Tragedy in AZ: God be w/Rep. Gabrielle Giiffords and others

[S2M]

What I said, Stuie...is that one only needs a LONE handgun to protect himself....a person doesn't need a fucking Tech-9, or an uzi....and those pieces of paper are flawed in that they aren't specific enough. Too much open to interpretation. I'm sorry the Air Force didn't brainwash me into this non-feeling, gung-ho, killing machine that is you...The Few....The Proud....The Dead.

Ex-Marine?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FGZvFZdVbk

'I pull the trigger...and kill them dead.'

[Behshad]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Then just deal with shootings as part of the 225 years package

Beshad you are NOT an idiot, so quit acting like one.

If a person wants to inflict harm they will find a way to do so, regardless of having a firearm or not. He could very easily have used a molotov cocktail or a bat.

Look what was done on 9/11 with BOX CUTTERS...those were the weapons people had.

Are you serious?! Are you telling me that if this guy would've walked in there with a BAT he wouldve managed to swing that bat around and KILL 6 people and wound another ten or twelve people ?!
Who's acting like an idiot now

[RossValoryRocks]

What I said, Stuie...is that one only needs a LONE handgun to protect himself....a person doesn't need a fucking Tech-9, or an uzi....and those pieces of paper are flawed in that they aren't specific enough. Too much open to interpretation. I'm sorry the Air Force didn't brainwash me into this non-feeling, gung-ho, killing machine that is you...The Few....The Proud....The Dead.

Ex-Marine?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FGZvFZdVbk

'I pull the trigger...and kill them dead.'

Uh...you can't GET a tech-9 or Uzi without a VERY special kind of tax stamp.

Most people I know that carry firearms have 1 maybe 2 hand guns for protection,a shotgun for hunting birds, and maybe a rifle for deer and other big game. You know people who legally have machine guns? I doubt it.

Yeah the Few, the Proud, the dead...at least we have honor...and pride in our country...it is obvious you do not. I am far from brainwashed, other than knowing I could kick the shit out of you. Hey come to Pittsburgh next year for the Steelers/Pats game, we can find out if you can cash the check your mouth is writing ok?

If you are SO convinced that the Constitution isn't all that please find a member of congress and get it amended.

[RossValoryRocks]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Then just deal with shootings as part of the 225 years package

Beshad you are NOT an idiot, so quit acting like one.

If a person wants to inflict harm they will find a way to do so, regardless of having a firearm or not. He could very easily have used a molotov cocktail or a bat.

Look what was done on 9/11 with BOX CUTTERS...those were the weapons people had.

Are you serious?! Are you telling me that if this guy would've walked in there with a BAT he wouldve managed to swing that bat around and KILL 6 people and wound another ten or twelve people ?!
Who's acting like an idiot now

I didn't say that...can you READ? I said if the goal is the infliction of harm...you also missed the line about the FIREBOMB (aka Molotov cocktail). What if he had driven a truck into the store? Should we ban those things because people can use them to inflict harm?

And yes...a person can kill easily with a bat...maybe not 6 people but enough.

I am curious how you think gun laws could have prevented this?

[S2M]

What I said, Stuie...is that one only needs a LONE handgun to protect himself....a person doesn't need a fucking Tech-9, or an uzi....and those pieces of paper are flawed in that they aren't specific enough. Too much open to interpretation. I'm sorry the Air Force didn't brainwash me into this non-feeling, gung-ho, killing machine that is you...The Few....The Proud....The Dead.

Ex-Marine?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FGZvFZdVbk

'I pull the trigger...and kill them dead.'

Uh...you can't GET a tech-9 or Uzi without a VERY special kind of tax stamp.

Most people I know that carry firearms have 1 maybe 2 hand guns for protection,a shotgun for hunting birds, and maybe a rifle for deer and other big game. You know people who legally have machine guns? I doubt it.

Yeah the Few, the Proud, the dead...at least we have honor...and pride in our country...it is obvious you do not. I am far from brainwashed, other than knowing I could kick the shit out of you. Hey come to Pittsburgh next year for the Steelers/Pats game, we can find out if you can cash the check your mouth is writing ok?

If you are SO convinced that the Constitution isn't all that please find a member of congress and get it amended.

And you have the gall to ask me why I dragged your name into a thread awhile ago about people who have uncontrollable violent tendencies? Priceless....

[S2M]

Having a law does absolutely nothing....you must ENFORCE the law. Not just sit back and pat yourself on the back because you have passed gun-control laws...WOW! Novel enough of a concept for ya, Private Pyle?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kU0XCVey_U

[RossValoryRocks]

What I said, Stuie...is that one only needs a LONE handgun to protect himself....a person doesn't need a fucking Tech-9, or an uzi....and those pieces of paper are flawed in that they aren't specific enough. Too much open to interpretation. I'm sorry the Air Force didn't brainwash me into this non-feeling, gung-ho, killing machine that is you...The Few....The Proud....The Dead.

Ex-Marine?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FGZvFZdVbk

'I pull the trigger...and kill them dead.'

Uh...you can't GET a tech-9 or Uzi without a VERY special kind of tax stamp.

Most people I know that carry firearms have 1 maybe 2 hand guns for protection,a shotgun for hunting birds, and maybe a rifle for deer and other big game. You know people who legally have machine guns? I doubt it.

Yeah the Few, the Proud, the dead...at least we have honor...and pride in our country...it is obvious you do not. I am far from brainwashed, other than knowing I could kick the shit out of you. Hey come to Pittsburgh next year for the Steelers/Pats game, we can find out if you can cash the check your mouth is writing ok?

If you are SO convinced that the Constitution isn't all that please find a member of congress and get it amended.

And you have the gall to ask me why I dragged your name into a thread awhile ago about people who have uncontrollable violent tendencies? Priceless....

Not uncontrollable...if they were I would come hunt you down and leave you bleeding in the street somewhere...I am saying you have the balls to open your mouth on here and castigate people do you have the balls to do it in person?

[RossValoryRocks]

Having a law does absolutely nothing....you must ENFORCE the law. Not just sit back and pat yourself on the back because you have passed gun-control laws...WOW! Novel enough of a concept for ya, Private Pyle?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kU0XCVey_U

Go read what I said earlier dipshit...I said there are enough gun control laws...they need enforced. very top of this page actually...that's page 3 for numnuts like you.

Wow you just aren't smart are you?

[Behshad]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Then just deal with shootings as part of the 225 years package

Beshad you are NOT an idiot, so quit acting like one.

If a person wants to inflict harm they will find a way to do so, regardless of having a firearm or not. He could very easily have used a molotov cocktail or a bat.

Look what was done on 9/11 with BOX CUTTERS...those were the weapons people had.

Are you serious?! Are you telling me that if this guy would've walked in there with a BAT he wouldve managed to swing that bat around and KILL 6 people and wound another ten or twelve people ?!
Who's acting like an idiot now

I didn't say that...can you READ? I said if the goal is the infliction of harm...you also missed the line about the FIREBOMB (aka Molotov cocktail).

And yes...a person can kill easily with a bat...maybe not 6 people but enough.

I am curious how you think gun laws could have prevented this?

If the gun law prevents a punk ass 22 year old to go pick up a gun from the local wallyworld, and he has to go a strict interview where he explains why he needs the gun , it will certainly DECREASE the random shootings we see in this country.

[RossValoryRocks]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Then just deal with shootings as part of the 225 years package

Beshad you are NOT an idiot, so quit acting like one.

If a person wants to inflict harm they will find a way to do so, regardless of having a firearm or not. He could very easily have used a molotov cocktail or a bat.

Look what was done on 9/11 with BOX CUTTERS...those were the weapons people had.

Are you serious?! Are you telling me that if this guy would've walked in there with a BAT he wouldve managed to swing that bat around and KILL 6 people and wound another ten or twelve people ?!
Who's acting like an idiot now

I didn't say that...can you READ? I said if the goal is the infliction of harm...you also missed the line about the FIREBOMB (aka Molotov cocktail).

And yes...a person can kill easily with a bat...maybe not 6 people but enough.

I am curious how you think gun laws could have prevented this?

If the gun law prevents a punk ass 22 year old to go pick up a gun from the local wallyworld, and he has to go a strict interview where he explains why he needs the gun , it will certainly DECREASE the random shootings we see in this country.

We have those...he had this gun for awhile now as evidenced by the pictures from his facebook page I have seen posted. He didn't just run out and buy a gun and hour before he committed the crime.
Try again...

[Monker]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

actually, right about now....the idea of martial law, and a police state look pretty damn appealing. Get rids of the gangs, guns, drugs, and every other thing that is eating this country away from the inside.....

Well now we know where you stand...unfortunately with your big mouth you would be the FIRST one put up against a wall and shot.

You seem to actually think you are smarter than the founders...I can assure you that you are not. Not even close.

Jefferson said this:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

Washington said this:

”Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”

and this

”A free people ought to be armed.”

As for the Constitution it is far from outdated, and not just a piece of paper...it is an amazing group of ideas never duplicated in history.

But someone of your obvious limited education can't grasp that.

The even funnier thing is you took an oath when you joined the military to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...and now you rail against it. Makes you only a few steps up from the douche that leaked everything to that idiot from WikiLeaks.

Regardless of that, what is said in the Costitution, and what people like Stuie wish to ignore, is the part about a 'well regulated militia". The Constitution only GUARANTEES the right if you are part of a militia....which is why the supreme court has allowed certain gun control to be law. If you wish for it to be otherwise, then amend the Constitution to remove the bit about a militia.

[Monker]

I want to know what his agenda is and WHY he had to shoot all those people.

It appears the guy was just a nutbag, some of his writings and ramblings I've seen are incoherent.

So, you are saying he works for Fox News?

[RossValoryRocks]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

actually, right about now....the idea of martial law, and a police state look pretty damn appealing. Get rids of the gangs, guns, drugs, and every other thing that is eating this country away from the inside.....

Well now we know where you stand...unfortunately with your big mouth you would be the FIRST one put up against a wall and shot.

You seem to actually think you are smarter than the founders...I can assure you that you are not. Not even close.

Jefferson said this:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

Washington said this:

”Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”

and this

”A free people ought to be armed.”

As for the Constitution it is far from outdated, and not just a piece of paper...it is an amazing group of ideas never duplicated in history.

But someone of your obvious limited education can't grasp that.

The even funnier thing is you took an oath when you joined the military to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...and now you rail against it. Makes you only a few steps up from the douche that leaked everything to that idiot from WikiLeaks.

Regardless of that, what is said in the Costitution, and what people like Stuie wish to ignore, is the part about a 'well regulated militia". The Constitution only GUARANTEES the right if you are part of a militia....which is why the supreme court has allowed certain gun control to be law. If you wish for it to be otherwise, then amend the Constitution to remove the bit about a militia.

Sorry Monker...you are wrong...as usual...if you read what they founders wrote about it, they say that the PEOPLE are the MILITIA.

Federalist papers I belive...

In addition that is now how the Supreme Court has consistantly intepreted the 2nd amendment.

Try again idiot..

[Behshad]

Let's see Stu.

We currently have the laws that you support. 6 people dead. Your law failed. None of the 100 or so people in that grocery store had or used a gun to protect themselves or eachother. So your theory of having guns to protect yourself doesn't fly here.
Anytime there's a shooting like this , how come we don't have the people shoot back and kill the guy ?!
The laws your supporting simply belong to the WildWildWest era.

Anyone besides law enforcement , wanting to get any kind of guns , should go through a thorough interview and full psychological evaluation/examination AND provide valid reasons to qualify to carry firearms.

[RedWingFan]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

Bin-Fuckin-Go !

If that's what you guys want there are plenty of places that will supply. May I suggest North Korea? Have fun!

[Behshad]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

Bin-Fuckin-Go !

If that's what you guys want there are plenty of places that will supply. May I suggest North Korea? Have fun!

If you wanna blindly follow outdated laws , may I suggest you move to let's say Saudi Arabia , Jose ?!

[RedWingFan]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

Bin-Fuckin-Go !

If that's what you guys want there are plenty of places that will supply. May I suggest North Korea? Have fun!

If you wanna blindly follow outdated laws , may I suggest you move to let's say Saudi Arabia , Jose ?!

I'm not the one opposed to freedom and liberty here. You are the one longing for a totalitarian police state. No one is stopping you. Go.

[Behshad]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

Bin-Fuckin-Go !

If that's what you guys want there are plenty of places that will supply. May I suggest North Korea? Have fun!

If you wanna blindly follow outdated laws , may I suggest you move to let's say Saudi Arabia , Jose ?!

I'm not the one opposed to freedom and liberty here. You are the one longing for a totalitarian police state. No one is stopping you. Go.

I don't have anything against freedom. However with tragedies like what happened yesterday , I seek some changes to the laws ( yet my so called freedom still prevents me from achieving my goals and wishes ) , to prevent innocent people getting killed !

Freedom of speech , yet no one listening , makes that freedom pretty much worthless don't you think ?!

[RedWingFan]

Well I hate to tell all you control advocates...but unless you get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and the 225 years or so of judicial backing there is a limit to how far the government can go to control guns.

And yes if firearms are restricted from the ordinary person, the only people that will have them are the government and the criminals leaving the law abiding citizens no way to defend themselves from either.

Look...the 2nd amendment is there so the citizens can protect their property, and so they can protect against the government....it doesn't say a person can stockpile automatic weapons, or even have ONE sub-machine gun. a handgun should suffice. Let's be real here....all you Constitution and Bill of Rights advocates are beginning to be quite silly....both pieces of paper are outdated pieces of antiquity.....time to redraft both of them....

Bin-Fuckin-Go !

If that's what you guys want there are plenty of places that will supply. May I suggest North Korea? Have fun!

If you wanna blindly follow outdated laws , may I suggest you move to let's say Saudi Arabia , Jose ?!

I'm not the one opposed to freedom and liberty here. You are the one longing for a totalitarian police state. No one is stopping you. Go.

I don't have anything against freedom. However with tragedies like what happened yesterday , I seek some changes to the laws ( yet my so called freedom still prevents me from achieving my goals and wishes ) , to prevent innocent people getting killed !

Freedom of speech , yet no one listening , makes that freedom pretty much worthless don't you think ?!

Not worthless at all. There are laws to prohibit what happened. Could you reduce the possibility of future occurance by taking everyones liberty away? Maybe.

State sanctioned tyranny is FAR worse.

[Behshad]

Taking away guns from nutjobs doesn't take away your liberty. It just adds to your safety.

[RedWingFan]

Taking away guns from nutjobs doesn't take away your liberty. It just adds to your safety.

Unless the guy had a criminal record or some other valid reason to bar him from owning a gun, people will kill however they can. Whether it's filling a van with fertilizer or lopping peoples heads off with a sword.

[whirlwind]

9-Year-Old Victim Was a 9/11 Baby, a ‘Face of Hope’
By JOSEPH BERGER


Christina Green was on the student council of her elementary school, so on Saturday her mother’s friend thought she might enjoy seeing government in action — the local congresswoman meeting with constituents outside a supermarket near Christina’s home.

It did not turn out that way. A gunman shot Representative Gabrielle Giffords, leaving her unconscious and in critical condition, and his fusillade killed six others, including Christina, a 9-year-old who loved animals and volunteered at a children’s charity.

She was special from birth because she was born on Sept. 11, 2001, and she was proud of it, her mother said, because it lent a grace note of hope to that terrible day.

[Duncan]

It's being reported over here that the FBI are investigating whether there is a link between the shootings and gunsight graphics posted on a map that can be found on Sarah Palins website.

[Behshad]

It's being reported over here that the FBI are investigating whether there is a link between the shootings and gunsight graphics posted on a map that can be found on Sarah Palins website.

Gillford was on Palin's list of politicians she wanted " gone "

[whirlwind]

http://yesbuthowever.com/palin-website- ... t-5000203/

[whirlwind]

It's being reported over here that the FBI are investigating whether there is a link between the shootings and gunsight graphics posted on a map that can be found on Sarah Palins website.

Gillford was on Palin's list of politicians she wanted " gone "

That's too easy. The website was just used for some one's own agenda, imo. No way would she want what happened.

[Melissa]

This country is too big and too populated to take guns out of society.
Doing so would only put guns into the hands even MORE of people
you DON'T want to have them, such as criminals. The geniuses who
wrote the Constitution put gun ownership #2 only behind free speech.
They understood the importance of the government being kept at
bay from oppressing the people. You people who get all up in arms
(pun intended) about guns should understand they are tools and
ONLY the PERSON using it will determine it's purpose, good or bad.
Contrary to your liberal beliefs, guns in the hands of the RIGHT people
WILL save lives, and HAVE saved lives.

[S2M]

This country is too big and too populated to take guns out of society.
Doing so would only put guns into the hands even MORE of people
you DON'T want to have them, such as criminals. The geniuses who
wrote the Constitution put gun ownership #2 only behind free speech.
They understood the importance of the government being kept at
bay from oppressing the people. You people who get all up in arms
(pun intended) about guns should understand they are tools and
ONLY the PERSON using it will determine it's purpose, good or bad.
Contrary to your liberal beliefs, guns in the hands of the RIGHT people
WILL save lives, and HAVE saved lives.

Has anyone ever told you to go get bent? No? Well get bent!

[Behshad]

And the right people are the law enforcement !

[Melissa]

Nope S2M, you're my first "get bent", awe! Have I ever told you
to kiss my sweet ass?

And B, law enforcement IS a branch of the government. People who
truly understand the 2nd amendment and it's INTENT, understand a
government can be just as oppressive as a person.