I said "Arm them". Because you'd only really be arming blacks who don't have guns legally. The majority of the ones that already have guns and are already committing acts of violence don't bother me - I have nothing to do with them, don't live in those areas and am not black. 90% of black crime is on other blacks. I have nothing to worry about. Arm the law abiding blacks. First, it's their right. Second, it might improve their plight. Regardless, your original comment about arming them making us all "run to our mommies" was ridiculous. And still is.
Yes, it was. "So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killerâs apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience. Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property. Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theaterâs entrance." http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater/
So are you arguing for the absolute right to carry concealed weapons onto private property, irrespective of the property owner's wishes on the matter? On the one hand, gun rights advocates say that schools are incredibly safe statistically, and that Newtown was a freak event, and that the one act of a deranged person shouldn't change policy for the entire nation. And on the other hand, gun rights advocates say that Newtown shows you that gun free zones only invite mass murder, except the events they cite they regard as freakish outliers. If gun free zones invite mass murder, why are there so few mass murders in gun free zones like schools?
I would argue that private business owners should be able to do what they want and the public can decide. That the killer went 20 miles out of his way to a a gun free zone... speaks volumes.
Not advocating one way or the other, just refuting your misinformation campaign. You said it was idiotic to claim killers seek out such zones. A highly intelligent killer did just that. The record needed correcting.
It really doesn't matter anymore. Washington is going lay down new laws and the good folks in Wyoming are going to obey them. Now if we can just get illegal immigration under control, I would not have to read about so many illegal Chinese and Central Americans here in the tri-state area.
the hardest smack down on ET since the guy who started the Romney is looking like the next President thread.
Opposing the death penalty soft on crime releasing repeat violent offenders more career criminals are among us free to continue praying on law abiding citizens, I thought this would be rather obvious. Even to you. perpetual welfare despising personal responsibility and accountability creates an entire class of individuals convinced they are entitled to other peoples money and property creating "gun free" zones which only invite mass murders 1)These zones only really exist in the minds of the ignorant fools who create them 2)They do invite mass murderers as the murderers have nothing to fear from the unarmed victims. When is the last time you heard of a mass shooting at a firing range or gun store? The idea that a gun free zone will be respected by someone bent on murder is what's idiotic. And yes the theater had a "no guns" sign on the door. Evidence suggests the shooter chose that particular theater because of the sign.
To be fair, you would have to agree, wouldn't you?, that there is not a single post here, from Kabong or anyone else, that suggests you should not, or "can't", own a gun. It seems most of the discussion has been centered around how to keep guns out of the wrong hands without infringing on our basic right to own them -- the Court in D.C. v. Heller has already put us on notice that the type of gun can be restricted without infringing on our right to own one. And it does seem there is plenty of support for restrictions among the public. Those who want no restrictions whatsoever --not saying that's you-- or want to advocate for every adult being able to carry a gun anywhere, no registration, no background checks, are free to do so. But I assure you that the national mode right now is not going to be accommodative of such positions. Nor will the idea that the probability of being a victim of one of these mass shootings is so small that it is not worth giving up any of our 2nd Amendment freedoms just to make a decrease in an already very slight probability. I must admit this latter argument held some appeal for me personally, until I considered it in greater depth. (See the data Tom Davis posted.) It seems the national mood is closer to what Cuomo is backing in New York than it is to what Kroeker is backing in Wyoming. The NRA hardliners, unwilling to give an inch, have so intermingled the absurd with what otherwise might have been reasonable, that few in a public forum will take them seriously. They will be pushed off into their own corner as lunatics. Their objective participation would be welcome, their petulant obstruction will not be. I see very low probability of any meaningful gun legislation getting through both House and Senate because of the current filibuster rule. (Unlikely to get out of the House, and if by miracle it did, a single Senator could block it!) Therefore I am virtually certain that if we get any federal action it will be in the form of an executive order. And that will surely be tested in the courts. And sadly, once again, because our Congress is non-functional, the grownups in the Court will have to fill the role that peoples' House should have filled. We are all best served by a rational discussion, recognizing that none of us will get everything we would want, and maybe not even most of what we want.