Register to leave a comment, or log in if you already have an account
cmu, back for another round are you? We’ve already established that your views on gun control have been implemented in places like:
– North Korea
– Iran
– Cuba
Previously, your gun control policies were put in place in Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s USSR, and Mussolini’s Italy.
So good job, your policies are shared by the most oppressive regimes that have ever existed.
I would rather not have a gun control debate today out of respect for the victims of the shooting, but if you insist on doing this I’m happy to spend all day smacking you around again.
>Gun control won’t substantially improve the situation
Wrong. The analogy could be to matches. Perfectly safe in adult hands, a disaster in the making in a child’s.
Switzerland’s national psyche is not comparable to ours, so their having easy access to guns is not comparable to here. We have a history and an ease with violence and a lack of collective restraint (aka individualism run amok) which makes it problematical. If reasonable, middle-class people can be so virulently anti-gun-control (as evidenced, say, on this site), clearly there’s something that needs to be changed.
Why is everyone jumping on Randolph? His first paragraph asking people to observe the moment of silence is a perfectly legit and reasonable request.
His second remark was clearly sarcasm, and God knows, sarcasm is part and parcel for half the comments on the OT. What makes his any more heinous than some of the truly inapropriate remarks that show up here all the time?
“Police already shoot-to-kill way too many times, but of course, it’s not people like you and me who are in danger, are they? It’s just those “others” who don’t count.”
Not me and hopefully not you.
Just cretins in the act of committing a crime.
I don’t care what color or economic class they are if that’s what you are insinuating.
Jackal, whatever the level of regulation, it will always be possible for some nut to find a way to cause some damage. I think stronger regs act as a filter and can reduce the odds or the damage. For example, it would have been nice if his psychiatric issues formed some kind of barrier between him and his gun, and it is worth noting that he would have done far less damage with a hunting rifle than a glock.
OTOH, your position is just about the same one Michael Moore reached at the end Bowling for Columbine. In contemplating Canada’s lax gun laws but relatively low incidence of gun crime, he seemed to be concluding that we’re just f%^king nuts in this country but that lax gun laws, per se, are not determinative of how often we actually shoot each other, although perhaps the point was we need tougher laws than Canada or Switzerland precisely because we are so much more culturally predisposed to pulling the trigger and/or have so many more loons and psychopaths here.
cmu, back for another round are you? We’ve already established that your views on gun control have been implemented in places like:
– North Korea
– Iran
– Cuba
Previously, your gun control policies were put in place in Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s USSR, and Mussolini’s Italy.
So good job, your policies are shared by the most oppressive regimes that have ever existed.
I would rather not have a gun control debate today out of respect for the victims of the shooting, but if you insist on doing this I’m happy to spend all day smacking you around again.
>Gun control won’t substantially improve the situation
Wrong. The analogy could be to matches. Perfectly safe in adult hands, a disaster in the making in a child’s.
Switzerland’s national psyche is not comparable to ours, so their having easy access to guns is not comparable to here. We have a history and an ease with violence and a lack of collective restraint (aka individualism run amok) which makes it problematical. If reasonable, middle-class people can be so virulently anti-gun-control (as evidenced, say, on this site), clearly there’s something that needs to be changed.
“Majority of gun crimes in this country are committed using illegally obtained and unregistered weapons”
In this case, the gun was legally purchased about a year ago from a sporting goods store in Tucson.
Go fuck yourself, randi.
Why is everyone jumping on Randolph? His first paragraph asking people to observe the moment of silence is a perfectly legit and reasonable request.
His second remark was clearly sarcasm, and God knows, sarcasm is part and parcel for half the comments on the OT. What makes his any more heinous than some of the truly inapropriate remarks that show up here all the time?
if we evolved from monkeys – why are there still monkeys?
“Police already shoot-to-kill way too many times, but of course, it’s not people like you and me who are in danger, are they? It’s just those “others” who don’t count.”
Not me and hopefully not you.
Just cretins in the act of committing a crime.
I don’t care what color or economic class they are if that’s what you are insinuating.
Jackal, whatever the level of regulation, it will always be possible for some nut to find a way to cause some damage. I think stronger regs act as a filter and can reduce the odds or the damage. For example, it would have been nice if his psychiatric issues formed some kind of barrier between him and his gun, and it is worth noting that he would have done far less damage with a hunting rifle than a glock.
OTOH, your position is just about the same one Michael Moore reached at the end Bowling for Columbine. In contemplating Canada’s lax gun laws but relatively low incidence of gun crime, he seemed to be concluding that we’re just f%^king nuts in this country but that lax gun laws, per se, are not determinative of how often we actually shoot each other, although perhaps the point was we need tougher laws than Canada or Switzerland precisely because we are so much more culturally predisposed to pulling the trigger and/or have so many more loons and psychopaths here.
ArPUMA, according to the news reports I saw yesterday, the shooter was booted out of at least one class for a period of time, but then let back in.