The 'Mass-Shooting In The US' thread

Started by Father Demon, February 14, 2008, 05:58:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

4and26

Guns are not banned in Canada but they sure make it hard to obtain one and keep lliceinced.  Not to say there are not illegal guns out there etc...

No guns means that while our gun fatalities are down  - stabbings are way up!

Father Demon

QuoteOther students leapt on to the youth to try to prevent him re-loading the crossbow. They said he had thrown a molotov cocktail against a wall of the science block where the girls were sitting and was attempting to light the fuel as they struggled with him.

"It was horrifying, it was like something you only hear about in America," 15-year-old Tania Miller said.
The drawback to marital longevity is your wife always knows when you're really interested in her and when you're just trying to bury it.

Geowhizzer

Just my view:

Stricter gun control / banning guns would lead to less deaths via the 'crime of passion," or murder as a result of an escalating argument, simply because it wouldn't be as easy to do.  It wouldn't eliminate it, but it would reduce it.

First degree murder probably wouldn't be reduced much, because if it is planned, the contingency would be in place.  The breakdowns of capital murder may be different, but I don't think the total number would be reduced by a whole lot.  Someone really wants to kill, they'll find a way.

ATV

#63
QuoteIf guns were illegal, it wouldn't mean that guns didn't exist.  There will always be ways to get guns, if you want guns.

If this were true then why do we need a second amendment to allow guns?

Because when the amendment was passed guns were five feet long and took 40+ seconds to reload. I can certainly grasp why it was passed. I have no problem with people carrying rifles.  Hell, carry them on the subway even. Like  to hunt? No problem, buy a rifle. Without a permit even. Take 50.

But the forefathers had no conception of the power of modern handguns. If you disagree then again, tell me where it should stop? If citizens should be allowed to own or carry 5-inch long self repeating death-sticks around, then should they be allowed machine guns? No? Yes? If so then should they be allowed to own or carry TOW missles? No? Why the hell not? Yes? If so then should citizens be allowed to own Titan missles? Why not - After all it's people that kill people, not missles for God's sake. Poor weetle missles. Remember these are arms too, and it's supposedly the right of the people "to keep and bear arms"

Just answer the fvcking question - Where do you draw the line?

rjs246

All I want is an automatic shotgun with banana clip, grenade launcher, hd-dvd player with lcd screen and flamethrower and until I get that I'm not going to be satisfied.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

General_Failure

Quote from: ATV on July 24, 2008, 06:13:42 PM
QuoteIf guns were illegal, it wouldn't mean that guns didn't exist.  There will always be ways to get guns, if you want guns.

If this were true then why do we need a second amendment to allow guns?

Because when the amendment was passed guns were five feet long and took 40+ seconds to reload. I can certainly grasp why it was passed. I have no problem with people carrying rifles.  Hell, carry them on the subway even. Like  to hunt? No problem, buy a rifle. Without a permit even. Take 50.

But the forefathers had no conception of the power of modern handguns. If you disagree then again, tell me where it should stop? If citizens should be allowed to own or carry 5-inch long self repeating death-sticks around, then should they be allowed machine guns? No? Yes? If so then should they be allowed to own or carry TOW missles? No? Why the hell not? Yes? If so then should citizens be allowed to own Titan missles? Why not - After all it's people that kill people, not missles for God's sake. Poor weetle missles. Remember these are arms too, and it's supposedly the right of the people "to keep and bear arms"

Just answer the fvcking question - Where do you draw the line?

People who call guns death sticks aren't allowed to own them. I think we're making progress now.

The man. The myth. The legend.

Phanatic

Your never going to get rid of guns in this country. Be realistic at least. Sheesh...
This post is brought to you by Alcohol!

PhillyPhreak54

Some dude picked off three people at a CC in Phoenix today...

ATV

QuoteSome dude picked off three people at a CC in Phoenix today...

That's more like it. So what did the guy use, a knife? Machette? Poison?

General_Failure

Scathing wit, I heard. Pointed commentary as well.

The man. The myth. The legend.


Diomedes

what made him think that suit worked, in any context, ever?
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

Father Demon

The drawback to marital longevity is your wife always knows when you're really interested in her and when you're just trying to bury it.

ice grillin you

Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on July 24, 2008, 11:26:35 PM
Some dude picked off three people at a CC in Phoenix today...


thanks for posting that esquire piece....just read it in the pooper....per usual an amazing expose by them
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Cerevant

Quote from: ATV on July 24, 2008, 06:13:42 PM
If this were true then why do we need a second amendment to allow guns?

When considered in the historical context, the point of the second amendment is to allow the existence of a militia independent of the federal government.  Cause, you know, when the king controls the military he accumulates too much power - he can unilaterally declare war and move forward unopposed.  But nothing like that would happen today.
An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or he is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by him rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself.