Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, July 10, 2014

Ronald Lee Haskell, 33, accused of killing four children and two adults and critically injuring a 15-year-old girl in a shooting in a home in the Houston suburb of Spring has been charged with capital murder. Killed in the shooting were Stephen Stay, 39, and Katie Stay, 33, and their sons, 4 and 14, and daughters, 7 and 9. Prosecutors said Haskell tied up the victims, placed them face down and then shot each of them in the head execution-style. He broke into the home demanding demanded to know the whereabouts of his estranged wife, who was related to the Stays, authorities said.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Perhaps if families employed armed guards or if we armed our kids?

#1 | Posted by danni at 2014-07-09 09:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

No! NO! NO!

An armed society is a polite society. Guns prevent trouble. And nobody gets "shot". That's gunist!

Just saved 125 Gunnut posts.

#2 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-07-09 09:09 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

two dancing bananas,please.

#3 | Posted by coyote at 2014-07-09 09:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Awesome. Cue the gun grabber hysteria.

#4 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-09 09:16 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

More 'news' without socioeconomic correlation. i.e. another political football.

Criminal = action without state license.

#5 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-07-09 09:26 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

...But lets ignore the 82 people shot during 84 hours in chicago over the weekend.

#6 | Posted by justanoversight at 2014-07-09 09:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

#6

Their guns say it was unintentional on their part. They would just as soon have been designed as hair dryers.

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2014-07-09 09:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not far from where I live. Looked at houses in that area before we bought this one.

Sad about the kids. Domestic disputes are a real bitch.

#8 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-09 09:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

the 82 people shot during 84 hours

Nobody gets "shot". That's gunist! Just say 82 people received Second Amendment plumbum IVs.

Thank you.

The NRA

#9 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-07-09 09:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many white people have to die before something is done about gun control?

#10 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-07-09 10:06 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"...But lets ignore the 82 people shot during 84 hours in chicago over the weekend."

You missed all 100+ posts on that thread, did you?

#11 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-09 10:10 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"...But lets ignore the 82 people shot during 84 hours in chicago over the weekend."

You missed all 100+ posts on that thread, did you?

#11 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-

let me clean that up for him a little

lets ignore the 82 people shot during 84 hours in chicago over the weekend, but let's go BESERK about gun control now...

there you go....

SO coyete...dancing bananas....does that mean you're happy people are DEAD >

#12 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-07-09 10:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm a hard-core liberal from a long line of them, but I also own guns.

What I've asked everyone is: WHAT do you think will solve the problem?

Give me specifics and the time-frame.

Thanks.

#13 | Posted by larry609 at 2014-07-09 10:44 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Meh. Shootings, er, "Freedom-ings" happen.

These folks are all Officially Free now (well, at least 5 of them are).

It's in the Constitution. So, so sorry.

There is nothing we can do.

Because.... This is America.

The Land of the There is Nothing We Can Do People(because it is in the Constitution).

That is The Reason.

So, Happy 4th of July and let Freedom-ings Ring!

Semper Fi

#14 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-09 10:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

#8 | Posted by et_al

A very compassionate, Texas style eulogy. by et_al

(In most states, domestic disputes are settled in family court, or divorce court, not with the slaughter of 3 children)

#15 | Posted by SammyAZ_RI at 2014-07-09 10:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

My bad.

6 Free Peoples now. But, I suppose that number rises steadily around the country so we really shouldn't think about that.

But, as I said, Nothing we can do.

It says so in the Constitution.

Sorry.

Let's not talk about this anymore, OK? Do we have to go on and on again?

I am pretty sure it will go away soon like all the others and then we can get back to our Freedoms.


Semper Fi Ya'll.

#16 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-09 10:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What I've asked everyone is: WHAT do you think will solve the problem?"

Nothing. It's too late. The US simply has about 100 million more people than it can support.

#17 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-09 11:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing. It's too late. The US simply has about 100 million more people than it can support.

#17 | Posted by REDIAL at

really ? interesting response....

so explain that a little further if you would...

#18 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-07-09 11:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

"so explain that a little further if you would..."

Too much poverty. Not enough jobs. Too much crime. Too much stress.

Too many people.

#19 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-09 11:07 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

What I've asked everyone is: WHAT do you think will solve the problem?

-------

Address the socioeconomic issues that cause most of these things to happen instead of building more prisons.

1. end the drug war

2. end the corporate person

3. end the american empire

4. end the american police state

5. use the resources saved to make the system more egalitarian

These things wouldn't solve the problems entirely, but they would definitely help.

#20 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-07-09 11:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

End the drug war.
Restart the Job Corps
Start infrastructure rebuilding (that's 10M jobs)
Feed and educate the poor.

300M guns - and most killings are with illegal weapons.

NO gun law will solve the problem.

#21 | Posted by larry609 at 2014-07-09 11:17 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The solution is simple, Education.
Fund the schools until they work.
In business no one questions the maxim that you get what you pay for. In business no one complains that you have to pay top money to get the best talent and that you have to build and maintain the best facilities to get the best results.
Pay teachers well and build super schools, if that means a 1:1 ratio in the Ghetto then do it. The investment will pay off when all the future muggers turn into future doctors and engineers.

#22 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2014-07-09 11:24 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#22 | POSTED BY TFDNIHILIST

Noble idea but wont work for two reason

Right would say that implies massive federal spending, contrary to the idea of small government.

Left would oppose it on the grounds that without a poor constituency their voter block would disappear.

So its kill from both sides. Which is why Ive always been an advocate of charter schools.

#23 | Posted by aescal at 2014-07-09 11:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

"so explain that a little further if you would..."

Too much poverty. Not enough jobs. Too much crime. Too much stress.

Too many people.

#19 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014

hmmm ..okay

#24 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-07-09 11:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

Right would say that implies massive federal spending, contrary to the idea of small government.

Left would oppose it on the grounds that without a poor constituency their voter block would disappear.

#23 | Posted by aescal

You're half correct.
Who do the more educated vote for?

#25 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2014-07-09 11:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

A very compassionate, Texas style eulogy. by et_al

I acknowledge the victims and the tragedy of their deaths. You, and others, mock that tragedy.

The question remains unanswered, what can be done? Run and hide, as you suggest in your anecdotes about vacating any area you perceive a gun may be present? Obviously not a policy solution.

This was a domestic problem, guns or no the suspect was intent on harm. Thankfully, the local cops avoided the suicide of that suspect. They were unable to succeed with a friend of mine a few years ago.

What more do you (generic) want?

Complete, total absence of guns? Or would something less satisfy your lust?

#26 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-09 11:46 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Who do the more educated vote for?

Which ever party benefits them most.

Doctors, lawyers, teachers, professors, those that recieve trickle down federal $ tend to vote left.

Wall Street, career military, engineers etc tend to vote right.

Everyone has forgotten about whats best the country and instead votes based on whats best for them. Which is why we will never reach an accord on gun control. The left wants everyone disarmed with the disallusion they and society will be safer, that criminals will know guns are illegal to use in crimes and there they wont use them. The Right fails to comprehend that to prevent loonies from obtaining guns you have to have a way to identify the loonies, and they have to have the gun industry and lobbyists stop influencing them.

#27 | Posted by aescal at 2014-07-09 11:54 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Which ever party benefits them most.

#27 | Posted by aescal

Study after study shows that the more educated someone is, the more likely they vote Dem.

#28 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2014-07-10 12:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

How many white people have to die before something is done about gun control?

#10 | POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT AT 2014-07-09 10:06 PM | REPLY | FLAG:I DUNNO

Well WW1 and WW2 guns killed a lot of white people. when the two wars are combined the tally is like 60 or 70 million in an 8 yer time span. I think guns make them want to breed which is why they are so enamoured with them. Better than viagra or booze or viagra and booze.

Wanton slaughter only makes them want more.. and more.. and more. Tjhat is why righty wihties are so against abortion. They want to make sure they have a supply of people to shoot.

#29 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2014-07-10 12:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Doctors, lawyers, teachers, professors, those that recieve trickle down federal $ tend to vote left."

Why didn't you include "career military" in this category since federal $ pay for their entire life?

#30 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-10 12:25 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Too much poverty. Not enough jobs. Too much crime. Too much stress.

Too many people.

Too many mind. No mind.

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2014-07-10 12:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

#29 | Posted by RightisTrite

Can we get a "Bull[...]" flag?

And while I'm asking questions of our dear leader, how come you banned climate denial threads over the inevitable dishonest BS that fills them but post or allow others to post cherry picked shooting threads despite the inevitable BS that will fill them?

#32 | Posted by jpw at 2014-07-10 12:59 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#28 the more educated or more indoctrinated to the liberal leaning idealistic educational system? Regardless, youre trying to imply that the smartestest people vote democrat because a study says so. Theres plenty of youtube case studies to prove the contrary as well. Not looking for a back and forth of 'mine is better than yours'. You arent working with the strongest argument there. From the start your perceived link to your fellow intellectuals betrays you...

Elsewise: #29... epic trolling! People are going to kill people. Probably nothing will change that and until it does id like to keep my right to purchase a piece even if it only ever sees the range. If there was a more effective tool, id use that.

#33 | Posted by monkeylogic42 at 2014-07-10 03:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

#33 | Posted by monkeylogic42

The name says it all.

#34 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2014-07-10 07:38 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Too much poverty. Not enough jobs.

Other countries with more poverty and economic problems don't have the levels of gun violence we do.

#35 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 07:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

#31 | POSTED BY JPW
"Too many mind. No mind."

This is a reference to...? Can't quite recall.

#36 | Posted by TheTom at 2014-07-10 08:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

#35 | Posted by rcade

They just throw acid at each other instead.

#37 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-10 08:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

don't have the levels of gun violence we d

and they dont enjoy the civil liberties or freedoms we have as well.

#38 | Posted by aescal at 2014-07-10 09:16 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

people are inheriently killers and allowing guns is crazy. we do enough damage to the waorld without guns.

#39 | Posted by junebubbles at 2014-07-10 12:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

and they dont enjoy the civil liberties or freedoms we have as well.

The U.S. isn't the only country in the world with lots of individual freedoms. It's possible to have a free country without the massive level of gun violence and all the spree killings. The belief that we're just paying a price for our "freedom" is NRA-encouraged lunacy.

#40 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 01:04 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Here's the dad, mom and four kids that Haskell killed. One -- the oldest -- survived and led police to his capture as he drove off looking for other relatives to kill:

ww2.hdnux.com

#41 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 01:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why wont liberals blame the individual instead of the tool he used? Oh that's right, it's too hard.

Just because one idiot cant handle an individual freedom doesn't mean you need to take mine..

#42 | Posted by boaz at 2014-07-10 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Why wont liberals blame the individual instead of the tool he used?

Why won't you admit that guns are designed for killing and great at killing and start to consider sensible measures to make them harder for killers to obtain? It seems like you care more about defending guns than defending people like those kids who just got murdered execution style.

No one would be taking away your freedom by making it harder to obtain guns. You'd still be able to get them.

#43 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Guys like this are why I can't be completely against the death penalty despite the fact that I know that we wrongly convict people all the time.

This piece of crap doesn't need to be around. He was caught red handed. There should be a way to to get rid of garbage like this without the endless appeals and without opening the door to executing people who were convicted in error. But there probably isnt'.

Also, this guy held the cops off for three hours and none of them shot him? What the hell?

#44 | Posted by Sully at 2014-07-10 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Also, this guy held the cops off for three hours and none of them shot him?

He didn't give them a reason to shoot him, apparently. During the standoff he only pointed his gun at himself.

We talk here often about concerns over increased police militarization, but here's one example where it helped a situation:

ww2.hdnux.com

Haskell is in the car between those two armored vehicles. There was no way he could harm the occupants of either vehicle, and they trapped him there.

#45 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 01:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"start to consider sensible measures to make them harder for killers to obtain?"

Well offer one up. So far no one has. The crap we are told is sensible is absolutely ridiculous.
Ask yourself was this guy a law abiding citizen?
If he was then he would be able to get a gun regardless of background checks anyway.

If he was not then the law was already preventing him from getting a gun.

Either way additional laws would not help.

Just because there is a tragic story does not mean we should let go of logic and reason. If you think there should be something done then somebody needs to come up with a real idea, as i said so far there has not been anything. Universal background check, limitations on weapon types and aesthetic limitations do not meet any standard of reason and are proven by fact to be useless. So what new idea do you have?

#46 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Well offer one up. So far no one has.

No one will ever offer a gun control measure you call sensible. You're on the furthest fringe of gun-rights extremism. If you had seen Adam Lanza walking into Newtown Elementary School carrying guns you would've thought to yourself, "Cool -- that guy's making the school safer!"

#47 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

No one will ever offer a gun control measure you call sensible."

I am not the measure. Reason should be the measure. Just stating that they will help is not the same as having reason to believe it.

So again what additional gun law could have stopped this?
Think about it. Can you think of one?

Repetition of the same flawed logic does not make it less flawed.

If i have to be fringe in your eyes to subscribe to reason and logic overruling emotional response so be it.

Come up with a reason why anything that has been suggested would have any real effect or maybe it is time to stop parroting the same ridiculous claims.

#48 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"You're on the furthest fringe of gun-rights extremism."

Extreamism?

I guess that puts me with the founders of the nation. I would rather be there then with the irrational people who look for something to pacify their fears without bothering to actually think if it has any effect.

#49 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

...start to consider sensible measures to make them harder for killers to obtain?

Most of the legislation I've seen isn't too sensible. If something new is introduced let me know.

Haskell is in the car between those two armored vehicles.

Those military vehicles showed up very late in the process. At the beginning, and at least an hour and a half in, officers took refuge behind their vehicles. There were several others in different positions before the military arrived. There was a sniper lying by the right front tire of the bottom police car. The left rear tire of the idiot's car was flat. The idiot was lost and had nowhere to go. Granted they didn't know what else he had but in pictures and video I saw, the idiot was holding a cell phone to his right ear and what looked like a revolver to his left. [...]

#50 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-10 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

I guess that puts me with the founders of the nation.

You're fetishizing the founding fathers just like you fetishize guns. As president, George Washington put down an insurrection of 500 armed men who didn't want to pay a whiskey tax.

If the founding fathers lived in a world like ours, they'd likely be glad the Second Amendment allows reasonable restrictions to be placed on gun ownership, as the Heller decision makes clear.

#51 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 02:11 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Those military vehicles showed up very late in the process.

I think it's still useful that they could be used to completely box him in without risk to the cops. I didn't suggest they were the first to keep him there -- just the most effective.

#52 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-10 02:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You're fetishizing the founding fathers just like you fetishize guns."

Funny, they were very clear in their concepts of freedom to have arms. Beyond that there are countless writings of them to people supporting gun ownership to those. Call it a fetish but there is no doubt that then the founders were just as into the fetish as those of us defending reason and rights.

" they'd likely be glad the Second Amendment allows reasonable restrictions to be placed on gun ownership"

Except that they chose not to do so. You think more firepower is a new thing? You think repeating firearm and cannon and rockets did not exist at the time? How in the world can anyone claim they would be for that when the did not say anything about it nor make any effort to curb those?
It's basically saying that "well they wanted it, they just never said nor did anything to that effect" See how ridiculous that statement would be?

" as the Heller decision makes clear."

The Heller decision did not make any contention that the founding fathers supported it only that they believed it was allowable under what was written.

#53 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

I think it's still useful that they could be used to completely box him in without risk to the cops. I didn't suggest they were the first to keep him there -- just the most effective."

Kind of a catch 22 here.
The militarization of the police kept people safe. Is it a good thing? Well without it the safest option would have been to put the guy down. So his life and right to it was preserved. But it would seem that rights are more easily violated then preserved. Conundrum, says i.

#54 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Before guns were invented, people were killing people with swords, knives, clubs, poison and any other thing they could get their hands on.

It's a people thing and not a tool thing. C'est la vie.

#55 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2014-07-10 03:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If the founding fathers lived in a world like ours ....."

They'd think people are idiots for treating the words of people who lived over 200 years ago with the near-religious reverence that many Americans do.

#56 | Posted by Sully at 2014-07-10 03:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'd like to think this pig wouldn't have even made it past my dogs.

#57 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

(no, I'm not a pit person. the last pit that found our place gained 2.25 ounces.)

#58 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 03:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

What color was the gun, and did it have any plastic parts on it? I need to know whether or not I'm scared.

#59 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-10 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Houston - we have a problem!

#60 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2014-07-10 04:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just a 12 gauge Mossberg. I think the trigger guard is plastic, and the safety lever as well.

#61 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 04:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's does not have a pistol grip or a folding or telescoping sock does it?
Cause that would be terrifying.

#62 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's all anyone needs to hunt and protect the home.

#63 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"It's all anyone needs to hunt and protect the home."

No big game?

#64 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 04:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

The big game where he is from is deaf and blind. Their noses don't work either. You could kill them with a mallet I imagine.

#65 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-10 04:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The big game where he is from is deaf and blind."

But how are their pinball skills?

#66 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-10 04:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Mean.

#67 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-10 04:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

Whitetail deer are the biggest game here, with the possible exception of the Legendary Ghost Yeti Cougar. I doubt you could approach either with a mallet, but a battered pickup truck might work, if you leave the lights off and drive real fast.

#68 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 04:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why won't you admit that guns are designed for killing and great at killing and start to consider sensible measures to make them harder for killers to obtain?

1. Some "guns" (I don't call them that, it's a weapon), are made for skeet shooting, hunting, etc. The fact that someone can use them to kill a human doesn't mean they were designed for that. A car can kill someone, was it designed for it?

2. Harder for killers to obtain. Ok, how do you know who is going to be a "killer" ahead of time? Oh, you talking about their records? Don't we already have a law against criminals having weapons?

#69 | Posted by boaz at 2014-07-10 04:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the founding fathers lived in a world like ours, they'd likely be glad the Second Amendment allows reasonable restrictions to be placed on gun ownership

Didn't you admonish me for "projecting" onto the founding fathers when I made a similar comment?

#70 | Posted by boaz at 2014-07-10 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

The pit people are sort of game, if that's what you mean. They like to abandon their beloved pets nearby. Puzzling, though, how some of them drop off litters of weaned puppies, and others drop off adult females when their puppies are about five weeks old. Still, they are useful as an embattled zone to keep liberals away.

#71 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 04:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

I hear the chuckles of superiority from the City People, I used to be one, long ago when cities were *nice* and *fun*, but when the economic system inevitably collapses, the menu here will be turkey, chicken, catfish, venison, squirrels and rabbits for snacks, dove in the fall, ducks if you can stand them, spoonbills and caviar, plus vegetables.

There you will fight for bat soup.

#72 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I'm not sure why this turned into a "gun" violence thread instead of a violence thread. Yes he used a gun - absolutely no disputing that. If he used an Axe would it have made a difference? How about a Hammer? Or a knife? This was a mentally disturbed man who "was going to find his ex-wife and children". Given what he did here - I'm pretty sure they would be dead as well.

What he did wasn't just open fire on a group of people - he tied them up and executed them up close and personal one by one. He was deranged. He didn't use the gun to break in - he just kicked his way in tied up the kids that were there and then lay in wait for the rest of the family. If he smashed their heads with an axe or a hammer or ---- their throats with a knife versus using a gun there would actually be more dead people. The girl would certainly not have survived and the next victims on his list would likely have been dead as well because she wouldn't have been able to call the police.

Yes I feel Guns empower people, but the truth is we are facing a breakdown in mental health in this country. I can hypothesize why but that doesn't matter as much as the fact virtually all elements of society are worried more about control of the tools rather than addressing underlying issues.

#73 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2014-07-10 05:13 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Sorry, I was apparently trying to make it a 'survive the collapse' thread. That may be related to the 'underlying issue' of a terminally ill social construct. A 'Texas Cage Match' comprising people ejected from their native geographies, mostly due to aberrant behavior to wit fanaticism and criminality, spiced with some rapacious forager volunteers. Our inchoate utopia. The rest of the world watches, placing their bets...

#74 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 05:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Some "guns" (I don't call them that, it's a weapon), are made for skeet shooting, hunting, etc. The fact that someone can use them to kill a human doesn't mean they were designed for that. A car can kill someone, was it designed for it?

I call BS on that one...A gun/weapon was designed to kill only more efficiently. We skeet shoot and target practice to get better at killing.

And I am pretty sure hunting with a gun almost always involves killing.

a car was designed for better transportation. Killing is accidental incidental to driving. Not the reason for it. And we actually require insurance for that.

Doesn't matter though. Nothing we can do about it. This is America.

#75 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-10 06:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

And I am pretty sure hunting with a gun almost always involves killing in the end.

(at least the way I have always hunted it is not a successful hunt unless you do)

#76 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-10 06:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Donner Party didn't have to kill their game

#77 | Posted by FlyUntied at 2014-07-10 06:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is a reference to...? Can't quite recall.

Last Samurai.

#73 | Posted by GalaxiePete

And the thread is over. Shut it down.

Next gun story, please. More than likely this can be cut and pasted and end that one too.

#78 | Posted by jpw at 2014-07-10 08:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

#78 | POSTED BY JPW
"Ah, thanks."

#73 | POSTED BY GALAXIEPETE
"I'm not sure why this turned into a "gun" violence thread instead of a violence thread. "
"Yes I feel Guns empower people, but the truth is we are facing a breakdown in mental health in this country."

THIS^^^

#74 | POSTED BY FLYUNTIED

Bonus points for using the phrase "inchoate utopia".

#79 | Posted by TheTom at 2014-07-11 12:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

"We skeet shoot and target practice to get better at killing."

I beg to differ. I shoot a lot, but I never hunt. I shoot skeet to get better at it.

I gave up on rifle target shooting because I found it static and boring.

#80 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-11 12:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Lemme guess. Another white man.

#81 | Posted by klifferd at 2014-07-11 12:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

"What I've asked everyone is: WHAT do you think will solve the problem?
Give me specifics and the time-frame."

Take the Supreme Court out of it by repealing the 2nd Amendment, which will force state legislatures to decide whether they want to be a "gun rights" state. After that, Americans can decide for themselves if they want to live in a Georgia (guns everywhere state) or a Connecticut (most likely to ban guns everywhere state).

#82 | Posted by DCTexan at 2014-07-11 01:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

More "common sense" than any other I've seen, not likely but not unreasonable.

#83 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-11 02:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

On second thought, without the constraint of the Second the feds would slam the "gun rights" states with the "it can do anything" Commerce Clause.

#84 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-11 02:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

Take the Supreme Court out of it

The problem with that is we know some states will not stop at just the 2nd. We know Calis farleft senators will push to ban free speech, considering it "hate", other left leaning states will do away with free press or any media that questions the Obama, Utah would most definitely become a theocracy, NY and its horrible civil rights records would abolish the 4th, making WWBAM (walking while being a minority) grounds for search and seizure, Red states might all of sudden institute voter ID, along with bloodsampling, fingerprinting at the booth etc. Every state is different from the next, and those legislatures might interpret the Constitution differently, pushing for the exact same abolishment as the 2nd.

#85 | Posted by aescal at 2014-07-11 04:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

Most of the killings and shootings in the USA are carried out by a tiny minority of felons or those who are already legally disqualified from owning a firearm. The media and many of great wealth and some politicians claim we can fix that by stripping gun rights from all those that legitimately own firearms for sport or self defense..

#86 | Posted by Robson at 2014-07-11 07:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

Killing is accidental incidental to driving. Not the reason for it. And we actually require insurance for that.

#75 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2014-07-10 06:05 PM | FLAG:

People can and will intentionally weaponize cars. Lets not pretend they don't.

man intentionally kills mother of 10 with car

woman intentionally kills man with car

man intentionally kills woman with car

Oh, and there's at least 1 state that doesn't require even liability insurance, nor seat belts for that matter. That state is currently a blue state.

#87 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-07-11 09:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

"On second thought, without the constraint of the Second the feds would slam the "gun rights" states with the "it can do anything" Commerce Clause."

I believe the 10th Amendment would preclude your concerns over the Commerce Clause.

#88 | Posted by DCTexan at 2014-07-11 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

#48, Salemander, et al,
OK, a sensible law proposal that would help over the long run:
Tag (chemically) all ammunition sold in USA, so that it can be traced back to the person that bought it. A person who provides ammunition to someone that uses it in a crime would be guilty of abetting.

#89 | Posted by mad_as_hell at 2014-07-11 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

Impossible. You're not informed enough to participate. Go away.

#90 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-11 11:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

What do the majority of shooters have in common? are they most likely to be black and male? lets start there. Uh oh, i dont think such a common sense approach will work because the ones that cry most for gun control are liberals, and heaven forbid they hold their protected classes accountable.

#91 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-07-11 11:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

A person who provides ammunition to someone that uses it in a crime would be guilty of abetting.

#89 | POSTED BY MAD_AS_HELL AT 2014-07-11 11:30 AM | FLAG:

How high are you? There's this thing called "intent". I would suggest looking it up.

#92 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-07-11 12:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"OK, a sensible law proposal that would help over the long run:
Tag (chemically) all ammunition sold in USA, so that it can be traced back to the person that bought it. A person who provides ammunition to someone that uses it in a crime would be guilty of abetting."

Well, that would not work for a plethora of reasons. But, i commend you for the effort. You at least tried to think of something that might work. That already puts you light years ahead of the normal gun control freak.

As i said there are many reasons. First being chemical signatures with millions of unique identities is not really a thing. Nor is there a way to accurately test for the minutia that would be needed. Then there is reloading. There would be issues with doctoring signatures. Stolen rounds. Heat modifying signatures. Degradation and reaction. The immense size of the database needed. The incredible manufacturing expense.
Those are just a few of the top of my head.

#93 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-11 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

@sal.. Like was alluded to up thread, I doubt if anything would ever meet your 'test'. If you were serious, though, you would suggest something yourself, perhaps some modified part of my input. It's always easy to throw up obstacles. Reloading? I think few criminals would do that. Database size? Not really a problem with today's tools. Manufacturing expense? They put inventory tags on everything these days. It could be automated. Fact is, you don't want to even try.

#94 | Posted by mad_as_hell at 2014-07-11 12:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

" Reloading? I think few criminals would do that."

You don't think there would be people willing to sell reloaded ammunition?
You really think if you made it knowable who's bullets they were there would be no one that would make any effort to circumvent it?

"Database size? Not really a problem with today's tools."
Billions of unique identifiers every year is no problem? It most certainly is.

Manufacturing expense? They put inventory tags on everything these days. It could be automated."

You are not talking a product identifier such as a bar code saying what that product is. You are talking an infusion of specific chemicals for every box of ammo. That is 20-50 rounds typically. Each box would have to be specifically coded, marked, and kept perfect track of. Then you would have to come up with a way to alter the chemical signature in infinitesimally small ways accurately and inject it into the lead. That's not a thing currently

". If you were serious, though, you would suggest something yourself,"

Sure, they have been suggested. Revolving doors need to go away. 80% of non-suicide or accidental deaths are gang related according to the FBI. Remove those and the problem becomes much much smaller. SO lets look at something that might help, reducing gang activity.
But you are right it is easy to shoot holes in suggestions that obviously won;t do anything but much harder to fix the problem. But that does not in any way suggest we should take the irrational route and just try things that everyone should know have 0% of succeeding so we feel better.

#95 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-11 01:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

C'est la vie.

#55 | Posted by Visitor2

Why are we still talking about this? Nothing can be done.

"C'est la Vie". That's French "Oh Well, another Shooting".

This is America!

We have a Constitution so Nothing Can Be done.

#96 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-11 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ban Rap Music video games and Movies with guns.

#97 | Posted by shirtsbyeric at 2014-07-11 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

People can and will intentionally weaponize cars. Lets not pretend they don't.

You can weaponize most anything if you are clever enough. Especially if it weighs a ton and it is on wheels.

Doesn't mean it was designed for that purpose.

Gun were invented and designed to kill...so let's not pretend they weren't.

#98 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-07-11 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Doesn't mean it was designed for that purpose."

#98 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2014-07-11 01:14 PM | FLAG:

So my friend's Ferret Armored Scout Car, the one with the machine gun turret... definitely not designed for killing. yeah right.

You should acknowledge that not all firearms are made for combat or killing, and not all cars are made for transportation. You would make more coherent arguments.

#99 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-07-11 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

That armored car btw, totally street legal. No background check required.

#100 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-07-11 02:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

I believe the 10th Amendment would preclude your concerns over the Commerce Clause.

It would, until one of the guns from a "gun rights" state traveled across the border into a "gun control" state, harmed someone and cries of safety rang out. Don't be fooled by the power of the "it can do anything" Commerce Clause.

#101 | Posted by et_al at 2014-07-11 02:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

America is a stupid place.

That is all.

#102 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-07-11 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"That armored car btw, totally street legal. No background check required."

Cars don't count. There is not an irrational fear that is propagated against them.

Unless of course it is painted black and has a high capacity fuel tank.

#103 | Posted by salamandagator at 2014-07-11 02:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

#28. Intelligent critical thinking people do not align with either Party. They analyze and vote candidate.

#104 | Posted by Robson at 2014-07-11 11:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Intelligent critical thinking people do not align with either Party. They analyze and vote candidate.

If you aren't a moderate, you'd have to be schizophrenic in your political views to do that. The parties differ on too many major issues for most of their candidates to appeal to people on the other side ideologically.

#105 | Posted by rcade at 2014-07-12 11:42 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

C'mon, Rogers.

"The Parties are the same!" is the meme de jour around here.

Even the far lefties use it, even though it is right out of the 1 percenter Playbook to say there is no difference, so the rabble doesn't really have a choice, so they might as well not vote.

It is a voter apathy promotion strategery.

#106 | Posted by Corky at 2014-07-12 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

""The Parties are the same!" is the meme de jour around here. "

Is it? The parties aren't the same. They differ on social issues, like abortion, gay marriage, gun control and identity politics. Other than that, they are both committed to imperialism, corporatism, and the surveillance state.

#107 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-07-12 03:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

They differ on domestic economics and SC justice appointments, among a myriad of other differences, including health care.

But keep ridiculing them both as the same, Unkle Karl appreciates your efforts.

#108 | Posted by Corky at 2014-07-12 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Unkle Karl appreciates your efforts."

*yawn*

Why did you stop calling him KKKarl?

#109 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-07-12 03:34 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

On the need to maintain only 2 Parties both Parties are the same.

On the need to fritter away America for Israel both Parties are the same.

On the need to create and become security/police state both Parties are the same.

On the need for TBTF banks that go unpunished both Parties are the same.

On the need to serve global bankers and business with free trade that harms the 99% both Parties are the same.

* both Parties as defined by the beholden political leadership that sets agendas, not average members.

#110 | Posted by Robson at 2014-07-13 07:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort