Home | About | Donate

We Have Too Many F*cking Guns


We Have Too Many F*cking Guns

Another. The latest sick and blood-soaked manifestation of American "liberty" - this one in San Bernardino - was the second mass shooting in a day, the third since Planned Parenthood, the 355th in the year's 336 days so far, and the 1,042nd since Sandy Hook; we have a Mass Shooting Tracker to tell us. Skip the hollow thoughts and prayers, please. We will be steeped in murderous death, abetted by a "toxic infatuation" with guns and too many lying, craven, NRA-funded politicos, until gun control controls the guns.


Don't buy the lies and false logic. Guns and bullets do kill people. The evidence is all there staring right back at us. The NRA and corrupted politicians deceived you and you bought it. If you want less murder in your country, like many other countries have figured out, get real gun control. If not - stop moaning about the senseless deaths created by violent, centrist political choices. The American people have a lot of blood on their hands.


No, we don't have too many guns, Abby.

What we have is far too few public services, especially residential care for the small number of people whose delusions dissolve the normal control we all are socialised to have, that the military finds very difficult to overcome, and that causes emotional disability in the vast majority of people who are successfully victimised by the military.

All getting rid of guns would do is make us more helpless in the face of the predators - who would never get rid of the guns that exist to serve them.


With all the illegal wars and murders of millions carried out by our oligarchy government, should we trust government with guns?



"House Republicans, meanwhile, just blocked debate on a bill to close a loophole allowing suspected terrorists to legally buy guns"

I assume Abby is talking about a bill that would stop people on the no-fly list to purchase weapons. You know that, "unconstitutional, kafkaesque that violates due process" list.


Continuation of the delusional rationale for justifying rates of violent death by firearms that leave all other western democracies in the dust. Well the delusion that "guns don't kill people, people do" still exist when the there's only one American left standing?


Correlation = Causation, right? So more guns = lower rates of violence??????
A great example of faulty reasoning.


Wow! This would mean expanding the "right to bear arms" to include nerve ga and nuclear weapons might eliminate violence altogether! You've hit on the solution that's bedeviled humanity for 10,000 years - how to end all war and all violence --- just give everybody the most lethal weapons technology can devise! A Nobel Peace Prize may be coming your way next year ....


The United States Has been murdering pep[;e all over the world at an accelerating rate for the last 14 years. They use
hellwinder missiles fired from drones, cluster bombs, heavy artillery, and sometimes sniper fire. They have just about destroyed Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Somalia without remorse. Anytime a state engages in that level of violence, its citizens may be expected to do so as well.Nobody's laughing at us. ISIL is responding in kind to all that mayhem. Of course they hate us.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Really? How so?


Do we have too many guns or too few citizens willing to govern them?

Do we have too much/too little gun control, or too few citizens willing to think again through what the founding generation was talking about when they wrote the beginning words of the Second Amendment: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State,..."

Do we have too many guns or not enough thinking citizens who can think through the charade of the US having built itself into a global commercial/industrial/military empire on the ashes and rapidly fading memories of that anti-imperial, anti-colonial 'republic of republics' these free states were envisioned and created to be way back then? Note the official charade passed by Wall Street-written legislation and rubber-stamped by the Wall Street appointed Supreme Court -- legislation that officially pretends nominally State-controlled (while Presidentially activated) "National Guards" (read: adjuncts to the Penatgon's massive standing military establishment) are the Second Amendment's "well-regulated militias" when, in fact, they are merely more imperial armies, air forces, marines, and naval troops standing at attention and waiting for presidential deployment to the next military adventurism abroad?

Do we have too many fake citizens with guns who cannot imagine belonging to a well-regulated militia, and too many cheeze-ball politicians who cannot read, and are not interested in thinking, because they are drunk on the power granted to them by the silent majority content upon being ruled by two armies of Wall Street-worshipping mediocrities who love being lesser evils?

When will we sober ourselves enough to organize our own local free societies comprised of the few citizens who do respect self-rule enough to rule themselves and also rule the silent majority who refuse to rule themselves and are content to keep putting into power those very same clueless Mammon-worshipping clowns?


QUOTE: in Canada and Sweden where gun ownership exceeds US levels,...UNQUOTE

Guns owned per 100 pop. in Sweden (31.6) and in Canada (30.8) are less then 1/4 of the US (112.6)
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country


I can't help it. When I saw the video last night and the still above the phrase just pops up and won't go away: Keystone Cops.

But seriously, without knowing why they did it (and I'm not waiting breathlessly to find out) this perturbation in the gun debate is fruitless. Timothy McVeigh, et al did not use guns. Continuing to argue that widespread gun adulation will make us safer is akin to continuing to insist that destroying Iraq, Libya, and Syria is successfully defeating terrorism.

I for one feel so much safer now knowing that many of my neighbors are armed to the teeth.


In western countries that have few gun related deaths one must look a little deeper to see where their violence is hidden because it is there. Here in Canada we have some Canadian corporations particularly, mining (especially for gold) and energy, that run amok in South America, Asia and Africa. Or we export air pollution (respiratory deaths) and climate change (human and ecosystem deaths) through our massive national energy sector The companies hire thugs to kill the local population if they protest the toxic waste and general environmental devastation corporate operations bring. So some Canadians think of their country as being a benign peace loving, enlightened middle class valued society when in fact a substantial portion of our wealth has come from the rape and pillage of the Earth and from the murder of indigenous peoples. UK, Germany, France, Spain, same, same, same, same!

The guns don't have to be actual guns. Nor does there need to be many of them, just in certain hands.


Truthful Premise 1 + Truthful Premise 2 >> Logical Conclusion = Valid Argument

Is a process that escapes many posters here.

Instead you'll find lots of 6 sec Blurb thinking. Truly worthy of repeating.

Lot's of "Us vs Them" Advanced Thinking

And don't forget that popular, "If they would all think like me, it would fix everything"


Snowbike was simply stating facts. Facts which are undeniable (FBI statistics) but which screw up your narrative of a positive correlation between guns and violence. Given that your side has consistently predicted that more violence would result from more guns, I think it is time that you reconsidered some of your assumptions.


Have you heard of the "ceiling effect". The US has hit the industrial world's ceiling for gun violence for decades. Minor drops in the numbers still leave the US pushing the ceiling. The numbers are obscene. No civilized society other than a brainwashed one could ever contemplate for 5 mins tolerating this situation. It's utter madness.

I don't do "sides" but if that's the way your mind works, I would ask that you put me on the side of a reason and logic that outside the United States is often referred to as common sense. On some issues, much of the US population is adrift in an 18th Century fantasy that was never reality even 200 years ago. It's a reality that has been manufactured by those who profit from gun sales and those who may have a tendency to run away with the nation's wealth while we are all distracted by our endless state of anxiety and mourning over the daily carnage that we witness.


The Second Amendment is a very thin reed to hang an immense amount of bullshit on.It's a two liner-barely, and it talks about a "well regulated militia"-which is exactly what we have, don't you think? We are the only country in the 'developed' world which has a gun mayhem problem of this magnitude. I guess you could say that it's another fine example of American exceptionalism.By the way, if you look up the statistics, you'll see that a pretty tiny percentage of gun deaths in America are due to warding off "predators". What is required at the moment is something along the lines of what Bernie is suggesting about gun control. It's a common sense start, anyway, and does not take guns away from people with legitimates uses for same.


A lot of people make that mistake! The militia is a reason for people who aren't "religiously scrupulous of bearing arms" to have arms, not the reason. As an example, look at the last clause of the First. The phrases the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances don't mean that the only reason it's legal for us to get together is if we want to petition government. It's just an example, in both cases.

I was going to write that a little over half the deaths are suicides, but a quick hit of research showed that my knowledge was stale: almost 2 out of 3 gunshot deaths are suicides. I can't think of many people who, if they had the choice, wouldn't choose some equally quick, certain, and painless, but less messy way of ending their life, can you? But we don't offer one.

A lot of the remaining 1/3+ are intended to solve a problem for which no other solution is available (the same could be said of suicide, I suppose). Either a business dispute between criminals, or a spouse suddenly being pushed over the edge by marital unhappiness from which they can see no other escape.

A lot of predator-fending doesn't involve death. Just showing the gun is often enough. I just yesterday posted an article about a 21yo mother who was nursing her baby when armed home invaders burst in. Unluckily for them, she's a NG combat medic, had a pistol to hand, and shot the shite out of them (though they put 2 in her, too). They're all in hospital, but the erstwhile invaders are chained to their beds. The baby was unscathed.

Try to find info on deaths by other means. I've tried for several days now and it doesn't matter what search terms I use, I get gun deaths. That's a pretty big anti-gun campaign, and there's not even a pretence of being focused on reducing violent deaths, just gun deaths. The psychopaths running -and ruining- the US want us disarmed.

What are the "legitimate uses" of a right? And is it a right if there's a test, or is it then a privilege, to be granted or withheld at someone's whim?

One of the most basic of human rights is defence of self and others. That's about as legitimate as it gets, and was one of the principal reasons for the Second Amendment. The very fact that Bernie is talking about illegally infringing a Constitutional provision that "shall not be infringed" should disqualify him from his current job, never mind the presidency!