Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ColDayMan

Gun Rights

Recommended Posts

More people need to read and share what Marilyn Mansion wrote and believed about Columbine. I came to respect him for it.


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^This is a good clip from Bowling for Columbine that describes the media's attack on video games and music as a cause for irrational human behavior. I think Manson does make a good point here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think guns are silly. They are for scared people with way too much testosterone.

 

It's very easy to try and paint all gun enthusiasts as fringe lunatics but I think we all know that's not the case.

 

You should come out to the gun range sometime, you won't find a group of nicer, law abiding, respectful people.  I belong to SCSA, would be happy to show you around.  We're always welcoming new members.  Most of the guys who shoot regularly are ex-military who are in their 50's and simply enjoy the comraderie and keeping their skills up for periodic competitions.  It's a very expensive hobby and there are very few places where one can participate in such a hobby. 

I just think guns are silly. They are for scared people with way too much testosterone.

 

It's very easy to try and paint all gun enthusiasts as fringe lunatics but I think we all know that's not the case.

 

You should come out to the gun range sometime, you won't find a group of nicer, law abiding, respectful people.  I belong to SCSA, would be happy to show you around.  We're always welcoming new members.  Most of the guys who shoot regularly are ex-military who are in their 50's and simply enjoy the comraderie and keeping their skills up for periodic competitions.  It's a very expensive hobby and there are very few places where one can participate in such a hobby. 

 

"An armed society is a polite society" - Robert Anson Heinlein.

 

Every proposed "solution" I have heard has severe drawbacks at best, and could lead to much dangerous situations.

 

A post above nailed it, while being otherwise wrong:  These killers want to become famous.

 

The media should never mention their names or discuss their motivations.

 

Unfortunately, that won't happen universally as it would run quite afoul of the First Amendment to make it so.

 

Gun owners, for the most part, are indeed "nice, respectful people".  Unless they think you are trying to take away a very essential right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mass shootings are no more common than they have been in past decades, despite the impression given by the media."

 

At the moment I'm not willing to put in the time to parse the word 'common' in association with mass shootings.

 

If you add in the Newtons shooting from last week it looks like 5 of the ten worst in the US  have happened since 2007 and that seems pretty significant in relation to this discussion

 

http://technorati.com/politics/article/newton-tragedy-and-10-deadliest-mass/

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been to a gun range -- in the Ukraine. A former soldier in the Russian Army taught me how to fire an AK-47. My aim at about 100 feet was pretty good despite my shaky hands. The AK was fixed for semi-auto only, so I could only fire single shot. So I was pretty happy that I hit 75% of the the targets -- all vodka bottles. It was actually interesting.

 

And I couldn't care if I ever do it again. In fact, after the increasing number of massacres in this country, I would prefer that nobody ever do it again if it means a life can be saved. You all better be sure I don't get elected dictator someday because I will seize all your guns, melt them down and make plow shares out of them. For those of you feeling patriotic, I advise you not to tell my jack-booted thugs "out of my cold dead hands"... All joking aside, that's how incredibly angry I am about things right now.

 

A post above nailed it, while being otherwise wrong:  These killers want to become famous.

 

The media should never mention their names or discuss their motivations.

 

Agree 100%. When I heard a CNN reporter say the killers name, I literally yelled at the TV and shut it off. Then I went back to writing my dictatorial manifesto.....


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take away the gun, and people would just get more creative in their killings; highjack a schoolbus, burn down a school, drive through a crowd, etc.

 

Fine. Make them be more creative. I'll put my money on heavily armed law enforcement vs. harder-to-be armed criminals with 'creative' killing solutions. There ARE creative mass murderers, but there are fewer of them. The idea that all, or even a significant number of gun killers would suddenly morph into geniuses and create new ways to murder...where is the data to support this argument? Why does it even make intuitive sense to you? Guns make killing easier. That's the problem. A gun control argument is not a 'we have to stop anything that kills people' argument, it's an argument that certain things make it SO EASY to commit mass murder (note: mass murder, not just murder) that they deserve special, very restrictive regulation. If you can show me other things in that category, I'll happily ban them as well.

 

I've seen a few people on Facebook make the simplistic analogy that "Oh, if we ban guns, we have to ban cars, because people die in accidents." I have a small aneurysm every time someone makes one of these analogies, because, guess what - cars are more regulated than firearms! And through consistent and careful regulation, vehicular deaths have steadily fallen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And I couldn't care if I ever do it again. In fact, after the increasing number of massacres in this country, I would prefer that nobody ever do it again if it means a life can be saved. You all better be sure I don't get elected dictator someday because I will seize all your guns, melt them down and make plow shares out of them. For those of you feeling patriotic, I advise you not to tell my jack-booted thugs "out of my cold dead hands"... All joking aside, that's how incredibly angry I am about things right now.

 

Damn, that’s the last thing anyone wants.  Especially the powers that be that have a clue, I’m becoming increasingly convinced.

 

You’d have the BATFE hot dogs that the cops and even some FBI agents call “F Troop”.  Maybe some of the TSA guys that are too hyper to pat down old ladies and little kids at airports.  The kinds of guys that do great on no-knock raids on what turns out to be the wrong address but need to be bailed out by the grownups at Idaho cabins or rural Texas religious nuthouses. 

 

Sure, they’d take out some of the tinfoil brigade.  But eventually, you’d be sending

them up against the likes of the guys that got bin Laden.

 

This would end up being a lot like sending one of the 82 bridge bombers against Chuck Norris.  Conceptually appealing, but ugly very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A post above nailed it, while being otherwise wrong:  These killers want to become famous.

 

The media should never mention their names or discuss their motivations.

 

Agree 100%. When I heard a CNN reporter say the killers name, I literally yelled at the TV and shut it off. Then I went back to writing my dictatorial manifesto.....

 

Hell, mentioning his name is one thing.  Going through every detail of his life like Tiger Beat magazine profiling Justin Beiber is another level of magnitude.  He just became the poster boy for kids who want to really scare their parents, and he knew it before he did this.  Otherwise, he just stays in his basement, writes bad poetry, and may not pull the trigger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick Perry's solution is to arm school teachers and administrators.  I swear that Texans will never be satisfied until we go back to the day when everyone walks around with a six-shooter on their hip...... or, to account for the times, a semi-automatic rifle harnessed onto their shoulder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol and cars kill exponentially more innocent children than guns do every year, perhaps we should ban them too?

 

This is a very good point and an excellent analogy, and one that I don't think has been brought up before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's try this one more time.  Nobody realistically expect a BAN on guns. 

 

But perfect example using alcohol and cars.  We regulate the hell out of both industries.  We tax the hell out of both industries.  Alcohol has 'proof' limits.  There is also dramshop and other types of liability which could attach to not just the consumer of alcohol, but also the provider/facilitator.  There are strict age requirements as well.  Similarly, there are "street legal" cars and there are cars which we as a society have deemed too dangerous to allow out in public.  You can sue a car manufacturer...... you can't sue a gun manufacturer.  There is negligent entrustment laws and your cars have to be routinely inspected.  Car ownership comes with all sorts of registration, insurance, and safety requirements.

 

Good analogy, 8Titles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's try this one more time.  Nobody realistically expect a BAN on guns. 

 

But perfect example using alcohol and cars.  We regulate the hell out of both industries.  We tax the hell out of both industries.  Alcohol has 'proof' limits.  There is also dramshop and other types of liability which could attach to not just the consumer of alcohol, but also the provider/facilitator.  There are strict age requirements as well.  Similarly, there are "street legal" cars and there are cars which we as a society have deemed too dangerous to allow out in public.  You can sue a car manufacturer...... you can't sue a gun manufacturer.  There is negligent entrustment laws and your cars have to be routinely inspected.  Car ownership comes with all sorts of registration, insurance, and safety requirements.

 

Good analogy, 8Titles

I agree that more regulation/limits are needed in the gun industry, especially in the area of assault rifles.  I also don't currently own a gun, and haven't since my days in the military.  I'm just interested in protecting freedom.

 

I also find it weird that the same side of the aisle that is strongly for abortion (killing innocent lives) are so strongly against guns which are used to kill innocent lives.  Seems hypocritical..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^He is expressing a personal desire, not a realistic expectation.  Can you point me to any legislation which would ban guns?  Has that even been proposed?  It's simple.  Nobody has proposed banning guns, just like nobody has proposed banning Christmas.  But that doesn't stop the radicals from suggesting that end result to prevent any type of reasonable regulation

 

^^Well...... now you are going to open a can of worms.  If you're abortion analogy were correct, wouldn't it be hypocritical both ways?  i.e. isn't it weird that the same side of the aisle that is against abortion (killing innocent lives) are so in favor of guns which are used to kill innocent lives?  Or, how about this?..... isn't it weird the same side of the aisle which is so strongly against a woman's consitutional right to choose what to do with her body is so strongly in favor of the right to bear arms (for purposes other than a well-regulated militia)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...... now you are going to open a can of worms.  If you're abortion analogy were correct, wouldn't it be hypocritical both ways?  i.e. isn't it weird that the same side of the aisle that is against abortion (killing innocent lives) are so in favor of guns which are used to kill defend innocent lives?

 

FTFY.

 

If you want a productive, constructive discussion, stop painting Second Amendment defenders as people who favor killing innocents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Did you not read the post I was responding to?  That paint job was done for a specific purpose.  How else do I respond to the notion that people who are pro-choice are not against killing innocent lives?  I was simply pointing out the ridiculous nature of that comment and, apparently, the tactic worked quite well on you.  Regardless, maybe you meant to respond to 8Titles.... as he was actually the one who put forth the language you take issue with (i.e. that guns are used to kill innocent lives)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^He is expressing a personal desire, not a realistic expectation.  Can you point me to any legislation which would ban guns?  Has that even been proposed?  It's simple.  Nobody has proposed banning guns, just like nobody has proposed banning Christmas.  But that doesn't stop the radicals from suggesting that end result to prevent any type of reasonable regulation

 

^^Well...... now you are going to open a can of worms.  If you're abortion analogy were correct, wouldn't it be hypocritical both ways?  i.e. isn't it weird that the same side of the aisle that is against abortion (killing innocent lives) are so in favor of guns which are used to kill innocent lives?  Or, how about this?..... isn't it weird the same side of the aisle which is so strongly against a woman's consitutional right to choose what to do with her body is so strongly in favor of the right to bear arms (for purposes other than a well-regulated militia)?

All "lives" have rights, not just women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Did you not read the post I was responding to?  That paint job was done for a specific purpose.  How else do I respond to the notion that people who are pro-choice are not against killing innocent lives?  I was simply pointing out the ridiculous nature of that comment and, apparently, the tactic worked quite well on you

 

I did miss that.  Too much activity on the thread in the span of a minute or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^He is expressing a personal desire, not a realistic expectation.  Can you point me to any legislation which would ban guns?  Has that even been proposed?  It's simple.  Nobody has proposed banning guns, just like nobody has proposed banning Christmas.  But that doesn't stop the radicals from suggesting that end result to prevent any type of reasonable regulation

 

 

Can we at least agree that we should ban buying guns on Christmas? Also, welfare queens that call to schedule their abortions on an Obamaphone should be allowed to have guns, but only for the purposes of keeping the government out of Medicare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban buying guns on Jesus's birthday?  He whooth handethed the Constitution to our Founding Fathers?  You will burn for even making that suggestion.

 

However, I am willing to entertain some new policy which requires children to present valid state issued ID to Santa if they want their wish list considered....... just to make sure no illegals are given the American entitlement of gifts on Christmas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good article on whats known so far about the perp.  Absolutley no indication that he would snap, aside from being shy & awkward (and there are a lot of shy awkward people around.

 

Connecticut shooting suspect described as quiet honour roll student

 

...and it wasn't his guns. Apparently his mother had this stuff registered.  Which does open up questions as to why?  Two pistols and a rifle....ok....but does this make sense.  Seems to belie the stereotype of a gun enthusiast.

 

Three guns were found — a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both pistols, inside the school, and a .223-calibre rifle in the back of the car. The guns were reportedly owned and registered to Nancy Lanza, Adam Lanza's mother.

 

....just wonder about why/ how this kid snapped.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nate Silver on a gee-whiz stat on gun ownership and political affliation

 

In Gun Ownership Stats Partisan Divide is Sharp

 

An American child grows up in a married household in the suburbs. What are the chances that his family keeps a gun in their home?

 

The probability is considerably higher than our New York readers might expect: about 40 percent of such households reported having a gun in their home, according to the exit poll conducted during the 2008 presidential election.

 

But the odds vary significantly based on the political identity of the child’s parents.

 

...more at the link

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the UK media (Daily Mail):

 

The Kid Knew What He Was Doing

 

Gunman Adam Lanza deliberately destroyed his hard drive to erase valuable evidence of his motive

 

Cellphones and computer games seized but no prescribed drugs

 

Investigators have trawled Lanza's home for clues, as he left no note offering an explanation

 

Much of the evidence seized involves video and internet gaming material

 

...so, hard to say, huh?  Obviously this guy snapped but we may never know why.

 

Question I now have is why did the late Mrs Lanza have two pistos and a rifle at home?  Did she like target practice?  Something I don't get.  Of course people might not get why I like to collect maps and atlases. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, google is your friend

 

Austism?

 

Adam Lanza's family had kept a watchful eye on him

 

...and this explains that little home arsenal:

 

A Mother, a Gun Enthusiast and the First Victim

 

NEWTOWN, Conn. — Nancy Lanza loved guns, and often took her sons to one of the shooting ranges here in the suburbs northeast of New York City, where there is an active community of gun enthusiasts, her friends said. At a local bar, she sometimes talked about her gun collection.

 

Man, this is like drinking and driving.  Taking yr crazy kid with you out on target practice. 

 

This reads like fiction....like out of a movie. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this is a gun rights thread not a mass murder thread here are some charts courtesy of WaPo on the US gun ownership rate vs the rest of the wolrd

 

US Gun Culture in Fourt Charts

 

...note that we are close to Finland in ownership (Switzerland is a special case), yet they dont quite have the murder rate we have

 

Gun ownership high, violence low in Finland

 

...and from Slate"

Packing Heat in Helsinki

 

Heres' a fascinating blurb about the difference between how the Americans & Finns kill each other...both are apparenlty somewhat violent socities:

 

While Finns have a reputation for violence, firearms almost never enter the picture. Finland does have the highest murder rate in Western Europe, but those cases—commonly related to alcohol or domestic abuse—often involve knives rather than guns.

 

 

[url=

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol and cars kill exponentially more innocent children than guns do every year, perhaps we should ban them too?

 

1. Oh, look, another false analogy. See my previous post on this page.

2. Exponentially? Give me a number. (I believe you, but I like numbers).

3. Assuming your facts are correct, okay, fine: I would be fine with making drunk driving laws far harsher and with increasing car safety standards, so why aren't you fine with doing the same for guns?

4. Nobody (well, other than KJP in this thread, anyway) is asking for a total ban. Straw man argument. Not the issue being debated at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre (in official NRA publications):

 

(In an NRA Fundraising letter)

 

"all of our freedoms, all of our rights, all of our values ... All of them will be lost if Barack Obama is reelected."

 

(In NRA's magazine)

 

"With four more years of Obama, your firearms freedoms are gone. And we'll spend the rest of our lives mourning the freedoms we've lost... Every freedom we cherish as Americans is endangered by Obama. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

 

(After being invited by Obama to discuss how to keep guns out of the hands of criminals)

 

"Why should I or the NRA go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment?"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this post by Megan McArdle in the Daily Beast sums up my thoughts on the issue pretty well:

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/17/there-s-little-we-can-do-to-prevent-another-massacre.html

 

There's Little We Can Do to Prevent Another Massacre

The things that would work are impractical and unconstitutional. The things we can do won't work.

 

* * *

 

Unlike many libertarians, I am fine with a ban on automatic weapons.  But no need to hop over to Change.org to start a petition to ban them; machine guns have been illegal in the United States since 1934, and since the 1980s, it has been illegal to manufacture and sell any automatic weapon.  Apparently unbeknownst to Twitter, we have also already made it illegal for the mentally ill to buy or have guns, and have background checks aimed at prevented just that.   

 

But beyond the strange calls to make serial killers pray more and outlaw things that are already illegal, the most interesting thing is how generic they were.  As soon as Newtown happened, people reached into a mental basket already full of "ways to stop school shootings" and pulled out a few of their favorite items.  They did not stop to find out whether those causes had actually obtained in this case.

 

Obviously, as the automatic weapons arguments show, some of the items in those baskets were not actually at all related to "causes of school shootings"; as far as I can determine, few to none of the mass shootings in recent decades involved automatics. 

 

But even when the cause was correct--Adam Lanza, like many of these shooters, seems to have had some fairly severe mental health problems--the proposed cure didn't have anything to do with the specifics of Lanza's situation.  I've seen calls to punish people who don't secure their guns properly, but no suggestions about how you "properly secure" guns against an adult child who lives in the house, or acknowledgement of the fact that Nancy Lanza is beyond punishment.  Presumably if she's thought her son would do something like this, she'd have gotten rid of the guns long since.

 

"Make more mental health resources available" or "early identification and treatment of troubled children" is a fine answer to many cases, but Adam Lanza had all that you could wish for in terms of resources.  It didn't stop him from picking up a gun and going to that school. 

 

What Lanza shows us is the limits of the obvious policy responses.  He had all the mental health resources he needed--and he did it anyway.  The law stopped him from buying a gun--and he did it anyway.  The school had an intercom system aimed at stopping unauthorized entry--and he did it anyway.  Any practical, easy-to-implement solution to school shootings that you could propose, along with several that were not at all easy to implement, was already in place.  Somehow, Lanza blew through them all. 

 

Perhaps we need to go farther.  But how far? The one thing we cannot do, though this did not stop many people from suggesting it, is to ban "the types of weapons that make these shootings possible".  It is easy and satisfying to be for "gun control" in the abstract, but we cannot pass gun control, in the abstract.  We have to pass a specific law that describes very specifically what people may and may not do.  That means we need to carefully specify the features that makes these shootings possible.  And unfortunately, the feature is . . . "fires metal pellets at high speed". 

 

You don't need a special kind of gun to shoot civilians.  You just need a gun. A handgun, a shotgun, and a rifle are all pretty deadly at close quarters, and Lanza went to the school with all three.  (He left the shotgun in the back of a car).  You don't need a military style rifle, or a high-powered scope, or a pistol grip, or a detachable stock, because concealment is not a big issue, and you don't need much aim to put a bullet into someone at ten feet.  Nor can you stop these shootings by restricting people to hunting rifles, which for some reason people seem to think are less deadly than regular guns.  The truth is the opposite: it takes a lot more wallop to bring down an elk than a person, and a couple of rounds of buckshot or a .30-06 would have had the same, horrible results.  Even a ban on semi-automatics is no panacea in a world full of powerful shotguns.

 

I'm not even going to delve into the various "tax/ban" ammunition arguments; they're just a special case of gun control, and about as useful.  Regular old bullets are extremely deadly, especially when fired at close range.  He didn't need something capable of penetrating kevlar.

 

* * *

 

(More at link.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article you posted contains perhaps the dumbist paragraph I've seen in regard to what to do in a mass shooting situation. Though the rest of the article was an interesting discussion of the options available.

 

...I'd also like us to encourage people to gang rush shooters, rather than following their instincts to hide; if we drilled it into young people that the correct thing to do is for everyone to instantly run at the guy with the gun, these sorts of mass shootings would be less deadly, because even a guy with a very powerful weapon can be brought down by 8-12 unarmed bodies piling on him at once.  Would it work?  Would people do it?  I have no idea; all I can say is that both these things would be more effective than banning rifles with pistol grips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I can't believe you read that but thanks for sussing out the derp.  I'm still trying to deal with reading derp but it does make a good case for amending the ACA to include comprehensive mental health coverage.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding was that the gun he used was a semi-automatic rifle. 

 

Question - why does the automatic weapon ban not fun afoul of the 2nd Amendment?  Does this mean that I can't park my own Howitzer on my front porch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for a full lobbying effort, the creeps don't get to wait this Christmas out:

 

The National Rifle Association America has released the following statement

 

"The National Rifle Association of America is made up of 4 million moms and dads, sons and daughters – and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown.

 

"Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting.

 

"The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

 

"The NRA is planning to hold a major news conference in the Washington, D.C., area on Friday, December 21."

 

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/18/nra-shocked-saddened-and-heartbroken-by-newtown-shooting/?hpt=hp_t2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^damned if they do, damned if they don't with making a statement. Calling them creeps is ridiculous though and a gross generalization.

 

In Israel schools have armed security guards and in the West Bank some teachers come in armed as well. That's their reality and on some level it's ours too. We really should do the same immediately, since gun and mental health issues will not be resolved in this country anytime soon

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding was that the gun he used was a semi-automatic rifle. 

 

Question - why does the automatic weapon ban not fun afoul of the 2nd Amendment?  Does this mean that I can't park my own Howitzer on my front porch?

 

Next thing you know, they'll be trying to take your nukes away!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This conversation is ridiculous. Anyone who thinks banning guns completely is possible is not living in reality. Any who thinks arming teachers will reduce gun violence in schools is not living in reality. Wanting guns banned is different than thinking guns can be banned.

 

^Really, Israel and the West Bank are going to be your two examples we should follow?  :drunk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banning assault weapons won't work.  Banning handguns won't work.  Spending more money on mental health won't work.  Assault weapons, handguns and mental patients have existed throughout our American history.  The problem today is the media.

 

The only way you will stop this is to take away the one thing these shooter's all crave:  fame. 

 

I think we should all get behind an Anonymity Law, in which the media is banned from publishing the perpetrator's names in these cases.  They should be sealed under a court order for 20 years, until the episode is but a distant memory in our collective minds.  Of course the families should be able to know the truth, but they'll have to accept this new reality as a way of preventing future copycat episodes.  Once the name is released in 20 years they can celebrate with closure, and knowing that they helped curb this dark period in American culture.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You barely hear about serial killers anymore, but when they were on TV and in the papers constantly in the '70s and '80s there sure was a steady supply of serial killers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You barely hear about serial killers anymore, but when they were on TV and in the papers constantly in the '70s and '80s there sure was a steady supply of serial killers.

 

Exactly.

 

You take away these guys chance at a posthumas fame via our 24/7 cable news media and they will probably stop pulling off these stunts.  Let them die like the nobodies they are and see how many more we get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You barely hear about serial killers anymore, but when they were on TV and in the papers constantly in the '70s and '80s there sure was a steady supply of serial killers.

Are serial killers not in the paper because there aren't as many of them, or because the story doesn't sell as many papers as it used to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol and cars kill exponentially more innocent children than guns do every year, perhaps we should ban them too?

 

1. Oh, look, another false analogy. See my previous post on this page.

2. Exponentially? Give me a number. (I believe you, but I like numbers).

3. Assuming your facts are correct, okay, fine: I would be fine with making drunk driving laws far harsher and with increasing car safety standards, so why aren't you fine with doing the same for guns?

4. Nobody (well, other than KJP in this thread, anyway) is asking for a total ban. Straw man argument. Not the issue being debated at all.

I'm not going research how many "cars" killed children, either by drunk drivers, or drivers driving carelessly, etc..  I did say that was supportive of further gun restrictions, especially in the area of assault rifles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel knows how to deal with lunatics with access to guns, whereas we in the US are clueless,  so I absolutely would emulate some of their practices relating to school and airport security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever hear (or say) the phrase: "He made me so mad that if I had a gun right then, I could have killed him." This is why having more weapons is crazy. It enables heated arguments to more easily escalate into bloodshed before we have time to cool down and think. If America is becoming a land of shootouts between wackos who want blood and wackos who want to be heroes, I will seek refuge in a sane nation.


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...