Psycho virgin makes sick video before Santa Barbara shooting spree; reported ‘Hunger Games’ link

rodgerAn overnight shooting in Isla Vista, Calif., left seven people dead, including the gunman, who is alleged to be the son of Peter Rodger, assistant director for The Hunger Game.

“This obviously was the work of a mad man,” Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown told reporters, according to CBS News.

The shooting took place just west of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and police were told the gunman was driving a black BMW, CBS News reported. Shortly thereafter, a person driving a similar vehicle was fatally shot by police.

Outraged GOP senator slams Dem chairman
for calling Obamacare opponents racists

The Daily Mail reported that Rodger’s son drives a black BMW and the tags on the vehicle involved in that shooting traced back to him.

According to Live Link, students identified Elliot Rodger as the shooter. The report included a creepy video of a man alleged to be Rodger describing a “day of retribution” for being rejected by girls.

With a diabolical laugh straight out of a Hollywood horror movie, the disturbing video will make your hair stand on end as the man calmly talks about how he will “slaughter” women at UCSB for rejecting him.

“After I have annihilated every single girl in the sorority house I will take to the streets of Isla Vista and slay every single person I see there,” he can be heard saying in the video.

WARNING: The video below is extremely disturbing. 

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed

Tom Tillison

Tom is a grassroots activist who distinguished himself as one of the top conservative bloggers in Florida before joining BizPac Review.He can be reached at TomTillisonFL@gmail.com
About Tom Tillison

Tom is a grassroots activist who distinguished himself as one of the top conservative bloggers in Florida before joining BizPac Review. He can be reached at TomTillisonFL@gmail.com

  • David Morgan

    A very troubled “Fruit Loop” with a huge chip on his shoulder and no-one saw this coming. He was a ticking bomb

    • http://1389blog.com/ 1389AD

      Instead of hating on the girls for rejecting him, he should have taken a good look at himself to see why this was so. Evidently he didn’t have the upbringing to learn not to blame others for his own failures. The culpability for the crimes is his own, but on the other hand, better parenting might have set him on a different path.

      • Guest

        he had aspegers he was fucked from birth

        • http://1389blog.com/ 1389AD

          Not everybody with Asperger’s ends up killing somebody. And some of them do end up establishing relationships with others.

          • Allison Clifton

            An educated person at last

        • Allison Clifton

          Try educating yourself just because he had asperger’s that does not mean you are a born killer, he hated the world and was mentally deluded. The papers stated this because they knew it would sell more papers the same as if someone was depressed or phycotic it would of been mentioned any person that had a mental problem it would of been printed and the sad fact is ignorant people like you give them the satisfaction of reading them !! Very narrow minded of you but then I suppose it can be a scary thing not actually understanding a illness just knowing the name .

      • LuckyCastan

        And…..he was way way too FEMININE. I bet guys payed more attention to him lol

      • Meko21

        Idiotic statment!, this is A failure of the community he lives in. It took the village to create him and some seriously stuck up girls somewhere at some time destroyed him and embarrassed him to create this hate.

        • http://1389blog.com/ 1389AD

          So any young female who doesn’t put out on demand is guilty of creating a murderer?

          You wish!

  • Mike Hobgood

    What will the libs want to ban for this….white people?

    • Butch1

      Why is this a “lib” or political problem? This young man is obviously sick in the head. It has nothing to do with politics. Now YOU on the other hand, are having a problem and have to inject “libs” into everything. Perhaps you should think about that for a moment.

      • seethrufaded

        something tells me if this guy was a Tea Partier, you’d be all over it. Let people rant if they want to. Stop the paranoia.

        • Butch1

          No, there is absolutely no politics in this story at all and I see no reason to inject it in it now. Why do you feel the need to do it?
          For people to have to add “tea party” or “lib” crap on to something that is already horrible just fuels the fire. Why? Does it really need to be political too?

          • Mary Brown

            It already is, one of the dead kids fathers is already crying about how guns caused this.

          • Independence_R_US

            As well as wanting to hold the NRA responsible. Also, the other article paints the kid as a saint. So it has to be the gun. I guess the facts that 100′s are killed every day in the inner cities by gangs. That doesn’t play along with the gun haters mentality of taking guns away from everyone. SO they don’t want to cloud the issues with facts. AS that doesn’t enforce the irrational hatred of the gun haters for anyone that doesn’t agree with them.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Pssst…guess what? If guns weren’t EVERYWHERE in this country, the kids in the inner city wouldn’t be murdering each other at anywhere near the same rate either.

          • Michael Lawrence

            Pssst….do you really think those inner city kids are buying their guns legally? Federal law states that NO ONE under the age of 18 may possess a long gun, NO ONE under 21 may possess a handgun. When 15 and 16 year old children are committing crimes with firearms, they did not come by those firearms legally. These inner city kids have committed multiple felonies just by possessing the firearm, let alone committing a crime with their illegal firearm.
            You claim that these inner city kids would not be murdering each other at near the same rate if guns were not EVERYWHERE….however, every place that has a total or near total gun ban has a higher gun crime rate (including murder) than places that allow guns. For example…the UK, Australia, and Chicago.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            5.5

            5.6
            5.8
            5.6
            5.4
            5.0
            4.7
            4.7
            4.7

            16,148
            16,740
            17,309
            17,128
            16,465
            15,399
            14,722
            14,661
            14,827

            USA murder rates above

            Australia murder rates below, deaths per 100,000 and total number.

            1.5
            1.3
            1.3
            1.2
            1.2
            1.2
            1.0
            1.1
            1.1

            302
            259
            281
            255
            261
            263
            230
            244
            254

          • Michael Lawrence

            First off, I did not specify ONLY murders in UK, Australia, and Chicago. I said GUN CRIMES (INCLUDING MURDER). I guess you missed that part. Go back and look at total gun related crimes in the UK and Australia and then get back to me if you still believe that their gun crime is lower than ours. Interestingly, you did not even try to explain the gun crime rate in Chicago. You are also probably not aware that if Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC, and Baltimore are removed from the murder statistics of the US, the murder rate drops to 0.25 per 100,000. The 4 cities with the strictest gun control measures nation wide boost our murder rare from 0.25 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. I would have to disagree with you on the gun control measure of a few cities contributing to the nations over all crime states….based on 2012 FBI statistics.
            By the way….a 2011 Brady Campaign study found that the top 5 states for gun murder rates were California, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, and Hawaii….In a direct correlation, these are the same five states that this study claimed to have the most gun murders. Even the anti-gun Brady Campaign proves that added gun restrictions means more gun murders.
            Also I find it very interesting that you agree with me that the inner city kids either stole or purchased illegally their guns. You would rather have laws put into place and take away the rights of law abiding citizens than cracking down and enforcing the existing laws against these inner city thugs that have guns and actually are committing most of the crime. You are part of the problem. Thanks for playing, but if you are going to come to the debate on gun control, you need to come more educated than you are.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            My statistics are accurate, and, yes, they only deal with gun deaths. While I’ll certainly admit that it’s traumatic to be threatened with a gun, or robbed by someone with one, you’re still alive after that. I happen to think that death is the most important statistic. You’re free to disagree with me, but don’t quote totally misleading stats that have very little to do with reality. Has it not occurred to you that cities with high murder rates don’t have them because of restrictive gun laws, they have the restrictive gun laws in hopes of curbing the out of control murder rate? As long as people can venture out of town and buy semi-automatics with 50 round clips, there’s really not much a local ordinance can do. As to violence in Australia, I quote an article from Reuters “Australia had 13 gun massacres in the 18 years before the 1996 gun reforms, but has not suffered any mass shootings since.
            Studies found a marked drop in gun-related homicides, down 59 percent, and a dramatic 65 percent drop in the rate of gun-related suicides, in the 10 years after the weapons crackdown.”

          • Michael Lawrence

            Wow, circular logic. I couldn’t expect better from a liberal….cities with high murder rates put restrictive gun laws in place to curb the violence. But those very same restrictive gun laws are a factor in the very gun violence that the laws are trying to curb. The 4 cities I mentioned raise the nations gun murder rate from 0.25 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. Take a look at Utah, the state with the least restrictive gun laws….their gun murder rate is 0.97 per 2.9 million…yes, 0.97 per the entire population of the state. Of course, that does not include suicide or accidental deaths by gun or justified death in stopping a crime either by police or civilians.
            You know, I can tell you only know about guns from what you read in the biased media. You used the word clip. There are only a handful of guns manufactured worldwide in any era of history that have used clips. You misuse of this word tells me exactly how ignorant you are of reality when it comes to guns. The correct word is magazine. Clips and magazines are not interchangeable words and they are not interchangeable in guns. You can not use a clip in a gun that requires a magazine and you can not use a magazine in a gun that requires a clip. You really do need to find a better source of information. You seem very typical of the gun banner type. You know nothing of the actual item you want to have banned, you only know biased statistics and talking points. I am done with this debate with you….you simply do not know enough about this topic.
            You might want to start to gain knowledge by reading a book called “More Guns, Less Crime”. It is written by John Lott. This book digs deeper into the crime statistics….actual statistics from the FBI and DOJ. Unlike the biased media, he looks at trends in these statistics, not just lows and highs. This book is not a recent book, but the information in the book is still relevant today. Places with the most and least restrictive gun laws have not changed much since the book was written.
            I am sure you will complain that this very book has been discredited by gun banners….sure it has, it proves them wrong on everything.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Wow….I didn’t use the exact terminology, so you feel like you can dismiss my idea. There is a name for this: pedantry, refusing to look at the issue and defending one’s stance by petty nonsense. If you truly can’t see that a local ordinance is useless when semi-automatics can be legally purchased ten miles away, there’s really no point in talking to you.

          • Michael Lawrence

            I”m not dismissing your idea because you used incorrect terminology. I am dismissing your idea because you use circular logic…. local ordinances banning sales of guns are in place because of the violence that is caused by those that don’t care about laws….so pass more local laws banning more guns because of the violence caused by those not caring anything about the laws…..so pass more laws banning more guns….
            What’s sad about the entire thing is that you do not even see that it is circular logic that you are using. I guess that’s what happens when you come from a background where everybody passes the class because it would make someone feel bad if the failed and participation trophies for showing up.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            You’re a laugh riot….Not that it matters, but I was a National Merit finalist back when that meant something, have an advanced degree from a first rate university, etc., and I’d be more than happy to discuss logic, if you wish. If, however, you’re unable to understand the relatively simple concept (local gun laws are meaningless when guns can be purchased next door), there’s really no point in it, as you clearly don’t have the faculties, and I’m in no mood to wage a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

          • Michael Lawrence

            Wow, and I thought that you were the unarmed one in this…you really are very ignorant when it comes to guns and laws concerning them. You only know liberal talking points and biased stats.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            “A fraud on the American public.” That’s how former Chief Justice
            Warren Burger described the idea that the Second Amendment gives an
            unfettered individual right to a gun. When he spoke these words to PBS
            in 1990, the rock-ribbed conservative appointed by Richard Nixon was
            expressing the longtime consensus of historians and judges across the
            political spectrum.
            Twenty-five years later, Burger’s view seems as quaint as a
            powdered wig. Not only is an individual right to a firearm widely
            accepted, but increasingly states are also passing laws to legalize
            carrying weapons on streets, in parks, in bars—even in churches.

            Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the
            Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until
            2008, when District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the capital’s law effectively banning handguns in the home.”

          • Michael Lawrence

            We have not had unfettered firearm ownership since 1934 with the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934. Many on the left, many anti-gunners do not know this. Further restrictions were placed on sales and ownership with the Gun Control Act of 1968. NFA1934 outlawed the ownership of fully automatic weapons without special licensing. GCA1968 gave more discretion to ATF on what could be purchased.
            Even more restrictions were placed on our second amendment right in 1986 with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1986. This law prohibited the manufacture of fully automatic weapons and the transfer of them….However, those weapons that were already in existence were grandfathered and can still be transferred with special licensing. Cost is prohibitive though. With the ban of newly created weapons, the laws of supply and demand took over. A fully automatic rifle is priced well above the price of most used cars….$10,000+++ It depends on the rarity of the firearm and the condition.
            By the way, the so called “assault rifle” is a misleading term. A true assault rifle has a full automatic capability. The so called “assault rifle” does not have this capability. The left leaning media does not seem to understand this distinction and passes on false information. 30 round magazines are not high capacity, they are standard capacity. That is what the manufacturer sends with these rifles. 10 round magazines are LOW capacity and have to be made special or standard magazines have to be modified.
            Again, we have not had unfettered ownership since 1934. Warren burger would be happy knowing that there were restrictions long before he became Chief Justice.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Well, if you read what he said above, Warren Burger would actually be sickened by the changes in interpretation of the 2nd amendment since his time on the court.

          • Michael Lawrence

            He wanted restrictions, there are restrictions. His interpretation of the second amendment is flawed. Every other place that the constitution says the right of the people it refers to an individual’s right. The second amendment reads:
            A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
            State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
            infringed.
            “The right of the PEOPLE….”
            Anti-gunners like to point to the first part of this amendment about the well regulated militia. However, the militia is every male from 18 to 45. Interpreting that today would be every adult, male and female….we can no longer discriminate on gender or age, so any adult is the militia. The militia act of 1792 states that each militia member needs to be armed and ready to be called into service. They need to have proper military weaponry, ammunition, and other military gear. They were required to the equivalent of their day’s military hardware. Again, today, that would mean that Americans should be allowed M16s with full automatic capability or at the very minimum, AR15s without the full automatic capability. It would be reasonable to expect that not everyone would choose the same rifle as not everyone in 1792 chose the same musket or rifle of their day.
            Despite all of that it is the second part of the 2nd amendment that is where the meat is….the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The right of the people….any other amendment with these words refers to an individual’s right, not the collective right of the militia, as applied to the 2nd amendment.
            Before you get to the Militia act of 1903 and claim that the militia is the national guard….not completely correct. The Militia Act of 1903 or the Dick act redefines the militia as organized and unorganized militia. Organized militia is the National Guard and are the states’ militias. The unorganized militia is still every adult.
            You should probably resign yourself to a portion of America’s citizens being armed. As long as the 2nd amendment is in the constitution, there will be armed citizens. If you don’t like that, move to the UK or Australia, I’m sure that they would welcome an anti-gunner with open arms. Of course, you should hope to avoid their rampant gun crime.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            I didn’t realize that you were more of a constitutional scholar than a former chief justice. There’s truly no point in going over these points yet again. Because of the phrasing of the second amendment, it’s quite easy for pro and anti gun people to say it says what they want it to say. Anyone with a knowledge of history knows that the “well regulated militia” was in place of a standing army. As there now IS such an army, my guess (and it’s just that) is that the founding fathers would say that it supersedes the need for the aforementioned militia. There’s no way to know this, and contemporary politics will be what governs the interpretation. Interestingly, I’ve previously asked proponents of unregulated gun ownership whether, in the extremely unlikely event of a new amendment being passed which modifies the second and limits gun ownership, they would be willing to abide by same. Pretty much universally, they said they would not. This dismisses the argument that such folks are adherents to the constitution, as such an amendment would be part of that document. If you argue that they only should have to go along with the original document, that would mean allowing slavery, no women’s suffrage and extending voting rights only to white men of property.

          • Michael Lawrence

            America had a standing army, however small it was, in 1792 when the Militia Act of 1792 was written and signed into law. The Militia Act of 1862 guaranteed black volunteers in state militias received equal pay to white volunteers…. During the Civil War, there was no National Guard and many states, on both sides of the war, had state militia units send volunteers to fight. There also was the Union Army and Confederate Army, the national armies.
            The Militia Act of 1903, created the National Guard or organized state militias. This Militia Act also defines unorganized or reserve militias shall be all able bodied citizens from the age of 18 to 45. But thanks to liberals, there can no longer be an age upper limit….age discrimination is pretty much outlawed…..so, this might as well read from the age of 18 until death. The Militia Act of 1903 is still in place and has not been repealed and is still the law of the land. There have been a couple of amendments added, but they do not redefine the militia.
            There is a problem with changing the constitution as you mentioned. This is not an easy process. A bill to amend the constitution can be created in Congress. It then has to be voted on and a supermajority or 60% has to vote for the new amendment in both houses. The President has to sign it, but it is still not added to the constitution yet. It has to be ratified by 75% of the states….37 states have to vote for such an amendment. The other way an amendment or other changes can be added is by a convention of the states. 34 states have to call for such a convention. Once the convention is convened changes can be made to the constitution without the congress or president involved. In such a convention everything about the constitution can be changed, up to and including the disbanding of the federal government. Again, any changes made have to be ratified by 37 states. By the way, a convention of states is being voted on and 33…maybe the required 34 states, have voted yes. This is in an attempt to place a balanced budget amendment in the constitution. Don’t like the 2nd amendment, now is your chance. Have the delegates from your state offer a repealing amendment.

            As for being a constitutional scholar….nope, but I can read. I can read the actual text of the constitution, the Articles of Confederation, the Federalist Papers, and the writings of the founding fathers. It is not that difficult to understand their reasoning behind the second amendment. It is not for deer hunting as many on the left would have you believe. It is for the removal of a tyrannical government. Without the teeth of the second amendment, we have no rights. The government could simply take our rights away. Do you think that in Germany, if Hitler had not banned ownership of firearms and had them confiscated, do you think that the Jews would have been forced into death camps so easily? Armed people do not willingly get into box cars that they know are going to death camps.
            Allowing Slavery, no women’s suffrage, and only propertied white men voting….I did not say that the constitution could not be amended. In fact, I just told you the two methods that the constitution can be amended. By the way, not ending slavery, not giving women the right to vote, and keeping only allowing white propertied men to vote were all DEMOCRAT policies.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Neither the modern Republican or Democrcatic parties existed at the time the constitution was written, so that part of your message makes no sense whatsoever. As to amending the constitution, I’m well aware that it’s a steep slope indeed. My point was that so many proponents of gun ownership say they hew to the constitution, but when asked if they would continue to do so if it were amended to change gun laws, they suddenly decide that it’s not the constitution they follow, it’s the intent of the founding fathers. Well, the founding fathers are the ones who allowed slavery, disallowed property and voting rights to women, etc.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Here’s an op-ed piece by Burger after his retirement. Mind you, he was very much a Republican conservative, and was appointed by Nixon.

            Keene Sentinel, Keene, NH, op-ed, November 26, 1991

            The Second Amendment very briefly provides that, since a “well regulated
            militia” is necessary to the security of the state, the people’s right
            to “keep and bear arms” is guaranteed.

            Few things have been more vigorously debated — and distorted — in
            recent times than the meaning of this clause, and very few subjects have
            been as cluttered and confused by calculated disinformation circulated
            by special interest groups.

            To really understand what was intended, it is necessary to look back and
            recall that in those days people had a great fear of a standing national
            army. They knew that the monarchs of Europe had held power at the
            expense of the people by having standing armies to preserve the status
            quo.

            In addition, before the Constitution the 13 colonies were not really the
            “united states” we know today, but 13 wholly independent, sovereign
            nations. For example, before the Constitution was adopted, the State of
            Virginia was virtually as independent of the other states and of the
            union established by the Articles of Confederation as France was
            independent of all the other countries of Europe. Before the adoption
            of the Constitution, each state could and did have its own army, and
            each state could also maintain its own navy, as some of the seaboard
            states did.

            The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that the “state
            armies” — “the militia” — would be maintained for the defense of the
            state.

            In order to do that it was necessary to grant each citizen the right to
            maintain arms. Of course, 200 years ago, the musket — which was the
            principal military weapon in use — was a common fixture in most
            American households, because many Americans depended on hunting game for food. Today the “state armies” that were prevalent in the 18th century
            have effectively been replaced by the National Guard, and hunting has
            basically become a recreational activity.

            The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind
            of weapon he or she desires. In referring to “a well regulated
            militia,” the Framers clearly intended to secure the right to bear arms
            essentially for military purposes. In the late 18th century, the “militia” was the aggregate of all able-bodied men, and the word “militia” was defined as “a body of troops; soldiers collectively.”
            Moreover, even where the militia was concerned, it is clear that the
            Framers contemplated that the use of arms could be “well-regulated.”

            If an 18th-century militia was intended to be “well regulated,” surely
            the Second Amendment does not remotely guarantee every person the
            constitutional right to have a “Saturday Night Special” or a machine gun
            without any regulation whatever. There is no support in the Constitution for the argument that federal and state governments are powerless to regulate the purchase of such firearms so that they do not get into the hands of persons with significant criminal records or mental impairments, or persons who are engaged in criminal activity.

            By analogy, although there is not a word or a hint in the Constitution
            about automobiles or motorcycles, no one would seriously argue that a
            state cannot regulate the use of motor vehicles by imposing licensing
            restrictions and speed limits based on such factors as a driver’s age,
            health condition, and driving record, and by recording every purchase or
            change of ownership.

            Of course, some of these observations will be challenged by weapons and
            ammunition manufacturers and other members of the so-called “gun lobby.”
            That there should be vigorous debate on this subject is a tribute to our
            freedom of speech and press, but the American people should have a firm
            understanding of the true origin and purpose of the Second Amendment.

          • Michael Lawrence

            I’ve read this before. I thought Chief Justice Burger was wrong when he wrote this and he is still wrong today. Every other place that the constitution lists a “right of the people” the right is reserved for our citizens. Why is the second amendment different? According to the 2008 ruling, it is not and the second amendment applies to the right of citizens, not the collective militia.
            Machine guns, as I have told you, were for the most part outlawed in 1934. Until then you could mail order them and have them show up in the mail at your home. Interestingly, there are no reports of mass shootings before the NFA 1934 was signed into law.
            How do you define “Saturday Night Special”? as no such gun exists. I have seen it defined as an inexpensive handgun. Why does the cost of a firearm matter? You would discriminate against those that do not have a large amount of money? By banning inexpensive firearms, that is exactly what you are doing. Often it is the poor that need a firearm for protection the most. They are the ones living in the inner cities with your “inner city kids” committing a variety of gun related crimes. The poor can not afford a month’s salary for an expensive handgun. You would leave these people defenseless.

            Burger was wrong about the definition of militia. It is clearly defined in the 3 militia acts that I told you about. The last militia act defines the regular army, the organized militia and the unorganized militia. This definition is what defines the militia, not the opinion of a retired judge.
            You mention that there is no support in the constitution for keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals…..never heard of the 10th amendment? This amendment gives all powers to the states not clearly defined in the constitution as federal powers. Every state has a law against felons owning firearms, are you not aware of this or was it not on the talking points? By the way, the NRA and other pro-gun groups have been and are pushing for those that have been found mentally ill to be in the list of those banned from purchasing firearms. However, liberal judges have ruled this to be a violation of their privacy and so far….this has not been added to the federally mandated background checks of the Brady act signed into law under Bill Clinton. By the way, the Brady Act is a federal law. Many will claim it is unconstitutional, but it has not been challenged on that in court. No support in the constitution….
            Your statement of cars and motorcycles not being mentioned int he constitution and states regulating them…again, 10th amendment….you really need to read the constitution if you are going to try and argue points of it.
            I am done with this conversation, you are far too ignorant of fact to continue. I will not be replying to your messages. Again, I suggest you actually read the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federalist Papers. If you can find any other writings of the founding fathers pertaining to the constitution, those writings would also be worth your time to read. Your everybody passes education is failing you.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            All of the points you dispute are not mine, but rather Warren Burger’s. If you wish to contend that you in fact are more of an expert on legal matters than he, you may, but realize that it’s more than foolish to call his arguments “far too ignorant”…he was the CHIEF JUSTICE, for God’s sake.

          • Independence_R_US

            Psst if you were half as smart as you thought you were you’d know we wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for guns. Or that there are over 300 million legals ones & way less than 1% of folks are killed each year with guns.

            Also, you’re too stupid to realize that 10 times as many folks are killed each year by cars. The list is endless but I’m discussing facts instead of misinformed stupidity from a gullibly ignorant person. But I digress.

            BTW you do know that CA has the highest amount of restrictive gun laws in the country & shows that your stupid nonsense gun laws do nothing to stop the dad guys from doing bad things or to help with the real issues. Also, that the 1st 3 victims were killed with knives. Bust as usual stupidity can’t be fixed. So congrat on being another of the poster children for stupid.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Well, moron, if the rate DID approach 1% murder rate per year, that would mean that someone who lived to 100 would almost certainly be murdered. Is not reaching that number something to be proud of? You’ll note the statistics I posted above which show that, among first world countries, the US has the most abysmal murder rate, and a high percentage of these are gun deaths. As I also mentioned above, regional or local gun restrictions do nothing to lower gun ownership rates; people just go to the nearest location where they CAN buy them. You can certainly kill people with knives, you just can’t kill them nearly as fast or from a distance. Developed countries with more restrictive gun laws (and pretty much all civilized countries DO have stricter gun laws) universally have far lower murder rates than the US.

          • Independence_R_US

            Wow moron it’s obvious that you’re a liberal. Math illiterate as well as just plain stupid. Sadly since you can’t seem to get anything. we’re talking about the total deaths per year of all folks in the US. Not of the countries population. Obviously your stupidity knows no bounds. But that’s to be expected from folks that can’t add or subtract. So they had to come up with a new education system for themselves. One where they don’t ever have to be right, just show up & get a pass.

            Only states you have are the ones that you folks manufacture to make more intentionally stupid conclusions.

            As sad & stupid as you folks are the proof is still there. Yet you can’t accept it because it destroys all your fake stats, lies, deceit, & pure stupid.

            Sadly you logic is as lame as you are. We can go back through history to show what gun bans have done. But you’re to stupid to read or do any real research. Why? Becasue it shoots huge holes in your stupid logic. There are still more folks killed by cars each year than by gun. There are more folks killed by other means than guns. Yet I don’t see any of you morons taking that into account. Why? Because you’re to stupid & it doesn’t play into your lies.

            You so stupid to believe that just because it’s agasint the law that bad guys will stop doing bad. How sad & mentally challenged you folks really are.

            But we’re talking liberals. You could line up all you gun haters in aline & then add up all their IQ’s & it wouldn’t be larger than a person’s shoe size. If you folks ever had a real thought, the world would end. If we could just harness all you folks stupid & turn it into energy, the world would be energy independent.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            I quote your former statement “way less than 1% of folks are killed each year with guns.” One would assume from your last post that you didn’t realize that what you said wasn’t what you meant, or perhaps you have such a poor command of grammar that you still don’t understand your error (that would also explain why you misused “to” for “too” and “you” for “you’re”). If you would like to show me some independent agency (not in the gun business) that disputes the figures for gun deaths in the US, Australia and the UK, I’d be happy to look….my guess is you’re just blowing smoke again. The figures I quoted are published in many places, and they show more than 4 times the gun fatalities per capita here than is either of those other countries.

          • Independence_R_US

            While I know it’s hard for liberals to get anything becasue of their inherent abilities to be intentionally stupid, the voices in your head are taking over again. I suppose, like an errant 2 year old that argues with an adult, you have to be held by your hand through every conversation becasue you can’t follow the logic or understand the big words.

            So here goes.

            The stats for deaths in America contains all death caused by things other than natural causes. When anyone with a brain talks about gun deaths, they’re a part of that stat. It was determined that of those deaths, not caused by natural causes, were less than 1%. Much of those are cuased by suicides. Also, the stats include deaths from guns due to police intervention. As stated, many more deaths are caused by other things, such as car accidents,. But being stupid & liberal means that you can take any stat or any sentence & apply your liberal interpretation to make it appear otherwise. In other words you folks lie.

            While it’s publicly known that liberalism is the newest form of a mental health issue, it would be nice for once to have one of you folks not have to be held by your pathetic little hands through every conversation. Then explained every nuance of ever term. Especially since you folks pride yourselves on being so intelligent becasue you have a myriad of liberal degrees from some high cost liberal college. Also, to realize that a piece of paper doesn’t equate into intelligence. But I digress.

            Finally I tire of the intentional stupidity that you folks manage to exert every time you’re confronted with anyone that doesn’t agree with your stupidity. While I know it’s ingrained & promoted by you liberals, reality shows how foolishly stupid you’re political pandering are.

            BTW don’t forget that the 1st three folks were killed by knives. But I gather that doesn’t allow you folks to churn that into gun confiscation. Or to create another 20k new knife laws.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            You still are apparently unable to understand that what you THOUGHT you were saying was not what you said. Not being a mind reader, I had to go by what you wrote rather than what you had hoped to convey. The real issue here, as far as I’m concerned, is made very clear by your post. This nutcase murderer justified his killing to himself by objectifying those he murdered. When you say garbage like “iberalism is the newest form of a mental health issue”, you’re doing the exact same thing. If you are willing to classify people as being of lesser worth because of their gender, their belief system, their color, anything that doesn’t treat them as individuals, you’re one step closer to saying “they’re not really human, and it’s okay if I kill them/enslave them/put them in concentration camps, etc”. I’m certain you’ll jump on this and tell me I’m an idiot and a “typical liberal”. You need to look at your own value system, and realize that we’re all humans. There are folks who lump all right wing extremists as sub-human as well. I say the same thing to them. The only way we can truly relate as human beings is to treat each other as such.

          • Independence_R_US

            I understand perfectly what I said. Yet you seem to be the one having problems. AS far as objectifying individuals, good one. When you say the truth about something that’s not objectifying. From my experience Liberals are unable to utilize any real facts. They take figures & make up things based on them. Instead of utilizing some research.

            If I had a nickle for ever time I had a liberal tell me that well over 100k were killed by guns. One of your elected liberal gun haters has stated that very thing. But hey we don’t want to cloud the issues with facts.

            Facts no mater whether those voices in your head tell you otherwise, there are a ton less deaths from guns than most any other thing. But that doesn’t play well with your stupidity & false made up interpretation of the data.

            Again the truth is inconvenient for you folks. You need to demonize anyone that doesn’t agree with your intentional stupidity.

            Being stupid isn’t dehumanizing. It’s a fact. Stupidity is color blind. But maybe we need to discuss facts. How about all the dehumanizing anyone that liberals don’t like. I could Google a ton of those. All from LIBERALS. So as they say “One who lives in a glass house shouldn’t throw stones.” But I digress.

            You might want to try staying on point & quit trying to move focus away from the issues. That being you gun haters will do anything to promote you agenda. That includes lying, being stupid, or what ever. Enough of the mock indignation. Oh so typical.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            So, by your logic, if I hear lies from conservatives (as I so often do) I should then conclude that all conservatives are liars….this is the sort of idiocy that does end up with one group trying to kill other groups. Are there fools who call themselves liberals? Sure! Are the fools who call themselves conservatives? You need only look on this page for confirmation of that. I know a good number of people who are staunch conservatives who are both intelligent and have well thought out arguments. I know even more liberals who fit that definition. Your attitude is that same one that ends up with “all Christians are murderers” of “all Muslims are murderers”, and leads to more meaningless violence. Oh, and there have of course been far MORE than 100,000 gun murders in the US, just not in any one year. What seems more germaine to the discussion is that pretty much ALL other first world countries have far far fewer such deaths per capita. If it were your son who was shot, the question of whether gun violence claimed 10,000 or 100,000 victims this year would seem totally meaningless compared to your loss.

          • Michael Lawrence

            Regional or local gun restrictions do nothing to lower gun ownership rates….. where do you get that information? For most of the last century it was illegal to own a handgun in Chicago. The rest of the state of Illinois, anybody could own a handgun without any restrictions. It took a SCOTUS ruling to remove this law restricting pistol ownership in Chicago. How about the total gun ban in Washington DC? Yep, another SCOTUS decision to remove that law passed in 1976. From about 1980 until the law was removed, Washington DC was the murder capital of the nation. Since citizens living in Washington DC are now allowed to own firearms, the crime rate, including the murder rate, is dropping.
            You really do need to find a better source of information, because the one you are using is telling you false information…..or you are deliberately ignorant of facts.

          • Dot

            Your first sentence totally nailed his character. (not that we couldn’t already see this.) Notice how he starts calling you names in the post below, because you disagreed with him. He is a liberal. Can’t help himself. He does this to everyone who disagrees with him.

          • FedUp With Zero

            The roommates who shared an apartment with him knew him as mentally ill, and still nothing was done. Apathy and Complacency killed and wounded his victims. ..not a weapon.

          • Mary Brown

            exactly, failed parenting, failed education system, and a failed government are the cause in that order. A concealed carry permit holder could have pointed a gun at this kid early on and stopped him in his tracks. Past shootings show that as soon as they face force they commit suicide.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            You’re truly pitiful.

          • Butch1

            For goodness sake, the man is hurting and has a right. How insensitive you are. That is NOT a political statement as I see it, but obviously you do. ( crying? You really take the cake with your statement. One can hope you never experience anything like this and have someone say something as insensitive like you have said. )

          • Michael Lawrence

            What right do you refer to him having? Killing 6 innocent people? Yes, he was hurting and sick, but that does not give him a right to kill others. I’d rather be insensitive than oversensitive and condone such acts.

          • Butch1

            Excuse me, I’m speaking about the father of the victim and not the murderer. Please keep up with the conversation and your reading comprehension skills.

          • jon

            how about making a clear statement as opposed to one so very ambiguous, douche bag…..

          • Butch1

            Don’t ever take any responsibility for misreading anything.

          • Dot

            Oh my, Butch, are you condemning Michael Lawrence’s reading skills in an “insensitive” way? SHAME ON YOU!!!!

          • Butch1

            Yes, he got it wrong. I was correct in pointing it out to him. What is your problem? Are you judging again?

          • Michael Lawrence

            Butch was right on this one….he was speaking of the victim’s father. But that does not give the killer an out. The killer is still wrong on so many new levels.

          • Michael Lawrence

            Well, Butch, you might want to check your own reading comprehension. The only mention of the victim’s father is that he is crying…or calling for more gun control. The comment was about the politicization of this act of violence. Yes, he is hurting, but he should not be calling for taking away the rights of law abiding citizens. Maybe you should go back and read the constitution that you swore to defend. The second amendment is still part of that document. Read the part that says…”shall not be infringed”.

          • Butch1

            I do not want our 2nd Amendment rights infringed with period. I think that under the circumstances of his grief, he said a lot and we probably should cut him some slack. He lost a child due to this mentally ill murderer. Sure, he’s going to blame it on guns right now. Give him some time, he’s grieving. He may change or not. Who knows.

          • Dot

            RIGHT ON, MICHAEL LAWRENCE!!!!

          • Butch1

            You don’t even have a clue of what you speak. Go read your bible and ask for forgiveness for bearing false witness.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Are you truly as despicable a human being as you appear to be in this conversation, or are you just temporarily deranged?

          • Dot

            Gee, I was fixing to ask you the same question.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Hadn’t even seen this one…you really DO have problems comprehending the written word. “Butch1″ was referring to the father of one of the victims…how could you possibly not understand that?

          • Michael Lawrence

            Keep reading, I was corrected on that and admitted that Butch was right.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            I saw that. I’m just amazed you could have misinterpreted his remarks in the first place. It DOES speak to your reading comprehension, which is what was under discussion previously.

          • curmudgeon

            Butch, you’re usually better than this. Must have affected you on a personal level. You are right, it’s not necessarily political, but want to bet the liberal democrat politician gun grabbers and their allies in the liberal media won’t make it so?

          • Butch1

            I’m sure the media is just warming up. They’re no friends of mine and that’s for sure. (you know that.)
            My sympathies are definitely for the victims in this and I do not want anything to happen to our gun rights. This will stir a new debate that’s for sure.

            My problem has been with the narrow minded fools here who have nothing better to do than to assume that I am in the democratic camp just because I happen to be a liberal. Even liberals can be sub-divided. Those in the government are traitors as far as I’m concerned as well as those republicans. The both have been bought by Wall Street. Many people here are too myopic to see the big picture and want to fight “blue team v red team” whilst the real battle should be the rich who have taken over this country against the rest of us. They still do not get it as long as they want to fight on this level about “liberals” being responsible for all the problems giving the conservatives a free pass. They both sold out as democrats and republicans in this government. We need new parties as these two are too corrupt.

          • curmudgeon

            Can’t argue regarding the corruption. My personal belief is that 100% of self identified democrat politicians are corrupt (Party of lawyers so it’s their nature) and a big chunk of the Republican party is owned by the lobbyists of K street. Look at all the former Congress critters and the family members of current sitting critters who lobby Congress. Harry Reid has three sons and a son-in-law who all lobby.

            What we need are term limits to get them out before they get owned and are past the point of no return. Elections don’t correct the problem because the great unwashed only see the names they recognize (Incumbents) and the party symbol behind the name and usually have little knowledge of issues nor voting records of the candidates they are voting for.

            I would like to see a party representing the extreme left and the Conservative right with the issues they stand for so that clear choices can be made.

          • Butch1

            I agree 100%

          • Mary Brown

            Nothing insensitive about it, people i this country are brainwashed to blame the gun instead of blaming a failed political system, a failed education system, failed parenting that is cranking out these little psychopaths. Put the blame squarely where it belongs, on the shooter

          • Butch1

            Exactly.

          • Dot

            Oh spare me with your talk of this poor “hurting man”. You talk about “being insensitive”, and all you have done is blaspheme the name of God, put down those who have a different opinion than you do. Is that not “insensitive?: It is one thing to disagree with someone, but there is a right way to go about it. Talk about HYPOCRITICAL!!!!

          • Butch1

            You are another person who cannot comprehend what I have written. Read this very slowly.
            The man who spoke was the father of one of the victims of the murder. I said he was hurting when he spoke. Does that make any sense to you, Dot? Then you bring up something from another subject to cloud the issue about your religion. Since I do not believe in religion and since you have stepped over the line by insulting me with it as well I said there would be “no holds barred.” If you consider it insensitive or blasphemous, that is just too bad. You will have to deal with it. There’s nothing hypocritical about it. You want to argue about it and we can certainly do that. You want to prove to me that your god exists, do it.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Oddly enough, I just looked up “hypocritical” and your picture was right next to the definition.

          • Dot

            You just proved yourself to be a LIAR.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Wow…not only are you a disgusting person, you also don’t understand satire. Why am I not surprised?

          • Dot

            Name calling LIBERAL…..people may pay attention to you if you could write without showing your true colors. Name calling and constantly putting people down is a turn off to people with good morals. You are not impressing anyone in a good way. In fact, you are just showing your true character. It’s not pretty. Think about it.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Yeah, what a pussy….his son is killed for no reason whatsoever and he cries and complains. Clearly not a REAL man. Why, without the guns, this kid would likely have bitten the heads off of his victims, and, hey, if everyone in Isla Vista had been carrying AK47s, they could have defended themselves (and likely killed a bunch of innocent bystanders at the same time).

          • Mary Brown

            You are an idiot, one person with a pistol could have stopped him. Most of these mass shooters have taken their own lives the minute they are facing a gun(mall shooter, several others). And most concealed carry permit holders practice, I go to the range twice a month and go through 1,000 rounds. So no bystanders would be hit(only cops do that) and the killer may have been stopped cold before he went on to kill even more people.

            Yes the guys kid was killed but blaming a tool instead of the real problem is wrong. I have a large assortment of guns. None of them have every jumped into my hand and said go kill people. None of them whisper to me kill kill kill… psychopaths will use whatever weapon they can get their hands one. If he didn’t use guns he would have used the car, or a fire bomb, or knives in a crowd. Criminals and psychopaths do not follow laws either, ban a gun they say so what I can buy one from the corner drug dealer or local gang. All gun laws do is harm law abiding people when they cannot defend themselves.

          • AFCrewChief

            Dig not a gun issue at all, it’s a parent-kid issue before the gun issue. Check it. The Sandy Hook Killer and this Sick F**k both came affluent divorced families. That mother in Conn knew her son was a Wack job. But there ya go she buys him guns and goes shooting with him…go figure

          • Mary Brown

            And we have a senator already latching onto it and calling for new gun laws that would have made zero difference. When a psychopath wants to kill they will find a way. Fire bomb, car into a crowd, he used knives on 3 of the people… the only way to stop them is to put them in a mental hospital where they belong but the dems cut funding for that.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Shame on you….just shame on you.

          • Mary Brown

            For what? Honesty? Sorry his kid was killed but guns are not the problem. Problem is a broken mental health system, problem is a refusal of democrats to enforce the gun laws on the books. When the kid bought the guns he has to fill out a form 4473. On that form it has mental health questions. Lie on a question and it is a felony. But the system didn’t catch him because none of his doctors reported it to the NICS system that does the background checks.

            And where is the call to ban knives, he killed 3 people with a machete. He tried to kill with the car too, where is a call for a ban on cars? Other nut jobs have used fire bombs made with gas, we better ban gasoline then.

          • FedUp With Zero

            Because the press has, and always will, make this political. As sick and as sad as this guy was, that will be lost on those who turn tragedies like this into a call for more gun control.

          • Butch1

            I can agree with you on that. I do not want to see anymore restrictions on our right to bear arms. Believe it or not, this mentally ill young man’s papers were in order for purchasing a weapon and there was no way in knowing he was sick. He hid it very well when he bought his guns.

          • LieutenantCharlie

            Liberals are already crying about Gun Control,……Liberals shoot Liberals and then blame the Gun.

          • Butch1

            This liberal isn’t. Don’t generalize.

          • jon

            general douche bag….

          • curmudgeon

            Sorry, I guess I never realized you were an admitted liberal. You seemed much smarter.

          • Dot

            LOL, LOL, LOL.

          • Butch1

            ;-)
            Look up the original definition of this word in the dictionary, curmudgeon and you will have the correct definition and not the one that has been pinned on me. Many of us had to change to calling ourselves “progressives” which I hate. I will not do that. I believe in the original definition and that is the one that I am not the one that conservatives invented.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            How can you stand to share ANY viewpoint with these particular morons on this page? They’re so repugnant that even if I believed in totally unfettered access to guns, reading their comments would change my mind. These are NOT people I’d trust with guns; they’re stupid and vicious and can’t even understand what you’re saying.

          • Butch1

            I am broad minded even when many of them are not.

          • Dot

            Alert….Alert….. Liberal near-by. Evidence is in the name calling. Can’t stand for someone to disagree with them….but they sure can call names behind their computer screens. I think we are suppose to be scared of them?

          • MrSwingGuitar

            I love having discussion with rational people with whom I disagree. What’s obnoxious is having to deal with vile people who are constitutionally opposed to thinking, such as yourself. You have exhibited no shame at all at vilifying the parent of a murdered young man because he was in pain. You somehow still consider yourself a Christian. I’ve got news for you: following Jesus doesn’t mean using the Bible to find excuses for your bad behavior.

          • Dot

            Oh, what a LIAR. Won’t even dignify your LIE above with a response. Your post, two up from mine, is calling all who disagree with you, names. Went through just this page, and all you do is call people hateful names, so you have no right to criticize anyone, on this thread. You are a Typical liberal who most likely voted for Obama. (don’t even say you didn’t….they ALL deny it NOW, as they see where their dictator is taking us.) People like you can dish it out, but can’t take it. You have “NO news for me”, as I fully know that quoting from the Bible does not excuse bad behavior. I have exhibited none, except to say what scripture says, (which always infuriates liberals), and state my opinion on things, just as you have. So get over it. I DO NOT AGREE on most everything you have said on this thread….especially your arrogant, prideful, HATEFUL way of expressing your opinion. Everyone on here has an opinion and believe it or not, your opinion does not take precedence over ours. Name calling people like you, sicken me.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            You bet I voted for Obama. I’m not a particular fan of his, but the alternative in both elections was far worse. You dare call me prideful, when you stand up there on your pulpit and act as though truth is revealed to you. You are likely in for an unpleasant surprise when you come to be judged and are found wanting for your lack of compassion. My criticism of people on here was sparked by their total lack of concern with the intense pain suffered by the parent of one of those murdered in this incident. Instead, they round up the wagons to protect their guns, which, after all, are far more important than peoples’ lives, right?

          • Dot

            You need to worry about where YOU will spend eternity. I have been washed in the Blood of Jesus, and acknowledge him as my Savior. Have you? Where are you coming up with the LIE that I have no compassion for the father of this young man? Never mind, you will just make my words out to be something you want them to be. I know it isn’t true and that is all that matters.
            I call you PRIDEFUL because you are….calling people names and putting people down, like you are a GOD who knows all. They have a RIGHT to their opinion, as do I, and you won’t take that away from us.
            You say, “you stand up there on your pulpit and act as though truth is revealed to you.” Well guess what. IS IT!!! Study God’s Word, and the Truth will be revealed to you as well. One thing for sure, I know that ABORTION is wrong, per scripture, and it is MURDER. YOUR president supports this. I also know that Homosexual behavior is wrong too. Scripture reveals this. Obama supports this too. I also know that the cult that worships pedafile, dead god, allah is wrong too. Obama supports and loves allah, by his own admission. It is on video with Obama himself supporting my statement about him. There is only ONE GOD, and that is Jehovah. I am sure you don’t believe these things, so don’t bother to rant and rave about what I just said. It is obvious you hate God and the Bible, as you have constantly put it down on this thread. Guess what. Your choice. Unlike you, I will not call you names because you disagree with God. I will not try to make you feel lower than me, as you have a habit of doing with others. I will just let you die in your sins, and go wherever you CHOOSE to go, as I now wash my hands of you, just as Paul did in scripture to those who were hard-headed and refused to come to the Truth. He moved on, and this is what I am going to do. Time to put someone else down, huh liberal?

          • MrSwingGuitar

            “I call you PRIDEFUL because you are….calling people names and putting people down”…I bet you can’t even see that you’re calling me names. As to the idea that calling someone liberal is an insult…try looking the word up in a dictionary some day. And, it seems to me that YOU are the one claiming to have all the answers. I merely called people on their lack of compassion (and in a couple of cases, on their clear lack of brain power). Oddly enough, fundamentalists of other religions also KNOW that theirs is the only path. People like you and they are major causes of war and bloodshed throughout history. ” It is obvious you hate God and the Bible, as you have constantly put it down on this thread”…Actually, what I said was that YOUR vision of God’s truth is so lacking compared to Jesus’ teachings that you clearly have no clue as to what it means to be a Christian. For example: Jesus said NOT ONE WORD condemning homosexuality. The Biblical verses that do are from the Jewish Old Testament. As to your total lack of understanding of what Obama said about Islam, I could easily correct you, but clearly you lack the capability to learn and change.

          • Dot

            You LIE. You say, “I merely called people on their lack of compassion, (and in a couple of cases, on their clear lack of brain power). GO BACK AND READ YOUR MANY POSTS, AND SEE IF YOU HAVEN’T LIED about calling people mean and nasty names. And before you say I am calling you a name when I call you a LIAR, just know that Biblical Characters called people worse names than this when they were doing evil things. You call people names when they do NOTHING to you…..just express their opinions. You just don’t see that, do you. Not surprised. I wasn’t even going to respond to you anymore, as you are the most EVIL person I have ever encountered on any thread. BUT, you LIED again, when you say that the SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY is not called out in the New Testament. IT CERTAINLY IS. I don’t want people to believe this LIE you are telling. People on here need to disregard every word out of your mouth. Go to Google: Type in: Is homosexuality a sin for New Testament Believers? This article is based on Scripture, so if you don’t believe in the Bible, which I suspect is the case, then don’t even bother to read it. This article brings out very clearly that Homosexuality IS MOST DEFINITELY A SIN. (and there is New Testament scripture to prove it). Don’t expect you to accept that though. You don’t want to know the TRUTH. Don’t bother to answer me back. You sicken me by the way you lie and talk about people.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Tell you what “Dot”…you show me anywhere in the Bible where Jesus spoke up against homosexuality, and I’ll apologize to you and everyone else in here. Not only that, I’ll vote for whatever candidate you tell me to in the next presidential election. Of course, if you CAN’T find that quote from Jesus, you have to vote for my candidate. What do you say? Deal??

          • Dot

            “The FOOL has said in his heart, There is no God.” Psalm 14:1
            I gave you your PROOF regarding homosexuality being a SIN, (two posts before this one), and it is based on scripture. If that doesn’t convince you, NOTHING will. So,
            proceed with your SIN. I no longer will answer a “FOOL” and a LIAR.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            I’ll take that as your admission that you were wrong. Jesus NEVER condemned either homosexuality or most of the things at which you Bible thumpers get outraged. You sound very desperate. I urge you to investigate what Jesus DID say…his was a positive message of love and forgiveness, not the hate you spew.

          • Dot

            LOL.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Personally, I don’t care about the politics of shooter or victim…I do care about lives lost for no reason. Shame on you for your callousness.

          • Dot

            Don’t take him seriously, Lieutenant Charlie. He puts EVERYONE down. You are “callous.” Someone else is called a “moron”, “stupid”, “not compassionate”, “obnoxious”, “pussy”, “disgusting”, and the list goes on and on. He is the only PERFECT one on here, so he thinks. He ALWAYS has a name for EVERYONE. He’s a LIBERAL. What more can I say.

          • chamuiel

            boy, the trolls jumped on this quick

            you must have been on high alert.

          • Butch1

            Really? Ad hominem really becomes you. If you have nothing to contribute to this conversation, then kindly don’t say anything; you aren’t helping.

          • Takiwiaa

            You have a point, however, this is a political website.

          • Butch1

            This is true.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Why do they do this, you ask? Perhaps because they realize that at some point Americans are going to be so sickened by the senseless slaughter that the proliferation of weaponry leads to that they’ll get the moral courage together to buck the NRA and the minority of guys whose manhood is totally tied up in the amount of firepower they own. I believe I read that this guy bought the guns legally. After all, he had no record that would have stopped the purchase. Any sort of reasonable oversight that governed who could own what guns would have stopped him, and almost certainly saved most or all of these lives.

          • Butch1

            I read that as well. They were all legally purchased. Someone like himself is going to fall through the cracks and it is impossible to try and write laws to prevent this type of crime from happening. He was mentally ill and hid it well enough to be able to buy weapons without any problems.

      • chris

        He is implying that every time there is a shooting liberals use it to start the conversation of more and more bans on fire arms. I like mike don’t want to live in a world where lawful citizens do not have access to firearms because they are all banned because of sick people like this.

        • Butch1

          I agree, but he shouldn’t assume that every “liberal” wants to have this dialogue. I am a liberal and I do not want to see any laws restricting the 2nd Amendment what so ever. This person’s papers to own a weapon were in order; everything was legal. They are going to slip through and there is no way every mentally ill person is going to be stopped from purchasing a weapon. It just isn’t going to happen. But, this wasn’t a political event and politics shouldn’t have entered into it; that was my point. People here immediately jumped on me for that assuming instead of keeping it on the subject.

          • Michael Lawrence

            You are a liberal….you probably vote for those that do want to place more and more restrictions on our freedoms, especially our second amendment freedoms. You are as much of the problem as the politicians writing the bills.

          • Butch1

            As former President Reagan once said, “There you go again . . .” You assume way too much just because I am a liberal. I didn’t even vote for this president and you already have me labeled and categorized and put into your little filing system. Stop it! You know nothing about me and stop assuming that you do. That’s the problem with many of you the minute a person mentions they are liberal. You assume. Don’t take anything for granted.

          • Michael Lawrence

            I didn’t say you voted for this president or any other…I said you voted for those that want more restrictions…you know, those that create the bills that become laws. Didn’t you say something about reading comprehension?
            I do understand about your desire to visit your buddies. May they rest in peace. I may not agree with you politically, but I respect you and your service to our great nation. Thank you.

          • Butch1

            I haven’t voted for those people in a long time. so my reading comprehension is still intact. ;-)

            It is always a solemn day for me when I go “visiting” and I often wonder where and what they would be doing today if they were alive to enjoy life. May they rest in peace, yes. I often wish them the same after spending a little time with them. Sometimes I run into their families and I do not wish to intrude so I hang back until it’s appropriate.
            Thank you for your kind wishes.

          • Mary Hunter

            If a person is this mentally ill he will GET a weapon of some kind- maybe a bomb that will kill more people instead of one at a time even- or a illegal gun- if nothing else he will stab them to death.

          • Butch1

            I agree.

          • jon

            well, douche bag, if EVERYONE had a gun, the idiot, if this crap really even happened, the idiot would have been shot down at the first stabbing? any questions, moron douche bag???

          • Butch1

            What is your problem besides your low IQ?

          • Theresa Easley

            Name calling is unnecessary and immature.

      • LieutenantCharlie

        They Liberals will, for weeks, dance in the Blood of the victims here, to push their Liberal Gun Control Agenda

        • Butch1

          Hyperbole.

      • mac12sam12

        Maybe because lately all the mass murders have been done by emotional liberals. Guaranteed, he’s a PJ libby.

        • Butch1

          I think it would be a good idea to check those facts again.

          • mac12sam12

            His dad is a Hollywood director. James Holmes, Obama volunteer campaign worker. The Gabby Gifford shooter. Adam Lansa from a liberal family as was the Columbine shooters. The boy in the Virginia Tech shooting sent nasty letters to the Bush administration. If it walks like a duck…..

          • MrSwingGuitar

            Ms. Gifford’s assailant, Jared Loughner posted messages with a “disjointed theme that runs through Loughner’s writings”, which was a “distrust for and
            dislike of the government.” It “manifested itself in various ways” – for
            instance, in the belief that the government used the control of language and grammar to brainwash people, the notion that the government was creating “infinite currency” without the backing of gold and silver, or the assertion that NASA was faking spaceflights.” Sounds kind of like your garden variety right wing conspiracy theorist to me, albeit one who actually went out and killed people. I can’t actually find any info about the political beliefs of any other mass shooters except for Timothy McVeigh, who was a known right wing wacko. Leaving McVeigh out of the picture, other mass murderers of recent times (including Loughner) tend to have mental illnesses which seem to have influenced them far more than any political beliefs. To insinuate that having a family member who might possibly vote Democratic somehow makes you more likely to kill people is perhaps the most idiotic thing I’ve heard this year.

          • mac12sam12

            I’m all for gun control, keeping firearms out of the hands of PJ liberals.

          • jon

            checked those facts….it was all mind controlled CIA and FBI fake bull crap….you douche bag……both the sandy hook and colorado bat man shooters were sons of men who were going to testify on the libor scandal….you stupid jack ass….this is all globalist set up crap….douche bag….

          • Butch1

            Speaking of anger issues, you need to get some help.

        • Mary Hunter

          I doubt very seriously that you can put anyone in a “can” and say they do this or that just because they are signed up as a Democrat or a Republican or say they are a liberal or whatever. I have never voted party- I pick out who is I think is best for the job and sometimes cannot even remember which party he is affiliated with later.

          • mac12sam12

            You voted Obama, twice. See my above^^^^comment.

          • Mary Hunter

            Haven’ t a clue what you are talking about- I never voted for Obama once much less twice- were did that come from

          • Dot

            Now, you REALLY don’t expect ANYONE on this thread to actually ADMIT that they voted for Obama, do you? Funny, that all seem to deny it. Butch 1 claims he didn’t vote for him. MOST Liberals deny that they did. Could it be that they SEE finally, what they put in as THEIR president and are ashamed?? OR, was the voter fraud even more wide-spread than was reported. In all honesty, if I was stupid enough to vote for Obama, I would deny it too.

    • LittleRoot_48

      More than likely, white MEN.

      • Michael Lawrence

        He was half Asian.

    • LieutenantCharlie

      Well said, and all truth,….LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISEASE that rots the brain,…..the only cure for LIBERALISM, is to read both, the Constitution, plus the Bill of Rights, and the the Federalist Papers,….and continue reading until you fully understand the intent of the Founding Fathers.

      • curmudgeon

        I truly believe the only cure for liberalism is some kind of significant emotional event like 9/11 or death. Stupid cannot be fixed.

    • pandainc

      George Bush.

    • Noz

      To the left this is another opportunity to blame guns.

  • Kay Ramsey

    Well, this is a surprise. I expected the shooter to be another one of Obama’s “sons.”

    • Butch1

      Another person who just has to make this a political problem instead of what it really is; a sick man with a problem with women and taking revenge out on them for rejecting him. You political hacks do get tiresome at times.

      • seethrufaded

        and clueless apologists are even more tiresome.

        • Butch1

          When you have something of significance to say I will respond to it. Did I apologize to you for something? I don’t recall doing that. Try again. If you’re tired go lie down.

          • chamuiel

            then, if you are not reading something of significance just be quiet.

          • Michael Lawrence

            You are making excuses for this murderer. Read your posts and stop making excuses for this killer.

        • curmudgeon

          AMEN! Butch? Could she possibly be one of those Lebanese type women?

      • Dot

        “You political hacks do get tiresome at times”. Boy, they sure do, especially when they keep blaming Mr. Bush for the mistakes of THEIR so-called president.

        • LieutenantCharlie

          so-called president;….KING PINOCIHO.

        • Butch1

          I have been apolitical regarding this. It seems that YOU and others are continuing to try and label me what you think I am. I didn’t vote for this president so stop the political BS and if you can try to keep your little mind on the subject, try.

          • jon

            douche bag……

          • Dot

            If I voted for Obama, I wouldn’t admit to it either. I have only labeled you as a Liberal atheist. Nothing more….nothing less. You have admitted to that. Come to think of it, I wouldn’t admit that either.

          • Butch1

            If I voted for him I wouldn’t need to lie about it. Why do you assume like everyone else here that I would want to vote for a pathological liar? No, I didn’t vote for him. Perhaps you’re going to have to change your opinions about some liberals. We all don’t fit your impressions. I also believe that this government should not infringe on our 2nd Amendment rights as well. Is that too much for you in one day to handle? Sorry, I do not want all the weapons in the hands of the government only. For a “christian” you really are quite judgmental. It’s something you should think about.

      • chamuiel

        you trolls get very tiresome. thanks for admitting that.

        • Butch1

          I recognize you; you are the type that generally has nothing of value to say or add to a conversation, but loves to be a gnat or irritant not unlike a fly in the ointment.

          You’ve had your few minutes of my time and from now on I will just ignore you like the little troll that you think I am.

    • chamuiel

      he is. the white side.

    • MrSwingGuitar

      How do you stand to look at yourself in the mirror?

  • catdog8

    i wonder what doctor prescribed mood altering drugs he was on?

    • Butch1

      He needed professional help that was for sure.

      • John A.

        He needed parents acting as parents. I highly doubt this was the first time he acted out. There is an aspect of politics at play here. The fact that laws only apply to law abiding citizens. No matter how many levels of new laws you pass making the way you kill someone “more illegal”, the fact remains murder is already illegal and sick people don’t care! If you don’t think our president is going to politicize this for more useless laws that only make more traps and less safety for law abiding citizens then I have a wager to make you (and I don’t gamble).

        • Mary Hunter

          People like this man can have wonderful parents and have had God in his life from early childhood but still turn out weird- stop blaming those who are already torn up about how their son acted- they have enough on their plate.

      • Dot

        He needed GOD in his life, just as we ALL do. No if and buts about that.

        • Butch1

          Perhaps you do, Dot; I don’t. I’m an atheist and do not believe in invisible sky faeries.

          • jon

            why? because youre an invisible earth fairy, you liberal cock sucking fairy….douche bag….oh….its not FAERIES, douch bag…HAHA…WENT ALL SPELLING NAZI ON YER ASS!!!!

          • Butch1

            I can see that I now have a staker troll following me around this site who really has some mental problems himself. I would suggest you go get help or get back on your medication.

          • Dot

            YES, I not only “need” him, I WANT him in my life, as he blesses me beyond what words can describe. Oh, but the day is coming, Butch, when you WILL believe in “sky ferries”, as you will stand before him, FACE TO FACE, and give an account of WHY you rejected his son, Jesus, who gave his life for you. Unfortunately, THEN, it won’t do you any good.

          • Theresa Easley

            I was in agreement with you on everything until you had to sink to a low level and make fun of people that believe in God. You atheists amuse me…you guys get your panties in a twist over someone you claim doesn’t even exist. If he doesn’t exist then why do atheists worry about it so much and attack people that believe in God?

          • Butch1

            I usually do not attack someone’s religion until they go after me for being an atheist, then the gloves come off. I will not ignore their ignorance and put up with it anymore, Theresa. If you think that is sinking to a low level, then I guess it is going to their low level to fight with them. They never respect atheists that we do not wish to believe in a deity like they need to and they resent us for that. We are derided for it and I will not ignore it anymore.

      • jon

        so do you, douche bag….

        • Butch1

          Right, jon. “Pot calling the kettle, black.”

    • chamuiel

      butch1?

      • Butch1

        Are you a child? You want to attack a nickname my grandmother gave me as a small child? Go for it, little one.

        • jon

          butch….usually applies to a homosexual with some slight tendencies towards manhood, when not engaged in acts of peter puffing, or fudge packing….or both at the same time….

          • Butch1

            How do you know so much about homosexuals, jon? By the way, I’ve reported you for your homophobic name calling and stalking.

  • nanap

    Sounds like a poorly written movie scene. I can understand why he was rejected if this is the way he approached a woman. No man deserves ADORATION. He doesn’t sound like he even deserve RESPECT as a man.

  • Dot

    Shame. Definitely “demom possessed.” Listen to his demonic laugh. There are many more out there, that will surface in time. This is what happens when we turn our backs on God. Satan rules this world, and he knows his time is short, and thus, he is doing as much damage to families as he possibly can. The only answer is for America to turn back to God, if we want our nation to be blessed as it has been in the past. It only gets worse from here on out, unless we humble ourselves and repent before God as a nation, and get back on the right track again. God is our only hope, and right now, America does not have God on our side, with good reason.

    • Max Rebel

      It’s not demonic. It’s called chemical imbalance.

      • Kenneth Clark

        It’s called a spoiled brat thinking that all is his for the taking.

        • Butch1

          No, he had mental problems and as one could see blamed everyone for his short comings and needed to get revenge on them for them.

          • Kenneth Clark

            I’m sure it’s mom and dad’s fault he was driving a BMW instead of the flashy Lamb too.
            Kids and young adults of today have the “feeling” the they are due what ever want crosses their feeble little minds. Blaming superior bad behavior on an “ism” dreamed up by the mental folk is nothing short of abuse for the almighty dollar. Instead this individual should have been held accountable for his actions in his short, spoiled life rather than all of the sudden deciding he had mental problems after the fact. I do believe their are people with mental problems, but not near as many as the “professionals” would have us believe. Most of what we See today is the result of spoiled brats and/or individuals being prescribed mind altering drugs rather than holding them accountable for their bad behavior.

          • Butch1

            It sounded like he came from a wealthy family and a BMW for their son would be nothing.

          • Kenneth Clark

            “Affluenza”, another made up term to excuse one in Texas already.

          • Butch1

            ;-)

          • chamuiel

            exactly what i was thinking.

          • chamuiel

            it sounded?

            his father was a producer of the hunger game movies.

            did you read the article?

          • chamuiel

            nothing of significance was typed.

            go back to sleep troll.

      • Dot

        Yeah, yeah, EVERYTHING is because of a chemical imbalance. What it is called, is SIN!!

        • Butch1

          How foolish. Sin is a made up thing to make you feel guilty. It comes from religions especially the Catholic one, which is also a made up religion.

          Sorry, there is enough proof to show where the present bible took its material from older religions to build its book. It’s all made up. You can believe what you want, though it needs to go on the pile of other religions before it. There are no invisible sky faeries; no heaven or hell. There is no sin. That was made up just to keep you in line by the church authorities. You have been duped, brain washed over the centuries.

          • seethrufaded

            getting a down vote on that one fella. For someone who sees shadows in the form of lib-blaming, you seem to do an awful lot of finger pointing at people who practice religion. Glass houses. Glass houses. Good luck when your time comes buddy.

          • Butch1

            Really? For those who actually practice religion, perhaps they should consider whether “judging others” is in their best interests as well. From what I understand trying to get into “heaven” is not so easy when you “judge others” because you get judged just as harshly as you judge. For the person who was “pointing the finger” and defining the person as committing a “sin”; I think that person again, was also judging the other person.
            It’s easy to pass judgment on others and not look at yourself when it is you who believes in the invisible sky faerie. Since I do not believe in that nonsense I do not have to worry about such things. If you want to follow those rule and regulations, be my guest but do not be hypocritical about it.

            I can call them as I see them and not worry about it. You, on the other hand need to worry about your “god” to see if you are offending it. ( don’t know whether it has a sex or not, eh? ) I try and not step on people’s toes if they do not try and throw their religion in my face, but when they do it is no holds barred.

          • LittleRoot_48

            Down vote again!

          • Butch1

            Yawn! Ditto . . .

          • Dot

            You need to stop quoting from a Bible that you obviously do not believe in. You say, “For those who actually practice religion, perhaps they should consider whether “judging others” is in their best interests as well.” Unfortunately, you like so many others, take a scripture out of context, and try to make the Bible say we are NOT to JUDGE. Well we are COMMANDED to judge WORDS and ACTIONS in the Bible, and if you would study it, you would see this. Where it says, “Judge not, lest ye be judged”….. you should continue on reading. Scriptures below that say, “BUT, IF ye judge, JUDGE RIGHTEOUSLY.” There is a right and a wrong way for Christians to judge. We are not allowed to judge whether someone is going to hell or not, as only GOD knows the heart. We do not “worry” about offending Jehovah God, but OUT OF LOVE, serve him to the best of our ability, and when we fail, we serve a wonderful God, “who is faithful and just” and will “forgive us of ALL our sins.” No-one is “trying to throw religion in your face”, but when this is an open forum for discussion, and we happen to bring GOD into it, WELL, YOU WILL HAVE TO JUST GET USE TO THAT OR LEAVE THE FORUM, as Jehovah God has told us to WITNESS, and that sir, we plan on doing.

          • Butch1

            Perhaps you need to stop telling me what to do. It appears as though you are judging me again. You know what your god says about that. Be careful, oh pompous and pious one. ;-)

          • Dot

            YES, I am JUDGING your ACTIONS, and WORDS, as GOD gives me that RIGHT. In fact, he COMMANDS that I do it, so that I, (we), don’t believe the LIES of the enemy. Perhaps YOU should study a Bible, before making foolish comments about which you obviously know nothing about, oh atheist “FOOL.” “The FOOL has said in his heart, there is no God.” Psalm 14:1 Nuff said.

          • Butch1

            “YES, I am JUDGING your ACTIONS, and WORDS, as GOD gives me that RIGHT.” . . .

            You’re wrong! “Judge not lest ye be judged.” I seem to know your scriptures better than you it seems.

          • Dot

            Silly boy….you take scripture out of context. Perhaps if you studied the Bible, you would learn and not be an atheist. Luke 17:3 – Take heed….if they brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. (How do you know he is sinning against you, except you JUDGE his actions). However, if you are doing the same thing he is doing, and you judge him for it, that is called not judging in a RIGHTEOUS MANNER.
            John 7:24 – Judge not according to appearance, but judge RIGHTEOUS judgment. (this scripture is saying to JUDGE).
            Luke 12:57 – Yea, and why not even of yourselves JUDGE ye not what is RIGHT?
            There are MANY scriptures that say to JUDGE. Don’t feel bad. Many Christians just repeat what they have heard pastors say, having taken the scripture, “Judge not lest ye be judged”, out of context. We can judge, but we must be careful to not judge in an un-righteous manner, (there are conditions to judging), and if we judge un-righteously, then others can judge us in an un-righteous way as well. Now, it is YOU that is WRONG! But, that is okay. Now, regarding your comment, “I seem to know your scriptures better than you, it seems.” I would give anything if that were true, and you would study so that you could be saved before it is to late. I study often, but am still learning. I do not “gloat” over what I know. That is PRIDE. Wish you would get in the Bible. It could lead you into all Truths, as God says it will, if you sincerely “seek him.” Trust me, it will be the best thing you ever did for yourself, in your entire life!! This world will pass, but Spiritual things do not ever pass away.

          • Butch1

            Dot, spare me your mindless copying from your bible. I got it right the first time. You were judging just like I said you were doing.

            Let me have you read something: The Epic of Gilgamesh.
            It was written 1000 years before the Torah was ever written by man and the religion invented. (1000 years) You will find stories in it that were lifted and are in your bible. Explain to me why that is?

          • Dot

            NO, you got it WRONG. But, an atheist THINKS they know everything about the Bible, when they indeed know NOTHING, so I will get to your book you are suggesting I read. I have the BIBLE, and it is the only book I totally trust.
            Now, if anyone wants to read a bunch of CRAP….a MYTH…..about a man who is 2/3 human and 1/3 deity, you may want to read this book Butch suggests. I wouldn’t waste my money on it.
            SEE for yourself people what this crap is all about. Go to Google: Type in: Gilgamesh – Metropolitan Museum of Art. You can see for yourself what hog-wash this is. Butch, you won’t read the Bible, but read this ficticious crap? Don’t waste my time. You are SO messed up. Seriously!!!

          • Butch1

            Interesting. You call this “crap” yet, it was written 1000 years before the Torah and they chose to take stories from it and put in in the Torah as well as in your Bible. Therefore, you must think that your bible is crap as well. If you think the Epic of Gilgamesh is crap and there are part of it in the Bible because it was obviously lifted from it, then the bible must be crap as well, Dot. You can’t have it both ways. One can’t be crap and not the other one as well if one is the source for the other. Right?

          • Dot

            You are gullible. Said all I plan to about this “myth.” You read it. I have the Holy Inspired Word of God to read and that is sufficient for me.

          • Butch1

            Sorry, Dot; you are the one who’s believing in the myth of gods and demons etc. not I. You are the gullible one, I live in reality.

          • MrSwingGuitar

            YOU complaining about someone quoting the Bible out of context? That’s the funniest thing I’ve heard in weeks!

          • MrSwingGuitar

            You might go back and read the part about hubris….

          • chamuiel

            on judgement day you will be worrying about it.
            Since you are an atheist, I can say that you are just a animal in a skin suit full of rotting meat.

            There is nothing for you (according to your own words) after death,

          • LittleRoot_48

            Down vote!

          • Butch1

            I care less; this isn’t a popularity vote.

          • Dot

            What is “foolish” is YOU, Butch 1. GOD calls atheists, “FOOLS.” “The fool has said in his heart, There is no God.” Psalm 14:1 and also found in Psalm 53:l Men deny the existence of God, not because they cannot find him, but because they are afraid to face the responsibility of being accountable to God after death. And “face him”, they shall. “All scripture is given by the inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and instruction in righteousness, that the MAN OF GOD, shall not be ashamed, RIGHTLY dividing the Word of Truth.” God himself wrote the Bible, though it was penned by 13 or 14 different writers. It is the Holy infallible Word of God. Not going to waste my time with someone who denies the very existence of God, as you sir, are a “FOOL.” God’s words, not mine. WHY does he call you a “fool?” Because you reject the Son of God, and CHOOSE to go to hell, and suffer through-out all eternity in TORMENTS. I truly feel sorry for you.

          • Butch1

            Dot, man made up the gods and man wrote your bible so guess what? It is only man who is calling people names. Since I do not believe in religion which tries to control man with lies and deception, it doesn’t surprise me you are so brainwashed that you would think your invisible sky faerie would say something like that. Man can be devious. You really shouldn’t pay any attention to that man behind the curtain controlling all the smoke and mirrors; it’s all a trick to fool you out of your tithes. Adults should know better, but they are so afraid of what’s going to happen to them once they die. Sorry, this is it and you had better enjoy your life right now because their’s nothing afterwards. No pie in the sky and there is no hell either.

          • Dot

            Scripture says, “The Word IS God.” Like I said before, not wasting my time on anyone who does not accept the Bible as the Truth. Go your way, and I will go mine. I feel sorry for you, that you feel there is “nothing afterwards”, because you are going to see that YOUR “afterwards”, is way different from MY “afterwards.” I believe that will occur SOON, based on prophesy that is coming to pass very quickly now, regarding the “last days.”

          • chamuiel

            dot has not been alive for centuries, so how could she have been brainwashed for centuries?

            You need a proof reader,
            what a silly nonsensical statement.

            It figures, the troll apologist is an atheist.

          • Dot

            LOL. I didn’t catch that “centuries” statement. Still laughing. Shame on me, as this “fool”, (per God), is on his way to hell. I don’t judge his soul….God does, as he admits to believing there is no God, no hell, no heaven. My heart breaks for him.

          • Theresa Easley

            I feel sorry for you. I hope you accept God in your life some day.

          • Butch1

            Save your pity for someone who needs it. There is no god. It was man’s invention to explain the unexplained over thousands of years ago. One would think that with education and science, we would put away childish things. There is no boogey man or Hell. We really do not need to hear: “If you’re good boys and girls, you get to go to heaven and if you’re bad girls and boys you will go to hell.” That’s nonsense and to scare children into behaving. Adults should know better. There are no “streets paved in gold,” no “pie in the sky,” no “lake of fire” to scare you into doing what those men in the pointy hats and dresses tell you to do. It’s all a sham, Theresa. Unfortunately, many have bought it for too many years and have gone to war for these religions and died for them as well. That bible should be X-rated for all the stories that are in it. You know what I’m talking about. All the murdering and everything else. No child should be reading it in my opinion. I’ve read it probably more times than you have; how do you think I came to the conclusion along with studying other religions older than the Mono-Theistic religions that there were no god(s)? Studying the history of religion; many of them. When you see that the newer ones like Judaism and Christianity took from these older ones many of their ideas and made their own religions, you would know that religion is a sham as well.

          • DarylT

            The word ‘sin’ comes from a greek archery term, it meant ‘to miss the mark’.

            All words are ‘made up’ if you think about it.

      • Mo86

        It’s called an evil man planning evil acts and then carrying them out.

      • Dot

        When people refuse to accept this young man’s actions as SINFUL….just as they do cross dressers, etc., it is ALWAYS caused by a Chemical Imbalance. Sorry, not in the eyes of God.

      • chamuiel

        i thought he was short a few screws.

    • Brad Welch

      Prove God and Satan exist.

      • Dot

        Prove they don’t exist!!

        • Brad Welch

          The burden is on you to prove that they exist.

          • Dot

            No, Brad and Butch…..I don’t have to PROVE anything to you. I believe by the Lord Jesus Christ by FAITH THROUGH GRACE, just as scripture tells me to believe. You WILL get your PROOF one day, trust me, but it won’t be ME that provides that proof. You will then wish that you have believed while there was yet time. Not going to prove anything to you or argue with you, as I am Safe in the arms of Jesus.

          • Brad Welch

            Dot, chose to be rational. I am a former Christian, but now I see that it was irrational to believe without evidence. Beliefs should be based on science, logic, and reason.

          • Dot

            “Former” Christian? Many say they are Christians, when they haven’t a clue what a Christian really is. A True Christian knows that when they come to Jesus Christ for Salvation, it is based on FAITH in a finished work. Doubting Thomas asked for proof after Jesus was crucified, and he saw the nail scars in Jesus hands. Jesus said Blessed are those who believe and have not seen the proof. (paraphrased). I don’t need science, logic or reason outside of the Word of God. Scripture says, “The WORD IS GOD.” That is enough for me.

          • Brad Welch

            I was truly a Christian. I believed the Bible to be the Word of God and accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior.

          • Dot

            REALLY, Brad? You said a few posts up to PROVE God and satan exist? You seriously need to be talking to GOD….not me. Nuff said.

          • chamuiel

            no, the burden is on you. you are the one insisting they don’t exist. we know they do. it is up to you to find out if they do?

            we, nor GOD has to prove anything to you.

          • Dot

            AMEN. God’s Word speaks for itself, and is the only book on Earth that you can read, and God reveals new things to you over and over again. HE is our teacher. Also, we know he lives, because “his Spirit bares witness with our Spirit.” Something that an unsaved, hell bound sinner CANNOT understand, as they have never experienced it.

        • Butch1

          No, that is YOUR job since you believe that they do exist!

          • chamuiel

            you job is that they don’t exist. offer proof, other than your mouth.

      • Butch1

        Exactly!

      • chamuiel

        prove that they do not.

    • Korton

      agree!!!!

    • Bradley T. Beam

      Religious fan with your imaginary friend, your not far from slipping a gasket yourself.
      Why didn’t you pray for this not to happen ?
      Nobody needs to prove god exists. There is not one single shred of evidence to prove there is a god at all so it is up to you to prove that he does. Your the one trying sell me your invisible friend so show me. Send me a lightning bolt, tell him to cool the sun down so I can turn my air conditioner off and save electricity and thus doing something good for the planet. I have nothing against anyone’s beliefs until they try to start selling their cool aid as to this being the problem and cause for all the world’s ills. Rather in fact organized religious extremism has been the cause of more wars and death and hatred than any other source throughout our history as human beings. So believe what you like but your faith is rubbish if you think this is why these things happen. Why did your god create this sick mo-fo? Or the parents who raised him? Or the mental defect he had? Or the chemical imbalance he had? Or just a shitty outlook on life that he had? Where is your god? I have spiritual values that allow me perfectly capable of being a loving , kind , caring and compassionate human being without needing any make believe friends. I don’t need some belief in an imaginary being to tell me or guide me from what’s right or what’s wrong. I am not perfect , I make mistakes but I learn from them and continue to evolve into the best person I can. I have free – will with a conscience and a set of values that require no make believe dietys to make me feel shame or guilt about myself or the absolute absurd and arrogant belief that if we’re to believe in this so called god I will be promised forgiveness or eternal life in a magical place called heaven? You people that profess your religious convictions aren’t to much creepier than this kid to me and some of you that are more extremely wired into your ‘cult’ are only a few turns of the screw from flying off the handle yourselves in my opinion. So there you have it. You have your belief system and stated your opinion and I have mine and shared it with you so go play with your imaginary friend and continue to pray that this type of thing doesn’t happen again and when it does maybe I’ll see you on here again and ask you what went wrong and why your prayers didn’t work? Peace ♡

      • Dot

        Isn’t it WONDERFUL that Jehovah God doesn’t torture us, to make us believe in him. Christians don’t torture you either, to try to force you to believe. So WHY are you so agitated over Christians on this thread stating their beliefs? God gives us FREE CHOICE. No-one is trying to make you believe anything, and as I said before on this thread, we, as Christians, have a RIGHT and a DESIRE to WITNESS, as that is what God has called us to do. Don’t like it? Go somewhere else, as we will do as our Lord and Savior has told us to do. Regarding your statement, “why didn’t you pray for this not to happen?” Foolish comment. We pray the way God instructs us to pray, and that is, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven”, just as Jesus Christ prayed before the Romans crucified him. It wasn’t the “will” of God to see his precious Son tortured, but God knew there was no other way, and he loved YOU and me enough that he gave up his son to the ENEMY to be crucified, that WE MIGHT LIVE. To REJECT this GIFT, seals our doom in the pits of hell. (no nice way to say that). Besides, we are not into witch-craft, so how on earth would we KNOW that this was going to happen??? This mans actions are a result of SIN. This is WHY God desires that all come to repentance, because a TRUE Child of God would never do something out of HATE like this man did, and since he died without repentance, guess where his soul is at right now. God’s will is that “NONE PERISH” in the pits of hell, but because we have FREE CHOICE, we can reject God and his Son, and choose where we wont to spend eternity. It is YOUR CHOICE. Believe what you want…go where you choose, but if you want us to STOP witnessing because you hate God and the fact that we as Christians love him, well, DREAM ON!!! Jesus Christ has ALREADY told us, that they “hated him, and they will hate you as well.” I personally don’t care. I will do, out of love for the Father, as he has commanded me to do, and that is to witness.

        • Theresa Easley

          It is funny how atheists foam at the mouth if anyone mentions God who they claim doesn’t exist.

          • Dot

            You noticed that too, Theresa?

        • MrSwingGuitar

          Dot…you might want to go research the Inquisition if you think Christians are free of the sin of torturing non believers. Check out also what Protestants did to Catholics after the reformation. No one that I know of wants to stop you from having your faith. It’s when you and your ilk insist that it’s the ONLY true belief system that we start to see just how close you are to Islamic terrorists in your mindset.

      • chamuiel

        we are not trying to sell you anything.

        whether you believe in God is up to you.

        If you do not, that is your loss, not ours.

        God did not create this sick mo-fo. The devil did. The devil at this time has control of the earth.
        Want proof? If he did not, you unbelievers would not be here

        God, even said that for a time he was giving dominion over the earth to the devil.

        Want to know why? He gave each of us free will to choose good or evil.

        It is obvious what you and the sick mo-fo chose.

    • john huscio

      This kid didn’t have a “demon” and I doubt he was mentally Ill……he was supremely entitled……some people are just evil.

      • Dot

        “some people are just evil.” Right you are. Have you ever seen a person that strongly believed in God, and followed his instructions in living a Godly life, act like this young man? This man WAS EVIL, and most likely demon possessed. He admitted to the HATE that was in him. What I am saying is: Demon possession ONLY enters those who are lost and refuse to accept Jesus as their Savior. Demons can harass and tempt a Christian, but they cannot enter into a Christian. We know this because Scripture says, “Light and Dark cannot dwell together.” There are other scriptures as well that bare this out. Some mentally ill people ARE demon possessed. I have a friend who is in a mental institution right now, who is demon possessed. She admits to being demon possessed, (she sees demons in the mental hospital), and I now stay away from her, as she has become a danger to those around her. I tried to help her, but she began to blaspheme God….curse his name, etc., and then she began to talk about killing people. Anyone that thinks a person can’t be demon possessed, needs to read their Bible. This world is getting more accepting of SIN, and we are going to see much more of this in the days to come. Hardly a day goes by now, that we don’t see parents killing their children, and children killing their parents. Demons are the force behind this. This was prophesied centuries ago, as taking place in the LAST DAYS.

        • MrSwingGuitar

          German Christian churches
          used slave labour during the war. Thousands of Catholic and Protestant chaplains ministered to the
          German army in WW2 as it went about its butchery on the Eastern Front.
          Chaplains were with the army as it was killing little Jewish children.
          They did not protest.
          When Hitler died in 1945, after the cold-blooded killing of millions,
          the Catholic church ordered a solemn requiem mass to be said in all churches
          for his soul, that Hitler be admitted to paradise.

      • chamuiel

        wonder why?

  • linnie13

    Did this pathetic freak ever think of getting a hooker? Yet, he blamed women, because he couldn’t get laid? WTF ..

    • Jarrad Williams

      While I’m no fan of prostitution it looks like this kid certainly had the means to afford a hooker…at least one who didn’t receive a quarterly shot of antibiotics.

  • Eric G

    I swear I’m not making light of this or taking a swipe at anyone who is gay, but after seeing this, it’s quite probable this kid could not accept his sexuality, and that’s why he didn’t hook up with any females. Yet again, perhaps he was just a PSYCHO!!!!!
    This is what we get as we move towards and ever increasing entitled society. Whenever we don’t get what we feel we DESERVE, we have a temper tantrum. There are no more morals; it has become all about self-gratification and no accountability.

    • miami1981

      I saw the same thing. I wondered if he ever put any effort into getting a girlfriend. Did he even talk to them or did he just hope they would fall for him after seeing him. I mean he had built in conversation starters. My dad worked on the hunger games, i go to movie premiers would you like to accompany me

      • Kenneth Clark

        Or he just thought because daddy was a director that the girls would swarm him once he dropped daddy’s name in their lap.

        • RustyNail88

          I think he wanted certain specific girls and he was too picky. I got laid many of times in college, but now that I think about it, never to a sorority girl, blond hair upstairs and down, 115 lbs, 5’8″ D Cup, 36-24-36, etc. Maybe he accepted no less.

      • Eric G

        I was thinking the same thing. Since more and more of his generation are drawn to the car, money, prestige, connections; he should have had NO trouble getting some shallow person (girl or guy) to jump all over him. Then again, he is about the creepiest kid I’ve seen in a long, long time and perhaps in person the crazy vibes overroad everything else.

  • disqus_GYXQ8Ms8Zk

    A typical Californian blaming everyone else for his own imperfections.

  • Lisa

    He should have put himself out of misery a long time ago!! But cowards like him have to take other people with them!! I’m sure there’s a special place in Hell for someone like him!!!