Arizona congresswoman shot

[timkona]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

Has anyone ever heard of a mass shooting at a Gun Show?

[bjd392]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

AFAIAC, the less said about the WBC, the better. They crave any and all kind of attention and publicity. Being jeered at and the target of everyone else's scorn,... that's exactly the kind of reaction they expect and desire. The one thing they don't want is indifference.

The quickest way to get rid of 'em is for everyone (the media and general public) to simply ignore them.

No one advocates violence, regardless of people accusing and blaming outside influences like media. However, would it not be ironic if another kook decided to mass obliterate the WBC protestors? Would anyone care? Or would people smile on the inside and whisper, "Thank God for that." Would this kook be arrested... or praised? (Probably both)

When it comes to the "quickest" way, ignoring isn't as fast as other illegal unacceptable methods. But that's just the non-PC response.

[bjd392]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

OTOH, I don't see any legitimate reason for a private citizen to own an assault weapon like the 9mm Glock. Those kinds of firearms have one purpose only. To slaughter dozens of people in the blink of an eye. I have the feeling that something similar to the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban might be instituted on a permanent basis.

The Glock 19 (as originally reported as the firearm used), is actually a "COMPACT" version of the 9mm Glock 17 that most law enforcement agencies use. The G17 standard capacity is 17+1, and the 19 is 15+1 (big deal). Manufacturers created the option of a 19- or 33-round hicap.

When you buy hicaps, they're meant for target/range shooting. However, no gun store retailer is going to ask you if your plan is to go on mass killings when you buy their products. What are they going to do, not sell it to you if you say, "Yes?" For every one unstable firearm purchaser, there are hundreds (probably thousands) of perfectly sane, stable, responsible owners.

However in states like Massachusetts, California and Hawaii (the ones that still held out when the Ban was repealed), they still only allow 10-round magazines. The obvious solution? Buy more magazines. DUH. Common sense thinking makes that portion of the bill pretty useless. How long does it take to reload? An untrained firearm user can do it in about 3 seconds.

A firearm has its use and purpose. No LAW is going to make an INDIVIDUAL PERSON less dangerous then they plan to be, no matter what weapon they choose to use.

[matapule]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot


How An Armed Hero Nearly Shot The Wrong Person

William Saletan at Slate offers up a cautionary tale about allowing more people to carry guns, and how gun-carrying citizens -- who may have the best intentions -- could make such situations worse.
He notes that many gun rights advocates are pointing to Joe Zamudio, who was in a nearby pharmacy -- armed -- when the shooting began. He rushed over and helped subdue the killer:

But before we embrace Zamudio's brave intervention as proof of the value of being armed, let's hear the whole story. "I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready," he explained on Fox and Friends. "I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter," Zamudio recalled. "I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!' "
But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out.
Zamudio agreed:

I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky.

Zamudio has no professional or military training with weapons. He also, according to the Arizona Daily Star, didn't initially pull out his own weapon because he was afraid of being confused as a second gunman.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

No one advocates violence, regardless of people accusing and blaming outside influences like media. However, would it not be ironic if another kook decided to mass obliterate the WBC protestors? Would anyone care? Or would people smile on the inside and whisper, "Thank God for that." Would this kook be arrested... or praised? (Probably both)

When it comes to the "quickest" way, ignoring isn't as fast as other illegal unacceptable methods. But that's just the non-PC response.

More than just being non-PC, the kind of sentiment you (and Tim) are expressing here makes an absolute mockery of any pretense that you're taking your position on gun ownership based on a firm support of the Bill of Rights. If you're gonna carry on like a great patriot defending the Bill of Rights, then you can't pick and choose your amendments and expect to be taken seriously.

[bjd392]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

More than just being non-PC, the kind of sentiment you (and Tim) are expressing here makes an absolute mockery of any pretense that you're taking your position on gun ownership based on a firm support of the Bill of Rights. If you're gonna carry on like a great patriot defending the Bill of Rights, then you can't pick and choose your amendments and expect to be taken seriously.

Like other members here who blame others for not reading their posts, you need a clarification as well.

(First, political correctness can kiss my ass. It's only there so people who get offended by everyone's breath can feel better about themselves.)

Second, it's NOT my sentiment to go out and perform or advocate performing what was pointed out in my post. I am pointing out the irony of a situation. If a kook can snap and go after any normal person, a kook can snap and go after other kooks too. It took 3 years for Loughtner to act on an initial impulse; and as history dictates, he is not the first, nor will he (unfortunately) ever be the last person to do something like that. No law or knee-jerk reaction will ever prevent someone else from acting out their crazy-headed notions. In the meantime, I'll continue with my great defending, and those who want more laws can impose them on yourselves. Feel FREE to "pursue happiness" through restriction.

Pointing out an obvious fact, "removal" is always faster than "ignoring." If another kook decides to do it, or if WBC decides to be like other cults and drink magic Kool Aid, one method is certainly more permanent than the other.

In the meantime, the only mockery I make is towards some of the posts here, especially since revealings of this guy's past actually show more similarities to leftists... contradicting the initial accusations that he's a right-wingnut. The more that comes out, the more some of these responses look like incorrect prejudiced judgements.

When bad things happen to good people, it's genuinely disturbing. When bad things happen to bad people, I feel indifferent.

[matapule]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

"Brazilians over the age of 25 are allowed to own guns as long as they are registered and kept indoors. The country has the second-highest gun-related death rate after the U.S."

[matapule]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

When bad things happen to good people, it's genuinely disturbing. When bad things happen to bad people, I feel indifferent.

So was Giffords a good person or bad person? You have never said. Are you disturbed by this incident or do you feel indifferent? She was a Democrat afterall. Just a simple yes or no will do, no rambling justification or waffling is necessary.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

Bottom line, the kooks are coming, be protected or be a victim.

BTW, AZ's Gov. made it unlawful to protest at/near a funeral, yesterday.

[timkona]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

Lumped in with BJD......well, okay.

No mockery of the 2nd intended. I'm all for reasonable, and well thought out weapons registration laws.

Kooks will be kooks regardless of laws. That is the part that the anti-gun crowd will not admit.

The fact that this particular kook is starting to look a little more left than right does not bother me at all. Kooks come in many flavors.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

The fact that this particular kook is starting to look a little more left than right does not bother me at all. Kooks come in many flavors.

Could you point us in the direction of your contention that he was in any way left/lib minded? I don't see anything credible to bear this out, just desperate spinning by the lie/deny crowd is all I can find.

BTW, Sarah has spoken further about the incident http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_807833.html
It will be seen just how she handles herself under fire about this and if she looks to be more or somehow even less a viable candidate for the Oval Office.

[bjd392]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

So was Giffords a good person or bad person? You have never said. Are you disturbed by this incident or do you feel indifferent? She was a Democrat afterall. Just a simple yes or no will do, no rambling justification or waffling is necessary.

She IS a good person. The disturbance I feel to this event is anger.
Sometimes the catalysts to this anger are the nonsensical arguments/positions that are also waffled out on this board.

Unlike some of you guys who blindly spew hatred to political parties, the fact that Giffords is a Democrat has no bearing on the matter; but, nice attempt to bait me into following that logic.

[tutusue]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

[...]
Kooks will be kooks regardless of laws. That is the part that the anti-gun crowd will not admit.

The fact that this particular kook is starting to look a little more left than right does not bother me at all. Kooks come in many flavors.

As a member of the "anti-gun crowd", I completely agree with you, Tim. Kooks will always find a way. Guns seem to be the quickest and easiest way to act out.

Loughner is described as not being very political in this piece from the Today Show this morning. The reference begins at approx. 2:55.

I wish I could remember which tv show that I recently saw a survivor from the UVA massacre interviewed. He was shot 4 times. A documentary was made and he appears on-camera going from sporting goods stores to gun shows buying guns with NO identification or background checks, in spite of existing laws in those particular states. Scary.

[matapule]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

Kooks will be kooks regardless of laws. .

Then why make it easier for them by allowing them to purchase guns?

The US is the most gun crazy nation in the world and as a result it has the highest death rate by guns in the world.

Unlike some of you guys who blindly spew hatred to political parties,

THAT is exactly the kind of vitriolic speech that needs to STOP!

but, nice attempt to bait me into following that logic.

Not baiting, just wanted to verify that I was presuming correctly the way you felt.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Arizona congresswoman shot

Second, it's NOT my sentiment to go out and perform or advocate performing what was pointed out in my post. I am pointing out the irony of a situation.

Whatever. The funny thing is you remain totally blind to the irony that your written sentiments re: the WBC to be "obliterated" (whether by you or someone else) amounts to a disdain of other people's 1st amendment rights,... while at the same time, you're lashing out at the gun control faction for encroaching on your 2nd amendment rights.

Listen, BJD. I'm sure you have your reasons for taking your position on the firearms ownership issue. That's all fine and dandy. I'm just letting you know that if you're trying to make your arguments principled upon some reverence for the Bill of Rights, you're doing an awfully poor job of it. How do you expect to get anyone else to respect your 2nd amendment rights when you have so little regard for the 1st amendment rights of other people, just because you don't agree with them?

Feel FREE to "pursue happiness" through restriction.

This, from someone who wishes for the WBC's rights to free speech to be silenced by means of "obliteration" and "removal."

The problem here is while you are all too aware about other people supposedly "restricting" your rights and freedoms, you're totally oblivious about how your sentiments would trample upon the rights of others.