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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (335034)	4/23/2007 10:23:07 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1574103

I don't remember if Z has weighed in on this or not, but pretty much everyone is on the side of keeping the 2nd amendment. lol

To: combjelly who wrote (335034)	4/24/2007 1:38:26 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1574103

This is going all over the place. What did you expect? You have him cornered. The rightie handbook says "when cornered start to ramble. It confounds the enemy and they let you win out of sheer frustration". How else do you expect a rightie to get ahead?

To: combjelly who wrote (335034)	4/24/2007 5:01:27 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574103

CJ, > This is going all over the place. I don't see why a liberal ought to find a "gray area" between the 2nd amendment and the abolition of it. More restrictions and more laws might reduce the chances of another Virginia Tech shooting, but in this crazy world we live in, we can expect to see another one, and sooner than we think. (Anyone remember the NASA dude who got a bad review? Boy did that fly underneath the radar.) Every time something like this happens, the gun control issue pops up. It inevitably does, and usually from the left, while the right quickly responds, "We shouldn't punish law-abiding citizens," or "We need more people carrying guns in public." I'm asking why the question is even raised if the logical conclusion won't be reached. If gun possession is going to remain a right, why even ask the question? Why focus on the gun and not the psycho who used it, unless you think it's possible to ensure that said psycho would have not obtained the gun in the first place? Tenchusatsu