penniless

He fires 100 rounds, kills the police officers and you expect him to make sense? I don't think any sane person would be able to follow the reason string he out together. I'm not sure I can follow your last sentence.

My question is what makes people have that tendency towards violence? I don't suppose that Americans are any more prone towards the tendency than any european nationality, If shootings are excluded, I don't believe the data show Americans to be more violent than Europeans. The really significant anomaly is in shootings. But it can't have anything to do with the availabilty of guns. Oh no.

Oooh an argumentum ad populum fallacy.

And your conclusion means what action should be taken? Perhaps actual prosecutions for violations would be a start? Tell us how rigorous the background check into the mental health of a gun buyer is.

Pittsburgh makes SIX in the last month. This is a national disgrace.

A bad man with a gun used it to take lives. Good men with guns arrived, ending the shooting spree, saving lives. What should you conclude from this? That we should do a far better job of ensuring that only good men get guns. I may be mistaken but I don't think that New york state has liberal gun laws It will be interesting to see how the nutter gained access to the guns he used in his senseless act of madness. There are laws, and then there are EFFECTIVE laws. What we are missing are effective laws. We have plenty of toothless laws.

Just because someone didn't stop a _mass shooting_ with a personal firearm does not mean that there are not other times when people do actually defend themselves with a personal firearm. I believe the dead cops WERE armed with guns and were properly trained in their use (unlike many civilians). Didn't seem to help them.

SIX mass shootings in the US in the last month. Somewhat of a difference.

Source? Just look at the funds reported they recieved!! AND WHO GAVE THEM What percentage of what really recieved we will never know How are their campaign contributions "different" from AIG's? AIG is on the list of the top 100 political donors? Or is the difference simply that you don't like Barney?

Shouldn't it be "many" ex-Palins? I'm an alien and a bit confused about your text ... Bristol's chance at being an ex-Palin faded this week when she announced that her engagement was off.

It is indeed. When Bush made stupid remarks people laughed at the stupidity of the remark. When Obama made a stupid remark there's "outrage" and "President A$$hole" and "deliberate" and "shocked, and horribly disappointed" and "offensive". Double standard indeed. That is one interesting reality in which you live Expalins much. Thanks Since every one of the expressions in quotes was used in this very thread, the alternate reality is clearly YOURS.

Which "top performers" would these be in companies that needed bailing out by taxpayers like me.

they're scared of deflation so they've got to get money into the economy - and spent. Problem: the money isn't being spent! The banks STILL aren't lending it. The public isn't spending money, either. About the only thing people are buying is the rhetoric of "depression" and the like. Which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The place I work, which is financially sound, wants to borrow some money for capital investments and contacted 25 banks within the past month. The response was a universal "We aren't lending". Not "We aren't lending to you", just "We aren't lending"/

Maybe if you had shown any concern in the past, your "outrage" would appear genuine. Given your SC persona exhibited previously, your "outrage" is clearly faked. Looks like this thread backfired on you.

That has nothing to do with whether their immigration was or was not legal. True,,,,but 90% that come from spanish countries are!!! No, that refers to the proportion of illegal immgrants who are from Spanish-speaking countries. (Which is logical, since we've just about got that nasty Canadian immigration problem licked, and our Eastern and Western borders are protected by really big moats.) But that's far different from saying that "90% of all those who immigrated to the US from Spanish-speaking countries did so illegally," which is not true. I thought it was well established on Speakers Corner that facts are not allowed to interfere with a good rant.

This is NOT new, it goes back to 2005, and the leader was Howard, not Rudd, and it has pieced together several bits to give a misleading impression. It always helps to check Snopes before posting stuff like this, or it makes YOU look foolish and bigoted.

You mean the government run (i.e. socialized, or if you prefer, "National Health Service") hospital? I think you're making the original poster's point far more eloquently than he did. Did you forget already that just yesterday there was an outcry on here about privatizing verterans' healthcare? Did you forget that the Walter Reed scandal was due to "local" mismanagement and not a systemic problem? Funny how the tune changes to suit the agenda.

But the record shows that on Nov. 25, Treasury Department officials signed a securities agreement to provide $40 billion to AIG in exchange for preferred stock and rights to buy common stock. In that 586-page document, the agency explicitly allowed AIG to pay individual executives as much as 3.5 times their base salary without any approval. The agreement also allowed AIG to set aside as much money for such bonuses for 2008 as it had in 2006, a year when the insurance giant was raking in vast amounts of profit from a financial bubble that would later maim the world economy. Who was in charge of the Treasury on Nov 25 last? Chris Dodd Barney Frank Obama OK, who was it?

They do these " Cheap Jobs" that so called no else will do only because they ARE ILLEGAL here. What happens when they do get their citizenship then want your job cause they will do it cheaper,,WHAT THEN?? Then they will be LEGALS, and entitled to exactly the same protections that you and I are entitled to.

Maybe you've forgotten what went on at Walter Reed a couple of years back.

One pilot starts jackin around with his pistol and shoots a hole and it's a dangerous program? One in seven years. hmmmmm, one guy hooked in the ground and died last month. Guess we should ban those also. Pretty dangerous move. What if the bullet had hit a critical system? Didn't think about that, did you? I never heard of a hook turn taking down an airliner.

The choice shouldn't be exclusive-OR. Rejecting a gun on account of its color is stupid, but THIS rejection appears appropriate because color is not actually the issue here.

Checking out at the supermarket involves waiting in line too. Two weeks ago I waited 45 minutes for a table at a restaurant where I had a reservation. Your motive here is remarkably transparent.

Godwin's Law - you just lost the argument. That aside, maybe you should have read the whole thing and not just the bullet statments. Reading really IS fundamental - you should try it sometime. See my reply to Marg, above. Godwin's Law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." It says nothing about losing an argument.

Since the banks were the biggest players in the fiasco that led inexorably to massive layoffs, and then took taxpayer money to bail themselves out while continuing to pay bonuses to their execs, I think forgoing the $0.50 is the least they should do.