House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

I do think the people who engage in violent political rhetoric and imagery should take a lesson from this- even if they're stupid enough to think that sort of monologue/dialogue/communication will achieve their purpose, they should also be cognizant of the fact that there are mentally ill people walking around who will, in their delusional state, think that they ARE being directly targeted for communication from these people, as David Berkowitz heard the dog's barking specifically to HIM and you hear stories about people who hear the voices on radio and television speaking directly to THEM.
Do you think that might not have been the case with this mentally ill guy - or was he so very different from other mentally ill people and indifferent to aural stimuli and delusion?

Sort of like how schizophrenia is an illness that requires a genetic predisposition and trauma and or insult to become manifest as opposed to remaining latent- by the same token if a schizophrenic person is then also bombarded with messages from seemingly legitimate and respectable members of society encouraging violence...why the surprise when it actually occurs at the hands of someone who is not in their right mind and cannot discern reality from delusion?

Wouldn't you feel guilty if you said, in front of a mentally ill person, facetiously or otherwise - 'I wish that person would get run over by a bus or something' only to find out the mentally ill person then pushed that person under a bus? I know I would. It wouldn't matter if I didn't mean it literally.
I'd feel at least partially responsible for the outcome.

And David - I'd like to know if you would trade your right to own a gun for one of these innocent victim's lives. In other words, if you didn't need a gun to protect yourself - suppose there was little chance of violence toward you in your lifetime - would you give up your guns in exchange for these peoples' lives?
Because it sounds more and more to me that you just enjoy guns and to hell with who gets killed by them.
For every one shooter that is killed by an armed defender - there are ten or twelve innocent people killed by the armed offender.
How does that square in your mind? It seems to me those ten or twelve innocent victims are nothing more than fodder in your mind...the price they pay - their lives-is incidental to your right to keep a gun.
Do you think about them at all - or only about your right to keep and bear arms?

And conservative/liberal politics has nothing to do with this in my mind. It's all about sanity/insanity and right and wrong.
Sane people should not be engaging in violent rhetoric that can be adopted and misinterpreted by insane people.
That's the bottom line.

But they had only got to Lesson 5 - How and where to carry your weapon in the most stylish manner considering the manner of dress one is in.

Lessons 8 thru 11 were on how to fire the weapon and 13 and 14 were on how to deploy the weapon in a situation where a congressperson was being attacked.

Here's a link to the Sally Satel article mentioned in Frum's column. It was written in 2006 after the Virginia Tech shootings.

http://www.sallysatelmd.com/html/a-ws8.html

He was one of Bush's speech writers.

His advice to Palin is still good. And his advice is good for the rest of us too.

But conservative enough to lie thru his teeth or help others do so.

David's defense of my father and daughter were a matter of public record. This is such a large forum and there's so much activity that you could have easily missed it. That's what I meant. Of course, you weren't privy to my PMs.

I'll say this about David: At least he's not arrogant and rude like you. Unlike you, he's a gentleman. About a year ago in another thread, a new member (i_like_1981) let it be known that he was prejudiced against "jocks." Never mind that for years he had been subjected to physical bullying by "jocks" at his school in London (for example, having his head jammed into a toilet bowl containing urine). Not that you cared about this, either. In a P.E. class after a game of cricket in which he had no choice but to participate and his team lost, one of his "teammates" walked up to him and deliberately smashed his face with a cricket bat, breaking his nose. A bit more traumatic than having a slurpie poured down the back of your shirt, wouldn't you say? (You know what I'm talking about.) The perp of this physical assault (which, in fact, was a crime) was not sent to juvenile detention (as if the British even have such), but was merely suspended from school for a few days. When the perp (who may have eventually become a professional athlete) returned to school, he shoved i_like_1981 into a locker. (So much for repentance.) So, here's i_like_1981 with his prejudice against "jocks" -- which, if not be be condoned, at least was understandable. Then here you come along -- Mister Bleeding-Heart Liberal, full of compassion and understanding for everyone (except, of course, for those who don't share your political views) -- and you call i_like_1981 (someone whom you had never addressed before, a complete stranger) a "pathetic f---ing loser." Wow, what compassion! (And I'm not even a conservative, folks! Well, except perhaps according to Cycloptichorn's rather broad definition.) That particular insult, sir, may be applied to you, and with considerable justification.

I had absolutely no intention of bringing up this matter or any of the past discord (certainly not in this thread), but you forced my hand by reacting like the little smart aleck you are. You started this; I finished it. Someone had to tell you off. (By the way, say what you want. I don't care about that. I won't be reading any of your replies.) End of story.

If Om Sig Dave were I_like_1981, he would have filled those jocks so full of lead that their time for the 100 yard dash would have doubled.

dave's arrogant hat is a different color than cyclo's.

they both wear them proudly on occasion...

Hah, that guy is crazy as **** - the concept that anyone should defend him for any reason is beyond me. He was crazy from the first moment he's shown up. I've never seen anyone make death threats on this site the way he did and I hope he's banned.

I don't know who told you I'm a bleeding-heart Liberal. I'm certainly not one.

Read and respond or not, I could care less. I don't have time for your juvenile mood swings. You go from offering to give me your phone number (!?) to telling me you'll not respond to my posts. It's the way I would expect a pissy high-school girl to act.

Cycloptichorn

A major difference being that Cy doesn't brag incessantly, [or even at all for that matter] about taking an active role in destroying people's lives simply because they held different political views.

I strongly suspect that given the nature of the McCarthy witch hunts that there were many destroyed with little to no regard as to the facts yet OmSigD seems to be exceedingly proud of the idea that he got to be involved in this.

This, despite his frequent trumpeting of how important individualism is and how damned important it is for government to stay out of people's lives.

I know David sometimes teases with his "comrade" bit and that his political views are, shall we say, dogmatic. But he's still more polite and respects others more than Cycloptichorn, who's driven by his own sense of self-importance.

but they weren't people, they were commies

And Goebbels was one of Hilter's speech writers.

Om's great at pretense and it seems that he's tricked you, big time, Wmw. Ask Sig about his support for Joe McCarthy and he'll gladly entertain you with a view of Mr Hyde.

Obviously, we should consider censoring that dog.

Really, we are not going to live in a society that speaks based on what psychopath may be listening. If I say "I hope a bus hits her," and you run over her with a bus, please hold your breath for me to feel guilty.

That dog has been censored for over 33 years now!

"Don't retreat, RELOAD!"

Reload your gun after you have fired it.
After you have fired it at the political targets I have supplied to you.

No, it's nothing to do with the rhetoric of the right.

McT,
You don't think she meant for anyone to kill Democrats, do you?

Don't you think this is a little bit of an over-simplification of the issue?

What if you spent every day talking about what a threat some lady is, to a large group of people? How we would all be better off without her? How that lady is directly threatening the lives of everyone in America because of her ideas?

What if you had drawn a picture of the lady getting ran over by, let's call it, the 'freedom bus.' And other people talk about killing this lady too - though of course they carefully use 'code words,' so that you can't come right out and accuse someone of calling for her death.

Still think all that's cool? Wouldn't feel bad at all?

I mean, I would feel bad. Personally.

Cycloptichorn

I am flapping my imaginary wings