namelesstavern.net

Not true... McVey was called a terrorist to the end.

I don't equate shootings with terrorism.

If he blew up a bus, school, hospital, market, etc. I would.

in my head, it depends on the motivation. kid who shot up omaha high school was pissed at his principals and overall upset with his life because of some huge changes--parents' divorce, moving to a new town, having trouble adjusting to school.

this whackjob in arizona, though, seems to be politically motivated, and if you're committing atrocious crimes where many people die in the name of making a political statement, that, to me, equals terrorism. homeboy is a terrorist. and also batshit insane.



on a somewhat related note: i was not aware of this until the shooting occurred, but apparently palin's crackerjack marketing team had a map illustrated with crosshairs on politicians they want to remove from office? and she frequently uses violent imagery/rhetoric to stir up her fan base? and we wonder why shooting seems like a perfectly viable way to get our point across.

although, i think the arizona guy has some way deeper issues than just political motivations: many psych pros are pointing to severe mental illness--schizophrenia especially.

ANYWAY. the whole thing really sucks, especially that poor nine-year-old girl. it's a miracle the senator is still alive.





OH and one more thing: http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/01/1 ... re_twitter WTF?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41027365/ns ... nd_courts/

yay, at least they're trying to stop these jackwagons. the protesters are really playing with fire, man... one of these days, someone's going to wind up dead. :\

It seems like everyone is avoiding the elephant in the room, which is that Tea Bagging moron who shot the Senator in the face.

The right will all come to the defense of their prize pig, Sarah Palin, but this shit is on her. If she wants to spew the kind of hate she does, this is going to happen.

To those gun loving types. Do you think he could have done that with a butter knife?

So, Mindia? Is it time to deport all tea baggers?

At the very least him having a 30-round clip for his Glock was a major contributing factor. If he'd had a typical 10-12 round clip, he would have had to stop to reload at least once, given how many bullets were fired. Who knows which of those people would be alive now if he'd had to pause in the middle, giving more chance for people to tackle him, etc? Even cops don't go into the field with magazines like that for their Glocks.

A bill has already been introduced to limit magazines to 10 rounds max, but it's already getting heavy pushback from the NRA. (surprise, surprise). Gotta protect the rights of hunters to mow down entire herds of deer at once without reloading I guess? Morons.

-Arlos

the best part of guns is how people think the second amendment is what allows them to own any. a little tiny passage from a hundreds of years old document that was referring specifically to arming each town's militia to fend off, i dunno, indians and the british? now we're to the point where the ability to own guns, and the ease of access to them, not to mention having 75% of the television programming int he country be about murder and having your evening news generally be full of murder, has made gun control go.... out of control. everyone thinks "oh, i gotta have a gun too then! to protect myself and stuff!"

i'm all about everyone bein able to own a concealed small arm, but i see no point whatsoever in the people like my neighbor that get AK-47 semi-auto banana-clipped riot shotguns and shit like that. you'll NEVER need something that ridiculous

Explain why they shouldn't be allowed to own it.

I'm sick of the fucking Government telling me what I can and can't eat, drink, do, see, breathe, walk on, etc.

Inanimate objects, substances, ideas, and beliefs aren't the fucking problem. The sooner people let that sink in, the better.

The government is the only organization that can step in and stop the systemic problem of gun violence in the US. It's a problem that is bred into the culture and its people who think the government has no role in preventing it that are the real problem.

Harrison wrote:Explain why they shouldn't be allowed to own it.

I'm sick of the fucking Government telling me what I can and can't eat, drink, do, see, breathe, walk on, etc.

Inanimate objects, substances, ideas, and beliefs aren't the fucking problem. The sooner people let that sink in, the better.

explain why anyone would ever need an semi-automatic riot shotgun made by mikhail kalashnikov

i wasn't raised around guns. i've never hunted. i never care to try it. i just think they could be controlled better. illegal weapon sales need to end, but how anyone expects our government to be the problem-solver is beyond me considering it's one of the main contributors to black market weapon sales around the world

honestly i think the problem is too deep-seeded at this point to resolve itself anytime soon. some people think of guns as second nature. i just think they're ugly, i dunno

Drem wrote:explain why anyone would ever need an semi-automatic riot shotgun made by mikhail kalashnikov

"riot shotgun" is just your standard pump with a shorter barrel, like you see in police cars.

semi-auto shottys with a magazine like the saiga-12 are "combat shotguns", and why would i need to own one? cause it's a good time unloading 10 rounds down range as quickly as you can. is that a good enough reason?

Tuggan wrote:and why would i need to own one? cause it's a good time unloading 10 rounds down range as quickly as you can. is that a good enough reason?

No that's not a good reason. That's the reason they should be illegal. Because people like the feel of unloading them.

Take all guns away and people won't stop killing each other. They WILL however, not be able to pull off what this fuckhead did.

Zanchief wrote:

Tuggan wrote:and why would i need to own one? cause it's a good time unloading 10 rounds down range as quickly as you can. is that a good enough reason?

No that's not a good reason. That's the reason they should be illegal. Because people like the feel of unloading them.

oh. i thought maybe there was a difference between lunatics that want to kill other human beings, and a person that goes to the range to test their skills and enjoy their hobbies.

Tuggan wrote:

Zanchief wrote:

Tuggan wrote:and why would i need to own one? cause it's a good time unloading 10 rounds down range as quickly as you can. is that a good enough reason?

No that's not a good reason. That's the reason they should be illegal. Because people like the feel of unloading them.

oh. i thought maybe there was a difference between lunatics that want to kill other human beings, and a person that goes to the range to test their skills and enjoy their hobbies.

Yes, opportunity.

Tuggan wrote:

Zanchief wrote:

Tuggan wrote:and why would i need to own one? cause it's a good time unloading 10 rounds down range as quickly as you can. is that a good enough reason?

No that's not a good reason. That's the reason they should be illegal. Because people like the feel of unloading them.

oh. i thought maybe there was a difference between lunatics that want to kill other human beings, and a person that goes to the range to test their skills and enjoy their hobbies.

that's not a "need" type of reason, that's a self-serving "want". you can't have fun shooting handguns or rifles? you just gotta have combat shotguns and shit you'll never use in your entire life except to waste your money at the shooting range ?

guns are stupid. i've never met a gun advocate that wasn't a hunter that had anything smart to say about owning guns. it's always just dudes with napoleon syndrome that are like "because it's fun to SHOOT SHIT YEAH AMERICA FUCK YEA"

guns don't kill people, but a person that wants to kill people and has a gun can kill many more people much more quickly than if he didn't have one

so how do you fix this? both sides argue about whose fault it is/isn't, but no one has any actual solutions

How many times is the Anti-gun vs. pro-gun, 2nd Amendment debate going to be re-hashed on here? It's the same people arguing the last 10 times. It's not like this is a bustling community where you can get fresh views any opinions anymore.

who gives a fuck? don't read the thread

I'm sure you follow that same exact advice every time you disagree with or dislike what people are talking about in threads you read...

if i don't care for a thread i don't post in it

Drem wrote:that's not a "need" type of reason, that's a self-serving "want". you can't have fun shooting handguns or rifles? you just gotta have combat shotguns and shit you'll never use in your entire life except to waste your money at the shooting range ?

guns are stupid. i've never met a gun advocate that wasn't a hunter that had anything smart to say about owning guns. it's always just dudes with napoleon syndrome that are like "because it's fun to SHOOT SHIT YEAH AMERICA FUCK YEA"

i don't need anyone's input when it comes to needs and wants. i'm a big boy and can decide for myself what i spend my money on. you're a cook too, how many knives do you own and how many do you "need"?

it's really hard to imagine why you haven't had any decent conversations with gun advocates with an argument like "guns are stupid".

edited because i think you're missing my point

i have plenty of respect for gun owners that do it right

i have all the knives i need and they're put to use for my jobs.

the fuck do you use an AK-47 shotgun for? there's one appeal to guns: they're fun. and that's it. and they need to be regulated better. period.

i don't really give a shit if you own an ak-47 shotgun because it's not my business, but people like Jared Loughner shouldn't be able to buy them.

when you can't even get into community college because you're declared mentally unstable you shouldn't be able to go buy a hand cannon. and that's all i'm really tryin to say

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/opini ... .html?_r=1

i know this is just some lame board where we re-hash unimportant social issues for no good reason, but i think there're a lot of fresh ideas for gun control in that article

"We can also learn from Australia, which in 1996 banned assault weapons and began buying back 650,000 of them. The impact is controversial and has sometimes been distorted. But the Journal of Public Health Policy notes that after the ban, the firearm suicide rate dropped by half in Australia over the next seven years, and the firearm homicide rate was almost halved."