A cousin-in-law on Facebook (I know, I know) put up something that a friend of hers said about the tragedy happening because everyone does not put wonderful, loving 'god' first in their lives, blah, blah, blah. I, of course, couldn't keep my mouth shut and said it had nothing to do with religion, moral people are moral people, and this guy was obviously insane. Then the cousin-in-law said she believes 'god' has something to do with EVERYTHING.
WHAT THE FUCK do you say to that? REALLY? Her 'god' had something to do with that? And WHY would you worship something that had the power, but didn't do anything to save those babies?????
I know, we talk about this all the time. I really just want to be a hermit. I hate dumb people, and there are WAY too many of them.
Yeah, you're right VikingDon, but I ate them anyway!!! LOL!
Who was it that said the least you could do for someone is to pray for them? Tonight on CNN they showed about a dozen golden retrievers they called comfort dogs that had been brought to Newtown. I am sure those dogs will do more to comfort people than all of the prayers put together.
yes, and the dogs don't believe in god.
I saw that story Lillie! Wasn't that great? Actual help from wonderful animals! It made me smile!
Exactly Mathew T.! Fuck them! How dare they use what happened as an excuse to bring out their bullshit.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for CBS Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer, and I think that respect is both warranted and reflected in the following op-ed piece on the tragedy in Newtown and what should be done about it:
By now the pros and cons of the gun issue are well known, but here is the question that must be asked: Is what happened Friday the new normal? Of course, there are legitimate reasons - for both pleasure and protection - to own guns. But if the slaughter of innocent children is not bad enough to make us rethink what we can do to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, what is bad enough? To what depths of horror must we sink before we say this cannot be tolerated? Are we willing to settle for a culture in which kindergarten children are no longer safe in the classroom, and a visit to the mall or a movie is a life-threatening experience?
In recent years there has been no serious effort to address this problem. No piece of gun legislation was seriously considered during this session of Congress. It is the subject no one wants to talk about for fear of offending the powerful gun lobby. Perhaps it is time to remember what Ed Murrow told us, that 'we are not descended from fearful people.' Our forefathers had the courage to tell the most powerful country of their day, 'You have gone too far, we can tolerate this no more,' and upon their courage America was built. Have we - their descendants - become so afraid of the possible political consequences that we are unwilling to explore ways to make a safer world for our children?
I can't believe we have. I think we are better than that.
Loren I need a like button for that piece!
I couldn't agree more and I think perhaps we should talk about handling ammunition purchases in the way we handle cold medicine, you sign for it when you buy it and show I.D. and there's a lot number for tracking. There should be a limit on the purchase amount unless you're at a range and purchasing for use while on the range. That way too, in the same way we handle the drugs and fertilizer components that some radicals use to make bombs, we can track larger lots of ammo through the system to where they'll be going and flag the larger purchases that fall outside the range of accepted usage purchases. Since banning gun purchases isn't going to cover the problem with the weapons already out there, this is one way we could deal with the problem of shooters coming in with footlockers of ammunition in their trunks. Sure, some still will slip through the cracks and purchase on the black market and some places are going to foul up the system not using it correctly from the sales location, but we could make it just a little harder for the nutbars to buy huge amounts of ammo and we could handle reloading materials in the same fashion.
I noticed someone saying on another thread on FB that we couldn't possibly check everyone's mental status, I disagree. We do a drug tests for employment and many of us take some sort of personality profile like the MMPI before we're hired and I feel that if you can't wait for the tests and the background to clear in order to buy a firearm, that we need to be asking you what your hurry is and you need to be flagged for that, it's suspicious behavior. We should be able to ask if you're currently on anit-psychotics for those purchasing firearms, I don't understand why that's not already a prerequisite just like the criminal background check is for handguns. Law abiding, stable, tax paying citizens will have access to firearms still, it just won't be 'walk in the local wal-mart and buy a cheap rifle or shotgun for your kid for Christmas', there will be paperwork and a process behind it and I honestly want to believe most Americans would be okay with that. Frankly I don't think a great many adults down here should have guns and I'm reaffirmed of this when New Year's Eve rolls around every year and our stupid, backwoods hick neighbors fail to understand gravity... I'm terrified one of these nights the bullets are going to come through the roof and with my bad luck they won't kill me, they'll just cripple me and make me more crotchety than I already am!
I hope no one takes offense at this but a couple in the waiting-room I was in yesterday was talking about the tragedy, and one of them said they remembered Chris Rock joking that people should be allowed to have all the guns they want, but each bullet would cost $5,000.00! Obviously meant to be funny, but maybe if people couldn't afford guns and ammo there would be fewer people with access to them. I don't have an answer. I do know that NO ONE outside the military needs some of the weapons that are available to purchase nowdays.
Unfortunately, those people who refuse to consider reasonable restrictions on weapons will not recognize their place in this debate. They believe they are the courageous ones, standing tall against those who would destroy democracy and take their freedom.
I really don't want to hurl insults at people. It rarely convinces anyone of their error. Still, this appears to be a dangerous fetish, protected by an obsolete amendment. It's a mess and we need to deal with this head on. No debating the meaning of the amendment. No useless discussions about the phrase "assault weapon". This could go on forever, and I believe that is the intention of the NRA and the gun industry. We can only resolve this issue by another amendment. I just don't know if there are enough people onboard to get it done. If not, we'll have one after another of these slaughters.
In the meantime, we're here:
It is noteworthy that many gun owners will proudly brag of the arsenals they own.
Now if it were their porn stash would they be so bragging publicly?
Perhaps that is the way the debate should be painted: as one of shame.