Skip to main content

View Diary: Shooting at an elementary school in CT (329 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, this is criminal gun use (0+ / 0-)

    This is not legal gun ownership.  It is not responsible gun ownership.  It is a criminal action by a homocidal maniac.

    If the laws banning the murder of children didn't stop him, why do you think laws banning gun ownership will work?

    •  Stop spamming the diary with strawmen (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, Anima, newpioneer, Drobin

      No one is proposing banning gun ownership

      •  No one? (0+ / 0-)

        I've counted about a dozen comments here saying "repeal the 2nd Amendment"  "take away all the guns"  "well regulated militia"  "fuck the supreme court"

        There are plenty of people proposing the full ban of gun ownership, and full violation of the Constitution.  Why don't you tell them to stop spamming.

    •  And if we outlaw (0+ / 0-)

      child molestation, then only outlaws will be fondling children. Hey, did child rape laws stop Jerry Sandusky?

      •  Laws deal with after the crime (0+ / 0-)

        Child rape laws are what put child molesters behind bars for life, same as with murder laws.  Now if you'd like to make murder of a child with a gun a death penalty case, fine by me.  But I think child murder should already bring the death penalty.

        I didn't say get rid of murder laws.  I'm saying that someone willing to risk life in prison or the death penalty already, and willing and ready to kill, isn't going to be deterred by a few extra gun laws.

        What does violating the gun laws do that violating the murder laws does not?

        •  Don't be a Dick (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Anima, blackjackal

          The issue is about making it more difficult to get guns, and thereby reducing the number of guns available to the Loonies.

          Today some Loonie in China attacked a school with a knife and injured 20 kids - none died.

          Linky here

          So, do you understand the concept of Pareto optimality?  If we can prevent one incident like the one in Sandy Hook, then this is an improvement. Take the guns away from just one fuckup is a net gain for society.

          •  Then do it on an individual level (0+ / 0-)

            If you want to start rounding up Loonies, finding them criminally insane by a jury of their peers, and thereby strip away their 2nd Amendment rights, fine.

            Do it on an individual basis, defining individual fuckups by their actions.  Get your gain for society one by one by one.

            I also have no problem with background checks.  But if a person has no priors and passes the check, by what basis do you define that person as a Loonie?

            It is the desire to label everyone as guilty until proven innocent, and the removal of rights on a group/regional basis that I disagree with.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site