I don't think anyone is saying that it's anyone else's fault. We all agree it is the shooter who bears the responsibility for his actions.

 

That aside, what do you think of the tone of politics and political discussion in this day and time?

 

Really, it's any day and time. It's been like this, or worse, for the entire history of this country. Shoot, we've had people almost killed in the Senate chambers in past, attacked by other senators.

Really, it's any day and time. It's been like this, or worse, for the entire history of this country. Shoot, we've had people almost killed in the Senate chambers in past, attacked by other senators.

 

You aren't getting what I'm saying. The 24/7 news age, internet, discussion boards like this...there's no escaping any more. Every where you turn, there's this constant barrage of vitrolic rhetoric. I know history, I'm not lacking in education. But this is worse.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's anyone else's fault. We all agree it is the shooter who bears the responsibility for his actions.

 

That aside, what do you think of the tone of politics and political discussion in this day and time?

 

I do. and that includes at least one poster here. Why even bring it up if you don't think there's some connection or to try to score political points. Who was the first person to even mention Palin in this thread?

 

I think in this day and age of 24 hour information access that political discourse is going to be harsh and that people are living in a Pollyanna world if they think otherwise. Once the bell has been rung you can't unring it.

 

Do you remember during the Bush presidency a film made in documentary style about assassinating GWB? The left defended that as art. Now they are getting their collective panties in a bunch over a map. It's hypocritical and despicable and show the double standard that exists.

You aren't getting what I'm saying. The 24/7 news age, internet, discussion boards like this...there's no escaping any more. Every where you turn, there's this constant barrage of vitrolic rhetoric. I know history, I'm not lacking in education. But this is worse.

 

The people saying the rhetoric aren't worse but yes, the instant communication of such puts it out there for everyone to see/hear.

I do. and that includes at least one poster here. Why even bring it up if you don't think there's some connection or to try to score political points. Who was the first person to even mention Palin in this thread?

 

I think in this day and age of 24 hour information access that political discourse is going to be harsh and that people are living in a Pollyanna world if they think otherwise. Once the bell has been rung you can't unring it.

 

Do you remember during the Bush presidency a film made in documentary style about assassinating GWB? The left defended that as art. Now they are getting their collective panties in a bunch over a map. It's hypocritical and despicable and show the double standard that exists.

 

But you imply (by virtue of pointing a finger at what the left did) that it's only one sided. I get the feeling that you feel this current state of affairs is quite OK.

 

There are double standards all over the place in politics. And you may call me polly-anna-ish in my wish to see the level of vitrol subisde, even stop. But frankly, the only way that things change for the better are when those like myself take a stand. You may call me a dreamer...but I'm not the only one....:lol:

To some extent I do think it's OK. People have minds and regardless of what many on the left believe they are perfectly capable of choosing who and what to listen to and believe. If there wasn't an audience for that kind of information it wouldn't exist. In my simple mind it's as easy as that. I don't think it's one sided at all, in fact I think that some of the worst vitriol comes from the left, but that is being ignored.

 

FWIW (and RM this paragraph is not intended as a reply to anything you have posted) I just heard that Fred Phelps has issued a press release that his group is going to protest the funeral of one of the victims. Guess which one? I'll give you a hint he used the word idolatrous to describe the victim and I think only one was Catholic. Just to be clear on my rhetoric I put ANYONE that would politicize these attacks right in the same category of evil as Fred Phelps. The Phelps group is going to protest the funeral of the beautiful 9 year old victim.

Hopefully, this will lead to some common sense gun law revisions. Is there a true need for a 30-shot clip? Shouldn't we require that states send criminal and mental health data to a national database? Shouldn't we require permits?

To some extent I do think it's OK. People have minds and regardless of what many on the left believe they are perfectly capable of choosing who and what to listen to and believe. If there wasn't an audience for that kind of information it wouldn't exist. In my simple mind it's as easy as that. I don't think it's one sided at all, in fact I think that some of the worst vitriol comes from the left, but that is being ignored.

 

For the record, I don't have a problem with discussion and debate. I have a problem with hyperbole and vitrol. There's no reason to stop the debate or discussion of policies and issues. But leave the ugly out of it, IMO. It's incendiary and does nothing to promote the understanding of the "other" side.

 

 

FWIW (and RM this paragraph is not intended as a reply to anything you have posted) I just heard that Fred Phelps has issued a press release that his group is going to protest the funeral of one of the victims. Guess which one? I'll give you a hint he used the word idolatrous to describe the victim and I think only one was Catholic. Just to be clear on my rhetoric I put ANYONE that would politicize these attacks right in the same category of evil as Fred Phelps. The Phelps group is going to protest the funeral of the beautiful 9 year old victim.

 

I agree with you.

Hopefully, this will lead to some common sense gun law revisions. Is there a true need for a 30-shot clip? Shouldn't we require that states send criminal and mental health data to a national database? Shouldn't we require permits?

 

 

In my humble (much maligned) opinion, yes to each of your questions.

If he really said that, it's might be a new low for him ...

 

If he indeed really said that, that's as obscene a thing (DEMOCRATS ARE GHOULS. They privately are thankful for Tucson because "they think it advances their sick and perverted purposes.") as I've read in a while; including 99.4% of rap lyrics.

Hopefully, this will lead to some common sense gun law revisions. Is there a true need for a 30-shot clip? Shouldn't we require that states send criminal and mental health data to a national database? Shouldn't we require permits?

 

What would be a good number? And again, just like with guns, to make them illegal does nothing to keep them out of the hands of someone like this. If I want to go on a killing spree I would have no problem getting all the 30 round clips I want. A bomb big enough to blow up a building is illegal as well but that didn't stop McVeigh from building one.

What would be a good number? And again, just like with guns, to make them illegal does nothing to keep them out of the hands of someone like this. If I want to go on a killing spree I would have no problem getting all the 30 round clips I want. A bomb big enough to blow up a building is illegal as well but that didn't stop McVeigh from building one.

 

So you're saying there is no reasonable limit to place on the clip size? We all(or many of us) agree that we should have the right to own a gun and have it for protection. However, what's "enough" for protection? Do I need a 30-clip to protect myself?

 

This guy bought everything he used legally.

So you're saying there is no reasonable limit to place on the clip size? We all(or many of us) agree that we should have the right to own a gun and have it for protection. However, what's "enough" for protection? Do I need a 30-clip to protect myself?

 

This guy bought everything he used legally.

 

It's not the guns fault or the gun laws fault. It's his, period.

It's not the guns fault or the gun laws fault. It's his, period.

You knew it was going to go there, though. It always does. Knee-jerk reactions when guns are involved are always quick to surface. Saw a lot of it in the media yesterday.

Hopefully, this will lead to some common sense gun law revisions. Is there a true need for a 30-shot clip? Shouldn't we require that states send criminal and mental health data to a national database? Shouldn't we require permits?

 

Problem is the range of mental health sickness involved and HIPA. Do you send everyone with depression? Anxiety? Anger issues? There's so many different issues involved when you start talking about mental health. If I'm not mistaken the shooter was never declared insane. So many issues involved in a free society.