Is Joe the Plumber correct??

[UaVaj]

And, as has been pointed out by several people, it's a MEANINGLESS fact.

And, in case you're still having problems understanding that:

meaningless: having no meaning; especially : lacking any significance.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/meaningless

an undisputed fact is now a meaningless fact just because a few fools thinks so?

based on this ill philosophy. wondering if the allied troop in Afghanistan war (or any fire fight) would gain an edge, if they just start shooting the guns instead actually shooting the enemy behind the gun?

yeal, that just might be the answer to all this violence. :biggrin:

 

[JEDIYoda]

MomentsofSanity --http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...people/1041591

There. Now you can drop the whole stupid argument. Unless of course them surviving is a bad thing.

You have to be a blooming idiot if you believe the gun intentionally went off by itself!!

 

[OutHouse]

I think the issue isn't is he correct, but is he a retarded moron tossing out a strawman because he's callous piece of shit.

i see this term thrown around a lot in P&N, and used wrong 99% of the time, this is one of them.

 

[Victorian Gray]

an undisputed fact is now a meaningless fact just because a few fools thinks so?

based on this ill philosophy. wondering if the allied troop in Afghanistan war (or any fire fight) would gain an edge, if they just start shooting the guns instead actually shooting the enemy behind the gun?

yeal, that just might be the answer to all this violence. :biggrin:

I've heard that the rutabaga crop will be good this year. That's probably because a butterfly farted in the Amazon.

 

[fskimospy]

an undisputed fact is now a meaningless fact just because a few fools thinks so?

based on this ill philosophy. wondering if the allied troop in Afghanistan war (or any fire fight) would gain an edge, if they just start shooting the guns instead actually shooting the enemy behind the gun?

yeal, that just might be the answer to all this violence. :biggrin:

Well then clearly you have no issue with Americans constructing their own nuclear weapons, correct?

 

[Newell Steamer]

I am OK, so you can just go fuck yourself - however, when you exhibit behavior that bothers/offends me, you bet your ass I'll scream, kick and yell to get you to stop.

Welcome, to conservative America.

 

[JockoJohnson]

The issue has nothing to do with what happened in SB. There are tons of cases where mentally ill people buy guns and murder dozens. Holmes and Lanza come to mind, and that's just in the last few years.


One thing I can guarantee you: If Elliot Roger had shot plumbers kids he would change his mind.


Also California's Gun control laws are anything but restrictive. So you can't buy full auto weapons and you have to make a request 7 days in advance? OMG so hard, who the hell plans a $500+ purchase 7 days in advance?


WHY CAN'T I BUY GUNS AT TOYS R US MUH RIGHTS!

WAAAAAHHH! We should restrict guns even further. Think of DUH CHILDRUHN!!! You like childruhn, don't you? See how much of a fucking retard you sound like.

 

[JockoJohnson]

Why are we not investing more in mental health and evaluation? My guess is that it is easier to blame the inanimate objects that can't fight back. Maybe there are legitimate reasons and someone can enlighten me.

 

[Engineer]

Why are we not investing more in mental health and evaluation? My guess is that it is easier to blame the inanimate objects that can't fight back. Maybe there are legitimate reasons and someone can enlighten me.

Because it's expensive and nobody wants to pay for it?!?

 

[fskimospy]

Why are we not investing more in mental health and evaluation? My guess is that it is easier to blame the inanimate objects that can't fight back. Maybe there are legitimate reasons and someone can enlighten me.

Maybe we should do both.

 

[UaVaj]

when the next gun kill someone. just put the gun in jail/prison. do not harm the human operating the gun. it is the gun's fault.

eventually all guns will be in jail/prison.

total genius.


btw. when do we get to nuclear, cars, knifes, spoons, etc.

also. what do you do when none of these inanimate objects are used to kill.
like that lady that left her 3yr for 20 hours and the kid died. looks like nobody goes to jail/prison. not even a spoon.

 

[Engineer]

btw. when do we get to nuclear,

Based on your logic, everyone should be able to own a nuke. I agree and have written my Congressman with your very story of the shotgun. I think he will agree too.

 

[Genx87]

Based on your logic, everyone should be able to own a nuke. I agree and have written my Congressman with your very story of the shotgun. I think he will agree too.

I don't advocate private citizens owning a nuclear device. However I also don't understand the argument that psychopaths like Putin, Obama, or any other leader who is willing to kill to preserve power should be trusted more with these weapons than say Bill Gates.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't advocate private citizens owning a nuclear device. However I also don't understand the argument that psychopaths like Putin, Obama, or any other leader who is willing to kill to preserve power should be trusted more with these weapons than say Bill Gates.

Because those leaders are subject to much much MUCH greater constraints than a private citizen. I mean if Obama or Putin (yes, even putin) decided to go nuts tomorrow and start lobbing nuclear weapons around the outcome would not be nuclear war, they would be overthrown and jailed. There are a large number of people who have to go along with their decision in order to actually launch, with a private citizen there is no one.

 

[Genx87]

Because those leaders are subject to much much MUCH greater constraints than a private citizen. I mean if Obama or Putin (yes, even putin) decided to go nuts tomorrow and start lobbing nuclear weapons around the outcome would not be nuclear war, they would be overthrown and jailed. There are a large number of people who have to go along with their decision in order to actually launch, with a private citizen there is no one.

So if a leader lobs a nuclear device and kill thousands we should be ok because they may be overthrown and land in jail. If a private citizen like Bill Gates does the same what would happen? I'd guess death instantly in a fireball. MAD doesn't only apply to a state.

Again, I don't advocate such a scenario. But at the same time find it interesting how we as a society are fine with people like Putin or Obama having access to them while being scared shitless of the Bill Gates of the world.

 

[MtnMan]

What do all the mass killings (regardless of the method used to kill) have in common?

Oh yea! mentally deranged people that fell through the cracks.

The last one, 3 stabbed, 3 shot, 1 sick fuck, and what was all the press about, guns.

 

[Engineer]

What do all the mass killings (regardless of the method used to kill) have in common?

Men in their late teens / early 20's?

 

[zephyrprime]

Why are we not investing more in mental health and evaluation? My guess is that it is easier to blame the inanimate objects that can't fight back. Maybe there are legitimate reasons and someone can enlighten me.

In this particular case, it seems like he had a lot mental health evaluations. The reason why they didn't amount to anything is that no one wants to institutionalize anyone and deprive them of their liberty until the person presents a clear threat to himself and others.

 

[fskimospy]

What do all the mass killings (regardless of the method used to kill) have in common?

Oh yea! mentally deranged people that fell through the cracks.

The last one, 3 stabbed, 3 shot, 1 sick fuck, and what was all the press about, guns.

It was actually 3 stabbed, 11 shot (3 fatally). Does that explain it?

 

[Daverino]

A letter to the editor of the Hartford Courant by Donald K. Martin on March 19th.

"Yesterday I placed a B83 nuclear bomb on the front porch, gave it an arming key, and noticing it had no legs, placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around. I left it alone and went about my business.

While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy across the street picked up my yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign near my house.

After 10 hours, I checked on the B83 nuclear bomb. It was still sitting in the wheelchair. It had not rolled outside and It had not killed anyone in spite of many opportunities that had been presented. It had not even armed itself.

Can you imagine how surprised I was with all the hype about how dangerous nuclear weapons are and how they kill people? Either the media is wrong and the nuclear weapons never vaporized hundreds of thousands of people or I’m in possession of the laziest nuclear weapon in the world.

So now I’m off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat."

 

[fskimospy]

So if a leader lobs a nuclear device and kill thousands we should be ok because they may be overthrown and land in jail. If a private citizen like Bill Gates does the same what would happen? I'd guess death instantly in a fireball. MAD doesn't only apply to a state.

Again, I don't advocate such a scenario. But at the same time find it interesting how we as a society are fine with people like Putin or Obama having access to them while being scared shitless of the Bill Gates of the world.

No, you misunderstand me. The weapon would likely never be lobbed to begin with.

I mean seriously do you think that if Obama lost his mind this morning and just grabbed the phone screaming "nuke em all!" that it would happen? Very unlikely. First of all, the US operates under the two man rule for all weapons release. The secretary of defense will need to go insane on the same day, not to mention how many other links in the chain would have to go along.

This is not the case with a private citizen. Therefore there's a REALLY good reason to have them in Obama's hands instead of bill gates. (And I love bill gates!)

 

[UaVaj]

No, you misunderstand me. The weapon would likely never be lobbed to begin with.

I mean seriously do you think that if Obama lost his mind this morning and just grabbed the phone screaming "nuke em all!" that it would happen? Very unlikely. First of all, the US operates under the two man rule for all weapons release. The secretary of defense will need to go insane on the same day, not to mention how many other links in the chain would have to go along.

This is not the case with a private citizen. Therefore there's a REALLY good reason to have them in Obama's hands instead of bill gates. (And I love bill gates!)

you think you got it all covered. what about the kid in the bird carrying the nuke. say he lost his mind and wanted to play angry birds. :biggrin:

weapon is only as safe as its keeper.

base on your ill philosophy. no need to lock up the kid (he might get off on an insanity plea). it was the nuke that did all the vaporizing. find all the scraps from the nuke and put all that scrap in prison. case solved.

 

[fskimospy]

you think you got it all covered. what about the kid in the bird carrying the nuke. say he lost his mind and wanted to play angry birds. :biggrin:

weapon is only as safe as its keeper.

base on your ill philosophy. no need to lock up the kid (he might get off on an insanity plea). it was the nuke that did all the vaporizing. find all the scraps from the nuke and put all that scrap in prison. case solved.

Lol. You idiot.

Pointing out that your argument that guns can't kill people by themselves is stupid doesn't mean that I therefore take the opposite stupid view that weapons alone kill. I have no idea why you insist on embarrassing yourself by repeating this.

 

[UaVaj]

mr. president with a two man rule is okay. but not the kid in the bird with the nuke nor mr. gate.

where do you make up these rules? do you make them up as you go?

your conviction is so deep. you choose to be blind to a little reality. and why resort to name calling when you are proven ill. is that all you can resort to? name calling?

at least try site some legit info to support your conviction. still waiting on that one measly occasion where a gun killed something all by itself without the human behind it. even a spoon example will suffice if you are unable to find a gun example.

 

[Engineer]

mr. president with a two man rule is okay. but not the kid in the bird with the nuke nor mr. gate.

where do you make up these rules? do you make them up as you go?

Why does it have to stop with guns don't kill people, people kill people. Why can't it be dynamite or nukes? I think, based on your outstanding argument, that we should be able to have all of those things, especially since they, by themselves, don't kill anyone.

Do you not agree?