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.

(SFGate)   Days since last mass shooting: 0   (sfgate.com) divider line 417
    More: Scary, mass shooting  
•       •       •

20082 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2013 at 8:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-14 12:49:59 AM

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....
 
2013-03-14 01:06:56 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:06:59 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 01:11:13 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:20:31 AM

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.

How adorable. You think you're reading.


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.
 
2013-03-14 01:26:32 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:29:03 AM
Will you farks get "well regulated" sometime soon?
 
2013-03-14 01:30:25 AM
This is when the NRA runs out and proves they are but sad shills for the gun industry instead of about freedom.
 
2013-03-14 01:30:30 AM

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...
 
2013-03-14 01:39:38 AM

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


My thoughts exactly. Talk about lowering the farking bar.
 
2013-03-14 01:40:34 AM
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.
 
2013-03-14 01:40:39 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:43:29 AM

Barbecue Bob: Will you farks get "well regulated" sometime soon?


Look, yet another illiterate who's misunderstood the text of the 2nd Amendment.
 
2013-03-14 01:44:30 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:48:51 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 01:50:40 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:50:49 AM

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. . .
 
2013-03-14 01:54:42 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:54:53 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:56:31 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 01:57:12 AM

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'.
 
2013-03-14 02:00:38 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 02:02:58 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 02:04:42 AM

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
"Deflectors at maximum, Captain!"
 
2013-03-14 02:05:00 AM

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!
 
2013-03-14 02:06:43 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 02:17:45 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 02:19:55 AM
Godscrack

It worked for the Templars and their swords/shields/armor
 
2013-03-14 02:40:44 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 04:29:24 AM

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?
 
2013-03-14 04:48:37 AM

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
 
2013-03-14 05:00:50 AM

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

So you DON'T care about the dead children, just your own political ideology? How... noble.

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.


Sad to say there is only one argument being made here that is idiotic, and it is yours. You are pretending as a way to further your argument, that those killed unintentionally don't count for some reason. Per the FBIs numbers, there were 8583 people murdered with a firearm in 2011. A number that is half of what it was just 30 years ago, with laws generally getting looser as far as firearms are concerned (most states adopted concealed carry, allow carry in bars now, have no waiting periods, etc). Drunk drivers alone killed more than that by over 1000. The fact of it is, there are many more people killed by accident than are killed intentionally with firearms, and no one seems to be overly bothered about the accidental deaths. In both of those cases someone is dead. In one of them, someone had complete control over if the incident will happen. For most people, it matters if you wanted them dead or not. More people are being killed accidentally by non guns than on purpose by guns by a wide margin (CDC reports 120k accidental deaths total vs FBI 8.5k intentional gun murders), but guns are apparently a huge problem. You are 14 times more likely to die by accident than be intentionally killed. You can "but they didn't mean it" all you want, but someone is still dead. We are getting preached at about a "gun crime" epidemic that has been constantly and steadily shrinking as if was worse now than ever before. It isn't. You can continue to argue that those 120k people don't actually matter because whether you think you are or not, that is what you are saying. For people like you, this makes gun murders seem less important than you would like them to be. It downplays them. And you know what? They are right. Depending on the estimate of the time, there are at least 310 million people in this country. 8583 gun murders. That is an extremely small fraction of our population. It sucks to be a statistic like that, but that is what it is. You simply wish to change the numbers to support your agenda. "X number of intentional car deaths? Well, guns kill more." seems to be what you want to say, except for all those others that die. We won't talk about them. Even if we say all gun deaths (murders, suicides, and "accidents") that adds up to less than 30k deaths per year. The CDC reports total auto fatalities at just over 33k per year. This is still lower than auto fatalities and still 4 times fewer over all accidents. Or even better, lets make them equal. CDC reports about 606 accidental gun deaths. 606 gun vs 33,687 automobile. Nope, still not seeing this massive problem.

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
 
2013-03-14 05:37:09 AM
resonsible gun owners.
 
2013-03-14 05:49:31 AM
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.
 
2013-03-14 05:59:50 AM
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?"
 
fdr
2013-03-14 06:31:10 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 06:40:23 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 06:55:58 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 07:00:00 AM
NY probably needs to pass a new law restricting magazine size...again
 
2013-03-14 07:06:31 AM

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.

sugoru.files.wordpress.com

/not obscure
//still one of my favorite movies
 
2013-03-14 07:06:39 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 08:58:53 AM
Herkimer, NY?

Isn't that where they make the Battle Jitney?

blu.stb.s-msn.com
 
2013-03-14 09:09:00 AM
It just ended about an hour ago, when the cops shot, killed him, and pried his gun from his dead cold fingers.
 
2013-03-14 09:13:37 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 10:37:37 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 10:45:02 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 10:59:46 AM

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"
 
2013-03-14 11:05:28 AM

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
 
2013-03-14 11:13:42 AM

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.
 
2013-03-14 11:29:25 AM
Godscrack:
[img560.imageshack.us image 577x578]

Reminds me of:

www.imfdb.org

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.
 
Displayed 50 of 417 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report