Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20282930
Results 436 to 449 of 449
  1. #436
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    12,518
    vCash
    5471

    ewing

    Quote Originally Posted by nymetsrule View Post
    It will calm everyone the **** down, and that is seriously what people need to do right now. Calm down, it's just a ****ing gun.

    I agree. I think peace of mind is a legit reason. I also think that a banned on certain weapons would reduce an individuals potential for extreme violence. I don't think we are are the first to provide what we feel is a legit answer to this question. Still no one has tried to answer anyone else's questions
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  2. #437
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orange County
    Posts
    3,452
    vCash
    1550
    Quote Originally Posted by macc View Post
    As I've stated earlier in the thread. The issue here isn't guns and banning assualt rifles. Banning assult rifles isn't going to make your kids any safer tomorrow then they were today. It solves nothing. Not only that it's done the exact opposite. Since the gun banning has been talked about, in EVERY community has seen a huge rise in assualt weapons purchases. I know they are damn near sold out in my local gun shop. So the Gov't has only done the exact opposite of what they accomplished.

    In saying that as I stated in previous posts, GUNS are not the issue. Mental health stability is.

    To all the people who are in full support of this gun ban because they think it's going to do a bit of difference, please read this link I'm about to post.

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/01/the-gi...ook-reporting/

    There are many parts of the article I can highlight but I'm just going to point one one part in particular.

    official omissions are motivated by a desire to protect the drug companies from ruinous product liability claims

    The mainstream media doesn't talk about the drugs these shooters are on when these extrememly violent things happen, they don't want to drug companies to get sued which in turns hurts the bottom line of the real heads of this country, so therefore it's swept under the carpet.

    While this is happening, they are throwing around assualt weapons in our faces like they are even the issue to begin with.
    Completely agree with you on this man. I actually read this article earlier this morning. Although this has been brought up many times by many of us, its amazing that people are still looking at the weapon and not the drugs the kid was on.

    Piers Morgan likes going back on his debates and asking what weapon was used for this or that shooting, but never asks "what drugs was this shooter on??"
    pretty ridiculous.
    To put into persepective, the drugs the kids were on during these shootings:

    Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox – like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and many others, a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant drug called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs. Harris and fellow student Dylan Klebold went on a hellish school shooting rampage in 1999 during which they killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves.Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials, 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox – that’s 1 in 25 – developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.

    Patrick Purdy went on a schoolyard shooting rampage in Stockton, Calif., in 1989, which became the catalyst for the original legislative frenzy to ban “semiautomatic assault weapons” in California and the nation. The 25-year-old Purdy, who murdered five children and wounded 30, had been on Amitriptyline, an antidepressant, as well as the antipsychotic drug Thorazine.

    Kip Kinkel, 15, murdered his parents in 1998 and the next day went to his school, Thurston High in Springfield, Ore., and opened fire on his classmates, killing two and wounding 22 others. He had been prescribed both Prozac and Ritalin.

    In 1988, 31-year-old Laurie Dann went on a shooting rampage in a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Ill., killing one child and wounding six. She had been taking the antidepressant Anafranil as well as Lithium, long used to treat mania.

    In Paducah, Ky., in late 1997, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, son of a prominent attorney, traveled to Heath High School and started shooting students in a prayer meeting taking place in the school’s lobby, killing three and leaving another paralyzed. Carneal reportedly was on Ritalin.

    In 2005, 16-year-old Native American Jeff Weise, living on Minnesota’s Red Lake Indian Reservation, shot and killed nine people and wounded five others before killing himself. Weise had been taking Prozac.
    In another famous case, 47-year-old Joseph T. Wesbecker, just a month after he began taking Prozac in 1989, shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Louisville, Ky., killing nine. Prozac-maker Eli Lilly later settled a lawsuit brought by survivors.

    Kurt Danysh, 18, shot his own father to death in 1996, a little more than two weeks after starting on Prozac. Danysh’s description of own his mental-emotional state at the time of the murder is chilling: “I didn’t realize I did it until after it was done,” Danysh said. “This might sound weird, but it felt like I had no control of what I was doing, like I was left there just holding a gun.”

    John Hinckley, age 25, took four Valium two hours before shooting and almost killing President Ronald Reagan in 1981. In the assassination attempt, Hinckley also wounded press secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and policeman Thomas Delahanty.
    #Chow!

  3. #438
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,874
    vCash
    1500
    Pharm companies are the most misleading thing you can imagine. They want the drug to help u, but not cure you enough to not need it anymore otherwise they lose $$$

  4. #439
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,817
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by macc View Post
    To answere that question directly there is a couple reasons 1) to protect yourself and your family and 2) to protect yourself incase your Gov't ever fell to any tyrants.

    To my # 2, some people will say it can never happen.....well why not? History has shown that it's happened over and over and over again. Just because it prob won't happen in the next 20 years, but what about after that? You just never know, which is why we have had the right to protect ourselves in the first place.

    Mix that with the fact that banning assuault rifles is literally going to fix/help nothing at all. I mean literally nothing and it makes it easy to oppose this ban.
    exactly. and like I've said, legal owners of assault rifles don't use them for crime. and more people are killed with blunt objects than rifles. no one is trying to make mandatory background checks for hammers. we had an assault weapon ban for 10 years and it did nothing. and this will do nothing. if an assault weapon ban worked, then Columbine wouldn't have happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by macc View Post
    As I've stated earlier in the thread. The issue here isn't guns and banning assualt rifles. Banning assult rifles isn't going to make your kids any safer tomorrow then they were today. It solves nothing. Not only that it's done the exact opposite. Since the gun banning has been talked about, in EVERY community has seen a huge rise in assualt weapons purchases. I know they are damn near sold out in my local gun shop. So the Gov't has only done the exact opposite of what they accomplished.

    In saying that as I stated in previous posts, GUNS are not the issue. Mental health stability is.

    To all the people who are in full support of this gun ban because they think it's going to do a bit of difference, please read this link I'm about to post.

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/01/the-gi...ook-reporting/

    There are many parts of the article I can highlight but I'm just going to point one one part in particular.

    official omissions are motivated by a desire to protect the drug companies from ruinous product liability claims

    The mainstream media doesn't talk about the drugs these shooters are on when these extrememly violent things happen, they don't want to drug companies to get sued which in turns hurts the bottom line of the real heads of this country, so therefore it's swept under the carpet.

    While this is happening, they are throwing around assualt weapons in our faces like they are even the issue to begin with.
    That's because these pharmaceutical company's are their biggest sponsors. Can't let them look bad. I was glad to see Alex Jones bring this up.

    I seriously don't understand why people think an assault weapon ban.

    and I'm still waiting for an answer. What will an assault weapon ban accomplish?
    **********

  5. #440
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,866
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by macc View Post
    To answere that question directly there is a couple reasons 1) to protect yourself and your family and 2) to protect yourself incase your Gov't ever fell to any tyrants.

    To my # 2, some people will say it can never happen.....well why not? History has shown that it's happened over and over and over again. Just because it prob won't happen in the next 20 years, but what about after that? You just never know, which is why we have had the right to protect ourselves in the first place.

    Mix that with the fact that banning assuault rifles is literally going to fix/help nothing at all. I mean literally nothing and it makes it easy to oppose this ban.

    Ok well, by protecting your family, I assume you mean from the occasional home invasion or robbery. wouldn't a simple handgun, shotgun, or similar type weapon be sufficient? Why do american's who share this mindset need an arsenal? I guess it can be justified if we lived in Africa but in the US? The protecting just doesn't make sense to me. Do you really fear that much for your life where you live?

    And to your point on the govt. collapsing. Sure, that can happen, not denying that. But realistically what are the odds of that happening tomorrow? Or in the foreseeable future? We're not a developing country prone to coup d'etats. And if the worst did miraculously occur, and the government really wanted to kill you, can you're machine gun stand up to a drone or nuke?
    I Heart Kimmi Smiles

    Support Her!

  6. #441
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,866
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jlohm1 View Post
    exactly. and like I've said, legal owners of assault rifles don't use them for crime. and more people are killed with blunt objects than rifles. no one is trying to make mandatory background checks for hammers. we had an assault weapon ban for 10 years and it did nothing. and this will do nothing. if an assault weapon ban worked, then Columbine wouldn't have happened.


    That's because these pharmaceutical company's are their biggest sponsors. Can't let them look bad. I was glad to see Alex Jones bring this up.

    I seriously don't understand why people think an assault weapon ban.

    and I'm still waiting for an answer. What will an assault weapon ban accomplish?
    Well whats the alternative? not doing anything and just wait for the next sandy hook? What's the solution you bring to the table? Just seems like paranoia of a govt impeding on our rights
    I Heart Kimmi Smiles

    Support Her!

  7. #442
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,817
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by JPHX View Post
    Well whats the alternative? not doing anything and just wait for the next sandy hook? What's the solution you bring to the table? Just seems like paranoia of a govt impeding on our rights
    I've laid out a ton of idea's. one is having armed staff in schools. another is better mental diagnostics/treatments, also tightening up the boarder. All an assault rifle ban will do is take them away from law abiding citizens. Criminals don't obey laws, and unfortunately, they will get assault rifles if they want them. I also think that loopholes that allow people without background checks to get assault rifles need to be closed. Trust me, I don't want these crazy people to have guns. no one does. but unfortunately, they'll still get them. and when they do get them, I think the best thing is to have a way to protect yourself. I think there is things they can do to make it harder for them to get guns, but banning them won't accomplish anything. We already tried it and it didn't work.
    **********

  8. #443
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    [QUOTE=JPHX;25122611]Ok well, by protecting your family, I assume you mean from the occasional home invasion or robbery. wouldn't a simple handgun, shotgun, or similar type weapon be sufficient? Why do american's who share this mindset need an arsenal? I guess it can be justified if we lived in Africa but in the US? The protecting just doesn't make sense to me. Do you really fear that much for your life where you live?
    And to your point on the govt. collapsing. Sure, that can happen, not denying that. But realistically what are the odds of that happening tomorrow? Or in the foreseeable future? We're not a developing country prone to coup d'etats. And if the worst did miraculously occur, and the government really wanted to kill you, can you're machine gun stand up to a drone or nuke?[/QUOTE]



    To answer your questions directly.......1) me no I don't fear for my life, but just because I don't doesn't mean someone else does. So therefore I'm not going to let my own opinions be forced onto other people. To you a simple pistol might be enough, but to alot of people it simply isn't. Is a pistol going to stop 4-6 intruders? I'm lucky enough not to live in a bad part of town but I hear stories all the time about areas where there's breakins weekly. Experience makes people think certain ways and have particular ideas. Bottom line is someone owning an assualt rifle because they feel safer with it doesn't affect me or my life, so why would I support something that takes away their right to have it?

    2) It's not the point on whether we would win a war with our Gov't or not, the point is we are a society that has the capablity to stand up and fight if need be. Don't pretend a Gov't wouldn't sway there decisions one way to another with a society ready to go to war if need be VS a society that just gets on their knees and begs like a lap dog.

    Though whether you agree with the points I made to have them are irralavent. To alot of people they are valid points. With the threat of nuclear weapons getting in the hands of the wrong people, maybe something isn't as far off as it seems like it would be. You can never predict the future, so why put laws into effect that can only hurt us in the long run? I'm sure the Romans thought they would live on forever....then the fall of Rome happened....Noone is to big for a collapse. Banning them doesn't help us at all. So I just don't understand why anyone with any bit of common sense would support banning something that isn't an issue to begin with.

  9. #444
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,817
    vCash
    1500
    apparently Alex Jones challenged Piers Morgan to another debate. a more formal debate with a moderator and both of them get equal time to talk and Piers declined. I would have loved to see it though.
    **********

  10. #445
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by JPHX View Post
    Well whats the alternative? not doing anything and just wait for the next sandy hook? What's the solution you bring to the table? Just seems like paranoia of a govt impeding on our rights


    First off this is a complex issue and there will never be one answere to this entire ordeal. Though as I stated in previous comments, heres a couple things you can do.

    1) Go after the Pharmaceutical companies who sell over the counter anti depressents that have possibe side effects of "suicidal thoughts" listed right on the bottle. In this article I will post right below this, it shows you that every person (almost every) who was involved in a school shooting was on some type of anti depressant. Why is there no outcry with anti depressants? Where is Obama/Gov't on giving stricter regulations on what exactly goes into these anti depressents, the addictiveness in nature of the drugs and how easily accessable it is to attain them. I can go into a doctors office and tell him some bs and 10 min later I'm walking out with a bottle of pills. In todays world we don't even try some good old fashioned theropy that can help in the long run. We like the "quick fix" with pills.

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/01/the-gi...ook-reporting/

    2) Stop making these school shooters celebrities. Within 72 hours of the Sandy hook incident Lanza was a household name. Imagine if you're a kid in your mothers basement w/ suicidal thoughts. Instead of just offing yourself you see all these "celebrity shooters" on tv and you say F it, I'll go out with a bang! So how about if the news is going to report a school shooting, make the killers nameless. Don't make them the character you want to create in your favorite shootem game.

    3) Put an armed guard at each school. Alot of schools have this already but why not all? We use armed guards to protect our Federal buildings, but why not our schools? I think someone would think twice about shooting up a schoo when you have a well trained Marine w/ an M16 A-2 Servce rifle standing at the door.

    Facts have shown a criminal is less likely to to to an area where they will possibly encounter an armed citizen, which is why gun free zones tend to have the most crime. ie schools.

    So there you go, theres a few reasons for you. Banning the instrument used is simply not going to help at all. That's taking a reactive approach vs proactive.
    Last edited by macc; 01-17-2013 at 11:58 AM.

  11. #446
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,817
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by macc View Post
    First off this is a complex issue and there will never be one answere to this entire ordeal. Though as I stated in previous comments, heres a couple things you can do.

    1) Go after the Pharmaceutical companies who sell over the counter anti depressents that have possibe side effects of "suicidal thoughts" listed right on the bottle. In this article I will post right below this, it shows you that every person (almost every) who was involved in a school shooting was on some type of anti depressant. Why is there no outcry with anti depressants? Where is Obama/Gov't on giving stricter regulations on what exactly goes into these anti depressents, the addictiveness in nature of the drugs and how easily accessable it is to attain them. I can go into a doctors office and tell him some bs and 10 min later I'm walking out with a bottle of pills. In todays world we don't even try some good old fashioned theropy that can help in the long run. We like the "quick fix" with pills.

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/01/the-gi...ook-reporting/

    2) Stop making these school shooters celebrities. Within 72 hours of the Sandy hook incident Lanza was a household name. Imagine if you're a kid in your mothers basement w/ suicidal thoughts. Instead of just offing yourself you see all these "celebrity shooters" on tv and you say F it, I'll go out with a bang! So how about if the news is going to report a school shooting, make the killers nameless. Don't make them the character you want to create in your favorite shootem game.

    3) Put an armed guard at each school. Alot of schools have this already but why not all? We use armed guards to protect our Federal buildings, but why not our schools? I think someone would think twice about shooting up a schoo when you have a well trained Marine w/ an M16 A-2 Servce rifle standing at the door.

    Facts have shown a criminal is less likely to to to an area where they will possibly encounter an armed citizen, which is why gun free zones tend to have the most crime. ie schools.

    So there you go, theres a few reasons for you. Banning the instrument used is simply not going to help at all. That's taking a reactive approach vs proactive.
    Yea I really wish more people would put some of the blame on pills. but when the media ignores it and only focuses on assault rifles, thats whats going to happen.

    and we have all these former military members who can't find jobs. If a school can afford to hire one, then they should. this is what they spent years training to do. Former members of the military who are teachers could also carry guns at school imo.
    **********

  12. #447
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    16,016
    vCash
    1500
    How to stop mass shootings-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec
    Last edited by Gators123; 01-17-2013 at 01:12 PM.

  13. #448
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam/Maryland
    Posts
    764
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gators123 View Post
    How to stop mass shootings-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec
    Absolutely. "Willful retardation at its finest"

    But the people who demonstrate the above quote from the clip to a tee are all those who would divert attention to everything under the sun, as long as attention is diverted away from guns.

  14. #449
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,817
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gators123 View Post
    How to stop mass shootings-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec
    the guys even wearing a Reds hat!
    **********

Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20282930

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •