[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Just what is it you think Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he drafted the 2nd Amendment? Paintball? [/quote]
“If he fhall fhould confider affault on my perfon or effential libertief, he fhall acquire a cap in hif aff”[/quote]
Well done, fir.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Just what is it you think Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he drafted the 2nd Amendment? Paintball? [/quote]
“If he fhall fhould confider affault on my perfon or effential libertief, he fhall acquire a cap in hif aff”[/quote]
Quite literally lolling. Thank you. (^_^)
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Just what is it you think Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he drafted the 2nd Amendment? Paintball? [/quote]
“If he fhall fhould confider affault on my perfon or effential libertief, he fhall acquire a cap in hif aff”[/quote]
Well done, fir.[/quote]
Damn thee, ftop! My fide is hurting!
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]treco wrote:
smh23
Do you think the incessant coverage influences a larger number of nuts deciding to go out in a blaze of glory.
It would seem, since so many kill themselves, it is not a fear of dying that would prevent the attack in the first place[/quote]
I wish I could know what drives people like this. A wide variety of factors are tossed around by “experts” and analysts: the knowledge that the 24-hour news cycle essentially guarantees infamy to anyone willing to do some human damage these days; long-term, incessant bullying made increasingly easier by social media. I’m not big on the violent video games/movies explanation, but it can’t help some burgeoning little nutcase that his only friends are the pixelated soldiers blowing each other to hell at his command as he wastes his years of youth and virility in his parents’ basement.
In the end, though, I don’t think something like this can be explained; I don’t think blame can be apportioned. We may learn of a motive but there will never be a reason.[/quote]
I think the media is getting a little better at not covering the person who committed the crime and focusing more on the victims. Aside from columbine I don’t think any recent shooters accomplished “fame” and doubt that has anything to do with the reason for committing the crime. Regardless of the media coverage, with the number of mass shootings we had in the last 10-20 years each single persons “fame” is diminished a little as another name gets added to the bucket of crazies.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
That just the way lefty’s think Push…
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]treco wrote:
smh23
Do you think the incessant coverage influences a larger number of nuts deciding to go out in a blaze of glory.
It would seem, since so many kill themselves, it is not a fear of dying that would prevent the attack in the first place[/quote]
I wish I could know what drives people like this. A wide variety of factors are tossed around by “experts” and analysts: the knowledge that the 24-hour news cycle essentially guarantees infamy to anyone willing to do some human damage these days; long-term, incessant bullying made increasingly easier by social media. I’m not big on the violent video games/movies explanation, but it can’t help some burgeoning little nutcase that his only friends are the pixelated soldiers blowing each other to hell at his command as he wastes his years of youth and virility in his parents’ basement.
In the end, though, I don’t think something like this can be explained; I don’t think blame can be apportioned. We may learn of a motive but there will never be a reason.[/quote]
I think the media is getting a little better at not covering the person who committed the crime and focusing more on the victims. Aside from columbine I don’t think any recent shooters accomplished “fame” and doubt that has anything to do with the reason for committing the crime. Regardless of the media coverage, with the number of mass shootings we had in the last 10-20 years each single persons “fame” is diminished a little as another name gets added to the bucket of crazies.[/quote]
I think you are correct, but the little that they do get probably encourages some other lunatic to pull a copy cat shooting.
But what can really be done about any of it?
We now live in a society that has this problem. Much can be said about society and how we got here but…we’re here and we’re absolutely not going back.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]treco wrote:
It would seem, since so many kill themselves, it is not a fear of dying that would prevent the attack in the first place[/quote]
If someone is willing to murder their own mother and kill themselves as well, there is nothing we can do to stop them.
[/quote]
So why bother trying? Is that what you are suggesting? Why even have laws since they will be broken?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
These nuttjob mass murderers are not the church going, pro USA tea party members that go to lots of rallies and Washington DC vacations. These are the anti-Americans, that want the United States to fall on it’s face and collapse.
The reason for mass shootings of people they do not know signifies the need to punish for their culpable “American behavior” that is similar to anti-USA terrorists. They certainly are not right leaning pro gun, pro God, pro American citizens.
They also want to punish an America they believe to be the reason for the world’s problems. That’s in line with Obama bowing and apologizing to world leaders for America’s sins - not right leaning conservatives as some have tried to put blame on here.[/quote]
Arguments like the above are the problem. No facts and the ubiquitous political statement. Did the Columbine shooters do it for political, or personal, reasons?
[/quote]
People blamed Marilyn Mason, and neither the Left, not the ACLU, or any other organization came to his defense in the name of “Free Speech.” And this link was made because the shooters allegedly listened to Marilyn Mason music, how stupid is that ?
In fact, how a 20-yr old White male from Connecticut can be linked to groups like the NRA is beyond me.
Had the shooter been a middle aged White male from the South, the Left would be shouting about redneck-ism all over the place. [/quote]
Is there an answer to the question buried somewhere in there?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So why bother trying? Is that what you are suggesting? Why even have laws since they will be broken? [/quote]
It’s not what I’m suggesting at all. Much as “hard cases make bad law”, rarely are good, new laws borne of crises. I would point to the Patriot Act as an example.
Laws are meant to provide a deterrent effect and punish those who break them. Laws are of no - or severely limited - use if someone is willing to kill their own mother as well as themselves in order to commit some evil act.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So why bother trying? Is that what you are suggesting? Why even have laws since they will be broken? [/quote]
It’s not what I’m suggesting at all. Much as “hard cases make bad law”, rarely are good, new laws borne of crises. I would point to the Patriot Act as an example.
Laws are meant to provide a deterrent effect and punish those who break them. Laws are of no - or severely limited - use if someone is willing to kill their own mother as well as themselves in order to commit some evil act.
[/quote]
Well said…very well said.
We now live in an age where we must have xray screening for every school and public place. Once again, we didn’t get here over night but we’re hear now and we’re not going back.
And it’s not even close to being a gun control issue. It’s a society is sick issue.
[quote]kamui wrote:
The more well-armed you are, the more well-armed your State will have to be.
[/quote]
It’s actually the other way around.
[quote]theBird wrote:
I know you Americans truly love your guns, but I personally feel that banning the ownership of guns or having some type of gun control law would prevent or at least reduce the number of shootings you have.
tweet[/quote]
Most gun deaths are caused by the coppers.
They love to shoot people.
[quote]kamui wrote:
If you can do it with airports, it should not be that hard to do it with schools.
[/quote]
Great idea! Maybe we can hire some blue-shirt rejects to feel up our kids in their schools too?!
It’s so obvious.
If we can prevent drug use by outlawing them then we can also prevent shootings by outlawing guns.
Only government officials should be armed because I fully trust my government to protect me.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
That just the way lefty’s think Push…[/quote]
It is not the thinking function they are using.
It is the emotional one.
It reads like a Celine Dion song;
“If you asked me to I will give you everything… If you ask me to…I’ll change my mind…give you my heart, give you my integrity, give you my money, give you my guns…”
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
That just the way lefty’s think Push…[/quote]
It is not the thinking function they are using.
It is the emotional one.
It reads like a Celine Dion song;
“If you asked me to I will give you everything… If you ask me to…I’ll change my mind…give you my heart, give you my integrity, give you my money, give you my guns…”
[/quote]
Someone else who can’t look at an issue without political goggles on. Allowing your hatred of liberals to govern your opinions is no better than liberals doing the same when it comes to conservatives. You both stand on common ground on one thing at least.
You’re right it isn’t a left versus right issue but rather an emotion versus logic issue.
Conservatives have their own heart strings but it comes attached to a woman’s uterus.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
The more well-armed you are, the more well-armed your State will have to be.
[/quote]
It’s actually the other way around.[/quote]
it’s actually both ways.
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
The more well-armed you are, the more well-armed your State will have to be.
[/quote]
It’s actually the other way around.[/quote]
it’s actually both ways. [/quote]
No, because no government should ever be armed.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
The point was not to actually give them up, but the exercise in thinking of realizing that this stuff will happen no matter what and not to focus on the tool used. Gun control pushers HONESTLY believe this. Like you get rid of guns and all the sudden we have this fairy tale world with no death, no violence, and no kids harmed. I just said oh certainly I’d give it up if I thought all the roses in the world would come out and nothing bad would happen because guns cause bad. Maybe I’m going too far, but it really seems as if many people honestly believe this.
You and I KNOW that’s not the case. We realize sick people will do sick things whether guns are illegal, legal, whatever. It’s not stopping them. Essentially most of these people almost wholeheartedly believe that these tragedies are prevented without guns. This is simply not based in reality in my thinking.