On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:00:18 -0800 (PST), Doc
wrote:

On Jan 10, 5:47*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:
Short-term furor over assassination of a Federal judge (!) and
possible murder (hope not!) of a national legislator, along with
murder of a 9-year-old child and other innocents.

Furor will soon die down. Nothing will be done. *

So assault rifles and other multiple-fire devices will continue to be
sold -- to kill little Bambi in the forest, as the NRA piously
pretends.


While it's not exactly clear to me why anyone actually *needs*
automatic and assault weapons, that wasn't the problem here nor is it
ever. The problem also isn't heated political rhetoric which for some
reason seems to be getting lots of press in this incident. There are
lots of people who are really angry at government or at specific
legislators, most of them don't go on a killing rampage.

The problem is a mentally unstable person who committed a violent act.
What do you propose be "done" about it? A determined attacker could
probably have done a similar amount of damage with a hunting knife.
Look how many people John Hinckley took down with a dinky .22 and in
the presence of heavily armed, highly trained bodyguards who were
there specifically to deter such an act.

doesnt do much for the argument that if everyone was armed this
wouldnt have h appened, does it?


Loughner could have just as easily set off a homemade bomb or 3. He
could have had a shotgun or run into the crowd with an SUV. Trite but
true - guns don't kill people, people kill people.

and yet 11,000 people arent killed by bombs or knives every year.

in the most heavily armed nation on earth we have the highest murder
rate of any industrialized country

but there's no connection, right?