Guns don't kill people ....

[Sundae]

Don't be sorry, Sarge.
Just post some photos of your wall of cards.

AND DANAC! You promised. I bought a tub of SlimFast. You need a mattress and to post some pics.

There. Ambushed both of you. Equal opportunity attack.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Adak

One thing that would help, is to work on welfare and military assignments, so fathers could be around their boys (especially), as they are growing up.

Absent fathers have a terrible impact on boys - not on every boy, but on many boys. With all of our military dads being assigned repeatedly overseas, and many welfare programs forcing welfare families to kick the dad out, so they're eligible, it's a disaster.

Go back and check out how many of these mass killers had dads around when they were growing up.

So what action do you propose?

[infinite monkey]

Oh oh oh oh oh I know I know [/horschack]

Cut off men's sperms supplies and make them take some tests and training to get spermies back.

Think of the poor baby daddies.

[BigV]

So... Adak. It's all or nothing with you? It sounds like you're arguing that way. If xyz idea won't completely solve the problem, then xyz idea should be discarded. And the way you are assessing whether or not xyz idea completely solves the problem is to look for any case, like the above example, that "proves" it won't work. Is this really your strategy?

Also, I'd like to repeat Pete's question, "What part of 'no mass shootings' do you have a problem with?" Are you in favor of mass shootings? If you are, please say so and I'll quit pestering you. If you are not in favor of more mass shootings, then please give me some examples of ideas you think will reduce them, or eliminate them completely.

Come on. What constructive contribution do *you* have to offer?

[Big Sarge]

Well mass shootings do help with population control. (Is it too soon to make a joke?)

[Nirvana]

Those who are not licensed to carry firearms, those convicted of felonies etc., when found to have guns shall do a minimum of 3 years in prison. No if ands or buts. Not talking about minors here. If you want to put your tax dollars to a solution lets build more prisons. We may solve the drive bys and the gang violence but you will never prevent nut jobs from carrying out their violent fantasies by legislating gun control..

[henry quirk]

As I say elsewhere: in a country of 350 million individuals (and counting), where an estimated 270,000,000 guns are 'out and about', total confiscation is the only answer (a long, bloody, expensive, process with no guarantee of success).

Anything less (patchworks of laws = band aid on a wound the size of the Grand Canyon) is purely emotional salve (sooth the distress by addressing symptoms; never, ever, getting to the *root).

If 'you' won't confiscate, then stop kvetching, make do with piecemeal, and get on with living.









*by all conventional accounts, the root is 'gun'...if this is the case: eradicate 'gun', solve problem, yes?

[Nirvana]

No.. why should law abiding citizens have to give up their weapons? Your theory is illogical. If some are so intent on making a new law concerning guns then they need to enforce the ones we have and make stiffer penalties for those that illegally carry.

Mass killings can occur with the use of cow manure [/hyperbole]

[henry quirk]

Nope. Perfectly logical, and confiscation is the (absurd but logical) end if folks really want to make themselves 'safe' from 'gun'.

Any other (more moderate) course is 'feel good' and nuthin' else.









Full disclosure (again): I own one gun (12 gauge coach gun...a man-killer, which is what I mean it to be, though -- in a pinch -- it works for hunting as well). I've no interest in any other firearm, and no interest in giving up what I have.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by Nirvana

No.. why should law abiding citizens have to give up their weapons? Your theory is illogical. If some are so intent on making a new law concerning guns then they need to enforce the ones we have and make stiffer penalties for those that illegally carry.

Mass killings can occur with the use of cow manure [/hyperbole]

We shouldn't. It's hard enough getting a deer with a rifle, now I'm sposed to shoot them with a bow?

I also prefer to call them firearms. It's not really a fight between me and the deer, I'm pretty much straight up killing them.

[BigV]

Nah, laughter is the best medicine. After all, a modest proposal such as yours has a long and storied history of being both funny and true.

[Nirvana]

If its absurd how is it logical? You and I are the same except I think those that illegally carry should have to face a stricter punishment. Again for full disclosure I have a Detroit Riot rifle and and an 1891 Winchester I don't hunt but I have shot skunks and coyotes,with the Winchester, not giving mine up either.

[henry quirk]

"If its absurd how is it logical?"

Since when do 'logic' and 'absurd' mutually exclude one another?

#

"...those that illegally carry should have to face a stricter punishment."

I got no problem with that (or any other option, large, small, moderate, extreme, etc.)...I just don't think -- long term -- it'll make any difference.

Sure will make lots of folks 'feel good' though.

#

"not giving mine up either."

[BigV]

Yeah, I'd agree with absurd. And since that means it's only useful for entertainment value, I'm moving on.

hq, we have LOTS of other rules in our society (another concept I know you have an allergic reaction to) that don't use absolute, zero tolerance thresholds that still make a useful positive difference. To say it's all or nothing isn't helpful. I'm looking for helpful ideas.

Also, your plea for no kvetching is similarly doomed.

[Gravdigr]

A woman woke up in the middle of the night to someone breaking down her apartment door. She grabs the gun from her nightstand as the intruder comes through her bedroom door,and shoots him dead, thus saving her life and the lives of her two young children.

Explain how this fictional use of a firearm was not defensive in nature.