so lord what do you have in a class 1 state?

 

Plenty, but not everything I want. Can't wait to move and leave this place behind.

 

Lets not forget that stumblshit sits in the basement in his superman underwear on the computer trying to convince everyone that he has a brain.

He was also on the short bus when he was young.

 

View attachment ​

 

Nope now that just is not true Tim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Campaign

But those are mental health professionals aren't they?

Police, Parents, and General Physicians aren't trained in diagnosing mental illness are they?

And you're also saying under your system the local deputy sheriff who doesn't like me could simply notify someone he thinks I'm mentally ill. Then what? I go on a list where I can't buy a gun? I already own several what do you propose doing about that. Have the police show up and confiscate my guns because one person claims I'm mentally ill.

But on this list you only have one the Psychiatrists that are actually capable of diagnosing mental illness. Throw in mental health counselors and you might have two.

But none of those others are trained in diagnosing mental illness.

So what you're saying is that under your proposal almost anyone could claim someone else is mentally Ill. Then what? Take that one person's word for it?

That sounds like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire to me.

Where are these fucking huge organizations within our government Tim?

And do you think the NRA would support or oppose something like this.

Isn't the NRA currently protecting the rights of people on a terrorist watch list to buy guns?

Yeah I'd regard that as a good things but it would not have stopped two of the past three mass killers. They already had their guns before anyone contacted them. They didn't need to buy a gun they already had them.

And once again according to you almost anyone could claim almost anyone else is mentally ill. How do you protect innocent people from that?

No that's what we've got now so I'd say its much easier to have some restrictions on what kind of guns are sold as well as who gets to buy them.

No, now you're just bullshitting about this. The gunman that just shot up the Shik Temple had no signs of mental illness or warning sings of what he was about to do. And he didn't need to buy a gun he already had one.

And now you are making my argument for me. As I've pointed out many times now we have tens of thousands of fully automatic machine guns in private hands and as far as I know now a single mass killing from any of them.

Why?

Because they have to be licensed. They have to pass a much more stringent background check and they have to be registered.

That's what I've been saying from the beginning of this dabate. Its time to move assault weapons and high capacity clips to class three and stop selling them to just anyone who happens to want one.

 

Didn't I already cover this one. When your voting ballot can leave your hand and travel 1100 feet per second and kill someone you'll have me convinced. Until then your an idiot for even posting this drivel.

 

Look more mass transit is something I've been advocating since the 1970's but you sure don't see many other advocating for it. And until they do your idea that people don't need personal automobiles is nothing more than a fantasy.

There is no mass transit in my entire state and for people like me its 20 miles one way to even get to the grocery store. The average commute is more than 15 miles.

How many buss and train stations are there in the suburbs around where you live? Are they there? Are they built and people just don't use them? I'm betting for the vast majority of people there is no mass transit and their car is their only transportation.

Hey I'm all for this. Now trying telling it to the NRA and the conservative/Republican/Tea Party that does their bidding for them.

Ok now you already pointed out didn't you that there are roughly the same amount of gun and traffic fatalities every year but to you traffic deaths are shocking to you but the same amount of carnage from guns is not?

Because you're still bullshitting yourself on the amount of things we are trying to do to cut down the number of traffic fatalities and injuries but not doing a damn thing about the carnage from guns.

And the proof how well our efforts in reducing traffic fatalities and injuries is right here?

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811552.pdf

There's some pretty neat graphs that also go with this statement.

PS The gun nuts around here I suspect will threaten to kill you for saying you agree that guns should be licensed and registered.

 

Again...you mis the point. The point I have been making is that there are other things in our society besides guns that come with inherent risks. Thos risks in many cases are substantialy greater than the risks posed by firearms. But because we percieve that there is some kind of personal benefit to these things we are willing to ignor the obvious risks and carry on as if everything were okay. Cars are just one example but doctors are another example. Roughly one quarter of a million people die every year as a result of medical accidents and malpractice. Yet we accept the risk. Far more people are permanently injured by doctors...again, the risk is deemed acceptable. Pharmasuiticals kill even more people still.In 2008, prescription pain meds alone killed over 15,000 people. And thats just pain meds...but the risk is regarded as neglegable. Alcohol related illness kills more people than traffic deaths and smoking combined and yet we stock our store shelves with it because the risk realy isnt that high.

What I am after here is the simple admission that guns are not in and of themselves the problem. There are a host of other issues that must be addressed first, befor the whole "lets ban the guns" argument can reasonably take place.

No...its not shocking at all. Guns, as I mentioned earlier were designed to kill people. Cars were not. They were designed for transportation and yet they are more efficient killers and maimers of people than guns are. Thats whats shocking. Something we regard as safe and harmless is in fact a blood thirsty killing machine bent on grinding men, women and children into a fine bloody pulp every day on our nations highways and roads. That should be fucking shocking. Sure, I find firearms deaths unacceptable unless they are resonably justified...but it doesnt come as any kind of shock that a gun would kill. They are supposed to do that. Cars arent. But the risks that are associated with cars dont even get mentioned on the news most of the time. Just a couple days after the theater shooting seven people died in a car accident in texas and it wasnt even a blip on the radar. Five more died the same day in another car crash and nobody batted an eye. Thats fucking sociopathic!

Again, people have learned to accept that risks becaus its something they like. Just like gun owners will defend guns because they like them. The only people who realy want to ban guns or institute harsh gun control measures are people who dont like them. Everyone else understands that just like a car, there are risks. If people didnt like their cars there would be no problem getting those murderous steel death boxes off the roads and replaced with busses and trains.

I forgot to point out above that there isnt "roughly the same amount of gun and traffic fatalities every year." There are MORE traffic fatalities every year and vastly more injuries every year. Two million plus to be more exact. The death toll from cars makes guns look safe by compairison.

There is no state in the united states that doesnt have some kind of mass transit opperating within its borders. Even Alaska has mass transit within the major cities. I live in a suburb and we have mass transit. My sister and her former room mate also live in the suburbs of other cities within the same state and they have busses too. Not as many as they could or should have...but they are there. And again. Take all the money spent on cars and spend it on mass transit instead and what do you have? Busses...lots of them...everywhere. Not that its something I actulay advocate. The point again is that we are willing to accept certain risks as long as we perceive that there is some benefit to the risk. If we dont perceive a benefit, we reject the risk. Simple human logic. Even if the risk is very slight we would reject it if there was no noticable benefit.

Again, the extreme right gets its fuel from the extreme left. The harder the extreme left gun control advocates fight, the harder the NRA wil pull the opposite direction. As long as the extremes are controling the discussion there will be no answers. I have always advocated that guns need to be licensed and that gun owners need to be trained and properly equiped with safes and locks befor they should be allowed to own a gun. But I will say again...it shouldnt make any difference what they own...just who owns it.

 

agreed

 

If this turns out to be true, and there's plenty of reason to doubt it is, I think this might defeat one of our earlier points about people using fully automatic weapons.

Shooter in custody, several injured after shooting near Texas A&M

http://www.kltv.com/story/19264793/several-reportedly-shot-near-texas-am-campus

 

this deserves it's own thread. "Surprise! ANOTHER US Shooting"

 

This one is pretty sketchy yet. They are claiming multiple people wounded including police but I've seen several different numbers so who knows. Apparently however there are no fatalities yet.

They are also claiming the shooter used automatic weapons which would be more like a machine gun than a semi automatic weapon. But that could just be the press now knowing anything about gun terminology.

 

One fatality. He was a "Constable," one civilian woman wounded as well as two police officers.

 

Update: Three fatalities now including the shooter.

 

Yep, another Obama supporter that is angry because he can't get a job. So he picks up a gun and does this....

Scumbag libtards with guns... A very dangerous combination.....

 

We will probably be reading out you one of these days stumbler....

 

Let me show you once again just what a stupid and ignorant (two different things) brainwashed parrot you really are.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/thomas-caffall-texas-am-shooting_n_1774282.html

 

todays shooter was already mentaly unstable
the constable that was killed a good person and was loved within the community and will be very much missed

the shooter did quit his job and stopped paying al bills and even leaving the house
the police were there to evict the family when the man began firing from inside the house

sadly the officer was hit and died from his wounds
the shooter was also hit and died before medical could arrive

but this was not an issue of gun control, this was an example of family and friends not taking the steps to report mental illness

 

i thought there were three dead. the police officer, the gunman and somebody else.

i also saw reports saying the gunman was taken into custody but then died.

who was the other person? asking as we don't get much info here.

 

the 3rd as an occupant of the home
and the few i do know of in the bryan pd say the shooter was dead before they would allow medical near him

so far reports are saying that that the constable and the shooter were pronounced dead at the hospital because in texas it requires either a doctor or a JP/judge to officialy pronounce death
the 3rd person was a 43 year old male
1 woman and 2 other officers were injured in the incident are are still in the hospital, the woman is in critical condition