Another school shooting

[felix rex]

[Emo EMAW]

Bullets aren't harmless, you crazy guy.

buying them is harmless.  making them is harmless.  i bet you're thinking of shooting them at other people, which i believe should not be legal.  fortunately, that activity is pretty conspicuous, and really isn't that easy either.

I think this is getting into semantics.  If you think that bullets, by their nature, "are harmless," i would imagine that your definition of "harmless" includes far more things than most others' would - which is okay, but important to recognize that you're opinion probably isn't widely held.  That's why regulations on bullets exist.

I understand your point of view and I recognize that it's consistent and rational, but our state operates functionally different than the one for which you're advocating.  The fact is, our laws prohibit certain activities, that in and of themselves, do no harm to others, are easy to do, and are inconspicuous.  Given your argument, I'd imagine you think that those activities (like the possession of heroin, for example) should be legal, but they're not.

Can you do anything legal and useful with heroin?  I mean I think it's reasonable to think if someone is caught with heroin that their either going to use it (illegal) or sell it (illegal).  Whereas millions of Americans drive around or carry everyday a loaded pistol, never with the intent of doing anything harmful or illegal. 

[DQ12]

I think this is getting into semantics.  If you think that bullets, by their nature, "are harmless," i would imagine that your definition of "harmless" includes far more things than most others' would - which is okay, but important to recognize that you're opinion probably isn't widely held.  That's why regulations on bullets exist.

I understand your point of view and I recognize that it's consistent and rational, but our state operates functionally different than the one for which you're advocating.  The fact is, our laws prohibit certain activities, that in and of themselves, do no harm to others, are easy to do, and are inconspicuous.  Given your argument, I'd imagine you think that those activities (like the possession of heroin, for example) should be legal, but they're not.

Can you do anything legal and useful with heroin?  I mean I think it's reasonable to think if someone is caught with heroin that their either going to use it (illegal) or sell it (illegal).  Whereas millions of Americans drive around or carry everyday a loaded pistol, never with the intent of doing anything harmful or illegal.

Ok, now you're getting into something completely different than what we were talking about (harmlessness) and a little convoluted.

Citizens can do something useful with heroin: Inject it into their body and feel good.
Citizens can't do anything legal with heroin because...possession of it is already illegal.  But at some point it wasn't illegal and in that period, people were going around using heroin legally.

Citizens can do something useful with ammunition: Stop a bad guy.
Citizens can do legal stuff with ammunition because...possession of "lethal" ammunition isn't illegal.  But it would be if legislators made it illegal.

[Emo EMAW]

I guess I just don't think it's a good idea to criminalize people doing perfectly harmless things like punching holes in paper or breaking sporting clays?   

Not to mention the whole 2nd amendment thing, but from a practical standpoint what you're advocating seems unreasonable.

[DQ12]

I guess I just don't think it's a good idea to criminalize people doing perfectly harmless things like punching holes in paper or breaking sporting clays?   

Not to mention the whole 2nd amendment thing, but from a practical standpoint what you're advocating seems unreasonable.

Okay, back to harmlessness. Your definition of "harmless" is so strict that mere "possession" of any otherwise prohibited thing (drugs, child porn, etc) could be considered "harmless." 

Also, you could probably break clays or punch holes in paper with non-lethal rubber bullets.

[Institutional Control]

I guess I just don't think it's a good idea to criminalize people doing perfectly harmless things like punching holes in paper or breaking sporting clays?   

Or doing a line of blow off of the top of a urinal in a bar.

[Emo EMAW]

Hi there strawman.

[CNS]

I guess I just don't think it's a good idea to criminalize people doing perfectly harmless things like punching holes in paper or breaking sporting clays?   

Or doing a line of blow off of the top of a urinal in a bar.

Agreed, as long as they didn't do anything that endangered someone else afterward.

[DQ12]

Hi there strawman.

I'm sorry.  I understood that you were saying that bullets, by their nature, are not harmless because there are non-harmful ways to use the bullets.  Did I misunderstand you?

My point here is, that to say that bullets are harmless, necessitates a definition of "harmless" so narrow that basically nothing, by its very nature, is not "harmless."

[Emo EMAW]

Hi there strawman.

I'm sorry.  I understood that you were saying that bullets, by their nature, are not harmless because there are non-harmful ways to use the bullets.  Did I misunderstand you?

Well I think you're making a far jump by implying that using heroin is not harmful.  Beyond harm to the user itself, much harm is done to produce, smuggle, and sell illicit drugs.  Just getting the heroin to market harms people.

[Institutional Control]

Hi there strawman.

I'm sorry.  I understood that you were saying that bullets, by their nature, are not harmless because there are non-harmful ways to use the bullets.  Did I misunderstand you?

Well I think you're making a far jump by implying that using heroin is not harmful.  Beyond harm to the user itself, much harm is done to produce, smuggle, and sell illicit drugs.  Just getting the heroin to market harms people.

If heroin was legal, those problems would go away.

[Emo EMAW]

Hi there strawman.

I'm sorry.  I understood that you were saying that bullets, by their nature, are not harmless because there are non-harmful ways to use the bullets.  Did I misunderstand you?

Well I think you're making a far jump by implying that using heroin is not harmful.  Beyond harm to the user itself, much harm is done to produce, smuggle, and sell illicit drugs.  Just getting the heroin to market harms people.

If heroin was legal, those problems would go away.

Well except for the harm it causes to people, but I agree.

[sys]

The fact is, our laws prohibit certain activities, that in and of themselves, do no harm to others, are easy to do, and are inconspicuous.  Given your argument, I'd imagine you think that those activities (like the possession of heroin, for example) should be legal, but they're not.   

you're right, dlew.  it's a fairly intractable discussion, the one we're having, because it depends not on differences in fact or in logic, but differences in the relative value people place on liberty and security.  i don't think it is easy to come to any agreement.

[HeinBallz]

Would meth exist if pot, DMT or other drugs had been legal?  Bath salts? 

What will the black market provide if tighter regulations are enforced on something, which happens to be a very low percentage of the things that do harm.

[DQ12]

The fact is, our laws prohibit certain activities, that in and of themselves, do no harm to others, are easy to do, and are inconspicuous.  Given your argument, I'd imagine you think that those activities (like the possession of heroin, for example) should be legal, but they're not.   

you're right, dlew.  it's a fairly intractable discussion, the one we're having, because it depends not on differences in fact or in logic, but differences in the relative value people place on liberty and security.  i don't think it is easy to come to any agreement.

Agreed.  Like I said, yours is a position that I disagree with, but respect because it's rational and consistent.  Just different philosophies. 

[Dugout DickStone]

Who the eff is effortlessly molding lead in their basement?

I can give you the names of three different rednecks in butler county alone that have been making their own fishing lures for years.  Making a mold and melting a metal with a super low melting point isn't rocket science.

Huge difference bewteen making a split shot and a bullet that can easily be put into a cartridge.

[CNS]

Who the eff is effortlessly molding lead in their basement?

I can give you the names of three different rednecks in butler county alone that have been making their own fishing lures for years.  Making a mold and melting a metal with a super low melting point isn't rocket science.

Huge difference bewteen making a split shot and a bullet that can easily be put into a cartridge.

Depends on the range you plan to fire it. 

Also, shotgun reloading is as easy as refilling your gas tank.

[Emo EMAW]

Who the eff is effortlessly molding lead in their basement?

I can give you the names of three different rednecks in butler county alone that have been making their own fishing lures for years.  Making a mold and melting a metal with a super low melting point isn't rocket science.

Huge difference bewteen making a split shot and a bullet that can easily be put into a cartridge.

Depends.  Making bullets that will functionally fire without pressure problems is one thing.  Making bullets that will shoot less than 1 MOA consistently is another.  The former can be done for less money than it takes to buy an AR15, FWIW.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Hey anti-gun nuts, is this considered enough of a massacre to outlaw all abortions?

 http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/legal/murder-trial-under-way-for-philadelphia-abortion-doctor-kermit-gosnell-680785/

7 kids born alive were slaughtered with scissors and god know what else by a planned parenthood quack.

i'd say once the kid is out in the world, it's no longer an abortion 

Planned Parenthood and Senate Democrats disagree

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/02/inconvenient_headlines_117749.html

Can we continue to put babies at risk like this just so a few women can have an abortion?  I say the answer is clearly, NO.

Sickening.

Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of California who engaged in an unwise colloquy with then-Senator Rick Santorum about when infants deserve to be treated as people, spoke for many of the caring elite when she said that life begins when "you take the baby home from the hospital."

Apparently B.O. took this position when he was in the Illinois Senate advocating for the murder of children born as the result of a botched abortion.  What a sick rough ridin' piece of crap.

[eastcat]

Just remember guys!

According to democrats innocent children have no right to life, but heinous murderers on death row do!
 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Just remember guys!

According to democrats innocent children have no right to life, but heinous murderers on death row do!
 

It's the white mans fault.

[star seed 7]

just remember guys!

According to republicans, blacks and mexicans have no rights, and neither do poor or gay people either!
 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

just remember guys!

According to republicans, blacks and mexicans have no rights, and neither do poor or gay people either!
 

But did they ever try and cut their tiny baby heads off with scissors or a rusty scalpal?

[star seed 7]

i'm sure the scalpel is never rusty.

[Shacks]

just remember guys!

According to republicans, blacks and mexicans have no rights, and neither do poor or gay people either!
 

But did they ever try and cut their tiny baby heads off with scissors or a rusty scalpal?

Gays can't have abortions for obvious reasons, you'd think that might make Republicans hate them a little less