Quantcast

Stephen King Says NRA Board of Directors Should 'Clean Up Blood, Brains and Chunks of Intestine' After Next Massacre....RAVE If You Agree.

Che Guevara - Hero 2013/01/27 22:40:34
Stephen King Says NRA Board of Directors Should 'Clean Up Blood, Brains and Chunks of Intestine' After Next Massacre....Rave If You Agree.

"One only wishes Wayne LaPierre and his NRA board of directors could be drafted to some of these [violent] scenes, where they would be required to put on booties and rubber gloves and help clean up the blood, the brains, and the chunks of intestine still containing the poor wads of half-digested food that were some innocent bystander’s last meal."

Read More: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • MO.gal 2013/05/06 02:11:14
    MO.gal
    I agree with Stephen King.
  • Mike 2013/03/03 11:15:08
  • wendy420 2013/02/22 18:14:23
    wendy420
    I think Stephen King really hit the nail on the head on this one. What gun controll are they talking about. They have been screwing with this for years and OBVIOUSLY there methods haven't worked. So now they just want to take the easy way out and take guns away from everyone! LOL Oh Yeah RIGHT. That will work...
  • eleonora.gozzini 2013/02/17 18:22:30
    eleonora.gozzini
    Why Not? Many people who push Laws and support certain Corporate positions based on Profit are unfortunately far gone from reality and its consequences. So, sure, I vote for this, he must get down with a bucket with all the politicians that did not see solutions to address this point and ponder on it while they clean up the mess and listen to REAL parents wale for their children, only then they may be able to address their decision making within a practical physical context, because what they imagine to be the best -if they do-- they have to test it, live it, assess it and when they have all sides of an argument, see if they can still find the balls to support the corporations that make money on the death of others, be at foreign wars or in house shooting or if Life is worth protecting and honoring for All instead.
  • mae 2013/02/13 23:15:44
    mae
    +1
    Hospital emergency room trauma center in any big metrpolitan hospital would be an eye-opener for these guys.
  • Che Gue... mae 2013/02/15 22:10:02
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +1
    That is an excellent idea ! Detroit would be a great place for them to start.
  • Larry M 2013/01/31 19:15:39
    Larry M
    +1
    Another thought is that none of the movies, games, guns, poor childhoods or anything else makes us go out and murder others. It is a hard wired problem in some people. Iv'e seen many people who came from horrible childhoods that were the greatest people, parents and citizen ever seen. And Iv'e seen those that come from the very best environment that do the most horrible acts.
  • Larry M 2013/01/31 19:11:08
    Larry M
    +1
    I enjoy King's books but like all stars and other wise I don't care what they think. They should however realize that taking a stand could lose them half of their audience. They often live in an alternate universe and are wealthy beyond even those of us that have scratched our way into the bottom of the top 5%. It is a lot easier to give up half of a 100 million than half of a million or half of $500,000. or half of $250,000 and so on.
  • Ramon 2013/01/31 13:07:51 (edited)
    Ramon
    +2
    Maybe the makers of the worst "first person shooter" video games like "Manhunt",
    "Grand Theft Auto", "Mad world", or "Saint's Row 2" should clean up all of the blood, brains, and intestines of the victims in the next mass shooting. These games depersonalize people and glorify violence. The NRA doesn't do that. They support responsible gun ownership.
  • phil.ol... Ramon 2013/01/31 14:04:16
    phil.olding.3
    +1
    Video games do not make people go out and kill people.

    The grand theft auto series of games has been played by tens of millions of people. I can confidently say that playing two of the games in this series did not make me a mass shooter.

    There is nothing and no one to blame except a bunch of idiots that got hold of guns, and decided to kill random people.
  • Ramon phil.ol... 2013/01/31 14:10:32
    Ramon
    +1
    Simply owning a gun doesn't make you want to go out and kill people. The glorification of violence and the general lack of respect for others is what's wrong with this country now. As a country citizens have had access to guns for our whole history....237 years. So this recent violence has noting to do with increased access to guns. Citizens have had that access for hundreds of years. What is recent is the increased violent tendencies of video games and movies.
  • phil.ol... Ramon 2013/01/31 14:22:42
    phil.olding.3
    +1
    Have you ever seen old western movies or TV shows from the 50s and later?

    I assure you - violence was quite prevalent back then, too.

    Kids aren't exposed to violence much these days. Kid shows are far less violent than they used to be.

    Adults? Of course they're drawn to violence. Crazy people? Of course they're drawn to violence.

    Sadly, the media tends only to report on things like wars. The goal of society now seems to be trying to be better than everyone else by killing them and/or making more money, and partying harder.

    The real goal of society should be technological advancement, social advancement, and the advancement of education.

    Instead, the coolest people are the ones that take the most drugs, drink the most booze, and get the most girls.
  • moira.faulds.14 2013/01/31 04:43:54
    moira.faulds.14
    +2
    Yay Stephen King! Well and bravely put and I absolutely agree.
  • Azrael-In GOD we trust 2013/01/31 03:05:23
    Azrael-In GOD we trust
    +1
    Creepy King makes violent movies, too, so maybe his movies could partly cause someone to go off the deep end and commit crimes.
  • Che Gue... Azrael-... 2013/01/31 03:10:33
    Che Guevara - Hero
    Commit crimes with what ?
  • Azrael-... Che Gue... 2013/01/31 03:17:54
    Azrael-In GOD we trust
    +2
    Commit crimes by watching his horrible movies-giving people the wrong ideas-like some folks think that owning guns are bad.
  • Che Gue... Azrael-... 2013/01/31 03:43:46
    Che Guevara - Hero
    You think the children at Sandy Hook Elementary with a movie projector ?
  • Azrael-... Che Gue... 2013/01/31 04:08:03
    Azrael-In GOD we trust
    +2
    No-I was just making a point that it isn't the fault of a gun owner-but the fault of a crazy who gets hold of a gun(s).
    Very tragic of Sandy Hook-I just couldn't get the looks of those poor little kids out of my mind. No sense in what happened at all. Just a crazy who had possession of guns.
  • Ramon Che Gue... 2013/01/31 13:13:56
    Ramon
    We have had guns available to citizens for the whole history of this country. All of this new violence isn't because of a wider availability of guns, it is because of people's lack of respect for others and the depersonalization of people and desensitization to violence that comes with watching all of this violence in movies and video games.
  • Tarheel Che Gue... 2013/02/09 06:11:39
    Tarheel
    Now, that's clever.
  • joe keeney 2013/01/31 01:38:51
    joe keeney
    +1
    That what happen when a car hits you.
  • Pam 2013/01/31 01:34:03
    Pam
    +2
    He who writes horror books! Come on now! We get rid of guns we will be just like Australia with increase in murder, rape, and crime. The criminals will have all the power like Chicago. Glad I don't live there!
  • Che Gue... Pam 2013/01/31 01:50:10
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +3
    How old is the data you are referring to or are you just taking Limbaugh's, Beck's, and O'Rielly's propaganda.

    Here is something more current.

    gun deaths down 47%
    murder down 25%
    assault up 15%,
    armed robbery down 20%
    burglary down 40%
    car theft down 50%

    I would say that anyone who would say that locking up guns and not having semiauto rifles made any crime go up, has a political motive and a hidden agenda
    Australia has low crime
    usa
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius20...
    aus
    http://www.aic.gov.au/publica...

    4 times less than your murder rate
    half your robbery
    less assault
    less car theft
    we have twice your burglary
    rate of per 100 thousand people, per capita so a direct comparison

    MURDER
    usa 6.1
    canada 1.85
    UK 1.55
    aus 1.40

    ROBBERY
    usa 160.4
    aus 83

    vehicular theft
    usa 424.4
    aus 397

    burglary
    usa 748.7
    aus 1,398

    ASSAULT total / aggravated and simple,
    usa 8.3%
    aus 5.9%
    http://www.unicri.it/wwd/anal...

    prisoners per 100k
    usa 714
    uk 142
    Aus 117
    Canada 116
    http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/r...
    How old is the data you are referring to or are you just taking Limbaugh's, Beck's, and O'Rielly's propaganda.

    Here is something more current.

    gun deaths down 47%
    murder down 25%
    assault up 15%,
    armed robbery down 20%
    burglary down 40%
    car theft down 50%

    I would say that anyone who would say that locking up guns and not having semiauto rifles made any crime go up, has a political motive and a hidden agenda
    Australia has low crime
    usa
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius20...
    aus
    http://www.aic.gov.au/publica...

    4 times less than your murder rate
    half your robbery
    less assault
    less car theft
    we have twice your burglary
    rate of per 100 thousand people, per capita so a direct comparison

    MURDER
    usa 6.1
    canada 1.85
    UK 1.55
    aus 1.40

    ROBBERY
    usa 160.4
    aus 83

    vehicular theft
    usa 424.4
    aus 397

    burglary
    usa 748.7
    aus 1,398

    ASSAULT total / aggravated and simple,
    usa 8.3%
    aus 5.9%
    http://www.unicri.it/wwd/anal...

    prisoners per 100k
    usa 714
    uk 142
    Aus 117
    Canada 116
    http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/r...
    (more)
  • Pam Che Gue... 2013/01/31 02:27:58
    Pam
    +2
    Americans are determined that massacres such as happened in Newtown, Conn., never happen again. But how? Many advocate more effective treatment of mentally-ill people or armed protection in so-called gun-free zones. Many others demand stricter control of firearms.

    We aren't alone in facing this problem. Great Britain and Australia, for example, suffered mass shootings in the 1980s and 1990s. Both countries had very stringent gun laws when they occurred. Nevertheless, both decided that even stricter control of guns was the answer. Their experiences can be instructive.

    In 1987, Michael Ryan went on a shooting spree in his small town of Hungerford, England, killing 16 people (including his mother) and wounding another 14 before shooting himself. Since the public was unarmed—as were the police—Ryan wandered the streets for eight hours with two semiautomatic rifles and a handgun before anyone with a firearm was able to come to the rescue.

    Nine years later, in March 1996, Thomas Hamilton, a man known to be mentally unstable, walked into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot 16 young children and their teacher. He wounded 10 other children and three other teachers before taking his own life.

    Enlarge Image

    David Klein
    Since 1920, anyone in Britain wanting a handgun had ...

























    Americans are determined that massacres such as happened in Newtown, Conn., never happen again. But how? Many advocate more effective treatment of mentally-ill people or armed protection in so-called gun-free zones. Many others demand stricter control of firearms.

    We aren't alone in facing this problem. Great Britain and Australia, for example, suffered mass shootings in the 1980s and 1990s. Both countries had very stringent gun laws when they occurred. Nevertheless, both decided that even stricter control of guns was the answer. Their experiences can be instructive.

    In 1987, Michael Ryan went on a shooting spree in his small town of Hungerford, England, killing 16 people (including his mother) and wounding another 14 before shooting himself. Since the public was unarmed—as were the police—Ryan wandered the streets for eight hours with two semiautomatic rifles and a handgun before anyone with a firearm was able to come to the rescue.

    Nine years later, in March 1996, Thomas Hamilton, a man known to be mentally unstable, walked into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot 16 young children and their teacher. He wounded 10 other children and three other teachers before taking his own life.

    Enlarge Image

    David Klein
    Since 1920, anyone in Britain wanting a handgun had to obtain a certificate from his local police stating he was fit to own a weapon and had good reason to have one. Over the years, the definition of "good reason" gradually narrowed. By 1969, self-defense was never a good reason for a permit.

    After Hungerford, the British government banned semiautomatic rifles and brought shotguns—the last type of firearm that could be purchased with a simple show of fitness—under controls similar to those in place for pistols and rifles. Magazines were limited to two shells with a third in the chamber.

    Dunblane had a more dramatic impact. Hamilton had a firearm certificate, although according to the rules he should not have been granted one. A media frenzy coupled with an emotional campaign by parents of Dunblane resulted in the Firearms Act of 1998, which instituted a nearly complete ban on handguns. Owners of pistols were required to turn them in. The penalty for illegal possession of a pistol is up to 10 years in prison.

    The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted. Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Moreover, another massacre occurred in June 2010. Derrick Bird, a taxi driver in Cumbria, shot his brother and a colleague then drove off through rural villages killing 12 people and injuring 11 more before killing himself.

    Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens who have come into the possession of a firearm, even accidentally, have been harshly treated. In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison. A public outcry eventually won his release.

    In November of this year, Danny Nightingale, member of a British special forces unit in Iraq and Afghanistan, was sentenced to 18 months in military prison for possession of a pistol and ammunition. Sgt. Nightingale was given the Glock pistol as a gift by Iraqi forces he had been training. It was packed up with his possessions and returned to him by colleagues in Iraq after he left the country to organize a funeral for two close friends killed in action. Mr. Nightingale pleaded guilty to avoid a five-year sentence and was in prison until an appeal and public outcry freed him on Nov. 29.

    ***
    Six weeks after the Dunblane massacre in 1996, Martin Bryant, an Australian with a lifelong history of violence, attacked tourists at a Port Arthur prison site in Tasmania with two semiautomatic rifles. He killed 35 people and wounded 21 others.

    At the time, Australia's guns laws were stricter than the United Kingdom's. In lieu of the requirement in Britain that an applicant for permission to purchase a gun have a "good reason," Australia required a "genuine reason." Hunting and protecting crops from feral animals were genuine reasons—personal protection wasn't.

    With new Prime Minister John Howard in the lead, Australia passed the National Firearms Agreement, banning all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns and imposing a more restrictive licensing system on other firearms. The government also launched a forced buyback scheme to remove thousands of firearms from private hands. Between Oct. 1, 1996, and Sept. 30, 1997, the government purchased and destroyed more than 631,000 of the banned guns at a cost of $500 million.

    To what end? While there has been much controversy over the result of the law and buyback, Peter Reuter and Jenny Mouzos, in a 2003 study published by the Brookings Institution, found homicides "continued a modest decline" since 1997. They concluded that the impact of the National Firearms Agreement was "relatively small," with the daily rate of firearms homicides declining 3.2%.

    According to their study, the use of handguns rather than long guns (rifles and shotguns) went up sharply, but only one out of 117 gun homicides in the two years following the 1996 National Firearms Agreement used a registered gun. Suicides with firearms went down but suicides by other means went up. They reported "a modest reduction in the severity" of massacres (four or more indiscriminate homicides) in the five years since the government weapons buyback. These involved knives, gas and arson rather than firearms.

    In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s, but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults.

    What to conclude? Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven't made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don't provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems.
    Read this! This was written for 01/2013
    (more)
  • Tarheel Che Gue... 2013/02/09 06:13:17
    Tarheel
    Hey, wait a minute. Are you saying that Limbaugh has an agenda? Just kidding around. Great post!
  • kurtis morin 2013/01/31 01:30:14
  • Ann Archy 2013/01/31 01:14:15
    Ann Archy
    +1
    This coming from a man who earns a very good living off violent scenes in his literature. The NRA are no more responsible for theses killings than the fork that I hold is for making me fat!
  • Che Gue... Ann Archy 2013/01/31 01:19:00
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +1
    Are forks designed, manufactured, marketed, and sold to slaughter people ? Do fork manufactures expend hundreds of millions of dollars in political donations so they can misuse the 2nd Amendment and make massive profits from the death machines they produce ?
  • Ann Archy Che Gue... 2013/01/31 01:28:45
    Ann Archy
    +1
    No forks aren't but abortion clinics are.
  • Pam Che Gue... 2013/01/31 01:30:24
    Pam
    Do Gun Bans Reduce Violent Crime? Ask the Aussies and Brits
    BY GLEN TSCHIRGI
    6 months, 1 week ago
    (H/T Instapundit)

    Nothing original to add here, but this posting I picked up from Instapundit is well worth passing along, particularly in light of the typical, knee-jerk, Statist reactions to the horrific Aurora CO shootings:

    Actually, if the Australian Bureau of Criminology can be believed, Americans would be insane to concern themselves with what non-Americans think about American gun rights.

    In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

    Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

    Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

    Between 1995 and...










    Do Gun Bans Reduce Violent Crime? Ask the Aussies and Brits
    BY GLEN TSCHIRGI
    6 months, 1 week ago
    (H/T Instapundit)

    Nothing original to add here, but this posting I picked up from Instapundit is well worth passing along, particularly in light of the typical, knee-jerk, Statist reactions to the horrific Aurora CO shootings:

    Actually, if the Australian Bureau of Criminology can be believed, Americans would be insane to concern themselves with what non-Americans think about American gun rights.

    In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

    Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

    Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

    Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America’s rate dropped 31.7 percent.
    During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
    At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
    Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

    So, if the USA follows Australia’s lead in banning guns, it should expect a 42 percent increase in violent crime, a higher percentage of murders committed with a gun, and three times more rape. One wonders if Freddy even bothered to look up the relative crime statistics.

    The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations. Twenty-six percent of English citizens — roughly one-quarter of the population — have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized. The United States didn’t even make the “top 10″ list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.

    Now all this statistical and factual information isn’t going to mean anything to Lefty’s and Statists, but it is always good to know that reality backs up the conservative position on gun rights and the 2nd Amendment.
    (more)
  • Che Gue... Pam 2013/01/31 01:46:31
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +1
    You are referring to information that is almost 10 years old.

    gun death down 47%
    murder down 25%
    assault up 15%,
    armed robbery down 20%
    burglary down 40%
    car theft down 50%

    I would say that anyone who would say that locking up guns and not having semiauto rifles made any crime go up, has a political motive and a hidden agenda
    Australia has low crime
    usa
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius20...
    aus
    http://www.aic.gov.au/publica...

    4 times less than your murder rate
    half your robbery
    less assault
    less car theft
    we have twice your burglary
    rate of per 100 thousand people, per capita so a direct comparison

    MURDER
    usa 6.1
    canada 1.85
    UK 1.55
    aus 1.40

    ROBBERY
    usa 160.4
    aus 83

    vehicular theft
    usa 424.4
    aus 397

    burglary
    usa 748.7
    aus 1,398

    ASSAULT total / aggravated and simple,
    usa 8.3%
    aus 5.9%
    http://www.unicri.it/wwd/anal...

    prisoners per 100k
    usa 714
    uk 142
    Aus 117
    Canada 116
    http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/r...
  • Ramon Che Gue... 2013/01/31 13:19:54
    Ramon
    Guns aren't specifically designed to slaughter people either. They are used routinely for hunting. target shooting, and don't forget....self defense. If there is no other reason to own a gun than to kill someone, then the majority of gun owners in this country are using their guns wrong.
  • Tarheel Ramon 2013/02/09 06:15:19
    Tarheel
    Semi-assault rifles are only made for one thing. To kill lots of people fast. So, I'd have to say that guns like the bushmaster, were in fact designed to slaughter people.
  • Plantgypc 2013/01/30 23:26:46 (edited)
    Plantgypc
    +2
    King is an ass. He is a man who has made his millions on gore and murder. He should stop writting books if he wants everyone to live in a fairy tale world.


    evil fairys
  • Che Gue... Plantgypc 2013/01/31 00:33:43
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +1
    Ah, so ban books and keep the guns ? Typical
  • Plantgypc Che Gue... 2013/01/31 03:04:22
    Plantgypc
    +1
    Ah so liberal. I never said ban books. I said he is a hypocrite for being so left wing, when he makes his money on murder.
  • Che Gue... Plantgypc 2013/01/31 03:08:10 (edited)
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +1
    Stephen King writes fiction. The Conservatives and the NRA protect the gun rights of mass murderers to slaughter REAL children, with REAL friends, REAL family, and REAL lives.
  • Plantgypc Che Gue... 2013/01/31 21:16:17
    Plantgypc
    How many children are murdered everyday by parents?

    The murder of children is considered an abhorrent crime in much of the world; children are perceived within their communities and the state at large as being vulnerable, and therefore especially susceptible to abduction and murder. The protection of children from abuse and possible death often involves disturbing the child's family structure, as tenuous as this may be. In 2008, there were 1,494 child (under 18 years) homicides in the United States. Of those killed 1,035 were male, while 453 were female.[1]
  • Tarheel Plantgypc 2013/02/09 06:18:54
    Tarheel
    That doesn't even make sense. I've been reading King since I was a teenager (and that was a long time ago), he's a great horror writer. But he did pull a new book off the shelf because he thought it was too violent, given the circumstances.

    And all LaPierre can say is...."it won't work", "we can't do that because it won't work." He is such a dweeb.
  • Tarheel Che Gue... 2013/02/09 06:15:35
    Tarheel
    lol
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 30 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/23 22:22:48

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals