I just heard the story of one of the victims

[lunatica]

Last edited Sat Jul 21, 2012, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)

edited for correction of facts.

I'm crying. The six year old child, Ashley, is dead and her mother, Veronica, is probably paralyzed, maybe from the neck down and no one has told her of her child's death.

How dare they not talk about gun control! How can anyone defend assault weapons in our streets?!

I'm not for banning guns, but I AM for banning fucking assault weapons!

[JeepJK556]

1. Assault Weapons are a myth.

That is why people oppose the ban.

[Schema Thing]

3. large magazines are not a myth though

[JeepJK556]

5. True.

But the deadliness of them is largely exaggerated.

In reality it makes virtually no difference if a psycho has 4 30 rounds standard mags, or a single 100 round mag.

Changing a mag only takes a couple seconds.

[lunatica]

6. This thread is about a six year old child, not a forum for selling NRA propaganda

A child who, if she lives, will probably be a paraplegic and about 70 other victims, and you want to sell us on guns.

I find that incredibly offensive.

[JeepJK556]

8. I don't want to sell anything.

Just pointing out a fact.

[flamingdem]

39. +1

[aikoaiko]

60. You opened the door with the Brady Bunch talking point.

I too grieve for the dead and injured, but think that if you want to talk about new gun control laws then I think you should expect discussion of those laws.

[KarenS]

70. Please explain ~ which part of what he/she said is "the Brady Bunch talking point"??

I simply do not see it or understand which door and what talking point you are referencing.

[aikoaiko]

76. She wrote: "I'm not for banning guns, but I AM for banning fucking assault weapons!"

Banning very popular semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and pistols dependent on their accessories is banning guns and a common theme from the Brady Campaign.

POSITION: The Brady Campaign supports banning military-style semi-automatic assault weapons along with high-capacity ammunition magazines. These dangerous weapons have no sporting or civilian use. Their combat features are appropriate to military, not civilian, contexts.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/msassaultweapons/

[lunatica]

108. Another warm hearted gun apologist

You guys are a real piece of work. Calling the group the Brady Bunch is fucking hilarious! Yuk. Yuk.

[aikoaiko]

117. I'm upset with this tragedy too.

My point is that you slammed someone for disagreeing with your call to ban a class of weapons as NRA propaganda, but the AWB probably wouldn't have stopped this tragedy from happening. It didn't make AR-15s inaccessible -- only certain features on newly made ones.

[lunatica]

143. that someone has been

tombstoned so I may have been right on the money. But I'm sure you were ready to defend him forever.

[aikoaiko]

144. What were you right on the money about?

I don't know what he was tombstoned for, but he wasn't wrong about the definition of AW being a dubious thing.

And it was you who brought that the proposal to ban them in your thread.

[liberalhistorian]

81. All the NRA types think and care about

is protecting their precious murder weapons and putting them in the hands of as many people as possible. They view any concern over gun deaths as an impediment to that purpose; they do not truly care about said victims. Believe me, I've talked and known enough of them over the years.

[RC]

88. The child is dead. The mother is the paraplegic.

[lunatica]

109. I corrected that

thanks for the correction.

[Travis_0004]

139. You were the one who brought up gun, not the other poster

Since you brought up the subject, I'll reply to it.

The fact is the assault weapon ban bans cosmetic features. Things such as a flash hider, bayonet lug and collapsible butt stock were banned by the federal assault weapons ban. These are simply cosmetic features that were targeted for a ban, but don't do anything to change the performance characteristics of a gun.

Also, don't forget that columbine happened during the assault weapon ban.

Nobody in this thread wants to see even a single innocent person die. The difference is we don't believe these laws to be effective. Criminals violate tons of laws, but for some reason people tend to believe that if we can pass just one more law, then it would prevent this. If an assult weapon ban is effective, why did columbine happen?

The movie theater in Colorado had a no guns policy, so nobody in the theater had a gun to defend them self. If somebody else had a gun, would it have helped? I don't know, but it would have been a small step in the right direction.

[4th law of robotics]

161. This thread started out as one about a six year old

then you through in the bit about banning certain guns.

That made it political.

[lunatica]

162. So that's when it became of interest to you right?

Your sympathy for the victims is noted.

[4th law of robotics]

164. I clicked on it because of the title

I thought it would simply be about one of the victims.

You *chose* to add your spin and are now acting outraged that people responded to your spin.

You used a story about a dead girl to give your two cents and now you're upset that people aren't just focusing on the victim, they're also reading the part you threw in.

[lunatica]

166. And that's what caught your attention enough to respond

Like I said. Your warmhearted concern and caring for the victims is noted. And that poster you seem to be supporting was tombstoned for his obvious NRA talking points.

[4th law of robotics]

167. You used a story about the victim

to push your agenda.

That is what is disturbing.

Imagine this: if someone had used a gunshot victim to play up the need for more CHL holders. Would you bet outraged that they used that corpse for their own agenda?

Of course you would.

Your double standard is noted.

[smirkymonkey]

172. Thank you! It makes me sick when a tragedy like this happens and all the pro-gun

nut jobs can only think of their right to bear arms. I never see any sympathy for the victims.

[Schema Thing]

12. First of all, 30 rounds is ridiculously large.

Also, a "couple seconds" is enough time to make a difference. That difference could be tackling the shooter and incapacitating him, or it may be as little as interfering with his loading. Either thing would save lives.

And lastly, changing a mag may take only a couple seconds in ideal circumstances, but a wild killing spree, often carrying (and having to manage) multiple weapons is probably not "ideal" for most people - even psychos.

[sdfernando]

25. yes! a few seconds to interfere

Remember the older lady that grabbed the shooters arm at the Gabby Gifford shooting? She bought time and saved lives.

[bluedigger]

43. 30 rounds is not "ridiculously large".

It's pretty convenient for practice/target shooting, actually. 100 rounds is ridiculously large.

[ananda]

46. ANY number of rounds is ridiculously large.

Geez.

[Schema Thing]

49. no, you couldn't be more wrong if you were a republican douchebag

30 rounds is ridiculously large.


It may be "convenient" for target practice, but it's fucking inconvenient for trying to get home from the mall alive.

[Johnny Rico]

63. Good grief, 30 round magazines are standard capacity for the AR-15.

They're not oversized by any stretch of the imagination.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

83. So ban AR-15s.

[Johnny Rico]

87. Do you honestly think there's the slightest chance of that happening in the foreseeable future?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

89. No.

Cold hearted RKBA freaks have won. So let the blood flow through the streets so paranoid kooks can have their way.

[Johnny Rico]

90. So you're just venting when you speak of banning guns. I respect you for acknowledging it.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

99. I've never said ban all guns.

Just assault rifles and clips over 5 rounds. That and a national background checks.

[Johnny Rico]

132. And, as you have acknowledged, such bans and checks aren't going to happen for decades at least.

Good!

[UnrepentantLiberal]

147. Yes, good!

More babies and six year old children will be shot.



And trees cause air pollution.

[movonne]

129. Are there people here that are hired by the NRA to go out on

different web sites and fight for the guns...I see the same names here all the time on gun subjects and don't see much of them on other subjects...I have been wondering..

[Johnny Rico]

134. Beats me, I'm not a member.

I see the same names here all the time on gun subjects and don't see much of them on other subjects

Not surprising. There are plenty of posters who only post about particular subjects. No need to invoke a conspiracy.

[bongbong]

169. Short answer

Yes

[JeepJK556]

106. Yup.

Ban AR rifles.

Even though there are millions of them out there.

And ALL rifles combined with ALL shotgun kills less people every year than hand and feet.

Ban them anyway. Even though they are used in an extremely minuscule amount of crimes.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

145. Nice logic.

This country is flooded with guns because of you and your pals so that's the reason not to regulate the sale of deadly weapons now.

I'm sure the people in that theater in Aurora would agree that it would have been much worse if the Karate Kid had walked through the exit door.

-----

It's a waste of time arguing with Freepers. I've known that since my days on Usenet. They claim to have the "facts" on their side but all they really bring to the table is robotic talking points.

[bluedigger]

96. I wouldn't know about that.

How long have you been one, and do you like it?

[Marrah_G]

75. Thankfully illegal in my state

[tsuki]

67. Husband is a hunter. According to Fish & Game rules,

he cannot have more than 5 rounds in his rifle. One rule for feral pigs, another for people.

[undeterred]

23. Deadliness exaggerated.

She isn't dead, just paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of her life. Its not so bad.

[malaise]

33. STTTTTTTTTTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPP!

This is about a dead child and her paralyzed mother - when is enough efuckingnough?

Good fucking grief.

[CTyankee]

73. malaise, don't you see? This is a forum to talk about ammo and guns and capacity and rapidity.

I see this happen on gun threads all the time. We talk about the humanity and the veritable sea of blood washing through our streets, we see the slaughtered children, the irreparably wounded, the grieving, shock and tears...and they talk about how many rounds can do this or that...it's just so much hardware...it is just amazing, is it not?

[malaise]

86. I simply cannot believe it

I mean WTF will it take for them to just pause and think.

[malaise]

94. Adding this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002993206

[citizen blues]

59. Of course it makes a difference!!!!

Try telling Jared Loughner that it doesn't make a difference. He was stopped while trying to reload!

What an absolutely ridiculous statement!

[JeepJK556]

107. No.

He was stopped when his gun jammed.

[savalez]

159. Jared Loughner was tackled while changing a mag and the carnage stopped. n/t

[lunatica]

4. If it's a myth why would anyone oppose a ban?

You comment doesn't make any sense.

[JeepJK556]

7. It's a class of weapons created from thin air.

Look at the '94 law and what defined "Assault Weapon"

Almost everything on the list of features that makes a regular gun an "assault weapon" is cosmetic por ergonomic freatures.

Bayonet lugs, Pistol grips, telescoping stocks, flash hiders, these things make a gun no more deadly. They certainly don't turn it into an assault rifle.

The above gun is an AR-15. The lower gun is a Mini-14. Both are semi-auto (one shot per trigger pull), both fire the .223 caliber round.

The only difference is one of them is in an innocent looking wooden stock which makes it look like grandpa's hunting rifle, whereas the other is modeled after it's military cousin. Both function exactly the same though. However only the top one, the AR, would be illegal under the AWB.

[img][/img]

[img][/img]

That is why the assault weapons ban is silly. "Assault Weapons" were perfectly legal during the ban. The manufacturers simply removed the supposedly deadly features. It is the equivalent of trying to stop street racing by banning chrome wheels, spoilers, racing stripes, and red paint.

[lunatica]

9. Is the NRA paying you to post here?

Because it sure smells like it from the stink you're posting.

[JeepJK556]

13. Sorry you feel that way.

I hate the NRA. I got a free membership when I bought my first gun a few years ago and I let it expire. Everyday I would get anti-obama propaganda in the mail. Sickening.

However that doesn't change the fact that what I am saying is true. All the features of the AWB are cosmetic of ergonomic in nature. They have no effect of the way the gun operates, how fast it can fire, or how powerful the ammunition is.

The only feature of the AWB which even remotely addressed that was mag capacity.

[Mojorabbit]

14. The poster is giving you facts which have nothing to do with the NRA nt

[lunatica]

15. This thread is about a six year old child, not a forum for selling NRA propaganda

propaganda uses facts too.

[Mojorabbit]

44. The OP added guns into the post so brought the subject up first I believe. nt

[Johnny Rico]

62. Exactly right. It's rather odd for someone to complain when a point in their *own* OP is addressed!

[Johnny Rico]

17. Facts are sure pesky things, aren't they?

[lunatica]

26. This thread is about a six year old child, not a forum for selling NRA propaganda

A six year old child is dead. That is also one of the pesky facts.

[Johnny Rico]

28. Here's another pesky fact: it was your OP that brought up the subject of banning

assault weapons. That makes discussion of them on-topic, by definition.

[lunatica]

31. So did you miss the part about Ashley and just skipped to defending assault weapons?

Are you shaking in your boots with fear that your guns might be taken away by the Big Bad President too?

[Johnny Rico]

36. You brought up the subject of banning assault weapons, not me.

It's very odd that you're complaining when people reply on-topic...

As for President Obama, I think he's far too politically savvy (unlike a certain OP) to try to ban firearms.

No worries there, my assault weapons are in good hands!

[lunatica]

58. Still ignoring the dead child I see.

I'm sure you get a good cuddle form your weapons.

[Johnny Rico]

61. The child in question isn't the subject I was addressing.

My first post in this thread was addressing a point made in a sub-thread. Why am I obligated to address every point in the OP?

And in any case, you haven't addressed any of the points I've made to you in this conversation. Gee...I wonder why?

[MattBaggins]

103. Relax the gun huggers and strokers on DU

only care about themselves.

Don't waste your time on them.

[eridani]

79. If you want to regulate something, you have to KNOW something about that which

--you want to regulate. The term "assault weapon" is about as meaningful as the term "partial birth abortion" or "logic and accuracy testing." All are, deliberately or not, obfuscating. Medical professionals do not recognize the former, and programmers would say "function testing" (as distinguished from actual security testing) for the latter.

I very much applaud any discussion of precisely how we can more effectively regulate guns, and that requires technical knowledge. I don't have it myself, but am willing to learn.

But "Brady bunch"? Why not just say "bleeding heart liberal" and be done with it?

[lunatica]

149. I wasn't the one using the term "Brady Bunch"

And wanting some serious regulation of gun ownership doesn't require a PhD on guns. I'll leave that to the gun nuts.

[KarenS]

78. Why are you posting gun porn in this thread?? Please, stop. n/t

[UnrepentantLiberal]

85. So ban semi-automatic weapons and clips that

carry more than 5 rounds.

[CreekDog]

11. tell your NRA talking point to Ashley

[JeepJK556]

16. I'm sorry.

I didn't know facts and knowledge were considered NRA talking points.

Look I don't care if you don't like guns. But if you're going to advocate for stronger gun control at least know what you're talking about. Every gun owner knows that the AWB really didn't do anything and that assault weapons are largely a myth. THAT is why they oppose a new ban.

Not because they want to shout out NRA talking points.

FUCK THE NRA. They work only to make gun owners look like a bunch of repuke rednecks. There are much better, non-partisan gun rights groups out there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Ok I will make it clear as day for you

Ak civilian versions, ar-15, and others in that family do not belong in civilian hands.

Horses and barns come to mind. So we are left with limits to magazines...And their size

And a full, 100% background check. As a gun owner this is common sense.

I expect this to be fought too...I mean they want my guns!!!! And secret helicopters are comming.

By the by, I will not ask to ban the Remington shotgun used, even though in this case it was mostly ideal, but no Jackhammers for ya!

By the way, don't expect to see this, on the other hand, I expect far more shootings, new normal. Enjoy.

[JeepJK556]

24. Why?

Why don't AKs or ARs belong is civilian hands?

I mean I could understand if you were advocating stricter licensing for ALL semi-auto firearms. At least that would be based on the operations and firepower of the gun.

But why specifically the military looking ones like the AK and AR, if they are functionally no different from any other semi-auto gun?

Is there a reason?

I agree. Background checks should always be done.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. You want to go hunting?

A single shot riffle is good enough. Small game, shotguns have been used since the 18 century.

And you got it, it's not cosmetic, it's the operation of the fire arm.

Don't worry, that won't happen, and more shootings to come.

That is the new normal.

You know why Tommy Guns were forbidden in the country? You don't want that to happen to these weapons, start accepting reasonable limits, ranging from background checks, glad we agree, to the size of magazines you can legally own.

Otherwise, after a lot more of this, pols will finally find their spine...

Not it my lifetime mind you, but when it happens it will be "sudden."

[JeepJK556]

40. I dont hunt

Never have. Probably never will. Im too much of a softy to kill an animal.

However I have shot in 3 gun competitions were a semi-auto gun such as an AR was needed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. You of course realize

After a hell of a background check, you could own a full auto. We could have the same process.

It ain't gonna happen anytime soon...

[wildeyed]

57. So what type of gun control do you think would help avert tragedies like this one?

You seem to know a lot about guns. So tell me, how do we keep them from falling into the hands of nutsos who use them to perpetrate mass murder?

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. Not a flower, but that is a nice talking point

It comes down to reduction ad absurdum, if we cannot stop all, why try?

Reasonable limits will not keep all guns out of crazies, but stats are clear, states with tougher controls actually have less deaths...and states with less controls lead to more deaths...it's like direct or something.

[hlthe2b]

128. Could you be any more insensitive. Not a damned word or concern for the victims...

Just barge right in with your NRA talking points. Do you have a total absence of compassion?

[Skittles]

135. but THAT is how NRA propganda works

they have to IGNORE the results of pimping for guns - this propaganda works the same way repuke propaganda in general works on the nitwits who watch FOX NEWS

[Skittles]

133. please PLEASE stop pimping for the NRA

[baldguy]

146. The dead don't care about the trivial technical minutiae of firearms design.

Automatic or semi-automatic - They're still dead.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

155. Assault Weapons are a myth

Tell that to the wannabe jarheads that pose before the cameras with them.

[spartan61]

2. I so very much agree with you.

[Frustratedlady]

10. I agree, even though it is an unpopular view.

I honestly believe that if everyone wasn't so afraid of the nasty verbal attacks and the NRA, there would be many more of us speaking out.

Our country has gone ballistic over guns and it's past time to do much about it. How many guns do we know of that have been legally sold just in these last 4 years? How many would you guess have been sold illegally?

Time for people to grow up and put their toys away.

And don't yell at me, gun lovers. I just lost a very dear friend and I'm in no mood to see/hear your idiotic comments.

[lunatica]

18. They're catapulting the propaganda now

Look at the sub-thread above.

[liberalhistorian]

84. I'm very sorry about your friend. Don't

expect the gun nuts here to give a shit, though. The only reason they care about the victims of gun violence is that it makes their precious murder sticks look bad.

[Doctor_J]

104. They're just another far right fringe group that's got a foothold in the govt

Like the "Christian" Coalition, the Chamber Of Commerce, and so on. The farther right a group is, the more likely they are to get their way

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Clarification

Mom is in ICU and paralyzed. The child died at he scene.

Which is just as tragic.

Oh and mom has not been told either.

[lunatica]

20. Thanks for the clarification

I'm very upset and rattled.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. I was upset with Columbine

These days I expect them. We need a general change in the culture.

[lunatica]

27. We should never stop being upset

This 'new normal' is unacceptable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. It is unacceptable

That is a fact, and given the reactions even here, how many more?

[lunatica]

34. The death of Ashley is totally overlooked

by the gun lovers. The carnage and the horror are nothing if it means their guns are in peril.

It sickens me that some people ignore the results of a murderous rampage because they fear their guns will be taken away. And no one is taking their guns. No one.

[Ineeda]

65. They (the gun worshipers) should be enraged

Last edited Sat Jul 21, 2012, 04:48 PM - Edit history (1)

instead of deflecting our righteous anger about bloodbaths like this one. I mean, really. Incidents like this give ALL gun worshipers a bad reputation. Eventually (hopefully) sanity will prevail and those same gun worshipers may be sorry they were too scared to participate in finding a remedy. They're so fucking paranoid about even the tiniest controls being mentioned, that they lose all fucking human decency. Reading here, I don't detect one whit of empathy, sympathy, or human kindness among them, not even an acknowledgement that there's a problem. And, of course, no suggestions of any kind to reduce the carnage. The gun worshipers don't just ignore it. In a way, they actually fucking defend it. It's like a crazy wacked-out religion.

We need to remember and mourn the innocent victims like Ashley and Veronica, not worship at the shrine of the tools of slaughter.

[kurtzapril4]

72. How about the deaths of the 11 others?

The kid isn't the only one who matters, you know. It sucks when innocent people are killed. It sucks if the victims are under 18, or over 18.

Like the Tom Tomorrow cartoon said, and I paraphrase....pro gun won, and the rest of us have to live with the consequences. It makes me sad that a person's right to bear arms is more important than my right to life.
To the poster above: I remember when the NRA was a pro-environmental group, too.

[lunatica]

95. What are you talking about?

I was reacting to one story that I had just heard seconds before. Do you really think I don't care about ALL the victims?

Go wag your finger in someone else's face.

[GarroHorus]

30. Here is why the do not talk about further laws

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

That right of the people has been defined as a PERSONAL right by the SCOTUS.

It would take one hell of a lot of change to alter that. For at least the next generation, we are living the reality.

[malaise]

35. It's a stupid argument

Which militia in which state can take on the Pentagon?

[GarroHorus]

91. SCOTUS separated the milita thing from the right in their decision

It was the only way to make it a personal right. Doing so means anybody can have access to firearms.

[malaise]

100. Fuck those RW scumbags

They are part of the problem.

[GarroHorus]

102. Majority decided by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito

Of those the ONLY one who MIGHT leave in the next four years is Kennedy, and I seriously doubt that.

So, if a Republican is elected in 2016, I expect quick retirements by Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy to keep the conservative majority.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. So what militia unit do you drill with regularly

But you are right, this will not change for the foreseable future, so will be going over this the next time, yes like the sun also rises, we have another mass shooting, and another, and another and so on, and so forth...

By the way, a certain ban in the 1930s survived Constitutional challenge. I am sure you know which one I am talking about.

[bongbong]

170. Right-wing SCOTUS

> That right of the people has been defined as a PERSONAL right by the SCOTUS.

Overturning decades of precedent that said it was a "group right". The ultra-conservatives on the current SCOTUS are a disgrace.

[mnhtnbb]

38. Another victim was a 27 year old man celebrating his birthday--and will leave a widow

who should be celebrating her first wedding anniversary tomorrow.

Alex Sullivan.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/alex-sullivan-12-aurora-victims-died-27th-birthday-article-1.1119138

[lunatica]

97. I feel the city of Aurora is filled with victims of this crime.

This is truly a national tragedy.

[mnhtnbb]

148. Well, of course. The stories are only beginning to come out as victims are ID'd

They were real. They had lives. They had families. They were loved.

It's all incredibly disturbing.

[liberalmuse]

41. This did it.

People who want to own a gun should have to go through a high-level security clearance first. I'm tired of the NRA using the 2nd Amendment as if it were their own personal jizz tissue.

[lunatica]

98. Sane gun owners should be the first to want security clearance

for buying weapons. If you can't pass a security clearance you have no business owning a gun.

[Atypical Liberal]

45. Why?

Did you know that all rifles combined, let alone assault rifles, kill half as many people each year as hands and feet do?

The latest shooting is tragic and high profile, but do you really want to ban the most popular center-fire target rifle in America when they are hardly ever used to commit murder?

[ananda]

48. But..

.. hands and feet are not made specifically to kill and maim.

[Atypical Liberal]

71. So?

So what? They still kill twice as many people as rifles do every year.

For being "made specifically to kill and maim" they seem to be doing a poor job of it, given the vast numbers of them in circulation.

[lunatica]

74. Your logic

is a sick thing bereft of human decency.

[Atypical Liberal]

153. In what way?

People are advocating restricting the rights of people to own a thing that is used only about 300 times a year to commit murder with.

How is it humanly decent to restrict the Constitutional rights of millions of people over the actions of so few? How is that decent?

[pinboy3niner]

157. "...used only about 300 times a year to commit murder"

Isn't 300 times to commit murder 300 times too much? And how about if we add handgun murders? Long arms are not our only problem.

[Atypical Liberal]

158. Compared to what?

Isn't 300 times to commit murder 300 times too much?

Any murder is a tragedy. But considering there are tens of millions of such arms in circulation, owned by tens of millions of people, this is absurdly low.

And how about if we add handgun murders? Long arms are not our only problem.

The OP was talking about assault weapons, which are almost exclusively long-arms.

[pinboy3niner]

160. Sorry, I have a hard time seeing a lot of murders as "absurdly low"

Especially when you count handgun deaths. The OP may not have raised it--but I did. And the numbers are not "absurdly low."

[Dragonfli]

150. Nuclear weapons killed 0 people last year, much less than hands OR feet, clearly I should own one

It is a crappy deterrent if I am the only one on my block with one, so obviously they should be available to all for their own self protection and safety!!

YOU BRADY BUNCH PUSSIES ARE AFTER MY PERSONAL HUNTING/TARGET SHOOTING NUCLEAR ARSENAL!!!! WAHHHHH!!!!

It takes a kiloton to kill a dear properly you know, and if you can't fire at least thirty missiles from one silo, well, you are no man at all!! (and the dear may escape your first 6 or so nukes)

[Atypical Liberal]

152. Ah, the old nuclear weapon red herring.

No one is suggesting that the second amendment is about nuclear weapons.

Leave the fish to the sea.

[lunatica]

53. Obviously you don't want any ban of any kind on weapons

Yes. I do. Will that mess with your guns?

[Atypical Liberal]

69. I certainly don't want a ban on long arms.

All rifles combined, let alone "assault" rifles, account for only about 300 homicides every year.

I'm not going to support any kind of ban based on that.

[Warren Stupidity]

131. Guns 9000 hands and feet 800.

But if we go to your point about the use of rifles, exactly how many mass murder events have been done with hands and feet?

[Atypical Liberal]

151. What makes mass murder any more serious than single murder?

Guns 9000 hands and feet 800.

Actually, over the last decade, firearms kill between 10,000 and 13,000 people every year in homicides.

But for rifles, only 300 people are killed every year.

But if we go to your point about the use of rifles, exactly how many mass murder events have been done with hands and feet?

None, but so what? Are mass murders more serious than single murders? The fact is, for all murders, rifles of all kinds, let alone assault rifles, are only used about 300 times a year. And twice as many people are killed by hands and feet. There is no pervasive rifle crime problem in the United States.

[Warren Stupidity]

154. A seriously stupid question at this point in tme.

[ErikJ]

47. America is under attack from within-greed of the American gun industry.

[down is up]

50. Problem/reaction/solution.

Try thinking outside the box. Try thinking for yourself. You think this young man (who looks so wholesome and kind in the picture) wasn't tampered with somehow? Try not being so damn gullible!

[ananda]

51. Holmes was tampered with ???

???

[lunatica]

54. Another idiotic statement from a new member

Why doesn't that surprise me. Another NRA lackey.

[pinboy3niner]

56. Former member :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=287461&sub=trans

[lunatica]

64. .

Thanks for the info and love the gif!

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. I was wondering how long

[spanone]

163. tampered with? hmmmm. please enlighten us.

[mzteris]

52. and the four month old baby. n/t

[lunatica]

55. It breaks my heart

[snappyturtle]

82. Me too. I can't even imagine what this family is going through.

Death, whether expected or unexpected (under normal circumstances) is bad enough but a violent, unexpected death would be forever life scarring and destroying. How do they cope? We must not just grieve the death but the aftermath too.

[skip fox]

77. And large clips.

Easier to get a gun than vote these days as someone on DU already noted.

[likesmountains 52]

80. I really hate that every time someone tries to discuss rational gun law, the pro gun gang

starts arguing semantics..' No such thing as assault weapon." ' Not automatic, semi automatic." "Not too many rounds." Can we just talk about doing something about guns that are designed to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time and not worry about their specific attribute already?

[RC]

92. And you will also notice that they do the same thing when multiple people die by gun.

It is as it the dead and wounded are of not much consequence. Guns and accessories count first, people and their lives, or lack of same, are secondary.

[lunatica]

93. And they even post photos of the weapons

with long winded explanations about how wonderful they are.

[CTyankee]

101. there has got to be a psychological profile somewhere about this phenomenom. I have seen

this repeatedly on DU gun threads. I know it's called gun porn and I am beginning to think it is. Perhaps it is even an addiction.

[JeepJK556]

114. Yes.

Because being asked "How are assault weapons a myth" and then replying with pictures to prove your point = gun porn.

[lunatica]

130. Now you're getting it

Because that's exactly what it looks and sounds like.

[JeepJK556]

111. Haha

You're funny.

So apparently pointing out the facts is talking about how wonderful they are?

I supposed if I was posting about how medical marijuana us safe you would say the same think right? Just bragging about how awesome weed is with my Stoner talking points.

Pass some laws! Facts be damned!

[lunatica]

113. I think marijuana should be legal

Go stroke your gun.

[JeepJK556]

116. So do I.

Well I'm off to stroke my gun.

Enjoy living life in ignorance!

[bongbong]

171. LOL

> Well I'm off to stroke my gun

Worship your Precious!

[JeepJK556]

112. So you hate facts being introduced into an argument.

Ban guns that are no different than any other gun based off of misinformation.

Ban "cop killer" bullets even though they are no such thing.

Make laws and form arguments based on complete and total ignorance.

That is what you support, right? Sure seems that way.

[lunatica]

115. Facts aren't obtuse and heartless

But you're the one who's ignoring the facts of the deaths in this murderous rampage. Not only ignoring them, but actually belittling and dismissing them.

Facts aren't hateful. But types like you are.

[likesmountains 52]

120. You joined yesterday just to chat guns on DU....and you accuse others of trolling?

[lunatica]

123. If he accuses people of his sins first, then no one will notice his sins will they?

I must be a successful troll if I've lasted this long.

[CTyankee]

141. Oh, ain't that rich? Yesterday? Holy cow!

Well, howdy doo Jeeperino! Enjoy your little set down with us, ya heah!

[lunatica]

122. The NRA must be paying you well

You've been all over DU today with your spiel. Go stroke your guns.

[likesmountains 52]

124. No kidding. Joined yesterday, coincidence? Just here to spew gun shit.

[JeepJK556]

126. I'm a long time lurker.

However since I am a gun owner, it makes sense that I would be drawn to these threads first.

[lunatica]

136. LOL!

Yup. You're drawn to ALL of them in one day.

Sure. LOL!

[Ruby the Liberal]

138. Elvis is back to lurking.

[lunatica]

140. Oops!

tombstoned!

LOL!

[CTyankee]

142. Ah, he has done his work among us. And now he is gone...well, that was brief!

[likesmountains 52]

119. I like facts, but sometimes the details don't matter that much. If someone drove in to a crowd of

people and killed 10 of them would it matter if someone said it was a Chevy Suburban or a Ford Expedition? That's what I'm talking about. A crazy person got a hold of some gun that could shoot an awful lot of rounds pretty quickly. Do we really have to argue about the correct lingo for the gun?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

105. Brings back horrible memories of the DC/MD sniper

not knowing whether your child would be mowed down outside their school. Tragic.

The same guy might have used a bomb if guns weren't available. He had intent to murder and maim.

[Ruby the Liberal]

121. I saw her aunt interviewed on the news.

This is beyond tragic for this family and the others.

Sorry your thread veered into a sewer with the first response. Almost can set your watch by the gun masturbators invading DU the last 48 hours. Time to drain this swamp, IMO.

[likesmountains 52]

125. I'm with you on this one.

[lunatica]

127. Well I hated that it was highjacked in an effort

to sell NRA talking points, but I love that my DU people jumped in to repudiate them.

It was because of that interview that I posted this thread. I was crying when I posted. The mother will have that gaping wound for the rest of her life and the girl is viciously robbed of a life. It breaks my heart.

[Ruby the Liberal]

137. Thats why they are here, sis.

To take any thought of sympathy for the victims and derail it into a conversation of NRA talking points to protect their BFFs - their weapons. Can't let the outrage, anger and grief get a foothold lest it threatens their right to buy toys over the internets.

[4th law of robotics]

165. How is it "hijacking" when people are responding to statements in the OP?

Don't want your memorial thread to become political? Don't insert a political message at the end.

[Liberal_in_LA]

156. that's really sad

[ananda]

168. The saddest story... and this from Whittier.

God pity them both! and pity us all,
Who vainly the dreams of youth recall.

For of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these: "It might have been!"

Ah, well! for us all some sweet hope lies
Deeply buried from human eyes;

And, in the hereafter, angels may
Roll the stone from its grave away!


Maud Muller by John Greenleaf Whittier