another school shooting in U.S. of A. :(

[chuck34]

Whether deliberately or not, you completely misunderstand and misrepresent what I wrote. I criticised a section of American opinion; you take this to mean that I 'don't like Americans'. This is utter nonsense, and I'd ask you to apologise. I don't like the American gun culture, true, but this is a very different thing. Surely you have the wit to draw the distinction?

'Truly troubling'? Really? Cease the hyperbole.

I think you should cease trying to wiggle out of your own words.

Now you try to make some distinction about "American Gun Culture" as if that is somehow completely separate from the rest of America. How is that possible. As of right now I do not own a gun, therefore I am not part of the "gun culture", and presumably in your mind a-ok. But if tomorrow I decide I want a gun, I am now part of the "gun culture", and deplorable beyond mention? Explain how that works.

And yes, I believe your statement about a triple homicide in Switzerland to cause you no concern for their gun laws, yet you have great concern for ours, to be truly troubling. There is no distinction. Murder is murder, and all murder is a monstrous act of a madman, simple as that. I will not back down from that. And that is no hyperbole.

[chuck34]

As I expected — you don't truly believe in freedom of speech and expression. It's just a front. As soon as it diverts what you consider to be too far from your own views, you're willing to see people, for example, impeached.

As an afterthought, I'm increasingly delighted the UK doesn't have a written constitution for people to get absurdly hung-up about.

Once again you show your lack of understanding of US law. US Senators take an oath of office to uphold the US Constitution. The US Constitution clearly states via the 2nd Amendment that it's citizens have the right to bear arms. Therefore, for a Senator to want to circumvent the Constitution is a clear violation of their oath of office, an impeachable offence. She can say what she wants, she can believe what she wants, but to introduce legislation such as she has/will (not sure of the timing) is a violation of her sworn oath.

So once again I'll say it. If she would simply be "courageous" as you claim, and propose a Constitutional Amendment, I would have no problem with her stand. I would disagree, but I would respect her.

[BDunnell]

I think you should cease trying to wiggle out of your own words.

Rubbish of the highest order. In no sense am I trying to wriggle out of anything I've said.

Now you try to make some distinction about "American Gun Culture" as if that is somehow completely separate from the rest of America. How is that possible. As of right now I do not own a gun, therefore I am not part of the "gun culture", and presumably in your mind a-ok. But if tomorrow I decide I want a gun, I am now part of the "gun culture", and deplorable beyond mention? Explain how that works.

Cultures are to do with attitudes and viewpoints, not just actual ownership. I would genuinely have thought you'd be able to recognise the distinction.

And yes, I believe your statement about a triple homicide in Switzerland to cause you no concern for their gun laws, yet you have great concern for ours, to be truly troubling. There is no distinction. Murder is murder, and all murder is a monstrous act of a madman, simple as that. I will not back down from that. And that is no hyperbole.

In which case, may I suggest you reset your moral compass?

I note you still haven't apologised for the assertion that I dislike all Americans, by the way. It was a low thing to say, though hardly atypical. In recent years, the slightest criticism of individual aspects of, say, US foreign policy have often precipitated excessive accusations from some quarters of 'anti-Americanism'. The same is true here. So, please apologise.

[BDunnell]

America has the problem that its been legal for so long and some of its citizens carry such a militant attitude towards their own government, its unlikely to ever change or be realistic.

An attitude that, I say again, borders on paranoia.

[BDunnell]

Once again you show your lack of understanding of US law. US Senators take an oath of office to uphold the US Constitution. The US Constitution clearly states via the 2nd Amendment that it's citizens have the right to bear arms. Therefore, for a Senator to want to circumvent the Constitution is a clear violation of their oath of office, an impeachable offence. She can say what she wants, she can believe what she wants, but to introduce legislation such as she has/will (not sure of the timing) is a violation of her sworn oath.

The degree to which your constitution is sacrosanct will, it's true, always baffle an outsider. In this respect, it holds policy-making back.

[airshifter]

Now over 1000 posts and to be honest, it seems that many of the pro gun crowd and responsibly gun owners are much more open to compromise than those opposing guns. If responsible gun ownership and tough laws (that are enforced) aren't enough it's clear that people really don't want a solution... unless it is there solution.

As stated many times, the solution used in Europe won't be used here in the US. We may as well discuss removing alcohol from all the world because some would like that and think it's the best solution.

[chuck34]

The degree to which your constitution is sacrosanct will, it's true, always baffle an outsider. In this respect, it holds policy-making back.

That is PRECISELY what the Constitution was written to do, hold back policy-making. Perhaps you would be better served speaking only of your own laws.

[Tazio]

A bit off topic (ok way off topic), but she's not even close to the record for percentage of the vote. Richard Lugar won 87.4% of the vote in 2006 (not sure if that's a record, just a number I know). Feinstein only got 62.5% in her election.

Lugar got punked in his 2012 bid for re-election and isn't even part of the 113th Congress. BTW the entire population of Indiana is 6.5 million, over one million less residents including unregistererd voters, felons that are prohibited from voting, and those of an age too young to vote than Feinstein received from the reseidents of "The Great State of California". In the here and now the constituency that is made up of residents in The Great State of Indiana decided he bro sucks. 61%-39%

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM01v_vVnbg

[chuck34]

I note you still haven't apologised for the assertion that I dislike all Americans, by the way. It was a low thing to say, though hardly atypical. In recent years, the slightest criticism of individual aspects of, say, US foreign policy have often precipitated excessive accusations from some quarters of 'anti-Americanism'. The same is true here. So, please apologise.

I try to be civil, but my patience wears thin. Your feelings were hurt when I say that you dislike Americans, and I am supposed to apologize for that, yet you continue to call me and others paranoid, ignorant, fearful, and worse? You like to point out the irony in other people's statements, yet you do not see it in your own.

Oh yes, yes, you were only referring to "certain people", "specific circumstances", on and on. We get it, you only dislike those you disagree with. And yet your statements about "culture" and the Swiss murders pretty much damn all Americans for having a "bad culture", basically saying Americans can't be trusted, yet the Swiss can.

[chuck34]

Lugar got punked in his 2012 bid for re-election and isn't even part of the 113th Congress. BTW the entire population of Indiana is 6.5 million, over one million less residents including unregistererd voters, felons that are prohibited from voting, and those of an age too young to vote than Feinstein received from the reseidents of "The Great State of California". In the here and now the constituency that is made up of residents in The Great State of Indiana decided he bro sucks. 61%-39%

So your point is that since Feinstein is from a larger state, and therefore has a larger voting pool, that she is somehow "better"??????