Kakar wrote:
So how long till Jack Thompson starts jumping in front of the camera blaming video games?
Edit: As of 9:45pm, Dr. Phil has just blamed all violent crime on video games.
Edited, Apr 16th 2007 9:46pm by PsiChi
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Shooting at Virginia Tech
Shooting at Virginia TechFollow
I had heard he was on the fair and balanced Fox News, but I have yet to find a write-up of it.
Edit: As of 9:45pm, Dr. Phil has just blamed all violent crime on video games.
Edited, Apr 16th 2007 9:46pm by PsiChi
Kakar wrote:
So how long till Jack Thompson starts jumping in front of the camera blaming video games?
Not long:
http://kotaku.com/gaming/virginia-tech/breaking-idiot-blames-va-shooting-on-games-252702.php]http://kotaku.com/gaming/virginia-tech/breaking-idiot-blames-va-shooting-on-games-252702.php
Edited, Apr 16th 2007 10:07pm by Wint
This is fucking scary, what an ********
First of all, I do think this is horrible. Loss of human life is almost always horrible (making reservations for those who take human life, where sometimes I can see justification).
However, I really find it interesting to compare these 33 deaths and the response they elicit compared to, say, influenza (36000 deaths in the USA annually), traffic accidents (42000), second-hand smoke (40000), and so on. What makes these deaths worth notice?
On a somewhat off-topic part, that guy who's livejournal you linked to has excellent taste in firearms (H&K). Also, suzi9mm art, which is also excellent. And unless I'm missing something, it's also pretty obvious that he's not the shooter, before you go off on how insensitive I am (unless he really planned this 6 years in advance, set friends up to make comments previous to the attack, has friends updating his page tonight, as so on, which I suppose is possible, but unlikely).
However, I really find it interesting to compare these 33 deaths and the response they elicit compared to, say, influenza (36000 deaths in the USA annually), traffic accidents (42000), second-hand smoke (40000), and so on. What makes these deaths worth notice?
On a somewhat off-topic part, that guy who's livejournal you linked to has excellent taste in firearms (H&K). Also, suzi9mm art, which is also excellent. And unless I'm missing something, it's also pretty obvious that he's not the shooter, before you go off on how insensitive I am (unless he really planned this 6 years in advance, set friends up to make comments previous to the attack, has friends updating his page tonight, as so on, which I suppose is possible, but unlikely).
With all the escaped cons hiding on their campus & the kids shooting each other: I do not believe Virginia Tech is worth the cost of tuition.
VT: $7397
I just happen to know Roxbury Community College is about 4K cheaper
(And with a prison down the street and people getting shot there all the time, it's a steaL!)
VT: $7397
I just happen to know Roxbury Community College is about 4K cheaper
(And with a prison down the street and people getting shot there all the time, it's a steaL!)
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Aparently clothing styles from the 60's aren't the only thing making a comeback.
Quote:
On a somewhat off-topic part, that guy who's livejournal you linked to has excellent taste in firearms (H&K). Also, suzi9mm art, which is also excellent.
Ummm...'excellent'. What at?
Oh Yeah...Killing stuff. Niiiiice one!
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Excellent as in, Germany knows how to make guns; they're some of the best-made in the world. The United States military have armed themselves with bench shooters that try and pass as something that you can actually use in combat.
Responsible people - as the livejournal that was linked appear to be - don't use guns to kill people except when someone else tries to harm them. Please don't fall into the notion that gun control somehow keeps violence from happening.
Responsible people - as the livejournal that was linked appear to be - don't use guns to kill people except when someone else tries to harm them. Please don't fall into the notion that gun control somehow keeps violence from happening.
Please don't fall into the notion that gun control somehow keeps violence from happening.
No, it just lowers the scale of the violence, just like nuclear weapons control lowers the fatalities from bombings.
The reality is if firearms were banned, less people would die. It's inarguable.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Quote:
The reality is if firearms were banned, less people would die. It's inarguable.
What he said.
PsychoJester wrote:
Quote:
The reality is if firearms were banned, less people would die. It's inarguable.
What he said.
Yes, because the black market would cease to exist.
Pot is illegal yet you wouldn't have to look hard to get some.
Yes, because the black market would cease to exist.
No, it'd just be vastly smaller, guns would be much much much harder and more expensive to get, and less people would die.
I'm not sure what your point is, really. Unlike pot or alcohol, or whatever other prohibited substance you want to name, it's reasonably difficult to manufacture high quality semi-automatic firearms, and the profitability of doing so would be exceptionally low.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
I'm not sure what your point is, really. Unlike pot or alcohol, or whatever other prohibited substance you want to name, it's reasonably difficult to manufacture high quality semi-automatic firearms, and the profitability of doing so would be exceptionally low.
Cause, you know, illegal gun owners now worry more about quality than just having a weapon.
What fantasy world are you living on?
PsychoJester wrote:
Quote:
The reality is if firearms were banned, less people would die. It's inarguable.
What he said.
The only this gun control would do is to make it hard for the honest guy to buy a gun. The " bad guys" would still be able to get a weapon.
edit: spelling
Edited, Apr 17th 2007 9:27am by rosleck
"If you ask me, we could do with a little less motivation. The people who are causing all the trouble seem highly motivated to me. Serial killers, stock swindlers, drug dealers, Christian Republicans"
George Carlin.
George Carlin.
Would be nice if authorities released statistics on the sources of guns from violent crimes. I hear a lot of speculation that these people would get guns elsewhere, but who knows if they really would?
You guys do realise that if guns were banned, carrying a gun would be a criminal offense that would send you to jail for as long as the law-makers wish?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
You guys do realise that if guns were banned, carrying a gun would be a criminal offense that would send you to jail for as long as the law-makers wish?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Overlord Uglysasquatch wrote:
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
You guys do realise that if guns were banned, carrying a gun would be a criminal offense that would send you to jail for as long as the law-makers wish?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
In the US, it's always hot so you don't get that moment of clear thinking after getting upset enough to kill. Also, 99% of gun deaths in Canada are gang related either in Toronto (Jamacian) or in Vancouver (Chinese). The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
You guys do realise that if guns were banned, carrying a gun would be a criminal offense that would send you to jail for as long as the law-makers wish?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
In the UK, it's 5 years. I think it should be 20, personally.
So yes, some people would still get hold of them. But if the police do their job, and do proper stop-and-search, not many people would trade 20 years of their life for the chance to carry a weapon.
Banning guns would make it:
- More difficult to get one.
- More dangerous to carry one.
- Less likely you would get shot.
And you guys are, somehow, opposed to this?
Well Froggo, the thing is that the US has that pesky "Bill of Rights," which I'll freely admit that some items on the list have not kept up with the times, guns in particular, there are more people than not in this country who will defend that 2nd Amendment like it's a religion.
Again, not my personal point of view, just how things are here. The right to bear arms is something that has been indoctrinated into this nation since we started.
Wait a minute....
I know what this is! You red-coated *******. Trying to convince Americans to give up their guns so that you toothless Brits can come in by force and finally end the revolution!
I'm on to you......
Elderon wrote:
True, but it's also usually too fucking cold to go out and shoot someone. Let's say you're all ad and want to kill someone. You need to go out, shovel your driveway and wait for the car to warm up. At this point you have time to re-evaluate if it's really worth doing right now or if it can wait until it warms up a bit.
In the US, it's always hot so you don't get that moment of clear thinking after getting upset enough to kill. Also, 99% of gun deaths in Canada are gang related either in Toronto (Jamacian) or in Vancouver (Chinese). The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
In the US, it's always hot so you don't get that moment of clear thinking after getting upset enough to kill. Also, 99% of gun deaths in Canada are gang related either in Toronto (Jamacian) or in Vancouver (Chinese). The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
So the real issue is global warming then.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Elderon wrote:
The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
Althrun the Silent wrote:
You red-coated *******. Trying to convince Americans to give up their guns so that you toothless Brits can come in by force and finally end the revolution! 
Exactly.
Everything has a context. I'm just sad so many people seem too stupid to understand that, and prefer instead to rely on some legal document that was written over 200 years ago for a country that is radically different to the one it was back then.
Overlord Uglysasquatch wrote:
Elderon wrote:
True, but it's also usually too fucking cold to go out and shoot someone. Let's say you're all ad and want to kill someone. You need to go out, shovel your driveway and wait for the car to warm up. At this point you have time to re-evaluate if it's really worth doing right now or if it can wait until it warms up a bit.
In the US, it's always hot so you don't get that moment of clear thinking after getting upset enough to kill. Also, 99% of gun deaths in Canada are gang related either in Toronto (Jamacian) or in Vancouver (Chinese). The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
In the US, it's always hot so you don't get that moment of clear thinking after getting upset enough to kill. Also, 99% of gun deaths in Canada are gang related either in Toronto (Jamacian) or in Vancouver (Chinese). The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
So the real issue is global warming then.
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Althrun the Silent wrote:
You red-coated *******. Trying to convince Americans to give up their guns so that you toothless Brits can come in by force and finally end the revolution!
Exactly.
Everything has a context. I'm just sad so many people seem too stupid to understand that, and prefer instead to rely on some legal document that was written over 200 years ago for a country that is radically different to the one it was back then.
Says someone who lives in a country that still has a (toothless) monarchy
Atomicflea wrote:
Elderon wrote:
The rest get attributed to the Hells Angels.
Recent Visitors: 296
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (296)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Shooting at Virginia Tech
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC