Arizona Congresswoman Shot At Public Event

Stop blaming the teaparty for this nut jobs actions. And new if you ever got out of your little box of ideology and into the real world you would not mass punishment does not and will not ever work.

Dumb.

Of course pointing fingers won't undue the tragedy.

I know that. I hope we all know that.

However, ever-so-unintelligent Maxse, it IS important to investigate and understand WHY it happened, for many reasons, but most importantly, to help prevent it from reoccurring in the future.

I, nay, no one is saying this gunman was a Tea Party member. HOWEVER, it is VERY obvious that he could have been heavily influenced by Sarah Palin and her nitwit army of followers. And if so, she needs to be held accountable, in some way.

preventing it from reoccurring in the future, I'm sorry but regulating guns isn't the answer you're looking for. Maybe getting rid of Sarah Palin, that might work.

lol

I would too, but I have yet to see, hear or think of anything that is not a knee jerk reaction that has a reasonable possibility of working or that isn't inherently cost prohibitive.

I got my conceal carry permit while in WA, but now I live in AZ where we no longer have conceal carry laws. I don't mind either way. In both cases Im not going to go out and kill anyone for any reason. I don't even hunt. I do like targets though (paper, bottles ect...).

If someone comes up with a reasonable answer I would vote for it.

I see your point and agree my examples were not well chosen. Better examples would be controlled substances or military grade explosives. Would the NRA like everyone to have access to rocket launchers? I mean if their take on the 2nd amendment's existence is as a deterrent to oppressive government, we're gonna need more than just a 12 gauge shotgun ... Those predator drones aren't going to be phased from me owning a .270

He could have been heavily influences by a number of things. Books movies voices in his head his upbringing Hitler the guy who beat his add every day for his lunch money. You have no basis for your argument that he was influenced by Sara or her parties. You are also not a doctor nor do you know this man or his mental state nor do you know me enough to be calling me dumb for that matter. This man did the crime he shouldn't will be punished I hope. Dont try placing the blame on others.

You're not hearing me.

I know and accept that regulating guns more heavily may not have the desired effect.

But what I also know is that our society is growing more and more angry and fed up with murder. Eventually, unchecked, this collective anger and frustration will climax and boil over.

So, since we've all agreed that the "Golden Rule" by itself is inadequate, and that imprisonment is an inadequate deterrent for mass murderers like the one in Arizona today, and that we can't seem to come up with any other ideas BESIDES stricter gun control .... logically, stricter gun control is what WILL happen, regardless of whether or not it has a high likelihood of preventing crime.

As I've tried to describe repeatedly, seemingly without notice and/or comprehension from you all, is that INACTION SETS THE PRECEDENT THAT EVENTS like the Arizona murders ARE TOLERATED.

Therefore, the government WILL act. You wait. Give this a few days, you'll see.

The first I agree with. The second I don't know if this applies, or I'm not sure how it applies. The third I would say is happening right now. First Obama was elected. This was a revolution of sorts and now the Tea Party movement is another revolution of sorts.

first of all America won't give 2 shits about 1 senator, secondly even if they did, it's not going to be enough of a force to cede our 2nd amendment, last I checked the courts were ruling in favor of it (DC pulling restriction on handguns awhile back or w/e)

secondly
no they won't, it would take too much support and it's way too low on the list for the government to do ***about it, it would take at least 1 more school shooting to get them even rustled, and I'll see nothing of the sort.

Even if by chance the government did impose new regulation, it would be overturned by the courts, unless you're suggesting they'll be able to get enough support to amend our constitution, which is laughable at best.

It's funny how some people scapegoat guns or religion for all the problems in the world instead of maybe influence or greed or any desire of their liking. Nationalism has sparked more armed conflict and caused more casualties in recent time than religion for example.

What Elana isn't comprehending is that the guns are not only not the problem, but if there was a way to get rid of all guns in this country then people will seek out alternative weapons to achieve what they want. Also when nobody but criminals have guns, there's no way to defend against something like people breaking into your home if they have guns. Gun laws not only don't solve the problem, they bring about new problems.

Edit: Anyone else seeing the Ann Coulter ads? Scary woman :-(

^this

I see no reason why A law abiding citizen shouldn't be allowed to own a rocket launcher in the proper place.

Weapons are of different capabilities and their requirements to own them should vary, I don't see the need to require strict regulations for a handgun or a shotgun/rifle, now an Ak-47, an rpg, a tank? sure regulate , just allow people to have them.

Dang Luz edited his post. I was going to have fun trying to defend my house against people with funs.

rofl sorry!

I'm kind of sleepy still but have to go to work in 30 minutes :-( I made that typo twice and knew someone saw at least one of them xD

Wat?

Sure is rednecks in here.

obviously one shouldn't be allowed to store one in a suburban neighborhood, but would be fine in like a house on 100 acres

What got nothing to say to me Elanabelle maybe you want to say none of us are hearing you again. Or maybe we can all 'hear' you just fine but we all just disagree with you ever think of that? Or are you actually so dense as to think your opinion is the only valid one.

This is opening a whole new can of worms, but I will go ahead and do it. But I'm with Jetackuu and wonder why I shouldn't be allowed to own a rocket launcher. Now lets be fair about this. Again I am ok with reasonable restrictions ie not to go destroy someones property with it.

Here is where I believe deterrence should happen, by making the punishment so unbearable to as to deter someone from the crime. I am going to go a little over the top here for illustrations sake, so please don't discuss my example, but the concept it portrays. In the Bible a person was killed if they raped someone. Death is a pretty strong deterrence and for something like rape I think it would make people think twice about doing it. If you added in obviously murder and then called vehicular homicide while DWI/DUI, then people would be a lot more cautious when headed to the bars. I would guess it would seriously lower, but not eliminate, rape and drunk driving.

While I am not advocating capitol punishment for rape or drunk driving, I am advocating some sort of severe punishment to use as deterrent. Since this has turned into a gun debate, I think that capitol punishment for gun related crimes should be considered (especially in this particular case)

And when the redneck that lives on 100 acres drives into town with his rocket launcher?

I see his point of view, I just disagree with it, entirely.

I even see Flion's, I just don't live in a fantasy world where nobody owns guns. If I could choose to live in a world where there were no guns and no nukes etc, let me have it, please. But there was such a world, we just killed each other with other weapons then, swords, knives, poison, rocks. It's not going to stop anything, just maybe less people would die.

"Dense", eh, Maxse ... if that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

This "just in":


Do you STILL really think this gunman wasn't heavily influenced by conservative/paranoid/Tea Party type rhetoric?

If so, yeah, you're pretty dense.

shoot him
edit: oh wait, you are too afraid to defend yourselves...

I disagree, capital punishment should never be considered, never.

I own many guns, try again.

then hush.

id say it could be reasonably kept anywhere as long as it was used (read - not fired) responsibly. Infractions on responsible use would need severe punishment. In keeping with the 2nd amendment, how am I supposed to defend myself against a tank (whether from a tyrannical government or from invasion)?

to an extent, but if it's kept in a residential neighborhood, who's to say it can't be easily stolen?

I'd say the same for any advanced weaponry, there's just some areas it probably doesn't belong. IDk that was more of an opinion and an idea not an actual "should be implemented" thing.

That is not new information it was posted on maybe page two if you could read or count that high for that matter.

I'm still trying to figure out what any of that quote even the bolder part has anything to do with the teaparties but hey I'm pretty dense maybe you could spell it out for me. Please continuing making up excuses for how this shooting is anyone's fault but the nut case who pulled the trigger.