guns

[moreluck]

Why didn't anybody report the tweets the night before? Tweets said he was going to hurt people.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

It's funny....

That liberals, somehow believe that a woman who has just been raped, is morally superior

to a woman standing over the body, of a perpetrator she just shot.... defending herself.



-Bug-

 

[The Other Side]

The one and only thing ya got right in this rant is "Irresponsible gun owner". All the rest is just blah blah blah and incorrect.

Don't you think his kid had problems? Now the root of those problems are debatable and are better taken on by someone that actually has knowledge of the kid and his world.

Where do you get the perceived (I before E except after C) 2nd amendment idea?

There is no "grassy knoll" to school shootings so no big investigation needs to occur. In every school shooting case, there is never a point of view on how the kid got the gun in the first place. That part of the tragedy is left out of the story. Especially on FOX news. There is NEVER a discussion on how the kid obtained the guns and ammo. Its always focused on the injured or killed, but NEVER on the origin of the gun and ammo.

Like in this case, there is no information about the kind of gun, the number of bullets, who bought the gun, who had last possession of that gun, where were the bullets, how did the kid gain access to the gun and ammo, were his parents the people who owned the gun and ammo. There are many questions that will NEVER be asked by a conservative news channel and that only serves to harm the general public.

I hope this kids parents kid SUED by all the people involved for this shooting. I hope the police take away EVERY WEAPON in their home as they are now shown to be completely irresponsible for securing dangerous weapons in their homes.

There will be no condemnation of these parents by anyone in the C9 or the GOP for this school shooting. Its always the same excuse that the KID is to blame alone and this is simply not true.

The parents are responsible for teaching their children to COPE with problems and handle them without the need to resort to violence, but when parents own guns and shoot things up because they can, they do nothing more than teach their children to handle their problems looking down the barrel of a gun.

I believe both the kID and his parents have problems. Most likely white, alchohol involved with parents, unsecured, unlocked guns all over the place and no supervision at home is the cause of this problem.
(most school shooters are white by the way)

Peace.

TOS

 

[bbsam]

Please define a "well regulated militia" and suggest the methods, limits, and parties involed in constituting a "well regulated militia".

 

[moreluck]

If he was on the internet the night before telling he was going to school in the morning and hurting someone, why didn't those kids (who were properly raised) bring it to the attention of the proper authorities?

The kid could get a gun whether his parents had one or not. Where he got it will come up later.....you can't assume the home had a gun.

The kid was described as an outcast and a victim of bullying.

 

[MinnesotaBrown]

The parents are responsible for teaching their children to COPE with problems and handle them without the need to resort to violence, but when parents own guns and shoot things up because they can, they do nothing more than teach their children to handle their problems looking down the barrel of a gun.
TOS

Who is responsible for teaching you to get your point across by calling people names and being close minded to the opinion of others?

 

[klein]

Oh c'mon Moreluck, you already posted about the prevention act a Canadian school and police did (Girl drawing a picture and their home being searched by police afterwards).

So, take 1 side or the other.

 

[trplnkl]

If this is true, how much different is the story from so many adult situations we hear of? Did the kid just copycat what he'd seen and heard of adults doing? I also wonder just how much dehumanizing the kid had gone through from public education to the that passes for entertainment on TV? I wonder how far is the stretch in a kid's mind when he hears adults say, "if they ain't like us or if they are out to harm us, we should just get rid of them" factored into all of this? Did hierarchical clicks and class stratifying with in the priso...sorry school system which is encouraged by the warden and guar...damn, sorry about that, centralized school structure of administrators and teachers also play into this? In the case of Columbine, I do think it was a factor but it's much easier to blame the kids and the guns rather than look real hard at the production line meat grinder we adults slam our kids through in the first place.

No doubt there are many aspects that can attribute to events such as this one. It could take a trained professional years to get the the true roots of the cause. Sure, the things you mentioned, though some seem a little far fetched to me, could be contributors. It's pretty common for kids to learn bad behavior from their parents and others around them. TV violence, playing war games on the computers etc can play a factor as well. Even though the stats are rising in these kind of disasters. Again, lay people would be hard pressed to know exactly why. There are far more people that go to public schools, watch TV, play video games and all the other ,so called, factors that never commit any kind of ill deeds, much less murder than do.

At some point I think someone needs to realize that how or where Little Johnny got his hands on a gun and work at finding out WHY he wanted to kill someone.

 

[moreluck]

Oh c'mon Moreluck, you already posted about the prevention act a Canadian school and police did (Girl drawing a picture and their home being searched by police afterwards).

So, take 1 side or the other.

How can anyone take any sides....the facts aren't in yet?

I don't remember what I posted about that drawing and that girl. Whatever it was ...it was probably irrelevent because apparently I'm the most annoying poster on BC.

 

[wkmac]

Please define a "well regulated militia" and suggest the methods, limits, and parties involed in constituting a "well regulated militia".

I think before you do that you'd have to establish if you are asking as in regards to what the men who wrote those words meant or what it means today in our modern context. We have a standing army which changes the nature of what the militia was then and what it is now but where this can become problematic is if the 2nd amendment is changeable by the fact that society has changed, does this mean the freedom of speech or religion are also qualified ideals and can in fact be heavily regulated? Even to the point of telling someone what religious dogma or doctrine is acceptable or even moreso require any said citizen that they must believe in a specific religious faith? If this is true, then Moreluck's hysteria about Sharia law may have some standing.

As one who holds no such beliefs, I find that troubling but having come from belief, I'd find it equally troubling if someone of faith was told they couldn't because a gov't entity determined for the betterment of society that no god existed and belief was illegal or prohibited. I do think that some atheists if given a chance would try something like that (and I'd opposed the hell out of them too) so I'd rather error on the side of caution and I'd tread lightly when it comes to the bill of rights because of the repercussions that could be set by unintended legal precedence. Way to many self serving interests at play and not always do they have the people's best intent either!

As for me, I'd love to see a world where swords are beat into plowshares.

As to the term "well-regulated" here is one POV on the subject. And here is a piece on the 2nd amendment from the University of Missouri at Kansas City Law School. I also believe the individual states or local jurisdictions were not prohibited from limiting firearms under the original Constitution but that the 14th amendment may have seriously changed that by creating a federal citizenship that did not exist before. An unintended consequence and a consequence both the NRA and gun control groups would use to full advantage of which I both find are out to set bad law.

 

[wkmac]

No doubt there are many aspects that can attribute to events such as this one. It could take a trained professional years to get the the true roots of the cause. Sure, the things you mentioned, though some seem a little far fetched to me, could be contributors. It's pretty common for kids to learn bad behavior from their parents and others around them. TV violence, playing war games on the computers etc can play a factor as well. Even though the stats are rising in these kind of disasters. Again, lay people would be hard pressed to know exactly why. There are far more people that go to public schools, watch TV, play video games and all the other ,so called, factors that never commit any kind of ill deeds, much less murder than do.

At some point I think someone needs to realize that how or where Little Johnny got his hands on a gun and work at finding out WHY he wanted to kill someone.

I don't disagree and ultimately this kid will have to face the music for his choices but I'm hearing now the kid was a victim of bullying and if true, you keep hitting and hitting someone, don't scream foul when they hit back by means of the hardest thing they can find. Everyone has a breaking point!

 

[The Other Side]

Who is responsible for teaching you to get your point across by calling people names and being close minded to the opinion of others?

THE C9ers.

Peace

TOS

 

[klein]

Well this year is suppose to be the safest year in the US, because of the record amount of guns sold in 2011.
It's too early to tell, but lets see if crime and shootings/murders go down in numbers this year.

NRA says yes (we all know that).

 

[soberups]

Well, another child of a second amendment supporter shoots up his school. This country will never learn and neither will the parents of children who take their "UNSECURED" weapons to school to settle their problems with bullets and guns laying around the home.

Gun supporters just dont get it. Your "percieved" second amendment rights are more important to your ego, than the safety of your children, friends and classmates.

Well, you got your wish again, available guns by an irresponsible gun owner and his child with the access, will and motive to use those guns on his fellow americans who did nothing to him.

Congrats Gun fans, you have more victims to add to the list.

Chardon High School Shooting, 5 Students Injured, 3 in Critical | Indiana's NewsCenter: News, Sports, Weather, Fort Wayne WPTA-TV, WISE-TV, CW, and MyFOX | Local

I am sure NOT ONE of you gun supporters will condemn the gun owner for this tragedy, but will excuse him by saying his child had problems.

Peace.

TOS

Yet more bigoted, predjudiced, ignorant statements by someone who doesnt know anything about guns other than that they are icky and poopy and scary.

How DARE you say that responsible, legal gun owners such as myself "got our wish" when a tragedy like this occurs. How DARE you "congratulate" responsible, legal gun owners like myself for the criminal misuse of a firearm.

I am a recovering alcoholic. Do I blame you, or the majority of people who drink moderately and responsibly, for the criminal actions of the drunk drivers who kill FAR MORE people each year than guns do? No, I dont. I dont blame inantimate objects such as bottles of alcohol...or cars...or guns...for the criminal actions of the small minority of people who misuse them.

For you to claim that gun owners like myself should be "congratulated" because some kid committed murder is downright sick and hateful.

Peace.

 

[soberups]

Of course, some of the NRA nuts have different attitudes and some would want to let their kids carry guns to school , so they can defend themselves.

It is not, and never has been, the position of the NRA that "kids should carry guns to school to defend themselves with". No rational person would ever propose such a thing either. You are buying into an ignorant and uninformed stereotype of what the NRA and the average gun owner stands for.

 

[soberups]

I believe both the kID and his parents have problems. Most likely white, alchohol involved with parents, unsecured, unlocked guns all over the place and no supervision at home is the cause of this problem.
(most school shooters are white by the way)

Peace.

TOS

TOS,

Alcohol is a direct causative factor in far more deaths, injuries, and crimes than guns are. And most gun crimes are also directly or indirectly alcohol-related.

Would you be in favor of banning alcohol? Would you be in favor of placing the same sort of restrictions on alcohol that you would on guns?

How about permits, waiting periods and backround checks for all alcohol purchases? How about serial numbers on all bottles of alcohol, and requiring all alcohol in the home to be stored in "smart bottles" that cannot be opened by anybody under the age of 21? And what about limiting all wine bottles to 4 ounces or less and banning those high-capacity "assault bottles" of alcohol that serve no legitimate "social purpose"?

I know you wont bother answering; I just had to ask anyway. Something tells me you would regard such infringements on YOUR rights as unacceptable. Its only OK to ban or regulate the things that YOU dont personally like.

Peace.

 

[soberups]

. Even when Congress passed the so-called assault weapons ban, what really that was about was the fact that patent deadlines were ending and thus anybody and their brother could start making "assault" weapons which would draw purchases away from gov't contract gun makers and their civilian versions. The assault weapons ban was about protecting markets and replacing old patent domination with new patent domination and now the assault weapons are being produced but on the latest platform with patent protections. "

I normally agree with a lot of what you say, but your statements about the assault weapons ban are completely and totally devoid of any factual basis.

The "assault weapons ban" was nothing more than warm and fuzzy feel-good legislation that banned certain cosmetic features on certain firearms, as well as banning the manufacture or importation of high-capacity magazines. It had nothing to do with crime prevention and it certainly had nothing to do with patent protection. The guns themselves never changed, they simply modified the magazines to hold less bullets and they removed certain combinations of features such as pistol grips, bayonet lugs, and flash suppressors on certain guns.

The people who wrote the legislation didnt know anything at all about guns. They were just trying to ban things that looked scary to them.

 

[wkmac]

I normally agree with a lot of what you say, but your statements about the assault weapons ban are completely and totally devoid of any factual basis.

The "assault weapons ban" was nothing more than warm and fuzzy feel-good legislation that banned certain cosmetic features on certain firearms, as well as banning the manufacture or importation of high-capacity magazines. It had nothing to do with crime prevention and it certainly had nothing to do with patent protection. The guns themselves never changed, they simply modified the magazines to hold less bullets and they removed certain combinations of features such as pistol grips, bayonet lugs, and flash suppressors on certain guns.

The people who wrote the legislation didnt know anything at all about guns. They were just trying to ban things that looked scary to them.

It wasn't about crime prevention, it used the illusion of crime prevention to protect market share for existing gov't connected gun contractors. The so-called legislation had no effect on preventing assault weapons from being on the market but rather it cleared the market from upstart competition. Only if you held patent exclusivity to the new technology, those weapons with the new cosmetic changes, were you still in the game.

Whether you agree or not is up to you but I've always said follow the money so that action is up to you.

One other note: You don't think those legislators are smart enough to write legislation do you? All legislation are written by lobbyists, special interests and 20 something year old ladder climbers. This is another reason law so often contradicts itself or cause bad consequences because everyone is loading the system with self interests and then the whole system tends to work for nobody other than the politicians who claim crisis again and they are the one with all the answers. Truth is, they are brainless liars!

 

[dilligaf]

Yup, I would say any gun owner that leaves the gun-case keys at home is irresponsible !
Parents should know that kids know the house and drawers inside and out.
They certainly spend more time at home then working parents do.

Indirectly, anyone that keeps those gun keys at home while having children in the house is irresponsible, period.

Of course, some of the NRA nuts have different attitudes and some would want to let their kids carry guns to school , so they can defend themselves.

​I can't say that I totally disagree with this.

 

[dilligaf]

There is no "grassy knoll" to school shootings so no big investigation needs to occur. In every school shooting case, there is never a point of view on how the kid got the gun in the first place. That part of the tragedy is left out of the story. Especially on FOX news. There is NEVER a discussion on how the kid obtained the guns and ammo. Its always focused on the injured or killed, but NEVER on the origin of the gun and ammo.

Like in this case, there is no information about the kind of gun, the number of bullets, who bought the gun, who had last possession of that gun, where were the bullets, how did the kid gain access to the gun and ammo, were his parents the people who owned the gun and ammo. There are many questions that will NEVER be asked by a conservative news channel and that only serves to harm the general public.

I hope this kids parents kid SUED by all the people involved for this shooting. I hope the police take away EVERY WEAPON in their home as they are now shown to be completely irresponsible for securing dangerous weapons in their homes.

There will be no condemnation of these parents by anyone in the C9 or the GOP for this school shooting. Its always the same excuse that the KID is to blame alone and this is simply not true.

The parents are responsible for teaching their children to COPE with problems and handle them without the need to resort to violence, but when parents own guns and shoot things up because they can, they do nothing more than teach their children to handle their problems looking down the barrel of a gun.

I believe both the kID and his parents have problems. Most likely white, alchohol involved with parents, unsecured, unlocked guns all over the place and no supervision at home is the cause of this problem.
(most school shooters are white by the way)

Peace.

TOS

​I can't say I totally disagree with this either.