Another day, another shooting in the US

[CMoon]

http://globalsociology.com/2012/12/15/o ... point-out/

Good read.

On a much less intelligent level, the onion fucking nails it:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/right- ... dde,30749/

[neorichieb1971]

The US is the only country that this happens on a regular basis. American people on here state there is no easy solution to the problem. Everyone else outside of the USA see's a very simple solution to the problem.

Then Americans go, but but but...

Its your country, you live in it. you live with it.

Skykid has a right to his opinion. He is saying "in America its easier to mass murder". And it is. FACT! A knife is a personal attack, a machine gun is not personal, its massacre.

What if the guy got away? He would be out there. Possibly with a big ass gun moving towards your little town, terrorizing a neighborhood near you.

[KAI]

Bipartisanship sux.
The first step to get rid of weapons is to ban the republican party from the government.
Then you can educate, and voilà.

[Hagane]

Why stop at guns? The right to privately own grenades, anti-personnel mines, bazookas, missiles and nukes should be protected by the Constitution too.

[Kiel]

I keep hearing automatic weapons and machine guns, which were not used and which are not available.

[SuperSoaker360]

Wooooooo, this is starting to get nasty! I'm bowing out of this one, gents.

I stopping reading this thread after the first few posts...

How in the hell did you get this far into the thread then?

[CMoon]

The US is the only country that this happens on a regular basis. American people on here state there is no easy solution to the problem. Everyone else outside of the USA see's a very simple solution to the problem.

All this. It's so fucking obvious. We aren't living in the 1800's anymore.

+1 +1 +1 +1

[BryanM]

The expired assault weapons ban and clip size restriction might have impacted the spree of the guy who doesn't like the Batman reboots. Since this sort of thing is so rare, were there any other incidents in the past 2 decades that it might have had an impact on?

Even without the DoDonpachi style three bullets a pull mode, the AR-15 is in the same class as the M-16. I think of it more as a lawnmower than a rifle.

[Skykid]

Well this thread was only started as an excuse for Skykid to vent his xenophobia

Hope you get a dictionary for Christmas.

Xenophobia is a fear of foreigners. You were probably trying to call me a racist, often the pithy brainfart of those with too poor a mental capacity to understand political commentary as anything except subversive.

Your silence, rather than the shit-stream you seem to keep vomiting of late, would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

What?! Who woke you up?! When the Hell did you realise this?!

They're just simple facts, doesn't take much except an open mind and a little reading comprehension to draw them together. It's the more outlandish theories I have difficulty in believing.

[GaijinPunch]

You guys that shit on the western (or only US?) media, liberties, and think it's a police state have your heads in the clouds. Come spend some time in Asia and get back to me.

[Skykid]

You guys that shit on the western (or only US?) media, liberties, and think it's a police state have your heads in the clouds. Come spend some time in Asia and get back to me.

Anyone who thinks there are fewer liberties in the west than in other oppressed countries, developed or otherwise, is an imbecile.

My response was only related to the idea that freedom of gun ownership still has any relevance to the US constitution. On paper, I think the idea of protecting one's liberty from tyrannous powers by having the right to take up arms is actually very good - in reality it's outdated, outmoded, and no longer holds any significance in todays corrupt political climate.

[O. Van Bruce]

You guys that shit on the western (or only US?) media, liberties, and think it's a police state have your heads in the clouds. Come spend some time in Asia and get back to me.

lol, no doubt about it. In fact that's one of the reasons I would probably never live in Japan.

But you can't aim to compare east asia to the west. There are so many wrong things in the Chinese, Korean and Japanese societies...

[DEL]

Skykid wrote;

They're just simple facts, doesn't take much except an open mind and a little reading comprehension to draw them together. It's the more outlandish theories I have difficulty in believing.

Yes this is true but you do realise that everything you wrote (below) is the result of conspiracy research:-

You have no liberties. The government does not follow the constitution. Your president has barely any power to do anything. You have no rights, nor any real influence. You can't stop your government from going to war. Gun ownership won't save you from totalitarian power, since it's already here. Your country is owned by banks that make withdrawals of taxpayers money if and when they choose. The USA is already a police state, more so than most of continental Europe, and your economy is completely fucked because the government of Goldman Sachs and corporate America (a different country, essentially) have their own constitution: money; and it takes higher priority over anything that's been before, as it does in US medicine and accompanying insurances, where you'll effectively be denied life because of the small print.

Because that's just what it is -> research.

Skykid wrote;

Gun ownership won't save you from totalitarian power, since it's already here.

Yes its already there and the Yuri Bezmenov interview in 1985 was quite startling in that he explained the work to make America communist was already mostly complete (in 1985 ).
The point that you make that gun ownership won't save you from a forthcoming totalitarian regime is the most interesting one. The AURORA operation was the most pre-advertised operation in the history of the World. The spate of spree shootings that came afterwards represents (to me) a concerted effort to remove guns from the hands of the American Public.
It seems that gun ownership is a thorn in the side of the Powers that Be. I agree with you that they can push forward with their dark plans regardless, but it also appears that they are quite desperate to remove guns from the US Public. Like I mentioned earlier, the very knowledgeable Bill Cooper was stating that they were trying to remove guns from the hands of the people in the 1990s, so its nothing new.

[O. Van Bruce]

The point that you make that gun ownership won't save you from a forthcoming totalitarian regime is the most interesting one. The AURORA operation was the most pre-advertised operation in the history of the World. The spate of spree shootings that came afterwards represents (to me) a concerted effort to remove guns from the hands of the American Public.
It seems that gun ownership is a thorn in the side of the Powers that Be. I agree with you that they can push forward with their dark plans regardless, but it also appears that they are quite desperate to remove guns from the US Public. Like I mentioned earlier, the very knowledgeable Bill Cooper was stating that they were trying to remove guns from the hands of the people in the 1990s, so its nothing new.

what are you gonna do with the evil doers? shoot then? As if the government will let you do that, as if the mass media wouldn't call you terrorist, evil doer, or whatever they get out of their ass. Ironically, the same chronic fear the american society has will make it easier for the rest of people to not even question what CBS, FOX, etc. tell then about you.

People with fear need something or someone to focus that fear and the consequent rage on, it could easily be you... It has been like that since the end of the WWII, You've been experimenting one wave of fear after another for the last 67 years! Feel the power of social engineering and behold the society that has been the subject of most of the experiments that science has done.

No wonder that you have fallen from this:




Onto what you are today. You were bussy preparing for soviet comspiracies and terrorists attacks while the fat cats destroyed your welfare state.

[R79]

Aw man, I was hoping the TX guy wasn't gonna be that cliché!

lol@people posting just to say they don't read the forum, how does that work?

[undamned]

My response was only related to the idea that freedom of gun ownership still has any relevance to the US constitution. On paper, I think the idea of protecting one's liberty from tyrannous powers by having the right to take up arms is actually very good - in reality it's outdated, outmoded, and no longer holds any significance in todays corrupt political climate.

Time for an uprising? Not that I'm looking for a civil war, but I think big gov. believes they can do whatever they want. I hope they are wrong and folks are willing to fight (literally) for their freedoms. Those willing to lay down their arms here are surrendering to those who do not have their best interest.
-ud

[O. Van Bruce]

My response was only related to the idea that freedom of gun ownership still has any relevance to the US constitution. On paper, I think the idea of protecting one's liberty from tyrannous powers by having the right to take up arms is actually very good - in reality it's outdated, outmoded, and no longer holds any significance in todays corrupt political climate.

Time for an uprising? Not that I'm looking for a civil war, but I think big gov. believes they can do whatever they want. I hope they are wrong and folks are willing to fight (literally) for their freedoms. Those willing to lay down their arms here are surrendering to those who do not have their best interest.
-ud

Once again I ask, why do Western European people live better than Americans? We have freedoms also and we know how to defend then without using or even owning guns.

[undamned]

we know how to defend then without using or even owning guns.

Examples, please. And just to clarify, I'm talking about large scale, not your right to buy cigarettes or something.
-ud

[Hagane]

Of course the best way to feel safer is to give everyone a gun.

[O. Van Bruce]

we know how to defend then without using or even owning guns.

Examples, please. And just to clarify, I'm talking about large scale, not your right to buy cigarettes or something.
-ud

- Large demonstrations and very frequent ones. The 99% movement in your country was special because things like that, which happens quite often in Europe, aren't nearly as common in the U.S.A.

- Multiparty system. There can be any number of political parties in almost every country of Europe (Exception: GB). You can found your own political party easily and it doens't has to be on parliament to have a justification in Spain (though, in order to recieve subsidies from the government you must reach a minimal quota of votes).

- Very strong Union power in some countries. In Germany there are Union delegates in the Board of directors of most companies, afaik.

Now I don't know if this also exists in U.S.A. but.

- Powerful Ombudsman. There is a national ombudsman and an ombudsman for every administrative region of Spain. Any of then can appeal to the constitutional court against a law.

- The people can present a law to be debated at the parliament if there are enough people that supports it. This is done by gathering popular support by signing a document. In the same way, the people can call for a referendum. The importance of it differs from each country, in Italy, referendums are deciesive; in Spain, referendums are only of consultative value (but any politician who doesn't pay attention to those results is crazy).


Among other things I don't know or recall. I'm not a politician, neither an advocate.

[neorichieb1971]

In a society where the law is a deterrent to every single person out there, possibly have guns.

But history states that not everyone who can wield a gun has the notion to use it responsibly, for the purpose it was bought for or even have the slight inclination that human life is valuable.

Even if the law stated "if you kill unjustifiably you will be killed". It would have no meaning in this case.

In contrast. If one single person dies in the UK its headline news. I heard in the USA if its just one person it doesn't even register on the news.

John woo said it best. "Life is so cheap, its the cost of a single bullet".

[Casey120]

Of course the best way to feel safer is to give everyone a gun.

Maybe gun turrets on every school corner just to be safe when every monkey is packed !

Just search for sniper rifle or heavy gun on youtube and see how many total lunatics are on the loose in the US with very, very heavy weapons .
How can it not go wrong

[Skykid]

Time for an uprising? Not that I'm looking for a civil war, but I think big gov. believes they can do whatever they want. I hope they are wrong and folks are willing to fight (literally) for their freedoms. Those willing to lay down their arms here are surrendering to those who do not have their best interest.
-ud

Well, to play devil's advocate, let's say the people did decide to take their country back, with the intention of replacing the existing government with one not owned almost entirely by banking institutions. Do US citizens believe that by taking arms and marching, the government will actually say "well, that time has come guys, let's step down quietly," or do you think they'll use military might to defend their positions of power and wealth? Any use of violent force and they would instantly qualify as bona fide oppressors, no different from the communist dictatorships whom they railed against for so long, or the tyrannies that were overthrown during the Arab uprisings last year (which also equated to a lot of bloodshed and civilian deaths.)

But which is the more likely scenario? That's an honest question, from an outsider to a domestic US citizen.

[O. Van Bruce]

Time for an uprising? Not that I'm looking for a civil war, but I think big gov. believes they can do whatever they want. I hope they are wrong and folks are willing to fight (literally) for their freedoms. Those willing to lay down their arms here are surrendering to those who do not have their best interest.
-ud

Well, to play devil's advocate, let's say the people did decide to take their country back, with the intention of replacing the existing government with one not owned almost entirely by banking institutions. Do US citizens believe that by taking arms and marching, the government will actually say "well, that time has come guys, let's step down quietly," or do you think they'll use military might to defend their positions of power and wealth? Any use of violent force and they would instantly qualify as bona fide oppressors, no different from the communist dictatorships whom they railed against for so long, or the tyrannies that were overthrown during the Arab uprisings last year (which also equated to a lot of bloodshed and civilian deaths.)

But which is the more likely scenario? That's an honest question, from an outsider to a domestic US citizen.

I doubt they'll use military might because a country (and its economy) is nothing without people. besides, americans would wake up from the dream that have been induced on then. Most normal escenario would be bribing some important figures and people and let the mass media do the rest.

[CStarFlare]

Well, to play devil's advocate, let's say the people did decide to take their country back, with the intention of replacing the existing government with one not owned almost entirely by banking institutions. Do US citizens believe that by taking arms and marching, the government will actually say "well, that time has come guys, let's step down quietly," or do you think they'll use military might to defend their positions of power and wealth? Any use of violent force and they would instantly qualify as bona fide oppressors, no different from the communist dictatorships whom they railed against for so long, or the tyrannies that were overthrown during the Arab uprisings last year (which also equated to a lot of bloodshed and civilian deaths.)

If you're small, you're a band of outlaw extremists and the government puts you down. If you're big, the government will play nice enough because of the repercussions from crushing their own people, not because the citizens were armed. Which is fortunate because against the US government, even the best equipped citizens would be bringing a knife to a tank fight.

[undamned]

Well, to play devil's advocate, let's say the people did decide to take their country back, with the intention of replacing the existing government with one not owned almost entirely by banking institutions. Do US citizens believe that by taking arms and marching, the government will actually say "well, that time has come guys, let's step down quietly," or do you think they'll use military might to defend their positions of power and wealth?

I don't think anyone believes the gov. will just bow out, but the thing that irks me is that a mass uprising is probably the most remote thought in the minds of the big wigs (and I mean "big wig" in the historical sense). Who would dare challenge them? Their own people? Poppycock!

Any use of violent force and they would instantly qualify as bona fide oppressors, no different from the communist dictatorships whom they railed against for so long, or the tyrannies that were overthrown during the Arab uprisings last year (which also equated to a lot of bloodshed and civilian deaths.)

Serious. Animal Farm.

I doubt they'll use military might because a country (and its economy) is nothing without people. besides, americans would wake up from the dream that have been induced on then. Most normal escenario would be bribing some important figures and people and let the mass media do the rest.

Yeah, it's hard for me to imagine mass scale war on our own people, but I'm not so daft as to rule it out.
-ud

[O. Van Bruce]

Maybe gun turrets on every school corner just to be safe when every monkey is packed !

Just search for sniper rifle or heavy gun on youtube and see how many total lunatics are on the loose in the US with very, very heavy weapons .
How can it not go wrong

You forgot the russians. Those are on the rise!

[robivy64]

I love the direct UK/other Euro country to US comparisons.

There is one major difference: Population. The UK has, what, 70 million residents? Meanwhile, the US has over 300 million.

I find it difficult to believe that when ONE person in the UK dies (assuming at the hands of someone's malicious act), it makes headline news.

In this area (DFW), murders make the news. I'm sure it depends on where you go. Detroit residents murder people like it's a bodily function, so I haven't spent enough time up there to speak for their media.

The problem is with the unintentional "glorification" of the perpetrators themselves. The attention and "fame" is what your demented slack-jawed recluse dreaming of mass murder pines over. Some newspapers have gone as far as to avoid publishing any details about the shooter, or not publishing the headline on the front page, which I applaud.

[O. Van Bruce]

I love the direct UK/other Euro country to US comparisons.

There is one major difference: Population. The UK has, what, 70 million residents? Meanwhile, the US has over 300 million.

I find it difficult to believe that when ONE person in the UK dies (assuming at the hands of someone's malicious act), it makes headline news.

In this area (DFW), murders make the news. I'm sure it depends on where you go. Detroit residents murder people like it's a bodily function, so I haven't spent enough time up there to speak for their media.

The problem is with the unintentional "glorification" of the perpetrators themselves. The attention and "fame" is what your demented slack-jawed recluse dreaming of mass murder pines over. Some newspapers have gone as far as to avoid publishing any details about the shooter, or not publishing the headline on the front page, which I applaud.

Are you serious, cowboy? That guy mentioned the newspapers because compared to the USA, an assesination is relatively uncommon here, specially one outside criminal organizations and such.

[robivy64]

Not sure why you are so worked up, brohemian.

Also not sure what the "cowboy" is for, unless you are making broad generalizations because I live in Texas.

That would be like me calling you Sancho Panza.