quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


except criminals are not the only problem

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


except criminals are not the only problem

Okay...there are laws against the insane or mentally unstable as well. But, just saying that makes you a troll rather than a person in a discussion. A troll swoops in and snipes at other's comments, which seems to be typical for you. Do you have a comment or a point to make that would add to a discussion?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

COLUMBIA, S.C. — A website with a white supremacist manifesto features dozens of photos of Dylann Storm Roof, the man accused of killing nine people at a church in Charleston, S.C., posing with weapons, burning an American flag and visiting Southern historic sites and Confederate soldiers’ graves.

It is not clear who wrote the words and who took the pictures, but it traces the evolution of the author’s racist worldview and concludes with a section labeled “An Explanation.”

“I have no choice,’’ it reads. “I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.”

In one picture, Mr. Roof is shown posing with wax figures of slaves. In others, he posed with a handgun. He is alone in all the photos, which appear to have been taken at a slave plantation, Sullivan Island, S.C., and at the Museum and Library of Confederate History.

The website links to several pages of long racist rants. Some describe Hispanics as enemies and say that “Negroes” have lower I.Q.s and low-impulse control. The writings are not signed.

The domain site was registered in February under the name Dylann Roof. Mr. Roof, 21, from Columbia, S.C., is a high school dropout and unemployed landscaper. He is accused of waging a racially motivated rampage at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/us/dylann-storm-roof-photos-website-charleston-church-shooting.html?emc=edit_na_20150620&nlid=69606674&ref=cta&_r=0

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Its awfully nice of you and the New York Slimes to give the twisted little killer all of the free publicity that he craves Lucy

I know, I know... Youre only here to help

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


except criminals are not the only problem

Okay...there are laws against the insane or mentally unstable as well. But, just saying that makes you a troll rather than a person in a discussion. A troll swoops in and snipes at other's comments, which seems to be typical for you. Do you have a comment or a point to make that would add to a discussion?

its a perfectly valid if simple, and directly pointed fact.
But I see no point in discussing this any further, you are doing an amazing job of proving your own ignorance:)

[image]http://www.lucylasticslair.com/test/10376143_10154783065670014_5611179928453355272_n.jpg[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Its awfully nice of you and the New York Slimes to give the twisted little killer all of the free publicity that he craves Lucy

I know, I know... Youre only here to help

And well done to you, too, Sanity, for doubling that publicity by quoting Lucy's entire post. :-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

It is part of the topic isnt it?
You just want it to go away??

Sorry
Not happening

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

And well done to you, too, Sanity, for doubling that publicity by quoting Lucy's entire post. :-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Its awfully nice of you and the New York Slimes to give the twisted little killer all of the free publicity that he craves Lucy

I know, I know... Youre only here to help

And well done to you, too, Sanity, for doubling that publicity by quoting Lucy's entire post. :-)

Peon, I responded to your snide challenge earlier in the thread. Your turn to actually express an idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Its awfully nice of you and the New York Slimes to give the twisted little killer all of the free publicity that he craves Lucy

I know, I know... Youre only here to help

And well done to you, too, Sanity, for doubling that publicity by quoting Lucy's entire post. :-)

Peon, I responded to your snide challenge earlier in the thread. Your turn to actually express an idea.

It wasn't a 'snide challenge'; though you did say in your much more obviously snide response to it that you'd 'wait until I post an idea of my own.'

However, in that post, you then went on to say "I'm not sure, well am am sure, that on a planet with a few billion people you're ever going to stop this sort of thing and I'm certainly not willing to give the government more power out of fear that it may happen again".

Therefore ... I saw no solution from you: as far as you're concerned, there isn't one - other, that is, than dealing with this one case as though it weren't part of any trend. So, you see, there was nothing worth responding to in your post.

quote:

So perhaps you could enlighten me with your superior knowledge?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy,

They are right to do it...how many children must die...how many innocents must die.... how many men women and children must be maimed before this gun nuts society regains it's sanity?

It will come you realize that don't you? If gun violence continues there will be a significant backlash and you may even loose the freedom to use the toys you own as you do today. It would be much better for responsible gun owners to head this off and help to draft truly effective gun control laws before this happens.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

Therein lies the problem. There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy, just as there are those who will accuse others of attempting to gain political capital out of a tragedy, in an effort to thwart prevention of future outrages.
How do you tell the difference?

Perhaps by having an honest conversation about the tragedy, the various factors that contributed to it and open-minded assessments of the various options advanced to thwart similar tragedies occurring in the future. An intention by all sides to listen and hear others would be enormously beneficial, as would honest declarations of interest by those with interests in the outcome.
To me, that seems a far more productive strategy that an automatic retreat to pre-existing dogmatic positions which is what happens at the moment.

Yep, and everyone involved will claim to be taking part honestly. We know many politicians will use anything to their advantage, even if it doesn't address the underlying situation.

To restate for you:

How do we know we're having an "honest conversation about the tragedy, the various factors that contributed to it and open-minded assessments of the various options advanced to thwart similar tragedies occurring in the future[, where the] intention by all sides [is] to listen and hear others[?]"

OK then let me ask you a question: Is a solution to the problem of gun violence possible given the current political realities and the 2nd Amendment?

If you feel a solution is possible, please outline it. If you feel a solution is not possible at the moment, what needs to change in order to arrive at and implement a solution?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Yea like Iraq

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

If you feel a solution is possible, please outline it. If you feel a solution is not possible at the moment, what needs to change in order to arrive at and implement a solution?

Arm yourselves, armed personnel or security workers in the schools and armed clergy in the churches, armed business owners and armed households. Freakin simple, an armed society is a polite society.

The USA with something in the order of 300 million guns in private hands is already an armed society. I don't know anyone who thinks it's a peaceful society. According to wiki:
" the [murder] rate of the United States is among the highest of developed countries, around 5.5 in 2004,[63] with rates in larger cities sometimes over 40 per 100,000"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder#Murder_rates_by_country

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

Therein lies the problem. There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy, just as there are those who will accuse others of attempting to gain political capital out of a tragedy, in an effort to thwart prevention of future outrages.
How do you tell the difference?

Perhaps by having an honest conversation about the tragedy, the various factors that contributed to it and open-minded assessments of the various options advanced to thwart similar tragedies occurring in the future. An intention by all sides to listen and hear others would be enormously beneficial, as would honest declarations of interest by those with interests in the outcome.
To me, that seems a far more productive strategy that an automatic retreat to pre-existing dogmatic positions which is what happens at the moment.

Yep, and everyone involved will claim to be taking part honestly. We know many politicians will use anything to their advantage, even if it doesn't address the underlying situation.

To restate for you:

How do we know we're having an "honest conversation about the tragedy, the various factors that contributed to it and open-minded assessments of the various options advanced to thwart similar tragedies occurring in the future[, where the] intention by all sides [is] to listen and hear others[?]"

OK then let me ask you a question: Is a solution to the problem of gun violence possible given the current political realities and the 2nd Amendment?

If you feel a solution is possible, please outline it. If you feel a solution is not possible at the moment, what needs to change in order to arrive at and implement a solution?