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 836
    More: NewsFlash, St. Vincent, Alabama, UAB, shootings, guns  
•       •       •

18590 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?

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

Archived thread

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-15 07:31:21 PM

MrGMan: flucto: Waxing_Chewbacca: - Charlotte Bacon, 2/22/06, female
- Daniel Barden, 9/25/05, male
- Rachel Davino, 7/17/83, female.
- Olivia Engel, 7/18/06, female
- Josephine Gay, 12/11/05, female
- Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 04/04/06, female
- Dylan Hockley, 3/8/06, male
- Dawn Hocksprung, 06/28/65, female
- Madeleine F. Hsu, 7/10/06, female
- Catherine V. Hubbard, 6/08/06, female
- Chase Kowalski, 10/31/05, male
- Jesse Lewis, 6/30/06, male
- James Mattioli , 3/22/06, male
- Grace McDonnell, 12/04/05, female
- Anne Marie Murphy, 07/25/60, female
- Emilie Parker, 5/12/06, female
- Jack Pinto, 5/06/06, male
- Noah Pozner, 11/20/06, male
- Caroline Previdi, 9/07/06, female
- Jessica Rekos, 5/10/06, female
- Avielle Richman, 10/17/06, female
- Lauren Russeau, 6/1982, female (full date of birth not specified)
- Mary Sherlach, 2/11/56, female
- Victoria Soto, 11/04/85, female
- Benjamin Wheeler, 9/12/06, male
- Allison N. Wyatt, 7/03/06, female

Better we have a civil war with the gun lobby now than ever see another list like this. I want to throw up.

So you are encouraging a civil war between those with guns and those without them...sure you thought your cunning plan all the way through there, sport?

Unless we can magically make all weapons disappear, which I wouldn't mind barring the unfathomable alien attack, no law to control guns will prevent a mentally unbalanced man from stealing weapons and using them to harm others. This monster violated several existing gun laws, and yet 20 kids and 6 educators are dead...the laws didn't make a difference.


Unless we can make all swords disappear we should make no law against murder. Unless we can make all stones and sticks disappear we should just let people do what they want. Hey! What's the point in locking up thieves and kidnappers and child molesters as they will always find a way to do what they will anyway. May as well let them be!

Notice how stupid your argument sounds?
 
2012-12-15 07:32:00 PM

The Face Of Oblivion: This is exactly what you said in your previous post, and I see no evidence that ANY of the controls proposed in the last 20 years will reduce the SUPPLY of guns available to the people who commit the most gun violence in this country (or anywhere else).


And also as I've said in previous posts, I agree that gun control will not keep guns out of the most sophisticated, dedicated, and resourceful seekers.

No, but car bombers, arsonists, poisoners - the people who commit murders out of mental illness have plenty of options, many of which are capable of killing more people in a single location/incident than firearms. Hell, people in the Middle East and Central Asia routinely die in numbers greater than 30 from attacks that require neither firearms nor any particular amount of sophistication.


I think you're wildly underestimating the sophistication required to use those kinds of weapons. The issue in the middle east is that there are a lot more people dedicated enough to acquire the sophistication to use them.
 
2012-12-15 07:32:25 PM

Generation_D: The Face Of Oblivion: mittromneysdog: The fact is, we can reduce the availability of contraband materials, and thereby put it out of the reach of some criminals. We can't eliminate it. But we can reduce it.

This is exactly what you said in your previous post, and I see no evidence that ANY of the controls proposed in the last 20 years will reduce the SUPPLY of guns available to the people who commit the most gun violence in this country (or anywhere else). Think about all the cheapo AK variants floating around outside the US and think about the flow of drugs into and money out of the US. Think about the lack of effective border controls. The best bet is demand-side controls: legalize drugs and prostitution and find ways to make gang affiliation and violence even less appealing than it is now.

But the Wen Ho Lees and Adam Lanzas of the world aren't those.

No, but car bombers, arsonists, poisoners - the people who commit murders out of mental illness have plenty of options, many of which are capable of killing more people in a single location/incident than firearms. Hell, people in the Middle East and Central Asia routinely die in numbers greater than 30 from attacks that require neither firearms nor any particular amount of sophistication.

Using weapons stolen from US arms depots and bases, or sold off by contractors on the gray market. Hardly a shining example.

I'd look to Europe deaths over all, and deaths by personal firearm, as the metrics to compare the USA to and see how we do.


Right, because crimes committed by people who sell arms out the back door to criminals where legal arms aren't available totally don't count when compared to crimes committed by people who buy them or steal them from legal owners, right?
 
2012-12-15 07:32:38 PM

Kit Fister: The school shooting was a tragedy. But I bear no blood for the actions of a man who murdered and stole weapons to commit further murders. There's nothing that says the kid couldn't have killed a cop to get ahold of his guns if that was the source he had to use to get them.


So much this. There is nothing in this incident that could have been prevented by tightening gun control laws unless it was an outright ban, and holy god have the US owners take away the arms from the civilians and watch how fast we beat China on human right abuse issues.
 
2012-12-15 07:35:09 PM

BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory


College Republican:

Thinks laws will keep people from having gay sex or smoking drugs
Kills family with gun
 
2012-12-15 07:35:42 PM

mittromneysdog: Kit Fister: Really? To test a theory, I asked around a bit to a few of my law enforcement friends that work on gun trafficking enforcement. The general consensus was that:
- Three phonecalls would get you a handgun for under $500.
- Five phonecalls and about $1500 would get you a full auto in about three days time that it took to get it here, coming in through some dealers in Mexico or South America.

That's a known status quo in law enforcement (FBI in this case).

Crazy. It's almost like handguns and even fully automatic weapons are legal in this country. If either were banned, you might have a point.

When asked what they thought about gun bans, they said that casual crimes might take a hit, but drug dealers and gangs would be able to get whatever they wanted smuggled in anyway (confirming what I stated in a previous post).

I actually agree with this to a point. Your typical heat of passion murderer could well be prevented from killing if firearms are unavailable to him. And so might your relatively unsophisticated mass shooter, who might not have the first idea who to call. And even if he did, by calling and asking around, he'd be increasing the likelihood of detection, just as he might under current law if he started calling around asking how to get hand grenades.


I think you fail to understand the point I was making. Acquisition of arms that are completely outside of the US's current legal gun procurement system is not only possible, but relatively easy. It's all about who you know.

And if you think that asking around is going to increase the chance of detection, how often is that the case when asking around for people who can get you access to pot, cocaine, heroine, LSD, etc? I mean, for fark's sake, black market firearms shipped to just about nay country out there can be had over the goddamn internet. Wired did a story on it not too long ago.
 
2012-12-15 07:37:14 PM

Kit Fister: mittromneysdog: No, but they will make firearms more difficult to acquire. Not impossible. But more difficult. In economics terms, that means their price will go up. Which in turn will put them out of the hands of more and more consumers. Which means that fewer criminals will have them. Not that no criminals will have them. But fewer.

Really? To test a theory, I asked around a bit to a few of my law enforcement friends that work on gun trafficking enforcement. The general consensus was that:
- Three phonecalls would get you a handgun for under $500.
- Five phonecalls and about $1500 would get you a full auto in about three days time that it took to get it here, coming in through some dealers in Mexico or South America.

That's a known status quo in law enforcement (FBI in this case).

When asked what they thought about gun bans, they said that casual crimes might take a hit, but drug dealers and gangs would be able to get whatever they wanted smuggled in anyway (confirming what I stated in a previous post).


So legalize drugs to put an end to smugglers, their profits, and their need for guns.

Keep guns legal but legalize all normal human behaviors and give more support to families so they have access to help for whatever mental or addiction problems might arise.
 
2012-12-15 07:38:43 PM
To back up my previous post:
http://gizmodo.com/5927379/the-secret-online-weapons-store-thatll-sel l -anyone-anything

Now, tell me again how hard it is for people that really want guns to get them, even in places where they're banned?
 
2012-12-15 07:39:44 PM

BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: The school shooting was a tragedy. But I bear no blood for the actions of a man who murdered and stole weapons to commit further murders. There's nothing that says the kid couldn't have killed a cop to get ahold of his guns if that was the source he had to use to get them.

So much this. There is nothing in this incident that could have been prevented by tightening gun control laws unless it was an outright ban, and holy god have the US owners take away the arms from the civilians and watch how fast we beat China on human right abuse issues.


So you disagree that doing a background and mental fitness check would have prevented it? Did you know that according to the FBI nearly 86% of those doing these shootings have a mental illness and in nearly all cases not only were the guns LEGAL but there was no mental fitness check.
 
2012-12-15 07:40:50 PM

BlippityBleep: Yes, we should ban all guns like China so the kids can suicide themselves while working in factories the government makes them work in.


Yeah but they make a damn fine pair of shoes for us!
 
2012-12-15 07:41:05 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: The school shooting was a tragedy. But I bear no blood for the actions of a man who murdered and stole weapons to commit further murders. There's nothing that says the kid couldn't have killed a cop to get ahold of his guns if that was the source he had to use to get them.

So much this. There is nothing in this incident that could have been prevented by tightening gun control laws unless it was an outright ban, and holy god have the US owners take away the arms from the civilians and watch how fast we beat China on human right abuse issues.

So you disagree that doing a background and mental fitness check would have prevented it? Did you know that according to the FBI nearly 86% of those doing these shootings have a mental illness and in nearly all cases not only were the guns LEGAL but there was no mental fitness check.


dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.
 
2012-12-15 07:41:29 PM

Kit Fister: I think you fail to understand the point I was making. Acquisition of arms that are completely outside of the US's current legal gun procurement system is not only possible, but relatively easy. It's all about who you know.


And I'm saying most of these kinds of shooters, and some other types of criminals, don't know the right people. They'd have no idea who to call. I've no doubt it's possible for me to acquire a black market grenade. But I've no idea where to begin looking. Why? Because I'm not sophisticated about the hand grenade black market.

And if you think that asking around is going to increase the chance of detection, how often is that the case when asking around for people who can get you access to pot, cocaine, heroine, LSD, etc? I mean, for fark's sake, black market firearms shipped to just about nay country out there can be had over the goddamn internet. Wired did a story on it not too long ago.

Yes, I think asking around increases the likelihood of detection. I think lots of criminals get snagged when they start asking around. Maybe less so with pot, for example, because many people don't care if their roommate is asking around about how to get it. But if that same roommate started seriously inquiring about, say, hiring a hitman, or acquiring a hand grenade, I think a lot more people would be concerned, and likely to report.
 
2012-12-15 07:42:34 PM

Generation_D: iq_in_binary: PsiChick: Dancin_In_Anson: basemetal: If a civilian took him out, would they still be a dumbass civilian?

Well, since that rarely if ever happens he doesn't have to answer that question.

The FBI profilers came up with the mental illness type that produces these incidents. How about just screening for that mental illness instead of trying to arm everyone and their brother?

I've told everyone I know when this subject comes up many times that most gun owners, myself included, have been PUSHING for having mental illness added to the NICS check for a loooong time. VT Massacre? We all brought it up. Aurora? We all brought it up. Loughner? We all brought it up. Even among gunbloggers online, check out The Law Dog Files, A View From The Porch, etc., we are absolutely fine with, and have been encouraging a system to prevent the mentally ill from getting guns. Half of the ideas posited even include a national ID/Database system to accomplish it.

It's something that we've been bringing up for a long time but now all of a sudden we're just scrambling for anything to deflect from the gun subject in the eyes of the people that look at these tragedies as a reason to retroactively criminalize 70 million US citizens.

And yet, the organization many of you belong to obstructs any improvement in gun ownership laws nationwide, and demonizes anyone who tries to put rational controls on assault rifle ownership, for example.


Bullshiat. I've been railing against the NRA for a LONG TIME now. Many of us have. Plenty of us were the FIRST to stand up and say the stupid shiat like the "Stand Your Ground" law in FL was a monumentally bad idea.

Don't let yourself fall into the "Squeaky Wheel Gets the Grease" syndrome. We've been there, we've been vocal, we've been railing against this stupid shiat. You just haven't been paying attention.
 
2012-12-15 07:43:51 PM

Generation_D: thisisarepeat: bulldg4life: thisisarepeat: How do you feel about people that want to remove your possessions, or enact legislation rendering any right you enjoy to exercise so expensive that only 1%ers can have that right?

I am very upset when people don't look at health care or student loan issues.

Of course, I also don't advocate the complete removal of gun ownership.

So, you're just shouting at nothingness.

Any amount of gun control is an incremental step toward a total gun ban. That is the ultimate goal of any gun control advocate, and to claim otherwise is just dishonest, smarmy really.

And I just found out I cant buy any more sudafed for the rest of the month! Which makes me feel extra tolerant of you gun grabbing liberty vampires.

And any defense of the system we have today is a set up for more innocent massacres. Your call, gun nut.


My call? Here it is. Sometimes people get hurt on this planet. Suck it up and drive on, pussy. Just leave everybody else alone and the sun will rise tomorrow, maybe, either way there isn't a damn thing anybody can do about it except to try not to be the next victim. I do this by making sure I'm armed about as well as anybody else. I know I'm still not guaranteed tomorrow, but you seem to think you aught to be, and that you can achieve this by making people like my self less able to defend themselves. That makes you a sociopath.
 
2012-12-15 07:44:02 PM

JRoo: So legalize drugs to put an end to smugglers, their profits, and their need for guns.

Keep guns legal but legalize all normal human behaviors and give more support to families so they have access to help for whatever mental or addiction problems might arise.


I think that's been my, and several other's, positions all along.

I said in another thread, current estimates are that 80% of the 9600 or so firearm-related homicides committed in the US are related to the drug war. That's 7700 murders, roughly. So, that puts us at about 2000 murders, or, when compared to normalized numbers per capita for some of the other countries that are touted as being much better than the US, right about on par.

As to mass shootings, well, the kid who shot up the school had been said to be disturbed and have emotional problems. You think that if the kid could've gotten help without the social stigma, he would've done it? Hell, even if it meant that when he showed up and had a confrontation at the school before the shooting he'd been arrested and held for mandatory evaluation, he probably wouldn't've done it.

had the aurora shooter been able to not only get the help he needed when he was diagnosed as a dangerous person, but also had been required to be an inpatient for treatment after being diagnosed as such, then he likely wouldn't've shot up the theater.

Had Loughner been held for treatment when his FAMILY tried to get something done prior to his shooting at Gabby Giffords, he probably would never have done it.

I'm seeing a trend here...
 
2012-12-15 07:44:41 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: MrGMan: flucto: Waxing_Chewbacca: - Charlotte Bacon, 2/22/06, female
- Daniel Barden, 9/25/05, male
- Rachel Davino, 7/17/83, female.
- Olivia Engel, 7/18/06, female
- Josephine Gay, 12/11/05, female
- Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 04/04/06, female
- Dylan Hockley, 3/8/06, male
- Dawn Hocksprung, 06/28/65, female
- Madeleine F. Hsu, 7/10/06, female
- Catherine V. Hubbard, 6/08/06, female
- Chase Kowalski, 10/31/05, male
- Jesse Lewis, 6/30/06, male
- James Mattioli , 3/22/06, male
- Grace McDonnell, 12/04/05, female
- Anne Marie Murphy, 07/25/60, female
- Emilie Parker, 5/12/06, female
- Jack Pinto, 5/06/06, male
- Noah Pozner, 11/20/06, male
- Caroline Previdi, 9/07/06, female
- Jessica Rekos, 5/10/06, female
- Avielle Richman, 10/17/06, female
- Lauren Russeau, 6/1982, female (full date of birth not specified)
- Mary Sherlach, 2/11/56, female
- Victoria Soto, 11/04/85, female
- Benjamin Wheeler, 9/12/06, male
- Allison N. Wyatt, 7/03/06, female

Better we have a civil war with the gun lobby now than ever see another list like this. I want to throw up.

So you are encouraging a civil war between those with guns and those without them...sure you thought your cunning plan all the way through there, sport?

Unless we can magically make all weapons disappear, which I wouldn't mind barring the unfathomable alien attack, no law to control guns will prevent a mentally unbalanced man from stealing weapons and using them to harm others. This monster violated several existing gun laws, and yet 20 kids and 6 educators are dead...the laws didn't make a difference.

Unless we can make all swords disappear we should make no law against murder. Unless we can make all stones and sticks disappear we should just let people do what they want. Hey! What's the point in locking up thieves and kidnappers and child molesters as they will always find a way to do what they will anyway. May as well let them be!

Notice how stupid your argument sounds?


Not as stupid as your response Princess.

This problem will not be solved with laws, including laws that make weapons illegal. If you noticed, most bad guys still have guns, many of them stolen or smuggled into the country. The best you can hope for is a reduction in such horrors, but never their elimination.

Go ahead, collect all the guns, melt them all down and turn them into plow shears...and throw in all metal smithing equipment as well, since guns are 19th century technology and anyone with any metal shop experience can create not only the guns but the bullets. Oh yeah, throw in all the explosives, and the sulfur and potassium used to create gunpowder...plus the equipment to mine those minerals...and remove all information found in libraries and the Internet on how to build the weapons and the weapon-making tools. Think that will stop this? really?

I really don't know the answer...laws obviously aren't working, and the gun genie is out of the bottle. Does that mean we do nothing? No! But we need an honest discussion FROM BOTH sides of the issue, and perhaps a test and try policy across the country to see what works and what does not...
 
2012-12-15 07:45:04 PM

BlippityBleep: dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.


Actually, there are some reports coming out that he did, in fact, have a mental illness. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.
 
2012-12-15 07:47:11 PM

Kit Fister: BlippityBleep: dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.

Actually, there are some reports coming out that he did, in fact, have a mental illness. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.


Of course he did, but he wasn't the gun owner. The gun owner didn't have a mental illness.
 
2012-12-15 07:48:33 PM

BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory


Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.
 
2012-12-15 07:48:57 PM
In this corner Crazy #1 armed with a knife.

In this corner Crazy #2 armed with a firearm and extra magazines.

They both get 10 minutes to kill as many students as possible before the Police arrive.

Who wins?
 
2012-12-15 07:49:28 PM

Generation_D: Kit Fister: Generation_D: And yet, the organization many of you belong to obstructs any improvement in gun ownership laws nationwide, and demonizes anyone who tries to put rational controls on assault rifle ownership, for example.

Because the "rational improvements" being proposed only affect the law-abiding and do nothing to actually affect violence in the US. They look to ban guns that are hardly used in crimes, they look to impose restrictions that criminals won't follow, and they look to penalize and make it harder on the law abiding to exercise a constitutionally protected privilege, while doing little if anything to curb crime.

There are no bans on the street, there are no waiting periods on the street, there are no controls or restrictions on the street. Just limitations based on what you can afford to pay.

Bring something to the table that involves ways of legalizing drugs, improving mental health care and screening, and enforce responsible ownership (I personally have long believed that some basic safety training should be required to obtain a firearm, including safe storage, the importance of same, and so forth), along with massive criminal penalties for those who do not follow the law, and we'll talk.

We don't actually know what will and won't improve the system, because the gun nut lobby keeps opposing any and everything.

As for your defiant stand your ground "bring something rational to the table," I think humbly that the gun sanity lobby has been doing this for 40 years, only to be shouted and spent and stomped down by the gun nut lobby.

The blood of children in multiple mass shootings was not my idea, gun nuts. My idea was 30, 40 years ago start regulating guns better and more tightly like they do in every other civilized nation but ours.

Instead you people fought tooth and nail, and the Republican party built one of its major planks on riding that wave to election victory.

Well, here you go asswits, here's your reward.

Rational argument is ...


What Gun Lobby. Point me to the Jack Abramoff of the "Gun Lobby."

Find him, or them, or whoever. The NRA has stopped being a Gun Lobby and started being a de facto arm of the Republican Party after they endorsed Romney. Only a complete retard would point at them. Point me towards the actual lobbyists. Not the "Special Interest Groups," but the actual LOBBYISTS. I can't find them, and I made more money in an hour than you like do in a day finding people for a living. There is no farking gun lobby. The Gun manufacturers could give a fark less, they've been selling at the capacity of their manufacturing capability for DECADES. They don't need a lobby.
 
2012-12-15 07:50:34 PM

MrGMan: I really don't know the answer...laws obviously aren't working, and the gun genie is out of the bottle. Does that mean we do nothing? No! But we need an honest discussion FROM BOTH sides of the issue, and perhaps a test and try policy across the country to see what works and what does not...


Except that the policies being pushed currently ARE being tried across the country. California bans most assault weapons, high capacity magazines, etc. It hasn't done a lot in places like LA.

Chicago bans pretty much everything firearm-related inside of city limits, and in the STATE people are required to have a permit to purchase and possess weapons, which relies on background checks, etc, and that hasn't stopped gangs from killing each other with them or even really made a dent.

In Michigan, to buy a handgun, you have to first get a permit from the sheriff (presuming you don't have a CCW permit), and then register your firearm. How's that working out for Detroit?

And lastly, CT is another state with very stiff requirements for gun ownership, storage, etc., which didn't stop this guy from killing someone to get ahold of weapons in order to commit this crime, DESPITE BEING LEGALLY STOPPED BY A WAITING PERIOD.

If these laws don't work at the state level, what makes you think federal-level bans and laws will work any better to stop crime? You'll slow down the perps, but after a lull as the criminal market adjusts to not having one source readily available for guns, they'll figure out other options and it won't stop them forever, and I guarantee you that if they can smuggle in tons of illegal drugs every year, adding firearms to the shipments won't be that much harder.
 
2012-12-15 07:51:32 PM

Gleeman: In this corner Crazy #1 armed with a knife.

In this corner Crazy #2 armed with a firearm and extra magazines.

They both get 10 minutes to kill as many students as possible before the Police arrive.

Who wins?


Crazy #3 who parked the truck bomb outside and kills crazy#1 and crazy #2 in the explosion
 
2012-12-15 07:51:32 PM

Gleeman: In this corner Crazy #1 armed with a knife.

In this corner Crazy #2 armed with a firearm and extra magazines.

They both get 10 minutes to kill as many students as possible before the Police arrive.

Who wins?


Depends on a lot of things. Crazy #2 needs to reload, hopefully providing time for someone/many someones to tackle the crazy to the ground. Crazy #1 doesn't need to reload... could go etiher way.
 
2012-12-15 07:52:54 PM

BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: BlippityBleep: dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.

Actually, there are some reports coming out that he did, in fact, have a mental illness. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

Of course he did, but he wasn't the gun owner. The gun owner didn't have a mental illness.


Are you sure?

Was she living in a high crime area?

Did she really have a need to have all those guns?

And why were they unsecure enough that her child could get to them?
 
2012-12-15 07:53:10 PM

BlippityBleep: Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: The school shooting was a tragedy. But I bear no blood for the actions of a man who murdered and stole weapons to commit further murders. There's nothing that says the kid couldn't have killed a cop to get ahold of his guns if that was the source he had to use to get them.

So much this. There is nothing in this incident that could have been prevented by tightening gun control laws unless it was an outright ban, and holy god have the US owners take away the arms from the civilians and watch how fast we beat China on human right abuse issues.

So you disagree that doing a background and mental fitness check would have prevented it? Did you know that according to the FBI nearly 86% of those doing these shootings have a mental illness and in nearly all cases not only were the guns LEGAL but there was no mental fitness check.

dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.


Odd, every news article is stating he did.
 
2012-12-15 07:53:11 PM
Gun Laws Worldwide


The USA is by far an outlier.
 
2012-12-15 07:54:27 PM

Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.


8 children in Osaka Japan, and 77 people in Norway, or at least their families, might disagree with you...
 
2012-12-15 07:54:58 PM

Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.


okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?
 
2012-12-15 07:55:09 PM

MrGMan: This problem will not be solved with laws, including laws that make weapons illegal. If you noticed, most bad guys still have guns, many of them stolen or smuggled into the country. The best you can hope for is a reduction in such horrors, but never their elimination.

Go ahead, collect all the guns, melt them all down and turn them into plow shears...and throw in all metal smithing equipment as well, since guns are 19th century technology and anyone with any metal shop experience can create not only the guns but the bullets. Oh yeah, throw in all the explosives, and the sulfur and potassium used to create gunpowder...plus the equipment to mine those minerals...and remove all information found in libraries and the Internet on how to build the weapons and the weapon-making tools. Think that will stop this? really?

I really don't know the answer...laws obviously aren't working, and the gun genie is out of the bottle. Does that mean we do nothing? No! But we need an honest discussion FROM BOTH sides of the issue, and perhaps a test and try policy across the country to see what works and what does not...


And yours is just as stupid. According to you we should remove laws for safety devices in cars because obviously they don't work in 100% of cases. We should also remove all workplace safety laws. Oh and did I mention we should remove the laws on gay sex, gay marriage, child molestation, kidnapping, murder, etc? Your logic is extremely flawed.
 
2012-12-15 07:55:40 PM
Copycat my ass. That is like saying a wreck in Texas was copying a wreck in Florida the day before.

SENSATIONALISM, LIBS HAVE IT
 
2012-12-15 07:56:06 PM

BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?


Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.
 
2012-12-15 07:56:28 PM
fark the NRA.

fark the 2nd Amendment.

And fark all you gun nuts. Every time an innocent American is killed or wounded in an act of gun violence, their blood is partly on your hands.
 
2012-12-15 07:57:37 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers:

Odd, every news article is stating he did.


no shiat, and I've already said he did. his mom didn't though. reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?

JRoo: BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: BlippityBleep: dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.

Actually, there are some reports coming out that he did, in fact, have a mental illness. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

Of course he did, but he wasn't the gun owner. The gun owner didn't have a mental illness.

Are you sure?

Was she living in a high crime area?

Did she really have a need to have all those guns?

And why were they unsecure enough that her child could get to them?


none of your business why she owned all the guns. 'unsecure enough?' jeebus the kid KILLED her.
 
2012-12-15 07:58:00 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?

Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.


Just to be clear... he didn't own the firearms in question. His mother did, and she did not have a mental illness. So why the all-caps "ALL" and "HAD"?
 
2012-12-15 07:58:11 PM
BTW, it's coming out now that the CT shooter's mother was a gun nut and owned all those guns. Not only that but the shooters was NRA. Oh and did we mention that one of the biggest gun lobby groups has a HQ in Newton and they have some of the laxest laws next to Texas where that mall shooter had his way despite open carry?
 
2012-12-15 07:58:55 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?

Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.


farking christ dude learn how to farking read. lol.
 
2012-12-15 07:59:16 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?

Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.



Dumb ass, the kids MOM was the gun owner, crazy boy took them from her home.
 
2012-12-15 08:00:42 PM

Doc Daneeka: fark the NRA.

fark the 2nd Amendment.

And fark all you gun nuts. Every time an innocent American is killed or wounded in an act of gun violence, their blood is partly on your hands.


Well, I guess I should walk into situations like helping battered wives get away from their big mean and quite frankly scary farking husbands with the notion that I would be walking into it at the complete mercy of the guy that outweighs me by 80 pounds and could punch my head CLEAN OFF my shoulders without even trying.

fark that, I wouldn't have taken a single one of those cases even if they were paying me, I took half those cases pro bono.

We're all evil I guess. I guess you got what you wanted.
 
2012-12-15 08:00:47 PM

BlippityBleep: Princess Ryans Knickers:

Odd, every news article is stating he did.

no shiat, and I've already said he did. his mom didn't though. reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?

JRoo: BlippityBleep: Kit Fister: BlippityBleep: dude, the conneticut guy killed his mother, who owned the guns and did not have a mental illness.

Actually, there are some reports coming out that he did, in fact, have a mental illness. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

Of course he did, but he wasn't the gun owner. The gun owner didn't have a mental illness.

Are you sure?

Was she living in a high crime area?

Did she really have a need to have all those guns?

And why were they unsecure enough that her child could get to them?

none of your business why she owned all the guns. 'unsecure enough?' jeebus the kid KILLED her.


So would you classify her as a responsible gun owner? One who knew her son, hell the entire community knew, had mental issues? That she trained her son how to use the guns and took him target practicing according to latest reports? That they were BOTH NRA members?
 
2012-12-15 08:02:24 PM

Psycoholic_Slag: Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?

Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.


Dumb ass, the kids MOM was the gun owner, crazy boy took them from her home.


Yes, they were BOTH NRA members. Yes, she trained him how to use the guns. Yes, she took him target practicing. It's all over the news tonight. Guess you consider her a responsible gun owner for letting her obviously well known mentally deranged child use a gun and had complete access to the guns.
 
2012-12-15 08:02:42 PM
311,591,917...the number of people in the US...how many do these horrible acts? Not that many....too many...if someone wants to kill they find a way....before guns humans killed....I don't know the answer and I know this should not be about politics, children died, adults died. A mentally ill person took his rage out on his mother and extended to the school. He could have done the same with a machete.
 
2012-12-15 08:03:35 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: MrGMan: This problem will not be solved with laws, including laws that make weapons illegal. If you noticed, most bad guys still have guns, many of them stolen or smuggled into the country. The best you can hope for is a reduction in such horrors, but never their elimination.

Go ahead, collect all the guns, melt them all down and turn them into plow shears...and throw in all metal smithing equipment as well, since guns are 19th century technology and anyone with any metal shop experience can create not only the guns but the bullets. Oh yeah, throw in all the explosives, and the sulfur and potassium used to create gunpowder...plus the equipment to mine those minerals...and remove all information found in libraries and the Internet on how to build the weapons and the weapon-making tools. Think that will stop this? really?

I really don't know the answer...laws obviously aren't working, and the gun genie is out of the bottle. Does that mean we do nothing? No! But we need an honest discussion FROM BOTH sides of the issue, and perhaps a test and try policy across the country to see what works and what does not...

And yours is just as stupid. According to you we should remove laws for safety devices in cars because obviously they don't work in 100% of cases. We should also remove all workplace safety laws. Oh and did I mention we should remove the laws on gay sex, gay marriage, child molestation, kidnapping, murder, etc? Your logic is extremely flawed.


Please show me the quote that says I want the laws removed, or try and keep your open flames away from the straw man you created. I am saying that laws do not stop this...they reduce it, they make it harder, but they do not stop it.

Do you know there was a law forbidding weapons on school property? Do you know that in CT there is a law that a 20-yr old cannot possess a handgun? Not very effective, unfortunately..., wouldn't you agree?

We need to look at additional measures to reduce these horrors, not a bunch of the same words written on new pieces of paper that gives politicians a stump speech accomplishment.
 
2012-12-15 08:04:00 PM

get real: 311,591,917...the number of people in the US...how many do these horrible acts? Not that many....too many...if someone wants to kill they find a way....before guns humans killed....I don't know the answer and I know this should not be about politics, children died, adults died. A mentally ill person took his rage out on his mother and extended to the school. He could have done the same with a machete.


You are right! We need to eliminate ALL criminal laws as obviously they will happen no matter what! Not to mention it happens to so few!
 
2012-12-15 08:04:26 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: Yes, they were BOTH NRA members. Yes, she trained him how to use the guns. Yes, she took him target practicing. It's all over the news tonight. Guess you consider her a responsible gun owner for letting her obviously well known mentally deranged child use a gun and had complete access to the guns.


Wasn't the shooter 20 years old? Don't call him a child - he doesn't deserve the sympathy such a statement would impart on him. He was an adult, plain and simple. A murdering adult.
 
2012-12-15 08:04:33 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: Psycoholic_Slag: Princess Ryans Knickers: BlippityBleep: Generation_D: BlippityBleep: MrGMan: the laws didn't make a difference.

[i50.tinypic.com image 440x642]

/obligitory

Laws seem to work out better in Europe and Japan. And they smoke pot too. Straw man is straw.

okay, so what gun control measures would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy? The gun owner didn't have any mental illnesses, so what would you do?

Again, ALL news articles are indicating he HAD a mental illness. So what would you do? BTW, citation needed.


Dumb ass, the kids MOM was the gun owner, crazy boy took them from her home.

Yes, they were BOTH NRA members. Yes, she trained him how to use the guns. Yes, she took him target practicing. It's all over the news tonight. Guess you consider her a responsible gun owner for letting her obviously well known mentally deranged child use a gun and had complete access to the guns.


Link?
 
2012-12-15 08:05:04 PM

NotoriousFire: Princess Ryans Knickers: Yes, they were BOTH NRA members. Yes, she trained him how to use the guns. Yes, she took him target practicing. It's all over the news tonight. Guess you consider her a responsible gun owner for letting her obviously well known mentally deranged child use a gun and had complete access to the guns.

Wasn't the shooter 20 years old? Don't call him a child - he doesn't deserve the sympathy such a statement would impart on him. He was an adult, plain and simple. A murdering adult.


So you agree that a mentally deficient MAN should not have had access to those guns?
 
2012-12-15 08:05:15 PM

iq_in_binary: Doc Daneeka: fark the NRA.

fark the 2nd Amendment.

And fark all you gun nuts. Every time an innocent American is killed or wounded in an act of gun violence, their blood is partly on your hands.

Well, I guess I should walk into situations like helping battered wives get away from their big mean and quite frankly scary farking husbands with the notion that I would be walking into it at the complete mercy of the guy that outweighs me by 80 pounds and could punch my head CLEAN OFF my shoulders without even trying.

fark that, I wouldn't have taken a single one of those cases even if they were paying me, I took half those cases pro bono.

We're all evil I guess. I guess you got what you wanted.


I'm inviting you to join my Society of Really Evil Lawful Gun Owners, or SRELGO. We go to the range and shoot targets while talking about killing puppies and pissing in people's wheaties.
 
2012-12-15 08:07:13 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: So would you classify her as a responsible gun owner? One who knew her son, hell the entire community knew, had mental issues? That she trained her son how to use the guns and took him target practicing according to latest reports? That they were BOTH NRA members?


if you choose to have guns in the house you'd better do safety training for everybody. again, he farking killed her to get them. you can't stop that kind of crazy shiat with gun control laws.
 
2012-12-15 08:07:57 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: NotoriousFire: Princess Ryans Knickers: Yes, they were BOTH NRA members. Yes, she trained him how to use the guns. Yes, she took him target practicing. It's all over the news tonight. Guess you consider her a responsible gun owner for letting her obviously well known mentally deranged child use a gun and had complete access to the guns.

Wasn't the shooter 20 years old? Don't call him a child - he doesn't deserve the sympathy such a statement would impart on him. He was an adult, plain and simple. A murdering adult.

So you agree that a mentally deficient MAN should not have had access to those guns?


There were already laws that restricted his access to firearms. His parent made a poor decision. Not the government. Not the Constitution. His parent. Remember that.
 
Displayed 50 of 836 comments

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report