Progressive parasites feed off the Sandy Hook Massacare in order to promote gun control.
The massacre that happened in Newtown Connecticut at Sandy Hook Elementary is fresh on the minds of many Americans. Twenty children all kindergartners and six adults were killed by a mentally disturbed young man Adam Lanzer who killed himself when armed police were closing in. If it weren't for the armed police, Adam Lanzer would have more then likely killed many more people and children. Progressives have seem to have forgotten that point. They are more concerned with attacking the inanimate objects that were used by the mentally disturbed person instead. This tragic event as predicted has become political exploited by the masters of no class and human decency, progressives. Instead of progressives questioning why the shooter wasn't under some sort of psychiatric care they rather focus on using this tragic event in order to try and gin up support for the non solution known as gun control.
posted by Alpha Conservative Male at 12:46 AM
42 Comments:
In typical liberal fashion, the self professed examples of tolerance and compassion are using "death threats" against the president of the NRA. The left always need a centralized bogey man in which to concentrate their hate towards. Nothing like group think orchestrated rabbit hate among the progressive hordes.
Oh they care about him getting mental healthcare, by saying it's easier to get a gun than it is to get mental care.
27 people weren't killed by a madman with a knife in China. 22 or 23 people were slashed.
BIG DIFFERENCE. No deaths.
K " 27 people weren't killed by a madman with a knife in China. 22 or 23 people were slashed.BIG DIFFERENCE. No deaths.
There is no "big difference" the reason why the children and adults that were shot all died was because they were shot multiple times. There are people who get stabbed with a knife and survive and there are also people who get shot and survive. I live in Baltimore and know all about it.Forget the knife attack in China then. If this nut case would have fire bombed the school and killed the same amount of people then what? What would the ban be called for? What if he was able to sneak and booby trap several class room with explosives, would there be a call for a ban on explosives? So where does it end. There are thousands of schools across this country and this is only the second time in history that a school massacre has happened. This is not to diminish what happened but to merely put it in perceptive.
If I recall right, the federal weapons assault ban was passed back in 1994 and expired in 2004. In between that time in 1999 the worst school violence massacre happened, the Columbine High School shootings. My how some people forget history. I thought the federal assault weapons ban was suppose to have prevented Columbine from ever happening. So much for gun control saving lives.
CB-"In typical liberal fashion, the self professed examples of tolerance and compassion are using "death threats" against the president of the NRA."
I find that very ironic. It's similar for those who call themselves "peace protestor" when suddenly they go out and commit acts of violence themselves.
You said it on the nose Tyrone, murder has been around much longer way before the invention of the gun. I wonder if there were people in the old days who demanded "blade control", "stone control", "bow and arrow control"? You don't have to have a gun to kill a bunch of people.
What really gets to me how the progressive go after the police who killed a criminal. They say cops should not have guns because they are "expendable". I heard the arguments about them saying that the police in Britain don't carry guns and crime is down. Well, we're not Britain and I don't know how their laws work. I can guess that there were plenty of bobbies who lost their lives because they did not have a gun simply because the criminal was already armed to the teeth. Many of these progressives don't think about what the cop goes through when he kills a man. All they can think about that the cop is a "stone-cold killer". My brother who was an MP stationed in Germany, had to kill a man because he drew a gun on him and his partner (who was killed) to protect himself. This traumatized him, and he was bitter for a long time.
Finally, you mention about Illinois having the strongest gun laws. Yet for some reason, Chicago has the highest murder rate. No matter what, you can have the toughest gun laws there is, but people can manage to get a gun through the black market, pick one up at a garage sale, or have the skills to manufacture their own.
I don't like guns. But if I have to, I will exercise my Second Amendment rights to purchase one for my own protection. I pray that I will never have to use to take a life just to protect mine. That would be the hardest thing to live with. I would probably understand what my brother went through.
-Big Pop
" I wonder if there were people in the old days who demanded "blade control", "stone control", "bow and arrow control?".
Why of course they were. There was the Steak and Cheese Knife Ban in Limburger, Germany after a chef cut the cheese sickening 12 and killing 5. Then there was the Crossbow ban after William Tell attempt to shoot apples off his 4 sons heads. Unfortunately his missed badly each time. An then there was the Flint & Stone Act of 1402, that limited the size and number of rocks a subject could throw during a public stoning. The Act however, was revised around 1425 to allow women to participate. Heck man, don't you watch Monty Python?
Arming teachers is the answer. I think it's about time Miss Crabapple learned to handle a Glock. An AR-15 closet in every school. Machine gun towers on the playgrounds. America could arm with firearms perhaps 90% of it's citizens. We can show the rest of the world that guns do make society safer. Just arm every law abiding citizen like every law biding country has nuclear weapons. The more nukes, the safer we'll be.
"K. said...
27 people weren't killed by a madman with a knife in China. 22 or 23 people were slashed.
BIG DIFFERENCE. No deaths."
Then I take it this doesn't mean anything either . . .
At least 8 dead in Japan school stabbings
Yeah but someone in my country kill 8 people with a knife in 2001! News flash, kid. Your country have mass-shooting more than 30 times a year. Why can't you talk about your problem? You still scared that the big bad scary Left is going to take away your guns like a baby scared of theft of it's bottle.
I wanted to say this but.....
Hey Tyrone I have the solution why not ban assault weapons from the angry violent white male they are the only ones committing mass murder.
Anonymous-"Heck man, don't you watch Monty Python?"
I was being rhetorical and I've seen every Monty Python episode. The issue about stoning , where women were not allowed to participate, sounds similar to a scene in "The Life Of Brian" where a man was condemned to death for blasphemy.
-Big Pop
Yuuta "Yeah but someone in my country kill 8 people with a knife in 2001! News flash, kid. Your country have mass-shooting more than 30 times a year."
Ah, I must have missed something in translation Yuuta, can you please post the other "29 other mass-shootings which occur ed this year", thanks,
Yuuta "Why can't you talk about your problem? You still scared that the big bad scary Left is going to take away your guns like a baby scared of theft of it's bottle."
What problem Yuuta?The last time a massacre happened in a school was 13 years ago, that hardly resembles a "problem". The problem isn't with the guns but with the mental state of the people who seek them to being with. Furthermore, it's the left who is crying about the need for gun control. They are the ones using every irrational argument available in order to try and push for it not the right. Also, they are the ones demonizing the National Riffle Association in all this not the right. I hope that cleared things up for you.
-Big Pop "I find that very ironic. It's similar for those who call themselves "peace protestor" when suddenly they go out and commit acts of violence themselves. "
Liberals are a walking talking contradiction to everything they say. Liberals talk about the right and racism to death. A blogger friend of mine by the name of Stacy Swimp is black and lives in Michigan. He was at the Michigan state house during the time the right to work bill was signed into law by Governor Synder. A bunch of union goons who are staunch allies of the Democratic Party called Stacey a bunch of racists names and they attacked him, because he supported the right to work bill. Now of course liberals will never call out their goons for attacking people just because they have opposing points of views. Black nor white liberals will never condemn their own when they act out in racist fashion towards a black person who has a opposing point of view. The union goons also attacked conservative pundit Steven Crowder. Again, these people are hypocrites to the highest order. That is why I never take what they say seriously.
This is an example Big Pop of what liberals don't want to talk about and the media don't want to report for obvious reasons.
Union Thugs Destroy Vendor’s Cart While Yelling Racist Epithets For Selling Hot Dogs To Conservatives
Anonymous-"Hey Tyrone I have the solution why not ban assault weapons from the angry violent white male they are the only ones committing mass murder."
Only white males commit mass murder? Perhaps you missed the mass murder of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia led by Pol Pot. How about the mass murders and genocides that are currently going on in the African regions like Darfur? Look what's happening in Syria right now. Look at the crime statistic of black homicide rates in the United States that are committed by other blacks.
So, where did you come up with that analogy, Anonymous.
CB, from his video;"Illinois has the toughest gun control laws in America...Illinois has the toughest gun control laws on the books".
Mind you that, just a few right-wing media outlets attempt to push this apparent falsehood. Apparently they've got you reeled in.
Right-wing "fact spinners" and "figure benders" depend on conservatives like you to further their agenda. What they fear most are people like me who actually perform diligent research by comparing facts (actual accounts based on empirical evidence) vs. mis-information (a.k.a. "LIES"). Figures don't lie, but liars do figure....
According to the following sources, the state of California has the strictest and toughest gun laws in the U.S.
Voice of America.
The Brady Campaign.
The National Rifle Association. "California, the state with the most restrictive waiting period law (15 days on all firearm sales, retail and private)".
That's just to name a few...
So, why (falsely) attack Illinois? I wonder if it has something to do with a president that resided, governed and was elected from the state? Never mind that gun violence (particularly in black communities) is shamefully high. What your cohorts have seen fit to do, is feed you, and other less informed conservatives, another false talking point simply to attack the president. And you call "progressives" parasites? Next time before you record a video filled with right-wing talking points, scratch the surface and pick off some of your parasite cohorts and do your own homework first.
Here's another tid-bit for you. The researchers over at The Daily Beast did a study in January 2011 on the "20 Deadliest Gun States" after the Arizona shooting done by nutcase Jared Lee Loughner. There study found that;
"You're five times more likely to die from a gun in Arizona than Hawaii". Whereas Hawaii has stricter gun laws, and Arizona has far, far less restrictions.
Moreover, Connecticut has stricter gun laws than Illinois, and far, far stricter than Arizona. However, in fact Connecticut's crime rate is below the national average, whereas Arizona's crime rate is above the national average. Mind you, I don't want the government to ban guns. Hell. I've owned as many as 8 guns, and presently own two. What we so-called "progressives" want is sensible gun allowances and restrictions.
The last time a massacre happened in a school was 13 years ago, that hardly resembles a "problem".
There's been a few school massacres this year. Like the seven shot and killed in Oikos. These massacres happen more often than you think.
anon"There's been a few school massacres this year. Like the seven shot and killed in Oikos. These massacres happen more often than you think.:
When I think about a massacre, I think about the Colorado movie theater shooting where 59 people were injuried in 12 shot dead or Columbine where 13 were shot dead and 21 were wounded. The Oikos University shooting was tragic and a senseless waste of life but it was not a massacre. A massacre by definition is "to kill unnecessarily and indiscriminately, especially a large number of persons. Eight students were killed in the Oikos shootings. In 2007 however the Virginia Tech shooting was a massacre were as 32 students were killed and 17 were wounded. Another tie in theme exists between the Oikos shootings and the Virginia Tech Massacre, both shooters were mentally ill just like the movie theater shooter in Colorado and Aadam Lanzer a few days ago. The problem is not with guns but with mentally ill people being able to access guns.
p allen "Mind you that, just a few right-wing media outlets attempt to push this apparent falsehood. Apparently they've got you reeled in. "
Poor allen, again your talking points only expose you in a foolish light. From the Denver Post.
Connecticut gun laws among the toughest in the nation Is that a lie allen? Also did those toughest gun laws prevent this massacre from happening? Yes or no. Again, you can try to deflect points you can't attack by merely labeling them as "right wing" but your inability to face the obvious speaks volume about you not me.
Yuuta, well if you really want some more recent events from "your country" . . .
Man stabs, kills 8 children outside school in China - March 23, 2010
School killer in property dispute - kills 7 children and 2 women - May 2010
Yan Yanming slashes and kills 9 in school dormitory - November 2004
If you want more . . .
China's School Killings
School attacks in China (2010–2012)
Why hasn't "your country" banned knives yet?
By the way, the deadliest school attack in "my country" didn't even involve a single gunshot.
So how about giving me details on those "mass shootings" you mentioned that happen "30 times a year" . . . or was that just BS?
Another thing Yuuta about "your country" and my fear of the Left taking away guns . . . how many people were killed by Mao Tse Tung in "your country"?
"At least 45 million people were worked, starved or beaten to death in China over these four years." How many of them could have defended themselves or maybe even hunted for food to save them from Mao's evil?
So yeah, I'm not only afraid of a tyrannical government taking away my means to defend myself, but also from tyrannies without!
p allen "p allen "According to the following sources, the state of California has the strictest and toughest gun laws in the U.S."
Do your homework allen and read the first sentence of your voice of America link. "California has SOME of the strictest gun control laws in the United States."
It has "SOME of the strictest", it didn't say it was "THE strictest" allen.
p allen "
Right-wing "fact spinners" and "figure benders" depend on conservatives like you to further their agenda. What they fear most are people like me who actually perform diligent research by comparing facts (actual accounts based on empirical evidence) vs. mis-information (a.k.a. "LIES"). Figures don't lie, but liars do figure...."
Left wingers like you can't deal with facts and reality allen,not my problem. The FACT FACT FACT is that Connecticut strict gun control laws could NOT and did NOT prevent the Sandy Hook Massacre from happening, enough said. And also, the Columbine Massacre happened WHILE the Federal Assault Weapon's ban gun control ban was in place, again enough said. No right wing spin, just the pointed facts.
p allen "
According to the following sources, the state of California has the strictest and toughest gun laws in the U.S."
Since you brought up California. Here's the crimes stats for California going back to 1960. Since California has very strict guns laws, like Illinois lets focus on their murder rate for just the past 10 years.
The state of California has had over 20,537 murders in the past ten years with their strict gun laws in place. Let me guess, it's just more "right wing spin" right allen? lol Simple question for you. How do gun control laws prevent criminals from getting guns? Try to at least answer that one question.
p allen "
"You're five times more likely to die from a gun in Arizona than Hawaii". Whereas Hawaii has stricter gun laws, and Arizona has far, far less restrictions. "
You forgot to mention that the main reason for that is because the Mexican drug cartel violence has spilled over into Arizona.
Arizona shares a 370-mile border with Mexico. More than 60% of the illegal drugs in the United States enter the country through Arizona. The state has seen a sharp increase in the past 12 months in drug-related violence. Cities like Phoenix and Tucson have had to create special police task-forces to deal with kidnappings and home invasions — signature drug crimes. Last year, there were more than 700 reported kidnappings related to the Mexican drug cartels in Phoenix, while Tucson authorities reported more than 200 kidnappings. It's not law obeying citizens committing crimes in Arizona allen, sorry. Also, also many of these criminals aren't even American citizens. They aren't buying their guns in gun shops etc. So what else do you have for me? lol
CB"Connecticut gun laws among the toughest in the nation Is that a lie allen? Also did those toughest gun laws prevent this massacre from happening? Yes or no. Again, you can try to deflect points you can't attack by merely labeling them as "right wing" but your inability to face the obvious speaks volume about you not me".
Lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, ROFLMAO!!!!
Connecticut gun laws among the toughest in the nation?? Why of course they are! I'm the one that showed you that they are!
P. Allen; "Moreover, Connecticut has stricter gun laws than Illinois, and far, far stricter than Arizona".
What you can't explain, nor see through your conservative brainwashed own eyes, is that statistically Connecticut (with it's strict gun laws), has far less gun crime than Arizona (with its less strict and fewer gun laws).
And no, it's not a deflection. It's your essay! You made the video! I'm merely given a direct response, which is something I've done here for the last 5, 6, 7 years! If you don't like that I pointed out what you said is not true, hey, it's your blog. You can stop responses and challeges and tell all the lies you want.
Tyrone, you react the same way every time you get caught spreading a falsehood. In reality you attempt a cheap deflection of the subject at hand.
-We both know that Connecticut is a state with strict gun laws. Agreed!
-We both know that these laws didn't prevent the gun violence. Agreed! (although, FYI, no law prevents people from committing any crime)
However, in an attempt to bolster your position and/or political agenda (what ever it is), you present false and misleading information. You do it a lot Tyrone. Afterwards you attempt to blur the issue, as though you never said it.
CB;"Do your homework allen and read the first sentence of your voice of America link. "California has SOME of the strictest gun control laws in the United States."
It has "SOME of the strictest", it didn't say it was "THE strictest" allen".
Now we turn to semantics?
How about what the "TITLE" of the article..
"California Leads US in Restrictive Gun Laws".!!!!! It says LEADS!
Why didn't Connecticut's strict gun control laws prevent Sandy Hook from happening allen? Why doesn't gun control laws prevent any gun crimes from happening? If they don't work, why have them?
p allen "What you can't explain, nor see through your conservative brainwashed own eyes, is that statistically Connecticut (with it's strict gun laws), has far less gun crime than Arizona (with its less strict and fewer gun laws). "
You're the one to talk about being brainwashed genius, lol. Most gun crimes happen in urban metropolitan areas. You live in Detroit, so you know all about that allen, and I live in Baltimore and I also know about it. The state of Connecticut doesn't have any metropolitan cities nor the elements which foster gun crime in the first place genius. Dam, you are dense. Compare the population, education level, poverty metrix and racial make up of NewTown to other areas where gun crimes is a problem. You can go back and look at the gun crime states in Connecticut from the conception of the state to now and it would show that it has always had a historically low gun violent rate even before the gun control laws in that state was passed. Arizona is a completely different story all together. Can your brainwashed self tell me how stricter gun control laws in Arizona can prevent gun violence from Mexican drug cartels overflowing into Arizona? Why is it that California's strict gun control laws couldn't prevent over 20,000 people from being murdered over the past ten years? Why has over 400 people have been killed in Chicago with Illinois having strict gun control laws? Answer those questions, no spin.
p allen "fornia Leads US in Restrictive Gun Laws".!!!!! It says LEADS!"
Who cares allen? It doesn't matter if California or Illinois or what other state had the STRICTEST gun control laws in the country. The bottom line, indisputable fact is that THE GUN CONTROL LAWS DO NOT "WORK"!!! Do gun control laws prevent gangs from obtaining guns? yes or no. Simple question.
Yuuta's country is Japan. He/she was responding to a 2001 school killing in Japan. China is a different country.
So called mass shooting massacres are just the price we pay for freedom. A tiny price for a great freedom. You are more likely to die in a car crash. Liberals are retards.
CB;"The bottom line, indisputable fact is that THE GUN CONTROL LAWS DO NOT "WORK"!!! Do gun control laws prevent gangs from obtaining guns? yes or no. Simple question".
Do gun laws prevent gangs from obtaining gun? NO!
The bottom line, indisputable fact is that NO LAWS PREVENT PEOPLE FROM DOING WHATEVER THEY ARE INTENDED UPON DOING!!!
What's happening here is that the right-wing, and some on the left, are not offering any positive solutions. True idiocy and utter madness has some right-wingers calling for arming teachers. This offers several problems. One, now you must train "A TEACHER" in counter terror tactics. Two, most teachers are college sheltered women who would have no interest in possibly being killed, or KILLING as part of their profession. It's just plain stupidity.
Others have come up with smoke-screen talking points, such as, "rocks, knives, baseball bats, crow bars, etc..." have killed people. You can build a house out of rocks, I've never seen one build out of guns. You can carve a Christmas turkey with a knife, where no gun will slice. You can hit a home run with a baseball bat, jack your car up with a crow bar, build a home from 2x4's. But with a semi automatic AR-15 and thousands of rounds of ammo, you can kill as many people as your twisted skills of mayhem will allow.
So instead of offering solution, many are conjuring up talking points simply to defend or forward their political point of view. Regardless of what many on the right might believe, "GUN CONTROL" (not gun confiscation) has to be, and is a significant part of the solution.
Being that certain "blades" are used specifically for killing, I have no problem with not allowing those blades in schools, public parks, churches and your place of work. However, when someone invents a rock, crow bar, wooden board, car, smothering pillow, or a string with the specific use of killing human beings, then we can ban all guns.
Magma;"So called mass shooting massacres are just the price we pay for freedom. A tiny price for a great freedom. You are more likely to die in a car crash. Liberals are retards".
Perfect example of conservative ignorance and insensitivity. Insensitive because "other peoples lives and children" are a tiny price to pay for his personal fetishes. Ignorant (or a liar) because he portends that car accidents somehow equates to a maniac with an assault rifle. Moreover, ignorant (or a liar) because in several American states Automobile Deaths are now outnumbered by gun deaths. The CDC has also forecasts that American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015.
I say this idiot is a conservative (or possibly an anarchist) because of his assertion that "liberals" are retards. Whatever your political persuasion, accepting violence and mayhem as a "tiny" price to pay for freedom, in itself a threat to your freedom.
p allen responding to Magnus "Perfect example of conservative ignorance and insensitivity. Insensitive because "other peoples lives and children" are a tiny price to pay for his personal fetishes. Ignorant (or a liar) because he portends that car accidents somehow equates to a maniac with an assault rifle. "
You're one to talk about ignorance and insensitivy allen, oh please. Please spare me and others that progressives give a dam about the adults and children killed. Not even 3 hours after the massacre happened a Democrat lawmakers was already saying that Obama should "exploit" this shooting to advance gun control, again spare me. I've heard very little by the left, the media (which are one in the same) and pundits talking about the need to reform laws related to psychiatric care but I've heard nonstop the cries for "gun control". Further, liberals aren't exaactly known for caring about innocent children anyways. They celebrate and advocate the process of killing one million unborn children a year, but I guess and others are suppose to buy into the "sincerity" over the 20 kindergarteners who were killed. Again, spare me. I remember Obama and that fake ass tear during his photo op. This is the same man who supported an infanticide bill while in the Illinois State Senate. Forget killing an unborn baby through the abortion process. Obama supported killing the baby once it was born after a botched abortion. One last time, spare me.
Lining kids up and killing them execution style is not an abortion. A woman has to choose to have an abortion. You don't get to choose who pulls the trigger on your child. I've never had an abortion, but I've lost a child due to gun violence. You as a man will never know the pain of either.
CB;" I've heard very little by the left, the media (which are one in the same) and pundits talking about the need to reform laws related to psychiatric care but I've heard nonstop the cries for "gun control".
Duuuhhhh? What type of weapon is being used in many of these mass killings? What is the murder weapon of choice in Detroit, Chicago, L.A., Dallas, Phoenix, Baltimore, etc...? If Americans were being killed at the same rate with, lets say, bows and arrows, what should be the most practical response to address the mayhem? You'd probably say "buy a gun", right? Forget about the sick heartless people shooting the arrows causing the problem. More weapons should not be a first response.
If Americans are being killed in large numbers by mosquitoes, what would be the best tactic in combating the deaths? More mosquitoes? If Americans are being killed by an over the counter medication, should you leave the medication on the counter until an antidote is found? If a levee breaks and thousands drown, after the flood, should your "FIRST AND INITIAL" areas of avoid deaths be lifeboats, life preservers and teaching people how to swim?
The point here is that you don't have to erratically jump to any one proposal or solution. However, you can't close your eyes and mind to the FACTS that, the mosquitoes are carrying the virus that kills. The over the counter medication is carrying the poison that kills. The levee broke releasing the water that killed. And the arrow shot from the bow is what kills.
Thus, the most logical, practical and sensible avenue of rational thought is to address the issue of "WHAT" killed these people. The "WHO" is what comes next. Therefore it only makes sense to address the "GUN" issue. Mind you, that's not saying that you need to ban guns. You wouldn't need to ban over the counter medications, water levee's, bows and arrows or mosquitoes either! People are using guns to create a murderous society. If you really care about curtailing a murderous society of gun users, wouldn't it make sense to start by looking at the guns?
Good point. The killing only STOPPED when MORE guns showed up.
p allen "Duuuhhhh? What type of weapon is being used in many of these mass killings?":
What is the ratio of gun crimes committed with "handguns vs that of assault weapons allen? The ration is like 98 to 1 if that. Add up all the victims in this country who were killed by handguns and then add up all the victims killed this year by assault style weapons. It's not even remotely close. All of this misguided out crying for weapons that are only used in 2% of gun crimes per year if that.. Give me a break.
p allen "If Americans are being killed in large numbers by mosquitoes, what would be the best tactic in combating the deaths? More mosquitoes?"
Warped logic in an attempt to use absurdity in a failed attempt at trying to use logic I see.
First off, Americans who are murdered are mostly NOT being shot by a criminal using an assault weapon to begin with, take the buzzer on that on allen. Second, Americans aren't mosquitoes, which means that people are not mosquitoes natural enemies. People use natural enemies of mosquitoes to get rid of mosquitoes, they don't draft a law to ban mosquitoes in an attempt to rid themselves of them. Now that is the proper use of absurdity in order to highlight a point.
p allen "If Americans are being killed by an over the counter medication, should you leave the medication on the counter until an antidote is found? "
Did it ever occur to you that if a person is addicted to a certain type of medication, he or she will just find another type of medication to take it's place? That is the problem with you liberals, you try to actually legislate human behavior. You all are also poor students of history. How did prohibition work out when when the government tried to ban the manufacturing, distribution and sale of alcohol? Pot is illegal, yet people find a way to get it. Crack, Pure Cocaine, Ecstasy, Crystal Meth is all illegal, yet people who seek it are able to obtain it, imagine that.
p allen "If a levee breaks and thousands drown, after the flood, should your "FIRST AND INITIAL" areas of avoid deaths be lifeboats, life preservers and teaching people how to swim?
What? Rephrase your statement
Joe Conservative "Good point. The killing only STOPPED when MORE guns showed up."
Liberals will never embrace common sense Joe. They are too emotional with every issue. If I am criminal with a gun looking to hold up a person, I'm sure as hell not going to target a person who I believe is also armed. I'm going to naturally look of the easiest target aka the path of least resistance. Most criminals think that way. If I do not fill like dying if I am a criminal, I'm going to drop my weapon if the supposed victim is armed or a cop pulls a gun on me. It's human nature. Liberals don't get that.
I asked: If a levee breaks and thousands drown, after the flood, should your "FIRST AND INITIAL" areas of avoid deaths be lifeboats, life preservers and teaching people how to swim?"
You ask; "What? Rephrase your statement".
All I'm trying to say is that, an ounce of prevention, is worth a pound of cure. Preventing gun violence starts with addressing the issue of guns. Just as preventing levee breaks begins with making levee's less like to be breached. Preventing drug abuse starts with addressing the drug. What so hard about that to understand? It's a simple concept...
Joe Conservative; "Good point. The killing only STOPPED when MORE guns showed up".
20 kids and 6 adults were killed by a maniac with a high powered assault weapon that fires hundreds of bullets. Dozens of armed officers showed up with enough fire power to battle a small army. Yet you foolishly believe something was "STOPPED?"
Okay, I give in. More guns are the answer to the American gun violence probl..., ahhh.. dilemm... ahhh.. predicamen.. I mean "question."
The NRA's, Wayne LaPierre says armed guards in the schools is the answer. Okay, I'll give in. He went on to say that the guards should be retired police officers and "volunteers." It's a great idea, isn't it? A 50 or 60-ish retired cop. As long as its not one of the hundred or so who commit suicide every year. But hey, that's the chance you take to "STOP" something.
NRA volunteers would be just perfect to thwart an "armed terrorist style attack!" Your kids will be plenty safe guarded by an army of "George Zimmermans."! An army of volunteer wanna-be cops? Wow...I feel safer already.
But, how will you be able to tell the NRA guards (armed with semi or automatic weapons of course! Hell, the attackers have them...) from the attackers in the midst of all the shooting. Simple! The NRA guards can wear "Brown Shirts" with huge NRA logo's on them! Wouldn't that be cool... The NRA could recruit thousands, tens of thousands, perhaps millions of Americans as "School Brown Shirt Guards" to protect our children from other Americans..(just those we think are maniac's, whoever they might be...)
Okay guys, you've convinced me! More guns. Arm everybody! More security camera's. More NRA influence in government! Hell, get rid of government departments like the EPA, CDC, USDA, HUD, Dept Of Ed, etc..., and co-op the NRA as an agency to distribute guns. Stop the terrorists, homosexuals and the pedophiles, criminalize abortion and add more "possible criminal" profiling! More NSA wiretaps, phone, computer and email searches! More airport security searches! More armed soldiers not just in New York, but on all American streets. More religion in government, the work place and schools (as long as it's Christianity of course...). But just don't take away our freedoms!!!!! Damn, I sound like a conservative.
Armed guards do nothing.
There was an armed guard on duty during the Columbine Massacre.
Armed guard won't deter a killer who wants to "suicide by cop".
Mixed messages from the NRA.
The second amendment is necessary to protect ourselves from jackbooted government thugs.
Now, would you please hire 100,000 new government employees, give them guns and station them in our schools?
Armed military officers stationed at every elementary school in the country... Ahhhh, I can smell the Freedom now.
Adam Lanza was armed with an assault weapon with a maxi effective range of over 500 meters. It had a semi-automatic rate of fire of 100 rounds a minute. Each projectile it fired had the ability to penetrate Type II body armor, then enter someone's shoulder and tumble right out the victim's hip. The NRA is proposing to place a policeman in each school to stop someone like Lanza. The policeman will be out gunned. So what will you do then? Arm the police with crew served medium machine guns? This arms race is not the answer. Banning assault weapons is.”
My plan would be to prohibit from the public, semiautomatic firearms with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following: a folding or telescoping stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; a grenade launcher (don't laugh, there are plenty out there); and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds;
These are weapons of war and have no place in the hands of the public.”
The problem is not with guns but with mentally ill people being able to gain access to guns.<<<<<<<<<<<
What level of mental illness would you start denying mentally ill people access to guns? Wayne Lapierre spoke of the lunatics with guns. Would you deny all those suffering from mood disorders? How about anxiety disorders? Or should you just relegated it to Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders? When was the last time you cracked open a DSM IV TR? Studies show that 20% of the American population suffer from a diagnosable mental illness.
Adam Lanza suffered from a mild form of Autism called Aspergers Syndrome. There are plenty of people who are afflicted with this and live very normal lives. However, Adam's mother was a right wing gun enthusiast who use to take him shooting regularly. Given the symptomatology of Aspergers, I can just imagine how repetitive the techniques of shooting went through his mind. It was probably like a scene out of the movies "Taxi Driver" and "Full Metal Jacket". Aspergers suffers are repetitive and ritualistic. Adam Lanza's mental illness was benign until the catalysis of a warped ideology far from the right was introduced regularly.
Regarding the video. It was cited that Adam Lanza was psychotic. Out of all the evidence I heard about Lanza, there were no signs of psychosis. If he were truly psychotic, he wouldn't be responsible for his actions. This was an act of madness, but it seems that the perpetrator understood what he was doing and could appreciate the evilness of his actions. There is no evidence of hallucinations. He wasn't disorganized in carrying out the murders. He had the wherewithal to murder his mother and drive her car to the school. If there were not access to weapons of war, this tragedy may not have happened. Adam's Bushmaster was weapon system of warfare.
But lets get to the reality of the circumstances. The right in America thinks that there will be a race war. They want these weapons of war so as to defend their families. Until you admit this, we are just spinning our wheels.
Post a Comment
<< Home