[HaydenAsche]

This is interesting.

There was a bomb threat yesterday and a gun in our school today.

[Daddylikes]

Oops. I guess we shouldn't have invaded Iraq.

[Daddylikes]

Oops. I guess we shouldn't have elected George W. Bush to office.

[Daddylikes]

Oops. I guess we should stop laughing at those less fortunate than us.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by k-krack

Fuck Rob, this is such a stupid thing to (agree with) say. Seriously, I'm not American, but the second ammendment is fucking bullshit, so primal in its nature that it's scary. Ted Nugent is a fucking trigger-happy wacko, and he is so obviously using this atrocity as a ploy to talk about how people that don't love their guns are pussies. Access to guns does not necessarily mean someone's goign to shoot it, BUT IT MAKES IT A HELL OF A LOT MORE LIKELY, especially with people like this Cho fella holding them. Which is not to say that there is no other way of getting a gun, BUT ANYBODY CAN GET A GUN AT THE DROP OF A HAT. THAT IS SERIOUSLY FUCKING ABSURD.

no no no no no no no and no!!!

the second amendment is not about what "the nuge" sez. it's NOT!!!!

K-KRACK: ted nugent will have you believe the u.s. constitution says that, but it doesn't. IT DOESN'T! he's confusing it with the individual right to self defense.

----

i hate it when people ignore the obvious. for fuck's sakes.

this is the second amendment. it was originally not even fucking punctuated:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

the right to individual self-protection precedes the constitution and it didn't require a constitutional amendment, it is part of english common law & so it has always been followed in the united states.

the second amendment refers to the right of the states to keep militias in order to balance a central power. the u.s. constitution gives the federal government the power to raise a standing army & the states feared that. this amendment was a concession to those states.

i've said this 3-4 times & people voluntarily choose to ignore it.

conflating the right to individual self-protection with the 2nd amendment is wrong, misguided, and (eventually) wilfully ignorant.

ted nugent is good for singing wango tango & poontang sweet poontang but he's no intellectual & HIS INTERPRETATION OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS ON CRACK.

--

[Daddylikes]

Oops. I guess we should give a shit about our fellow human beings.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Daddylikes

Oops. I guess we should give a shit about our fellow human beings.

if you're going to try to be funny at least please have some success

[Daddylikes]

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm trying to break your heart. I guess I'd be lying if I said it wasn't easy. But, I am trying to break your heart.

Thanks for the advice tho. I'm not fucking laughing.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Daddylikes

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm trying to break your heart. I guess I'd be lying if I said it wasn't easy. But, I am trying to break your heart.

Thanks for the advice tho. I'm not fucking laughing.

neither am i. i have no heart. but your stupidity is annoying. upgrade already. say something funny or say something smart or shut the fuck up.

yes. the first amendment allows me to tell you to shut the fuck up.

[Malcolm81]

Being European (Italian), I know I was raised in a different society which isn't necessarily better (there are so many problems in Europe as well, starting from racism and immigration), but I will never understand how people can believe that guns for everyone make their lives safer. The fact is that simply no one is really safe when everyone else can get a gun so easily. You can check people who buy guns all you want, but madmen and potential murderers can be identified and isolated so easily only in crappy TV "profiler" crime series. Yes, there are other weapons. Yes, you can even kill without a weapon. So the reasoning is, since there are other things to kill with, we might as well give them a gun?
I've heard and read people tell about how they believe making guns illegal would be dangerous because then only criminals would have guns. Well, I don't know - but that's the way it works in a lot of countries. If the police can't protect citizens, that's where the problem lies. I believe that in a modern country citizens shouldn't feel the need to defend themselves on their own - of course it's an ideal, but it is one that should be approached as closely as possible. Yes, you can get a gun (illegally) in all countries, but at least make it difficult, make it risky so that there's at least a chance they're caught before they act.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...rms-per-capita
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita

Statistics like these make me feel I would never consider myself safer in a country where firearms are legal and easy to buy. It takes a huge, bold step to get rid of guns, so it will probably never happen, but the way I see it from my perspective, it would really be worth it.

[atari 2600]

Yes, any discussion of the Second Amendment should properly begin with the fundamental point that there is, of course, no longer the same historical military need for a well-regulated militia anymore.

I sort of only alluded to this by just stating that the changes to the Second Amendment were "long overdue" in my first post. I didn't think I had to go into all this.
Glad you formally dropped that bomb, !@#$%!.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by k-krack

Fuck Rob, this is such a stupid thing to (agree with) say. Seriously, I'm not American, but the second ammendment is fucking bullshit, so primal in its nature that it's scary. Ted Nugent is a fucking trigger-happy wacko, and he is so obviously using this atrocity as a ploy to talk about how people that don't love their guns are pussies. Access to guns does not necessarily mean someone's goign to shoot it, BUT IT MAKES IT A HELL OF A LOT MORE LIKELY, especially with people like this Cho fella holding them. Which is not to say that there is no other way of getting a gun, BUT ANYBODY CAN GET A GUN AT THE DROP OF A HAT. THAT IS SERIOUSLY FUCKING ABSURD.

wrong wrong wrong.
not anyone can get a gun. the massacres that ahve taken place in the past decades have occurred, as the nuge says, in areas marked as NO GUN ZONES (schools, cafeterias etc). what the nuge states and what I agree with is that having armed people trained in the use of their weapons the death tool in these mass murders would be MUCH lower.

[Rob Instigator]

and do you REALLY believe that the police are here to protect the citizenry? in this day and age? How did the police protect the 29 or so people shot and killed two hours AFTER they had "deduced" that the first shooting was a domestic violence thing at Virginia Tech?
They are here to maintain the status quo, plain and simple.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

wrong wrong wrong.
not anyone can get a gun. the massacres that ahve taken place in the past decades have occurred, as the nuge says, in areas marked as NO GUN ZONES (schools, cafeterias etc). what the nuge states and what I agree with is that having armed people trained in the use of their weapons the death tool in these mass murders would be MUCH lower.

but these so-called massacres you can count with your fingers, compared to the HUGE number of gun fatalities outside of these well-publicized hysteria-inducing episodes.

i'm not for banning guns by the way. i'm for a rational policy that does not put weapons in the hands of random jackasses.

[atari 2600]

Yes, 'they' wish to maintain the status quo...no doubt about it, Rob.

Law Enforcement wouldn't pay if they really were able to do their jobs and virtually clean-up most crime.

[Rob Instigator]

and criminals, and people who seek to do others harm, are not going to be swayed by ANY law. What about that do yo0u not understand? The violent ones are gonna be violent and get their guns on the black market and someone will make BIG BUCKS selling them these guns.

look at our war on drugs. the government has been implicated in several cocaine smuggling and heroin smuggling deals where they used the profits from impounded drugs sales to run. Iran Contra, air america was a smuggling operation, and there are many reports of the US government using offshore oil rigs to smuggle cocaine and heroin into the usa for sale.

I don;t trust any of those motherfuckers.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

but these so-called massacres you can count with your fingers, compared to the HUGE number of gun fatalities outside of these well-publicized hysteria-inducing episodes.

i'm not for banning guns by the way. i'm for a rational policy that does not put weapons in the hands of random jackasses.

like I posted before, the number of gun fatalities in this country are dwarfed by drunk driving fatalities. How come when an inner city all black and hispanic school gets shot up by some idiot fuck and a dozen die the crux of the coverage is about how warped all the urban kids are and how they are thugs and have a thug culture, but when a college student kills other college students it is about the fact he used two handguns? this refers to the media of course.

[Daddylikes]

Rob, how is it stupid for me to talk about causes and conditions of this massacre?

The fact is that society failed the kid. Society fails a lot of kids. People need to wake up to the fact that they have responsibilities as human beings.

So. Why don't you shut the fuck up until you have something intelligent to say?

And by the way, I'm not a jester, and I'm not a clown. I do not feel like making people laugh right now.

[!@#$%!]

ROB:

the u.s. has a much higher level of gun violence than the u.k., true or not?

answer man, answer.


the 2nd amendment is not about the individual right to self defense. true or not?

answer man, answer.

the gun issue doesn't have to be black & white. it doesn't have to be "everybody get a gun" vs. "nobody has a gun". there is an option to regulate without banning. true or not?

answer man, answer.

but answer.

----

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

like I posted before, the number of gun fatalities in this country are dwarfed by drunk driving fatalities. How come when an inner city all black and hispanic school gets shot up by some idiot fuck and a dozen die the crux of the coverage is about how warped all the urban kids are and how they are thugs and have a thug culture, but when a college student kills other college students it is about the fact he used two handguns? this refers to the media of course.

oops! looks like you WERE answering. but can you still answer the questions above?

you know, the drunk driving problem is a huge issue and you strong laws against it. i'm not opposed to putting a breathalizer in every car, actually.

of course you can theorize-- "well, what if you're in a drunken party and suddenly guns break out and your designated driver gets shot & they are chasing you and you must flee but your car won't start because of the breathalizer" ?? well shit anything can happen...

[Rob Instigator]

dadydlikes I never called you stupid. I referred to the denial by people f the true horror of this, of how we produce more sociopaths and psychopaths and people who just do not give a flying fuck about LIFE, teir own or anyone elses. That is the true issue, not the availability of guins.

howvere the gun issue is EASY. it is comfy, one can just scream "NO GUNS FOR ANYONE!"
easy answerr right? wrong answer I say.