The posts on this public forum do not necessarily represent the LGC
https://theliberalgunclub.com/phpBB3/
So what is?Hynes57 wrote:http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08 ... -club?lite
What a dumb @$$! I am so sick of having to explain why guns are not the problem in these situations....
That was my point with the question. In the view of most people, the gun IS the problem, because if he hadn't had it, he would not have been able to kill with it when he lost his temper (and maybe mixed in some alcohol). So how do we counter that argument?Hynes57 wrote:What is...?
I have no freaking idea. Hard to argue against my wife's logic that the gun is what allowed him to kill 3 people. If was able to toss someone out on his arse prior to his coming in and gunning 3 people down then clearly it was the gun that allowed him to commit the crime since i would have just tossed him again had he came back with fists...Still.. i cannot buy the line that the gun caused this issue as it is just a tool...The dude needed a hug or something growing up....Somewhere somehow this man developed a sense that his needs were most important and denying those needs was grounds for murder....sounds like a small child that has not yet learned that the world does not revolve around him/her....
.Simmer down wrote:The shooter is a "dissatisfied patron." Who doesn't leave a topless bar dissatisfied?
I can name a few where you leave very satisfiedSimmer down wrote:The shooter is a "dissatisfied patron." Who doesn't leave a topless bar dissatisfied?
Sounds like the clubs out on the West Side back in the old days. There was always the back rooms where you could get a dance too.whitey wrote:I can name a few where you leave very satisfied
The gun was not the root cause of this guy's propensity to act out with violence. The gun allowed him to realize this potential with greater efficiency than another weapon such as a pointy stick, for example. The majority of firearm offenses are committed by those with an existing history of violence, unless a mix of alcohol and anger can compel an otherwise non-violent person to commit intentional homicide. I'm sure it happens but I have never seen someone lose their moral judgement so completely, and I've been around many angry drunks in my time. I'm sure there's plenty of literature (that I'm too lazy to reference) out there that addresses the issue from a psychological perspective.Awake wrote:That was my point with the question. In the view of most people, the gun IS the problem, because if he hadn't had it, he would not have been able to kill with it when he lost his temper (and maybe mixed in some alcohol). So how do we counter that argument?Hynes57 wrote:What is...?
I have no freaking idea. Hard to argue against my wife's logic that the gun is what allowed him to kill 3 people. If was able to toss someone out on his arse prior to his coming in and gunning 3 people down then clearly it was the gun that allowed him to commit the crime since i would have just tossed him again had he came back with fists...Still.. i cannot buy the line that the gun caused this issue as it is just a tool...The dude needed a hug or something growing up....Somewhere somehow this man developed a sense that his needs were most important and denying those needs was grounds for murder....sounds like a small child that has not yet learned that the world does not revolve around him/her....
I think you would have used one of these.punkinlobber wrote:In my younger years, if I had a rage on, I could have done a he'll of a lot more damage with a machete. It would have even been far more psychologically damaging than any firearm.
I'd like a little mustard on that biscuit.
I have one of these, http://www.simpsonltd.com/product_info. ... s_id=19630 My uncle was issued it during WWII, he wasn't a corpsman he was a raider. He brought it home with him after he mustered out and I inherited it from him. I use it when I camp.punkinlobber wrote:I have several. Raising hell since Guadalcanal and still going strong!
No he was not a Carlson raider. He was in one of the other raider units. He didn't talk about it much. I've only seen a couple of pictures of him in the Marines, lifting weights with a lucky strike hanging out of his mouth, looked like he could bend horse shoes.punkinlobber wrote:Uncle was one of Carlson"s Raiders!
Hoorah!
I remember a case in Fort Worth, back in the 60's, when a guy got tossed out of a club and he returned, later, and fire bombed the place. If I recall correctly, more than 3 people were killed. One of the people killed was a girl I had gone to school with a few years earlier. Guns are probably more often used in these multiple murder cases because they are so accessible; however, regardless of the tool, a nut WILL find a way. Now, having said that, I do believe we should find a way to make it more difficult for nuts to gain access to the "typical" tool he/she uses to kill people. Sensible gun control would probably help.Awake wrote:That was my point with the question. In the view of most people, the gun IS the problem, because if he hadn't had it, he would not have been able to kill with it when he lost his temper (and maybe mixed in some alcohol). So how do we counter that argument?Hynes57 wrote:What is...?
I have no freaking idea. Hard to argue against my wife's logic that the gun is what allowed him to kill 3 people. If was able to toss someone out on his arse prior to his coming in and gunning 3 people down then clearly it was the gun that allowed him to commit the crime since i would have just tossed him again had he came back with fists...Still.. i cannot buy the line that the gun caused this issue as it is just a tool...The dude needed a hug or something growing up....Somewhere somehow this man developed a sense that his needs were most important and denying those needs was grounds for murder....sounds like a small child that has not yet learned that the world does not revolve around him/her....
CafeRisque on 75 just south of Gainesville. Never had a problem going home with one of the ladies.whitey wrote:I can name a few where you leave very satisfiedSimmer down wrote:The shooter is a "dissatisfied patron." Who doesn't leave a topless bar dissatisfied?
