Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(NBC News)   Four people dead in hostage situation/shootout in Aurora, CO. Sadly, this is NOT a repeat   ( usnews.nbcnews.com) divider line
    More: Sad, morning, hostage situation, NBC News, KUSA, hostages  
•       •       •

12713 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Jan 2013 at 4:01 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



632 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-01-05 01:47:08 PM  
But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.
 
2013-01-05 01:49:40 PM  
That guy in the picture is somebody we all know and love.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-05 02:01:53 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Like the creepy attraction to weapons that psychos have?
 
2013-01-05 02:05:44 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.
 
2013-01-05 02:16:21 PM  
Evil is something that your average person, gun owner or not, doesn't engage in.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-05 03:25:10 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


Or the interaction between the two.

Why are many people including police officers able to be safe with a revolver or a shotgun that doesn't hold more than 6 rounds?

Why is it that some people fear that they are in deathly peril if they can't have a large capacity magazine in a semi automatic weapon, while 2/3 of the population survive just fine with no firearms at all?

What if there was some sort of symptom of persecutory delusional disorder?  Perhaps hoarding a certain type of object?  Something that they were so dependent on that they would do anything to keep it, make any sort of irrational argument.  Even threaten violence if someone were to come between them and the precious?

If you could identify a certain type of object that that insecure violent people would fixate on, you would be well on your way to understanding the link to mental illness and gun violence.
 
2013-01-05 03:38:09 PM  
I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.
 
2013-01-05 03:56:01 PM  

GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.


And it never will be.
 
2013-01-05 04:03:39 PM  

vpb: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Like the creepy attraction to weapons that psychos Americans have?



Also works.
 
2013-01-05 04:04:24 PM  

GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.


Let's talk about them on Fark-that'll be productive!
 
2013-01-05 04:04:31 PM  
The only thing that stops a bad psycho with a gun is a good psycho with a gun, so we have to let mentally ill people own whatever weapons they want.
 
2013-01-05 04:04:56 PM  

vpb: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Like the creepy attraction to weapons that psychos have?


Bingo
 
2013-01-05 04:04:56 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Nobody brought it up in the mama bear thread.
 
2013-01-05 04:06:44 PM  

vpb: Like the creepy attraction to weapons Ellen Degeneres that psychos I have?


Fixed that for me.
 
2013-01-05 04:06:46 PM  
news.bbcimg.co.uk

it's a designated rape zone, yo
 
2013-01-05 04:08:17 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Not that mental health isn't an important issue, but what part of that article gave you any inclination as to the shooter's frame of mind? Sure, you are free to guess about it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that the shooter was anything more than a criminal as yet.
 
2013-01-05 04:08:24 PM  
The NRA solution for this type of shooting is for the Federal government to post armed guards in every house.
 
2013-01-05 04:09:35 PM  

Chinchillazilla: The only thing that stops a bad psycho with a gun is a good psycho with a gun, so we have to let mentally ill people own whatever weapons they want.


Who's the man with the golden gun?
Who's the man who kills for fun?
Psycho Dad! Psycho Dad.
 
2013-01-05 04:10:08 PM  

vudutek: GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.

And it never will be.


And when guns actually do get discussed, we get nowhere. So what's the point of even bringing it up anymore?
 
2013-01-05 04:10:28 PM  
So things are improving?
 
2013-01-05 04:10:36 PM  
Gunn porn thread?

lax-magazine.com
 
2013-01-05 04:10:41 PM  
I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue
 
2013-01-05 04:11:41 PM  
We should ban hostages, and then things like this wouldn't happen.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-01-05 04:11:46 PM  
who do we arm next to prevent this?
 
2013-01-05 04:12:08 PM  
Mel?
 
2013-01-05 04:12:30 PM  
I wonder what the liberal fascists will try to ban this time. They're already working on 2nd amendment and also the 1st with "violent" video games. How about the 3rd this time? You know, if more soldiers could commandeer homes, tragedies like this wouldn't happen as often. Think of the children and ban the 3rd amendment! No tragedy should remain unexploited!
 
2013-01-05 04:12:47 PM  
Typical family murder-suicide is typical.

*yawn*
 
2013-01-05 04:13:27 PM  
This is what happens when you take God out of hostage negotiations.
 
2013-01-05 04:13:48 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


Stupidity is thinking that taking away guns will solve the completely problem.
 
2013-01-05 04:14:22 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Has there been any determination the suspect had prior mental health issues?
 
2013-01-05 04:14:23 PM  
Is this the thread where we assume a bunch things and then the facts come out later but the trolls are already on a roll? I can't wait!


Adam Lanza used stolen weapons, let's retroactively criminalize everyone who doesn't piss their pants at the thought of tools.
 
2013-01-05 04:14:36 PM  
Clearly, this could have been easily avoided if everyone in the house was armed with ED-209s.

/you have 20 seconds to comply
//you must wait 60 seconds to reply
 
2013-01-05 04:14:36 PM  
So the gun nuts new war cry is "BUT WE SHOULDZ BE LOOKING INTO MENTAL HEALTH!!1" and acting as if that was somehow never suggested by the gun control advocates before?

Wow... just... wow.
 
2013-01-05 04:14:44 PM  
The Dark Knight Rises? As usual, the sequel fails to live up to the hype
 
2013-01-05 04:15:26 PM  
Clearly the answer to these situations is.....more guns!
 
2013-01-05 04:15:36 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


Because mentally healthy people don't shoot up schools.
 
2013-01-05 04:15:49 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


Thank You

this needs to be item ONE for Obama
 
2013-01-05 04:16:03 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue


Exactly!!!' Everyone from birth to death should be heavily armed. Then we'd all be safe! Yippee.
 
2013-01-05 04:17:03 PM  
That'll teach those people to go to bed at 3am unarmed!
 
2013-01-05 04:17:11 PM  

Perverted Idiotic Nobleman: Stupidity is thinking that taking away guns will solve the completely problem.



Can the completely problem ever be solved?

/Rhetorical question, I know
 
2013-01-05 04:17:25 PM  
What type of gun was used?
 
2013-01-05 04:17:38 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue



You should get in touch with the police since you seem to be so familiar with the situation. Also, do you know which room I just walked in to?
 
2013-01-05 04:18:07 PM  
Better regulation of guns would reduce these kinds of events, period. Anyone arguing otherwise is simply denying documented reality (those crazy bastards in Australia offer the most recent example).

But, benefits of universal gun ownership would be lost. Not sure what those are, but that's where the argument should be. Anyone arguing that gun control 'can't work to stop gun violence' is a mindless zealot you should ignore as thoroughly as a member of Westboro Baptist. But if they start asking why politicians tend to like having bodyguards who carry guns around, well that's a point for us to debate.

The benefits of gun ownership may outweigh the rare, if horrific, spectacle of a pile of dead kindergartners. That's the debate rational folks should be having.
 
2013-01-05 04:18:34 PM  
Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.
 
2013-01-05 04:18:54 PM  

Perverted Idiotic Nobleman: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Stupidity is thinking that taking away guns will solve the completely problem.


stupidity is thinking that "better regulation of guns" means "ZOMG SOCIALISTBONGO BE TAKIN' MY ROCKIT LONCHER"
 
2013-01-05 04:18:55 PM  
Maybe if they'd kept their dog armed, this wouldn't have happened.
 
2013-01-05 04:19:22 PM  
He could have drowned them in a pool.
 
2013-01-05 04:19:36 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


What additional regulation would you have? As it is now the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and will never use their guns to commit a crime. Only a handful of legal gun owners ever use their legally purchased guns to commit a crime. And with that being said, what regulation would you enact to prevent them from doing so? You are saying that we need better regulation of guns, so give us your suggestions. Tell us what regulation would have prevented this incident.
 
2013-01-05 04:19:40 PM  

Duke_leto_Atredes: Thank You

this needs to be item ONE for Obama


Too bad his original healthcare plan that WOULD have made access to mental help easier got flushed down the toilet, right? Too bad about that... huh? Eh? Hello?

Yeah.
 
2013-01-05 04:20:00 PM  
Another day in america. Another mass murder. Another shoot out. Another day full of sound and fury signifying nothing as america does nothing to solve the situation but whine. Another day where nobody outside of the us cares.
 
2013-01-05 04:20:12 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


A)We have a constitutional right to own firearms
B)There's no putting the genie back in the bottle. There's nearly one firearm for every man woman and child in this country, trying to remove them is futile.
C)It's become a trite talking point but guns don't kill people, crazy people with guns kill people.
D)Trying to take the guns would result in a civil war/insurgency, if you think Iraq and Afghanistan were something realize that those populations had 1/3rd to 1/4 the gun ownership rate of the US and that soldiers could be conditioned to think of the brown people as evil, much harder to do that against your own citizenry.
 
2013-01-05 04:20:41 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


.
Another farking blue state, and liberalisim is indeed a mental disorder.
 
2013-01-05 04:20:46 PM  
Reading these gun threads on Fark over the past year has led me to believe that only the mentally ill use/own guns since every time a gun is used the person is disregarded as being mentally ill.
 
2013-01-05 04:21:10 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


What sucks about reading your posts is knowing you're exactly the type of delusional nutjob that probably has a cache of guns
 
2013-01-05 04:21:26 PM  
You know what? fark it. If people are intent on pretending like guns aren't a problem and it's 'THE CRAZY PEOPLE ARE TO BLAME LOL', then we need to have a tragedy like this every goddamned day until people get tired of seeing dead people, or enough victims get pissed off enough to tar and feather the local NRA gun nuts in their respective communities.

Until then, BRING IT ON, BABY. Let's see how much blood America can take before she flinches.
 
2013-01-05 04:21:39 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.



So a powerful weapon - does it go on the left with the forks, the right with the knife, or above the plate?
 
2013-01-05 04:21:42 PM  

CruiserTwelve: That guy in the picture is somebody we all know and love.


I don't recognize him. Was in anything recent?
 
2013-01-05 04:21:59 PM  
another Schizophrenic gun. when are these manufacturers going to start screen these guns for mental illness? its crazy. you'd have thougt they'd figured it out by now.
 
2013-01-05 04:22:09 PM  

tblax: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

What sucks about reading your posts is knowing you're exactly the type of delusional nutjob that probably has a cache of guns


He's a bleeding heart liberal, FWIW
 
2013-01-05 04:22:18 PM  

Duke_leto_Atredes: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Thank You

this needs to be item ONE for Obama


If it is, then it'll be item 800 billion for the House GOP, right after tax cuts for billionaires, repealing Obamacare, tax cuts for billionaires, outlawing abortion, tax cuts for billionaires, criminalizing the practice of Islam, tax cuts for billionaires, cutting funding for social services, tax cuts for billionaires, cutting funding for infrastructure maintenance, tax cuts for billionaires, outlawing fuel-efficient cars, tax cuts for billionaires, redefining rape, tax cu--

[[omitted for brevity]]



--criminalizing the act of existing while Hispanic and tax cuts for billionaires.
 
2013-01-05 04:22:44 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

.
Another farking blue state, and liberalisim is indeed a mental disorder.


Because, as we all know, 'blue' state means EVERYONE is a liberal! And political affiliations have EVERYTHING to do with every shooting.
 
2013-01-05 04:22:50 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off


Which side of the plate does the Glock go on?
 
2013-01-05 04:23:00 PM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: Bit'O'Gristle: I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue

Exactly!!!' Everyone from birth to death should be heavily armed. Then we'd all be safe! Yippee.


/yes, because enacting a new total gun ban would make every criminal in the USA turn in their guns. You know, out of civic duty. It's a much better tactic when faced with a armed person in your home to just lay down and piss yourself, and wait for him to kill you and your family. Let me know how that works out for you.
 
2013-01-05 04:23:40 PM  
i1121.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-05 04:23:50 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


I don't want to meet the family in your second scenario.
 
2013-01-05 04:23:54 PM  

duffblue: Adam Lanza used stolen weapons, let's retroactively criminalize everyone who doesn't piss their pants at the thought of tools.


The guns were legally bought by his mother, who taught Adam how to use them properly at legal gun control ranges (can't wait for the inevitable breathless media reports about what NRA supported classes he took). Adam would not have had access to them if they were illegal since his law-following mother would not have owned them.

"Good gun control means hitting what you shoot at - just like Adam Lanza did!" ...Hmm I think that tired joke may be retired soon.
 
2013-01-05 04:24:09 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Waxing_Chewbacca: Bit'O'Gristle: I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue

Exactly!!!' Everyone from birth to death should be heavily armed. Then we'd all be safe! Yippee.

/yes, because enacting a new total gun ban would make every criminal in the USA turn in their guns. You know, out of civic duty. It's a much better tactic when faced with a armed person in your home to just lay down and piss yourself, and wait for him to kill you and your family. Let me know how that works out for you.


How do you get through the day without pissing yourself in fear?
 
2013-01-05 04:24:31 PM  
once we ban aurora colorado all will be well. is columbine in aurora ?
 
2013-01-05 04:24:34 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


The difference between you and me, is that I dream of place where people don't need guns to defend themselves and you do. Both dreams are stupidly implausible, but I choose the one that behooves a modern society and is nothing like Somalia. You really want a place where people NEED to carry guns? Really? That's barbaric. Dream bigger.
 
2013-01-05 04:24:46 PM  

Mock26: What type of gun was used?


The bad kind, obviously.
 
2013-01-05 04:25:16 PM  

MorePeasPlease: GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.

Let's talk about them on Fark-that'll be productive!


Yeah, go get a blog.
 
2013-01-05 04:25:46 PM  

vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.


Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?
 
2013-01-05 04:25:53 PM  

TheHappyCanadian: Perverted Idiotic Nobleman: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Stupidity is thinking that taking away guns will solve the completely problem.

stupidity is thinking that "better regulation of guns" means "ZOMG SOCIALISTBONGO BE TAKIN' MY ROCKIT LONCHER"


Alright, goddammit. I sick of this farking analogy. Rifles are small arms. Rocket Launchers are ordnance. NO ONE is advocating for ordnance to be legal. NO ONE. Now stop this nonsense, you ass.
 
2013-01-05 04:26:01 PM  

TheHappyCanadian: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

I don't want to meet the family in your second scenario.


After reading so many threads on this topic, I think scenario #2 is a wet dream fantasy of way too many people. As if people are just sitting around eating dinner hoping someone barges in so they can blow their head off. I know that's not actually true, but it sure seems that way.
 
2013-01-05 04:26:16 PM  
We didn't even make it one day into 2013 without a shooting. We didn't even make it one week into 2013 without a shooting occurring where a massive shooting took place last year.

upload.wikimedia.org
"It is in your nature to destroy yourselves."
Life is short. Act accordingly.
 
2013-01-05 04:26:18 PM  

Surpheon: The guns were legally bought by his mother, who taught Adam how to use them properly at legal gun control ranges (can't wait for the inevitable breathless media reports about what NRA supported classes he took). Adam would not have had access to them if they were illegal since his law-following mother would not have owned them.


Thankfully it's so simple. Just ban EVERYONE's guns because a very rare few may misuse them. Maybe we should do that with everything else.

Would we be having this same convseration if he had burglarized a police vehicle and used their guns? Even the ATF, FBI, and DEA have had automatic weapons, flashbangs, vests, etc. stolen in vehicle burglaries. If someone misuses one of their guns, should we disarm them too?
 
2013-01-05 04:26:27 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Bit'O'Gristle: story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off

Which side of the plate does the Glock go on?


/whichever side "handed" the person is. And yes, they would have to get to it...im not saying they would not, but whatever, lay down for it if you wanna, i prefer to have a method to defend my family. You do what you want.
 
2013-01-05 04:27:11 PM  

TheHappyCanadian: stupidity is thinking that "better regulation of guns" means "ZOMG SOCIALISTBONGO BE TAKIN' MY ROCKIT LONCHER"


Not entirely. For it to be effective, gun control means a HELL of a lot more than requiring gun licenses. If we don't go whole-hog banning, there isn't much point beyond liberal point scoring. See Australia for the minimum needed actions to really have an impact.

No point lying about what it will take. It will take a constitutional amendment, with that level of public support, for that to happen too.

Obama will take the political point, but ultimately the half-measure will do no good. You have to dam the whole stream not just half, and the public support isn't there yet. Better to do nothing other than collect facts and educate people on them - both the good and bad on universal gun access.
 
2013-01-05 04:27:43 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun

and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.


FTFY.
 
2013-01-05 04:27:52 PM  

JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?


No, that would be ridiculous, of course. The difference is only one of those things was specifically designed to kill people, the rest weren't
 
2013-01-05 04:28:33 PM  

Infernalist: Bit'O'Gristle: Waxing_Chewbacca: Bit'O'Gristle: I'm really glad that the people in the house had guns, and were able to effectively take out this scumbag before everyone in the house were gunned down like tied down sheep.


/oh wait...they didn't and they were.
//please continue

Exactly!!!' Everyone from birth to death should be heavily armed. Then we'd all be safe! Yippee.

/yes, because enacting a new total gun ban would make every criminal in the USA turn in their guns. You know, out of civic duty. It's a much better tactic when faced with a armed person in your home to just lay down and piss yourself, and wait for him to kill you and your family. Let me know how that works out for you.

How do you get through the day without pissing yourself in fear?


/lol..who said i was afraid? I'm actually not at all.  i just choose my right to be able to defend myself and my family.  No, the odds are that nothing will happen, but those people killed probably thought the same thing. Just saying. Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it.
 
2013-01-05 04:28:39 PM  

PillsHere: Reading these gun threads on Fark over the past year has led me to believe that only the mentally ill use/own guns since every time a gun is used the person is disregarded as being mentally ill.


Well it certainly shouldn't be normal for someone to have the urge to go on a shooting spree. Are you suggesting mentally stable people would shoot up a neighborhood?
 
2013-01-05 04:28:57 PM  

LordJiro: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.

FTFY.


So it's not a big deal if the dad still has a gun since he won't be able to make a difference anyway, right?
 
2013-01-05 04:29:00 PM  

LordJiro: david_gaithersburg: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

.
Another farking blue state, and liberalisim is indeed a mental disorder.

Because, as we all know, 'blue' state means EVERYONE is a liberal! And political affiliations have EVERYTHING to do with every shooting.


.
Fark has taught me that such broad generalizations are perfectly acceptable, normal, and expected.
 
2013-01-05 04:29:43 PM  

Linux_Yes: another Schizophrenic gun. when are these manufacturers going to start screen these guns for mental illness? its crazy. you'd have thougt they'd figured it out by now.


Lol, he's talking about himself.
 
2013-01-05 04:29:55 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle:
/whichever side "handed" the person is. And yes, they would have to get to it...im not saying they would not, but whatever, lay down for it if you wanna, i prefer to have a method to defend my family. You do what you want.



Do you also set a second glass at each meal to collect the urine you expel while pissing yourself in fear?
 
2013-01-05 04:29:56 PM  

tblax: No, that would be ridiculous, of course. The difference is only one of those things was specifically designed to kill people, the rest weren't


Does that really make it better? That they're used to kill as a secondary use, OR that they kill as an unintended side effect?

I thought the goal was saving lives and not simply shifting the methods of murder.
 
2013-01-05 04:29:57 PM  

LordJiro: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.

FTFY.


0 / 10. Who said anything about having it right at the table. Moron.
 
2013-01-05 04:30:17 PM  

david_gaithersburg: LordJiro: david_gaithersburg: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

.
Another farking blue state, and liberalisim is indeed a mental disorder.

Because, as we all know, 'blue' state means EVERYONE is a liberal! And political affiliations have EVERYTHING to do with every shooting.

.
Fark has taught me that such broad generalizations are perfectly acceptable, normal, and expected.


Only for red states. Get it right.
 
2013-01-05 04:30:26 PM  

Awesome T-Shirt: Linux_Yes: another Schizophrenic gun. when are these manufacturers going to start screen these guns for mental illness? its crazy. you'd have thougt they'd figured it out by now.

Lol, he's talking about himself.


And of course, I quote the wrong person.
 
2013-01-05 04:31:05 PM  

pedrop357: Thankfully it's so simple. Just ban EVERYONE's guns because a very rare few may misuse them. Maybe we should do that with everything else.

Would we be having this same convseration if he had burglarized a police vehicle and used their guns? Even the ATF, FBI, and DEA have had automatic weapons, flashbangs, vests, etc. stolen in vehicle burglaries. If someone misuses one of their guns, should we disarm them too?



Again, every other first world nation on Earth demonstrates your argument as stupid. Police are well trained and take reasonable precautions with their weapons. Private citizens statistically do not.

I am not pro-gun control, but I have nothing but contempt for your idiotic and factually baseless religious position. It's the intellectual equivalent of creationism when we live in a world of data on a plethora of effective gun regulation schemes.
 
2013-01-05 04:31:37 PM  
As a long-standing liberal the whole thing makes me chuckle.

There's SO much emphasis by the right to keep Libs away from their guns that they're willing to forego and betray almost every single other principle they stand for in order to keep them.

Mental health? We need more services....which means state-sponsored health care.
Better licensing? They're game to get as obtrusive into private lives as is needed.
More legislation? As long as it means they get to keep their guns, they're willing to listen.
Mandatory Safety Training? If they get to keep their guns then they'll be happy to let the State tell them what is and what is not a safe practice.
Mandatory Registration? Do you want DNA or is microchipping the weapon and the owner to match reasonable enough?

Seriously....you'll give it all away for the sake of being able to have the existing situation continue where people are getting killed on a consistent basis.
 
2013-01-05 04:32:12 PM  
You all understand hostage situations and standoffs have gone on FOREVER, right? Find one year where someone doesn't do this. Then try to find one year in any of those gun control paradises where someone doesn't also take hostages and shoot at the police.
 
2013-01-05 04:33:19 PM  

Surpheon: pedrop357: Thankfully it's so simple. Just ban EVERYONE's guns because a very rare few may misuse them. Maybe we should do that with everything else.

Would we be having this same convseration if he had burglarized a police vehicle and used their guns? Even the ATF, FBI, and DEA have had automatic weapons, flashbangs, vests, etc. stolen in vehicle burglaries. If someone misuses one of their guns, should we disarm them too?


Again, every other first world nation on Earth demonstrates your argument as stupid. Police are well trained and take reasonable precautions with their weapons. Private citizens statistically do not.

I am not pro-gun control, but I have nothing but contempt for your idiotic and factually baseless religious position. It's the intellectual equivalent of creationism when we live in a world of data on a plethora of effective gun regulation schemes.


.
DId you post to the wrong thread or something?
 
2013-01-05 04:33:19 PM  

skinink: The NRA solution for this type of shooting is for the Federal government to post armed guards in every house.


My house has an armed guard. We haven't had a single problem.
 
2013-01-05 04:33:26 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: /ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed.


Yep. If you have a gun in the house, you are more likely to be involved in a homicide. 10 TIMES more likely to be involved in a suicide.

Good job. And I notice in your scenario, the gunman that breaks into the house lets dad go get his gun, go get ammo, load the weapon, and come back.

What a considerate gunman!
 
2013-01-05 04:33:30 PM  
I wonder if he used guns purchased legally, like Holmes or Lanza.
 
2013-01-05 04:33:59 PM  

Surpheon: Again, every other first world nation on Earth demonstrates your argument as stupid. Police are well trained and take reasonable precautions with their weapons. Private citizens statistically do not.

I am not pro-gun control, but I have nothing but contempt for your idiotic and factually baseless religious position. It's the intellectual equivalent of creationism when we live in a world of data on a plethora of effective gun regulation schemes.



Really? Is that why the police injure so many bystanders and average citizens do not? How do you explain police vehicles and armories being occasionally burglarized? If everyone should be disarms because one guy in CT stole someone's weapons and killed people, shouldn't that same standard apply to the government's weapons?
 
2013-01-05 04:34:28 PM  

aearra: Another day in america. Another mass murder. Another shoot out. Another day full of sound and fury signifying nothing as america does nothing to solve the situation but whine. Another day where nobody outside of the us cares.


the us?
 
2013-01-05 04:35:04 PM  
Aurora, Co. The Tijuana of Colorado. Act accordingly.
 
2013-01-05 04:35:32 PM  

tblax: I wonder if he used guns purchased legally, like Holmes or Lanza.


Adam Lanza did not purchase any firearms legally.
 
2013-01-05 04:36:10 PM  

Dimensio: tblax: I wonder if he used guns purchased legally, like Holmes or Lanza.

Adam Lanza did not purchase any firearms legally.


I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.
 
2013-01-05 04:36:54 PM  
The first one or two threads I made popcorn.Now? Not even worth peanuts.
The same old rehtoric and non-viable solutions.
It's going to happen,one way or the other.Always has and always will.
 
2013-01-05 04:37:03 PM  
Nice to see that, as usual, Fark knows exactly what happened and what should be done to solve the problem, even before the police.

We should hire this shiat out.
 
2013-01-05 04:37:11 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: skinink: The NRA solution for this type of shooting is for the Federal government to post armed guards in every house.

My house has an armed guard. We haven't had a single problem.


I leave my doors unlocked, my car unlocked, and my guns are nowhere near where I sleep.

I haven't had a single problem.

Shouldn't you have THREE armed guards? You know, for when one has to take a piss, sleep, eat?
 
2013-01-05 04:37:38 PM  

aearra: Another day in america. Another mass murder. Another shoot out. Another day full of sound and fury signifying nothing as america does nothing to solve the situation but whine. Another day where nobody outside of the us cares.


They have their own problems:

MEXICO: "Mexico registered 27,199 murders in 2011, or 24 per 100,000 people"

USA: All homicides (2011): 16,799, or 5.5 per 100,000 population

Private ownership of firearms is verboten in Mexico, yet their murder rate is FOUR TIMES that of the US, and their rates are climbing, while ares have fallen to the lowest level in four decades.

Go figure.
 
2013-01-05 04:38:02 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: 0 / 10. Who said anything about having it right at the table. Moron.


Well, you seemed to have assumed that him having the gun would have somehow saved him, so the options for that scenario are
A) He has the gun at the table with him (in your hypothetical scenario)

B) This man in your hypothetical scenario is, in fact,The Flash, or has precognitive abilities that allow you to guarantee that the man is able to get to the gun, get back to his family, and shoot the man before anyone gets shot.
 
2013-01-05 04:38:26 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: LordJiro: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.

FTFY.

0 / 10. Who said anything about having it right at the table. Moron.


You realize it's more likely Dad is the one who took the hostages in the first place, right?
 
2013-01-05 04:38:32 PM  

sweet-daddy-2: The first one or two threads I made popcorn.Now? Not even worth peanuts.
The same old rehtoric and non-viable solutions.
It's going to happen,one way or the other.Always has and always will.


Truly, the American answer to this issue. Nothing can be done. Why even try?
 
2013-01-05 04:39:13 PM  

Amos Quito: Private ownership of firearms is verboten in Mexico, yet their murder rate is FOUR TIMES that of the US, and their rates are climbing, while ares have fallen to the lowest level in four decades.

Go figure.



We happily supply Mexico with guns. They learned it from us.
 
2013-01-05 04:39:56 PM  

tblax: I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.


If that's the standard, then ALL guns were purchased legally. Every gun the Nazis used to kill Jews was procured or purchased legally. Every gun ever used by the police to kill innocent, unarmed people has been purchased legally. Every gun the US Marshals and FBI used at Ruby Ridge was purchased legally.

BTW, every length of rope used to hand runaway slaves, lynch black people, etc. was all purchased legally.

What's your point?
 
2013-01-05 04:40:57 PM  

mediablitz: We happily supply Mexico with guns. They learned it from us.


"'We" do? Who is 'we', and how are 'we' supplying them with Russian and Chinese full auto AK rifles?
 
2013-01-05 04:40:59 PM  
In before "Arming more people with guns would of prevented this tragedy"

/Okay... i'm late to the party.... way way too late.
 
2013-01-05 04:41:19 PM  

tblax: JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?

No, that would be ridiculous, of course. The difference is only one of those things was specifically designed to kill people, the rest weren't


Unfortunately, killing people is sometime still a valid need in this world.

And does the original intent of something really matter if someone turns it into a weapon and people end up dead anyway? In what way does the mental state of the original creator change anything?
 
2013-01-05 04:41:41 PM  

MorePeasPlease: GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.

Let's talk about them on Fark-that'll be productive!


Why not? Trolls aside, behind every Fark handle is a real person engaging in a real conversation even if it is taking place online. At least we're willing to have the conversation, even if the media and politicians won't.
 
2013-01-05 04:41:45 PM  

pedrop357: BTW, every length of rope used to handdhang runaway slaves, lynch black people, etc. was all purchased legally.

 
2013-01-05 04:41:47 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


Sadly, most of the time it's Dad shooting up his family, not some stranger.
 
2013-01-05 04:42:18 PM  
In before Aspergers...
 
2013-01-05 04:42:50 PM  

tblax: I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.


Then that would apply to any guns that weren't either stolen from the factory or manufactured by a non-licensed manufacturer, thus making the measure all-but pointless. :-|
 
2013-01-05 04:42:51 PM  

pedrop357: mediablitz: We happily supply Mexico with guns. They learned it from us.

"'We" do? Who is 'we', and how are 'we' supplying them with Russian and Chinese full auto AK rifles?


We meaning our ATFE and DOJ. Maybe you should learn a little bit before being willfully retarded.
 
2013-01-05 04:42:56 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.


http://www.fark.com/comments/7519459 here we have everyone suffering from multiple personality disorder.
 
2013-01-05 04:43:01 PM  
Mental health and education are always the first to be chopped from the bootstrappy, deficit-reducing types in Government.

Once that stops and we're able to have a rational discussion about gun culture (not necessary control, but CULTURE), will any intelligent thought come out of this.
 
2013-01-05 04:43:08 PM  

tblax: Dimensio: tblax: I wonder if he used guns purchased legally, like Holmes or Lanza.

Adam Lanza did not purchase any firearms legally.

I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.


Well, most are. Because having them stolen from the warehouse of gun shop is bad business.
 
2013-01-05 04:43:37 PM  

pedrop357: tblax: I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.

If that's the standard, then ALL guns were purchased legally. Every gun the Nazis used to kill Jews was procured or purchased legally. Every gun ever used by the police to kill innocent, unarmed people has been purchased legally. Every gun the US Marshals and FBI used at Ruby Ridge was purchased legally.

BTW, every length of rope used to hand runaway slaves, lynch black people, etc. was all purchased legally.

What's your point?


I believe the point is the day before Adam went to school Nancy Lanza was one of millions of responsible gun owners who shouldn't be punished for the crimes of a few nuts.
 
2013-01-05 04:44:34 PM  

JesseL: And does the original intent of something really matter if someone turns it into a weapon and people end up dead anyway? In what way does the mental state of the original creator change anything?


That's the thing they never admit, it doesn't. It makes them happier to know that a gun wasn't used, because gun control is an end unto itself for them.

A person who barricades some doors and lights a place on fire doesn't count in their world because he didn't use a gun. Matches, gasoline, etc. aren't 'intended' for that use, and if you follow left wing politics, you know that intentions are more important then methods or actions.
 
2013-01-05 04:46:04 PM  

vpb: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Like the creepy attraction to weapons that psychos have?


Or maybe something is wrong withe people of Aurora CO?

You really think you are going to be able to create an effective mental health treatment program for a very diverse population of 315 million? This like all other health care is one of those issues best addressed at the state and local level.
 
2013-01-05 04:46:40 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: I believe the point is the day before Adam went to school Nancy Lanza was one of millions of responsible gun owners who shouldn't be punished for the crimes of a few nuts.


If we're going to start cracking down on responsible and/or law abiding gun owners because someone might kill them and misuses their guns, are we also going to disarm the police when it happens to them?
 
2013-01-05 04:46:57 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: I believe the point is the day before Adam went to school Nancy Lanza was one of millions of responsible gun owners who shouldn't be punished for the crimes of a few nuts.


Sounds like Nancy should have pulled the trigger, as it were, on getting her son committed a bit earlier.
 
2013-01-05 04:47:46 PM  
We need to ban liberal cities. Far too many cities run by liberals have high murder rates.
 
2013-01-05 04:47:50 PM  

here to help: So the gun nuts new war cry is "BUT WE SHOULDZ BE LOOKING INTO MENTAL HEALTH!!1" and acting as if that was somehow never suggested by the gun control advocates before?

Wow... just... wow.


When was that? The early '80s when Reagan and Brady were shot by a crazy person and more hospitals were closed down? Bang up job the Brady people did there.
 
2013-01-05 04:48:45 PM  

WhoopAssWayne: I wonder what the liberal fascists will try to ban this time. They're already working on 2nd amendment and also the 1st with "violent" video games. How about the 3rd this time? You know, if more soldiers could commandeer homes, tragedies like this wouldn't happen as often. Think of the children and ban the 3rd amendment! No tragedy should remain unexploited!


I would ban people who believe that fascists can be liberals. Obviously too dim to think on their own.
 
2013-01-05 04:49:06 PM  

pedrop357: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: I believe the point is the day before Adam went to school Nancy Lanza was one of millions of responsible gun owners who shouldn't be punished for the crimes of a few nuts.

If we're going to start cracking down on responsible and/or law abiding gun owners because someone might kill them and misuses their guns, are we also going to disarm the police when it happens to them?


Yeah, okay. Sure, why not?
 
2013-01-05 04:49:08 PM  

mediablitz: Amos Quito: Private ownership of firearms is verboten in Mexico, yet their murder rate is FOUR TIMES that of the US, and their rates are climbing, while ares have fallen to the lowest level in four decades.

Go figure.


We happily supply Mexico with guns. They learned it from us.



Well, that was a fast and furious reply.

Hint: The fact that DRUGS ARE ILLEGAL is the PRIMARY cause for most murders in BOTH countries.
 
2013-01-05 04:49:14 PM  

SN1987a goes boom: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Not that mental health isn't an important issue, but what part of that article gave you any inclination as to the shooter's frame of mind? Sure, you are free to guess about it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that the shooter was anything more than a criminal as yet.


Anyone who considers shooting hostages an option under any circumstances is mentally ill you farking moron.
 
2013-01-05 04:49:48 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: pedrop357: tblax: I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.

If that's the standard, then ALL guns were purchased legally. Every gun the Nazis used to kill Jews was procured or purchased legally. Every gun ever used by the police to kill innocent, unarmed people has been purchased legally. Every gun the US Marshals and FBI used at Ruby Ridge was purchased legally.

BTW, every length of rope used to hand runaway slaves, lynch black people, etc. was all purchased legally.

What's your point?

I believe the point is the day before Adam went to school Nancy Lanza was one of millions of responsible gun owners who shouldn't be punished for the crimes of a few nuts.


So we should remove any means a person might have to potentially have someone else kill them, steal it, and then commit a crime?

Seriously - you offer nothing of value to the debate.
 
2013-01-05 04:50:00 PM  

pedrop357: That's the thing they never admit, it doesn't. It makes them happier to know that a gun wasn't used, because gun control is an end unto itself for them.


Damned straight.

Those people died FREE!

Free, before Fartbama and the UN could take away all their guns.
 
2013-01-05 04:50:55 PM  
Headlines you never see:
"Crazed lunatic with a baseball bat holds family hostage, 4 dead, including batsman".

Crazy people will always be crazy, sometimes people just snap, regardless of access to mental health services. We do not have to let them get their hands on firearms.
 
2013-01-05 04:50:57 PM  

GAT_00: I'm sure glad this still isn't time to talk about guns.


Such a dumb thing to keep repeating. You chickheads haven't shut your traps for years now.
 
2013-01-05 04:50:59 PM  

pedrop357: tblax: I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.

If that's the standard, then ALL guns were purchased legally. Every gun the Nazis used to kill Jews was procured or purchased legally. Every gun ever used by the police to kill innocent, unarmed people has been purchased legally. Every gun the US Marshals and FBI used at Ruby Ridge was purchased legally.

BTW, every length of rope used to hand runaway slaves, lynch black people, etc. was all purchased legally.

What's your point?


But rope isn't meant to kill people, so that makes it all better.
 
2013-01-05 04:51:40 PM  

aearra: Another day in america. Another mass murder. Another shoot out. Another day full of sound and fury signifying nothing as america does nothing to solve the situation but whine. Another day where nobody outside of the us cares.


another day where people let emotion overwhelm logic.
 
2013-01-05 04:52:16 PM  

Infernalist: You know what? fark it. If people are intent on pretending like guns aren't a problem and it's 'THE CRAZY PEOPLE ARE TO BLAME LOL', then we need to have a tragedy like this every goddamned day until people get tired of seeing dead people, or enough victims get pissed off enough to tar and feather the local NRA gun nuts in their respective communities.

Until then, BRING IT ON, BABY. Let's see how much blood America can take before she flinches.


Newsletter please.
 
2013-01-05 04:52:23 PM  

2wolves: WhoopAssWayne: I wonder what the liberal fascists will try to ban this time. They're already working on 2nd amendment and also the 1st with "violent" video games. How about the 3rd this time? You know, if more soldiers could commandeer homes, tragedies like this wouldn't happen as often. Think of the children and ban the 3rd amendment! No tragedy should remain unexploited!

I would ban people who believe that fascists can be liberals. Obviously too dim to think on their own.


That's why I like "statists". It encompasses tyranny from both ends of the left-right spectrum.
 
2013-01-05 04:52:24 PM  

aearra: Another day in america. Another mass murder. Another shoot out. Another day full of sound and fury signifying nothing as america does nothing to solve the situation but whine. Another day where nobody outside of the us cares.


Pretty much my thoughts as well.
I live in Denver and just realized this happened by going on Fark.
 
2013-01-05 04:52:56 PM  

SN1987a goes boom: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Not that mental health isn't an important issue, but what part of that article gave you any inclination as to the shooter's frame of mind? Sure, you are free to guess about it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that the shooter was anything more than a criminal as yet.


The fact that he killed 4 people seems to be a pretty solid clue to me. It seems to me that even "normal" criminals are averse to mass murder.

What is happening now is that there are more people who have no regard for their own lives and simply want to kill as many people as they can before they are taken out themselves. If such people are not classified as mentally ill, that term has absolutely no meaning.
 
2013-01-05 04:53:22 PM  
And here's the counter-article about someone shooting a home invader in self-defense. Of course no one can prove the person entering the premises would have killed anyone and a gun stopped them but that's how lopsided the argument is.

Woman shoots alleged home invader in Walton County
 
2013-01-05 04:54:08 PM  
If only those hostages had hostages...
 
2013-01-05 04:54:43 PM  

volodya: Clearly the answer to these situations is.....more guns!


I bet we'd get a resounding "Yes!" if we could ask the three victims who were shot to death.
 
2013-01-05 04:56:00 PM  
Interesting. Looks like the gunman was related to those who were killed.

So... the gun was already in the house? Yet another example of family killing family, courtesy of a gun for "protection"?
 
2013-01-05 04:56:10 PM  

jaytkay: Damned straight.

Those people died FREE!

Free, before Fartbama and the UN could take away all their guns.



They died at the hands of another. Gun control groups and all the concern trolls only care when it's a gun in the killer's hands. The fact that there are tens of millions of people who own hundreds of millions of guns, only tens of thousands of problems with those guns, areas with high gun ownership do not correspond to high crime with or without guns, AND our non-gun crime rate ALONE dwarfs most countries goes very far to suggest that it's not a gun availability problem driving our crime rate, it's a violence problem.

Banning and confiscating is about the the only way to make a dent in the small number of deaths by the very rare mass shooting. So, all guns to stop some of the 200 or so deaths in this year by mass killer. Now what about the other 8800 or so people killed by guns? You really think the criminals will just walk away or will hey just guns they managed to steal (look at Britain), knives, fire, etc.? If we shift a substantial number of deaths by gun to being deaths by something else, we may have saved lives.

Now, what about all the crime against people gun owners have stopped? How many more rapes, robberies, brutal beatings, home invasions, etc. are we willing to accept?

Focusing 'crime prevention' efforts on guns, or other tools, is short sighted, idiotic, distracting, and overall ineffective. Focus on the people doing it and why,
 
2013-01-05 04:56:50 PM  

stirfrybry: volodya: Clearly the answer to these situations is.....more guns!

I bet we'd get a resounding "Yes!" if we could ask the three victims who were shot to death.


Really? It looks like they were killed by a relative. Possibly by a gun already in the house. You think they wish the gun was there?
 
2013-01-05 04:56:53 PM  
This is what happens when you legalize marijuana.
 
2013-01-05 04:58:01 PM  
I just love how libs love to ignore the effectual use of firearms while spouting all of the evil. Look just 30 or so stories back and you see where a mom used a gun to stop an intruder and thus protect herself and 2 children. But I suppose in the liberal mind set, that is just fictional.

Y'all spend so much time panicking about the few gun tragedies that happen, and ignore the huge vast majority of guns and gun owners that NEVER are involved in a tragedy.

FACT: you are not safe, at all, in anything that you do. Life has dangers and you can not eliminate them.

/Not trying to minimize the tragedies that have occurred, every innocent death is a sad loss, but you are focusing on the wrong thing. Violence will happen regardless.
 
2013-01-05 04:58:17 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Bit'O'Gristle: LordJiro: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.

FTFY.

0 / 10. Who said anything about having it right at the table. Moron.

You realize it's more likely Dad is the one who took the hostages in the first place, right?


1. Dad snaps and kills family with gun at dinner table.

Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun
 
2013-01-05 04:58:29 PM  

JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?


fark that basic freedom shiat. it's crap and you know it. want to bear arms? join the goddamn well-regulated militia. until then, stfu or diaf. cuz right now, this shiat is anything BUT well-regulated.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:10 PM  

utah dude: once we ban aurora colorado all will be well. is columbine in aurora ?


No, but it's very close, and all are in the Denver area. I suggest a ban on high-altitude living.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:36 PM  

LessO2: Mental health and education are always the first to be chopped from the bootstrappy, deficit-reducing types in Government.

Once that stops and we're able to have a rational discussion about gun culture (not necessary control, but CULTURE), will any intelligent thought come out of this.


Or when there's a mass shooting, if the media elects to not publish the name of the shooter and their high chore, but instead focus on the names of the victims (if their family allows them to be released). That may take away the potential notoriety that these shooters are seeking. I'm not looking to restrict the media with legislation, but maybe realize that they're part of the problem.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:52 PM  

Farker Soze: But rope isn't meant to kill people, so that makes it all better.


Indeed. I'm sure that was comforting to all those people hung for helping runaway slaves, being runaway slaves, being black in a shiatty town.

Come to think of it, crosses were never meant to be used to crucify people. I wonder if it mattered to the people slowly dying on the cross that crosses weren't meant to be used that way.

All those heretic burned at the stake should have taken cold comfort in knowing that fire wasn't meant to kill and stakes weren't intended to be used this way.
 
2013-01-05 05:00:06 PM  
Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-05 05:00:13 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.
 
2013-01-05 05:00:16 PM  
score, not chore
 
2013-01-05 05:00:58 PM  

pedrop357: Come to think of it, crosses were never meant to be used to crucify people. I wonder if it mattered to the people slowly dying on the cross that crosses weren't meant to be used that way.


What? Yes they were. That was where the originated. That was the entire f*cking point of them, they were execution devices.
 
2013-01-05 05:01:12 PM  

piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun



Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.
 
2013-01-05 05:02:18 PM  

mediablitz: sweet-daddy-2: The first one or two threads I made popcorn.Now? Not even worth peanuts.
The same old rehtoric and non-viable solutions.
It's going to happen,one way or the other.Always has and always will.

Truly, the American answer to this issue. Nothing can be done. Why even try?


The American reality is that nothing can be done by society. Only by individuals, and only one at a time. Organized action on such a hot issue is always going to be either ineffective or misguided.

We just have to hope that lots of individuals, including us, acting alone to do what we think is the right thing will be enough.
 
2013-01-05 05:02:47 PM  

Felgraf: What? Yes they were. That was where the originated. That was the entire f*cking point of them, they were execution devices.


Good point.

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill
 
2013-01-05 05:04:52 PM  

topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


These facts get posted in every thread (once or twice by me). Few people seem to care.
 
2013-01-05 05:05:12 PM  

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


At least they're still having dinner.

This probably started over an argument over what movie they were going to go see.
 
2013-01-05 05:06:17 PM  

buckler: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.


Maybe because it's stupid and irresponsible fire a weapon into a crowd of screaming people. Bullets don't just magically stop once they enter a human body. Try learning something about what you're talking about if you want people to take you seriously.
 
2013-01-05 05:09:05 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You realize it's more likely Dad is the one who took the hostages in the first place, right?


mediablitz: the gun was already in the house?



Then who was phone?
 
2013-01-05 05:09:17 PM  

duffblue: Maybe because it's stupid and irresponsible fire a weapon into a crowd of screaming people. Bullets don't just magically stop once they enter a human body. Try learning something about what you're talking about if you want people to take you seriously.


And that's one point I was getting at. People think (as I saw in the aftermath of the first Aurora shooting), that they can fire willy-nilly into a crowd of screaming, rushing people trying desperately to escape, and magically only hit the gunman. Thanks for helping to support my point.
 
2013-01-05 05:09:51 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?
 
2013-01-05 05:09:53 PM  

buckler: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.


It's very doubtful that there were any CCW holders packing in the mall since I've yet to see a mall that allows you to carry your firearm and most CCW holders are law abiding citizens.
 
2013-01-05 05:10:25 PM  

brukmann: SN1987a goes boom: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Not that mental health isn't an important issue, but what part of that article gave you any inclination as to the shooter's frame of mind? Sure, you are free to guess about it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that the shooter was anything more than a criminal as yet.

Anyone who considers shooting hostages an option under any circumstances is mentally ill you farking moron.


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

/Also, if you have to resort to name calling, then your argument is probably BS.
 
2013-01-05 05:11:18 PM  

buckler: And that's one point I was getting at. People think (as I saw in the aftermath of the first Aurora shooting), that they can fire willy-nilly into a crowd of screaming, rushing people trying desperately to escape, and magically only hit the gunman. Thanks for helping to support my point.


Crowd and bystander don't stop the police form firing like crazy and hitting everyone else and each other as much as the target. Average citizens? not so much. It should be easy to find all the stories where they shoot an attacker and wound/kill innocent people too.
 
2013-01-05 05:11:22 PM  

vudutek: JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?

fark that basic freedom shiat. it's crap and you know it. want to bear arms? join the goddamn well-regulated militia. until then, stfu or diaf. cuz right now, this shiat is anything BUT well-regulated.


#1 According to 10 USC § 311 I am in fact a member of the militia.

#2 The idea that the right to keep and bear arms is predicated on militia service has been thoroughly dismissed by the Supreme Court. It's a non-starter for a legal argument. Give it up.

#3 I'd have the right to own guns even if it weren't protected by the constitution. I'd have that right even if the state explicitly denied it, because it's directly implied by my self-ownership.

Owning myself implies the right to prevent others from infringing upon that ownership by killing, imprisoning, or enslaving me. Having that right to defend myself would be meaningless if I were powerless to enforce it. Effectively defending myself requires tools, and the most effective tools in existence today for defending myself are firearms.

Pass whatever laws you like, but I'll keep my guns.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:04 PM  

robodog: It's very doubtful that there were any CCW holders packing in the mall since I've yet to see a mall that allows you to carry your firearm and most CCW holders are law abiding citizens.


And if they're concealed, how would the mall know unless they frisked everyone coming in? Your faith in humanity is charming.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:30 PM  

efgeise: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?


The family in story 2 is pretty farked up if they can just go back to eating dinner after witnessing the dad kill a guy.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:31 PM  

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)
 
2013-01-05 05:12:35 PM  

pedrop357: .

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill


Haha, yes, it's totally a tactic that only the left wing uses. Right. Please, keep telling yourself that.

For those calling for 'better mental health screening', I do ask a question.

How exactly do you plan to implement this? Pay for it? Are you OK with people being held against their will? What checks will there be in place to make sure those who get committed involuntarily (BEFORE commiting, or attempting to commit, any act that endangers another) are actually insane, and are being evaluated fairly and objectively? (This is actually a HUGE problem. In a science/medical field that is currently almost *Entirely* observation based, observation bias is a dangerous son of a biatch).

And before you go off on me as ONNA DEM GUN GRABBIN LBIERALS!, no. I'm not certain what gun control measures (IF ANY) could, in fact, prevent stuff like this. Or even make them less common.
However, I'd also like those who are super-pro-second ammendment to ALSO be honest. Because I've seen people biatching when news or radio shows claimed that some people purchased the AR-rifles because, well, they thought they were cool! I've seen people going "What, no! That's a horrible mischaracterization, no one does that!"

And yet, bushmaster, you know, *had advertisements* to that very effect. That it should be purchased simply because it was "manly".

So, you know, I'd like some actual goddamn honesty from both sides. And perhaps some attempt to at least understand where people are coming from on different issues. Because, you know what? I can understand why people might feel any form of gun regulation is evil. I disagree, but I can understand where they come from. I'm not seeing a whole lot of that from the other side, but that could be the aforementioned 'confirmation bias' being a biatch.

Or perhaps a bit of honesty and humility from everyone is a bit too much to ask for.
 
2013-01-05 05:13:57 PM  

piglet: Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)



Lack of availability of guns doesn't stop the Japanese from killing themselves as much or more as we do.
 
2013-01-05 05:17:21 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle:

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-01-05 05:17:31 PM  
This killed my boner :c
 
2013-01-05 05:17:33 PM  

pedrop357: piglet: Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)


Lack of availability of guns doesn't stop the Japanese from killing themselves as much or more as we do.


Yes, but his argument is that a gun is a lot more effective, a lot harder to recover from if people catch you after the fact, and a lot easier to do in the spur of the moment if you have access to one (before you suggest "Jumping off a bridge is hard to recover from and super effective, too!", I wish to point out that very few people own tall bridges within their homes. Nor do many people have trains within their homes, and in theory people can be pulled off the train track-there's likely to be other people around). He has even pointed out he is not anti-gun, he IS pointing out that, yes, they ARE more effective suicide weapons, and that it's stupid, and, quite frankly, dishonest and childish to pretend that they are not.

Do you disagree?
 
2013-01-05 05:18:13 PM  

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


The problem is though that, statistically, a gun in a house yields a higher chance of someone committing suicide a gun not in a house. Mainly because the gun offers the (hopefully) quickest and least-painful way of kill yourself.

That said, I am both a fan of mental health help and *smart* gun control. But I doubt either will come about, because A) gun control is inherently bad, according to the NRA, and B) increasing mental health care means spending money on it, and we've all seen how the GOP "dislikes" spending.

So, I don't see either of these problems getting fixed while the current crop of politicians are in place. The current left are too gun-control happy, and the current right are too batshiat to want to fix the problems.
 
2013-01-05 05:18:52 PM  

buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario


Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.
 
2013-01-05 05:21:33 PM  

JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.


Wishful thinking.
 
2013-01-05 05:23:13 PM  

Felgraf: Yes, but his argument is that a gun is a lot more effective, a lot harder to recover from if people catch you after the fact, and a lot easier to do in the spur of the moment if you have access to one (before you suggest "Jumping off a bridge is hard to recover from and super effective, too!", I wish to point out that very few people own tall bridges within their homes. Nor do many people have trains within their homes, and in theory people can be pulled off the train track-there's likely to be other people around). He has even pointed out he is not anti-gun, he IS pointing out that, yes, they ARE more effective suicide weapons, and that it's stupid, and, quite frankly, dishonest and childish to pretend that they are not.

Do you disagree?



I suppose. We'd have to know how often people attempt in countries like Japan, Australia, etc.

If guns are 90% effective here and we have 100 attempts of which 90 succeed, is that better overall then a country where 300 people attempt with a 50% success rate? That means a lot more suicidal, depressed people. Still better to try and deal with the suicidal people and not their tools.
 
2013-01-05 05:23:18 PM  

JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.


Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).
 
2013-01-05 05:24:09 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.



Because the right has always considered violence a mental health issue where the perps require hospital care and medication, not prison time.
 
2013-01-05 05:24:25 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.


Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?
 
2013-01-05 05:25:21 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.


That is received wisdom now. I actually read the daily NRA spam, and every time a "fact" like that is included, the gun wankers immediately begin parroting it on Fark.

They've got a whole canon of bullshiat stories and arguments, straight from the NRA.
 
2013-01-05 05:25:35 PM  

buckler: JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).


http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-1 83 593571.html
 
2013-01-05 05:27:16 PM  

Rich Cream: And here's the counter-article about someone shooting a home invader in self-defense. Of course no one can prove the person entering the premises would have killed anyone and a gun stopped them but that's how lopsided the argument is.

Woman shoots alleged home invader in Walton County



This is worthy of quoting.

"According to Walton County Chief Deputy Keith Brooks, the woman was working upstairs when she spotted a man outside the window of her home on Henderson Ridge Lane.  The woman, who was home with her 9-year-old twins, heard the man knock at the door. She called her husband, who said that he wasn't expecting anyone at the house.

The woman said that the man went to his vehicle and returned with a crowbar. The man then forced his way inside and rummaged through the home.
The woman grabbed a revolver fled into a crawlspace with her children.

When the man opened the crawlspace door, she fired six shots with her .38 revolver, hitting the man several times.
"She comes out of the crawlspace and she's standing over the perpetrator, who she says is crying, telling her to stop shooting," said Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman.

The alleged would-be burglar -- now wounded --  fled the house, jumped into his vehicle and attempted to drive away, according to Brooks. He lost control of the vehicle and crashed. Deputies arrived on scene and took him into custody.

The man, identified by authorities as 32-year-old Paul Slater of Loganville, was taken to Gwinnett Medical Center. He is listed in critical condition."

END STORY

Clearly this is a selfish, right wing pigheaded woman who does NOT CARE about the well being of burglars / rapists / murderers, and has NO RESPECT for the families of those who lost their loved ones in Aurora or at Sandy Hook.

SHE IS THE PROBLEM!


/And I'll bet she's racist, too!
 
2013-01-05 05:27:54 PM  

JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?


I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.
 
2013-01-05 05:27:54 PM  

JesseL: buckler: JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-1 83 593571.html


Interesting, and food for thought. Thanks.
 
2013-01-05 05:28:38 PM  

pedrop357: I suppose. We'd have to know how often people attempt in countries like Japan, Australia, etc.

If guns are 90% effective here and we have 100 attempts of which 90 succeed, is that better overall then a country where 300 people attempt with a 50% success rate? That means a lot more suicidal, depressed people. Still better to try and deal with the suicidal people and not their tools.


Where did I, or the original poster, *suggest* that we needed to deal with their tools?

As I said in my earlier post, I'm pissed people aren't being honest, and are just prentending that guns AREN'T effective killing machines, or better for suicicide, etc, like you seemed to be implying.

Why, look! Even in the person's post!

": Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)"

Being dishonest about the lethality of guns (and also denying the fact that, yeah, some gun manufacturers have sold their guns angling for the "IT'S COOOOOLLLLL to own this gun! You're not MANLY if you don't own it!) is only going to hurt your cause in the long run.

We're not going to be able to have a discussion about mental health, guns, and how they relate to each other (because, should we, say, improve mental health and remove all restrictions on guns?... even restrictions like, say, checking to see if the person is undergoing depression/on anti-psychotics-etc?), until people can be f*cking honest. And that includes being honest about guns lethality. Even if it makes you uncomfortable. Or makes you afraid that people are going to use that discussion to try to ban it. Or whatever.

/Not to say you were denying the fact that guns have been sold and MARKETED on the cool factor, just that I know a lot of people had.
 
2013-01-05 05:29:01 PM  

Felgraf: pedrop357: .

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill

Haha, yes, it's totally a tactic that only the left wing uses. Right. Please, keep telling yourself that.

For those calling for 'better mental health screening', I do ask a question.

How exactly do you plan to implement this? Pay for it? Are you OK with people being held against their will? What checks will there be in place to make sure those who get committed involuntarily (BEFORE commiting, or attempting to commit, any act that endangers another) are actually insane, and are being evaluated fairly and objectively? (This is actually a HUGE problem. In a science/medical field that is currently almost *Entirely* observation based, observation bias is a dangerous son of a biatch).

And before you go off on me as ONNA DEM GUN GRABBIN LBIERALS!, no. I'm not certain what gun control measures (IF ANY) could, in fact, prevent stuff like this. Or even make them less common.
However, I'd also like those who are super-pro-second ammendment to ALSO be honest. Because I've seen people biatching when news or radio shows claimed that some people purchased the AR-rifles because, well, they thought they were cool! I've seen people going "What, no! That's a horrible mischaracterization, no one does that!"

And yet, bushmaster, you know, *had advertisements* to that very effect. That it should be purchased simply because it was "manly".

So, you know, I'd like some actual goddamn honesty from both sides. And perhaps some attempt to at least understand where people are coming from on different issues. Because, you know what? I can understand why people might feel any form of gun regulation is evil. I disagree, but I can understand where they come from. I'm not seeing a whole lot of that from the other side, but that could be the aforementioned 'confirmation bias' being a biatch.

Or perhaps a bit of honesty and humility from everyone is a bit too much to ask for.


I bought my AR for fun. I hunt deer and shoot targets with it. Both are fun. I will se it in a self defense scenario if that ever happens, but that will not be "fun" in any sense of the word and is very unlikely to happen. Once we see the proposals put on the table we will be able to better respond, but what I have seen proposed will not make us safer - it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.
 
2013-01-05 05:29:12 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.


So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.
 
2013-01-05 05:30:04 PM  
Let me make this point again...

THE RIGHT WING GUN NUTS DID NOT CARE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH UNTIL A BUNCH OF KIDS GOT MOWED DOWN BY A GUY WHO STOLE HIS GUN NUT MOTHER'S LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS AND THEY HAD NO FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!!

You do not care about mental health. You only care about your f*cking guns! You FOUGHT restrictions that would help prevent tragedies like Connecticut. Claiming the mental health stance (which has been a left leaning policy for ages) as if it's your own NOW is absolutely freaking disgusting!!

But... hopefully the mentally ill can get some help now because of your selfish lies. Just don't start screaming about funding after the spotlight has faded.
 
2013-01-05 05:31:09 PM  

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.

So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.


Quote it.
 
2013-01-05 05:31:42 PM  

efgeise: That said, I am both a fan of mental health help and *smart* gun control. But I doubt either will come about, because A) gun control is inherently bad, according to the NRA, and B) increasing mental health care means spending money on it, and we've all seen how the GOP "dislikes" spending.

So, I don't see either of these problems getting fixed while the current crop of politicians are in place. The current left are too gun-control happy, and the current right are too batshiat to want to fix the problems.


Indeed.

My take on the situation is that healthy, well-adjusted, prosperous people are extremely unlikely to commit violent crime regardless of the availability of firearms. By working to improve people's lot in society, a lot of the factors that drive violent crime can be reduced (though never truly eliminated). I'm in full support of measures that provide people with good healthcare (both physical and mental), treating personal drug use as a public health issue rather than a crime, helping people to improve their lot in life, working to get people out of the cycle of multi-generational welfare dependence, gangs, lack of economic opportunity and social mobility, etc. It'll cost money, sure, and I for one think that it'd be money well-spent (assuming it isn't squandered, like so much the government does).

On the enforcement side, I'd much rather see the authorities going after drug smugglers, gun traffickers, and violent criminals than individuals who use drugs for personal use.

Violent crime is a symptom of underlying issues. Treating the symptoms does little if any to treat the cause of the problem.

Alas, I agree that little is going to be accomplished with the current batch of politicians. There's little I can do other than write letters to my members of Congress, even though it's not likely to do much. At least it gives a bit of money to the post office.
 
2013-01-05 05:31:58 PM  

Felgraf: Where did I, or the original poster, *suggest* that we needed to deal with their tools?

As I said in my earlier post, I'm pissed people aren't being honest, and are just prentending that guns AREN'T effective killing machines, or better for suicicide, etc, like you seemed to be implying.

Why, look! Even in the person's post!

": Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)"

Being dishonest about the lethality of guns (and also denying the fact that, yeah, some gun manufacturers have sold their guns angling for the "IT'S COOOOOLLLLL to own this gun! You're not MANLY if you don't own it!) is only going to hurt your cause in the long run.

We're not going to be able to have a discussion about mental health, guns, and how they relate to each other (because, should we, say, improve mental health and remove all restrictions on guns?... even restrictions like, say, checking to see if the person is undergoing depression/on anti-psychotics-etc?), until people can be f*cking honest. And that includes being honest about guns lethality. Even if it makes you uncomfortable. Or makes you afraid that people are going to use that discussion to try to ban it. Or whatever.

/Not to say you were denying the fact that guns have been sold and MARKETED on the cool factor, just that I know a lot of people


I've never disputed that guns are lethal or even more lethal, just that it's irrelevant in the larger scheme of things.
 
2013-01-05 05:32:01 PM  

here to help: Let me make this point again...

THE RIGHT WING GUN NUTS DID NOT CARE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH UNTIL A BUNCH OF KIDS GOT MOWED DOWN BY A GUY WHO STOLE HIS GUN NUT MOTHER'S LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS AND THEY HAD NO FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!!

You do not care about mental health. You only care about your f*cking guns! You FOUGHT restrictions that would help prevent tragedies like Connecticut. Claiming the mental health stance (which has been a left leaning policy for ages) as if it's your own NOW is absolutely freaking disgusting!!

But... hopefully the mentally ill can get some help now because of your selfish lies. Just don't start screaming about funding after the spotlight has faded.


I also care about Chipotle.
 
2013-01-05 05:32:14 PM  

not2conceited: I bought my AR for fun. I hunt deer and shoot targets with it. Both are fun. I will se it in a self defense scenario if that ever happens, but that will not be "fun" in any sense of the word and is very unlikely to happen. Once we see the proposals put on the table we will be able to better respond, but what I have seen proposed will not make us safer - it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.


That's fair. As I said, I don't know what gun control would work. Or if ANY would work. I'd rather do it not at all than do it halfassed.

But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.
 
2013-01-05 05:32:50 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.

So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.

Quote it.


Scroll down you lazy twit. Seriously - it's just a few posts down, likely in blue letters as it's a link.
 
2013-01-05 05:33:12 PM  

not2conceited: it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.



And whether he shoots 5 people or 30 before getting tackled while reloading, it won't matter cuz...oh wait.
 
2013-01-05 05:33:43 PM  

ronaprhys: I also care about Chipotle.


God damnit now I want chipotle.
 
2013-01-05 05:34:03 PM  

SN1987a goes boom: efgeise: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?

The family in story 2 is pretty farked up if they can just go back to eating dinner after witnessing the dad kill a guy.


I can only imagine them eating KFC while screaming "FREEDOM" at each other with mouthfuls of food before masturbating each other and shooting their guns into the ceiling
 
2013-01-05 05:35:17 PM  

Felgraf: ronaprhys: I also care about Chipotle.

God damnit now I want chipotle.


I will have it in about 2 hours. A nice steak fajita burrito. No sauce, but double cheese and lettuce. I'll chase it down with SoCo/OJ. This will make me happy.
 
2013-01-05 05:35:44 PM  

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.

So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.

Quote it.

Scroll down you lazy twit. Seriously - it's just a few posts down, likely in blue letters as it's a link.


I've read it. Nothing in there but speculation by someone who wants it to be true.
 
2013-01-05 05:35:54 PM  

pedrop357: I've never disputed that guns are lethal or even more lethal, just that it's irrelevant in the larger scheme of things.


Really? You seemed really focused on downplaying how guns were just as lethal as knives and ropes.

If it's irrelevant, then we should ONLY focus on mental health screening, right? No need to even focus on making sure we keep the guns out of the hands of people, say, on antipsychotics or who have criminal backgrounds or whatnot?

/Or, if we SHOULD do that, should we also prevent them from purchasing knives, ropes, sleeping pills, and bridges?
//If the answer to *that* is no, then yeah, actually, the lethality of guns is, at least in a small way, relevant.
 
2013-01-05 05:36:27 PM  

Felgraf: But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.


If I get killed by stabbing, it IS just as bad as being killed by a Bushmaster. If I lose use of a limb or am paralyzed after being stabbed, it IS every bit as bad.
 
2013-01-05 05:37:00 PM  

TheHappyCanadian: SN1987a goes boom: efgeise: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?

The family in story 2 is pretty farked up if they can just go back to eating dinner after witnessing the dad kill a guy.

I can only imagine them eating KFC while screaming "FREEDOM" at each other with mouthfuls of food before masturbating each other and shooting their guns into the ceiling


Too bad mom and the twins were still hiding in the attic.
 
2013-01-05 05:37:24 PM  

Felgraf: not2conceited: I bought my AR for fun. I hunt deer and shoot targets with it. Both are fun. I will se it in a self defense scenario if that ever happens, but that will not be "fun" in any sense of the word and is very unlikely to happen. Once we see the proposals put on the table we will be able to better respond, but what I have seen proposed will not make us safer - it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.

That's fair. As I said, I don't know what gun control would work. Or if ANY would work. I'd rather do it not at all than do it halfassed.

But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.


What's "a bushmaster?"
 
2013-01-05 05:37:47 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.

So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.

Quote it.

Scroll down you lazy twit. Seriously - it's just a few posts down, likely in blue letters as it's a link.

I've read it. Nothing in there but speculation by someone who wants it to be true.


Good to know you can prove that and conveniently use that to dismiss the possibility. You are disingenuous. Again - you bring nothing to the debate that holds any value.
 
2013-01-05 05:38:45 PM  

ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.


Just quote your "evidence", jackass.
 
2013-01-05 05:38:46 PM  

topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


Who do you think you are comin' in here with your facts and statistics? Don't you know this is a "ZOMG GUNZ ARE EBIL!!" thread?
 
2013-01-05 05:39:03 PM  

Felgraf: Really? You seemed really focused on downplaying how guns were just as lethal as knives and ropes.


No, that the obsession some have with gun violence is misguided. People without guns manage to do quite a bit of damage, and there's no evidence to suggest overall violence would actually go down
 
2013-01-05 05:39:06 PM  

here to help: You do not care about mental health. You only care about your f*cking guns! You FOUGHT restrictions that would help prevent tragedies like Connecticut. Claiming the mental health stance (which has been a left leaning policy for ages) as if it's your own NOW is absolutely freaking disgusting!!

But... hopefully the mentally ill can get some help now because of your selfish lies. Just don't start screaming about funding after the spotlight has faded.



Which restrictions in particular are you talking about?
 
2013-01-05 05:39:23 PM  

pedrop357: Felgraf: But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.

If I get killed by stabbing, it IS just as bad as being killed by a Bushmaster. If I lose use of a limb or am paralyzed after being stabbed, it IS every bit as bad.


So if you lose a limb or an arm after being stabbed, it's just as bad as being killed if you were shot?

So if someone attacks, say, a bunch of school children with a knife, your argument is that the outcome will be the same as if he attacks a bunch of school children with the gun?

/Again, not in favor of banning all guns, or a half-assed assault weapons ban or whatever.
//But I'd, again, like some honesty.
 
2013-01-05 05:39:56 PM  
Gee... wonder which videogames this guy played.. *eyeroll*
 
2013-01-05 05:41:18 PM  

tblax: Dimensio: tblax: I wonder if he used guns purchased legally, like Holmes or Lanza.

Adam Lanza did not purchase any firearms legally.

I didn't say he did. I said he used guns purchased legally.


99.999% of all guns everywhere are purchased legally, at least initially. How many gun factories or shipments from manufacturers are ripped off on a regular basis? Retard. Gee someone got stabbed. I bet that knife was purchased legally. I don't think anyone makes shanks to commit murder outside of prison. A vehicular homicide? Bet that car was purchased legally. In the end, murder is an older thing than firearms, as is psychosis. You won't end either, regardless of what you do. And if you think the gun was the deciding factor in sandy hook, may I refer you to the knife attacks against school children, think it was in China. Wasn't a one time incident either. In fact it happens pretty regularly. It's almost as if banning the "deadliest" weapon just makes the next weapon down the new deadliest. And if you want to argue that mass killings will be gone in a disarmed society, two words: suicide bomber. Bottom line, in a world completely without weapons or anything like weapons there are a myriad of ways to kill. Strangulation, pushing off a cliff, etc.
 
2013-01-05 05:41:26 PM  

Felgraf: pedrop357: Felgraf: But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.

If I get killed by stabbing, it IS just as bad as being killed by a Bushmaster. If I lose use of a limb or am paralyzed after being stabbed, it IS every bit as bad.

So if you lose a limb or an arm after being stabbed, it's just as bad as being killed if you were shot?

So if someone attacks, say, a bunch of school children with a knife, your argument is that the outcome will be the same as if he attacks a bunch of school children with the gun?

/Again, not in favor of banning all guns, or a half-assed assault weapons ban or whatever.
//But I'd, again, like some honesty.


That's not the argument he was making, a little reading comprehension goes a long way.
 
2013-01-05 05:41:49 PM  

Abox: And whether he shoots 5 people or 30 before getting tackled while reloading, it won't matter cuz...oh wait.


[citation something something]
 
2013-01-05 05:42:02 PM  

duffblue: Felgraf: not2conceited: I bought my AR for fun. I hunt deer and shoot targets with it. Both are fun. I will se it in a self defense scenario if that ever happens, but that will not be "fun" in any sense of the word and is very unlikely to happen. Once we see the proposals put on the table we will be able to better respond, but what I have seen proposed will not make us safer - it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.

That's fair. As I said, I don't know what gun control would work. Or if ANY would work. I'd rather do it not at all than do it halfassed.

But I'm also f*cking tired of people pretending that using a knife would be JUST AS BAD as using a bushmaster. Like the knife can shoot bullets, or teleport, or render the user invulnerable or something.

What's "a bushmaster?"


Bah, screwed up, sorry. I farked up the words in my head because I'd been talked about Bushmaster's advertising earlier, I realize "a bushmaster" is not, in fact, a gun.

And I did not mean to imply the poster as one of the people pretending the knife was as bad as a gun, which I realize I inadvertently did.
 
2013-01-05 05:42:06 PM  

Felgraf: So if you lose a limb or an arm after being stabbed, it's just as bad as being killed if you were shot?

So if someone attacks, say, a bunch of school children with a knife, your argument is that the outcome will be the same as if he attacks a bunch of school children with the gun?

/Again, not in favor of banning all guns, or a half-assed assault weapons ban or whatever.
//But I'd, again, like some honesty.



Not all gun shots result in death. death is death, maiming is maiming. If a guy runs a bunch of kids over at a crosswalk, are they any less dead or injured because the guy didn't use a gun?
 
2013-01-05 05:43:51 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.


I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.
 
2013-01-05 05:43:51 PM  

Felgraf: For those calling for 'better mental health screening', I do ask a question.

How exactly do you plan to implement this? Pay for it? Are you OK with people being held against their will? What checks will there be in place to make sure those who get committed involuntarily (BEFORE commiting, or attempting to commit, any act that endangers another) are actually insane, and are being evaluated fairly and objectively? (This is actually a HUGE problem. In a science/medical field that is currently almost *Entirely* observation based, observation bias is a dangerous son of a biatch).



This should get posted at the beginning of every Fark thread about guns and/or multiple murders.
 
2013-01-05 05:44:40 PM  
SN1987a goes boom:

I think trolling may in part be an outlet of self-gratification for those who have reached the physical limit of masturbation.
 
2013-01-05 05:44:45 PM  

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.

I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.


Nice concession speech.
 
2013-01-05 05:45:06 PM  
REGARDING MENTAL HEALTH

In the US and Mexico, nearly 44,000 murders were committed in 2011 alone.

The vast majority of these murders were related to illegal drugs - to trafficking, turf wars, revenge hits, or to crimes committed by people seeking to feed their drug habits.

I have to question the collective sanity of any nation that would maintain the anti-drug policies that feed this senseless carnage.
 
2013-01-05 05:45:53 PM  
If EVERYONE had a gun then no one would ever get shot.

/common sense.
 
2013-01-05 05:46:47 PM  

ElBarto79: If EVERYONE had a gun then no one would ever get shot.

/common sense.


I'm sure there's a Laffer curve in there somewhere.
 
2013-01-05 05:46:54 PM  

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.

I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.


"You know when you make up a statisic you always use 83%" --Ted Mosby
 
2013-01-05 05:47:13 PM  
www.freeimagehosting.net
 
2013-01-05 05:47:35 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.

I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.

Nice concession speech.


Not at all - anyone who spends any time in these threads knows your schtick. Throw out a bit of snark, get called on it, abandon the thread. Just like here - an eyewitness gives a story, you immediately dismiss it. However, had it gone the other way (to support your case) you'd be all over it.
 
2013-01-05 05:48:23 PM  

Amos Quito: REGARDING MENTAL HEALTH

In the US and Mexico, nearly 44,000 murders were committed in 2011 alone.

The vast majority of these murders were related to illegal drugs - to trafficking, turf wars, revenge hits, or to crimes committed by people seeking to feed their drug habits.

I have to question the collective sanity of any nation that would maintain the anti-drug policies that feed this senseless carnage.


Holmes? Mr. Hostage-Taker here? Whatchou talkin' 'bout, Amos?
 
2013-01-05 05:48:54 PM  

Wulfman: Which restrictions in particular are you talking about?


Depends on the level of whackjobbiness. Some would have preferred that ANYONE (but preferably not minorities) could just walk into anywhere, buy a gun and start wandering around jerking it off.

Now that's not to say there aren't REASONABLE conservatives who have known for a looong time that SOME restrictions are necessary. But a lot of those people are just as disgusted as I am and perhaps MORE because they've seen their political ideologies hijacked by unreasonable, self serving, disingenuous psychopaths.
 
2013-01-05 05:49:55 PM  

Muta: He could have drowned them in a pool.


The only thing that can save us is a good guy with a pool.
 
2013-01-05 05:50:46 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Holmes? Mr. Hostage-Taker here? Whatchou talkin' 'bout, Amos?


Extremely rare events in a nation of 360 million, and barely accounting for 2% of all homicides in any given year. Nice try though.
 
2013-01-05 05:51:00 PM  
Bit'O'Gristle:
Strawman story 1.

Strawman story 2.

B.O.G, have you considered moving to a better neighbourhood?
 
2013-01-05 05:51:07 PM  
What is up with Aurora Colorardo?
 
2013-01-05 05:51:26 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


More like:

1. Gunman breaks in
2. Dad goes for his gun, drops his keys and can't get the lock off, now also can't open the locked ammo box
3. Gunman shoots him, rapes the daughter, kicks the dog
4. Police storm the house and kill everybody inside
 
2013-01-05 05:51:27 PM  

lobotomy survivor: The only thing that can save us is a good guy with a pool.


We need that Yo Dawg guy here.
 
2013-01-05 05:51:58 PM  

Felgraf: pedrop357: piglet: Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)


Lack of availability of guns doesn't stop the Japanese from killing themselves as much or more as we do.

Yes, but his argument is that a gun is a lot more effective, a lot harder to recover from if people catch you after the fact, and a lot easier to do in the spur of the moment if you have access to one (before you suggest "Jumping off a bridge is hard to recover from and super effective, too!", I wish to point out that very few people own tall bridges within their homes. Nor do many people have trains within their homes, and in theory people can be pulled off the train track-there's likely to be other people around). He has even pointed out he is not anti-gun, he IS pointing out that, yes, they ARE more effective suicide weapons, and that it's stupid, and, quite frankly, dishonest and childish to pretend that they are not.

Do you disagree?


It's also irrelevant to the whole gun control debate. Depending on which list you choose, there are between two and three dozen countries with a higher per capita suicide rate than the US. Several of them have have very strict control of firearms, and yet their citizens seem to find effective means of killing themselves.
 
2013-01-05 05:52:09 PM  

ronaprhys: an eyewitness gives a story


Just show us all the part that lends credence to the theory that the Clackamas shooter quit because he saw another gun.

Besides you and CCW wanting it to be true, that is.
 
2013-01-05 05:52:48 PM  

duffblue: That's not the argument he was making, a little reading comprehension goes a long way.


Actually, judging by his next post, that's the impression that I am getting: That all things can be deadly, so clearly the degree of lethality doesn't matter.

However, again, confirmation bias can be a biatch, and I know how a third party can sometimes sort of... restate what one side is saying, to make it clearer to the other side. (So if you've got a better idea/explanation, I would really appreciate it-and this is not sarcasm.)

pedrop357: Not all gun shots result in death. death is death, maiming is maiming. If a guy runs a bunch of kids over at a crosswalk, are they any less dead or injured because the guy didn't use a gun?


Yep, death is death, and maiming is maiming, and perhaps we are talking at cross purposes, or about different things. I'll try to explain my point more clearly, and I suppose I should apologize for some of the above snarkiness, I was growing a bit frustrated.

I am arguing that some things are, in fact, *more likely* to cause death. I realize that not all shots are fatal. This is not golden eye, we are not playing 1 Hit, 1 Kill, Slaps in the Facility. Even injuries that one would think SHOULD be fatal (getting shot through the head) are survivable (sometimes.)

But if we're going to talk about mental health as a result of these shootings, we again need to be honest. Would you, or would you not, advocate that a person on antipsychotics should be able to purchase weapons (if we improve mental health care in this country). What if the person were involuntarily committed, released, but still didn't think they had an issue?

If you feel the answer to the above is "No, they shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun", then, yeah, guns (and their lethality) ARE kind of relevant, to an extent. It wouldn't necessarily require any NEW gun laws, mind you-I think existing gun laws *would* cover the above scenario?

Basically, if we KNOW a guy is psychotic or at strong risk of a psychotic break, I would rather them, at the very least, not able to easily purchase a firearm (again, I realize existing laws *already* cover this.) Them purchasing a knife and attempting to attack a group of schoolchildren would ALSO be bad, but, well...

If a guy attacks a group of schoolchildren with a knife, are they more or less likely to survive than if he attacks them with a gun?

We kind of have at least some degree of empiracal evidence on this. Can't draw *many* conclusions from it, though, because it is a (THANKFULLY) rather small data set.
 
2013-01-05 05:53:24 PM  

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.

I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.

Nice concession speech.

Not at all - anyone who spends any time in these threads knows your schtick. Throw out a bit of snark, get called on it, abandon the thread. Just like here - an eyewitness gives a story, you immediately dismiss it. However, had it gone the other way (to support your case) you'd be all over it.


I thought you didn't have time.
 
2013-01-05 05:53:24 PM  
4 deaths? Thats almost 1/10000th of a % of the population. Pools, automobiles, food, cigarrettes are all still deadlier. Fists and blunt objects kill more in a year here than scary rifles according to fbi statistics. But yes. Lets focus on this. I cant live without wetting my pants about everything.
 
2013-01-05 05:54:16 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: an eyewitness gives a story

Just show us all the part that lends credence to the theory that the Clackamas shooter quit because he saw another gun.

Besides you and CCW wanting it to be true, that is.


That he fixed his firearm and then offed himself. Seems plenty reasonable. Of course, other reasons could exist - but to immediately dismiss them just shows that you aren't interested in honest debate. I.e., disingenuous.

And yes, I've been in many of these threads. Well more than necessary to see your nonsense.
 
2013-01-05 05:54:18 PM  
We must ban Aurora, CO!
 
2013-01-05 05:54:55 PM  

vpb: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Like the creepy attraction to weapons that psychos have?


Psychos have creepy attraction to abuse.
 
2013-01-05 05:55:11 PM  

duffblue: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: You are disingenuous.

Just quote your "evidence", jackass.

I don't have enough time. Now run along and let the adults talk about important things.

Nice concession speech.

Not at all - anyone who spends any time in these threads knows your schtick. Throw out a bit of snark, get called on it, abandon the thread. Just like here - an eyewitness gives a story, you immediately dismiss it. However, had it gone the other way (to support your case) you'd be all over it.

I thought you didn't have time.


Well played, though I believe I did call out that I didn't have the time to quote all of the nonsense.
 
2013-01-05 05:55:52 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Amos Quito: REGARDING MENTAL HEALTH

In the US and Mexico, nearly 44,000 murders were committed in 2011 alone.

The vast majority of these murders were related to illegal drugs - to trafficking, turf wars, revenge hits, or to crimes committed by people seeking to feed their drug habits.

I have to question the collective sanity of any nation that would maintain the anti-drug policies that feed this senseless carnage.

Holmes? Mr. Hostage-Taker here? Whatchou talkin' 'bout, Amos?



The vast majority of murders.

As EMOTIONALLY SHOCKING as incidents like those in Aurora and at Sandy Hook may be, they represent a tiny percentage of the total homicides - with or without firearms - committed in the two countries mentioned.
 
2013-01-05 05:55:57 PM  

MyRandomName: 4 deaths? Thats almost 1/10000th of a % of the population. Pools, automobiles, food, cigarrettes are all still deadlier. Fists and blunt objects kill more in a year here than scary rifles according to fbi statistics. But yes. Lets focus on this. I cant live without wetting my pants about everything.


I don't know why we waste time on anything til we figure out immortality.
 
2013-01-05 05:56:34 PM  

Mock26: What type of gun was used?


I'll bet it was black and scary looking, just like those people on the other side of town.
 
2013-01-05 05:57:46 PM  

topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


Those figures get posted a lot. If you want to get into statistics I would point out that since Australia enacted strict gun laws and a mandatory buy back they haven't seen a single mass shooting and have seen both homicides and suicides drop by 50 percent. So you post your statistics that say more guns = less crime and I can put up my statistics that say fewer guns = even less crime.

Also, one particularly gruesome category of gun crime; mass shootings, have been on the increase lately.
 
2013-01-05 05:58:11 PM  

lizardbrain: What is up with Aurora Colorardo?


Absolutely nothing different than the rest of the US. It's just the media's dicks are dribbling all over it because now it has name recognition to send everyone into a fervor.

Sh*t like the kids getting massacred is rare. The incident in this article isn't.

The fact that incidents like this one AREN'T rare should be the bigger signal that something is very much askew.
 
2013-01-05 05:59:07 PM  

ronaprhys: That he fixed his firearm and then offed himself.


So, at least as likely the interruption made him doubt his plan and still NO evidence he saw CCW's weapon.

So, wishful thinking.
 
2013-01-05 06:00:19 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: That he fixed his firearm and then offed himself.

So, at least as likely the interruption made him doubt his plan and still NO evidence he saw CCW's weapon.

So, wishful thinking.


And still no evidence that it's not the reason. The CCW holder was there and he states he saw him.

You have no desire whatsoever to engage in an appropriate debate on the subject.
 
2013-01-05 06:00:23 PM  

vpb: Why is it that some people fear that they are in deathly peril if they can't have a large capacity magazine in a semi automatic weapon, while 2/3 of the population survive just fine with no firearms at all?


That's probably a question best answered by the people who've had to defend themselves against more than 1 attacker. Statistically most people will never be victims of violent crime. Statistics aren't much comfort for those that are.
 
2013-01-05 06:02:43 PM  

ElBarto79: topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]

Those figures get posted a lot. If you want to get into statistics I would point out that since Australia enacted strict gun laws and a mandatory buy back they haven't seen a single mass shooting and have seen both homicides and suicides drop by 50 percent. So you post your statistics that say more guns = less crime and I can put up my statistics that say fewer guns = even less crime.

Also, one particularly gruesome category of gun crime; mass shootings, have been on the increase lately.


You can - but their law would be unconstitutional here. Plain and simple. It's a seizure program and folks there have to prove need to obtain an approved firearm. No need means that they take your firearm. There are other differences there (cultural, etc)
 
2013-01-05 06:03:02 PM  

ronaprhys: And still no evidence that it's not the reason.


Oh, well then, it was probably all those people in the mall praying for deliverance.

I'll bet we could find dozens willing to back up that theory.
 
2013-01-05 06:06:04 PM  

Felgraf: But if we're going to talk about mental health as a result of these shootings, we again need to be honest. Would you, or would you not, advocate that a person on antipsychotics should be able to purchase weapons (if we improve mental health care in this country). What if the person were involuntarily committed, released, but still didn't think they had an issue?

If you feel the answer to the above is "No, they shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun", then, yeah, guns (and their lethality) ARE kind of relevant, to an extent. It wouldn't necessarily require any NEW gun laws, mind you-I think existing gun laws *would* cover the above scenario?



I don't know if I agree with forbidding them from purchasing guns. The idea that they will end up in a database be subject to restrictions may cause some to avoid treatment and try to resolve it on their own.

I'd rather take the chance that a guy on meds will buy a gun and misuse, if the alternative is more guys don't seek help, go undetected, buy guns and engage in killings.

We see something similar with pilots and antidepressants. The mere use of an antidepressant is enough to get a certificate pulled. So, pilots who are depressed will not seek medication and some will misunderstand the policy and simply not seek help. So now we have depressed pilots flying planes rather than take very rare chance that an antidepressant will cause them make mistakes, apparently mistake that they won't make while distracted or mired in depression.

Involuntary commitment implies something illegal or seriously wrong has happened and there has been some form of hearing. This is more like a person being arrested and/or convicted.

I think one aspect of mental health reform has to be the stigma attached to it. Seeking mental health care should be viewed no differently than seeking dental health care. We may have to make it so the bar is actually higher before a professional can report a person and make that limitation known so as to draw in the people who are afraid of being committed so they can actually have a chance of getting help vs not going and either suffering from it OR acting out on it. That does mean a guy may tell his shrink that he's thinking of killing someone and the shrink can't say anything. If it works to make more people come in and admit that sort of stuff without fear of arrest, it may be better off in the long run.

It's worth pointing out that most killing in this country doesn't seem to involve mental health issues, the drug war and the gangs it fosters are a big part. Domestic issue and the issues of boundaries, impulse control, etc. that lead to domestic violence won't be helped much right away.

It might be better for the whole country, esp all the people who won't ever kill like these few guys did, but are are dealing with the same issues and suffering from the various ill effects all the same.

End the drug war and there goes a ton of violence and deaths with and without guns. Take the money that would be spent on all that law enforcement excess and apply it to mental health care. It's win-win.
 
2013-01-05 06:06:46 PM  

ElBarto79: Also, one particularly gruesome category of gun crime; mass shootings, have been on the increase lately.


They have?
 
2013-01-05 06:07:05 PM  

pedrop357: Not all gun shots result in death. death is death, maiming is maiming. If a guy runs a bunch of kids over at a crosswalk, are they any less dead or injured because the guy didn't use a gun?


You're not being clever, you're not winning any argument, you're not entertaining. Being dishonest and disingenuous just makes you look like an asshole.
 
2013-01-05 06:07:44 PM  

jaytkay: pedrop357: Not all gun shots result in death. death is death, maiming is maiming. If a guy runs a bunch of kids over at a crosswalk, are they any less dead or injured because the guy didn't use a gun?

You're not being clever, you're not winning any argument, you're not entertaining. Being dishonest and disingenuous just makes you look like an asshole.


Unlike your valuable contributions and insight?
 
2013-01-05 06:09:16 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: ronaprhys: And still no evidence that it's not the reason.

Oh, well then, it was probably all those people in the mall praying for deliverance.

I'll bet we could find dozens willing to back up that theory.


Probably. What's your point? We have an eyewitness story that could be plausible, yet you immediately dismiss it because it doesn't fit in your narrative. It's very possible to show that firearms prevent crimes - yet I'm betting you'll also dismiss that as well.

Again - you have no interest in an honest debate.
 
2013-01-05 06:11:13 PM  

topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


it's sad that you come into the tread with facts and only get 2 replies
 
2013-01-05 06:12:36 PM  
I wouldn't mind massive gun ownership if it was only the gun owners shooting themselves.

jibarosoy.files.wordpress.com.
 
2013-01-05 06:12:37 PM  

ronaprhys: ElBarto79: topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]

Those figures get posted a lot. If you want to get into statistics I would point out that since Australia enacted strict gun laws and a mandatory buy back they haven't seen a single mass shooting and have seen both homicides and suicides drop by 50 percent. So you post your statistics that say more guns = less crime and I can put up my statistics that say fewer guns = even less crime.

Also, one particularly gruesome category of gun crime; mass shootings, have been on the increase lately.

You can - but their law would be unconstitutional here. Plain and simple. It's a seizure program and folks there have to prove need to obtain an approved firearm. No need means that they take your firearm. There are other differences there (cultural, etc)


We don't need to have a seizure program, though I would question whether a mandatory buyback that is only aimed at certain classes of weapons and not all guns would be illegal. One possibility would be to ban all future sales of all semi-automatic weapons, both public and private. So, anyone who currently has an assault weapon could keep it, but it would be illegal for them to sell or trade it to anyone else and once they die it would have to be turned into the government. Institute a mandatory nationwide registration system for all guns. Every gun must be registered to someone, if the police come across any guns that aren't registered they can seize them on the spot. This would severely cut back on any kind of black market gun sales, for one thing prices would sky rocket and for another thing availability would dry up. There would still be guns around but not nearly as many in the hands of criminals, and the number of weapons would steadily drop over time through attrition.
 
2013-01-05 06:12:41 PM  
Too many guns.
 
2013-01-05 06:14:08 PM  

haywatchthis: it's sad that you come into the tread with facts and only get 2 replies


Facts have no place in anti-gun arguments. It's all about intentions and feelings. You've to to get emotional and talk about what things are supposed to do and disregard any evidence that they didn't work (see DC, Chicago and handgun bans)
 
2013-01-05 06:15:29 PM  

ronaprhys: We have an eyewitness story that could be plausible, yet you immediately dismiss it because it doesn't fit in your narrative.


Roberts is the only reliable eyewitness for what you're claiming and he isn't talking.

Just stick with the evolution threads.
 
2013-01-05 06:16:18 PM  

ElBarto79: We don't need to have a seizure program, though I would question whether a mandatory buyback that is only aimed at certain classes of weapons and not all guns would be illegal. One possibility would be to ban all future sales of all semi-automatic weapons, both public and private. So, anyone who currently has an assault weapon could keep it, but it would be illegal for them to sell or trade it to anyone else and once they die it would have to be turned into the government. Institute a mandatory nationwide registration system for all guns. Every gun must be registered to someone, if the police come across any guns that aren't registered they can seize them on the spot. This would severely cut back on any kind of black market gun sales, for one thing prices would sky rocket and for another thing availability would dry up. There would still be guns around but not nearly as many in the hands of criminals, and the number of weapons would steadily drop over time through attrition.


If someone proposed the same with abortion, it would be called a blatant infringement on rights. We're not banning abortion, just issuing licenses that can't be transferred. When abortion doctors die, no can take their place and the number of abortions will steadily drop over time through attrition.

Will the cops be disarmed in your fantasy? If not, I know who I'm killing to get a gun.
 
2013-01-05 06:18:45 PM  

Fano: Chinchillazilla: The only thing that stops a bad psycho with a gun is a good psycho with a gun, so we have to let mentally ill people own whatever weapons they want.

Who's the man with the golden gun?
Who's the man who kills for fun?
Psycho Dad! Psycho Dad.


great now they are gonna quit rerunning the episodes with Psycho Dad mentioned in them
 
2013-01-05 06:18:45 PM  

pedrop357: abortions will steadily drop over time through attrition.

Will the cops be disarmed in your fantasy? If not, I know who I'm killing to get a gun.


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-05 06:19:04 PM  

here to help: Let me make this point again...

THE RIGHT WING GUN NUTS DID NOT CARE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH UNTIL A BUNCH OF KIDS GOT MOWED DOWN BY A GUY WHO STOLE HIS GUN NUT MOTHER'S LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS AND THEY HAD NO FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!!

You do not care about mental health. You only care about your f*cking guns! You FOUGHT restrictions that would help prevent tragedies like Connecticut. Claiming the mental health stance (which has been a left leaning policy for ages) as if it's your own NOW is absolutely freaking disgusting!!

But... hopefully the mentally ill can get some help now because of your selfish lies. Just don't start screaming about funding after the spotlight has faded.


Typical, scream accusations leaving out little things like facts to try and cover up YOUR part in that tragedy. "AND THEY HAD NO FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!!" because people like YOU forbid them having a FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!! Liberals have been training school children for years that they have to passively take anything anyone does to them and fighting back will be punished. That lunatic was more cowardly than most, choosing the most helpless victims YOU could provide. YOUR efforts to pretend that there are no bad people and ALL violence even in self-defense is EVIL has a large share of the blame.
 
2013-01-05 06:19:55 PM  

ElBarto79: We don't need to have a seizure program, though I would question whether a mandatory buyback that is only aimed at certain classes of weapons and not all guns would be illegal. One possibility would be to ban all future sales of all semi-automatic weapons, both public and private. So, anyone who currently has an assault weapon could keep it, but it would be illegal for them to sell or trade it to anyone else and once they die it would have to be turned into the government. Institute a mandatory nationwide registration system for all guns. Every gun must be registered to someone, if the police come across any guns that aren't registered they can seize them on the spot. This would severely cut back on any kind of black market gun sales, for one thing prices would sky rocket and for another thing availability would dry up. There would still be guns around but not nearly as many in the hands of criminals, and the number of weapons would steadily drop over time through attrition.


1 - a buyback program is nothing more than a polite seizure program. You are forcing people, who have not broken any laws, to give up their firearms under penalty of law. That is a seizure program, regardless of the veneer you attempt to put on it.
2 - you are banning entire classes of weapons. DC v Heller showed us that this unconstitutional.
3 - drugs are illegal and the police seize any on the spot, charge the person possessing them. This has not made drugs any more difficult to get. As such, I don't think your program will work like you think it'll work.

Prohibition has never, ever worked. Ever. The vast majority of firearm-related homicides in the US are gang/drug related. A decent additional number are related to crimes already in progress (a burgler/robber comes across someone and shoots them to get away).
 
2013-01-05 06:20:34 PM  

pedrop357: ElBarto79: We don't need to have a seizure program, though I would question whether a mandatory buyback that is only aimed at certain classes of weapons and not all guns would be illegal. One possibility would be to ban all future sales of all semi-automatic weapons, both public and private. So, anyone who currently has an assault weapon could keep it, but it would be illegal for them to sell or trade it to anyone else and once they die it would have to be turned into the government. Institute a mandatory nationwide registration system for all guns. Every gun must be registered to someone, if the police come across any guns that aren't registered they can seize them on the spot. This would severely cut back on any kind of black market gun sales, for one thing prices would sky rocket and for another thing availability would dry up. There would still be guns around but not nearly as many in the hands of criminals, and the number of weapons would steadily drop over time through attrition.

If someone proposed the same with abortion, it would be called a blatant infringement on rights. We're not banning abortion, just issuing licenses that can't be transferred. When abortion doctors die, no can take their place and the number of abortions will steadily drop over time through attrition.

Will the cops be disarmed in your fantasy? If not, I know who I'm killing to get a gun.


I'm not sure how your analogy is even remotely relevant. Of course cops would have guns. And citizens could still own guns too, and buy new ones, just not semi-automatic guns. This is why it's not a violation of the second amendment, you can still buy a gun if you want! just not an assault rifle or semi-automatic pistol. That would be my proposition anyway.
 
2013-01-05 06:21:07 PM