Connecticut Shooting Leaves 28 Dead, Including 20 Pupils

[Petit Papillon]

It seemed like you were insulting me and assuming that it was directed at me, saying "Talking to a wall" is definitely going to receive a similarly rude response. My opinion is obviously the least popular, what sort of reaction am I supposed to have to "peace and love, you are stupid"?

Wall - moron.

There is a significant difference. If you don't see that, then I'm sorry for you. And I didn't call you stupid, you put that in my mouth. So yeah. Watch out or next time you earn your first point.

[Love'sReject]

Again, just because you can't get something off the streets does not justify it being legalized (otherwise, why wasn't legislature passed to allow everyone to buy coke in the 80s? and that's only a little "harmless drug" not a "weapon").

A major fallacy is the "huurrr, uhh, derp, that Colorado massacre wouldn't have happened if derp movie patrons were allowed to carry guns durr...." I think most likely patrons would increase the casualties because the common gun carrying citizen is not very smart.

[Hotaru]

Wall - moron.

There is a significant difference. If you don't see that, then I'm sorry for you. And I didn't call you stupid, you put that in my mouth. So yeah. Watch out or next time you earn your first point.

So then it's perfectly acceptable for me to say that talking to you is like talking to a wall? And that's not an actionable offense?

[Hotaru]

Again, just because you can't get something off the streets does not justify it being legalized (otherwise, why wasn't legislature passed to allow everyone to buy coke in the 80s? and that's only a little "harmless drug" not a "weapon").

You aren't comparing similar things. Possessing coke doesn't have an upside that I'm aware of... xD

[Love'sReject]

You aren't comparing similar things. Possessing coke doesn't have an upside that I'm aware of... xD

Any druggie could probably rationalize it, in the way gun-toting nutbags can. Anyone can virtually justify anything with a specious, well articulated argument. Doesn't prove they're right.

[Petit Papillon]

So then it's perfectly acceptable for me to say that talking to you is like talking to a wall? And that's not an actionable offense?

Can't believe I need to explain to you what "talking to a wall" means. It means you are STUBBORN. IS IT OFFENSIVE TO YOU? WELL I guess not. WOULD YOU BE OFFENDED BY A WORD "MORON"? I guess yeah. So watch your mouth next time. If people you know allow you to call them moron for free, then do that, but I'm not your friend, and we don't know each other.

[Hotaru]

Can't believe I need to explain to you what "talking to a wall" means. It means you are STUBBORN. IS IT OFFENSIVE TO YOU? WELL I guess not. WOULD YOU BE OFFENDED BY A WORD "MORON"? I guess yeah. So watch your mouth next time. If people you know allow you to call them moron for free, then do that, but I'm not your friend, and we don't know each other.

Believe me, not being a mod's pal doesn't give me nightmares. I think you need to understand that you aren't the center of the world, orange traffic cone name or not. What one thing means to you means something else to somebody else. To me, when that phrase is used, it doesn't mean stubborn, it means stupid. You could have said the same phrase to anyone else I know and they'd have had just as nasty of a reaction, it's similar to, "Talking to you is like talking to a box of rocks". And if I think someone is calling me stupid, yes, I respond in kind. If that truly isn't what you meant I apologize but even if you said I'm stubborn, so is everyone involved in the argument, I'm no different.

Any druggie could probably rationalize it, in the way gun-toting nutbags can. Anyone can virtually justify anything with a specious, well articulated argument. Doesn't prove they're right.

Tell me why reasonable, responsible citizens with permits shouldn't have them and I'll concede the point. It's really that simple.

[Petit Papillon]

Then next time check dictionary if you're not sure, before you start insulting people around. You non-center of the world. Geez...

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/be-like-talking-to-a-brick-wall

If I weren't a mod, I would just report you and you would get infracted anyway. Like this, I'm just giving you a warning by telling you to have some respect to me, as I have to you, cause I could start calling you names as well.

[haxan]

Devastating for everyone, my heart goes out to them. The poor little ones who never had a chance and the survivors whose lives will never be the same, ever again.

[Love'sReject]

Tell me why reasonable, responsible citizens with permits shouldn't have them and I'll concede the point. It's really that simple.

In theory, I GUESS guns might be OK in the hands of reasonable citizens but what's the definition of "reasonable"? What about that guy that was perfectly normal before he went on that shooting rampage at the mall a few days ago? This isn't "Minority Report": we don't have the benefit of precogs.

[Hotaru]

I don't care what that link says, different regions have different word/phrase meanings. This is how language evolves. I'm telling you, say that to someone in my area and you'd get either the same response or a punch to the mouth if you were unlucky enough to be talking to someone with a nasty temper. It's comparable to saying, "Talking to you is like talking to a box of rocks". You can keep arguing and threatening me all day long but being a mod doesn't mean I have to talk like you and think like you so this will be my last response on the issue.

Everyone who says they don't think people should carry guns can't say why. They just don't think it sounds "good" and crack sarcastic jokes. Every response thus far has been an exaggeration or a comparison that makes no sense. And yet in a few minutes' time, I just gave real examples of instances where guns saved lives, no jokes, no exaggerations. Should those people have died? Is this what you are seriously suggesting? Because if they hadn't had them, chances are, they wouldn't be around now. An innocent little baby, really? We're all crying over these little kids dying but we don't think the mother who protected herself and her baby should have had a gun? What alternative, in that situation, is there? You call the cops, they get there when they can. That's the problem - they get there when they can. For some of us, that's not a trip down the street, that's quite a ride. When a neighbor of mine called the cops a few years back, it took close to half an hour to get here. Half a damn hour. But walk in on almost anyone's house along this road and they probably have an entire gun rack. We've had one since I was a kid and it's still in our hallway. I don't personally like guns but I can't ignore the fact that responsible gun carriers have a point.

So are you suggesting that if we had banned guns, this psycho wouldn't have had access to them? That no one would outside the police force?


ALSO, what is so special about cops? Are we also suggesting no cop has ever been convicted of murder? lmfao

[Love'sReject]

The amount of guns used to assault rather than defend is a hugely disparate ratio so you're deliberately omitting the full picture. It's probably like a 500-1 ratio.

[Hotaru]

The amount of guns used to assault rather than defend is a hugely disparate ratio so you're deliberately omitting the full picture. It's probably like a 500-1 ratio.

And you are deliberating ignoring the main point I'm trying to make - do you really think banning guns will keep stuff like this from happening, knowing damn well that the wrong people will still be armed? All you would effectively be doing is pushing normally law abiding citizens who would have had a registered weapon/permit to look elsewhere, too. Those who wouldn't, probably like that young mother, would just be unarmed and that guy likely would have shot up the school anyways.

I'm asking you directly - could you justify taking away gun rights, basically just because you think it might help but aren't actually sure, knowing that woman and her baby would have come to great harm or even death? Knowing criminals will still get guns, that cop response times are still not always fast enough, would that be good enough?

[Love'sReject]

Why SHOULD they have guns to begin with? They serve NO purpose except to hunt animals which I LOATHE (hunting should be illegal), penile extension or for crime. We're not going to be invaded by the British are even by Commies a la Red Dawn: there is certifiably no national interest in keeping citizens armed.


Yes, I would STILL justify taking gun rights away (I don't even think calling them "rights" is correct; it's a PRIVILEGE to live in a nation that allows morons to have guns).

[Hotaru]

Why SHOULD they have guns to begin with?

We've covered this.

They serve NO purpose except to hunt animals which I LOATHE (hunting should be illegal),

So you're a vegetarian?

Yes, I would STILL justify taking gun rights away (I don't even think calling them "rights" is correct; it's a PRIVILEGE to live in a nation that allows morons to have guns).

Then don't carry a gun, it's that simple. You still haven't given any reason for why you shouldn't be allowed to have one if you are responsible but I've given you reasons why you should. Your argument amounts to, "I just don't like it okay?"

I'm going to take a break and wrap some Christmas presents, let me know if you think of a valid reason without resorting to exaggerations.