Posted - 12/14/2012 3:42:53 PM | show profile | flag this post
...rears its twisted modern day manifestation again.
"This isn't the right time!"
Yeah, it wasn't the right time the last time or the time before that or the time before that or the time before that either.
Posted - 12/14/2012 4:45:07 PM | show profile | flag this post
Here is your challenge: write the law that can guarantee what happened today never happens again and I will support it.
Posted - 12/14/2012 4:45:08 PM | show profile | flag this post
Here is your challenge: write the law that can guarantee what happened today never happens again and I will support it.
Posted - 12/14/2012 5:08:43 PM | show profile | flag this post
I challenge you
...to design an atomic bomb that won't detonate unless it's justified.
But then, you're not a bomb maker and I'm not a legislator. I won't be writing that legislation, or a symphony, for that matter. This is however an opinion page. I have one, and will express it. That's fair, isn't it?
1. COMPLETE gun control,
and there is
2. what we have, which is very LITTLE gun control.
Continual defending the present, as if no other options are possible, is false equivalence and candidly, the playground of losers. Would you folks be arguing in 1964 that traveling to the moon was impossible simply because it hadn't been done? Good legislation is hard. Throwing up our hands before even trying just because the NRA is used to stomping its feet and getting what it wants isn't leadership. Let's see if our leaders have some cojones. Invite the gun lobby to make suggestions.
Further, deciding that the framers of the Constitution believed anyone should be armed today (when the very notion of a gun which shot more than once was inconceivable) is really rather silly. That's cherry picking ancient words and assuming those same people, alive today, would still vehemently defend gun ownership in any manifestation. You're "using" the framers without being able to ask their opinions.
I say "you" and I don't mean specifically you, blacked tape. I'm just weary of having this conversation every few weeks or couple of months. And I've known no one killed in one of those tragedies. I can't imagine how outraged I'd be if I did.
Posted - 12/14/2012 5:19:34 PM | show profile | flag this post
Whether or not it's the right time
this discussion WILL degenerate into predictable finger-pointing and blame games. Left wingers will blame the mere existence of firearms and call for the overturn of the Second Amndment to the Constitution...nevermind that the emerging information points to a severely emotionally disturbed individual.
This has been the case in virtually all of the mass shootings in recent memory, including Clackamus County, OR (Mall), Tucson, AZ (Giffords), Aurora, CO (Batman movie), Jefferson County, CO (Columbine), Blacksburg, VA (VA Tech), etc.
Mental health information MUST ABSOLUTELTY be pried away from the medical profession and shared with law enforcement if we ever hope to get a handle on these kinds of incidents.
We SIMPLY CANNOT deprive 315 million people of legitimate recreational, provisioning and self-protection pursuits when other measures are not being explored.
Posted - 12/14/2012 5:45:16 PM | show profile | flag this post
the type of guns used in these mass murders have
nothing to do with recreational use or self-protection.
Posted - 12/14/2012 5:56:48 PM | show profile | flag this post
In fact, they have EVERYTHING to do with
recreation and self-protection.
The AR-15/M16-style rifle is one of the most popular target firearms in existence. And the projectile fired by the AR-15/M16 is only VERY SLIGHTLY larger and heavier than the ubiquitous 22 caliber bullet. By contrast, the projectile of a deer rifle is much larger and FIVE TIMES as heavy as a .223 round.
Semi-automatic pistols are THE most popular self protection weapons available. They are maneuverable in a hallway where a rifle or shotgun may not be and the round will likely NOT penetrate the exterior wall of the dwelling.
What we need is FACTUAL information, not emotionally-charged opinion.
Posted - 12/14/2012 6:01:25 PM | show profile | flag this post
New, unconfirmed information
indicates that the shooter may have been an Asperger's Syndrome sufferer (autistic) and/or have a learning disorder. This would put him squarely in the midst of the group I listed in an earlier post.
Posted - 12/14/2012 6:01:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
Yeah, about those facts
Rounds probably won't penetrate brick, but with standard wood frame construction they damn sure will. You know that, but you're cherry picking your facts to make your point.
Posted - 12/14/2012 6:19:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
A standard six-inch
insulated wall with interior drywall, exterior plywood sheathing and siding will stop a .40S&W round UNLESS it is fired perpendicular to the wall in very close proximity. I doubt many...if ANY...self-protection situations match those parameters. Brick, stucco, adobe and other hard sidings are not as penetrable. Obviously, a 9mm Parabellum is not as powerful as the .40S&W and a .38 Special even less powerful.
Posted - 12/14/2012 6:23:56 PM | show profile | flag this post
Just to add some perspective
and...hopefully...put to bed once and for all the notion that if guns didn't exist this situation would not have occurred.
Read the following...it happened in China:
Posted - 12/14/2012 7:36:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
Until some yayhoo
...breaks into a school and kills 20 kids with his bare hands I don't want to hear GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE; PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.
Just keep yourself from looking stupid by refraining from that.
Posted - 12/14/2012 8:24:27 PM | show profile | flag this post
Because china has gun laws, 22 children will wake up tomorrow with knife wounds.
And the families of 27 Americans, the parents of 20 children, will be burying their loved ones.
It is indefensible.
Posted - 12/14/2012 8:33:32 PM | show profile | flag this post
The material used today
were A Glock and a Sig Sauer nine millimeter. Both are handguns, but both have the capability to be used with the high-capacity clips. Also, a Bushmaster .223, an AR-15 basically.
And they were legally purchased by one of the victims--not the mentally disturbed shooter. So much for stricter bakground checks.
These weapons are not designed for hunting. They do have two uses. To kill something, or to practice on killing something. That's it.
You want "reasonable legislation"? It's already on the books. It's called the Second Amendment. Unless you are a member of a "Well regulated Militia", you shouldn't be allowed to buy or possess anything like this.
Posted - 12/14/2012 9:10:03 PM | show profile | flag this post
That's getting REALLY
old and threadbare. And that's not what the amendment says.
The ONLY imperative statement therein reads, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That's SHALL NOT be infringed. Verstehen Sie?
Posted - 12/14/2012 9:33:47 PM | show profile | flag this post
Not going to argue with you.
it says "A Well Regulated Militia". And it's never been changed. You don't like the wording? Sign a petitition. But it's right there. In English.
Besides, some prominent conservatives have already figured out the cause of todays tragedy.,..
"Bryan Fischer spent the first hour of his radio program today discussing this morning's truly horrific shooting at an elementary school in Connecticut, which he, of course, blamed on the fact that prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments are not taught in public schools.
Fischer said that God could have protected the victims of this massacre, but didn't because "God is not going to go where he is not wanted" and so if school administrators really want to protect students, they will start every school day with prayer"
Huckabee echoed that theme later on FOX: "Appearing on Fox News’ Your World this afternoon to discuss the tragic massacre in Newtown, Conn., former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that we shouldn’t be surprised that schools have become a place of carnage after Americans have rejected teaching about life and responsibility by “removing God from our schools.”
It's so clear now...
Posted - 12/14/2012 9:51:23 PM | show profile | flag this post
"That's SHALL NOT be infringed. Verstehen Sie?"
Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This
Posted - 12/14/2012 10:02:21 PM | show profile | flag this post
Guns don't kill people....
but gun owners do.
Posted - 12/15/2012 12:40:05 AM | show profile | flag this post
And they don't even have to be owners
as is reportedly the case in Connecticut.
But you're absolutely right. Firearms DO NOT kill people. In fact, I've been associated with firearms for in excess of sixty years and I've never seen one take an independent action.
Posted - 12/15/2012 12:50:55 AM | show profile | flag this post
"A Well Regulated Militia"
I won't argue with you. That's what it says. And the "well regulated militia" consists of the people...ALL of the people.
That all of the people are necessary to the security of a free state is the content of the dependent clause, which provides the justification for the directive that the right of the people shall not be infringed.
It's simple English...which I perfectly understand you fervently wish had a different meaning. But it doesn't. Live with it.
Posted - 12/15/2012 9:26:39 AM | show profile | flag this post
So according to an amendment written over 200 years ago, the rights of gun owners ( mostly hobbyists) trumps the rights of little kids to live. do I have that correct? How can anyone sane keep defending an amendment whose language ( "well regulated militia") is totally out of date and was written at a different period in history and does not make much sense in2012.
Posted - 12/15/2012 9:49:57 AM | show profile | flag this post
was written when the U.S. didn't have a standing army. People had to be guaranteed to own guns so they could be called to action. If you think the law is not outdated, read the 3rd Amendment. When is the last time you saw someone trying to quarter soldiers in your neighborhood? BTW, cars weren't around when the Constitution was written. They must be registered and operators must be licensed. But where have you seen anyone's "right" to own a car be infringed? There are only a few hundred million of them around and the government hasn't been seen trying to take them away from anyone yet. Your arguments have no validity.
Posted - 12/15/2012 11:24:39 AM | show profile | flag this post
"the rights of gun owners trumps the rights of little kids"
Pardon me but this is a specious argument and typical of the unthinking emotional/reactionary left wing.
Little kids get killed in cars but I don't see anyone with a serious agenda of banning cars. Same for jet skis...and snowboards...and dozens of other products routinely in use by Americans.
Death by mass shooting is tragic but IT IS NOT...AND NEVER WILL BE...THE FAULT OF FIREARMS. The fault lies with the user...and in most cases of mass shooting there is a mental health issue. Until we as a people learn how do deal with that such tragedies will continue.
Liberals MUST accept some of the blame...they are the ones who continually campaign for the privacy of medical records when making mental health data available to law enforcement would be beneficial. The data should be in the form of lists of persons prohibited by virtue of their mental state from owning or using firearms, purchasing ammunition, etc.
And don't come at me with the typical left wing bromide of the only purpose of a gun is to kill people. That is patently untrue.
Tens of thousands use firearms for hunting, target practice and competition, and the defense of self, family and domicile. Few...and I mean DAMN FEW...ever kill another person.
I don't mean to minimize the horror of this incident or the trauma and grief experience by the families of the victims but we need to approach this topic rationally and intelligently.
Posted - 12/15/2012 12:00:16 PM | show profile | flag this post
Hail the Militia!
Too bad they were all busy posting on some dumb ass internet message board and not available to help out when they were needed.
|it's just tv folks||
Posted - 12/15/2012 12:08:39 PM | show profile | flag this post
As I said before
this type of carnage will happen again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again.
Again, nothing will be done to make our children safer, to make Americans safer. Funny how many of the same people who defend the right of dangerous people to own guns had no problem with the elimination of rights for all of us under the Patriot Act. The NRA leadership tells us that "guns are good .. guns who kill people are REALLY good!".
Maybe the next "kid" shot dead will be 2oldcuztwit's "granddaughter" or blackedtaped's imaginary son. I'd love to see them come on here and do their "happy dance" over their own dead "kids" and express their comfort in the knowledge that their "right" to be stupid with a gun is safe and secure. (That's definitely what they'd tell all the parents in Newtown.) I'm sure their gun would give them great joy and comfort and more than make up for the loss of a child. What disgusting vile filth you two are for celebrating the guns that were the instruments of murdering these innocent children and noble adults. The murderer obviously is in the disgusting pile of vile filth.
What is wrong with making sure everyone who buys a gun is a sane, rational person? What is wrong with making sure everyone who buys a gun doesn't have a restraining order against them? What is wrong with making sure everyone who buys a gun doesn't have a history of violence? What is wrong with making sure everyone who buys a gun doesn't have any associations with terrorists/terrorism? What is wrong with making sure that anyone who buys a gun does not give access to his/her guns to anyone who is not sane/rational, has a history of violence, has a restraining order against him/her, and/or has an association with terrorists/terrorism?
These latest victims of an idiot, angry, vile creature with guns, were 5 to 10 years old. Why is this acceptable to any decent human being?
Why do gun nuts, the "oh we can't have any impediment to mass gun possession by every idiot who wants guns", recoil to any attempt to keep guns out of the hands of those with murderous ambitions? If these guns were owned by the mother of the murder, yes, she failed to keep those guns safe and out of the hands of her murderous son. How did he get so many rounds to kill so many?
Even NRA member overwhelmingly agree a background check is a good idea:
Why don't we allow those sentenced to prison or jail to own guns and have them inside of prison or jail with them? It's their sekonnd menment rite now ain't it? Because it'd be retarded now, wouldn't it!?!!?!!.
Heaven forbid there could be any reason to limit gun ownership/possession. Heaven forbid we require responsible gun ownership/possession.
The framers of the Constitution thought it was cool to murder people, didintday?!?! Of course the Holy Founders thought it was a great idea that I can stand my ground against 2oldcruztwit, blackedtaped and other tards and shoot dem ded cuz I feewl afeerd.
What is wrong with you people who fear responsibility???? blackedtaped sez we can't stop every gun death, so let's NOT do anything to stop those deaths WE CAN STOP. What a stupid, retarded response. That says all we need to know about that idiot, that retard.
Republitards had no problem taking the right to vote away from people who likely wouldn't vote in the republitard way. Why can't sane people take the right to possess a gun away from murderous people? We sane people don't want idiots to murder people. Aren't we sane people on the side of our Lord Jesus who was NOT a member of the NR