I wish I could think of some words to say, but all I see is a Christmas tree with unopened gifts below it, an empty place at table, an empty room, a silent house. What can I say.

. Wigbomb wrote: Oh, Muckington, the player you're thinking of is Chepin. Yep, he's a ripper, he is.

And a belated Happy B'day, Jimbo! M.O.Ms don't get older, they just get...uh...less young.

Do we want him?

Yes that is terrible, nobody deserves that pain. I don't want anyone to confuse my last post as being an insensitive a******. Just making a point, you know it could have been a car, a bomb, or even a natural disaster. A loss is a loss and this time of year its a lot harder for people to handle.

Don't worry, Jacob, I certainly don't think less of you for taking a differing position. But it's an unsupportable position. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Not true. No one has ever seen a gun get up, walk itself out the door, drive itself to a public place and open fire with itself.

People with access to guns use guns to kill people.

Nor does the old baseball bat argument hold up. Yes, people are killed by all sorts of forces. The only ones they're killed by that are designed with the expressed purpose of killing are the guns. A baseball bat would not have left 27 people, 20 of them children, dead. If you adhere to that logic, where is the line? "People are killed by cars but cars are legal." So...are hand grenades okay for private possession? RPG's? How about a few nuclear warheads in the garage? "We can't stop the psychopath next door from getting his hands on a nuke if he wants it badly enough, so why bother trying to slow him down?" Is a madman with legally acquired and licensed military grade firearms to be regarded as the same as a baseball bat, a car or a tornado? Surely not.

To say, "Evil will find a way" or, "Things kill people every day." is to say, "Those kids died. Oh well." I know you aren't saying that. We can't in good conscience say that. One of the ways evil finds is to kill with guns nobody has any business owning. Evil killed 35 people in Tasmania in the mid-90's. Evil used an automatic rifle to do it. Australia implemented major gun-control reform. A decade later the annual homicide/suicide rates for Australia have been cut in half. Outlaw the guns and the gun crimes drop. It's a fact. You won't find it in this month's NRA newsletter but a fact it remains. The insane 20 year old in the Connecticut school...what would be the preferred scenario? He's there with his dad's baseball bat? Or he's there with his mother's Glock? Any argument in favor of gun ownership is a straw man argument. We don't hunt for our food, we aren't prepping for another British invasion, we can take down a burglar with a Tazer as easily as with a Glock. We just want what we're simple minded enough to be persuaded by television and movies is "sexy" (what's sexier, in a movie, than a great big, glistening, steely...gun?) and we don't want to be accountable. And we don't care if a couple dozen children have to die now and then as long as it means retaining our "rights". Our rights are immovable in the face of the countless black kids in Chicago, DC, Detroit, Miami, L.A., who die at the wrong end of a high-powered firearm every day. So secure are our rights that those gun crimes don't ever make the news. Would a school full of gunned down black kids make the headlines? Perhaps. Should it matter? Do we recognize degrees of horror pursuant to gun crimes just as we recognize degrees of danger associated with different types of guns? We do. And we should be ashamed.

No, you aren't going to legislate away evil. Does that mean we shrug, give up, and polish our guns against the next mass murdering maniac? No, it doesn't mean that. It can't mean that. If it does, we deserve whatever we get. We deserve all the Columbines and Virginia Techs and Auroras and Newtowns we get. I don't think the 27 dead, not even the woman who owned the murder weapons, deserved what they got last week. Something must be done.

Jacklpe wrote: Wig invited, I accepted. Nice to join you guys. Thanks Jacklpe

Played a couple of games with him over the weekend, pretty good player!

First of all good morning to all , Thank you Mr Wig foretting me in your band of merry men. I'm from South Carolina were we have conceled carry laws .Crime isn't as crazy as it is in the states that don't allow these rights. Bad people are always going to do bad that's a fact. We need to start recognizing these people with mental issues and start helping them just face it no normal person just kills people for the hell of it. Then the Thing that gets me they wind up killing themselves. What a waste of life. No live lost is acceptable to me by violence. My heart is heavy for the lost of these children and adults in Conn. Bad thing happen when good men do nothing!!!!!! If you see it report it don't wait till you here about it in the media. How many people had known about Adam Lanza prior to this and did nothing. Stand up make a difference people.

Flyingmuck wrote: I wish I could think of some words to say, but all I see is a Christmas tree with unopened gifts below it, an empty place at table, an empty room, a silent house. What can I say.

The only thing I can say as a Father is exactly what Muck said. It does not matter what was used, they are lost and our heart bleeds and all our prayers go out to all the families effected.

Mr. WIGMEISTER:

During our game, your caps WERE stuck, & all I could visualize was Sam Kinison with Phyllis Diller hair.

Fun game and as I said comfortable. Someday, they will all be like that.

Paul (aka: EASY TARGET)

sadly, as Wig suggests, the means of horror do matter. We are nearing the point in the US where almost as many people die from gun deaths as do in vehicle accidents. Sure, people die from knives, falls, vehicular homicide, poisoning, and many other means, but our cultural attachment to firearms runs right alongside our history of violent behavior. Until we decide to remove military capable weapons from civilian hands, to actually enforce the laws that would require serious background checks, to force citizens to lock up their weapons so unstable passersby can't steal them for murderous purpose, to treat those in need of psychiatric help BEFORE they run off the rails...this trend will continue. Given we have almost as many guns as citizens, it may also be that the best limit will be to tax military grade ammo and accessories to the point that only legal entities could purchase them.

Until someone can convince me that one household has actually benefitted in self protection by possession of an AK, an RPG, a hi-capacity clipped Sig Sauer, or other weapon designed only lay waste to human life, I cannot see the justification for this addiction we as a society have for murderous toys. And, for anyone who has ever hunted, why don't we question the use of these hi-capacity weapons as means to lay waste to Bambi or Thumper, just as we question the use of salt licks or leg traps. Is it really necessary to take a trophy buck with a full auto elephant gun? For those so-called noble hunters, maybe they should "grow a pair".

Sadly, public policy is sometimes a slow process. Sadder still is that often it takes full-blown madness and horror like we've seen in Newtown to propel change. As a father, I know there's no good to come from the death of these innocents...but maybe, just maybe, the event can touch our national conscience enough to force us to follow through to make this a much rarer happening in the future...And yes, still allow us free American, law-abiding citizens to possess and use firearms reasonable for the ends of self protection or hunting...

...thus endeth my sermon...I now descend from my soap box...!

I'm reposting what I said in another location. You guys are the best, and I doubt that any one of us would get into a heated argument over this, which is why I sincerely appreciate the age and maturity of this group of "older" adults to intelligently discuss this very sensitive topic. I wanted to see if there is a direct relationship between private citizen ownership of firearms and high homicide rates (by firearms) and I found that there seems to be a direct correlation between the gun murder rate within a country and whether those citizens have access to firearms. I have to agree with Wig - banning firearms/changing the 2nd Amendment WOULD have an effect.

Let's look at the firearms homicide rate per 100,000 people, as reported by the Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, in 2005. Keep in mind though that these numbers are based mainly on surveys and reports by government agencies and subject to their reliability. In addition, the numbers may vary significantly due to changes in crime rate trends. The top ten countries with homicides as reported:

CountryHomicide Rate by Firearms

1. El Salvador - 50.36
2. Jamaica - 47.44
3. Honduras - 46.70
4. Guatemala - 38.52
5. Swaziland - 37.16
6. Colombia - 27.10
7. Brazil - 18.10
8. Panama - 12.92
9. Mexico - 10.00
10. Philipines - 9.46

The US is ranked 18th with a rate of 2.98 firearms homicides per 100,000.

Now, let's take a look at the bottom 10 countries from the same report:

1. Japan - 0.02
2. Poland - 0.02
3. Azerbijan - 0.04
4. South Korea - 0.04
5. Romania - 0.04
6. UK - 0.04
7. Norway - 0.04
8. Slovenia - 0.05
9. Chile - 0.06
10. Germany - 0.06

These numbers by themselves do not prove or disprove that guns, or access to guns, alone, causes a higher homicide rate per se. The strength of Rule of Law in each of these countries can also be an important contributing factor. I live less that 2 hours from the Mexican border and am all too familiar with the effects the violence that the drug wars are causing its beleagured citizens. But the correlation bewtween the higher number of gun related homicides in the countries where personal ownership of firearms is either legal, or if illegal, easy to gain access to them, and those where personal ownership of firearms is illegal is staggering and cannot be ignored. To simply say that guns don't cause violence is a horrible understatement and is a poor attempt to simplify what is a complex issue.

I have lots of friends and know many others who are responsible gun owners. Hunting is a big time "sport" here in Texas, and I would never wish to take away anyone's hunting rifles. However, I do not see the need for personal ownership of handguns, assualt weapons, and ammunition designed to burst into pieces when it enters another human being. When the 2nd Amendment was written, you still had to hunt for your food, and the threat of attack on the frontier was very real. Also, Blacks were owned as property (counted as 3/5 of a person) and women were not allowed to vote when the 2nd Amendment was written. Times have changed, and we amended the Constitution to not only make slavery illegal, but with the 19th amendment made voting universal. It's high time that our view of what the 2nd Amendment should mean in the 21st century needs to change to reflect the times as well.

Guns don't kill people.

Bullets do.

When the coroner fills in the blanks on his report he is not going to put "bad, deranged or evil person doing bad things" in the "cause of death" part. He is going put "bullets" along with descriptions of the type of bullets, their entry and exit wounds and the fatal damage caused by their trajectory through organs, arteries, muscle and bone.

That's a fact.

Ok I have to chime in while most of you are correct its not the gun its the psycho pulling the trigger. Again as a former combat veteran I am for the second amendment.But there is no reason for civilians to have these types of wepons period. When i was over seas my job was special wepons sgt.if they stopped selling these types of wepons to civilians the damage would have been muxh less thsese wepons are made to kill good for nothing else most guys that have have these types of wepons probably never fired them in a combat situation I call these folks wanna bes sorry i f I hurt any feelings hunting rifles and shot guns and revolvers should be it sorry you can still have your second admendment right but there isnt anyone that needs thirty round clips of 5.56mm or 7.63mm im sorry.is it going to stop probably not but they are not going to as many and youe cant rap off 100 rds of 30 06 in a matter or seconds with a bolt Acton.

We are learning about the Christmas carol in language arts. I remember the present saying that "I forsee an empty chair in the corner a crutch with no owner…" that's how this is it is sooo sad.

What was it Chris Rock said? Not gun control, but bullet control? Limit the type and quantity available to civilians.

I saw "military grade ammo" mentioned, and I have to say that this is a great example of the phrasing that the media uses to make things sound more dangerous. You can by old military/NATO ammunition cheaper that new ammo, and actually "less deadly" than hollow point rounds required by law for deer hunting. The full metal jacketed ammunition is designed to put a hole through an enemy to take them off of the battlefeild not necessarily to kill. A person shot with this type of ammo is more likely to survive due to the projectile passing through rather than fragmenting for maximum tissue damage.

Trust me i am quite aware of the effects of thos ammo as I have been shot with it so okay than I will use .223and .308 if ot sounds less scary bottom line is civilians do need these types of wepons they don't they are useless in public people buy them dress them up best they can to make them look like the real thing for what what do civilians need with a night scope or a heads up sight on a wepon answer because we allow it. And that needs to stop its a hell of lot easier to walk into a school with a bushmaster and 10 30 round mags and wipe oit a bunch of children quick to reload as if he had to do it with a shot gun or hunting rifle I guarantee you he is not killing 26 in that short of time

Sadly, arms and munitions manufacturers and dealers will lobby against any change to the "right to bear arms" they have the financial resources to do so and think about how many congressmen own a weapon it two. Big guns are like big fast cars, they give the owner a hard on and nobody can make a man willing give up his penis. And the so called hunter...he can't go into work on Monday and brag about the joint of meat a purchased in the market on Saturday, in the way he can brag about shooting down bambi from 500 yards, hidden and using a telescopic sight. Notice how all these people psychos and so called hunters go for easy targets.

Sorry if I upset any of you who hunt, but this is the 21st c, you don't need to hunt anymore, therefore you don't need guns.

If I might throw my 2 cents into the pot we do not need the salt weapons in the hands of the general public.
But can we really trust this government 2 only take an inch And not a mile If we allow them to ban any type of firearm
they will most likely ban them all. Historically That's what the government does it's either all or nothing.
Just food for thought.

Some figures

94,388 people shot in US so far this year
190 people shot in US this Saturday
50 shots fired by a gunman at shopping mall the day after the massacre
40% of firearms purchases in US do not need a background check
42 US states do not ban or regulate assault rifles
39 people killed by firearms in UK 2008/2009
35 killed by firearms in Australia in one year
60 killed by firearms in Spain in one year
9,484 killed by firearms in US in the same year
US is just 5% of global population but has 50% of firearms worldwide
300 million is the number of privately owned firearms in the US

Stop and think about it.

You don't need a gun to be a man, if you want to be a man and a decent human being, help an old lady cross the road, or better yet....make a child laugh.

Big Tex and all. I'll try to keep it brief. The first amendment and the rest of the bill of rights that we love so much is worthless without the second amendment. Yes, other countries have different statistics than ours, but they also enjoy many less freedoms. Please understand that what happened in CT was done by an individual who was ineligible to own a firearm. Also know that CT has some of the most stringent firearms laws in the US. Neither of these facts stopped this crazy and evil person. Mass murderers have only their mind to limit their abilities to inflict harm. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer, the 9/11 hijackers used box cutters and airplanes. And for my final point... The city with the worst murder rate in the US is also the city with the strictest gun laws. Chicago.

Until we get serious about consequences for bad actions, mental health treatment, and just the general idea that there is good and evil, there will be no end to these type of things.

My 2 cents
Everyone have a great day

Jacklpe

Flyingmuck wrote: Sadly, arms and munitions manufacturers and dealers will lobby against any change to the "right to bear arms" they have the financial resources to do so and think about how many congressmen own a weapon it two. Big guns are like big fast cars, they give the owner a hard on and nobody can make a man willing give up his penis. And the so called hunter...he can't go into work on Monday and brag about the joint of meat a purchased in the market on Saturday, in the way he can brag about shooting down bambi from 500 yards, hidden and using a telescopic sight. Notice how all these people psychos and so called hunters go for easy targets.

Sorry if I upset any of you who hunt, but this is the 21st c, you don't need to hunt anymore, therefore you don't need guns.

D**n! And I just took out a flock of sheep with my '57 chrome covered Caddilac! Sorry Muck....my lead in to question the logic suggested for the "guns don't kill people" , etc etc. With that reasoning, we can stretch the analogy to, "cars don't kill people...." True, but roughly 40,000 people die on our roads each year. That number is roughly what we saw in the 1950's with far fewer drivers, roads, etc. What happened? It is called sensible regulation. Seat belt requirements, crumple zones, air bags, safe construction, driver training, DWI enforcement. Those regulations made cars and people safer on the road....and amazingly we can all earn the right to drive if we so choose. Not surprisingly, car makers and their lobbies (read NRA) fought these ideas like hell, but change did come. No government stepped in to say driving was dangerous so we should all get used to walking again. Just because we need to regulate weapon possession and use doesn't foretell a total ban. But wouldn't it be nice to know that it would be much more difficult for your local wack job to get their hands on an Uzi and brutally murder innocents in your theaters, schools, malls, et. Remember good old Confucious: the longest journey begins with the first step...

Sorry about the sheep, Muck...

And Wig, I guess I misunderstood the invite. I'm not sure how to "join a squad" or whatever, for the simple fact I don't know how the culture around here works. I'll hold off of flying the M.O.M banner as long as you guys wish. By the way, my name is David, I live in Orlando, FL, and I'm a self employed trucker who works too much. I usually play this game while having to wait around here and there to be loaded/unloaded etc. It is a pleasant diversion. I'm normally not too much of a "gamer", but I do find this one to be addictive. By the way, I normally wouldn't share this, but considering the current discussion... I'm a very conservative/libertarian type of guy. I believe in personal responsibility, small government, and the general idea that the government in the US belongs to the people. Not the other way around. Sooo... With all of that being said, once again I appreciate the invite.

Thanks

Jacklpe

Sorry, but the UK, Australia, Norway, Sweden, France, all have the same freedoms as the United States, but none of them feel the need for a bill of rights that says you can bear arms. And as wig said earlier you ain't about to get invaded by us, or anyone else for that matter and the white colonists and settlers made sure the Native American didn't pose any threat for long, incidentally, the white man massacred more Native Americans, than the other way around, and without the help of people's such as the Iroquois, the first colonists would probably not have made it and they were British and if I'm not mistaken the Americas were our first penal colony before Australia, yes, an awful lot of the early colonists were criminals.

Perhaps that's where the gun mentality comes from!

btschuman wrote:

Flyingmuck wrote: Sadly, arms and munitions manufacturers and dealers will lobby against any change to the "right to bear arms" they have the financial resources to do so and think about how many congressmen own a weapon it two. Big guns are like big fast cars, they give the owner a hard on and nobody can make a man willing give up his penis. And the so called hunter...he can't go into work on Monday and brag about the joint of meat a purchased in the market on Saturday, in the way he can brag about shooting down bambi from 500 yards, hidden and using a telescopic sight. Notice how all these people psychos and so called hunters go for easy targets.

Sorry if I upset any of you who hunt, but this is the 21st c, you don't need to hunt anymore, therefore you don't need guns.

D**n! And I just took out a flock of sheep with my '57 chrome covered Caddilac! Sorry Muck....my lead in to question the logic suggested for the "guns don't kill people" , etc etc. With that reasoning, we can stretch the analogy to, "cars don't kill people...." True, but roughly 40,000 people die on our roads each year. That number is roughly what we saw in the 1950's with far fewer drivers, roads, etc. What happened? It is called sensible regulation. Seat belt requirements, crumple zones, air bags, safe construction, driver training, DWI enforcement. Those regulations made cars and people safer on the road....and amazingly we can all earn the right to drive if we so choose. Not surprisingly, car makers and their lobbies (read NRA) fought these ideas like hell, but change did come. No government stepped in to say driving was dangerous so we should all get used to walking again. Just because we need to regulate weapon possession and use doesn't foretell a total ban. But wouldn't it be nice to know that it would be much more difficult for your local wack job to get their hands on an Uzi and brutally murder innocents in your theaters, schools, malls, et. Remember good old Confucious: the longest journey begins with the first step...

Sorry about the sheep, Muck...

Ah! But did you get the one with the chopper! He's the one you gotta watch out for.

Guess Big Tex better get that giant grill truck set up!

Jacklpe wrote: And Wig, I guess I misunderstood the invite. I'm not sure how to "join a squad" or whatever, for the simple fact I don't know how the culture around here works. I'll hold off of flying the M.O.M banner as long as you guys wish. By the way, my name is David, I live in Orlando, FL, and I'm a self employed trucker who works too much. I usually play this game while having to wait around here and there to be loaded/unloaded etc. It is a pleasant diversion. I'm normally not too much of a "gamer", but I do find this one to be addictive. By the way, I normally wouldn't share this, but considering the current discussion... I'm a very conservative/libertarian type of guy. I believe in personal responsibility, small government, and the general idea that the government in the US belongs to the people. Not the other way around. Sooo... With all of that being said, once again I appreciate the invite.

Thanks

Jacklpe

Didn't we vote you in already?
If not i vote in. Never know when we might have need of a truck or two!

Quick hello to all M.O.M. members. See you in the skies!

Europeans do have many similar freedoms. I will agree. They do not have the same rights and protections that we do though. As far as our nation being founded by criminals, maybe so, but there would be a lot of Europeans speaking German without us. Do I hunt? Yes. Do I eat what I kill? Certainly. But the second amendment is about so much more. It guarantees that our government will continue to be by, of, and for the people. If you look back at the most talented mass murderers of the 20th century, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, you will see they understood what I am saying very well. All three, very early in their "terms" as leaders instituted gun bans, and confiscations. Armed people are free people. It's a simple as that. But as with any freedom, some will abuse it and give those who wish to end those freedoms all kinds of ammo for their arguments.

People so quickly forget history. I would live to play the "who said this" game and see how many guesses would come back as modern political figures. It's amazing how many lines from Mein Kampf could be mistaken for today's political rhetoric. Anyway, I'm probably not going to change anyone's mind, and I'd hate to wear out my newfound welcome around here.

Once again, have a great day.

Jacklpe

. Wigbomb wrote: Barring any late breaking "out" votes, ICARUS, RacinMadness and Jacklpe are IN! Still waiting to hear from RyansAce. I'm trying my best to maintain the M.O.M anti-protocol protocol but generally "stop by and apply" is heard as "stop by and be in". I've been playing with Jacklpe for months, he's always impressive and always fun...and always bearing a squad tag, "Pure Evil". Only tonight did I get around to asking, "Hey Jack, is Pure Evil a real squad?" When he said "no", I invited him to the thread. Jack, give us a sliver of info about yourself...I'll need first name, city, state (for the roster) and the squad will want to know whatever you'd care to share by way of brief "get to know your Jackalope" thumbnail bio type stuff.

Welcome to The House of M.O.M, men!

Congratz new M.O.M memberssss!!!!!!

Europeans have exactly the same rights and freedoms as in the US (except for guns) and all elected governments, whoever and wherever are for and by the people, but politicians usually opt to forget that part. Did you know the Declaration of Independence and many legal rulings in the states are based directly on the Magna Carta, signed by king John under duress from the barons, at Runny Mead in 1200 and something, I forget exactly.

I can never fathom or understand why some Americans think they have greater freedom than the rest of us. My lady friend held the same views, until she started learning more about the UK and the world at large from me, in fact she came to realise that for all the dealings the states has in the rest of the world, the common people are surprisingly very insular.

Yes. I know about the Magna Carta, English common law etc. as far as "exactly" the same protections, I'm see I'm going to have to do a bit of work and check that out. I've got a few hundred miles to run, waiting for me to get in gear at this moment, but I'll work on that. As I work on that, do me a favor and check out a little history regarding the disarming of a population, being followed by its enslavement (in one form or another). It'll make for some interesting reading. Hitler and his ilk were not stupid. They understood that to compel people to carry out their plans, first they must be disarmed and submissive. Our founding fathers were not stupid either. You will notice that nowhere in our bill of rights is it mentioned that "women can only
Be whipped on Sunday" or other antiquated crap like that. They understood what we would be up against very well. If in doubt, read The Federalist Papers. It will help you to understand their intentions a lot more.

Ok.

Again...

Jacklpe