dumbfuckism on full display here...

[Luddly Neddite]

Mention "dumbfuckism" and look who comes strolling in, like a moth to a flame.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Its what we've all come to expect from you.

 

[liarintheWH]

Mention "dumbfuckism" and look who comes strolling in, like a moth to a flame.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Its what we've all come to expect from you.

He was obviously talking about Truthmatters.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Hey you know what we needed? Another thread whining about people whining about gun control. I don't think I've seen one yet on here.

so what? the mods will allow people to express their thoughts for a bit and then bring some control to the situation.

why don't you let people live their lives and not assert control?

What are you talking about? I'm genuinely thrilled at yet another thread with the same talking points and the same faux rage. So much originality and intelligence flowing here.

Its hard to take seriously anything said by someone picking their nose.

I don't care if its Frank Zappa or the Queen of England.

It screams out loud that the writer of the post isn't all that sharp.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Mention "dumbfuckism" and look who comes strolling in, like a moth to a flame.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Its what we've all come to expect from you.

He was obviously talking about Truthmatters.

Nope.

No mod would post that. Its below them.

 

[Oddball]

Mention "dumbfuckism" and look who comes strolling in, like a moth to a flame.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Its what we've all come to expect from you.

He was obviously talking about Truthmatters.

Well, I did end up in a dumbfuck sammich, of sorts.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

My question is why don't these schools have security?

They did.

He got around it by breaking a window.


We could turn our schools into prisons.


I don't really see how a ban on the most powerful weapons would not have reduced the death toll. The kid got the weapons from his mother who legally obtained them, its not like he had street connections. He was limited by whatever selection was in his law abiding mother's arsenal.

I definitely see the argument that gun control won't prevent gun crimes among career criminals, who usually use unregistered illegal guns to begin with - but fact of the matter is most mass killers like this use legally obtained weapons and are practically limited to those choices.

 

[daveman]

Very simply, we have a nation that absolutely does nothing for the mentally ill untill they go completely off. And we also have a nation awash in weopons, very easy access to such weopons.

And a bunch of people that believe the answer is even easier access to more weopons yet.

Time for some real action. Both on the mental health end, and on the ease of access to weopons.

I simply will not tolerate the right wing nonsense about second amendment rights on this issue. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the government has the right to protect citizens by limiting the type of weopons and who can own them. It is time to get the people weopons off the streets.

I agree. Weopons should be banned.

There is, however, a Constitutional right to private ownership of weapons, so they can't be banned.

 

[daveman]

libs calling for gun-control measures that would, in no way, have prevented the Connecticut tragedy...

typical dumb-fuck libs...

Sorry, but human dog shit like you is being scooped up and thrown out.

We're done with you and your kind.

 

[blastoff]

A while ago I read Chicago had already exceeded the number of murders this year vs. last. Don't remember the to-date total at the time but it was nearing 450 as I recall. And the city has tried everything from ratcheting up gun laws to offering cash for guns turned in, but folks continue to get killed or wounded every single day there.

If nothing else we should learn that increased gun laws don't mean a damn thing.

 

[Pogo]

i am liberal. i don't support more gun legislation. the solution is deeper than that. i wish it were as a simple as passing laws.

As do we all, but "simple" is all simpletons understand. That's why they come up with these strawmen about "waaah, they're gonna take my guns away" like a baby clutching its pacifier.

Somebody in another thread pointed out that it's always the right wing nuts that begin the ad hominem. After perusing this board for a week and a half certainly including the OP here ("dumbfuckism on full display here... typical dumb-fuck libs" posted before anyone says a word), I have yet to see an exception to this rule.

 

[NLT]

right and you are exemplifying intelligence right now? don't think so.

Don't you think it's intelligent for people to say the same fucking things over and over? I certainly do. Hey maybe you should consider starting a thread about people whining about gun control. Haven't seen that yet.

From the guys who has started a total of 13 topics on USMB?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Hey you know what we needed? Another thread whining about people whining about gun control. I don't think I've seen one yet on here.

Then stop whining about gun control.

There, you're welcome.

 

[waltky]

Sen. Chuck Schumer on Gun Control...

Schumer: ‘We Could Be at a Tipping Point’ on Gun Control
December 17, 2012 – Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who wrote the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and authored the original assault weapons ban in the House, said Sunday that the shooting massacre in Newtown, Conn., “could be the tipping point” in advancing gun control in Congress.

“Well I think we could be at a tipping point for two reasons: a tipping point where we might actually get something done. First, this was not a single incident. It followed a series of others. In the last few months, we’ve had mass shootings in Oregon and Wisconsin and Colorado,” Schumer said in response to CBS’ “Face the Nation” host Bob Schieffer asking, “Where do you see this going?” “When the public sees these as isolated incidents, they’re less upset than when they occur one after the other, and the public will not accept, the public will not accept as a new normal one of these incidents every month – these mass shootings,” the senator said.

Twenty-year-old Adam Lanza killed 20 children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday after murdering his mother at their home. “Second, of course, it involved children, and it’s so poignant to see those pictures, and I read the story in the newspaper where the families waited in the firehouse, and when they found that a young child had survived, they called the parents out, and there were other parents waiting. What agony! What horror! So I think we can get something done,” Schumer said.

Schumer proposed reinstating the ban on assault weapons, limiting the size of clips to no more than 10 bullets per clip, and making it “harder for mentally unstable people to get guns.” “I think we have to do things that protect the Second Amendment rights of legitimate gun owners, but three things that we should focus on: We don’t know the details yet, so you can’t say that any of them would have stopped this incident, but you can say they are parts of the pattern,” Schumer said. “One is to ban assault weapons, to try and reinstate the assault weapons ban. The second is to limit the size of clips to maybe no more than 10 bullets per clip. And the third would be to make it harder for mentally unstable people to get guns. Each has had something to do with these other incidents – obviously assault weapons,” he said.

“The clips – you may remember when Jared Loughner in the Gabby Giffords shooting tried to reload. That’s when he was tackled. And it seems most of the people who were involved had mental instability. So those are the three areas that I think we will focus on, and I’m hopeful that there can be some kind of change,” Schumer added. Schieffer said he tried to get a Republican from the Judiciary Committee to appear on the show, “but all of the members were either unavailable or said no.”

Source

See also:

Schumer: Pro-Gun Control Advocates Have to Admit There Is a Right to Bear Arms
December 17, 2012 – Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday that progress will be made on stricter gun control laws when both sides meet in the middle, starting with pro-gun control advocates, who must admit that there is a right to bear arms.

“First, those of us who are pro-gun control have to admit that there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms. I know that my colleagues on the pro-gun side say, ‘How can the liberals, how can the left say the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th Amendments should be read expansively and the 2nd Amendment should be seen so narrowly through the pinhole of, ‘Well, it’s only militias,’” Schumer said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Host Bob Schieffer asked: “I’d like your view on why is it that it is so hard to get anything done in this area, because you know it’s not just that Congress is reluctant to pass laws. Members, as we found out this weekend when we tried to get guests to come and talk about this on Face the Nation, people are just reluctant to even discuss it. It’s the thing that I think they’re more reluctant about this than they are about raising taxes when you come right down to it.”

Schumer, who wrote the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and authored the original assault weapons ban in the House, proposed reinstating the ban on assault weapons, limiting the size of clips, and making sure mentally unstable people can’t get guns. “Well that may well be true. We’ve been gridlocked. You have both sides off in a corner, and I, as someone who wrote the Brady law and was the House author of the assault weapons ban, spend more time trying to stop bad things from happening than being able to do good things,” Schumer said. “But I think we need a new paradigm, Bob. It’s not any one person making another speech or whatever. We need a new paradigm ‘cause both sides are in a corner, and they could come to the middle,” he said. “And the NRA and other groups even further to the right have engendered fear in the average gun owner. In large parts of America, guns are a way of life that, you know, the left wants to take that hunting rifle that your Uncle Tommy gave you when you were 14,” the senator said.

Also, Schumer said, the right must admit that “no amendment is absolute.” “Once we establish that there is a constitutional right to bear arms, we should have the right admit – and maybe they’ll be willing to admit – that no amendment is absolute. After all, the 1st Amendment has limitations – you can’t scream fire in a, falsely scream fire in a crowded theater. We have limits on libel and pornography,” he said. “Every amendment should have some balance and some limitation, and if we’re together, we can come to the middle on that, maybe we can make some real progress, instead of each side being off in their corner – one side saying, ‘Ban guns. Get rid of guns,’ and the other side saying, ‘Don’t you touch anything about guns,’” Schumer said.

Source

 

[LoneLaugher]

We need to ease up, folks. Change is needed. We will have to abandon our talking points and get it done.

Has this latest massacre jolted anyone into a desire to solve the problem? Anyone?

 

[theHawk]

People just want a solution to this problem. Liberals knee-jerk reaction is to call for gun control, even though it will never work, especially in this country.

My question is why don't these schools have security? We have cops giving out bogus traffic tickets all over the place, but we don't have cops or security at schools? We pay property taxes and state/fed taxes that supposedly go to our schools, they can't hire security with all those millions of dollars?

my understanding is that this is a lock down school. it was 'secure'...

Then how did he just walk into the school with a rifle? Did he kill a security guard?

 

[theHawk]

i am liberal. i don't support more gun legislation. the solution is deeper than that. i wish it were as a simple as passing laws.

I agree. I keep saying that I believe we should treat this as an issue of gun safety. But, if we really want our people, our children to be safe, we need to address that in a serious way.

The gun nuts say we need more guns but its obvious that more guns has not worked so far and it would be ridiculous to believe that something will suddenly change that.

If they want more guns, they should go out and buy more guns. Nothing is stopping them. And, nothing stops them from blowing away a mass killer but that doesn't happen either.

(In all the mass murders we've had in the US, I've found two examples of an ARMED bystander trying to stop the shooter. OTOH, there have been multiple instances of UNarmed bystanders trying and succeeding in stopping the carnage.

So, go ahead and buy all the guns you want but that has shown itself to be wishful thinking on the part of all the Mighty Mice.

Its obvious that "more guns" hasn't worked? All these bloodbath incidents have happened in "no gun" zones. Law abiding citizens CAN'T take guns to these places, which is exactly why the derranged asswipes go there to massacre people.

There are plenty of stories of people shooting bad guys with their legally owned firearms. Happens all the time in Texas, home invaders get shot quite often here.

In the case of schools, I am not saying we need to arm teachers and staff with AR-15s, but something needs to be done. If teachers don't want guns, at least carry a stun gun/tazer. It would be better than nothing for situations like this.

 

[blastoff]

We need to ease up, folks. Change is needed. We will have to abandon our talking points and get it done.

Has this latest massacre jolted anyone into a desire to solve the problem? Anyone?

Sure. You come up with a solution for predicting who in society is going to be the next person to snap, and thereby prevent some tragedy from taking place, and I'll be with you 100%.