Wisconsin massacre

[Prospero]

No comments yet from the American majority here on yet another gun massacre - six Sikhs shot dead by "white shooter" at their temple. FBI talk about internal terrorism. It wasn't the gun that killed these folk at their place of prayer, of course...,

[Silcc69]

Well he was a known skinhead Prospero, now I wonder was he a conservative or a liberal? Hmmmmmmmm

http://c498390.r90.cf2.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Wade-Page-500x281.jpg

[hippifried]

Another klan/nazi attack on America & everything it stands for. Is it just me, or is this so expected that it's hardly a surprize anymore? Since one of his buddies was spotted at the scene, & is now being sought as a material witness, I think we can throw the whole "lone wolf" crock of shit right out the window before it even gets started.

[Prospero]

The pro-gun lunatics on here are noticeable by their absence. I guess they want to let the bodies get cold before they come on here proclaiming the sanctity of the Constitution over the sanctity of life.

[Willie Escalade]

I have no comments because I really have nothing to say. I'll just let the actions speak for themselves and wait for the "defenders" to,come out of the woodwork.

[Prospero]

Our resident neo-nazi is busy elsewhere berating the New York Times for its journalism but has nothing to say about another slaughter of innocent people and the real hate involved in that crime.

[buttslinger]

It was clearly self defense.

[trish]

Voter suppression is on the rise. Suppression of violence, not so much. It's going to be harder for a poor man to vote, or an elderly person, or an ethnic minority or a student to vote, then it is to by buy and secretly carry a gun.

[broncofan]

Those who affirm their right to carry all sorts of armaments rarely sound as though they're expressing an earnest belief. Rather their views take on a sort of cultish, deeply cynical hysteria. There is the collective action argument; "well the guns are out there already, so I don't want to be the guy left out of the mix when 19 other people pull weapons at the grocery store." Their utopia is 20 people at the grocery store pulling their weapons. With dreams like that who needs nightmares.

There are those who make the I'm a bad-ass and can control even the uncontrollable situation argument. "If some punk breaks into my house where my wife and kids are sleeping, I'm going to defend myself." This person neglects the possibility that their ten year old son might blow his face off with same gun. They are very much a kindred spirit with those who snicker at cancer victims and accuse them of being weak-willed. In a similar vein, victims of crimes are only victims of their own failure to wear an ankle holster.

My favorite of course are the history buffs who argue that every atrocity dating back to the Roman destruction of Carthage could have been prevented with widespread possession of Kalashnikovs. These are of course my sentimental favorites. Their flailing pretty much sums up the desperation and futility of the gun nut's attempts at rationalization.

But yes, this was a horrible crime. Gun control won't prevent every such atrocity, but it would likely reduce their frequency.

[Prospero]

I love the idea of the Carthaginians - perhaps on their elephants led by Hannibal - blazing away at the Romans with Kalashnikovs or Uzis.

[broncofan]

I love the idea of the Carthaginians - perhaps on their elephants led by Hannibal - blazing away at the Romans with Kalashnikovs or Uzis.
I won't argue if the NRA wants to use this imagery in a national ad campaign:).

How about Julius Caesar pulling out a .45 after being stabbed by Casca? No grand funeral, no oratorial fireworks by Mark Antony, no civil war. Just Casca pumped full of lead laying in a pool of blood and Caesar nursing a minor wound.

[Prospero]

The death of Caesar by Brutus and the others in Shakespeare would be a lot less satisfying if he'd just been gunned down.

[muh_muh]

My favorite of course are the history buffs who argue that every atrocity dating back to the Roman destruction of Carthage could have been prevented with widespread possession of Kalashnikovs.

well considering the times if that had been the case the romans would have literally brought knives to a gunfight
so on that front at least theyre correct

[broncofan]

True Muh_Muh, but in addition to the anachronism, the hypothetical would only replace one massacre with another. And the weapons that one nation possesses eventually fall into the hands of another, so you are left with kalashnikovs v. kalashnikovs and the like. Gun nuts are often correct on the small points anyhow. As an individual, you may be safer having a handgun, but you are not safer if your having one means everyone else gets one. People are sometimes expected to sacrifice their individual safety for collective safety. There's no way greater proliferation of guns solves any problem except in the mind of someone who is very insecure and feels safer because he's carrying. But his psychic comfort is not nearly as significant as the major problems wrought by legislators giving in to this type of pseudo-masculine rationalization.