The guy wasn't saving himself, his family or anyone else. There was no imminent danger. They weren't even on his property. He just declared himself a vigilante and gunned them down on a public street.
Those would be the notebooks pulled from the hands of the five students killed at NIU this week...as well as the legally purchased guns from the nutjob who did this.
In case anyone has noticed, there has been a flurry of shootings the past few months...most at schools...but after Va Tach and the close loss in the Virginia legislature of some new purchasing restriction laws in that state, it seems like no one is bothering to even try to do anything about it anymore.
The pro-gun lobby is so powerful in this country that I think most have thrown in the towel about even considering trying to restrict guns at all. So have we just become a society that these scenarios are just "part of the norm"...the price we pay for gun freedom being every few months or so someone shoots up a bunch of innocent people?
I know I am a bleeding heart liberal and all, but it just amazes me that our wild west society is just so in love with having guns that we have just accepted this as the norm, and that those who scream that gun control will "deprive them of their right to defend themselves" win out every time.
When was the last time you heard a story on the news about someone who owned a gun "protecting their family" from a house invasion because they had a gun at hand...compared with the last time you heard a story about someone who walked into someplace and shot a bunch of innocent people?
I just sometimes wonder if I am the only person who feels this way (yes, I already know how many of you on here disagree with me, thank you). I wonder sometimes if guns were made illegal for private ownership AND using a gun in the commission of a crime carried the penalty it would to actually deter criminals from it (like the death penalty for shooting someone...no questions, no appeals, no delay) what that might do to the gun violence in this country.
Anyway, all non-sarcastic discussion is appreciated.
-- Modified on 2/16/2008 11:25:43 AM
Those gun restriction laws are working out real well, aren’t they?
Too much sarcasm? Good. You don't need to appreciate my speech, but I'm sure you'd like to control it, as you'd like to control guns.
I’m all in favor of severe and swift penalties for violent crimes using all weapons, including guns. The NRA and legal gun owners share my viewpoint. If we are oh so powerful, then tell me why we can’t get those laws passed.
If anyone really cares what the true effects of severe gun control laws have on a society, look to what is happening in England, Australia, and Canada. Private citizens can't have handguns, but the bad guys have plenty of them. They don't give a shit about gun control laws. Perhaps, if the professor in the SIU classroom had a 'Right to carry permit', he could have engaged the shooter, and made him put down his weapons before he killed anyone.
even if the professor had a 'right to carry permit' there is no way he would ever be allowed to bring a gun on campus.
all the firefights we could have whenever some car backfired!!
have weapons of ANY kind in on-base housing & barracks?
They lock them in the armory.
Must be because they're a bunch of wusses who don't know anything about guns.
Gun Free Zones are stupid. No one who will commit a crime would care, so why bother? Laws that only go "half way" don't help. Either do complete gun control with use of guns a capital offense, or don't bother. Sure, it won't stop the suicidal types, but if you have complete control, there would be less of that anyway.
Until the penalty fits the crime, only the innocent will pay.
I don't give a fuck about controlling your speech...I ignore it for the most part. I just don't want to contribute to more unnecessary sarcasm around here (like the moron who mentioned global warming...chip on their shoulder, perhaps?) by posting one thread. Just thought I could discuss this and keep it real, and I am responding to the "real" parts of your post. Thank you for them.
Problem with "legal" gun owners, BTW, is you can never tell when they will become illegal. Just ask the parents of the five dead at NIU.
And yes...I would love to control guns. If people need to threaten people, they can fistfight.
Its a matter of freedom of choice. If they were shooting fetuses, I think you would understand better.
I doubt seriously these incidents are caused by gun nuts. Its the gun nuts that are restricted from taking these people out in the first place. A criminal can go on a rampage safety in this country, knowing the surrounding population and the c=victim is likely unarmed by law. Criminals by definition are not so encumbered.
but don't worry about that, you solve that problem by shooting anybody who looks like a criminal.
All I want is to restrict weapons to people smarter than the fucking weapon.
...thats going really well. More of that and we'll be violence free.
because he wasn't a criminal.
We need MORE weapons in the hands of MORE non-criminals.
With any luck, half of Texas will shoot the other half.
But you were pretty close.
was there something that made NIU deserve it?
gent had defended his neighbor's property, shot the bad guys, and the bleeding heart liberals wanted his head on a platter. I would give the guy a medal!
The media does not want to print the everyday stories about a man defending himself or his property if no one was shot. They don't want to print about a lawful gun owner saving himself, and his family.
While the recent shooting are tragic, it is not gun violence, it is people violence.
Tougher laws for those who are violent is the answer, so I agree with you on that point.
And I would think "the media" would drool over the chance to talk about that...as it is SENSATIONALIST, which is about the ONLY think that a story needs to be anymore. There is no liberal or conservative bias in the media...it's all about money, so whatever sells prints.
And I didn't mean scenarios like what you discussed NEVER happen...but I am sure there are plenty of local crimes committed with guns (as well as accidents, domestic abuse, etc) that never go national, either.
-- Modified on 2/16/2008 3:03:07 PM
The guy wasn't saving himself, his family or anyone else. There was no imminent danger. They weren't even on his property. He just declared himself a vigilante and gunned them down on a public street.
Sure, here's the link. Here I thought the left wing liberals had a better memory.
the target's dog shitting on the lawn?
What was going on, did the guy drive up in a crane & try to make off with the house & lot?
I would definitely shoot people for that sort of shit. Save all the trial costs.
and see if things don't change!!
Attach a bond/insurance policy to every weapon - last transferor's insurer picks up the tab for any UNLAWFUL shooting.
See if they don't pucker right up when they become responsible for their choices. Accountability always scares the shit right out of Republicans.
unlawful shooting! Shoot them back, I say! Better yet, blow them the fuck up! Just like they do in Somalia, only with white folks!!
So what if you scare all the pussy off! Real men don't want pussy, only whiskey AND guns!!
that'll get yer asswipe dummyrat bleeding hearts puckering up too.
release a murederer who kills again?
we kill you.
make a career out of springing rapists and murderers?
we ass fuck ya to death.
yeah, that'll clear yer senses....
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 5:50:44 PM
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 5:52:02 PM
So you want to insure lawyers & parole board members?
1st, lawyers are insured. Never saw one I couldn't collect from. 2nd, the parole board has sovereign immunity. That's what the RepubliCONS want.
You might want to come down off your rush before you try posting. Makes it easier to hit the right key.
Most Swedish citizens have a full-auto rifle in their home and yet their gun violence statistics is infinitesimal compared with the U.S.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not”
(Thomas Jefferson)
“Those who would trade essential liberty for some temporary security; deserve neither.”
(Benjamin Franklin)
Likewise in Switzerland. Every able bodied male must serve 2 years in the Swiss military, (yep, they really do have a military force), and they are then placed in the reserve forces. They keep their weapons at home with them until their reserve committment is completed. Violent crime is unheard of there. How do i know? Both my father and grandfather came from Naters, Wallis, Switzerland.
opposed to universal military service? After all, it shouldn't affect too many of them - I haven't seen more than a handful that would meet the minimum IQ requirements.
machine-guns at home?
"I'm confused - how can the Swedes be socialists if they all have
Posted by Bushit-eater, 2/16/2008 10:34:52 PM
machine-guns at home?"
Maybe you haven't noticed but the socialists are killing each other with illegal guns..in a city near you..
To a city near you!! They're leftist Swedish people with machine guns!! And they're cleverly disguised as - as Jamaicans?! WTF, over?
The Jamaicans are coming! and they're Swedish people! I mean socialists! Or leftists! Or drug-runners! Bad people! I'm a bad person! I mean, we're bad people! What DO WE MEAN!! We have to do something! Panic! Hyperventilate! Shoot first and ask questions later! Nukem all & let Jesus fuck them! Hooray for our side!! Bangbang!!!
If you use a gun to commit a crime, whether it be murder or robbing the corner store, you will be executed. Conviction = death sentence. Instant. No jail time. Zero tolerance.
Honest gun owners will remain honest gun owners.
Watch how gun related crime in this country drops.
In addition;
Legal "law-abiding" gun ownership should be rewarded by a CCW for everyone passing the DOJ background check along with a written, as well as practical safety/handling/marksmanship test.
why don't we have zero tolerance for idiots?
Because nobody could be President!!
Maybe you hadn't noticed, but violent criminals are rarely the sharpest knives in the drawer. Some of them don't seem to think they have much to lose, and others tend not to be able to see a week in advance - sort of like you.
Deterrence/social structure works for 90%, but the last 10% are enough to disrupt normal society.
These - the last 10% - are not people who are going to be "deterred" - they are criminals because they are too far out of step, and don't think like most people.
All these recent killers have ended up shooting themselves. Obviously, execution was a big deterrent there, eh, rocket scientist?
Let's do this - let's just execute morons, ie, all Republicans.
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 8:03:16 AM
I guess we should probably start with JackO.
If you and the rest of the anti gunners want to give up your right to keep and bear arms, go right ahead, What the hell, I'll even join you, but I am not giving my means to self defense until every last criminal has done the same.
If you want to trust the police to protect you, go right ahead, maybe we won't have to execute you for being a moron, some crack head who needs twenty bucks might just it for you.
meet anybody who is pissed off and a better shot than you (or gets the drop on you) and that's a reasonable risk because your entire attitude is an exercise in minor paranoia.
Here you are depending on the police to protect you from mafiosi, and they do a pretty fair job, eh? No mafiosi got you yet, eh?
So, how often do you actually use that weapon?
That said, hyperventilation on either & both sides of the aisle are BULLSHIT!! That shrink got hacked to death, and the college shooters have clean records until they gun down a dozen and then themselves. Deterrence works real good there, eh?
Well, life ain't perfect, but the human schtick is to work on it. Many pro burglars do in fact work the day shift hoping to avoid people, and especially people with guns.
My position is that gun possession should come with due diligence and insurance, ie training and testing (yes guns can do more damage than cars), and insurance so the distributors actually make judgments about who to pass off a weapon to.
generally, I would bar Republicans from gun ownership, since I feel very strongly that the operator should be smarter than the machine.
And if you're sending your crackhead cousin over, tell him to bring a platoon of his buddies, we'll deal with them all at once.
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 9:03:01 AM
people with NO RECORDS, and they either shot themselves with the last round, or made sure the cops shot them.
Real good deterrence, eh, rocket scientist?!
All you have to be is a simple fuck, and you'll have all the answers.
In both the cases you cite, VT and NIU, (and any others where someone has gone on a shooting rampage), the shooter has been insane, crazy, mentally ill.
By definition you need to be in order to do these things. Guns don't have a fucking thing to do with it.
Jack The Ripper did'nt use a gun. What was the caliber of Jeffy Dahmers weapon?
You'll find a closer nexus to video games, movies and stupid rap bullshit put out by your freethinking friends in hollyweird than proximity to weapons, otherwise we'd be seeing these killing more on military installations, que no doooshbag?
If you wanna solve a problem, you gotta know what's causing it see? You are confused about cause and effect, like so many that think they have all the answers and can't see their nose in front of them.
Don't bother replying, I know what I've said will go over your head.......
Now where's my meat cleaver?????
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 10:43:51 PM
-- Modified on 2/17/2008 10:44:55 PM
the Meat-cleaver boy killed 1 person. How many did the other guys kill? Lots, I think. More than I can count.
Guns don't have a thing to do with killing people. That's the reason the Army is gonna go back to issuing bows & fucking arrows.
and civilian use of guns...
and your no idiot...
maybe all the bushit you been eatin is clouding your mind....
for you i'll recommend the extra strenght..
and civilian use of guns...
and your no idiot...
maybe all the bushit you been eatin is clouding your mind....
for you i'll recommend the extra strenght..
"stupid rap bullshit put out by your freethinking friends in hollyweird "
That's giving me and my buds a bad rap.
and take it on a case by case basis but I'll also want to discuss with you the correlation between thoughts, and how they are formed, and actions.
For starters, how many Aborigines say "Yo muthFucka, gonna cap ya wit my 9er...."" then put a 9mm projectile thru the skull of a 18 year old store clerk?
anybody is entitled to both, and it's pretty futile trying to prevent either.
Nobody is going to argue that practitioners of shithead culture shouldn't pay the price.
The problem is how much & what kind of prevention to carry out - any better alternative is a start, but it's not like those aren't obvious enough.
My only problem with the death penalty is that courts get it wrong so often, usually about 10% of the time. But I don't buy the idea that death has to be painless or pretty. We're fucking KILLING a person, sending him Fedex back to his Maker because he's defective, and hiding from that is bullshit. I'd hang their asses, just like we did war criminals. You don't like hanging, then don't be an asshole. We missed with Charlie Manson, but we coulda saved a lot of toxic chemicals with Tookie & Timmy.
yammering libs don't anyone to know that arguement has 2 sides. see, i say go ahead and play your shit but i reserve the right to call it toxic brain shit without being labeled a racist by the Dummyrat CivilRights/Class WArfare Industrial Complex your buddy Al_what_The_Fuck runs
so you can understand some folks aren't sure if you're campaigning for some Republican, or admission to the insane asylum.
is that why you need all that armament, because you're all that delicate? In case some towelhead on the other side of the world might not LIKE you, then you go blow him and his clan away? Just in case?
Is that the way it works?
So you're not a racist, just paranoid schizophrenic.
BTW, i was in LA in 92, i've seen what happens when subhumans get the upper hand
home is where my kids are
you bet i'm armed
the black parts of town. Most crime is against homies - just like most Ponzi scheme victims are white people with money - and IMHO, it only takes a few assholes to screw everybody up.
You can't blame any victim, nor can you blame them for their in-laws. Unless they're Springsteen's Highway Patrolman.
Nobody's getting into that because of any concern for a victim, but rather because it's too likely that somebody else you know may be the next victim.
Whether a person's reaction - or town's reaction - is reasonable, is an issue of fact.
BK: I was flying a trip into LAX and landed about 5:30am the morning after the riots started. We counted 35 major fires. Not dumpster fires, but large building fires. We were cleared to land on Rwy 25L at LAX which overflies parts of South Central. Descending through 3,000 feet, we were recleared to climb to 7,000 feet, go out over the ocean and land on Rwy 7R. LAX tower had reports from police of "Free Rodney King" types shooting at planes landing at LAX. After landing, maintenance found 2 bullet holes in the #4 engine inlet cowling. I was flying a freighter, no passengers. Good thing too. Still trying to figure out what we had to do with anything going on there.
they're way too unpredictable, and results unmanageable, to bet that the investment will pay off in any way.
Cardinal rule of management - you can't manage anything without an objective, measurable goal. And then you gotta make sure that is what the ladies really want - it usually isn't. You gotta understand, you will never please anybody but yourself, so you may as well do that, and just fuck the rest of them!!
Remember, natural selection is not about staying alive, it's about reproducing!! What we need is girls that grow up faster, and recycle faster. This 18 years and 9 months is altogether too slow.