R.I.P. those affected by the school shooting in CT

[Teal]

Inuyasha couldn't insult me if he wanted to, dude...lol

[Jimmydeicide]

Piers Muppet is an Arsenal fan. Nuff said.

[Teal]

Piers Muppet is an Arsenal fan. Nuff said.

Emphasis on 'Arse'...

[Feanor]

Feanor, you put up all sorts of slanted crap, so you calling something 'propaganda for a conservative' yada yada yada is pretty ridiculous. Yeah, I do, too, but I'm not trying to pretend to be 'objective'. Give it a rest.

Give up whatever rights you want to. Fine by me. But I won't be, no matter if they pass some unconstitutional law. "Not infringed" means "not infringed". Simple as that.

BTW, are you for the legalization of drugs?

Not the kind you are smoking. But you must be for the legalization of drugs and everything else because you constantly state that laws don't affect criminals. The logical conclusion of this argument is that there is no point in having any laws at all.

I'm sorry that you find a list of developed countries (and India) ranked by murder rate to be slanted. Would you like me to multiply all the non-American countries figures by 10 to make them look worse? Because that's what the author of that study did with Luxembourg's murder rate, and then used that bogus statistic to try and show that Luexmbourg's total ban on handguns actually left them with a murder rate nine times higher than Germany.

[Feanor]

We are truly fortunate that Gabrielle Giffords survived her assassination attempt and is well enough to take on the gun lobby and try and do something to reduce the horrific level of gun violence in this country.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... l/1816383/

Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interests of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission. Rather than working to find the balance between our rights and the regulation of a dangerous product, these groups have cast simple protections for our communities as existential threats to individual liberties. Rather than conducting a dialogue, they threaten those who divert from their orthodoxy with political extinction.

As a result, we are more vulnerable to gun violence. Weapons designed for the battlefield have a home in our streets. Criminals and the mentally ill can easily purchase guns by avoiding background checks. Firearm accessories designed for killing at a high rate are legal and widely available. And gun owners are less responsible for the misuse of their weapons than they are for their automobiles.

Forget the boogeyman of big, bad government coming to dispossess you of your firearms. As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don't want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home. What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.

We saw from the NRA leadership's defiant and unsympathetic response to the Newtown, Conn., massacre that winning even the most common-sense reforms will require a fight. But whether it has been in campaigns or in Congress, in combat or in space, fighting for what we believe in has always been what we do.

[Teal]

Feanor, you put up all sorts of slanted crap, so you calling something 'propaganda for a conservative' yada yada yada is pretty ridiculous. Yeah, I do, too, but I'm not trying to pretend to be 'objective'. Give it a rest.

Give up whatever rights you want to. Fine by me. But I won't be, no matter if they pass some unconstitutional law. "Not infringed" means "not infringed". Simple as that.

BTW, are you for the legalization of drugs?

Not the kind you are smoking. But you must be for the legalization of drugs and everything else because you constantly state that laws don't affect criminals. The logical conclusion of this argument is that there is no point in having any laws at all.

I'm sorry that you find a list of developed countries (and India) ranked by murder rate to be slanted. Would you like me to multiply all the non-American countries figures by 10 to make them look worse? Because that's what the author of that study did with Luxembourg's murder rate, and then used that bogus statistic to try and show that Luexmbourg's total ban on handguns actually left them with a murder rate nine times higher than Germany.

Name me one law that the lawless have ever been 'affected' by in such a way as to drive down crime.

[Teal]

We are truly fortunate that Gabrielle Giffords survived her assassination attempt and is well enough to take on the gun lobby and try and do something to reduce the horrific level of gun violence in this country.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... l/1816383/

Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interests of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission. Rather than working to find the balance between our rights and the regulation of a dangerous product, these groups have cast simple protections for our communities as existential threats to individual liberties. Rather than conducting a dialogue, they threaten those who divert from their orthodoxy with political extinction.

As a result, we are more vulnerable to gun violence. Weapons designed for the battlefield have a home in our streets. Criminals and the mentally ill can easily purchase guns by avoiding background checks. Firearm accessories designed for killing at a high rate are legal and widely available. And gun owners are less responsible for the misuse of their weapons than they are for their automobiles.

Forget the boogeyman of big, bad government coming to dispossess you of your firearms. As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don't want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home. What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.

We saw from the NRA leadership's defiant and unsympathetic response to the Newtown, Conn., massacre that winning even the most common-sense reforms will require a fight. But whether it has been in campaigns or in Congress, in combat or in space, fighting for what we believe in has always been what we do.

Yeah, just like Brady. His survival surely made the world a safer place.

[Feanor]

You seem bitter that she survived and is now healthy enough to take on the gun nuts who make this country the most dangerous place in the developed world.

[Teal]

I'm telling you right now, if this thread gets locked, it will be because of bullshit like you just posted. Bitter that she survived? What kind of idiocy is that?

EDIT: I edited my previous content, and have decided just to put Feanor on the ignore list. I'd rather have grown up discussions, and not let stupidity like his last hold sway over otherwise good, honest discussions. So, carry on. He won't be bothering me anymore with his schtick.

[Feanor]

Go ahead and retreat even further away from reality. If you choose to mock people like Brady who were the victims of gun violence and spent their lives trying to prevent it from happening to other people instead of actually responding to the substantive points made by the Giffords in their editorial, then don't cry like a b*tch and call me "a f***in moron" when I point out how bitter you obviously are.

Name me one law that the lawless have ever been 'affected' by in such a way as to drive down crime.

Tough drink driving laws.

I find it truly bizarre that you are so dead against gun laws that would do a better job of stopping the mentally ill and people with criminal records obtaining firearms. Gun laws can work by stopping the guns getting into the hands of criminals and potential criminals to start with.

[Brando70]

I want to keep this respectful, so I am just posing a question. In reading about Aurora movie theater gunman James Holmes, it's being reported that he was able to legally purchase all the items he used for his rampage: the guns, ammo, tear gas, and body armor.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... chemicals/

This was all legal, and he had no previous criminal record. However, as with Virginia Tech, you have a mentally unstable person purchasing firearms and large quantities of ammo. Is there a way to alert authorities for things like this? We've given up all kinds of privacy considerations to thwart foreign terrorism on our soil, but what about domestic terrorism -- that's essentially what this is. Are there any checks when someone makes a purchase like this?

[Jared]

Yeah, just like Brady. His survival surely made the world a safer place.

Let's give Teal the benefit of the doubt that he's not wishing that Brady/Giffords were dead, but rather that he strongly disagrees with their political viewpoints after they were shot.

That said, the thread will remain open for now - people should feel free to express their opinions on this (on either side of the debate), while trying to keep it civil-ish.

[dbdynsty25]

I want to keep this respectful, so I am just posing a question. In reading about Aurora movie theater gunman James Holmes, it's being reported that he was able to legally purchase all the items he used for his rampage: the guns, ammo, tear gas, and body armor.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... chemicals/

This was all legal, and he had no previous criminal record. However, as with Virginia Tech, you have a mentally unstable person purchasing firearms and large quantities of ammo. Is there a way to alert authorities for things like this? We've given up all kinds of privacy considerations to thwart foreign terrorism on our soil, but what about domestic terrorism -- that's essentially what this is. Are there any checks when someone makes a purchase like this?

Holmes had a history of working with the psychologist (or was is psychiatrist) at school...before he dropped out anyway, so I think you're right in that there should be some sort of a trigger when someone goes to buy weapons that says they've had mental issues in the past. However, then we get into the whole hippa and patient confidentiality issues, but like you said, we already are taking away the privacy of most americans, what's a little more?

[Teal]

What I disagree with is the level of effect their lobbying has had or will have on the level of violence and evil that exists. Evil, murder, and death didn't come into being with the advent of he gun, because the gun is an inanimate object until the trigger is pulled. James Brady did not deserve what happened to him any more than Giffords deserved what happened to her. (And benefit of the doubt? How about "we know enough about Teal to know that is not what he meant in the slightest"?). But it happened, it happens everyday on the streets with no reporting or reaction from anyone, and there are also countless other situations that have been curbed because a law abiding citizen was armed and stopped it before it could get to an Aurora level. But that isn't widely reported, because it doesn't fit the template. Politicians don't want to restrict guns because of incidents of murder; if they did, they'd go after the guns that are used most in murders...and those aren't rifles of any kind.

Truth is, the media have shined spotlights on Giffords and Brady (seemingly ignoring the others who died and/or survived those particular shootings), and they have taken that spotlight and have wielded it in order to make their personal stances into political platforms. Platforms that, in the instance of James Brady, have had zero effect on the overall violence and murder rates in this country. Why? Because it doesn't have one thing to do with guns. Background checks are about the only reasonable thing that have come from the Brady lobbying. BUT those checks are being stunted by HIPAA laws. There is an easy solution.

Gun ownership is a private thing, and, in most cases, the gun selling business is also a private enterprise. Most private businesses have the ability to, as the signs in their businesses say, 'reserve the right to refuse service'. I would require a background check that included any psych profiles. You don't HAVE to give the gun store one...but they don't have to sell you a gun, either. If there's no psych history? Then fine. Does that stop evil? No. But it might stop Aurora from happening. Won't stop Newtown. Won't stop VA Tech. Won't stop the almost everyday drive-by incidentals. But it would stop that one tiny segment of murderers that go for psychiatric help before they shoot up a theater. Still, I have no problem with making those checks mandatory, and having the privacy conversations about HIPAA. I don't think that the information should ever be made public, but in the case of making a significant purchase of something like a gun, sure. No problem with that. If you're schitzoid, you shouldn't be allowed to buy a gun. That seems pretty cut and dried to me.

I go back, though, to the basic premise. Making ever more draconian gun laws will never curb gun violence, because gun violence is perpetrated by those who ignore current gun laws, by and large. It won't work. Nothing Gabby Giffords is trying to do will stop it. James Brady's bunch hasn't had any discernable effect, and no politician's bills will ever have such effect, if the bill is 'banning' this or that. There has never, ever, EVER been a 'ban' bill that has ever done a doggone thing.

[Brando70]

I was thinking of the way ammonium nitrate is regulated -- it took a long time after Oklahoma City, but now you have to be registered to buy it in large quantities. And hell, you can't even buy the good cold medicine without a background check. So it seems very strange to me that someone could purchase weapons, thousands of rounds, and body armor without some flag going up.

Maybe that kind of purchase is fairly common and doesn't really stand out.

[Macca00]

(And benefit of the doubt? How about "we know enough about Teal to know that is not what he meant in the slightest?)

Don't worry, bud - there's no one here who knows you that thought even for a second you meant anything bad.

[Teal]

I was thinking of the way ammonium nitrate is regulated -- it took a long time after Oklahoma City, but now you have to be registered to buy it in large quantities. And hell, you can't even buy the good cold medicine without a background check. So it seems very strange to me that someone could purchase weapons, thousands of rounds, and body armor without some flag going up.

Maybe that kind of purchase is fairly common and doesn't really stand out.

He didn't go and purchase all that stuff all at once, else it would have red flagged. As far as ammonium nitrate, you can still buy quite enough to do the job, if that's your aim. The regulation part really only made it harder for big time farmers to get the amount of fertilizer they need. And so we sort of come full circle with 'banning' and 'regulation'.

The cold and flu medicine thing is a pain in the ass, by the way...

[Teal]

(And benefit of the doubt? How about "we know enough about Teal to know that is not what he meant in the slightest?)

Don't worry, bud - there's no one here who knows you that thought even for a second you meant anything bad.

Thanks.

[Jared]

(And benefit of the doubt? How about "we know enough about Teal to know that is not what he meant in the slightest"?)

Yes, benefit of the doubt. Like giving me the benefit of the doubt that I meant "Teal is a good person, don't assume he's bad, that's not what he meant" and not "Well, I actually think Teal might be a fan of Brady/Giffords getting shot, but let's just assume he's not to be civil."

I didn't think you meant anything bad. The doubt in the phrase earlier refers to the ambiguity of your statement, not in your intentions. So chill.

[dbdynsty25]

If there is any cut and dry argument "for" gun control, it can be summed up in this 2 minute video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pg-vy8vOiM

What the F do Heidi & Spencer need this kinda fire power for?

[Teal]

If there is any cut and dry argument "for" gun control, it can be summed up in this 2 minute video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pg-vy8vOiM

What the F do Heidi & Spencer need this kinda fire power for?

Who decides who 'needs' what? That's the problem with it all. If you let someone else decide what you can and can't have, where you can and can't go, what you can and can't eat, what you do or don't 'need'...then you are abdicating your freedom for the opinions of strangers.

LOVE that collection, by the way...

[dbdynsty25]

If there is any cut and dry argument "for" gun control, it can be summed up in this 2 minute video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pg-vy8vOiM

What the F do Heidi & Spencer need this kinda fire power for?

Who decides who 'needs' what? That's the problem with it all. If you let someone else decide what you can and can't have, where you can and can't go, what you can and can't eat, what you do or don't 'need'...then you are abdicating your freedom for the opinions of strangers.

LOVE that collection, by the way...

It's just funny that the dumb barbie wannabe says she feels safer now from crazed fans. Well that's good...at least you have ten assault rifles and shotguns to handle your "fans".

[Feanor]

You'd get pretty good odds on her being the next Reeva Steenkamp.

[Teal]

If there is any cut and dry argument "for" gun control, it can be summed up in this 2 minute video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pg-vy8vOiM

What the F do Heidi & Spencer need this kinda fire power for?

Who decides who 'needs' what? That's the problem with it all. If you let someone else decide what you can and can't have, where you can and can't go, what you can and can't eat, what you do or don't 'need'...then you are abdicating your freedom for the opinions of strangers.

LOVE that collection, by the way...

It's just funny that the dumb barbie wannabe says she feels safer now from crazed fans. Well that's good...at least you have ten assault rifles and shotguns to handle your "fans".

Yeah, she's a little over opinionated of herself, I think. lol. But misplaced narcissism is no reason for gun control...