CT school shooting

[lucabrasi]

.

Naw, not yet. Getting pretty close tho. Maybe I can do it here too. 

[SUPflorida]

You can quote Mitchael Moore ...I will stick to scripture...

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

[Chan]

You can quote Mitchael Moore ...I will stick to scripture...

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

If God wants us to own assault rifles is the message you glean from a reading of the lives and musings of 12 martyrs then I would feel much safer if you didn't have a gun.  

[Maritimestandup]

I just find it funny. Do people really believe that their lives will be so much worse if Handguns and Automatic weapons are restricted.  Guns didn't save Adam Lanza's mother, nor did they save the 20 children in Newton. Face reality people.  Easy access to guns kills people. period.

[TEX_SUP]

I just find it funny. Do people really believe that their lives will be so much worse if Handguns and Automatic weapons are restricted.  Guns didn't save Adam Lanza's mother, nor did they save the 20 children in Newton. Face reality people.  Easy access to guns kills people. period.

Your post is the opposite of reality.  

The deranged murderer tried to purchase a gun, but because they are NOT easy to get he failed in that attempt.  

This clown had to kill his own mother to get ahold of guns, you think a silly law would have stopped someone capable of KILLING HIS OWN MOTHER?

You find this funny? 20 children are dead and you think it's funny?  The only thing funny is that your view of the world is so simplistic that you think a law would have stopped a CRIMINAL who broke about 30 laws during his rampage.

[supdiscobay]

Tex,
I don't disagree with you, but what was a mother living in a very affluent neighborhood, doing with two hand guns and a rifle?

[TEX_SUP]

Tex,
I don't disagree with you, but what was a mother living in a very affluent neighborhood, doing with two hand guns and a rifle?

I don't understand your question. Why does it matter where she lives?

Why isn't anyone asking the question "why was the mother hiding a deranged psychopath who was kicked out of multiple schools and not locking her guns up in a safe"?

[pdxmike]

I just find it funny. Do people really believe that their lives will be so much worse if Handguns and Automatic weapons are restricted.  Guns didn't save Adam Lanza's mother, nor did they save the 20 children in Newton. Face reality people.  Easy access to guns kills people. period.

It depends on the restrictions.  Most people here and elsewhere who support gun rights aren't opposed to some restrictions, and so would say their lives would be no worse with reasonable restrictions.  If the restrictions were strong enough--say a ban on carrying concealed weapons--then certainly some people would think their lives were worse, and I believe others would also be less safe. 

Guns didn't save Adam Lanza's mother, but nobody's claiming they would have.  Like Tex said, anyone capable of killing their own mother is going to find a way, and isn't going to be concerned about breaking laws, which as Tex also pointed out, he felt free to do over and over again. 

And guns didn't save the children, but on the other hand you could argue that that's because there were no guns available at the school to do that.  Again (4th time without any comments against it) the Clackamas mall shooter stopped as soon as a bystander aimed his concealed weapon at him.  He was comparably armed as the school shooter, but that gun--not even fired, just aimed--may have been what stopped him. 

Clackamas had 10,000 people, one concealed weapon holder and 2 deaths, while Connecticut had a few hundred people, no guns on site, and over 20 deaths.  You can't dismiss the possibility that the difference was a gun on site.  You also can't dismiss the possibility that there may have been many more deaths at Clackamas if the first guns on site were the police.

And again, if the school shooter had thought there may have been guns at the school, maybe he wouldn't have even shown up there in the first place. 

[TEX_SUP]

And again, if the school shooter had thought there may have been guns at the school, maybe he wouldn't have even shown up there in the first place. 

What he said ^^^^^

I haven't found enough articles to support it, but apparently that nut job who shot up the theater awhile back actually tried several places prior to his murdering spree.  The difference is claimed to be that he saw armed guards at his first choices.

I find it very telling that the same media that is running non stop coverage of the CT murders is NOT saying very much about the guy with the concealed carry permit that apparently stopped the Clackamas murderer.

[pdxmike]

And again, if the school shooter had thought there may have been guns at the school, maybe he wouldn't have even shown up there in the first place. 

What he said ^^^^^

I haven't found enough articles to support it, but apparently that nut job who shot up the theater awhile back actually tried several places prior to his murdering spree.  The difference is claimed to be that he saw armed guards at his first choices.

I find it very telling that the same media that is running non stop coverage of the CT murders is NOT saying very much about the guy with the concealed carry permit that apparently stopped the Clackamas murderer.

What he said ^^^^

And if me and TEX SUP are in agreement, that's a sign some of you people have some serious flaws in your arguments   

[surfinJ]

If we were to loosen up gun restrictions even more, there would be more civilian
interventions saving lives.  But at the same time the overall gun violence would also
rise - more guns available-  raising the number of gun related deaths.  The uninterrupted shootings would
still produce more deaths then those saved thru interventions.  And how much collateral damage
will we be able to take.

[SUPflorida]

Quote from: SUPflorida on December 20, 2012, 10:22:18 PM
You can quote Mitchael Moore ...I will stick to scripture...

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17


If God wants us to own assault rifles is the message you glean from a reading of the lives and musings of 12 martyrs then I would feel much safer if you didn't have a gun. 

"I was questioned for using scripture...I gave an answer...the rest is from you not me.

[Kevin]

Speaking of old fashioned shot guns:

--------------------------------------------

Why do I need an assault rifle you ask? I don't need it for hunting. I don't need it for home protection from a single invader, or even two. So I echo the sentiment of many gun control advocates; Why do I need an assault rifle, with a high capacity mag no less?

Here is why. I need an assault rifle because I live under the rule of a government who thinks it has the right to take away my assault rifle; a government who dictates who I can marry, what I can eat, drink, and smoke; a government who uses force to take my money away from me, who charges me rent (property tax) to live in my own home: a government who commits acts of war without the consent of the people, who murders it's own citizens witout probable cause or due process; a government who has monopolized the currency with which I can trade my goods and services, then devalued that currency through inflation and taxation; a government which uses the tyranny of democracy rather than the fre...edom of a republic.

To put it bluntly, I need an assault rifle in the event that I might have to declare my independence from a tyrannical government. I'm statistically unlikely to ever shoot an intruder in my home. I'm statistically unlikely to ever be in the position to stop one of these rare mass killings at a school, as these things happen far less often than the media would have you believe. However, whether you are Democrat or Republican, you can easily find countless instances of the government stepping all over your rights, whether it be on social issues (marriage, gay rights, religious rights, etc.) or fiscal issues (taxation, property rights, business regulations, etc.)

So, how likely is it you will use your assault rifle to prevent a school shooting? Not very likely at all. However, how likely is it that you will need your assault rifle for the purpose of protecting your rights from a tyrannical government? Well, the fact that we are having this conversation not only shows that it is increasingly likely, but it also clearly demonstrates the reason why the right to bear arms is unalienable.

When a tyrannical government uses it's assault rifles to take away my rights, it would be beyond immoral to expect me to defend those rights with my grandpa's shotgun. That is why I need an assault rifle.

-anon
----------------------------------------------------

[1tuberider]

Gun sales are sky high and you can not find a ar or a ak at the stores.  So if you need a semi auto rifle good luck finding one. 

Why is that so?

[TN_SUP]

Was that written by the cult in Waco? Or Timothy Mcvay? Sounds like someone wants to kill government employees.