Time for a "Mass Shootings" Forum?

I am not a conservative, but I do disagree as to the nature of the problem. Guns are NOT the most pressing issue in our society right now and if you think they are then you have to be either paranoid or delusional. It is not a sanctity of life issue either or you guys would all be raising hell about our pre-emptive first strike cheney/bush doctrine.

I am fine with the status quo on guns, why do we need to move? You are the ones that want change why can't you go to that paradise and set up the great society you so desire?

Obviously it is not a simple fix either since it involves people on my side of the fence abdicating their own personal responsibility for their safety and the safety of their loved ones to an inept inefficient and largely uncaring government.

 

Its karma if he killed innocents. Im assuming from what i know about him that he claims he did not kill innocents.

 

I dont think that is KARMA . Karma is what goes round comes round, what you sew you reap. he who lives by the sword dies by the sword ....that is karma...killers getting killed is karma

 

This is getting awfully semantic but i think you are right actually. My bad. I still think its a pretty douchey thing to say.

 

For the last time nobody wants your guns!!

We just want some common sense laws/enforcement that keep guns away from criminals, minors, the mentally ill, terrorists etc ... as much as possible. That's it. No need to read into it any more than that.

Anything else is just a product of your delusional fantasies that your gun is some symbol of independence instead of just a piece of steel and plastic engineered to kill things

 

That is what you say now, I do not believe you. you have the laws jsut need to enforce them if that is the case.

 

The post wasn't targeted at you, either. Nor stanger, nor ASF, nor Ismitje, nor JBJake, nor MitH nor Mastershake, nor many of the other moderate and conservative people on P&CE who are reasonable and I can disagree with without really wishing them banished to Mars. This was targeted exclusively at the y-lees, the persianfootballs, the InTheNets (not from experience but from glimpses resurrected via necroposts). The family members who send me stuff about Obama's Kenyan heritage and the friends who wish the President were dead because his socialism has hurt their business. It was borne of frustration and anger over the intellectual vacuum that has emerged in the Republican Party of Dwight Eisenhower, George H.W. Bush, and, hell, even Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. I'm sure there are people you've wanted shipped off to Antarctica, and that was the frustration I feel just about once a week since Aurora.

 

Listen, bub. You REAP what you SOW, not what you SEW. We JUST have to enforce the laws, not JSUT. You have two ways to make an impression on this forum: content and grammar. You're losing the first battle in a rout, don't join the exalted list of failed trolls that litter these pages.

 

So the president wants to address the issue of gun control and somehow it is "skeet-gate" (an absolute nonissue) that is the focus of our failed media establishment? Effin useless , just incredible.....

 

I assumed it was just foxnews running with that angle. Sad.

 

You would think a country boy who grows his own food would know that.

 

You city slickers ar sew dum, you can only figger out won way to spell a word.

 

Just like Florida right? There's no law barring someone to make a private gun purchase at a gun show. But you get caught with an illegal gun in the act of a crime you get put away for half your life.

That's so ass backwards. Could save the taxpayer millions of dollars of prison upkeep if we just enforce laws that prevent the guy getting a gun, instead of just enforcing the laws once he's found with the gun

 

You can repeat this as many times as you like and its still bullshit. NOTHING being proposed by ANYONE in Washington would affect you or the ownership of the guns you have. You just live in this delusional fantasy that limiting the size of magazines will be the first domino that results in your indentured servitude to the evil government. And yet we are paranoid.

 

Right, which is why you keep getting called paranoid. And no, it's not projecting.

 

Your post is more proof, as if any more was needed, that gun nuttery is the triumph of dysfunctional psychology over intelligence and reason.

 

Usually when I think of Bolingbroke, I'm thinking of Henry St John, but that could be because I studied under the author who biographied him.

 

You may say I am losing, I never, ever thought was going to win. It is the Sun Tzu tactic of harry and harasss , delay, and hope to outlast your adversary. Good catch on the sow and not sew, cerebral flatulence. As for the jsut, well monsieur grammar nazi I missed a typo. BFD.

As for your intellectual vacuum of the party of RR and George HW Bush are you serious? A charismatic corporate shill and a known liar? The very fact so many think so highly of them illustrates an intellectual vacuum. If it were not for the fact that natures abhorrence of vacuum would at least elevate it to some level of intelligence instead of being a black hole to any sort of critical thinking.

You got me pegged wrong I am on this one issue very much aligned with conservative or libertarian thought. I don't care what a consenting adults do in their bedrooms, I am in favor of women's reproductive rights, if I get a woman pregnant that stuff will be between me and her, I would afford to all others that same measure of respect. I am glad we have social safety nets, and think they may be all that is standing between us, and a high level of civil unrest with rioting in many major cities. Taxation.. well you get the message, we probably agree on more of this stuff than we disagree on.

As for the paranoia. cigarettes? I am not saying any of those laws are wrong. I am merely using it as an example of incremental legislation. It went from can't smoke inside a building to can't smoke in your cars or home if you have children in space of about ten- fifteen years. The laws as they stand would have been unthinkable and impossible in the beginning. I think we as a society were right on the cigarette issue although the child welfare in the home thing is a bit of a stretch and invasive in my opinion. This is not a pattern of behavior I am willing to wait and see, if that is what is up or not with firearms. The biggest reason is if you are wrong and it does not work you will want more, to say otherwise means that all your arguments are not valid. I mean those same arguments would still exist if your proposals do not work, why wouldn't you double down?

 

Frm their definition of "Assault" (p23) this part was something that I have tried to point out before:

In other words as much as the gun lobby want to say that there are more assaults in Australia, UK , or wherever, the data is not accurate enough to confirm this. Australia for instance is one country where threats and punching/ slapping is considerred assault. I don't know if the US is.

Also interesting to see they have attempted to put a number for "major assaults". Now I couldn't find where the definition was (I dont have the time to read the whole report) but I would think that a major assault is something where you would be in hospital the next day whereas a minor assault would be something you may well laugh about the next day. From pages 36 - 37, the USA is still in the top percentile of overall assaults (as the author says it is mostly developed countries at the top as they have higher rates of reporting), but if we compare a few:

Then when we compare major assaults (ie more likely to actually have a negative impact on your life) then the USA comes out as the worst of the above contries - by quite a long way.

More guns = less major violence is utter BS. I want to ask y-lee (again) is whether he really thinks the deaths from guns are realy worth having less puching and slapping, as it seems, as far as violence goes, that is the only thing that guns are detering.