27 dead at Connecticut school, including 14 kids

[Rum]

The price of the freedom to own machines which fire little pellets of alloy so fast they can kill people is that you tolerate those little pellets killing people at a level most of the world finds breathtakingly puzzling and staggeringly stupid.

However I doubt that this blind spot in your national psyche is going to change much at all in the near future.

Fools.

[mozg]

To say that in the context of 20 dead little children is deeply, deeply sick.

"It's their parent's problem, not mine ; I have my guns, that's the really important thing"

Today 18,000 children died because they starved to death. Did you eat more food than you needed for survival?

I didn't know any of those dead kids either, and it was no less a tragedy to the people who loved them than the 20 kids who were shot to death in Newtown, CT.

In the purely logical sense, mass shootings are not a particularly common or overwhelming problem. It is only when you rely on emotional pleas that they seem to be so.

need a serious math lesson let alone a compassion lesson.....

I was specifically referring to those who died in mass shootings in the United States in 2012, which is less than thirty.

The price of the freedom to own machines which fire little pellets of alloy so fast they can kill people is that you tolerate those little pellets killing people at a level most of the world finds breathtakingly puzzling and staggeringly stupid.

The price of the freedom to own machines that are made of 2,000 pounds of steel that can travel at more than 100 mph and contain 10 or more gallons of extremely flammable liquid is that you tolerate those 2,000 pound hunks of steel killing 40,000 people in the United States alone in every given year.

Four times as many people died in the US in automobile accidents friday as died in Sandy Hook Elementary School, and that same number of people died in car accidents every single day this year in this country.

Nobody's out campaigning to make it harder to buy a car or get a driver's license.

[SteveB]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

[Kristie]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

[tattuchu]

The price of the freedom to own machines which fire little pellets of alloy so fast they can kill people is that you tolerate those little pellets killing people at a level most of the world finds breathtakingly puzzling and staggeringly stupid.

However I doubt that this blind spot in your national psyche is going to change much at all in the near future.

Fools.

Not all of us, old chum. Some of us here shake our heas in disbelief as well. Unfortunately, those of us that do are outnumbered. And the people who outnumber us have guns

[tattuchu]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

Why? It's a perfect analogy, with an elegant one to one correspondence. Guns are devices designed specifically to kill, while cars are also designed specifically to kill. It's just, with cars, you look goooood on the way to the reaper. Check out my sweet ride of death, bitches!

[Blind groper]

Driver's licenses are not the property of the individual, they are the property of the state that issues them. Moving about on public highways is a right that cannot be licensed. Operating a motor vehicle on the other hand is not a right, so the state can license such operators and condition that license upon display of the license upon a lawful demand of a police officer when one is operating a motor vehicle on a public highway. One is not obliged to present one's driver's license in any other context whatsoever, except in court during a hearing regarding a traffic offense.

do you not realise, Seth, how ludicrous this argument is?
Both cars and guns, when carelessly used, carry a terrible cost in death and maiming. It is, therefore, right and proper that both should require a license, and that license should not be issued lightly.

[Ian]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

Fair enough. It shouldn't be much of a comparison; guns should be far more regulated than cars. But it's the other way around.

[Blind groper]

Not all of us, old chum. Some of us here shake our heads in disbelief as well. Unfortunately, those of us that do are outnumbered. And the people who outnumber us have guns

I am not sure that is correct. In my internet research on this topic, I came across several survey results of how Americans feel about guns, and it appears that the ones who favour increased restrictions outnumber the gun nutters. However, the latter group are more united as lobbyists.

All that is needed, really, is to unite the people who want saner gun laws, and get this as a major election issue. When the politicians are faced with a majority united in asking for better gun laws, and willing to vote out those who fail to provide, things will change quickly.

Of course, like so many things, this is probably easier said than done.

[Seth]

The price of the freedom to own machines which fire little pellets of alloy so fast they can kill people is that you tolerate those little pellets killing people at a level most of the world finds breathtakingly puzzling and staggeringly stupid.

That's hardly surprising coming from cowed, servile sheeple who do what they are told by their masters.

However I doubt that this blind spot in your national psyche is going to change much at all in the near future.

It won't if I have any say in it.

Fools.

You certainly are.

[Seth]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

Fair enough. It shouldn't be much of a comparison; guns should be far more regulated than cars. But it's the other way around.

Horseshit. When was the last time you had to have a background check through the FBI to buy a car?

[Seth]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

That's because it's such an apt comparison and so brilliantly illuminates the cognitive impairment of hoplophobes and gun banners.

[Seth]

The price of the freedom to own machines which fire little pellets of alloy so fast they can kill people is that you tolerate those little pellets killing people at a level most of the world finds breathtakingly puzzling and staggeringly stupid.

However I doubt that this blind spot in your national psyche is going to change much at all in the near future.

Fools.

Not all of us, old chum. Some of us here shake our heas in disbelief as well. Unfortunately, those of us that do are outnumbered. And the people who outnumber us have guns

Indeed. And that's rather the point.

[Kristie]

Oh dog, do I hate it when people compare cars to guns.

Fair enough. It shouldn't be much of a comparison; guns should be far more regulated than cars. But it's the other way around.

Horseshit. When was the last time you had to have a background check through the FBI to buy a car?

Ok, but if you carry your gun drunk, you should have it confiscated and your permit revoked.

[Seth]

Not all of us, old chum. Some of us here shake our heads in disbelief as well. Unfortunately, those of us that do are outnumbered. And the people who outnumber us have guns

I am not sure that is correct. In my internet research on this topic, I came across several survey results of how Americans feel about guns, and it appears that the ones who favour increased restrictions outnumber the gun nutters. However, the latter group are more united as lobbyists.

All that is needed, really, is to unite the people who want saner gun laws, and get this as a major election issue. When the politicians are faced with a majority united in asking for better gun laws, and willing to vote out those who fail to provide, things will change quickly.

Of course, like so many things, this is probably easier said than done.

Strangely, the last time the Democrats tried that they lost their asses in Congress and the White House. That's why Obama utterly ignored gun control and even lied his lying ass off during the campaign trying to appear to be a "good guy" to gun owners.

Gun control is the live third-rail of politics. Touch it and your political career ends. The only reason Obama will touch it now is because he's a lame-duck President and his political career is over anyway. And that's exactly what he was waiting for. We gun owners have know this since before his first election because he's always been an openly rabid opponent of the 2nd Amendment throughout his political career.

Despite your bullshit "research" the truth is that the vast majority of Americans understand, accept and embrace the 2nd Amendment and our right to keep and bear arms and do not wish to see it further degraded.