If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS 42 Birmingham) NewsFlash Gunman enters Alabama hospital, opens fire. Injures three before being killed by police. Begun, the copycat shootings have   (cbs42.com) divider line 835
    More: NewsFlash, St. Vincent, Alabama, UAB, shootings, guns  
•       •       •

18593 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Dec 2012 at 2:53 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

835 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-15 04:25:17 PM

Generation_D: mr lawson: [sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 542x539]

Thats funny. I would vote "All weapons prohibited on the premises." And define that as the whole country.

I'd much rather outlaw guns entirely and then sort out who the criminals are, than leave guns lying around and wait for the next round of victims to happen.


Good luck getting my guns for less than market value. Otherwise you'll be finding the confiscation process to be a right biatch.
 
2012-12-15 04:25:50 PM
The way I see it, there is no one answer, but everything needs to be on the table for discussion in the U.S. That doesn't mean that Big Brother is going to take away your guns, but it does mean that the national dialogue needs to be all-inclusive and not all-dismissive as I fear it will be.

Again, in my opinion, three things need to change:

1. Violence (not just gun violence) needs to become less socially acceptable in the U.S., period. This will take quite a large sociocultural shift.

2. The U.S. needs a robust mental healthcare system, which includes education for the populace at large that having a mental disorder doesn't make you "defective" and that sometimes, you can't just "suck it up, Nancy". I'm sick of hearing "Back in my day, we didn't have therapy and talk about our emotions." Well, back in your day, schools were segregated and women were relegated to the kitchen. In a historical sense, "your day" sucked and you're on the wrong side of history.

3. We (the U.S.) need to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. That doesn't have to mean "impossible", but you'll have to go through more hoops. Sorry if you feel like you need your M-15 to protect your double-wide a few weeks earlier. You can be patient.
 
2012-12-15 04:26:02 PM

justtray: You're fine with that? We've deemed you a psycho


who is "we" and what is the test?
you know just spouting out hypotheticals not based on any real science or data make you look desperate. Or perhaps it is projection.
Let me guess...YOU or somebody you know has been found to be psychotic? Right?
 
2012-12-15 04:26:35 PM

justtray: Friction8r: John Dewey: NotoriousFire: Second amendment already justifies a gun owners "need" to own. You need to justify your point - the US Bill of Rights justifies against your point.

The Bill of Rights justified owning a musket.

The right of the People to keep and bear ARMS, not "muskets," ya dolt. I enjoy mine, and I'm keeping them, and you can't do a thing about it...except flame on, which is delightful!

Keep reading. Don't stop after the first sentence this time.

I hope you fight back when we force you to register your weapons and pay property taxes on them. Then we can legally put you down and remove you from the equation.


Who is WE? Some pussified lib posting on the internet?? You really think the military will EVER go house to house to confiscate all guns?? That notion is precisely why our Founders wanted the citizenry to be armed in the first place!! You lose! You have no game, and zero chance of taking our guns.
 
2012-12-15 04:26:45 PM

iq_in_binary: Generation_D: mr lawson: [sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 542x539]

Thats funny. I would vote "All weapons prohibited on the premises." And define that as the whole country.

I'd much rather outlaw guns entirely and then sort out who the criminals are, than leave guns lying around and wait for the next round of victims to happen.

Good luck getting my guns for less than market value. Otherwise you'll be finding the confiscation process to be a right biatch.


We'll just tax you on each one instead until you're begging us to give you anything for them.
 
2012-12-15 04:26:48 PM

Generation_D: I bet guns evolve out of American culture, if it survives, in under 100 years.

Enjoy your freedoms to shoot everything you want now.


I truly and wholeheartedly hope you are right.
 
2012-12-15 04:27:22 PM

KiwDaWabbit: The way I see it, there is no one answer, but everything needs to be on the table for discussion in the U.S. That doesn't mean that Big Brother is going to take away your guns, but it does mean that the national dialogue needs to be all-inclusive and not all-dismissive as I fear it will be.

Again, in my opinion, three things need to change:

1. Violence (not just gun violence) needs to become less socially acceptable in the U.S., period. This will take quite a large sociocultural shift.

2. The U.S. needs a robust mental healthcare system, which includes education for the populace at large that having a mental disorder doesn't make you "defective" and that sometimes, you can't just "suck it up, Nancy". I'm sick of hearing "Back in my day, we didn't have therapy and talk about our emotions." Well, back in your day, schools were segregated and women were relegated to the kitchen. In a historical sense, "your day" sucked and you're on the wrong side of history.

3. We (the U.S.) need to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. That doesn't have to mean "impossible", but you'll have to go through more hoops. Sorry if you feel like you need your M-15 to protect your double-wide a few weeks earlier. You can be patient.


Yup.
 
2012-12-15 04:27:23 PM

SlothB77: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 726x416]


Farking thing didn't even reach 1 this time.
 
2012-12-15 04:28:26 PM

SlothB77:


That image has an unrealistic number of columns hunny
 
2012-12-15 04:28:32 PM

mr lawson: justtray: You're fine with that? We've deemed you a psycho

who is "we" and what is the test?
you know just spouting out hypotheticals not based on any real science or data make you look desperate. Or perhaps it is projection.
Let me guess...YOU or somebody you know has been found to be psychotic? Right?


You tell me, you're the one who ignorantly uses it as a deflection. Who gets locked up?
 
2012-12-15 04:28:57 PM

iq_in_binary: Generation_D: mr lawson: [sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 542x539]

Thats funny. I would vote "All weapons prohibited on the premises." And define that as the whole country.

I'd much rather outlaw guns entirely and then sort out who the criminals are, than leave guns lying around and wait for the next round of victims to happen.

Good luck getting my guns for less than market value. Otherwise you'll be finding the confiscation process to be a right biatch.


I dont think I care what you own.

What I care about is the society we both share over values what you own as a necessity for survival and defense.

The rest of the world that we call civilized for the most part disputes the value you placed on owning weapons.

Thats what will eventually fix this. The rest of the world keeps seeping into America as much as we try and deny it.

Just like the Romney bots were shocked and amazed to find a majority didn't want their derp, so too will the gun owners one day be shocked and amazed that most in America dispute their need to own a gun, or their fear-based requirement that everyone else own one to feel defended too.
 
2012-12-15 04:29:04 PM

drewogatory: Without fair compensation? Alot.


So people with registered firearms would ignore the law and refuse to turn in their guns if the 2nd Amendment was repealed? Maybe a few nuts, but most people aren't that dumb.
 
2012-12-15 04:29:37 PM
Jaws_Victim
I agree something needs to be done, but I draw the line at holding other people responsible for something they did not physically do.

I understand your point. But it's not exactly radical. Tort law requires people to take reasonable steps to prevent property damage and injury to other people. If they fail to, and someone suffers property damage or is injured, they have to pay.

That's all this is. If you're a responsible gun owner, you should take reasonable steps to prevent your gun(s) from being used by someone else. That's especially true if someone with access to your gun(s) has a criminal record or has shown signs of mental instability.

In economic terms, it's a classic example of a negative externality. The law forces you to take steps to internalize costs that other people could incur as a result of your carelessness. And no guns are banned, confiscated, etc.
 
2012-12-15 04:29:48 PM

Friction8r: justtray: Friction8r: John Dewey: NotoriousFire: Second amendment already justifies a gun owners "need" to own. You need to justify your point - the US Bill of Rights justifies against your point.

The Bill of Rights justified owning a musket.

The right of the People to keep and bear ARMS, not "muskets," ya dolt. I enjoy mine, and I'm keeping them, and you can't do a thing about it...except flame on, which is delightful!

Keep reading. Don't stop after the first sentence this time.

I hope you fight back when we force you to register your weapons and pay property taxes on them. Then we can legally put you down and remove you from the equation.

Who is WE? Some pussified lib posting on the internet?? You really think the military will EVER go house to house to confiscate all guns?? That notion is precisely why our Founders wanted the citizenry to be armed in the first place!! You lose! You have no game, and zero chance of taking our guns.


If you believed that you wouldn't be in this thread trying to convince me otherwise.

Your guns will be taken, or you'll go broke or to jail trying to keep them. Win/win/win
 
2012-12-15 04:30:02 PM

justtray: You tell me, you're the one who ignorantly uses it as a deflection. Who gets locked up?


Start here
 
2012-12-15 04:30:37 PM

tricycleracer: Catch-22 was such a good movie. Didn't they make a book out of that?


Why you ... don't make me come over there!
 
2012-12-15 04:30:53 PM
 
2012-12-15 04:30:58 PM
So you have a society that celebrates stupidity, cuts education, thinks that guns are Jesus' gift from heaven, in economic downfall and no one puts 2 and 2 together?

Wow you Yanks are really really really stupid to say the least.
 
2012-12-15 04:32:15 PM

Popcorn Johnny: drewogatory: Without fair compensation? Alot.

So people with registered firearms would ignore the law and refuse to turn in their guns if the 2nd Amendment was repealed? Maybe a few nuts, but most people aren't that dumb.


What "registered" firearms do you keep referring to? Only a tiny fraction of the weapons in this country could be construed as registered in any way. There is no "lisT'. You would basically be dependant on the honour system to get people to declare them and turn them in.
 
2012-12-15 04:32:59 PM
TheDirtyNacho: I don't think the writers of the constitution envisioned mass produced semiautomatic handguns and the social ills they create when that amendment was written.

when the 2nd was written those available firearms were the most advanced of their day; they were mass produced as best they could be at that time. They were the most deadly weapons the world had seen. They could be reloaded faster than previous firearms. Your distinction between guns of yesteryear and now is quite arbitrary. When the 2nd was written its authors envisioned the citizenry possessing the most dangerous weapons ever.
 
2012-12-15 04:33:12 PM
Everyone with the over 270,000,000 privately owned guns in the United States please send your name, address, and social security number so we may tax and/or confiscate your guns.

Thank you. 

i47.tinypic.com
 
2012-12-15 04:33:47 PM

whither_apophis: So Obama gets reelected... suddenly a bunch of shootings happen... then the next thing you know he'll want to take away all our guns... OMG!!!

/sorry took off the tinfoil hat for a moment.


There were a bunch of people at Midway airport last night talking about how it's all a government conspiracy to blame it on a secret cult of secret gunmen that are trying to appear individual but are actually all in a group, to cover up the fact that it's actually the government shooting people.

I wanted to punch them in their faces so hard. SO HARD.
 
2012-12-15 04:33:52 PM

Popcorn Johnny: drewogatory: Without fair compensation? Alot.

So people with registered firearms would ignore the law and refuse to turn in their guns if the 2nd Amendment was repealed? Maybe a few nuts, but most people aren't that dumb.


Are you advocating confiscation without compensation?
 
2012-12-15 04:33:57 PM

mr lawson: justtray: You tell me, you're the one who ignorantly uses it as a deflection. Who gets locked up?

Start here


Be specific. I know rhe DS4. Do people with depression get locked up? How about semi autistic? Whose judgement do we defer to? All of those diagnoses are subjective. I accurately played two of the as pseudo patients in my psych class ~10 years ago. Everyone has some level of the disorders, and I think you'd be surprised to find out you do too, as well as most gun nuts having anti social personality disorder.

Like i said, we're locking you up, based on your own suggestion.
 
2012-12-15 04:34:21 PM
6 mass shootings in under 4 months. Another arrested yesterday plotting to do the same to a school in OK. This shooter was handled by those who had no weapons. The mass shooter at the army base was surrounded by trained soldiers with weapons and did more damage. The shooter in Texas was surrounded by those who could openly carry and a few did but was not stopped by them until he ran out of bullets.

The only way to stop this is to make move gun control to the Federal level. This way your gun permits are valid in EVERY state. Same rules in EVERY state. And the mentally ill can be prevented from getting guns. Nearly 90% of all these massacres were from folks who had LEGALLY OBTAINED guns. And nearly all of the shooters were WHITE.
 
2012-12-15 04:34:47 PM
DSM-IV even*
 
2012-12-15 04:35:04 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: ToxicMunkee: Arm all the doctors and nurses, stat!

Funny you say that as the gunman attacked a place where he wasn't the only armed person and look how it turned out.


But he was the only armed person there. He didn't open fire until the cops arrived (after being called by unarmed hospital staff) and confronted him.
 
2012-12-15 04:36:43 PM

drewogatory: What "registered" firearms do you keep referring to? Only a tiny fraction of the weapons in this country could be construed as registered in any way. There is no "lisT'. You would basically be dependant on the honour system to get people to declare them and turn them in.


Keep thinking that.
 
2012-12-15 04:36:57 PM
Dimensio
I could only support such a measure if the law required "reasonable" measures (with actual "reasonable" measures defined) that, if followed, would absolve a firearm owner of liability.

Agreed. What would you think of something like -- when a gun is not in the owner's custody/possession, it should be placed in a secure gun safe or trigger-locked. If not, and another person uses the gun to kill or injure, the owner is also liable for the injury/death. (If the gun is in the owner's custody/possession, no such requirement. Obviously, such a measure would be unconstitutional under District of Columbia v. Heller.)

A firearm owner whose firearms are stolen despite taking reasonable measures to secure his or her firearms should suffer no liability for the actions of criminals.

Agreed. But in light of the fact that stolen firearms are frequently used in crime, what about owner liability for injury/death caused by a stolen firearm if the owner knew his/her gun was stolen and failed to report it?
 
2012-12-15 04:37:28 PM
'We heard after Columbine that it was too soon to talk about gun laws. We heard it after Virginia Tech. After Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek. And now we are hearing it again.

For every day we wait, 34 more people are murdered with guns. Today, many of them were five-year-olds.

President Obama rightly sent his heartfelt condolences to the families in Newtown. But the country needs him to send a bill to Congress to fix this problem.

Calling for "meaningful action" is not enough. We need immediate action.'

-Mayor Bloomberg


Obama, Democrat, and Bloomberg, Republican appear to agree.

What say you, gun nuts? No laws can change because you say? Or is there just no need because its always the victims fault because they didn't arm themselves enough to shoot back in time?
 
2012-12-15 04:37:41 PM

KiwDaWabbit: The way I see it, there is no one answer, but everything needs to be on the table for discussion in the U.S. That doesn't mean that Big Brother is going to take away your guns, but it does mean that the national dialogue needs to be all-inclusive and not all-dismissive as I fear it will be.

Again, in my opinion, three things need to change:

1. Violence (not just gun violence) needs to become less socially acceptable in the U.S., period. This will take quite a large sociocultural shift.

2. The U.S. needs a robust mental healthcare system, which includes education for the populace at large that having a mental disorder doesn't make you "defective" and that sometimes, you can't just "suck it up, Nancy". I'm sick of hearing "Back in my day, we didn't have therapy and talk about our emotions." Well, back in your day, schools were segregated and women were relegated to the kitchen. In a historical sense, "your day" sucked and you're on the wrong side of history.

3. We (the U.S.) need to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. That doesn't have to mean "impossible", but you'll have to go through more hoops. Sorry if you feel like you need your M-15 to protect your double-wide a few weeks earlier. You can be patient.


Thank you, you saved me a bunch of typing. Very Well Said
 
2012-12-15 04:38:07 PM

Fellate O'Fish: Dimensio
I could only support such a measure if the law required "reasonable" measures (with actual "reasonable" measures defined) that, if followed, would absolve a firearm owner of liability.

Agreed. What would you think of something like -- when a gun is not in the owner's custody/possession, it should be placed in a secure gun safe or trigger-locked. If not, and another person uses the gun to kill or injure, the owner is also liable for the injury/death. (If the gun is in the owner's custody/possession, no such requirement. Obviously, such a measure would be unconstitutional under District of Columbia v. Heller.)

A firearm owner whose firearms are stolen despite taking reasonable measures to secure his or her firearms should suffer no liability for the actions of criminals.

Agreed. But in light of the fact that stolen firearms are frequently used in crime, what about owner liability for injury/death caused by a stolen firearm if the owner knew his/her gun was stolen and failed to report it?


I am not necessarily opposed to such a measure, but proving that an owner knew a firearm to be stolen is difficult.
 
2012-12-15 04:39:09 PM
Guns aren't really the problem, it's the attitudes towards them, as well as the over-glorification of violence.

The USA is basically screwed; this problem isn't going to go away no matter what: you can't fix stupid.
 
2012-12-15 04:39:49 PM
Fellate O'Fish: Agreed. But in light of the fact that stolen firearms are frequently used in crime, what about owner liability for injury/death caused by a stolen firearm if the owner knew his/her gun was stolen and failed to report it?

I'm absolutely fine with this. Only a moron would not report their weapon stolen, and they deserve pain.
 
2012-12-15 04:40:01 PM
To everyone defending gun rights as they currently are in America:

Your arguments are what helped this kid get weapons and murder 6 year olds.

I doubt you think that is true, but I do. Many others will too.
 
2012-12-15 04:40:58 PM

justtray: Everyone has some level of the disorders, and I think you'd be surprised to find out you do too, as well as most gun nuts having anti social personality disorder.


Whatever level a person is at which is deemed to have the highest probability of mass killings as defined by experts of such incidences.

/are you seriously defending Psychotic mass killers?!?!?
 
2012-12-15 04:41:00 PM
 
2012-12-15 04:41:05 PM

ekdikeo4: This is an open-shut case - suicide by cop.


BigBooper: Sounds more like suicide by cop.


This sounds like it to me. I really dislike 'Suicide by cop' though. I'm going to suggest we use one of the other terms, like victim-precipitated homicide. 'Blue suicide' is a creepy name if we need one.
 
2012-12-15 04:41:36 PM

WhippingBoy: Guns aren't really the problem, it's the attitudes towards them, as well as the over-glorification of violence.

The USA is basically screwed; this problem isn't going to go away no matter what: you can't fix stupid.


I think it evolves away over time. Worldwide, the USA gun owner is the outlier.
 
2012-12-15 04:41:54 PM
Dimensio: but proving that an owner knew a firearm to be stolen is difficult.

then the owner would not be liable if the state couldn't show that they knowingly failed to report the theft. The onus is on the state to provide evidence of wrongdoing.
 
2012-12-15 04:42:22 PM

Popcorn Johnny: drewogatory: What "registered" firearms do you keep referring to? Only a tiny fraction of the weapons in this country could be construed as registered in any way. There is no "lisT'. You would basically be dependant on the honour system to get people to declare them and turn them in.

Keep thinking that.


The vast majority of my life you could buy any firearm directly over the counter,cash and carry, no question asked,no records kept. So,yeah, I will keep thinking that.
 
2012-12-15 04:42:42 PM
Guns for everybody bumper sticker!

Convenient e-mail address on the webpage....
 
2012-12-15 04:42:45 PM
I don't think it's fair to compare gun bans to drug/alcohol bans. Any idiot can grow pot, coca, make moonshine, etc. on private property, which is why these bans are easily subverted. I don't think many people can manufacture their own guns at home.
 
2012-12-15 04:42:49 PM

Generation_D: To everyone defending gun rights as they currently are in America:

Your arguments are what helped this kid get weapons and murder 6 year olds.

I doubt you think that is true, but I do. Many others will too.


Your irrational assessment is not a valid basis for public policy.
 
2012-12-15 04:43:44 PM

KiwDaWabbit: The way I see it, there is no one answer, but everything needs to be on the table for discussion in the U.S. That doesn't mean that Big Brother is going to take away your guns, but it does mean that the national dialogue needs to be all-inclusive and not all-dismissive as I fear it will be.

Again, in my opinion, three things need to change:

1. Violence (not just gun violence) needs to become less socially acceptable in the U.S., period. This will take quite a large sociocultural shift.

2. The U.S. needs a robust mental healthcare system, which includes education for the populace at large that having a mental disorder doesn't make you "defective" and that sometimes, you can't just "suck it up, Nancy". I'm sick of hearing "Back in my day, we didn't have therapy and talk about our emotions." Well, back in your day, schools were segregated and women were relegated to the kitchen. In a historical sense, "your day" sucked and you're on the wrong side of history.

3. We (the U.S.) need to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. That doesn't have to mean "impossible", but you'll have to go through more hoops. Sorry if you feel like you need your M-15 to protect your double-wide a few weeks earlier. You can be patient.


This is Fark, quit being logical.
 
2012-12-15 04:44:04 PM
So what do you figure will be next? Nursing home? Maternity ward? Home for sick children?
Best prepare yourselves now for it, as it's pretty much inevitable at this point.
 
2012-12-15 04:44:26 PM
Generation_D: I doubt you think that is true, but I do.

Convincing. So convincing.
 
2012-12-15 04:44:26 PM
Dimensio
I am not necessarily opposed to such a measure, but proving that an owner knew a firearm to be stolen is difficult.

True. Can you think of an alternative measure that might achieve similar results? (I think some such measure would be beneficial, in light of the fact that stolen firearms are frequently used in violent crime.) I am aware that owners are required by federal law to report stolen firearms, but I am not sure how stringently the law is enforced, or whether it has significant criminal penalties.
 
2012-12-15 04:44:40 PM

John Dewey: Here is a modest proposal that I'm actually kind of liking - http://moproposal.blogspot.com/2012/12/121512-i-am-extraordinarily-ang ry-and.html

1. Firearms remain legal. But, they must be larger than a grown man's arm, so that they cannot be concealed. They must also be day-glo orange, so that they are unmistakably guns. Whoever carries their gun must wear a day-glo orange hat that says, CARRYING A GUN on it. Hunters will not have to change their behavior or (with the exception of painting their guns) their outfits in any real way. Failure to adhere to this law will result in 20 years in prison, no exceptions.

2. Any entertainment (TV, Movies, Video Games, Books, etc.) that feature gun-play will be subject to a tax of 20% of the producers' profits. Producers can still make blood-soaked entertainment, understanding that their profits will be reduced.

3. The press can only publish the names or biographies of mass killers by paying a 20% tax on their organization's profits for the year. To avoid the tax, mass killers can be denoted by an alias ("A-hole #4", for example), insuring that slaughter is not an easy road to fame. Any news organization will also be fined $200,000.00 every time they ask a victim of senseless violence "how they feel". They fine doubles if a minor is asked that inane question (We can guess how they feel on our own, thanks).


WTF am I reading? Sh*t like this is why I can't take gun-grabbers seriously. You have no intention of making America safer. You want to paint guns to look like water pistols and pretend that crazy murderers give a crap about the laws, or that something bigger than my hand cant be tucked under my coat. And then you want to put a strangulation of a tax on the First Amendment.
 
2012-12-15 04:45:06 PM
How does this relate to the school shooting? This was a guy with a gun, who was confronted police, and opened fire on them instead. He wasn't hunting down random people to shoot.
 
Displayed 50 of 835 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report