You may not be impressed but you have no reason to believe that I would try to impress you.
The mass murderers at Columbine HS planted propane cylinder IEDs and threw pipe bombs.
Do you actually believe that suicides wouldn’t occur if firearms were banned? Wouldn’t you also have to ban tall buildings, bridges, rope, wire, chain, and gas lines to homes? Did an inanimate object tell the suicidal person to kill themselves, or did their depression make their life unbearable?
Using the words “obviously true” and “if we assume” in the same sentence weakens any conclusion you were trying to convey.
The mass murdering monster IS the problem. THEY justified their mass murdering.
Society needs to help these sick, twisted monsters BEFORE they carry out their rampage. You can spend your time blaming inanimate objects for their Svengali-like influences, but how many voters are going to buy into your talking Glock?
Great. Got any ideas how? No, you don’t? OK, then what? :dubious:
Nobody is doing that, are they?
At all? Of course not. Fewer? Damn straight. Murders? Tragic “accidents”? Same answer. Got any other *feasible, realistic *approaches to consider that would have the same benefit? No, you don’t.
Please look into “excluded middles”, while you’re at it.
Brazen. Bone is just ignoring and evading. One of your techniques seems to be (1) to avoid any questions you don't want put to you, and (2) attempt to foist the majority of the work on the other poster. Not gonna bite.
What Bone is avoiding or failing to address:
[ul]
[li]that within the American cultural landscape (to include media, family and community practices and traditions, etc.) information comes through on the gun as an instrument of power, leverage, revenge, anger-, fear- and threat-response, and even on these boards, for example through giveaways like “Colt’s great equalizer”[/li][li]that he is operating out of a position where gun rights and the 2nd Amendment have aproached or reached the level of a sacred value, and by extension allow picking and choosing among facts to suit that faith-based thinking[/li][/ul]
Bone (and I think many others on his "side") raise the issue of self-defense in defense of guns. Fine. I thought he'd say that. Follow-up: do you think that America's gun culture (ie all the information that's loaded and updated in our brain in association with guns, eg how, where, when, why, on whom to use them--because a gun is never acquired in isolation, it comes with all this cultural information too) is so concise, so clean, that the sole information it conveys is this purified, absolute, black-and-white scenario of someone shooting another because, beyond a doubt, they were going to kill the defending shooter? In the context of a larger culture that champions self-gratification, immediate satisfaction, loves for example to parade revenge scenarios and their agents for wrongs suffered, (etc.), isn't the gun culture actually much more complex and fraught than that?
(point ceded on the 2nd Amendment and age of majority, but I can pretty much go play fish-in-a-barrel for other evidence of your 2nd Amendment = 1st Commandment mode of thinking; again, not judging that, or impugning, just that it’s not for everyone)
(And as far as the chain of reasoning in my previous post that lead to “sending a message” to the gun culture, I did not post that to appease you. I posted that to appeal to common sense (before you ask, look it up).)
As an avid shooter and occasional firearms collector, I can tell you that there are far too many bat-shit crazy gun owners out there, and it scares me. Why on earth would you have 5,000 rounds of .223 in your pick-up’s tool box? Because society is about to collapse? Because a (half) black guy was elected president? Why do you have 25 AR-15s stashed throughout your house? Because you honestly think the government is coming to get your guns and you have to hold them off? Please stop buying guns now if you think any of that is true. You make me nervous.
I don’t even know what to say to these people. They always want to talk about my rights as a gun owner (none of which have been infringed upon, mind you), and how we can get them back. The look on their faces when I say I support significantly tighter gun regulations is priceless, though.
I love to shoot; it’s my recreation of choice. I’m also immensely saddened and angered by the gun culture in this country, where everyone is trying to be Tommy Tacticool, claiming they alone can ward off a terrorist attack. Groups like the NRA have made it so there’s no real responsibility associated with firearms ownership, and that if you want to be an American, you damn well better buy a gun and wave it at some liberals.
I can’t even tell if this is a coherent post. I get so pissed off with gun owners that I can’t see straight.
I’m curious as to why you aren’t pissed off at the drug dealers, petty criminals, thug-life assholes and hot-headed low-lifes who are the ones who are actually committing most of the country’s gun murders instead. I can’t remember the last time I last heard that somebody with 25 AR-15s and 5,000 rounds of ammo actually shot somebody. This isn’t to say they never will, but the types of people I just mentioned are killing people every day in every major city. Until someone figures out a way to keep guns out of their hands I’ll not be supporting any government effort at gun control.
And of course, what we see in the news tonight, is a rural New York shootouts involving said Matt and Sweat.
Someone here may point out that New York has more gun restrictions than most states, and that legal restrictions on shotguns tend to be light even in countries where most kinds of guns are forbidden. That’s right. The main problem isn’t the laws, but attitudes, and sheer numbers of guns. Fewer guns, and Americans would be more careful where they keep them.
I’m a gun owner and quite simply , because it’s a right that as an American I am allowed to exercise . And will conntinue to do so as long as I abide by the laws of my state and take responsibility for my self and my actions .
The reason that it’s out of proportion to most other countries is also simple I am lucky enough to have been born in America with our Constitution and our Bill of rights and those folks in those other countries weren’t .
You were already asked how to do that, and if you were OK with removing gun rights from citizens who were still law-abiding, and how specifically you would have prevented this latest mass murder, or any other for that matter. You still have nothing to offer, and you still are ducking the need to go to a Plan B.
Oh, Ed, you sounded like Dirty Harry just then.
-Grace (Ferris Bueller’s Day Off)
I have no idea how you work, but that’s not the issue.
Since you asked so nicely, I’m not OK with removing gun rights from citizens who are still law-abiding. I’ve already made a strong case that banning all firearms will not prevent mass-murdering monsters from committing mass murder. That seems to be your Plan B. Mass-murdering monsters will find another way.
Looking at the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the mass-murdering monster admitted that he had “planned ahead” to murder people. He had somehow managed, in his mind, to justify his actions. There were many red flags concerning that monsters odd, and dangerous behavior, and yet, nothing was done to confine, or medicate him.
*Tucson, Arizona (CNN) – The suspect in the weekend massacre in Arizona was kicked out of an algebra class at a community college in June after repeated interruptions and clearly “needed psychological help,” his instructor said Sunday.
The Monster was “physically removed” from the Pima Community College course less than a month after it began, its instructor, Ben McGahee told CNN. McGahee said The Monster sometimes shook, blurted things out in class, and appeared to be under the influence of drugs at times.
“I was scared of what he could do,” McGahee said. “I wasn’t scared of him physically, but I was scared of him bringing a weapon to class.”
…When he tried to enlist in the Army in 2008, the service rejected him for reasons it says it can’t disclose due to privacy laws. But an administration official told CNN on Sunday that The Monster had failed a drug test.
…In postings on the social media sites YouTube and MySpace, The Monster railed against government “mind control,” being surrounded by people he considered illiterate and the illegitimacy of the U.S. government. In class, McGahee said The Monster accused him of violating his free-speech rights, “And of course free speech is limited in the classroom.”
One such outburst was “the straw that broke the camel’s back,” and McGahee – who had already raised concerns about The Monster with administrators – had him removed.
The Monster “needed psychological help,” and McGahee said he was not surprised to hear his former student was the suspect in Saturday’s bloodbath.*
If people are not surprised that a person committed mass-murders, it’s important to find out why those family members, school authorities, neighbors, police, and legislators hadn’t been more proactive in getting these people help.
Question for you: You are going to be materialized 20 yards away from a desperate escaped murderer with nothing to lose. The location: upstate New York, with typical-for-that-area surroundings–trees, buildings, what-have-you. There is “cover” around, in other words.
You can be materialized in a clearing 20 yards from Murderer A–a good shot–who is facing you with a loaded shotgun in his hands.
Or, you can be materialized in a clearing 20 yards from Murderer B–a good driver–who has stolen a Camry and is sitting behind the wheel.
Then you must have some other way to keep the dangerous mental types from having them. Isn’t it about time you came up with something?
No, your case is not “strong”, largely because you still haven’t learned about excluded middles.
And you’re OK with doing, well, what? Remember that he’s still a citizen and still law-abiding at that point. So, next, what?
Perhaps because they had no legal right to force that on him, being a law-abiding citizen at that point? Nor a right to deprive him of his weapons, either?
You are jumping to conclusions. In a few years, when someone comes out with a true crime book incorporating a biography of this man, then we’ll know. Until then, we don’t whether there were people trying hard to get him treatment, just as we don’t know if there was a gun enthusiast who taught him how to shoot.
I thought I made it, so I’ll make a different one.
Stealing cars gets harder every few years as car locks get better. That’s the likely reason those murderers on the run, after escaping from a northern New York prison, are still (one dead) in northern New York. Maybe the true crime book on the prison escape will show I’m wrong, and that there’s another reason these guys didn’t steal a car (can’t drive?). But it’s a fact that stealing a car, whether for transportation or to run people over, became harder as auto manufactures gradually improved locking mechanisms.
By contrast, due to more of them being around, and none of them having smart-gun features, stealing a gun, in the United States, to shoot someone, remains as easy as ever. And America’s gun culturists are doing their damnedest to prevent the step-by-step anti-theft progress we’ve seen with cars being made with guns:
This is no better thought out here than it was in the last umpteen threads where you posted it. I’ll ask you again: How many people are alive today just because you choose not to own a gun?
Do you actually believe this twaddle or is it your plan that if you repeat it often enough it will become accepted as the truth by everyone else?