No, lets ban those people who talk about using those airplanes (guns) violently to affect change.

The bitch is people who don't use their first amendment rights sensibly.

It's just not going to matter how bat-shit insane the killer is, you will apply your narrative to it anyway.

Is that the First Amendment you want to squash for people you disagree with?

Measure "Sensibly", quantify it.

The problem is BOTH sides will blame the other and the rift continues and the violence will escalate :(

Yeah, their rhetoric is the fucking elephant in the room after an event like this.

How 'bout examples of seriously not sensible...

Yelling fire in a theater, proposing gunplay as a way to solve political problems.

Why do you think the violence will escalate. To date there is no evidence this act was purely politically motivated. Sounds more like a mental illness issue.

Gunplay? That is a strange description.

I would hope that it would contribute to ending the hostile and violent rhetoric in politics.

why

I have seen no example of anyone playing with guns in any of those pictures you posted.

D'oh...semantics schemantics. :rolleyes:

Looks like nothing more than people exercising their First Amendment rights and saying what they believe. No harm in that.

So you are Ok with using the threat of violence as a First Amendment Right.

The kid who did the shooting was obviously having "issues",

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/jared-...ry?id=12572164

I think those who were completely against where this government used the historical precedent of overthrowing a government by the use of force if that what it took to get the changes they wanted. Hell now we we have wacko's like Olberman saying it happened because of the Tea Party and Bush, now there is part of the problem.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/302352

Why did you alter your post?

Interestingly, my narrative IS that the killer is bat-shit insane.

CooCoo for Coco Puffs.

There aren't going to end up being any reasons that a reasonable person would understand, if the postings on youtube are correctly attributed to the shooter.

You caught me mid-change in my post, merc. I'm not entirely understanding your reply. Terrorists use force to try to get changes they want.

Since you changed it I will answer this one too. Actually I believe that is a crime in most states if you can prove that the fear of violence is real.

Because I type as I am thinking. Why doesn't your name show up in the member list at the bottom of the Cellar front page?

Yea, and we shoot drones at them. I am completely ok with a response to such acts.

Keep your eye on the news. By those signs Pico posted there seems to be allot of mental illness in this country. Pretending you don't see doesn't mean it isn't so...

So those people and politicians who use rhetoric involving threats of violence to change this government could be considered possible terrorists?

Ok. I will watch for it. But I don't believe that because we have "allot of mental illness in this country" that it is an indication that we are suddenly going to see people running around shooting more Congressmen and Women.

Many of his friends admitted/tweeted and said in interviews that he was LIBERAL, not conservative.
How is it that the liberals are still trying to blame this on the GOP?
No matter how badly you want to blame this on those you disagree with,
ignoring the facts will not change them.

Ya know...then in that case, if someones says they have a gun and will use it, they need to be taken seriously...the fear of violence is there.

Not when they are American Citizens in a public place holding a sign during a protest. No. And no I don't believe that politicians are using "rhetoric involving threats of violence". Because people put a bulls eye on a state to indicate a target for political action or change is not a "rhetoric involving threats of violence". Politicians have been using bulls eyes in political discourse for years.

Yea, that is why you should call the police if someone says that to you so you can have the threat documented and file charges agains the person who is threatening you. If you don't, it is on you.

I really don't consider it a "fine line and total bullshit".

We have less than 2% seriously and persistently mentally ill (off the top of my head).

About 10% of people have some diagnosable form of mental illness over the course of their lives.

Merc, what do you suppose saying 'second amendment remedy' means? Or saying 'armed and dangerous' in the same sentence with 'Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing'.

Are they republican or democrat? ;) :D

Ok. Time for me to take a breather from this.

Even if he hadn't shot all those people, even if it never happened, posting on-line rifle cross-hairs over "target" election sites and political opponants like Palin did was stupid, provocative and dangerous.
She and her spokesperson can claim it was never meant to represent rifle crosshairs but only a complete moron could think they were anything else.

Oh they were cross hairs, but to claim that she meant it as a way to incite a violent act is BS.

Sounds like someone co-opting and perverting their perception of what the Second Amendment actually says in an effort to add emphasis to a point of protest. Do I believe they are actually carrying a gun or are going to try to overthrow the government using armed force? No.

Sounds like people who are using their First Amendment right to make the point that historically, if TJ actually said such a thing, that they are willing to support armed revolt if the government continues down the path they disagree with. Do I think they would do it? No. They are doing what many people do with signs at political rallies, they are drawing attention to their point of view.

There's no way you can convince me this guy isn't making a threat, that he isn't trying to intimidate anyone that opposes him.
http://cellar.org/2010/bulletballot.jpg

Personally, I don't take the threat seriously, because he, even with a hundred buddies, can't do it. Not with a thousand, not with a hundred thousand. The government, no matter which party is in charge, would crush them like grapes.

Besides, I know this is all a diversion, a dog & pony show. Something to distract you from what's really going on, while Big Money, through Karl Rove and the lobbyists, subvert our system in a meaningful, probably irreparable way.

:lol: You forgot to mention Haliburton....

Post a threat here to kill the president and see how much proof the Secret Service really needs. Your 1st Amendment rights are worth trampled beans if you also do not use it responsibly.

Meanwhile, history says the nutjobs come from everywhere once extremists start promoting hate. But then Likud really did not mean to have Rabin assassinated. Likud were just calling for it repeatedly and it accidentally happened. That is your logic. And I guess you are sticking to it.

Wow. Vaccinations did that much damage?

Nonsense. It was intentional. It is how nutjobs are inspired. It was not stupid. It was intentional. Extremists love promoting that kind of hate. And, like Likud, then deny that was their intent.

Mafia godfathers wish they could get people killed that easily. But then the mafia only does it for money. Extremists do it for hate.

How many automatic weapons are required to take out the Westboro Baptist Church. And its not my fault when it accidentally happens.

One bullet to the head of Fred. If talking about it caused this to happen, he would be a dead man long ago and would continue to be dug up and shot every few weeks.

:lol:

No bullets, they're all lawyers, just pour salt on 'em.

From the Washington Post of 9 Jan 2011:
How strange. The same rhetoric was preached by Likud. And then Rabin was assassinated. Oh. But that was just a coincidence. That both parties calling for murder were extremists. And that both got nutjobs to do what they wanted.

Has Sarah Palin put Manhattan Muslims on her schedule yet?

Maybe I too could get on Palin's enemies list. Nixon wouldn't have me.

Of course, the tea party has given a whole new meaning to this phrase: The Hit Parade.

I was thinking the same thing.

Except, I don't see anyone expressing any pangs of conscience over their dangerous and provocative words.

Is it a sign of the apocalypse when TW sounds like the sane one here? :eyebrow:

Yes.

Interesting link that Dailykos had up...
http://sheya.com/wp-content/uploads/...3-05-33-pm.png

Good local article here ...

Alleged Shooter in Attack, Described by Classmate as "Left-Wing Pothead"

pot is often used by schizophrenics who are attempting to self medicate

Pot is used by lots of people to self medicate :)

He was also a rabid grammar nazi, and we know how ruthless they are.;)

And what Mr. McGahee described as a pattern of behavior by Mr. Loughner, marked by hysterical laughter, bizarre non sequiturs and aggressive outbursts,
-nyt

I guess the parents were highly aggressive too.

Free speech has a price tag in this case it was too high. Think freedom of speech is really free? Try yelling bomb while you are being groped by the TSA.