Scots Taffer on 17/4/2007 at 02:42
Quote Posted by jbairdjr
What's a mong?
A mong is an idiot, which is precisely what StD is by being unable to resist wading in with his shit-slinging agenda.
BlackErtai on 17/4/2007 at 02:45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strontium Dog:...the "right to bear arms" is a right that should have died out when the British Empire did?
I guess whenever the British Empire does die out, we'll get rid of guns then, kthx. When historians from your own country argue that British Imperialism and the Empire are still as strong as ever (or at least not dead), you can't go around making dumb ass statements like that. Read some current British historical writing on India, and see how many of them believe that Britain's done with Empire. Really. Try it.
Anyways, nice job turning this thread about a tragedy into another "I'm a jack-ass"-a-thon. We give up, you win.
AR Master on 17/4/2007 at 02:55
.
SD on 17/4/2007 at 03:23
Quote Posted by Stitch
It appears you simply can't resist being that guy. Time for a long, hard look in the mirror, mate.
I'm just expressing an opinion. There are 10,000 gun homicides a year in the USA. Should we not discuss measures that could lower that number without people hiding behind an historical document that has lost all relevance? Isn't it time to accept that you're not getting invaded by the British any time soon and bring that country of yours kicking and screaming into the 21st century?
Maybe gun control doesn't work, maybe it's just a coincidence that there have been precisely zero gun massacres in Britain since handguns were banned, but would it be too much for me to expect answers to my questions without people descending into hysteria?
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
A mong is an idiot, which is precisely what StD is by being unable to resist wading in with his shit-slinging agenda.
Except I haven't been slinging any shit. Nor do I even have an agenda for that matter, unless "people shouldn't be shot to death" is an agenda now.
Scots Taffer on 17/4/2007 at 03:26
Sorry, you're possibly right, stirring shit or kicking up shit is what I meant (though I contend you were shit-slinging with your "mongs" comment, seeking to incite pro-gun-owners), but you're still being an idiot.
Gun control is such contentious issue at the best of times that to be bringing it up while people are in the midst of a tragedy is not only poor timing, but completely unnecessary. Yes, guns were used in this tragedy, but it is conceivable that gun control could not stop any of this from happening.
As for "it's a debate that needs to be had" or that line of reasoning, I'd say that you've probably been involved in enough of those to understand that the majority of Americans are entrenched in gun culture and it's probably never going to change, despite what many of us non-gun-culture people think.
And you definitely have an agenda, it's an agenda of rage - understandable perhaps but definitely misplaced.
Gingerbread Man on 17/4/2007 at 03:27
I deride your erstwhile comprehension of fecal-referent metaphor, sir.
SD on 17/4/2007 at 03:47
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
As for "it's a debate that needs to be had" or that line of reasoning, I'd say that you've probably been involved in enough of those to understand that the majority of Americans are entrenched in gun culture and it's probably never going to change, despite what many of us non-gun-culture people think.
I'm inclined to believe you may be right there. Guns may be too ingrained in American culture for simple restrictions on possession to have much of an effect.
So what say rather than just banning the possession of guns, we ban the
manufacture of guns. If guns don't exist, then people can't get shot. Of course, it would need to be a worldwide initiative, and something would need to be done about the military. I'm surprised nobody thought of this earlier.
Scots Taffer on 17/4/2007 at 03:51
Hah. I'm afraid that kind of thinking gets relegated along with the uber-pacifist "make love, not war" stuff that I wish wasn't so quickly dismissed. However, I fully accept that these are idealisms and not at fitting in a world where people enjoy carrying out violence and horror upon one another.
Ko0K on 17/4/2007 at 04:11
What we really need to do as a human race is find a way to channel hate and anger through something other than violence, and make it a permanently sustainable culture while we're at it. Easier said than done, I'm sure.
Anyway, when I heard about this on the NPR I had the same reaction as I did on 9-11: completely dumbfounded, like a deer in the ultra-brights. I would imagine it was a much more intense experience for many, no doubt. As of now, it makes me feel vulnerable to know that daily routines I take for granted may come to an abrupt end with no warning what-so-ever. Worse yet, I would certainly not want to be in the hell the kids' parents are in right now. I'd have to agree that tact is definitely something to keep in mind.
Stitch on 17/4/2007 at 04:20
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
I'm just expressing an opinion.
No, it's an opinion worded tactlessly at an inappropriate time. Don't play innocent.
The worst thing is
you do this shit all the time. At the end of the day do you really want this forum to be a more divisive and unpleasant place because of your interaction with it? Do you really dislike TTLG that much?
