In flames? We only tweaked the list. I added McVeigh out of courtesy because he was not in the timeline established by the author. Neither the author nor I presented it as a comprehensive list. It's a list that commenced with the killings at Ft. Hood-- a likely marker due to the military affiliation of the author. Frankly, most of the evidence against the original claims is merely counter-assertion, i.e. Lanza was a "likely" Republican voter because the motehr he killed was, too. The broad point still stands; these killers aren't entirely who you expect them to be.
If that was the broad point you were making, it wasn't made very clearly at all. It seemed like the point you were making was that killers had Democratic party leanings. One of the ones you mentioned was actually a Republican, another couldn't vote at all. Those aren't counter assertions those are facts.
Like this one? How does "likely false" become a fact? "According to at least one media source, Nancy Lanza was a registered Republican. The source does not provide a link, but the author of this article is seeking further confirmation). We can therefore claim that with no evidence to support the claim, the assertion that Lanza was a Democrat is not demonstrated and that in the absence of any evidence it is likely FALSE." There is more... Yes, I was talking about leanings; leanings that were probably surprising to most. It says nothing about causality much less conspiracy as some have tried to charge. One a Republican? McVeigh had registered as one ten years earlier but had not voted Republican recently? Is that the ONE that you are talking about. Oh yeah, he is out because we are talking about perpetrators of gun violence against innocents.
I removed McVeigh from the list because I forgot that this thread was about gun violence and that wasn't McVeigh's weapon of choice.
How often you do have to be given misleading and false information before you start questioning the sources?
giddy, I don't care what party any killer is a member of, because it has nothing to do with their killing or crazed sick minds. I was merely pointing out how wrong this thread was.
In a sub-forum filled with some ridiculous weak sauce threads, this is one of the dumbest ever. Congrats OP, you're a hack.
Yeah, with some research we can probably cherry-pick a tidy list of Democrat killers to villify. But, this is the part that makes me do a double-take. What do we have to get rid of? Democrats? Is it the liberal ideals that are inspiring mass murder?
You wonder why a group of humans could burn Giordano Bruno at the stake for suggesting that planets existed around other stars, and you wonder why a group of humans could possibly take hundreds of years to apologize for their collective insult to the logic of Galileo, but then you read a giddyup thread, and you see that a lot of humans just cannot recognize, utilize or accept logic at all. (HINT for giddy: in the paragraph above, you are NOT analogously in the role of visionaries like Bruno or Galileo. You are more like one of the people arguing that the earth is standing still because otherwise there would be a "great wind," and then you make your own great wind and hit "submit thread.")
MY GOD YOU ARE PATHETIC. I do not even particularly like you, but am embarrassed for you. The thread idea and execution is simply stupid. I do not think that anyone is saying to limit access to assault rifles for Republicans, I believe it is for all people. Second, I am a (D) and am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and an owner of assault rifles. So your assertion is flawed on that account as well. Third, a rebuttal is provided that there is NO evidence to support ANY of the claims made in your cut&paste chain letter.... yet you do not let the carcass of this abomination of a thread die, you DOUBLE down in classic GIDDY fashion to only magnify your incredible level of stupidity. Fourth, you then change the "purpose" of the thread to something that is obviously not what the thread was about.... at this point most readers in shame say nothing, but a few marvel at your complete ignorance and openly scoff at you. Last, I can see why you teach young children, you are incapable of the mental maturity needed to have a meaningful conversation with folks above 10 years of age. You are something else, like the turd that just won't go away, no matter how many times you flush.
