• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

26 reported killed in Newtown [W:72/89]

Not particularly. I just wanted to address for the liberal community what was obvious to the rest of us.

by maniuplating context. gotcha.
 
by maniuplating context. gotcha.

What context is that? That she's an idiot because you say she is, even in the face of an obvious error on your part?
 
What context is that? That she's an idiot because you say she is, even in the face of an obvious error on your part?

The context that she is an idiot for what SHE said. You cherry picked my post and cut out the really nuts part of her writing. You know, the part that when asked you refused to address?

So your cherry picked quote of me makes it look like I'm saying she's nuts for only this small other part. That is an intentional ripping apart of the context. Of course you knew that. Then of course your riding to her defense by ripping the context apart in my post to make the personal attack on me. You should work for Fox with that kind of deceptive skill.
 
Here's an interesting perspective from a woman at the National Review. Lanza would've been stopped if the school didn't have so many females in it.


The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm. Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.

link...

Dawn "seemed" to act bravely?

I particularly like the thought proccess that men can somehow stop a bullet better than women.

This tragedy is bringing out the idiots in droves.

IMO, she should have owned, trained with, and in this situation USED....


A firearm.


All the teachers in the school should have.
 
The context that she is an idiot for what SHE said. You cherry picked my post and cut out the really nuts part of her writing. You know, the part that when asked you refused to address?

Well, it, um, seemed to be a central part of your thesis, since you highlighted the word "seemed" in red and then provided your own (erroneous) commentary on it. I'm merely addressing that point. Then you accuse me of "cherry picking." As far as her basic contention, which is that if men had been on the premises there might have been a different outcome, she might have a valid point. It's certainly not "idiocy." I'd be interested in seeing data concerning mass shootings to see how many of these perps were stopped by civilians as opposed to police and what percentage of the "heroes" were men. At least at this point in the Sandy Hook case, it's not looking good for the ladies, who only saw the carnage end when the cops showed up. Absent the police, they probably all would have been led to slaughter like sheep.
 
The problem here is not the gun, but the crazy person.

The third part of your scenario: Crazy person steals or illegally purchases a gun, and kills people.



Edit: If anything, this indicates that we need more awareness, help, and as a last resort, control of, crazy people.

There’s that whole “right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness” thing, but if your liberty or pursuit of happiness infringes upon my right to live, you should lose the confrontation.

How can you illegally buy a gun when it says you bought it leagally.
Virginia Tech gun leagally bought gun
Conn. crime commited with an easy accessible gun bought leagally.

Is not tougher gun control being more aware , help, and last resort, or should society wait for another innocent person to die as a result of easy gu8n control laws?

What are we as a society to say it's the violence on T.V, it's the violence of vidieo games it's this it's that.
Every excuse but tougher gun control laws.
What 's next?
An innocent man gets killed by a person with a gun .
Why? because the innocent person did not want to buy a gun of course???? :peace
 
Last edited:
No, controls are stopped by the Constitution. If you hadn't noticed, it does more to limit govt infringement on rights than it enables it.



Au contrair. The average massacre occurs in areas where the cowardly perpetrator is relatively certain that the victims are unarmed. Tough gun control will only disarm those that you would want to be armed. Those bent on murder will get the guns another way.



Again, it is evident that you don't quite understand what a "complete" background check entails. I gaurantee you that no person was interview over your apartment application.



So, you get to pick and choose which rights are worth protecting....gotcha.



Apparently the cops disabled your logic mechanisms.



I disagree.



If you actually looked into anything you'd realize that areas with high rates of private, legal ownership of firearms have low incidence of violent crime.



I think you need to look up what subjective means.

First of all I knew this was coming a longer and longer response, but no problem.

As for does more to limit government infringing on rights?
Didn't do much for the dead at Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Conn.

Very well if this can be prevented , by arming more people, how about a gun in every household, and when protestors occupy again arm them as well ,forget basic education straight to gun school at the age of 12??????

You would be wrong I was interveiwed right after my application was read.


So you take a pass on innocent people dieing, just because it might be harder for you to purchase a gun???



I got my bell rung if that's what you mean, I was one of many marching against segregation.
However, I still know the difference between right and wrong.
No matter what excuse you come with no matter what distractions you try.
Gun control in America today needs to be tougher the proof is page after page of history saying "MAN WITH A GUN , INNOCENT PEOPLE DEAD.:peace
 
How do you measure that it is not working ? Because of such as Newtown, VA Tech, and Columbine ?

OK, then apparently "gun control" was working in the 50's and 60's and 70's.

What laws changed ? Or perhaps, its not the "laws" that have changed ......... ;)

OBTW, none of what you suggest would have changed this recent tragedy.

Responsibility has changed a responsible person with a gun , knows to respect it , knows to use it to defend theirself and knows to keep it out of the hands of other people that should not have access to a gun, they know it is their responsibility.
However, in today's society irresponsible people are buying guns.
WHY ARE GUNS SOLD TO IRRESPONSIBLE PEOPLE???:peace
 
First of all I knew this was coming a longer and longer response, but no problem.

Just responding to your posts. :shrug:

As for does more to limit government infringing on rights?
Didn't do much for the dead at Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Conn.

Lol, exactly.

Very well if this can be prevented , by arming more people, how about a gun in every household, and when protestors occupy again arm them as well ,forget basic education straight to gun school at the age of 12??????

A gun in every house is a good idea. And, why would it have any impact on education? Non-sequitur.

You would be wrong I was interveiwed right after my application was read.

Sigh,

So you take a pass on innocent people dieing, just because it might be harder for you to purchase a gun???

Nothing I've said would lead a logical person to this conclusion.

I got my bell rung if that's what you mean, I was one of many marching against segregation.
However, I still know the difference between right and wrong.
No matter what excuse you come with no matter what distractions you try.
Gun control in America today needs to be tougher the proof is page after page of history saying "MAN WITH A GUN , INNOCENT PEOPLE DEAD.:peace

Actually, the headline is "Man without a gun is killed because he had no way to defend himself."
 
Only badly maintained or horribly designed guns have the possibility of firing without a finger on the trigger, and even that requires mishandling and obviously someone loading the gun.

Ergo, gun did not fire bullets, person fired bullets with gun.
Of course this guy shouldn't have had access to those guns. That's an issue with poor mental health care and bad parenting, it sounds like - he got the weapons from his mom?
It's not an issue with gun control - except in that the person who owned the guns gave him access and should not have.


Edit: Additionally, even extremely strict gun control measures will not stop those nutcases who give no outward signs of mental issues.


As I view it, the only real way to prevent/stop violence on this level is to have more people armed with personal weapons, and specifically in this case, armed (concealed or even openly) guards at schools.

FFS children are considered most precious by us, we go nuts when **** like this happens, but we can't deal with armed guards to protect them?

A gun by itself as no destructive power put it in the hands of a nut job it can and has killed innocent people.
My question is how did the nut job aquire the gun?
Maybe a magic trick and it appeared , maybe Santa Clause bought it?
No, the gun was purchased leagally I might add from a person that sells guns.
The question is how would a gun sitting on a shelf wind up at the scene of a homicide involving 26 people?

If this was the first time this happened then perhaps it might be considered a fluke just a bad coincedence , but this is not the first time and unless there are tougher gun controls there will be more guns going off shelves winding up at a homicide crime scene with more innocent people dead.
 
Just responding to your posts. :shrug:



Lol, exactly.



A gun in every house is a good idea. And, why would it have any impact on education? Non-sequitur.



Sigh,



Nothing I've said would lead a logical person to this conclusion.



Actually, the headline is "Man without a gun is killed because he had no way to defend himself."

No big deal.

I don't think the dead at Columbine, Virginia tech, Aurora and Conn, need a lol.


A gun in every house a good idea huh?
That include gangbangers , blood crips, Latin Kings, Arian Nation maybe a few digruntled muslims as well?
Do the people that protest get guns too?
What kind AK'S, M 16'S ,LAWS ROCKETS MAYBE?

TIRED?

Yes you have you have said leave gun control laws alone , at least that's the impression I got.
When after so much death it is simply not working.

Are we to arm every citizen in America with a gun or are we to make it more difficult for people that shouldn't have a gun to buy one?:peace
 
No big deal.

I don't think the dead at Columbine, Virginia tech, Aurora and Conn, need a lol.

Did this make sense in your head?

A gun in every house a good idea huh?

Absolutely. Areas with higher legal gun ownership have lower crime.

That include gangbangers , blood crips, Latin Kings, Arian Nation maybe a few digruntled muslims as well?

No.

Do the people that protest get guns too?

Yeah. Heard of the Black Panthers? It's kinda their schtick.

What kind AK'S, M 16'S ,LAWS ROCKETS MAYBE?

Any weapon they legally own.


Lol, hardly.

Yes you have you have said leave gun control laws alone , at least that's the impression I got.

Yes, I agree with a wait period on handguns and I agree that felons should be prohibited from owning them.

When after so much death it is simply not working.

The gun control laws have no affect on violent crime. :shrug:

Are we to arm every citizen in America with a gun or are we to make it more difficult for people that shouldn't have a gun to buy one?:peace

Yes and yes, within the confines of the constitution.
 
Responsibility has changed a responsible person with a gun , knows to respect it , knows to use it to defend theirself and knows to keep it out of the hands of other people that should not have access to a gun, they know it is their responsibility.
However, in today's society irresponsible people are buying guns.
WHY ARE GUNS SOLD TO IRRESPONSIBLE PEOPLE???:peace

C'mon. You can do better than that. When have we ever had a "responsibility" meter to measure folks with before we enable them to do all sorts of adult things. To suggest that irresponsible folks did not buy guns in yesteryear, but do now .............. like I said. Try again. ;)

You don't really believe the **** you posted. Do you ?
 
Did this make sense in your head?



Absolutely. Areas with higher legal gun ownership have lower crime.



No.



Yeah. Heard of the Black Panthers? It's kinda their schtick.



Any weapon they legally own.



Lol, hardly.



Yes, I agree with a wait period on handguns and I agree that felons should be prohibited from owning them.



The gun control laws have no affect on violent crime. :shrug:



Yes and yes, within the confines of the constitution.

YES.

That include crack houses?

But these people do live in houses
"A gun in every house is good idea" your words right?

A gun in the right hands can be used as defense against a predator, a gun in the wrong hands can be used as , well check the news.

Tell me the difference between a felon with false ID and a crazy person that buys a gun leagally.

There is no violent crime here, only killing of innocents. by a person who bought or had easy access to a gun.
t
As I have said the Constitution does not stop at the 2nd amendmend.
The oath read to protect all against threats foreign and domestic.:peace
 
C'mon. You can do better than that. When have we ever had a "responsibility" meter to measure folks with before we enable them to do all sorts of adult things. To suggest that irresponsible folks did not buy guns in yesteryear, but do now .............. like I said. Try again. ;)

You don't really believe the **** you posted. Do you ?

I don't know, why don't you check the school shooting between 1950 and 1960.
Now check the school shootings between 2000 and 2012?
Check how many times and automatic weapon was used during school shootings between 1960 till 1970 .
Check how many times an automatic weapon as been used from 1990 till 2000.

Not to suggest to prove guns were not bought by crazy people in the yesteryear but that they were were not that easy to buy by crazy people in the yesteryear.

Perhaps the reason is there are more crazy people today , or more people willing to sell guns to crazy people, if that is the case perhaps there should be a closer watch on who you sell guns to, or who sells guns.
Which leaves us right back to gun control is it tough enough???

I can not believe that a gun owner would not want tougher laws on selling guns if you have ever picked up a gun.

Picture this weapon being sold leagally to a crazy person that just wants to pull the trigger to watch people die.
Wether they are old or young disabled or kids at an movie or or kids in an elementary school.:peace
 
Last edited:
0, I believe.



0 also, I believe.

My bad, when I make a mistake I will admit it.


However , Virginia Tech automatic handguns were used were they not the same in Aurora the same in Conn.

My point is simple when American society accepts innocent people teenagers and kids being killed as just the way things are something is wrong with American society

Indeed if somebody walked into Wall street and shot people and brokers , gun control would not be ask for it would be demanded

If banks were easy to rob something would be done
Yet when teenagers at college are killed, people in a movie are killed elementary kids are killed you say sorry that's the way things are, we can't have tougher gun laws it would be an invasion of privacy, or that's the 2nd amendment can't be changed or updated ?:peace
 
YES.

That include crack houses?

But these people do live in houses
"A gun in every house is good idea" your words right?

A gun in the right hands can be used as defense against a predator, a gun in the wrong hands can be used as , well check the news.

Tell me the difference between a felon with false ID and a crazy person that buys a gun leagally.

There is no violent crime here, only killing of innocents. by a person who bought or had easy access to a gun.
t
As I have said the Constitution does not stop at the 2nd amendmend.
The oath read to protect all against threats foreign and domestic.:peace

Tell me when you're going to start making sense...
 
Tell me when you're going to start making sense...

Tell me when you are, on this forum everything is questioned.
Education quote by more than a few including me is not working it should be investigated
Social Security not working should be investagated
American labor force
Economics
Government spending
AND THE LIST GOES ON

Changes have been made in all these some, good ,some bad.

However you ask for better gun control you hit a brick wall.
Thats not to take guns away from responsible people but to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people..:peace
 
Tell me when you are, on this forum everything is questioned.

Question everything, but for the love of all that's holy....make a cohesive point.

However you ask for better gun control you hit a brick wall.
Thats not to take guns away from responsible people but to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people..:peace

You're not asking for better gun control, you're asking to ban guns.
 
My bad, when I make a mistake I will admit it.

All we can ask for.

However , Virginia Tech automatic handguns were used were they not the same in Aurora the same in Conn.

Wrong again, no automatic guns used at Va Tech either.

My point is simple when American society accepts innocent people teenagers and kids being killed as just the way things are something is wrong with American society

So, you're against abortion for convenience?

Indeed if somebody walked into Wall street and shot people and brokers , gun control would not be ask for it would be demanded

Doubt it, it isn't the tool that is at fault.

If banks were easy to rob something would be done

And why aren't banks 'easy to rob'? Could it be because there is an armed guard in them?

Yet when teenagers at college are killed, people in a movie are killed elementary kids are killed you say sorry that's the way things are, we can't have tougher gun laws it would be an invasion of privacy, or that's the 2nd amendment can't be changed or updated ?

Explain what this means please....

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

What you are asking for is summed up by this patriot many years ago...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

-Benjamin Franklin
 
All we can ask for.



Wrong again, no automatic guns used at Va Tech either.



So, you're against abortion for convenience?



Doubt it, it isn't the tool that is at fault.



And why aren't banks 'easy to rob'? Could it be because there is an armed guard in them?



Explain what this means please....

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

What you are asking for is summed up by this patriot many years ago...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

-Benjamin Franklin

I said I woukld admit when I was wrong , a glock is an automatic handgun is it not?

Who said I was against abortion
Have them post me, bad intelligence ya got there I am a strong supporter of abortion as well as the death penalty.

It isn't the tool that's at fault never said it was, it is the salesmen that puts the gun into the hands of a crazy person or somewhere in the chain

A joke for ya a muslim walks into a gun store with an interpertor which says he wants to buy automatic weapon and promptly shows his passport from Iraq and then ask for directions on how to get to 1600 Pennsylvania Washington DC.
Question; would he be allowed the standard gun control law to purchase an automatic weapon???

No because they have a big vault.

I can not believe that this would mean crazy people as well as responsible people.

"The tree of liberty must be pruned from time to time from tyrants"
Thomas Jefferson.

As you did not understand that right of the people to keep and bear arms , did not include crazy people that kills teenagers , movie goers and elementary kids.

Let me break that downed for ya pruned means change,in short if something isn't working you change it tyrant means anybody that would take advantage of America's rights to suit their own agenda. by causing harm to others.

Sir this is not FORT APACHE this is America.:peace
 
In conservativespeak, that means she's
not jumping to conclusions and taking it as fact that that's what happened. The clue is at the beginning of her next sentence: "According to reports.... " We all know how accurate media reporting is in the immediate aftermath of an event like this, especially when it involves "assault weapons" and "high-capacity clips." :roll:



No ****.

Yep, I knew there were people out there who wanted gun control but some of these idiots actually think limiting how much a clip can carry or doing away with assault rifles would actually have stopped the shooting.

I mean people so gullible and one dimensional you could put the word "assault" in front of any inaminate object and they would throw a big hissy fit.

Assault lolipops, assault poodles, assault ramen noodles.....BAN THEM !!!

I feel unsafe.

Its comical to say the least.
 
I said I woukld admit when I was wrong , a glock is an automatic handgun is it not?

.............

Why do you not take the time to learn ? A Glock is semi-automatic by definition. Just like the AR-15 is a semi rifle version of the automatic M-16.

One trigger squeeze = one bullet, casing ejected, is semi automatic.

One trigger squeeze, held = continuous rounds at the cyclic rate until the magazine is empty, or jams, is full automatic.
 
I said I woukld admit when I was wrong , a glock is an automatic handgun is it not?

No, it is not. All weapons that those without a class 3 firearms license can obtain are semi auto. A fully automatic weapon is not on the streets to the average person. Never has been.

Who said I was against abortion
Have them post me, bad intelligence ya got there I am a strong supporter of abortion as well as the death penalty.

That is my extrapolation based on your words in the post where you rail on killing kids.
Now don't get me wrong, what happened in New Town CT. is horrible and brings a tear to any rational persons eye.

It isn't the tool that's at fault never said it was, it is the salesmen that puts the gun into the hands of a crazy person or somewhere in the chain

I know several gun dealers where I live here, and believe me when I say they are absolutely anal about crossing all the t's and dotting all the i's...So, who are these clumsy sales people you are speaking of? Do you have some examples of this? Or is that what you imagine is happening?

A joke for ya a muslim walks into a gun store with an interpertor which says he wants to buy automatic weapon and promptly shows his passport from Iraq and then ask for directions on how to get to 1600 Pennsylvania Washington DC.
Question; would he be allowed the standard gun control law to purchase an automatic weapon???

No, I can't see that hypothetical being allowed to purchase a gun in America.

No because they have a big vault.

I am not talking about branch banks here, but rather the main banks....Tell me of one that doesn't have armed security?

I can not believe that this would mean crazy people as well as responsible people.

Well, it certainly doesn't mean that a knee jerk reaction to a crazy person means that I now lose my right.

"The tree of liberty must be pruned from time to time from tyrants"
Thomas Jefferson.

You don't prune the tree with a flame thrower. There is a process, if you want to change the rights of the people, then amend the constitution. Good luck with that.

As you did not understand that right of the people to keep and bear arms , did not include crazy people that kills teenagers , movie goers and elementary kids.

Well, call your congresscritters, maybe you can have that inane question added to the other stupid questions on the forms to purchase....I can see it now...

'Do you have the intention of killing teenagers, movie goers, or children? Yes____ No____'

Let me break that downed for ya pruned means change,in short if something isn't working you change it tyrant means anybody that would take advantage of America's rights to suit their own agenda. by causing harm to others.

Let me break this down for ya...Seems like your sentence here could be interpreted to fit Obama and the demo's today also.

Sir this is not FORT APACHE this is America.

It is equally not a monarchy, or dictatorship either.
 
Back
Top Bottom