Congresswoman and 17 others shot in Arizona

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Azure

Likewise a 'war on guns'....won't stop gun violence.

And yet the countries that place controls on the number and types of guns individuals can own have far less gun violence.

Fewer guns = less gun violence.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

One thing that always stands out to me is that they always find these massive gun and explosive collections after the shooting and these guns range from the legal to the completely illegal.

I'm not against gun control, but if your going to have gun control then you need to also have the criminal justice system to back it up.

Canada for example has gun control, but we're seeing gun crimes because there's not a big enough punative bite for people that use legal and illegal guns in crimes.

Plus on the whole thing, Canada and the U.S. and guns. Canada was never the gun culture that the States was. You will never ever be able to remove something thats mentioned in the constitution.

your right there has only been 27 ammendements

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Well I understand this fellow was an atheist, so I guess it might be hard for the atheists here to blame religion for this one.

I'll take...
Zealous dedication to an irrational conclusion for $800, Alex

[Azure]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

And yet the countries that place controls on the number and types of guns individuals can own have far less gun violence.

Fewer guns = less gun violence.

Pretty generic statement to make considering there are a lot of different variables to consider.

If you go purely by statistics, obviously fewer guns = less gun violence simply because based on percentages, less guns means less guns to be involved in a violent act. But, like I said, a lot of different variables you're not considering.

From the unprotected border, which basically assures that illegal guns get transported into the US on a daily basis; a culture that is in some ways fanatical about guns, which isn't exactly bad, but it does lead to accidents, stolen guns being involved in crimes, and more guns being made, which means more guns ending up in the hands of criminals.

Personally I think people who want gun control to fix their problem are delusional. Education has been the #1 factor in keeping teenagers off drugs. Not the 'war on drugs.' Why should we believe anything else to happen with guns.

And like I said earlier, since the majority of gun crime is the result of people being involved in illegal activities, one would be a bit naive to actually believe gun legislation will prohibit criminals from further obtaining firearms, and using them in whatever trade they're involved in.

Gun control is a quick fix solution that won't work. At least not in the US. Too many other problems involved.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by T@T

Holy crap people, the 2nd Amendment was written over 200 years ago, I'm fairly certain if the for-fathers had known how out of control guns would become it never would have been written.

Constitutional amendments can be changed.

Yes, the Constitution was written over 200 years ago, but it was created as a way to escape the authoritarian oppression and tyranny over mankind in the prior 500-1000 years and even more really. Besides, governments have killed far more people with guns than citizens have.

[Azure]

Another question is, if the guy only wanted to kill political figures, why were 18 people shot? Maybe he was just pissed at shot at everyone.

At this point its hard to say if there was an intended target.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Neither side is on the side of angels.

That is grade A bullshinguard and the exact problem with this debate.

One of the first posts in this thread was something like "when I heard a congresswoman was shot I would have bet my house it was a democrat" and he was absolutely right.

Equating the moral actions of the two parties is wrong. The republicans are a national political party that endorses ignorance and hatred, I consider proof of this to be the consumers of their message acting this way.

The sin of the left is marginalization?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I once saw a steer take a shot gun plug in between the eyes at about 2 feet away and only drop to his front knees before getting back up. It took a 22 bullet afterwards to kill him. A 22 pistol probably would have killed her on the spot because it would have rattled around inside of her head instead of breaking out the other side.

He also might have been useing full metal jackets which would have limited the damage. That might also explain how he got so many hits in before someone reacted. Some shots might have gone through more than one person.

That's the worst thing I've ever heard! Not a good image!

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's the worst thing I've ever heard! Not a good image!

That's one of the reasons the military uses full metal jackets. The other is that a wounded soldier takes up more of your enemies resources than a dead soldier.

[GirlySports]

Yeah but that's the military!

This is a community function! Ribbon-cutting!

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Gozer

That is grade A bullshinguard and the exact problem with this debate.

One of the first posts in this thread was something like "when I heard a congresswoman was shot I would have bet my house it was a democrat" and he was absolutely right.

Equating the moral actions of the two parties is wrong. The republicans are a national political party that endorses ignorance and hatred, I consider proof of this to be the consumers of their message acting this way.

The sin of the left is marginalization?

It's not just the Republicans that are angry though Gozer. Obama has pretty low approval rates, and many democrats are unsatisifed as well.
I'm not sure how the Republicans promote hatred....

[HPLovecraft]

Some crazy shiznit sure goes down a lot in the US of A.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

It's not just the Republicans that are angry though Gozer. Obama has pretty low approval rates, and many democrats are unsatisifed as well.
I'm not sure how the Republicans promote hatred....

The Republicans aren't, at least not overtly, promoting hatred.

What they are doing is embracing an ignorant and hateful element of their party, riding the wave of the popularity of Rush Beck and Palin while cherry-picking their arguments solely to oppose Obama. The Republicans are shirking their role as opposition party in favor of sitting on their hands for two more years and letting the fringe define the debate.

The republicans aren't saying these things; (media matters)
http://wv=ETxEcWFMU1s&
but by refusing to engage the President by stonewalling anything he tries to accomplish is implicitly endorsing the fringe's message.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Well I understand this fellow was an atheist, so I guess it might be hard for the atheists here to blame religion for this one.

And if he was a bible thumper you wouldn't be posting in this thread

We all know how you work.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by T@T

And if he was a bible thumper you wouldn't be posting in this thread

We all know how you work.

Actually I was posting in this thread before his faith was known.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Gozer

That is grade A bullshinguard and the exact problem with this debate.

One of the first posts in this thread was something like "when I heard a congresswoman was shot I would have bet my house it was a democrat" and he was absolutely right.

Equating the moral actions of the two parties is wrong. The republicans are a national political party that endorses ignorance and hatred, I consider proof of this to be the consumers of their message acting this way.

The sin of the left is marginalization?

The greatest lie of ideology is that the left is somehow exempt from any wrongdoing. Who heightened US involvement in the Vietnam War? Who got the French out of Algeria?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Gozer

The Republicans aren't, at least not overtly, promoting hatred.

What they are doing is embracing an ignorant and hateful element of their party, riding the wave of the popularity of Rush Beck and Palin while cherry-picking their arguments solely to oppose Obama. The Republicans are shirking their role as opposition party in favor of sitting on their hands for two more years and letting the fringe define the debate.

The republicans aren't saying these things; (media matters)
http://wv=ETxEcWFMU1s&
but by refusing to engage the President by stonewalling anything he tries to accomplish is implicitly endorsing the fringe's message.

The bolded part is correct, everything else misses your own point.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by peter12

The greatest lie of ideology is that the left is somehow exempt from any wrongdoing. Who heightened US involvement in the Vietnam War? Who got the French out of Algeria?

My argument is not historic.

edit: the greatest lie of ideology isn't nearly as bad as I had guessed

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Actually I was posting in this thread before his faith was known.

Good thing we have a man of the cloth in here to gloat about theism and theorize about type of ammunition used in the murders.

Preach on!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Gozer

My argument is not historic.

Then why make it?