Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 'Batman' Shooting: Gun Lobby Counts On Short Attention Span

Posted 1 year ago on July 21, 2012, 11:35 a.m. EST by ComeTogetherNOW (650)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

"The powerful National Rifle Association -- which opposes any restrictions on gun rights -- is lying low for now, the Washington Examiner reported. “Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families and the community," an NRA spokesman told the Examiner. "NRA will not have any further comment until all the facts are known.""

"But many politicians fear the NRA -- even though it may be in decline."

Read Full Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/batman-shooting_n_1690547.html



DEJU VU DOO

There will be more massacres as the causality count increases each go round. There won't be any Gun Control measures now. The GOP and the gun lobby including the NRA have too much firepower to overcome for the democrats to take up this issue at this time. Nothing will change. In two weeks we'll back in the pit with Mittney defending his money grubbing ways.

The escalation of the firepower in the hands of koo koo nuts will some years from now be addressed after the pattern, just like the stand your ground laws, is much more undeniable. Sometimes the truth, due to extreme ignorance, takes a while before it becomes illuminated in enough minds to matter.

Come Together NOW

Later may be too LATE

Choose Wisely...............

108 Comments

108 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

The huff post has this one completely wrong.

At about 2 AM this morning, that is, 2 AM, July 21, 2012, on WCAX television, a CBS affiliate, the NRA ran a paid televised spot, featuring the likes of John Bolton, who engaged in a paranoid rant against the UN, President Obama, British gun laws and lawlessness that included mass rioting with extensive property damage, drawing parallels between these two, and insisting these would be our fate should the President be reelected.

It was part of the NRA campaign All In, which I have not yet had time to look into today.

In any case, gun laws or gun prohibitions will not likely curb instances like this, where mass murder is the intent. Not if they remain available on the black market.

And you can be sure, I'll be keeping my firearms, regardless . . . .

[-] 3 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Thanks for the post Zen Dog. As usual, you have lots of good information to share on these topics.

There's a delicate balance here somewhere between complete freedom to own any type of weapon to reasonable approaches to gun ownership where certain type weapons are banned (as is today).

Some think the laws are great as is, others want even more lax gun laws, and others want more restrictive laws. Personally, I think it will be time soon to rein in some of these laws that create more violence. Such as assault weapons. Rifles for hunting, ok.....assault weapons, what for?

I'm not against gun ownership. I got one unloaded under lock and key with the bullets locked somewhere else. If a gunman broke into my house (home invasion) I would not be able to use the gun in time to stop a surprise attack. I'm a very realistic person, and realize that I'm astronomically more likely to be hit by bus and die in car accident then have my home invaded by some armed madman. This doesn't stop me from driving, and I'm NOT sleeping with gun and leaving it loaded for quick discharge. The truth is the loaded gun in a drawer is usually quite the opposite, it's a tragedy in the waiting when children mistake it as a play toy. Also, it's not responsible gun use, period. Children need to be kept away from them.

I have known one person in my life, Ex-DEA officier, who truly feared for his life, and he explained that a loaded gun is necessity to stop a surprise attack from a home invader. He and his wife had no children, and had a loaded gun ready to go in every single room in his house. Grab it and pull the trigger. Every single room. This is the exception to the rule ONLY. Not many have bona-fide death threats against them by folks clearly able to do it. And, if done responsibly, can be safe but it's harder. Also, cars be operated safely, but, oops, sometimes it doesn't happen. Reality.

Thanks again Zen, and, by the way, I missed your posts here, glad your back. I fight for a better country for us all on many fronts and this forum gives us an idea who is in this fight with us. Glad to have on the side that respects truth and dispels ignorance by bringing the provable truth into the light. It will always be a worthy battle no matter where we find ourselves!

Come Together NOW

Before it's too late.............

[-] 5 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

you are more than welcome - though it seems to me I should have more to say on this topic. I don't believe gun laws will do anything to curb this kind of violence - I believe the solution lies elsewhere.

I believe it has much more to do with the way in which basic fairness - or its lack - becomes so woven into the social fabric that we become dependent upon those systems, procedures, or other facets that support or reinforce basic fairness - or its lack - within that fabric.

Ted Kazinski as I recall, was reportedly experimented on while in college, in such a manner that it left him forever changed, and not for the better. I think it was Time Magazine, but the details as I remember were a bit sketchy.

I will not be one bit surprised if something like that comes out in this case. Current news reports indicate that this young man was an honor student, enrolled in post graduate studies, dropped out in June of this year for unspecified reasons - and his plot was sufficiently complex that it is impossible to suggest that his mental acumen was anything less than above average, regardless of his emotional status or the heinous nature of his actions.

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

I do agree this problem runs much deeper and there's probably another tortured story there that will make a wonderful movie some day. It can start with a tidbit I just heard that this psycho was a camp counselor for under-privileged kids.

I think biggest take away really, is this: how much firepower do want ordinary citizens to have free access to.

Human beings hating other humans enough to kill them like sewer rats is nothing new in the vastness of human history. It becomes despicable when they have enough firepower to commit mass genocide.

Our only hope really is US. We're evolving, but into what?

I'll fight for what I hope that is, if not, I lost my purpose here, this planet.

I believe, ultimately, science will provide us the best answers. It's tool for good when used properly and not distorted. Some things will always be best explained in relative terms. Certainly science has taught US one big lesson already, there's no absolute truth. So, get over it, no shortcuts. The truth comes only after thorough investigation.

What could help in this journey, is this:

Come Together NOW

[-] 4 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I think biggest take away really, is this: how much firepower do want ordinary citizens to have free access to.

I'm not sure that is an issue at all, and here is why:

During prohibition we had tommy guns available on the open market. Fully automatic 45 caliber machine guns. Yet despite the fact of both prohibition and the availability of this firepower, we did not have incidents like that that took place in Colorado.

Nor did we have suicide cults proclaiming the path to righteousness.

The psych industry was, even before WWI, on a growth trajectory, and the turn of the century saw the first abuse by researchers within a clinical setting that I have heard of, and this involved children. WWI opened interest into War Psychosis, later termed battle fatigue during WWII. During WWII Jewish doctors in the Warsaw Ghetto provided an unprecedented amount of documentation on the effects of starvation - they did not have the resources to do anything else but watch as a population of tens of thousands was systematically starved to death, but they were able to take some very good notes.

This in turn provided some measure of justification for human suffering on a tremendous scale, in the interest of science. It also helped produce the Nuremberg Code, which we cannot seem to adhere to.

after WWII the Russians paraded upon the national stage a well known figure who proclaimed his guilt for something it was well known he was innocent of, and he did so in a slack monotone - leading to speculation on and interest in mind control methodologies and research. This interest expanded in the wake of the Korean War, with former U.S. P.O.W.s returning home and their tales of abuse at the hands of their captures.

Enter one researcher named Festinger, author of the term Cognitive Dissonance - whose college thesis involved the surreptitious insertion of researchers into a small mid western cult who proclaimed doomsday was imminent. In his thesis, titled When Prophecy Fails, (1961) he recounts how his infiltration of this cult with student assistants, all of whom proclaimed devout faith in the cult leader, had as a consequence the effect of positive reinforcement of the belief system of the cult. He states explicitly a lack of concern on this point.

It has been documented that at about this time the CIA developed an interest in mind control and the creation of what we came to call Manchurian Candidates.

It has also been documented that MKULTRA research not only involved the likes of Ted Kaczynski; it was, where it was conducted in Canada overseen by the very head of the American Psychological Association, one D. E. Cameron.

Given the depths of interest in this field of research, and the heights that interest did reach, combined with the rise of lone gunmen and suicide cults in our society at the same time this research was gaining prominence - combined with the evidence of Vance Packard in his book, The People Shapers [1977] that the field of behavioral research was in the wake of scandal taking its research underground -

well. I've been long winded, haven't I. But I think it is clear where I am going with all of this. I don't believe guns themselves are the issue. People are. Behaviorists, and behavioral researchers. Game theorists. Complex systems analysts.

Legitimization of paranoia as a virtue by the NRA as demonstrated with their ongoing All In campaign is an issue. If nothing else, this itself clearly demonstrates that paranoia has value to some as a means to political ends.

.

EDIT:

Human engineers . . . I forgot them among my list of ne'er do wells . ..

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Psychology to control the masses. This concept ( actual practice ) was taught in grade school as to how the government tapped into psychology to control the population. That was my 1st introduction to the concept - in a public school that was dedicated to teaching one to be aware and think for yourself. How times have changed.

[-] 4 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

And we no longer teach civics as a component of basic education - I guess the children of today will have no need of interacting with their government when they get older . . .

so much for the future of democracy . . .

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Hence my letter of chastisement sent to the government and copied out on social media for others to read and consider.

People "THINK" analyze weigh and measure - be aware.

[+] -4 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Nobody in authority at "the government" reads your ridiculous forum-posted "letters", troll. Like everything else you pollute this forum with, they're not about making a difference but drawing attention to your pitiful self.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

See this is a part of your problem - your attacks are lame.

I could give a rats ass if government actually reads and shares my letters - well I mean it would be nice if they did - but I don't expect them to.

No the letters are to get people to think - many people won't read the letters either - many may read them and say crackpot - others though may actually consider the communication and look at the world around them and start seeing correlations in their own experience that they had overlooked before - because until that point in time they had not been looking.

[-] -3 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

I read your last "letter", troll, and it DID make me think: I think I'm not going to waste my time reading any more of them.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

That is something I would expect from you RustyButtheadBrucie.

And in that regard you do not disappoint.

[-] -3 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Ironic, isn't it? Word on the street is "disappoint" is the one thing you can be counted on to do, Danny boy.

[-] 3 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Irony?

That would be you suddenly making a cogent post, free of insults.

[-] -3 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

If we deleted all of your posts that contained either lies or insults, shooz, you'd have no posts remaining here.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

R U a student of the mittens? Do you sit at the feet of the compulsive pathological liar and worship? As you are so comfortable stating lie after lie even lying about your lies. Is mittens proud at you?

All anyone needs to do is google my username and they will see some of the shit you have put out there.


[-] 0 points by vvv0721 (-30) 0 minutes ago

"We" have never run any "advertisements", troll, so go sell your BS to the clueless slacktivists. There's plenty here for you to fool. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Attention Clueless Slacktivists: To spot the partisan posers, pro-regime plants and Geritrolls in this forum, just look for the ones who accuse everyone else of being liars and never post a thread of objective evidence to support their accusations.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yeah I've seen your advertisements - it is funny how you get booted/banned all over the place but blame others and do not take a look in the mirror.

Like I said before and will say again your attacks are lame and if anyone is interested to check into your allegations they are free to check out what I have written and make their own decision.

So thanks for your nasty PR Brucie to bad (not) it works against you - Hey?

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

"We" have never run any "advertisements", troll, so go sell your BS to the clueless slacktivists. There's plenty here for you to fool.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

they tell us Obama has no authority to stop US military aggression

[-] -3 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

yes , come together and stand up to obama and his hatred for/of america .

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

salta, you don't seem well, you ok?

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

salta, what happened???

[-] 4 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

And here is a page with two NRA videos in the All In campaign:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/07/nra-is-all-in-against-obama.php

I believe the second one may be the one I saw on tv this morning, but haven't verified that.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

It says a lot about the US that when a man in a costume with a gun kills people, they ban costumes.

https://twitter.com/mister_limey

[-] 3 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Guns don't kill people, costumes do!

Or maybe it's just clothes in general.

Holsters tend to chafe when you're naked.

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

So true. And surreal. Good point.

If no one really complains about this stuff we could just get used this. Maybe instead of once or twice every year we could have mass killings once a month and then every week. Then they could make a reality show patched together with cell phone videos and eyewitness reports. What a exciting time to alive and not shot. Human beings adapt extremely well to new circumstances. Sometimes seeing others in misery makes us feel better. It's bad, but hell look at them, maybe it really isn't so bad after all.

I brought this topic (post) here just so we could mark the moment. ONLY. And, as I said, nothing will change, not a damn thing. So, the NRA lays low for a couple weeks, no problem, they'll be back pushing gun sales through stroking our fear of each other. What we'll get is paranoid freaks who'd shot a fly on the wall with bazooka because it threatened a buzz by and damn those maggots. KIll! KiLL! Kill!

Come Together NOW

[-] 2 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 1 year ago

Gun control laws did do wonders in Norway last summer

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Yes, they do, absolutely, and it's proven. How many murders are there in Norway per capita?

How many in USA per capita?

Now. You don't have leg to stand on. But nice try. Next time think a little before posting.

Wow, Jack, no response. Run away, hide..... :D

Come Together NOW

[-] 1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

And, speaking of the proven power of gun control laws, did the crime rate in DC go up or down when they made it legal to own handguns? I dare you to answer... :)

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

I'll be glad to pound your ridiculous argument into the ground with a hammer of truth, since you're so anxious for him to respond within 16 minutes. (He probably has one of those "job" things)

There are more than 31 guns per 100 people in Norway. Murder rates are extremely low, as they are in Britain where the violent crime rate is four times higher than the US.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

And in USA, it's one gun per each living person including children and babies. And, if you wish, you may buy a semi-automatic assault rifle with a 100 round clip. Take as many clips as you need. Two for one. You don't want that deer to get away now do you?

Come Together NOW

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Nope. It's .88 per capita, I'm officially allowing you to do something called "research", so now or later, it's up to you.

Or, if you have basic shop skills, (LOL not you, but someone with basic shop skills) you could easily make a high capacity magazine. But someone who rigged their apartment with bombs is not capable of such a complicated task.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Good for splitting those hairs over this. Is not 0.88 very close to 1. Yes it is, that's why I rounded it to the nearest whole number.

DO you have a point?

Come Together NOW

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

You can't round to the nearest number, or you'd only have ones and zeroes. Most developed countries have guns per capita ratios of .3-.6, so you'd be destroying the data to round up to the nearest figure.

It's called scientific method :)

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

And your point is.......what?!?

America isn't armed to teeth??? What?

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

I never said that.

Of course we are armed to the teeth, that's why our violent crime and burglary statistics are some of the lowest in the world. But this does not qualify as an answer for "How many guns per capita are there in the US?"

But you are right, this argument is getting rather childish. Back to something of substance, notably:

Why are you willing to deny most women the chance to defend themselves against a larger attacker? Do you not care because you are male and don't have to deal with it?

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Where do you live, in a war zone?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

I live near DC, so yeah, pretty much.

There were over 88,000 rapes reported to police nationally in 2009, so if you want to put a blanket over your head and say the rights of these women doesn't matter, go ahead. You're a male, what do you care what happens to women.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

I just happen to live in the same region. No, it is not a War Zone. And just because you say so, doesn't make it so. DO you understand what I just said???

It's important that you do understand because if we don't know the truth or we lie about, we ALL would certainly be screwed. But especially you since it does tend permeate everything you do. Don't you think the evident truth matters?

ON ANOTHER NOTE: Oh yeah, I'm male, really? This is clear proof that you have this nasty habit of making these things up if you somehow believe it helps bolster your wild claims. Anyone reading this post will easily get this one. So there you are, exposed......for what you are.....a liar

What is your excuse for your rampant ignorance?

Come Together NOW

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

A liar? Maybe, lol. Of course I made it up.

It's a win-win, if you are male, you get defensive and angry, and I win, if you're female, you get defensive and angry, and I win. See what I did there? At any rate, you don't seem to care the least about the rights of rape victims, the disabled, or anyone else routinely victimized by unarmed and more physically able attackers.

Chicago's crime rate is worse than Kabul Afghanistan, I can't find any statistics on DC, but either way, perhaps you live in "that" part of DC and don't worry as much about crime as a poor person living deep in the city.

But things are getting better, crime in DC dropped to a 45 year low after the Heller decision. If you want some facts or data, do a Google search with the terms "District of columbia crime rate heller". Or, you can just keep spouting talking points without data to support them.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Now, your on record, here. Anybody with a critical mind can clearly see your tactic. Your making it up and your lying is rampant, unbridled. Your immersed so far you haven't caught what I'm saying yet.

Now, you are telling me what I care about. Do I know you???

Do I? Do I know you??? Do you know me??? Do you?

Come Together NOW

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

You can clearly see my tactic? Because I told you about it?

Sigh...

See, you shouldn't take my word for any of this stuff, anyway. I could be anyone, so if you have even a shred of objectivity, you would research this stuff yourself. The Chicago crime rate thing and the other statistic are completely true, you are free to google them if you want to know, or you can just keep getting angry and disregarding anything that does not confirm your predetermined conclusions.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Banks don't rob people, People rob people. Occupy People? Register bankers? Close the bank show loophole?

Gee, I thought I was onto something there.

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Isn't it ironic when you apply that bumper sticker to other problems?

It would be funny, if it wasn't so tragic.

Sharks don't kill people, swimming does.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Without guns, nobody would kill anyone at all! It would be a paradise!

[-] 0 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Aaaw, you just have no sense of irony.

Or perhaps no sense at all.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

All we have to do is take constitutional right away from law abiding people, and whammo! Instant paradise! Just add tyranny!

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

We already have corporate tyranny.

We've labored under it for at least decades.

You like that. So what's the problem?

And here your moniker suggests you are all about justice.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Yeah! Corporations do bad things, so what's the difference between that and taking away guns from the public? It's all bad, so who cares? They started it!

[-] 0 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Like I said, it's the kind of tyranny you fully endorse.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Why do you assume things? When did I say anything of the sort? Are you making random assumptions to fulfill your predetermined conclusions again?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Where have you not endorsed it?

Where have you not been in opposition to what this movement is attempting to accomplish?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Who. More false assumptions.

First of all, if I was in opposition to what this movement is attempting to accomplish, why would it then follow that I am in support of what it is not?

I do support what this movement is attempting to accomplish, an end to the Bush years. You know, the illegal wiretapping, corporate welfare, bombing of random countries, theft of tax money...

[-] 0 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Yep, nothing but convolutions.

How's that justice thing coming along?

In fact you sound just like one more Mr. P supporter.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

That's disgusting, I loathe Rick Perry. More of your false assumptions.

Unless you're talking about Mr. Pelosi?

So you like corporate welfare, bombing random countries, and having your phone tapped? That's all well and good, but get the heck out of this movement. No one here wants your brand of fascistic idiocy.

[-] 2 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Evasions and convolutions.

Just like your chosen moniker.

Corporations have been robbing you blind and spying on you for decades, but you turn it into partisanship BS.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

You're right, they have been, and I've been fighting it for decades.

They are constantly stealing my tax dollars, lobbying to go to war with other countries, and getting their favors paid for by their puppets in both parties.

What did I say that was partisan? Both of the large parties are full of despicable corporate puppets.

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 1 year ago

turn it into partisanship BS? I hate it when jerks do that. They're usually just sheeple who walk a party's line without thinking for themselves.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 1 year ago

I'm just curious, where did this person who killed and shot at everyone get ideas as to how to do it?

Did he think it up himself - I don't think so. He was probably watching a movie and learned how to mix the chemicals he had in his room from the internet or youtube.

So, what kind of gun control do you think would have stopped him - anybody have an answer that question?

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Yes, he used a AR-15 assault rifle with a 100 round clip, it jammed after 60 shots in minute. Under the old assault weapons ban that the GOP let expire, he could never bought that gun or the large clip. Some people today would have survived if he couldn't get off as many rounds as he did.

Steve, is human life expendable for you to enjoy your assault weapons?

What purpose does an assault weapon serve, other than killing many people very quickly?

When you hunt is the object to fill your prey with as bullets as possible?

Come Together NOW

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 1 year ago

Look you are missing the point - What about all the explosives in his apartment. If he never mentioned to the police that it was set with a trip wire - when the door opened it would have exploded - and the door wasn't locked. We don't hear any comments about that though do we.

So to say that "more gun control" would have stopped this idiot is rediculous - he had other means at his disposal to harm people.

What if he threw a home brew bomb in the theatre with a lit fuse instead of shooting people and ran out - we wouldn't be talking about gun control would we - would we be talking about more control of chemicals? No.

We have yet to experience "suicide bomers" in this country - but it's going to happen. And when it does what are the "government controls" and regulations going to be then?

The point I am making is this - you could take away all the guns and ammo you want from everyone. If someone is pissed off enough to kill people on a "mass scale" they will find the way.

You have one person out of millions who own guns in this country - all of a sudden we need to control everyone because of one person who decided to take the life of others.

How about we look at "violence control" instead of "gun control". How about if we start giving psychiatric exams to kids in high school and follow monitor them to they reach an age where we are sure they are not going to go off the deep end.

That will definitely solve the problem - .

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Tim McVeigh

The problem with the koo koo nuts is many don't get enough treatment. It's part of the health crisis in this country. The other is the stigma for those who suffer mental illness. I agree we can shore up that problem by getting more help for these people. But, this would not solve the bigger problem of the koo koo nuts with guns looking for maximum kill. Reducing availability of these things, assault weapons, high round clips, and including the chemicals McVeigh used for his bomb is smart strategy, and if not done, would be outright negligence.

Why do you think we haven't seen a massive bombing like Tim McVeigh pulled off since that horrible day in OK when we had 168 dead and 800 wounded?

Come Together NOW

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 1 year ago

With regard to the McVeigh incident - what laws have been changed to stop that from happening again. There are plenty of chemicals on the shelves that people can buy to make explosive devices.

This crazy nut job that just killed 12 people proved that - his apartment was booby trapped with them.

So to say that more gun control will solve the problem - it won't.

And I will ask you this - If you think more gun control will stop mass murderers can you guarentee that? If you say you can then I will agree with it. Give me a guarentee that it won't happen again if we go to eliminating 100 round mags, AR-15's, 30 round pistol clips or semi-automatic hand guns.

Give me a guarentee that we won't have mass killings by doing this? You can't because our society if violent - if it wasn't you wouldn't be having 30 killings a day across the country. And the vast majority of those are done with a handgun - not a AR-15 with a 100 round mag.

But you don't hear the news media talking about those 30 people who died in one day. I guess it has to happen "instantaneously" for it to be news worthy.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by freewriterguy (882) 1 year ago

not enough guns in the theatre is the problem, try to take away my constitutional right and ill shoot you!

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Let's see, your gun is pointed at me because of some idea your having, and, in defense, I point the gun I own at you.........

Now what Free Guy?

If you don't know I will tell you, shoot first, because in the next instant I have pulled my trigger and I usually hit my target. When it comes to gun play, I'm deadly serious. I have played before. The game is real.

Let's have Peace Instead.

Come Together NOW

Get it?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

kill soldier kill

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 1 year ago

nope, you will never get my gun period. im not going to shoot someone unless they draw their gun, and in the theatre instance, the guilty person did draw it and shoot. come on NOW, use reason, get it?

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

SO, if I point my gun at you and your gun is not out. You lose. I got the bead and your through. Reason a' plenty. Have your gun ready at all times, or your dead. Why do think soldiers sleep with their guns at the ready?

It's never how you see it on TV. The attacker always has an overwhelming advantage. Surprise. If you think your that good, you would be mistaken. They see you way before you'll see them. You may never know what hit you. Feel safe with your warm gun?

Come Together NOW

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Of course not. It's not like the department of justice statistics indicate that guns are used more than a million times per year for self defense.

We don't need actual facts... they have a rational bias.

So, people associated with the occupy movement loot stores during riots, and now are calling for disarmament of the public.... interesting correlation.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Correlation? Really, in your mind?

You make it up as a selfish convenience to make a point. What you said is no where near factual. In fact, it's a lie. And, to boot, you did state: "We don't need actual facts..."

And with that clear fact. You are admiting unkowly I'm sure that I'm right. You just made it up.

Here's the real fact you missed: Most people with the OWS movement are not looters. A very small percentage may be and any of us would gladly turn them into the police because this not how we roll.

Justice, don't tell me what I do, you DO NOT KNOW ME.

Do you understand that actual fact?

Learn how to deal with evident truth instead convenient lies.

Come together NOW

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

Whoa... (looks at camera) I touched on a nerve...

I didn't say anything about you, I said about Occupy in general. Facts are nice things... you should try some lol

If you did take it that way, then excuse me, what I meant was that you want the public disarmed so that YOUR FRIENDS can loot houses and businesses. Is that better? LOL

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

First, I can only speak for myself, but I not for disarming anyone.

Second, you don't know me, and you certainly don't know my friends.

So, removing the "riff" from the "raff", and I can't see where you have any valid point. It does seem that you'd rather employ smear tactics because you really don't have any facts to share. None.

You do know what a fact is Justice, Don't you?

With a name like that I would hope so Justice, or where is the Justice?

Really?

Like Truth? Do you care?

By the way, I have nerves of steel so relax you can be your self and I take or leave as I wish. Your expression is yours. You live with it. I won't.

Now, share some pearls of wisdom so everyone here may enjoy such a wonderful surprise from a poster who suddenly wakes from their slumber.

:D The stage is YOURS----------------------------->

[-] 1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

You're reminding me of "Puzzlin"... I pounded him so badly his behind was smoking once. I think he cried... you wouldn't know him, would you?

[-] -1 points by tedscrat70 (-35) 1 year ago

Perhaps a few people with concealed weapons in the theatre would have saved some lives. You gun controls nuts must love this shit since it advances your agenda

[-] 1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

This has nothing to do with guns, street criminals are made more dangerous by guns. This man had a large budget, and considerable explosives knowledge. Guns did not enable him to commit mayhem anymore than they enabled Mcveigh.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

We don't need assault weapons which are solely for hunting people. Pistols are legal and should stay legal. I own one. So should hunting rifles (for wild animasl like deer) be legal. Rapid firing guns with high round clips have nothing to do with hunting, and they are designed to kill as many people as quickly as possible. They should be banned.

Ted, do you pay homage to Reason?

Come Together NOW

[-] 0 points by tedscrat70 (-35) 1 year ago

Hmmm. You bring up a good point. However, the ban on automatic weapons is really enough. I can't offer concrete proof that that is enough. It comes down to individual freedom vs government control. I will be honest with you. If semiautomatic weapons were banned or certain types of handguns were banned, people would find a way to achieve maximum killing if they put their mind to it.
The information is out there. Multiple small explosives could be coordinated to blow up in strategic places in, say, a mall. It is unfortunate, but you cannot save the world, there will always be a risk out there. I am sorry. I have lost friends to drunk driving and lost multiple family members to a multitude of ailments and accidents. This is a part of life. And I do not want the government to try to wrap me in bubble wrap, no matter how good their intentions.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Yes, but we don't ride our guns to work, we ride in cars. Having a car for transportation is compromise all of us are willing to make. The benefit of having a car is astounding compared to a small benefit of having semi-automatic weapons. A simple pistol offers plenty of protection. Life is filled with these trade-offs.

Come Together NOW

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 1 year ago

So the second amendment is about hunting?

[-] -2 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

Do these shooting ever occur in places that allow 'carry'? I remember one in a mall a couple of years ago but some armed citizen took him out before he could do much damage.

The theater was a gun free zone which makes it a killing field for any crazy who wants attention. Maybe congress should use it's new taxing authority to force everyone to buy a gun, it would certainly slow down attention seeking moonbats.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

Tuscon, Arizona?

can't remember that far back, eh?

[-] -1 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

Exactly, citizens took him down before he could do more damage.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

interesting . . .

I don't recall that firearms played any role in the apprehension of Jared Loughner whatsoever . . .

But, perhaps I am wrong on this point. Perhaps foreeverLeft could enlighten us regarding the precise details of his capture and arrest, while paying particular attention to the role firearms, any firearms, may have played in that singular event . . .

[-] -1 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

So, you don't really want to discuss the reality that these moonbats always pick a place where they know they will be safe to kill as many as possible? Gun free zones are killing fields for moonbats.

[-] 4 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

Your statement is so full of fallacious innuendo and outright falsehood one hardly knows where to begin . . .

It hardly seems possible that a linguistic construct of such brevity could contain an entire compass of misdirection and yet there it is - the task does indeed seem daunting . . . .

but I will see what may be done to set you straight -

[-] -1 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

So, you have no argument, well you are a lefty. Ft Hood or any military installation are the most arms restricted places on earth. Of course, you would have no way of knowing that.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I didn't really think I needed an argument given that you state plainly that there is a safe place to kill, for surely it can be seen that no such place exists.

No such place exists because there is no safety in killing, there can be no safety in killing; there is, at best, only necessity, and in that there is no safety.

Any child can see that. So can most . . .

. . . moonbats . . .

[-] 0 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

I'll type slowly, if you are a deranged moonbat wanting to slaughter the maximum number of people you will go to a place that doesn't allow guns because it is safe compared to an open carry area.

Moonbats are deranged but always concerned for their personal safety, moonbats are cowards at heart.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I'll type slowly,

that's good, since that is most likely the only way you can type with any accuracy whatever, I'm sure we all appreciate your careful deliberation.

I repeat, in the event that such repetition may provide you with some small, brief measure of clarity:

surely it can be seen that no such place exists.

No such place exists because there is no safety in killing, there can be no safety in killing; there is, at best, only necessity, and in that there is no safety.

Any child can see that. So can most . . .

. . . moonbats . . .

Further evidence that the issue of gun free zones are completely irrelevant to this issue:

[-] -2 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

I see, so you simply reply with non-sequiters and crude deflection, noted. Is your approach based on Laffer's latest advice? Never, ever actually engage with a differing ideology, simply ignore what is being said and spout more lefty narrative?

Good luck with that. :)

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

Is your approach based on

actually it's based on the fact that you're an idiot, and so I just don't much care . .

But I was looking for something I had written and posted above, so um, with many regrets . . . thanks

bwa hahaha

[-] 2 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Yes, but you can walk around Colorado with multiple weapons of mass destruction.

Now isn't that ironic.

If losta guns, in lotsa hands is such a good idea?

Why not on a well trained base?

Irony indeed.

[-] -2 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

What would be the point of arming everyone on a military installation? An Islamic terrorist gunning down unarmed soldiers on an American Army base was the exception that proved the rule. You can bet your ass it would be difficult for one to do it today.

Common sense suffers in the service of political correctness and the simple truth of a well armed society being a well behaved society is lost on those who would rule the lives of others through politics rather than logic.

[-] 2 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Then why was there no logic in your statement?

The armed services are made up of a cross section of citizens.

Therefore, what happens on the street could happen on a base.

You could be robbed, confronted threateningly, even raped.

It happens all the time.

Yet the well trained cannot arm themselves?

But an idiot can walk around Denver with multiple weapons of mass destruction.

You don't see the irony here?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I think it's cause the brass are afraid they might get fragged.

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Hey, they can carry too........:) Plus they have air support and artillery.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Do career officers above the rank of Captain remember how to use their weapons? Do officers from the rank of captain to the rank of lieutenant even practice on a regular basis? And I don't think the officers even trust the 90 day wonders with a weapon.

I can see them calling in air support and artillery though. {:-])

Echo Charley Bravo this is the base commandant - we need air support on the base coordinates ----- Um Sir(?) That's your office waiting room - Echo Charley Bravo just confirm coordinates --- are you carrying napalm?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Now you're talkin' a movie script.........:)

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

A recruitment film? {:-O

Global Force - they even scare the hell out of their chain of command.

Rated - R

[-] 0 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 1 year ago

Why make shit up? It just makes you look bad. Aurora has restrictive gun policies, a moonbat killed a bunch of people made defenseless by those laws. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

You didn't answer a single question I asked, you just gave me the NRA line.

That line was written and propagated by crazy people.

But then the teabagge(R)s want to arm the crazies too.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/07/22/tea-party-senator-says-mentally-unstable-people-should-be-allowed-to-get-guns-freely-video/

[-] 0 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 1 year ago

So stop and frisk would have saved lives here?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

No he was carrying unconcealed weapons in a carry state.

[-] 1 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

That's not at all what I implied, but you go ahead explain how that will work in the face of such gun nuttery.

I was just pointing the irony of no carry military bases, even though they are thoroughly trained, as opposed to any town USA, where they can carry yet are just as thoroughly untrained..

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago
[-] -2 points by bearclaw (-152) 1 year ago

idiot is back

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20530) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

indeed - signed up July 22, 2012 . . .

so, tell us please . . .

  • why did you return . . . ?
[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I honestly think that self defense should be taught to everyone starting in kindergarten and continuing all through school. But right now I would be afraid that if it was introduced to the educational system that it would be for some other purpose then for helping to develop strong capable individuals to support a strong society.