Edit

Ms. Marsh, I lovez ya, ya knowz dat. But I am in a smiling (if it’s possible to smile over this sort of thing)state of amazement. Rawanda was an attempted Genocide against the minority Tutsi population by the majority Hutu population instigated and fueled by radio broadcasts exhorting the Hutus to “exterminate the cockroaches” etc. etc.
Straight up politicol leader instigated Genocude.
The Child soldiers are more Sudan and Somalia and the Congo. Also Uganda. I never referanced them, reprehensable as the military, or gun thugs, may be it’s murder and not Genocide.

I addressed the futility argument quite well, methinks. To use my analogy about speeding, people still speed regardless of speed limits. And ingest drugs, regardless of their prohibition. Same with prostitution.

Guns are no different than speeding, drugs, or prostitution. There will never be 100% compliance. But, at the margin, proscribing these activities means that some people don’t engage in them. All else equal, that in turn means some people are spared loss of life and limb as a result. And that’s a good thing. Only hard core libertarians think otherwise, like the folks at Reason. And they’re just Ayn Rand nuts.

The “sanctimonious” charge was not based on your views, which I respect, but on your telling me very snidely to “do a bit of studying.” In case you hadn’t realized, I’ve studied quite a bit. And I’m studied by nature

chazmonk says:
05 April 2009 at 1:34 pm

People still don’t get and won’t address that “banning” assault weapons won’t actually ban anything fully. Call it “sanctimony” if you want, change the subject, say I’m wrong it you like, but it’s a fact.

People driving cars, driving while drunk also kill. Liquor kills. Tobacco kills. The list is endless.

We also have a lot of very good gun laws, but we also need a database, and to use our technology better as well, and that’s just for starters. We are not members of the NRA because they’re extreme, as well as part of the problem, because they stand in the way of common sense transparency on guns. That’s where people should focus as well.

Edit

Edit

Edit

I can find no better person to ask the question, than a family member who has lost someone dear to them, because of this craziness. Just as John Walsh and other have done, they can turn their personal tragedy into something that will do good for the country and stop this from happening in the future.

I am all for free speech, but when you are inciting people to violence that must be considered a crime and a menace to our society.

The guy in Tenn killed all of those people because they were “liberal” and instead of the field day the press would have had if the dude had had Al franken’s books in his car there was not much after the 1st few days.
No one in the MSM called out the purveyors of this BS hate speech. We have free speech, but you are also accountable for your words.
Now we have a cop killer who truly belived the BS the NRA and the gun makers have been spreading since Obama was elected and this may have played into his delusions.
I want these groups, these purveyors of hate shamed on national TV. I want them to have to do interview after interview explaining why none of this has anything to do with them. This shit has got to stop…on both sides.

Of course “law abiding citizens” should have a right to own guns, the only problem is that you never know when one of those “law abiding citizens” just might snap and use their legally obtained weapon to take out a few of their neighbors.

Here is Arkansas there was a big stink because the weekly newspaper had a link, on their website, to the public record of who has a conceal and carry permit.
Jesus, you would think the man had accused them all of being puppy killers. The stink that was raised, the death threats that were made and yes, even the legislature had to get involved. I think I have a right to know if my crazy neighbor has a gun. This week a bill was brought up to “protect the right to hunting” here. Nuts…they are NUTS.

and in the end, i give you Eddie Izzard on “People kill people”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsN0FCXw914

Remember the family and friends of Poplawski, too. In addition to their grief, they must also contend with the shame and responsibility they must feel for the actions of a very sick man.

I never read a story about some “law abiding citizen” getting the chance to protect themselves. 99% of these stories is someone using the guns to kill innocent people. Guns should be banned, period, unless you hunt or are law enforcement. And this is coming from someone whose entire family are NRA members. Guns kill people because they give them the feeling of power they normally would not have, not to mention the opportunity from a distance they normally would not take otherwise.

You are wrong Taylor and the NRA is wrong. Guns kill people every day.

Edit

Edit

Edit

Edit

Let’s turn to your logic. You contend that “a law abiding citizen should [not] be kept from owning any firearm he or she wants.” That’s extreme libertarianism, and a philosophy this country has utterly rejected in just about every other instance. Take the debate about Wall Street, as one example. Applying your logic, why should the innocent Wall Street banker be subject to severe restrictions on remuneration because of a few thieves? Here’s another — Why should any drugs (not just cannabis) be outlawed, just because a few addicts overindulge? Here’s a third — Why should there be speed limits, just because a few people are incapable of handling their cars at high speed? Here’s a fourth — why have antitrust regulations at all? What’s wrong with monopolies, as long as they make good products?

The answer to your question is fairly obvious, and is the same for the hypotheticals I posed: in each such case, society has determined that the benefits to the few are outweighed by the risks to the many. So, as much as I resent it, I have to idle at 45-65 mph when I drive a car capable of 200 mph with ease. For you, that will mean you can shoot or display most guns. Just not AK-47s. It’s a small cost that you and I should willingly pay for the protections afforded by society.

By the way, I have had enough of this “rugged individualist” mentality to make me puke. It’s completely fake. If, all of a sudden, this country reverted to a Lockeian, survival-of-the-fittest mentality, very few espousing this claptrap would actually make it.

You need to do a bit of studying on assault weapons and guns, because “banning” them doesn’t do squat. There are always parts to buy that will allow anyone to have an assault weapon outside the ban. Please also explain why a law abiding citizen should be kept from owning any firearm he or she wants. Gun collectors, some of whom never fire a shot, should be kept from owning guns because of some nut job? Really? But even if they do fire the guns, why again should they not be able to own them?

It’s akin to screaming “fire” in a crowded theatre and the expressing dismay that some people are trampled to death.

How ’bout a little kum ba ya?

Ms. Marsh, I lovez ya, ya knowz I doz, BUT by your reconning here Hitler wasn’t responsible for the Deathcamps, the Leaders in Rawanda weren’t responsible for the Genocide and Jim Jones SURE couldn’t be held responsible for Congressman Ryans death and all those bodies rotting in the jungle were just a coincidence.
Can’t blame those folks just because someone was dumb or brainwashed enough to actually ACT on what the leaders/loudmouths had been saying.
Hell, maybe we even need to dig up a whole bunch of folks we buried after WW2 and apologize!

Fox News (O’Reilly) story ? OH MY GAWD. His ‘approval’ rating DROPPED from 62% last week to only 60% this week (using a survey with a +/- 5% error level). “America is Losing confidence in Obama!” (direct quote)

Yeah. And did we also mention he’s the anti-Christ and the world is coming to an end?
This is getting *really* pitiful.

Faux Noise is winning some dirty message wars currently …