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.

(Think Progress)   In one day, more people have signed a petition asking Obama to address gun control than Texans wanting to secede from the Union   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 1049
    More: Obvious, President Obama, unions, gun regulation, petitions  
•       •       •

3076 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Dec 2012 at 8:59 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1049 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-16 03:41:09 PM
1000 posts, and I can only see 342. What a cesspool of derp Fark has become.
 
2012-12-16 03:52:50 PM

James F. Campbell: 1000 posts, and I can only see 342. What a cesspool of derp Fark has become.


That many people on ignore? Must be fun only listening to people you want to hear.
 
2012-12-16 03:52:50 PM

keithgabryelski: Fark It: Are you reading the same thread? Where is the compromise? I have only read calls for capitulation

i see a main thread of discussion (the title of this thread) which wishes to address gun control.

I see some people saying gun control has never worked never never never

i see some people asking for an honest discussion on guns in america and their relationship with gun violence.

and i see a lot of people talking passed each other -- and demanding the other's position or their claims are much different than what is actually being said.

I see YOU as being in the latter category.


I have repeatedly asked for gun control advocates to demonstrate compromise and I have ben meet with silence. Capitulation is not compromise. What have gun control advocates ever put on the table?
 
2012-12-16 03:55:52 PM

Fark It: I have repeatedly asked for gun control advocates to demonstrate compromise and I have ben meet with silence. Capitulation is not compromise. What have gun control advocates ever put on the table?


what would you consider compromise?
 
2012-12-16 03:58:44 PM

themindiswatching: What if Obama submits a bill to Congress next month that extends mental healthcare to everyone? We could call it Medicare Part E or something. Surely people would be okay with that if it'll prevent at least one mass shooting, right?


Ding Ding DIng!! we have a winner!

This is about convenience for the 'progressives' who vote black because it's the white thing to do.

If you want real reform, take care of these fools, via mental health screenings or executions, before they go all shooty. But it's GOING TO COST MONEY. Still interested?

Oh wait, they'll just pass that debt off to their grandkids, to save their.. uh, grandkids? wait, what?
 
2012-12-16 04:05:01 PM

James F. Campbell: 1000 posts, and I can only see 342. What a cesspool of derp Fark has become.


that's an interesting position. I find there are far far fewer trolls in this thread than I would normally expect, and certainly there are far far fewer trolls on fark since the last great purge.

in fact, it's been pretty easy to have a discussion in this thread -- not that it isn't contentious and there isn't a lot of misunderstanding of each others positions but I see nothing like the thread shiatting a certain internet dentist employed.

hell my blacked-out farkys are not even noticeable as I scroll through this thread -- and even the ones that are seem to talking rather than puking on this thread.
 
2012-12-16 04:05:33 PM

Mrbogey: the_vegetarian_cannibal: No, the Tea Party and the whole shiatfit conservatives threw about Obamacare over the last 3 years never happened. NEVER! YOU CAN'T PROVE IT!!!

In your wild anger, you should realize you made yourself look childish, ignorant, and just plain dumb. You've conflated several issues and put them under the same heading as shallow minds are want to do.

So, got a link to Tea Party/conservatives/Republicans saying we don't need an improved mental health system?


Do you really need me to link to every instance of Tea Partiers and conservatives angrily decrying any change to improve our health care system since 2009? Really? You do realize that "funding of mental health programs" is part of the umbrella of "funding of public health in general" and that they are not mutually exclusive entities, right?

And FWIW, I've worked with numerous psychiatrists who have been in the field for several decades. To this day, most of them still absolutely revile President Reagan because he essentially gutted the country's entire mental health system back in the 1980s. We reap what we sow, I guess.
 
2012-12-16 04:14:10 PM
After reading all of this Derp, I'm going to finish fixing my SKS (broken extractor), lube it, and fire off a round for every comment posted.

/ok, maybe not that msny
 
2012-12-16 04:23:28 PM

keithgabryelski: Fark It: I have repeatedly asked for gun control advocates to demonstrate compromise and I have ben meet with silence. Capitulation is not compromise. What have gun control advocates ever put on the table?

what would you consider compromise?


As I've already said:

Relaxing certain NFA restrictions, for SBRs and suppressors
The Hughes Amendment
GHWB's import ban
National concealed carry

If you're not willing to discuss any of these prior 'compromises' then you're not looking for compromise
 
2012-12-16 04:37:55 PM

Fark It: keithgabryelski: Fark It: I have repeatedly asked for gun control advocates to demonstrate compromise and I have ben meet with silence. Capitulation is not compromise. What have gun control advocates ever put on the table?

what would you consider compromise?

As I've already said:

Relaxing certain NFA restrictions, for SBRs and suppressors
The Hughes Amendment
GHWB's import ban
National concealed carry

If you're not willing to discuss any of these prior 'compromises' then you're not looking for compromise


let me get this correct -- you want silencers and automatic weapons restrictions removed
you want a national concealed carry permit?

(i'm really just trying to understand your position).
 
2012-12-16 04:48:29 PM

topcon: Fact: You could outright BAN guns right now in all shapes and forms, and literally hundreds of years from now, there will still be mass killings with them.


You need to high thee ho to a dictionary and look up "Fact". A prediction about the future cannot be a fact. You could predict that the sun will rise in the East and it isn't a fact. Also, I trust your prediction as much as I trust your understanding of the vocabulary you use.
 
2012-12-16 04:57:00 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets," Feinstein said of her proposal.



What a coont.
 
2012-12-16 05:05:32 PM

keithgabryelski: Fark It: I have repeatedly asked for gun control advocates to demonstrate compromise and I have ben meet with silence. Capitulation is not compromise. What have gun control advocates ever put on the table?

what would you consider compromise?


How about if every state followed the model of one of the most strict gun control states to prevent this from happening. Oh, right CT already is one of the most strict gun control states.
 
2012-12-16 05:52:07 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Mrbogey: ivan: For instance, it should be harder to acquire, possess and use firearms than it is to acquire, possess and use automobiles. Not easier.

It is harder. A 16yr old can buy a car. No background checks. They don't even need a license to buy one.

Anywhere, if you have cash in hand, you can buy a car as fast as they can do the paperwork.

Yeah...the paperwork

[i48.photobucket.com image 500x675]


Again, not true. In most every state, there isn't a law per se. A dealer will usually require a license for insurance reasons.

the_vegetarian_cannibal: Do you really need me to link to every instance of Tea Partiers and conservatives angrily decrying any change to improve our health care system since 2009? Really? You do realize that "funding of mental health programs" is part of the umbrella of "funding of public health in general" and that they are not mutually exclusive entities, right?


So the problem is your inability to dissect arguments and instead make them either pro-or against everything.
 
2012-12-16 05:55:36 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: How about if every state followed the model of one of the most strict gun control states to prevent this from happening. Oh, right CT already is one of the most strict gun control states


obviously they aren't strict enough.

shall we look at gun availability to homicides across countries?
 
2012-12-16 05:56:27 PM

rohar: Ok, I''ll bite. Can anyone come up with a correlation between a change in gun control laws and a change in gun violence corrected for external variables? Either positive or negative would do.

/without that we're busy arguing over I believe, you believe
//no offense, but your beliefs aren't much better than mine


Okay rohar, I'm sold.

You have convinced me that gun control would be treating the symptom and not the disease. I agree that we should be directing more of our resources to the mental health problem in our country. Maybe we could take a cue from Farker "curious" and use the resources we already dedicate to the war on drugs and allocate them to proper education for inner city kids and mental health treatment for all.

I was never really married to any new gun control laws btw. I'm just sick of the conversation stopping there. People just say 2nd amendment/NRA and magically you can't discuss gun violence in this country. I prefer to discuss what can be done. Not just say what we can't do and give up there.

Thank you for the intelligent discussion.
 
2012-12-16 06:04:24 PM

keithgabryelski: BraveNewCheneyWorld: How about if every state followed the model of one of the most strict gun control states to prevent this from happening. Oh, right CT already is one of the most strict gun control states

obviously they aren't strict enough.

shall we look at gun availability to homicides across countries?


What makes you assume gun control is the solution? It's never been proven to lessen violence. Are you open to finding the root cause and attacking that, or are you simply set in your opinion based beliefs? Everybody wants this to stop, but if we don't take a serious look at what actually causes massacres to happen, then we're doomed to hear of this happening again. Guns aren't the cause, they're a tool of choice used by most people who are already set on the path of murder by something else, we need to focus on the people, not what the choose to pick up first.
 
2012-12-16 06:05:46 PM

pornopose: rohar: Ok, I''ll bite. Can anyone come up with a correlation between a change in gun control laws and a change in gun violence corrected for external variables? Either positive or negative would do.

/without that we're busy arguing over I believe, you believe
//no offense, but your beliefs aren't much better than mine

Okay rohar, I'm sold.

You have convinced me that gun control would be treating the symptom and not the disease. I agree that we should be directing more of our resources to the mental health problem in our country. Maybe we could take a cue from Farker "curious" and use the resources we already dedicate to the war on drugs and allocate them to proper education for inner city kids and mental health treatment for all.

I was never really married to any new gun control laws btw. I'm just sick of the conversation stopping there. People just say 2nd amendment/NRA and magically you can't discuss gun violence in this country. I prefer to discuss what can be done. Not just say what we can't do and give up there.

Thank you for the intelligent discussion.


except that rohar has not and will not consider gun legislation across countries -- basically he throws up his hands and says "there is no information on how this would work so let's not do it"

which is incorrect -- we actually have a lot of information that if your country has less guns you will have less homicides -- and we can extrapolate that if THIS country did the same we would have similar results.
 
2012-12-16 06:08:30 PM
Gun culture.

When I was a kid, Westerns dominated the television schedule. The plot of virtually every TV drama was "Stranger comes to town and causes trouble. Hero shoots him dead. Everybody happy."

Marshall Dillon got shot almost every week. He'd wear a sling for a few minutes and be fine next week.

If it wasn't a Western, it was an Army Show. Even the sitcoms. "Shoot the Bad Guy. Crack a joke. Fade to black."

On Saturday morning, I watched Elmer Fudd blow Daffy's face off with a shotgun and Jonny and Hadji mow guys down with machine guns. In between, Kenner and Mattel would advertise "The most realistic toy gun ever!" The back page of almost every comic book I bought had an ad for a Daisy Rifle.

I remember one mass shooting. One.

Then things changed. People decided, "Guns are bad, m'kay."

No more guns in cartoons. No more toy guns on the shelves. No more Westerns.

G.I. Joe shrunk from a 12 inch soldier to a 3 inch super-spy. He could fire off a thousand rounds and never hit anybody.

We, as a people, decided that "gun culture" was a bad thing.

And then mass shootings became an annual tradition. Now it seems we can't even go a month without one.

So, what changed? Hard to say.

When I was a kid, there was a war going on. Our fathers and brothers were being shot dead every day. It was the lead story on every newscast. Even the people who supported the war recognized that it was a bad thing.

Today? We have lived in a state of perpetual war for more than a decade now. If I asked you to name all of the countries where our troops are shooting people on a daily basis, you would probably be off by one or two. Watch the news tonight and see if it is even mentioned.

They say that depression is hate turned inward. Rage is depression turned outward.

What is the cause?

Hopelessness.

Millions of Americans believe that the world will end in their lifetime. Many of them actually pray for it to happen. We look to our leaders and they tell us that nothing can be done. The few that want to change things are told by their corporate overlords to shut their mouths or the money will stop flowing.

They tell us to pray for an end to "The Violence." Like "The Violence" is "The Weather." Turn on the radio and hear 24/7 that we are doomed. Then go buy a gun, because "they" are going to get you.

We can't make guns go away. We can't outlaw them. Gun ownership is one our founding principles.

But we can outlaw the manufacture and sale of them. If you want to own a gun, oil it and maintain it, because there aren't going to be any more. Period.

An angry man, a crazy man, can throw a punch. An angry, crazy man with a gun can kill a dozen children.

But let's not change anything. Let's just pray.
 
2012-12-16 06:08:55 PM

Mrbogey: Lionel Mandrake: Mrbogey: ivan: For instance, it should be harder to acquire, possess and use firearms than it is to acquire, possess and use automobiles. Not easier.

It is harder. A 16yr old can buy a car. No background checks. They don't even need a license to buy one.

Anywhere, if you have cash in hand, you can buy a car as fast as they can do the paperwork.

Yeah...the paperwork

[i48.photobucket.com image 500x675]

Again, not true. In most every state, there isn't a law per se. A dealer will usually require a license for insurance reasons.

the_vegetarian_cannibal: Do you really need me to link to every instance of Tea Partiers and conservatives angrily decrying any change to improve our health care system since 2009? Really? You do realize that "funding of mental health programs" is part of the umbrella of "funding of public health in general" and that they are not mutually exclusive entities, right?

So the problem is your inability to dissect arguments and instead make them either pro-or against everything.


The general healthcare system in this country is currently very broken and needs reform. One of the parts of that system is our mental healthcare, which has been hit hard by budget cuts since the 80s. Most of those cuts were done under a Republican president and even today, the GOP continues to obstruct any attempt to reform the broken system, effectively stonewalling any potential for improving many aspects of healthcare (one of which is mental healthcare).

I'm sorry that the consequences of your side's political beliefs and past actions are inconvenient for you. But I'm just the messenger.
 
2012-12-16 06:18:33 PM
The only thing Repugnicans hate more than gun control is free and easy access to health care.

Dead children is just the cost of doing business,
 
2012-12-16 06:20:04 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: What makes you assume gun control is the solution? It's never been proven to lessen violence. Are you open to finding the root cause and attacking that, or are you simply set in your opinion based beliefs? Everybody wants this to stop, but if we don't take a serious look at what actually causes massacres to happen, then we're doomed to hear of this happening again. Guns aren't the cause, they're a tool of choice used by most people who are already set on the path of murder by something else, we need to focus on the people, not what the choose to pick up first.


I have been talking honestly about this.

are you willing to talk honestly about this? then let's go:

the more guns the more homicides -- across income, across countries.
google "gun availability by country" and "homicides by country" and compare the lists (lists from wikepedia -- i've posted them above).

now we can start there. reducing guns will reduce homicides.

You can bring up alternatives (do it -- i'm willing to consider anything), but it seems there is a direct correlation right here and denying THAT is wishful thinking.

We can talk about the causation.

For instance, is it that guns are just readily available when someone is in a passionate situation -- that having a gun accessible in such a situation is just too tempting?

Is that because guns are impersonal and protect the murderer by being feet away instead of the incredibly personal knifing and just plain muscle work required to stab someone to death?

It doesn't seem that knifing murders "fill in" when guns are removed (again, look at the two wikipedia links).

So, this doesn't seem to be "if you remove guns people will just used sharpen spoons".

But it seems you want to predict and intervene? (is that right -- i don't want to put words in your mouth).
I think that makes sense, but I also think that is FAR more intrusive and difficult to implement.
It also seems to be this years distraction from the facts: more guns = more homicides.
 
2012-12-16 06:20:54 PM

ivan: BraveNewCheneyWorld: ivan: For instance, it should be harder to acquire, possess and use firearms than it is to acquire, possess and use automobiles. Not easier.

How fast can you buy a car? Because it took about a year to get my gun license in CT.

Good. All states should be like that.

And then were you required to demonstrate that you can operate your lethal firearms safely and responsibly? Because that's what I had to do to get my driver's licence.

Lionel Mandrake: Mrbogey: ivan: For instance, it should be harder to acquire, possess and use firearms than it is to acquire, possess and use automobiles. Not easier.

It is harder. A 16yr old can buy a car. No background checks. They don't even need a license to buy one.

Anywhere, if you have cash in hand, you can buy a car as fast as they can do the paperwork.

Yeah...the paperwork

[i48.photobucket.com image 500x675]




Which of those two things is operated on public roads? The car, my gun sits in the safe in my house. You do not have to do any of those things if you merely want to own a car, only if you want to operate it in public.

A more apt point might be CCW permits to driver permits. In that case, the only thing lacking from "car control" in comparison to the CCW that wishes to carry his gun in public is the requirement to carry liability insurance. Most states have dropped the inspection requirement or cars. So that is moot.
 
2012-12-16 06:25:37 PM

dericwater: Saborlas: I wish I had the cash to invest in Smith & Wesson, because the moment Obama opens his mouth on the topic, gun sales are gonna SKYROCKET.

Stocks generally move because of long-term outlook. Just because gun sales skyrocket for the following two weeks after Obama makes a comment, that's no reason to up the value of the stock. What's the sustained outlook for S&W? If Obama manages to push through legislation that may curb the use (or worse, in your case, purchase) of guns, S&W's stock price will tank. That one week blip would be mostly useless, and your short-term trading would be taxed at income rates and not capital gains rates.


This.

Oh, and to the original poster?

i.imgur.com

At least you can be grateful you didn't buy SWHC "the moment Obama opened his mouth" on Friday afternoon. The market has already weighed your thesis in the balance and found it wanting.
 
2012-12-16 06:29:29 PM

Solid Muldoon: Gun culture.

When I was a kid, Westerns dominated the television schedule. The plot of virtually every TV drama was "Stranger comes to town and causes trouble. Hero shoots him dead. Everybody happy."

Marshall Dillon got shot almost every week. He'd wear a sling for a few minutes and be fine next week.

If it wasn't a Western, it was an Army Show. Even the sitcoms. "Shoot the Bad Guy. Crack a joke. Fade to black."

On Saturday morning, I watched Elmer Fudd blow Daffy's face off with a shotgun and Jonny and Hadji mow guys down with machine guns. In between, Kenner and Mattel would advertise "The most realistic toy gun ever!" The back page of almost every comic book I bought had an ad for a Daisy Rifle.

I remember one mass shooting. One.

Then things changed. People decided, "Guns are bad, m'kay."

No more guns in cartoons. No more toy guns on the shelves. No more Westerns.

G.I. Joe shrunk from a 12 inch soldier to a 3 inch super-spy. He could fire off a thousand rounds and never hit anybody.

We, as a people, decided that "gun culture" was a bad thing.

And then mass shootings became an annual tradition. Now it seems we can't even go a month without one.

So, what changed? Hard to say.

When I was a kid, there was a war going on. Our fathers and brothers were being shot dead every day. It was the lead story on every newscast. Even the people who supported the war recognized that it was a bad thing.

Today? We have lived in a state of perpetual war for more than a decade now. If I asked you to name all of the countries where our troops are shooting people on a daily basis, you would probably be off by one or two. Watch the news tonight and see if it is even mentioned.

They say that depression is hate turned inward. Rage is depression turned outward.

What is the cause?

Hopelessness.

Millions of Americans believe that the world will end in their lifetime. Many of them actually pray for it to happen. We look to our leaders and they tell us that nothing can be done ...


The fact that you cal depression hate turned inwards, makes me think you are farking moron, I no longer care about anything you have to say. You obviously have no clue what depression is and should be ashamed for describing it as you did.
 
2012-12-16 06:42:03 PM
No, you can't have mine. Not yours. I will resist.
 
2012-12-16 06:45:49 PM
I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry that I mentioned what thousands of mental health professionals say every day.

Sorry to see you go. You'll miss some good jokes.
 
2012-12-16 06:53:41 PM

Twilight Farkle: dericwater: Saborlas: I wish I had the cash to invest in Smith & Wesson, because the moment Obama opens his mouth on the topic, gun sales are gonna SKYROCKET.

Stocks generally move because of long-term outlook. Just because gun sales skyrocket for the following two weeks after Obama makes a comment, that's no reason to up the value of the stock. What's the sustained outlook for S&W? If Obama manages to push through legislation that may curb the use (or worse, in your case, purchase) of guns, S&W's stock price will tank. That one week blip would be mostly useless, and your short-term trading would be taxed at income rates and not capital gains rates.

This.

Oh, and to the original poster?

[i.imgur.com image 500x342]

At least you can be grateful you didn't buy SWHC "the moment Obama opened his mouth" on Friday afternoon. The market has already weighed your thesis in the balance and found it wanting.


Maybe he should buy after Obama spoke, depending on what Obama said.
 
2012-12-16 06:53:53 PM

keithgabryelski: the more guns the more homicides -- across income, across countries.
google "gun availability by country" and "homicides by country" and compare the lists (lists from wikepedia -- i've posted them above).


Those type of statistics don't correlate smoothly between gun owners and violence across the world. Something else is the problem. I know I have been harping on this, but I believe it's tied more to our mentally ill population. I want to see this fixed as much as you do, but we need to address the root of the problem not the end result and the means by which it is carried out at the expense of 310,000,000 innocent, law abiding people, especially if the net change will be trivial. There is a direct correlation between our society's increase in violent crime and our defunding of state run mental health facilities. The math bears out my position much more clearly, and I wish we'd focus on the more apparent problem for once, because I really want these events to stop.
 
2012-12-16 07:04:17 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: keithgabryelski: the more guns the more homicides -- across income, across countries.
google "gun availability by country" and "homicides by country" and compare the lists (lists from wikepedia -- i've posted them above).

Those type of statistics don't correlate smoothly between gun owners and violence across the world. Something else is the problem. I know I have been harping on this, but I believe it's tied more to our mentally ill population. I want to see this fixed as much as you do, but we need to address the root of the problem not the end result and the means by which it is carried out at the expense of 310,000,000 innocent, law abiding people, especially if the net change will be trivial. There is a direct correlation between our society's increase in violent crime and our defunding of state run mental health facilities. The math bears out my position much more clearly, and I wish we'd focus on the more apparent problem for once, because I really want these events to stop.


i'd like to see that math.

it's not "gun owners" and "violence" across the world -- that does not correlate. It is "number of guns" (gun availability) and homicides.

violence is a completely separate issue -- which I think gets mixed in on this discussions too much.

Guns are used to kill not injure.
 
2012-12-16 07:33:26 PM
Yes, because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

And the fact that guns allow people to kill other people just by pointing at them in no way contributes to this...
 
2012-12-16 07:37:15 PM

Garble: Yes, because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

And the fact that guns allow people to kill other people just by pointing at them in no way contributes to this...


You are incorrect. Guns neither allow or disallow people from using it.
 
2012-12-16 08:20:14 PM

diaphoresis: Garble: Yes, because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

And the fact that guns allow people to kill other people just by pointing at them in no way contributes to this...

You are incorrect. Guns neither allow or disallow people from using it.


The presence of a gun allows it to be used. The unavailability of a gun prevents it from being used.
 
2012-12-16 08:27:22 PM

keithgabryelski: You can bring up alternatives (do it -- i'm willing to consider anything), but it seems there is a direct correlation right here and denying THAT is wishful thinking.


...you're talking to a representative of a rather large group in this country that says at least two of the most sound scientific theories around today can't be true because their beliefs and lifestyle won't permit them to be true. It's not at all a stretch to believe that he could and would deny correlation data on guns as well. Especially when he has a single line in a document he holds sacrosanct (except for all the stuff in it he doesn't like) to back him up.
 
2012-12-16 08:27:43 PM

the_vegetarian_cannibal: The general healthcare system in this country is currently very broken and needs reform. One of the parts of that system is our mental healthcare, which has been hit hard by budget cuts since the 80s. Most of those cuts were done under a Republican president and even today, the GOP continues to obstruct any attempt to reform the broken system, effectively stonewalling any potential for improving many aspects of healthcare (one of which is mental healthcare).

I'm sorry that the consequences of your side's political beliefs and past actions are inconvenient for you. But I'm just the messenger.


That is revisionist history:
Link
Link
 
2012-12-16 09:43:07 PM
Time to grow up America.
 
2012-12-16 09:55:17 PM

IlGreven: keithgabryelski: You can bring up alternatives (do it -- i'm willing to consider anything), but it seems there is a direct correlation right here and denying THAT is wishful thinking.

...you're talking to a representative of a rather large group in this country that says at least two of the most sound scientific theories around today can't be true because their beliefs and lifestyle won't permit them to be true. It's not at all a stretch to believe that he could and would deny correlation data on guns as well. Especially when he has a single line in a document he holds sacrosanct (except for all the stuff in it he doesn't like) to back him up.


I'm probably more scientifically knowledgeable than you, but if all you can come up with is an assumption that I'm a young earth creationist, or some other bullshiat ad hominem, simply based on the fact that I disagree with your opinions, have at it. You're pathetic.
 
2012-12-16 10:03:14 PM

keithgabryelski: the more guns the more homicides -- across income, across countries.
google "gun availability by country" and "homicides by country" and compare the lists (lists from wikepedia -- i've posted them above).


first, as a very common fark favorite, correlation does not equal causation. You need to show your work. Is global warming due to the decrease in pirates in the world? You need to show a study.. or anything to back your position other than a couple of graphs.

keithgabryelski: violence is a completely separate issue -- which I think gets mixed in on this discussions too much.


It's a COMPLETELY separate issue? I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but come on, this is over the top.

keithgabryelski: Guns are used to kill not injure.


They're also used to defend people who are physically outnumbered or inferior, and to get food. What's your point?
 
2012-12-16 10:21:16 PM

Lionel Mandrake: jimmiejaz: Might as well ban bombs and cars too.

We already took care of this bullshiat argument earlier in the thread.


Funny, /bath shows nothing
 
2012-12-16 10:22:09 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: keithgabryelski: violence is a completely separate issue -- which I think gets mixed in on this discussions too much.

It's a COMPLETELY separate issue? I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but come on, this is over the top.


yes -- for the sake of this discussion. violence and guns seem to have no correlation. murder and guns do correlate.

that is remove guns and you still have the same amount of violence -- but remove guns and you have less murders.

and if you read the previous message from me in this thread you'll notice I talk about causation as a possibility.
 
2012-12-16 10:24:02 PM

mrshowrules: diaphoresis: Garble: Yes, because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

And the fact that guns allow people to kill other people just by pointing at them in no way contributes to this...

You are incorrect. Guns neither allow or disallow people from using it.

The presence of a gun allows it to be used. The unavailability of a gun prevents it from being used.


The PERSON makes the choice, not the gun.
 
2012-12-16 10:26:39 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Lionel Mandrake: We already took care of this bullshiat argument earlier in the thread.

Also, I avoided the thread and posted when I woke up, because I know it was a shiatstorm and I didn't read any of it, just scanned keywords.

 
2012-12-16 11:38:12 PM
Mrbogey-again, you insinuate the conservative side of the Nation is more interested in helping people with mental illness. Can you produce any links that support the present?
 
2012-12-17 07:11:01 AM

lj1330: Mrbogey-again, you insinuate the conservative side of the Nation is more interested in helping people with mental illness. Can you produce any links that support the present?


The denial of a negative doesn't mean a positive. Conservatives weren't trying to tear down the mental health system. I don't have to prove they were more interested in helping the mentally ill. Only that the claim that they're responsible for the system having problems is incorrect.
 
2012-12-17 12:06:18 PM

Jorn the Younger: Yes, guns have a higher potential to be lethal than words.


How many people do you think Hitler or Stalin *personally* killed? How many died as a result of their words?

words are far more dangerous than firearms and equally protected.

Touch the issue with a ten foot pole and see where it ends up. I would love to see you try.
 
2012-12-17 12:26:44 PM

Lionel Mandrake: That's because gun control is a serious issue that sensible people want to see addressed...not the pathetic whining of a few paranoid, pussy "conservative" tebaggers.


Gun control should be addressed. But it has nothing to do with what happened Friday.

But then again you want another Patriot act or worse. Lets keep pissing away what freedoms we have in the name of the all mighty bandaid and never address the real issues.
 
2012-12-17 01:31:30 PM

diaphoresis: mrshowrules: diaphoresis: Garble: Yes, because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

And the fact that guns allow people to kill other people just by pointing at them in no way contributes to this...

You are incorrect. Guns neither allow or disallow people from using it.

The presence of a gun allows it to be used. The unavailability of a gun prevents it from being used.

The PERSON makes the choice, not the gun.


If a person chooses to shoot someone, they need a gun to do so, right? Take away the gun, you take away that option, right?
 
2012-12-18 02:17:58 PM

mrshowrules: The unavailability of a gun prevents it from being used.


Mexico and Northern Ireland would like to have a word with you.

Also:
2.bp.blogspot.com

Those are home-made, full-auto submachine guns. They may be ugly and unreliable compared to commercial firearms, but they work well enough to kill a bunch of people.

If you passed high school metal shop and can follow instructions, you can manufacture a firearm from scratch. Ammo is a bit more difficult, but it's still 150 year old technology. If you can cook meth you can make powder and primers.
 
2012-12-18 02:19:18 PM

CruiserTwelve: If a person chooses to shoot someone, they need a gun to do so, right? Take away the gun, you take away that option, right?


Why am I completely unsurprised that you're a gun-grabber?
 
Displayed 49 of 1049 comments

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report