Jump to content


All about gun control

Off topic guns killers nutjobs

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
750 replies to this topic

#1 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    This pleases Nikita

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,886 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 01:35 AM

I feel like in light of recent events, both yesterday and within the last two decades, we should be able to have a thread on this. Let's talk about firearms and the United States.

There's one very important thing we must note from the outset and it's that the US is unlike any other country in the world when it comes to both production and sale of firearms meant for killing more than just animals. This must be accounted for.

Firearms are a symbol of freedom here. But in my mind true freedom would be the complete abandonment of guns. That's just me.

Let's talk. No holds barred, right Chz?

#2 skaught

skaught

    Rolston Centipede

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 418 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 15 December 2012 - 05:42 AM

It's not the guns, it's the people. If you remove guns from the equation, I'm sure there will just be an increase in bombings.

Edited by skaught, 15 December 2012 - 05:44 AM.


#3 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:00 AM

View Postd4rksabre, on 15 December 2012 - 01:35 AM, said:

I feel like in light of recent events, both yesterday and within the last two decades, we should be able to have a thread on this. Let's talk about firearms and the United States.

There's one very important thing we must note from the outset and it's that the US is unlike any other country in the world when it comes to both production and sale of firearms meant for killing more than just animals. This must be accounted for.

Firearms are a symbol of freedom here. But in my mind true freedom would be the complete abandonment of guns. That's just me.

Let's talk. No holds barred, right Chz?
If firearms are a "symbol of freedom" than we have never truly been free.

View Postskaught, on 15 December 2012 - 05:42 AM, said:

It's not the guns, it's the people. If you remove guns from the equation, I'm sure there will just be an increase in bombings.
This is the same pathetic rhetoric the NRA has been spewing for years. The idea that guns should remain legal because people will just find other methods to kill. You do realize how stupid a rational that is?

#4 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:06 AM

Here's a quote to take a look at.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."   Thomas Jefferson

I agree w/ Thomas Jefferson's view on the right to bare arms. I do feel higher restrictions should be put in place; as in lower the level or types of guns that can be sold to the general public. Today's firearms are far different than the ones that existed in Jefferson's time. I also believe people should only be allowed to own an x amount of guns. Simply doing these two things will reduce the thousands of shootings that occur year in and year out.

Edited by thanes16, 15 December 2012 - 09:13 AM.


#5 Corp000085

Corp000085

    Morris Titanic Fan Club, Charter Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hope Mills, NC

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:18 AM

My stance on gun control and 2nd Amendment rights have not changed since yesterday...  Hunting rifles, shotguns, and non-military/police grade sidearms should be legal, military grade sidearms/large clips/etc, plus assault rifles should be illegal.  


The right to hold and use these arms should be scrutinized though.  You want to own one of my specified legal guns?  Great...  Now pass through a more rigorous licensing system than is currently in place.  Have this licensing system controlled by the feds through the ATF or something.  Classes, physicals, psychological review, etc, just as the FAA controls pilots licenses.  If you're a legit hunter, farmer, etc, you should have no problem jumping through the hoops.  People that complain should automatically be shipped off...

#6 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:20 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 09:06 AM, said:

Here's a quote to take a look at.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."   Thomas Jefferson

I agree w/ Thomas Jefferson's view on the right to bare arms. I do feel higher restrictions should be put in place; as in lower the level or types of guns that can be sold to the general public. Today's firearms are far different than the ones that existed in Jefferson's time. I also believe people should only be allowed to own an x amount of guns. Simply doing these two things will reduce the thousands of shootings that occur year in and year out.
You think Jefferson would feel the same if someone walked into a school and slaughtered 20 children in his day? Jefferson's thought may have been appropriate 200+ years ago. it simply doesn't fit in today's society.

#7 SDS

SDS

    #7

  • SS Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:21 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:

If firearms are a "symbol of freedom" than we have never truly been free.
This is the same pathetic rhetoric the NRA has been spewing for years. The idea that guns should remain legal because people will just find other methods to kill. You do realize how stupid a rational that is?

I doubt you really want to talk about this. Your few posts so far has amounted to you on a soapbox pointing and shouting and calling the other side a bunch of poopy-heads. Hardly needle moving rhetoric.

#8 weave

weave

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:30 AM

I'd love to have this conversation. I'll pass until folks like DeLuca can participate without the condescension and trolling. if what you really want is a serious and reasonable debate you use serious, reasonable words.

#9 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:32 AM

View PostSDS, on 15 December 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

I doubt you really want to talk about this. Your few posts so far has amounted to you on a soapbox pointing and shouting and calling the other side a bunch of poopy-heads. Hardly needle moving rhetoric.
Are you Grover Norquist?

#10 biodork

biodork

    I love lamp.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,282 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:central PA

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:38 AM

View PostCorp000085, on 15 December 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

My stance on gun control and 2nd Amendment rights have not changed since yesterday...  Hunting rifles, shotguns, and non-military/police grade sidearms should be legal, military grade sidearms/large clips/etc, plus assault rifles should be illegal.  


The right to hold and use these arms should be scrutinized though.  You want to own one of my specified legal guns?  Great...  Now pass through a more rigorous licensing system than is currently in place.  Have this licensing system controlled by the feds through the ATF or something.  Classes, physicals, psychological review, etc, just as the FAA controls pilots licenses.  If you're a legit hunter, farmer, etc, you should have no problem jumping through the hoops.  People that complain should automatically be shipped off...

This is pretty much where I fall.  Like d4rk, I wish no one had them (couldn't you just rent one for hunting, target practice, etc rather than owning?), but realistically I doubt that will ever happen so I favor reduced access and more intense regulations on licensing and purchases.  Way too easy to get something that can hurt a lot of people.  And yes, someone determined will always find a way to harm others, but let's not make it so easy for them.

#11 wjag

wjag

    Buffalo Sports -- Dysfunction Junction

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just below the Mason-Dixon Line

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:38 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:


You think Jefferson would feel the same if someone walked into a school and slaughtered 20 children in his day? Jefferson's thought may have been appropriate 200+ years ago. it simply doesn't fit in today's society.

Apparently it did happen in Jefferson's time too..  Found on a search for school shootings.

#12 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:40 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

You think Jefferson would feel the same if someone walked into a school and slaughtered 20 children in his day? Jefferson's thought may have been appropriate 200+ years ago. it simply doesn't fit in today's society.

The earliest known United States shooting to happen on school property was the Pontiac's Rebellion school massacre on July 26, 1764, where four Lenape American Indian entered the schoolhouse near present-day Greencastle, Pennsylvania, shot and killed a schoolmaster and nine or ten children.

School shootings unfortunately did occur during Thomas Jefferson's time.Yet, he still believed in the right to bare arms. I agree w/ what Thomas Jefferson had to say about the highly debated topic.

#13 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:43 AM

View Postweave, on 15 December 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

I'd love to have this conversation. I'll pass until folks like DeLuca can participate without the condescension and trolling. if what you really want is a serious and reasonable debate you use serious, reasonable words.
There is no reason for the weapons like the ones used yesterday to be available to anyone. There is no "serious" or "reasonable" debate in favor of continuing to allow these weapons to exist.

Enough is enough, and now is the time sweeping and massive restrictions to the type of firearms and accessories that are available. It must canvas the the entire country so some yahoo can't just drive a state over and load up on arms.

#14 wjag

wjag

    Buffalo Sports -- Dysfunction Junction

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just below the Mason-Dixon Line

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:49 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:



The earliest known United States shooting to happen on school property was the Pontiac's Rebellion school massacre on July 26, 1764, where four Lenape American Indian entered the schoolhouse near present-day Greencastle, Pennsylvania, shot and killed a schoolmaster and nine or ten children.

School shootings unfortunately did occur during Thomas Jefferson's time.Yet, he still believed in the right to bare arms. I agree w/ what Thomas Jefferson had to say about the highly debated topic.

Article I read also said they were scalped too...  Yikes..

With each one of these I think less and less in our ability to effect change.

The clearest demand signal or lack of was the Gifford supermarket parking lot shooting.  If Congress wasn't compelled to act on that one, then this country is simply prepared to live with days like yesterday as the price we pay.  It is already normalized into the debate.  Children being gunned down in schools and on street corners just doesn't impact us in a way where progressive change can be made.



#15 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:54 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

The earliest known United States shooting to happen on school property was the Pontiac's Rebellion school massacre on July 26, 1764, where four Lenape American Indian entered the schoolhouse near present-day Greencastle, Pennsylvania, shot and killed a schoolmaster and nine or ten children.

School shootings unfortunately did occur during Thomas Jefferson's time.Yet, he still believed in the right to bare arms. I agree w/ what Thomas Jefferson had to say about the highly debated topic.
I think there is a slight difference between an Indian attack and the series of horrific crimes this country has recently experienced in a short period of time.

#16 weave

weave

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:56 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

There is no reason for the weapons like the ones used yesterday to be available to anyone. There is no "serious" or "reasonable" debate in favor of continuing to allow these weapons to exist.

Enough is enough, and now is the time sweeping and massive restrictions to the type of firearms and accessories that are available. It must canvas the the entire country so some yahoo can't just drive a state over and load up on arms.

Your posting history this offseason has opened my eyes.  I was a fool to ever defend you in the past.  You are a troll, pure and simple.

#17 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:00 AM

View Postwjag, on 15 December 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

Apparently it did happen in Jefferson's time too..  Found on a search for school shootings.
That list is even more horrifying. Why do we allow this to happen.

View Postweave, on 15 December 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Your posting history this offseason has opened my eyes.  I was a fool to ever defend you in the past.  You are a troll, pure and simple.
Don't bother trying to make this about me, this is too serious a subject to fall for that lame tactic.

#18 weave

weave

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:03 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:


Don't bother trying to make this about me, this is too serious a subject to fall for that lame tactic.


And you are very good at too.  :rolleyes:

#19 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:06 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

I think there is a slight difference between an Indian attack and the series of horrific crimes this country has recently experienced in a short period of time.

And what the 4 Lenape American Indians did was not horrific? I don't see the difference between the two. What you need to understand is shootings of all types have been occurring throughout our nation's history. Do you honestly believe people weren't being gunned down almost on daily basis during Jefferson's time? Many peopled feared to travel certain "trails or traces", because shootings were known to be taking place. Jefferson was aware of what was going on, but he still supported one's right to bare arms. Go back to the Thomas Jefferson quote I posted earlier this morning. Heck, here's a portion of it. "Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants" Thomas Jefferson

Edited by thanes16, 15 December 2012 - 10:09 AM.


#20 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:08 AM

View Postwjag, on 15 December 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

Article I read also said they were scalped too...  Yikes..

With each one of these I think less and less in our ability to effect change.

The clearest demand signal or lack of was the Gifford supermarket parking lot shooting.  If Congress wasn't compelled to act on that one, then this country is simply prepared to live with days like yesterday as the price we pay.  It is already normalized into the debate.  Children being gunned down in schools and on street corners just doesn't impact us in a way where progressive change can be made.

We just can't give up. I know guns are big money and that the NRA has millions behind it. We can't as a Nation allow that to deter getting done what needs to get done.

#21 SwampD

SwampD

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Jersey, orig. NT

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:11 AM

View Postweave, on 15 December 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Your posting history this offseason has opened my eyes.  I was a fool to ever defend you in the past.  You are a troll, pure and simple.

Attack the post, not the poster.  Trolls don't believe what they post.  They just post to fire up others.  I don't believe that is what  DeLuca is doing here.


As left as I am, I am very much against gun control.  But I will concede that if guns were as available in China as they are in the US, that knife attack would have ended much worse.  I have no idea what to do with that knowledge on how it should effect gun control, but I can't deny that fact.

#22 Eleven

Eleven

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,137 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:14 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:

If firearms are a "symbol of freedom" than we have never truly been free.


I'll bite.  As much as I wish the Second Amendment would, itself, be amended (see my posts in earlier thread), I can't deny that firearms are any less a symbol of freedom than a free press.  How is it otherwise?

#23 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:16 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 10:06 AM, said:

And what the 4 Lenape American Indians did was not horrific? I don't see the difference between the two. What you need to understand is shootings of all types have been occurring throughout our nation's history. Do you honestly believe people weren't being gunned down almost on daily basis during Jefferson's time? Many peopled feared to travel certain "trails or traces", because shootings were known to be taking place. Jefferson was aware of what was going on, but he still supported one's right to bare arms.
The horrific nature of the crime is no less startling than what happened yesterday. Shootings have happened in the past and not matter the level of gun control they will continue to happen in the future. That doesn't mean we can't as a Nation remove those weapons designed to kill with the utmost efficiency.

#24 DR HOLLIDAY

DR HOLLIDAY

    Born in 1970- Just like the Sabres

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southern Ontario

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:18 AM

I am against guns.  But I think that mental health treatment and assessment is just as much a problem in today's society and played just as big a part in the tragedy that took place yesterday.

#25 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:21 AM

View PostEleven, on 15 December 2012 - 10:14 AM, said:

I'll bite.  As much as I wish the Second Amendment would, itself, be amended (see my posts in earlier thread), I can't deny that firearms are any less a symbol of freedom than a free press.  How is it otherwise?
How can an instrument of death be a symbol of freedom? Freedom of speech and the right to vote are symbols of true freedom. Firearms are a symbol of oppression.

#26 Eleven

Eleven

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,137 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:24 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

How can an instrument of death be a symbol of freedom? Freedom of speech and the right to vote are symbols of true freedom. Firearms are a symbol of oppression.

Mostly because blanket prohibitions on weapons are badges of tyrrany.

#27 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:31 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:16 AM, said:

The horrific nature of the crime is no less startling than what happened yesterday. Shootings have happened in the past and not matter the level of gun control they will continue to happen in the future. That doesn't mean we can't as a Nation remove those weapons designed to kill with the utmost efficiency.

I do believe some type of restriction should be placed on what types of guns can be sold and not sold. However, I will always support one's right to bare arms.

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

How can an instrument of death be a symbol of freedom? Freedom of speech and the right to vote are symbols of true freedom. Firearms are a symbol of oppression.

If one can use firearms as a symbol of oppression, one can also argue the freedom of speech and the right to vote are symbols of oppression. As they say, the pen is mightier then the sword.

#28 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:49 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

I do believe some type of restriction should be placed on what types of guns can be sold and not sold. However, I will always support one's right to bare arms.



If one can use firearms as a symbol of oppression, one can also argue the freedom of speech and the right to vote are symbols of oppression. As they say, the pen is mightier then the sword.
Please continue on this thought.

#29 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:17 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:


Please continue on this thought.

Considering the fact our country is slowly progressing to a state of totalatarianism, how can one say freedom of speech cannot be viewed as a symbol of oppression? Speech can be used as a tool for change. Has change been good for our country? Of course it has. The rights we have today were established w/ the freedom of speech.  However, the freedom of speech is indirectly taking away the freedom of speech. In which case, it can be viewed as a symbol for oppression. All in all, the freedom of speech can take away the rights we have. The right to bare arms is an example to use.

Let me stress I STRONGLY support our right to freedom of speech. I am simply explaining how one can view it as a symbol of oppression.

Edited by thanes16, 15 December 2012 - 11:23 AM.


#30 SwampD

SwampD

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Jersey, orig. NT

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:29 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

Considering the fact our country is slowly progressing to a state of totalatarianism, how can one say freedom of speech cannot be viewed as a symbol of oppression? Speech can be used as a tool for change. Has change been good for our country? Of course it has. The rights we have today were established w/ the freedom of speech.  However, the freedom of speech is indirectly taking away the freedom of speech. In which case, it can be viewed as a symbol for oppression. All in all, the freedom of speech can take away the rights we have. The right to bare arms is an example to use.

Let me stress I STRONGLY support our right to freedom of speech. I am simply explaining how one can view it as a symbol of oppression.
How else would I know who I'm supposed to hate and why unless someone told me?

#31 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:29 AM

View Postthanes16, on 15 December 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

Considering the fact our country is slowly progressing to a state of totalatarianism, how can one say freedom of speech cannot be viewed as a symbol of oppression? Speech can be used as a tool for change. Has change been good for our country? Of course it has. The rights we have today were established w/ the freedom of speech.  However, the freedom of speech is indirectly taking away the freedom of speech. In which case, it can be viewed as a symbol for oppression. All in all, the freedom of speech can take away the rights we have. The right to bare arms is an example to use.
I see your point, on one level I actually agree. IMO, though we have freedom of speech I feel that many voices are drowned out by those that can afford to lay down cash. Lobby groups like the NRA and Grover Norquist have voices louder than the average citizen simply because they have the cash to propel their voice. I do not think Freedom of Speech can be oppressive, I do feel it can be oppressed.

#32 weave

weave

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:37 AM

Freedom of Speech as oppression:

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.  There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions." - Saul Alinsky

#33 K-9

K-9

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,891 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:44 AM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

I see your point, on one level I actually agree. IMO, though we have freedom of speech I feel that many voices are drowned out by those that can afford to lay down cash. Lobby groups like the NRA and Grover Norquist have voices louder than the average citizen simply because they have the cash to propel their voice. I do not think Freedom of Speech can be oppressive, I do feel it can be oppressed.

More than the cash, it helps to have the world's second largest media conglomerate as a pulpit. It's a well-oiled machine.

Goebbels knew what he was doing.

#34 bobis

bobis

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 604 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:41 PM

View PostDeLuca67, on 15 December 2012 - 10:16 AM, said:

The horrific nature of the crime is no less startling than what happened yesterday. Shootings have happened in the past and not matter the level of gun control they will continue to happen in the future. That doesn't mean we can't as a Nation remove those weapons designed to kill with the utmost efficiency.

How do you propose to rid every inner city in this country of illegal guns? It's the people that have the Illegal guns that are the problem in this country not the people that have the legal ones.

Edited by Freakpop, 15 December 2012 - 12:43 PM.


#35 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:48 PM

I am against killing of any kind, including *hunting*.

Humans are the only species that can and do kill indescriminately.

In my mind gun powder was the worst inovation / invention ever devised.  It lead to guns ...

#36 SwampD

SwampD

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Jersey, orig. NT

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:49 PM

View PostFreakpop, on 15 December 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

How do you propose to rid every inner city in this country of illegal guns? It's the people that have the Illegal guns that are the problem in this country not the people that have the legal ones.
All the guns were legally registered to the mother yesterday.

#37 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:50 PM

View PostSwampD, on 15 December 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

All the guns were legally registered to the mother yesterday.

I won't say it, but everyone will proabaly be able to guess what I'm thinking.

#38 DeLuca1967

DeLuca1967

    #39 - Greatest of All-Time.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,269 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 01:33 PM

View PostFreakpop, on 15 December 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

How do you propose to rid every inner city in this country of illegal guns? It's the people that have the Illegal guns that are the problem in this country not the people that have the legal ones.
Are you suggesting that just because you can't rid the country of "every gun" there shouldn't be a concerted effort to get as many off the streets as possible. Many of the "illegal" guns were "legal" at one point.

View PostSabres Fan In NS, on 15 December 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

I am against killing of any kind, including *hunting*.

Humans are the only species that can and do kill indescriminately.

In my mind gun powder was the worst inovation / invention ever devised.  It lead to guns ...
This goes to something I said after a previous horrific tragedy, there have been so many I'm not sure which one. The 2nd Amendment covers firearms, I do not believe it covers ammunition. If states can tax the hell out of cigarettes, there is no reason they can't tax the hell out of bullets. I would also like to see gunpowder be declared a controlled substance where a license is needed to process it in any form, even if it is packed into a shell casing.

#39 Eleven

Eleven

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,137 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo

Posted 15 December 2012 - 03:11 PM

View PostFreakpop, on 15 December 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

How do you propose to rid every inner city in this country of illegal guns? It's the people that have the Illegal guns that are the problem in this country not the people that have the legal ones.

The logistics aren't really germane at this point, are they?  And how many of the mass shootings that prompt this dialogue were perpetrated by residents of the inner cities?  (We all know what that's a euphemism for, anyway.)

#40 thanes16

thanes16

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2012 - 03:41 PM

View PostEleven, on 15 December 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

The logistics aren't really germane at this point, are they?  And how many of the mass shootings that prompt this dialogue were perpetrated by residents of the inner cities?  (We all know what that's a euphemism for, anyway.)

That is a very good point. What is sad is many people seem to stereotype different types of people and different parts of society. What people should understand is we are all the same. Yes, I understand people from all parts of society face different difficulties, but what we all need to recognize is the fact something like yesterday's tragedy can happen at any time and at any place. It sickens me people are quick to assume this, that and the other.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Off topic, guns, killers, nutjobs