Horrific Newtown, CT school shooting

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

Not Hijacking just making a point but it is big of you to admit to your prior hijack.

Not really admitting anything - but since it was the reverse situation:

If my prior post was a hijack, then so is your post here.

If your post here is not a hijack, than neither was mine.

Pick one. No double standard here.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The law is not a constant. They are about to get more restrictive.

Some (not all) will not obey the new law. Nobody would get hurt any more than when the law was not in effect. The same guys who would not hurt anybody with an "assault" rifle still would not hurt anybody with that same rifle.

So good point on "law-abiding". The smart and determined will find a way to get what they want - though again, those kinds of people - the ones not of the sort to go hurt somebody with a gun - are not the danger in the first place.

This whole issue is degrading nationally to the point where people just want to see "something, anything" done so they'll feel better, even though the measures being proposed would not have helped avert this horrible crime.

And the professional politicians are acting more to further an anti-gun agenda rather than provide any real safety as a result of new legislation. And they know it.

As Rahm Emmanuel said, "Never let a crisis go to waste."

no, i think most people understand that we don't need to do 'something'. big difference between a knee jerk reaction and common sense restrictions. only the ultra-zealous gun control folks are going to ask for a complete ban-everyone knows that won't happen.
by the same token, do we just say 'meh, can't do a thing'? no, no reason for that either.

[joeydb]

You know what's ironic?

For all the energy in debating this (which I much enjoyed - thanks), I'm probably not in the market for an assault weapon anyway.

But, saw this post out there, and apparently just the debate has really ramped up the gun buying.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/12/1...al-gun-buyers/

OK, many fear a "slippery slope", but emotions aside for both viewpoints - I wonder how many more people will have guns by the time any ban is enacted, and if they are doing it in response to anticipated legal measures, how long will the ban take for us to "break even" to the number of soon-to-be-banned guns that we have today?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Everything is legal that is not expressly prohibited.

A purpose is not necessary at all. Like pet rocks and wallpaper.

But most gun owners do have one or more purposes. Most popular are self defense, home defense, target shooting (they do have automatic rifle competitions for that), just having fun with it at shooting range...

I guess here is the discriminator - guns, even automatic rifles, can be used for sport, hobbies and defensively. That would not be true of explosives, which are rightly banned outside of industry and the military, or other more destructive weaponry.

Where we disagree is, I think you're saying "Ban it unless there is a purpose to allow it." I'm saying "Allow it unless there is a reason to ban it." It sounds like a subtle difference but it's not.

people want hard core drugs. people want child porn. people want sex slaves. i still want my tank.
what's that got to do with it? i want it, so i should have it? of course not. many things are regulated, restricted, etc. why do guns get a pass? and there is a line drawn already on them. i don't have rpg's. the neighbor doesn't have sam's.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Of what purpose does it serve to own a weapon like this? Because if the answer is none...then why are they legal?

Because the NRA is essentially a lobbying arm now for gun and ammo manufacturers (it wasn't always, but it is now) and it's all about moving product. They want these things kept legal so they can sell them.

It's not the only think the NRA has lobbied about- I learned today that, since the 1980's, they have lobbied successfully for convicted felons to get their guns back. And many do, with no sort of review. Voting rights, they can't have back, but their guns, why sure. Because only one of those things can be purchased legally and it's all about moving product.

Federally convicted felons are still banned for life, but most felonies are state crimes, and many states now permit felons to own guns after they complete their sentence:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us...irlY8lBrPWnmxg

As George Carlin said about war, it all comes down to stuff. In this case, selling stuff.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Spoken like a true intellectual, with manners no less.

It's hard to be well mannered when you act like the conservative version of Riot talking around points and ignoring the ones that prove you wrong.

[NTamm1215]

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

I agree. We are already limited to what we can or cannot own. We didnt slide down any slippery slope when the assault ban was in force before.

[Rupert Pupkin]

"As a teenager, Adam Lanza would come in for a haircut about every six weeks without speaking or looking at anyone and always accompanied by his mother."

http://news.yahoo.com/stylists-lanza...215310243.html

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

"As a teenager, Adam Lanza would come in for a haircut about every six weeks without speaking or looking at anyone and always accompanied by his mother."

http://news.yahoo.com/stylists-lanza...215310243.html

I've been waiting for days now for you to chime in on this topic of banning assault weapons and this is the best you can do?

How many times has the story changed? First it was the brother who was the shooter and the media reported that, then it was the mother was a teacher at the school, now she isn't, then the mother is a prepper, now she isn't.

You simply DO NOT CARE. STOP ACTING LIKE YOU CARE. If you cared you would restrain from wanting the second amendment destroyed. But unfortunately your brain can't see that many angles and definitely can't handle trauma so you just let the television do the thinking for you.

jms you're just a troll like Piers Morgan who wants to demonize his fellow American for not falling hook, line, and sinker for your masters beckoning. You have enough sense to see through the bs of this storyline.

More coverage by reporters and investigators in the media on gun control than finding out what really happened at that school.

You people who want to take our liberties for the illusion of safety need to open up a history book that isn't state run.

This country is unique. Take our right to defend ourselves away and we're stuck with a government the rest of the world truly despises. A government that has bullied millions of people on this planet. A country where the borders are wide open and have been for quite some time. A country where 50-60 million food stamps are handed out each month and the CEO of the bank that is making it so warning us that his bank will be o.k....America might not be.

Absolutely brilliant. Low information liberals...the lot of you.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

How many times has the story changed? First it was the brother who was the shooter and the media reported that, then it was the mother was a teacher at the school, now she isn't, then the mother is a prepper, now she isn't.

You simply DO NOT CARE. STOP ACTING LIKE YOU CARE. If you cared you would restrain from wanting the second amendment destroyed. But unfortunately your brain can't see that many angles and definitely can't handle trauma so you just let the television do the thinking for you.

jms you're just a troll like Piers Morgan who wants to demonize his fellow American for not falling hook, line, and sinker for your masters beckoning. You have enough sense to see through the bs of this storyline.

More coverage by reporters and investigators in the media on gun control than finding out what really happened at that school.

You people who want to take our liberties for the illusion of safety need to open up a history book that isn't state run.

This country is unique. Take our right to defend ourselves away and we're stuck with a government the rest of the world truly despises. A government that has bullied millions of people on this planet. A country where the borders are wide open and have been for quite some time. A country where 50-60 million food stamps are handed out each month and the CEO of the bank that is making it so warning us that his bank will be o.k....America might not be.

Absolutely brilliant. Low information liberals...the lot of you.

Thanks for the compliment, I guess. Welcome back and please stay.

Thanks.

But really the storyline changes daily. Doesn't seem to matter that the media is being irresponsible. What matters is people see through it. Cable news ratings are plummeting...mainly because heartland America doesn't want to come home after a hard days work...oh who am I kidding? Most people who watch cable news don't work, and if they do work it's more than likely they're a barista or work in some hipster health food store that serves gmo.

What amazes me is how the same media can still manipulate the population to agree and support their agenda. You know, there was a time in this country when investigative reporting and ethical standards in journalism mattered somewhat. Why would any sane American want to give a government anything? Especially one that can't even decide on a budget, much less balance one. A government that selectively shows their outrage on tragedies. A government that didn't have multiple press conferences and attend religious services of the victims of drone strikes that we're responsible for as a country.

My reasoning why they didn't? They DON'T CARE!! There is nothing to gain by mourning the death of innocent men, women and children if they aren't American. In fact, we still deny any responsibility for the death of these people.

So knowing this, why would you want to give up your right to defend yourself, family, and property and hand everything that could protect you to an irresponsible government?

Sure semi-autos have been banned before. But when has a bureaucrat, once they've banned a certain type of gun, stopped pursuing all of them? A country of significance, not one of the small fufu countries that doesn't have a 5th world country next door.

Do you really think that a government in a country where just about every chronic health condition has skyrocketed the past 20 years really cares about our well being? Whatever. Keep shining, you cray cray diamond.

The storyline today seems to be the shooter basically didn't exist the past 3 years.

How can you not be on the internet? No trail? YOU REALLY BELIEVE THIS S.HIT?

Come on be smarter than this, people. For some of you I know that's an impossibility but most of you know better. It doesn't add up.

Notice how the picture they keep showing is of a child. This murderer is 20 years old. The Trayvon Martin trick...to get feels out of you. Mind/Control System.

It's real.

[Danzig]

Welcome back coach. Good to see ya.

[Dahoss]

No one is trying to take away your liberties or your right to defend yourself. I haven't seen anyone say that in any post on the subject.

No one is for giving up our rights to defend ourselves. The argument is about semi automatic rifles. We don't need them IMO. Are handguns not enough to defend yourself?

What are you defending yourself against that you need a semi automatic weapon?

Originally Posted by Dahoss

No one is trying to take away your liberties or your right to defend yourself. I haven't seen anyone say that in any post on the subject.

No one is for giving up our rights to defend ourselves. The argument is about semi automatic rifles. We don't need them IMO. Are handguns not enough to defend yourself?

What are you defending yourself against that you need a semi automatic weapon?

It's also about ending gun shows where average americans make their living. But f.uck those people and their livelihood.

Tell you what, Hoss. When the government solves the debt problem, the jobs problem, the health care problem, the infrastructure problem, the spies in our government problem, the nuclear weapons problem, the border problem, etc. then I'll talk about giving up my rights that the founders made possible.

All of your reasoning is not important. If you don't like guns don't buy one. A gun ban in a country with an open border to our neighbor that has some of the most evil drug cartels on earth is ridiculous.

They are playing with your emotions and it is clouding your reasoning. The majority of these shooters didn't have registered guns. They were using them illegally. A gun ban is not going to take the semi-autos out of the criminals hand.

No pie chart, statistic, or liberal talking point will change that fact. Think a criminal won't take advantage of the citizens if he has a cache of semi-autos and he knows you have a pea shooter? PPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFT

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

It's also about ending gun shows where average americans make their living. But f.uck those people and their livelihood.

Tell you what, Hoss. When the government solves the debt problem, the jobs problem, the health care problem, the infrastructure problem, the spies in our government problem, the nuclear weapons problem, the border problem, etc. then I'll talk about giving up my rights that the founders made possible.

All of your reasoning is not important. If you don't like guns don't buy one. A gun ban in a country with an open border to our neighbor that has some of the most evil drug cartels on earth is ridiculous.

They are playing with your emotions and it is clouding your reasoning. The majority of these shooters didn't have registered guns. They were using them illegally. A gun ban is not going to take the semi-autos out of the criminals hand.

No pie chart, statistic, or liberal talking point will change that fact. Think a criminal won't take advantage of the citizens if he has a cache of semi-autos and he knows you have a pea shooter? PPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFT

Couldn't agree more. And welcome back Coach.

Remember emo boy in Portland that stole a friends gun and went on that rampage in the mall?

That story has seemed to drop completely off the state-run media news reel. I believe why it did is because an armed citizen brandished his weapon, the shooter saw him and like the chicken sh.it he was took his own life. That guy is a hero IMO.
They don't want good news that counters their agenda. It's sinister.

Edit: Said the guy killed the shooter. He didn't. Here is the story...

http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/2...n-mall-shooter