John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Anti-gun control supporters are part of the problem, and have the blood of every one of those children on their hands. You can absolutely claim part of the responsibility. Well then, by all means enjoy that drink with dinner, you have the blood of the 32,885 people killed by drunk drivers last year... What a ridiculous argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Back off Henchman. He is direct and a little confrontational but no more so than some others on this forum. ... "Direct and a little confrontational" is fine with me. But, in this case, as someone who is not even a target of this person's unrelenting vitriol, I find it beyond the pale. It lacks both logic and civility. His lack of logic, while sadly comical, is acceptable. The lack of civility is not. Despite a few exceptions and a variety of small flare-ups over the years, Jeff has managed to keep this forum a civil and respectful place. A large part of that is due to his "self-regulating" policy. I appreciate the opinion differences I see discussed here, and with a few exceptions, there is something to be learned from most of them. Name calling and bullying doesn't facilitate that. I have little use for bullies -- even if I'm not the target. It would appear that Laurence's original question has been answered -- at least by most of those who have expressed opinions in this thread. Those of us who prefer to learn and grow, rather than convince ourselves that we already have all the answers, tend to get less involved in such discussions due in no small part to some of the aforementioned nastiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Tuzo Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Well then, by all means enjoy that drink with dinner, you have the blood of the 32,885 people killed by drunk drivers last year... What a ridiculous argument. And the drunk driving argument is a cheap shot. No one here is condoning drunk driving. There is a serious issue being discussed here, and frivolous counterpoints won't serve to further the discussion. I don't read henchman's posts as psychotic, I think he's just angry. I'M sad and angry... We should all be angry that this is happening, and we should all be doing everything within our power to put an end to this nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 The point is, it's not the object, it's the person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfisk Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 The point is, it's not the object, it's the person. This is also my feeling. The best quote I heard to support this is: Take a loaded gun. Place it in the middle of the busiest mall in America. If nobody ever touches it, a bullet from that gun will never kill anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atheisticmystic Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 They share a huge mistrust of the government, and a belief that as adults and citizens they should be allowed to make gun choices themselves. For my own part, I like to think that I have a "healthy dis-trust" of any state entity. From the state of Israel, the IRA, the PLO, and to the colonial settlers of the USA, they all started out as "terrorists", and ended up as internationally-recognized, state-sanctioned, power-brokers. I remember Clinton's remarks after the Columbine tragedy, saying that we had to teach our children that violence is not how we solve problems. At that time we were actively engaged in bombing eastern Europe. Violence is in fact how we solve problems on this planet. Is my attitude a product of my environment, or is my environment a result of my attitude? I'm open to arguments on that account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Tuzo Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 I would say that the fairly clear distinction between a car and a gun as a possible weapon, is that a car is a tool designed to transport people, a gun is a tool designed to kill (Aside from target practice, a gun has no other design). As the Senator may say... "apples and potatoes" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seth Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 An article that might be of interest states "The rate of gun deaths is negatively correlated with states that ban assault weapons, require trigger locks, and mandate safe storage requirements for guns." http://www.theatlant...-violence/4171/ If the guns were locked up this might not have happened. Granted heroin is illegal and people still have access. Honestly I don't see why people have guns except for sport. Does anyone really think we can protect ourselves from our government at this point in time if needed? If giving up your sport (specifically semi automatic weapons) would lower the chances of some waco easier access to killing people wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason porter Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Nobody believes it is the gun that is doing the violence, it is the person. No one is arguing that point. Restrict/limit the ability for PEOPLE to get guns. Why is that such a difficult concept? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 " My wife works in a school with a history of weapons problems. That school is maybe 9 miles from the White House and about 10 miles from Capitol Hill. I spend my days in fear of becoming a widower. " Washington DC shares with Chicago IL, the strictest gun control laws in the USA, even after losing 2 second amendment cases in the SCOTUS, and IL has just had its gun ban laws declared unconstitutional... my point is: how can there be a history of weapons problems if they are illegal there ?? exactly, the laws are being wantonly ignored and constantly broken by the "bad guys", (while being carefully followed by the good guys, who are thus endangered!) "gun free zones" are just criminal playgrounds where they know their victims will be unarmed...There are no "Gun Free Zones" that is a misnomer, they are in reality, "Target Rich Envirnoments."... Meaningful action? As opposed to the totally meaningless action that gave us openly declared gun free zones? We can all see how well that deterred the murderous Adam Lanza, " It should be noted that my state has some of the strictest gun laws in America " " Restrict/limit the ability for PEOPLE to get guns. Why is that such a difficult concept? " not difficult... take away rights and privileges from everyone that might be misused by a few, ... Which right to start with? right to bear arms (current topic)?, or freedom to worship as we choose?, or right to assemble?, right to petition our government ? right to speak?, to vote secretly?, freedom to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures ?? freedom to write and print and distribute ? (aka freedom of the press)?, freedom from government intrusion? (aka right to privacy)? freedom from discrimination on account of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, etc (aka civil rights)...?? (actually, all of our rights, and privileges are all blamed for being problematic, and or abused by some, and they are are all under continuing attacks... "Does anyone really think we can protect ourselves from our government at this point in time if needed? " well not really, unless you buy into "Red Dawn", but it has been going on in other countries (and our government sends them guns and bullets), and,frankly, our country's police departments (include Sheriffs, Fed's, ICE, IRS, and DHS, among the very many) actually do seem to be concerned about it! (and that makes it scary, as the governments keep spending hundreds of millions on guns and ammunition... what and who are they afraid of? " Call it what you will but it explains that a membership in a "well regulated militia" is a condition to a "right to bear arms". " well, not really, and that has been decided by the courts.... " You know what would have prevented this tragedy?...A $200 gun safe.... What if she was required to have the guns locked in a gunsafe? " there are typically already safe and proper storage laws that make it a crime to allow access to weapons for the commission of a crime, or for an adult to allow their firearms to be accessible to minors.. there are already plenty of laws, and they are being broken! the answer is not to "ore-punish" the law abiding for the crimes that bad guys will end up committing anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atheisticmystic Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 If giving up your sport (specifically semi automatic weapons) would lower the chances of some waco easier access to killing people wouldn't you? Interesting typo/Freudian mishap. Does gun control lower instances of "whackos" or "Wacos" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 For my own part, I like to think that I have a "healthy dis-trust" of any state entity. From the state of Israel, the IRA, the PLO, and to the colonial settlers of the USA, they all started out as "terrorists", and ended up as internationally-recognized, state-sanctioned, power-brokers. I remember Clinton's remarks after the Columbine tragedy, saying that we had to teach our children that violence is not how we solve problems. At that time we were actively engaged in bombing eastern Europe. Violence is in fact how we solve problems on this planet. Is my attitude a product of my environment, or is my environment a result of my attitude? I'm open to arguments on that account. How the hell do you work out the the IRA as a state backed organization? Unless you are referring to the United States as state backing saying as you funded them for over 30 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Restrict/limit the ability for PEOPLE to get guns. Why is that such a difficult concept? Had the kids mother been a responsible owner, they would have been locked up and he wouldn't have had the ability to get them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 On a side note, could the networks possibly wring any more ratings out of this whole ordeal? What part of complete speculation and showing endless photos of grieving people with a somber piano soundtrack constitutes news? Maybe if anytime something like this happened, instead of naming the shooter, they just refer to them as "douchebag". "Today a douchebag walked into a school..." Might give all those 15-minute dreamers pause. /Rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 I think that's a bit of an over generalization. I don't own firearms because I think the government is coming for me, I own them because I enjoy shooting them and challenging myself to be a better marksman. Many of my friends own for similar reasons. Sure, there's the right wing nutjobs that are arming up for the 'big showdown', but to lump every gun owner into that category I believe is disingenuous. And nobody is talking about taking away guns. We are talking about restricting availability. Hey, I like shooting if fireworks. Guess what. Illegal in most sates now, after years of stupidity causing injury. But mass murders on a regular basis aren't reason enough to gun restrictions? Give me a break. BTW, did you know hat paintball is one of the safest extreme sports, yet there are people who have been trying to outlaw it. They want to outlaw a harmless sport. But lets let every idiot with an ID buy an assault file or semi-Automatic pistol that can hold a magazine of up to 30 rounds or more. This is completely idiotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrd456 Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 The constitution basically states that people who belong to a state militia can have guns in defense of there state and/or country J.D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 And nobody is talking about taking away guns. We are talking about restricting availability. Hey, I like shooting if fireworks. Guess what. Illegal in most sates now, after years of stupidity causing injury. But mass murders on a regular basis aren't reason enough to gun restrictions? Give me a break. BTW, did you know hat paintball is one of the safest extreme sports, yet there are people who have been trying to outlaw it. They want to outlaw a harmless sport. But lets let every idiot with an ID buy an assault file or semi-Automatic pistol that can hold a magazine of up to 30 rounds or more. This is completely idiotic. I never mentioned anything about guns being taken away, only that generalizations aren't inherently accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Had the kids mother been a responsible owner, they would have been locked up and he wouldn't have had the ability to get them. Had she not been able to purchase semi-automatic, magazine using high capacity round guns, the results would not have been so horrifying. Where some of the victims were shot up To 11 times. Wanting to be allowed to shoot these guns for fun is simply not a good enough reason to not outlaw them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 The not way gun control works effectively, is if it is a national regulation. It's simply idiotic to have different laws in different states. As it doesn't require a membership in Mensa to realize that a type of gun not allowed in California, can easily be obtained in a neighboring state. So, using cities or states with tough gun laws as a yard stick to the effectiveness of gun control is pointless. Most of those places have had problems with and without local gun laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Had she not been able to purchase semi-automatic, magazine using high capacity round guns, the results would not have been so horrifying. Where some of the victims were shot up To 11 times. Wanting to be allowed to shoot these guns for fun is simply not a good enough reason to not outlaw them. Had her parents never had sex.. Had there been a tornado... The fact is those guns were harmless up until the point of being in the hands of someone irresponsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atheisticmystic Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 How the hell do you work out the the IRA as a state backed organization? Unless you are referring to the United States as state backing saying as you funded them for over 30 years The IRA began as a terrorist organization ( as labeled by the British Government ), their political arm was Sinn Fein, which is now a political party in Ireland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrd456 Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Had her parents never had sex.. Had there been a tornado... The fact is those guns were harmless up until the point of being in the hands of someone irresponsible. There's a whole lot of irresponsible people.No 100 round clips---Right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 Had she not been able to purchase semi-automatic, magazine using high capacity round guns, the results would not have been so horrifying. Where some of the victims were shot up To 11 times. Wanting to be allowed to shoot these guns for fun is simply not a good enough reason to not outlaw them. Really? What semi-auto handguns don't use a magazine? Standard magazine capacity in a 9mm is 10-13 rounds depending on the length of the hand grip. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 "Direct and a little confrontational" is fine with me. But, in this case, as someone who is not even a target of this person's unrelenting vitriol, I find it beyond the pale. It lacks both logic and civility. His lack of logic, while sadly comical, is acceptable. The lack of civility is not. . I think the logic is pretty sound. The fact people don't want to expect responsibility for actions that are a direct silt of their own thinking, is not my fault. I will repeat this simple fact. Anybody against gun control, and who will lobby against it, is responsible for all of these mass murders. Own it. Accept it. There are consequences for actions. My civility towards anyone who still wants to push the " guns don't kill people, people kill people" line of bullshit, is non-existent after these recent events. As is my patience about their blathering on about their 2nd amendment rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Steigerwald Posted December 16, 2012 Report Share Posted December 16, 2012 There's a whole lot of irresponsible people.No 100 round clips---Right Magazine capacity is a strawman argument at best. If I have 10 10-round magazines, I have the exact same number of bullets, and I can change a magazine in under a second. It comes back to the person. You take a gun out of their hand, they'll use a knife. Take the knife away, they'll us a bat. IMO, the efforts would be better served determining what conditioning makes people think it's a good idea to go shoot people in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts