew" it was him when she heard of it shadowrider Jul 2012 #83
Gun culture helped. liberalmuse Jul 2012 #76
miss the larger picture gejohnston Jul 2012 #86
The 1% are the real culprits Triloon Jul 2012 #80
A rather *loud* alarm on the door MAY have stopped this. shadowrider Jul 2012 #89
In my part of the country Jenoch Jul 2012 #193
because people want to blame their most feared object, not offend the shooter. ileus Jul 2012 #111
You can't blame both? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #116
you can but like water off a ducks back ileus Jul 2012 #124
Until it's picked up and used by a crazy person. Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #169
At the very least, we shouldn't be making guns so easily available to disturbed pnwmom Jul 2012 #112
If the mother was aware of his state of mind freethought Jul 2012 #132
Which is my point. Personally, I think the guy should fry in a big time way. shadowrider Jul 2012 #146
Probably "Not My Kid" Syndrome. freethought Jul 2012 #164
No need to read... I've seen enough justifications from the gun crowd bowens43 Jul 2012 #152
Whatever n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #154
And your answer is to "ban them all". So how would you go about it? oneshooter Jul 2012 #155
Exactly. Just imagine if McVeigh had been unable to get a gun 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #162
And if Seung-Hi Cho had been unable to get a gun? Pamela Troy Jul 2012 #170
there ya go . . . that is it! DrDan Jul 2012 #176
Did you miss the part Jenoch Jul 2012 #184
Think what you want, but he should not have been able to gain access to such lethal equipment. jonthebru Jul 2012 #177
complete bullshit gejohnston Jul 2012 #178
The Problem with the Argument "Guns Don't Kill People -- People Kill People" Is On the Road Jul 2012 #183
couple of things. gejohnston Jul 2012 #188
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Why are people blaming th...»Reply #22