Re: At Least 10 Dead at a Community College Shooting In Oregon..

[kingstonlake]

We cut the mental health budget.

Even assuming we had the budget, how would this play out exactly? So would we read the country of mental illness with a bigger budget?   Would we identify only those who are interested in purchasing guns and check their mental health?  Good lovers will never agree to that.

Do the gun owners and prospective owners voluntarily submit to psychological testing?

How does this diversion towards fixing mental health play out?

We're getting to a point where you can't really deny the advantages of such a thing.

[CheesySpartan]

Even assuming we had the budget, how would this play out exactly? So would we read the country of mental illness with a bigger budget?   Would we identify only those who are interested in purchasing guns and check their mental health?  Good lovers will never agree to that.

Do the gun owners and prospective owners voluntarily submit to psychological testing?

How does this diversion towards fixing mental health play out?

We're getting to a point where you can't really deny the advantages of such a thing.

What about the illegal gun owners who are the problem??? Because shootings with legal guns account for 20% of gun related homicides in this country

[Vlad]

Even assuming we had the budget, how would this play out exactly? So would we read the country of mental illness with a bigger budget?   Would we identify only those who are interested in purchasing guns and check their mental health?  Good lovers will never agree to that.

Do the gun owners and prospective owners voluntarily submit to psychological testing?

How does this diversion towards fixing mental health play out?

We're getting to a point where you can't really deny the advantages of such a thing.

I'm all for sending these lunatics for psychological testing! The fact that they feel they need to have multiple guns of all varieties to protect against the government (or whatever they're afraid of) pretty much gives away the fact that they need their heads examined.

The problem is how would you practically get them to agree?

[The_Dude]

When people say stuff like lower magazine capacties

We're getting to a point where you can't really deny the advantages of such a thing.

I'm all for sending these lunatics for psychological testing! The fact that they feel they need to have multiple guns of all varieties to protect against the government (or whatever they're afraid of) pretty much gives away the fact that they need their heads examined.

The problem is how would you practically get them to agree?

I mean, didn't the Founding Fathers specifically wrtie the 2nd ammendment to protect the citizens from complete tyranny?

Sorry but most people aren't willing to give up essential liberty because of a few tragedies.

[Watch Out Pylon!]

Did you ever graduate high school? Just wondering because for the most part you are far and away the dumbest poster on this board. Don't feel too bad though, someone has to be.

Well since you asked, 4.0 gpa in high school (3 sport Varsity Athlete) and I attend Michigan State. I'm a baller with an opinion, I have more money then you and my sperry's don't give a fuck. Any other questions poor, lonely bitch? Did you run out of food stamps early?

[Vlad]

When people say stuff like lower magazine capacties

I'm all for sending these lunatics for psychological testing! The fact that they feel they need to have multiple guns of all varieties to protect against the government (or whatever they're afraid of) pretty much gives away the fact that they need their heads examined.

The problem is how would you practically get them to agree?

I mean, didn't the Founding Fathers specifically wrtie the 2nd ammendment to protect the citizens from complete tyranny?

Sorry but most people aren't willing to give up essential liberty because of a few tragedies.

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny. Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to make it a fair fight?

[Turtleneck]

When the framers wrote "well regulated militia," what did they mean by regulated and who gets to do the regulating?

[The_Dude]

When people say stuff like lower magazine capacties


I mean, didn't the Founding Fathers specifically wrtie the 2nd ammendment to protect the citizens from complete tyranny?

Sorry but most people aren't willing to give up essential liberty because of a few tragedies.

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny.  Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to make it a fair fight?

I, for one, refuse to become a complete sheep to the government and give up essential liberty.  Period.

Good day, sir.  

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny.  Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to make it a fair fight?

I, for one, refuse to become a complete sheep to the government and give up essential liberty.  Period.

Good day, sir.  

In other words "rush isn't going to give me that particular response talking point until tomorrow's show, so you're just going to have to wait."

[The_Dude]

I, for one, refuse to become a complete sheep to the government and give up essential liberty.  Period.

Good day, sir.  

In other words "rush isn't going to give me that particular response talking point until tomorrow's show, so you're just going to have to wait."

Nope. Its as simple as my statement. I am not willing to give up essential liberty so many have fought and died for. Thanks.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

In other words "rush isn't going to give me that particular response talking point until tomorrow's show, so you're just going to have to wait."

Nope. Its as simple as my statement. I am not willing to give up essential liberty so many have fought and died for. Thanks.

And your statement is assinine.

But whatever. This is all pointless. You defending it is pointless, anyone arguing for logic is pointless. It's all pointless. Everyone knows that you already won and not a goddamn fucking thing is going to happen except well get back together in 2 weeks and do it all again.

[Turtleneck]

When people say stuff like lower magazine capacties


I mean, didn't the Founding Fathers specifically wrtie the 2nd ammendment to protect the citizens from complete tyranny?

Sorry but most people aren't willing to give up essential liberty because of a few tragedies.

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny. Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to make it a fair fight?

You are contradicting yourself.

First you say our political institutions are insulated from tyranny. Then you say the balance of power between the people and government is so skewed that the people could never resist government if it turned tyrannical.

So, if the balance of power is skewed to that extent - where we could not resist a tyrannical authority - our government is no longer rooted in consent. Consent is not possible when the balance of power is so incredibly uneven. If we revoked consent, if we no longer found government to be legitimate, government could simply coerce us to obey its authority.

In other words, the government you describe is nearly tyrannical because it can govern without the consent of the people.

[CheesySpartan]

When people say stuff like lower magazine capacties


I mean, didn't the Founding Fathers specifically wrtie the 2nd ammendment to protect the citizens from complete tyranny?

Sorry but most people aren't willing to give up essential liberty because of a few tragedies.

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny. Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to

make it a fair fight?

"Almost 300 years"...LMFAO...give or take 50+ yrs

[Turtleneck]

In other words "rush isn't going to give me that particular response talking point until tomorrow's show, so you're just going to have to wait."

Nope. Its as simple as my statement. I am not willing to give up essential liberty so many have fought and died for. Thanks.

You willing do so every day. It's cute you think otherwise.

[The Pantry]

If Bob was serious he'd be stuffing bulletproof vests into library books instead of 10 dollar bills

-OTPT

[Vlad]

In other words "rush isn't going to give me that particular response talking point until tomorrow's show, so you're just going to have to wait."

Nope.  Its as simple as my statement.  I am not willing to give up essential liberty so many have fought and died for.  Thanks.  

You do realize the government has a missiles and drones right?? I hate to break this to you but you really don't have the "liberties" do you think you do.

But you do have the right to vote. That has proven to be pretty effective in preventing government tyranny. At least for the past 250 years or so.

Seriously, is it really the plan to fight the government with guns??? LOL

[The Pantry]

Nope.  Its as simple as my statement.  I am not willing to give up essential liberty so many have fought and died for.  Thanks.  

You do realize the government has a missiles and drones right?? I hate to break this to you but you really don't have the "liberties" do you think you do.

But you do have the right to vote. That has proven to be pretty effective in preventing government tyranny. At least for the past 250 years or so.

Seriously, is it really the plan to fight the government with guns??? LOL

Have nothing to add to this. Just wanted to save Vlad's words before he edits them

[Turtleneck]

Oh wow, democratic institutions!!!! How nice of them!!!!

[duffy munn]

Threads like this make me happy that I really don't have an opinion on most everything political.

[InTenSity]

Threads like this make me happy that I really don't have an opinion on most everything political.

Everyone has an opinion. You just happen to have the opinion that your opinion doesn't matter.

[duffy munn]

Did you ever graduate high school? Just wondering because for the most part you are far and away the dumbest poster on this board. Don't feel too bad though, someone has to be.

Well since you asked, 4.0 gpa in high school (3 sport Varsity Athlete) and I attend Michigan State. I'm a baller with an opinion, I have more money then you and my sperry's don't give a fuck. Any other questions poor, lonely bitch? Did you run out of food stamps early?

How did you make all of YOUR money, baller ?

[Turtleneck]

Threads like this make me happy that I really don't have an opinion on most everything political.

I, too, have no opinions about binding decisions made by a small number of people imposed on all members of society.

[The Pantry]

Fuck all the anal political twats

[Vlad]

Yeah except that was at a time when our government was still in infancy stage, checks and balances had not been tested, there was no structure for law enforcement, and the guns and cannons were pretty much the only weapons in existence.

Almost 300 years later, I'd like to think that our system of government has proved to be pretty foolproof against tyranny. Or do you really believe that judge in Lubbock Texas who thinks Obama is going to invade Lubbock one day ??

And if the government ever did invade it's own country, or even specific pockets within the country, it feels to me like the government has a huge advantage now. They have these things called tanks and Humvees and helicopters and fighter jets and bombers and drones ... Do you really think a few militia groups are going to fight the government with their fancy guns??

Or do you feel private citizens should have access to all those same weapons as well, just to make it a fair fight?

You are contradicting yourself.

First you say our political institutions are insulated from tyranny. Then you say the balance of power between the people and government is so skewed that the people could never resist government if it turned tyrannical.

So, if the balance of power is skewed to that extent - where we could not resist a tyrannical authority - our government is no longer rooted in consent. Consent is not possible when the balance of power is so incredibly uneven. If we revoked consent, if we no longer found government to be legitimate, government could simply coerce us to obey its authority.

In other words, the government you describe is nearly tyrannical because it can govern without the consent of the people.

Your paranoia would have some merit If our government just came from an alien ship somewhere. But as I understand it we actually get to vote for our government officials every two years or so. We have governments at the local state and federal level and there are checks and balances between the various branches of government.

Paranoia and guns… Can you see why the rest of us are concerned more about you and your type, than with the tyranny of our ELECTED officials?

[duffy munn]

Threads like this make me happy that I really don't have an opinion on most everything political.

Everyone has an opinion. You just happen to have the opinion that your opinion doesn't matter.

Probably true. One thing I know for sure is that spouting my opinion ( or lack there of) on a message board wasnt going to prevent what happened in Oregon.

[InTenSity]

Everyone has an opinion. You just happen to have the opinion that your opinion doesn't matter.

Probably true. One thing I know for sure is that spouting my opinion ( or lack there of) on a message board wasnt going to prevent what happened in Oregon.

I hope you don't secretly post on 4Chan. Even then I doubt you would have changed his mind.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

Everyone has an opinion. You just happen to have the opinion that your opinion doesn't matter.

Probably true. One thing I know for sure is that spouting my opinion ( or lack there of)  on a message board wasnt going to prevent what happened in Oregon.

Yeah. I had a long post typed out. I axed it. No one cares. I hate politicized bullshit.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Probably true. One thing I know for sure is that spouting my opinion ( or lack there of)  on a message board wasnt going to prevent what happened in Oregon.

Yeah. I had a long post typed out. I axed it. No one cares. I hate politicized bullshit.

I care.

[InTenSity]

Probably true. One thing I know for sure is that spouting my opinion ( or lack there of)  on a message board wasnt going to prevent what happened in Oregon.

Yeah. I had a long post typed out. I axed it. No one cares. I hate politicized bullshit.

I care. As long as I agree with you. Otherwise go Fuck yourself commie.

[Gomer]

Well since you asked, 4.0 gpa in high school (3 sport Varsity Athlete) and I attend Michigan State. I'm a baller with an opinion, I have more money then you and my sperry's don't give a fuck. Any other questions poor, lonely bitch? Did you run out of food stamps early?

How did you make all of YOUR money, baller ?

His dead dad gave it to him.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

Thanks for caring guys. 

TL;DR - compromise is necessary.

[CheesySpartan]

Obama and others were quick to jump on this tragedy and promote their agenda...SMH...where the heck were you EVERYDAY for the last 20+ years when we avg 25 gun related murders a day in this country???

#ICare

[The_Dude]

Obama and others were quick to jump on this tragedy and promote their agenda...SMH...where the heck were you EVERYDAY for the last 20+ years when we avg 25 gun related murders a day in this country???

He should go to Chicago....

[Turtleneck]

Vlad, I see you're an arm

You are contradicting yourself.

First you say our political institutions are insulated from tyranny. Then you say the balance of power between the people and government is so skewed that the people could never resist government if it turned tyrannical.

So, if the balance of power is skewed to that extent - where we could not resist a tyrannical authority - our government is no longer rooted in consent. Consent is not possible when the balance of power is so incredibly uneven. If we revoked consent, if we no longer found government to be legitimate, government could simply coerce us to obey its authority.

In other words, the government you describe is nearly tyrannical because it can govern without the consent of the people.

Your paranoia would have some merit   If our government just came from an alien ship somewhere. But as I understand it we actually get to vote for our government officials every two years or so.  We have governments at the local state and federal level and there are checks and balances between the various branches of government.

Paranoia and guns… Can you see why the rest of us are concerned more about you and your type, than with the tyranny of our ELECTED officials?

My type? Clearly what I wrote went over your head. I should not be surprised.

Our country was formed on the basis of consent. Government exists because we allow it to exist. Through participation in the political institutions you refer to, we continue to grant consent. What I suggest is that consent is now an overrated concept. Why? Because, as you point out, government possesses vastly superior physical capabilities that give it a coercive power that threatens consent. Some argue that consent is not even real, and what we have is managed consent.

This discussion, or something similar, is not uncommon to political theory. John Locke, whose 17th century writings were incredibly influential at the time of the founding, wrestled with how to establish a limited state rooted in consent. However, rather than engage an actual debate, in true Vlad style, it is more convenient to assume an armchair posture.

[The Pantry]

How did you make all of YOUR money, baller ?

His dead dad gave it to him.

According to his pubescent posts as Ross at the old RCMB, his dad was already gone and he was living with his grandma.

Maybe his dad fucked up before he died and set him up with a trust

[Vlad]

Vlad, I see you're an arm

Your paranoia would have some merit   If our government just came from an alien ship somewhere. But as I understand it we actually get to vote for our government officials every two years or so.  We have governments at the local state and federal level and there are checks and balances between the various branches of government.

Paranoia and guns… Can you see why the rest of us are concerned more about you and your type, than with the tyranny of our ELECTED officials?

My type? Clearly what I wrote went over your head. I should not be surprised.

Our country was formed on the basis of consent. Government exists because we allow it to exist. Through participation in the political institutions you refer to, we continue to grant consent. What I suggest is that consent is now an overrated concept. Why? Because, as you point out, government possesses vastly superior physical capabilities that give it a coercive power that threatens consent. Some argue that consent is not even real, and what we have is managed consent.

This discussion, or something similar, is not uncommon to political theory. John Locke, whose 17th century writings were incredibly influential at the time of the founding, wrestled with how to establish a limited state rooted in consent. However, rather than engage an actual debate, in true Vlad style, it is more convenient to assume an armchair posture.

My elected officials have my full consent to have weapons that are far superior than the paranoid fucks who lose sleep over their elected officials  using those same weapons against them.

If you truly think your own government would do this, you really need to consider moving to another country. This form of government is no longer working for you.

[InTenSity]

His dead dad gave it to him.

According to his pubescent posts as Ross at the old RCMB, his dad was already gone and he was living with his grandma.

Maybe his dad fucked up before he died and set him up with a trust

Maybe you shit gold. Why would you give any credence to...oh, I get it now. People on the internet lie.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Why does everyone think that mental health treatment and gun bans will reduce these types of incidents? Huh? I suppose you could hypothesize that perhaps one, two, maybe three of these maniacs would have been screened at some point then prohibited from legally purchasing a firearm. But guess what? Its just as easy to buy a gun on the black market as it is to buy a dime bag.

There are just way too many unknown causes of these tragic phenomena. These guys are misfits and losers, guys that simply don't quite fit in to society. Look at the UC Santa Barbara killer - kid's dad was a Hollywood producer but that little asshole couldn't even get laid so he decided to kill a bunch of popular people. Va Tech kid had some serious mental illness, as did the Sandy Hook killer - I can't imagine what kind of tormented mind would murder children. My God that was fucking awful, the worst of these tragedies IMO.

You fuckfaces can argue endlessly but, sadly, we'll never really know what causes these mass killings. It's just a tragic by-product of our modern society.

Sitting on our hands doing nothing isn't working. Those things you mentioned in the first sentence won't make it worse, particularly mental health screening which from my seat seems to be something everyone can agree on. Except the extreme lunatics.

Might as well try it and see if it helps.

[The Pantry]

For as slow as he drives, glad to know ghost keeps a handgun in the glovebox of the Rubicon

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Sitting on our hands doing nothing isn't working. Those things you mentioned in the first sentence won't make it worse, particularly mental health screening which from my seat seems to be something everyone can agree on. Except the extreme lunatics.

Might as well try it and see if it helps.

I'm really skeptical that there's much we can do to prevent these mass murders from happening. What are we going to do, screen everyone? Fuck that.

So you'd rather just do nothing and accept the weekly tragedy as a result of our fucked up society?

I'd rather try to do something to save lives. But whatever. Like I said, it doesn't matter. We're not going to do shit regardless.

[Sponsored content]