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.

(Minneapolis Star Tribune)   Pick your ban: Teen girl who performed at Obama's inauguration fatally shot in Chicago   (startribune.com) divider line 576
    More: Sad, obama, Chicago, inauguration  
•       •       •

17296 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2013 at 10:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-30 11:05:06 AM
assets.dnainfo.com

Hadiya Pendleton, honor student
 
2013-01-30 11:05:18 AM
Everyone seen carrying a gun should be shot.
 
2013-01-30 11:05:18 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ed Grubermann: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Because the very day a tragedy involving the use of guns happens, that's the right time to talk about more gun control as with Sandy Hook, but if circumstance shows that gun control is doing nothing, then it's "too soon" to talk about the problem with gun control, right?


Yes exactly.
It is the way the liberal mind works:
1.  We must do something about X.
2.  Y is something
3.  Let's do Y!
4.  Oh look, we did something!  Yay for us.

It is an emptional response instead of an intellectual one.  They never stop to think about whether or not Y would actually solve the probem.
 
2013-01-30 11:05:35 AM

FeFiFoFark: so with the combined massive Brainpower of Fark™, how about tossing out some solutions to this dilemma?


Basically, a lot more police. Hotspot policing and harassing known gang locations works but the city is in bad financial straits and can't really get a lot more. They disbanded their gang task force to get feet on the ground in a general way but that was pretty much the opposite of targeting high crime areas.

Part of that disbanding was also arresting head gang leaders. That didn't help. It actually destabilized the gangs and what we are seeing now is warfare that is determining new gang organization and turf lines.

There isn't a pro or anti gun law in the world that would have changed this so both sides of that debate need to shut their fool mouths.
 
2013-01-30 11:06:14 AM
LUCKILY THE LIBERALS BANNED GUNS FROM CHICAGO OH WAIT.
 
2013-01-30 11:06:32 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: IlGreven: /NRA against every reasonable measure to curb gun violence, up to and including mental health screenings.

you are an idiot.  stop getting your talking points from Schultz and Madow, you are just embarrassing yourself.

The NRA has supported mental health as part of background checks.

They have been blocked by some states who are resisting.

Here, from libby MA


But they're not interested in actually having background checks.

"When it comes to the issue of background checks, let's be honest - background checks will never be 'universal' - because criminals will never submit to them," LaPierre's testimony reads.

And you actually believe they'll support something they call for? HA.

And in 2007, the NRA gutted a mental health screening law.

In order to get the support of the NRA, Congress agreed to two concessions that had long been on the agenda of gun rights advocates - concessions that later proved to hamstring the database.

The NRA wanted the government to change the way it deemed someone "mentally defective," excluding people, for example, who were no longer under any psychiatric supervision or monitoring. The group also pushed for a way for the mentally ill to regain gun rights if they could prove in court that they'd been rehabilitated.

Here's how it worked. It would cost money for states to share their data: A state agency would have to monitor the courts, collect the names of people who had been institutionalized, and then send that information to the FBI on a regular basis.

So, to help pay for data-sharing Congress created $375 million in annual federal grants and incentives. But to be eligible for the federal money, the states would have to set-up a gun restoration program approved by the Justice Department. No gun rights restoration program, no money to help pay for sharing data.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who once joked he'd like to bring a gun with him to the Senate floor, blocked the legislation, citing concerns about privacy and spending.

He negotiated language that, among other things, would allow a person's application for gun restoration rights to be granted automatically if an agency didn't respond within 365 days of the application and allowed people to have their attorney's fees reimbursed if they were forced to go to court to restore their rights.
 
2013-01-30 11:06:56 AM
Is it just me, or with the Gun Ban/restrictions looming are people shooting each other at nearly record numbers?

It seems wiser to NOT shoot at everyone, to try and assure Congress to not ban guns. Instead, the morons are presenting an even greater case for the new restrictions.

Either that or shootings haven't increased but the press is making it seem like they have.

I read an article about a gang fight back a few months, where both gangs blasted at each other in a neighborhood using maybe 200 bullets. Close range too. They hit everything else except each other.

That sideways firing position is more of a hazard to anyone not in the line of fire.
 
2013-01-30 11:07:05 AM
I blame rap music.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-01-30 11:07:24 AM

odinsposse: FeFiFoFark: so with the combined massive Brainpower of Fark™, how about tossing out some solutions to this dilemma?

Basically, a lot more police. Hotspot policing and harassing known gang locations works but the city is in bad financial straits and can't really get a lot more. They disbanded their gang task force to get feet on the ground in a general way but that was pretty much the opposite of targeting high crime areas.

Part of that disbanding was also arresting head gang leaders. That didn't help. It actually destabilized the gangs and what we are seeing now is warfare that is determining new gang organization and turf lines.

There isn't a pro or anti gun law in the world that would have changed this so both sides of that debate need to shut their fool mouths.


Thunderdome, however...
 
2013-01-30 11:07:30 AM
It always amazes me how difficult it is for some people to follow a simple chain of logic.

If firearms are plentiful and easy to obtain legally in your society, it then means that there is a plentiful supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners.

If firearms are rare and difficult to legally obtain in your society, then there is only a scarce supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners. In neither case is it legal for criminals or the insane to have guns. But only in the former case is it easy for them to get them anyhow.

This is the empirical result that every other nation in the world has discovered as a result of experimenting with gun control, and yet somehow Americans who argue against gun control cannot seem to understand it. It's really not that hard. Say what you will about the ideology or rights involved, many legal firearms means many firearm equipped criminals and insane individualss, few legal firearms means few firearm equipped criminals and insane individuals.

The only exception to this rule occurs when you have two locations close to each other, one with plentiful easy to acquire legal firearms, and one without. That results in smuggling of illegal weapons to profitably meet the black market demand. Much like how a great deal of Canadian criminals are armed with illegal weapons originally from legal American sources, or how areas with strict local gun control in the USA have issues with guns coming in from areas of the USA where the restrictions are much lower, to the point of near nonexistence. However, it is still the case that the existence of many illegal firearms is initially due to the presence of many legal firearms.

Guns don't manufacture themselves, and last time I checked gang-bangers and crazy people don't tend to be skilled gunsmiths. Almost all those firearms in the hands of criminals and the insane causing crime and violence were originally manufactured by a legal manufacturer for legal sale at a profit. As long as that plethora of legal firearms is not just accepted but glorified and fetishized, the violence and crime facilitated by illegal firearms will continue.

You can tell yourselves that's the price you have to pay for your 'freedom' if you must, but at least have the moral courage and honesty to acknowledge why it is happening in the first place.
 
2013-01-30 11:08:56 AM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [www.wnd.com image 607x405]
[www.wnd.com image 609x517]

Paradise.


White people need to step it up.
 
2013-01-30 11:09:04 AM
Did it happen here?

nsfw language

Hilarity @ 3:30 mark

/you betta back it up
 
2013-01-30 11:09:32 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ed Grubermann: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Because the very day a tragedy involving the use of guns happens, that's the right time to talk about more gun control as with Sandy Hook, but if circumstance shows that gun control is doing nothing, then it's "too soon" to talk about the problem with gun control, right?


Who said too soon? You could wait a hundred years and that talking point would still be stupid.

Localized gun laws are undermined by the ease in which weapons are brought into the controlled area. This is less of an issue with a National policy where illegal weapons would have to come across a controlled border.

Besides, if we had to wait a month from a shooting to discuss gun control, we could never discuss it.
 
2013-01-30 11:09:34 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

If only those kids had been armed.


Assuming this was gang related, someof them may havee been.
 
2013-01-30 11:09:41 AM
I bet it comes out that the killing was contracted by a furiously jealous teen girl who hated the dead teen cos she "thought she was all that."

Or maybe the contractor's boyfriend/babydaddy was chasing after the dead teen.

Basically, Obama killed her, by inviting her to the inaugural, then letting her go back to Chicago.

So, ban Obama! Right?
 
2013-01-30 11:09:50 AM

KiltedBastich: It always amazes me how difficult it is for some people to follow a simple chain of logic.

If firearms are plentiful and easy to obtain legally in your society, it then means that there is a plentiful supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners.

If firearms are rare and difficult to legally obtain in your society, then there is only a scarce supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners. In neither case is it legal for criminals or the insane to have guns. But only in the former case is it easy for them to get them anyhow.

This is the empirical result that every other nation in the world has discovered as a result of experimenting with gun control, and yet somehow Americans who argue against gun control cannot seem to understand it. It's really not that hard. Say what you will about the ideology or rights involved, many legal firearms means many firearm equipped criminals and insane individualss, few legal firearms means few firearm equipped criminals and insane individuals.

The only exception to this rule occurs when you have two locations close to each other, one with plentiful easy to acquire legal firearms, and one without. That results in smuggling of illegal weapons to profitably meet the black market demand. Much like how a great deal of Canadian criminals are armed with illegal weapons originally from legal American sources, or how areas with strict local gun control in the USA have issues with guns coming in from areas of the USA where the restrictions are much lower, to the point of near nonexistence. However, it is still the case that the existence of many illegal firearms is initially due to the presence of many legal firearms.

Guns don't manufacture themselves, and last time I checked gang-bangers and crazy people don't tend to be skilled gunsmiths. Almost all those firearms in the hands of criminals an ...


The prohibition on drugs has certainly worked, no?
 
2013-01-30 11:10:31 AM
This has been said elsewhere, but I will repeat it here.
Chicago's gun ban can not work. Regardless of where you fall on gun control issues, it should be obvious that a city banning guns cannot keep them from coming in when the state itself and the neighboring states have loose gun laws and there is no "border check" to get in and out of the city. True gun control can only work at a national level, if at all.
 
2013-01-30 11:10:41 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ed Grubermann: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Because the very day a tragedy involving the use of guns happens, that's the right time to talk about more gun control as with Sandy Hook, but if circumstance shows that gun control is doing nothing, then it's "too soon" to talk about the problem with gun control, right?

Yes exactly.
It is the way the liberal mind works:
1.  We must do something about X.
2.  Y is something
3.  Let's do Y!
4.  Oh look, we did something!  Yay for us.

It is an emptional response instead of an intellectual one.  They never stop to think about whether or not Y would actually solve the probem.


Meanwhile, the right-wing thought process is this:

1. We're being pushed to do something about X.
2. Y is something, but it's not a perfect solution that will eliminate X completely.
3. So fark it.

You even refer to "solv[ing] the problem." You aren't going to eradicate gun violence any more than you're going to completely stop drunk driving. The point is to reduce the scope of the problem and decrease the threat in the long term.

I'd say that stopping one mass shooting of kindergarteners would be a victory, but people like you will only support measures that end all mass shootings for all time but somehow don't involve any measure of firearm regulation.
 
2013-01-30 11:10:45 AM

varmitydog: Hadiya Pendleton, honor student


Don't fret, she died feeding the tree of liberty. We should all be so lucky to die so gloriously.

/I'm a bit envious that these Chicago gang-bangers have so much ammo.
 
2013-01-30 11:10:46 AM
The shooter is probably from Gary.

/ Go Railcats!
 
2013-01-30 11:11:52 AM

Rik01: Is it just me, or with the Gun Ban/restrictions looming are people shooting each other at nearly record numbers?

It seems wiser to NOT shoot at everyone, to try and assure Congress to not ban guns. Instead, the morons are presenting an even greater case for the new restrictions.


It would seem wiser, wouldn't it.
 
2013-01-30 11:12:15 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: Everyone seen carrying a gun should be shot.


Glad I carry concealed.
 
2013-01-30 11:12:36 AM

FeFiFoFark: so with the combined massive Brainpower of Fark™, how about tossing out some solutions to this dilemma?


It starts at home. People raising their children to go after an education instead of easy money in a gang. Teach people job skills and instill the pride of hard work. Make the drug market non-existent so there is no reason to kill each other over territory.

But I'm a white dude in MD so it doesn't matter what I say
 
2013-01-30 11:12:44 AM

KiltedBastich: It always amazes me how difficult it is for some people to follow a simple chain of logic.

If firearms are plentiful and easy to obtain legally in your society, it then means that there is a plentiful supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners.

If firearms are rare and difficult to legally obtain in your society, then there is only a scarce supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners. In neither case is it legal for criminals or the insane to have guns. But only in the former case is it easy for them to get them anyhow.

This is the empirical result that every other nation in the world has discovered as a result of experimenting with gun control, and yet somehow Americans who argue against gun control cannot seem to understand it. It's really not that hard. Say what you will about the ideology or rights involved, many legal firearms means many firearm equipped criminals and insane individualss, few legal firearms means few firearm equipped criminals and insane individuals.

The only exception to this rule occurs when you have two locations close to each other, one with plentiful easy to acquire legal firearms, and one without. That results in smuggling of illegal weapons to profitably meet the black market demand. Much like how a great deal of Canadian criminals are armed with illegal weapons originally from legal American sources, or how areas with strict local gun control in the USA have issues with guns coming in from areas of the USA where the restrictions are much lower, to the point of near nonexistence. However, it is still the case that the existence of many illegal firearms is initially due to the presence of many legal firearms.

Guns don't manufacture themselves, and last time I checked gang-bangers and crazy people don't tend to be skilled gunsmiths. Almost all those firearms in the hands of criminals an ...


If I didn't already have you favorited I would favorite you for that.
 
2013-01-30 11:12:51 AM

rufus-t-firefly: tenpoundsofcheese: IlGreven: /NRA against every reasonable measure to curb gun violence, up to and including mental health screenings.

you are an idiot. stop getting your talking points from Schultz and Madow, you are just embarrassing yourself.

The NRA has supported mental health as part of background checks.

They have been blocked by some states who are resisting.

Here, from libby MA

But they're not interested in actually having background checks.

"When it comes to the issue of background checks, let's be honest - background checks will never be 'universal' - because criminals will never submit to them," LaPierre's testimony reads.


Oh look, failed reading comprehension AGAIN!
He didn't say they weren't interested in background checks, he said that background checks will never be universal (e.g. every gun transaction would have a background check) because criminals would avoid that.

Now, I didn't expect you would actually understand that since you get your news from a place called Talking Point Memo.
 
2013-01-30 11:13:13 AM

WeenerGord: devilEther: cgraves67: Chacago: "You're safe here; guns are illegal"

all you got to do is buy them from a neighboring city where they are still legal. duh

You think gangbangers buy their guns only from legal sources? HAHA!

They wait for the background check too, right? HAHA!

Wise up America!


gangbangers shoot other gangbangers.

why not legalize rape since people are still being raped? maybe because it might deter at least one individual from doing it.
 
2013-01-30 11:13:18 AM
Ed Grubermann

Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Yes we understand, you are very angry when facts are presented.
 
2013-01-30 11:13:21 AM

miss diminutive: I drunk what: we should ban teens, girls, Obamas, Chicago, performances, fatalities

did i miss anything?

You forgot inaugurations.


He also forgot Poland.
 
2013-01-30 11:14:20 AM
The solution to Chicago's problem is to make sure all the gang bangers have guns.

That way they'll all be polite to each other.
 
2013-01-30 11:14:45 AM
Sounds like the shooter was going through a gang initiation.
 
2013-01-30 11:14:52 AM

rufus-t-firefly: tenpoundsofcheese: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ed Grubermann: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Because the very day a tragedy involving the use of guns happens, that's the right time to talk about more gun control as with Sandy Hook, but if circumstance shows that gun control is doing nothing, then it's "too soon" to talk about the problem with gun control, right?

Yes exactly.
It is the way the liberal mind works:
1.  We must do something about X.
2.  Y is something
3.  Let's do Y!
4.  Oh look, we did something!  Yay for us.

It is an emptional response instead of an intellectual one.  They never stop to think about whether or not Y would actually solve the probem.

Meanwhile, the right-wing thought process is this:

1. We're being pushed to do something about X.
2. Y is something, but it's not a perfect solution that will eliminate X completely.
3. So fark it.

You even refer to "solv[ing] the problem." You aren't going to eradicate gun violence any more than you're going to completely stop drunk driving. The point is to reduce the scope of the problem and decrease the threat in the long term.

I never said "X" was  "eradicate gun violence".  It could just as easily be "reduce it by 20%".

Your argument fails.  Again.
 
2013-01-30 11:14:59 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Yes exactly.
It is the way the liberal mind works:
1.  We must do something about X.
2.  Y is something
3.  Let's do Y!
4.  Oh look, we did something!  Yay for us.

It is an emptional response instead of an intellectual one.  They never stop to think about whether or not Y would actually solve the probem.

Meanwhile, the right-wing thought process is this:

1. We're being pushed to do something about X.
2. Y is something, but it's not a perfect solution that will eliminate X completely.
3. So fark it.

You even refer to "solv[ing] the problem." You aren't going to eradicate gun violence any more than you're going to completely stop drunk driving. The point is to reduce the scope of the problem and decrease the threat in the long term.

I'd say that stopping one mass shooting of kindergarteners would be a victory, but people like you will only support measures that end all mass shootings for all time but somehow don't involve any measure of firearm regulation.


I'd argue that the the "Y is something, but it's not a perfect solution that will eliminate X completely" doesn't reflect anything that's being proposed. The "Y" that's being proposed has been shown to have absolutely no effect on firearm homicide rates in the history of our country, is unconsitutional (depending on the suggestion), is unenforceable, or is something that will do nothing but inconvenience law-abiding firearm owners in order to accomplish nothing. Especially when the proposals tend to float around "let's ban scary black looking rifles that are less powerful than normal hunting rifles".
 
2013-01-30 11:15:06 AM

Verdelak: This has been said elsewhere, but I will repeat it here.
Chicago's gun ban can not work. Regardless of where you fall on gun control issues, it should be obvious that a city banning guns cannot keep them from coming in when the state itself and the neighboring states have loose gun laws and there is no "border check" to get in and out of the city. True gun control can only work at a national level, if at all.


the southern border is rock solid yo.
 
2013-01-30 11:15:28 AM
BTW, here's a much better article.
 
2013-01-30 11:16:39 AM
HotIgneous Intruder
Everyone seen carrying a gun should be shot.


So

1) bye bye police officers and soldiers

2) bye bye citizens allowed to carry depending on the county, city, state and

3) bye bye people who follow your directions and shoot people carrying a gun. Because they must be shot too. By your rules.
 
2013-01-30 11:16:47 AM

Verdelak: This has been said elsewhere, but I will repeat it here.
Chicago's gun ban can not work. Regardless of where you fall on gun control issues, it should be obvious that a city banning guns cannot keep them from coming in when the state itself and the neighboring states have loose gun laws and there is no "border check" to get in and out of the city. True gun control can only work at a national level, if at all.


Are you saying people couldnt get guns from Mexico or South America?  Interesting viewpoint.
 
2013-01-30 11:17:12 AM

GameSprocket: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ed Grubermann: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

And our thread's designated asshole makes himself known...

Because the very day a tragedy involving the use of guns happens, that's the right time to talk about more gun control as with Sandy Hook, but if circumstance shows that gun control is doing nothing, then it's "too soon" to talk about the problem with gun control, right?

Who said too soon? You could wait a hundred years and that talking point would still be stupid.

Localized gun laws are undermined by the ease in which weapons are brought into the controlled area. This is less of an issue with a National policy where illegal weapons would have to come across a controlled border.

Besides, if we had to wait a month from a shooting to discuss gun control, we could never discuss it.


Let's see here..
ad hominem..Argument consisting of "laws are undermined by lawbreakers", so moar laws!..blatant lie.

Exactly the sort of response I expected!
 
2013-01-30 11:17:18 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Cybernetic: I see that Chicago's strict gun-control laws are working as well as ever.

If only those kids had been armed.


Nobody I know is in favor of arming kids. And it is impossible to look at a situation that has already occurred and determine whether the outcome would have been different had there been an armed, law-abiding citizen present and able to respond. (Note that the phrase "law-abiding citizen" excludes children by default, because laws--even in jurisdictions where firearm carry is legal-- preclude children from carrying.)

Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms has two separate effects. At the individual level, it enables a person to respond to a situation where a criminal endangers the life of that person or someone else. In the aggregate, it creates an environment of uncertainty in the minds of criminals who know that they may face an armed response.

In this situation, two things are certain:
1) The death of Hadiya Pendleton is a horrible tragedy
2) The person who shot her was certain that he would not face any kind of an armed response from a law-abiding citizen

Chicago does not have a gun problem, it has a criminal problem--one that the city's government seems to be either unwilling or unable to address. Until it does so, we will continue to see sad stories like this one.
 
2013-01-30 11:17:23 AM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [www.wnd.com image 607x405]
[www.wnd.com image 609x517]

Paradise.


.
While interviewing for my current job I was asked if I had any reservations about travel to Iraq or Afghanistan. I said no, just don't send me to Detroit or Chicago.
 
2013-01-30 11:17:58 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: He didn't say they weren't interested in background checks, he said that background checks will never be universal (e.g. every gun transaction would have a background check) because criminals would avoid that.


Which is why you should have a national gun registry where every ownership change is tracked, and if a gun is found after having been transferred illegally, the name and address of the person who first sold it illegally without the background check or transfer paperwork is readily available to law enforcement.
 
2013-01-30 11:18:34 AM

mikefitz: LUCKILY THE LIBERALS BANNED GUNS FROM CHICAGO OH WAIT.


right-wing talk radio must repeat this over and over. your echochamber buddies have echoed this sentiment at least 20 times already in this thread alone. at least they didn't use all caps.
 
2013-01-30 11:18:58 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: cptjeff: Bubbarella: She shouldn't have been hanging out with gang members.

She wasn't. She was waiting with friends at a bus stop in a decent part of the city, and was hit by stray gunfire.

The man jumped a fence, shot at them, then jumped in a car and sped away.

That's not stray, that's deliberate.


Indications are that the intended target wasn't killed. This means that the shooter saw him in a crowd, didn't care about collateral damage, and popped off some rounds.

These people are making Al Capone look like a nice guy. Seriously. At least Capone's boys actually took the time to try to limit civilian casualties. Gang bangers don't care and should be hunted down with no mercy. Of course that will never happen, so we have what we have.
 
2013-01-30 11:19:25 AM

varmitydog: [assets.dnainfo.com image 320x240]

Hadiya Pendleton, honor student



I'd hit it....with a 9mm.


/I was already going, one more won't make much difference
 
2013-01-30 11:20:05 AM

ronaprhys: KiltedBastich: Guns don't manufacture themselves, and last time I checked gang-bangers and crazy people don't tend to be skilled gunsmiths

The prohibition on drugs has certainly worked, no?


Can you easily plant a seed and grow a gun?

Is anyone proposing making all civilian ownership of firearms illegal, with no exceptions? Are there proposals to confiscate and destroy all guns?

Then only way gun regulations are comparable to prohibition or the "war on drugs" would be if we were trying to ban all guns while guns continued to get through.

What would heroin and cocaine use look like if we only had the same regulations on them that guns currently have? You'd see people snorting coke rather than taking a smoke break at work.

The "perfect solution fallacy" is all the MAH GERNS crowd has.

"We can't eliminate gun violence, so why bother doing anything?"
 
2013-01-30 11:20:05 AM

WeenerGord: This article states that

Many of the teens with Pendleton at the time of the shooting were believed to be gang members and left the scene, according to reports.

Wonder if some gangster got street cred for killing her? Wonder if some in the black community might hate her because she performed at the inaugural? The old crab in the bucket syndrome?


And I wonder if your mother's heroin use is responsible for your low brain activity.
 
2013-01-30 11:20:09 AM

USP .45: Verdelak: This has been said elsewhere, but I will repeat it here.
Chicago's gun ban can not work. Regardless of where you fall on gun control issues, it should be obvious that a city banning guns cannot keep them from coming in when the state itself and the neighboring states have loose gun laws and there is no "border check" to get in and out of the city. True gun control can only work at a national level, if at all.

the southern border is rock solid yo.


Because Illinois is renowned for its lax firearms laws.
 
2013-01-30 11:20:11 AM

KiltedBastich: If firearms are plentiful and easy to obtain legally in your society, it then means that there is a plentiful supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners.

If firearms are rare and difficult to legally obtain in your society, then there is only a scarce supply of such legal weapons for criminals and the insane to buy, borrow or steal those firearms from the legal owners. In neither case is it legal for criminals or the insane to have guns. But only in the former case is it easy for them to get them anyhow...Guns don't manufacture themselves, and last time I checked gang-bangers and crazy people don't tend to be skilled gunsmiths. Almost all those firearms in the hands of criminals an ...


Sorry, but the genie is out of the bottle and guns are already plentiful in our country. If they weren't a part of our culture and our Constitution I might be more apt to support gun control.

If your solution is for all law abiding people to willfully turn in their guns, then all the remaining guns will be owned by the disturbed, the criminals and the police. This seems like a great argument for an enhanced police state. If your idea is to take away everyone's guns by forced search and seizure, that is a police state. Fantastic ideas both of them and totally within the spirit of our country's founding. You should run for President.
 
2013-01-30 11:20:46 AM

hdhale: AverageAmericanGuy: cptjeff: Bubbarella: She shouldn't have been hanging out with gang members.

She wasn't. She was waiting with friends at a bus stop in a decent part of the city, and was hit by stray gunfire.

The man jumped a fence, shot at them, then jumped in a car and sped away.

That's not stray, that's deliberate.

Indications are that the intended target wasn't killed. This means that the shooter saw him in a crowd, didn't care about collateral damage, and popped off some rounds.

These people are making Al Capone look like a nice guy. Seriously. At least Capone's boys actually took the time to try to limit civilian casualties. Gang bangers don't care and should be hunted down with no mercy. Of course that will never happen, so we have what we have.


You're assuming it's a gangbanger.
 
2013-01-30 11:20:46 AM

ronaprhys: Especially when the proposals tend to float around "let's ban scary black looking rifles that are less powerful than normal hunting rifles".


yes, that is the emotional response from them again...ohh, scary.

It is also political theater for the left and fits in with their nanny mentality.
 
2013-01-30 11:20:57 AM
"Gang bangers don't care and should be hunted down with no mercy."

Yes.

"Of course that will never happen, so we have what we have."

Also yes.
 
Displayed 50 of 576 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report