1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I know. Guns don't kill people.... (chapter infinity minus a few)

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Simon_Cowbell, Feb 14, 2008.

  1. Barsuk

    Barsuk Active Member

    I suppose it was <a href="http://www.wyff4.com/news/15271515/detail.html">this kid's</a> fault, too. Eh, hondo? ::)
     
  2. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    I gotta believe that the chances of the kid killing his classmate in computer class with a knife or a lead pipe or a candlestick are significantly less than with a gun.

    Physically and psychologically, there is a big difference between pulling a trigger and stabbing or clubbing someone.
     
  3. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    How dare you allow logic to enter the argument!
     
  4. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Again I ask, what has changed in the last 20 years that has led to these shootings?

    Guns were easier to get years ago. Why weren't there shootings like this in the 50s, 60s and 70s?
     
  5. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    hondo,

    But, see, I dunno, you're kinda missing the point.

    I mean - do you think it's like <i> fucking profound </i> to point your finger at a "bad person" and say "You're a fucking bad person! Bah!" In Hebrews, it talks about moving beyond elementary teachings. I think the "people are bad fucking people" nugget of wisdom is pretty easily grasped by most sentient human beings.

    Let's take Congo, for example. Now, in the Congo, six million people have been murdered. Why? Because everybody over the age of ten is toting a gun around and blasting off bullets like it's piss from their whizzers. Now, me, I could say "yeah, man, some bad motherfucking people over there in the Congo" and that's solved, exactly, well, jack shit. Just like you saying "this is a little thug" solves jack shit.

    News flash to anyone who thinks this is ever - ever - an interesting argument: WE ALL FUCKING KNOW HE'S A BAD FUCKING PERSON.

    This is not a revelation. Nobody - aside from Roger Clemens - is running around blissfully naive of the awful, horrible world we live in. And since we've all settled on the fact that it kinda sucks, we can:

    A. Limit the damage of the suck-fest
    B. Eliminate the suck-fest

    Now, me, as a Christian, hey, I want "B." I also know, as a Christian, it'll never be that way. The world is fallen. It's designed to suck.

    So sue any of us for wanting to limit or lessen the damage by wondering whether the prevalence of guns could be addressed in such a way that bad people don't have such an easy time of hurting others.
     
  6. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    Check out the murder rates in large American cities in the 1970s and 80s. It wasn't, like, pretty.

    Beyond that, the influence of television and the war on drugs has altered the landscape since the 1950s and 1960s.
     
  7. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    Guns don't kill people, they just make it easier to do quickly and with less effort. I'm not naive enough to think that if we outlaw guns, shootings would stop. The existence of a law never stopped someone from doing anything they were intent on doing. But I do wish those people who wrap themselves around the 2nd Amendment felt that way about ALL of the amendments.
     
  8. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Could you explain that sentence a bit more?

    As a gun owner, I'd like to know what amendments I'm supposed to be against.
     
  9. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    Mostly the fourth and sixth, and I'm referring to politicians that can allow warrantless wire-taps and vote to authorize laws that, if the Constitution is viewed by a strict constructionist, would be unconstitutional.


    Amendment IV

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Amendment VI

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
     
  10. mike311gd

    mike311gd Active Member

    [​IMG]

    Guns don't kill people. I kill people.
     
  11. mike311gd

    mike311gd Active Member

    It depends on how strong your arm is.
     
  12. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    Pretty sure there were Inky. They weren't as widely reported back then. Didn't someone post a school shooting from the 30s not long ago?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page