Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

O.k. UK, WTF?Follow

#102 Apr 07 2008 at 2:16 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
The shooters also possessed a TEC-DC9 semi-automatic handgun, which had a long history. The manufacturer of the TEC-DC9 first sold it to Miami-based Navegar Incorporated. It was then sold to Zander's Sporting Goods in Baldwin, Illinois in 1994. The gun was later sold to Thornton, Colorado firearms dealer Larry Russel. In violation of federal law, Russel failed to keep records of the sale, yet he determined that the purchaser of the gun was twenty-one years of age or older. He was unable to identify the pictures of Klebold, Anderson, or Harris shown to him by police after the shooting. Two men, Mark Manes and Philip Duran, were convicted of supplying weapons to the two. Early descriptions of the TEC- DC9 claimed that it was a fully automatic weapon, one that fired continuously with one pull of the trigger, although this was not the case. Their model was the closed bolt KG99-related variant, which would have proven virtually impossible to convert to fully automatic without access to firearm machining equipment and substantial expertise.[citation needed]



As so these guns were registered yes? I mean they had to have been for a history to exist. All the weapons had a history (despite the length) yet the killings still happened.


Just goes to show how effective gun registration legislation is.


Now, if these weapons were unavailable for purchase (as they all were purchased, from legal dealers), would this unfortunate situation still have happened?

Hmmm.

One day America is going to wake up from the Conservatism-induced coma and ban weapons and accompany the ban with heavy fines and prison time. The only question remaining is how many children will have to die in schools in the process.
#103 Apr 07 2008 at 2:21 PM Rating: Default
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

One day America is going to wake up from the Conservatism-induced coma and ban weapons


Seems unlikely given the current composition of the Supreme Court. Unless if by "one day" you mean when the flying car laser shootings get out of hand.

____________________________
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.

#104 Apr 07 2008 at 2:35 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:

One day America is going to wake up from the Conservatism-induced coma and ban weapons


Seems unlikely given the current composition of the Supreme Court. Unless if by "one day" you mean when the flying car laser shootings get out of hand.



As the school shootings continue to be more violent and more frequent I think it'll come sooner than that. Then again, I may have too much faith in that belief.
#105 Apr 07 2008 at 2:37 PM Rating: Decent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
NaughtyWord wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

One day America is going to wake up from the Conservatism-induced coma and ban weapons


Seems unlikely given the current composition of the Supreme Court. Unless if by "one day" you mean when the flying car laser shootings get out of hand.



As the school shootings continue to be more violent and more frequent I think it'll come sooner than that. Then again, I may have too much faith in that belief.


That's a nice thought, but the reaction has largely been to allow kids/teachers to carry guns or to have armed guards in schools. Anytime there is a gun crime, it seems the NRA folks want more guns to counter all the guns.

*sigh*

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#106 Apr 07 2008 at 2:54 PM Rating: Default
Nexa wrote:

That's a nice thought, but the reaction has largely been to allow kids/teachers to carry guns or to have armed guards in schools. Anytime there is a gun crime, it seems the NRA folks want more guns to counter all the guns.

*sigh*

Nexa


I know full well what the retards at the NRA propose. No matter how hard you try, you can't put a fire out by adding more fuel.
#107 Apr 07 2008 at 4:38 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Nobby wrote:
Baron von tarv wrote:
Quote:
you may reduce the chance of getting shot or stabbed, but you also lose other freedoms as well.
Sure you lose the right to shoot or stab people
Yeah, I feel repressed because I'm not allowed to wander around with weapons I never ever want to use.



I'm sure if you give them enough time, they'll eventually get around to banning something you do want to use...


I just find it amusing, since one of the arguments against strict gun control is basically the standard slippery slope: "Ok. But what will they ban next?". And we're always told "Oh no! That wont happen. This is just about gun control".


Suckers! It is not, nor has it every been, about gun control. It's about people control. Once you realize this, you realize that these types of bans aren't about protecting you, but gradually increasing the ability of those in power to control you.


I sympathize with the Smasharoo's of the world who honestly do think it's just about weapons that can be used in some kind of spree shooting to kill masses of people at a shot and would never ever be applied to other things. Sadly, they would appear to be in the minority of the "protect the population from itself" crowd...

Edited, Apr 7th 2008 5:39pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#108 Apr 07 2008 at 4:43 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
NaughtyWord wrote:
Nexa wrote:

That's a nice thought, but the reaction has largely been to allow kids/teachers to carry guns or to have armed guards in schools. Anytime there is a gun crime, it seems the NRA folks want more guns to counter all the guns.

*sigh*

Nexa


I know full well what the retards at the NRA propose. No matter how hard you try, you can't put a fire out by adding more fuel.



You are assuming that the "fuel" for the fire in this case is the existence and/or possession of guns by private citizens.

I tend to think that an increasing tendency towards the removal of consequences within a society lends itself to the increased violence, not the presence of guns. Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...


And a whole bunch of other people armed with guns and willing to teach that person the consequences of his actions would certainly seem to put that fire out pretty darn quick.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#109 Apr 07 2008 at 4:45 PM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
Quote:


Suckers! It is not, nor has it every been, about gun control. It's about people control. Once you realize this, you realize that these types of bans aren't about protecting you, but gradually increasing the ability of those in power to control you.


First Heston dies... next it'll be public executions on the National Mall.

____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#110 Apr 07 2008 at 6:52 PM Rating: Good
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
I tend to think that an increasing tendency towards the removal of consequences within a society lends itself to the increased violence, not the presence of guns. Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...


So by that logic people who have been to prison should be less violent than people who have not.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#111 Apr 07 2008 at 9:06 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:

Suckers! It is not, nor has it every been, about gun control. It's about people control. Once you realize this, you realize that these types of bans aren't about protecting you, but gradually increasing the ability of those in power to control you.



Here, you can borrow mine. Smiley: tinfoilhat


#112 Apr 07 2008 at 9:19 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...



No it doesn't make you want to shoot someone, but what more effective means to an end is there for those that want to?

We got tired of terrorists ramming planes into our buildings and killing 2974 people. So we clamped down on airports, security, aircraft security, and ID process (among a whole plethora of things).

In 2002, 3,012 children and teens lost their lives due to a firearm, how they lost it due to a firearm is irrelevant. What I mean is, I don't care if daddy didn't lock up the gun, if some psycho shot them, or they shot themselves in depression. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics). Yet somehow protecting some dumb rednecks rights is more important than 3,000 children lives.


Here is where conservatives, NRA, and you fail. People aren't going into schools, universities, and post offices with slingshots and killing 30 people a pop. If guns were unavailable, it would seem difficult for a situation such as Columbine to have such a high death toll.
#113 Apr 07 2008 at 9:53 PM Rating: Decent
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Samira wrote:
Quote:
I tend to think that an increasing tendency towards the removal of consequences within a society lends itself to the increased violence, not the presence of guns. Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...


So by that logic people who have been to prison should be less violent than people who have not.

... and there you go, messing up perfectly good rhetoric with inconvenient evidence. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#114 Apr 08 2008 at 1:00 AM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
And a whole bunch of other people armed with guns and willing to teach that person the consequences of his actions would certainly seem to put that fire out pretty darn quick.


So your answer to gun crime is to set-up paramilitary militias that would enforce justice as and when they saw fit?

That's real clever. Well done. Here, have a Smiley: hk

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#115 Apr 08 2008 at 1:44 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...

And a whole bunch of other people armed with guns and willing to teach that person the consequences of his actions would certainly seem to put that fire out pretty darn quick.


Right. This is why Mogadishu is such a safe place to raise a kid.
____________________________
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.

#116 Apr 08 2008 at 1:47 AM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...


You realise that these sentences mean: "Thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never been punished in the past makes you want to shoot someone?"

Just checking.

Would suck to have your English corrected by a Frenchman.


Edited, Apr 8th 2008 9:47am by RedPhoenixxx
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#117 Apr 08 2008 at 4:09 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
NaughtyWord wrote:
Quote:
Simply having a gun doesn't make someone want to shoot someone. But thinking it's ok to do whatever you want because you've never really been punished in the past does...



No it doesn't make you want to shoot someone, but what more effective means to an end is there for those that want to?


Yup. And when you finish banning all the guns, what more effective means will there be? Would that be swords? Knives? Baseball bats?

The problem is that your logic applies to whatever weapon is the "most effective means" for someone to hurt someone else. You'll always have one.


The reasons you do something are as important as what you do.


Quote:
Here is where conservatives, NRA, and you fail. People aren't going into schools, universities, and post offices with slingshots and killing 30 people a pop. If guns were unavailable, it would seem difficult for a situation such as Columbine to have such a high death toll.



And how does this apply to a ban on swords?


I'm pointing out the slippery slope aspect of this. We can debate the merits of gun control all day long, but one of the arguments against gun control is that the same arguments eventually get applied to other things as well. Hence, my comment that it's not really about gun control, but people control. Guns just happen to be the target of the moment. The same broad arguments are used to justify all sorts of "for your own good" style legislation.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#118 Apr 08 2008 at 5:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Hence, my comment that it's not really about gun control, but people control. Guns just happen to be the target of the moment. The same broad arguments are used to justify all sorts of "for your own good" style legislation.



Well shit, here I thought you were just being your overly paranoid, delusional, and diluted self. I would have never guessed you actually had a fucking point to make with your paranoid-schizophrenia running around like Katie in the Dallas Cowboys locker room during halftime.


Oh wait...


1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 206 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (206)