glassgowkiss

Because NRA says so? Actually there is a pretty good empirical evidence from Australia and Canada, that security and screenings work. And yet you fail again to answer the crux question- why aren't mass shootings treated as acts of domestic terrorism. If they were, the lifespan of such activities would be very short.

That pretty much sums up how fucked up you are. Not to mention you are for abusing mentally ill.

This is exact nonsense proliferation of guns leads to: Charge her with an assault! Charge him with murder

Well, it's EXACT thing you have posted and advocated earlier, which I have reported to the admin- because such acts constitute of advocating abuse, plain and simple. It just shows how morally fucked up your belief system is.

How does a licensing system for firearms punishing people? To legally drive a car on a road, you have to have a valid license. Commit a DUI and you will find your license suspended. This is how you regulate, allowing people to follow the rules to drive, and get stupid off the road. By the token of your "logic" anyone turning 16 should be able to jump into a car and just simply start driving?

Mass shooting occcurs. Lefties demand tougher gun control laws. And NRA blocks EVERY attempt to even start addressing the issue Fact is- the system does not work. However NRA is basically a terrorist organization. These shootings ARE acts of domestic terrorism, and if treated as such could be largely eliminated. The truth is gun=death industry is interested in such shootings. Every time it happens, the gun sales go up.

I guess 19 000 committing suicides with guns or getting accidentally shot do not matter? Fact is, since 2001 over 406K were killed with guns

Number of dead in terrorist acts (including 9/11): 3380 (world wide), number of gun related deaths since 9/11: 406 496. Want to continue arguing about the numbers? Why aren't the acts of mass shootings treated as cases of domestic terrorism? They are, hence both FBI and NSA should use the very same methods of investigation. Buying 14 pieces of guns in a span of a few months (basically stock piling of guns and ammunition) should trigger a knock of an FBI agent on your door.

When did the executive branch start passing tax bills or declaring war? CF and BC sure talk a lot about defunding PP based on bad interpretations of faulty videos. The last Bush started wars then submitted fake evidence to congress about WMD Congress voted for Afghanistan and Iraq engagements before we sent troops, little known fact. Based upon testimony by Colin Powell stating there were terrorists and WMD in Iraq. A well known fact is, the entire "evidence" was pretty much fabricated by the Administration. That entire group of people, should have been on trial for a treason.

not that I've vetted this list, but I remember at least the 2007 church shooting http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/10-potential-mass-shootings-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit#.ehVw7yNA1 again, I'm not saying I'm for this approach, but to dismiss it as totally ineffective is wrong - anybody, cop or civilian, who distracts a psycho w/ a gun by shooting at him is going to buy time for more cops to show up and more folks to escape - whether that benefit is scuppered by cops shooting armed friendly civilians and armed civilians just generally shooting more people at all times I couldn't say The theory of armed sides works great with gang turf warfare. The facts are simple: even factoring 9/11 attacks, terrorist attacks killed 3 380 US citizens world wide, guns killed 406 496 people (according to cnn.com). That makes it 0.8%, just to put it into a better perspective. If guns is not a public health and national security issue, I do not know what is.

humans terrorists will always kill others. there is no problem that is 'solvable' here Fixed it for ya.

NRA is a populist bullshit propaganda, with ZERO backing in real life. As the matter of fact, not a single mass shooter was stopped by an armed civilian. Fact is, that most likely an armed civilian would get shot by a SWAT team during the process. In Roseburg there were several people (some of them former military), who were carrying a conceal weapons, yet they did not intervene during the events.

You should repeat "It Ain't Over Motherfuckers" on the East face of Pyramid. The middle crux is one of the best alpine mix I have ever done. Besides about 100m of easy snow (right after the end of first pitch), every other section will keep you occupied. Way better route then say "Shooting Gallery" on Andromeda in the Rockies.

Based upon CNN report elected County Sherif decided he will not be enforcing both Federal and State background check laws. If that is indeed the case, he should be charged with a felony in this case.

humans will always kill each other. there is no problem that is 'solvable' here Well, just like Jeb Bush, with his "stuff happens" as his comment on the recent shooting, you represent the same miserable logical standard, hence yet again you just prove you support these events.

And KKK, FW and other right wing nuts are just happy about the whole situation. A mean silence is an approval.

more then 99% of mentally ill people are non violent. As the matter of fact tying mental illness to violence is a repugnant argument of right wing lunacy and gun death industry and shifting a blame onto the victim. One common these with these mass killings is stock piling of ammunition and guns. In recent incident 13 guns were purchased in a short span of time. Why isn't there a system tracking these purchases, that should have been a red flag. Even if you are a super redneck hunter, 13 firearms purchased in a span of less then 2 years should raise some red flags. But the argument that mentally ill people are more likely to commit acts of violence is baseless assumption without any evidence backing it up. It's another red herring argument of NRA, which is only trying to shift the blame.

What a bullshit approach.... Calling bullshit on your bullshit. The data are VERY clear. People in the US have easy access to guns and they shoot people. You don't hear of mass stranglings or mass knifings. Not stranglings, but in China mass stabbings have occurred. Look, countries like Canada are not that far off as far as culture, they have almost as many guns per capita as US. In Switzerland every adult male between 18 and 35 has military grade rifle at home, but somehow you do not hear about mass shootings there on weekly basis. That fact is we do not know what triggers these events, and until we actually do some science based research we do not have even an idea where and how to start. Licensing to operate a firearm- the very same way as we license drivers could be a way to curb some of it. And since you are claiming such data exist, would you post some links to studies conducted by CDC in this subject matter? I am not for status quo, but simplifying such complex issue is sure way for failure.

Good question. The issue at hand is, that probably vast amount of this money does not even make it into Nepal.

What a bullshit approach. The fact is that this should be treated as public health issue. Hence the prerequisite to any logical and meaningful discussion should be data gathering. And NRA=death lobby is preventing CDC from doing it's job. People freak out about less then 100 cases of measles, yet over 30 000 people a year getting killed by firearms is OK. for every shooting that makes it into the media, there are dozens with zero media coverage. Very frequently they involve women and children. But let's not talk about it, just let's keep pretending this is normal. And of course venom cool-aid drinking right wing lunacy will try to convince us, they are pro life, but the only answer to mass shootings are more guns.

It's obvious right wing lunacy is supportive of the status quo. Silence= approval.

Not going to fix a thing. What kills people is inexperience. Guided trips facilitate inexperience. The only remedy is to ban guided trips. If someone can afford to pay 100K for a guided trip up on Everest, they also can afford to be guided up on 7K peak. Do you really think getting to a top of something like Aconcagua with a guide yields enough alpine/high altitude experience building? People, who pay for guided ascents simply do not go through enough development in the alpine. And the moment shit hits the fan (like storms) they simply fold and die.

Looks like it's a norm these days. Why worry about ISIS, when we have NRA?

Banning guided parties would solve the problem. The issue at hand is inexperience, which simply is supported by guiding companies. No fixed ropes, no fixed camps, go alpine style, that is it.

If you truly did not care, you'd simply not reply.