|
|
Quote:
He didn't say what that weapon was, but a law enforcement source has previously said that the gunman was found dead with next to three guns: a semi-automatic .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle and two pistols made by Glock and Sig Sauer. The medical examiner, H. Wayne Carver II, said he personally did postmortem examinations of seven victims' bodies. “All the wounds that I know of at this point were caused by the one weapon,” |
Quote:
Have they said why the mother had these guns? |
600 dollars of federal tax on each bullet.
Own all the guns you want. ...and Dorskind has another really bright idea with the concept of banning illegal drugs. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Garry Shandling: "Why doesn't the NRA get behind allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon? Because, nuclear weapons don't kill people. People kill people."
|
Oh to hell with the Constitution, lets just burn the piece of shit!
|
Quote:
|
There's precedence to amending it, sir.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
"Oh, okay - now it all seems so simple", the mentally ill person (I'm sorry - I meant to say "the nut job") responds, and he begins behaving 'normal' and everyone is happy. If he doesn't, you simply punish him until he realizes that he's "a nut job". Only one problem with all of this: mental illness affects insight. The old saying that if you think you're crazy, you must not be, is completely true...and vice versa, if you are certain you are NOT crazy, you might be. But carry on. 'Insight' is something the 'normal' people also are lacking. |
Barry....
Great to see you posting:)
my friend.... |
Quote:
|
Root of the problem
Stop and consider the following facts from various federal databases. Deaths per year from: tobacco use – 529,000; medical errors – 195,000; alcohol abuse – 1007, 400; firearm homicides – 11,493. Where is the mindless cry for the elimination of tobacco, alcohol, or hospitals?
The problem is not weapon based. The problem is human based. We live in a culture that does not value human life. |
Quote:
We live in a world that desensatizes killing - almost glorifies it like it's no big deal. You watch it movies, see it in video games and hear it in music. Even if the assault rifle ban were re-enacted, do you really believe it would stop events like this? I don't. |
If the assault rifle ban were reinstated, some incidents would be stopped. Even if only one were thwarted it could save the life of somebody's loved one.
And make no mistake about it: if you think the gun laws should remain exactly as they are, you are now officially in the minority. The majority wants this issue to be addressed now, and whether gun lovers agree or disagree with possible new laws will not matter. There are going to be changes, it's only a matter of when and what they will be. The days of keeping the status quo will soon end. |
How about this for an argument?
You want to know why there are more and more shootings? It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody. CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next. You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news. |
Quote:
|
People are mentally ill in this country and they obviously are feeling like they're out of options. Being driven to kill random strangers and as many as you can at once is a pretty good indicator that these people feel ostracized from society and are now so angry with being the outcast that they are determined to kill society at large.
Mental illness does not make a person "evil." I'm so tired of seeing people like the shooter in Newtown and the Aurora shooter labeled "evil." They are mentally ill. If the country had a stable healthcare system that encouraged treatment rather than making healthcare so expensive that people seek it out only at extreme moments in their lives, and then are turned away as people who don't need help or "are just blowing off steam" I believe that these people could get the help they need. I'm not making excuses for this kind of behavior. But it doesn't boil down to "good" people and "bad" people. And if you take a gun out of someone's hand you're putting something else in it. You need to find a way to keep them from wanting either if you're going to solve anything. Let's see mental health services encouraged. Let's make it easier to access mental health professionals. Let's stop labeling anyone who has special mental health needs "crazy." Let's stop making them feel like they aren't a part of our lives. |
Quote:
I respectfully disagree. I believe these sickos would just find a hand gun, shotgun or other type of rifle (lever action, bolt action, etc) instead. I believe they're choosing assault rifles only because of their magazine capacity - to inflict as much damage as possible. An assault rifle ban would probably limit the amount of casualties, but would not stop the frequency of these types of events. No way! They'll find other types of guns. Besides, from my understanding (and someone can correct me if I am wrong), an assault rifle ban (as the last one) does not mean gun owners have to "give up" their assault rifles. It only stops future transactions. The ban does not make it illegal to own an assault rifle, it only makes it illegal to barter one - buy, sell or trade. In other words, an assault rifle ban will not get existing assault rifles off the streets. |
It's putting a band aid on a broken arm. You can say you've done something to help. But you haven't fixed anything.
|
Second Ammendment: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The above is the Second Ammendment. It was written at a time when the US had no standing army; state militias were the country's sole ground army. As such, it was necessary for people to be armed to protect the country from foreign intrusion. The right to bear arms appears to be linked to the need for a well regulated militia. Today, there is no such need. Therefore, the way I read it, there is no reason today for private citizens to be armed, and certainly not to own automatic weapons. Hopefully lawmakers and the courts will agree. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...in_Switzerland It's there in black and white. You can choose to read it or not. Doesn't this take the assault rifle blame out of the equation? Sure it does. Because if there are more assault rifles in the homes of the Swiss than the US, why don't they have these types of problems? I would like to see someone answer that!!! |
Do you guys know over 16,000 children die everyday because of starvation, yet not one word is mentioned on the news.
|
Quote:
|
David--not a game, just an attempt to diffuse a ridiculous argument. That argument costs countless lives while the First Ammendment arguments do not.
Peter--pity. Maybe a future Supreme Court will interpret it differently. Brock--and your point is that we should ignore the guns because children are also starving? |
Quote:
|
Peter, am I correct in saying that the Heller decision still allows for significant discretion regarding the regulation of types of guns sold as well as who can buy them? As I understand, there is a fair amount of flexibility so long as the law doesn't effectively disarm citizens as the DC laws were interpreted to do.
|
The second amendment as it applies to regular citizens is predicated on people's need to hunt in order to feed themselves. This is still true even today. I think guns have a place in America and I think there ARE still people who NEED a gun. If I choose to hunt rather than buy store bought food pumped full of hormones and who knows what else I should have the option to do so. So I don't think banning all guns is logical. But I do support a limitation on the kinds of guns you can buy.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. |
Quote:
not only that but the last assault rifle ban only stopped sales of assault rifles and the high capacity magazines produced after a certain date, all the rifles and magazines produced before that date were still legal to buy albeit at high prices due to supply and demand. Also the ban didn't refer to the guns semi-automatic feature, as full automatic is already banned. It basically referred to the looks of the gun, the folding stock, the telescoping stock, a certain scope, the pistol grip, the bayonet mount, etc. it needed three of these characteristics to fall under the ban. manufacturers just made these guns with 2 characteristics and it was still legal to sell. so an assault weapons ban was nothing more than a ban of "scary looking" guns. semi-automatic rifles (one pull, one shot) were still legal to buy and sell and regular semi-automatic hunting rifles that don't look as scary are still one pull, one shot, and they are just as lethal in the wrong hands. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The gun debate isn't necessarily party affiliated (though I realize it is a little bit). If this thread goes into a political debate (Republican vs Democrat) the thread will be closed. |
Sorry Leon, I will reword it.
|
"We, the people must be armed to keep our government in their place. End of story. And please do not continue to confuse Automatic weapons with Semi-Automatic weapons."
Probably the most ubiquitous, lamest, dumbest argument of the NRA. Even if you had to keep the government "in their place" (laughable), your "assault rifles" would be no match for the superior firepower of our military (fighter jets, helicopters, missiles, bombs, etc.). Just ask Iraq during Desert Storm.... And an FYI, I firmly believe in the right to bear arms, just not in the NRA. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Enjoy your weapons, Matt Hall |
The number of weapons in the arms of private citizens is the number 1 reason why we have not been invaded, whether it be a foreign or domestic government.
That color is the sun in your world? |
So, it's not only foreign governments its our own government you guys need to protect us from. Now I feel so much better. Yep.
|
Quote:
Mathew H. For the record I only own a couple of shotguns for hunting. I am very passionate about the way people in this country are trying to change the constitution because of what they want. There are parts of the constitution that I would love to change but I would NEVER try to force my opinions on to other people. This has probably gone far enough. We will never be able to change each others mind as to how we feel and I am going to get out of the conversation. I will be glad to defend your right to your opinion. That is your constitutional right. |
Quote:
|
"The number of weapons in the arms of private citizens is the number 1 reason why we have not been invaded, whether it be a foreign or domestic government."
"Hmmm, maybe we should withdraw our nuclear missles from Cuba. Do you know how many citizens are armed over there???" -Kruschev 1962 "Will someone set up a meeting with Reagan ASAP? Maybe we should re-think this arms race. I heard many of the citizens are armed over there..." - Gorbachev 1984 |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:39 PM. |