Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?

[barnesy305]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Speaking of which, I'm surprised those assholes haven't gone to Colorado yet.

[nab]

I have little faith that that debates about gun control will break free of Argumentum ad Populum in my lifetime. 

[runawayjimbo]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

[sls.stormyrider]

[gah]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

[runawayjimbo]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?

[phil]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?

Just an aside, driving twice the speed limit constitutes "driving with intent to kill" (in VA at least)


carry on.

[gah]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?

No, it doesn't.

I'm done with this nonsense.

America is fucked up.

[aphineday]

I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.

[gah]

I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.

Wrong again. Guns are for our pleasure. Haven't you ever gone to a shooting range just to blow off some steam? Gone in the woods to destroy watermelons? I just wish I had a rocket launcher. Or maybe a tank. I'd probably need a special parking permit since I only have street parking, fucking city, always trying to make a buck off me. Why won't the gov't just get off my back. I'm just trying to have some good times.



USA! USA! USA!

[aphineday]

I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.

Wrong again. Guns are for our pleasure. Haven't you ever gone to a shooting range just to blow off some steam? Gone in the woods to destroy watermelons? I just wish I had a rocket launcher. Or maybe a tank. I'd probably need a special parking permit since I only have street parking, fucking city, always trying to make a buck off me. Why won't the gov't just get off my back. I'm just trying to have some good times.



USA! USA! USA!

If I could +100k for this, I would.

[Superfreakie]

the right to bear arms does not = the right to a fucking arsenal.

I think Jason said it pretty well, data or no data.

common sense.
the gun lobby should get some.

eta- several years ago someone had the common sense to say that the right to free speech does not include the right to yellifire in a crowded theater.
the same logic, imo, should be extended to weapons.

Look, I obviously understand where you all are coming from and I'm not disagreeing that there is no legitimate reason for civilians to legally own instruments of war. And believe me, this isn't a position I take easily; remember, I am a recently converted liberty nutjob. But, to echo your free speech point, sls, just as I feel compelled to defend the free speech rights of the despicable Westboro Baptist Church, I find myself defending the 2nd amendment more in recent years than I ever cared to in the past. An unfortunate side effect of liberty is you have to defend it even when it is hard.

But then let's not misconstrue the argument. Many of us here are not asking for an outright ban on weapons. We wish simply to qualify the second amendment; laws being living things that evolve over time alongside our own re-interpretations of humanity and its existence. That being said, to be governed and receive the benefits of governance, such as security, property rights etc.. (Lockian), we must relinquish some of our liberties. Now, if you are a pure libertarian wishing for a return to the state of nature, then the relinquishing of any right is a problem. However, for most of us, anarchy is not a whole lot of fun.

Ultimately, why I take issue with an armed citizenry such as yours, is that if the country were to go through a traumatic upheaval, such as another Great Depression, would the state fall into anarchic armed pockets, fracturing to a point where a central government is no longer able to regain the control necessary for its ensuing stabilization. Now, such an apocalyptic event will hardly occur in our lifetimes, but revolution is an eternal renewing process of the state, much like forest fires restart nature's cycle of life. However, if the destruction is complete, the renewal is inevitably much harder. Should you doubt this happenstance, there are many countries that have born witness to a citizenry that has turned its arms on each other, places where reconciliation is no longer possible, at least not for the foreseeable future. Algeria, Afghanistan, Angola and that's just the A's. Lest it be forgotten, the 2nd most powerful nation in the world today nearly tore itself to pieces 60 years ago, a blink of one's eye in the context of human history. Secondly, can you imagine the potential for destruction and death if the Greeks were presently armed to the teeth.           

While I am one who believes in Jefferson's quote: "when the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty" - I would still rather see the fear come from the ballot box, as opposed to light infantry weapons.     

[Hicks]

Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

I guess my reading comprehension has gone downhill because I'm pretty sure you did compare defending the right to free speech to the right to buy an assault weapon.  And yeah I do see those two things as vastly different. 

In any event, all of those weapons out there that were designed with the explicit purpose of killing people are just timebombs waiting to go off in my opinion.  All of those people that own them haven't used them to take an innocent life. . .  until they do.  Seems to me it is pretty presumptious to think that it will continue to be the case for all of them.  With resources dwindling, you know like WATER, and the continuing economic clusterfuck of a nearly third world wealth distribution, the chances that someone snaps and does shit like the other night is increasing.  Not to mention the lack of access to mental healthcare. 

As for auto accidents, as someone who drives 30 miles roundtrip on the freeway to work everyday and has been involved in a high speed freeway accident that could have easily been fatal it's something I think about all the time and to be honest it terrifies me on a nearly daily basis.  I do my best to stay alert and hope that the car next to me doesn't do anything stupid.  I'm well aware that it's a bet that doesn't have the best odds, but I need to feed my family and with good jobs scarce and my house underwater, the opportunities to change my life circumstances are somewhat limited.  It sucks that I and many people like me have to spend so much time in our cars, but unfortunately American life has been structured as such that it is difficult to avoid.   

That right there is the difference.  No one needs an automatic weapon to survive, unlike a car, and even if they think they do I would argue that they are delusional.  Why all of these weapons are legal when they are merely one emotional meltdown away from another unnecessary massacre is something I will never understand. 

[sls.stormyrider]

the sad fact is that if Ronald Reagan getting shot didn't change the attitude of the NRA or the GOP, then nothing will.

I guess I'll go out and by that RPG. I have a lot of land to worry about and you never know who might try to break in.

[phil]

the sad fact is that if Ronald Reagan getting shot didn't change the attitude of the NRA or the GOP, then nothing will.

I guess I'll go out and by that RPG. I have a lot of land to worry about and you never know who might try to break in.

With that much land I'm sure you have lots of deer getting all up in your business? RPG is a good way to keep them under control.