Parent of shooting spree victim pleads to NRA
24 May 2014, 10:59 pm
News flash. The NRA does not CARE. This is merely an opportunity to pimp more guns. That is all the NRA sees in events like this. If you dare to show public anguish for victims of gun crimes you are now an enemy of the gun industry. Dare to at least try to do something besides sit idly by and watch people be slaughtered, by creating any technology,even if flawed in the beginning, and you are attacking gun owners, gun manufacturers and the NRA. You are expected by the NRA to just go out and buy some more guns. Stop whining about dead people. Go out and kill some people yourself. That is the NRA response to gun violence. Apathy and greed.
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-vict ... 19408.html
Last edited by khaoz on 25 May 2014, 2:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
24 May 2014, 11:33 pm
Dox47 wrote:
Dang, now I want to go out and buy some more guns!
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
25 May 2014, 12:21 am
khaoz wrote:
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
If you want to make the choice for yourself to go unarmed, that's your business, but you seem bound and determined to make the choice for everyone else as well, which is not your business. This attack took place in one of the most heavily gun controlled states in the country, and was carried out against a defenseless population by someone who complied with all the local laws, except the ones against murder of course. I've read the eye witness reports, and do you know what people were doing while being shot at? Diving to the floor with their cell phones, calling relatives. Now it seems to me, someone who dives to the floor, extracts their phone, and still has the mental acuity and physical dexterity to dial a phone under that sort of strain could have much more constructively drawn a firearm and possibly ended this attack earlier, but are prevented from doing so by the laws of California, which did nothing to prevent these deaths. I'll take my chances with a pistol in my back pocket, you can dial relatives, but leave my choice to me.
_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson
25 May 2014, 12:30 am
Dox47 wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
If you want to make the choice for yourself to go unarmed, that's your business, but you seem bound and determined to make the choice for everyone else as well, which is not your business. This attack took place in one of the most heavily gun controlled states in the country, and was carried out against a defenseless population by someone who complied with all the local laws, except the ones against murder of course. I've read the eye witness reports, and do you know what people were doing while being shot at? Diving to the floor with their cell phones, calling relatives. Now it seems to me, someone who dives to the floor, extracts their phone, and still has the mental acuity and physical dexterity to dial a phone under that sort of strain could have much more constructively drawn a firearm and possibly ended this attack earlier, but are prevented from doing so by the laws of California, which did nothing to prevent these deaths. I'll take my chances with a pistol in my back pocket, you can dial relatives, but leave my choice to me.
^ The Squid says "Seems Legit.".
25 May 2014, 1:02 am
Dox47 wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
If you want to make the choice for yourself to go unarmed, that's your business, but you seem bound and determined to make the choice for everyone else as well, which is not your business. This attack took place in one of the most heavily gun controlled states in the country, and was carried out against a defenseless population by someone who complied with all the local laws, except the ones against murder of course. I've read the eye witness reports, and do you know what people were doing while being shot at? Diving to the floor with their cell phones, calling relatives. Now it seems to me, someone who dives to the floor, extracts their phone, and still has the mental acuity and physical dexterity to dial a phone under that sort of strain could have much more constructively drawn a firearm and possibly ended this attack earlier, but are prevented from doing so by the laws of California, which did nothing to prevent these deaths. I'll take my chances with a pistol in my back pocket, you can dial relatives, but leave my choice to me.
Well said.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
_________________
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-tru ... er-person/
http://www.wimp.com/speakconviction/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFzXaFbxDcM
25 May 2014, 1:23 am
SquidinHostBody wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
If you want to make the choice for yourself to go unarmed, that's your business, but you seem bound and determined to make the choice for everyone else as well, which is not your business. This attack took place in one of the most heavily gun controlled states in the country, and was carried out against a defenseless population by someone who complied with all the local laws, except the ones against murder of course. I've read the eye witness reports, and do you know what people were doing while being shot at? Diving to the floor with their cell phones, calling relatives. Now it seems to me, someone who dives to the floor, extracts their phone, and still has the mental acuity and physical dexterity to dial a phone under that sort of strain could have much more constructively drawn a firearm and possibly ended this attack earlier, but are prevented from doing so by the laws of California, which did nothing to prevent these deaths. http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-vict ... 08.htmlote]
^ The Squid says "Seems Legit.".
What part of "I have no problem with gun ownership" do people have trouble comprehending? I am not trying to tell anyone they cannot own guns. I am saying it gets tedious for gun extremists to push this rhetoric that people are trying to take your guns away from you when all people are trying to do is make society more safe And extremist ignore the reality that the world is not as dangerous and unsafe as the NRA and the media make it seem, but these extremist, alarmist assertions that putting more guns in more peoples hands and refusing to even attempt ANY regulatory or gun safety measures are the things that will make society more unsafe. People try to create things like smart gun technology or promote the study of smart gun technology and they receive death threats from pro gun extremists.
Why would I waste time calling my relatives in such a situation? I don't even think about things like someone driving around shooting people. Despite what just happened in California, I know that the reality of the situation is that there is more probability of a train derailing on tracks 100 yards from me and a caboose flipping over 6 times and pummeling me into garden mulch than I do someone shooting me with a gun. I have far greater probability of choking on a porkchop bone at Chipotles at 2AM Sunday morning than I do of being killed by a "bad man with a gun. I have far greater chance of falling off a ladder changing a light bulb and fracturing my skull than I do of someone walking down the sidewalk shooting me. Or my doctor telling me I have cancer when I go for my yearly physical next week.
I just think it is ridiculous that society allows the gun industry to scare people into stocking up on guns by promoting and creating fear of the statistically improbable. And it has nothing to do with people being unsafe. It is about scaring people into spending money on guns. That is my whole point. The NRA and gun industry are getting filthy rich by fearmongering. It has nothing to do with public safety or 2nd Amendment rights. It is about making MONEY. The gun lobby, NRA and pro gun extremists are actually making our schools and streets more dangerous just so they can make money.
I dont care how many guns you own. More guns does not make society safer. It just makes the gun industry richer.
THAT is my whole point. Own all the guns you think you need. I dont care
25 May 2014, 1:27 am
JBlitzen wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Cool for you. A lot of people will do that, and the gun industry will encourage it, but obviously all of these guns in circulation are not making society a safer place. It may make you feel secure, but that is illusion. You could be carrying twenty guns and someone could still drive by you on the street and shoot you. And the odds of that person being successful are far better than the odds of you stopping it. As proficient as you think you are with your guns the odds of you being able to freeze your emotions in a situation like that, draw your weapon and hit someone who is already shooting, despite the way a movie makes it look easy, are minimal at best. You know it. I know it. Studies have confirmed it. It makes you feel more secure though, so have at it. I don't need it. I am not a slave to that fear. And I have no problems with gun ownership. Every sibling I have has multiple guns in their homes. I have a problem with the disillusionment about the probabilities of people needing a weapon for self defense. The world is not that violent, incidents like this aside. The odds of someone never needing to use a firearm for self defense outweigh the odds of someone needing a firearm for self defense, exponentially. Even if someone lives in the middle of nowhere. That is the reality
If you want to make the choice for yourself to go unarmed, that's your business, but you seem bound and determined to make the choice for everyone else as well, which is not your business. This attack took place in one of the most heavily gun controlled states in the country, and was carried out against a defenseless population by someone who complied with all the local laws, except the ones against murder of course. I've read the eye witness reports, and do you know what people were doing while being shot at? Diving to the floor with their cell phones, calling relatives. Now it seems to me, someone who dives to the floor, extracts their phone, and still has the mental acuity and physical dexterity to dial a phone under that sort of strain could have much more constructively drawn a firearm and possibly ended this attack earlier, but are prevented from doing so by the laws of California, which did nothing to prevent these deaths. I'll take my chances with a pistol in my back pocket, you can dial relatives, but leave my choice to me.
Well said.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
Again, I am not trying to make the choice for anyone else.
My point is that the pimping of guns by the NRA and pro gun groups has nothing to do with making you safer or with any constitutional freedom. They are yanking your chains to get you to spend money. And THAT is what is making America more dangerous.
It is all about them making money.
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,699
Location: the island of defective toy santas
25 May 2014, 1:34 am
khaoz wrote:
JBlitzen wrote:
Well said.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
Again, I am not trying to make the choice for anyone else.
My point is that the pimping of guns by the NRA and pro gun groups has nothing to do with making you safer or with any constitutional freedom. They are yanking your chains to get you to spend money. And THAT is what is making America more dangerous.
It is all about them making money.
I don't understand this pimping that you're talking about.
Can you explain why an advertisement for a self-defense firearm is pimping, while an advertisement for a movie, or a car, or a LEGO set, isn't?
_________________
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-tru ... er-person/
http://www.wimp.com/speakconviction/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFzXaFbxDcM
25 May 2014, 1:37 am
auntblabby wrote:
too many people gloss over the fact that killing a person for any reason is still a hell of a thing, nothing to take lightly.
and glossing over the fact that this kid was suffering emotionally. We are supposed to ignore emotional suffering. We are supposed to take the attitude that these people are just crazy. Mental issues. That is all people see. Because society sees emotional suffering as a weakness. Get over it kid. Life is tough. Grow some balls.
That is societies response to emotional suffering. We are supposed to be unfeeling, uncaring, emotionless, money making, money spending robots. We don't want to see your emotional pain. We don't care.
Someone should have picked up on this kids very first youtube video how much emotional pain he was in. Instead people are laughing about it. Society is sicker than kids like this and Adam Lanza will ever be.
25 May 2014, 1:38 am
Didn't he kill 3 with a knife, then another 3 with a pistol, and wounded 13 others via various means (pistol and car).
Poor knives. Always left out.
(And yes, a big problem is the lack of help for high functioning individuals who're silently suffering. This dude would have been boiling for some time to get to this point. Clinically diagnosed and getting "help", but where was the actual help that could get him the things he wanted? I mean, how hard is it for society to organize dates for such people? Not hard at all.)
25 May 2014, 1:43 am
JBlitzen wrote:
khaoz wrote:
JBlitzen wrote:
Well said.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
Also, this guy had a couple thousand pounds of car under his control.
I remember the Tyler TX courthouse shooting where the killer didn't get very far before taking fire from an armed citizen. That person was killed in the fire, but he drew the killer away from a defenseless woman and child and bought time for the police to arrive.
I'm not going to be a dick and say that this guy's son might have saved himself as well as other people if he'd had a pistol on him, but... well, okay, I am going to say that, because it's indisputably true.
Again, I am not trying to make the choice for anyone else.
My point is that the pimping of guns by the NRA and pro gun groups has nothing to do with making you safer or with any constitutional freedom. They are yanking your chains to get you to spend money. And THAT is what is making America more dangerous.
It is all about them making money.
I don't understand this pimping that you're talking about.
Can you explain why an advertisement for a self-defense firearm is pimping, while an advertisement for a movie, or a car, or a LEGO set, isn't?
Noone uses fear to sell movie tickets, or cars, or Legos. The gun industry and NRA want you to believe that you need more guns to protect yourself, from this, or that, or whatever. They want you to believe they are standing up for your rights, and for freedom, and they manipulate you with that rhetoric when all they are interested in is getting you to spend more money on guns and ammunition. They are playing you. Yeah, everyone who is selling something is manipulating people with how they advertise, but most people are not using scare tactics to sell their products.
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,699
Location: the island of defective toy santas
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Texas Megachurch shooting |
16 Feb 2024, 8:00 pm |
| Parent of ASD looking for resources |
08 Mar 2024, 3:07 pm |
| Moscow Concert Hall Mass Shooting and Fire |
25 Mar 2024, 3:42 pm |
| Post Super Bowl victory parade mass shooting |
20 Feb 2024, 5:38 pm |
