Author Topic: Guns again  (Read 14396 times)

screwtape and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shnozzola

Re: Guns again
« Reply #116 on: December 18, 2012, 09:10:40 PM »
melo-dramatic crap.

Yeah, you're right.  I don't mean on the 21st of December.  But in the long run, to progress, we need to change our views.
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #117 on: December 18, 2012, 09:11:52 PM »
ok, now you have defined "the kid".
"the kid" as "he" who is not always in control of his actions...

I have described "the kid" in the article I linked to.  You know.  The topic at hand.

if "the kid" isn't in control of "his" actions who is?

Nobody.  A lot of what we do isn't inside our control.  In cases of mental illness, that can extend to a lot of the things that otherwise usually do fall within conscious control.

I challenge you to choose not to wake up when someone pours cold water on you while sleeping.  After all, if you're not in control, who is - right?

and well, I hate to say it but I disagree with you that "Yes, it is needed. ...[rambling]...", but you know what kinda "troll" I am.. right?
anyways..

You originally said it was needed.  Now you're disagreeing that it was needed.   :o

what is the justification for the sentiment "Yes, it is needed.  Not having as many guns in the community would help.  Not being allowed to have one in the home would, too."?
hopefully you won't lose concentration and forget I asked at least 2 questions...

Well, if guns are harder for this kid to get ahold of, then he'll be less able to kill people when he loses control.  Some people would consider that effect to be a good thing.  Not you, apparently.

This thread your first introduction to the concept of mental illness, isn't it?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: Guns again
« Reply #118 on: December 18, 2012, 10:05:47 PM »
wow, that is amazing.
receiving an education without educators.
continue to elaborate, please.

There isn’t much more to be said. We learn how to behave by observing others. We take our cues from the culture and society in which we are raised. We learn what is acceptable behaviour by noting whether people consider it acceptable or not. Isn’t that how you learned to behave or did you go through some formal, government sanctioned, behaviour modification program?


Quote
yeah, close your eyes, change borders, compartmentalize.
see you don't have to be part of society or culture.
you can say this is not "my" culture and claim innocence.
I see how it works now, thanks.

No, that isn’t what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that current US society is broken. The rampant gun culture is ridiculous. This idea that gun ownership is almost a god-given right and the only way someone will take people’s guns is out of their cold dead hands is childish in the extreme. As others here have noted, it seems the most common reaction to increasing gun violence is not to restrict access to guns, but to buy more guns. It’s ludicrous.

I’d like to see a society where gun ownership is considered equivalent to drunk driving. They both put peoples lives at risk. There should be the same social stigma attached. The first step towards that goal is to amend or repeal the Second Amendment.


Quote
Quote
I’d like to hear what you propose as solutions to those two problems and how and when you think they could be implemented.
education and therapy.

Continue to elaborate, please. What form would this education and therapy take? Is it the same as my description above of how we learn to behave or do you have some formal training in mind. Give us an idea of what that training might be.


Quote
Quote
In the meantime, don’t you think a reasonable way to reduce the number of gun deaths would be to restrict access to guns?
yeah, but the elimination of murder is the priority in my actions.

In answer to my other questions (kudos for that), you said that my proposal is not reasonable, a red herring, irrelevant and you wouldn’t vote for it. You also said you are not in favour of any restrictions on gun ownership at all. Yet here you say that restricting access to guns is a reasonable way to reduce the number of gun deaths so which is it—is it reasonable or not? Furthermore, while you may be prioritising your quest for the lofty and probably unattainable goal of eliminating murder, don’t you think it would be wise or prudent to implement some interim measures to reduce the number of people murdered? Aiming for unattainable perfection is all well and good, but not at the expense of the reasonable and achievable.

Offline kardula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #119 on: December 19, 2012, 08:14:42 PM »
The first thing we need is to educate the masses on guns. Not only what an assault rifle is but also what damage guns can do. We also need to explain that there are no new automatic weapons being sold, all automatic weapons being bought and sold (legally of course) are those which were made and registered with the US gov prior to 1986. The "AR" in "AR-15" is short for Armalite, the original patent holder, not Assault Rifle. Semi-automatic means that the gun can fire more than one bullet with each trigger pull and the new bullet is chambered automatically. It doesn't mean the weapon is a burst fire weapon. I believe that this is the first step. Truly educate people on the dangers of guns and what they can do. After that I think we can have a much more open debate on how to combat mass shootings and not resort to rhetoric.



The issue in the US is a lot more complicated than many people realize.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2806
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Guns again
« Reply #120 on: December 20, 2012, 12:15:46 AM »
wow, that is amazing.
receiving an education without educators.
continue to elaborate, please.

There isn’t much more to be said. We learn how to behave by observing others. We take our cues from the culture and society in which we are raised. We learn what is acceptable behaviour by noting whether people consider it acceptable or not. Isn’t that how you learned to behave or did you go through some formal, government sanctioned, behaviour modification program?
yeah I wasn't home schooled I was institutionalized.
Quote
Quote
yeah, close your eyes, change borders, compartmentalize.
see you don't have to be part of society or culture.
you can say this is not "my" culture and claim innocence.
I see how it works now, thanks.

No, that isn’t what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that current US society is broken. The rampant gun culture is ridiculous. This idea that gun ownership is almost a god-given right and the only way someone will take people’s guns is out of their cold dead hands is childish in the extreme. As others here have noted, it seems the most common reaction to increasing gun violence is not to restrict access to guns, but to buy more guns. It’s ludicrous.
can I call you an American citizen?
why the fuck not?
compartmentalize my ass you don't.
can I can call you dumbfuck?
why the fuck not?
oh you don't self identify as an American or self identify as a dumbfuck...
great.
well geuss what if you can't label you you can't label the murderers.
dumbfuck American.
Quote
I’d like to see a society where gun ownership is considered equivalent to drunk driving. They both put peoples lives at risk. There should be the same social stigma attached. The first step towards that goal is to amend or repeal the Second Amendment.
ok, that is fine.
enemy of the entity known as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
keep it up, I dare you.
Quote
Quote
Quote
I’d like to hear what you propose as solutions to those two problems and how and when you think they could be implemented.
education and therapy.

Continue to elaborate, please. What form would this education and therapy take? Is it the same as my description above of how we learn to behave or do you have some formal training in mind. Give us an idea of what that training might be.
whatever form necessary.
maybe I should set an appointment to waterboard your ass for a long long time.
oh you don't like me talking like that huh?
oh you do?
right on, if you like it sooo much get a towel and waterboard yourself but make sure there is somebody there so you do it right, I don't want you to get hurt.
Quote
Quote
Quote
In the meantime, don’t you think a reasonable way to reduce the number of gun deaths would be to restrict access to guns?
yeah, but the elimination of murder is the priority in my actions.

In answer to my other questions (kudos for that), you said that my proposal is not reasonable, a red herring, irrelevant and you wouldn’t vote for it. You also said you are not in favour of any restrictions on gun ownership at all. Yet here you say that restricting access to guns is a reasonable way to reduce the number of gun deaths so which is it—is it reasonable or not? Furthermore, while you may be prioritising your quest for the lofty and probably unattainable goal of eliminating murder, don’t you think it would be wise or prudent to implement some interim measures to reduce the number of people murdered? Aiming for unattainable perfection is all well and good, but not at the expense of the reasonable and achievable.
wow, kudos to you too.
you obviously confuse the word gun with the word murder.
what method of conditioning would you suggest for an individual to experience that would enlighten them enough to admit the word gun is not equivalent to murder and then admit that murder is wrong and guns are not murder and murder is wrong and guns are not murder and guns are wrong and guns are not murder and...?
until they realized what they were saying was the truth that guns are not murder and murder is not guns and murder is wrong but guns are not wrong because guns don't kill people do they should shut the fuck up.
don't skip any words.
I want confirmation that you read every word in this post.
this is almost as bad as teaching a theist that they believe in dogma not reality,
at least a pacifist realizes that they can carry a gun without some idiot saying they can't because 3sigma doesn't understand that guns are not dangerous.
its the people like 3sigma that are dangerous, they have an opinion about guns and that opinion is guns are dangerous.
well guess what 3sigma maybe you shouldn't be around guns because guns are dangerous.
 ;D
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 12:17:21 AM by none »

Offline Bagheera

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • Darwins +7/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #121 on: December 20, 2012, 06:01:03 AM »
I returned to this board remembering some of the more constructive and stimulating conversations I've had in the past on various topics, hoping I might be able to have a rational one regarding the Sandy Hook shootings.

I may have been overly optimistic. . . but here goes.

I'm not interested in discussing how horrible the shootings were (utterly) or how ridiculous people's knee-jerk reactions are (very). What I want is a frank discussion, with supporting evidence, about a number of issues.

1. Will increased firearms legislation have the desired effect of reducing incidents like these?

Because that is the most likely result of the S.H. shootings. The federal government will likely attempt to enact some version of the Brady Bill, perhaps requiring a few more hoops for firearms dealers to jump through, some states or cities will toughen their gun laws, while others may loosen them. I suspect a peicemeal solution like this will do little more than anger pro-gun activists while disappointing anti-gun ones while having little overall effect.

2. If there's no meaningful legislation from the Capitol, will we see more private citizens arming themselves, even teachers? If so, might this be the lesser of two evils?

Because mass shootings are not going away, and with each shooting the next crop of would-be killers will be further emboldened to enter a school shooting, if only because the last killer was so successful.  I think the prospect of elementary schools all over the US staffed with armed teachers is a disturbing one, but no less so than the notion that schools might be targeted specifically because they are "soft" targets.

3. If stats suggest that only banning guns entirely can reduce violence-related fatalities (as suggested by the cited Australia study), will the political climate in the US ever allow that to happen?

People are easily suaded by appeals to personal safety, and many in the US (rightfully) believe that the police are usually too far away to help when they are being assaulted. They also believe (incorrectly) that violent crime is on the rise in the US, has been for some time, and that they are in more danger than ever from the types of violence exemplified by Sandy Hook. given those two factors, it seems extremely unlikely that repealing the 2nd Amendment will ever happen.

4. Even if the 2nd Amendment were successfully appealed, in a country of over 300 Million people and almost as many (estimated) privately owned firearms, could a ban on firearms be physically enforced?

Especially considering the number of firearms in the hands of people who don't have a right to own them, haven't registered them, and will not give them up.

5. A lot of people cite Switzerland as a model gun-ownership state. Fine. Should we abolish our army and have mandatory military service for all adults who want to own their own firearm? That would take care of the 'well regulated militia'. Anyone not in the militia, doesn't get a gun. Anyone in the militia, has compulsory training and military service when needed. Yes, I know how unlikely it sounds. If we're talking about actually trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment, this is about as likely. Might as well bring it up. Plus, we'd save a lot of money on the Army, I guess, with all the unpaid militia available. We stop policing the world and act only for defense.

The stats on gun violence in the US seem to suggest that per capita, we kill ourselves far more often than we kill each other, yet we do both at a much higher rate than in other industrialized nations. Anyone have other studies they can contribute to the discussion?

Histrionics and name-calling not necessary. From either side of the fence. And if people have compelling arguments on either side (I really would like to hear from those who feel we should be encouraging gun ownership by responsible citizens would solve the problem) I welcome their input.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2806
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Guns again
« Reply #122 on: December 20, 2012, 06:56:35 AM »
I returned to this board remembering some of the more constructive and stimulating conversations I've had in the past on various topics, hoping I might be able to have a rational one regarding the Sandy Hook shootings.

I may have been overly optimistic. . . but here goes.
yep, because you started typign lebbers witout tinking.
Quote
I'm not interested in discussing how horrible the shootings were (utterly) or how ridiculous people's knee-jerk reactions are (very). What I want is a frank discussion, with supporting evidence, about a number of issues.
superB.
get it buzz all in your HEAD.
gunz not bad. GUNS not in your head.
Quote
1. Will increased firearms legislation have the desired effect of reducing incidents like these?

Because that is the most likely result of the S.H. shootings. The federal government will likely attempt to enact some version of the Brady Bill, perhaps requiring a few more hoops for firearms dealers to jump through, some states or cities will toughen their gun laws, while others may loosen them. I suspect a peicemeal solution like this will do little more than anger pro-gun activists while disappointing anti-gun ones while having little overall effect.
Yes, less gunz appropriate quanity?
how many redrumz/murders appropriate?
Quote
2. If there's no meaningful legislation from the Capitol, will we see more private citizens arming themselves, even teachers? If so, might this be the lesser of two evils?

Because mass shootings are not going away, and with each shooting the next crop of would-be killers will be further emboldened to enter a school shooting, if only because the last killer was so successful.  I think the prospect of elementary schools all over the US staffed with armed teachers is a disturbing one, but no less so than the notion that schools might be targeted specifically because they are "soft" targets.
yeah, educators shouldn't own armz because you are no educator!
U juz tink U iz EDUCATOR!
scrambled:get it buzz all in your HEAD.
scrambled:U juz tink U iz EDUCATOR!
Quote
3. If stats suggest that only banning guns entirely can reduce violence-related fatalities (as suggested by the cited Australia study), will the political climate in the US ever allow that to happen?

People are easily suaded by appeals to personal safety, and many in the US (rightfully) believe that the police are usually too far away to help when they are being assaulted. They also believe (incorrectly) that violent crime is on the rise in the US, has been for some time, and that they are in more danger than ever from the types of violence exemplified by Sandy Hook. given those two factors, it seems extremely unlikely that repealing the 2nd Amendment will ever happen.
bannz USelf not AMErIcan.
femalz CuN be merry canz? YES.
NOT australia WOMEN bcz DAY not merry.
AUSTRALIAM woman goodz aDmiz it SSelf.
gun good.
SSelf tink.
scrambled:get it buzz all in your HEAD.
scrambled:U juz tink U iz EDUCATOR?
Quote
4. Even if the 2nd Amendment were successfully appealed, in a country of over 300 Million people and almost as many (estimated) privately owned firearms, could a ban on firearms be physically enforced?

Especially considering the number of firearms in the hands of people who don't have a right to own them, haven't registered them, and will not give them up.
HELT!
HELT!
HELT!
SSelf.
scrambled:get it buzz all in your HEAD.
scrambled:U juz tink U iz EDUCATOR? SSelf.
Quote
5. A lot of people cite Switzerland as a model gun-ownership state. Fine. Should we abolish our army and have mandatory military service for all adults who want to own their own firearm? That would take care of the 'well regulated militia'. Anyone not in the militia, doesn't get a gun. Anyone in the militia, has compulsory training and military service when needed. Yes, I know how unlikely it sounds. If we're talking about actually trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment, this is about as likely. Might as well bring it up. Plus, we'd save a lot of money on the Army, I guess, with all the unpaid militia available. We stop policing the world and act only for defense.

The stats on gun violence in the US seem to suggest that per capita, we kill ourselves far more often than we kill each other, yet we do both at a much higher rate than in other industrialized nations. Anyone have other studies they can contribute to the discussion?
HELT!
HELT!
HELT!
SSelf.
scrambled:get it buzz all in your HEAD.
scrambled:U juz tink U iz EDUCATOR? SSelf.
bannz USelf not AMErIcan.
SS find U own shit, tell me WUT U learn.
Quote
Histrionics and name-calling not necessary. From either side of the fence. And if people have compelling arguments on either side (I really would like to hear from those who feel we should be encouraging gun ownership by responsible citizens would solve the problem) I welcome their input.
of course not name-calling not necessary!
Swiss person good in your opinion.
German person good in your opinion.
Russian person good in your opinion.
American person bad in your opinion.
Bezt one so FAR: EDUCATOR person bad in your opinion.
you know guns are bad because AMERICAN person ownz.
U din't lake me tillz now Becozz I am person.
wut is you?
good person bad person nation person?
fuk USelf no gunz 4U.
if you need me to translate I will, what are you thinking?
murder is cool in less numbers.../sarcasm..!<hint hint hint.
murder is not cool study any geographic area and you will discover murder longz b4 gun.
so give up.
b4 its too late. you no gunz is bad.
so don't get a gun becuz you are dangerous, right?
fuk USelf no gunz 4U. if DAT iz what U want.
or what makes you think you can responsibly own a computer? I really would like to know because if you can figure that out then maybe you will understand the 2nd amendment.
you own the 1st amendment.
uz sez stupid zhiz and tink none notice.
none diz da perzon no fuk USelf no gunz 4U n NO puter eeeedrrrr.
get it?
haha
;D

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2806
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Guns again
« Reply #123 on: December 20, 2012, 07:01:58 AM »
ok, now you have defined "the kid".
"the kid" as "he" who is not always in control of his actions...

I have described "the kid" in the article I linked to.  You know.  The topic at hand.

if "the kid" isn't in control of "his" actions who is?

Nobody.  A lot of what we do isn't inside our control.  In cases of mental illness, that can extend to a lot of the things that otherwise usually do fall within conscious control.

I challenge you to choose not to wake up when someone pours cold water on you while sleeping.  After all, if you're not in control, who is - right?

and well, I hate to say it but I disagree with you that "Yes, it is needed. ...[rambling]...", but you know what kinda "troll" I am.. right?
anyways..

You originally said it was needed.  Now you're disagreeing that it was needed.   :o

what is the justification for the sentiment "Yes, it is needed.  Not having as many guns in the community would help.  Not being allowed to have one in the home would, too."?
hopefully you won't lose concentration and forget I asked at least 2 questions...

Well, if guns are harder for this kid to get ahold of, then he'll be less able to kill people when he loses control.  Some people would consider that effect to be a good thing.  Not you, apparently.

This thread your first introduction to the concept of mental illness, isn't it?
yep, and you display the illness well.
no gun 4u obviously.

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: Guns again
« Reply #124 on: December 20, 2012, 07:06:58 AM »
yeah I wasn't home schooled I was institutionalized.

can I call you an American citizen?
why the fuck not?
compartmentalize my ass you don't.
can I can call you dumbfuck?
why the fuck not?
oh you don't self identify as an American or self identify as a dumbfuck...
great.
well geuss what if you can't label you you can't label the murderers.
dumbfuck American.

ok, that is fine.
enemy of the entity known as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
keep it up, I dare you.

whatever form necessary.
maybe I should set an appointment to waterboard your ass for a long long time.
oh you don't like me talking like that huh?
oh you do?
right on, if you like it sooo much get a towel and waterboard yourself but make sure there is somebody there so you do it right, I don't want you to get hurt.

wow, kudos to you too.
you obviously confuse the word gun with the word murder.
what method of conditioning would you suggest for an individual to experience that would enlighten them enough to admit the word gun is not equivalent to murder and then admit that murder is wrong and guns are not murder and murder is wrong and guns are not murder and guns are wrong and guns are not murder and...?
until they realized what they were saying was the truth that guns are not murder and murder is not guns and murder is wrong but guns are not wrong because guns don't kill people do they should shut the fuck up.
don't skip any words.
I want confirmation that you read every word in this post.
this is almost as bad as teaching a theist that they believe in dogma not reality,
at least a pacifist realizes that they can carry a gun without some idiot saying they can't because 3sigma doesn't understand that guns are not dangerous.
its the people like 3sigma that are dangerous, they have an opinion about guns and that opinion is guns are dangerous.
well guess what 3sigma maybe you shouldn't be around guns because guns are dangerous.

Sadly, I did read every word of this post, though it appears to be little more than incoherent spitting and snarling because you have no reasonable answer to my questions. What on Earth is all that nonsense at the beginning supposed to mean? Is that a veiled threat in there and why are you talking about waterboarding? I guess this is just your personal charm surfacing again.

The final part of your post almost makes sense. You seem to think I’m equating guns with murder as though they are the only means of murder. No, I’m not doing that. I’m asking you if you think restricting access to guns would reduce gun deaths? That’s a simple enough question with a pretty obvious answer.

You also seem to be falling back to that old trope, “guns don’t kill people; people kill people”. Yes, people kill people and the majority of the time they use guns to do it. In 2009, there were 16,799 murders in the US. Of those, 68% were firearm murders. In 2011, the number of murders was down to 15,953. Nearly 70% of those were firearm murders. Do you really think that severely restricting access to guns wouldn’t reduce the total number of people murdered? People use guns to murder because they are freely available, easy to use, they keep the murderer at a distance and they have been designed and refined specifically to be extremely effective at killing people.

Your behaviour in this thread prompts me to ask, do you live in the US? Are you a gun owner and, if so, how many guns do you own? Are you perhaps a member of the NRA as well?

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2806
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Guns again
« Reply #125 on: December 20, 2012, 07:12:25 AM »
yeah I wasn't home schooled I was institutionalized.

can I call you an American citizen?
why the fuck not?
compartmentalize my ass you don't.
can I can call you dumbfuck?
why the fuck not?
oh you don't self identify as an American or self identify as a dumbfuck...
great.
well geuss what if you can't label you you can't label the murderers.
dumbfuck American.

ok, that is fine.
enemy of the entity known as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
keep it up, I dare you.

whatever form necessary.
maybe I should set an appointment to waterboard your ass for a long long time.
oh you don't like me talking like that huh?
oh you do?
right on, if you like it sooo much get a towel and waterboard yourself but make sure there is somebody there so you do it right, I don't want you to get hurt.

wow, kudos to you too.
you obviously confuse the word gun with the word murder.
what method of conditioning would you suggest for an individual to experience that would enlighten them enough to admit the word gun is not equivalent to murder and then admit that murder is wrong and guns are not murder and murder is wrong and guns are not murder and guns are wrong and guns are not murder and...?
until they realized what they were saying was the truth that guns are not murder and murder is not guns and murder is wrong but guns are not wrong because guns don't kill people do they should shut the fuck up.
don't skip any words.
I want confirmation that you read every word in this post.
this is almost as bad as teaching a theist that they believe in dogma not reality,
at least a pacifist realizes that they can carry a gun without some idiot saying they can't because 3sigma doesn't understand that guns are not dangerous.
its the people like 3sigma that are dangerous, they have an opinion about guns and that opinion is guns are dangerous.
well guess what 3sigma maybe you shouldn't be around guns because guns are dangerous.

Sadly, I did read every word of this post, though it appears to be little more than incoherent spitting and snarling because you have no reasonable answer to my questions. What on Earth is all that nonsense at the beginning supposed to mean? Is that a veiled threat in there and why are you talking about waterboarding? I guess this is just your personal charm surfacing again.

The final part of your post almost makes sense. You seem to think I’m equating guns with murder as though they are the only means of murder. No, I’m not doing that. I’m asking you if you think restricting access to guns would reduce gun deaths? That’s a simple enough question with a pretty obvious answer.

You also seem to be falling back to that old trope, “guns don’t kill people; people kill people”. Yes, people kill people and the majority of the time they use guns to do it. In 2009, there were 16,799 murders in the US. Of those, 68% were firearm murders. In 2011, the number of murders was down to 15,953. Nearly 70% of those were firearm murders. Do you really think that severely restricting access to guns wouldn’t reduce the total number of people murdered? People use guns to murder because they are freely available, easy to use, they keep the murderer at a distance and they have been designed and refined specifically to be extremely effective at killing people.

Your behaviour in this thread prompts me to ask, do you live in the US? Are you a gun owner and, if so, how many guns do you own? Are you perhaps a member of the NRA as well?
all of your post is irrelevant.
you want to ban gunz.
so ban them for your SSelf.
quit fucking with "americans".
and "NRA" people.
I am not into GUNZ and it is none of your business what I am into is it?

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: Guns again
« Reply #126 on: December 20, 2012, 07:44:05 AM »
What is your problem, none? Why can’t you behave like a normal person and discuss this subject reasonably? What is it about this subject that has you posting incoherent nonsense and personal attacks? You certainly seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something.

Online screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 11994
  • Darwins +618/-23
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Guns again
« Reply #127 on: December 20, 2012, 10:59:04 AM »
some rude thoughts on guns:

Guns and minds 
Quote
When I had that gun pointed in my face all those years ago, I didn't think, "Damn, I wish I had a gun, too." I didn't think, "Damn, I wish someone else with a gun would come along and save me." I thought, "Damn, I wish he didn't have a gun."
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2012/12/guns-and-minds-ive-had-gun-pointed-in.html

On guns, crazies make the law.
Quote
You got that? The FBI or DHS might pay you a visit if you quietly buy too much of a certain kind of fortified shit. If you are a child in a wheelchair, chosen at random at an airport, and you have fortified shit residue on your hands because you touched the wheels of your chair, you will be held until the truth about the fortified shit residue is ascertained.

But if you are on the terrorist watch list, you can buy all the goddamn guns you want, as long as you're not disqualified for other reasons (like not being a citizen, because legal immigrants don't need to be safe).
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2012/12/on-guns-crazies-make-laws-as-nation.html

Guns and the Constitution: "Keep and Bear," Not "Buy and Sell"
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2012/12/guns-and-constitution-keep-and-bear-not.html
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline shnozzola

Re: Guns again
« Reply #128 on: December 21, 2012, 09:30:37 AM »
Quote
Nancy Lanza, it seems, was suffering from the same fears that grip millions of Americans who believe that without firearms they will be slain on the streets or in their beds.
Quote
Even if his chances of success are slim in a Congress of gutless wonders who always think of their own survival first, he should demand a national moratorium on the sale of banana clip devices and the closing of loopholes that permit gun show operators to avoid the necessity of checking out their purchasers.

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/thomasson17/thomasson17

Quote
The bullets used at Newtown, said Connecticut’s chief medical examiner, “are designed in such a fashion the energy is deposited in the tissue so the bullet stays in” producing a “very devastating set of injuries.”

http://www.southernminn.com/faribault_daily_news/opinion/article_38478de5-15b4-57ce-94ea-cb683a2d3d52.html

The articles above by conservative columnists show that there may be some progress.  Instead of allowing this thread to move down the page into obscurity, at least until the next rampage, I should have the balls to keep bringing it back to the top.   I should pound this issue home until I get banned from this website, so people can go on happily arguing about the possible existence of a deity, while continuing to  ignore the problem with  guns in America that create a difficult debate that is just so, so hard for people.
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline shnozzola

Re: Guns again
« Reply #129 on: December 21, 2012, 12:40:42 PM »
   So the NRA says every school in America needs to have an armed police officer. 
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20121221/US.Connecticut.School.Shooting.NRA/

Lets go with a simplified  gun plan to start.   At 98,817 schools in America, and, lets say, only a glock 18 at $507.00 a piece, instead of a 30 bullet Bushmaster at $729.99, that’s $50,100,219 for gun manufacturers.  Works for the NRA.

    Obviously simplified, let’s say $40,000 a year for each police officer, at 98,817 schools, that’s  $3,952,680,000 added to taxes.

   Let’s do it.  Let’s see if it saves lives.  Let’s see if we can put our money and this rationality where the NRA’s mouth is.  But let’s not wait.  Paying for the police officers is only $12.54 per American per year.
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline mhaberling

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Darwins +9/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I could write some personal text here...
Re: Guns again
« Reply #130 on: December 21, 2012, 01:45:24 PM »
I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents here... Different regions of this country have different cultures... My region is one in which this gun culture is strongest... And here might be a little insight... Most all  kids at about 6 are expected to take hunting safety classes and learn how to use a firearm... When you learn that this weapon will take a mans life when your not careful. That shooting someone is permanent and that is real... It is amazing how deep that sits in a person when they are taught that at such a young age
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10294
  • Darwins +177/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #131 on: December 21, 2012, 04:02:43 PM »
When I was in high school almost every student car/truck had a gun in it.  Many came to school straight from morning hunting.  There is not going to be an easy answer to this problem.  If congress can't even protect us from something they made themselves (fisical cliff)...how will they ever get any kind of meaningful gun control passed?
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Tide goes in, tide goes out !!!

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: Guns again
« Reply #132 on: December 21, 2012, 06:00:48 PM »
Most all  kids at about 6 are expected to take hunting safety classes and learn how to use a firearm... When you learn that this weapon will take a mans life when your not careful.

…when you’re not careful? Not careful? Do you think Adam Lanza didn’t mean to kill twenty schoolchildren and seven adults by shooting them all multiple times with semi-automatic assault rifle?

News reports indicate that Nancy Lanza taught her children how to shoot and took them to gun ranges. She was reported to be a prepper as well so it is quite likely she impressed upon her children the fact that guns kill people.

Offline mhaberling

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Darwins +9/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I could write some personal text here...
Re: Guns again
« Reply #133 on: December 21, 2012, 06:22:03 PM »
Most all  kids at about 6 are expected to take hunting safety classes and learn how to use a firearm... When you learn that this weapon will take a mans life when your not careful.

…when you’re not careful? Not careful? Do you think Adam Lanza didn’t mean to kill twenty schoolchildren and seven adults by shooting them all multiple times with semi-automatic assault rifle?

News reports indicate that Nancy Lanza taught her children how to shoot and took them to gun ranges. She was reported to be a prepper as well so it is quite likely she impressed upon her children the fact that guns kill people.

this is a discussion about the gun culture in america... i am aware it would do little in the case of the mentally ill or handicapped.. wasnt my point at all
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." - Benjamin Franklin

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: Guns again
« Reply #134 on: December 21, 2012, 06:52:59 PM »
this is a discussion about the gun culture in america... i am aware it would do little in the case of the mentally ill or handicapped.. wasnt my point at all

What would help in those cases? What is the most effective way to prevent people like Adam Lanza shooting schoolchildren? What would help reduce the other 30,000 gun deaths in the US each year? My suggestion is to severely restrict access to all guns by any private citizen. What’s your suggestion?

Would you suggest putting even more guns in the community as the NRA is doing? Shnozzola gave several good reasons why that is unworkable. More guns in the community just increases their availability to those who would use them for murder.

Would you suggest better screening of licence applicants or trying to identify potential mass shooters before they start shooting? Bear in mind that Adam Lanza didn’t have to pass any background checks for the guns he used. They weren’t his. They were legally owned by his mother and thus were easily within his reach. Adam Lanza was variously reported as being shy, quiet, keeping to himself, a computer nerd and mildly autistic (possibly with Asperger’s syndrome). Are you going to stigmatise everyone like that by labelling them as a potential mass shooter and placing them on a watch list?

Edit: My apologies, shnozzola, I misspelled your username.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 08:13:50 PM by 3sigma »

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5375
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: Guns again
« Reply #135 on: December 21, 2012, 06:56:23 PM »
   So the NRA says every school in America needs to have an armed police officer. 
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20121221/US.Connecticut.School.Shooting.NRA/



How lacking in foresight and guts,  they should just arm all the kids.
"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5007
  • Darwins +98/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #136 on: December 21, 2012, 07:16:19 PM »
...  they should just arm all the kids.


Offline shnozzola

Re: Guns again
« Reply #137 on: December 21, 2012, 08:48:23 PM »
Quote
As the U.S. wages a debate on its gun laws, some Australians are urging Americans to consider their experience.
For Australia, the turning point came on April 28, 1996, when a lone gunman opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle in Port Arthur, a popular tourist destination in the state of Tasmania.

http://www.npr.org/2012/12/21/167814684/australians-urge-u-s-to-look-at-their-gun-laws
______________________________________

Bill Moyers this past summer after Aurora:

Quote
"So why do we always act so surprised? Violence is alter ego, wired into our Stone Age brains, so intrinsic its toxic eruptions no longer shock, except momentarily when we hear of a mass shooting...."

http://occupyamerica.crooksandliars.com/diane-sweet/bill-moyers-toys-better-regulated-guns
__________________________________________
Quote
After Newtown, anchored by Gwen Ifill, addresses such issues as access to guns and the politics of gun laws; mental illness in young adults; the science of detecting violent impulses; and how communities react to unspeakable tragedy

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/after-newtown/
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline mhaberling

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Darwins +9/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I could write some personal text here...
Re: Guns again
« Reply #138 on: December 21, 2012, 09:07:31 PM »
this is a discussion about the gun culture in america... i am aware it would do little in the case of the mentally ill or handicapped.. wasnt my point at all

What would help in those cases? What is the most effective way to prevent people like Adam Lanza shooting schoolchildren? What would help reduce the other 30,000 gun deaths in the US each year? My suggestion is to severely restrict access to all guns by any private citizen. What’s your suggestion?

Would you suggest putting even more guns in the community as the NRA is doing? Shnozzola gave several good reasons why that is unworkable. More guns in the community just increases their availability to those who would use them for murder.

Would you suggest better screening of licence applicants or trying to identify potential mass shooters before they start shooting? Bear in mind that Adam Lanza didn’t have to pass any background checks for the guns he used. They weren’t his. They were legally owned by his mother and thus were easily within his reach. Adam Lanza was variously reported as being shy, quiet, keeping to himself, a computer nerd and mildly autistic (possibly with Asperger’s syndrome). Are you going to stigmatise everyone like that by labelling them as a potential mass shooter and placing them on a watch list?

Edit: My apologies, shnozzola, I misspelled your username.

I dont know if there are any easy answers
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10294
  • Darwins +177/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #139 on: December 24, 2012, 10:07:04 AM »
(12-24-12) 2 NY firemen shot to death responding to a fire today.  But it is too soon to discuss gun control.
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Tide goes in, tide goes out !!!

Offline kaziglu bey

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 772
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • There is no Big Brother in the sky.
Re: Guns again
« Reply #140 on: December 24, 2012, 10:16:56 AM »
(12-24-12) 2 NY firemen shot to death responding to a fire today.  But it is too soon to discuss gun control.
If only we allowed God back into our fires, this would never have happened.
Seriously though... What would happen if the Great Green Arkleseizure didn't fram up the rammastam before the hermite curve achieved maximum nurdfurdle velocity? Now THAT would be something. AmIrite?

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10294
  • Darwins +177/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guns again
« Reply #141 on: December 24, 2012, 10:18:23 AM »
True, and arm our firemen.
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Tide goes in, tide goes out !!!

Offline kaziglu bey

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 772
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • There is no Big Brother in the sky.
Re: Guns again
« Reply #142 on: December 24, 2012, 10:21:12 AM »
True, and arm our firemen.
Shouldn't they have water guns?
Seriously though... What would happen if the Great Green Arkleseizure didn't fram up the rammastam before the hermite curve achieved maximum nurdfurdle velocity? Now THAT would be something. AmIrite?

Offline Chronos

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 2273
  • Darwins +120/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Born without religion
    • Marking Time
Re: Guns again
« Reply #143 on: December 24, 2012, 04:25:08 PM »
At the end of every fire hose there should be an AR-15 that just randomly fires into ... the fire ... just to make sure that anything is dead and roasted.
John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

Offline Chronos

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 2273
  • Darwins +120/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Born without religion
    • Marking Time
Re: Guns again
« Reply #144 on: December 26, 2012, 09:54:52 PM »
Every American home should be equipped with a setup like this:






« Last Edit: December 26, 2012, 09:59:13 PM by Chronos »
John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.