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.

 417 More: Scary, mass shooting
•       •       •

20107 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2013 at 8:26 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:    more»

 Paginated (1/page) Single page Single page, reversed Normal view Change images to links Show raw HTML
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

My buddy was a witness to this shooting. He's pretty shaken up about it.

Between this and the CA gun thread a few down I suspect we will be witnessing a mass goalpost migration.

Well it had been literal HOURS since the last gun thread so it was bound to happen.

Where have I seen this guy? Hmmmm.... I know!

(yes, welcome to fark and all that)

You mean all those draconian gun control laws didn't work?

But...guns!

Haters gonna hate.

It's not like the counter was set high anyway. 2 days isn't a long time.... Oh wait... you didn't realize that 11 were shot in inner-city and predominately black DC two days ago? Link

America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a problem with white folk getting shot.

Did the gunman use a Glock AK-15 assault missle with high capacity clip?

so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

But I was assured guns don't kill people.

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

They don't. Bullets do.  Well, technically, the lack of oxygenated blood getting to the proper organs, tissue damage, and infection do.

lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

Wow. That cop is FABULOUS.

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Four Dead. EMS1 is reporting 6 in critical condition, some others are wounded.

To avoid turning this into a debate, my thoughts go out to the family and people involved in this shooting. And to the Responders, Trauma team, and people caring for these victims.

Been following this story on the local news outlets here in Utica, was wondering how long it'd take to show up on here.

The fact that this is basically considered "background noise" in the USA is telling, isn't it?

it's just like marijuana.

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

Guns don't, bullets do.

But generally, people kill people.  What tool they use is a different topic.

I'm just glad to see the cop running with the shotgun didn't have his finger on the trigger.

If everyone wore a personal force shield, this wouldn't be an issue.

Locked down a college?  A shooting happens at a freaking barber shop off campus, and they force adults who are going deep into debt for their education to be locked in a room?

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

He shot at least 12 people, does it not count as a mass shooting if only four die?

Yogimus: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

They don't. Bullets do.  Well, technically, the lack of oxygenated blood getting to the proper organs, tissue damage, and infection do.

I prefer, "Guns don't kill people, momentum does."

hardinparamedic: lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

Wow. That cop is FABULOUS.

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Four Dead. EMS1 is reporting 6 in critical condition, some others are wounded.

To avoid turning this into a debate, my thoughts go out to the family and people involved in this shooting. And to the Responders, Trauma team, and people caring for these victims.

Ah, ok. My reading comprehension was a bit sub-par as I was skimming the story.

Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

halB: Locked down a college?  A shooting happens at a freaking barber shop off campus, and they force adults who are going deep into debt for their education to be locked in a room?

Better than getting sued by one of the parents of those "adults who are going deep into debt" for not trying to protect them when the shooter decided to wander onto campus.

lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

LOLZ

firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

firefly212: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

He shot at least 12 people, does it not count as a mass shooting if only four die?

You have to draw the line somewhere.  I propose 10 dead and at least 25 wounded for qualification.

MNguy: firefly212: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

He shot at least 12 people, does it not count as a mass shooting if only four die?

You have to draw the line somewhere.  I propose 10 dead and at least 25 wounded for qualification.

Jared Lee Loughner would be heartbroken.

tallen702: It's not like the counter was set high anyway. 2 days isn't a long time.... Oh wait... you didn't realize that 11 were shot in inner-city and predominately black DC two days ago? Link

America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a problem with white folk getting shot.

Obviously Americans don't care about that shooting. If they did it would have been covered in a national newspaper that reported daily events.

/they'd probably call it The U.S. Today or something like that

Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

ever try Utica's favorite recipe, steamed hams?

lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

Your post needs to be captioned in that pic.

TerminalEchoes: Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Exactly. Guns aren't more dangerous than any other object.

That's why the Marines gave up firearms years ago. They now carry golf clubs. It's saved the taxpayer millions.

It's always dangerous when everybody's sleeping

Christian gun nuts celebrate another victory!

So 4 = mass now? In what Catholic church did you get shiat out from subby?   Or was this in Massachusetts?

I can see Westboro protesting this in support of gun control: GOD  HATES MAGS!!!

TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

Haha libs!! Only four people innocent people were murdered so guns are awesome!

lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

If ever there was a photo begging to be shopped...

firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

I was intentionally keeping my sarcasm turned down as low as possible.

This is pretty farked up.

/Can't wait for summer when it heats up out there.

TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

And what happens if they take away the internets. WHAT THEN???

How long has it been since we've gone  twelve hourswithout a mass shooting?

Am I the only one who read the headline and thought - 'omg - someone shot the new pope'...

/prolly just me

Repeat?

Oh.  Right.

I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Look on the bright side. Obama might have some more dead kids to exploit and use as props in the next state of the union, being the classy guy that he is, right democrats? This tragedy would just be another great win for you, you scumbag pieces of sh*t.

It's a 3.5 hr drive from NYC. It's 4 people (dunno that I would call it Mass Shootings).  Media focuses on this because... it's a slow news day and the current federal administration is trying to pound a way to get rid of guns...

Why was this even a story? If the dude killed vestial virgins, then it would a story.

Ill just leave this here:

"These swine had no chance against us. It is appalling that they even resisted." He did not say what was
actually on his mind. A ragged band of Jews with a few guns and no military training whatsoever had
managed to hold off the best efforts of the German Army. This fact went counter to everything the General
leading them, then pushed the disturbing thoughts out of his mind and returned to more immediate tasks.
The general's unease was well-founded, and the Warsaw ghetto resistance would be a valuable history
lesson for anyone who studied it. With less than twenty weapons, a starving band of resisters had held off
the German Army for twenty-seven days and nights before being defeated.
When the German Army had conquered the entire country of Poland in 1939, it had taken them sixteen
days."

-Unintended Consequences

TerminalEchoes: Did the gunman use a Glock AK-15 assault missle with high capacity clip?

He exercised his second amendment right to be an asshole.

tallen702: It's not like the counter was set high anyway. 2 days isn't a long time.... Oh wait... you didn't realize that 11 were shot in inner-city and predominately black DC two days ago? Link

America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a problem with white folk getting shot.

Come down to the rez. We'll protect you, you miserable piece of filth.

SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

In the state, hmm?

boxster: SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

In the state, hmm?

in the state

Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Four people counts as a mass shooting these days? Talk about lowering the bar. Whatever you can attention whore to further your agenda, I guess.

lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Damn skippy, you lily livered pansy. Go cry me a river.

Todd300: "-Unintended Consequences "

Not sure what that little bit from the book has to do with this shooting.

/has a copy

Todd300: Ill just leave this here:

"These swine had no chance against us. It is appalling that they even resisted." He did not say what was
actually on his mind. A ragged band of Jews with a few guns and no military training whatsoever had
managed to hold off the best efforts of the German Army. This fact went counter to everything the General
leading them, then pushed the disturbing thoughts out of his mind and returned to more immediate tasks.
The general's unease was well-founded, and the Warsaw ghetto resistance would be a valuable history
lesson for anyone who studied it. With less than twenty weapons, a starving band of resisters had held off
the German Army for twenty-seven days and nights before being defeated.
When the German Army had conquered the entire country of Poland in 1939, it had taken them sixteen
days."

-Unintended Consequences

For God's sake, why?

Hey, who's got a factory in the next town over (Ilian)? Remington Arms.

Bbbbut New York is a gun-free zone. Nanny Bloomberg PROMISED!

BGates: You mean all those draconian gun control laws didn't work?

Dear BGates, The right to bear arms is draconian, agreed. Sincerely, the rest of the unarmed world.

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

according to this criteria. yes
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

The shooter took the lives of at least four people. An FBI crime classification report identifies an individual as a mass murderer-versus a spree killer or a serial killer-if he kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location.
The killings were carried out by a lone shooter. (Except in the case of the Columbine massacre and the Westside Middle School killings, both of which involved two shooters.)
The shootings occured in a public place. (Except in the case of a party in Crandon, Wisconsin, and another in Seattle.) Crimes primarily related to gang activity or armed robbery are not included.

vudukungfu: This is pretty farked up.

/Can't wait for summer when it heats up out there.

Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Another dumbass expecting the state to protect him. I'm sure the officer will be very sympathetic in his report if something bad happens to you.

firefly212: MNguy: firefly212: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

He shot at least 12 people, does it not count as a mass shooting if only four die?

You have to draw the line somewhere.  I propose 10 dead and at least 25 wounded for qualification.

Jared Lee Loughner would be heartbroken.

Welp.  Sorry Jared.  Not every ball player can make it to the Hall of Fame.

libranoelrose: lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

[i.imgur.com image 628x407]

My God... it's full of win.

Peki:

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

My wife, who is this soft-spoken, touchy-feely Japanese national, walked in the door a few weeks ago and said to me, "You know, I understand now why some people in America go crazy and start shooting everyone. There's no way to talk to anyone in power anymore. You can't argue with them. You can't explain your situation to them."

She had just gotten a parking ticket on a meter that had expired less than three minutes before she got back to the car. She got there as the officer was writing the ticket, and was pleading with her not to give her the ticket, but she said the woman just ignored her. She has this complaint about bus drivers who won't answer questions about the route. She has this complaint about government officials who make the process of renewing her visa a massive headache.

At first I was like, "Well, you should make sure to get back to your car with plenty of time before the meter expires." But then I thought about it for a bit.

She's mostly right. As Americans we have all this freedom, but the minute you try to talk to anyone who isn't employed in the private sector, you just get stonewalled, or worse. I've somehow internalized all of the frustration I've felt at the post office, DMV, traffic stops, public transportation, and any other run-ins with "officials" and those employed by public agencies.

My wife lived in Vietnam for a number of years while doing business there. You can basically talk to any official and explain the circumstances of your situation, and they will at least listen to you, more often taking your circumstances into account. I've seen the same in Laos and Cambodia. Ironically, these are "non-free" countries.

I think she has a point. There's a desperation in this country that comes from living in a democratic system, but one in which individual voices are squelched and ignored, and everyone's circumstances have to be pushed into a cookie cutter so that they can be processed as efficiently as possible.

Too much words. Sorry.

This is more like a spree killing.

I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

uttertosh: BGates: You mean all those draconian gun control laws didn't work?

Dear BGates, The right to bear arms is draconian, agreed. Sincerely, the rest of the unarmed world.

OH! Sorry... That's the joke dot jay peg, ahm ah rite?

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

I was wondering the same thing.

4, really?

Phony_Soldier: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

I was wondering the same thing.

4, really?

What's the official tally of dead and wounded that you need?

Jeez, it would seem like the cops could just use one of these

LesserEvil: Where have I seen this guy? Hmmmm.... I know!

(yes, welcome to fark and all that)

No militarization of the police there, no siree

WhoopAssWayne: Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Another dumbass expecting the state to protect him. I'm sure the officer will be very sympathetic in his report if something bad happens to you.

So you're in favor of disbanding the U.S.'s standing military.

Good to know you are ready to repel the coming invasion by those bloody Welsh!

Oh America... You silly farkers...

Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

Yea, but he looks cool and in control, don't he?

hardinparamedic: To avoid turning this into a debate in my head, my thoughts go out to the family and people involved in this shooting.

ftfy

TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

That reminds me, I need to pick up a baseball bat.

/for the zombies, duh.
//no ammo

Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

Its a style choice, like mounting iron sights backwards...

/facepalm

Mrbogey: Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

Yea, but he looks cool and in control, don't he?

Like the farking Duke of New York. A-number-1

Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

Agents of the State are beyond criticism or reproach, teatard -- they are simply better than we are, that's why they can be trusted with AR-15s and we can't. I for one am grateful that our superiors have our best interests at heart.

God bless these people and their friends and families who sacrificed so much for the Second Amendment.

Sweaty Dynamite: Jeez, it would seem like the cops could just use one of these

[i641.photobucket.com image 400x266]

Thank you for this. It means that I didn't have to go look for my own pic of it.

And we all know who the real winners are in any gun thread, don't we??

lostcat: Peki:

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

My wife, who is this soft-spoken, touchy-feely Japanese national, walked in the door a few weeks ago and said to me, "You know, I understand now why some people in America go crazy and start shooting everyone. There's no way to talk to anyone in power anymore. You can't argue with them. You can't explain your situation to them."

She had just gotten a parking ticket on a meter that had expired less than three minutes before she got back to the car. She got there as the officer was writing the ticket, and was pleading with her not to give her the ticket, but she said the woman just ignored her. She has this complaint about bus drivers who won't answer questions about the route. She has this complaint about government officials who make the process of renewing her visa a massive headache.

At first I was like, "Well, you should make sure to get back to your car with plenty of time before the meter expires." But then I thought about it for a bit.

She's mostly right. As Americans we have all this freedom, but the minute you try to talk to anyone who isn't employed in the private sector, you just get stonewalled, or worse. I've somehow internalized all of the frustration I've felt at the post office, DMV, traffic stops, public transportation, and any other run-ins with "officials" and those employed by public agencies.

My wife lived in Vietnam for a number of years while doing business there. You can basically talk to any official and explain the circumstances of your situation, and they will at least listen to you, more often taking your circumstances into account. I've seen the same in Laos and Cambodia. Ironically, these are "non-free" countries.

I think she has a point. There's a desperatio ...

Nope, wasn't too long. My fiancé just paid a parking ticket that said "expired meter" in an area that has no meter because he knew it would pointless to fight it. Also, how can he fight it when he's working 60-70 hours week between school and his career? (He's a musician, so it's not like these are normal business hours either) I can't work because of mental health issues (PTSD + two sleep disorders), but trying to access any kind of social services is a nightmare because they want three letters from my employer stating how much I earned, when I worked, and when I quit. I worked for Bank of America through a temp agency: temp agency says I have to go to BofA, BofA says I have to go to the temp agency, and of course no one at the social services offices gives a damn about the argument between the temp agency and BofA. At this point I'm waiting for the location to close so I can go back to social services and say "Can't get you the paperwork you need because the company closed, sorry." We're so farking paranoid about the ONE guy getting food stamps who drives a BMW that the people who ACTUALLY need help but are in farked up situations CAN'T get help because the paperwork is so damned complicated. And then we wonder why there are so many homeless on the street, why so many mentally ill people are freaking out, why so many suicides. . . . .

Sorry for the rant, but this is sort of a personal issue for me. I don't understand why the people in power (whoever that actually is) haven't figured out that if you seriously depress the living situation of a large group of people, especially a majority of a country, violence will occur, and their power will do little to protect them from it (see Mubarak, etc.).

2wolves: So you're in favor of disbanding the U.S.'s standing military.

As a matter of fact I am, sort of. I think we could disband the Air Force, Marines, Army, and Naval Surface Warfare fleets (carriers, etc). The Air's Force's ICBM units would be rolled into the Navy. That would give us our Strategic Nuclear Forces (ICBM, Subs/SLBMs) for the big boys, Special Forces/SEALS (for the tarrists), and Naval Intelligence as our sole military intelligence unit. I'm guessing roughly a 80% reduction in military spending, but that may be very conservative.

2wolves: Good to know you are ready to repel the coming invasion by those bloody Welsh!

Never turn your back on them!

libranoelrose: lordargent: [ww4.hdnux.com image 628x407]

Haters gonna hate.

[i.imgur.com image 628x407]

Thanks.

//gun nut

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

Agents of the State are beyond criticism or reproach, teatard -- they are simply better than we are, that's why they can be trusted with AR-15s and we can't. I for one am grateful that our superiors have our best interests at heart.

Another one, proving that that people who most want guns are the mentally ill.

I think we need to discuss the word "mass" when it comes to shooting. I mean technically it was in  a public area and there were lots of bullets BUT--------Only 2 people were killed. So really is that mass? In my opinion it is not.

Folks who are against widespread high-capacity guns: "See - this has to stop. How can we address this?"
Folks who are for widespread high-capacity guns: "Shut up you baby asswipe pieces of shiat. You sound like an idiot."

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

Well they MIGHT if thrown just right by a very strong person and it hits them just right.

Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

Cup_O_Jo: I think we need to discuss the word "mass" when it comes to shooting. I mean technically it was in  a public area and there were lots of bullets BUT--------Only 2 people were killed. So really is that mass? In my opinion it is not.

The opinion of someone who lives on socialized medicine but hates socialized medicine is probably not an opinion most people would take seriously.

WhoopAssWayne: 2wolves: So you're in favor of disbanding the U.S.'s standing military.

As a matter of fact I am, sort of. I think we could disband the Air Force, Marines, Army, and Naval Surface Warfare fleets (carriers, etc). The Air's Force's ICBM units would be rolled into the Navy. That would give us our Strategic Nuclear Forces (ICBM, Subs/SLBMs) for the big boys, Special Forces/SEALS (for the tarrists), and Naval Intelligence as our sole military intelligence unit. I'm guessing roughly a 80% reduction in military spending, but that may be very conservative.

I'm not exactly a proponent of any kind of arms race, but at the same time if we scaled back that much, how long do you think it would be until some other country came for our natural resources? We still have a LOT compared to many nations...

That's always the first reason I invade in RTS's - need more stone/wood/etc...

Zeno-25: Four people counts as a mass shooting these days? Talk about lowering the bar. Whatever you can attention whore to further your agenda, I guess.

That's twice as many as were killed by firearms in Japan in the entire year of 2006.

Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Yeah, whenever people are charged with vehicular homicide I feel real guilty for driving a car.

Godscrack: Christian gun nuts celebrate another victory!

I live with my mom

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

It was only a civilian who did it.  It's not like he was a trigger happy gang of pigs

I've seen him before...

Oh yeah!

Peki: TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

Wasn't this a sixty something year old shooter?

jaytkay: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

My firearms are not allowed in the state of New York because I am not on the list of people with firearms to be confiscated at a later date.

This wouldn't have happened if the victims each had an AK-47 and missile launcher.  (Am I doing that right, NRA?)

Zeno-25: Four people counts as a mass shooting these days? Talk about lowering the bar. Whatever you can attention whore to further your agenda, I guess.

That anyone is so desensitized as to dismiss four people as too few to count as a mass shooting indicates a serious problem.

2 things.

1.Why is this in a San Francisco newspaper website?

2. FTA--The mayor described his village as close-knit and friendly, "the kind of place where you'd say, 'Oh, it would never happen here.'"

This IS scary, 'cos there are so, SO many small towns that describe themselves this way. I live in a burg of about 5000 and we fit that demo perfectly.

Where does an economically depressed town get all this money for their law enforcement gear?

ghare: Another one, proving that that people who most want guns are the mentally ill.

Anybody who wants any so-called "freedom" is mentally ill. What we really need is the freedom to let the State micromanage every aspect of our lives. Are you with me?

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Shame on you, even by trolling, by trying to minimize the wrongness of this. I get that it's Fark, and that it's the internets.
But shame on you anyway.

Somewhere I know there's someone who's lost a friend or family member because of this "freedom" paranoia. Their kid or dad or sister is dead because folks want to impede action by arguing about nomenclature or legalese or obscure historical points.

All that stuff falls away when you remember that there are not-quite-sane people out there who can't parse subtleties and can easily access high-powered deadly weapons. And kill someone that doesn't deserve it. (So that Farkers can post our own version of gallows humor)

davidphogan: Peki: TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

Wasn't this a sixty something year old shooter?

This is a gun thread, dude. Everyone is just gonna talk about what they imagine to be true.

Bigdogdaddy: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

Well they MIGHT if thrown just right by a very strong person and it hits them just right.

Pistol whip someone right behind the ear, that'll do it. Also you could probably kill someone by... never mind, I've said too much.

Godscrack: Christian gun nuts celebrate another victory!

Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.  I never thought you'd be a troll.

ladyfortuna: I'm not exactly a proponent of any kind of arms race, but at the same time if we scaled back that much, how long do you think it would be until some other country came for our natural resources? We still have a LOT compared to many nations...

We'd have the nukes - intercontinental ballistic missiles and the submarine launched missiles. There's no way any country is going to take us on at any kind of scale. Eisenhower talked extensively about this new state of of affairs (post nuclear weapons) both inside and out of his presidency. Military/industrial complex was just a part of it (the spending.) Our homeland will not be systematically attacked by any power capable of doing any real harm as long as we possess these weapons. I highly recommend reading him post-war - he just nails it - what we are spending now is just insane given the reality.

WhoopAssWayne: Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Another dumbass expecting the state to protect him. I'm sure the officer will be very sympathetic in his report if something bad happens to you.

Watch out we got a badass here guys. He must be part of the well regulated militia we hear so much about.

Except the well regulated part, not that big on the regulations. But the tough talk and a lot of guns, he's ALL over that.

Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

Please. Google the Tri Willow Nursery murders in 1979 in Rome NY. Stuff happens everywhere.

Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

My firearms are not allowed in the state of New York because I am not on the list of people with firearms to be confiscated at a later date.

Wow. You are fierce. I bet you get all the ladies with your knowledge of scopes and NY gun laws.

DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

boxster:   I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

In the state, hmm?

Hey, you never posted a mistake on Fark?  Okay, it's late in the day fehr crying out loud.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: ghare: Another one, proving that that people who most want guns are the mentally ill.

Anybody who wants any so-called "freedom" is mentally ill. What we really need is the freedom to let the State micromanage every aspect of our lives. Are you with me?

I read an article that said a dude pushed his girlfriend off a cliff. OK actually I just read the headline but still.

Sure it was only one person but one death is a tragedy. Many deaths is a statistic.

Special ED209: [ww3.hdnux.com image 628x457]
I've seen him before...

Oh yeah!
[5wordmoviereviews.files.wordpress.com image 450x300]

DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

ladyfortuna: WhoopAssWayne: 2wolves: So you're in favor of disbanding the U.S.'s standing military.

As a matter of fact I am, sort of. I think we could disband the Air Force, Marines, Army, and Naval Surface Warfare fleets (carriers, etc). The Air's Force's ICBM units would be rolled into the Navy. That would give us our Strategic Nuclear Forces (ICBM, Subs/SLBMs) for the big boys, Special Forces/SEALS (for the tarrists), and Naval Intelligence as our sole military intelligence unit. I'm guessing roughly a 80% reduction in military spending, but that may be very conservative.

I'm not exactly a proponent of any kind of arms race, but at the same time if we scaled back that much, how long do you think it would be until some other country came for our natural resources? We still have a LOT compared to many nations...

That's always the first reason I invade in RTS's - need more stone/wood/etc...

The only country that has a decent chance of messing with us in a ground war on our turf is China, and that's just a pure numbers game. When we're spending more than almost ALL of the other countries IN THE WORLD combined??? Yeah, we can afford to cut. . . a lot. . .

Also, if you need to invade because you're short on resources, then how are you going to get the resources to finish the war? To reference another post on this thread, it's not like we're Poland and can be taken over in 16 days. Much better would be to do an economic war, which is what I suspect is actually going on right now. If you look at the housing market, first time buyers are NOT the ones snapping up land; it's foreign investors, usually Chinese and Japanese. They might just move everyone over, and then, surprise, we're a colony of China now.

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Eh, its more a function of style than success rate.

Did they fire randomly upon strangers or near strangers? mass shooting.
Did they soot some people who they personally had something against? not mass.

Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

His patch and hat say 'police' and the crest on the hat is state police, so... [quizzicaldog.jpg]

Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

Freud's Cigar: Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

Please. Google the Tri Willow Nursery murders in 1979 in Rome NY. Stuff happens everywhere.

Before my time, as it happens, but I hear you.

Only criminals should have background checks and be kept from having guns.. oh wait, what's that you say? He wasn't a criminal until AFTER he got the guns just like all the rest of the mass shooters?

If my source is correct, between now and December 14th 2012 we've killed more people than all the real "Gun Fights" in the west.

Good jorb 'Murica

Citation-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_West_gunfights

Marcintosh: If my source is correct, between now and December 14th 2012 we've killed more people than all the real "Gun Fights" in the west.

Good jorb 'Murica

Citation-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_West_gunfights

My thoughts and prayers go out to the doctors and first responders and near by wild-life and the guys that have to clean up all the blood and poop and to the manufacturers of the bullets and their families and friends and their parents and the folks who love them.

Freud's Cigar: Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

Please. Google the Tri Willow Nursery murders in 1979 in Rome NY. Stuff happens everywhere.

Stuff like this that doesn't involve mass shootings happens all the time in central NY. Hell, we had some morons try to outrun some troopers and then pull off on a farm road and take potshots at them on the route I take to school. Last I heard they were getting some serious time for that, since it's a higher felony to attempt/kill law enforcement in NY... Been several other crazy things just since I moved here a few years ago.

/the boonies
//the white trash
///and the booze...

News is reporting that there was an argument in the barber shop prior to the shooting......witnesses are claiming it went something like this

You must be out your goddamn mind! Joe Louis, the greatest boxer that ever lived.  I'll be with you boys in a minute. He was badder than Cassius Clay, he was badder than Sugar Ray, and that new boy-what's his name? Mike Tyson?-looks like a bulldog; he was badder than him, too.

Vait a minute. Vat about Rocky Marciano

Oh, there they go. There they go, every time I start talkin' 'bout boxing, a white man got to pull Rocky Marciano out they ass. That's their one, that's their one. Rocky Marciano! Rocky Marciano! Let me tell you something, once and for all-Rocky Marciano was good; but compared to Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano ain't shiat.

He beat Joe Louis' ass.

That's right, he did whoop Joe Louis' ass.

Joe Louis was 75 years old when they fought.

I don't know how old he was, but he got his ass whooped.

Joe Louis had come out of retirement to fight Rocky Marciano the minute he was 76 years old. Joe Louis was always lying about his age. He lied about his age all the time. One time Frank Sinatra came in here and sat in this chair. I said Frank 'you hang out with Joe Louis, just between me and you, how old is Joe Louis?' You know what Frank told me, he said "Hey, Joe Louis is 137 years old." A hundred and thirty-seven years old!

Oh. Man, you lying, you ain't never meet no Frank Sinatra.

Fark you, (gunsots) fark you,(gunshots) and fark you!(more gunshots) Who's next?!

davidphogan: Peki: TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

Wasn't this a sixty something year old shooter?

My point can still stand. It's not like seniors are getting the better end of the stick these days. You mess with people, they will mess with you back.

/yes, made an assumption about the shooter's age, but not without cause. Wasn't the DC sniper older too (not the kid, the other one)?

Tillmaster: Freud's Cigar: Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

Please. Google the Tri Willow Nursery murders in 1979 in Rome NY. Stuff happens everywhere.

Before my time, as it happens, but I hear you.

Google Rome, NY 1999. Yeah shiat happens.

I thought all weapons with large magazines were illegal in new york.

Giltric: News is reporting that there was an argument in the barber shop prior to the shooting......witnesses are claiming it went something like this

You must be out your goddamn mind! Joe Louis, the greatest boxer that ever lived.  I'll be with you boys in a minute. He was badder than Cassius Clay, he was badder than Sugar Ray, and that new boy-what's his name? Mike Tyson?-looks like a bulldog; he was badder than him, too.

Vait a minute. Vat about Rocky Marciano

Oh, there they go. There they go, every time I start talkin' 'bout boxing, a white man got to pull Rocky Marciano out they ass. That's their one, that's their one. Rocky Marciano! Rocky Marciano! Let me tell you something, once and for all-Rocky Marciano was good; but compared to Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano ain't shiat.

He beat Joe Louis' ass.

That's right, he did whoop Joe Louis' ass.

Joe Louis was 75 years old when they fought.

I don't know how old he was, but he got his ass whooped.

Joe Louis had come out of retirement to fight Rocky Marciano the minute he was 76 years old. Joe Louis was always lying about his age. He lied about his age all the time. One time Frank Sinatra came in here and sat in this chair. I said Frank 'you hang out with Joe Louis, just between me and you, how old is Joe Louis?' You know what Frank told me, he said "Hey, Joe Louis is 137 years old." A hundred and thirty-seven years old!

Oh. Man, you lying, you ain't never meet no Frank Sinatra.

Fark you, (gunsots) fark you,(gunshots) and fark you!(more gunshots) Who's next?!

justifiable homicide, clearly.

jaytkay: Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

My firearms are not allowed in the state of New York because I am not on the list of people with firearms to be confiscated at a later date.

Wow. You are fierce. I bet you get all the ladies with your knowledge of scopes and NY gun laws.

I've fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones on three continents. I led thousands of men into battle with everything from horses and swords to artillery and tanks. I've seen the headwaters of the Nile, and tribes of natives no white man had ever seen before. I've won and lost a dozen fortunes, KILLED MANY MEN and loved only one woman with a passion a FLEA like you could never begin to understand. That's who I am. NOW, GO HOME, BOY!

Peki: The only country that has a decent chance of messing with us in a ground war on our turf is China, and that's just a pure numbers game.

Part of the beauty of the reductions I proposed is that we could no longer face them in a numbers game / infantry battle. We would have no conventional forces - just the nuclear deterrent. It would protect our homeland and also prevent us from "getting into a land war in asia" or anywhere else.

potterydove: I thought all weapons with large magazines were illegal in new york.

No, large magazines  aboutweapons were banned.

willfullyobscure: And we all know who the real winners[i.imgur.com image 604x768] are in any gun thread, don't we??

Drew Curtis?

Peki: We're so farking paranoid about the ONE guy getting food stamps who drives a BMW that the people who ACTUALLY need help but are in farked up situations CAN'T get help because the paperwork is so damned complicated.

Government agencies have a perverse level of risk aversion because the public will jump down their throats if someone who didn't deserve help gets their depraved hands on a handout. We don't forgive if the government screws up. We get angry and we demand hearings and investigations. We blame the agency, not the perpetrator of the fraud.

js34603: Watch out we got a badass here guys. He must be part of the well regulated militia we hear so much about. Except the well regulated part, not that big on the regulations. But the tough talk and a lot of guns, he's ALL over that.

The government ought to have more and more and more guns (and bullets, of course) and the people ought to have fewer and fewer and fewer. This is because guns are inherently destructive, except in the hands of the government, in which case they become a valuable tool for enforcing the common good; and because people cannot be trusted to own guns responsibly, unless those same people manage to get a job with a government agency, in which case you can be assured they will only ever use their guns against you in your best interest. Simple really.

ladyfortuna: Freud's Cigar: Tillmaster: Herkimer? I've spent some time in Utica a few years ago. It never occurred to me that something like this would happen in Central New York.

Please. Google the Tri Willow Nursery murders in 1979 in Rome NY. Stuff happens everywhere.

Stuff like this that doesn't involve mass shootings happens all the time in central NY. Hell, we had some morons try to outrun some troopers and then pull off on a farm road and take potshots at them on the route I take to school. Last I heard they were getting some serious time for that, since it's a higher felony to attempt/kill law enforcement in NY... Been several other crazy things just since I moved here a few years ago.

/the boonies
//the white trash
///and the booze...

I used to live in that area, back in the day of the Tri Willow etc.

Sigh. No place is safe anymore. But if you are living in the Utica/Rome area, please leave. I hate to see any Farker that close to the Evil Vortex.

Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

My firearms are not allowed in the state of New York because I am not on the list of people with firearms to be confiscated at a later date.

Wow. You are fierce. I bet you get all the ladies with your knowledge of scopes and NY gun laws.

I've fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones on three continents. I led thousands of men into battle with everything from horses and swords to artillery and tanks. I've seen the headwaters of the Nile, and tribes of natives no white man had ever seen before. I've won and lost a dozen fortunes, KILLED MANY MEN and loved only one woman with a passion a FLEA like you could never begin to understand. That's who I am. NOW, GO HOME, BOY!

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.

/Twice in three days!
\\wait, slashies or backslashies?

Marcintosh: If my source is correct, between now and December 14th 2012 we've killed more people than all the real "Gun Fights" in the west.

Good jorb 'Murica

Citation-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_West_gunfights

Princess Ryans Knickers: Only criminals should have background checks and be kept from having guns.. oh wait, what's that you say? He wasn't a criminal until AFTER he got the guns just like all the rest of the mass shooters?

OK, so a drunk driver only becomes a criminal AFTER he/she is caught.  Do we do some sort of DNA test to check for a predisposition to alcohol gene before we give him/her a license?  What if, they don't ever get that driver's license and go out and kill someone while drunk driving, or just mis-handling the car?

You're right, let's just ban all automobiles.

/because those bans on alcohol, cocaine and heroin made them all disappear, amiright?

Clearly the cops should stop shooting guns at criminals and start throwing laws at them, the more laws, the less often this happens right?

boxster: In the state, hmm

"Best fried chicken"

Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: jaytkay: Giltric: Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.

So you're saying you ran down there with your AR-15 to defend the community?

Good job!

My firearms are not allowed in the state of New York because I am not on the list of people with firearms to be confiscated at a later date.

Wow. You are fierce. I bet you get all the ladies with your knowledge of scopes and NY gun laws.

I've fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones on three continents. I led thousands of men into battle with everything from horses and swords to artillery and tanks. I've seen the headwaters of the Nile, and tribes of natives no white man had ever seen before. I've won and lost a dozen fortunes, KILLED MANY MEN and loved only one woman with a passion a FLEA like you could never begin to understand. That's who I am. NOW, GO HOME, BOY!

1/10

Caps lock is an anagram and spoonerism for laps cock.  Which is ironic because anyone who uses caps lock inappropriately unrepentantly laps cock.

This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: and the people ought to have fewer and fewer and fewer.

Actually right now the trend is for fewer and fewer people to stockpile more and more guns. Only something like 30% of the country actually own guns and the rate is like an average of 6 per owner.

js34603: Except the well regulated part, not that big on the regulations. But the tough talk and a lot of guns, he's ALL over that.

I'd love to see it work the way Volunteer Fire Departments work in rural areas, which while being all-volunteer, are regulated in the since of a hierarchical structure, training, community support (including evil, evil taxes!), standards, qualifications, etc. As for me, I only have a shotgun and an antique rifle, the former of which was last fired 2 years ago when wifey found a nasty, mean snake in the garden!

Caffandtranqs: the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it

Agreed.

So why is a bunch of derp about guns all that ever comes up when we talk about violence in this country?

2wolves: tallen702: It's not like the counter was set high anyway. 2 days isn't a long time.... Oh wait... you didn't realize that 11 were shot in inner-city and predominately black DC two days ago? Link

America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a problem with white folk getting shot.

Come down to the rez. We'll protect you, you miserable piece of filth.

Oh, I'll be alright. MSP finally gave the "proceed" on my FAL receiver after 7 goddamned weeks. I figure between that and everything else in the main safe and the Mak in the biometric in the bedroom, I'm pretty well protected right here.

I don't get why people think little "close knit" communities would be immune to this type of violence (as opposed to drug/gang violence which it really seems they should be immune to).

People in little rural communities are less progressive. They are less accepting of other ways of life. People who are ostracized or bullied become depressed. For example, the bullying of LGBT people has caused them to have a high suicide rate. Thanks, bullies.

More seriously: NO COMMUNITY IS IMMUNE TO MENTAL ILLNESS.

America.  fark YEAH!

Ned Stark: Caffandtranqs: the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it

Agreed.

So why is a bunch of derp about guns all that ever comes up when we talk about violence in this country?

Clap. Clap. Clap.

Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

The problem with freedom, is that some people make poor choices with their freedom.    S

Giltric: Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Lol bootstraps is pretty much all your 'personal responsibility" garbage deserves.

If the average American slips on some ice or dumps their coffee in their lap, they're suing someone, but they expect to be given the responsibility of owning a firearm without question.

cameroncrazy1984: EvilRacistNaziFascist: and the people ought to have fewer and fewer and fewer.

Actually right now the trend is for fewer and fewer people to stockpile more and more guns. Only something like 30% of the country actually own guns and the rate is like an average of 6 per owner.

Over 2 million background checks per month in the last three months. If you buy multiple firearms at a time you get one background check...and out of that over 2 million background checks per month number the FBI claims a conservative 25% as first time buyers. Other groups rate it at higher than 40% being first time buyers....so at least over 1 million brand new, first time firearms owners in the last 3 months.

Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

If this is true, what bearing does it have on gun owners in those parts of the First World where there is relatively little economic disparity, and where a high rate of gun ownership can easily co-exist with a low rate of crime?

/P.S. the meaningless monosyllable "derp" is not an argument for or against anything

Ned Stark: Giltric: Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Lol bootstraps is pretty much all your 'personal responsibility" garbage deserves.

So you think this killers firearms should be smelted into ingots and he should be let go? It is the guns fault not his?

The first Fark submissions on this were at around noon, and it took this long to greenlight one?

The situation is still going on by the way. They still don't have the guy in custody.

Kurt Myers.

Wow, Fark is  chock full of fail today.
I guess he didn't have a funny enough hat.

Here is a link to the local news coverage.
http://www.9wsyr.com/content/news/breakingnews/Man-suspected-in-fire -4 -shooting-deaths-in/qzeUmKZusEquHSQ8BhkaYQ.cspx

spidermilk: I don't get why people think little "close knit" communities would be immune to this type of violence (as opposed to drug/gang violence which it really seems they should be immune to).

People in little rural communities are less progressive. They are less accepting of other ways of life. People who are ostracized or bullied become depressed. For example, the bullying of LGBT people has caused them to have a high suicide rate. Thanks, bullies.

More seriously: NO COMMUNITY IS IMMUNE TO MENTAL ILLNESS.

How uncultured and stereotypical of you. "Rural communities are less progressive" really? Is that why the majority of hate crimes occur in cities? "less accepting of other ways of life" nah we accept other ways of life, we just realize that OUR way of life is just fine also. Since it is OUR neighborhoods and OUR counties, maybe others should make an effort to conform.

"For example, the bullying of LGBT people has caused them to have a high suicide rate"

Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed, being as how nature itself rules that breeding should be the prime motive of a creature, human or other wise, and LGBT are unable to do so. Or maybe its the fact that trans people live at odds with themselves..but I guess its easy to blame everyone but the person who ultimately kills themselves. That would be politically uncorrect, and we cant have that.

Oh well. Flip the calendar cards back to 0, fellas.

Giltric: Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Can anyone translate this into English for me?

Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

/better believe it's obligatory

Giltric: Ned Stark: Giltric: Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Lol bootstraps is pretty much all your 'personal responsibility" garbage deserves.

So you think this killers firearms should be smelted into ingots and he should be let go? It is the guns fault not his?

Yep. It's not like Ive spent a couple of dozen threads sticking up for gun rights or anything.

Ned Stark: Caffandtranqs: the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it

Agreed.

So why is a bunch of derp about guns all that ever comes up when we talk about violence in this country?

Because we are a violent people.  We have been starting fights with people all over the world that has not wanted to give up their lunch money.  We are mean to each other.  We kill each other.  Our behavior speaks of our culture.  Entertainment in all forms is merely a mirror of this.  Just stating what I think.

gilgamesh23: Peki: We're so farking paranoid about the ONE guy getting food stamps who drives a BMW that the people who ACTUALLY need help but are in farked up situations CAN'T get help because the paperwork is so damned complicated.

Government agencies have a perverse level of risk aversion because the public will jump down their throats if someone who didn't deserve help gets their depraved hands on a handout. We don't forgive if the government screws up. We get angry and we demand hearings and investigations. We blame the agency, not the perpetrator of the fraud.

Yup. Best part is when the fraud doesn't even exist (see voter fraud). I've been to several social services offices and have yet to see the guy in the BMW that the right-wingers claim are so prevalent. Maybe it was like that in the 90s, but a good portion of the people I see trying to get help can't even read the 11 pages of forms they want you to fill out, let alone have any kind of ID, etc. Hell, I HAVE almost all of those things, can read and write, even have two college degrees in different fields, and I *still* can't get help.

We blame the government and the people who are legitimately on the dole, not the perpetrator of the fraud or the people who made the decisions that farked the country so badly that made more people needed to go on the dole.

Giltric: cameroncrazy1984: EvilRacistNaziFascist: and the people ought to have fewer and fewer and fewer.

Actually right now the trend is for fewer and fewer people to stockpile more and more guns. Only something like 30% of the country actually own guns and the rate is like an average of 6 per owner.

Over 2 million background checks per month in the last three months. If you buy multiple firearms at a time you get one background check...and out of that over 2 million background checks per month number the FBI claims a conservative 25% as first time buyers. Other groups rate it at higher than 40% being first time buyers....so at least over 1 million brand new, first time firearms owners in the last 3 months.

And? that's less than .03% of the current US population.

whatshisname: If the average American slips on some ice or dumps their coffee in their lap, they're suing someone, but they expect to be given the responsibility of owning a firearm without question.

Caffandtranqs: Ned Stark: Caffandtranqs: the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it

Agreed.

So why is a bunch of derp about guns all that ever comes up when we talk about violence in this country?

Because we are a violent people.  We have been starting fights with people all over the world that has not wanted to give up their lunch money.  We are mean to each other.  We kill each other.  Our behavior speaks of our culture.  Entertainment in all forms is merely a mirror of this.  Just stating what I think.

Seems like some pretty smart things to think.

Ned Stark: Giltric: Ned Stark: Giltric: Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Lol bootstraps is pretty much all your 'personal responsibility" garbage deserves.

So you think this killers firearms should be smelted into ingots and he should be let go? It is the guns fault not his?

Yep. It's not like Ive spent a couple of dozen threads sticking up for gun rights or anything.

I try not to color code people. I want every post to be fresh and not have a bias towards a poister based on things they have said in the past.

What sort of sticking up for rights have you done? Any compromises? Limits on ownership or magazine capacities? Are things good the way they are?

I have a question,  Giltric:do you support universal background checks? Are you a member of the NRA? If so, why?

taxandspend: lostcat: Peki:

I think she has a point. There's a d ...

Funny, I get the same treatment when trying to talk to:

Airline Employees
Time Warner Customer Service
Apple Computers when my Protection Plan is near expiration
Bank of America

Yes, it's true there are rude people in customer service. At least in most of those cases I have the option of moving my business to a competitor.

I also think that this bad customer service is the result of what they can get away with because we've all come to expect bad service. Then when we get good service we're blown away. I could tell you amazing stories about consistently good service from ANA (All Nippon Airways), Vietnam Air and NOK (Thai airline) agents who have bent over backwards to help me.

Once, when flying ANA to Vietnam, I realized as I checked in that my return ticket was AFTER the expiration of my Vietnam visa. The ANA agent actually booked me on an earlier flight back, and then told me that she would ensure my original seat was held, so as soon as I got past Vietnamese border control I could call and cancel the return flight and go back to my original flight. It worked without a hitch. I can guarantee you that if I'd been on United that day I would not have flown.

dmax: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Shame on you, even by trolling, by trying to minimize the wrongness of this. I get that it's Fark, and that it's the internets.
But shame on you anyway.

Somewhere I know there's someone who's lost a friend or family member because of this "freedom" paranoia. Their kid or dad or sister is dead because folks want to impede action by arguing about nomenclature or legalese or obscure historical points.

All that stuff falls away when you remember that there are not-quite-sane people out there who can't parse subtleties and can easily access high-powered deadly weapons. And kill someone that doesn't deserve it. (So that Farkers can post our own version of gallows humor)

True - but if you look at the statistics, you can see that America's love affair with the gun is waning. The percentage of Americans who own guns and households that have them is dwindling year by year.
Statistically, it's safer to live in this country than it has ever been. And I am not really that worried about people having guns, or even thinking that guns can protect their freedoms.
What worries me is that a lot of people assume that guns (which may confer some ability to resist physical force) CAN protect our freedoms in today's worlds. It makes the assumption that when and if our freedoms are taken, it will be by physical force.
I have a mental image of a person, and I have no doubt that he exists. He sits in his house, secure with his closet full of guns. His television is tuned to American Idol. He sits there, soaking up whatever the people with real power want to feed him, while blunting his mind with Bud Light and prescription drugs. Tomorrow, he will rise and go to the soul-killing job he hates, while the AM radio shock jock bludgeons his mind with yet more nonsense. He grinds his way through his empty day, killing his own soul while he enriches his masters.
And then, he goes home and repeats the cycle. Day after day, month after month, year after year. Every so often, he goes to the polls and elects some empty suit that the same TV that rots his mind daily tells him to.
And someday, inevitably, without anyone ever forcibly "taking" it - all his freedom, manhood, and reason for living is gone - and his guns still sit moldering in the closet, unused, because there was never anybody to use them on.
Smart crooks don't do violent crime - they become con artists. Why would anybody use force to take from his victim what that victim can be tricked into relinquishing without a fight? And tyrants are just another type of criminal - the smart ones don't use force, and no gun will ever stop them.
So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me. But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

spidermilk: the bullying of LGBT people has caused them to have a high suicide rate.

I think that's got a something to do with it, but correlation and causation... Link

cameroncrazy1984: I have a question,  Giltric:do you support universal background checks? Are you a member of the NRA? If so, why?

Do you support background checks for violent video games? And did you really attend and graduate from Duke, given your username, or are you just posing?

Giltric: Ned Stark: Giltric: Ned Stark: Giltric: Caffandtranqs: This is what you see on the net, "When guns are illegal only criminals have guns."  Then they point to Mexico, but not England or France.  They point to impoverished countries where the real problem is poverty and people killing each other to get out of it.  You never see, "People living under great disparities in economic disposition only own guns."  That's because gun nuts do not seem to connect those little dots. Too much derp in that.

Actually the gun nuts recognize it and say "hey, we've been giving them fish for decades now, and the problem is only getting worse. How about we try something new and teach them how to fish and see if that works" And then the people in support of modern slavery...ie generational welfare, vote for us, we will help you, honest injun, claim "LOL bootstraps" and nothing is ever done.

Lol bootstraps is pretty much all your 'personal responsibility" garbage deserves.

So you think this killers firearms should be smelted into ingots and he should be let go? It is the guns fault not his?

Yep. It's not like Ive spent a couple of dozen threads sticking up for gun rights or anything.

I try not to color code people. I want every post to be fresh and not have a bias towards a poister based on things they have said in the past.

What sort of sticking up for rights have you done? Any compromises? Limits on ownership or magazine capacities? Are things good the way they are?

I think universal background checks are an alright idea. I think magazine limits are dumb but give little enough of a shiat that if I were the big burrito in congress I would be willing to trade it for something good. I flatly oppose further bans of types of firearms.

cameroncrazy1984: I have a question, Giltric:do you support universal background checks? Are you a member of the NRA? If so, why?

"Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the NRA?"

Peki: atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

Only one that pratices homophobia? Are you implying that you 100% understand the nature of animal aggression and its motives? Chimps have violent fights, they have wars, in fact, they turn on their own sometimes without being provoked. You can not state for a fact that humans are the only ones that practice "homophobia" Yes, depression because a gay acts strait is another example of acting against your nature, but acting against NATURE in general is denying your drive to breed. Some are not born with that drive, I am not stating that a lack of drive or homosexuality is not another facet of nature, but the law of nature is simple, you need food, water shelter, socialization, and a drive to breed. it is the core of all living things. If you are somehow wired to not breed, it can be classified as a defect, and should be. Acknowledgement of this does not make someone a bully, it is a truth. If someone can come to grips with themselves on this issue fine and good, I hope that most can, but lets not say "BULLYING IS THE REASON' when in fact it could be nothing more then a realization of the above, that homosexuality can be viewed as a genetic defect that goes against the rules of survival and nature.

spidermilk: People in little rural communities are less progressive. They are less accepting of other ways of life. People who are ostracized or bullied become depressed. For example, the bullying of LGBT people has caused them to have a high suicide rate. Thanks, bullies.

Hmm, I've lived in a little rural community for 15 years and I've never heard of anyone locally killing themselves for any reason, let alone because of anti- LGBTQQ2SOMGWTF bullying. It must be because Billy-Joe-Bob-Cletus and his sister-wife hid all the bodies (before celebrating with a hoedown over a jug of moonshine, of course).

libranoelrose: Haters gonna hate.

I just got home, couldn't have done a better job myself :D

Herkimer, huh?  Seems appropriate.  Not the first mass killing associated with the name...

// cheap shot, I know...

ladyfortuna: Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

His patch and hat say 'police' and the crest on the hat is state police, so... [quizzicaldog.jpg]

cameroncrazy1984: I have a question,  Giltric:do you support universal background checks? Are you a member of the NRA? If so, why?

No i do not support universal background checks in its current potential form because it is linked to mandatory registration. The Schumer UBC bill also makes it a felony for me to go on a business trip while leaving my firearms at home with my wife even if they are in a safe. I am currently a meber of the NRA. I let my membership lapse years ago but became a member again in January because they are the most capable group with the deepest pockets when it comes to 2nd amendment issues and democrats started pushing the gun control agenda again.

SpdrJay: If everyone wore a personal force shield, this wouldn't be an issue.

Until some jerk invents lasguns. Then we're all doomed.

Flash_NYC: Marcintosh: If my source is correct, between now and December 14th 2012 we've killed more people than all the real "Gun Fights" in the west.

Good jorb 'Murica

Citation-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_West_gunfights
Princess Ryans Knickers: Only criminals should have background checks and be kept from having guns.. oh wait, what's that you say? He wasn't a criminal until AFTER he got the guns just like all the rest of the mass shooters?

OK, so a drunk driver only becomes a criminal AFTER he/she is caught.  Do we do some sort of DNA test to check for a predisposition to alcohol gene before we give him/her a license?  What if, they don't ever get that driver's license and go out and kill someone while drunk driving, or just mis-handling the car?

You're right, let's just ban all automobiles.

/because those bans on alcohol, cocaine and heroin made them all disappear, amiright?

So, Strawman much?

Peki: atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

Um, 14,000?  Or is it more like 1500 have been observed and it's been well documented for 500?

lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

Giltric: No i do not support universal background checks in its current potential form because it is linked to mandatory registration. The Schumer UBC bill also makes it a felony for me to go on a business trip while leaving my firearms at home with my wife even if they are in a safe.

Holy cow, I didn't realize that.  That is crazy.

Mrbogey: cameroncrazy1984: I have a question, Giltric:do you support universal background checks? Are you a member of the NRA? If so, why?

"Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the NRA?"

Yep...one of the stages of the 8 stages of genocide.

http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/8stagesofgenocide.html

LoneWolf343: It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it,

YES IT WOULD.

Your "doing something" wouldn't stop the violence. You're focusing on the effects, not the cause. Come back with something that targets the source of the problem and is based on facts not emotions and smart people will agree with you.

LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

It shouldn't? What makes this particular cause of death any worse or better then any others? Death by auto accident has a far higher body count. Death by chainsaw more gory. Death by fall is far easier and no way to regulate it. What makes guns the crusade you are so willing to go on?

old man they say opened fire at a car wash and a barbershop Wednesday morning, killing four people and wounding at least two.

Maybe the old line "Shave and a haircut, 2 bits" finally got to him.

LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

what exactly would you do to prevent people from killing each other?

make it illegal?
or how about a commandment or something like that?

LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

you do know that gun murders are at it's lowest point since 1981, right?  About half as many now as then.

atomicmask: What makes guns the crusade you are so willing to go on?

Emotion. Guns are "scary"

The anti gun people are the ones who bring the 20 oz can of bear mace camping and three different battery powered LED headlamps in case you have to hike out at night, but forget to bring a sleeping bag and a backup lighter.

Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

I thought you were kidding, but sure enough it's on backwards.  I think it's from the XPS line.

Picked them up here.

jaytkay: TerminalEchoes: Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Exactly. Guns aren't more dangerous than any other object.

That's why the Marines gave up firearms years ago. They now carry golf clubs. It's saved the taxpayer millions.

That's ridiculous! No, after extensive study, they opted for bath tubs. Cars were a close second.

jso2897:
True - but if you look at the statistics, you can see that America's love affair with the gun is waning. The percentage of Americans who own guns and households that have them is dwindling year by year.
Statistically, it's safer to live in this country than it has ever been. And I am not really that worried about people having guns, or even thinking that guns can protect their freedoms.
What worries me is that a lot of people assume that guns (which may confer some ability to resist physical force) CAN protect our freedoms in today's worlds. It makes the assumption that when and if our freedoms are taken, it will be by physical force.

The "dwindling households with guns" one always makes me chuckle a bit. Firearms sales are at all time highs (in MD, there were 50,000 background checks performed by the MSP the entirety of last year, there were more than that in the first two months of this year alone. Given that MD law says you can only buy so many "restricted" firearms in a given time period, those 50,000 firearms are more than likely going to nearly 50,000 people. And that's just for handguns and "assault weapons" not shotguns or non-baby-seeking evil black rifles.

Most gun owners are loath to divulge that they own guns to strangers who have either:
A) Mailed them a questionnaire and thus know their physical address.
or
B) Called them on the phone, again thus knowing their location and physical address thanks to whoever prints the phone books these days.
or
C) Physically showed up at their property to ask them in person.

If someone from Gallup were to come to my front door tomorrow and ask me if I owned firearms, my answer wouldn't be "Why yes, I do!" It'd be a blatant "Nope, never have, never will" lie. The Gov't has tried to put us on lists for years and years and years, and firearms owners have fought tooth and nail to prevent any kind of national registry because no good can come of it. Do you  really think we're going to tell someone who knows where we live that we have guns?

I'd be willing to bet that the real number is that over 50% of the nation's homes have firearms in them where not prohibited by law, and that the number would really be even higher than that if you included all the illegally owned firearms by gangbangers and ex felons who bought them off the street.

As for protecting our freedoms. Yes, a lot of people wind up in the doldrums of life, but not everyone. Just look at the thousands of people who showed up to protest MD's proposed bans. They took time off of work, time away from their families, etc to turn out on a work day to stand up for their freedoms. If it had been a non-work day, you'd have seen many times more.

I know it's anecdotal, but all of my gun-owning friends spend more time doing things with their families, getting out and about on the weekends, and enjoying their lives than most of my non-gun-owning friends.

Has anyone responded to the point that NYC has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, yet they failed to prevent this incident nonetheless?

jso2897: So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me.

That's great, but could you write to Sen. Feinstein to let her know that? Thanks.

But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

I don't disagree that western civilization is going down the sh*tter in large part due to the stupefied apathy of the citizenry. Guns are for free men, but how free are we when we let State agencies dictate what kinds of lightbulbs we can use or what kinds of cheeses we can eat, when online companies are gathering our data freely and sharing it with the government, or when we censor ourselves from speaking plainly in everyday conversation because we are worried that someone might be offended and we might be reprimanded, fired or even prosecuted? How free are we when our traditional deference towards the police and the military has mutated into a cringing servility towards all forms of authority, no matter how they treat us? But no matter, there is always something on TV to watch and some food to stuff our faces with -- until one day there won't be, of course, and we'll wonder what the hell happened while we were choosing not to notice.

FilmBELOH20: Peki: atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

Um, 14,000?  Or is it more like 1500 have been observed and it's been well documented for 500?

Bah! I remember the comma in the wrong place (I'm not perfect, and I've already made one error on this thread, so I guess a trifecta's in play).

atomicmask: If you are somehow wired to not breed, it can be classified as a defect, and should be.

So what? Just because someone's not wired like 90% of the rest of population they should be treated as defective? So, people who are left-handed are defective? People who are asexual are "defective"? People who are black/white/red/yellow are now defective because their skin tone doesn't match the majority of the people around them? How about, it's not a defect, just another variation of HUMAN that you haven't accounted for.

The idea that there are ONLY two sexes / ONLY two genders flies in the face of even human history, let alone evolutionary. Being LGBT is NOT a defect; the defect is in those who think it's a justification to discriminate.

And what dafuq are you doing making this an LGBT issue on a gun-control issue??? (and yes, bad on me for rising to it, but ffs) Are you about to suggest that gay people shouldn't own guns because they're defective?

jso2897: What worries me is that a lot of people assume that guns (which may confer some ability to resist physical force) CAN protect our freedoms in today's worlds. It makes the assumption that when and if our freedoms are taken, it will be by physical force.
I have a mental image of a person, and I have no doubt that he exists. He sits in his house, secure with his closet full of guns. His television is tuned to American Idol. He sits there, soaking up whatever the people with real power want to feed him, while blunting his mind with Bud Light and prescription drugs. Tomorrow, he will rise and go to the soul-killing job he hates, while the AM radio shock jock bludgeons his mind with yet more nonsense. He grinds his way through his empty day, killing his own soul while he enriches his masters.
And then, he goes home and repeats the cycle. Day after day, month after month, year after year. Every so often, he goes to the polls and elects some empty suit that the same TV that rots his mind daily tells him to.
And someday, inevitably, without anyone ever forcibly "taking" it - all his freedom, manhood, and reason for living is gone - and his guns still sit moldering in the closet, unused, because there was never anybody to use them on.
Smart crooks don't do violent crime - they become con artists. Why would anybody use force to take from his victim what that victim can be tricked into relinquishing without a fight? And tyrants are just another type of criminal - the smart ones don't use force, and no gun will ever stop them.
So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me. But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

Worthy of repeating.

LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

SARCASM

Try reading it again as if I were someone who thinks tjat guns in the hands over anyone who can afford them is not a brilliant idea.

GoldSpider: Has anyone responded to the point that NYC has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, yet they failed to prevent this incident nonetheless?

Because it didn't happen in NYC?

js34603: tallen702: It's not like the counter was set high anyway. 2 days isn't a long time.... Oh wait... you didn't realize that 11 were shot in inner-city and predominately black DC two days ago? Link

America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a problem with white folk getting shot.

Obviously Americans don't care about that shooting. If they did it would have been covered in a national newspaper that reported daily events.

/they'd probably call it The U.S. Today or something like that

USA Today isn't broadcasted nationally. Did Fox News have a "Breaking News" alert with that unique ping sound they use? (Maybe, during the report as the reporter is talking the lower thirds has the caption saying, "DRIVE BY SHOOTING IN WASHINGTON DC AT NEW YORK AVENUE, EVERYBODY BETTER FARKING DUCK!")

atomicmask: LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

It shouldn't? What makes this particular cause of death any worse or better then any others? Death by auto accident has a far higher body count. Death by chainsaw more gory. Death by fall is far easier and no way to regulate it. What makes guns the crusade you are so willing to go on?

What's the ratio of homicide by vehicle to accidental deaths in vehicle accidents?  What's the ratio for gun deaths, accidental vs intentional?

If you're going to use that ridiculous argument, at least make the comparison relevant.  Compare the rate of people killed intentionally by cars and killed intentionally by guns and see if your brilliant idea holds up.

Mazzic518: Because it didn't happen in NYC?

Heh, aw fack.  Still, New York state isn't a slouch on gun laws either.

Unarmed customers at the Ft. Pitt Inn overcome armed looney. Wonder why the NRA isn't crowing about this incident.

Just outside Imperial Pennsylvania.

Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

To kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible.

TerminalEchoes: Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

You just can't make this stuff up

Man kills his wife using a vacuum cleaner.

tallen702:

know it's anecdotal, but all of my gun-owning friends spend more time doing things with their families, getting out and about on the weekends, and enjoying their lives than most of my non-gun-owning friends.

It's not so much that it's anecdotal is it's not causal. The fact that your gun-owning friends spend more time with their family and outdoors is not directly attributable to their gun ownership.

if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

GoldSpider: Mazzic518: Because it didn't happen in NYC?

Heh, aw fack.  Still, New York state isn't a slouch on gun laws either.

We do not have to turn in our high cap mags yet :)

Mrbogey: Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

To kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible.

If i was ENCON i'd want something with more stopping power than a .223

lostcat: tallen702:

know it's anecdotal, but all of my gun-owning friends spend more time doing things with their families, getting out and about on the weekends, and enjoying their lives than most of my non-gun-owning friends.

It's not so much that it's anecdotal is it's not causal. The fact that your gun-owning friends spend more time with their family and outdoors is not directly attributable to their gun ownership.

how do you know that?

willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

What happens if it was a glock?

Molavian: Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

I thought you were kidding, but sure enough it's on backwards.  I think it's from the XPS line.

[i184.photobucket.com image 640x480]

[i184.photobucket.com image 640x480]

Picked them up here.

Maybe wrong rear sight too. He shouldn't have a gun.

GoldSpider: willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

What happens if it was a glock?

We are going to sue Australia

WhoopAssWayne: Look on the bright side. Obama might have some more dead kids to exploit and use as props in the next state of the union, being the classy guy that he is, right democrats? This tragedy would just be another great win for you, you scumbag pieces of sh*t.

Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name. Hey Chief! When you go, can you just start with yourself? Kthxby.

Mazzic518: GoldSpider: Has anyone responded to the point that NYC has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, yet they failed to prevent this incident nonetheless?

Because it didn't happen in NYC?

Too bad NY state has the most restrictive firearm laws in the nation.

Mazzic518: We do not have to turn in our high cap mags yet :)

On a completely unrelated note, is it just me, or does Andrew Cuomo look and sound more "connected" than a Scranton trash kingpin?

boxster: atomicmask: LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

It shouldn't? What makes this particular cause of death any worse or better then any others? Death by auto accident has a far higher body count. Death by chainsaw more gory. Death by fall is far easier and no way to regulate it. What makes guns the crusade you are so willing to go on?

What's the ratio of homicide by vehicle to accidental deaths in vehicle accidents?  What's the ratio for gun deaths, accidental vs intentional?

If you're going to use that ridiculous argument, at least make the comparison relevant.  Compare the rate of people killed intentionally by cars and killed intentionally by guns and see if your brilliant idea holds up.

So you don't care about all the children killed in car accidents? Or do you just ignore them because you can't use their dead bodies as a platform against gun ownership?

jso2897: As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

Just FYI it was T.S. Eliot who said that. Yeats was the one who is frequently quoted for his famous phrase "the best lack all conviction / while the worst are full of a passionate intensity". The best of the Modernist poets had a hell of a lot to teach us about ourselves as we journey through our limited lives; for anyone who wants to get into poetry but doesn't know where to begin, I'd recommend an anthology of Eliot's and Yeats's complete works to get you started -- you won't regret it.

tallen702: I know it's anecdotal, but all of my gun-owning friends spend more time doing things with their families, getting out and about on the weekends, and enjoying their lives than most of my non-gun-owning friends.

Not anecdotal: Men who murder their families and then kill themselves after a barricade situation are nearly 100% gun owners.

GUTSU: So you don't care about all the children killed in car accidents? Or do you just ignore them because you can't use their dead bodies as a platform against gun ownership?

How many were killed intentionally?  I'm sure you have stats since you think the comparison is apt.

BGates: Mazzic518: GoldSpider: Has anyone responded to the point that NYC has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, yet they failed to prevent this incident nonetheless?

Because it didn't happen in NYC?

Too bad NY state has the most restrictive firearm laws in the nation.

I live in NY and I know many many gun owners.... point?

Spree shooting NOT a mass shooting. Clock continues!
/Play Ball!
//Doinrite?

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me.

That's great, but could you write to Sen. Feinstein to let her know that? Thanks.

But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

I don't disagree that western civilization is going down the sh*tter in large part due to the stupefied apathy of the citizenry. Guns are for free men, but how free are we when we let State agencies dictate what kinds of lightbulbs we can use or what kinds of cheeses we can eat, when online companies are gathering our data freely and sharing it with the government, or when we censor ourselves from speaking plainly in everyday conversation because we are worried that someone might be offended and we might be reprimanded, fired or even prosecuted? How free are we when our traditional deference towards the police and the military has mutated into a cringing servility towards all forms of authority, no matter how they treat us? But no matter, there is always something on TV to watch and some food to stuff our faces with -- until one day there won't be, of course, and we'll wonder what the hell happened while we were choosing not to notice.

First they came for the cheese. But I was not a cheese..

willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

And if he used a shotgun?

GoldSpider: Mazzic518: We do not have to turn in our high cap mags yet :)

On a completely unrelated note, is it just me, or does Andrew Cuomo look and sound more "connected" than a Scranton trash kingpin?

Takes after his father Mario

boxster: GUTSU: So you don't care about all the children killed in car accidents? Or do you just ignore them because you can't use their dead bodies as a platform against gun ownership?

How many were killed intentionally?  I'm sure you have stats since you think the comparison is apt.

What's the percentage of gun owners that are also mass murders?

Molavian: Giltric: I really hope this well trained SWAT officer does not enocoonter the suspect and a gunfight ensues....his EOTech is mounted backwards.

You are not able to see the reticle looking through the EOTech from that direction...there is a 100% chance he has nver fired that rifle while looking through the scope....and if he hasn't fired that rifle with that scope on it it would not be zeroed and he has as much a chance as shooting some citizen crossing the street a half mile away as he does the suspect.

Remember....there are alot of people on this site who think that only people like that should own a rifle like an AR-15.
[statepolitics.lohudblogs.com image 300x225]

I thought you were kidding, but sure enough it's on backwards.  I think it's from the XPS line.

[i184.photobucket.com image 640x480]

[i184.photobucket.com image 640x480]

Picked them up here.

I didn't know LE agencies in NYS used Hollywood armorers and prop-masters to outfit their weapons.

Evil High Priest: EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me.

That's great, but could you write to Sen. Feinstein to let her know that? Thanks.

But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

I don't disagree that western civilization is going down the sh*tter in large part due to the stupefied apathy of the citizenry. Guns are for free men, but how free are we when we let State agencies dictate what kinds of lightbulbs we can use or what kinds of cheeses we can eat, when online companies are gathering our data freely and sharing it with the government, or when we censor ourselves from speaking plainly in everyday conversation because we are worried that someone might be offended and we might be reprimanded, fired or even prosecuted? How free are we when our traditional deference towards the police and the military has mutated into a cringing servility towards all forms of authority, no matter how they treat us? But no matter, there is always something on TV to watch and some food to stuff our faces with -- until one day there won't be, of course, and we'll wonder what the hell happened while we were choosing not to notice.

First they came for the cheese. But I was not a cheese..

How much cheese, in pounds, did they come for?

willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

I don't understand. What possible difference would it make what firearm a particular murderer used? Every gun on the planet can be used to kill someone; nobody has ever claimed otherwise. The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

GoldSpider: EvilRacistNaziFascist: The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

Shhhh, don't tell that that, are you daft! You never give them ideas!

dr_blasto: Evil High Priest: EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me.

That's great, but could you write to Sen. Feinstein to let her know that? Thanks.

But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

I don't disagree that western civilization is going down the sh*tter in large part due to the stupefied apathy of the citizenry. Guns are for free men, but how free are we when we let State agencies dictate what kinds of lightbulbs we can use or what kinds of cheeses we can eat, when online companies are gathering our data freely and sharing it with the government, or when we censor ourselves from speaking plainly in everyday conversation because we are worried that someone might be offended and we might be reprimanded, fired or even prosecuted? How free are we when our traditional deference towards the police and the military has mutated into a cringing servility towards all forms of authority, no matter how they treat us? But no matter, there is always something on TV to watch and some food to stuff our faces with -- until one day there won't be, of course, and we'll wonder what the hell happened while we were choosing not to notice.

First they came for the cheese. But I was not a cheese..

How much cheese, in pounds, did they come for?

Ten pounds?

GoldSpider: EvilRacistNaziFascist: The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

Or what a creative soul could load into a a bunch of 12 gauge shells with nothing but a pocket knife and ten minutes.

Benjamin Orr: willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

And if he used a shotgun?

btw.... He did use a shotgun

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/nyregion/four-killed-in-shootings-i n -upstate-new-york.html

Evil High Priest: First they came for the cheese. But I was not a cheese..

...or a bucket of Amish-produced raw milk.

Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: So you don't care about all the children killed in car accidents? Or do you just ignore them because you can't use their dead bodies as a platform against gun ownership?

How many were killed intentionally?  I'm sure you have stats since you think the comparison is apt.

What's the percentage of gun owners that are also mass murders?

Nope, wrong again.  The relevant question would be what percentage of gun owners use their guns to intentionally kill other people.

The related relevant question is what percentage of car owners - or drivers, for that matter - use their cars to intentionally kill other people.

"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Bringing you 24hr shooting coverage on... The Shooting Channel!

GoldSpider: EvilRacistNaziFascist: The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

Yeah. There are plenty of videos on youtube showing .308 or .30-06 rifles blowing apart concrete blocks from 100 yards away.

.223 pretty much bounces off at that range.

Benjamin Orr: btw.... He did use a shotgun

A Biden Special?

GoldSpider: Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

Give them credit. Most know this. It takes a lot of effort to ignore it. Don't denigrate their work.

Benjamin Orr: Benjamin Orr: willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

And if he used a shotgun?

btw.... He did use a shotgun

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/nyregion/four-killed-in-shootings-i n -upstate-new-york.html

After Newtown there was a farker who chimed in about how if Lanza had a shotgun things would have turned out differently... because children apparently get +5 AC to shotgun.

KarmicDisaster: Bringing you 24hr shooting coverage on... The Shooting Channel!

The ratings would be through the roof.

Peki: dr_blasto: Evil High Priest: EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: So - keep your guns. They, and you, are no threat to me.

That's great, but could you write to Sen. Feinstein to let her know that? Thanks.

But as for your freedoms - you'd better guard them closely, and don't assume that when they are taken that it will be by some guy in jackboots kicking in your front door. As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

I don't disagree that western civilization is going down the sh*tter in large part due to the stupefied apathy of the citizenry. Guns are for free men, but how free are we when we let State agencies dictate what kinds of lightbulbs we can use or what kinds of cheeses we can eat, when online companies are gathering our data freely and sharing it with the government, or when we censor ourselves from speaking plainly in everyday conversation because we are worried that someone might be offended and we might be reprimanded, fired or even prosecuted? How free are we when our traditional deference towards the police and the military has mutated into a cringing servility towards all forms of authority, no matter how they treat us? But no matter, there is always something on TV to watch and some food to stuff our faces with -- until one day there won't be, of course, and we'll wonder what the hell happened while we were choosing not to notice.

First they came for the cheese. But I was not a cheese..

How much cheese, in pounds, did they come for?

Ten pounds?

Benjamin Orr: btw.... He did use a shotgun

Listen you dirty right-wing bastard, if the shotgun is good enough for Joe Biden then it's good enough for me.

Benjamin Orr: Benjamin Orr: willfullyobscure: if it ends up that this dude had an AyHurr-Furfteen type weapon, I am NEVER going to let you tards live it down. It's gonna be great.

And if he used a shotgun?

btw.... He did use a shotgun

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/nyregion/four-killed-in-shootings-i n -upstate-new-york.html

Mrbogey: because children apparently get +5 AC to shotgun.

I lawled.

KarmicDisaster: Bringing you 24hr shooting coverage on... The Shooting Channel!

The Shooting Channel. Bringing you the Pros...

And Cons...

Of Weapons Discharging!

lostcat: She's mostly right. As Americans we have all this freedom

the sooner you realize this is not true, and that you've been lied to, the better off you'll be.

boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

Peki: atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

How the fark did this cool gun thread turn into a gay/straight (oh, and let's not forget those bi's) bullshiatfest?

boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

John Buck 41: Peki: atomicmask: Or maybe the fact that they are at odds with nature itself makes them more depressed,

Going against a gay person's nature to act straight? That would surely cause depression.

Depression because being gay is against nature? (when there are over 14,000 species that have documented occurrences of homosexual encounters, and only one that practices homophobia?) Nope.

I'm bi. The only time I have ever been "depressed" was a) when I couldn't figure wtf I was because the only words batted around at the time were gay and straight, and I knew I wasn't either, and b) whenever I've had discrimination because of who I am (not just because I'm bi, but because of other things about me too).

If you're straight, try practicing a homosexual lifestyle. You'll find out just how much against our nature it is for us to "just act straight." Now, go sit in the corner until you can learn to behave like a decent human being.

How the fark did this cool gun thread turn into a gay/straight (oh, and let's not forget those bi's) bullshiatfest?

Well there was a gay thread earlier that got all gunny. 's only fair.

GoldSpider: EvilRacistNaziFascist: The AR-15 is simply one weapon that has been stigmatized by emotional incontinents due to the fact that it looks scary, even though it is very far from being the most powerful legal firearm available.

Imagine what they would say if they knew most deer rifles can penetrate armor.

Holy crap you guys have armored deer there?

Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

Sure.  Provide some stats on how many drivers intentionally kill other people with cars while drunk vs. the number of gun owners intentionally kill other people with guns while drunk and let's see how they look.

Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

If you outlaw iron pipes with a screw set on the end of them, then only outlaws will have metal pipes with a screw set on the end of them.

boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

Oh, so children killed accidentally by cars don't count? Shouldn't you want to ban cars and pools? Both of them kill far, far more children than guns do annually. If you don't campaign to stop the sale, production, and distribution of motor-vehicles and pools you honestly don't care about the deaths of children... or you're somehow biased against firearms.

tallen702: The "dwindling households with guns" one always makes me chuckle a bit. Firearms sales are at all time highs

The actual statistic: Households with guns 1974-51%  2010-37%. The fact that the dwindling number of people who own guns panic buying them in great numbers doesn't change the demographic trend of diminishing interest in guns. Not that we are arguing about it, since you stated that your opinion is based on anecdotal evidence. But it it only part of the reason that I don't really care about gun control, one way or the other. As I said -you are welcome to your guns - neither you or them are or ever could be a threat to me. Anyway, I am a gun owner myself, and not a hypocrite. If they pass a few gun control laws - I don't care either.
You missed maybe 98% of the point I was making - that the idea that when and if our freedoms are taken from us, it will be by force, or that guns will even have anything to do with it. Guns do not equal freedom - they are just a tool of, or against, physical force. Handy in some situations, but no guarantee of freedom.
Now maybe you can look around this country today and think that the only threat to your freedom is some jackbooted thug from the government - in my view, that's the least of our worries. I think it is far more likely that when the day comes that we all line up to cheer Big Brother, that the NRA and it's members will be lustily cheering and waving their guns in the air in approval, along with everybody else.
Nobody has to "take" our freedom if we have forgotten what it is. Freedom is a state of mind, not a pile of worthless possessions - not guns, or any THING else. You could have an arsenal, and still be a slave - as long as you don't know it.Guns are useful tools - and only that. They will not make or keep you free, or brave, or happy, or a man. Believe that they (or any other THING) will at your own peril.
But hey - keep your guns. Neither they nor you frighten me in the least.

GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

Oh, so children killed accidentally by cars don't count? Shouldn't you want to ban cars and pools? Both of them kill far, far more children than guns do annually. If you don't campaign to stop the sale, production, and distribution of motor-vehicles and pools you honestly don't care about the deaths of children... or you're somehow biased against firearms.

They are biased against intent.

I don't agree with it at all, but its hardly an utterly nonsensical point of view.

Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

How many drunk drivers kill 20 children in 5 minutes?

boxster: Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

Sure.  Provide some stats on how many drivers intentionally kill other people with cars while drunk vs. the number of gun owners intentionally kill other people with guns while drunk and let's see how they look.

So if you get drunk and then drive a 3000 pound machine around and plow into a bus full of nuns bottle feeding baby monkeys... That is just an unfortunate accident that nobody could have seen coming?

WhoopAssWayne: Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

What is a serial killer safety word?

/for serial

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Yeah, give it another week and one person and a dog will be a massacre.

jso2897: tallen702: The "dwindling households with guns" one always makes me chuckle a bit. Firearms sales are at all time highs

The actual statistic: Households with guns 1974-51%  2010-37%. The fact that the dwindling number of people who own guns panic buying them in great numbers doesn't change the demographic trend of diminishing interest in guns. Not that we are arguing about it, since you stated that your opinion is based on anecdotal evidence. But it it only part of the reason that I don't really care about gun control, one way or the other. As I said -you are welcome to your guns - neither you or them are or ever could be a threat to me. Anyway, I am a gun owner myself, and not a hypocrite. If they pass a few gun control laws - I don't care either.
You missed maybe 98% of the point I was making - that the idea that when and if our freedoms are taken from us, it will be by force, or that guns will even have anything to do with it. Guns do not equal freedom - they are just a tool of, or against, physical force. Handy in some situations, but no guarantee of freedom.
Now maybe you can look around this country today and think that the only threat to your freedom is some jackbooted thug from the government - in my view, that's the least of our worries. I think it is far more likely that when the day comes that we all line up to cheer Big Brother, that the NRA and it's members will be lustily cheering and waving their guns in the air in approval, along with everybody else.
Nobody has to "take" our freedom if we have forgotten what it is. Freedom is a state of mind, not a pile of worthless possessions - not guns, or any THING else. You could have an arsenal, and still be a slave - as long as you don't know it.Guns are useful tools - and only that. They will not make or keep you free, or brave, or happy, or a man. Believe that they (or any other THING) will at your own peril.
But hey - keep your guns. Neither they nor you frighten me in the least.

That statistic is hilariously skewed, if you looked at the graph gun ownership for whatever reason mysteriously dropped during 1994 and during other not-so-friendly to gun owner years, only to jump back up later.
Also, who the fark would tell someone doing a phone or house survey that they own guns?

jaytkay: tallen702: I know it's anecdotal, but all of my gun-owning friends spend more time doing things with their families, getting out and about on the weekends, and enjoying their lives than most of my non-gun-owning friends.

Not anecdotal: Men who murder their families and then kill themselves after a barricade situation are nearly 100% gun owners.

Anti-gunners are nearly 100% void of common sense.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: As Yeats so depressingly pointed out, not all worlds end with bangs - sometimes, they end in whimpers.

Just FYI it was T.S. Eliot who said that. Yeats was the one who is frequently quoted for his famous phrase "the best lack all conviction / while the worst are full of a passionate intensity". The best of the Modernist poets had a hell of a lot to teach us about ourselves as we journey through our limited lives; for anyone who wants to get into poetry but doesn't know where to begin, I'd recommend an anthology of Eliot's and Yeats's complete works to get you started -- you won't regret it.

Thank you. Lack of sleep and antihistamines aren't helping. I own Yeats complete works - and yes, I should read more Elliot. But, he depresses me, as I mentioned. I'm not sure I care to know all he has to teach.

alcoda: WhoopAssWayne: Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

What is a serial killer safety word?

/for serial

Well, if you're serial about it, here's urban dictionary's definition of a safety word. Seems like Scooby-Doo would be a good choice. What harm could sweet, sweet Scoob ever do to you?

cameroncrazy1984: Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

How many drunk drivers kill 20 children in 5 minutes?

Well this guy killed 27 people and injured 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrollton,_Kentucky_bus_collision

But I guess you are ok with more people dying from car accidents per year as long as they die 2 or 3 at a time.

Mrbogey: Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

If you outlaw iron pipes with a screw set on the end of them, then only outlaws will have metal pipes with a screw set on the end of them.

Why are these guys always fat?

GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

Oh, so children killed accidentally by cars don't count? Shouldn't you want to ban cars and pools? Both of them kill far, far more children than guns do annually. If you don't campaign to stop the sale, production, and distribution of motor-vehicles and pools you honestly don't care about the deaths of children... or you're somehow biased against firearms.

I have no problem with firearms.  I own several and have been a gun owner since I was a kid.  I have a problem with idiotic comparisons that make zero sense.  Comparing vehicle deaths to gun deaths is one of the dumbest arguments people can make, and it makes them look ridiculous.  On top of that, they, just like you did, try to have it both ways.  Yes, let's compare all vehicle deaths to just gun deaths via "mass murder".  That makes perfect sense.

Nope, sorry, doesn't work that way.  Either put them on equal terms - how many times are they used as weapons to intentionally kill people - or the comparison is invalid.  It just makes you look like an idiot.

Gyrfalcon: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Yeah, give it another week and one person and a dog will be a massacre.

A fella can't murder 3 or 4 neighbors these days without the LIEBERALS going all "massacre!" and "carnage!"

Thanks, Obama!

Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

Following the Port Arthur massacre in Australia back in the 90s the government of that country outlawed all semi- automatic rifles, semi- automatic and pump- action shotguns... but rates of violent crime in that country have continued to rise, and now the usual suspects down there are saying that the remaining legal kinds of firearms (mostly single- shot and bolt- action types) should be outlawed.

Make no mistake: so-called "gun control" (or the even more Orwellian- termed "gun safety") is an incremental process on the way towards the complete abolition of civilian firearms ownership. Once they take your 30-round magazine, they will take your 10- round magazine next (which is already happening in New York State); and once the magazine- capacity restrictions inevitably fail to prevent the next mass shooting, eventually even the 5- round magazine will be too much for the authorities to tolerate, so that the single- shot will be your only choice... until that, in turn, is abolished. You have to resist these people at every step, and never let them gain even an inch.

Benjamin Orr: cameroncrazy1984: Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

How many drunk drivers kill 20 children in 5 minutes?

Well this guy killed 27 people and injured 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrollton,_Kentucky_bus_collision

But I guess you are ok with more people dying from car accidents per year as long as they die 2 or 3 at a time.

Actually, how do you calculate how long it takes to kill someone with a car? From impact, or from the actual collision? Depending how long he was on the road his Kill-to-Minute ratio could have been more than 20 in 5 minutes.

vudukungfu: Mrbogey: Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

If you outlaw iron pipes with a screw set on the end of them, then only outlaws will have metal pipes with a screw set on the end of them.

Why are these guys always fat?

There is a high probability that anyone you see on youtube is drunk, fat, poor or all three.

/statistical parameters of the population or something

WhoopAssWayne: alcoda: WhoopAssWayne: Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

What is a serial killer safety word?

/for serial

Well, if you're serial about it, here's urban dictionary's definition of a safety word. Seems like Scooby-Doo would be a good choice. What harm could sweet, sweet Scoob ever do to you?

Yeah I know what a safety word is. Just don't get the serial killer part. I mean, It's not as if a killer would tell a victim the only phrase that could stop their murder. Maybe I'm stupid.

GUTSU: jso2897: tallen702: The "dwindling households with guns" one always makes me chuckle a bit. Firearms sales are at all time highs

The actual statistic: Households with guns 1974-51%  2010-37%. The fact that the dwindling number of people who own guns panic buying them in great numbers doesn't change the demographic trend of diminishing interest in guns. Not that we are arguing about it, since you stated that your opinion is based on anecdotal evidence. But it it only part of the reason that I don't really care about gun control, one way or the other. As I said -you are welcome to your guns - neither you or them are or ever could be a threat to me. Anyway, I am a gun owner myself, and not a hypocrite. If they pass a few gun control laws - I don't care either.
You missed maybe 98% of the point I was making - that the idea that when and if our freedoms are taken from us, it will be by force, or that guns will even have anything to do with it. Guns do not equal freedom - they are just a tool of, or against, physical force. Handy in some situations, but no guarantee of freedom.
Now maybe you can look around this country today and think that the only threat to your freedom is some jackbooted thug from the government - in my view, that's the least of our worries. I think it is far more likely that when the day comes that we all line up to cheer Big Brother, that the NRA and it's members will be lustily cheering and waving their guns in the air in approval, along with everybody else.
Nobody has to "take" our freedom if we have forgotten what it is. Freedom is a state of mind, not a pile of worthless possessions - not guns, or any THING else. You could have an arsenal, and still be a slave - as long as you don't know it.Guns are useful tools - and only that. They will not make or keep you free, or brave, or happy, or a man. Believe that they (or any other THING) will at your own peril.
But hey - keep your guns. Neither they nor you frighten me in the least.

That statistic i ...

Not important. If you want to think that guns are growing in popularity among Americans, think it. It doesn't matter. Society is getting safer anyway, statistically, and I think that safety is about the least of our worries - at least, the immediate, personal sort of safety. What worries me - and I'll say it again, one last time - is a populace who only believe that they can lose their freedom to be human by having it taken from them.
Guns are fine - have all you want. Just don't think they'll make you safe, or free, or.....anything, really.
I'm pretty sure that if and when we all line up to cheer the Antichrist, or Big Brother, or Paris Hilton that the heavily armed will be right there cheering along with the rest of us.
I know it is not enough for you that I don't want to take your guns away - I know that you insist that I share your fantasies about their non-existent power. I apologize - I can't. But hey - keep 'em. In the end , they won't make any difference.

Benjamin Orr: Well this guy killed 27 people and injured 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrollton,_Kentucky_bus_collision

But I guess you are ok with more people dying from car accidents per year as long as they die 2 or 3 at a time.

The fact that you had to go back 25 years is pretty interesting.

boxster: GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

Oh, so children killed accidentally by cars don't count? Shouldn't you want to ban cars and pools? Both of them kill far, far more children than guns do annually. If you don't campaign to stop the sale, production, and distribution of motor-vehicles and pools you honestly don't care about the deaths of children... or you're somehow biased against firearms.

I have no problem with firearms.  I own several and have been a gun owner since I was a kid.  I have a problem with idiotic comparisons that make zero sense.  Comparing vehicle deaths to gun deaths is one of the dumbest arguments people can make, and it makes them look ridiculous.  On top of that, they, just like you did, try to have it both ways.  Yes, let's compare all vehicle deaths to just gun deaths via "mass murder".  That makes perfect sense.

Nope, sorry, doesn't work that way.  Either put them on equal terms - how many times are they used as weapons to intentionally kill people - or the comparison is invalid.  It just makes you look like an idiot.

So to be perfectly clear, you don't care about children killed by cars? Well okay then.

jaytkay: TerminalEchoes: Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

Exactly. Guns aren't more dangerous than any other object.

That's why the Marines gave up firearms years ago. They now carry golf clubs. It's saved the taxpayer millions.

You're putting words in my mouth. 1/10

WhoopAssWayne: alcoda: WhoopAssWayne: Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

What is a serial killer safety word?

/for serial

Well, if you're serial about it, here's urban dictionary's definition of a safety word. Seems like Scooby-Doo would be a good choice. What harm could sweet, sweet Scoob ever do to you?

That has raised such a hysterical image of a dominatrix's dungeon in my mind, with her submissive on all fours yelling "Scooooby-dooooo!" in Scooby's voice.

+1 and a Scooby Snack.

boxster: Benjamin Orr: Well this guy killed 27 people and injured 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrollton,_Kentucky_bus_collision

But I guess you are ok with more people dying from car accidents per year as long as they die 2 or 3 at a time.

The fact that you had to go back 25 years is pretty interesting.

First one I found on google....

So we are back to it being ok as long as the deaths from drunk driving are spread out over more events?

GUTSU: So to be perfectly clear, you don't care about children killed by cars? Well okay then.

So, to be perfectly clear, you have nothing to back up your idiotic position.  Well okay then.

jso2897:
That stat ...

I like your brand of nihilism, it's refreshing. Tell me, have you heard of Chaos Undivided? They're always looking for converts.

alcoda: Yeah I know what a safety word is. Just don't get the serial killer part. I mean, It's not as if a killer would tell a victim the only phrase that could stop their murder. Maybe I'm stupid.

Just thought the idea of them having a safety word might be amusing in a Scary Movie type of way. Some people have a strong sense of gallows humor I guess. welcometofark.jpg/etc/etc.

vudukungfu: Mrbogey: Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

If you outlaw iron pipes with a screw set on the end of them, then only outlaws will have metal pipes with a screw set on the end of them.

Why are these guys always fat?

Why is it that I always watch old black and white Twilight Zone episodes and I can still be amazed at how many future stars appeared in them?

boxster: GUTSU: So to be perfectly clear, you don't care about children killed by cars? Well okay then.

So, to be perfectly clear, you have nothing to back up your idiotic position.  Well okay then.

It's okay if you think guns are somehow more dangerous than cars, even though statistically they aren't. Tell the truth, you don't care about the children... you just don't like guns. Come on, the truth will set you free.

jso2897: Thank you. Lack of sleep and antihistamines aren't helping. I own Yeats complete works - and yes, I should read more Elliot. But, he depresses me, as I mentioned. I'm not sure I care to know all he has to teach.

Eliot can be depressing as hell -- but also funny too, as in "Sweeney Agonistes". His more redemptive and enlightening stuff however is in more developed works such as the "Four Quartets". He was obviously a melancholic type, but was at least partially rescued from it by his late- found faith in Christianity.

boxster: Benjamin Orr: Well this guy killed 27 people and injured 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrollton,_Kentucky_bus_collision

But I guess you are ok with more people dying from car accidents per year as long as they die 2 or 3 at a time.

The fact that you had to go back 25 years is pretty interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Grubman

It happens but it is far easier to claim "oops" when intentionally running someone over with a car then it is when you shoot them with a gun.

Just a hunch but I would wager that to some whites in the it would be considered sporting to run over some random black guy walking along the road in the South.

Bigdogdaddy: Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.

cameroncrazy1984: Benjamin Orr: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

What about drunk drivers? Do they count?

How many drunk drivers kill 20 children in 5 minutes?

So now it's a matter of timing? Really?

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Benjamin Orr: So.... Since he was an old man with a shotgun.... Should we expect this to quietly fade away from view or be the incident used to pass SAFE2 NY gun control bugaloo part 2?

Following the Port Arthur massacre in Australia back in the 90s the government of that country outlawed all semi- automatic rifles, semi- automatic and pump- action shotguns... but rates of violent crime in that country have continued to rise, and now the usual suspects down there are saying that the remaining legal kinds of firearms (mostly single- shot and bolt- action types) should be outlawed.

Make no mistake: so-called "gun control" (or the even more Orwellian- termed "gun safety") is an incremental process on the way towards the complete abolition of civilian firearms ownership. Once they take your 30-round magazine, they will take your 10- round magazine next (which is already happening in New York State); and once the magazine- capacity restrictions inevitably fail to prevent the next mass shooting, eventually even the 5- round magazine will be too much for the authorities to tolerate, so that the single- shot will be your only choice... until that, in turn, is abolished. You have to resist these people at every step, and never let them gain even an inch.

Well, everybody needs a hobby. Obsessions are good, actually - they keep  people busy. I, for one, have nothing to gain by taking your guns away - it would be a waste of time and money that would neither make my life safer or better in any way. I have far more intractable and worrisome concerns.

The safe word is fluggaenkdechioebolsen

Godscrack: Bigdogdaddy: Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.

[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

There used to be arguments over why soldiers from the 17/1800s closed their eyes when firing muskets....was it from the flash of the gunpowder or was it because they were religious and if they did not see them shoot the adversary they did not commit a sin or something.

GUTSU: jso2897:
That stat ...

I like your brand of nihilism, it's refreshing. Tell me, have you heard of Chaos Undivided? They're always looking for converts.

I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member. I'm a Groucho Marxist.

Godscrack: Bigdogdaddy: Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.

[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

Giltric: There used to be arguments over why soldiers from the 17/1800s closed their eyes when firing muskets

Now they get a free ticket by just going to confession.

jso2897: GUTSU: jso2897:
That stat ...

I like your brand of nihilism, it's refreshing. Tell me, have you heard of Chaos Undivided? They're always looking for converts.

I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member. I'm a Groucho Marxist.

Well, Papa Nurgle counts everyone as family. He's very forgiving.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: Thank you. Lack of sleep and antihistamines aren't helping. I own Yeats complete works - and yes, I should read more Elliot. But, he depresses me, as I mentioned. I'm not sure I care to know all he has to teach.

Eliot can be depressing as hell -- but also funny too, as in "Sweeney Agonistes". His more redemptive and enlightening stuff however is in more developed works such as the "Four Quartets". He was obviously a melancholic type, but was at least partially rescued from it by his late- found faith in Christianity.

Resolved - when I finish the massive tome on the history of American Art I am now reading*, I'm off to the library for some Elliot. Let's face it - I'm depressed anyway, I may as well do it with style.

*American Visions - Robert Hughes - helluva read.

Benjamin Orr: The safe word is fluggaenkdechioebolsen

it is better to have your partner use non verbal communication like crossing their eyes instead of using a safe word when practicing sexual asphixiation.

Giltric: Benjamin Orr: The safe word is fluggaenkdechioebolsen

it is better to have your partner use non verbal communication like crossing their eyes instead of using a safe word when practicing sexual asphixiation.

Or just stop when they start turning into a smurf.

doglover: Godscrack: Bigdogdaddy: Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.

[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

[www.cosplayhouse.com image 800x351]

What Would Jesus Shoot?U.S. Guns in Afghanistan and Iraq Bear Biblical Inscriptions Praising ChristCBS News - January 20, 2010

Know what one of the worst parts about the Newtown CT massacre is? We have to relive this farking thread every time there's a shooting, Same bullshiat spouted by (pick whatever side you're on)

Nobodys mind gets changed.

Mazzic518: DaFuq do game wardens need AR-15's for?

[www.fbastard.com image 628x457]

For shooting things.  You should read the Joe Pickett books by CJ Box.  Game wardens are often involved in gunfights and national-level conspiracy.

lostcat: LoneWolf343: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

Because people get shot every day. That shouldn't be happening. It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it, goddammit.

SARCASM

Try reading it again as if I were someone who thinks tjat guns in the hands over anyone who can afford them is not a brilliant idea.

I can't read inflection through text, dude.

doglover: LoneWolf343: It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it,

YES IT WOULD.

Your "doing something" wouldn't stop the violence. You're focusing on the effects, not the cause. Come back with something that targets the source of the problem and is based on facts not emotions and smart people will agree with you.

Tell that to Australia.

jaytkay: doglover: Godscrack: Bigdogdaddy: Most of the "gun nuts" I know have not been inside a church in years.

[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

[www.cosplayhouse.com image 800x351]

What Would Jesus Shoot?
U.S. Guns in Afghanistan and Iraq Bear Biblical Inscriptions Praising Christ
CBS News - January 20, 2010

jso2897: I'm pretty sure that if and when we all line up to cheer the Antichrist, or Big Brother, or Paris Hilton that the heavily armed will be right there cheering along with the rest of us.

Well, no. I won't, for one; and I doubt that I'm unique in being repelled by much of our contemporary culture and political life.

I know it is not enough for you that I don't want to take your guns away - I know that you insist that I share your fantasies about their non-existent power. I apologize - I can't. But hey - keep 'em. In the end , they won't make any difference

Just out of curiosity, jso2897, how do you think the future is going to unfold in the US over the next fifty years or so? The comments you've made on this thread seem to suggest that you don't share in the limitless optimism of those Farkers who believe that everything will be fine so long as the Democrats remain in power.

diaphoresis: It's a 3.5 hr drive from NYC. It's 4 people (dunno that I would call it Mass Shootings).  Media focuses on this because... it's a slow news day and the current federal administration is trying to pound a way to get rid of guns...

Why was this even a story? If the dude killed vestial virgins, then it would a story.

I didn't even see this in the news. Popeapalozza sucked up all the airtime on the news stations today.

News stations don't bother on reporting these now unless there's more than 10 people involved.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Just out of curiosity, jso2897, how do you think the future is going to unfold in the US over the next fifty years or so? The comments you've made on this thread seem to suggest that you don't share in the limitless optimism of those Farkers who believe that everything will be fine so long as the Democrats remain in power.

I know, things would be so much better if the Republicans were back in charge right?

I don't think the next 50 years are going to be as dramatic as people try to make it sound myself.

Yes, YOU WILL BEG the gubbermint to take your guns.

And yes, the gubbermint will happily oblige.

And this will cause a HUGE rift in the political spectrum - and all of the Lefty Liberal Gun Grabbers WILL be voted out of office - only to be replaced by the hard-core Right-Wing Conservative Douchebags that you HATE, and that will enact laws that you utterly DESPISE.

But you know what? There won't be a damn thing you can do about it - because you BEGGED the gubbermint to take from you the only card you had to play.

Do you think "they" would actually reinstate "rights" that effectively weaken their position?

LOL!

Elitist Authoritarian asshats don't give a shiat about principle or politics, they want POWER, and that means a strong ruling class and a subservient peasant class.

Enjoy.

LoneWolf343: Tell that to Australia.

Where only the bad guys have guns. You wanna live there, you go right ahead.

Mrtraveler01: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Just out of curiosity, jso2897, how do you think the future is going to unfold in the US over the next fifty years or so? The comments you've made on this thread seem to suggest that you don't share in the limitless optimism of those Farkers who believe that everything will be fine so long as the Democrats remain in power.

I know, things would be so much better if the Republicans were back in charge right?

I don't think the next 50 years are going to be as dramatic as people try to make it sound myself.

It will be pretty much like the last 50 years, only with more of everything.

Unless that zombie apocalypse happens, then it will be like the last 50 years only with way more awesome.

John Buck 41: Know what one of the worst parts about the Newtown CT massacre is? We have to relive this farking thread every time there's a shooting, Same bullshiat spouted by (pick whatever side you're on)

Nobodys mind gets changed.

That - and the concern that both sides are investing way too much import in a relatively trivial matter while far worse and more profound things are going wrong with us and our society that we aren't even aware of.

Gyrfalcon: WhoopAssWayne: alcoda: WhoopAssWayne: Evil High Priest: Ah. "Wayne". The most popular serial killer name.

Don't tell anyone, but my serial killer 'safety word' is 'Scooby-Doo'. It's like a get out of jail for free card.

What is a serial killer safety word?

/for serial

Well, if you're serial about it, here's urban dictionary's definition of a safety word. Seems like Scooby-Doo would be a good choice. What harm could sweet, sweet Scoob ever do to you?

That has raised such a hysterical image of a dominatrix's dungeon in my mind, with her submissive on all fours yelling "Scooooby-dooooo!" in Scooby's voice.

+1 and a Scooby Snack.

VELMA!

I knew it.

Benjamin Orr: First one I found on google....

So we are back to it being ok as long as the deaths from drunk driving are spread out over more events?

Nope, we're still at asking for data showing that cars are used as weapons as much or more than guns are, all other things being equal.

While you're busy changing the subject, cars are one of the most regulated and restricted products sold in the United States, and drivers are required to register, provide proof of insurance, follow traffic laws, etc.  Move to a new state, and the new agency usually checks your prior record before issuing you a license.

So, you're OK with guns and gun owners facing the same levels of regulation?  Nope, 'cause cars ain't in the Constitution!

jso2897: Not important. If you want to think that guns are growing in popularity among Americans, think it. It doesn't matter. Society is getting safer anyway, statistically, and I think that safety is about the least of our worries - at least, the immediate, personal sort of safety. What worries me - and I'll say it again, one last time - is a populace who only believe that they can lose their freedom to be human by having it taken from them.
Guns are fine - have all you want. Just don't think they'll make you safe, or free, or.....anything, really.
I'm pretty sure that if and when we all line up to cheer the Antichrist, or Big Brother, or Paris Hilton that the heavily armed will be right there cheering along with the rest of us.
I know it is not enough for you that I don't want to take your guns away - I know that you insist that I share your fantasies about their non-existent power. I apologize - I can't. But hey - keep 'em. In the end , they won't make any difference.

No, he's right. You're citing bad statics, assuming that you're going off the GSS survey. The director is a gun control advocate. Here's a link to a more reputable gallop poll from 2011

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/Self-Reported-Gun-Ownership-Highe st- 1993.aspx

And these estimates are low. There have been other polls that included questions like " would you tell a stranger that you owned a gun?" with 50% responding "no", and they fit the demographic to own a gun. Gun owners arent much into admitting it now to anonymous people, I wouldn't. Well, at least not on the phone.  Gun grabbers like to promote the diminishing amount of owners buying more guns idea. It makes them feel that they have the support of more of the population, and it fits in with the gun nut hoarding stereotype.

Also, there is pretty strong anecdotal evidence. I know about 4 people who have just gotten their first guns, and I'm pretty hard pressed to think of any guys I know well that don't own any. That coupled with the fact that the internet is sold out of guns and even farking 90\$ Nagant revolvers have sold out is pretty compelling that gun ownership just took a steep rise.

As to your freedom point, sure. Both sides are basically a bunch of jackasses that want to force you to live how they think you should and are happy to burden people with more laws and take away choices, no matter their rhetoric. I've said quite few times that I with people were as vocal about their rights in general as gun owners are about gun rights.

boxster: Benjamin Orr: First one I found on google....

So we are back to it being ok as long as the deaths from drunk driving are spread out over more events?

Nope, we're still at asking for data showing that cars are used as weapons as much or more than guns are, all other things being equal.

While you're busy changing the subject, cars are one of the most regulated and restricted products sold in the United States, and drivers are required to register, provide proof of insurance, follow traffic laws, etc.  Move to a new state, and the new agency usually checks your prior record before issuing you a license.

So, you're OK with guns and gun owners facing the same levels of regulation?  Nope, 'cause cars ain't in the Constitution!

Dead kids only count if someone intentionally killed them. Kids killed in a hit and run? fark them. Juat admit you hate guns, come on, I'll understand.

jso2897: John Buck 41: Know what one of the worst parts about the Newtown CT massacre is? We have to relive this farking thread every time there's a shooting, Same bullshiat spouted by (pick whatever side you're on)

Nobodys mind gets changed.

That - and the concern that both sides are investing way too much import in a relatively trivial matter while far worse and more profound things are going wrong with us and our society that we aren't even aware of.

Even though I'm not sure which side of the gun debate you're on, you just got favorited. In bright green, for now, until I figure you out.

LoneWolf343: doglover: LoneWolf343: It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it,

YES IT WOULD.

Your "doing something" wouldn't stop the violence. You're focusing on the effects, not the cause. Come back with something that targets the source of the problem and is based on facts not emotions and smart people will agree with you.

Tell that to Australia.

Look at those numbers. Do they support your claim that gun violence would not happen if we would just "let you do something about it," or do they support everyone else's claim that violence would still occur?

Your own data prove you wrong.

jso2897: I have far more intractable and worrisome concerns.

If this is true you should know that you always have the option of sharing those concerns with others here, and of finding out if any of us are able to give you worthwhile advice about them... at the very least, we can commiserate with whatever it is you are going through.

Mrtraveler01: I don't think the next 50 years are going to be as dramatic as people try to make it sound myself.

The last 10 or 12 have been pretty damn dramatic to me when you start adding up what we've lost and what's on the table to go next. As a 70s kid, I'm still not quite believing how much we've lost in 12 years - it just doesn't seem possible.

Remote murder by drone - no trial - no questions asked?
No fair and speedy trials for the gitmo bunch?
10 year-olds with BB guns being arrested for terrorism?
2nd amendment on the chopping block again?
Illegal wiretapping - completely ignored by the 3 branches, media, AND people?

Your boy Obama has as much culpability as Bush in all of this. He promised to turn it all around, failed, then started expanding on it. Again...... I just can't f****ing believe it. It just happened so fast.

GUTSU: Dead kids only count if someone intentionally killed them. Kids killed in a hit and run? fark them. Juat admit you hate guns, come on, I'll understand.

A hit and run is intentional, dumbass.  Here's a clue:  "run".

boxster: GUTSU: Dead kids only count if someone intentionally killed them. Kids killed in a hit and run? fark them. Juat admit you hate guns, come on, I'll understand.

A hit and run is intentional, dumbass.  Here's a clue:  "run".

So every hit and run is intentional? Hit and run, just means someone fled the scene not that they planned it. Of course this is just you deflecting. Come on, all that you have to do is tell the truth, just say it. "I hate guns" just do it, we all know you're thinking it.

jso2897: That - and the concern that both sides are investing way too much import in a relatively trivial matter while far worse and more profound things are going wrong with us and our society that we aren't even aware of.

Whatever it is, i'm sure the liberals are to blame, somehow.

Mrtraveler01: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Just out of curiosity, jso2897, how do you think the future is going to unfold in the US over the next fifty years or so? The comments you've made on this thread seem to suggest that you don't share in the limitless optimism of those Farkers who believe that everything will be fine so long as the Democrats remain in power.

I know, things would be so much better if the Republicans were back in charge right?

Oh, don't you worry.

If the Libs succeed in disarming the populace, the Repubs WILL regain power. And retain it.

Not that they'll restore any "rights". No, not at all.

Why would they?

Nothing would thrill power-hungry Republicans more than to be handed unlimited power over a populace that has been rendered defenseless.

Horrorshow, baby.

Horrorshow.

Mrtraveler01: I know, things would be so much better if the Republicans were back in charge right?

Ah no, I never said that. I only suggested that things weren't automatically going to be fine just because the Democrats were in charge. You need to review your basic logic, pal. As it happens, the only difference between the Republicans and Democrats is that the Republicans would take a couple of extra years to destroy the US economy.

I don't think the next 50 years are going to be as dramatic as people try to make it sound myself.

Good for you. I've no doubt you also believe that the government can continue to expand indefinitely in scope without at some point becoming tyrannical; that it can indefinitely print money without that radically devaluing the value of the dollar and its purchasing power for the average consumer; and that the vast demographic shifts within your country -- with a population increasingly fractured along ethnic lines and an ever- burgeoning elderly population living off an ever- shrinking younger one -- can sustain your present standard of living. I wish you all the joy of your optimism; God knows it's better than confronting your future honestly.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: I'm pretty sure that if and when we all line up to cheer the Antichrist, or Big Brother, or Paris Hilton that the heavily armed will be right there cheering along with the rest of us.

Well, no. I won't, for one; and I doubt that I'm unique in being repelled by much of our contemporary culture and political life.

I know it is not enough for you that I don't want to take your guns away - I know that you insist that I share your fantasies about their non-existent power. I apologize - I can't. But hey - keep 'em. In the end , they won't make any difference

Just out of curiosity, jso2897, how do you think the future is going to unfold in the US over the next fifty years or so? The comments you've made on this thread seem to suggest that you don't share in the limitless optimism of those Farkers who believe that everything will be fine so long as the Democrats remain in power.

It doesn't have much to do with politics. The current popularity of the Democrats (which I think will increase, for a while) is more of a reaction to the recent excesses of the Neoconservatives than any particular measure of their merits. I don't see politics as the main thing that is changing our lives right now - I am more concerned about technology. And I think that the changes technology is bringing are going to make politics pale to insignificance in the future we are looking at right now. We are a species about a million years old , more or less - and in the last hundred years, the way we live has turned into something that doesn't bear much relationship to what we have evolved in - and I really wonder if we can adapt and r5etain the parts of our humanity that we value.
We have created a world in which more and more material wealth is created by fewer and fewer people, and more and more of us simply have nothing to do with ourselves beyond what amuses us - society needs fewer and fewer of us to function. I don't know if that's a good thing, or a bad thing, or whether we can adapt to that at all. We've created a world where a person can eschew any and all actual interaction with other humans - and yet have the entire world at his fingertips. Again - maybe good, maybe bad - who knows? But I'm seeing some cracks in the structure. Without he necessity of the ape-pack to define us, and ensure our survival, what will define us? When existence ceases to be a struggle, what outlet will our innate need to struggle against the universe take? I'm not ready to panic, but I'm not confident of a good outcome, either. It's easy to laugh at the crap one sees on 4chan, or the worst of what we see here - but there are a lot of people these days that seem to be simply seething with existential terror and rage - despite the fact that we are safer, more entertained, and fed than we have ever been - and maybe it's not all that funny.
It's early in the game. What will we be like after a century of this, or two? We have been given much that generations and generations of humans have desired, and never had - and assuming that we will be happier because we get what we desired is a rash assumption, at best - humans often are not at all happy when we get what we desire.
The gun debate often turns to the subject of freedom - and freedom is a good thing. But all the guns in the world (or for that matter, any illusory "safety" that might result from the lack of them) will be of little use to us
if we become creatures who don't value freedom or even know what it is, or what it's for. It won't matter whether the government, or any political faction, abuse or defend our freedom if we cease to value it, or live lives in whose context it even matters.
It might be more appropriate for us to fear Ryan Seacrest far more than we do Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, or whoever their counterparts in the future may be. There's a reason they didn't bother to make President Camacho a Democrat or a Republican - in the context of Idiocracy, it didn't matter.

GUTSU: So every hit and run is intentional? Hit and run, just means someone fled the scene not that they planned it. Of course this is just you deflecting. Come on, all that you have to do is tell the truth, just say it. "I
hate guns" just do it, we all know you're thinking it.

Deflection, ha ha.  So says the master.

How many intentional hit-and-runs result in death vs. how many intentional shootings result in death?

That's relevant.  Comparing all vehicle deaths to shooting deaths is not.

I love you guys.  By your logic, every drunk-driving death is a murder and just like shooting someone intentionally.  But, but, drunk drivers kill as many people as guns do!!

Even then, you're wrong.  You guys always conveniently forget that drunk drivers often kill only themselves.

So, is that murder or suicide?

DrExplosion: LoneWolf343: doglover: LoneWolf343: It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it,

YES IT WOULD.

Your "doing something" wouldn't stop the violence. You're focusing on the effects, not the cause. Come back with something that targets the source of the problem and is based on facts not emotions and smart people will agree with you.

Tell that to Australia.

Look at those numbers. Do they support your claim that gun violence would not happen if we would just "let you do something about it," or do they support everyone else's claim that violence would still occur?

Your own data prove you wrong.

Pete_T_Mann: A lot of stuff about whether guns are or aren't losing popularity.

Peter - I'm sorry - I don't agree, but either way, it is a trivial issue to me, and I am only responding to you out of courtesy - believe what you wish to believe. In the greater scheme of things, it doesn't matter. If guns were our biggest problem, and our only concerns regarding freedom is that some guy from the government might try to take it away from us, we'd be a society (and a species) in far, far better shape. Put bluntly - we got 99 problems, and guns ain't one.

boxster: GUTSU: So every hit and run is intentional? Hit and run, just means someone fled the scene not that they planned it. Of course this is just you deflecting. Come on, all that you have to do is tell the truth, just say it. "I
hate guns" just do it, we all know you're thinking it.

Deflection, ha ha.  So says the master.

How many intentional hit-and-runs result in death vs. how many intentional shootings result in death?

That's relevant.  Comparing all vehicle deaths to shooting deaths is not.

I love you guys.  By your logic, every drunk-driving death is a murder and just like shooting someone intentionally.  But, but, drunk drivers kill as many people as guns do!!

Even then, you're wrong.  You guys always conveniently forget that drunk drivers often kill only themselves.

So, is that murder or suicide?

So a child killed intentionally by a gun, is worse than being killed by a car accidentally? Would 2 children killed by cars be worse? Or would that still not matter?

Still waiting for you to admit that you hate guns, I honestly don't know why you just don't come out and say it.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jso2897: I have far more intractable and worrisome concerns.

If this is true you should know that you always have the option of sharing those concerns with others here, and of finding out if any of us are able to give you worthwhile advice about them... at the very least, we can commiserate with whatever it is you are going through.

It does cheer me up to argue and talk with people on Fark. But the concerns I have for humanity, I will probably carry to my grave. I'm old, and I personally have the great fortune to have a pretty nice life, and the options to enjoy what's left of it in peace. The important answers to my questions are hidden in the future - and we humans are horrible at predicting the future. Human life is changing so fast, now, that the issue of whether we can or will change with it successfully simply can't be even partially answered until it happens. Those of you who are young though - I would suggest you fasten your seat belts, because I suspect that you are in for one weird and bumpy ride.

Pete_T_Mann: Both sides are basically a bunch of jackasses that want to force you to live how they think you should

I disagree.

I don't think many people on the pro RKBA side of things want to force you to own a firearm. That would be like saying there are people on the pro choice side who want to force you to have an abortion.

We just want the ability to own firearms for whatever reason be it personal defense, hunting, competition, nostalgia, art, collecting etc....

jso2897: It does cheer me up to argue and talk with people on Fark. But the concerns I have for humanity, I will probably carry to my grave. I'm old, and I personally have the great fortune to have a pretty nice life, and the options to enjoy what's left of it in peace.

You're lucky. I'm just getting into middle- age, and hoping that I'll manage to get through the next few decades of my life without something terrible happening to society... and all indications are that, at the very least, our material standard of living is likely to decline steadily until we regress to -- at the very best -- the way of life our grandparents or great- parents had to endure before the War. The decline has already started to happen, with the devaluation of the dollar and the concomitant rise in the price of energy and foodstuffs...

The important answers to my questions are hidden in the future - and we humans are horrible at predicting the future. Human life is changing so fast, now, that the issue of whether we can or will change with it successfully simply can't be even partially answered until it happens. Those of you who are young though - I would suggest you fasten your seat belts, because I suspect that you are in for one weird and bumpy ride.

This is true, but I wouldn't want the young to feel unduly pessimistic. After all, someone born in Europe in 1900 was bound to go through a great deal of hardship, too, but if they managed to survive until they were 45 -- at the end of WWII -- they could be pretty much assured of a decent life afterwards. My own great- grandmother was born in 1901 and lived until 1993, and I recall in my youth that she loved to drink and go to parties... whatever else happens, humanity at its best will always endure.

boxster: GUTSU: So every hit and run is intentional? Hit and run, just means someone fled the scene not that they planned it. Of course this is just you deflecting. Come on, all that you have to do is tell the truth, just say it. "I
hate guns" just do it, we all know you're thinking it.

Deflection, ha ha.  So says the master.

How many intentional hit-and-runs result in death vs. how many intentional shootings result in death?

That's relevant.  Comparing all vehicle deaths to shooting deaths is not.

I love you guys.  By your logic, every drunk-driving death is a murder and just like shooting someone intentionally.  But, but, drunk drivers kill as many people as guns do!!

Even then, you're wrong.  You guys always conveniently forget that drunk drivers often kill only themselves.

So, is that murder or suicide?

How much did they hate themselves?

Gyrfalcon: boxster: GUTSU: So every hit and run is intentional? Hit and run, just means someone fled the scene not that they planned it. Of course this is just you deflecting. Come on, all that you have to do is tell the truth, just say it. "I
hate guns" just do it, we all know you're thinking it.

Deflection, ha ha.  So says the master.

How many intentional hit-and-runs result in death vs. how many intentional shootings result in death?

That's relevant.  Comparing all vehicle deaths to shooting deaths is not.

I love you guys.  By your logic, every drunk-driving death is a murder and just like shooting someone intentionally.  But, but, drunk drivers kill as many people as guns do!!

Even then, you're wrong.  You guys always conveniently forget that drunk drivers often kill only themselves.

So, is that murder or suicide?

How much did they hate themselves?

Mornings can be brutal.

LoneWolf343: DrExplosion: LoneWolf343: doglover: LoneWolf343: It wouldn't be happening if you let us do something about it,

YES IT WOULD.

Your "doing something" wouldn't stop the violence. You're focusing on the effects, not the cause. Come back with something that targets the source of the problem and is based on facts not emotions and smart people will agree with you.

Tell that to Australia.

Look at those numbers. Do they support your claim that gun violence would not happen if we would just "let you do something about it," or do they support everyone else's claim that violence would still occur?

Your own data prove you wrong.

Huh, I must have missed the part where gun homicides stopped completely once the magic gun control solution came in and saved the day, then. Could you quote it for me directly? Obviously my reading ability must suck if I couldn't find something that obvious. I did see something in the first sentence of the fifth paragraph about how "there's no consensus about whether the changes decreased gun violence," though.

It appears to me that the only thing you've done is say "Gun control in Australia did not lead to an increase in gun violence," which counters a point made by absolutely no one.

GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: So to be perfectly clear, you don't care about children killed by cars? Well okay then.

So, to be perfectly clear, you have nothing to back up your idiotic position.  Well okay then.

It's okay if you think guns are somehow more dangerous than cars, even though statistically they aren't. Tell the truth, you don't care about the children... you just don't like guns. Come on, the truth will set you free.

Such a lame argument. Vehicles are not made to kill people. The few that are, civilians are not allowed to have... for a reason.

Get a new schtick. You sound like a twatwaffle.

Will you farks get "well regulated" sometime soon?

This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

jso2897: Pete_T_Mann: A lot of stuff about whether guns are or aren't losing popularity.

Pete - I'm sorry - I don't agree, but either way, it is a trivial issue to me, and I am only responding to you out of courtesy - believe what you wish to believe. In the greater scheme of things, it doesn't matter. If guns were our biggest problem, and our only concerns regarding freedom is that some guy from the government might try to take it away from us, we'd be a society (and a species) in far, far better shape. Put bluntly - we got 99 problems, and guns ain't one.

Well, yeah. I agree with that. I believe I disagree with you over the effects of banning them, if that's part of what you're saying (though not because of fears of jackboot gov't thugs). But my main concern was correcting an inaccuracy in the information you were presenting. If it you disagree, thats fine, but I think its good for the other 2 people still reading this thread to have the information available.

But anyway, I believe you're correct about upcoming technological situation, if I'm reading what you're saying right. There's likely going to be an increasing need for a very different economy, among other things.

Giltric: Pete_T_Mann: Both sides are basically a bunch of jackasses that want to force you to live how they think you should

I disagree.

I don't think many people on the pro RKBA side of things want to force you to own a firearm. That would be like saying there are people on the pro choice side who want to force you to have an abortion.

We just want the ability to own firearms for whatever reason be it personal defense, hunting, competition, nostalgia, art, collecting etc....

I was talking about the political situation in the US, not RKBA specifically at that point. Both sides (lib/consrv) have their infringements and can't really be trusted...

Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

My thoughts exactly. Talk about lowering the farking bar.

Barbecue Bob:  Such a lame argument. Vehicles are not made to kill people.

Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

lostcat: Peki:

Yup. These are the lessons we get to learn from the "FU got mine" generation (for clarity, I'm referring to Boomers). Young adults, especially males, who are looking into their future and not very optimistic, tend to make the future not so optimistic for everyone else.

My wife, who is this soft-spoken, touchy-feely Japanese national, walked in the door a few weeks ago and said to me, "You know, I understand now why some people in America go crazy and start shooting everyone. There's no way to talk to anyone in power anymore. You can't argue with them. You can't explain your situation to them."

She had just gotten a parking ticket on a meter that had expired less than three minutes before she got back to the car. She got there as the officer was writing the ticket, and was pleading with her not to give her the ticket, but she said the woman just ignored her. She has this complaint about bus drivers who won't answer questions about the route. She has this complaint about government officials who make the process of renewing her visa a massive headache.

At first I was like, "Well, you should make sure to get back to your car with plenty of time before the meter expires." But then I thought about it for a bit.

She's mostly right. As Americans we have all this freedom, but the minute you try to talk to anyone who isn't employed in the private sector, you just get stonewalled, or worse. I've somehow internalized all of the frustration I've felt at the post office, DMV, traffic stops, public transportation, and any other run-ins with "officials" and those employed by public agencies.
...

Dude, have you ever tried calling customer service for...  basically any company, ever?  Just complete crap.  Talk about stonewalling.  Most of the time they're reading off scripts, but those scripts are often set explicitly to lie to you.  Good luck trying to get real answers from a corporation nowadays.

Barbecue Bob: Will you farks get "well regulated" sometime soon?

Look, yet another illiterate who's misunderstood the text of the 2nd Amendment.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Yeah, but kill what? Don't be a tool and pretend that the vast majority of guns (99%+) are used to kill people -- they aren't.

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dude, have you ever tried calling customer service for...  basically any company, ever?  Just complete crap.  Talk about stonewalling.  Most of the time they're reading off scripts, but those scripts are often set explicitly to lie to you.  Good luck trying to get real answers from a corporation nowadays.

Hey, I resembled that remark. I worked for Smack and Pecker (names changed to protect the guilty, think of a popular home tool manufacturer and you've got it) at their call center. You know the 1-800 number on the drills? Yup, I answered that number for a while. I did my best to tell the customer whatever it was I knew about a product, even if it was crappy. I got a visit from Corporate HQ (meaning some bigwig flew from Maryland to Texas) twice on account of something I did because it was the right thing to do for the customer, and I never backed down about it. Funny part was, three months later same corporate bigwigs were screaming at my bosses to promote me. Something about a 100% customer satisfaction rating impressed the hell out of them.

I probably would have made it just fine through the recession if I'd been able to keep that job. . .

Dictatorial_Flair: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

My thoughts exactly. Talk about lowering the farking bar.

The GOP is very concerned about an incident where ONLY 4 people were killed, so yeah, I guess it's a BFD.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Yeah, but kill what? Don't be a tool and pretend that the vast majority of guns (99%+) are used to kill people -- they aren't.

Didn't say they were, so don't pretend that I am. You can kill a person with 99% of the bullet-firing guns out there though.

Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Amazing how an item specifically designed to kill people kills less people than an item that is supposed to be enjoyed recreationally like alchohol.

Maybe we need to throw some money at scientists and engineers to have them make guns more capable of doing what they are designed to do.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Curious how the "interests" of the NRA happen to be the bread and butter of the entire gun industry... must be a complete coincidence. Just making sure you have the right to line their best buddy's pockets in the interest of 'freedom'.

Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Curious how the "interests" of the NRA happen to be the bread and butter of the entire gun industry... must be a complete coincidence. Just making sure you have the right to line their best buddy's pockets in the interest of 'freedom'.

Does that mean the ACLU helps to line the pockets of International Paper and DIC/Sun Chemical when they defend the 1st amendment?

Giltric: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Amazing how an item specifically designed to kill people kills less people than an item that is supposed to be enjoyed recreationally like alchohol.

Maybe we need to throw some money at scientists and engineers to have them make guns more capable of doing what they are designed to do.

So... you're saying you want everyone to own a gun so the gun death rate can compete? Last time I checked, car ownership was waaaaaaay over the number of folks with guns. Alcohol has also been involved with gun deaths too.

Giltric: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Curious how the "interests" of the NRA happen to be the bread and butter of the entire gun industry... must be a complete coincidence. Just making sure you have the right to line their best buddy's pockets in the interest of 'freedom'.

Does that mean the ACLU helps to line the pockets of International Paper and DIC/Sun Chemical when they defend the 1st amendment?

"Deflectors at maximum, Captain!"

BeSerious: Where does an economically depressed town get all this money for their law enforcement gear?

It's Herkimer, so probably from all the diamonds they have.

/more blood for the blood god!

Surool: Giltric: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Amazing how an item specifically designed to kill people kills less people than an item that is supposed to be enjoyed recreationally like alchohol.

Maybe we need to throw some money at scientists and engineers to have them make guns more capable of doing what they are designed to do.

So... you're saying you want everyone to own a gun so the gun death rate can compete? Last time I checked, car ownership was waaaaaaay over the number of folks with guns. Alcohol has also been involved with gun deaths too.

There are more firearms owned by people in the US then there are cars owned.....and you can only drive one car at a time.

Alchohol has also been involved in car deaths...maybe we should ban alchohol so both firearm and vehicular death stats can drop.  Don't you care about saving as many people as possible?

Surool: Giltric: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Curious how the "interests" of the NRA happen to be the bread and butter of the entire gun industry... must be a complete coincidence. Just making sure you have the right to line their best buddy's pockets in the interest of 'freedom'.

Does that mean the ACLU helps to line the pockets of International Paper and DIC/Sun Chemical when they defend the 1st amendment?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x641]
"Deflectors at maximum, Captain!"

According to the VPC and other groups the NRA has raised between 14 and 35 million dollars from firearm and firearm related manufacturers in total since 2004. The NRA claimed an income of over 218 million in 2011 with expenditures of over 230 million, In 2010 the NRA claimed an income of over 210 million dollars.

Do you really think a majority of their funding comes from manufacturers?

Godscrack

It worked for the Templars and their swords/shields/armor

Giltric: According to the VPC and other groups the NRA has raised between 14 and 35 million dollars from firearm and firearm related manufacturers in total since 2004. The NRA claimed an income of over 218 million in 2011 with expenditures of over 230 million, In 2010 the NRA claimed an income of over 210 million dollars.

Do you really think a majority of their funding comes from manufacturers?

Here's something fun: The NRA spend about 3 million in lobbying last year. Bloomberg, through his super PAC, spend 2 million alone on Jesse Jackson jr's old seat (specifically to support a gun grabber politician--in chicago no less), and another 10 million or so to support other candidates of his choice.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

Yeah, but kill what? Don't be a tool and pretend that the vast majority of guns (99%+) are used to kill people -- they aren't.

Have you read my post about how guns were originally designed to kill walls?

WhoopAssWayne: Look on the bright side. Obama might have some more dead kids to exploit and use as props in the next state of the union, being the classy guy that he is, right democrats? This tragedy would just be another great win for you, you scumbag pieces of sh*t.

Someone needs a hug

boxster: GUTSU: boxster: GUTSU: boxster:
"Mass murder" is irrelevant in that context, by the way.  Nice job moving the goalposts, though.

Only the ones run over by car-wielding maniacs.

Oh, so children killed accidentally by cars don't count? Shouldn't you want to ban cars and pools? Both of them kill far, far more children than guns do annually. If you don't campaign to stop the sale, production, and distribution of motor-vehicles and pools you honestly don't care about the deaths of children... or you're somehow biased against firearms.

I have no problem with firearms.  I own several and have been a gun owner since I was a kid.  I have a problem with idiotic comparisons that make zero sense.  Comparing vehicle deaths to gun deaths is one of the dumbest arguments people can make, and it makes them look ridiculous.  On top of that, they, just like you did, try to have it both ways.  Yes, let's compare all vehicle deaths to just gun deaths via "mass murder".  That makes perfect sense.

Nope, sorry, doesn't work that way.  Either put them on equal terms - how many times are they used as weapons to intentionally kill people - or the comparison is invalid.  It just makes you look like an idiot.

And that is what the real problem is at this point. We have declining violent crime and murder rates, but more prisoners than ever. Any and all of the proposed changes to existing gun laws wouldn't do a single thing to stop these murders, nor prevent their severity. Worse yet, it continues the partisan nature of the issue. Had there been a actual well thought out request by the Obama administration, meaningful change could be made that would have reduced the crime rate in the long run. In fact if he had asked for only these things he probably would have had actual bipartisan support:

1) Standardize the list of all criminal records and those judged to be mentally incompetent to be added to the NICS database
2) Standardize the amount of time that a state is required to add information to the database. Some don't do it all that often.
3) Allow for a limited time temporary hold to be placed into the NICS database by doctors for those that are currently being treated for certain conditions that may increase the possibility of violence from the patient. Keeping it temporary ensures that someone that needs help may actually seek it if their rights won't be removed forever.
4) Streamline the process for getting people declared mentally incompetent for those that need to be.
5) Allow a system that can be accessed by any individual, without fee, to perform a NICS check. Make it a felony for someone to use this system for anything other than firearms background checking to prevent abuse of the system. If anyone can do a check when transferring a firearm with any additional cost or effort, they will likely do it. Likewise, this stops employers from cheaping out and trying to get a free background check.
6) Investigate those that were turned down in NICS checks. This rarely happens now. Part of it is due to the fact that the BATFE got their hands slapped after using most of their time to entrap folks that didn't intend to commit a crime or pushing to prosecute people for minor, unintentional mistakes.

Those alone would to wonders to fix some of these problems. Ya know what would likely help even more? Declare the "War on Drugs" to be the failure and waste of money that it is. As much as I think pot heads are stupid, stupid people, legalize it and grow it locally. While we are at it, we need a restoration of rights for those that come out of prison. Yes, they committed a crime. They served their time, punishment is over. If they cannot be trusted to reenter society a full productive members, they shouldn't be reentering society. Have you ever wondered why most murder statistics note that those doing the murdering usually have a past criminal background? We keep them there. In most places, we don't allow them to have decent jobs, they have no say in their government. They get pushed into bad neighborhoods filled with more crime, and crime becomes the only thing they can do. Massive prison reform is needed.

But hey, that would be the reasonable thing to do. Lets just ban things like booze, cars, and guns. The only solutions pushed for by the dems right now seek to punish and inconvenience the 99.99% of people that aren't criminals.

\end rant
\\All data pulled from FBI and CDC

resonsible gun owners.

I don't understand the argument. You have the most hilariously relaxed gun laws and your citizens are routinely mowing down large groups of people. What could possibly be the connection.

UN: "Today over 25,000 people died of starvation."

USA: "Weren't white, doesn't count.  Can we get back to talking about how evil guns are, now?"

TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

The case has never been made that if there were no guns the number of murders would remain the same because people would switch to knifes, bats, etc.

NephilimNexus: UN: "Today over 25,000 people died of starvation."

USA: "Weren't white, doesn't count.  Can we get back to talking about how evil guns are, now?"

We killed more Americans than that from being FAT.  SUCK IT WORLD.

TerminalEchoes: firefly212: lostcat: Yogimus: so... 4 people is a mass shooting now?

Seriously...This is nothing for anyone to get bent out of shape about. Come on, it's just four people. People get shot every day. Why all this sensationalism?

How is it not a problem because people get shot every day?

I mean, that seems really farked up that because we lose almost 20k people to gun violence (excluding suicde) every year that it somehow simply doesn't matter that 4 people are dead, six are in critical condition, and several others got transported with non-life threatening injuries. 4, 40, whatever... we're slowly flushing our future away with mindless violence.

Agreed. The problem isn't guns but rather a lack of general civility between Americans. Take away the guns and we'll just start stabbing each other. Take away the knives and there'll be a run on baseball bats.

What effectively amounts to pressing a button is a lot easier than having to get your hands dirty.

NY probably needs to pass a new law restricting magazine size...again

Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Neither are guns. They're made to kill animals, and to target shoot; that they can kill people if necessary -- just as cars can -- does not invalidate the primary two reasons for their existence.

I think the point is that guns are specifically designed to kill. Don't be a brick.

I don't care about what anything was designed to do.  I care about what it can do.

/not obscure
//still one of my favorite movies

SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Loughner was taken down as he was changing magazines.

Herkimer, NY?

Isn't that where they make the Battle Jitney?

It just ended about an hour ago, when the cops shot, killed him, and pried his gun from his dead cold fingers.

Shakin_Haitian: SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Loughner was taken down as he was changing magazines.

Odds are he was probably doing more than just changing magazines. Probably trying to clear a jam as well since they found his firearm jammed when they arrested him and did their secure site exploitation.

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Old enough to know better: Ah, just another brave sacrifice on the alter of Liberty, eh gun owners?

Yeah, whenever people are charged with vehicular homicide I feel real guilty for driving a car.

As soon as guns have to be registered and insured your analogy may make a bit more sense.  It still won't be valid, as cars have a primary purpose other than killing people, but it'll be closer.

BGates: You mean all those draconian gun control laws didn't work?

What draconian gun control laws? Anyone get an AR-15 and have target practice in an elementary school.

lostcat: Yogimus: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

They don't. Bullets do.  Well, technically, the lack of oxygenated blood getting to the proper organs, tissue damage, and infection do.

I prefer, "Guns don't kill people, momentum does."

"Guns don't kill people, hypovolemia does"
"Guns don't kill people, hydrostatic shock does"
"Guns don't kill people, penetrating trauma followed by cavatation wounds does"
"Guns don't kill people, your brain case being splayed out on the wall behind you does"

MythDragon: lostcat: Yogimus: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: But I was assured guns don't kill people.

They don't. Bullets do.  Well, technically, the lack of oxygenated blood getting to the proper organs, tissue damage, and infection do.

I prefer, "Guns don't kill people, momentum does."

"Guns don't kill people, hypovolemia does"
"Guns don't kill people, hydrostatic shock does"
"Guns don't kill people, penetrating trauma followed by cavatation wounds does"
"Guns don't kill people, your brain case being splayed out on the wall behind you does"

I'm going to hell because that post made me LOL

TommyymmoT: It just ended about an hour ago, when the cops shot, killed him, and pried his gun from his dead cold fingers.

Which is how he would have wanted it.

Godscrack:
[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

Reminds me of:

What noise is this? Give me my long sword, ho!

A crutch, a crutch! why call you for a sword?

My sword, I say! Old Montague is come, And flourishes his blade in spite of me.

Kolonel Matt: 4) Streamline the process for getting people declared mentally incompetent for those that need to be.
5) Allow a system that can be accessed by any individual, without fee, to perform a NICS check. Make it a felony for someone to use this system for anything other than firearms background checking to prevent abuse of the system. If anyone can do a check when transferring a firearm with any additional cost or effort, they will likely do it. Likewise, this stops employers from cheaping out and trying to get a free background check.
6) Investigate those that were turned down in NICS checks. This rarely happens now. Part of it is due to the fact that the BATFE got their hands slapped after using most of their time to entrap folks that didn't intend to commit a crime or pushing to prosecute people for minor, unintentional mistakes.

Do you REALLY want the government to be able to make a judgement about who is sane and who isn't and be able to act on that? As well as providing a free mechanism for everyone to see who is "sane" and who isn't? Do you think that "banning' people from misusing the system will work? Do you realize how your rights are lost if you are declared "mentally incompetent"?  You will need a pretty low threshold to take in the mental states of a lot of the recent shooters. You really will need those FEMA camps then to hold all the "incompetents" that are no longer allowed to handle their own finances and will be unhireable "mentally incompetent", for example.

The Irresponsible Captain: Godscrack:
[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

Reminds me of:

[www.imfdb.org image 600x274]

What noise is this? Give me my long sword, ho!

A crutch, a crutch! why call you for a sword?

My sword, I say! Old Montague is come, And flourishes his blade in spite of me.

Shakespeare in FARK? You're gonna give someone a brain clot from exposure to culture LOL.

Surool: Giltric: Surool: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Surool: This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.

This makes no sense. The NRA only advocates the "freedom" to bear arms, a freedom that is utterly dependent upon the gun manufacturers producing those arms to begin with. That being the case, why in the hell wouldn't the NRA support the gun industry? Or is this one of those cases where we're supposed to believe that private enterprise is inherently evil because it is making a product we don't happen to believe in, unlike IPads and frappuccinos?

Curious how the "interests" of the NRA happen to be the bread and butter of the entire gun industry... must be a complete coincidence. Just making sure you have the right to line their best buddy's pockets in the interest of 'freedom'.

Does that mean the ACLU helps to line the pockets of International Paper and DIC/Sun Chemical when they defend the 1st amendment?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x641]
"Deflectors at maximum, Captain!"

Let me guess, others "deflect". When you posted a mocking photo or sarcastic ridicule that doesn't address the point, it's not deflection.

Only other people deflect.

KarmicDisaster: Do you REALLY want the government to be able to make a judgement about who is sane and who isn't and be able to act on that?

Awww... poor baby worried Tea Partiers would be sent back to the mental institutions!

KarmicDisaster: Do you REALLY want the government to be able to make a judgement about who is sane and who isn't and be able to act on that?

As long as it qualifies as "due process", sure.  Who do you suppose should make that determination?

KarmicDisaster: Kolonel Matt: 4) Streamline the process for getting people declared mentally incompetent for those that need to be.
5) Allow a system that can be accessed by any individual, without fee, to perform a NICS check. Make it a felony for someone to use this system for anything other than firearms background checking to prevent abuse of the system. If anyone can do a check when transferring a firearm with any additional cost or effort, they will likely do it. Likewise, this stops employers from cheaping out and trying to get a free background check.
6) Investigate those that were turned down in NICS checks. This rarely happens now. Part of it is due to the fact that the BATFE got their hands slapped after using most of their time to entrap folks that didn't intend to commit a crime or pushing to prosecute people for minor, unintentional mistakes.

Do you REALLY want the government to be able to make a judgement about who is sane and who isn't and be able to act on that? As well as providing a free mechanism for everyone to see who is "sane" and who isn't? Do you think that "banning' people from misusing the system will work? Do you realize how your rights are lost if you are declared "mentally incompetent"?  You will need a pretty low threshold to take in the mental states of a lot of the recent shooters. You really will need those FEMA camps then to hold all the "incompetents" that are no longer allowed to handle their own finances and will be unhireable "mentally incompetent", for example.

That is how it works RIGHT NOW, only its EASIER than you think. The only thing a judge has to do is order you confined for observation against your will and your rights are now gone. Most court systems have ruled that once you need to be committed for observation against your will you are no longer competent. We are talking a removal of rights and having it done through a legal process and it needs to be changed to done right. It needs to be relatively easy for a judge to ask for a short period of observation without a removal of rights, and relatively hard for them to rule someone insane. Maybe the whole involuntary confinement thing is unique to my state, but I doubt it.

As far as the "banning" people from abusing the NICS access system, notice the word felony. If it is found that someone is abusing the system instead of running their own checks for non firearm use then you arrest them, send them to court, then send them to prison. This is one of those glorious situations where you can't accidentally commit the crime. Either information was entered for checking, or it wasn't. A NICS check needs to be simple, free, and able to be done anywhere if you are going to want people to actually want to use it. One of the big complaints is how to do it now someone has to go out of their way to go to a gun shop that will charge a fee for a 3 minute call at a rate of at least double the average employees hourly salary.

The media must have been getting pretty worried. They hadn't blown up one of these stories in a while.

Princess Ryans Knickers: KarmicDisaster: Do you REALLY want the government to be able to make a judgement about who is sane and who isn't and be able to act on that?

Awww... poor baby worried Tea Partiers would be sent back to the mental institutions!

Can you try harder to be funny? Thanks.

Giltric: Shakin_Haitian: SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Loughner was taken down as he was changing magazines.

Odds are he was probably doing more than just changing magazines. Probably trying to clear a jam as well since they found his firearm jammed when they arrested him and did their secure site exploitation.

Loughner dropped his magazine, which is only possible if he's changing magazines.

Interestingly enough, a man took Loughner's weapon and another man with a concealed weapon almost unloaded on the weapon taker, but thankfully, realized he wasn't totally sure who the gunman was and held back. He showed amazing restraint in a time of heightened emotion.

Shakin_Haitian: Giltric: Shakin_Haitian: SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Loughner was taken down as he was changing magazines.

Odds are he was probably doing more than just changing magazines. Probably trying to clear a jam as well since they found his firearm jammed when they arrested him and did their secure site exploitation.

Loughner dropped his magazine, which is only possible if he's changing magazines.

Interestingly enough, a man took Loughner's weapon and another man with a concealed weapon almost unloaded on the weapon taker, but thankfully, realized he wasn't totally sure who the gunman was and held back. He showed amazing restraint in a time of heightened emotion.

You know what you do when your firearm jams? You drop your magazine and rack the slide and try to clear the jam. His pistol was found jammed and inoperational.

Was he chaning magazines or did his weapon jam and he had to drop the magazine and attempt to clear the jam?

Evidence points to him dropping the magazine and Laughner not firing another round.......evidence also shows his weapon was jammed.

If his weapon did not jam and he was just changing magazines he probably would have been able to shoot the people who were trying to subdue him.

How much distance can you cover in the 1 second, and under, time that it takes to change a magazine and attempt to subdue someone?

Giltric: Shakin_Haitian: Giltric: Shakin_Haitian: SirEattonHogg: I call BS. New York State has the strictest gun laws in the state.

Maybe they need to reduce the magazine size limit even further.

Loughner was taken down as he was changing magazines.

Odds are he was probably doing more than just changing magazines. Probably trying to clear a jam as well since they found his firearm jammed when they arrested him and did their secure site exploitation.

Loughner dropped his magazine, which is only possible if he's changing magazines.

Interestingly enough, a man took Loughner's weapon and another man with a concealed weapon almost unloaded on the weapon taker, but thankfully, realized he wasn't totally sure who the gunman was and held back. He showed amazing restraint in a time of heightened emotion.

You know what you do when your firearm jams? You drop your magazine and rack the slide and try to clear the jam. His pistol was found jammed and inoperational.

Was he chaning magazines or did his weapon jam and he had to drop the magazine and attempt to clear the jam?

Evidence points to him dropping the magazine and Laughner not firing another round.......evidence also shows his weapon was jammed.

If his weapon did not jam and he was just changing magazines he probably would have been able to shoot the people who were trying to subdue him.

How much distance can you cover in the 1 second, and under, time that it takes to change a magazine and attempt to subdue someone?

It's takes 6-8 seconds to change a magazine. Count that: that's a long time for someone probably jacked on adrenaline to cover distance.

Mrbogey: Let me guess, others "deflect". When you posted a mocking photo or sarcastic ridicule that doesn't address the point, it's not deflection.

Only other people deflect.

Calling other people out for deflection is deflection?

"Truly you have a dizzying intellect."

LoneWolf343: It's takes 6-8 seconds to change a magazine. Count that: that's a long time for someone probably jacked on adrenaline to cover distance.

Lol? In what universe would this be the case?  Hellen Keller could change a magazine in that time.

LoneWolf343: It's takes 6-8 seconds to change a magazine. Count that: that's a long time for someone probably jacked on adrenaline to cover distance

You push a button with the index finger of your trigger hand as you use your off hand to grab a new magazine. The empty mag in the well drops free and you slam home the new fresh mag that you grabbed with your off hand.

2 seconds tops.

The thing is, is that I've seen an article posted here with that god awful information of a 6 second magazine change. And it seems that they added the time it took to change 5-6 magazines and posted the total time as the amount of time that it takes to change one magazine.

It might have been from Mother Jones News IIRC...go figure. The same "journalists"  that refer to a study done the year after mandatory background checks were implemented back in 95 or so that asked people who purchased their guns before the mandatory background checks if they had to go through a background check to purchase their weapon.

Please tell me you are trolling....or at least lie and say you were trolling even if you were being honest about it taking 6 seconds to change a magazine.

Yogimus: Hellen Keller could change a magazine in that time

She could probably read a magazine in that time.

Well, I could SEE a mag change taking 6 -8 seconds.  1-2 sec to realize you are out.  another to realize the implications of this development... 4 seconds to unzip fanny pack, and dig past the wad of singles, the roll of Tums and the various change to find magazine, and another 3 seconds to align it correctly and insert it into magazine well.... 4 more seconds to remember to send the slide forward.

Of course this would most likely be the case in someone who carries a gun for defense, since killers tend to have immaculate plans and prepare at length, fantasize about, and generally take a great deal of care in execution...

Gosh... these would be a dangerous set of steps for someone who fears for their life... Might be best for them to have a larger capacity magazine in the first place.

Shakin_Haitian: Loughner dropped his magazine, which is only possible if he's changing magazines.

How would things have turned out if he had a smaller lighter magazine? One that he could handle easier? One that had a shorter spring travel and be less prone to jamming?

LoneWolf343: It's takes 6-8 seconds to change a magazine. Count that: that's a long time for someone probably jacked on adrenaline to cover distance.

If you take 6-8 seconds to change a magazine, you're just not trying.

Surool: Calling other people out for deflection is deflection?

You never answered his/her question. Good deflection.

Yogimus: Of course this would most likely be the case in someone who carries a gun for defense, since killers tend to have immaculate plans and prepare at length, fantasize about, and generally take a great deal of care in execution...

I posted a while back about how defensive use and aggressive use have different priorities for gun operation and ability. People don't seem to realize that there's different concerns. Magazine size isn't a major issue if you're planning an assault as you can compensate for it with good planning (as Cho did). However, if you're using a gun defensively, you generally have minimal prior planning and are completely at a loss for controlling events.

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

In Other Media
1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.