So you are Ok with using the threat of violence as a First Amendment Right.

The kid who did the shooting was obviously having "issues",

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/jared-...ry?id=12572164

I think those who were completely against where this government used the historical precedent of overthrowing a government by the use of force if that what it took to get the changes they wanted. Hell now we we have wacko's like Olberman saying it happened because of the Tea Party and Bush, now there is part of the problem.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/302352

Why did you alter your post?

Interestingly, my narrative IS that the killer is bat-shit insane.

CooCoo for Coco Puffs.

There aren't going to end up being any reasons that a reasonable person would understand, if the postings on youtube are correctly attributed to the shooter.

You caught me mid-change in my post, merc. I'm not entirely understanding your reply. Terrorists use force to try to get changes they want.

Since you changed it I will answer this one too. Actually I believe that is a crime in most states if you can prove that the fear of violence is real.

Because I type as I am thinking. Why doesn't your name show up in the member list at the bottom of the Cellar front page?

Yea, and we shoot drones at them. I am completely ok with a response to such acts.

Keep your eye on the news. By those signs Pico posted there seems to be allot of mental illness in this country. Pretending you don't see doesn't mean it isn't so...

So those people and politicians who use rhetoric involving threats of violence to change this government could be considered possible terrorists?

Ok. I will watch for it. But I don't believe that because we have "allot of mental illness in this country" that it is an indication that we are suddenly going to see people running around shooting more Congressmen and Women.

Many of his friends admitted/tweeted and said in interviews that he was LIBERAL, not conservative.
How is it that the liberals are still trying to blame this on the GOP?
No matter how badly you want to blame this on those you disagree with,
ignoring the facts will not change them.

Ya know...then in that case, if someones says they have a gun and will use it, they need to be taken seriously...the fear of violence is there.

Not when they are American Citizens in a public place holding a sign during a protest. No. And no I don't believe that politicians are using "rhetoric involving threats of violence". Because people put a bulls eye on a state to indicate a target for political action or change is not a "rhetoric involving threats of violence". Politicians have been using bulls eyes in political discourse for years.