Another School Massacre

[Ms Tree]

Honestly, The exact same way. I buried my Dad at 13, it wouldn't be my first rodeo.
 
Guns don't kill. An amoral, often legally drugged up society causes people to pick up weapons of which guns are a percentage of the whole. The people responsible for these acts must be brought to justice. NOT a entire Society having to surrender their Liberty.because of the actions of a few

Seems to me if people feel the need to carry guns in order to feel safe that we have already surrendered our liberty.

 

[signals]

I bet there were more people murdered with butcher knives than pairing knives. Who cares that more people were killed with knives than with rifles? What purpose does it serve to separate out one type of gun from another other than to try and make the weak argument that knives are more dangerous than guns.

Ah, but that is where I love multiculturalism. If that's the case, then knives can be combined with all the other categories outside of FIREARMS!

You can't separate the guns but the others make sense??? Sorry this should be a firearms and non-firearms list to be fair.

No I am not spinning anything, but if you use the weapon of guns as a whole, then all the others are a whole, which kind of puts a pickle in your statistics.

Rifles are the easiest firearm to obtain, and in most restrictive states, like NY, you don't need a background check or permit! So the statistics actually mean something to those of us who don't rely on the internet for all our intelligence.

 

[Ms Tree]

Right! Why should it matter if I own a RPG, and AR-15, A Sig Sauer 9mm semi auto pistol if I never fire any of them in anger at another human being?

OK. Point?

 

[Ms Tree]

And by the way, if we get to separate rifles from "guns" why is it that hammers are lumped in with other "blunt" objects. That whole comparison is so full of holes. I bet that would substantially change the results.

 

[SparrowHawk]

http://buzzpo.com/breaking-armed-cc-civilian-stops-mass-killing-vegas/

 

[Ms Tree]

Yep. The easy access to guns is a dangerous thing.

 

[SparrowHawk]

BOTTOM LINE: Which is more dangerous? Living in a country where your every move, word and action is monitored by the Government. Like say North Korea, Burma or Iran. 
 
OR
 
Living in a country that respects the rights of individuals over the rights of Government? Factor in the fact that this unfettered Liberty comes at a price. The Price being that a few thousand out of 300 milion my lose their lives as a result of the above Liberty.
 
For me the answer is clear.

 

[Ms Tree]

Are there countries other than the dictatorships that you mentioned like places in Europe where people are free and not have the murder rates that we do?

Given the silly alternatives you proposed I suspect the answer is pretty simple for everyone.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Are there countries other than the dictatorships that you mentioned like places in Europe where people are free and not have the murder rates that we do?

Given the silly alternatives you proposed I suspect the answer is pretty simple for everyone.

 
 
Are they? With a marginal tax rate at or above 50% nationally in most countries there is no Liberty.

 

[Ms Tree]

Pay a little now or more later. I don't equate taxes with loss of freedom. Death is loss of liberty.

 

[SparrowHawk]

a 50%  AVERAGE Confiscation rate of the fruits of your labor automatically means you are NOT free.

 

[Ms Tree]

a 50%  AVERAGE Confiscation rate of the fruits of your labor automatically means you are NOT free.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  

 

[Ms Tree]

http://buzzpo.com/breaking-armed-cc-civilian-stops-mass-killing-vegas/

Police seek person who accidentally shot Detroit boy being attacked by dog
 
http://www.freep.com/article/20140609/NEWS01/306090120/Detroit-rescuer-shoots-boy-dog-attack

 

[ChockJockey]

Pay a little now or more later. I don't equate taxes with loss of freedom. Death is loss of liberty.

 
Different people have different ideas of what Liberty is and what it entails.  Generally speaking, if you equate Liberty with property and consider money property, then any taxation that represents a loss in money (and the opportunity, security, and influence that go with it) also represents a loss in real freedom (although freedom itself isn't quantifiable in dollars or any unit).  People so believing will logically exercise their right to own and acquire firearms for the sake of protecting their life, liberty, and property.

 

[ChockJockey]

a 50%  AVERAGE Confiscation rate of the fruits of your labor automatically means you are NOT free.

 
Freedom is a relative term, and Americans in the vein of Classical Liberalism (in the sense of property-as-liberty) don't hold a monopoly on what freedom is or what conditions allow for a person to consider themselves free because Liberty isn't an orthodoxy.
 
For certain European countries, those higher tax rates bring freedom from illness (healthcare), freedom from ignorance (education), freedom from poverty (social security) while still allowing a large range of intellectual and social liberty.  The Nordic countries in particular even retain a relatively high degree of gun ownership.  It would seem to me that that is how those people choose to live, otherwise they'd emigrate (some do) or use the democratic means open to them to change how their systems operate.   They've been able to make it work for them, but there are many reasons why that model isn't immediately transferable to other cultures and countries.