HOME | DD
joelashimself — 12-14-12
Published: 2012-12-14 22:55:55 +0000 UTC; Views: 4748; Favourites: 106; Downloads: 36
Redirect to original
Description
I just...I just felt like I had to do something.If I was there, I'd have killed the monster myself. But I wasn't. I just had to sit there and hear about it.
Those children were murdered and I couldn't do a damned thing.
....They are with God in paradise now. I guess that's the only solace we can take at this point...
...I'm sorry. I don't know what else to say.
....Hold your loved ones.
Appropriate music-[link]
Related content
Comments: 206
Free is the word.
Free to do immense good,
free to show great mercy and compassion,
Free to enact horrible deeds of nightmare and evil.
We all have the choice. Some are just weak, but we all must be held accountable to our actions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What kind of coward goes and shoots innocent children...and then take the easy way out by killing himself...just because he had a personality disorder?! Fucking prick...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Imagine how it would have gone if one or more of the teachers were trained gun carriers.
God, Ill never understand this liberal culture.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
of course, more guns flooding the county will protet us from guns. you do realize the only reason reoublicans have any interest in protecting the "2nd ammendment" is because gun companies pay them to through "campaign donation." and the idea of turning the united states into a warzone sickens me. i'm not saying take away every gun in america, i'm saying make it FUCKING ILLEGAL to purchase a 75 round magazine for assault rifles. honestly, how many more people need to die in these shootings before we get some damn restrictions? in my state, buying a un is as easy as writing your name and walking out the store. i could then get some hillbilly magazine and buy 3000 bullets, body armor, and 70 round magazines and do the exact same thing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Killing is easier now. We have to adapt.
Restricting what you can buy in self defense only puts law abiding citizens at a disadvantage.
I carry a weapon so my loved ones don't become victims. I'd use my weapon to protect you too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
but any crack head insane motherfucker can just as easily get the gun. in fact, he can buy a shitload of military grade weaponry and as many bullets as he wants. good luck using your mouse gun against a maniac that went onto some website and bought a fucking machine gun. bolt-action hunting rifles, revolvers are fine in my book but buying an assault rifle that can be easily modified into an automatic weapon with an 80 round magazine is fucking insane. here's a statistic: i saw a graph that showed murder techniques for america and several euorpean countries. in one year, germany had 386 fatal stabbings and 83 gun deaths, the unitedkingdom had 243 stabbings and 48 gun deaths. the united states of america had over 30 fucking thousand gun murders in one year. imagine if al-quaeda killed 30000 americans, imagine what the response would be. but nope, americans killed 30,000 americans with guns. TOO MANY FUCKING GUNS. when the 2nd ammnedent was written 250 years ago, we had a tiny population, muskets were the only guns, guns were very expensive, and half the people in the colonies were britsh soldiers. that's why they made it. now, we have the most powerful rmy on earth, no one will invade us. slavery was once legal but times changed, now owning machine guns is legal but times have changed and we need to get rid of our new version of slavery.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
This isn't the place to argue about beliefs. We already have enough guns bought illegally that it would not matter if they were easier to get. We need to protect ourselves. And how is having guns slavery? It makes us freer not repression of our freedom.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Our fore-fathers agree with you explicitly. And so do I.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i said slavery because laws about slavery were changed because times changed, now, gun laws need to be changed because guns are hurting this country just like slavery did.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Pardon the logically inclined amongst us for finding the ability to defend your life independently a poor comparison to slavery.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Please it is not the time or place for this
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Slavery...not sure how that's relevant to the discussion.
But anyhoo, regarding how many deaths are attributed to guns, how exactly would outlawing legal gun sales and ownership fix this? The weapons will still be out there, and those with the means to get them illegally will do so, and they will have relative immunity to take advantage of an unarmed populace don't you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
the problem with the "guns protect us from guns" arguement is that it just doesn't work like that. for every "i used a gun to save my life" incident, there are 200 "i was murdered by a gun" cases. the idea of turning america into a place where you need a gun to not be murdered is horrific. i will not allow my country to become places like Los Angeles in the movie "Predator 2" or Detroit in Robocop. the republican idea of turning our country into a warzone filled with firearms is the first step towards a dystopian society. i have a fucktard neighbor that actually believes that those children should have had guns to defend themselves.... he wants children to be allowed to carry concealed firearms. when i told him what a fucking idiot he was, he called me a "homo fascist"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cool story bro.
In all honesty though, a world in which decent people are trained and armed (Not kids, we agree completely on that) is a world in which people with evil and violent intentions have trepidation about committing evil deeds right?
Wouldn't robbing a bank be much less tempting if all the patrons were strapped? Logic, dude.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, then please riddle me this, of all the patrons at said bank, how many of them are even mentally fit to hold a goddamn gun? How many aren't gonna go off like a firecracker and turn the place into a damn shooting gallery. Giving everyone guns is fine, but as said not all people are mentally stable to be issued them. When it comes to gun stuff, you have both the Republicans and Democrats either going for more guns, or banning guns. Yet nobody wants to have a middle ground. Like say, having stores not sell weapons that can be easily modified, or hell how bout making sanity test actually matter. In Russia, you'll have to go trough a shitload of sanity tests before you are even allowed to own a gas gun, license or no license. If you fail least ONE test, you get jack. In America, apparently you can get anything from MG to a damn bazooka if you have license. Hell, have parents lock away their guns in like a special storage, a safe, keep in on locked combinations, key cards, ANYTHING. This is mind bogelling avoidable, and yet apparently nobody can get a damn clue
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There are over 350,000 Kalashnikov series rifles in Russia presently in civilian ownership. It's easy to get guns in the old country.
Here's the point. Sure there are a few nut jobs out there, but making it impossible to buy guns legally doesn't make them any less nuts or dangerous.
Read a book called "More Guns less crime." It's a New York Times best seller, and it's really eye opening on the subject.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, but majority of said civilians are former military background or special forces, majority having served in hot spots like Afghanistan, Chechnya and other places. They are fully trained on the usage of weapons, and have underwent alot of psychic tests and studies. Even, even some bandits are former military and not just schmucks who somehow managed to get a gun.
I'm not saying not banning stuff entirely, but there needs to be some sort of middle ground where people aren't or can't get their hands on hardcore weapons. Yes, I know that if that happens you'll have people going to gun runners and getting stuff from them, much like in the 1920's mobster family's were supplying booze to people. But there's a difference between a drunk, and some wacko using a M60 in his office place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, it's not really the type of weapon that matters. The intent to kill manifests it's self in what ever form it has available to it.
Here's a solid middle ground that I think we can both stand on comfortably: Require that in order to carry a fully automatic combat rifle, one must first complete a weapons safety course and background check (part of which is already required)
Sort of like having to pass a drivers test before you get a drivers license. How's that sound?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, that's what I'm getting at (maybe I should have said it better), have people go trough a safety course, do background checks, see if they have any mental issues or suffered from any in the past, hell have them go see professional shrinks (and I do mean real ones, not those fake assholes who have as much of a doctor degree as I have knowledge of operating a nuclear reactor). I mean, this isn't rocket science, and yet people still miss this point and instead go: A. We need more guns; B. Let's ban ALL guns or C. Let's blame escapism fiction on this like we always do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Guns do indeed kill people, and I hope this will finally be the one thing that ban guns. But, I know that is naive, and I'm not actually expecting it. But one of my strongest hopes for the world is that owning a gun would become illegal in the USA. But I am a product of my own environment and opinions are many and different.
[link]
I feel as if #4 and #2 apply best here.
I also think it's a new thing for me to come across a christian that has no problems with announcing that he would murder someone. I don't think any christian over here would ever ever ever say that, but then again it's a divided religion and a large world.
Don't get me wrong, this crime was sick. Sick, disturbing, wrong and oh so terrible. I cry with the related persons, I really do. But I can't agree with a lot of opinions in these comments.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
That is the problem with gun-control laws. The criminals with guns will still have guns. People will still be shot and shootings will still occur. Even if guns were made illegal, they would still be bought and used. People would still buy guns. In the 1920's alcohol was banned. There were criminals who made entire careers selling booze because people still wanted it. People will sell guns and people will buy them.
Besides, guns don't kill people. People kill people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You raise an excellent point.
A ban on gun sales and ownership would only effect law abiding citizens. The lawless would continue to purchase fire-arms illegally, and those of us who follow the laws would be all the more defenseless.
It's purely common sense.
More gun ownership = less crime.
Just look at the numbers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly.
If guns were currently outlawed, and this exact same situation came up, nothing would have changed. He would still have had a gun and he would still have killed.
But if SOMEONE in the vicinity had been carrying at the time, he MIGHT have been stopped before he committed the crime.
I just don't understand the concept of banning guns. It wouldn't stop shootings. The criminals would still have them, and they would still use them.
All it would do is diminish the ability for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In the words of Thomas Jefferson. "A people who cannot defend themselves are slaves."
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Guns are inanimate objects.
The drive to kill comes from us.
Christianity has nothing to do with this.
Fascinating to see that your prejudice towards Christians supersedes your disgust with a child murderer. Speaks volumes about you character sir. Not uncommon with the obsessed atheist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Hey, not all atheists are bad, not all christians are bad. Anybody who puts their religion over someone else's, thats bad . Now, I'm an atheist who is converting to pure spiritualism ( Still rejecting of religion, but connected to the world on a higher level without a higher power) and I believe in coexistence. But if you just said that Atheists hate christianity more than they feel for a murder, let alone a mass shooting at an elementary school, you sir are bigoted, closed minded, and honestly stupid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not all atheist dude. Just the ones who get it into their head that simply being a spiritual person makes you an idiot.
Hardly a tolerant lot. Certainly not inclined towards intelligent debate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, that depends on the 'lot'. Once again that's more opinion based. One could say that all christians are anti-gay, pro death penalty, women hating domestic terrorists, and definitely not inclined towards intelligent debate either. It all depends on who you interact with, I mean we have religious differences, me and my parents have religious differences, some of my friends and I have religious differences, but we manage not to display words of hate. In the end we're all people
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's the core of it really.
In the end we all have the same needs, both physical and otherwise.
Weather a person is a butt head Christian, or a butt head atheist, or a butt head Muslim, it's not because of their faith. It's because they're a butt head.
.....I like typing the term "butt head." Hehe.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, that whole line was awesome. It's nice to find religious people with kind hearts and logical minds... Unfortunately, my cereal seems to have gotten soggy, and I must get more. I'm simply amazed that the words 'God' 'Christianity' 'law' and 'religion' were all used on the internet without starting a flame war. Good on you sir, good on you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Totally dude. We win the interwebs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...wow, really. That hurt my feelings. I'm not even kidding. I'm actually quite sad and emotionally hurt by that respone. I wasn't trying to lay blame or speak ill of anyone, and that's the respone I get?
Guns are inanimate objects made to be used as a killing device by humans. I will not add anymore to this, because I linked an article that explains it better than me and that's not what this particular comment is about.
I'd say a religion that promotes love towards the fellow man and not killing would have something to do with a follower of said religion wanting to kill. Because if I haven't misunderstood, you are a christian. (More on this two paragrahps down.)
What hurts me the most is that last one. To even SUGGEST that my "prejudice" towards christians would supersede my disgust with child murderer? Honestly, Sir, do you have no shame at all? Do you really have such little shame that you actually just made that statement? I'm mortified and incredibly offended.
First of all, what "prejudice" do I have against christianity? Huh? I said it was new for me to encounter a christian willing to kill, becuase I've never met one. That is all. I NEVER passed any judgement of you, and I specifically stated that I know it's a world wide and largely divided religion. I just never thought, or wanted to believe, that it would be divided on this particular issue. But have I called you a bad person? Have I judged you for it? Hell no. So what exactly "speaks volume about my character" here? I would ask you to appologize, but we're on the internet and I don't actually expect it to happen.
Second, "obsessed atheist"? You know, I might just start developing some prejudice against christians here, because what on what base are you saying that? Hmm? What kind of base could you possible have to take it up to yourself to decide what religion or non-religion I belong to? That if anything speaks volume about YOUR character. Well, let me give you a f'cking eye opener: Not everyone not agreeing 100% with what a christian says is an atheist. Myself? I'm a former christian and now an agnostic who's contemplating the possibility of the involvment of a divine force in the earth's evolution. There you go. Those are my beliefs. I would THANK YOU KINDLY not to take it upon yourself to decide another human's beliefs until he or she actually tell you them.
I really did not want for this to happen. I wanted to lay down a few opinions in a non-hostile manner, because I've always believed seeing other sides of an argument is good for everyone. But for you to even for a second think that whatever kind of prejudice I bear against a religion is stronger than the disgust I have for children being shot? ...I can't even finish this, because I don't know how to.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Any one who needs seven paragraphs to say "Nuh uh!" is in dire need of a nap.
Look bud, you insult me, you better be ready to tango.
Crying about being called out for being poorly informed and ignorant to reality is a clear indicator that you need to gear up before picking a fight.
Go find something you're better suited for.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It was never my intention to insult you, as I've already stated. I did not want to insult anyone, nor did I want to pick a fight. I've already explained that. All I was trying to do was, as I've said, present some opinions and arguments that could be interesting for both sides of the gun debate. I never wanted this to turn out the way it has now.
I lost respect for and was offended by a great artist who I thought was someone you could present opinions to without being accused of liking child murder. Sad, but that's life. I don't plan on answering this anymore, so don't even bother.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You could have just waved a white flag and saved yourself the time.
Good night, and enjoy your ignorance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, no, wait. One more thing. Because I really can't let this slide.
The whole "seven paragrahps" thing? It's called "being elaborate", something you obviously don't know anything about. Great job on not actaually responding to anything I said. Way to cop out. And jeez, after all the things I said about not wanting to be offensive? After everything I wrote about not meaning to insult you? You're still ending your comments with that. Fucking beautiful. I guess there really is no point then. I say the same to you, my friend. May you sleep tight, hugging your precious guns close to your chest as you slumber, dreaming of how you can gun down every nasty atheist who wants you harm. Hopefully, you accidently pull one of the triggers in your sleep and spare the world from a gun-crazy self-centered ignorant douche. God, I swear I don't WANT to hate the USA, but I just keep getting reminded of what kind of people live there.
Now, I actually do need a nap. How 'bout that, you had a sensible opinion for once. Feel quite unique, aye? Well, have a good life and all. This really will be my last comment. I pray to whatever god/s that may or may not exist that you never breed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Man, I didn't think you'd actually fall for that.
Little lesson here kid, once you say you're done with the debate, then your opponent responds....anything you write after that makes it eminently clear just how emotional you are, thus displaying a juvenile and childish nature.
One last tip bud, if you're getting emotional about a debate on the internet, it means three things...
1-You care too much about something you don't fully understand
2-Your opponent struck an exposed nerve, indicating you're self conscious about your lack of knowlege concerning the subject.
3-you aught to engage in more real world social activity.
I hope you find these tips helpful. God bless.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I didn't know about the shooting until I came home and saw this image, and I must say damn, this is shocking. I mean who shoots an elementary school? This 'man' just killed a bunch of innocent children. He wasn't doing it in the name of god, he wasn't doing it out of racism or rage, murder in general is disturbing, but murdering children? the oldest kids there are like fucking 12! They still want to be power rangers when they grow up! Though there must be so much pain for the kids who lived. They wont be able to hang out with those who didn't. They have to live with the image of dead peers for the rest of their lives.
The only solutions are less guns or more defense; and for a person like me who thinks guns are the tools of killers and psychopaths, I'm rooting for less guns. Civilians just can't handle that responsibility yet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
It wouldn't change anything. Not to start a gun debate here, but he could have used any weapon. A sword, a bow, a hunting shotgun, whatever. It's a totally unarmed environment. Someone who intends to do harm will be armed one way or the other, and only putting weapons in the hands of responsible citizens that can stop someone like that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I agree, however, who and how do we define 'responsible'? Killers aren't known as killers until they kill someone. So unless some new test has been created, there is no way to define responsible.
Besides, debates, when kept in good nature, are pretty fun
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Well, I was referring to responsibility as opposed to incompetence. The biggest dangers of having a gun in the house is accidental discharge and kids playing with guns, which are counteracted by starting kids on training early. That teaches them how to handle a gun safely, and it removes the 'lure of the forbidden' from the lockbox in the closet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
True homie. Chill debates rule.
As far as finding out if someone's "Responsible" is generally discerned by a background check (legally required in all 50 states prier to gun sales) but yeah, some nut jobs slip through the cracks, but what's the alternative? Depriving the population of it's right to self defense?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True that. And another incident happened in China today, [link] , I mean what is wrong with people? Maybe the world is ending, I just hope its after dec. 26 or whatever, I kinda like christmas.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
For realz.
Killers gonna kill I guess.
I just want to be ready to fight back if the monsters come for my loved ones, you know what I mean? I'm sure there's tons of loved ones you'd do everything you can to protect. What ever the bad guys are packing, we decent folks had better be better trained and better armed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
When I was seven, My best friend Christen Star was stabbed to death on school grounds after witnessing a drug deal.
It's not guns. It's weak broken humans that do these things.
Read this: [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm just saying all people have the ability to kill, all people can and will kill in certain circumstances. And the easiest and by far most common murder weapons are firearms. Human's are desensitized against how guns work, and are definitely not ready for such an easy device of killing. As all humans are chaotic in nature, there is no cure for our violence. But as a person who has seen deaths at the hands of firearms far too many times, I want them gone.
And to retort to the link, there are statistics that suggest that Ice cream sales and high crime rates are related. Statistics aren;t always true.
Still, to each their own...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see what you mean. But outlawing guns wont' make them go away. It just means only outlaws will have them.
The same thing happened centuries ago with the bow and arrow.
Guns exist, and we have to adapt weather we like it or not.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
This is quite true... I just dont think anybody should be able to run around toting a loaded 45 into a walmart. If guns are to be given to people, they should be given to trained officials and people at risk. Giving a teacher a gun is like giving a drug addict a gun; you just touch them wrong once and you're getting a face full of lead.
Kid: "Hey Mrs. Walter?"
Teacher: "Ohmygod!" *Bang bang bang*
[Kid dies]
And this isn't a joke. Most people just aren't stable enough to be runnig around with guns in public spaces. Your house, even your neighborhood, sure, but a local store or a school? Leave it to security officials.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>