Elementary school shooting

[Quantum Windbag]

When a classroom full of first graders gets taken out by IEDs we can start addressing the problem

Right now, the problem is guns.

Guns are our leading tool of murder in THIS COUNTRY. 67% of murders use a gun. We need to address our major cause of violence in this country and that is the gun

Actually, the problem is young males, not guns.

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

Depends.

Sometimes they use guns, sometimes they use bobs, they have even been known to use airplanes.

What's your point?

 

[ERGO]

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

Your argument is ridiculous and not too realistic. Nobody has been caught using flame throwers, mortar shells or RPG's against other people within the U.S. if criminals have semi-auto military assault rifles, like the Bushmaster .223 or any other military semi-auto's, I want to be able to stop them with a military assault rifle. I would want to at least match their force. When criminals start using flame throwers, a good rifle will stop them. When criminals start using Mortars and RPG's, which isn't likely to happen, then yes I would like to be able to DEFEND myself with a matched force.


Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gZn-Pq38B_Y]Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The clumsy tactic of demeaning your opposition may work on those you associate with (birds of a feather so to speak), but it fails to effect me. Such tactics do, in fact, tell me that I am dealing with a lesser intellect. So there you are.

Military style weaponry is designed to give the bearer of such weapons a sense of cool and machismo. It is designed to fire rapidly and is often fitted with magazines so the rate of fire can be sustained. They have absolutely no legitimate use other than that which was designed. They are a blight on society and should be forever banned from civilian use.

Gun enthusiasts tend to love their mechanical penis extensions and seek and seek all answers by expanding the gun culture. The problem is guns in hands that should not have such guns, not to add more guns.

Really? Can you point o marketing studies that support that, or are you just posturing?

You don't believe that sex appeal has anything to do with marketing weapons?

I believe a lot of things, I try to have evidence to back those beliefs up before posting them. Do you, or do you not, have evidence?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yep, that's exactly what they want

Ever talk to a criminal? Ever think about the fact that gun stores are rarely victims of armed robbery, unlike 7-11s? Do you know what the major difference between the two are, other than gun stores being more likely to get the criminal a large amount of money?

I was referring to the second sentence.

Are you trying to deny that the left wants to categorically deny people the right to carry a weapon?

 

[JakeStarkey]

morons will continue to moron

look at daveman, Uncensored, QWB, and the rest of the morons on the far right

 

[Plasmaball]

Actually, the problem is young males, not guns.

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

Depends.

Sometimes they use guns, sometimes they use bobs, they have even been known to use airplanes.

What's your point?

Yes bobs are very dangerous!

 

[Stephanie]

morons will continue to moron

look at daveman, Uncensored, QWB, and the rest of the morons on the far right

and you

 

[JakeStarkey]

ERGO, means of military weapons violence is restricted to the military.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

I can build a flame thrower in any garage with rudimentary tools, denying me the right to buy one only comforts idiots.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am neither far right nor a moron. You just proved my point.

morons will continue to moron

look at daveman, Uncensored, QWB, and the rest of the morons on the far right

and you

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

As a society, we have made harsh changes to combat the effects of Drunk Driving. Later ages when you can legally drink, harsher punishments against drunk drivers, penalties against those who serve alchohol

Why can't we do the same for guns?

Drunk driving is an action that is illegal, owning a gun is not. By the way, using a gun in a crime counts for an automatic 5 year sentence in most jurisdictions, so we already have laws about using guns to break the law.

 

[Nosmo King]

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

Your argument is ridiculous and not too realistic. Nobody has been caught using flame throwers, mortar shells or RPG's against other people within the U.S. if criminals have semi-auto military assault rifles, like the Bushmaster .223 or any other military semi-auto's, I want to be able to stop them with a military assault rifle. I would want to at least match their force. When criminals start using flame throwers, a good rifle will stop them. When criminals start using Mortars and RPG's, which isn't likely to happen, then yes I would like to be able to DEFEND myself with a matched force.


Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gZn-Pq38B_Y]Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say - YouTube[/ame]

So, by your logic, if the problem is big guns, you want a big gun too rather than eliminate the big gun from the start. And you call my point ridiculous.

 

[ERGO]

What apparatus is used by these frightening young males to kill scores of people?

The problem is guns. If you love guns, I know it seems ridiculous that your beloved gun could be anything but an elegant, empowering, benign extension of your pseudo-machismo world outlook.

But here's a news flash: guns shoot bullets at a ghastly rate into the bodies of innocent men, women and children.

If young males were the problem, and they had no access to the type of weapons soldiers and law enforcement officers should exclusively have, we would not see two dozen funerals in Connecticut or a dozen in Aurora Colorado or thousands more nationwide.

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

As a society, we have made harsh changes to combat the effects of Drunk Driving. Later ages when you can legally drink, harsher punishments against drunk drivers, penalties against those who serve alchohol

Why can't we do the same for guns?

Yes, but we don't collectively punish everybody (the responsible drinkers) by denying their access to alcohol because of the irresponsible drinkers do we. It's dealt with on a case by case basis.

 

[Nosmo King]

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

I can build a flame thrower in any garage with rudimentary tools, denying me the right to buy one only comforts idiots.

The literalist reveals a shallow mind. The point is (and follow closely if you can) there are weapons designed for military use. The design mandate is the ability to kill as many people in as short a period of time as possible. Such weapons are fitted out with semi or fully automatic firing systems or a semi automatic firing system modified to act as fully automatic. They are also equipped with high capacity magazines to sustain that ghastly rate of fire. Such weapons have no legitimate civilian use and should never be in the hands of civilians.

Steps have been taken to keep some military weapons out of civilian hands. My position is the ban is incomplete. All military weapons must be out of civilian hands.

Now, pick some fly shit out of that ground pepper, or bring logic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

ERGO has just created a false derivative analogy below.

More people die each year from alcoholism and drunk driving than from guns. Why isn't alcohol being made illegal? Because that would be collectivized punishment. Something a collectivist liberal no doubt can grasp, I'm sure. More people die each year in traffic accidents than from guns. Why don't we just make people take public transportation in order to stop people from dying in traffic accidents. This is another collectivist solution.
Just because some irresponsible crazy person uses a gun to murder with doesn't mean good responsible people should be collectively punished for it.

As a society, we have made harsh changes to combat the effects of Drunk Driving. Later ages when you can legally drink, harsher punishments against drunk drivers, penalties against those who serve alchohol

Why can't we do the same for guns?

Yes, but we don't collectively punish everybody (the responsible drinkers) by denying their access to alcohol because of the irresponsible drinkers do we. It's dealt with on a case by case basis.

 

[ERGO]

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

Your argument is ridiculous and not too realistic. Nobody has been caught using flame throwers, mortar shells or RPG's against other people within the U.S. if criminals have semi-auto military assault rifles, like the Bushmaster .223 or any other military semi-auto's, I want to be able to stop them with a military assault rifle. I would want to at least match their force. When criminals start using flame throwers, a good rifle will stop them. When criminals start using Mortars and RPG's, which isn't likely to happen, then yes I would like to be able to DEFEND myself with a matched force.


Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gZn-Pq38B_Y]Connecticut Shootings What No One Dares Say - YouTube[/ame]

So, by your logic, if the problem is big guns, you want a big gun too rather than eliminate the big gun from the start. And you call my point ridiculous.

You're not going to eliminate the big gun from start, we're long past that. Criminal's aren't going to surrender their assault rifles because you make them illegal, Plus...A lot of criminals obtain their weapons in the black underground market. There's underground machine shops that make guns, modify guns and make bullets.

The world would be a safer place if all countries got rid of their nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. How likely is that to happen? The reason they maintain them is for defensive/offensive purposes.

 

[koshergrl]

"

Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.
The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain’s heart.
In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA – because I don’t believe that they are responsible for my daughter’s death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel’s murder I would be their strongest opponent.
I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy — it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.
Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You’ve stripped away our heritage,
You’ve outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question “Why?”
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!
Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation’s history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine’s tragedy occurs — politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.
As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA — I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter’s death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!” Darrell Scott "

Columbine Father 12 Years Later… In the Wake of Another Tragedy | askmarion

 

[idb]

Ever talk to a criminal? Ever think about the fact that gun stores are rarely victims of armed robbery, unlike 7-11s? Do you know what the major difference between the two are, other than gun stores being more likely to get the criminal a large amount of money?

I was referring to the second sentence.

Are you trying to deny that the left wants to categorically deny people the right to carry a weapon?

There are some on the left that want that for sure...I'm sure there will be some on the right as well.
The sensible discussion though is not about total disarming.

I reject the blanket statement

But the left wants us all unarmed so the armed bad guys and loons can wreck havoc in even more places.

As a matter of interest, why is the gun debate perceived as a left/right debate?
If you are Democrat do you have to reject guns with the opposite being true if you're a Republican?

 

[koshergrl]

The left does want to unarm the citizenry. They don't deny it.
You will not find a single person who values liberty (i.e., a member of the ideological right in this country) calling for more restrictive gun laws.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are you being punished by restriction on flame thrower ownership? Are you being punished by having mortars and shell kept from you? Is it a punishment to you not to be able to own an RPG launcher and the projectiles they launch?

Keep your guns. Just surrender the ones designed for military use, not sport.

I can build a flame thrower in any garage with rudimentary tools, denying me the right to buy one only comforts idiots.

The literalist reveals a shallow mind. The point is (and follow closely if you can) there are weapons designed for military use. The design mandate is the ability to kill as many people in as short a period of time as possible. Such weapons are fitted out with semi or fully automatic firing systems or a semi automatic firing system modified to act as fully automatic. They are also equipped with high capacity magazines to sustain that ghastly rate of fire. Such weapons have no legitimate civilian use and should never be in the hands of civilians.

Steps have been taken to keep some military weapons out of civilian hands. My position is the ban is incomplete. All military weapons must be out of civilian hands.

Now, pick some fly shit out of that ground pepper, or bring logic.

The point is that weapons designed for infantry use tend to be lighter and less deadly than those designed for civilian use. Yet, for some reason that escapes me, you think we should get rid of these types of weapons and use only hunting weapons.

Can't find enough logic in that to pick an electron out of, much less fly shit.