7-yr-old girl killed at MI soccer practice after ‘paranoid’ man with CCW license opens fire

originally posted by: Kukri

originally posted by: intrepid
I think the point is that people are always saying, "Criminals will still own and have guns and do evil with them." The point of this is that all laws were followed and a child still lost her life. At least that's how I read it.

Sadly Intrepid it is what it is and there's no point in trying to allocate blame or trying to find solutions to problems that will probably never be solved.

Again condolences to those involved and I wish only the best for them going forward.

Exactly the point I've been making for a few years now. They are collateral casualties for the good of the 2nd. The 2nd supporters want NOTHING done. I wonder if their opinion will change when it's one of their family or friends that are collateral damage.

originally posted by: DAVID64

7-yr-old girl killed at MI soccer practice after ‘paranoid’ man with CCW license opens fire

So, let's have our usual "Blame All Gun Owners" rant. Never mind that we preach not to lump all Muslims, Blacks or any other group together. Let's hammer the CC permit holders extra hard for this, 'cause , you know, it's especially their fault.

And if that's not the point of this thread, then what exactly is it?

Well if the gun crowd gave as much a crap about those that die for their rights, as those rights AND would acknowledge them that might, MIGHT, help allay the distaste one has for those that don't value life. Or so it seems.

a reply to: intrepid

How casually and easily you make the blanket statements.

I have no problem with gun control. I'm an avid supporter of the 2nd amendment, and I see no reason why every tom, dick, and harry should be able to own a howitzer and an M2 .50 cal.

So tell me a) why we're resorting to the intellectually weak broad brush approach and b) what should have or could have prevented this? Mandatory mental health checks? Okay, great. How does that stop somebody who snaps? Mandatory reporting by family if they believe somebody has a mental health issue? Yea, okay.

So...what then? Surely if you're so quick to lump "2nd supporters" into one big net, you have a solution to the problem other than "them damn gun bunnies!"

Right?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
So...what then? Surely if you're so quick to lump "2nd supporters" into one big net, you have a solution to the problem other than "them damn gun bunnies!"

Right?

There is no solution until the 2nd supporters are at least willing to discuss any change. THAT is the basis of my position and if one if honest they will see that. "Mental health". Yeah we did that one this year and any change that was put forth was determined to be an "infringement". Like I said.... BE HONEST. You don't want any change at least own those innocent lives as collateral casualties for your rights.

Any reader here will EASILY see this.

I think we should immediately turn over our medical records to the gov., then push the " mental health is a serious gun issue" line.-check

Since we can control the records, and the disqualification parameters, we can backdoor all the guns out of America.

Just look at the daily gun grab speeches by Obama and Clinton. She is now claiming the internet is being used by terrorists. Does any one know the implications of that statement compounded by the recent FCC control of the net.

Massive bombardment of the media with the mental health push, gaining will of the people, to then remove massive amounts of qualifications IS their agenda.

This sht is getting ridiculous.

a reply to: intrepid

I'll tell you what the 2A supporters want. They want an honest unpolitical approach to the discussion about the propensity of some parts of our society toward violence, the drug culture, the gang culture, the criminal element that is thriving, the push to over prescribe pharmaceutical cocktails that cause people to be suicidal or homicidal, the idiotic religious fanaticism that causes people to kill innocents.

What we don't want is the constant avoidance of all the above issues in order to attack our Second Amendment, which by the way, is non-negotiable. It is an unalienable right that the government cannot take away from us. So stop with the b*llsh*t already and look at the REAL problems in our society.

Should some people not be able to purchase a firearm? Of course, but that should be a discussion done without all the blanket denials that some people want. Obama's "pen and phone" Executive Orders scare some Americans. He is a dangerous man to our Constitution and thankfully the elections of 2010 and 2014 put him in check.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
I think we should immediately turn over our medical records to the gov., then but the " mental health is a serious gun issue" line.-check

Since we can control the records, and the disqualification parameters, we can backdoor all the guns out of America.

Just look at the daily gun grab speeches by Obama and Clinton. She is now claiming the internet is being used by terrorists. Does any one know the implications of that statement compounded by the recent FCC control of the net.

Massive bombardment of the media with the mental health push, gaining will of the people, to then remove massive amounts of qualifications IS their agenda.

This sht is getting ridiculous.

Well, if you research all the UN agendas (you will have to wade through their "we're so benevolent" rhetoric) you will find that it is all on their stated agendas which is all about control. Obama is in lockstep with it. The American People's Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a thorn in their side.

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: intrepid

I'll tell you what the 2A supporters want. They want an honest unpolitical approach to the discussion about the propensity of some parts of our society toward violence, the drug culture, the gang culture, the criminal element that is thriving, the push to over prescribe pharmaceutical cocktails that cause people to be suicidal or homicidal, the idiotic religious fanaticism that causes people to kill innocents.

That's a lovely....fairy tale. I've been here through at least 10 years of debate and "discussion" is not what 2nd supporters want. Just saying something doesn't make it true.

What we don't want is the constant avoidance of all the above issues in order to attack our Second Amendment, which by the way, is non-negotiable. It is an unalienable right that the government cannot take away from us. So stop with the b*llsh*t already and look at the REAL problems in our society.

Wow. You mean like paranoia and aggression? That's what I get from your post. Hell, throw unlimited guns in there. That is a recipe for success.

Humans are an inherently selfish species, so do not expect much sympathy from gun nuts any time an innocent child or classrooms full of innocent children like in sandy hook get slaughtered by lunatics that had easy access to high powered rifles or hand guns.

To them, their "god given" right to own a firearm so that they can someday fulfill their sick fantasy of playing a super hero and stopping a mass shooting is way more important to them than lives of innocent kids.

a reply to: intrepid

Funny how after my post, which directly rebuts your blanket statement, you turn around and tell me how I feel and think. Despite ME telling YOU what I think.

And yet still weren't able to answer the question, just banged your drum a little more. Perhaps I was a little too subtle?

To be blunt: I'm all for sensible, workable solutions. I'm not all for handing over my firearms because somebody else did something. So find something between unfettered access to any and everything and total confiscation and then we can discuss it.

But to be honest, you've very succinctly demonstrated the real problem with the gun debate: those on "your side" of the aisle in the debate don't know how to deal with those of us in the middle. I have no problem with gun control. I do have a problem a total ban or a ludicrously restrictive method, such as what DC tried to do when they intentionally made a mess of their permit process to deny ownership in a back door manner. Background checks? Great. Restricted access to certain weapons and modifications? Go for it. Waiting period? Sure, as long as it's reasonable and not wildly over the top. Permit to carry concealed? Fine by me.

But no, you're too busy telling me what I think and how I feel to listen to anything I have to say.

originally posted by: muse7
Humans are an inherently selfish species, so do not expect much sympathy from gun nuts any time an innocent child or classrooms full of innocent children like in sandy hook get slaughtered by lunatics that had easy access to high powered rifles or hand guns.

To them, their "god given" right to own a firearm so that they can someday fulfill their sick fantasy of playing a super hero and stopping a mass shooting is way more important to them than lives of innocent kids.

1. Is Sandyhook even real? Sure doesn't look like it when viewing the evidence.

2. So do you hate cops too? Sounds like your describing one.

3. Why do you quote them with the "god given right" expression. It makes me picture some dumb redneck. This is false. I know several ccp holders, and a bunch are women.
Do you want to disarm women too?


4. It sounds like you have a sick fantasy of reality.

For quite some time now I've thought that this country needs a national database that tracks people with mental illness. If you're on that list, then you can't purchase guns, you have to get rid of the guns you have and you can't live in a house with guns.

I don't know what diagnosis's should be on that list but I think that the mental health community could come up with a list. If you are diagnosed with a mental illness on the list and your health care provider didn't put you on the list, then the mental health care provider would be liable for any gun related violence you commit and would be liable in a court of law.

Guns don't commit violence, crazy people do.

OK Sparkey. I thought you knew me.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
To be blunt: I'm all for sensible, workable solutions. I'm not all for handing over my firearms because somebody else did something. So find something between unfettered access to any and everything and total confiscation and then we can discuss it.

But to be honest, you've very succinctly demonstrated the real problem with the gun debate: those on "your side" of the aisle in the debate don't know how to deal with those of us in the middle. I have no problem with gun control. I do have a problem a total ban or a ludicrously restrictive method...

And this Canuck with firearms doesn't disagree. THAT is logical but there seems to be no logic with many on the 2nd. There is no "side" with me. Well, I side with logic.

Have we forgotten the 7 yo girl again? Emma Nowling was her name. THAT is the topic of the thread. We all got caught up in BS and forgot her, didn't we?

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

If he had seen a professional because of this, then surely the sensible thing to do would be to check what firearm licenses he had and revoke them.

What better way to discourage people who need it from seeking professional help?

a reply to: intrepid

Good grief! Nobody forgot this precious little girl. What is with your hyperbolic ranting about our 2A. I have said it before and I will say it again. Too many people cannot see more than one or two layers of an issue, but they bloviate as if they actually know something. I'm with Shamrock on this. And he's right about you always telling people what they think and feel when you actually don't know squat what we think or feel. One layer.

Misleading headline.

Like the vast majority of murders, the killer was well known to the victims.

This was not a random shooting at a playground. This was a targeted shooting by severely mentally ill aquaintance that happened to occur while the poor girl was leaving practice IN A VEHICLE.

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: intrepid

Good grief! Nobody forgot this precious little girl.

Yes we did. I'm feeling like a dick.

What is with your hyperbolic ranting about our 2A.

It's basic. Just own the dead. Say, "Thanks for your sacrifice for the 2nd. You are patriots."

Too many people cannot see more than one or two layers of an issue, but they bloviate as if they actually know something.

No disagreement on the process. Disagree with the outcome. YOU know it? OK.

originally posted by: intrepid
I think the point is that people are always saying, "Criminals will still own and have guns and do evil with them." The point of this is that all laws were followed and a child still lost her life. At least that's how I read it.

Do people die in cars and all laws were followed? Maybe we would save more if the max speed limit was 25, what ya think? We have 330 million people so we get rid of all guns and we drop the death rate by what 5k, win win there. People who want to die will die, people who want to kill will kill, guns or no guns.
Another choice for this crazy guy would be to get in his truck and plow down as many kids and people that he can on the field, not a good replacement for the gun I think.

a reply to: Xtrozero

So you're saying that Americans by and large are nuts?

Is it possible that the mental issue is a bunch of bull#? No, no one would ever lie about a tragedy to further an agenda...

On every post we have here about someone getting killed with a gun, there is discussion about unfettered access to guns. Where is it that people think others walk into a store, grab a gun, toss down some cash and walk out? We do not have unfettered access to guns and we already have common sense gun control. The problem isn't a law of laws, it's just bad people. Sure, it's tragic that innocent lives are lost but people kill one another everyday using all sorts of different methods. It's only gun owners that are painted as loons for the actions of a few though. It's ironic that, in light of what happened in Paris, we are constantly told that the actions of those people are not indicative of all Muslims. However, the actions of less than 1% of all gun owners are indicative of whole group. BS