Shooting in Conn. School

[quote name='mykevermin']Every goddamned Libertarian thinks of themselves as a Wordsmith. An Oedipus complex for dear mother Ayn, perhaps?

Are background checks and/or registries constitutional or not? It's not a complex fucking question, I don't need a wanking attempt at literary genius. I'd like a "yes," a "no," or a "maybe" with some kind of elaboration in any case. You ain't Socrates Johnson, friend, so answer in terms of declarative statements.

Weren't you..oh, never mind, that was temporaryscars. Yep, nevermind.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't that just drive you up the damn wall? When you ask someone a question to which a yes or no answer would suffice, and they go babbling on and STILL do not answer the question. Worst part is that you can usually tell they're doing this simply because they don't know the answer.
 
[quote name='Clak']they're doing this simply because they don't know the answer.[/QUOTE]

disagree; they don't want to admit the answer, or, rather, they don't want to admit that the premise they ideologically disagree with is a thoroughly plausible interpretation.

epistemic closure, my friend.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']disagree; they don't want to admit the answer, or, rather, they don't want to admit that the premise they ideologically disagree with is a thoroughly plausible interpretation.

epistemic closure, my friend.[/QUOTE]
I just meant in general, not necessarily in a debate or argument situation. Just as an example, last week was asking someone a question about policy here at work, couldn't give me as straight answer. Was a yes or no question, still couldn't answer. Not wanting to admit the answer may be true, I suppose it depends on what you're asking someone and whether they even can answer the question. Of course in that case it would make more sense to simply say "I don't know".
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Every goddamned Libertarian thinks of themselves as a Wordsmith. An Oedipus complex for dear mother Ayn, perhaps?

Are background checks and/or registries constitutional or not? It's not a complex fucking question, I don't need a wanking attempt at literary genius. I'd like a "yes," a "no," or a "maybe" with some kind of elaboration in any case. You ain't Socrates Johnson, friend, so answer in terms of declarative statements.

Weren't you..oh, never mind, that was temporaryscars. Yep, nevermind.[/QUOTE]

Finish your sentence, statist coward.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Wow, Chris Kyle was more of a hero than you, and the extent of your family will probably ever be. Keep being an obscure jackass, because that will be your significance.[/QUOTE]

I'd proudly be an obscure jackass over sniping women and children from a mile away as part of an occupying and invading force, then calling them savages and wishing I'd killed more of them in a book that brought me fame and fortune.
 
He certainly sounds like the typical thick headed heroes we've been given lately.

edit- I'd also like to point out how absolutely stupid it is to take a guy known to be suffering from PTSD to a motherfucking shooting range.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']I'd proudly be an obscure jackass over sniping women and children from a mile away as part of an occupying and invading force, then calling them savages and wishing I'd killed more of them in a book that brought me fame and fortune.[/QUOTE]

Why do you hate America? :roll:
 
[quote name='IRHari']Why do you hate America? :roll:[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']I'd proudly be an obscure jackass over sniping women and children from a mile away as part of an occupying and invading force, then calling them savages and wishing I'd killed more of them in a book that brought me fame and fortune.[/QUOTE]

He does make a valid point..

Whether you murder for fun or murder on orders, you are still a murderer
 
[quote name='Clak']He certainly sounds like the typical thick headed heroes we've been given lately.

edit- I'd also like to point out how absolutely stupid it is to take a guy known to be suffering from PTSD to a motherfucking shooting range.[/QUOTE]

You are neither a doctor, nor have you suffered from PTSD. Nor have you helped people who had PTSD. You have no basis for your opinion here. As usual you take a scenario and apply your own brand of "common sense" to it, and believe it is so obvious why someone should or shouldn't do something because you read a single newstory. It is beyond irritating.

As for the rest of you jackasses, keep it up. You make everyone proud. :roll:
Please inform me of specific situations in which he should be deemed worthy of such little respect when he was murdered?

Mykevermin, still haven't gotten those statistics, or something, ANYTHING backing up your proposed legislation...tough to find them huh? Maybe if you give it enough time, we will all forget the flawed points you were trying to make, and you can start fresh.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']I'd proudly be an obscure jackass over sniping women and children from a mile away as part of an occupying and invading force, then calling them savages and wishing I'd killed more of them in a book that brought me fame and fortune.[/QUOTE]
Sooo... you hate Obama too, right? He's ordered the deaths of over fifty thousand Libyans by drone stike. Libyans alone, not counting Afghans, Pakis and others.
 
[quote name='Mad39er']Sooo... you hate Obama too, right? He's ordered the deaths of over fifty thousand Libyans by drone stike. Libyans alone, not counting Afghans, Pakis and others.[/QUOTE]

You... must be new here. Yes, he hates Obama's use of drone strikes as well. He's been very outspoken about that.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']You... must be new here. Yes, he hates Obama's use of drone strikes as well. He's been very outspoken about that.[/QUOTE]
At least he's consistent, there are worse things in life.
 
I've never heard of him shooting children, and I know of one time when he shot a woman while she was about to attack with a grenade. Don't make it sound as though he's slaughtering innocent, unarmed women and children.
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']He does make a valid point..

Whether you murder for fun or murder on orders, you are still a murderer[/QUOTE]
IRHari was being sarcastic.

[quote name='Mad39er']At least he's consistent, there are worse things in life.[/QUOTE]
FtAbscess is actually the most evenhanded libertarian in vs. and isn't a Republican posing as a libertarian like most "libertarians" here...or at least he doesn't present himself as one.

I completely disagree with his ideology, but he at least he doesn't act like he's a part of the lunatic fringe.
 
[quote name='Temporaryscars']I've never heard of him shooting children, and I know of one time when he shot a woman while she was about to attack with a grenade. Don't make it sound as though he's slaughtering innocent, unarmed women and children.[/QUOTE]

If a group of robbers breaks into your house and you point a rifle at them trying to defend yourself, which causes one of the intruders to shoot you, would you say the killing was justified, because he saved the lives of his fellow robbers?
 
Considering Chris Kyle book details his bragging rights to how many people he gunned down... is much the same a Ted Bundy writing a book on all the women he tricked and strangled..

There are two types of psycho/sociopaths, ones that act freely and one who take orders ( from the gov't )
If you can come back sane and without any affect after watching death, destruction, and death that is caused by your hands, that is a hallmark sign of a psycho/sociopath

Those who come back and actually suffer trauma and PTSD are actually the normal ones..
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']If a group of robbers breaks into your house and you point a rifle at them trying to defend yourself, which causes one of the intruders to shoot you, would you say the killing was justified, because he saved the lives of his fellow robbers?[/QUOTE]

I'm not excusing what he did or saying he was a hero for doing it, but acting as though he murdered unarmed women and their children is just being dishonest, regardless of the reasons.
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']Considering Chris Kyle book details his bragging rights to how many people he gunned down... is much the same a Ted Bundy writing a book on all the women he tricked and strangled..

There are two types of psycho/sociopaths, ones that act freely and one who take orders ( from the gov't )
If you can come back sane and without any affect after watching death, destruction, and death that is caused by your hands, that is a hallmark sign of a psycho/sociopath

Those who come back and actually suffer trauma and PTSD are actually the normal ones..[/QUOTE]

Kyle did have PTSD.

Have you even read the book, or are you quoting from some news article too?

Kyle's kills were a matter of protecting his unit. I have seen nothing to tell me otherwise. Care to provide something?
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']If a group of robbers breaks into your house and you point a rifle at them trying to defend yourself, which causes one of the intruders to shoot you, would you say the killing was justified, because he saved the lives of his fellow robbers?[/QUOTE]

That's fine if that's your opinion and view of how the war worked. However the man served his country, and took orders, and did what he could to protect his men and eliminate hostiles. It is how war works, they weren't busting down doors to simply piss off the locals. If you are against wars fine, but show some respect for the people who put themselves in harms way in defense of your country. He didn't put himself in Iraq any more than a WW2 Vet put himself on Iwo Jima or any other place in war.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is Chris Kyle.

...

Oh, guys, about that...[/QUOTE]

Must of went over my head....

Anyways, got those facts to back up your ideas yet?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is Chris Kyle.

...

Oh, guys, about that...[/QUOTE]
Hard to defend yourself with a gun when you're shot pointblank and by someone you trusted.
 
Harder to even defend yourself, when you give a gun to mentally unstable person, or take a mentally unstable person to a GUN range with access to tons of guns.

But then again he is a Texan...
 
[quote name='GUNNM']Hard to defend yourself with a gun when you're shot pointblank and by someone you trusted.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Kyle should have had a gun.[/LaPierreLogic]
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']Harder to even defend yourself, when you give a gun to mentally unstable person, or take a mentally unstable person to a GUN range with access to tons of guns.

But then again he is a Texan...[/QUOTE]

Do you even know what you are talking about with PTSD?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Do you even know what you are talking about with PTSD?[/QUOTE]

yes a guy who suffers the TRAUMA of war is taken to range where GUNFIRE rings around him from every angle...

BRILLIANT........................:applause:
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']yes a guy who suffers the TRAUMA of war is taken to range where GUNFIRE rings around him from every angle...

BRILLIANT........................:applause:[/QUOTE]

Brilliant is right. That is vastly different from what you first stated.

But still, I would love to know where your insight into PTSD comes from? That you may know better on a person to person basis how they might deal with it and that you can tell two people who have it, what they should or shouldn't do because they have it?
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']yes a guy who suffers the TRAUMA of war is taken to range where GUNFIRE rings around him from every angle...

BRILLIANT........................:applause:[/QUOTE]

90% of today's PTSD cases are pure bullshit. I know multiple vets collecting benefits because they lied to their doctors. To be honest, if you said that I was going to the range with a guy who was diagnosed with "PTSD", I wouldn't think twice.
 
Kyle donated much of his money to PTSD soldier causes. He often would take ex soldiers out shooting. It was one of his charity things.

To a lot of vets, going target shooting is cathartic. It's how you let off steam. It's how you bond with each other. It's the same thing as going out and playing basketball for many other guys. Granted, basketballs can't usually kill you either.

Clearly the dude was far worse than anyone knew. In the 911 call from the suspects sister, she says he told her he killed them because he thought they were going to kill him.

Just a tragedy all around.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Kyle donated much of his money to PTSD soldier causes. He often would take ex soldiers out shooting. It was one of his charity things.

To a lot of vets, going target shooting is cathartic. It's how you let off steam. It's how you bond with each other. It's the same thing as going out and playing basketball for many other guys. Granted, basketballs can't usually kill you either.

Clearly the dude was far worse than anyone knew. In the 911 call from the suspects sister, she says he told her he killed them because he thought they were going to kill him.

Just a tragedy all around.[/QUOTE]
According to the post above yours, PTSD is bullshit.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']he told her he killed them because he thought they were going to kill him.[/quote]

now I'm confused. who was the "bad guy" and who was the "good guy" here?

Or does this mean that Wayne LaPierre's logic is simplistic black/white idiotic reductionism that has no place in the domain of public policy discussions, let alone at the forefront of it?

Maybe we need armed guards at shooting ranges. That would have stopped this from happening. Or more guns.

Just a tragedy all around.
Click to expand...

Such an incurious thing to say.
 
Let me restate this, taking a person, whom is known to have mental stability issues, to a shooting range, with live ammo, is fucking stupid. I don't even care if they think it's "cathartic", it's a really stupid thing to do so far as common sense goes.

You have no idea what might cause someone suffering from trauma like that to freak out, and preferably it would be better if they weren't near loaded firearms when/if it happens.
 
[quote name='Clak']Let me restate this, taking a person, whom is known to have mental stability issues, to a shooting range, with live ammo, is fucking stupid. I don't even care if they think it's "cathartic", it's a really stupid thing to do so far as common sense goes.

You have no idea what might cause someone suffering from trauma like that to freak out, and preferably it would be better if they weren't near loaded firearms when/if it happens.[/QUOTE]

Think about what he's saying, though. This is quite literally how harmless they view firearms to be.

Preposterous? Sure. Not my reality, though. Theirs.
 
I have to believe that, were some sort of mental evaluation required in order to buy a gun, many traumatized soldiers would probably not pass that evaluation. Think about that, that's a good number of people.

But see, it isn't about safety, or mental health, or any other thing which seems sensible, it's about rights, it's always about rights. Never mind if the guy has nightly terrors where he's back in combat and killing people, or shakes like Sarah Palin taking an ACT test, it's his damn right to buy whatever and as many guns as he wants.
 
Obviously the solution is to clone everyone in America and do a buddy system. You and your clone will be inseparable. One of you is evil. But only the scientist who made you knows! And sometimes, that scientist's evil clone made you, and if you ask him, he'll lie!

But we're getting off track here. See, now you have TWO people with guns. Because, because you see, then there's a good guy with a gun for every bad guy with a gun! And as I've been told so many times before, whenever someone starts fucking shit up, the good guy steps in and becomes the hero! Everybody wins! That way only bad people die from shootings!

Gosh, I'm disappointed none of you other people are smart enough to think up this ....*snicker*...bullerproof plan! Bhwahahahahaha!
 
Wow, you are all showing how out of touch and off base you are.

The way you think you have the other side so pegged is just amusing.

I don't even know where to interject. It's just a big mess of nonsense claiming we don't listen to your ideas. Yet you propose ideas, and we suggest something to back them up, and we hear crickets.

Your solutions won't work. They haven't worked anywhere else. You guys live in a utopia of a dreamland. It is funny how you think you can legislate out murder.
 
I have more to add to my masterful plan of dealing with guns.

See, I heard somewhere - and I forgot where - that women who are raped can shut down their bodies and not be affected by it. OBVIOUSLY we all just need to activate our internal termination process when getting shot. That way nothing bad will happen. Unless you are evil, in which case you don't need to turn anything off. You can die. Also we should just stay away from bullets at all times. If you see one flying toward you, just politely move in some other direction. That way, you aren't asking for it anymore, even though all clothing and human flesh tastes delicious to bullets, who salivate at the very thought of ravaging your life force.

As an extension to this, children can just hide under their desks, which is statistically the safest place in the world.

I probably need a third prong to really solve this.

OH. The X-men.

There, done.
 
[quote name='Clak']But see, it isn't about safety, or mental health, or any other thing which seems sensible, it's about rights, it's always about rights. Never mind if the guy has nightly terrors where he's back in combat and killing people, or shakes like Sarah Palin taking an ACT test, it's his damn right to buy whatever and as many guns as he wants.[/QUOTE]

Should we also ban that same guy from buying cars? Or axes? Or household supplies that can be turned into bombs? In fact, maybe we should just lock him in a box so he can't ever hurt anybody ever.

Stop blaming guns. Guns are no more dangerous than the people who carry them. Mentally ill or violent people aren't going to stop doing bad stuff just because you take away their guns. They're just going to move to a different weapon.

EDIT: And to be clear, I'm not advocating that mentally ill people be able to buy guns. I'm just stating that if we want to take away guns, there's a whole class of other items that we have to take away as well. Guns aren't the only dangerous items that exist in our society.
 
[quote name='Strell']I have more to add to my masterful plan of dealing with guns.

See, I heard somewhere - and I forgot where - that women who are raped can shut down their bodies and not be affected by it. OBVIOUSLY we all just need to activate our internal termination process when getting shot. That way nothing bad will happen. Unless you are evil, in which case you don't need to turn anything off. You can die. Also we should just stay away from bullets at all times. If you see one flying toward you, just politely move in some other direction. That way, you aren't asking for it anymore, even though all clothing and human flesh tastes delicious to bullets, who salivate at the very thought of ravaging your life force.

As an extension to this, children can just hide under their desks, which is statistically the safest place in the world.

I probably need a third prong to really solve this.

OH. The X-men.

There, done.[/QUOTE]

If we track who has guns, we can prevent the people who are going to kill someone from killing someone. Amiright? I mean minority report shit, man. We will know who the bad guy is that has a gun, and we can have a team on stand by ready to swoop in and save the day before he goes on a massacre.

Which one of the recent massacres would have been stopped by gun registration again?
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Should we also ban that same guy from buying cars? Or axes? Or household supplies that can be turned into bombs? In fact, maybe we should just lock him in a box so he can't ever hurt anybody ever.

Stop blaming guns. Guns are no more dangerous than the people who carry them. Mentally ill or violent people aren't going to stop doing bad stuff just because you take away their guns. They're just going to move to a different weapon.

EDIT: And to be clear, I'm not advocating that mentally ill people be able to buy guns. I'm just stating that if we want to take away guns, there's a whole class of other items that we have to take away as well. Guns aren't the only dangerous items that exist in our society.[/QUOTE]

They won't listen to valid points. They have this picture stuck in their head, and they won't see any other way. Just the way they phrase their posts shows this.

"bullets flying everywhere"
"who lets a person with PTSD do anything?"
"registering guns will help.......solve murders and stuff"
"assault weapons are scary and you don't need them, do you?"
"what's an assault weapon"
"we need to get rid of those high capacity clips!"
"what's a statistic?"
"Am I being emotional?"
"What's a knee-jerk reaction?"
"We have a gun violence epidemic, compared to other countries!......don't compare our situation to other countries though"

And that's not exaggerating either. It would be scary if this wasn't a video game forum. Although most news article comments are much scarier.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Cool starmen Knoell.[/QUOTE]

There are other countries that have less gun violence than we do.

What do they do that we can't. I dont expect an answer from the usual gaggle.
 
[quote name='Msut77']There are other countries that have less gun violence than we do.

What do they do that we can't. I dont expect an answer from the usual gaggle.[/QUOTE]

Providing far greater access to healthcare that won't put you into debt slavery for life is a big one. But that that'd be socialism and communism so...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top