patrick.net

PeterP, you refer to me and many others as Trolls, have you seen how many posts on this thread you made?. You can't help yourself fill peoples threads with your comments and call everyone else around you a troll.

Troll.

I have not used the T word for a long, long time.

I do remember calling Marina Prime a troll. That was a fun troll.

Doesn't an extra grip turn a hand-gun into an "assault" weapon in some cases?

It is just a label. Assault weapons are not necessarily machine guns. I guess most people have the image of a Ak-47/MP-5/AR-15 in their heads.

This isn't a "gun control" problem, honestly, it's a "big pharma" problem. We seriously need to examine what pharmaceutical companies are creating to "treat" people with mental illness.

Goran_K says

We seriously need to examine what pharmaceutical companies are creating to "treat" people with mental illness.

rooemoore says

Of course much better mental health services, support and education is the real answer. But that costs lots and lots of money (i.e. taxes) and much of what is needed could infringe upon personal liberties.

I agree with rooemoore.

There is medication available to treat mentally ill individuals. There are therapeutic treatments also available. However, it doesn't come cheap.

It costs anywhere from $100-$300 per hour for a psychological or psychiatric session and anywhere from $50-$250 per hour for a therapy session with a therapist. Some will work on a sliding scale, but these people are harder to find.

We need to start getting more insurance companies to cover mental health and we need to get those companies who offer limited mental health coverage to start offering better coverage.

I'm more scared of "mind altering drugs that may alter perception and cause mood swings" than I am an AK-47.

Goran_K says

I'm more scared of "mind altering drugs that may alter perception and cause mood swings" than I am an AK-47.

Other people feel differently and that doesn't mean their feeling is any less valid than yours.

Suburban Gal says

There is medication available to treat mentally ill individuals. There are therapeutic treatments also available. However, it doesn't come cheap.

I just don't think there is a pill for every illness.

Goran_K says

This isn't a "gun control" problem, honestly, it's a "big pharma" problem. We seriously need to examine what pharmaceutical companies are creating to "treat" people with mental illness.

This is a load of crap. You can't pretend that prescription drugs are the stole cause of antisocial behavior and that mental illness wouldn't exist otherwise

Suburban Gal says

Other people feel differently and that doesn't mean their feeling is any less valid than yours.

I'm not sure I was invalidating anyone else's feelings.

Homeboy says

This is a load of crap. You can't pretend that prescription drugs are the stole cause of antisocial behavior and that mental illness wouldn't exist otherwise

I never made those points. But considering that "Batman killer", Eric Harris, and Adam Lanza were all prescribed mental illness drugs, perhaps it's time to take a closer look at what big pharma is creating to treat people for mental illness.

Call it Crazy says

rooemoore says

How about a ban on assault weapons?

What is your definition of "assault weapon"? This is a widely used term and I'm wondering on how you describe them.

Like most laws, arbitrary lines must be drawn with the help of professionals. For example, who determines the mph that constitute speeding on a particular road? It isn't an exact science, but it is still necessary to determine a limit for public safety.

For assault weapon classification, I think the expired law is a good place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

Call it Crazy says

Peter P says

I just don't think there is a pill for every illness.

and sometimes the pill CAUSES the illness...

They call it a side-effect.

After 9/11 we gladly changed our entire world in order to keep ourselves safe. We did this even though planes don't kill people, people kill people. We've done everything to keep people from using planes to kill people. We changed our laws, gave up our constitutional rights, we forbid people to fly for just looking cross eyed and we've allowed ourselves to be searched in areas that we formerly only allowed to be explored by our most intimate partners. We have spent ourselves into eternal hock implementing security and starting wars designed to kill the "boogie man". But let someone murder 27 people and the mere mention of making changes to protect ourselves becomes something akin to castration. We are willing to sell our souls to protect ourselves from a boogie man who flies a plane but we dare anyone to even suggest that we protect ourselves from the boogie man that lives right next door.

I am praying that medical science researchers find a way to give men the size penis they really want. Maybe then men will be able to feel powerful knowing that the gun between their legs is finally adequate and no longer feel the need to compensate. Until then we can only extend our compassion to those who are trying to fulfill that which God slighted them on. I'm sure a small dick is a terrible burden to bear.

Buster says

I'm sure a small dick is a terrible burden to bear.

How are you so sure?

Buster says

I am praying that medical science researchers find a way to give men the size penis they really want.

Just turn off the email spam filter and the solution will appear.

Call it Crazy says

rooemoore says

For assault weapon classification, I think the expired law is a good place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

Here is what has been said about the Ban directly from your link above:

...."Expiration and Effect on Crime

This is true. Others have said there have been positive effects because fewer assault weapons are in the public and the cost of weapons in general went up.

The point is why does someone need a weapon that is solely designed to take out several people in just a few seconds? Your logic is that because gun crime didn't rise ("due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban ... the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small....") we should just continue to allow weapons that are extremely potent and not needed for personal protection.

In effect, your argument against an assault ban is that because non-assault crime is so high, the assault weapon crimes like this one and Virginia Tech can't put a dent in the crime stats. My point is that in these cases and others like them, if the perpetrators had to use non-assault weapons, few people would have died. And if more and more weapons are produced and enter the market, isn't the likelihood of deranged killers getting their hands on automatic weapons with large clips that are easy to reload going to become even easier?

One trained person with a regular hand gun could have taken out this kid in short order.

Last years there were 33,808 traffic related deaths in the USA. There were only 101 in Estonia.

Ban cars!

Irrelevant, traffic related deaths have nothing to do with 1st degree murder.

Over 10K murders accredited to guns.

How many 1st degree murders did cars commit?

None, because cars don't intentionality commit murder, they drive people from A to B, although people who have guns do murder over 10K times a year.

To the dead people and their families they are the same.

Or not... then we should focus on the people and not the tools.

Peter P says

To the dead people and their families they are the same.

FACIST!

Guns are the issue. Not cars.

Again making false equivalences and creating fake strawmen is from your fascist playbook.

What is overexertion?

I am surprised so many people are poisoned. Accidentally I presume?

Car accidents and Gun Murders are not equivalent, your creating a starwman.

You guys are pathetic.

Why don't you put a statics for heart disease deaths, aids, lost of limbs!
Suicides, just keep going with the FALSE Equivalences.

Keep up your memeberships with the NRA!

The domain dependence of some people is astonishing.

How about food related deaths! from salmonella.

Mad Cow disease
Ovarian Cancer
Breast Cancer

There is no comparison to gun MURDERS!

How about the statistics of domestic violence on woman with guns, 12x more likely to be murdered.

Self-driving cars can save many lives.

Wait, the chart is for accidents. Does it include intentional deaths and illnesses?

the topic of discussion is what again you TROLLS?

Call it Crazy says

Peter P says

I am surprised so many people are poisoned. Accidentally I presume?

Yea, accidentally, by their wives!!!

LOL! Now I need to stop my wife from being inspired.

Why do some people think that intention matters (murder vs accident) yet they think the tools should be banned?

Call it Crazy says

121212 says

Car accidents and Gun Murders are not equivalent, your creating a starwman

Great, you're finally learning!!!! Cars kill way more people then guns.

Way more people own cars and use them way more than GUNS.

Your a fool.

What if we include homicides and illnesses?

why not include colds, flu and sneezes, it fits your data model.

did you guys get an education?

Call it Crazy says

That's been my whole point. If the true intention is there to harm someone, it doesn't matter what the "tool" is... they will inflict carnage with what ever they can get. Sure, a gun is a easy "tool" for that chore, but so is many other items like I posted in the past.

its far easier to do harm with a Gun, BECAUSE it's designed to KILL!!

A car is not designed to KILL. A car is designed to get your from a to b. They are also used much more often.

by your own moronic rationale you should ban condoms, they kill billions of children!

by your own moronic rationale you should ban condoms, they kill billions of children!

Personhood begins at birth or incorporation. Condoms do not kill. I support the right to abortion.