Dozens killed in Brussels terrorist attack

[El-blanco]

Are there any verses of peace? If so, are we only judging by that standard.

The point is none of us can control how someone manipulates any text for nefarious reasons. When this happens It is a problem with the manipulators, not just the text itself.

Blaming the text of the Quran, IMO, would be like saying Helter Skelter was a dangerous album and the Beatles a dangerous group because Manson believed it signaled a race war.

I see a problem with that.

Wtf? You think the apparent word of God has the same influence as an album? Just because one lunatic thought it influenced a race war doesn't mean it holds the same weight a book people believe God wrote. There is verses of peace but the overall tone is very hostile and angry. The bible certainly does too but the majority of Christians have moved on from that thinking, and the ones who haven't are ostracized in society. Meanwhile regular Muslims still believe in all of its barbarity and you think it's sane to integrate them into society?

Islam needs to be called out for its stupidity and antiquated ideas just like creationists are. But we don't, instead we act like their beliefs are normal.

[1bad65]

I didn't ask your opinion on whether you think increased gun laws will result in higher body counts, I asked if you were aware of the loophole I listed. Since you didn't answer I take it as NO.

Again, it's moot. The bottom line is closing this loophole only affects law-abiding people, not criminals.

One of history's greatest minds told us this hundreds of years ago:

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -Plato

Yes using crime stats are because multiple studies (sourced the same place you sourced how increased gun laws result in higher body counts) have shown arrest data is faulty because police, who are overwhelmingly white, handle cases differently in different areas, which skews data.

When one plays the race card, they have conceded the fact they cannot offer up an effective argument/rebuttal.

Try again, this time without the race card. Good luck with that.

This is where we disagree. if the primary goal is stopping terrorism, than we can tweak laws to prevent almost everyone from obtaining a weapon. While I know this might infringe on 2nd amendment rights, the framers of the Constitution were not faced with this kind of violence.

And the Founders were not faced with motion pictures, television, radio, and the Internet. So by that flawed logic the 1st Amendment doesn't cover those types of speech.

Try again.

It is astonishing that you actually agree with Wayne LaPierre.

Who mentioned Mr LaPierre?

Can you please, please stop with all the strawman arguments. It's gotten beyond old. If you must resort to fallacy, at least vary the fallacy you employ.

As much as you and your politics annoys me, I pray you are not faced with a terrorist (domestic or otherwise) with an automatic weapon and 100 round magazine and you pull out your 9MM or whatever.

Ah, hoping for violence on your political opponents. How disgusting, but totally expected by someone who plays the race card and resorts to fallacy at every point I make.

But if that does happen, I'll be in a position to shoot back. My State allows me the rights to own, and carry on my person and in my vehicles, a firearm so I can protect me and my family and friends if need be.

You'd take that right from me and leave me defenseless.

Have you ever researched the rising crime rates (including rape) that happened when Australia banned private ownership of guns?

[1bad65]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health...s_suicide.html

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...730-story.html

http://www.bustle.com/articles/92454...-risk-of-being

All non sequiturs.

We are not debating whether a gun is more likely to be used to stop a crime or used against the owner or stolen in a burglary. That's not the debate topic.

The topic is the higher gun crime rates we see in liberal cities with strict gun laws vs the lower gun crime rates in non-liberal cities with more lax guns laws.

Try and keep up on the actual topic of debate and source accordingly. Thanks!

[BostonGuy]

"Seems like not a day goes by without a terror attack". Seriously, that is intellectually honest? He is making the same distinction I am making. He is calling it a subset of Islam.

Yes, I would say that is an intellectually honest statement. Pick up the newspaper any day of the week and, chances are, you will see a story about muslim religious violence.

Edit: can you at least aknowledge the different consequences for a TV host taking this position and a President and/or Presidential Candidate?

I think this hyper PC mindset that the Dems seem to have is incredibly counterproductive to the global issue of "Islamic" terrorism. Hillary/Obama are not doing moderate muslims any favors by ignoring or pretending their isn't a problem within their religion when there clearly is a huge problem. If you don't distinguish between radical muslims and moderate muslims then you risk people grouping them all together - like Donald Trump has done.

[Weltschmerz]

[Zaroku]

Again, it's moot. The bottom line is closing this loophole only affects law-abiding people, not criminals.

One of history's greatest minds told us this hundreds of years ago:

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -Plato



When one plays the race card, they have conceded the fact they cannot offer up an effective argument/rebuttal.

Try again, this time without the race card. Good luck with that.



And the Founders were not faced with motion pictures, television, radio, and the Internet. So by that flawed logic the 1st Amendment doesn't cover those types of speech.

Try again.



Who mentioned Mr LaPierre?

Can you please, please stop with all the strawman arguments. It's gotten beyond old. If you must resort to fallacy, at least vary the fallacy you employ.



Ah, hoping for violence on your political opponents. How disgusting, but totally expected by someone who plays the race card and resorts to fallacy at every point I make.

But if that does happen, I'll be in a position to shoot back. My State allows me the rights to own, and carry on my person and in my vehicles, a firearm so I can protect me and my family and friends if need be.

You'd take that right from me and leave me defenseless.

Have you ever researched the rising crime rates (including rape) that happened when Australia banned private ownership of guns?

I am a gun owner and firmly believe in my right to shoot and kill anyone who ****s with me and my family.

Like Al Capone reportedly nice said,

You get a lot more from a kind word and a gun than from a kind word alone.

[The-Iron-Sheik]

Can you really blame people who become suicide bombers? You need to look at the root cause. Nobody grows up wanting to be a suicide bomber - they are all driven to it due to deprivation and islamophobia. These young men have been victims since the day they were born - abused for their religion, told they are not "real Europeans".

Look, muslims are an integral and growing part of European societes and this is not going to change no matter what far-right racists want. Learn to be tolerant and problems like this will lessen.