Today's Tragedy

controling guns won't keep them out of the hands of those that will use them for harm and no good. It might make us feel warm and safe, but the answer is much deeper than just gun control. I am more than willing to consider a ban on assault rifles and high cap magazines but don't think this is the answer to solve the greater issue. False security is just that, false.

We have a society ripe with mental instability and its taboo to discuss it or ask for help. People need help and parents need to be responsible for their children and demanding help. Its our responsibility together as a community to help those in need and build a system where life is measured as priceless and anything less won't be tolerated. You should not be considered less of a person for telling someone if your afraid of your child/friend/family is threatening or "could" harm someone else.

We also have news media outlets that sensationalize these acts and give the culprit more than 15 minutes of fame. Stop offering their culprits name in every story and measuring the size of damage as if someone is trying to up the last one. You have a moral obligation as does every citizen of our country and the camera doesn't excuse you from it.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Our "tyrannical" government has tanks and nuclear weapons, good luck against that with your AR-15. Oh, and a PGM coming from a Predator is just subsonic, so you won't hear it coming to shoot with your AK-47, either. Just saying. You know, if my kid pokes my other kid in the eye with a fork, I can sit him down and give him a long talk about how he shouldn't poke his brother in the eye with a fork, and maybe that will work. Or I could throw him out the back door and see how he does in the snow. Or I could put the forks in a drawer he can't reach, so the only time he gets a fork in his hand is when we're eating and I can keep an eye on him. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Not a big fan of the AK family. They have proven to be ineffective against fast attack submarines....

The "real" purpose behind my comment was to illustrate the fact that the 2nd amendment has everything to do with self defense and not "sporting" arms although there is really no difference. The first amendment applies to speech I like and some I don't but protected none the less.

I'm not willing to trade with my rights for the sake of perceived safety.

I will pray for those lost and those who have lost. I wish a great Holliday for everyone on this forum, including those whose political views differ from my own. May you all make several thousand dollars detailing a Bugatti which you get to keep when you're done (detail forum specific wish for good tidings).:xyxthumbs:
 
which-of-these-signs-will-prevent-another-tragedy.jpg


nuf said :props:
 
Fast Eddie said:
I guess you missed the part were I stated that most people I know bought firearms for competitions, so the intended use of that firearms was to compete, and nothing more. Someone saying that the intent of these purpose built firearms is anything but what the owner had intended, to compete, would be giving false information.

If you use a toyota to mow down a crowd of people, it's considered a deadly weapon.
Click to expand...

I fully understand that one of the uses of guns is for competition. Another use is hunting. I am fine with both. I'm not looking to confiscate the guns of law abiding citizens and I am fully aware of the existence of the Second Amendment and am not demanding its repeal. I am also not so naive to think that a couple extra controls on the purchase of guns will fully solve the problem. If a bad person who is determined enough wants to get a hold of weapons, he will find a way.

But to respond to a number of posters on this thread, Adam Lanza did not kill 26 people in that elementary school with a musket or a Toyota or a bottle of scotch. He killed them using assault weapons. Isn't it worth doing what we can to prevent the senseless death of so many children? Our right to the freedoms provided in the Second Amendment are a good thing, but it doesn't necessarily trump their right to live.
 
KenR said:
But to respond to a number of posters on this thread, Adam Lanza did not kill 26 people in that elementary school with a musket or a Toyota or a bottle of scotch. He killed them using assault weapons. Isn't it worth doing what we can to prevent the senseless death of so many children? Our right to the freedoms provided in the Second Amendment are a good thing, but it doesn't necessarily trump their right to live.
Click to expand...

So many look at this in black and white terms (like eveything today in our polarized politics). There should be some middle ground between everyone having a gun and nobody having a gun (shouldn't there??). Here's a pretty balanced, common-sense viewpoint from someone who has worked for several Republican presidents: Honor the victims -- with action - CNN.com
 
Flash Gordon said:
It's hard enough to find quality educators without demanding they be trained murderers. I for one wouldn't want my child around that kind of enviroment

Where in the bible did Jesus teach we are to kill are enemy?
Click to expand...

You know Flash, most of the time you are silly and frivolous with what you post (and we all enjoy it!), but it sometimes makes us forget what a caring and thoughtful person you are (as evidenced by your charity work and your contributions in this thread).

It's kind of ironic how this tragedy has been blamed on our decaying society and the normalization of glorification of guns and violence (media, movies/tv, video games) but the solution is...glorification of guns and violence.

It's kind of funny how the circle works, we all agree the problem is crazy people, so how do we control the crazy people? Well, that would require medical attention, probably. So how many will raise their hand to pay more taxes so we can fund some crazy-people remediation programs?

If you think that there is no connection, back in the 80's there was a huge influx of homeless people in New York City. People thought it was the economy, etc. I know someone who worked in the health care field in New York state, who told me unequivocally that the state had cut funding to the state mental hospitals, causing thousands of marginally functional patients to be discharged, who wound up homeless.

So since the consensus of the contributors to this thread, by majority, feel that guns are not the problem in these incidents, and I will postulate that media coverage, violent movies, lack of faith, etc., are not enough by themselves to cause people to go on murderous rampages, crazy people are the problem.

Therefore, let's hear some suggestions on crazy people elimination (let's call it CPE). Whose responsibility is it, how will it be conducted, how will these people be identified?
 
Flash Gordon said:
It's hard enough to find quality educators without demanding they be trained murderers. I for one wouldn't want my child around that kind of enviroment

Where in the bible did Jesus teach we are to kill are enemy?
Click to expand...
I don't know anyone "personally" that would categorize someone that's armed and trained to protect children as a "trained murderer". I don't think a police officer or armed security guard would appreciate being called a trained murderer either, but I guess there is no law against calling someone that.
 
I have read most of the post on this tread. Most of them would be really funny, if they were not so sad. People are really nuts when it comes to gun ownership. In parts of this country gun ownership is understanable for sport ( hunting) for safety ( if you live 50 miles from the nearest Police). But 50 mm rifles?. Semi Automatic pistol and rifles? Attack military weapons? Why? It is just beyond my understanding. If you need this kind of stuff why not make a career of the military?
 
slimnib said:
I have read most of the post on this tread. Most of them would be really funny, if they were not so sad. People are really nuts when it comes to gun ownership. In parts of this country gun ownership is understanable for sport ( hunting) for safety ( if you live 50 miles from the nearest Police). But 50 mm rifles?. Semi Automatic pistol and rifles? Attack military weapons? Why? It is just beyond my understanding. If you need this kind of stuff why not make a career of the military?
Click to expand...

Why do people need a Cadillac Escalade when most likely, a Toyota Camry will due? Why do couples with no kids buy 5000 square foot homes with 5 bedrooms and 7 bathrooms when a 1 bedroom apartment should suffice? Why have a 4 slice toaster when all you ever toast are 2 pieces of bread? Your argument lends well to politicians but not to an overwhelming majority of the population. Neither you or I should be choosing which freedoms another person should have or should give up. What's beyond my understanding is why so many are so quick to give up so much of their freedom, whether it be on guns, what they can eat or drink or smoke, or anything for that matter. In all actuality, it's more like people want to give up other people's freedom because they personally don't have any skin in the game. We all have a personal obligation to keep these things from happening; placing that responsibility on the governments' shoulders will only result in higher taxes, less freedom, and nothing to show for it.
 
We are talking about the murder of 26 people and how it can hopefully be prevented in the future. Comparing that to the purchase of a fancy car or the number of rooms one can have in ones home seems a bit off base.

"If I can't have an assault rifle you should not have more than four bathrooms" is a tough argument to make.

I'm not trying to be snarky here. It's just a very highly charged topic.
 
I was really trying hard to avoid this discussion. But all this crap about we don't need this and that. It's not about needs its about rights. Our founders didn't create the "bill of needs". They created the "bill of rights ". It's not what I need or don't need. It's about what I have the right to lawfully own. If the gun grabbers want more "gun control" then amend the constitution. Get 2/3 2/3 3/4. But why is it the Cities with the most restrictive gun laws also have the highest gun crime/murder rate. Oh and assault rifles? What about the Clinton assault rifle ban and the Columbine massacre? Didn't work did it? Personal responsibility people. It all starts in the home. Great write up Bobby.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
.

Therefore, let's hear some suggestions on crazy people elimination (let's call it CPE). Whose responsibility is it, how will it be conducted, how will these people be identified?
Click to expand...

I think if someone would've spent time with this young man giving him encouragment, letting him that someone loved him I doubt he would've reacted as he did

Thanks for jumping under the bus with me :props:

Fast Eddie said:
I don't know anyone "personally" that would categorize someone that's armed and trained to protect children as a "trained murderer". I don't think a police officer or armed security guard would appreciate being called a trained murderer either, but I guess there is no law against calling someone that.
Click to expand...


Police officers know that carrying a gun and possibly having to use it comes with the package they signed up for

You've been listening to Rush Douchbuagh to long. That was a terrible comparison

slimnib said:
I have read most of the post on this tread. Most of them would be really funny, if they were not so sad. People are really nuts when it comes to gun ownership. In parts of this country gun ownership is understanable for sport ( hunting) for safety ( if you live 50 miles from the nearest Police). But 50 mm rifles?. Semi Automatic pistol and rifles? Attack military weapons? Why? It is just beyond my understanding. If you need this kind of stuff why not make a career of the military?
Click to expand...


:iagree:
 
KenR said:
We are talking about the murder of 26 people and how it can hopefully be prevented in the future. Comparing that to the purchase of a fancy car or the number of rooms one can have in ones home seems a bit off base.

"If I can't have an assault rifle you should not have more than four bathrooms" is a tough argument to make.

I'm not trying to be snarky here. It's just a very highly charged topic.
Click to expand...

My intention was not to draw a direct correlation between guns and cars or guns and toasters. My point is, taking guns away from law abiding citizens will not stop this type of mess in the future. I don't own any guns; heck, I've never even shot a gun in my 31 years of life, but I'm long past the initial knee-jerk reaction of taking something away from everyone because of the actions of a few deranged individuals. Again, we all have a personal responsibility in this. If your brother or your uncle or the crazy neighbor down the street that thinks he's awesome because he carries a gun gives a legitimate reason to fear that they may be a harm to society, then it is our responsibility to get that individual some help.

"Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul
 
Thank God we've spent the last 45 years progressing. During the years between the end of WWII and the early sixties it was hardly safe to step out one's front door.
 
Y2KSVT said:
My intention was not to draw a direct correlation between guns and cars or guns and toasters. My point is, taking guns away from law abiding citizens will not stop this type of mess in the future. I don't own any guns; heck, I've never even shot a gun in my 31 years of life, but I'm long past the initial knee-jerk reaction of taking something away from everyone because of the actions of a few deranged individuals. Again, we all have a personal responsibility in this. If your brother or your uncle or the crazy neighbor down the street that thinks he's awesome because he carries a gun gives a legitimate reason to fear that they may be a harm to society, then it is our responsibility to get that individual some help.

"Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul
Click to expand...

We do have some common ground here. Not looking for knee-jerk reaction either. Just looking for a solution, or at least a partial one.
 
Flash Gordon said:
It's hard enough to find quality educators without demanding they be trained murderers. I for one wouldn't want my child around that kind of enviroment

Where in the bible did Jesus teach we are to kill are enemy?
Click to expand...

There is a difference between just killing someone whom you regard as an enemy, and stopping someone who is in the act of killing people.
 
Flash Gordon said:
It's hard enough to find quality educators without demanding they be trained murderers. I for one wouldn't want my child around that kind of enviroment

Where in the bible did Jesus teach we are to kill are enemy?
Click to expand...


WHAT!?!?!?!? Do you own a Bible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top