or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead - Page 10

post #361 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking View Post

Well you didn't put it in perspective like that when you posted it, so why wouldn't automatically figure you were backing up it?

If I post some twisted "Cho is a hero" article and don't say "look guys at how messed up this is" why would I expect you to know that I wasn't agreeing?

I don't have words for this...

Where Were the Men? - Nathanael Blake - Humanevents.com

"Something is clearly wrong with the men in our culture. Among the first rules of manliness are fighting bad guys and protecting others: in a word, courage. And not a one of the healthy young fellows in the classrooms seems to have done that."


Why isn't college grad Nathanael Blake in Iraq?


What did you miss?
post #362 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by 100mph View Post

No guns = no problems.
Seems pretty obvious.

As far as your "right to bear arms", I personally don't give a $hit. Stick your f-n guns in your f-n a$$e$, and pull your f-n triggers. Second amendment was making sense centuries ago. Nowadays your personal guns are no help against government. Our government will vaporize anything and anyone standing on the way of powerful lobbies with a click of a button. So, quit this BS, and EVOLVE, you f-n Neanderthals!

Wants to hunt or fish, get Nintendo WII.






I stand my ground

"...

What I've concluded from decades of working with murderers and rapists and every kind of violent criminal," he said, "is that an underlying factor that is virtually always present to one degree or another is a feeling that one has to prove one's manhood, and that the way to do that, to gain the respect that has been lost, is to commit a violent act."

Violence is commonly resorted to as the antidote to the disturbing emotions raised by the widespread hostility toward women in our society and the pathological fear of so many men that they aren't quite tough enough, masculine enough - in short, that they might have homosexual tendencies.

In a culture that is relentless in equating violence with masculinity, "it is tremendously tempting," said Dr. Gilligan, "to use violence as a means of trying to shore up one's sense of masculine self-esteem."
"

... "

"...

There are nearly 200 million firearms in private hands in the U.S., and more than 30,000 people - nearly 10 times the total number of Americans who have died in Iraq - are killed by those guns each year. In 1966 Americans were being killed by guns at the rate of 17,000 a year. An article in The Times examining such "rampages" as the Charles Whitman shootings said:

"Whatever the motivation, it seems clear that the way is made easier by the fact that guns of all sorts are readily available to Americans of all shades of morality and mentality."

We've learned very little in 40 years.

..."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041907P.shtml

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
post #363 of 524
All the bold talk and grandstanding is great, but how are you going to do it? You need to convince the population that the gangs and the muggers and the rapists are unarmed. I don't think that the American people have enough trust in government or law enforcement to do that. Many of you here would be appalled at the methods that would be needed to disarm the population. Maybe we need less freedom? Maybe we need more government control to save us from ourselves?

Gun registration is good. Waiting periods are good. Background checks are good. The truth is, however, that none of these would have stopped "Mr.?” Any inclusive gun control will require a major change in the way we view our relationship with government. Debating the need for gun control is little more than mental masturbation without some solid ideas of how to make it work here in the US.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #364 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

All the bold talk and grandstanding is great, but how are you going to do it? You need to convince the population that the gangs and the muggers and the rapists are unarmed. I don't think that the American people have enough trust in government or law enforcement to do that. Many of you here would be appalled at the methods that would be needed to disarm the population. Maybe we need less freedom? Maybe we need more government control to save us from ourselves?

Why do you have this misconception that most of America is armed and prepared to defend themselves today? Relative few Americans own guns, and stories of avergae citizens preventing crimes and defending themselves with their own legal guns are few and far between.

This whole defense thing is simply a made up argument by those who are insecure about stating their real reasons.
post #365 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Debating the need for gun control is little more than mental masturbation without some solid ideas of how to make it work here in the US.

  1. Prohibit sales of fire-arms and ammunition.
  2. Establish gun-collection points where handing over a fire-arm gives you a hundred dollar reward, no questions asked.
  3. Wait five years, after which possession of guns becomes illegal except for licensed hunters who need to get every gun registered.
  4. Keep the anonymous collection/reward points in place
  5. Combine the above with high punishment for being caught carrying a gun.

Yes guns will remain hidden but gun possession will go down with the years. With it, your society will become safer and gun-deaths will go down.
post #366 of 524
Guns and religious scripture should be made illegal. One destroys reason, the other life, combined they are deadly all across the world every single day.
post #367 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by 100mph View Post

I stand my ground

"...

What I've concluded from decades of working with murderers and rapists and every kind of violent criminal," he said, "is that an underlying factor that is virtually always present to one degree or another is a feeling that one has to prove one's manhood, and that the way to do that, to gain the respect that has been lost, is to commit a violent act."

Violence is commonly resorted to as the antidote to the disturbing emotions raised by the widespread hostility toward women in our society and the pathological fear of so many men that they aren't quite tough enough, masculine enough - in short, that they might have homosexual tendencies.

In a culture that is relentless in equating violence with masculinity, "it is tremendously tempting," said Dr. Gilligan, "to use violence as a means of trying to shore up one's sense of masculine self-esteem."
"

... "

"...

There are nearly 200 million firearms in private hands in the U.S., and more than 30,000 people - nearly 10 times the total number of Americans who have died in Iraq - are killed by those guns each year. In 1966 Americans were being killed by guns at the rate of 17,000 a year. An article in The Times examining such "rampages" as the Charles Whitman shootings said:

"Whatever the motivation, it seems clear that the way is made easier by the fact that guns of all sorts are readily available to Americans of all shades of morality and mentality."

We've learned very little in 40 years.

..."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041907P.shtml

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

Duh Cretin,

You might want to use rate to more accurately reflect your statistics, you know per capita like this;



Also, comparing the Iraqi situation, as you have done to the US situation, as Cartman would say IS lame AND weak!

You really, Really, REALLY need to take a basic statistics course to at least try to clean up your bogus statistical analysis!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #368 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Capitan View Post

Why do you have this misconception that most of America is armed and prepared to defend themselves today? Relative few Americans own guns, and stories of avergae citizens preventing crimes and defending themselves with their own legal guns are few and far between.

This whole defense thing is simply a made up argument by those who are insecure about stating their real reasons.

Cap'n Noob, you are wrong. You don't know how many people own gun, mostly because the NORC does not get real answers from gun owners afraid of ideologues like yourself. I'm not telling some schmuck from a liberal university if I have guns or how many guns I have. Most of us gun owners are like that... "its none of your GD business" is the attitude. Who wants to be a target for your eventual door-to-door confiscations?

Your liberal buddies in the media make sure we never hear of a gun doing anything good, so saying "stories are few and far between" is a farce.

As for defense, tell me what my real reason is, then, Mr. Genius. Tell ME that self defense does not matter.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #369 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch pear View Post

  1. Prohibit sales of fire-arms and ammunition.
  2. Establish gun-collection points where handing over a fire-arm gives you a hundred dollar reward, no questions asked.
  3. Wait five years, after which possession of guns becomes illegal except for licensed hunters who need to get every gun registered.
  4. Keep the anonymous collection/reward points in place
  5. Combine the above with high punishment for being caught carrying a gun.

Yes guns will remain hidden but gun possession will go down with the years. With it, your society will become safer and gun-deaths will go down.

Thanks for your input on how to run our nation.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #370 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Not nearly as many as they cost... you see... that's the BIGGER PICTURE.

"Guns save 1,000 lives per year!"
Uh, yeah, but they cost 20,000.

"Yeah, but guns save 1,000 lives per year!"
Uh, yeah, but they cost 20,000.

"But if you take away those guns, they won't save those 1,000 lives!"
Uh, yeah, but they'll cost thousands less... sure, not ZERO, but still, much less than that 1000 difference.

"Yeah, duh... but guns save 1,000 lives per year!"

ad ignoramus infinitum

Show me the statistics that say this is a safer society OVERALL because of gun ownership. Go ahead show them to me. Make my day.

Otherwise admit that you are wrong.

I have never said that we are safer here overall because there are guns. We are a violent society in places. Why? Not because of NRA members, friend. Because of armed criminals. I have said time and again that if I could make all guns disappear, I would. But that is not possible. Take a step back and make out a plan that does not disarm the law abiding people before the criminals. If you can solve that impossible problem, I'll buy it. All of you keep crowing about how if guns were banned, everything would be great. You miss the decades in between here and there where there are no longer guns EXCEPT in the hands of the criminal element. (Who will be having a hell of a good time, like they have in Australia)

Why don't you join with the NRA and agree that we need to get hard, extremely hard, on people who misuse guns and violate the law. The answer to breaking law is not to make more law. The answer is to ENFORCE the law.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #371 of 524
You have repeatedly suggested how many lives guns have saved, which in effect is saying that we are safer because of guns.

You have also said that you are scared of the Bad Guys, Inc., and the guns they have.

You dfinately implied, though, that guns make us safer.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #372 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Thanks for your input on how to run our nation.



I thought it was a reasonable suggestion and far better than what our own leaders have bothered to come up with. He was answering an implied question from Moe.

This is a free Net and this forum is free... FREEDOM. It is his RIGHT to voice his opinion; he is not slandering or insulting anyone.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #373 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I thought it was a reasonable suggestion and far better than what our own leaders have bothered to come up with. He was answering an implied question from Moe.

This is a free Net and this forum is free... FREEDOM. It is his RIGHT to voice his opinion; he is not slandering or insulting anyone.

Pffft. Rights don't matter. The Second Amendment especially.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #374 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch pear View Post

  1. Prohibit sales of fire-arms and ammunition.
  2. Establish gun-collection points where handing over a fire-arm gives you a hundred dollar reward, no questions asked.
  3. Wait five years, after which possession of guns becomes illegal except for licensed hunters who need to get every gun registered.
  4. Keep the anonymous collection/reward points in place
  5. Combine the above with high punishment for being caught carrying a gun.

Yes guns will remain hidden but gun possession will go down with the years. With it, your society will become safer and gun-deaths will go down.


I like the idea... are there any countries or territories where something like this has been done?

Some cease-fire... IRA? Something like that... can't remember well...

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #375 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

You have repeatedly suggested how many lives guns have saved, which in effect is saying that we are safer because of guns.

You have also said that you are scared of the Bad Guys, Inc., and the guns they have.

You dfinately implied, though, that guns make us safer.

Let me go over this one last time for you. They make us safer because we are dealing with bad people that are NOT, I repeat, NOT going to surrender their guns. We'd all be safer if all guns vaporized. But that is wishful thinking in your liberal utopia.

We are talking in circles here.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #376 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Pffft. Rights don't matter. The Second Amendment especially.

Was wondering how you would respond to that. Interesting.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #377 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I thought it was a reasonable suggestion and far better than what our own leaders have bothered to come up with. He was answering an implied question from Moe.

This is a free Net and this forum is free... FREEDOM. It is his RIGHT to voice his opinion; he is not slandering or insulting anyone.

Implied question? It was pretty direct. Nothing I have seen approaches resembling a workable plan to disarm the US. We have a significant and heavily armed criminal element. A plan where a few latte sippers drop their grandfathers gun off at a collection station won't get it done. Do you guys have any idea what it is like in the heart of our cities? We had a shootout between rival people -smuggling gangs on the freeway at noon Tuesday. Do you think those fellows are going to drop their guns off?
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #378 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Implied question? It was pretty direct. Nothing I have seen approaches resembling a workable plan to disarm the US. We have a significant and heavily armed criminal element. A plan where a few latte sippers drop their grandfathers gun off at a collection station won't get it done. Do you guys have any idea what it is like in the heart of our cities? We had a shootout between rival people -smuggling gangs on the freeway at noon Tuesday. Do you think those fellows are going to drop their guns off?

In fantasyland, everyone plays nice. As usual, liberals totally disregard human nature and the unintended consequences for average people. They don't have a way to disarm the US without creating a crime wave. You are right about the latte sippers. These liberal gun haters actually think that an armed drug dealer is going to take the bait in a buy-back, and not get another gun. Sure they will. Then just go steal some guns with a guaranteed place to sell. Just another liberal creation with unforeseen consequences.

Why don't you liberals get tough on criminals and leave us law abiding people alone? THAT does not fit with your agenda, that's why. You just want to run other peoples' lives.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #379 of 524
We can't have this debate anymore without statistical data.

Your argument rests on assumptions that I just don't buy.
post #380 of 524
Everyone here is talking about guns...

What about medication?

http://www.newstarget.com/021798.html

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #381 of 524
Back OT- Ya know, not one of you has said a thing about my suggestion days ago that people admitted to a mental institution and adjudicated mentally ill be added the FBI-NICS and prevented from buying a gun. That would have prevented this tragedy.

That silence in itself is telling. It's not about solving the problem. This is just a nice time to go and take full advantage of the situation to advance the liberal gun hating agenda. Its a pathetic use of a tragedy to go after law abiding people and their rights, rather than to look at how we prevent this in the future.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #382 of 524
Here's a proposal I heard from a relative in law enforcement that I found interesting. I have some reservations, but I thought it was interesting enough to throw out and see what everyone else thinks:

Quote:
1) Pass a law requiring every new gun sold by 200x to have biosecirty built into the trigger that only allows for owner to be able to shoot the firearm. This, of course, can only be done at considerable expense. The added expense gets rolled onto customers, making the ease of purchasing a weapon that much less. The biosecurity helps to make sure only the owner can fire his/her weapon.

2) Levy HUGE taxes on weapons sales as we've done with tobacco. Tax weapons at a rate of 400% or more. If you want the weapon, you can still get it; but it's going to cost you. This large tax levy, the expensive security, and the security itself all serve to make guns still legally obtainable but make them much more difficult to obtain and makes gun theft much less desirable to the criminal element.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #383 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Back OT- Ya know, not one of you has said a thing about my suggestion days ago that people admitted to a mental institution and adjudicated mentally ill be added the FBI-NICS and prevented from buying a gun. That would have prevented this tragedy.

That silence in itself is telling. It's not about solving the problem. This is just a nice time to go and take full advantage of the situation to advance the liberal gun hating agenda. Its a pathetic use of a tragedy to go after law abiding people and their rights, rather than to look at how we prevent this in the future.

I missed your post about this thus did not respond, but I think absolutely they should be prevented from buying weapons.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #384 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Implied question? It was pretty direct. Nothing I have seen approaches resembling a workable plan to disarm the US. We have a significant and heavily armed criminal element. A plan where a few latte sippers drop their grandfather’s gun off at a collection station won't get it done. Do you guys have any idea what it is like in the heart of our cities? We had a shootout between rival people -smuggling gangs on the freeway at noon Tuesday. Do you think those fellows are going to drop their guns off?


It was a suggestion, a starting point. It might work in some areas, some countries, but not in others. It could be part of the overall plan, one among several efforts. Let the discussion begin.

Yeah, I know what US cities are like: I spent four years in the inner part of one of our major cities and volunteered for the local rescue squad. That is an eye-opener that will stay with me forever. Two decades later, I live near a small town where most folk don't lock their doors and the local police box gets calls about cats stuck in trees; there is an ambulance stationed there by law, but it is unused except for emergencies in the outskirts of the neighboring city. There is a water pistol at the local store, but it has several years of dust on it. Kids skip school on days when the tide is very low so that they can go collect clams. Heaven on Earth.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #385 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

We can't have this debate anymore without statistical data.

Your argument rests on assumptions that I just don't buy.

Lies. Damned Lies. Statistics.

"Statistics" in the 19th century pointed out that African Americans had anatomical differences that guaranteed they were stupid.

We just disagree. That's fine. I don't live in your world, and none of you live in mine. Today when I go to work, someone could walk in my front door and harm or kill me. Such is my vocation, now in our fourth generation.

Gun control would put lives at risk in my little corner of the world.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #386 of 524
Should I dare to ask what your vocation is? You seem to want to tell us, but not be able to bring yourself to do so. How will your family be protected while your highly-trained self is away?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #387 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Should I dare to ask what your vocaton is? You seem to want to tell us, but not be able to bring yourself to do so. How will your family be protected while your highly-trained self is away?

My family is trained as well.

I am a precious stone dealer. Among other things. People in my line of work are killed weekly by gun-law violating criminals.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #388 of 524
Tried using a security consultant to redesign your workplace so that it naturally creates a safer environment for you?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #389 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Tried using a security consultant to redesign your workplace so that it naturally creates a safer environment for you?

Sure. Let me get right on that. What a typical liberal response.

And when I go home? And to dinner? And on the road to shows? Get real. I have taken as many precautions as I can with security.

Maybe I should hire a feng shui consultant to make people feel less crime-prone within my space. Maybe chant a mantra. Or put a good luck charm over the door.
Obviously you have no connection to a world with violent people.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #390 of 524
Four years in law enforcement. That's all.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #391 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Four years in law enforcement. That's all.

And you honestly think that creating a fortress in one single place means that I will not need a method of self defense? Did you only carry a gun at the police station? C'mon.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #392 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Maybe I should hire a feng shui consultant to make people feel less crime-prone within my space.


we need to get back on track a little, or at least think bigger picture here.


But that still made me LOL
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #393 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Who wants to be a target for your eventual door-to-door confiscations?

It is this kind of paranoia that makes gun proponents sound like nutjobs and why the rest of the gun owning populations stay the heck away.

Registration is part of responsible gun ownership. Training is part of responsible gun ownership. Gun locks and gun safes are part of responsible gun ownership. Being liable when your gun is used in a crime is part of responsible gun ownership at both the individual and corporate level because really...the only way a criminal should get ahold of any of your guns is to pry it from your cold dead fingers.

Gun proponents fight ALL of these things and their only justification is paranoia. Well, screw that...you're behaving like children who won't agree to boundries on their toys. Which means you're more likely to get all the toys completely taken away and ruin it for everyone.

So Jub...just STFU. I'm for repealing of all Bill of Rights protections from Texans and shipping the whole lot to Iraq. And I'm only half kidding.

Or heck, you guys can just secede from the Union. You have oil, I'm sure you'll do fine. You can keep W. and Cheney along with Iraq. Your mess. You deal. Heck, the roots of Vietnam can be found in the Eisnehower administration and certainly well fertilized by Johnson.

Vinea
post #394 of 524
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/gun.laws/index.html

Virginia judge dealt with Cho in 2005, deemed him a danger to himself due to mental illness, but, because he was not hospitalized, his status as far as background checks went unchanged, thus allowing him to legally purchase a weapon just a few weeks ago.

This is a fair question: should the current system (assuming little else is done) be upgraded to include "patients" like Cho who are not institutionalized but are considered dangerous?

---

In Japan, hunters can get licenses for guns, but the waiting period takes a couple of months and includes home visits, interviews with neighbors and such. It certainly prevents most unworthies from getting their hands on a gun. The guns that are ussed by the mob are smuggled into the country in very small numbers, and possession carries a prison sentence.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #395 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/gun.laws/index.html

Virginia judge dealt with Cho in 2005, deemed him a danger to himself due to mental illness, but, because he was not hospitalized, his status as far as background checks went unchanged, thus allowing him to legally purchase a weapon just a few weeks ago.

This is a fair question: should the current system (assuming little else is done) be upgraded to include "patients" like Cho who are not institutionalized but are considered dangerous?.

Yes. It should. It is horrid that he was declared insane and sold a gun.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #396 of 524
Quote:
In Japan, hunters can get licenses for guns, but the waiting period takes a couple of months and includes home visits, interviews with neighbors and such. It certainly prevents most unworthies from getting their hands on a gun. The guns that are ussed by the mob are smuggled into the country in very small numbers, and possession carries a prison sentence.

The problems we face are the huge baseline of weapons and the ease of smuggling. Japan's borders are a little easier to protect than ours.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #397 of 524
For a break to the lighter side, what do you bet "Mr ?" made his DVD on a Mac? I wonder if he read these forums??
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #398 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

For a break to the lighter side, what do you bet "Mr ?" made his DVD on a Mac? I wonder if he read these forums??

That's the lighter side?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #399 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

That's the lighter side?

Lighter in a dark sorta way.

\
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #400 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

It is this kind of paranoia that makes gun proponents sound like nutjobs and why the rest of the gun owning populations stay the heck away.

Registration is part of responsible gun ownership. Training is part of responsible gun ownership. Gun locks and gun safes are part of responsible gun ownership. Being liable when your gun is used in a crime is part of responsible gun ownership at both the individual and corporate level because really...the only way a criminal should get ahold of any of your guns is to pry it from your cold dead fingers.

STFU? That's not very nice. Tsk. Tsk.

You are woefully misinformed. Or just pushing your hatred of guns. I'm a proud NRA Life Member, Instructor, and gun owner. And will be forever. You are just another utopian socialist that is carrying Michael Bloomberg's water.

There are plenty of boundaries already. Thousands of gun laws that have done little when criminals want to break the law. Should we make more laws so things are MORE illegal? Sure, that will work! Make it double-secret illegal!

Let me help you here. What follows registration? In Australia? In California? In Africa? In 1939 Germany? yep- CONFISCATION. Sorry, but that is historical fact. Deal with it. I have precedent for thinking that people like you want to eventually TAKE MY GUNS.

BTW- Who has given away more gun locks than the VPC and Brady combined? In fact more than any other group in the nation? That's right- the N-R-A!

BTW- Who trains more people in the firearms safety than anyone else? That's right- the N-R-A!

If your car is stolen and used in a crime by a criminal... are you responsible even though you locked the doors? Give me a break.

You can have your totalitarian wet-dream all day about shipping us all off to our own little country, or whatever the hell you are babbling about. It's indicative of the fantasy world you'd like to live in, and are trying to force on the rest of us.

Please, stay the hell out of Texas. It's much too dangerous for you here apparently. Here in my home county, fully 1 in 40 people has a CHL. We have not experienced random mass murders or any of the problems that plague Washington DC which has a total gun ban.

If guns themselves are the problem, why are there no shootings at gun shows? Thousands of guns just lying around? Because the good people have guns TOO.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead