DaVinci

Did you see any of the Seal team guys partying? Please tell me who they are, I'd like to shake their hand. Did you see any of their chain of command hanging by a light-pole, drunk, in front of the White House? Did you see me, or any of these other posters running wild in the streets? Do you have ratios of who went out and partied to those that silently raised a toast to fallen friends/family? Or did you fall hook, line, and sinker into the image the media spoon fed you?

Criminals can still have support staff. I am no longer in the service, yet I still have support staff, many company's have support staff without being a recognized 'state'. Criminals are not exactly 'civilians' either... they are criminals. Saying that the criminals that supported him were not 'civilians' is applicable even if you do not like it.

Yes, that is exactly what you tried to use. Wrong, you want to claim that all guns are in one pile, but flying machines for man is not. I have proved it, you decided to try and play semantics. When out of logical debate, that is a pretty common tactic. Ah, another lightly hidden attack. Never forget that YOU made a claim that YOU were unable to support. Fact is that since you are unable to debate with facts... Attacks are all you clearly have left.

They were not exactly 'civilians' either. They were support staff.

And as long as you just assume that being born in a country makes it impossible to think clearly and objectively, you'll be making invalid assumptions. Is that "American" thinking or are you the only one able to shuck the geographical thinking?

Frankly, I think Obama handled this *very* well.

You mean the ones that were harboring an "internationally recognised/known terrorist??" They were not innocent... Not by a long shot. And how would YOU have handled OBL?

Agreed. This time the USIA got it right... Keep everyone in the dark until it is over.

I think like a human. He was the leader of a terrorist organization. He financed that organization. He targeted civilians all over, not just the US. He was very good at what he did. Him being dead removes his ability to lead. It creates a power struggle to see who will lead next. The next leader may not be so bold as even OBL was. Some will, but they thought of him pretty much as a hero already. Some will see that even the hero can be killed. Some might just wonder why Allah didn't protect him (and for 10 years they were claiming that Allah protected him). The hard liners will not waiver no matter what, the middle might feel dejected and confused. Just like elections, it is not the far left or right, but the middle that has the real power. The fact is that we do not really know what the 'emotional' fallout will be. But there are good arguments for BOTH sides. The fact is that he was a dangerous man in charge of a dangerous organization.... The 'command and supply' if you will has been hit pretty hard, and most see that as a good thing.

Ah, yes, you have never admitted that you made it up... So now you are just trying to distract from that FACT. Face it, you tried to make up things and were called on it. Your position is devoid of any logic and you are playing with semantics and BS.

You were done from the start.... You just now quit spouting nonsense.

Maybe, but he was the leader and gave the order. Of course, but leaving him alive would have done nothing, I think bringing justice to the guy who led his troops to attack civilians is not 'killing someone based on our beliefs'. Have you read OBL's letter to America? Unless we change over to Islam they are not going to stop.... Thats the thing about religious nuts... They only care about religion and are nuts.

We did what we said we would do. To many people, OBL was a hero that was untouchable. Him dying sends a message that we can find anyone and that we will not stop. It is an emotional win for us and an emotional loss for them. Not the end, but still a victory.

I agree, but it came from a good source.... It was also shown on Pakistani TV. Muslim burial rights say a body should be buried within 24 hours. They left it at sea to make sure the site didn't become a shrine to him. You may ask why we are treating his body with any level of respect.... So we do not piss off Muslims and are not considered brutish in regard to the faith. Personally, I would have fed him to some hogs on the 9/11 site and then had a BBQ with beer and mostly naked women cooking the hogs. But I am not a politician.

This is what I have heard as well I can't authenticate the pic below... Mod if it is not allowed, please remove it.

Interesting comment in your link: "We know that guns can contribute to a community’s safety, and yet we acknowledge that none of the 18 mass shootings since May 2007 was stopped by a legal-handgun carrier. " OK, so lets look at a list I quickly "googled" -- In April 1999, two teenage schoolboys shot and killed 12 schoolmates and a teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, before killing themselves. * criminal records/known mental issues * not able to buy the guns legally * not allowed to have guns at a school -- In July 1999, a stock exchange trader in Atlanta, Georgia, killed 12 people including his wife and two children before taking his own life. * Killed his family with a hammer, not a gun. * all the other murders were at a business that didnt allow firearms. -- In September 1999, a gunman opened fire at a prayer service in Fort Worth, Texas, killing six people before committing suicide. * also used a pipe bomb * lets not forget Jeanne Assam http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_7683781 -- In October 2002, a series of sniper-style shootings occurred in Washington DC, leaving 10 dead. *Muhammad was arrested on federal charges of violating the restraining order against him by possessing a weapon. Under federal law, those with restraining orders are prohibited to purchase or possess guns as per the Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968 * Malvo was 17, not able to buy a weapon. -- In August 2003 in Chicago, a laid-off worker shot and killed six of his former workmates. * Chicago has a hundgun ban * Tapia had been arrested 12 times. He has an arrest record dating back to 1989, including counts of domestic battery, gun violations, aggravated assault and driving while intoxicated. * IL has no concealed carry permit. -- In November 2004 in Birchwood, Wisconsin, a hunter killed six other hunters and wounded two others after an argument with them. * rumor is the good ol boys in Wisconsin had a personal issue with Chai Soua Vang. * Both the Minneapolis and St. Paul police departments have records of several calls about domestic violence at the Vang residences. -- In March 2005, a man opened fire at a church service in Brookfield, Wisconsin, killing seven people. -- In October 2006, a truck driver killed five schoolgirls and seriously wounded six others in a school in Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania before taking his own life. * guns are not allowed on a school. -- In April 2007, a student shot and killed 32 people and wounded 15 others at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia, before shooting himself, making it the deadliest mass shooting in the United States after 2000. * Guns not allowed in a school. * Cho was not allowed to own a firearm, but was never reported. -- In December 2007, a 20-year-old man killed nine people and injured five others in a shopping center in Omaha, Nebraska. * An hour before the shootings the police had a note from him that said, ""I just want to take a few peices [sic] of shit with me... just think tho [sic], I'm gonna be fuckin [sic] famous." * The day after he turned 14, he was sent to a mental health treatment center for threatening to kill his stepmother Candace Hawkins with an axe. He had undergone two psychiatric hospitalizations, and was diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, an unspecified mood disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and parent-child relationship problems -- In December 2007, a woman and her boyfriend shot dead six members of her family on Christmas Eve in Carnation, Washington. * Police will also investigate why two sheriff's deputies, who responded to the 911 call from the family's trailer home at 5:13 p.m. on Christmas Eve, left the scene without confirming there was nothing wrong inside. -- In February 2008, a shooter who is still at large tied up and shot six women at a suburban clothing store in Chicago, leaving five of them dead and the remaining one injured. * Robbery gone wrong. * No CHL program -- In February 2008, a man opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois, killing five students and wounding 16 others before laying down his weapon and surrendering. * Gun Ban in Chicago * Guns not allowed on school grounds. * No CHL program in IL * 1998, during which he was treated temporarily for mental illness at the Elk Grove Village Thresholds-Mary Hill House psychiatric center * He enlisted in the United States Army in September 2001, and was discharged before completing basic training in February 2002 for lying on his application about his mental illness -- In September 2008, a mentally ill man who was released from jail one month earlier shot eight people in Alger, Washington, leaving six of them dead and the rest two wounded. * The suspected shooter had been on a Skagit County Sheriff's Office watch list * History of mental illness. -- In December 2008, a man dressed in a Santa Claus suit opened fire at a family Christmas party in Covina, California, then set fire on the house and killed himself. Police later found nine people dead in the debris of the house. * used a homemade flamethrower as well as a gun. * At least three victims' deaths were caused by gunshot wounds alone, while four others died from a combination of both gunshot wounds and fire; two other deaths stemmed from the fire alone -- In March 2009, a 28-year-old laid-off worker opened fire while driving a car through several towns in Alabama, killing 10 people. -- In March 2009, a heavily-armed gunman shot dead eight people, many of them elderly and sick people, in a private-owned nursing home in North Carolina. * nursing home patients and workers are not allowed to carry a weapon. -- In March 2009, six people were shot dead in a high-grade apartment building in Santa Clara, California. -- In April 2009, a man shot dead 13 people at a civic center in Binghamton, New York. * NY has gun registration... The guns were registered to him. * NY does not allow carry "It is a crime to possess any rifle, shotgun or handgun in or upon a building or grounds, used for educational purposes," -- In November 2009, U.S. army psychologist Major Nidal Hasan opened fire at a military base in Fort Hood, Texas, leaving 13 dead and 42 others wounded. * History of Mental illness * Troops are NOT allowed to carry on post. -- In January 2011, a gunman opened fire at a public gathering outside a grocery in Tuscon, Arizona, killing six people including a nine-year-old girl and wounding at least 12 others. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was severely injured with a gunshot to the head. * History of mental illness. So: * 10 of those 21 cases were in places where guns were not allowed. Of the remaining 11, 3 were family killings and the police knew of violence in some of them before. * 11 of the shooters were not legally allowed to own a weapon.

As soon as you admit that anything that shoots a projectile is a gun and therefore protected by the 2nd... We might be finally getting somewhere. BTW why no response on this yet? Still waiting on YOU to answer this one Still waiting... you keep saying that the SC is the final say here in the US. Do you have a problem with the phrase "Shall not be infringed"? You love to claim that the SC is the final say.... Cool. But I have shown, using ONLY SC cases, the SCOTUS has said that an individual is allowed an M-16. You have not been able to counter that claim. United States v. Miller: "The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia." DC v Heller: that it is "an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia," "The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause" McDonald v. Chicago: that it applies to the States You have shown that it is not an unlimited right.... Yes, and to cite the SC they mentioned prohibitions 'against felons and the insane'. But the fact remains that the SC has ruled that it is an individual right to own a 'military-type weapon' in all of the United States. Can you provide a SINGLE SCOTUS quote that proves your position against my comment? Remember, "Shall not be infringed" is already there as well.

Thanks... If it helps explain it at all, it was copy/pasted from the PDF I linked...

http://wilsoncenter.org/news/docs/Goodman%20Update%20on%20US%20Firearms%20to%20Mexico.pdf The 90% number used by the left and Mexico has been completely debunked. They were only using the number that was found to be from the US based on a very limited sample of guns that could be traced to the US. Now it seems other problems have come to light. When the ATF asks to see the weapons captured to see if the ATF can help: In addition the ATF seems to be ignoring a good number of straw purchases: Finally: Mortars, hand grenades and launchers are not really available in the US and are clearly coming from the Southern Mexico border. What makes anyone think that if they can get grenades over the Southern border that they will not be able to get a handgun over that border as well. 1. I think that the penalty for running a gun should increase to at least the same penalty as drug running (one year vs, 10 years) 2.The ATF should not allow 10-20 instances before they investigate and make an arrest. 3. Mexican officials should allow the US to physically inspect the guns they claim come from the US 4. Mexican officials should create a system where one agency sends the requests in and duplicate requests should only be counted once. I disagree with the studies request for multiple sales being recorded. There is nothing preventing a shop from calling the ATF about a suspicious person already. And the information is at the shop already as well.

Still waiting on YOU to answer this one Still waiting... you keep saying that the SC is the final say here in the US. Do you have a problem with the phrase "Shall not be infringed"? You love to claim that the SC is the final say.... Cool. But I have shown, using ONLY SC cases, the SCOTUS has said that an individual is allowed an M-16. You have not been able to counter that claim. United States v. Miller: "The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia." DC v Heller: that it is "an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia," "The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause" McDonald v. Chicago: that it applies to the States You have shown that it is not an unlimited right.... Yes, and to cite the SC they mentioned prohibitions 'against felons and the insane'. But the fact remains that the SC has ruled that it is an individual right to own a 'military-type weapon' in all of the United States. Can you provide a SINGLE SCOTUS quote that proves your position against my comment? Remember, "Shall not be infringed" is already there as well.

Yes, we both agree that you use weak tricks when you have nothing of substance. You are the one making up stuff and claiming I said it. Ah, a lightly veiled insult. Fact is that once again you are making up things you have no proof of... Unless you can prove I have been a 'mental patient'? Although you might want to look into the voices that are saying the things you are claiming to hear. Your attempts to make up things has been called.

Never heard that quote attributed to him. Not saying he didn't say it, but never heard it attributed to him. It was kinda applicable, you tried to tie it to the NAZI's. His use was fine.

Still waiting... you keep saying that the SC is the final say here in the US. Do you have a problem with the phrase "Shall not be infringed"? You love to claim that the SC is the final say.... Cool. But I have shown, using ONLY SC cases, the SCOTUS has said that an individual is allowed an M-16. You have not been able to counter that claim. United States v. Miller: "The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia." DC v Heller: that it is "an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia," "The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause" McDonald v. Chicago: that it applies to the States You have shown that it is not an unlimited right.... Yes, and to cite the SC they mentioned prohibitions 'against felons and the insane'. But the fact remains that the SC has ruled that it is an individual right to own a 'military-type weapon' in all of the United States. Can you provide a SINGLE SCOTUS quote that proves your position against my comment? Remember, "Shall not be infringed" is already there as well.

Simple, that you want to claim that a any gun is a gun, but not any plane is a plane.

So, all things that shoot a projectile by the use of a powder charge is a gun. But not all vehicles that fly a person are planes.... Got it. Nice that you like to play these word games instead of discuss the actual issues.