64
   

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

 
 
JTT
 
  2  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:40 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
But, as far as mass murders go. If Australia can put the law in place and have no mass murders for over 16 years, yet had 13 prior to the Masacre in Port Arthur, Tasmania does not not speak volume?


Focus, Bill, you have to learn how to focus.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:41 pm
@Val Killmore,
I'll will repeat just one more time; this topic is about guns. If you wish to talk about other issues, please start another thread.
BillRM
 
  2  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:43 pm
Quote:
uh, Bill, they come in with guns, not with swords or cans of gasoline. Talk about a strawman.


Oh? Let see there is some rule that mad killers will followed that only assault label rifles must be used to killed children?

That other means will not be use even if those means are able to kill just as well as firearms will not be use?

Knifes/swords and explosives had indeed been used in mass murders and young children trap in a small room could be killed by any number of methods.

Footnote a can a simple can of gasoline wiped out a night club full of people in New York.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:44 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
You don't have SCOTUS.


Oh yes I do.



MontereyJack wrote:
Again, look at Scalia's recent interviews.


I asked you before if he really said that the Supreme Court was going to abandon Rational Basis Review and the other standards of scrutiny. And if so, if you had a cite.

I've not seen any cites. Though I am a few pages behind, so if you did provide them I may just have not gotten to it yet.



MontereyJack wrote:
They've been ducking having to define the limits they said exist in Heller,


Not really. The third round is still making it's way through the appeals courts. It'll get there soon enough.

This time Mr. Gura is having the courts rule that all Americans have the right to carry guns when they go about in public, even in our largest cities.



MontereyJack wrote:
but Richard Posner stuck them in the ass


Nah. That case will likely be moot (unless it manages to reach the Supreme Court at the same time that Mr. Gura's case does).



MontereyJack wrote:
And Scalia is talking about the standards that people would have applied to firearms in the 18th century. And assault weapons are pretty much something they would have thought of as the 18th century equivalent of a terror weapon.


Nonsense. Having harmless cosmetic features would not make a gun count as a terror weapon in any era.



MontereyJack wrote:
When the cases get to the court, you're probably going to see the NRA get smacked down. You too. And more than about time.


The NRA is not going to court. Mr. Gura is. Cool

And the only thing you're going to see when Mr. Gura returns to the Supreme Court is: a ruling that all Americans have the right to carry guns when they go about in public, even in our largest cities.
JTT
 
  1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:47 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
You forget that killers would just kill using different weapons.


I suppose one might consider being disingenuous as better than flat out lying, but really, Oral, they are the same and you know it.

oralloy
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:48 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
One big drawback to the NRA's plan, the killers don't need schools or theaters to have lots of targets. Any big gathering will do. You would need a standing army to occupy every city and village to do it exclusively NRA style.


We are on the verge of the US Supreme Court ruling that all Americans have the right to carry guns when they go about in public, even in our largest cities.

Don't worry. Your armed security is on its way.
0 Replies
 
FOUND SOUL
 
  2  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:49 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
this mass murders nonsense had been of fairly recent happening.


I see no copy cats. View this link below. Whilst across the World, note, Australia has only the incident in Tasmania and nothing since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers#Americas

I don't ever recall hearing about Cho.. Yet, this was 2007 and University students, not babies... So I can not see any copycats at all.. This was the last mass murder prior to Lanza.

Quote:
Seung-Hui Cho[2] (pron.: /ˌtʃoʊ sʌŋˈhiː/; January 18, 1984 – April 16, 2007) was a Korean spree killer who killed 32 people and wounded 17 others on April 16, 2007, at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.[3] An additional 6 people were injured jumping from windows to escape.[4] He was a senior-level undergraduate student at the university. The shooting rampage came to be known as the "Virginia Tech massacre."[5][6] Cho later committed suicide after law enforcement officers breached the doors of the building where the majority of the shooting had taken place. His body is buried in Fairfax, Virginia.

Born in South Korea, Cho arrived in the United States at the age of 8 with his family. He became a US permanent resident as a South Korean national.[7][8][9] In middle school, he was diagnosed with a severe anxiety disorder known as selective mutism, as well as major depressive disorder.[10] After this diagnosis he began receiving treatment and continued to receive therapy and special education support until his junior year of high school. During Cho's last two years at Virginia Tech, several instances of his abnormal behavior, as well as plays and other writings he submitted containing references to violence, caused concern among teachers and classmates.


What is interesting if you take note of all of those reports of school massacres around the world is nearly every single one of the 15 instances committed suicide, 13 in fact. 1 was shot by police and the other was 18, and caught by the police. I think if we took the time to read up on each as well, we would find a history of illnesses of each of those murders.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:51 pm
@McTag,
That golden shower on your face means it windy.
farmerman
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:51 pm
@oralloy,
BRINKS and DOE guards can carry FULL_AUTO weapons (like the Secret servuice carries when guarding the pres)

SPORTING GUNS ARE LIMITED IN THEIR CAPACITIES AND THEIR WAYS OF SHOOTING. eg, a semi automatic .223 sport style gun doesnt have an available " ammunition tuibe" they use 5 shot clips and several makes WILL NOT accept banana clips. Why did Bushmaster decide to make a gun that looks and fires like an M-16 with the only exception being that itd take a fairly simple conversion to make it fire full-auto

The BUSHMASTER IS AN ASSAULT WEAPON by its ability to rapidly fire semi auto and accept big clips and its short barrel(it fairly useless as a sport gun). All the other features(bayonnet mount, etc) were knocked out cause they were superfluous to the guns mission opf rapid fire and killing ability.

If you keep repeating your same old tripe, Ill keep up the same old rejoinders
oralloy
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:51 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
I suppose one might consider being disingenuous as better than flat out lying, but really, Oral, they are the same and you know it.


I do indeed. But I always tell the truth, so it's nothing to do with me.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I`ll repeat it once more, CI.

Up a stump and you resort to one of the same ole lame responses.

Nice touch using OmSig bolding.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:54 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
One big drawback to the NRA's plan, the killers don't need schools or theaters to have lots of targets.


You say this out of ignorance or you are just stupid.

'Gun free zones' are target rich for evil doers that guarantee the least amount of resistance.

Are you wanting to ban 'gun free zones'.?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:54 pm
@farmerman,
question to any of the gun brandishers. IF the 94 assault ban were to be reinstated and soon in effect effect,would you support a mega clip ban as part of the "stand alone" designs of an assault weapon? And if that were the case, would the BUSHMASTER .223 be an assault weapin by definition?
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:57 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
The BUSHMASTER IS AN ASSAULT WEAPON


That's incorrect.

Please continue...
BillRM
 
  1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:57 pm
@FOUND SOUL,
I remember only one time that a shooter went into a police station and open fired most of these killers picked gun free areas and when the police show up most do not engage them but killed themselves at this point.

Just having armed security in school are likely to stop most of the attacks on schools.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:58 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
But, even if someone proved that banning guns would save lives, our freedom would still take precedence over everything else.


My god, you are seriously unwell to say something like that.
Ragman
 
  2  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:58 pm
@roger,
However, driving on higway speeds should be viewed as an important means of transportation and commerce. There is a need for such every-day sort of activity in our way of life. However, owning such firepower is not.
JTT
 
  0  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 04:59 pm
@H2O MAN,
If I had a son, he could look like Trayvon, but there is no way in hell my son would attend a government school.

You want to home school to ensure he`s a Georgia cracker.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 05:02 pm
@Ragman,
Ragman wrote:
BillRM wrote:
Are cars more important then children as far far far far more children died in car accidents then by guns so are we uncaring for not banning cars?

Footnote as the ban the assault weapons people are unlikely to save one child and take attentions away from real solution such people do not care about children in my opinion they just wish to used the death of children to promote there own programs.


Congratulations are in order. When I don't have you on ignore, I've noticed that you've got the distinction of always making an impertinent and irrelevant analogy every single time. You've gotten this down to an art form. Did you study this somewhere or is it a natural talent?


Nonsense. There was nothing impertinent or irrelevant about his analogy.

You just don't like it because it shows the hypocrisy of the Freedom Haters.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Fri 21 Dec, 2012 05:02 pm
@Ragman,
I remember that. The obvious usefulness of lower speed limits did not win.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 03/10/2025 at 10:34:29