It's the Guns, Stupid

Apr 20, 2007 Full story: Truthdig 103,368

“And that's the end of the issue”

Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing? Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent ... via Truthdig

Full Story
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#105593 Apr 26, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
society is breaking down that is why we have to prize each life, because once we start looking at taking a life as a means to join a gang, then we know something has gone pear shaped. The fact that they can so easily get their hands on a gun doesn't help matters...it gives these kids some kind of power over life and death...I wonder would they have the balls to kill someone if they had to use their bare hands?
Yes they would. back in the 70s and 60s it was the switchblade knife that was blamed. Everyone claimed if they were banned it would stop gang killings. It didn't it just moved them on to bigger and better weapons. If they can't get guns then they will move to bombs, ect. ect. The killers of today are starting to move from guns to bombs and chemical weapons. It's just a matter of time before guns become obsolete. With these new weapons they can kill from miles even states or countries away. The chance of being caught is minimal. I keep saying the most powerful weapon in the world is the human brain. Your point of bare hands implies the killers would have to be on even ground with their victim. Being as they have guns, knives, ect. ect and no real way of removing modern weapons would it not be prudent to arm the victim so once again the even ground would exist? Removing weapons from the the innocent victims tilts the scales in favor of the criminal, in doing so it simply encourages the criminal activity.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#105594 Apr 26, 2013
Larry wrote:
<quoted text> Ok you are saying I am of low IQ? Well I don't know, but how is doing very well at school and studying Science with a Psychology major sound?..
I ve had a fair bit to do with psychometric testing also, and what most people think about the concept of ' IQ' as a defining number to basically boast about, is simply so far off the mark when it comes to psychometric testing. IQ tests are just one type of psychometric test psychologists use to obtain information about peoples cognition. There are a dozen or more well known IQ tests also.
Esentially you can forget about your ignorant, and oh so hurtful opinion that I have a low IQ score, because firstly you demonstrate to me that you are not well informed of the true purposes of an IQ test, such as identifying learning difficulties or cognitive decline. It is used as a tool, and is not an absolute value. So if you score high on an internet IQ test, you are making a fool of yourself going around telling people your 'IQ'. You would be better of telling people about some of your achievrments which reflect good cognitive abilities. As I have briefly done.
Finally in case you are wondering, no I dont score low on I Q tests. I have always scored above average on the tests I have taken personally.
ps its the guns stupid.
Oh I'm sorry, I used the wrong term. What I should have said is YOU CAN'T FIND YOUR ARSE WITH BOTH HANDS. Is that better? As far as degrees I have 4 and I bet I got them long before you were even born. Real world experience can't be measured in a test. The day you realize you don't know everything is the day you start learning something. Untill then you are a bore.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#105595 Apr 26, 2013
Jackass Whisperer wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes america has held the balance of terror for many years which defines your baseness not your greatness. Envious of imperialistic bullies and your vain glorious delusions of grandeur, I doubt it. The foundations are cracking, you're already on the way down. Karma is a bitch.
He he he. Is that why you are on here obsessing about the U.S.? Seams you have a lot of time on your hands to be reading and posting about a country you care nothing about. Do we keep you up at night? Do you spend large amounts of time trying to find a weak spot to attack? Your envy green is screaming right now. If you post here again it only proves it.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105596 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man who freed them was also a racist and thought they were inferior.
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”
Abraham Lincoln
Where would Jefferson's slaves go?
All that is true and he did the right thing for the wrong reasons....it was about money, if the South succeeded from the Union then they would loose 75% of their income...he didn't like African Americans and did think they were inferior...he had plans with the British to ship them to plantations to work for them, as their slaves....the greatest fighter for the abolition of slavery was actually Harriet Beecher Stowe....followed by freed slave and abolitionists Frederick Douglass, newspaper editor William Garrison and heiress Angelina Grimke were the real heroes and heroines of the struggle to end slavery. If Lincoln hadn't realise freed slave could help him win his war...history for America at least would tell a very different story...:)

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105597 Apr 26, 2013
Here is the follow up of Jon Stewarts show with Australians on gun control...for those gunnies brave enough to watch it....Onyer Jon Stewart if only the twats in media in Australia hadn't removed his show and Steven Colbert's from free to air TV...how much better informed we would all be. Ho hum.
&fe ature=share

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105599 Apr 26, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes they would. back in the 70s and 60s it was the switchblade knife that was blamed. Everyone claimed if they were banned it would stop gang killings. It didn't it just moved them on to bigger and better weapons.
A: did America ban the switch blade knife? or did the gangs find out it is a lot easier doing a drive by with a gun?
If they can't get guns then they will move to bombs, ect. ect. The killers of today are starting to move from guns to bombs and chemical weapons. It's just a matter of time before guns become obsolete. With these new weapons they can kill from miles even states or countries away.
A: Then if you believe that wouldn't it be in your best interest to educate people on the danger of guns from a young age, introduce legislature for gun control and give harsher penalties to prevent the violence escalating...Ie any kid caught with a weapon is interred on their first offence?
The chance of being caught is minimal. I keep saying the most powerful weapon in the world is the human brain. Your point of bare hands implies the killers would have to be on even ground with their victim. Being as they have guns, knives, ect. ect and no real way of removing modern weapons would it not be prudent to arm the victim so once again the even ground would exist?

A: no that is not practical...all that does is say I have a gun to so the others get bigger ones...and on and on...There should be a show of united force by state and federal governments in which they stand with each other to purge themselves of this mentality by introducing tough laws across the board and education etc.

Removing weapons from the the innocent victims tilts the scales in favor of the criminal, in doing so it simply encourages the criminal activity.
A: if you start by removing the excess of guns in your country and then move to implement laws by which those who need guns for their own protection and so on...you phase it out it is not a now you see them now you don't attitude...we have guns for those who need them and some who wish them for the personal use...but they are not encouraged or supported to use them against home invaders as the be all and end all...they must use equal force and nothing more else the law abider will find himself facing a trial for manslaughter or murder...that does not give the law abider the right to kill first and ask questions later...it makes them responsible for their behavior...as it should be.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105600 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
I practice gun control. I use both hands when I shoot.:-)
Hard to do Teaman when YOU don't have a gun?:)

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105601 Apr 26, 2013
armedude wrote:
Obama gave assault weapons to Mexican gangs, leaving thousands dead. But he cares about gun violence Lol period
What! can't decide which name you like betterm,]you mole and paid troll...make a decision and stick to it...you are not fooling anyone....dumb arse.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105602 Apr 26, 2013
has anyone noticed the Americans are now saying that Syria has used small amounts of WMDS and the UN is calling them on it...sound familiar...be careful America...your government is entering an arena you have been in before and that hasn't turned out too well for you...your people are broke...can you afford to instigate another war with a third world country that is gonna kick your arse?

Australia should take all this with a pinch of salt the evidence is suspect at best....here we go again.
Larry

Australia

#105603 Apr 26, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Oh I'm sorry, I used the wrong term. What I should have said is YOU CAN'T FIND YOUR ARSE WITH BOTH HANDS. Is that better? As far as degrees I have 4 and I bet I got them long before you were even born. Real world experience can't be measured in a test. The day you realize you don't know everything is the day you start learning something. Untill then you are a bore.
Four degrees aye well lets hear them.. Make them good ones ; ) would you conceede to the fact that you dont know everything, or is that only people that have a different opinion to you? How old are you since we are onto making claims of age?
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#105604 Apr 26, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
All that is true and he did the right thing for the wrong reasons....it was about money, if the South succeeded from the Union then they would loose 75% of their income...he didn't like African Americans and did think they were inferior...he had plans with the British to ship them to plantations to work for them, as their slaves....the greatest fighter for the abolition of slavery was actually Harriet Beecher Stowe....followed by freed slave and abolitionists Frederick Douglass, newspaper editor William Garrison and heiress Angelina Grimke were the real heroes and heroines of the struggle to end slavery. If Lincoln hadn't realise freed slave could help him win his war...history for America at least would tell a very different story...:)
You got it. His only interest was preserving the union.

A different story indeed. If the Battle of Gettysburg was won by the south, the Brits were ready to enter the war on the southern side.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#105605 Apr 26, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
has anyone noticed the Americans are now saying that Syria has used small amounts of WMDS and the UN is calling them on it...sound familiar...be careful America...your government is entering an arena you have been in before and that hasn't turned out too well for you...your people are broke...can you afford to instigate another war with a third world country that is gonna kick your arse?
Australia should take all this with a pinch of salt the evidence is suspect at best....here we go again.
Now is the time to speak out while the saber rattling is still going on.

If it wasn't important when Saddam was using them on his people, it isn't important now.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#105606 Apr 26, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Hard to do Teaman when YOU don't have a gun?:)
I use my finger. Here, pull my finger.:-)

I don't own a gun. That little cliché is common here.
spocko

Oakland, CA

#105607 Apr 26, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Yes they would. back in the 70s and 60s it was the switchblade knife that was blamed. Everyone claimed if they were banned it would stop gang killings. It didn't it just moved them on to bigger and better weapons. If they can't get guns then they will move to bombs, ect. ect. The killers of today are starting to move from guns to bombs and chemical weapons. It's just a matter of time before guns become obsolete. With these new weapons they can kill from miles even states or countries away. The chance of being caught is minimal. I keep saying the most powerful weapon in the world is the human brain. Your point of bare hands implies the killers would have to be on even ground with their victim. Being as they have guns, knives, ect. ect and no real way of removing modern weapons would it not be prudent to arm the victim so once again the even ground would exist? Removing weapons from the the innocent victims tilts the scales in favor of the criminal, in doing so it simply encourages the criminal activity.
I bet no one has ever accused you of being the brightest bulb in the chandelier ...
spocko

Oakland, CA

#105608 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
You got it. His only interest was preserving the union.
A different story indeed. If the Battle of Gettysburg was won by the south, the Brits were ready to enter the war on the southern side.
Britain remained neutral but the British people were all too eager to join in. There were more than three million British immigrants living in the U.S. at the time. Not only was slavery a deeply emotive political topic since being abolished in England three decades earlier, but so was cotton. The livelihoods of 1 million British workers — nearly one in five of the entire national workforce — depended in one way or another on cotton from the Southern states. As a result thousands of Brits disobeyed the Government’s neutrality injunction to volunteer for either the Federal Army joined the North.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105609 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
You got it. His only interest was preserving the union.
A different story indeed. If the Battle of Gettysburg was won by the south, the Brits were ready to enter the war on the southern side.
Gees imagine...a simple turn in history and what America would look like now...Canada and America would be buddies...:)

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105610 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
I use my finger. Here, pull my finger.:-)
I don't own a gun. That little cliché is common here.
LOL...no thanks...pull your own finger...I know how that one ends.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#105611 Apr 26, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Britain remained neutral but the British people were all too eager to join in. There were more than three million British immigrants living in the U.S. at the time. Not only was slavery a deeply emotive political topic since being abolished in England three decades earlier, but so was cotton. The livelihoods of 1 million British workers — nearly one in five of the entire national workforce — depended in one way or another on cotton from the Southern states. As a result thousands of Brits disobeyed the Government’s neutrality injunction to volunteer for either the Federal Army joined the North.
That was it. Cotton was king.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#105612 Apr 26, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Now is the time to speak out while the saber rattling is still going on.
If it wasn't important when Saddam was using them on his people, it isn't important now.
But it has never stopped America from taking advantage while Sadam was plunging those sabre's or using gas on the Kurds...the yanks were there getting in for their chop...that is why we shouldn't interfere with Syria...it is Assad vs his people who must fight to gain the government they want in their country. America, Britain, Australia,etc should stop sending aid to the rebels, it is their fight to win or lose...the outcome effects them not us...but it is so reminiscent of the Iraqi war...the American government is using the same tactics and propaganda but mindful of their allies unwillingness to so easily believe them accept the fact that our government also benefits if the yanks get involved, so wise up America, Britai,n and Aus...oil isn't everything, we have proof that the wars we have fought with Iraq and Afghanistan has not cleared the way.....that is what I am saying, they don't have reliable evidence and even if it was...stay the feck out of another countries CIVIL war.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#105613 Apr 26, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Gees imagine...a simple turn in history and what America would look like now...Canada and America would be buddies...:)
We're buddies now.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Oceania Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
For Australian Christmas, Everything's Overturn... 57 min Pauline 5
Police warn of online child sex 'grooming' 1 hr easy 3
What's for dinner? Australia 2 hr J RULES 9
Comedian faces resentencing on sex charge (Apr '12) 8 hr punjabi mp 78
Where is Santa right now? 2012 NORAD Santa trac... (Dec '12) 16 hr umm 11
LDS Apostle visited Tonga (Feb '14) 18 hr piratefighting 27,145
Holidaymakers warned about high risk of shellfi... 23 hr Keyster 1
More from around the web