Gunman at DC Navy Yard shoots at least 7

[Brain357]

You guys keep saying that when NO ONE is advocating that. There are plenty of guns out there. We're not saying we need more guns, we're saying your well intended but illogical laws are preventing good people from effectively defending themselves. Please stop lying.

Throw out the first thing you would do so we can discuss.

Easy:

1. Remove the legal, bureaucratic and other feel-good rules that impede people from effectively defending themselves against the crazies and thugs that couldn't give two shits about your rules. That means no more 'gun free zones', no more waiting periods, no more 'may issue' conceal carry permits, no more limiting the types of firearms, ammunition and accessories law abiding citizens can own. It means what the second amendment says: "Shall not be infringed".
2. Increasing sentencing for VIOLENT offenders. Make using a firearm in the commission of a crime all the more punishable, that's fine too. In order to free up prison space, I would also advocate we stop persecuting consensual activity between adults, which represents the 'crimes' of the vast majority of inmates...but that's another topic.
3. Put more cops on the streets. It's the one thing that that is proven to reduce violent crime.
4. Make it easier to detain individuals that have demonstrated mental instability. Admittedly, that one treads perilously close to stepping on civil liberties and you can be sure the ACLU would be all over it. Nevertheless, as we have seen from so many of the mass killing crazies, they provided amble evidence of mental imbalance well prior to murdering innocents.

1. The more guns option. Don't see this making much of a difference. Anyone who wants a gun already has 10. No gun free zones would have ment this shooter wouldn't have to sneak his gun in. Will you force every company to allow guns. Otherwise there will still be lots of gun free zones.

2. Sounds fine, but practical? Our jails are full. We jail more per capita than any other country already.

3. I like it, but can we afford it? Wonder how the number of cops we have compares to other countries?

4. Sounds ok at first. Will non crazies find themselves locked up for political reasons? Seems ripe for abuse. Also infringes on a much more important right.

 

[Spoonman]

If its missing evidence we know evidence needs to be made more secure. Not knowing we can't improve anything.

we already know evidence goes missing, but are we doing anything to fix the problem? no. so what is going to change? come up with some solutions to the existing problems first ok, before you continue to try to tread on my rights. because i have to tell you, with all of your bullshit up to this point, right now you are getting nothing. we aren't willing to budge at all

And we seem to have more and more shootings. You're quite the hero.

actually we have less and less. but the media and the current administration don't want you to believe that.

 

[Spoonman]

Throw out the first thing you would do so we can discuss.

Easy:

1. Remove the legal, bureaucratic and other feel-good rules that impede people from effectively defending themselves against the crazies and thugs that couldn't give two shits about your rules. That means no more 'gun free zones', no more waiting periods, no more 'may issue' conceal carry permits, no more limiting the types of firearms, ammunition and accessories law abiding citizens can own. It means what the second amendment says: "Shall not be infringed".
2. Increasing sentencing for VIOLENT offenders. Make using a firearm in the commission of a crime all the more punishable, that's fine too. In order to free up prison space, I would also advocate we stop persecuting consensual activity between adults, which represents the 'crimes' of the vast majority of inmates...but that's another topic.
3. Put more cops on the streets. It's the one thing that that is proven to reduce violent crime.
4. Make it easier to detain individuals that have demonstrated mental instability. Admittedly, that one treads perilously close to stepping on civil liberties and you can be sure the ACLU would be all over it. Nevertheless, as we have seen from so many of the mass killing crazies, they provided amble evidence of mental imbalance well prior to murdering innocents.

1. The more guns option. Don't see this making much of a difference. Anyone who wants a gun already has 10. No gun free zones would have ment this shooter wouldn't have to sneak his gun in. Will you force every company to allow guns. Otherwise there will still be lots of gun free zones.

2. Sounds fine, but practical? Our jails are full. We jail more per capita than any other country already.

3. I like it, but can we afford it? Wonder how the number of cops we have compares to other countries?

4. Sounds ok at first. Will non crazies find themselves locked up for political reasons? Seems ripe for abuse. Also infringes on a much more important right.

1 in the last decade the number of guns has almost doubled. the number of homicides by guns has decreased about a third. more guns has absolutely resulted in less deaths.

2 so the problem is we have more criminals in the usa then anywhere else. so guns really arn't the problem, the number of criminals are

3. if we have so many criminals, as you state, we obviously need more cops. or perhaps, due to political correctness our penal system is too lax. these other countries with less people in jail have real jails, not country clubs. bring back chain gangs and real hard time

4. you can't have it both ways, and you have just identified one of our major issues with background checks. its ripe for abuse. and our government has shown a penchant for abuse

 

[eflatminor]

Throw out the first thing you would do so we can discuss.

Easy:

1. Remove the legal, bureaucratic and other feel-good rules that impede people from effectively defending themselves against the crazies and thugs that couldn't give two shits about your rules. That means no more 'gun free zones', no more waiting periods, no more 'may issue' conceal carry permits, no more limiting the types of firearms, ammunition and accessories law abiding citizens can own. It means what the second amendment says: "Shall not be infringed".
2. Increasing sentencing for VIOLENT offenders. Make using a firearm in the commission of a crime all the more punishable, that's fine too. In order to free up prison space, I would also advocate we stop persecuting consensual activity between adults, which represents the 'crimes' of the vast majority of inmates...but that's another topic.
3. Put more cops on the streets. It's the one thing that that is proven to reduce violent crime.
4. Make it easier to detain individuals that have demonstrated mental instability. Admittedly, that one treads perilously close to stepping on civil liberties and you can be sure the ACLU would be all over it. Nevertheless, as we have seen from so many of the mass killing crazies, they provided amble evidence of mental imbalance well prior to murdering innocents.

1. The more guns option. Don't see this making much of a difference. Anyone who wants a gun already has 10.

There you go lying again. Nothing in my #1 point calls for more guns, only the removal of impediments that prevent people from defending themselves. Please, stop lying. It doesn't help your case.

No gun free zones would have ment this shooter wouldn't have to sneak his gun in.

And how'd that gun free zone thing work out? About the same as at the Colorado theater, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech and all the other places where maniacs choose to murder innocents?

What you obtusely choose to overlook is that my first suggestion would have also meant that the people could have had the means to defend themselves rather than cowering in the corner waiting for a good guy with a gun to arrive and save their ass.

Will you force every company to allow guns. Otherwise there will still be lots of gun free zones.

If business owners are forced to serve everyone and anyone that walks through their doors, even if that means violating the tenants of their religion, then you sure as shit can't make a case that a person should be refused service based on a right codified in the Bill of Rights.

You want to return to the days of strict private property rights? Then fine, I'm all for allowing businesses to define who and what can be brought on to their property. But you can't have it both ways.

2. Sounds fine, but practical? Our jails are full. We jail more per capita than any other country already.

Stop being obtuse. I CLEARLY stated that we should not imprison people for consensual activity between adults, which would free up the vast majority of jail space and resources. Further, we spend ungodly amounts of money on violent recidivist criminals, far more than if we would have locked them up long term instead of releasing them time and time again only to be recaptured, retried, re-sentenced and reincarnated. Stop the cycle and we'd save significant resources...and lives.

3. I like it, but can we afford it? Wonder how the number of cops we have compares to other countries?

You seem to have no problem with the cost of implementing vast bureaucracies to restrict second amendment rights. Now you have a fiscal issue? Please. The money could be easily found with common sense prioritization.

4. Sounds ok at first. Will non crazies find themselves locked up for political reasons? Seems ripe for abuse. Also infringes on a much more important right.

Like I said, that's not an easy one, but clearly, we need to reevaluate when a person's mental illness makes him a danger to others and worthy of detainment. You have no problem stamping all over second amendment rights, but other rights are sacrosanct? How about a little consistency?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Your point?

That you are a shameless liar, a demagogue, and entirely reprehensible..

The direct point is that you lied and claimed Alexis used an AR-15, which he didn't. BUT the police did, to stop him. So rather than the "evil assault weapon" wreaking havok, we actually see that the rifle STOPPED the killing of innocents.

That police armed with AR-15s is a good thing..... as is making sure Alexis could only buy a shotgun and not the AR-15 he wanted?

You DO grasp that the guns that Alexis killed 11 out of 12 people with were taken off of the police, right Herr Goebbels?

link to where I said Alexis used an AR-15....I didn't

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-yard-shoots-at-least-7-a-48.html#post7848211

 

[westwall]

Glad you seem to be for it.

On another note you mention no registry. Doesn't not registering guns make it impossible to keep them away from criminals? Can't I go out and buy a gun and sell it to whoever I want with no background check? I really don't understand why the law abiding have a problem with registering something dangerous like a gun when it would help keep them from criminals.

No registry on this planet would ever prevent a criminal from obtaining a weapon. That's why they're called criminals. Guns aren't dangerous. It's the PEOPLE using them that are. Why do you wish to penalize a 100,000,000 people, at minimum, for the illegal behavior of at most 200,000 people?

And no you can't go out and buy a gun and then sell it to someone else. You have to keep it for at least one year before you sell it and if you do that more than a very few times the ATF will make you get a FFL....if they don't arrest you first for dealing in firearms without a license.

How is it really penalizing anyone? Don't people have guns to protect themselves? Wouldn't they better protect themselves if fewer criminals have guns?

Since guns aren't registered, how does anyone know how long you have a gun?

Read the book then get back to us. You are too ignorant and an uninformed opinion is pretty useless. get informed.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Couldn't you then track guns and see how they are getting into the hands of criminals?

You want to put tracking ships in guns?

You'd track it back to the last legal owner and find out how it got into criminal hands.

Do you want to do the same thing with computers? What if they are used for child porn? Does your brain work, or do you just use it for a username?

 

[westwall]

Not sure if your statement is true, but do you really think the government would need a registry to ban guns? Couldn't they just send the military door to door and get them? They couldn't get them all registry or not as some would sneak in from other countries I suppose. It seems like the crimes that could be stopped with a registry isn't worth being paranoid about a ban.

A registry makes it really easy for the government to confiscate them. I suggest you read The Nazi Seizure of Power by William Sheridan Allen.

I think the threat of being shot by a crazy or some criminal greatly outweighs any ban.

The people of Wurzburg thought that too, till the NAZI's came in and started rounding folks up. Now, where did that lead????

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think we have learned that we have a very serious problem. And despite having far more guns than any other country, the crazy right thinks the only solution is more guns.

No, I think the solution is not attacking innocent people.

Weird, I know, but that is the way I think.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You don't see me arguing that we should limit access to guns either

After seeing 20 first graders and 7 of their teachers get massacred and have our country do absolutely nothing about it, I have conceded that there is nothing to be done. Our nation is too entralled with its second amendment to try to do anything about guns and our gun culture.

We, as a nation have accepted that we are willing to accept a horrendous murder rate along with assasinations and massacres.....all so that we can maintain our second amendment.

So when a dozen of our citizens get gunned down the best I can offer is ....too bad for them, but thats the way it is

Look, you're a demagogue and lack even a hint of integrity, but would you explain to the class what the #1 weapon used in homicides is? And if that weapon is not rifles, or hand guns, or any sort of firearm; will you explain why you, and the hate sites that do your thinking for you, do not campaign for the outlaw of those weapons that ARE responsible for most homicides?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You don't see me arguing that we should limit access to guns either

After seeing 20 first graders and 7 of their teachers get massacred and have our country do absolutely nothing about it, I have conceded that there is nothing to be done. Our nation is too entralled with its second amendment to try to do anything about guns and our gun culture.

We, as a nation have accepted that we are willing to accept a horrendous murder rate along with assasinations and massacres.....all so that we can maintain our second amendment.

So when a dozen of our citizens get gunned down the best I can offer is ....too bad for them, but thats the way it is

Horrendous? 4.7 per 100000 is horrendous? I guess you think the deaths over over 100000 a year due to doctor neglect is something we should do something about but you are just to busy whining about firearms to say anything, right?

It seems pretty bad when Germany is .8.

It doesn't if you look at the whole picture.

 

[westwall]

I think the threat of being shot by a crazy or some criminal greatly outweighs any ban.

I disagree- Acceptable risk to live in a free country backed by Bill of Rights

-Geaux

You think your more likely to have your gun taken by a Nazi than be shot by a criminal? I don't think either are that likely, but the nazi thing definitely less likely.

80% of all homicides are gang related. If you're in a gang you have a good chance of getting shot. If you're a normal person your chances of dying in a car crash are significantly greater....or dying from medical malpractice... WAAAAYYY more probable to die from that than from any form of gun violence...

 

[Uncensored2008]

And we seem to have more and more shootings. You're quite the hero.

No, we sure don't. Shootings, like all murder, is at an all time LOW, and continues to decline.

It doesn't stop the hate sites that fill the vacuum of your cranium with bullshit - because the agenda of the left is to crush civil rights, not to lower the homicide rate.

 

[rightwinger]

Horrendous? 4.7 per 100000 is horrendous? I guess you think the deaths over over 100000 a year due to doctor neglect is something we should do something about but you are just to busy whining about firearms to say anything, right?

I guess you are right 4.7 is not too bad

Especially when Japan is 0.4, Canada is 1.6, England is 1.2, Italy is 0.9, France is 1.1

We should be glad. We have our second amendment, we have 300 million guns and only 4.7 per 100,000 get murdered

I can live with it as long as we have our second amendment

And until you grow the balls to try and take that right away you will have to live with it. You have already admitted you don't have the balls to push for a new amendment. So quit your whining and crying and stfu, ok?

Actually, I no longer care

We can't pass simple gun legislation, no way can we touch the second amendment. Might as well accept an outrageous murder rate, assassinations and massacres. It is part of what makes us Americans.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I guess you are right 4.7 is not too bad

Especially when Japan is 0.4, Canada is 1.6, England is 1.2, Italy is 0.9, France is 1.1

We should be glad. We have our second amendment, we have 300 million guns and only 4.7 per 100,000 get murdered

I can live with it as long as we have our second amendment

Is that rate higher, or lower than it was 50 years ago, Herr Goebbels?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You don't see me arguing that we should limit access to guns either

After seeing 20 first graders and 7 of their teachers get massacred and have our country do absolutely nothing about it, I have conceded that there is nothing to be done. Our nation is too entralled with its second amendment to try to do anything about guns and our gun culture.

We, as a nation have accepted that we are willing to accept a horrendous murder rate along with assasinations and massacres.....all so that we can maintain our second amendment.

So when a dozen of our citizens get gunned down the best I can offer is ....too bad for them, but thats the way it is

Horrendous? 4.7 per 100000 is horrendous? I guess you think the deaths over over 100000 a year due to doctor neglect is something we should do something about but you are just to busy whining about firearms to say anything, right?

I guess you are right 4.7 is not too bad

Especially when Japan is 0.4, Canada is 1.6, England is 1.2, Italy is 0.9, France is 1.1

We should be glad. We have our second amendment, we have 300 million guns and only 4.7 per 100,000 get murdered

I can live with it as long as we have our second amendment

http://www.usmessageboard.com/gener...nning-firearms-reduce-murder-and-suicide.html

 

[westwall]

I love the second amendment

It allows Americans to go out and buy any weapon they choose when they feel like shooting up a Navy Base, school, movie theater or mall
Look, massacres are not easy.....you need the proper weapons

And yet the largest mass murder in US history was accomplished with a gallon of gasoline. I say we ban all fuels, let's go back to the bronze age! Who's with me!

Yea....but you know?

You don't get the satisfaction with gasoline that you get by squeezing off round after round as your fellow citizens scamper about. If you are going to commit a massacre you have to do it with style. Combat uniform, kick ass looking gun, large capacity magazine

The problem is that our gun owners like to look badass too. So we have to make sure they can look the part when they play Rambo

The problem with you is you're a hysterical little girl. I understand that freedom scares the shit out of you. I understand that uncle Obama is going to take care of you... I understand that you are incapable of taking care of yourself. It's OK. We free people though... we DO take care of ourselves and we despise you whiney little girls who want to punish us for the criminal misdeeds of a very, small minority of the population.

Let's put it in a form you can understand. Since welfare and medicare fraud is rampant we should shut it all down. No one gets nothing. How does that sound? Fair?

 

[rightwinger]

Horrendous? 4.7 per 100000 is horrendous? I guess you think the deaths over over 100000 a year due to doctor neglect is something we should do something about but you are just to busy whining about firearms to say anything, right?

I guess you are right 4.7 is not too bad

Especially when Japan is 0.4, Canada is 1.6, England is 1.2, Italy is 0.9, France is 1.1

We should be glad. We have our second amendment, we have 300 million guns and only 4.7 per 100,000 get murdered

I can live with it as long as we have our second amendment

Then move to one of those countries and leave Americans alone.

Oh and what you are too stupid to understand is that the countries you listed do not count homicides the way we do. Most of them don't count a murder as a homicide unless there's a conviction. And some countries list suicides as homicides.

So the stats aren't comparable. But as I said, you're too stupid to understand.

NRA bullshit propaganda. But if it makes you feel safer ...go with it

 

[rightwinger]

I disagree- Acceptable risk to live in a free country backed by Bill of Rights

-Geaux

You think your more likely to have your gun taken by a Nazi than be shot by a criminal? I don't think either are that likely, but the nazi thing definitely less likely.

80% of all homicides are gang related. If you're in a gang you have a good chance of getting shot. If you're a normal person your chances of dying in a car crash are significantly greater....or dying from medical malpractice... WAAAAYYY more probable to die from that than from any form of gun violence...

Not true

Most homicides are by someone you know.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I guess you are right 4.7 is not too bad

Especially when Japan is 0.4, Canada is 1.6, England is 1.2, Italy is 0.9, France is 1.1

We should be glad. We have our second amendment, we have 300 million guns and only 4.7 per 100,000 get murdered

I can live with it as long as we have our second amendment

And until you grow the balls to try and take that right away you will have to live with it. You have already admitted you don't have the balls to push for a new amendment. So quit your whining and crying and stfu, ok?

Actually, I no longer care

We can't pass simple gun legislation, no way can we touch the second amendment. Might as well accept an outrageous murder rate, assassinations and massacres. It is part of what makes us Americans.

You know longer care, but you are still whinging about it.

Isn't there a word for that?