MightyMouse

The complex case works as well as the simple case. It is best to look for solutions to problems by first simplifying them. The intuitive solution emerges when the problem is simplified. Real data points to an increase in homicide rates when you increase the availability of guns. Homicide rates drop when you decrease the availability of guns. It really is that simple. Not the BS propaganda put out by pro-gun groups. Sure, if you add in large amounts of relatively cheap but addictive drugs, then you can have an increase in the homicide rate with a decrease in legally purchased guns. in my opinion, what happens to someone's brain when they are "heated" is certainly interesting, but I do not feel that it is important to consider what happens to someone's brain when considering whether or not to increase or improve control of guns. If we remove the availability of guns from a very large group of people and let them be or if we ease the availability of guns to a very large group of people and let them be, then which group will experience the higher homicide rate?

Dick's Sporting Goods issued the following release, "We are extremely saddened by the unspeakable tragedy that occurred last week in Newtown, CT, and our hearts go out to the victims and their families, and to the entire community. "Out of respect for the victims and their families, during this time of national mourning we have removed all guns from sale and from display in our store nearest to Newtown and suspended the sale of modern sporting rifles in all of our stores chainwide. "The modern sporting rifle looks like an assault weapon, although it isn't one. It was removed from all Dick's Stores. "We continue to extend our deepest sympathies to those affected by this terrible tragedy." Translation: We noticed a huge drop in traffic at this store. Gun sales are only a small part of our business and we would be fucking dumb if we threw away the baby with the bath water. We did anticipate this and readily slashed prices on gun merchandise right after the incident. In doing so we really didn't have to take anything off the shelves since we sold most of it to other potential homicidal maniacs in the area. We hope you come in and buy our other merchandise in spite of the fact that we almost sold a gun to a monster (Adam Lanza was going to buy a gun at this location but did not want to go through the back ground check). When the dust clears we will once again indulge in the delicious and ever-so-flavorful profits of "Modern Sporting Rifles". But until then, we want you to still come in and buy our other stuff. Taking out large numbers of people in public locations is apparently a sport (zdo this is flawed thinking). Maybe EA will create a new game called "Genocide" or "Elementary School " or "Mall Mauler". Maybe in the future the EA website can have a menu of different psychological disorders that you can choose to develop. It wouldn't be right to hem everyone into one single stress disorder. What if there are homicidal maniacs that do not want to kill on foreign soil? Should everyone be forced to attack soldiers? What if it is only appealing to you to kill unarmed people? These guys should be able to choose who, how, and where they kill. Life is about choices. I am a bitter bastard.

You believe the issue is that people have violent tendencies? This smacks of "guns don't kill people, people do". That is fine if you think it, but it seems like some lobbyists got you to agree without putting you on the payroll. I care about as much about why people have violent tendencies as I do about the reasons why people drink too much alcohol. The goal with drinking laws is to keep drunks off the road. The goal with gun laws is to keep guns out of the hands of violent people. People still drive drunk and kill people. No doubt. But, it is a lot less now that we have tougher drinking laws (please don't bother looking up the stats). We can achieve similar results with tougher gun laws. Only a drunken violent gun owner would not agree.

Zdo, Make it simple: 2 people with 1 gun each. A heated argument ensues. 2 people with no guns each. A heated argument ensues. 2 people: 1 has a gun and the other doesn't. A heated argument ensues. Which case is more likely to result in an accidental death? Least likely? Which case is more likely to result in an intentional homicide? Least likely? Which case is more likely to result in an accidental homicide? Least likely? The gun advocates would say that when everyone has a gun, the world is safer. The anti-gun advocates would say that we are safer with no guns. Reason is possible without emotion. Most rational people will rank the above properly. The bias is in favor of life. If we remove that bias and replace life with, say, profit, then there are other rational outcomes.

States with Higher Gun Ownership Lead Nation in Gun Death « Gun Law Forum http://www.vpc.org/fadeathchart09.htm

It is no wonder at all. WISQARS Details of Leading Causes of Death

Question: What is the last phrase you want to hear in the men's bathroom? Answer: "Hey, that's a nice dick".

The Euro is rising. There is a distinct difference between the Euro rising and it being strong.

Sorry about your mom. I suppose that if i were given a choice of how to die, accidentally hitting a tree would be first or second. It is the surprise and quickness that is enviable. Quick is the most horrible for the family, but self aside, quick is better than death by disease. Disease is painful for both the family and the victim. Anyhow, you do touch on a good point. In both cases, death by accident or crossfire, the person is gone. Is there really any difference? If you wouldn't be angry at the tree, then why should or ought you be angry at the assailant who fired the stray bullet?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU5fAGOVvEM]Police Brutality - Officer Beats Special Ed Kid - YouTube[/ame] Maybe it would be wise to pay extra to send your kids to safe schools. Schools that do not have police.

They should have"Fly at your own risk" flights. Cheap with no security. You get a box cutter with your ticket. So evryone has a box cutter. Let me see someone get out of his seat on that flight.

I only see ads for girls and cars.

One needs to look at all the data to make a fair assessment of the impact of changing a variable. It is not possible that if guns were banned that murder rate with guns would go up. I am sure this is a hypothesis that I could easily prove if I took the time. A few other variables to consider are drug consumption rates, changes in law enforcement, economic conditions, abortion laws, etc.

I don't agree. If a large gun toting male who eats a Burger King Whopper with Cheese every day tripped and fell on your I think the greatest impact to your body would result from the accumulated Whopper with Cheese consumption than it would from him carrying a gun every day. I would like to see a study on it.

Mind altering substances are a funny thing. People will do what it takes to self medicate. I agree that the unintended consequences of US drug policy is more crime and death and expense.

Today is going to be an awesome trading day in ES. Unfortunately, I can't participate because of other obligations.

Police Raid Gun Store Where Nancy Lanza Purchased Rifle After Owner Was Unaware That a Man Stole an AR-15 With Plan For a Massacre This is all a truly dark comedy.

Tams, A ban will have an impact. In Newtown's case, we are unfortunate that Adam Lanza's mother had guns. He did go to purchase a gun and if assault rifles were not available, then he wouldn't have been able to get one and the damage, at least, would have been less. Unfortunately, his second amendment advocate mother had one. Unfortunately for her, her guns did not protect her or anyone. If she didn't have one, he wouldn't be able to have one. I do not think the kid would have been able to obtain one if he couldn't have gotten it from his mother. It at least would have been harder and he may have turned to plan B. Not everyone who has guns is irresponsible. But, then, there will always be some who exercise poor judgement. One of the nuts in the Columbine massacre bought an assault pistol from someone who knew he was underage and he sold it to him anyway.

No one would ever learn Buddhism and think they way this guy does. The same is true for someone learning to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu., and etc. This guy was dragged through a watered down version of something. I am pretty sure it is Christian, but when you water it down it isn't Christian anymore. It is something else. It is rather clear that his religious believes are directly tied to his politics. He may think he is Christian, but he just isn't. In his mind there is a benefit of having firearms to quell his delusional fears even if from time to time it costs the lives of innocent people, recently twenty 6 year old children. I am no expert, but that doesn't sound Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or Hindi to me.

I hope you are posting this as entertainment. It is entertaining and I hope you have not developed an opinion from it. Its also entertaining that you label liberals - people who traditionally are champions of the poor as atheists and conservatives, people who are champions of the rich and all things right as non-atheist. Simply, you are entertaining. I would be even more amused if I could watch you speak while using roller skates

Christianity has no place on this thread. It seems like your mind jumbles all things together into one conservative doctrine in favor of the NRA.

Freedom for all! Except my black slaves until we have class warfare.

Connecticut store where Sandy Hook gunman Adam Lanza tried to buy rifle now has huge sale on ammunition | Mail Online maybe a boycott of Walmart, Dick's, Kmart, any and all other major chains that sell guns is in order. Certainly, guns are just a fraction of what they sell. A boycott would paralyze Christmas sales. New meaning to Black Friday. Great advertizing to have the Dick's Sale and the funeral pictures of the Sandyhook mourners. Awesome! I don't do Facebook, but someone should post a boycott to protest retail stores profiting from the sale of firearms to lunatics and people who allow access of their guns to lunatics. Since they have his application to buy a gun, it would be very interesting if, given his history prior to the massacre, if he would have passed a background check to buy.

Ok I reverse everything. Guns are awesome.

If you ask this guy he will tell you that he thinks he is a good dad. He spends time with his daughter, he is proud of her, he teaches her things, in short, he loves her. Poor girl is growing up with a skewed reality.