Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Daytrader goes Postal -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jds who wrote (104)	7/31/1999 12:38:00 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 193

very much a sick person, you are: "Fortunately, this nation is being rudely awakened to the need for tighter gun control(Colombine, etc. etc. etc. ad naseum)"

To: jds who wrote (104)	7/31/1999 12:40:00 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 193

jds, I try not to get into the gun debate too often, but.... The automobile is the tool that is by far the most common device involved in illegal homicide. Replace "guns" with "cars" in your argument and you can get a feel for where gun advocates are coming from. You may think that this is an absurd point, but if you think about it, eliminate cars and you would eliminate a hell of a lot more homicide than if you eliminated guns. The reason that he have one of the highest murder rates (declining by the way) is that our culture allows it. Statistically, the mass murders that get the greatest attention are a small fraction of the actual murders that occur. But because they are sensational, they get more publicity. Similar to air travel, if a plane crashes and many people die it will get big headlines, but if somebody dies in an automobile accident...back page. I would be interested in seeing how many people are afraid of flying compared to being in a car. I don't mean to minimalize the Atlanta killings at all, but he could have done much more harm if he had chosen gasoline/fire as his weapon. He did not need a gun to accomplish his goals. JXM

To: jds who wrote (104)	7/31/1999 1:37:00 PM
From: nuke44	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 193

That dipshit in Atlanta DID go berserk with a hammer and killed at least three people, probably five. Your "fact" that people and families that own guns are 7 times more likely to be shot is a blatant lie. It would be considered an urban legend except for the fact that it is propagated to further a specific agenda, which is to disarm the private citizen in America. It is a fabrication of the anit-gun lobby. They use facts like "firearms are always present when people are shot, ergo people who own guns are always shot". It is a lie and I defy you to produce any verifiable sources to prove otherwise. Especially in light of the fact that studies by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, conducted in 1992, 1994, and 1998 directly contradict your claim by showing that gun ownership by private citizens has resulted in a lower death and injury rate amongst legal gun owners and members of their households due to any type of violence. These rates are lower than the national average and lower even than households where no firearms are present. The 1998 study also verified the fact that firearms were used in excess of 15,000 times in 1997 to protect law abiding gun owners from becoming victims of crime. Also in 1997, more criminals were killed by law abiding private citizens with firearms than were killed by law enforcement authorities. You will never hear the results of these official studies advertised by the Big Brother (and his ugly wife) administration in the White House, but that doesn't make them any less factual. I challenge you to produce legitimate proof of your "7 times more likely" claim. And don't quote Bill and Hillary. They are pathological liars who have made a career out of lying. They couldn't tell us the truth if their life depended on it. If they did, they never would have made it out of Arkansas.

To: jds who wrote (104)	7/31/1999 10:05:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Respond to of 193

jds, you wrote, "If this dip shit in atlanta had gone berserk with a hammer, do you think so many people would have died??? of course not." You have some issues there which you're going to have to deal with: #1: This psychotic killer did indeed "go berserk with a hammer", bludgeoning his wife and two kids to death, just before going on the shooting spree. #2: So much for your argument about guns. #3: If, when you say, "gone berserk", you are referring to the shooting, then I guess you think the wife and kids being bludgeoned with a hammer don't count??? #4: Since you're obviously a gun-grabber, I have assume that you are also a hammer-grabber. Would you then support a seven-day waiting period on buying hammers? How about hammer-registration? Now I'd like to answer some of the questions you posed to someone else: >>But why do you feel the need to own guns? Guns are an integral part of the founding and forming of this country. Do you live in America, jds? If so, you are living on the blood of Native Americans, spilled by white men with "thunder sticks" (yeah, guns). In case you didn't know, jds, the Native Americans once lived and roamed across the entire North American continent. They lived that way until the white men pushed them back, and forced them to give up land permanently. Or do you support the military use of force, but don't want your neighbor to be able to defend his or her family? What's your agenda? I also own a gun because I like shooting them. The bang and kick and the hole they punch in a target makes me feel good. :-) >>Are you going to shoot someone who breaks into your house? I might. If I felt cornered and felt the intruder posed a threat to my safety, I would shoot, yes. >>What if it's yor son or his friend? I don't have a son, but dozens of close kin. Nobody I know would break into my house. You go to a store and use the phone to call someone, you don't break into someone's house. Unless of course, you have a death wish.