Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@BillRM,

Quote:

Or a few gasoline containers

Stealth is a problem when youre walkin around with two cans of gas. Also, Id think it would be difficult to break into the school lobby with its reinforced (chicken wire) glass with a gas can.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

oralloy,

Quote:

the Democrats hate the Constitution.

Wow! That's really out of touch with reality. He doesn't even recognize how the GOP has been destroying unions (un-democratic), voter suppression (right to vote protected by our Constitution), and discrimination against gays and lesbians (unequal treatment under our laws).

This guy needs a head exam! He makes a statement without providing any support for it.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Killing small children trapped in small rooms does not take firepower of any kind.
Going to try to outlaw all means of killings under that kind of situation?

No, just the ones being more routinely used--which are particular types of firearms, and large capacity clips.

Just because you can't eliminate all means of killing, does not mean we should not better control, and regulate, the most common methods of mass murder which are currently being used in this country.

Because you can't control the spread of all diseases doesn't mean you don't attempt to control the spread of some of them.

2 Replies

@RexRed,

I'm gonna play play the devil's advocate here a bit, if 12 kids were killed by a man with two 7 shot .357 revolvers, would that be the next bit of gun control?

What about Charles Whitman who killed 14 people and wounded countless others with a basic M1 carbine. That rifle didn't have a 100 round mag (or even a 20 or 30 round mag)

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Two more instances of hyperbole on your part, oralloy.

Nope. Telling the truth is not hyperbole. It does not matter how much you dislike hearing the truth. Telling the truth is still not hyperbole.

oralloy wrote:

I'm not familiar with whatever argument he made, but we are not about to give up our freedom just because the Democrats hate the Constitution.

That is the truth. We are not going to give up our freedom just because the Democrats hate the Constitution.

oralloy wrote:

Those people are planning to take our freedom away, and they are planing to do it by grievously violating our Constitutional rights.

That is also the truth. The Democrats are planning to take our freedom away, and the Democrats are planning to do it by grievously violating our Constitutional rights.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Calm down. Give up on the hyperbole.

No matter how much you dislike hearing the truth, the truth will never be hyperbole.

Frank Apisa wrote:

In response to my question, "Are you saying it is reasonable to characterize those people as “hating our freedom and plotting to assault the Constitution?”

...you said: "No. There was no opposition to freedom. Nor was there any attempt to violate the Constitution."

Well, the people you are calling haters of the Constitution are not attempting to "violate" it.

Yes they are. They are trying to pass a measure that is a grievous violation of our Constitutional rights.

When people try to violate other people's rights, the proper English language term for it is: "trying to violate people's rights".

Frank Apisa wrote:

They may be attempting to modify or change it in part...but that is exactly what those instances are.

Nope. A attempt to violate the Constitution is not an attempt to modify it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

You have got to get it...so why pretend that you do not?

No. There is no requirement that I accept a lie as if it were the truth.

Frank Apisa wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Those people are planning to take our freedom away, and they are planing to do it by grievously violating our Constitutional rights.

This is the second of the new bits of hyperbole.

Nope. Telling the truth is not hyperbole.

No matter how much you don't like it when I tell the truth, telling the truth will never be hyperbole.

Frank Apisa wrote:

They are not doing that at all...

Yes they are. Trying to pass a measure that would be a grievous violation of our Constitutional rights, counts as trying to grievously violate our Constitutional rights.

Frank Apisa wrote:

they are attempting to modify the original document in light of how the world exists at this moment in time.

Really!

Nope. They are making no attempt to modify the Constitution.

All they are doing is trying to violate the Constitution.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You're wasting your time, this topic always brings out the hysteria in Oralloy.

A denunciation of a blatant attempt to violate the Constitution hardly amounts to hysteria.

It just shows that I'm a good American.

1 Reply

@Val Killmore,

M-1 banana clips are easily obtained. Dont give em ideas, we have enough nutbags on the line.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

NRA news states clearly that 72% to 82 % of NRA memebrs are doubsting that NRA is "for them" and is , as weve suspected, a shill for gun manufacturers. These majorities of members are now asking for reasonable gun laws that can work.

I call fake. A majority of NRA members are not suddenly spouting HCI talking points.

farmerman wrote:

As a former NRA member, I was sickened by the stance that Moses took re: gun ownership at any cost. I think that the days of reasonable controls may be dawning.

Why would defense of freedom and liberty ever be sickening?

Do you have some sort of irrational fear of pistol grips for some reason?

0 Replies

@firefly,

Weapon of choice of a few insane people does not means the best type of weapon or the only weapon and why would anyone care about the means of killing those poor children as long as there are many more means that can be employ to do the same sad deed?

We might better look towards actions that might block such killers no matter what the means they decide to employ such as having arm security in all schools.

Come on Firefly you do not care for the safety of our children just how you can used such deaths to promote your own program.

0 Replies

@RexRed,

RexRed wrote:

Yep. Bloomberg hates our freedom even more than Osama bin Ladn did.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Killing small children trapped in small rooms does not take firepower of any kind.

Going to try to outlaw all means of killings under that kind of situation?

you don't think it's a good idea to try to prevent the murder of small children? you're an odd duck.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Let see walking from you car to the school with a cans of gasoline or a rifle which one would draw more attentions Farmerman in your opinion?

Second a tire iron or the car itself could deal with a door with chicken wire glass.

Ram the door with car then removed gasoline from trunk or stand in front of door and fired rounds into the door window which would work faster in your opinion?

0 Replies

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/31627_516229065077035_397519132_n.jpg

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Does your bottle go Oralloy when it comes to the right of women to vote? Are you not up for being opposed to that measure?

As far as I'm concerned your position is politically on a level with female Guardian columnists and their lickspittals and lackeys.

Don't claim to be on the right-wing when I'm around. It was the biggest single mistake civilised mankind has ever made imo.

3 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Just because you can't eliminate all means of killing, does not mean we should not better control, and regulate, the most common methods of mass murder which are currently being used in this country.

So there is some strange benefit in forcing killers to change the means of killing children they employ Firefly?

The families would feel better if their children are kill by fire or by being blown up the shots Firefly?

Or if we are not going to ban all firearms just so call assault rifles the families would feel better having their children kill with a riot shotgun or even an old level action rifle who magazine and rate of fire could do the killing without any problem also.

1 Reply

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

For the government to turn a blind eye to the fact that "domestic tranquility" has been shattered by recurring mass murders, all done with particular types of firearms,

Nonsense. Stop making things up. These killings are not all being done with assault weapons.

And of those that were, the fact that there was a pistol grip on the gun made absolutely no difference.

firefly wrote:

And, just as the government limited what could be taken aboard planes in order to prevent hijackings and terrorist bombings, the government should limit, and better regulate, and better control, the specific types of weapons being used to effect these mass murders of innocent citizens in our daily venues, because these murders are also acts of terrorism which are enabled by these particular types of weapons.

As above, stop making things up. These killings are not all being done with assault weapons.

And of those that were, the fact that there was a pistol grip on the gun made absolutely no difference.

And Rational Basis Review is quite clear on the fact that the government is not allowed to ban harmless cosmetic features like pistol grips and flash suppressors.

firefly wrote:

The domestic tranquility of life was shattered in a Sandy Hook school last week--and the domestic tranquility of life was shattered for every other parent, and grandparent, and aunt and uncle in this nation, who now fear that the children they love might also meet the same fate of having their bodies rapidly riddled with bullets from this same type of easily attainable weapon.

If they really have a fear that they might be shot with a gun that has a pistol grip (as opposed to just fearing being shot), they must be pretty goofy people.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

M-1 banana clips are easily obtained. Dont give em ideas, we have enough nutbags on the line.

Farmermaan the problem is that mass killers tend to be bright so I question if possible future such killers need your or mine aid.

0 Replies

@RexRed,

"Cerberus Capital Management, a private equity firm, said it would sell the maker of the rifle used in the school shootings as California on Tuesday sought tighter regulations on the sale of ammunition. "

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

BillRM wrote:
Killing small children trapped in small rooms does not take firepower of any kind.
Going to try to outlaw all means of killings under that kind of situation?

No, just the ones being more routinely used--which are particular types of firearms, and large capacity clips.

Constitution says you aren't allowed to ban assault weapons.

It doesn't matter how many fake claims you concoct about how often they are used, you are still not allowed to ban them.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

Quote:

you don't think it's a good idea to try to prevent the murder of small children? you're an odd duck.

Sure I wish to take actions that have a chance of helping prevent such killings not actions that have zero chance of doing so even if they make some people feel better such as a ban on so call assault rifles.

Already suggested arm security in schools and perhaps an arm teacher program similar to the arm airline pilots we has have running for a number of years.

0 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know