Another mass shooting in America

[Scar Symmetry]

Why does Piers Morgan have a US TV show? Everyone hates the guy.

I'm glad that Alex Jones has shown his true colours though, I've never liked the guy and I want him to be exposed for the political extremist he is, in my mind he's no better than Limbaugh, just like the guy says.

 

[Watty]

Why does Piers Morgan have a US TV show? Everyone hates the guy.

Because he can? And not everyone hates him.... Hell, I'd never watched his show before this point and had therefore never formed an opinion about him. All I know is that he and I tend to agree on this topic.

 

[Danukenator]

That video is INSANE! He managed to plug: Rape, Hitler, Stalin, Suicide Pills, Invasion of America, America is born of guns, Gangs, Corporate cover ups, NWO conspiracy and 9/11 in the span of 30 seconds.

 

[habicore_5150]

Trying to move away from this whole gun talk, apparently there's some Connecticut people wanting to do "something" about the shooting.

Only thing I can really say to this: "Not gonna get rid of the problem."

https://www.gamespot.com/news/connecticut-town-collecting-and-destroying-games-6401982

If any of those people come across this, I urge you to put down the wad of $100 bills, and use your heads for once

above quote is void:
I guess they finally listened, they decided to stop with this whole game burning BS: Connecticut Town Cancels Planned Game Burning | Side Mission | GameTrailers

 

[Randy]

Scapegoat Hunter - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 01/08/13 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

 

[Dooky]

I wonder what it's like to live inside the mind of Alex Jones... I'm quite certain it must be scary.
That dude is paranoid as all hell! It's a wonder he's ever travelled overseas without his gun at the risk of being caught up in a "Red Coat" Civil War of a Government looking to take full control of its people. Sheez.

 

[ST3MOCON]

Mom who shot intruder inspires gun control foes - Yahoo! News

A woman home alone with her children shoots a home invader with her husband and 911 dispatch on the line. On the phone for 10 mins and no police are there. Got her gun from the safe goes and hides and husband reminds her of the lessons he taught her. Good for them that a responsible husband taught his wife how to defend herself and children.

 

[Jakke]

This whole thread is an opinion piece.

Wow... Is that your comeback? Yes, there are a lot of opinions here, but they are different opinions. As you can see there are americans both pro and anti-guns, and the odd foreigner like me.

Did you actually think that an opinion piece written by someone who is very pro-guns would convince anyone? I mean, I could pull out a lecture by David Icke, would that convince you that there are reptilians living in the moon?
There are plenty of editorials claiming that the jews control the world, is that hypothesis automatically valid because someone published it?

 

[ST3MOCON]

Wow... Is that your comeback? Yes, there are a lot of opinions here, but they are different opinions. As you can see there are americans both pro and anti-guns, and the odd foreigner like me.

Did you actually think that an opinion piece written by someone who is very pro-guns would convince anyone? I mean, I could pull out a lecture by David Icke, would that convince you that there are reptilians living in the moon?

Do you actually think that after reading so many opinions on this thread from people who are very anti-gun would convince me?

Double standards I guess right?

 

[Jakke]

Do you actually think that after reading so many opinions on this thread from people who are very anti-gun would convince me?

No, because I don't care what you believe. I would hope that you are a rational human being and therefore adjust your worldview based on observation, but my continued existance on this planet does not depend on what you believe.


But I do hope you know the difference between a partisan opinion piece in a newspaper and the more thoughtful members here on both sides who dig up statistics and facts on an in-depth level.

 

[Randy]

Mom who shot intruder inspires gun control foes - Yahoo! News

A woman home alone with her children shoots a home invader with her husband and 911 dispatch on the line. On the phone for 10 mins and no police are there. Got her gun from the safe goes and hides and husband reminds her of the lessons he taught her. Good for them that a responsible husband taught his wife how to defend herself and children.

"Gun control foes" for like, the last fucking time, the number of people saying that we should take away "all the guns" is so little. I wish people would stop going that direction.

From the clips I posted just above (John Stewart and Piers Morgan), some of the most "liberal, anti-gun" folks you'll find in the mainstream media, both of them said they don't want to "take away all the guns" and Piers Morgan even mentions (on occasion) he supports the use of a firearm for self-defense in situations of home invasion.

How a story about an inept police force and a woman using a gun exactly as fair minded Americans prescribe (try 911, keeping the gun in a safe but being trained on how to used it as a last resort) proves anything of substance in this debate is beyond me. Stop suggesting that all "gun control" advocacy means removing all guns.

Jesus fucking christ.

 

[Treeunit212]

But, "guns don't kill people".

They don't. And that's a liberal saying that.

I'd recommend everyone to listen to the arguments of Dan Carlin in the "Gunning for Violence" episode of his podcast Common Sense. He explains very well why the NRA, despite it's current state of radical extremism and total disregard for common sense, is the best equipped to lead the conversation on gun control.

He argues that although guns, along with many many other factors, are the problem, attacking guns themselves won't solve anything. He cites the failings of Prohibition, pre-1970's NRA politics, and the idea that the only logical solution should be that of treating gun crime much, much more seriously.

Give thirty years to anyone who commits a gun crime of any kind, and, like with drunk driving, the disincentive will take care of a lot of the problem.

 

[Randy]

There's some truth to that, but it's not a perfect analogy.

You mentioned prohibition, I'm assuming it not preventing alcohol use...? We're not talking taking away all guns to prevent people from using them in any capacity (as prohibition was enacted to do with alcohol), we're talking about preventing guns being used to carry out murder. There's no comparison of a law built of moral prudishness and absolutes, to a nuanced bill about access to dangerous weapons specifically directed at criminals and the mentally ill. A closer comparison would be the fact we have DWI laws and restrictions on alcohol for those guilty of substance abuse related crimes, and those restrictions have proportionately led to reductions in those crimes.

I do agree that "gun crimes" should carry a stricter penalty but that needs to include incentives against straw purchase and unsecured weapons that can be easily stolen.

EDIT: Another point about DWI laws... don't forget, you don't need to wrap your car around a tree to lose your license or go to jail. It's a law of prevention. You might be Mario Andretti when you're buzzed but if you reach a road block and you blow over the legal limit, you're going to jail anyway.

 

[ST3MOCON]

I do agree that "gun crimes" should carry a stricter penalty but that needs to include incentives against straw purchase and unsecured weapons that can be easily stolen.

So someone who can't afford to buy a safe but maybe puts a safety lock on their firearm should be punished for having it stolen in a shitty neighborhood?

 

[synrgy]

I don't think it's unreasonable to require safe keeping.

I can't just go out and buy/drive a car; I have to prove that I know how to operate one safely, and I have to pay for my license to drive it, and pay to insure my driving, and pay for regular safety and emissions inspections, not to mention any maintenance.

 

[Randy]

So someone who can't afford to buy a safe but maybe puts a safety lock on their firearm should be punished for having it stolen in a shitty neighborhood?

It's certainly negligence.

If Adam Lanza hadn't killed his mother, do you think she should have been held at all liable for him carrying out that attack with her weapons? Honest question.

 

[ST3MOCON]

In California you are required to have a trigger lock or safe when purchasing. You go through background and safety checks for handguns and rifles already. You need to pass a handgun certification test before you can buy a handgun.Essentially what randy is saying, if we apply this to cars synrgy is that if you forget to lock your car you will be punished. If you leave your window down you will be punished. I don't think punishing a victim is the answer. If your gun is in your house than it is already under lock and key.

 

[Randy]

Answer my question directly.

 

[ST3MOCON]

It's certainly negligence.

If Adam Lanza hadn't killed his mother, do you think she should have been held at all liable for him carrying out that attack with her weapons? Honest question.

First off I wrote that response before I saw you post.

Adam Lanza is responsible for the killing. No one else. Even if he didn't kill his mother. He stole the guns they weren't given to him. He killed his own mom. Who's to say the guns weren't locked and he unlocked them after he killed her. Neither you or I have any idea what went on in that house.

 

[synrgy]

Continuing my/your car analogy:

If my car is uninsured, then someone steals it and smashes it into another car, I'm at least partially liable for damages, not to mention being officially on the hook for having an uninsured vehicle.