Arizona Congresswoman Shot At Public Event

of the three id say its paranoid. but it seams that you are trying to lump conservative with tea party and also with paranoid.

the part about illiteracy is a fact. no one not even GG would deny it. the part about mind control isnt a tea party or conservative idea. the part about currency i have no idea.

Well said.
The problem with this logic though is that most people who are willing to walk up to a US Congresswoman and shoot her in the head at point-blank range, and then proceed to murder and shoot various other people nearby, including little girls and old ladies ... this type of person almost certainly doesn't give a ***if he goes to prison for life or even if he gets the needle.

When someone has devalued human life to the degree that he will murder random children and elderly ladies, he no longer attaches any value to his own life, either. Therefore, no matter how severe, there is no punishment, after-the-fact, that would deter a man like today's gunman in Arizona. The ONLY way to deter this type of crime is to prevent it from happening in the first place.

And that means gun control laws, greater police and security presence, and less civil liberty.

I don't want that to happen. But I don't want absurd massacres like what happened in Arizona today, either.

Ask yourself, which would prefer, if you have to choose? Unadulterated freedom, with political rhetoric fueling unstable people to commit atrocious crimes with guns? Or, limited freedom, with greater internal security and less guns?

If you chose the former, I ask you to place yourself as the father of the 9-year-old girl who was slain today in Arizona. Now, choose again.

If you can REALLY say that you would prefer that your 9-year-old daughter would be killed randomly in a marketplace shooting, just so you could "be free of The Man", then I name you a fool, and a coward.

So instead of making a commons sense law banning rocket launchers I have to protect myself against people using rocket launchers? I don't know why I continue to expect anything reasonable from you.

oh id never go buy a rocket launcher nor do i think it will be available for me to buy nor would i spend anymore time than we are doing right now to try to make it available for purchase, but i think it is reasonable to think it should be legal.

man anything can be stolen from your house. if something like that was in your house you would probably take some extra precautions to keep it safe. i doubt that you leave guns just lying around on your couch when you have gusts over or where the kids can play with them.

it makes no sense to ban something just because a few people may misuse them, again for a weapon such as that I'm saying go ahead and do the background and psych tests for.

Why should you defend yourself? Because that's what a person in a free *** country does.

I should totally be able to have my own WMD

For my own protection.

Hell, I might get some cyanide too.

first one no, second one, go ahead.

edit: actually as long as you haven't signed a paper saying you won't aspire to obtain one, go ahead, have both.

This is typical fear mongering used by far left nuts to slowly take away liberties and add more government. A few isolated incidents every now and then cannot be prevented and no amount of big brother holding our hands will stop it. America is a great country to live in and it does not need drastic change to fix it. If you are so scarred why don't you just move to Canada.

Just because a few people may misuse WMD doesn't mean we should ban them.

Why have laws in the first place! It's a free country after all!

True, there's logic there.

unlike there, we have our highest set of laws to protect US from the government, just so you know.

C'mon now.
Would you not agree that "conspiracy theorists" tend to have extreme conservative values? Would you not agree that Tea Party activists tend to have somewhat extreme conservative values?

I know it's an over-generalization to lump all those groups into one lump. But if the shoe fits, wear it.

The point is, this gunman was CLEARLY influenced by current far-right ideals and rhetoric (disdain for Hispanic immigrants, disdain for "big" government) and specifically targeted the Congresswoman because she represented tolerance of political agendas that he disapproved of.

Ultimately, yes Maxse, on the most concrete, most small-minded level, the gunman is responsible for his actions.
However, I'm asking you to use more of your gray matter (I'm sure it's hard for you, or even impossible) and comprehend that political rhetoric and vitriol had a BIG hand in cooking this pot of ***.

Same with guns, and long as some people have them, everyone should be allowed to have them (within reason IE: NKorea)

*** the system, let everyone have and use anything they want.

After all you never know when the government will fire WMD's at you, so you need to be able to defend yourself with WMD's.

you're right, you don't know when the government may attack the people it's sworn to protect.

Exactly, so if one person has nukes everyone should have nukes to defend themselves.

Just in case.

Of course they'd have deep psychological tests first so there'd be a 0% chance that they'd randomly set of a nuke, Psychological tests are foolproof like that.

Didn't you know, the cold war was a totally fun time.

I think we should deregulate firearms of all kinds and illegalize murder.

FROM THE DAY I WAS BORN!

Jet, come on, man.

Doctors can legally open up people's bodies with knives.
So, should everyone be allowed to open up people's bodies with knives?
Policemen can club someone who appears to be committing a crime. So, should everyone be allowed to club someone who appears to be committing a crime in their eyes?
Army soldiers can drive tanks.
So, should everyone be allowed to drive tanks?
Professional baseball pitchers can hurl dense objects towards relatively defenseless people at speeds up to and exceeding 100 mph. So, should everyone be allowed to do that?

People cling to guns because it provides comfort and a false sense of security. It's like a baby's blanket or fuzzy teddy bear.

If we outlawed swords, not too many people would really give a ***. If we outlawed poison, again, we'd be lucky if that story made the evening news.

But, oh no, not guns! Can't take baby's binkie and teddy away!! Baby would feel lonely and uncomfortable, and scared!!

Funny story, my uncle whom I was named after ended up on Nixon's little black book of potential threats, simply by subscribing to a communist newsletter out of mere curiosity and study from a scholarly point of view.

I don't think I have an uncle... I might do...

Nope, no uncles here.

I do have a cousin who I see as an uncle though, he bought me rum and told me it wouldn't make me ill :(

Speaking of guns! Here's another funny story.
When I was at age 2, my aunt humorously signed me up for the NRA on my behalf and it was approved. I got my own card and everything; at age *** two.

Who green lights this ***? Anyways, she proved her point quite well.