You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Like I said before; The Second Amendment isn't a bad thing. Guns aren't evil or bad, just some of the people who get a hold of them.
Should this man own guns? No
The second amendment is what ensures American's have access to the guns, including the ones that shouldn't have them.
If access to guns was restricted to the extent that people were not allowed to physically own them, instead only rent them from the government for hunting and sport purposes it would be much more difficult for people like this to gain access to them. If people were only allowed to rent guns for sporting purposes, it would be impossible to add to the pool of illegal weapons available to criminals and lunatics through domestic sources. A decrease in the pool of guns available will raise the price of illegal guns dramatically, limiting those who have access to them and in turn decreasing gun violence in Canada.
Yes, I know many of the guns in the hands of criminals come in through the border, but every little bit helps.
I don't get why everytime someone goes off and does something like this that people have to look at their background and start drawing some sort of connection between their beliefs and their actions.
Here's an idea. Instead of looking at their political, religious or other affiliations, why not look at the one that really counts: they're part of the group of fucking lunatic psychopaths.
Stupid politicians saying it's somehow Palin's fault because she used crosshairs on her website are fucking idiots. What's next, saying all Muslims are violent and prone to becoming suicide bombers because of a few lunatics that do? Oh wait.... Assholes trying to take a horrible situation and use it for their own political gain or to take a shot at the opposition. Truly pathetic.
And taking away guns won't do a damn thing. People like this who want to wreak havoc have so many alternatives to use if they didn't have guns. Look at Timothy McVeigh. He didn't use a gun.
While I agree with you that politicians trying to take advantage of the situation for their own political gain is sickening, I don't agree with the rest of what you said.
Something indoctrinates and triggers people who commit horrible actions like this, mass shooters aren't born with a hatred of democratic politicians, they're given that hatred and those ideas by extremists. People like Rush Limbaugh, a man who spouts factually incorrect dogma over the airwaves, create an environment where someone with slight instabilities can evolve to a become a mass shooter. That's why many countries with more sensible governments than the U.S. outlaw media like fox news.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangonay
Stupid politicians saying it's somehow Palin's fault because she used crosshairs on her website are fucking idiots. What's next, saying all Muslims are violent and prone to becoming suicide bombers because of a few lunatics that do? Oh wait.... Assholes trying to take a horrible situation and use it for their own political gain or to take a shot at the opposition. Truly pathetic.
Like I said before; The Second Amendment isn't a bad thing. Guns aren't evil or bad, just some of the people who get a hold of them.
The second amendment was passed in 1791. Laws need to keep up with the times. at one point it was illegal to secretly record audio record of someone but it was 100% legal to record video.
If the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was still in effect the shooter would not have been able to purchase an extended clip and a lot less people would have died.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
The second amendment was passed in 1791. Laws need to keep up with the times. at one pont it was illegal to secretly recod audio record of someone but it was 100% legal to record video.
If the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was still in effect the shooter would not have been able to purchase an extended clip and a lot less people would have died.
"extended clip" /facepalm. If you don't know any about guns shut up before i post that video about the barrel shroud.
The states are so fucked. Apparently the Westboro Baptist Church is going to picket that little girls funeral.
__________________
Probably because he tells it like it is and knows hockey better than you two dipshits? People respect his opinions, not like you two dipshits? He has a solid income, not like you two dipshits?
I don't get why everytime someone goes off and does something like this that people have to look at their background and start drawing some sort of connection between their beliefs and their actions.
Here's an idea. Instead of looking at their political, religious or other affiliations, why not look at the one that really counts: they're part of the group of fucking lunatic psychopaths.
Stupid politicians saying it's somehow Palin's fault because she used crosshairs on her website are fucking idiots. What's next, saying all Muslims are violent and prone to becoming suicide bombers because of a few lunatics that do? Oh wait.... Assholes trying to take a horrible situation and use it for their own political gain or to take a shot at the opposition. Truly pathetic.
And taking away guns won't do a damn thing. People like this who want to wreak havoc have so many alternatives to use if they didn't have guns. Look at Timothy McVeigh. He didn't use a gun.
You kidding? Obviously the fact that he listened to Marilyn Manson was the reason why he did it... lol
Here's an idea. Instead of looking at their political, religious or other affiliations, why not look at the one that really counts: they're part of the group of fucking lunatic psychopaths.
Who is more likely to have members ready to commit murder? A group of people who dress up in Quiddich costumes and have Harry Potter re-enactments or a white supremest Nazi group?
Regardless of whether this caused anything or not, doesn't this seem kind of high schoolish? You'd expect "leaders" to act more grown up, no? How old is Palin.. 45-50? LOL WTF?
Watching his videos, this guy wants people to be literate so that they can understand their rights, rights which they dont know or understand which are higher then the law.
He wants us to dream about being in control of our own currency, and it looks like he's giving a grammar lesson all the while telling you to communicate in new ways and to recognize the system.
Oh and he says people are brain washed.
While I agree with you that politicians trying to take advantage of the situation for their own political gain is sickening, I don't agree with the rest of what you said.
Something indoctrinates and triggers people who commit horrible actions like this, mass shooters aren't born with a hatred of democratic politicians, they're given that hatred and those ideas by extremists. People like Rush Limbaugh, a man who spouts factually incorrect dogma over the airwaves, create an environment where someone with slight instabilities can evolve to a become a mass shooter. That's why many countries with more sensible governments than the U.S. outlaw media like fox news.
Cut the bullshit. What are you, party whip for the Dems? People with "slight instabilities"? Are you kidding? So we potentially have millions of Americans who are on the verge of committing mass murder and only need someone to properly motivate them with a good speech before they head on out?
You are just as bad as the politicians trying to use this for their own gain.
Countires with "sensible governments"? Which countires specifically do this? I'd love to move to a country where the government controls what you can and can't listen to or watch, instead of letting people choose for themselves.
While it is the "god hates fags" church, it seems to me from their record that they only seek to incite anger on themselves so that they can get people to attack them and then they can sue.
Almost all the members of the church are part of their extended family, and a great number of them are lawyers. Who needs a job when you can just scan the news and protest once every 3 months to get a multi-thousand dollar payout.
__________________
Probably because he tells it like it is and knows hockey better than you two dipshits? People respect his opinions, not like you two dipshits? He has a solid income, not like you two dipshits?
Psychological instabilities can be triggered or worsened by environmental factors, such as a crazy news anchor who insists the President of the United States was born in Kenya. Did I say that the shooter was not an extreme case, no I didn't; the birther movement in the United States is an example of what I am referring too.
Countries like Germany outlaw hate speech that have the potential to insight violence, while still protecting freedom of speech. For example, in Germany you can't scream "God hates Fags" at funerals, but you can question the Government. There's a huge difference between restricting freedom of speech for the protection of select social groups and eliminating it like China or North Korea have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangonay
Cut the bullshit. What are you, party whip for the Dems? People with "slight instabilities"? Are you kidding? So we potentially have millions of Americans who are on the verge of committing mass murder and only need someone to properly motivate them with a good speech before they head on out?
You are just as bad as the politicians trying to use this for their own gain.
Countires with "sensible governments"? Which countires specifically do this? I'd love to move to a country where the government controls what you can and can't listen to or watch, instead of letting people choose for themselves.
Last edited by MindBomber; 01-11-2011 at 08:31 PM.
The issue with survival is how much functionality she'll have afterwards.
I wonder how much mental acuity she lost. Her husband's an astronaut and she used to be a social worker who has now become a Senator. She's lost a lot, here's hoping she hasn't lost it all.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
