(12-18-2012, 07:22 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote:
What a waste of brain power.
Enjoy your bubble......

Yeah, you're right.

Kinda silly to have wasted my time reading and considering reasoned and passionate comments (and personal experiences) from posters on both sides and straight up the middle of the gun control issue. Now that I know how you feel, it's all clear and definitive.

Whew, ready to give my brain a good solid work out by re-reading or making new posts about "Bulges" and "Slurpees".

(12-18-2012, 09:00 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 07:22 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote:
What a waste of brain power.
Enjoy your bubble......

Yeah, you're right.

Kinda silly to have wasted my time reading and considering reasoned and passionate comments (and personal experiences) from posters on both sides and straight up the middle of the gun control issue. Now that I know how you feel, it's all clear and definitive.

Whew, ready to give my brain a good solid work out by re-reading or making new posts about "Bulges" and "Slurpees".

Sex and Sugar are important factors in everday life; maybe you should ban those to. Oh wait, we'll start a parallel thread about that first.

(12-18-2012, 09:19 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 09:00 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 07:22 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote:
What a waste of brain power.
Enjoy your bubble......

Yeah, you're right.

Kinda silly to have wasted my time reading and considering reasoned and passionate comments (and personal experiences) from posters on both sides and straight up the middle of the gun control issue. Now that I know how you feel, it's all clear and definitive.

Whew, ready to give my brain a good solid work out by re-reading or making new posts about "Bulges" and "Slurpees".

Sex and Sugar are important factors in everday life; maybe you should ban those to. Oh wait, we'll start a parallel thread about that first.

Well, I could tell you my opinion about Sex and Sugar and declare that it would be a waste of time for you or anybody else to consider another.

But, I kinda like reading other people's take on things, whether I agree or not. Weird that I'd come to a message board for that, I know.

I guess if you wanna start a brain buster debate topic regarding the pros and cons of Sex and Sugar, I could see the value of you opening a separate thread for it. It could throw things off a bit in this one and I don't dislike you, so wouldn't want to put you through the internal dilemma and soul-searching drama that apparently goes along with determining whether to close a thread. It's easy enough to simply open a new one for the offshoot and just let people do their thing. Opening a thread isn't really a controversial action, unless you're jumping on someone else's mock bandwagon.

(12-18-2012, 09:42 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: It could throw things off a bit in this one and I don't dislike you, so wouldn't want to put you through the internal dilemma and soul-searching drama that apparently goes along with determining whether to close a thread; easy enough to simply open a new one for the offshoot and just let people do their thing. Opening a thread isn't really a controversial action, unless you're jumping on someone else's mock bandwagon.

I didn't make an issue out of "closing the thread" and because I presented an honest platform instead of hiding behind the commentary of others; doesn't justify your lackluster take on it. Oh, I know! I'll try to be witty and pull in off topic bullshit to prove a self indulgant epiphany because it will impress the others here. Witless, ignorant, and retarded at best.

Instead of taking bits and pieces of a dialogue I wrote and trying to manipulate it into some trolling bit of rhetoric; try using a litte comprehension first. It doesn't hurt to read, think, consider, and possibly read again.

Oh wait, I see the lasso over my prior "opinion" being shunned because it goes against your expectations in a discussion. Well played.....

(12-18-2012, 09:58 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 09:42 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: It could throw things off a bit in this one and I don't dislike you, so wouldn't want to put you through the internal dilemma and soul-searching drama that apparently goes along with determining whether to close a thread; easy enough to simply open a new one for the offshoot and just let people do their thing. Opening a thread isn't really a controversial action, unless you're jumping on someone else's mock bandwagon.

I didn't make an issue out of "closing the thread" and because I presented an honest platform instead of hiding behind the commentary of others; doesn't justify your lackluster take on it. Oh, I know! I'll try to be witty and pull in off topic bullshit to prove a self indulgant epiphany because it will impress the others here. Witless, ignorant, and retarded at best.

Instead of taking bits and pieces of a dialogue I wrote and trying to manipulate it into some trolling bit of rhetoric; try using a litte comprehension first. It doesn't hurt to read, think, consider, and possibly read again.

Oh wait, I see the lasso over my prior "opinion" being shunned because it goes against your expectations in a discussion. Well played.....

I do like reading the opinions of others and don't feel that they're brainless for expressing them when I don't happen to agree; don't care if you see it differently either. But, the rest of it is just mocking around as we do here, though I love the dramatic trolling rhetoric bit.

I read your post about losing your friendly filter; I'm not offended.

P.s. You mocked the context in which I opened a new thread; I then mocked the context in which you closed one. It's not serious, to me.

(12-17-2012, 11:25 PM)Jimbone Wrote: I thought this was a reasoned and fair approach to the current debate... FWIW to anyone interested:

http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2012...wn-debate/

This is another good piece, imo. It focuses on the challenges facing gun control effectiveness where it's most needed.

Snipped:
People with histories of mental illness and a proclivity toward violence are not supposed to be able to purchase firearms in the United States. But in practice, say experts, a patchwork of state and federal laws only apply to people who have been institutionalized or deemed by authorities to be dangerous.

Federal law mandates background checks meant to keep convicted felons and people with mental illnesses from legally acquiring guns, but the rules only apply to people who buy weapons from licensed dealers -- meaning that people, including those with mental illnesses, can buy what they please from other individuals at gun shows or elsewhere. At the state level, standards vary and are bedeviled by poor tracking and a lack of coordination with federal authorities, making enforcement spotty.

In short, no effective system exists that can prevent those with mental illness from getting hold of deadly firearms or reliably predict who may act out in violence.

The underlying goal of laws restricting who can buy guns is to keep guns out of the hands of the people most likely to commit violent acts. By that measure, the laws aren't working, said Paul Appelbaum, the director of the Division of Law, Ethics and Psychiatry at Columbia University's department of psychiatry.

"What we've been pursuing here has been not just a failed strategy, but a strategy that is unlikely ever to be implemented successfully," Appelbaum said. "We're both sweeping up lots of people about whom we probably shouldn't be worried and omitting many people about whom we should."

Full story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17...18421.html

(12-18-2012, 07:22 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote: Some of you need to get the fuck over yourselves......
If I want to own any weapon, I'll buy it or obtain it. Criminals do the same!

Gun control will never work, stop trying to blame a symptom over the real problem.

No criminal will follow a gun control law, and good fucking luck in getting a law passed and then getting guns off the street.

What a waste of brain power.
Enjoy your bubble......

You're odd for a cop.

Hairy says she likes you and that's great.

I personally don't care for any of your posts or 'like' you or your aura.

I'm sure the feeling is mutual.

I'll continue to waste my brain power and live in my apparent bubble.

I can tell you don't have any kids, and that's cool.

There's a reason the reaction to this incident has been above and beyond others, but you don't get it and never will.

(12-18-2012, 10:50 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 07:22 AM)Sphincter Cop Wrote: Some of you need to get the fuck over yourselves......
If I want to own any weapon, I'll buy it or obtain it. Criminals do the same!

Gun control will never work, stop trying to blame a symptom over the real problem.

No criminal will follow a gun control law, and good fucking luck in getting a law passed and then getting guns off the street.

What a waste of brain power.
Enjoy your bubble......

You're odd for a cop.

Hairy says she likes you and that's great.

I personally don't care for any of your posts or 'like' you or your aura.

I'm sure the feeling is mutual.

I'll continue to waste my brain power and live in my apparent bubble.

I can tell you don't have any kids, and that's cool.

There's a reason the reaction to this incident has been above and beyond others, but you don't get it and never will.

Let me go find a tissue......and a liberals shoulder to cry on. Because everything is just rainbows and roses. We should live life under your direction.

Let me know when you make an informed post based on reality and not some make believe world that you feel the need to question every single facet of; without giving answer that shows an intelligent disection of the topic at hand.

We can't seem to win the war on drugs either.



LEGALIZE CRACK NOW!

(12-18-2012, 10:50 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: You're odd for a cop.

Hairy says she likes you and that's great.

Hey, don't misquote me!!! I said, "don't dislike", to be accurate (which is true but irrelevant).

I thought the article that Jim posted with gun statistics/facts and the article about the difficulty of keeping guns out of the hands of those who are mentally ill and/or have a proclivity for violence were both good reads. The latter one, though, only addresses the challenges in keeping the mentally ill/violent from purchasing and doesn't address the challenge of keeping them from gaining access to guns via a qualified owner.

Anyway, neither of the pieces seems too politically-swayed or focused on one incident alone, imo. Maybe as emotions start to level out, we'll start seeing more unbiased reports emerge that at least provide valid current data/information without so much rhetoric. Personally, I don't expect there to ever be full answers, but do like to understand as much as possible about "why/how" so at least efforts can be made to minimize the problem (whether those efforts ultimately focus primarily around stricter gun control or not).

@SC

I thought the topic of this thread was 'Guns don't kill people, or do they?'

IMO, guns kill people.

The problem with 2^nd Amendment supporters, is:

A) They don't look at how archaic the language in the actual amendment is. It's clearly written for 1791 America, not 21^st century America.

B) They instantly retreat to a postion of 'No one is going to take away my right to own guns. Period.'

C) They are closed minded. Not looking at the 'big picture'. Not willing to even consider some form of limitations on any sort of firearms or their capacity to create carnage.

Fortunately, as I read more about this deranged killer, I'm discovering that he was living in a world of isolation with just his mother. I don't know if he actually ever came out of the house. If he did it was rare.

He was more than just a 'loner' or 'a little off'.

Are there more like him in our country? Most likely, but I pray that very few are actually capable of what he has done.

However, massive body counts are being perpetrated by people with semi-automatic weapons with high-capacity magazines.

Why are those necessary in our society?

If someone could give me a rational answer without invoking 'Well, it's simply our right to have them', I'd be interested in hearing it.

I have never ONCE in any of my posts said 'Revoke or rewrite the 2^nd Amendment'. I have also never said 'ban all guns'.

That's what's so funny to me. Clearly, I'm the rational one trying to seek answers to a clear epidemic, while the hard-liners basically say, 'fuck you, leave me and my guns alone'.

Interesting.

Wonder who's truly living in their bubble?

Interestingly we had a ban that was allowed to expire. I don't see what's so liberal about the notion of reinstating something that already existed.

(12-18-2012, 11:45 AM)username Wrote: Interestingly we had a ban that was allowed to expire. I don't see what's so liberal about the notion of reinstating something that already existed.

I've thrown around a negative connotation of Liberal in here myself from time to time.

Now that I'm on the apparent Liberal side of an issue, it's actually funny to listen to the views of those who hurl it.

They have nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing.

I heard about this yesterday and found it promising...

West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin, one of 31 senators with an "A" rating from the NRA, said Monday that the shooting "really has changed us. It's changed me."

Manchin questions why anyone would need the kind of Bushmaster AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle used in the Newtown killings.

"I don't know of anybody that goes hunting with an assault rifle. I don't know anybody that needs those types of multiple clips as far as ammunition in a gun," he said on MSNBC. "The most that I've ever used in my hunting rifle is three shells. Usually you get one shot and very seldom ever two. ... This doesn't make a lot of sense, and this has to be brought to this level now, and it's a shame."

Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, told WTVR-TV in Richmond on Monday: "I had an NRA rating of an 'A.' But, you know, enough is enough. ... I'm the father of three daughters, and this weekend they all said, 'Dad ... how can this go on?' And I, like I think most of us, realize that there are ways to get to rational gun control."

Story:


http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/...n-gun-laws

(12-18-2012, 12:31 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I've thrown around a negative connotation of Liberal in here myself from time to time.

Now that I'm on the apparent Liberal side of an issue, it's actually funny to listen to the views of those who hurl it.

They have nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing.

IDK, MS. I think that there have been some pretty intelligent posts (and otherwise) by both those for and against stricter gun control.

(12-18-2012, 12:41 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 12:31 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I've thrown around a negative connotation of Liberal in here myself from time to time.

Now that I'm on the apparent Liberal side of an issue, it's actually funny to listen to the views of those who hurl it.

They have nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing.

IDK, MS. I think that there have been some pretty intelligent posts (and otherwise) by both those for and against stricter gun control.

It's the same old rhetoric.

'Don't blame the tool', 'if they didn't have a semi-automatic weapon, they'd use a knife or a bomb', etc. (I'm on record as saying I'll gladly deal with a looney wielding a knife or homemade bomb).

I want 6-year olds to go to school and not wonder if they'll come home that day.

That's what this all about.

There's FINALLY a level of outrage in this country that's so great, that we're finally debating 'reasonable' gun control.

As many have read, we're the only industrialized nation that has such an epidemic of mass shootings.

And, you know what, let's take a look at this argument:

'Even if guns were outlawed, the criminals will still find a way to get them.'

The perpetrators of mass killings in the past decade have been mainly young men, who actually obtained their weapons legally. They usually have no priors on their record, and are mentally deranged.

Let's say that semi-automatic weapons had been banned. How easy would Lanza have been able to get one on the black market? He's no seasoned criminal. He has no connections. He sits in his basement all day and shoots people in video games.

And, if ammo were harder to obtain, and was perhaps even more expensive, again, it might make it harder for this type of incident to occur.

And that's what this is really all about.

I have no problem with Six or Maggot or Jim or HarleyGuy having guns in their home for self-defense or hunting.

I have a problem with people who look at the Massacre at the elementary school and say, 'Fuck you. We're not changing anything.'

(12-18-2012, 12:31 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: They have nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing.

You're not qualified to judge that.

I support a ban on the assault weapons that fire hundreds of rounds a minute & the clips/ammo that accompany those weapons. The reality is that the ban will not affect the ones that are already out there. Outlaws have access to it all, this will only affect law abiding citizens.

MS, arguing with you is only fun when it's about bullshit that has little to no significance. You have presented your opinion on this topic as if yours is the only one that is relevant, I've often been left feeling as if your comfort level is the only one that matters. When others have disagreed with you they are labeled selfish, you're disgusted with those that aren't as willing as you are to give up their rights & it appears to anger you that some don't fall in line with your thinking, you even went so far as to totally diminish posts and refer to them as unintelligent. Who are you to do that?

(12-18-2012, 01:05 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: He sits in his basement all day and shoots people in video games.

How do you know this?

Never mind. I just saw where you are getting your "facts" from the Daily Mail.

(12-18-2012, 01:17 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(12-18-2012, 12:31 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: They have nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing.

You're not qualified to judge that.

I support a ban on the assault weapons that fire hundreds of rounds a minute & the clips/ammo that accompany those weapons. The reality is that the ban will not affect the ones that are already out there. Outlaws have access to it all, this will only affect law abiding citizens.

MS, arguing with you is only fun when it's about bullshit that has little to no significance. You have presented your opinion on this topic as if yours is the only one that is relevant, I've often been left feeling as if your comfort level is the only one that matters. When others have disagreed with you they are labeled selfish, you're disgusted with those that aren't as willing as you are to give up their rights & it appears to anger you that some don't fall in line with your thinking, you even went so far as to totally diminish posts and refer to them as unintelligent. Who are you to do that?

If you go back and re-read I actually have not hurled any insults until someone has first insulted me.

This is an extremely divisive issue. I get it.

And your point about existing weapons is noted. I understand that.

Yes, it angers me that people want to stick their head in the sand and say, 'Gun control will never work.' '2^nd Amendment, leave me alone.', etc.

I've made my points time and again, and am NOT arguing for a complete ban of firearms.

People will continue to be passionate about this and NOW is the time to get something done, while images of dead babies are fresh in our minds.