Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What part of it's too damn late for those 26 dead people don't you understand?
Great. He broke the law. So glad we know now ... that it's too late.
The sane people aren't interested in what we do AFTER people have been slaughtered -- by a guy who was a law-abiding citizen until AFTER he snapped and massacred those first graders. Who got his guns from someone who was a law-abiding citizen and responsible gun owner until AFTER her son killed her and 26 other people.
The sane people have figured out that AFTER is TOO DAMN LATE. Fewer "law-abiding citizens" with guns, fewer deaths. Period.
We know it's TOO DAMN LATE!!! But I for one cannot support p***ing on the 2nd Amendment effectively disarming law abiding citizens, and hindering their ability to defend themselves and their families! Face it, there are evil people in the world, who are going to do evil things regardless of how many "feel good" laws we try to pass! I'd rather be afforded the option to defend myself and others that I care about, than be defenseless! And besides, wasn't this idiot denied when he himself tried to purchase guns? Hmmm, wonder why? Nevertheless, his actions proved that he was going to get them, no matter what. Had their been an armed guard there, this guy wouldn't have been able to murder all of those children!
Again, you insult people for being paranoid for using common sense, in wanting to have the knowledge and the ability to defend themselves, when in fact it seems you are the one who is paranoid that all gun owners are these evil people that want to go on killing sprees. I know several gun owners. Family members included. NOT ONE has felt any inkling to go out and shoot up innocent people! But you automatically ASSume that these people are already criminals, because they own guns!
And that is the problem with banning "assault weapons". It's a meaningless term, invented by politicians who want to be perceived as "doing something".
People in the know, understand. People who don't understand want to ban. It's mostly cosmetic and people need to learn what they are against.
We know it's TOO DAMN LATE!!! But I for one cannot support p***ing on the 2nd Amendment effectively disarming law abiding citizens, and hindering their ability to defend themselves and their families! Face it, there are evil people in the world, who are going to do evil things regardless of how many "feel good" laws we try to pass! I'd rather be afforded the option to defend myself and others that I care about, than be defenseless! And besides, wasn't this idiot denied when he himself tried to purchase guns? Hmmm, wonder why? Nevertheless, his actions proved that he was going to get them, no matter what. Had their been an armed guard there, this guy wouldn't have been able to murder all of those children!
Again, you insult people for being paranoid for using common sense, in wanting to have the knowledge and the ability to defend themselves, when in fact it seems you are the one who is paranoid that all gun owners are these evil people that want to go on killing sprees. I know several gun owners. Family members included. NOT ONE has felt any inkling to go out and shoot up innocent people! But you automatically ASSume that these people are already criminals, because they own guns!
*sigh* Still disappointing me.
Your circular arguments are worthless, so I won't bother to engage after this.
Blah blah blah, my rights trump children's rights to live, blah blah, let's arrest people after they kill, blah blah, my rights, blah blah, arm babies, blah blah, MY RIGHTS ME ME ME.
As do I, but let me see if I can cut to the chase.
Everyone from the President on down is calling to "ban assault weapons", saying "these weapons of war have no place on the streets of America".
Clever wordsmithing, IMO. No doubt both phrases were extensively tested.
But the thing is, firearms do one thing. They put bullets downrange at a high rate of speed. However, the power and ability of the firearm is not what determines the lethality, rather it's the round that determines that.
In this case, the shooter used an AR-15 that fires .223 or 5.56 rounds. OMG it's an assault weapon!!!
But there are pistols that fire the same rounds, and don't meet the definition of assault weapon, and are much easier to conceal than a rifle, even if it has a collapsable stock! There are other semi-automatic rifles that fire the same rounds, and don't meet the definition of assault weapon. Ergo, banning AR-15's because of their appearance is nothing but symbolism over substance, and will not prevent someone from using .223 rounds to kill other people.
And, as I pointed out in a different thread, if the AR-15 is a "weapon of war", then why doesn't the Army use them?
I agree with you that classifying the AR-15 as a "weapon of war" is silly and that the general use of hyperbolic descriptors takes away from the primary argument. The AR-15 is a dumbed down M-16, so the Army would find the weapon useless as we have generally moved on from the usage of the M-16 anyway.
Something to consider though..
"Assault weapons are routinely the weapons of choice for gang members and drug dealers. They are regularly encountered in drug busts and are all too often used against our officers. In fact, one in five law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2001, was killed with an assault weapon, according to "Officer Down," a report from the Violence Policy Center. The weapons in question—including the Colt AR-15, a semiautomatic version of the M-16 machine gun used by our armed forces, the Uzi, and the Tec-9 pistol, whose manufacturer's advertisements hailed its "fingerprint-resistant" finish—have been used in countless murders such as the Stockton schoolyard and Columbine High School shootings."
This segment of an article wasn't written by Leftist grassroots mouthpiece, or by an Anti-NRA PAC. It was written by the Chief of Police of Garden Grove, CA. Police Chief Magazine - View Article
Your wrong!! It is indeed the gun thing that has the rest of the World shaking their heads at America, many of which peoples are even scared to come here for a short vacation. The foreign impression our gun-mania fanatics are giving the World is a heavily armed society of wild west mentality. This produces fear and distrust in visiting the USA.
Nobody hates the Constitution and it is not an issue of far left or right. Its common sense, realizing that this gun "culture" has to come to an end NOW! America is killing itself from within, this is absolutely NOT what our founding fathers wanted.
No ... no .... no .... no ... nooooooo! You have got this totally backward, turned upside down, and twisted inside out. So lets see if you and others who hold your opinion on the matter really are interested in rational solutions, or just promoting the anti-gun agenda, OKAY?
First of all, violent crime has actually been declining nationally over the past two decades, with the largest decreases in states and cities with the least restrictive gun policies. Increased state issue of concealed carry permits correlate closely with the most dramatic decreases. By the same token, the cities with the most restrictive gun laws have bucked that national trend, and have experienced increases. This is not a coincidence. This "gun culture" you refer to is a media created perception for which neither the facts nor common sense aline with. And I suggest a lack of common sense exists precisely because people who accept such perceptions will consistently and summarily reject any competing view or evidence that does not fit that perception. This closed mindedness is dogmatic in nature, and rejects any information or fact that does not fit their accepted narrative. This demonstrates an irrational mental rigidity, to an extent that must be considered a form of willful ignorance. That's the only description that fits a scenario in which the facts do not support the "perception", yet the perception is defended vigorously, while facts are attacked or dismissed out-of-hand.
While violent crime has been on the decline nationally, we have indeed experienced a recent increase in mass shootings over the past few years, and there are many factors which might be contributing to that trend, to include the almost doubling of the number of people who are taking psychotropic antidepressant drugs which have proven, documented side effects of increased depression; aggression and violent behavior; thoughts of suicide; and psychotic breakdowns. And in almost every case, from Columbine to Sandy Hook, and those in between, the "shooter" or "shooters" have had a history of taking these powerful, mind altering drugs. Another commonality to these events is that they almost always occur at locations defined as "gun free zones" ... such as schools and theaters designated as such, or at locations with a reasonable expectation of unarmed victims.
Obviously, individuals who commit mass murder are demonstratively suffering severe mental dysfunction, as rational, mentally stable, law abiding people simply aren't criminals and don't murder people. Quite to the contrary ... armed, law abiding citizens use firearms to prevent or thwart violent crime in significant volume. This is just pure common sense. And the most rational conclusion is that no amount of gun laws will prevent criminals and nuts from committing violence because neither are likely to abide by those laws ... that's why they are called criminals! What restrictive gun laws actually do is extend and increase the number of unarmed potential victims who are left defenseless and at the mercy of such psychopaths.
Now, it only stands to reason that these people who commit these psycho-murders while taking such powerful drugs are likely already suffering mental issues (which is the reason for their prescription), or doctors are over-prescribing these drugs to people they shouldn't be. The truth is .. both scenarios are true. Nowadays, people just don't get psychiatric care in the form of counseling and real psychotherapy, but are instead, simply issued these powerful drugs .... "take this, and come back and see me next month". And others are also being prescribed these drugs to address such things as "situational depression". Hell, we all get depressed from time to time ... life ain't always a bowl of cherries, and modern day life has many sources of stress ... but that's no reason to prescribe mind altering substances, to replace the counseling (and monitoring) people used to receive which helped them develop strategies to cope with and minimize or solve these common problems of life. And here comes that little issue of "common sense" once again. Tell me just how sensible it is to take a drug which is prescribed to treat depression and mental illness, when the side effect of that drug is depression, aggression, suicidal thoughts, and psychosis? Explain that one, and you will receive your personal "George Orwell" award for backward thinking. It's like trying to put out a fire with gasoline. It's as crazy as the nut taking the drugs.
One of our biggest problems negatively affecting society is that we don't have a mentality of focusing on the causes of problems ... we're a "treat the symptom" society, who's solution to all problems is either to throw money at it, or throw drugs at it, or "ban" something. And when you take such an antithetical approach of treating mental illness and simple depression with drugs which can cause the very issues you're trying to treat ... there is a freaking collective mental problem at hand, and it's called mass stupidity. Drugs that can cause psychotic episodes and break downs, by nature ought to be eliminated altogether, rather than deluding ourselves that they are needed to treat mental illness. And when you consider that 27 Million Americans are now on such drugs ( a two fold increase in just the past 10 years) ... why should anyone be surprised by an increase in psychotic nuts committing insane acts, including senseless mass murder? With 27 Million potential "side effect" victims of these psychotropic drugs walking around among us, many of which are presumably already suffering a mental disorders, that ought to be one of the prime areas of attention, with common sense demanding that we rethink the idiocy of embracing causes as cures. But the propagandists will not promote rational responses. The drugs are good, and it's the guns that are bad. That's the promoted narrative, and the masses so easily manipulated, are led by their noses in whatever direction desired.
So I tell you this ... you can remain a member of the emotional, knee-jerk reactionary crowd which believes that "guns" are responsible for such psycho-crime ... but it's a position void of any reason or rationality whatsoever. That a nut chooses a gun to act out their psychotic episodes will not be prevented by making that one tool harder to legally attain, as they will simply find a new source for that tool, or choose another tool to use. As an example, there is nothing to stop a psycho-killer from driving a car onto a school playground at recess time, and mowing down a hundred children in a matter of moments. You simply cannot eliminate the long list of potential methods for which a psychopath could choose to kill people, and the premise that the gun allows for greater damage is TOTALLY FALSE, as per the example just given.
The truth is, historically, psychopathic murderers rarely use firearms as the tool of their deviate behavior. Knives, ropes, instruments to bludgeon are used far more often by psycho-serial killers to slice, stab, strangle and incapacitate their victims. That's the reality. And it is also true that many of these psychos are highly intelligent and clever ... enough so to avoid choosing armed victims, or prey upon those in areas where firearms might be prevalently owned.
The ultimate reality is, aside poorly conceived ideas to the contrary, guns make you safer. That's precisely what the statistics show, and what common sense would suggest. The truth is, criminals and psychopaths love gun laws, because they love defenseless victims, which is why people like you ought to have the good sense not to labor so much to accommodate their desires.
This segment of an article wasn't written by Leftist grassroots mouthpiece, or by an Anti-NRA PAC. It was written by the Chief of Police of Garden Grove, CA. Police Chief Magazine - View Article
Well, I don't know if his statistics are accurate or not, but I do know that overall "assault weapons" are responsible for less than 1% of all murders.
And, at the risk of being repetitive, which of the following weapons is an "assault weapon"?
The one on the bottom meets the legal definition as outlined in the 1994 AWB. It has a detachable magazine, a pistol grip, a flash suppressor, and a collapsable stock. That means it's more dangerous and deadly than the one on the top, right?
Well, there's a problem with that. They are both Ruger Mini-14's, just with different cosmetic packages. Take off the wood and plastic and under the hood they're identical. They both fire the same cartridge (.223) at the same rate of speed, and can be loaded with the same magazines.
Banning just the bottom one is meaningless, feel good, symbolism over substance nonsense.
Your circular arguments are worthless, so I won't bother to engage after this.
Blah blah blah, my rights trump children's rights to live, blah blah, let's arrest people after they kill, blah blah, my rights, blah blah, arm babies, blah blah, MY RIGHTS ME ME ME.
Got it.
My argument is based on logic! Yours are based on emotion. Personally, I don't give a s*** if I'm disappointing you! Don't like it, don't respond! Unless, you'd like to take away our freedom of speech as well! You're saying that it's all me me me! Lets be realistic as to who is overreacting and being selfish here. Unlike you, where you believe in using big daddy gubermint to tell people how to live their lives, and enact feel good laws that don't do a GOD DAMNED BIT OF GOOD, I believe in individual liberty, personal accountability, and responsiblity!
Why is it with some lefties it's always somebody elses fault? Everybody is a victim. Adam Lanza is the ONE who should be held accountable! HE is the ONE that committed the act of theft! And HE is the ONE who committed the murder! Not his dead mother, whom he shot in her sleep!
If you consider 20 first graders blown to smithereens simply an acceptable price for your "freedoms", then I guess I just remembered why I moved away from Ohio 35 years ago.
If you consider 20 first graders blown to smithereens simply an acceptable price for your "freedoms", then I guess I just remembered why I moved away from Ohio 35 years ago.
We could live in a locked down prison society to protect everyone. How much freedom are you willing to give up ?
Do you drink socially ? Alcohol kills thousands yearly. To achieve no deaths by alcohol we should ban it 100%. Does your right to have 1 drink override the hundreds of kids slaughtered by drunk drivers ?
As it is, the gun law worked, he was reused sale of a weapon, he violated the law by stealing his mothers gun to commit a crime, it was the mothers stupidity by letting him have access to her guns, what part don't you understand? If she were still alive, she would be charged possibly with negligent homicide or some sort of accomplice crime.
Please....someone....explain to me how a real live human being can keep going around in these same circles and not begin to see the big picture....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But I for one cannot support p***ing on the 2nd Amendment effectively disarming law abiding citizens, and hindering their ability to defend themselves and their families! Face it, there are evil people in the world, who are going to do evil things regardless of how many "feel good" laws we try to pass! I'd rather be afforded the option to defend myself and others that I care about, than be defenseless! And besides, wasn't this idiot denied when he himself tried to purchase guns? Hmmm, wonder why? Nevertheless, his actions proved that he was going to get them, no matter what. Had their been an armed guard there, this guy wouldn't have been able to murder all of those children! 
It is indeed the gun thing that has the rest of the World shaking their heads at America, many of which peoples are even scared to come here for a short vacation. The foreign impression our gun-mania fanatics are giving the World is a heavily armed society of wild west mentality. This produces fear and distrust in visiting the USA.
