Groom killed sat his own wedding by celebratory gunshot.

[11 Bravo]

This is tragic on so many levels. (I'm a gun owner, but it never even occured to me to pack hsat at my own nuptials.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/22/indian-groom-killed-at-we_n_469246.html

[slackmaster]

1. How about dem Bears?

Link does not go to article described in the OP.

[11 Bravo]

8. Fixed it. (I can't type worth a shit.)

[rcrush]

2. The link takes me to an article about rising prices of Chicago Bears tickets.

[damntexdem]

16. Well that's more a kick in the head.

But the link now leads to the article about the shot in the head.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. If only the bridal party had been armed . . .

[maxsolomon]

11. if only their militia was well-regulated

we never see accidental shootings like that here.

:sarcasm:

[elocs]

20. Have you been reading the Second Amendment...all of it?

Damn, you just don't hear much about that well-regulated militia anymore, or ever.

[maxsolomon]

25. i recognize that the 'well-regulated' issue is long closed

you would think that "regulated" would imply organization, control. but apparently, the SCOTUS once ruled that "well-regulated militia" means "any male over the age of 18". so, basically, anyone but kids, with no organization.

i learned that in the Gungeon once upon a time, but i have no reason to doubt its veracity.

[elocs]

27. I wouldn't go into the Gungeon anymore than I would an Anti-Abortion forum if DU had one.

Of course, from reading DU I have learned of the infallibility of Supreme Court decisions, that every one come straight from the mouth of God. I bet if they read the Constitution backwards they would find another clue about how "Paul is dead".

[joeybee12]

32. yeah, so then Gore v Bush was the product of wise minds also...

...the supreme Court never ruled on the regulation of guns under the Second Amendment until very recently, a court dominated by five douchebags.

[beevul]

33. It was never a matter...

It was never a matter of what "well regulated" meant.

That was a red herring introduced by those that oppose the right of the people to keep and bear arms.


What does matter, is proper and correct understanding of what the amendments contained within the bill of rights are, and the fact of that matter, is that they are restrictions on governmental power.

Says so in the bill of rights itself, right in the preamble:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

http://billofrights.org/

Notice whom the declaratory and restrictive clauses are aimed at - government.

The amendment can not be read or interpreted properly or correctly, unless it is within that context.


The "well regulated militia" reading, or the collective rights reading - was always a red herring, USSC decision or not.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. Especially in India.

[booley]

36. yeah we do

it's called the national guard now.

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Sounds like #1 for the Darwin Awards next year.

[rcrush]

6. Just need to find the f'n article...

[Toasterlad]

14. My First Thought As Well. Big Win For the Species.

[Don Caballero]

5. And here come the Second Amendment defenders

[rcrush]

10. It was in India...

[Don Caballero]

13. Never matters to them

They defend the use of firearms in all instances.

[Edweird]

21. Like this guy.... A real 'gun nut'...

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn." Mohandas K. Gandhi, Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Chapter XXVII, Recruiting Campaign, Page 403, Dover paperback edition, 1983.

Ghandi - 1
authoritarian - 0

[MyNameGoesHere]

29. Hmm maybe this guy?

"And in my mind, I'm going why can't I just shoot this guy in the spine right now; shoot him in the spine, explain the facts of life to him"

* Ted Nugent, as guest DJ on WRIF-FM, Detroit, September 28, 1990; referring to an encounter with a Hare Krishna

[Edweird]

30. What about him? I think Ted Nugent is a prick and a waste of space. His music sucks, too.

Furthermore, how is he even remotely connected to this?

[MyNameGoesHere]

31. it's the quotes

you threw one out and so did i.

[Edweird]

35. Ah, since we're sharing irrelevant quotes, here's one I love:

"Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No! But I do it anyway, cause it's sterile and I like the taste."
- Patches O'Houlihan played by actor Rip Torn from the movie Dodgeball.
Great movie.

If you have anything, you know, on topic, let's hear it.
While I could go on for days with my favorite movie quotes, it's not polite to threadjack.
Maybe you could start a thread where people could post their favorite quotes?

[MyNameGoesHere]

38. Hey by the way this thread is about

morons with guns. You tried to justify your point with what seemed to be a pro gun point of view, though you got it entirely wrong. that's ok most pro gun people think it's cool to take Gandhi's quote out of context. And I countered with a real pro gun representative quote. But then you went off on a tangent and started quoting movie shit. Then accused me of getting off topic. Irony much? Thread jacking? Um yeah I got a thread hanging, want to take care of it?

[Edweird]

39. This thread is about an incident in India.

I posted a reply, to a poster other than you, about gun control IN INDIA.

You respond with Ted Nugent.

Lastly, it's very clear EXACTLY what Ghandi was saying - the only reason you claim it is 'out of context' is because it points out how pathetic your agenda is.

[Sebastian Doyle]

40. "I'm watching you, Ghandi!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0INpj__GCbI

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. Stupid constitution.

[Edweird]

19. Authoritarians HATE the constitution - ESPECIALLY the Bill Of Rights.

[beevul]

34. Most definitely.

And its directly because it limits the authority they would see used against those they disagree with and/or issues they disagree with.

[tularetom]

7. Something is amiss - link takes me to an article about Chicago Bears raising ticket prices

:wtf:

[leftstreet]

Ban Marriage! n/t

[liberal N proud]

9. I had to look just to see where it was

I figured it would be the US or Texas.

I guess the are dumb and dumber people everywhere.


BTW, you link goes to a Bears Ticket Price increase story (sucks). I had to do a little searching to find story.

[WI_DEM]

12. a bride and a widow within minutes.

[TheCowsCameHome]

17. At least it was licensed.

Not that that means shit in this case.

[TreasonousBastard]

18. "The relatives told us...

they were carrying arms to tackle robbers if they are attacked on the way -- that's the reasoning we get after most such cases," the Superintendent of Police told reporters.

(Where have I heard this before...)

[Historic NY]

22. What goes up must come down...learn it & live.

[Shell Beau]

23. How sad. I can't even imagine.

[donco6]

24. Maybe just light a sparkler instead.

They're pretty - and the worst is you can burn your fingers.

[Blue_Tires]

28. guns, disregard for safety and booze with the predicted result

[glen123098]

37. You ahve no business owning a gun if you cannot use it responsibly.

[951-Riverside]

41. "Groom killed sat his own wedding by celebratory gunshot." ...HA

What a poorly written headline. God help us if the article writer is a gun owner.