You can comment because philosophically you believe guns cause more harm than good.

Private prison lobby buys a lot of votes, yeah.

Morgan Freeman has a fresh and stunningly persuasive argument about where the deranged massacres are coming from. There's more to be done than what he says, but it has a powerful ring of truth.

This is such poor comprehension, even for you.

I don't care about their IQ. I don't care about their GPA. I don't care about their Wonderlic score.

I simply care that they are familiar with the process they're commenting on.

There are some people who believe the gun purchase process is too lenient who know exactly WTF they are talking about.

There are others who make stuttering asses of themselves when asked how to buy a gun after making comments that "It's too easy to legally purchase a gun in this state!"

I know, I made a prominent State rep from my district look rather foolish by asking her the question in a town hall meeting after she made the statement she would "propose measures to make it more dfficult to legally purchase a gun."

Her only response was that "it should take longer than half an hour!"

I asked "Well, what occurs in that half an hour?" And was removed by an aide.

And this is worse than the last post.

The worst part is, you're not trolling. You really believe that's a good summation of the parts of my posts you've made it through.

Sad.

Ikes sez:

Are you suggesting gun prevalence does not play a role in homicide? That our gun murder rate 40x Britain's has nothing to do with their strict laws?

Nobody denies there are lots of factors that move the rate around. But the single best way to reduce gun violence is to reduce the iron out there.

The honest gun proponent argument would be like our automobile philosophy. No one doubts that more driving means more deaths, but we say it's worth it. We'll try and hold it down, but we basically accept it.

Because claiming liberal gun laws do not drive up homicides is birther-level brain damage.

Yeah but it's a start. Maybe this year we'll save only 20 or 30 first graders, then we can work on eliminating all semiautos somewhere down the road and save the rest of the ones you and the NRA are willing to sacrifice each year so you can keep playing with your toys.

Wait, you're off (or finally on) your meds now, not using urination on childrens graves as an example, and want to be taken seriously now?

so, I read this post and it appears nothing in it implies you're open to the possibility that poll respondents saying the gun purchasing process is too strict are also stuttering asses when asked about why they hold those beliefs, which is exactly what I was loling at before


so, youmissedthepoint.jpg, loldbj

and

super cool story bro about your state rep, you must have felt really important

So they sound a little stupid explaining their opinion compared to a more intelligent, eloquent person who holds the same opinion.

Actually, no.

And I love Morgan Freeman, but is there any real evidence whatsoever that reporting about massacres causes massacres? These nutjobs aren't motivated by anything rational like fame, they just kill because they are out of their ever-loving minds afaict. Blaming CNN is scapegoating.

Anderson Cooper makes a fairly decent attempt at dealing with this. He goes way out of his way to make a point of not mentioning the killer's name and focusing on the victims. He gets my vote for GOAT cable news guy.

It just depends who you believe.

In an unrelated story, while looking up stats on the GSS and ANES about how many people want stricter gun laws, something like 80% of people wanted stricter gun control laws (wait for it)...



For the record, before yahoo changed how their mail portion worked, any time I logged in and saw some orange-suit-wearing bald white guy with a crazy look in his eyes staring back at me, I got pretty pissed at yahoo for making me even have to look at that human scum, let alone think about him, which I think was at least some of what he wanted. Maybe. Who knows? Maybe people who study those types of killers. But why should we listen to them? What do they know?

I'm not willing to put all (or even most) of the blame on CNN, but there is evidence that copycat crimes happen for a while and then kind of peter off (I'm thinking of the rash of shootings that gave us the expression "going postal" as one example). And examples of "suicide clusters" (like, one kid on a college campus commits suicide in a particular way and then, suddenly, a bunch of other students commit suicide, even students who were not directly connected to the first one). And the kid arrested in OK this week for allegedly plotting to shoot up his school had reportedly been reading up on the Columbine kids, so it doesn't seem totally unreasonable to think that these guys might be modeling their attacks on previous incidents.

That being said, I don't think that we can really expect the media to not cover these events and the perpetrators...

They follow a script. The killers are clearly familiar with the model. How many care about notoriety vs. those who just want to inflict as much pain as possible -- that's a good question, research needed. But damn, they do seem to go for the highest possible count.

I think banning hand guns is more important than what Freeman calls for, but he's interesting.

I agree with Dbl, assault rifles and tougher screening are just posturing. Only a ban would have an impact.

The Morgan Freeman facebook chain letter thing is awful, let's be clear.

On the surface at least there is an incongruity between the proposed motivation for the crimes (notoriety) and the typical murderer's personality of shy and reclusive.

It's kind of a moot argument against media coverage anyway because when things like this happen people always want to know why and that is why there is always intense interest in the killer(s). People want badly to know why the killers did it as part of their attempt to make sense of a horrific tragedy. If there is an intense interest the media will serve that no matter what.

you think people don't ever want to change? the self-help section of every borders and the spiking gym memberships after january first beg to differ

The shy and reclusive (and murderous) types want their time to shine. A final "I'll show them."

i don't think you want to go to the self-help section of borders for your proof...

This. Stop blaming CNN or any other media outlet. If the killers wanted fame they wouldn't off themselves immediately. They'd bring a portable TV and hole up someplace to see their coverage. Get real. News agencies report news. There were a lot of errors in the reporting of this story, so if you want something to rage about, direct your anger there. This whole should-they-or-should-they-not-report thing is ridiculous. It was a major event.

I watched most of it and I was disgusted, but it happened and I wanted to know what happened.

Haven't read the last few pages so I apologize if this has been posted:

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-ma...183593571.html

Cliffs: CCW carrier manages not to shoot anybody during mall crisis

It's not really change when you wind up dead; at least, it's not the kind of change you're talking about. Most of these guys kill themselves on the scene it seems like. They don't even get to enjoy their 15 minutes.

So you're wrong as to why but you might be right that they do want what they do to be widely known. They don't want fame. I think it's more likely that they want people to feel their pain and maybe the murders is their last desperate way of making a connection. It could be that the people they are trying to reach by these acts are already tangentially in their lives and that stopping media coverage would have no effect.

What's the #1 easiest way we could immediately reduce homicides? Hint: It rhymes with "Bend the Hug Drawer"

Lend the thugs more? Haven't they taken enough from our society?