And it didn't take long, but an evangelical Christian(Mike Huckabee) has figured out the real issue here. We have taken god out of our schools.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...n-schools/

Quote:"We don't have a crime problem, or a gun problem, or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem," he said after the July shooting on Fox News. "And since we've ordered God out of our schools and communities; the military and public conversations... we really shouldn't act so surprised when all hell breaks loose."

It has nothing to do with a society saturated with violence, nor does it have anything to do with our dereliction of mental health issues. No, it is all because we have stopped appeasing the magic sky-fairy.

(December 15, 2012 at 6:23 pm)Kousbroek Wrote: I don't see what that has got to do with people having 5 or 8 or 12 or even more weapons in their home, we don't live in 17 something anymore.
And the masses is always stronger than the army, just look at the french or russian revolution.

You think? The only way that unarmed masses could have dislodged me (back when I was a joe) from a static position was to throw more people at me than I had rounds....and I carried 1,600 rounds- on my person..excluding support or resupply- IOW, if you surprised me....I'd still have 1600 rounds to fire at you, from a weapon effective out to 1100m.

I'd say allowing John Q a shotgun on priciple isn't going to tilt the scale that much in this equation.....but, telling him he can never have a shotgun, well that's obvious dick-hattery.

(December 15, 2012 at 7:58 pm)Faith No More Wrote: And it didn't take long, but an evangelical Christian(Mike Huckabee) has figured out the real issue here. We have taken god out of our schools.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...n-schools/

Quote:"We don't have a crime problem, or a gun problem, or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem," he said after the July shooting on Fox News. "And since we've ordered God out of our schools and communities; the military and public conversations... we really shouldn't act so surprised when all hell breaks loose."

It has nothing to do with a society saturated with violence, nor does it have anything to do with our dereliction of mental health issues.. No, it is all because we have stopped appeasing the magic sky-fairy.

What an idiot. If that idiot would look at the other westernized countries that are less religious they have LESS CRIME.

And his magical cosmic security guard in the sky did such a great job protecting those 20 kids and 6 adults. So he has part of it right, not even God was in that school.

I fucking hate this logic. It never occurs to morons like this that the cause of it was a mentally ill person, not a magic man in a white robe, or man in a red leotard with a pitchfork battling over the neurons in the killer's brain.

(December 15, 2012 at 7:47 pm)TaraJo Wrote: But if we're looking at the constitution, let's take a better look at the second amendment, shall we?

Quote: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.

I'm not ignoring he part that says the people can keep and bear arms, but I'm wondering why people reject the first part of the amendment which specfically references a well regulated militia. Every time someone tries to regulate guns, the NRA starts screaming "slippery slope!" and talking about how the government is gonna take away all our guns.

Let's do then.

http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

(December 15, 2012 at 7:47 pm)TaraJo Wrote: The government also has tanks and nuclear weapons. Should we have those, too?

What makes a tank dangerous, Tara? The guns. Furthermore, people can own tanks and do. And . . . the government is not supposed to have nuclear weapons. Try again.

Quote:Also, worth considering, the second amendment was written a long time ago.

Not nearly as long ago as some people like to make it out. Your great grandparent could have been around for that if you were quite old; it is that recent. It's not the fucking Magna Carta.

Quote:The guns they had then were primitave muskets, not semi-automatic assault rifles. It's worth considering what the framers would have said if such destructive weapons existed then.

Oh, yes, primitive weapons that could set fire to towns and destroy them, tear through the sides of buildings and kill people just easily as your assault rifles. Pfft. Seriously, if you think a gun is any more destructive than gas, swords, cannons, etc., you are yet another victim of history lesson failure. The Civil War. Read about it.

Quote:But if we're looking at the constitution, let's take a better look at the second amendment, shall we?

Haha. Yes, let's do.

Quote: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.

Let me put that into plain English. "Because militia is necessary to the security of this country, the right to bear arms will remain indefinitely." It does not say it has to be for militia.

Now, before we go trying to figure out what the framers of the Constitution would feel about "destructive" weapons, let's remember that they charged each other head on among cannon fire across fields back then. Let's also try to remember what they said about weapons and rebellion in their own words. I mean, we're on the internet as we speak. Google is right there for anyone to use.

Quote:If some crazy loon is determined to do something horrible like this he/she will do it no matter what i'm afraid.

So, is that an excuse to do nothing, Kous? That is the problem with the gun nuts. They can't admit that guns are even part of the problem.

When a guy does exactly the same thing in China on the exact same day, using a knife rather than a gun, 22 people were wounded.

The problem with this situation is the squeakiest wheels are at the far ends of the spectrum. We have people who think there should be no guns at all in citizens hands, which is really frightening and there are those who think there should be no restrictions, which is equally frightening. The middle ground is too empty or just filled with the Silence.

(December 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm)Shell B Wrote: The problem with this situation is the squeakiest wheels are at the far ends of the spectrum. We have people who think there should be no guns at all in citizens hands, which is really frightening and there are those who think there should be no restrictions, which is equally frightening. The middle ground is too empty or just filled with the Silence.

We're all focusing on mental health and the media attention people who commit murder rampages.

(December 15, 2012 at 9:24 pm)Ryantology Wrote: When a guy does exactly the same thing in China on the exact same day, using a knife rather than a gun, 22 people were wounded.

...and when a guy does the same thing in Oklahoma on the exact same day, using a common farming ammonium nitrate fertilizer rather than using a gun or a knife, 168 people were killed and another 800 were wounded....

If some crazed lunatic is determined to kill a massive amount of people, they're going to find a way, (at their local 'Tractor Supply' store), with or without the use of guns.