The guy who shot at the congregation in the Unitarian church said it was because of their "liberal" views. Nice, huh?
Printable View
The guy who shot at the congregation in the Unitarian church said it was because of their "liberal" views. Nice, huh?
I live in Knoxville. Such a sad and tragic thing to happen anywhere!:(
They are suppose to be analyzing that guy today to find out just how "crazy" he is. In my opinion you have be at a certain level of nuts to do something like that. Sounds like he had several issues going on. He's unemployeed and his food stamps were about to run out plus a neighbor says he talked to her last year about how he hated his parents for making him go to church (geez, he's 58) and how he thinks the Bible is contradictory.
:( Yes so sad & tragic.. Just Horrible.. I just dont get people anymore.. :mad:
This tragic shooting and the fire burning by Yosemite -- started by someone target shooting.
Why are we so obsessed with guns?????
What really blows my mind is that the Unitarian Universalists (at least the ones I've known) are about the most mellow,tolerant bunch I've seen; that's why they follow that particular path. They don't bother anybody. I feel so bad for those kids who had to see such a tragedy.
That's really sad. :( Why on earth was he allowed to have a gun to begin with!! Yes, I know that is a stupid question, as I just saw a programme about how easy it is for ANYONE to get a weapen in USA - this however, was about smuggling weapens to Mexico, and even legitimate gun shop owners were part of it! :rolleyes: :mad:
I think that was the guy's problem, he felt they were too tolerant.Quote:
Originally Posted by smokey the elder
:o Which goes for the True saying of :: The More I Get To Know Some People The More I Love Love My Animals & Cherish them Dearly..
I don't care how crazy he is.
Lock his worthless a$$ up in jail. he won't need the food stamps in prison. he can get three squares a day.
A y es... blaming inanimate objects instead of the psycho people that do these things. let's just give him a pat on the back and send him on his way.
Lock him up... and throw away the key.
too bad prison farms are seen as "cruel and unusual punishment". Then he could work to earn his keep and would be providing a service to the community he wronged. there should be more of them
Actually we have the death penalty here in TN. On the local news I've heard them discussing the possible charges - they are waiting for the guy's mental evaluation. Also they are talking about this being a hate crime. He left a long letter in his car (he didn't expect to walk out alive) and if he specifically mentioned a group - gays, unitarians, something like that - then this could also be charged as a hate crime. I think the fact that he murdered two people is enough - put him away!
Yikes, I just watched the local evening news and learned that the nut job shooter is from my hometown. He lives here in Knoxville now - like me - but he grew up where I did, about 35 miles west of Knoxville. It's a small town and I don't know him but I'm sure my Dad knew his family. My parents owned an appliance store and knew almost everyone back then.
I don't see anyone here excusing him or blaming the instrument of death he used.
I just hope they will also catch the psycho who set Yosemite on fire -- target shooting. Same inanimate object. So unnecessary. Look him (or her) up as well and throw away the key.
The guy could have done the same (or worse) by driivng a vehicle into the church. I don't see how the inanimate object used has anything to do with it.
Curious as to how they link the Yosemite fires to target shooting. I've been shooting hundreds of times, never set anything on fire.
They aren't viewed that way everywhere. One prison in New Hampshire that had fairly spacious grounds offered gardening as an option for prisoners who had behaved WELL. Not only did they prefer watering and weeding to staring at the TV, but the prison sold some of the vegetables and served some in the cafeteria, so they made AND saved money.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
Work is good medicine, once a sick person figures out they want it. And fresh produce is always a good deal. But this guy sounds like the hospital should definitely be the first stop, or he'll just go around beating and strangling his fellow prisoners.
Love, Columbine
Oh...that old chestnut about cars. See....cars have a purpose...transportation. Guns have a purpose...Killing. Real simple if you think about it...A by-product of many useful objects can be killing...knives, showers, rope, toys. Guns have only one purpose and one by-product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
But of course, you are, I am sure, more of an authority on what started the fire than those investigating it!
Unlike you, Sara, I wasn't questioning whether or not it was started by target shooting (If someone who does something for a living states what they believe as fact, I tend to believe it, unlike you) I was questioning how they linked it to target shooting. Unlike some who take the MSM at face value, I'd like to see something a little more in depth before I take it as gospel.
The only thing in any of the reports about the yosemite fires I found on the web was a single sentence stating that they had traced the fire to target shooting. In the thousands of rounds I've sent downrange, and the millions of rounds I've been responsible for going downrange, the only fires I've ever seen started were from tracers, which are normally military use only.I've never seen a range fire started by Bubba with his shotgun.
yeesh that's a little scarey! Every single person I met in my old (Unitarian) church was pretty open and caring. That's pretty much the only thing they had in common, but still.
I think our culture is just gun obsessed. Heaven forbid you revoke the rights of the people to own as many of them as they want as well. That's just so "un-American". (that was sarcasm)
Too many guns in the hands of too many people who shouldn't hold anything sharper than pencil.
Someday it would be nice if people would stop judging groups of people, or things, by the lowset common denominator. ALL people.
In the United States, we have a God given and 2nd Amendment confirmed right to Keep and Bear Arms. The reason for this is clearly defined by a vast majority of our founders. It is not about hunting, target shooting etc. It is about EVERY human's right to defend themSELVES from tryanny no matter what form it takes. Should this right be removed, we are no longer truly free. All our other rights are simply on 'loan'.
I pray daily that I will never need to use my firearms to protect myself and/or my family. Or worse, protect myself from tyranny of government. But if necessary I can and I WILL.
Further, for a great many people here, we just grew up in a culture where firearms were not 'taboo'. They were just another part of living. ANYthing that is sensationalized can be made to be seen "poorly". For a great many of us, it is just a part of who we are. Part of the American culture. Not that American culture is taught or revered anymore.
"Take away a peoples culture and they are easily persuaded."
Karl Marx
So, to the anti-gun folks out there... There are MANY gun control type laws out there. Why not enforce those, rather than make new and absurd ones. Or, why must you try to impose your will on us? I personally would want nothing of imposing my will on you.
"A people who are willing to give up a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security shall have nor deserve, either."
Benjamin Franklin.
But one must consider that the founders of this nation were not envisioning a world like ours. I have no problem with someone owning a gun if they know how to use it, care for it, and keep it away from those who don't. It's these people with military issue weapons that bother me. The founders never meant for us to have machine guns in our houses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
The primary arguement of the anti-gun types is that the 2nd Amendment is ONLY applicable to service in a militia. I could go into what a milita is, but that is not the point here. If that arguement was indeed true, then the founders DID intend for the people to possess military weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by lady_zana
I own military weapons, legally. Does that mean I bother you? A honest, law abiding citizen, well trained in their use?
Make all the gun laws you want. They never have and never will do squat to deter crime, because criminals by definition do not follow the law. A disarmed and defenceless citizenry are nothing but chattle.
But their idea of a military weapon would have been vastly different from a 2008 idea of a military weapon because they could not have dreamed of the technology we have created.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
I have a friend who is in the military. She has a couple small military issue handgun. I have no problem with that because she knows how to use them and how to keep people who don't from messing with them. What I have a problem with is the huge machine guns that people have in their house. I don't see any reason why someone would need something that looks like a rocket launcher in their home to defend themselves.
I don't see how the technology improvements make a difference. The same arguement could be made all through history. "Sure, a musket is OK, but a RIFLED musket?" "Ok, a rifled musket is OK, but what about a lever action rifle" And so on and so forth. It should be about the paradigm of the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by lady_zana
But, a little sensation much with the "HUGE machine gun" thing? How many people do you know with a 'huge machine gun' in their home. What do you define as a huge machine gun? Rocket launcher? Huh? Do you honestly know anybody who owns a 'machine gun'? BTW, the legal definition of a machine gun is a 'self loading weapon that will repeatedly fire while the trigger is depressed. I only know one person who has a license for such a thing. They are very difficult to obtain, as they should be.
Getting back to the point...I don't want to argue the merits of the 2nd Amendment. There are valid points on both sides of the argument. The point is this is an example of man's inhumanity to man, and if the guy did not have a gun, and had so much hate, he'd use a bomb, a knife or a crossbow to kill people.:(
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by smokey the elder
it doesn't matter the means... what matters is that this HAPPENS at all. How can someone HATE so much that they would just take the lives of innocent people without blinking.
Ah...the second amendment. Kind of like a shield, then a weapon, all at the same time, depending on who is arguing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by smokey the elder
I think that the problem IS man's inhumanity to man, and that includes my opinion that people that kill (leaving aside self defense, and perhaps a few other noted exceptions) are mentally unwell to begin with. So, imagine an honest, law-abiding, citizen, trained in weaponry (sic) going off the deep end. It happens. While guns might not be the problem, I don't see too much blunt instrument killing taking place. When is the last time we read about a mass knifing taking place? Or, a mass baseball bat event? Ten people killed with a broom....I guess it could happen, but, it seems that a gun is much more prevalent.
I AM concerned about my neighbor's "right" to carry a gun. His/her "right" has a way to irrevocably influence my family's life, to me, without a justifiable use. A handgun in the city? WhatEVER for?
I don't understand your first paragraph. (And I also don't think you are being truthful.) I believe the fire inspectors. You questioned it, I didn't. Perhaps, just perhaps, as I live in California, it is covered more extensively here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
How many rounds have you shot downhill in California, during high fire danger and during an epic drought? I live on the edge of Camp Pendleton and I can tell you there are frequent brush fires there from target practice.
So, if it had never happened to you, you don't believe it. If you have never seen it, it doesn't happen. Got it.
p.s. What is MSM????
I cannot disagree about the problem being man's inhumanity to itself. We are a imperfect bunch and will always be that way. However, I refuse to believe that more than a very SMALL portion of us are the type who would commit thes unspeakable acts. Which brings me back to my point about judging entire groups based on the very small percentage of people who commit evil acts. I believe VERY strongly in the concept of individual liberty and responsibility. It is a free person's DUTY to strive to take care of themselves. If you place the responsibility for your well being into another's hand, well, you take a risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataholic
Read up on violence in the UK. They pretty much banned almost all firearms. So it turns to knives. Next, watch them ban knives. It turns to sticks and stones.
So why 'punish' the VASt majority of responsible people for the acts of a very, very few?
Well, the chances of you being murdered by a person with a firearm are WAY, WAY lower than that of being killed by a drunk driver. Yet, I bet you don't fear my 'right' to drive.Quote:
I AM concerned about my neighbor's "right" to carry a gun. His/her "right" has a way to irrevocably influence my family's life, to me, without a justifiable use. A handgun in the city? WhatEVER for?
I do understand the concept of hoplophobia, which you obviously have. It is the duty of me and my fellow responsible gun owners to behave in a manner which might help alleviate that fear. It is also too bad you very rarely hear about the c. 2.5 MILLION violent crimes that are prevented every year by a law abiding gun owner. A vast majority of those situations are defused with out even having to fire the weapon.
A handgun in the city? The only time I ever needed to use a weapon to protect myself was in a city. All I did was produce it and off he ran.
Finally, I love my family too much to put their safety into anyone's hands but my own. You are free to choose otherwise, but it would be wrong for YOU to make that choice for me.
I do believe that is Main Stream Media.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
I tend to see points to both sides of the gun arguments.. But I think a lot of the problem lies in how much more violent and unstable people seem to be. I know some of it could be a case of we see it more because it's reported more, but it just seems to me there are a lot of people snapping and going on rampages these days compared to when I was younger. We could take squirt guns to school and no one would think anything of it. Now it can have serious repercussions.
This article I just saw tonight doesn't involve a gun but is just as shocking, if not more to me. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3896502
OMG :(Quote:
Originally Posted by K9soul
that is just ... disturbing.
What makes KIDS do things like that and over a girl?
I don't care how young they are they are very very sick and I hope they spend the rest of their lives confined.
WOW
I don't do long distance reading comprehension instruction, Sara.Quote:
How many rounds have you shot downhill in California, during high fire danger and during an epic drought? I live on the edge of Camp Pendleton and I can tell you there are frequent brush fires there from target practice.
As I said in my other post, I have never seen target shooting start fires EXCEPT FOR TRACERS WHICH ARE NORMALLY MILITARY USE ONLY.
Actually, if you are drinking and getting behind the wheel of the car, I DO fear your "right" to drive. (Driving is actually a privilege in the US, and not a "right"). And, I take the necessary precautions in that fashion- I avoid the streets during what seems to be a high probability time for OVIs- holidays and weekend nights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
That example doesn't exactly fit with the topic much, anyhow. Many, if not most, of us require a car. That same thing can't be said of carrying a gun.
What exactly happened in a city that caused you to need to pull your weapon? I can't imagine carrying a weapon with a child.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
I love my family in a similar fashion, I can assure you, and feel the same way- I don't want YOU to make the choice for ME, either. It is an argument that works both ways.
It was about 12 years ago, when I lived in Florida. So this was before we had our child. Still, now that I have a child, it is even more important for me to be able to protect them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataholic
As for not imagining carry a weapon with a child, that just proves you are a hoplophobe. Nothing wrong with that, but it just means you do not understand what it means to be a RESPONSIBLE gun owner. I was raised with them. From a very early age my father taught me that they are not toys and to respect them for what they are. I was taught how to SAFELY handle, operate and maintain them. I plan on doing the same with Hannah.
If you make them not a taboo thing, take away the curiosity... Perhaps if you educated yourself a little about firearms, you might be a little less apprehensive about them. I mean, it is the first thing I do when I don't understand somerthing, I try to educate myself about it first.
Thats the thing. You DO have the CHOICE to not own a firearm. But I am pretty sure you would advocate to take away my choice, no, my RIGHT to own them. Now, my owning a firearm is in NO way a threat to you. Unless of course you ever posed a threat to me.Quote:
I love my family in a similar fashion, I can assure you, and feel the same way- I don't want YOU to make the choice for ME, either. It is an argument that works both ways.
It is a shame that law abiding Americans cannot trust other law abiding Americans and assume good before evil.
"No free man should ever be denied the use of arms. If for no other reason than to defend himself from tyranny of government."
Thomas Jefferson
Finally, let me make one thing abundantly clear. I pray without ceasing that I will never have to use my weapons to protect myself or my family. But I will be damned before I put my and my families safety into anybody's hands but my own. That is not a matter of trust, as I know we have generally excellent law enforcement here. The issue is they are 99.9% likely to NOT be there at the moment I need them.
Why does not agreeing with someone mean I don't understand something? I am reasonably intelligent, and have an ability to comprehend- even if I don't support- someone's opinion.
I am a HUGE breastfeeding advocate. Does that mean everyone that doesn't support MY position is ignorant about the benefits of breastfeeding? That they are wrong, or, a bad parent if they don't follow a child-led approach to weaning? No, it means they don't support my position, that they feel differently.
I don't like guns (as much as one can affix a human emotion to an inanimate object). I don't agree with hunting, I don't agree with carrying a weapon, I don't agree with your interpretation of the 2nd amendment...that doesn't mean I don't understand, though.
Fair nuff'. I see your point. So, I suppose you do not have to agree with those things. Just understand that I am a HUGE advocate of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. When you really research it, the intent of the Founders was and is crystal clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataholic
So, while it is perfectly fine for you to feel the way you do, the 2nd Amendment IS the law of the land. And, as the recent Supreme Court decision has said, it is a individual right. So, I would prefer if you not try to impose your will upon we law abiding gun owners. Just as I strive to live my life in a way where I do not impose my will on you.
Instead of gun control.... How about we focus on CRIMINAL control?
We could get into hunting and how controlled hunting is actually a good way to keep animal populations healthy... Or how hunting groups do more to preserve habitat and maintain healthy animal populations than PETA or the USHS could ever dream of... I am sure that is WAY outside of the scope of this discussion. :)
It is the law of the land...and there has been, in the past, other laws that were challenged and sucessfully overturned because of people with differing opinions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
So, while I will respect your will, I cannot agree to not challenge the law, your will, my neighbor's will, etc, by voicing my opposing opinion.
A lemming I am not. And, I recognize that about you, too. :D
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Cataholic
I would almost welcome an attempt to "repeal" the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps we could, once and for all, be done with it. One way or the other...
I say this because there are simply WAY too many gun owners who would not stand for it. It would quite literally, IMHO, spark another revolution/civil war.
As a side note, I would like to thank you for keeping this civil. Most of the time when I debate this topic, it gets ugly and I get called names. LOL
The only name I can think to call you is "Annie" as in "Annie get your gun". :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
I am really tempted to deep-six this thread...mainly because it is starting an internet WWIII among people I think of as friends.