Myspace to blame for colorado shooting

FinsburyParkCarrots

miller8966 wrote:

Again its not the guns fault..but the person using the gun. Guns do plenty of good in this world..hell how can i hunt deer without it?

Why the fuck would you want to hunt an innocent deer? Isn't there a Walmart in your neighbourhood?

floyd1975

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Why the fuck would you want to hunt an innocent deer? Isn't there a Walmart in your neighbourhood?

Does Wal Mart sell venison?

hippiemom

miller8966 wrote:

WHat about us law abiding citizens who have guns...should we have to pay for some lunatic who cant obey the law? What about my 2nd amendement right to own a gun?

I'm a gun owner too, and I don't favor a total ban, but I do think there should be much tighter restrictions than there are now. There should be more thorough background checks, the gun show loophole should be closed, there should be a paper trail of where every gun goes, and you should have to demonstrate that you know how to handle a gun and that you have an appropriate place to store it.

We keep much better track of our cars, which actually have a purpose other than killing things, than we do our guns, and that's just crazy.

miller8966

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Why the fuck would you want to hunt an innocent deer? Isn't there a Walmart in your neighbourhood?

Because hunting is part of the american tradition..as is my 2nd amendment right to own a gun if im a law abiding citizen. You ever hunt deer before?

FinsburyParkCarrots

zstillings wrote:

Does Wal Mart sell venison?

I fucking well hope not. But can't he eat something else, from the store? I hear they do a nice line of vegetarian chilli, these days. He could even hunt for his own recipes, on Myspace. You don't need a gun for that.

FinsburyParkCarrots

miller8966 wrote:

Because hunting is part of the american tradition..as is my 2nd amendment right to own a gun if im a law abiding citizen. You ever hunt deer before?

Nope. Hunting used to be a British tradition here, for a minority of people. It's illegal here, now.

hippiemom

miller8966 wrote:

Because hunting is part of the american tradition..as is my 2nd amendment right to own a gun if im a law abiding citizen. You ever hunt deer before?

American tradition??? Right, because America started the whole hunting craze. I guess it's just a myth that people hunted thousands of years ago so they wouldn't starve.

miller8966

hippiemom wrote:

I'm a gun owner too, and I don't favor a total ban, but I do think there should be much tighter restrictions than there are now. There should be more thorough background checks, the gun show loophole should be closed, there should be a paper trail of where every gun goes, and you should have to demonstrate that you know how to handle a gun and that you have an appropriate place to store it.

We keep much better track of our cars, which actually have a purpose other than killing things, than we do our guns, and that's just crazy.

I agree...But cars do kill alot of people also..maybe even more than guns

rebornFixer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Plenty of logic.

Myspace did not clearly cause this homicidal predator's illness: it merely provided him with a dangerous outlet for his fixations and fantasies.

True ... And neither did a gun. Choice of weapon is indeed significant here. But not for legality reasons. Banning said weapons would not likely have changed that much, which I think is miller's point.

rebornFixer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Nope. Hunting used to be a British tradition here, for a minority of people. It's illegal here, now.

Illegal why, though? Because game populations are so low, or because of gun phobia?

miller8966

honestly hunting rules..becoming one with nature...and participating in an american tradition. Id like to get better with the bow an arrow though

floyd1975

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

I fucking well hope not. But can't he eat something else, from the store? I hear they do a nice line of vegetarian chilli, these days. He could even hunt for his own recipes, on Myspace. You don't need a gun for that.

I would never force somebody to eat what I saw fit for them but then I like to see people free to make their own choices.

rebornFixer

hippiemom wrote:

I'm a gun owner too, and I don't favor a total ban, but I do think there should be much tighter restrictions than there are now. There should be more thorough background checks, the gun show loophole should be closed, there should be a paper trail of where every gun goes, and you should have to demonstrate that you know how to handle a gun and that you have an appropriate place to store it.

We keep much better track of our cars, which actually have a purpose other than killing things, than we do our guns, and that's just crazy.

This sounds fairly reasonable. In fact, your proposal looks much like current laws here in Canada, except that ours go a bit too far. Keeping track of individual guns is less important than keeping track of owners themselves.

Byrnzie

reborncareerist wrote:

And the attached hands. After all, you can strangle people with hands and fingers.

Yeah, but you can't strangle people with no fingers. Just as you can't walk without toes.

hippiemom

reborncareerist wrote:

This sounds fairly reasonable. In fact, your proposal looks much like current laws here in Canada, except that ours go a bit too far. Keeping track of individual guns is less important than keeping track of owners themselves.

Well, that's why it's important to keep track of the guns. I can legally sell my guns to any Ohio citizen over the age of 18, without doing a background check, and I don't have to keep any kind of records. Can't keep track of the owners if we don't know who they are, can we? Huge numbers of weapons enter the black market this way. My husband has bought guns at gun shows ... perfectly legal, but no one knows we have them. So if something snaps inside my head and I start hearing voices, there's no database my psychiatrist can tap into and say "Oh dear, this lunatic is armed to the teeth! Better get someone out to her house right away!"

Byrnzie

aNiMaL wrote:

If we just banned computer monitors, I think it would solve this problem.

But then nobody could read what you've just typed, and therefore we would have made no dialogue, and no dialectical thought process would be occuring on this message board, so that we would eventually revert to the level of chimpanzees with base animal instincts and the urge to stab, shoot, and eat each other! :eek:

FinsburyParkCarrots

reborncareerist wrote:

True ... And neither did a gun. Choice of weapon is indeed significant here. But not for legality reasons. Banning said weapons would not likely have changed that much, which I think is miller's point.

I'd venture that the choice of victim/venue, and the means of extracting information regarding that victim, is a variable end result of a psychopathological fantasy. However, I would ask you as someone who has training in the field of the mind, whether the gun is merely an outlet for that fantasy, or a crucial part of the fantasy itself? In American popular culture, having a gun has always been portrayed as a symbol of social and sexual status. (Just think of the cowboy or bounty hunter in all sorts of westerns through the decades, who asserts himself through killing, and gets lots of women, one way or another.) If the obsession with guns could be argued convincingly to be part of the illness, rather than the means through which the illness is manifested most violently, can it not be said that guns constitute cause rather than means of realising the effect?

FinsburyParkCarrots

miller8966 wrote:

honestly hunting rules..becoming one with nature...

By killing it?

rebornFixer

hippiemom wrote:

Well, that's why it's important to keep track of the guns. I can legally sell my guns to any Ohio citizen over the age of 18, without doing a background check, and I don't have to keep any kind of records. Can't keep track of the owners if we don't know who they are, can we? Huge numbers of weapons enter the black market this way. My husband has bought guns at gun shows ... perfectly legal, but no one knows we have them. So if something snaps inside my head and I start hearing voices, there's no database my psychiatrist can tap into and say "Oh dear, this lunatic is armed to the teeth! Better get someone out to her house right away!"

So I think the solution would be to do a background check, no matter the nature of the transaction (private seller to private seller, purchasing from a gun show) ... Knowledge of what guns are where could be useful under some circumstances, but it should not dictate police responses, which should be cautious no matter what the call ... Doing a check on what guns are in a possible offender's home should not make police lazy and less cautious if said check indicates "no guns". Too much tracking and bookkeeping starts to give negative returns after a while. I think a more effective approach would be to do as many background checks and psyc. evals as needed, whenever a weapon is sold.

rebornFixer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

By killing it?

I don't think we need to turn this into a discussion of vegetarianism.