• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Connecticut School Shooting

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
It's actually kind of ironic. The same people who shouldn't be allowed to own dogs because they mistreat and abuse them and indirectly lead to most of those bites are the same people that shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

I'm becoming more concerned that the people on this board who are trying to convince themselves that guns are less damaging than knives, molotov cocktails and dogs are the ones that shouldn't be owning them, either.

I've actually become more concerned with enhancing psychological screenings now more than ever.



At the very least, I hope the disaster in Newtown brings some good towards banning assault weapons and extending the background checks and education necessary to own a gun in this country.
 
I'm becoming more concerned that the people on this board who are trying to convince themselves that guns are less damaging than knives, molotov cocktails and dogs are the ones that shouldn't be owning them, either.

I've actually become more concerned with enhancing psychological screenings now more than ever.



At the very least, I hope the disaster in Newtown brings some good towards banning assault weapons and extending the background checks and education necessary to own a gun in this country.

You'll be hoping for an eternity. And good luck with your enhanced psychological findings. I guess b00bie thinks people shouldn't own dogs and guns at the same time now? lol wow

PS - The education is already there. People just don't adhere to it. People can't even comprehend it.
 
You'll be hoping for an eternity. And good luck with your enhanced psychological findings. I guess b00bie thinks people shouldn't own dogs and guns at the same time now? lol wow

PS - The education is already there. People just don't adhere to it. People can't even comprehend it.

Wut
 
MORGAN FREEMAN ON THE SHOOTINGS YESTERDAY:

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.


Absolutely congruent with my line of thinking. The media are filthy fucking pigs.

You're just looking for someone/something to blame. Same with Morgan Freeman.

Yeah, the news reports it that way, but they do it because people LOVE IT. They will tune in.
 
How many of our favorite movies don't have a gun in them(this is just off the top of the dome)?
 
You're just looking for someone/something to blame. Same with Morgan Freeman.

Yeah, the news reports it that way, but they do it because people LOVE IT. They will tune in.

You are right. It all comes down to us as a people. We dictate what is on T.V. We dictate what the news reports by watching certain programming. We are just as liable as the networks but i wouldn't say we are more liable.
 
How many of our favorite movies don't have a gun in them(this is just off the top of the dome)?

I don't really see the correlation there. Most of the movies I watch have guns in them. Most of the games I play are shooters. Yet I don't own a gun.
 
I'm becoming more concerned that the people on this board who are trying to convince themselves that guns are less damaging than knives, molotov cocktails and dogs are the ones that shouldn't be owning them, either.

I've actually become more concerned with enhancing psychological screenings now more than ever.



At the very least, I hope the disaster in Newtown brings some good towards banning assault weapons and extending the background checks and education necessary to own a gun in this country.

I'm glad you know everything about me b00bie. And in no way did I say dogs are more damaging than guns; I simply stated that they are also known to kill children if we're looking to ban dangerous things.
 
I don't really see the correlation there. Most of the movies I watch have guns in them. Most of the games I play are shooters. Yet I don't own a gun.


Heaven forbid someones video games are taken away

Murder would sky rocket
 
I'm glad you know everything about me b00bie. And in no way did I say dogs are more damaging than guns; I simply stated that they are also known to kill children if we're looking to ban dangerous things.

I'm merely pointing out that your example is horrendous and misguided, lacking anything close to what could be considered a rational thought.
 
I'm glad you know everything about me b00bie. And in no way did I say dogs are more damaging than guns; I simply stated that they are also known to kill children if we're looking to ban dangerous things.

I'm not sure I follow this line of argument. Almost anything could theoretically be used as a weapon. However, there's a big difference between a dog, which wasn't originally designed (and yes, humans designed dogs over hundreds of years of forced evolution) to be a weapon but rather a tool (primarily used for herding, tracking, retrieving, etc.), and a gun, which has a singular purpose as a weapon used to harm or kill others.

Sure, you can train a dog to be an attack dog if you have the time and the patience. Most aggressive dogs, though, are the ones that are poorly-trained, abused, or neglected rather than the ones that are highly-trained. That said, dogs can also be trained to herd sheep, as guide dogs for blind or disabled people, to track down missing people based on their scent, to sniff out drugs or explosives, or to simply be family pets, and that's only a fraction of what dogs can be trained to do.

You can't train a gun to be anything other than a weapon.
 
I'm not sure I follow this line of argument. Almost anything could theoretically be used as a weapon. However, there's a big difference between a dog, which wasn't originally designed (and yes, humans designed dogs over hundreds of years of forced evolution) to be a weapon but rather a tool (primarily used for herding, tracking, retrieving, etc.), and a gun, which has a singular purpose as a weapon used to harm or kill others.

Sure, you can train a dog to be an attack dog if you have the time and the patience. Most aggressive dogs, though, are the ones that are poorly-trained, abused, or neglected rather than the ones that are highly-trained. That said, dogs can also be trained to herd sheep, as guide dogs for blind or disabled people, to track down missing people based on their scent, to sniff out drugs or explosives, or to simply be family pets, and that's only a fraction of what dogs can be trained to do.

You can't train a gun to be anything other than a weapon.

You see what your doing Brickman, your off on a tangent now, talking about some random nonsense trying to draw lines in the sand.

You have officially went off topic into some kind of strange rationalization why you think guns are bad, yet you admit that you live in a decent area and have nothing to worry about.

You were talking before about amending our constitution because you feel guns have no purpose in society.

You're safe and fortunate, but not everyone can live in a decent neighborhood. The government can't force people to use dogs as protection or tell them how to live their lives. We're supposed to have liberty.

It's why we are who we are in the first place. Government interventionism and prohibition has done nothing but more harm and waste away our resources. The problem never goes away. Just look at the drug war, social security, foreign invasions...

Your better off just looking out for yourself. If you don't need guns good for you, but you simply can't take them away from law abiding good citizens that deserve to protect themselves and their families.

Liberty is what made us great. Not government interventionism and patchwork fixes like making guns illegal.


Get real man. You are off on some crazy utopian tangent trying to define the philosophical purpose of guns and why we need dogs rather than weapons.

A dog is a wild animal, I don't want them to be the sole protector of my life, can't rely on that.

You CAN rely on your own will to survive and fight for your life in a situation regarding your life safety.

You should have that opportunity under the principles of liberty that this country was founded under.

Once again, you are never going to get rid of guns, so just stop entertaining that as a legitimate possibility.
 
Last edited:
You see what your doing Brickman, your off on a tangent now, talking about some random nonsense trying to draw lines in the sand.

You have officially went off topic into some kind of strange rationalization why you think guns are bad, yet you admit that you live in a decent area and have nothing to worry about.

You were talking before about amending our constitution because you feel guns have no purpose in society.

You're safe and fortunate, but not everyone can live in a decent neighborhood. The government can't force people to use dogs as protection or tell them how to live their lives. We're supposed to have liberty.

It's why we are who we are in the first place. Government interventionism and prohibition has done nothing but more harm and waste away our resources. The problem never goes away. Just look at the drug war, social security, foreign invasions...

Your better off just looking out for yourself. If you don't need guns good for you, but you simply can't take them away from law abiding good citizens that deserve to protect themselves and their families.

Liberty is what made us great. Not government interventionism and patchwork fixes like making guns illegal.


Get real man. You are off on some crazy utopian tangent trying to define the philosophical purpose of guns and why we need dogs rather than weapons.

A dog is a wild animal, I don't want them to be the sole protector of my life, can't rely on that.

You CAN rely on your own will to survive and fight for your life in a situation regarding your life safety.

You should have that opportunity under the principles of liberty that this country was founded under.

Once again, you are never going to get rid of guns, so just stop entertaining that as a legitimate possibility.

1. It's not like there is no crime where I live. As I said, I live in a fairly urban area. There is project housing like two blocks from my apartment complex. I simply said I don't live my life in fear of being mugged or having my place robbed, which is true.

2. A dog isn't a wild animal. A dog is a domesticated animal.

3. I never said anything about getting rid of guns. I have, however, talked about the need for there to be heavier restrictions on who can buy guns. And there should be. It's far too easy to buy guns right now and there are too many absurd loopholes. This obviously won't stop every gun-related death, but it's a start.

4. The principles of liberty this country was founded under included the principle that black people were possessions. Times change, and simply adhering to ideals written 200 years earlier because that's the way it's always been is the opposite of progress. Again, this isn't to say that guns should be illegal, but rather that clinging to the notion that they should be legal simply because the founding fathers said so in the late 1700s is asinine.
 
1. It's not like there is no crime where I live. As I said, I live in a fairly urban area. There is project housing like two blocks from my apartment complex. I simply said I don't live my life in fear of being mugged or having my place robbed, which is true.

2. A dog isn't a wild animal. A dog is a domesticated animal.

3. I never said anything about getting rid of guns. I have, however, talked about the need for there to be heavier restrictions on who can buy guns. And there should be. It's far too easy to buy guns right now and there are too many absurd loopholes. This obviously won't stop every gun-related death, but it's a start.

4. The principles of liberty this country was founded under included the principle that black people were possessions. Times change, and simply adhering to ideals written 200 years earlier because that's the way it's always been is the opposite of progress. Again, this isn't to say that guns should be illegal, but rather that clinging to the notion that they should be legal simply because the founding fathers said so in the late 1700s is asinine.



1. So you are relying on blind luck really. If someone invades your home and threatens your life your best bet is to wait on the police to arrive, well again good luck with that, I hope you are fortunate should something ever happen. Maybe you'll reply with another smart answer like you'll attack him with one of your steak knives, or any innumerable things you could fashion into a weapon, or maybe you'll get away on a slip and slide. Don't derail me with another crazy off topic answer.

2. That's funny smartass

3. Please tell me about these specific loopholes that you speak of. I want hard evidence of a loophole that's posing to be a huge problem in people attaining weapons easily. You have none, so don't bullshit me or RCF readers. Your ideas still can't solve the unique problem of a normal guy, like Adam Lanza, with no criminal record deciding that he's going to go postal and take out mass people. These people are untraceable. Any normal, average, quiet citizen can decide to go postal at any given moment.

And for your information this shooter tried to go and purchase guns legally in a store, but was denied at the counter because he wasn't of age. They put your information through a complete BCI background check before you are cleared to make your gun purchase in a store. So what else do you want them to do Jack? You have this fantasy idea of lets just make it harder, but you still can never stop a problem like this where a normal person snaps and decides to arm himself. Don't go blaming Wal Mart because that's where the guy got his weapons. People can attain weapons in a variety of ways illegally or legally, so stop with the fantasy talk of more regulations and difficulty to acquire arms. You are going nowhere but running around in circles here. You're the guy that wants progress in America.

4. Again, WEAK WEAK argument. Childish really, guns have also saved innocent people's lives too! You haven't acknowledged that fact at all anywhere in your argument. We should simply be indifferent to guns because they are not going anywhere, they are in society to stay, and the faster you can recognize this fact, the sooner you will start to make honest progress towards real solutions.

I wish we could progress as a society too Jack , I really do, but it's not that easy, and there's no direct answer. There's arguably more random acts of violence in the world now than ever before, so everyone should make their personal safety of the utmost importance, under the principles of liberty, you should be able to protect yourself however you see fit (guns, pepper spray, heavy bank vault doors on your house whatever suits your personal needs....)

There will never be a time where Americans can't go to a store and acquire weapons to protect themselves. (barring they clear a BCI background check and possess no criminal record.) It's not that I'm hanging onto how things have always been.

It's how it ought to be!

That's the spirit under which this country has founded. Your acting like America is a better place now, I'm saying there's more random violence than ever. We haven't exactly progressed to a better time where things are safer and the constitutional spirit no longer applies.
 
Last edited:

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top