darksabre Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 From Jason Alexander http://www.twitlonger.com/show/if2nht Good stuff. Well written and spot on. I just want to point out that the discussions we've been having here are a great example of what Alexander is promoting. It's nice to be part of an (online) community with a level of intelligence high enough to result in meaningful discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Sorry. I can't read any of that without hearing the voice of one George Costanza. All that was missing was a loud "ho HO!" at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 From Jason Alexander http://www.twitlonger.com/show/if2nht Good stuff. Very well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sloth Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Sorry. I can't read any of that without hearing the voice of one George Costanza. All that was missing was a loud "ho HO!" at the end. Ha ha Costanza was the best character on Seinfeld. Easily one of the greatests shows of all time. On a serious note, what he wrote was well said and so true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I take it no one has bothered to verify the "100,000 Americans die every year from domestic gun violence" statement. But, man, he makes you feel all warm, cozy, and correct, doesn't he? He's such a cutie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I take it no one has bothered to verify the "100,000 Americans die every year from domestic gun violence" statement. But, man, he makes you feel all warm, cozy, and correct, doesn't he? He's such a cutie. I took it as a typo with an extra 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 From Jason Alexander http://www.twitlonger.com/show/if2nht Good stuff. Jason Alexander says: Despite these massacres recurring and despite the 100,000 Americans that die every year due to domestic gun violence This was only his fourth paragraph but a pretty good place to stop reading because he is completely abandoning reality. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths.[6 So when it comes to homicides involving guns, he was only off by about a factor of 8, which is actually pretty good for celebrity math. Then he quotes Jefferson and Hamilton, and copies and pastes the dictionary definition of "militia" on his way to pushing for new, stronger gun control laws. Great, except that he never addresses how that will work from a practical standpoint. Here in Chicago we have some of the strongest gun laws in the country.... and a few dozen shootings every weekend. We're past 250 homicides already this year. I'm skeptical about more laws being the solution. This is the War on Drugs all over again. Drugs exist, they work, people want them, and outlawing them hasn't solved anything. Chicago's War on Guns has had roughly the same amount of success, although that won't stop our legislators from citing their own good intentions as some sort of favorable outcome. Guns exist and people want them. And the vast majority who want to own guns legally want them for sport or self-defense -- and aren't using them for murder. Meanwhile, this was an act perpetrated by a complete lunatic who, apparently, believed himself to be the Joker. Maybe it's good that he picked guns since the Dark Knight version of the Joker was a pretty big fan of bombs too. Given this guy's background, he probably could have rigged a large truck bomb. Were that the case, would we be talking about banning Batman movies? (Remember, at this time in 1999, Marilyn Manson and The Matrix were responsible for the Columbine shootings.) Crazy and evil people exist, just like they always have, and they hurt and kill people, just like they always have. You can take issue with the actual weapons this guy used, but keep in mind that the worst mass shooting in US history was Virginia Tech in 2007 and that was one guy with two handguns. People who are crazy or evil are going to find a way to do what they do unfortunately. I take it no one has bothered to verify the "100,000 Americans die every year from domestic gun violence" statement. But, man, he makes you feel all warm, cozy, and correct, doesn't he? He's such a cutie. I noticed it and typed the really long response above when you were posting this. I'm amazed how many people just accepted that instantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Jason Alexander says: This was only his fourth paragraph but a pretty good place to stop reading because he is completely abandoning reality. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States So when it comes to homicides involving guns, he was only off by about a factor of 8, which is actually pretty good for celebrity math. Then he quotes Jefferson and Hamilton, and copies and pastes the dictionary definition of "militia" on his way to pushing for new, stronger gun control laws. Great, except that he never addresses how that will work from a practical standpoint. Here in Chicago we have some of the strongest gun laws in the country.... and a few dozen shootings every weekend. We're past 250 homicides already this year. I'm skeptical about more laws being the solution. This is the War on Drugs all over again. Drugs exist, they work, people want them, and outlawing them hasn't solved anything. Chicago's War on Guns has had roughly the same amount of success, although that won't stop our legislators from citing their own good intentions as some sort of favorable outcome. Guns exist and people want them. And the vast majority who want to own guns legally want them for sport or self-defense -- and aren't using them for murder. Meanwhile, this was an act perpetrated by a complete lunatic who, apparently, believed himself to be the Joker. Maybe it's good that he picked guns since the Dark Knight version of the Joker was a pretty big fan of bombs too. Given this guy's background, he probably could have rigged a large truck bomb. Were that the case, would we be talking about banning Batman movies? (Remember, at this time in 1999, Marilyn Manson and The Matrix were responsible for the Columbine shootings.) Crazy and evil people exist, just like they always have, and they hurt and kill people, just like they always have. You can take issue with the actual weapons this guy used, but keep in mind that the worst mass shooting in US history was Virginia Tech in 2007 and that was one guy with two handguns. People who are crazy or evil are going to find a way to do what they do unfortunately. I noticed it and typed the really long response above when you were posting this. I'm amazed how many people just accepted that instantly. Assault rifle... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I take it no one has bothered to verify the "100,000 Americans die every year from domestic gun violence" statement. But, man, he makes you feel all warm, cozy, and correct, doesn't he? He's such a cutie. It's closer to 10,000 a year. Per US Census numbers, 129,741 murders were reported between 2000-2008. 66% of them or 86,112 were by firearms. Not 100,000 but just as chilling. http://sbcoalition.org/2011/04/gun-violence-and-the-census-sobering-statistics/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Jason Alexander says: This was only his fourth paragraph but a pretty good place to stop reading because he is completely abandoning reality. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States So when it comes to homicides involving guns, he was only off by about a factor of 8, which is actually pretty good for celebrity math. Then he quotes Jefferson and Hamilton, and copies and pastes the dictionary definition of "militia" on his way to pushing for new, stronger gun control laws. Great, except that he never addresses how that will work from a practical standpoint. Here in Chicago we have some of the strongest gun laws in the country.... and a few dozen shootings every weekend. We're past 250 homicides already this year. I'm skeptical about more laws being the solution. This is the War on Drugs all over again. Drugs exist, they work, people want them, and outlawing them hasn't solved anything. Chicago's War on Guns has had roughly the same amount of success, although that won't stop our legislators from citing their own good intentions as some sort of favorable outcome. Guns exist and people want them. And the vast majority who want to own guns legally want them for sport or self-defense -- and aren't using them for murder. Meanwhile, this was an act perpetrated by a complete lunatic who, apparently, believed himself to be the Joker. Maybe it's good that he picked guns since the Dark Knight version of the Joker was a pretty big fan of bombs too. Given this guy's background, he probably could have rigged a large truck bomb. Were that the case, would we be talking about banning Batman movies? (Remember, at this time in 1999, Marilyn Manson and The Matrix were responsible for the Columbine shootings.) Crazy and evil people exist, just like they always have, and they hurt and kill people, just like they always have. You can take issue with the actual weapons this guy used, but keep in mind that the worst mass shooting in US history was Virginia Tech in 2007 and that was one guy with two handguns. People who are crazy or evil are going to find a way to do what they do unfortunately. I noticed it and typed the really long response above when you were posting this. I'm amazed how many people just accepted that instantly. This is not the same as the war on drugs. You don't need a gun designed solely to kill human beings. You don't. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Assault rifle... I'll repeat: The Virginia Tech shooter killed 33 with two handguns. Worrying about the weapon is treating the symptom and not the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Assault rifle... Seriously, if someone needs a high powered automatic weapon to hunt, they probably should just give up hunting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 This is not the same as the war on drugs. You don't need a gun designed solely to kill human beings. You don't. Sorry. Every gun is designed solely to kill. And it is the War on Drugs, or else Chicago wouldn't be a war zone right now. Laws don't change people wanting what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I'll repeat: The Virginia Tech shooter killed 33 with two handguns. Worrying about the weapon is treating the symptom and not the problem. He used semi-automatic handguns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I take it no one has bothered to verify the "100,000 Americans die every year from domestic gun violence" statement. But, man, he makes you feel all warm, cozy, and correct, doesn't he? He's such a cutie. jason alexander @IJasonAlexander Correction all: the 100,000 guns deaths should be 100,000 incidents of death or injury with guns per annum. My bad. Number still sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I'll repeat: The Virginia Tech shooter killed 33 with two handguns. Worrying about the weapon is treating the symptom and not the problem. 1. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that this is correct (it isn't). It still doesn't explain why assault rifles are necessary for sport and/or self-defense. EDIT: And what DeLuca said. 2. Handguns are not defensive weapons, either. They're specifically designed to be concealed. You want someone to not attack you? Carry a shotgun. That's going to make them back off. A handgun, they won't see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 jason alexander @IJasonAlexander Correction all: the 100,000 guns deaths should be 100,000 incidents of death or injury with guns per annum. My bad. Number still sucks. He must read this board. I wonder what his thoughts are on Lindy Ruff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 He used semi-automatic handguns. Which are pretty common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 He must read this board. I wonder what his thoughts are on Lindy Ruff. Every thread, every time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Every gun is designed solely to kill. And it is the War on Drugs, or else Chicago wouldn't be a war zone right now. Laws don't change people wanting what they want. Yes, but every gun is not designed to kill a ton of people. I could kill a few people with an old Mosin but my 5 round stripper clips are going to make that process pretty slow. What a gun is capable of and designed to do is extremely relevant to the discussion. And the war on drugs is completely different. That campaign was initiated in a time where fear of and actual usage of crack cocaine was extremely high. The "war" was a poor way of handling the crisis though and it resulted in the US having the largest prison population in the world. We ignored the real issues and went straight for the tough on crime route. Regulation of firearms for the sake of safety in this country is not the same thing. This is not a "war" on guns. It's a move towards progress. We're well behind the rest of the world when it comes to how we treat guns and devices meant to harm humans, and our crime stats reflect it. Most guns used for crime are stolen. They're usually small caliber handguns, machine pistols, and pretty much anything else that isn't meant to be used for sport. Other countries have gotten on the wagon and banned these tools of destruction, and to resounding success. Why do we still cling to some cowboy fantasy of days past in this country? Because we can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 1. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that this is correct (it isn't). It still doesn't explain why assault rifles are necessary for sport and/or self-defense. EDIT: And what DeLuca said. 2. Handguns are not defensive weapons, either. They're specifically designed to be concealed. You want someone to not attack you? Carry a shotgun. That's going to make them back off. A handgun, they won't see. 1. You're missing my point. One person can do a lot of damage with guns that aren't anything special. If the Aurora shooter had had to settle for a pair of Glocks, he could have done just as much damage or more. 2. Really? The women I know who carry handguns do so specifically for self-defense. Most of the people I know who own handguns keep them locked away in a bedroom in case of a home invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 1. You're missing my point. One person can do a lot of damage with guns that aren't anything special. If the Aurora shooter had had to settle for a pair of Glocks, he could have done just as much damage or more. 2. Really? The women I know who carry handguns do so specifically for self-defense. Most of the people I know who own handguns keep them locked away in a bedroom in case of a home invasion. 1. Make him settle for the pair of Glocks, then. It's a good first step. There is no legitimate reason for a civilian to have an assault rifle. 2. Home invasion: Shotgun is fine. Someone carrying for self defense: Tasers and mace are fine. Concealment is the primary reason for the design of a handgun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 If we continue the line of reasoning that laws won't stop people from having assault weapons if they want them...then we should have no laws at all. The entire function of law enforcement is pointless if that's how you believe people work. People who really really want to steal something are going to steal it regardless of the law, so let's legalize stealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Jason Alexander says: I noticed it and typed the really long response above when you were posting this. I'm amazed how many people just accepted that instantly. .. All from ..Jason Alexander, a pillar of our community, and one of the greatest intellects of the 21st century. One can learn a lot by reading the responses here to his little propaganda driven missive. It can be frightening, but informative none the less!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Yes, but every gun is not designed to kill a ton of people. I could kill a few people with an old Mosin but my 5 round stripper clips are going to make that process pretty slow. What a gun is capable of and designed to do is extremely relevant to the discussion. And the war on drugs is completely different. That campaign was initiated in a time where fear of and actual usage of crack cocaine was extremely high. The "war" was a poor way of handling the crisis though and it resulted in the US having the largest prison population in the world. We ignored the real issues and went straight for the tough on crime route. Regulation of firearms for the sake of safety in this country is not the same thing. This is not a "war" on guns. It's a move towards progress. We're well behind the rest of the world when it comes to how we treat guns and devices meant to harm humans, and our crime stats reflect it. Most guns used for crime are stolen. They're usually small caliber handguns, machine pistols, and pretty much anything else that isn't meant to be used for sport. Other countries have gotten on the wagon and banned these tools of destruction, and to resounding success. Why do we still cling to some cowboy fantasy of days past in this country? Because we can? As I said, most people own guns legally for sport (hunting or target practice) or for self-defense in the event of a home invasion or attempted rape or murder (when the police would never make it in time). The vast majority of these people (99.99%) are not the problem, but they would be the ones affected by the laws. The people who want guns illegally are still going to want them and probably won't care if a new law is passed or not. As with drugs, passing a law won't make guns stop existing. They'll still be a problem. Ask Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.