|
Replies: 72
| visibility 2,646
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 11:35 AM
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting
Gunman was caught and apprehended my the assistant principal with a personal .45. Why was this not a big story? Only those stories that move the liberal and big government agenda make the media I guess.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1162]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 629
Joined: 7/8/12
|
Go read Morgan Freeman's rant
Dec 18, 2012, 11:41 AM
|
|
About what media potrays, saying we give these killers unnecessary attention. It gives them a reason to do this, instead of being a nobody that off'd himself in the basement.
We will never know or remember the victims name, that doesn't sell. This is deeper and dirtier then politics, this is mainstream media
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Go read Morgan Freeman's rant
Dec 18, 2012, 11:44 AM
|
|
That rant was fake. He never made it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [773]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 813
Joined: 8/10/04
|
I don't think he made that rant either...
Dec 18, 2012, 11:47 AM
|
|
how would he have time now that he is the president of South Africa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4444]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3616
Joined: 5/16/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81897]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47116
Joined: 3/18/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [541]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 419
Joined: 10/10/10
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 11:48 AM
|
|
Hahaha who actually believes he said that? Gotta love Tiger net
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [61822]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39640
Joined: 12/16/01
|
What?!?!? I believe everything I read on the internet.***
Dec 18, 2012, 12:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1265]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1576
Joined: 5/20/08
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 11:50 AM
|
|
I am a strong believer that if more people carried guns their would be less crime. I know there are school shootings and those are terrible terrible acts, but those terrible acts are normally committed by 1 person. 1 person does not represent the majority. Myself and a BUNCH of other friends and family owns guns as I'm sure many of you guys do as well. Just because we own guns doesn't make us a risk to commit crimes, it makes us a risk for the people who try to commit a crime against us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:51 PM
|
|
If that's true then given that we have the we have the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, why do we have the highest rates of gun deaths per capita of any developed country? Is the problem that we just don't have enough guns for this dynamic to finally turn around?
I know it's comforting to think that having your gun keeps you safe, but just because it feels that way doesn't make it so. And sure, you can think up all sorts of scenarios where having a gun could be a benefit, but there are plenty more times where that isn't true, and you don't get to choose between which moments you will have access to a gun and in which moments you won't.
The thing is that we, as humans, have problems weighing the complex risks presented by certain choices. For example: Should I have a gun in my home?
Pros:
1. Could successfully defend against intruder. This is the scenario you seem to imagine when you say that you are a "risk for people who try to commit a crime," against you. I'm sure such situations occur out there, will not dispute that.
Cons:
1. Family member could intentionally kill other family member/friend with gun. This could range anywhere from cold-blooded murder, to something more impulsive (heat of the moment), to suicide (the number one type of gun related death in America). In my household, where there aren't any guns, if someone gets into an argument at the house, and things get heated, and they want to use a gun, they will have to wait a few days to go find and purchase one, because one isn't just sitting around the house. Sure, this doesn't prevent all violence, a determined person could always buy the gun the next day or something, or use another, less lethal weapon, such as a knife, but it still reduces the risk of death occurring.
2. Family member could unintentionally kill someone with gun. This would be the cleaning the gun accident, the accidental discharge, or the accidentally shot a hunting partner accident.
3. Presence of gun in intruder situation could escalate non-violent situation (mere theft, intrusion, etc.) to violent situation resulting in the death of the family member. I know it doesn't feel good, but a situation where the criminal has a gun and you don't is generally safer for you than one where you both have a gun. In the vast majority of crimes, the criminal only wants your property, not your life. For me personally, I'd much rather a criminal come and take all my stuff (it's just stuff, and insurance is readily available to deal with that risk), than to take a 50/50 shot at maybe gunning the criminal down and maybe getting shot by the criminal. As a side note, the criminal will likely have the drop on you so your odds are probably not 50/50 anyway.
And I won't dispute that you can do things to minimize the chance that the cons will occur(keeping gun locked in safe, unloaded, trigger lock, etc.), but some of those things will decrease your chance of using the gun to protect yourself, so it goes both ways there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:59 PM
|
|
Very well said. I understand the reason people want guns, even if I choose not to have them myself...I basically agree with everything you said here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:07 PM
|
|
Other countries fight drug wars too, but they don't have our high homicide rate. Also, suicide is the number one type of gun death in this country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:14 PM
|
|
Other countries don't spend near as much nor outlaw near as much when it comes to fighting drugs as we do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2965]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 3036
Joined: 10/13/08
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting? ] |
|
Can you back that up with reports stats something? It sounds good but I do not think it is true. There are many people killed that have nothing to do with drugs! Now include Alchol use with that and I bet the #s go up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 5:44 PM
|
|
Just go find a graph of the homocide rate in the US over the last 150 years. They are out there. You'll see spike during prohibition and then another spike in the late 60's when the drug war started and never comes back down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4998
Joined: 10/31/04
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:36 PM
[ in reply to Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting? ] |
|
"For me personally, I'd much rather a criminal come and take all my stuff (it's just stuff, and insurance is readily available to deal with that risk), than to take a 50/50 shot at maybe gunning the criminal down and maybe getting shot by the criminal. As a side note, the criminal will likely have the drop on you so your odds are probably not 50/50 anyway."
So you would rather put your life in the hands of an armed criminal and HOPE that all he wants is your stuff?
That sounds like a victim's mentality. I much prefer my chances of survival with a firearm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 2:17 PM
|
|
You do know the right to own guns is a nice deterrent for home invasions right?
You remove the 2cd amendment you would see home invasion increase a good amount thus increasing your odds of someone "stealing your stuff".
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1162]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 629
Joined: 7/8/12
|
Honestly, I just thought it was him cause
Dec 18, 2012, 11:56 AM
|
|
It was articulate and intelligent, I don't know, like something he would say.
Regardless if he wrote it or not, it makes bold points that are 100% correct. We dont remember the victims of Columbine, we remember the monsters who did it.
Who cares who wrote it to be frank, it's the truth.
Integrity and truth, two things our media lacks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:03 PM
|
|
I'm up in the air on gun control, so I won't jump into that area...but one thing I always notice about very conservative people...is that they always talk about the media as if it's all liberal. Fox News is potentially the largest of the cable news networks and is about as conservative as it gets. What's funny is that even they constantly talk about the "liberal media".
Of course there are several liberal-leaning outlets, most notably MSNBC and the Huffington Post...but super-conservative people get so worked up about the liberal media for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:08 PM
|
|
Fox News is Neoconservative, not conservative. Media as a whole is very liberal and progressive leaning, even Fox News. The establishment on both asiles all have practically the same agenda. They may talk the talk but when it comes time to vote they both spend to the moon and back and end up taking our liberties. Just look at John Roberts (appointed by Bush) and Boehner for perfect examples of republicans being nothing more than liberals.
This is why I tend to lean libertarian the last 10 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:15 PM
|
|
The fact that you're suggesting that Fox News and Boehner are liberal is sort of troubling...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:23 PM
|
|
They are. They are Neoconservatives. Go look up where NeoConservatives came from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13245
Joined: 11/10/00
|
Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:06 PM
|
|
Just curious.
I don't know anything about guns, so I ask the question sincerely. It doesn't make sense to me why anyone would need 30 shots in a clip, (or whatever the # is) unless you are hunting people. Help me understand why large rounds of ammo are necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:12 PM
|
|
Does everyone with large rounds of ammo kill people?
Who are you or anyone else to define how one is entitled to defend one self? Who needs 12 donuts to themselves? Should we ban the sell of dozen baked goods?
If you would think on the side of liberty and logic rather than emotion and what sounds good on the surface you would see where I come from. I belive the majority are inherently good and kind people. We have some maniacs sure but that's all the reason to allow the good and kind people to use whatever methods they choose to stop the maniacs.
A bat chit crazy person is bat chit crazy whether they have a gun or a toothpick. A good person is good whether they have a toothpick or an assault rifle..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3389]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3043
Joined: 10/22/07
|
How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:21 PM
|
|
I mean, on a good day---how many people do you think you could kill with one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:24 PM
|
|
Are you suggesting that guns can be successfully banned?
Besides, even if it were possible (and it isn't) a crazy person will use other means.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:55 PM
|
|
This line of argument (you might not be successful) is just a diversionary tactic. That you might not ban all guns is not a reason to avoid trying to enact policies that might reduce overall harm caused by guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:01 PM
|
|
No it isn't. It is a common sense tactic by looking at the epic failure that is the drug war. Gun control is not going to stop criminals form owning guns anymore than the drug war stops drug dealers from selling drugs. It simply creates unintended consequences. It is a failed policy before enacted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:12 PM
|
|
I agree there shouldn't be a drug war, but desire to own guns is not the same thing as desire to do drugs (the driving force behind drug production and importation).
People don't have a natural, psychological urge to own guns in the same way that they do to do drugs. Drugs are addictive. People will resort to all kinds of crime to obtain the thing they are addicted to. It's silly to fight drugs as if it was regular crime which could be thwarted by deterrents. The same is not true for guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: How good are you with a toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:20 PM
|
|
It's not about the desire to own guns. It's about the desire to do harm. It's not the one's who desire to protect themselves that we have to worry about in a society where guns are banned. It's the relentless crazed lunatic mind that we have to worry about and I'd argue that that desire is much stronger than that of any addiction simply based on the irrationallity of that person's thinking. They all seemed d@mn determined to kill. And they will find a way and they will find the guns. When the opportunity to make money is there, people will find ways to sell them and at that point they will be in the hands of criminals, not you and me and other law abiding citizens.
It is a failed philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13245
Joined: 11/10/00
|
why can't you own a granade launcher?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:29 PM
[ in reply to Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns? ] |
|
I mean who am I to put limitations on your liberty?
We put limitations on all sorts of things as a society. I am not advocating for any change at this time. I am just asking a question as someone who doesn't know squat about firearms. I certainly won't over-react to a liberal media. I do think we need to investigate if placing limitations on certain types of weaponry is warrented
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: why can't you own a granade launcher?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:35 PM
|
|
That discussion would certainly need to take place. I don't have an answer to it. However, any limitation should be done constitutionally as an amendment to amend the 2nd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:51 PM
[ in reply to Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns? ] |
|
Well it's interesting you say "who are you or anyone else to define how one is entitled to defend one self"...but at the same time, who are we we to so many people the ability to hurt so many others? There are two sides to every argument.
In my opinion there is a legitimate argument to carry a gun for protection if you live in a horrible/dangerous neighborhood. In areas where there is a high level of gang activity, a large drug trade--basically the high chance of violent crime taking place nearby on a daily basis--then yes I believe it makes sense to have/carry a gun for defense of person and property.
However the in the case of a phychotic episode such as in CT or Colorado, there was no reason for people to expect danger. There's no reason that on a day-to-day basis in Aurora, CO or Newtown, CT you should have to carry a weapon. There's absolutely no forewarning to something like this. Therefore, in my opinion, the best way to prevent things such as school/mall/theater shootings is to limit access to weapons.
There are always going to be ways to get guns, but by limiting access, we can limit the rate of things like this. Maybe a drug dealer with connections will be able to get their hands on a weapon, but the recluse who's holed up in his apartment, looking to mow down a movie theater/school won't have such easy access.
It's easy for people to talk about how quickly they'd shoot these guys down if they were there...but people always seem to forget that:
1. They've never been in the situation. There's as good of a chance that you'd run away as fast as you could than there is of you pulling out your gun.
2. These situations are EXTREMELY panicked, with innocent people running around everywhere. If you're in a crowded movie theater filled with smoke (remember the guy in Colorado popped in a few smoke grenades before doing this) with a bunch of people who have guns, there's a good chance you're going to shoot the first person you see who has a gun as opposed to stalking around the theater to find out for sure where the shots are coming from--and the guy in the row behind you is going to do the same thing.
3. In both this case and in Colorado, the guys were armed to the teeth with body armor, pistols, assault rifles, and, in the case of the Colorado shooter, smoke grenades and a shotgun. The guy in CO also had drum mags loaded into his AR15. You know what's going to happen when you take him on with your 9-16 shot pistol? You're going to die.
Ultimately, I can hear and understand parts of both sides of the argument...
However one thing that I believe should be universally agreed upon is that there need to be stricter limits on gun access--especially for assault weapons and high capacity magazines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:53 PM
|
|
"who are we we to so many people the ability to hurt so many others? There are two sides to every argument."
sorry, that should read "who are we to give so many people the ability to hurt so many others"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns? ] |
|
The ability to hurt people is there with guns or not. So again who are you to tell someone that can't use a gun to protect themselves against someone with a knife?
And the risk of violence is there in any neighboorhood. Newtown was not a drug town. Newtown was a quiet town.
CT has some the strictest gun laws. They have limited access to weapons. IT DIDN'T WORK!!
Just makes people sitting ducks for crazy fools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:30 PM
|
|
Of course people can use anything to hurt others, but please stop acting like you're going to do as much damage with another weapon when you're clearly not.
People posted about the guy in China who slashed 20 kids as a point that it's not guns doing this, it's people...which is true, but zero kids died in China and only 4 were hospitalized with serious injuries.
In terms of CT's gun laws, I would push it considerably further than what's in place now. Either way, maybe he still would have gotten his hands on a weapon. However, I think you could argue the Colorado shooter would not have. Nor would he have been able to purchase 6,000 rounds of ammunition on the internet.
You missed my point on the "risk of violence" thing. It's a quiet little town in Fairfield County...there's no reason these people should have to carry weapons everyday. I come from a similar town outside of Boston, and 99% of people there would never consider carrying a gun.
The majority of the divide on this is purely cultural. For a country boy in South Carolina, having a gun is a way of life. It's just as normal as having your driver's license. If you go outside of a city like New York or Boston, the majority of people wouldn't ever dream of it. One thing I noticed in my time at Clemson is that despite the "Southern Hospitality" and outward friendliness of the population, people are far more scared and suspicious of others...and I think that's ultimately why people are so adamant about keeping their guns close by...
In the end, nothing will change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:36 PM
|
|
Neither of us will win this argument. To me your argument is as illogical as one can be.
But let me ask one question:
Do you think the Pearl HS school shooting would have ended better had Pearl, ms had strict gun laws? How many junior high kids would have been killed?
The logic that gun advocates have that it's better for a maniac to have a gun in a school with no other people having guns than for a maniac to have a gun in a school along with a 65 year old female teacher packing, is beyond disturbing to me. I don't actually believe you guys believe this. I simply thing you ignore logic to avoid admitting to being illogical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3422]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 6697
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 1:58 PM
|
|
Well with the right gun laws, perhaps he never would have obtained the weapon...but regardless of the gun laws, or who's carrying guns, this will happen. Nothing will change that.
You think my argument is as illogical as can be...but I could easily say the same thing about your argument. The problem I have with everyone carrying guns is it's far easier for things to turn from bad to worse.
Quick examples of why I'm in favor of not carrying guns:
A few years ago a couple of my friends got hammered...they argued and eventually got into a horrible fist fight. One had to go to the hospital because he was all cut up and had a huge black eye...but after a few weeks, he was fine (as was the friendship).
A few years ago, South Carolina beat Clemson and a couple of friends got into an argument about it. Instead of getting into a fist fight, one guy grabbed a gun and killed his best friend. Now one guy is dead, the other is in jail for life.
What's my point? People are foolish, unreasonable creatures, especially when put into emotional situations and ESPECIALLY when drinking is involved. If the KC Chiefs player from a couple of weeks ago didn't own a gun, both he and his girlfriend are alive.
There are countless examples of someone picking up a gun and making an irrational, emotional decision. There are far more opportunities and examples of people doing bad things with guns than there are people doing good/heroic things with guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:59 PM
[ in reply to Re: Do you think we should have any limitations on guns? ] |
|
Yeah, we can play that same false logic on the other side too. I'm sure that if we all owned nuclear weapons we wouldn't all kill everyone with them. Mine would sit stowed neatly in my garage. Why should the idiots who would kill millions with them spoil the fun for the rest of us?
But I'll ask you a question: the Second Amendment guarantees a constitutional right to possess a weapon that can kill how many people per minute?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [354]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 612
Joined: 5/16/01
|
Very little
Dec 18, 2012, 12:38 PM
[ in reply to Do you think we should have any limitations on guns? ] |
|
The 2nd ammendment points out the reason to not abridge our citizens rights to bear arms is for the ultimate check and balance of our government. Don't focus only on what someone may personally desire for his/her enjoyment, this ammendment is much deeper. A government that believes no credible threat exists, is a government that will ultimately run amuck. To your question, if then the only gun that a citizen is allowed to own is his grandfathers 16 guage double barrel ahotgun,... well, that's not much of a threat to a government out of control is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: Very little
Dec 18, 2012, 1:05 PM
|
|
Yeah, our founding fathers enacted an amendment whose express purpose was facilitating the armed insurrection of citizens against the government that they had just founded. It's amazing to me that this viewpoint has gained credence as if it was true.
The fact is that the states were concerned about the presence of a federal standing army, and wanted to know that they had the ability to keep their state-based militias in force. Perhaps this was so that the states could revolt against the union (we fought a war about that I think), but it was always about militias. That's why it's there in the first sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Very little
Dec 18, 2012, 1:11 PM
|
|
You obviouslt have read zero of the founding fathers writings during this time. That is exactly and most certainly why the 2nd amendment was added. There is no doubt about it. Educate yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Very little
Dec 18, 2012, 1:25 PM
|
|
So I'm using the writings of those who actually drafted the constitution (Madison, Mason, Hamilton, Jefferson, etc.) while your argument is by a guy named Toobin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
FTFY
Dec 18, 2012, 1:54 PM
[ in reply to Re: Very little ] |
|
Yeah, our founding fathers enacted an amendment whose express purpose was facilitating the armed insurrection of citizens against the government that they had just founded, as the laws of the previous regime had made a certain earlier armed insurrection (that many of them had themselves fought in) infinitely more difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5712]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4268
Joined: 10/22/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14866
Joined: 12/11/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13245
Joined: 11/10/00
|
Nope. Shot a bird once
Dec 18, 2012, 7:13 PM
|
|
no seriously, I shot a bird once with a bebe gun and felt like #### about it.
I like fishing, but I am not a hunter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I remember this making the news.***
Dec 18, 2012, 12:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: I remember this making the news.***
Dec 18, 2012, 12:36 PM
|
|
Yeah, but would an average person know what "Columbine" means? Yes
Would they know what Pearl means? no
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [304]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 149
Joined: 10/4/03
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:14 PM
|
|
What if the government issued every taxpayer a firearm and then provided optional training in their use? Think of the money we could save on law enforcement!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:25 PM
|
|
We can't afford to rebuild our roads much less issue govt fire arms. That's a ridiculous and illogical notion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Follower [265]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 93
Joined: 8/31/11
|
Re: To gun control advocates, ever heard of this shooting?
Dec 18, 2012, 12:49 PM
|
|
Sarcasm is a wonderful tool my friend. Also, regarding this entire issue, this is yet another example of a polarizing topic. Neither side is going to convine the other that they are right, and both sides of the issue have stories and data to support them. When you're caught between a rock and a hard place you must compromise. Obviously if you wish to own a gun it should be available for you to purchase, but that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some regulations that go along with the purchase.
TLDR: Gun Control is not (realistically) about taking guns away from people it's about making sure that responsible people are the ones who are able to purchase firearms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [458]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 402
Joined: 4/23/04
|
When you give up the right to own guns, even a little
Dec 18, 2012, 12:51 PM
|
|
you never get that right back from the government, except by bloodshed. If you find out down the road that the gov't does in fact tyrannize its own people because it can, and because the people have no way to protect themselves, the only way to get those lost rights back is to take them by force. We call that revolution or civil war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [284]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 302
Joined: 12/8/05
|
Just Curious..
Dec 18, 2012, 1:17 PM
|
|
Hey I was just curious on y'alls thoughts with regard to the ownership of pistols. I'd personally be up in arms if they wanted to take my rifles away as I'm an avid hunter, but it seems most of these crimes are done with hand guns and semi autos. Are they necessary to your arsenal? Someone breaks in to my house i'll do just fine with my 12 gauge. Unless I were an avid marksman that used hand guns with scopes, is it really the end all be all to have a little more control on those types of weapons?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Just Curious..
Dec 18, 2012, 1:26 PM
|
|
If someone feels safer in their home with a pistol why shouldn't they have that right? You chose a rifle. What if it were the other way around?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [284]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 302
Joined: 12/8/05
|
Re: Just Curious..
Dec 18, 2012, 1:30 PM
|
|
It is a lot easier to conceal a pistol in a public place than a shotgun or rifle, therefore reducing the element of surprise in potential massacre type situations. I own my guns for hunting, they happen to work for protection as well, most hand guns are not for hunting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Just Curious..
Dec 18, 2012, 1:32 PM
|
|
So because a .0000001% of the population MAY conceal a pistol for harm, let's ban the use of them as protection for the other 99.9999999%?
That's absolutely illogical. If anything we should be able to open carry. If said fool sees 10 people with guns on their hip maybe the little snotty nosed punk will think twice about doing something stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [284]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 302
Joined: 12/8/05
|
Re: Just Curious..
Dec 18, 2012, 1:42 PM
|
|
Lol, no not once did I mention banning the use of them, I was simply suggesting tighter control and maybe starting programs that suggest using other guns for protection of their homes, guns that cant be taken out of the closet and thrown in a backpack and taken into school. These kids that do these things are so messed up in the head it doesn't matter if they know other people have guns, they clearly plan on killing themselves in the end anyway. Would it prevent more people from dying? Sure. But tighter controls would restrict people from owning multiple handguns and being so careless with them. If you make shotguns and rifles easier to own than hand guns, then it may promote people to own those types of guns to protect their homes. Those who choose to open carry are generally responsible gun owners who lock their guns in safe's where children may not have access.... just a thought I suppose?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Do you really think that a bunch of paranoid wanna-be
Dec 18, 2012, 2:10 PM
[ in reply to When you give up the right to own guns, even a little ] |
|
soldiers with gun show weaponry is going to last more than 5 seconds against an average SWAT team? They would be prying your assault rifle out of your cold dead fingers before you knew what hit you (multiple times from different angles).
The only tyranny we face is from paranoid nutjobs within our population who go on killing sprees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11414
Joined: 9/10/99
|
That WAS a big story back in the late 1990's. I
Dec 18, 2012, 1:30 PM
|
|
remember it clearly. Columbine struck a nerve because of the number of deaths and the fact that the TV cameras got there before it ended.
I don't think it was a ploy by any gun control advocates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [-100]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 229
Joined: 1/22/11
|
toothpick?
Dec 18, 2012, 2:04 PM
|
|
Ok
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2213]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3397
Joined: 9/2/07
|
People defending themselves with guns....
Dec 18, 2012, 11:13 PM
|
|
..doesn't fit the liberal "template", that's why they'll never take notice of such cases. If gun deaths in this country went down to zero for ten consecutive years, there would still be people in the country wanting to ban guns; think of them as control freaks grown old....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Bullshiite. I am liberal and I am not for eliminating gun
Dec 19, 2012, 7:46 AM
|
|
ownership. I am for licensing and registration. I am for banning high capacity military type weapons.
No one has the right to unlimited, anonymous ownership of high power high capacity firearms. You want to step up from a revolver or shotgun to an AR15? Fine. Get a license and as part of the license you will be required to have taken a weapon safety class, full background check, and like they do in Israel submit to a psychological evaluation.
People defend their homes and loved ones with legal handguns and shotguns all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2213]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3397
Joined: 9/2/07
|
Double hosrshitt; registration will simply make it...
Dec 19, 2012, 9:03 AM
|
|
...easier for the eventual confiscation of all firearms. It's just the "next step".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Read it. Learn it. Get help.
Dec 19, 2012, 9:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2213]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3397
Joined: 9/2/07
|
You're a control freak, probably uneducated....
Dec 19, 2012, 9:41 AM
|
|
..but your desire is to force your notions of the world upon others.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2213]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3397
Joined: 9/2/07
|
Your remind me of those "seminar" callers to Rush...
Dec 19, 2012, 9:48 AM
|
|
..they would call in and start reading a prepared statement and Rush would stop them and say "...stop reading that..I need to know what *you* think...". And of course they would respond "..uh, er.., duh..blah, er duh..duh duh..."..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [32958]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 53106
Joined: 3/5/02
|
It did make the news.
Dec 19, 2012, 7:17 AM
|
|
When it happened 15 years ago.
I would say it's disingenuous to try and compare the frequency of mentions of a 15-year old even to something that happened days ago, but that would give you too much credit. It's just silly.
Sorry you weren't reading newspapers, watching TV news or just paying attention to other people talking in 1997 and missed it.
Oh yeah, why didn't you bring up these thoughts from someone there at the time who really studied the shooter in that event?
"It seems that when a person is deranged in some way mentally they want attention," Dodson said.
Dodson said more needs to be done to spot warning signs of troubled students and "assault rifles have no place among civilians."
http://www.wlox.com/story/20364500/former-pearl-superintendent-reflects-on-ct-school-shootings
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 72
| visibility 2,646
|
|
|
50
