Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by mikeyh9in, Oct 8, 2009.
Sometimes karma is very direct.
Gun-toting Pa. soccer mom, husband found shot dead
Its the kind of thing I fear that will accompany the increasing number of people who see the need to pack.
nj, is that you?
Very tragic, yet VERY ironic at the same time.
Makes you wonder what goes on through the minds of some people who are just this adamant to engage in their Second Amendment Rights.
It's called "thinning the herd". At least they didn't get to take the kids with them.
Some of you seem a bit vague on the concept of "karma." To you, the elementary fact that a gun seems to have been involved is "karma" - or rather, it's spelled karma, but it's pronounced bullshit.
All that we can really guess so far is that she carried because she thought that she faced deadly threats, and that she was apparently right about that.
We can also note that her carry gun didn't protect her from this particular threat. It's hardly a novel insight that no defense is perfect.
There is no indication yet that the presence of her own gun had anything to do with this particular crime.
That, of course, won't stop the militantly unreflective from their crowing.
It still doesn't downplay any of the irony of the situation.
Although I don't really have any problem with responsible people owning guns, I do find it somewhat obnoxious that some gun owners are adamant to flaunt the fact that they're strapped and armed. Call it a self-fulfilling prophecy, but I can walk the streets of New York without seeing someone with a holster around their waist and know there's a good chance I will encounter someone who has a gun if I REALLY wanted to look for it.
It's not an issue of whether you can exercise your rights... it's about whether or not you want that stigma and attention for doing it.
I can hardly believe I'm saying this, but "nobody" up there is right. There's nothing karmic about this at all. Gruesomely ironic, as VB pointed out, sure...but implying that advocating for open carry rights merits a death sentence by some cosmological force is a bit on the lunatic fringe.
Anyone on here who even tries to advocate the fact that this woman somehow deserved what she got for touting her right to carry is a sick freak... She did nothing illegal, and although what she did was outright stupid and dumb as hell, there is no excuse for her being shot dead, even by her husband...
it's very sad to lose such a vocal advocate for civil rights
Ummmmm... She walked around in public with a gun strapped to her side like a cop. Many other people died in more iconic struggles for civil rights. Let's not turn her into some kind of martyr now.
She obviously needed her head examined.
You don't need to flaunt that your carrying a firearm. The point of a concealed weapon permit, is to be able to carry without other people knowing.
Flaunting it will only attract more trouble, which she found.
This woman only gave the anti-gun protesters more ammunition to fight to take away good citizens rights to carry. The judge should not have overruled that decision without a mental evaluation.
I completely agree, carrying a gun doesn't mean someone deserves to die. Hell, only the lunatic fringe would think/say that - much like those who say abortion docs who get killed "deserved it" or were "victims of karma."
If a public defender who represents rapists gets raped - is that karma? I don't think any rational person would say yes.
The irony inherent in gun ownership is that gun owners are more likely to die from a gunshot than non-gun-owners. This story is a perfect example of that principle.
Which is why any legitimacy afforded to all the impassioned "Second Amendment" arguments is based on the principle that "people really want their guns". Not that guns "protect" them.
People really want their oxycontin, too. But......
That widely cited "statistic" was from a study by Kellermann. However, in his study, over 85% of the deaths from guns were suicides. So, the statistic is not false, but the instinctive interpretation really doesn't reflect the data.
I'm not arguing with the premise - gun owners are more likely to die from gun-related injuries (I think it's about 6x more likely), but then again, people who don't own cars rarely die in car accidents.
It's also been shown that gun-owers are something like 100x more likely to successfully stop a home-invasion attempt that those armed with a butter knife. (Not that dialing 911 isn't available to everyone, just pointing out another side).
(Obama, Abortion, Gun Control... what's next on this dick site? :smile
It's the politics forum. I guess when an unpleasant situation arises you will always fall back on that trite phrase.
Anyway, one study? Give me a break. Google "gun owners more likely to be shot" and see what varying kinds of data you get.
And as to your analogy to cars, I guess you could say that people who breathe are more likely to die from suffocation. But driving a car has an inherent utility that at least somewhat justifies the risk in driving (or owning) a car. The utility in owning guns? Perhaps you'll link us some sourcing on your home invasion theory, but basically, guns are dangerous toys. That kill people and animals. Or targets at shooting ranges. [Enormous eye roll]
Defend the practice you will continue to do, I'm sure. But it's just outrageous. Sorry, there's NO legit rationale.
I certainly don't celebrate this tragic occurrence. But I take a moment to highlight the outrageousness of justifying the massive stockpiling of home weaponry in the USA.
Right now it seems that guns and gold are rapidly becoming some of the few things that retain (or grow) in value. Buy them while you can!
Yes, Yes, Yes... I want all the crazys to buy guns!! please, how can we help them buy more guns??
bbucko is right... it's thinning the herd from the morons.
Though it is tragic... There is no valid reason why you would need to bring a loaded gun to a child's soccer game. She was a moron who, I bet, listened to Glen Beck daily.
If you own a gun and have it in your home, the chances that it will be used on a family member is significantly higher than it being used on a criminal breaking into your home.
As an Aussie I do not understand the relevance of the right to bear arms in modern society.
It is an obvious fact that the more guns in a society the more deaths (suicide included)
To the various posters here who profess confusion with regard to the reason for any free peoples to arm themselves, I can only suggest you go back and study your history lessons more closely.