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.

(Slate)   Slate is crowdsourcing all the gun deaths in the US since December 14   (slate.com) divider line 461
    More: Sad, GunDeaths, gun deaths, New York Times Magazine  
•       •       •

13877 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Dec 2012 at 10:52 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-21 12:06:54 PM  

WhippingBoy: DeathByGeekSquad: Vegan Meat Popsicle: duffblue: Gotta love these instant greenlights, guess the mods are the type of people that piss themselves at the idea of firearms.

Yep.

Because only a complete coward would think that gun nuts should have a few basic responsibilities placed on the acquisition and distribution of their deadly toys. I mean, it's not like any other rights come with limitations on their use based on the impact it can have on other people or anything.

The REAL tragedy here, after all, is that somebody might have to wait an extra day or two to get a gun or reload slightly more often at the local range. Truly a historical atrocity with no equal.

The real tragedy is that people are falling for emotional appeals. Great, restrictions on law-abiding citizens, that wouldn't have changed what happened at Newtown, and it won't change the majority of gun-related deaths stemming from criminal activities. The US has a high gun death rate due in part to our proximity to the epicenter of the drug trade, and the routes it takes from that location to its various destinations.

Adding a few days wait time won't change that, and in the end, it won't change much other than causing a few people to wait an extra few days.

Holy crap you're stupid!!!


You'll really have to try harder than the lowball effort you just phoned in. Then again, you've probably already convinced yourself of your own superiority and as such will immediately view any comment made in your direction as a 'win'. More than likely you're the same type of person who views being banned or moderated while failing to troll as a 'success'. So, why the truth may pass you by, you can rest easy knowing that you've convinced yourself that you're successful in your endeavors - much like the retarded child who is blissfully unaware that they are in fact, mentally handicap.

Attaboy.
 
2012-12-21 12:07:26 PM  
Would ya be happier if they was pushed out of windows?
 
2012-12-21 12:07:35 PM  

manimal2878: WhippingBoy: Given that the US government has a military that uses stealth bombers, nuclear powered aircraft carriers, drones, bunker-buster bombs, etc, etc, etc, would you agree that it makes sense for civilians to be allowed to own these same types of weapons in case the government decides to "push us too far"? After all, you don't being an AR-15 to an aircraft carrier fight.

Why do you keep bringing this up? Guns are not on the same scale as any kind of bomb or missile. They are not part of the second amendment discussion, laws regarding destructive devices have already taken care of this. Nobody is questioning that destructive devices should be regulated.


I keep bringing it up because one of the arguments for guns is that they're necessary in order for an oppressed populace to rise up and overthrow a tyrannical government. I'm merely pointing out that because the current government possesses weapons of such unbelievable destructive power, it seems disingenuous to argue that you need guns in case you need to someday overthrow them.
 
2012-12-21 12:09:07 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: duffblue: Gotta love these instant greenlights, guess the mods are the type of people that piss themselves at the idea of firearms.

Yep.

Because only a complete coward would think that gun nuts should have a few basic responsibilities placed on the acquisition and distribution of their deadly toys. I mean, it's not like any other rights come with limitations on their use based on the impact it can have on other people or anything.

The REAL tragedy here, after all, is that somebody might have to wait an extra day or two to get a gun or reload slightly more often at the local range. Truly a historical atrocity with no equal.


Its hard to tell if you were trying to be sarcastic but most people do have to wait between 3 and 10 days to pick up a new gun. If you were trying to bring up how stupid the waiting period is, I totally agree. However I don't mind waiting 10 days to pick up a new gun. I have other guns to shoot, and I even when I went to purchase my first gun it was no big deal to wait 10 days. I simply planned an outing with the guys and girls who like to shoot with me a few days after my pickup date and everyone had a good time.

What did the spree killer say about the firearm waiting period? law says they have to go back to school sometime.
 
2012-12-21 12:09:08 PM  
Don't blame the tool for the job the carpenter did.
 
2012-12-21 12:09:22 PM  
And now we wait...

I need a cooler full of beer, stat.
 
2012-12-21 12:09:39 PM  
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/19/fbi-report-violent-crime-down-fo r-the-fifth-straight-year-in-a-row/

Not sure if there is a correlation between self defense laws and increased firearm ownership as the reason violent crime rates have dropped for five straight years. Maybe the perpetrators are just nicer than they were before. :-/
 
2012-12-21 12:10:08 PM  
It has been found through numerous polls that guns are used approximately 2.5 million times a year to prevent a violent crime. Even during the Clinton administration, the justice department found in their study that guns were used about 1.5 million times to prevent violent crime. So, we have both sides of the isle agreeing that an astonishing number of people have been saved the effects of violent crime by brandishing, and in rare cases, actually using the gun. When you consider that there very well could be instances where a person may have used their gun to protect their family, the actual number of people saved the trauma of a violent crime, and perhaps death could be even more staggering.
Now, let's look at the number of violent crimes that were actually committed in the United States. The Bureau of Justice Statistics, part of the United States Department of Justice indicate that in 2008 there were 5.1 million violent crimes, not including homicide. Of these 5.1 million crimes, only 7% were committed with a firearm. This means that 357,000 violent crimes were committed with a firearm. The same bureau indicates that there were 16,929 murders in 2007, of which 68% were committed with a firearm. That means there were 11,512 murders by gun. To compare these two statistics, we have a total of 368,929 violent crimes committed using a firearm.
What if we were to take guns away. We would have around 370,000 people that would be alive, and not have to suffer the trauma of a violent crime. But, what about all of those people that were saved by guns? Just looking at Clinton's Justice department, we are looking at an increase of over 1 million people now either dead, or suffering from the trauma. In reality, it may be well over 2 million. No guns means that instead of 370,000 victims, we have over 2 million victims.
 
2012-12-21 12:10:44 PM  
Here's an interesting trend from that chart...

Utah, 'Red State Central', gun ownership is a way of life. 2.8 million people, 1 dead.
Arizona, such a gun friendly state that they were the second(Behind Utah) to have a 'state gun'. 6.5 million people, 1 dead.
Oklahoma, roughly the same gun laws as both AZ and UT, although they don't allow the unlicensed carry that AZ does, 3.8 million people. 6 dead.

What the fark is wrong in Oklahoma? All 3 places have roughly the same gun laws, Oklahoma has about 30% more population, about 40% of AZ's population, yet they have 6 times as many deaths as either.

WTF?
 
2012-12-21 12:11:41 PM  

henryhill: The list of things you are scared of must be long and detailed.


I'm afraid of getting any kind of degenerative disease and I'm afraid of living my whole life as a mediocre middle class salaryman and also spiders.

I'm not really even afraid of crime. I live in Seattle and even though I am legal to CCW, I almost never do.

But I also know my history, and I know that anyone who wants to deprive you the right to protect yourself does not have your best interest in mind.
 
2012-12-21 12:11:48 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: impaler: I also despise media hype.

Yea, hype. Can't imagine what might have happened recently that put blood in the water to attract all the "sharks". Nope... nothing at all springs to mind. It doesn't spring to mind seven times, in fact.


Violent crimes are on the decline though, and mass shootings aren't a 'gun thing,' they're a 'mental health' thing. Although I suppose limiting access to firearms to those with mental health issues is a 'gun rights' issue. The focus should be on the mental health angle, not the gun angle, otherwise we're going to 'fix' something that doesn't address this problem.
 
2012-12-21 12:11:54 PM  

Evilnissan: Don't blame the tool for the job the carpenter did.


Nice analogy. How many mass hammer bashings do you recall in recent memory?

Definitely a valid comparison. Totally the same thing.
 
2012-12-21 12:13:37 PM  

Magnanimous_J: henryhill: The list of things you are scared of must be long and detailed.

I'm afraid of getting any kind of degenerative disease and I'm afraid of living my whole life as a mediocre middle class salaryman and also spiders.

I'm not really even afraid of crime. I live in Seattle and even though I am legal to CCW, I almost never do.

But I also know my history, and I know that anyone who wants to deprive you the right to protect yourself does not have your best interest in mind.


So you hate the TSA too, right?
 
2012-12-21 12:13:58 PM  
If the knee-jerk reactionaries want to ban civilians from owning guns we might as well also:

* Allow law enforcement officials to perform searches and seizures completely at their discretion and allow all poisoned fruit to be used as evidence. This will help ensure people don't have guns.

* Automatically incarcerate anyone caught with a firearm for life. No trial required.

* Enact excessive fines and bails for people caught with guns.

* Afford the federal government powers outside and/or contrary to the Constitution.

If we're going to significantly or completely erode one of the rights granted to us under our Constitution we may as well crap all over all of them. We cannot selectively choose to enforce or ignore certain parts of our Constitution.

The problem does not go away by addressing the symptom. We can rid our highways of drunk drivers if only we were to ban all alcohol. Would that sit well with most?
 
2012-12-21 12:14:22 PM  
Were people allowed to own cannons when they wrote this shiat? I'm interested. People keep saying, "Does that mean I should be allowed to own a stealth bomber?" Well fark it, if they could have cannons, I want a stealth bomber. Or an Apache.
 
2012-12-21 12:14:48 PM  

davidab: Its hard to tell if you were trying to be sarcastic but most people do have to wait between 3 and 10 days to pick up a new hand gun.


FTFY. Rifles can usually be bought on the spot.
 
2012-12-21 12:14:52 PM  

Carn: Nice analogy. How many mass hammer bashings do you recall in recent memory?

Definitely a valid comparison. Totally the same thing.


The best analogy I can think of is the 1st Amendment.

Freedom of press, Freedom of speech, and Freedom of religion have all directly lead to violence against other people. I firmly believe that the AM radio set is probably guilty of inciting many murders. However, no matter how vile the speech, or inflammatory the press, we all defend the right to say it.
 
2012-12-21 12:15:14 PM  

impaler: Vegan Meat Popsicle: impaler: I also despise media hype.

Yea, hype. Can't imagine what might have happened recently that put blood in the water to attract all the "sharks". Nope... nothing at all springs to mind. It doesn't spring to mind seven times, in fact.

Violent crimes are on the decline though, and mass shootings aren't a 'gun thing,' they're a 'mental health' thing. Although I suppose limiting access to firearms to those with mental health issues is a 'gun rights' issue. The focus should be on the mental health angle, not the gun angle, otherwise we're going to 'fix' something that doesn't address this problem.


How many mass shootings have been accomplished with a bow and arrow? They are both a gun thing and a mental health thing. Denying this is really stupid. It doesn't mean all guns should be illegal but it certainly suggests that we need to do more to prevent them from happening, including stronger gun control.
 
2012-12-21 12:15:34 PM  
The guy who is compiling the data is wrong. Example: The South Dakota marker states a teenager was killed in Sioux Falls. That is incorrect; the kid was killed in Pierre. I should know, I saw the cops flying down the street after it happened.

While the information they are trying to aggregate probably has a purpose, they really need to verify the information before passing it on from what appears to be an amateur source. The person is merely grabbing the local news outlet city and then regurgitating it without actually reading the article/news source.
 
2012-12-21 12:16:11 PM  

Headso: wow look how chill the west coast is, must be the weed...


Yeah, the anti's always talk about how gun culture is a part of the "Wild West" atitude. The entire western HALF of the US has just 33% more gun deaths than Oklahoma alone. 8 deaths in 11 states vs. 6 in one state.
 
2012-12-21 12:16:41 PM  

impaler: Vegan Meat Popsicle: impaler: I also despise media hype.

Yea, hype. Can't imagine what might have happened recently that put blood in the water to attract all the "sharks". Nope... nothing at all springs to mind. It doesn't spring to mind seven times, in fact.

Violent crimes are on the decline though, and mass shootings aren't a 'gun thing,' they're a 'mental health' thing. Although I suppose limiting access to firearms to those with mental health issues is a 'gun rights' issue. The focus should be on the mental health angle, not the gun angle, otherwise we're going to 'fix' something that doesn't address this problem.


The problem isn't guns. It's the attitudes that people have towards them. For example, the attitude that teaching your mentally unstable son how to use a gun, and allowing that same son access to your guns (whether explicitly or through neglect) somehow makes you "safer" than not owning a gun.
 
2012-12-21 12:16:46 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Cars kill more people every day and it's not like we're moving to make those things autonomous so they're taken out of human hands amirite?


Are you saying that we should be moving toward autonomous, gun-toting robots as well? 'Cause I saw RoboCop back in the 80's, and that didn't work out so well...
 
2012-12-21 12:16:48 PM  

Magnanimous_J: Carn: Nice analogy. How many mass hammer bashings do you recall in recent memory?

Definitely a valid comparison. Totally the same thing.

The best analogy I can think of is the 1st Amendment.

Freedom of press, Freedom of speech, and Freedom of religion have all directly lead to violence against other people. I firmly believe that the AM radio set is probably guilty of inciting many murders. However, no matter how vile the speech, or inflammatory the press, we all defend the right to say it.


You can't yell fire in a crowded theater or say you want to kill the President. There are restrictions on this and other rights. We probably need more for the second amendment.
 
2012-12-21 12:17:02 PM  

davidab: Its hard to tell if you were trying to be sarcastic but most people do have to wait between 3 and 10 days to pick up a new gun


Here in Oklahoma, I have always been able to walk in, buy the firearm and walk out with it. Is the wait time you mentioned due to state law?
 
2012-12-21 12:18:08 PM  

Carn: Thisbymaster: WhippingBoy: Serious question:

Who's the bigger pussy? The guy afraid of gun violence, or the guy afraid to face life without his gun?

The one afraid of an inanimate object.

So, the gun people then.


Criminals are "inanimate"?
 
2012-12-21 12:18:28 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Were people allowed to own cannons when they wrote this shiat?


Did well regulated militias use cannons?
 
2012-12-21 12:18:54 PM  

Mikey1969: Carn: Thisbymaster: WhippingBoy: Serious question:

Who's the bigger pussy? The guy afraid of gun violence, or the guy afraid to face life without his gun?

The one afraid of an inanimate object.

So, the gun people then.

Criminals are "inanimate"?


They are when I'm done with them.
 
2012-12-21 12:20:08 PM  

WhippingBoy: If, say, Great Britain fully supported the US military during a civil war, wouldn't you need to be able to take out those capital ships somehow?


Well, infighting within the military itself would be the first problem. 100% of the military isn't going to just follow orders to fire on their friends and families, especially if you are stripping them of their constitutional rights. I would expect some aircraft carries to "turn traitor", as well as some bases. Especially if its "hey we are taking away your rights and guess what...Great Britain is going to help us!" Or who knows, maybe GB will take to the plight of the rebellion and support them instead of the US government (or some other country).

Remember, a bunch of colonists fought the largest superpower in the world, and won (with high ranking military minds who turned traitor to their country and support from foreign powers). Hell, even the south, though not successful, gave the government a good fight for a couple of years.
 
2012-12-21 12:20:19 PM  

WhippingBoy: tukatz: With guns, knives, baseball bats, cars, shards of glass, etc.  They'll always find a method if they're going to kill.  Guns don't whisper in their ear... telling them to kill.

Yeah, but shards of glass don't make you feel manly enough to shoot up a classroom full of helpless, innocent children.


Knives have helped multiple men feel manly enough to hack up classrooms full of children. ABout 20 dead and 110 injured in the last 5 years or so.
 
2012-12-21 12:20:23 PM  

Carn: How many mass shootings have been accomplished with a bow and arrow? They are both a gun thing and a mental health thing. Denying this is really stupid. It doesn't mean all guns should be illegal but it certainly suggests that we need to do more to prevent them from happening, including stronger gun control.


Which is what I'm saying. An assault weapon ban will do very little to solve this problem. I'm also not going to lose any sleep if they enact one.
 
2012-12-21 12:21:06 PM  

Mikey1969: WhippingBoy: tukatz: With guns, knives, baseball bats, cars, shards of glass, etc.  They'll always find a method if they're going to kill.  Guns don't whisper in their ear... telling them to kill.

Yeah, but shards of glass don't make you feel manly enough to shoot up a classroom full of helpless, innocent children.

Knives have helped multiple men feel manly enough to hack up classrooms full of children. ABout 20 dead and 110 injured in the last 5 years or so.


Compared to 20 dead in a single instance. Totally the same thing.
 
2012-12-21 12:23:08 PM  

cragmor: It has been found through numerous polls that guns are used approximately 2.5 million times a year to prevent a violent crime.


That's just simply incorrect. One study, that has been thoroughly debunked, listed 2.5 million. Most studies say it's between 100,000 and 200,000.

Before you call me a lying gun-fearing lib, know that I own and carry firearms.
 
2012-12-21 12:23:35 PM  
most of you folks just don't seem to get it.
the guns are already out there
let me say that again
the guns are already out there
for example, the bank robbery in LA when the police were sorely outgunned
or in this latest case where the guns didn't belong to the sick, murderous bastard.
you cannot make all the 'bad' guns go away by banning them
bad people will still get them
or they will use explosives
or sarin gas
or what the fark ever.
that's why they are bad people

this was a horrible tragedy
not an excuse to begin disarming people

How this logic is missing
is beyond me
 
2012-12-21 12:24:01 PM  
I wonder if mass killings follow a power law distribution.
 
2012-12-21 12:24:06 PM  

Amos Quito:

From you link:

Every day, 85 Americans are shot dead, about 53 of them in suicides.

So, you want these people who are currently killing themselves with guns to start killing themselves with cars?


Lanza was a suicide.
 
2012-12-21 12:24:09 PM  

Amos Quito: Vegan Meat Popsicle: duffblue: Gotta love these instant greenlights, guess the mods are the type of people that piss themselves at the idea of firearms.

Yep.

Because only a complete coward would think that gun nuts should have a few basic responsibilities placed on the acquisition and distribution of their deadly toys


I don't think "gun nuts" are responsible for the vast majority of the carnage.

That award would go to gangsters, etc.


It's the gun nuts who deliberately misrepresented the 2nd Amendment and inflicted insane gun laws on the rest of us. So, yeah, the gun nuts are very much responsible.
 
2012-12-21 12:24:34 PM  

impaler: WhippingBoy: Given that the US government has a military that uses stealth bombers, nuclear powered aircraft carriers, drones, bunker-buster bombs, etc, etc, etc, would you agree that it makes sense for civilians to be allowed to own these same types of weapons in case the government decides to "push us too far"? After all, you don't being an AR-15 to an aircraft carrier fight.

No, but you do bring one to a Guerrilla war.


And no guerrilla war has ever been successful without the help of another nation. Ever. During our revolutionary war there were more foreign troops than Americans. George Washington and others in the Continental Army did not like the unregulated militias because they did not win battles and tend to commit atrocities. yes, I can cite. They also did not want armed populations with a militia but were politically forced due to English traditions. Whiich is why the "well regulated" part is in the amendment.

Just an FYI.
 
2012-12-21 12:25:05 PM  

Carn: So you hate the TSA too, right?


No, I love being groped by high school dropouts at the airport.
 
2012-12-21 12:25:56 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Cars kill more people every day and it's not like we're moving to make those things autonomous so they're taken out of human hands amirite?


Cars have an actual use that is not directly related to killing people. Cars are our primary mode of transportation. Cars are not deisnged to kill people. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill living things. But of course, we're forgetting that gun owners rights are more important than the lives of little kids.
 
2012-12-21 12:26:08 PM  

Magnanimous_J: Carn: So you hate the TSA too, right?

No, I love being groped by high school dropouts at the airport.


You win. I lol'd.
 
2012-12-21 12:26:12 PM  
Way to crank up the pathos.
 
2012-12-21 12:26:43 PM  

Carn: Evilnissan: Don't blame the tool for the job the carpenter did.

Nice analogy. How many mass hammer bashings do you recall in recent memory?

Definitely a valid comparison. Totally the same thing.


Here's a pretty good list of attacks around the world. Guess what? People have stormed schools with hammers a couple of times, they've killed them with knives, and the US isn't the only place that has school shootings OR attacks, no matter what you want to believe.

Link
 
2012-12-21 12:27:04 PM  
If it's not a muzzle loader, it's not a real gun...
 
2012-12-21 12:30:13 PM  

natas6.0: not an excuse to begin disarming people


Has there been an attempt to disarm someone? The only talk I have heard is a reinstatement of the AWB, which does not make any of the firearms covered in the ban illegal to own. After the AWB was passed, all you had to do was stroll into a gun store or gun show to see how ridiculous the law was.
 
2012-12-21 12:30:34 PM  

Red_Fox: duffblue: guess the mods are the type of people that piss themselves at the idea of firearms.

And you're the kind of guy who get a bone from handling a deadly weapon....Better get used to it pro-gun people...the days of your side being in charge about this kinda shiat if farking over.


Says the Canadian.
 
2012-12-21 12:32:09 PM  

NightOwl2255: cragmor: It has been found through numerous polls that guns are used approximately 2.5 million times a year to prevent a violent crime.

That's just simply incorrect. One study, that has been thoroughly debunked, listed 2.5 million. Most studies say it's between 100,000 and 200,000.

Before you call me a lying gun-fearing lib, know that I own and carry firearms.


Can you provide me the info on debunking? I tried to be as thorough as possible, and I did not come up with anything to debunk it. In looking up this info, I was actually surprised to find the info from the Clinton administration agreed to a point, saying the number was about 1.5 million. Not calling you anything, but would appreciate knowing where the info came from.
 
2012-12-21 12:33:06 PM  

vdawg: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/19/fbi-report-violent-crime-down-f o r-the-fifth-straight-year-in-a-row/

Not sure if there is a correlation between self defense laws and increased firearm ownership as the reason violent crime rates have dropped for five straight years. Maybe the perpetrators are just nicer than they were before. :-/


Articles like this are why some people look with scorn upon rightwingers. They have no idea about statistical analysis. Nor do they understand correlation versus causation. They don't look at the reasons, nor causes of the drop or even the locations of the drop. That is why teen pregnancy rates are so high in Red States. They really are just bad at critical thinking.
 
2012-12-21 12:34:43 PM  

Deep Contact: Deaths in the U.S. Automobiles, which kill 117 Americans a day, or nearly 43,000 a year. Then comes flu, which (along with pneumonia, its associated disease) kills 36,000 people. Third is guns: 26,000 deaths. Fourth, food-borne illness: 5,000. And finally, terrorism, which in a typical year claims virtually no U.S. lives


Don't forget alcohol, that kills 80,000 people each year. Alcohol is far less of a necessity than cars or even guns, but strangely you don't hear the gun control nuts ever suggest that it too should be made illegal, even though it kills several times the total of guns, including children.

Similarly, the gun control side would argue that since we have in place a system of penalties for driving under the influence of various drugs, cars are well regulated. However when the subject turns to the scary looking (but statistically less dangerous) gun, the want not just a system of penalties, but to ban them outright. Or limit them to some low capacity, which would be the equivalent of outlawing all cars that go faster than 40mph. These people have no concern about things that kill lots of people, but major concern about things that kill relatively few, they're irrational.
 
2012-12-21 12:38:18 PM  
And then there's abortion. Abortion is death, after all.

Abortion; death of the most innocent. A total of 827,609 abortions were reported to CDC for 2007. In 2008, approximately 1.21 million abortions took place in the U.S.

No current data is available. Or, bluntly - 3,325 every day of the year in 2008, meaning 139 innocent lives every hour. Or, 5.3 Newtown catastrophes every hour for an entire year, round the clock. Clearly sexual congress must be outlawed since it can lead to the death of an innocent child. Because it's all about the children, isn't it?

My head can't wrap around the logic of the Left shouting for law-abiding, well mannered, adult American citizens - from whom the government derives its right to govern - to have their 2nd Amendment weapons forcibly taken from them when the same political crowd not only endures the staggering volume of termination of innocent life on a scale that would make Hitler cringe, but glories in it.
Tell you what. The Left gives up Roe v. Wade, renounces it and never again goes near the question of abortion and I will afterwards agree to a "national conversation" about the 2nd Amendment and what it really meant to the Framers. They go first. That will signal their sincerity. Absolute constitutional rejection and elimination of abortion.

What's that? Getting rid of abortion will cause needless death and anguish? It's a woman's right to protect her body from others who don't have the right to tell her how to preserve and defend her sovereignty, especially as pertains to her safety and well being?

You don't say.
 
2012-12-21 12:38:52 PM  

Mikey1969: Carn: Evilnissan: Don't blame the tool for the job the carpenter did.

Nice analogy. How many mass hammer bashings do you recall in recent memory?

Definitely a valid comparison. Totally the same thing.

Here's a pretty good list of attacks around the world. Guess what? People have stormed schools with hammers a couple of times, they've killed them with knives, and the US isn't the only place that has school shootings OR attacks, no matter what you want to believe.

Link


Hammers and guns: equally dangerous in your mind then?
 
Displayed 50 of 461 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report