At least 32 Dead at Virginia Tech

[Black Jack II]

but

are you basically saying the problems in Africa can for the most be blamed simply on tribalism?

Yes.

Also for those that brought up the gun control side of this, which is a waste of space as well all know who on this forum fall into what and where, so why rehash it, this may fall into the avenue of a illegally purchased firearm as this crazy b@stard spent some serious time in a mental institution in 2005.

The question is, why did not the auto dectect system in VA pull this info and/or does mental institution/psychological problem data not configure into that states system.

[BoulderDawg]

The question is, why did not the auto dectect system in VA pull this info and/or does mental institution/psychological problem data not configure into that states system.

Medical information (Especially psychological treatment) is private in this country. Hopefully it's not going to show up on anybody's database.

[Dark Knight]

also notice how often this type of "mad gunmen kills everybody" thing happens in the state compared with the uk


now look at our gun laws




oh but no

the answer is to have more guns

christ


don't u guys learn anything ?

how many gun deaths were there in the UK before the gun bans and how many last year? The same for Australia.

The anti gunners want to say gun control works but dont give the full story. The UK and Austrailia didnt have a big gun problem before the bans, Aulstrailia had a little over 300 before the bans in 1996, and had 250 last year.

We have a more violent culture, our problems are not guns but social.

[Eddie]

but are you basically saying the problems in Africa can for the most be blamed simply on tribalism? thats very disheartening. corrupt governments really aren't to blame? who exactly is pulling the strings there?

i think its a combination of a few things.

ill start a new topic later tonight after class.

[B-Rad]

Guns will never be completely banned here. It'd be nice if a complete ban actually worked, but it doesn't seem realistic to me. Just seems it'd take guns out of the hands of people who need them for protection more than criminals. Violent criminals being criminals probably aren't too concerned with whether something is illegal or not.

Also, you never know when it might be necessary for citizens to be well armed (to protect themselves from foreign or domestic government). May seem like science fiction, but it's kind of hard to predict what things will be like 100 or 200 years from now. That constitutional right might come in handy someday

In this particular case, this kid was pretty darn effed up. Who's to say he wouldn't have found out how to get a gun illegally, or resorted to some other form of terrorist type attack (ordering poison over the internet, building a home made bomb, etc.) I don't think this is one of those cases where a law change clearly would have made much of a difference.

Gore lost because of gun control?....Hardly. Gore lost because he did not have the support of all true liberals.

Also, because Clinton couldn't keep his pants on...

[Dark Knight]

Who said anything about democrat or republican? The weak knee dems are as conservative as the republicans. In fact I refer to a democrat as a republican who's pro choice!

Gore lost because of gun control?....Hardly.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/...rol/index.html

"The last significant gun control measures to make it through Congress were the Brady bill in 1993 and the assault weapons ban in 1994.

And what happened? Democrats lost control of Congress for 12 years. President Clinton said the gun lobby had a lot to do with his party's defeat. Democrats have been gun-shy ever since."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070417/...ng_politics_dc

"But few candidates have wanted to aggressively tackle the issue since Al Gore lost the presidency in 2000 partly because of his gun control stance that analysts said tipped key swing states to Republican George W. Bush."

[BoulderDawg]

The word "Partly" plays a big role here. Gore lost due to a 100 different factors. One being that he couldn't even carry his home state. However the vast, vast majority of liberals voted for Ralph Nader. Had Gore just have had a third of these votes he would have won.

[Dark Knight]

It was so close, if guns were not an issue, he would have won.

I understand there are many other issues. Gore also blamed clintons problems as part of it.

Look at the first Bush, he won because reagan was so popular, everyone figured we would have more Reagan years.

[BoulderDawg]

I don't believe guns were an issue at all. Any voter who voted against a candidate just because of his pro gun control stance was never going to vote for the democrat in the first place.

[Royal Dragon]

Gore lost because he is a Dorky Duffass...and he didn't have an intern who likes cigars.

[Dark Knight]

I don't believe guns were an issue at all. Any voter who voted against a candidate just because of his pro gun control stance was never going to vote for the democrat in the first place.

Lot of good pro gun Democrats out there, also alot of anti gun Republicans out there, actually the Republicans leading for pres nomination are anti gun.

As a gun issue guy I will vote for the one who will not end guns. I live in WV and we have some good pro gun Dems that I voted for.

[Black Jack II]

Lot of good pro gun Democrats out there

Yes there are some pro-gun Democrats and its nice to have them but I would not stress that they are vast in number. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee, Brad Henry of Oklahoma, and Dave Freudenthal of Wyoming come to mind as pro-gun dem's.

also alot of anti gun Republicans out there

Rudolph Giuliani comes to mind. One main reason he is not getting my vote if it comes that time.

As a gun issue guy I will vote for the one who will not end guns

Same here.

[rogue]

Medical information (Especially psychological treatment) is private in this country. Hopefully it's not going to show up on anybody's database.

Privacy be ****ed, you are not being forced to buy a gun. Psychological treatment should factor in allowing someone to purchase a gun.

[Royal Dragon]

No, then anyone could be denined because they are deemed looney...and ANYONE can be called looney for no other reason that they dissagree or have a differing opinion.

For example, if I were to go out to the pond behind my appartment,and kill a goose, bring it in bleed it and pluck all it's feathers off, cook it and eat it, I'd be considred sick and demented, BUT if I were in Kentucky on a farm or in the back woods, i'd be considred crazy for NOT doing something like that, especially if I happened to like roast goose and the nearest store that might have one frozen was an hour away.

[Dark Knight]

I was reading an article about a soldier who was stationed at FT Devins (when it was open) He applied for a conceal carry permit. Mass is a May Issue state where they do not have to give you a permit.

The police did a check on him and found he went to school in the 8th grade with somone who is now a felon.

so he was turned down for knowing a felon, even though the kid was not a felon back then (If the soldier even knew him, or remembers him).

So the Army trust him with a M-16, gave him a security clearance, he is ther as part of the defense of this country. But a police chief who will look for any reason not to issue a permit will find one.

So if you went in for counciling for marriage, and the police see you went to a councilor, they can now say you are unstable and cannot have a gun.