BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?

Subject: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: beeliner
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:20 AM

Just heard on the TeeVee, and don't have all the details.

Last night at a Dallas skating rink, a birthday party, the father of the birthday boy and another man began arguing and then just started shooting it out, several killed.

Unfortunate, but after all, that's their second amendment right!

Right?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: saulgoldie
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:04 AM

Nevermind the morality or law of one side or the other. It is tautologically true that if there are no guns present, then there will be no gunshots.

Furthermore, I remember research--can't find it right now--from some time back that showed that just the presence of a knife or a gun in a room where study participants are given a manufactured conflict situation will cause the argument to escalate higher and faster with the knife, and higher and faster still more with the gun.

Whatever one's interpretation of the law or the Founders' intent might have been, logic and facts are what they are.

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Bettynh
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:10 AM

More Than 1,000,000 Americans
from I DONT MAKE THIS STUFF UP . . . I JUST MAKE IT RHYME

(Inspired by Bob Herbert's column "Hooked On Violence," April 26, 2007 in The New York Times)


In 1968 Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King
were killed by bullets, a tragic shameful thing
And in the years that followed in this land of the free
how many more Americans would die in a shooting spree?

The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention
tracks this data down and brings it to our attention
From 1968 to now the number killed by guns
stuns

More than one million Americans -- babies, toddlers, mothers
more than one million Americans -- fathers, sisters, brothers
More than one million Americans -- students, teachers, brides
More than one million American murders and suicides

more than one million Americans -- neighbors, daughters, sons
more than one million Americans -- killed by guns
more than a million American families miss someone every day
more than one million American lives simply blown away

More than a million birthdays
a million graduations
more than a million weddings
with a million expectations
how can anyone justify this annihilation?
why is it we never get a convincing explanation?

more than one million Americans -- grandparents, husbands, wives
more than one million American permanently interrupted lives
more than one million Americans -- co-workers and friends
more than one million Americans met heartbreaking ends

More than one million Americans who needed our protection
more than one million Americans who can't vote the next election
more than one million Americans who no longer have a choice
for more than a million Americans we must raise up our voice

In 1968 Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King
were killed by bullets, a tragic shameful thing
in the years that followed in this land of the free
more than a million Americans died in shooting sprees


© Christine Lavin Music (ASCAP)

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: saulgoldie
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:13 AM

* If It Were Up to Me
    * Words and Lyrics by:
    * Cheryl Wheeler
    *
    * Maybe it's the movies, maybe it's the books
    * Maybe it's the bullets, maybe it's the real crooks
    * Maybe it's the drugs, maybe it's the parents
    * Maybe it's the colors everybody's wearin
    * Maybe it's the President, maybe it's the last one
    * Maybe it's the one before that, what he done
    * Maybe it's the high schools, maybe it's the teachers
    * Maybe it's the tattooed children in the bleachers
    * Maybe it's the Bible, maybe it's the lack
    * Maybe it's the music, maybe it's the crack
    * Maybe it's the hairdos, maybe it's the TV
    * Maybe it's the cigarettes, maybe it's the family
    * Maybe it's the fast food, maybe it's the news
    * Maybe it's divorce, maybe it's abuse
    * Maybe it's the lawyers, maybe it's the prisons
    * Maybe it's the Senators, maybe it's the system
    * Maybe it's the fathers, maybe it's the sons
    * Maybe it's the sisters, maybe it's the moms
    * Maybe it's the radio, maybe it's road rage
    * Maybe El Nino, or UV rays
    * Maybe it's the army, maybe it's the liquor
    * Maybe it's the papers, maybe the militia
    * Maybe it's the athletes, maybe it's the ads
    * Maybe it's the sports fans, maybe it's a fad
    * Maybe it's the magazines, maybe it's the internet
    * Maybe it's the lottery, maybe it's the immigrants
    * Maybe it's taxes, big business
    * Maybe it's the KKK and the skinheads
    * Maybe it's the communists, maybe it's the Catholics
    * Maybe it's the hippies, maybe it's the addicts
    * Maybe it's the art, maybe it's the sex
    * Maybe it's the homeless, maybe it's the banks
    * Maybe it's the clearcut, maybe it's the ozone
    * Maybe it's the chemicals, maybe it's the car phones
    * Maybe it's the fertilizer, maybe it's the nose rings
    * Maybe it's the end, but I know one thing.
    * If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns.
    *
    * (P) October 1, 1997
    *
    * Penrod And Higgins Music / Amachrist Music
    * ACF Music Group
    * International Copyright Reserved

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:15 AM

Whoopie Ty Yi Yo! Let's hear it for The Great State Of Texas!

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/07/24/texas.shooting/

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/07/23/5-killed-in-grand-prairie-roller-rink-shooting/

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: saulgoldie
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:17 AM

This is the Youtube of the above song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OITGAbQG1WU


Saul

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: beeliner
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 10:34 AM

Additional information has become available and it seems that the ahooter was not celebrating his child's birthday but rather his own, that he was the only shooter, and that the dispute was between him and his wife.

Latest stats: Six dead, four injured.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Big Ballad Singer
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 12:02 PM

So many people go on and on about the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. That right, of course, was instituted so that a well-armed MILITIA might be maintained in those newborn United States, but I digress...

Most of the people who go raving about their "right" to carry arms tend to fall into the stereotypically "macho" category. These "tough guys" also tend to like hunting and fishing for "sport". In other words, a lot of these people basically want to carry guns so that they can shoot less-well-armed or even defenseless targets at will.

Six people will now never go on to enjoy any more pleasures in life, nor learn from any new experiences... all because some idiot Rambo decided that his "right" to carry a gun made it OK for him to use it at his discretion.

As far as I'm concerned, any right to carry or even own firearms privately, when one is NOT a member of the Armed Forces or a law-enforcement agency, should be accompanied by the strictest regulations and penalties for the use or misuse of said firearms.

FYI, I was raised by a man who is a Benefactor/Life Member of the NRA and is ferociously supportive of so-called "gun rights". That not only did not affect me positively towards guns, it made me even more convinced that blanket "freedoms" spell disaster for our society when it comes to guns. My father is a VERY peaceable, uber-conservative evangelical Christian in active ministry at his church, and unless the vast majority of "gun rights" private-carry advocates are equally as intelligent and morally tempered, the "right to carry" is going to turn our country into Dodge City.

We've heard enough stories about the idiots, drug dealers, mobsters and others who have used guns to their selfish advantage and devastated the lives of others... Oslo, anyone?

I think it's time Americans left the shooting to those whose job it is to bear arms for our protection and safety here and abroad.

You know that BS about "guns don't kill people; PEOPLE kill people"? Maybe so, but those "people" often use those innocent little guns to do it, don't they?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 12:17 PM

Hasn't this been talked to death here already? Nobody's going to change anyone's mind. Why waste your time typing? If you want to DO something about it, go DO it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 12:24 PM

Please assume I have inserted all my previous posts about the 'right to carry' in the 14...or 27...or 39 previous threads on related topics.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 12:39 PM

I don't object to hunting and shooting as rural pursuits (though personally I don't see hunting per se, as a 'sport') I think it's appropriate for sensible grown-up people to shoot rabbits or pheasant if they wish to, particularly if they are inclined to eat what they kill. However such weapons do not belong in urban environments, particularly not small lethal weapons designed to kill human beings.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: mg
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 12:57 PM

Well there is one human being at least who should have been shot by someone carrying a gun and perhaps 50 people could have been saved. mg

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 01:00 PM

PS: I don't see fishing or shooting as particularly "macho" either - one of the most pleasant and gentle fellows I ever knew would fish and shoot for his supper - he was just a country boy "macho" posturing didn't come into it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 01:03 PM

Just goes to show you Mg, if someone wants to kill you, they will. It only takes a second. And that's a second too long to defend yourself, be it with a gun or without one.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: kendall
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 01:10 PM

Norway has no 2nd amendment or right to carry.
Scotland has no such rights but it didn't stop that whacko from killing a room full of kids.

Vermont has no need for a license to carry, yet it's the safest state in the union.

NYC has its Sullivan law, what's the murder rate there?
How about Mass.? heavy penalty for carrying a gun. Does it stop the crooks?

The old west is famous for shootouts but most of them happen in cheap novels.
15 years ago Florida had a crime wave, tourists murdered and robbed. Then they passed a "Right to carry" law and the crime rate plummeted.
I'm talking facts here, not fear or emotions.

"A sword, in its scabbard, keeps another so.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 02:28 PM

Thank you, Captain. I am afraid it will fall on deaf ears. But I will address a couple of comments.

The insinuation that those of us that hunt have some kind of macho thing going on is both gratuitous and the mark of a mind that lives within their own biases. It is certainly not the case with me or most of those I hunt with. There very definitely are those that have this type of attitude, but they are known by us as slob hunters and I won't allow them in my circle.

The idea that my use for a weapon must conform to your idea of appropriate use is ludicrous. My reason for having a small gun is none of your business, as long as I use it lawfully. It might be for hunting, target shooting, personal protection, or some combination of all those things. The logic that says that because some unbalanced person in Texas shot folks, we should take away guns from everybody means we should also take away every other item used to commit murder. It is demagoguery at it's finest. True examination of the points Kendall made leads you to conclusions you all don't want to acknowledge. But that does not make them less valid or true.

Finally, with all due respect to Saul Goldie whom I consider a fine Mudcatter, his point that somehow one could make all the guns disappear and the problem would disappear is ludicrous on it's face. Whether my friends across the pond, or my friends here in NA, get it or not, guns have been a part of the fabric of this society since it's beginning. For the vast majority of us they have been a part of our lives and a right we have always had.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 02:54 PM

Mudcatters, check your guns at the door.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 03:11 PM

Attach my previous posts to Bill's above.

This subject is as dead as Tidwell's goat and if you want to stand up for your gun rights, driving rights, or rights to the best in dildos, have at it..............I think I officially no longer give a rat's ass if you shoot someone or can't get fucked.............


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 03:11 PM

Scotland has no such rights but it didn't stop that whacko from killing a room full of kids.

I think you need to consider the frequency of events, Kendall.

Dumblane was in 1996 and the law was tightened after this one. I don't think Scotland has had anything similar since.

What is the US record from 1996 to 2011?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: michaelr
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 04:14 PM

...guns have been a part of the fabric of this society since it's beginning. For the vast majority of us they have been a part of our lives and a right we have always had.

Yes, that's the old argument (if you can call it that) "we always done it like that, we never done it like that, who the hell are you anyway". It doesn't constitute a good reason to do things.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 04:26 PM

I am with Spaw... and I'll shoot any man that says different.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 04:28 PM

Oh... one other thing. Why ANOTHER thread? Can't (SHOULDN'T) this thread be combined with one of the MANY previous threads?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 05:21 PM

I grew up in the East Midlands of the UK. My Dad had a gun - a .22 rifle which he used for shooting at paper targets at an indoor range. He took me to the range, a couple of times, and I got to shoot at the paper targets. What sticks in my mind about those visits is the range officials. They were men of my father's generation and many of them had probably seen combat in the 2nd World War; they knew what guns can do to the human body and safety precautions at the range were very strict (checking breeches were empty before a gun was removed from the range; keeping strict counts of rounds fired etc.). Although my Dad was a crack shot, and I quite enjoyed my visits to the range, I never took it any further.

Years later, after some horror story in the news about a gun crime, I thought long and hard about what guns are for. A few people, like my Dad, use them for shooting at paper targets with, but their PRIMARY purpose is to kill people and other living things. I have absolutely no desire to kill anyone or anything (and hope and pray that I will never find myself in a situation where I might need to do so) and, therefore, I don't NEED a gun - and I supect that the vast majority of people don't need one either.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 05:28 PM

Gladly the vast majority of us don't need a gun in the UK Shimrod, however looser legislation on ownership, would inevitably result in more people feeling the need to own one..

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 05:30 PM

In UK in the the late forties, all the little boys had toy guns with which to play 'cowboys and Indians'. There were rolls of paper 'caps' you could feed into the guns to make a realistic shooting sound. I clearly remember trying out a toy gun, and the tremendous feeling of power it seemed to give me. I actually enjoyed 'shooting' a nearby boy and saying "You're dead!" I wonder if this feeling of power is part of the attraction of owning/using a real gun? I was quite a timid child, but that 'gun' suddenly made me feel wonderfully dominant and strong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 05:48 PM

In case anyone is interested in the facts of what actually happened before they start flapping their jaws:

A man opened fire at a Texas roller skating rink during a birthday party for one of his children, killing his estranged wife and four of her family members before turning the gun on himself, police said Sunday.

Tan Do, 35, and Trini Do, 29, were hosting the party at the Roller World Skating Rink in the Dallas suburb of Grand Prairie, Texas, on Saturday for one of their two children, Grand Prairie police said in a statement.

"The couple had been involved in ongoing marital problems and it is believed that this led to the shooting," police said. "Trini Do was among the deceased."

Police responded to a call of a shooting at 7:10 p.m. Saturday (8:10 p.m. ET). Officers found the bodies of five people; a sixth person -- the suspect -- with a gunshot wound to the head; and four other people who had sustained non-life-threatening injuries.

Others who were killed included Trini Do's sisters, Lynn Ta, 16, and Michelle Ta, 28; her brother, Hien Ta, 21; and her sister-in-law, Thuy Nguyen, 25. "It appears the suspect targeted his estranged wife and her family members," police said.

The couple's two children were not harmed, and were in the care of other family members Sunday, authorities said.

Tan Do was transported to a hospital where he was pronounced dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to police.

About 30 people were attending the party at the time of the shooting, but the roller rink was not open to the public, police said. Employees of the rink were not injured. Witnesses were interviewed by police, and the police department's crisis counselors and chaplain were working with the survivors, authorities said.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 06:23 PM

Of course you might not have time to defend yourself if she has you in her sights..sites?

But someone else can defend you or you can defend someone else, or a roomful of kids at McDonald's, or a domestic violence situation..mg

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 06:29 PM

Hi Mg, that;s a fair point. I can't answer it, but perhaps someone who knows the details of shootings in the USA could? By which I mean situations where mass shooters have been eliminated by gun owning citizens? Or citizens owning guns have proceeded to prevent escalation of a gun crime in a specific instance? Perhaps some of the pro-gun lobby (nra?) might have examples and statistics on that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 07:02 PM

Why should it be combined? Every situation is different. That is my general viewpoint anyway that I prefer fresh conversations rather than giving people a transcript of what went before, even if it is about Carricfergus or American Pie. mg

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 07:29 PM

Please place my previous comments vest to Bill's and Spaw's.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: kendall
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 07:50 PM

I do not hunt. I am not macho and I don't NEED a gun. I live in a reasonably civilized state.
I am also a retired federal law enforcement officer who posses no threat to anyone except a mugger or a burglar. I've never encountered either.
If my owning a gun is a problem to you, own it, it is YOUR problem.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 07:50 PM

And add mine to Spaw, Bill D., etc.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Songwronger
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:33 PM

Murder / suicide is always sad and ugly. But you don't need a gun to carry out a crime like that.

Unfortunately we in America are under assault from more than just random violence. There's the orchestrated kind too. Has anyone posted anything about Operation Fast and Furious? Look it up. The Department of Justice was just caught providing thousands of guns to gang members on the Mexican border.

The Department of Justice provided guns to drug gangs that then used them to kill U.S. law enforcement officers. The Department of Justice is arming the Mexican drug gangs.

So thank God for the Second Amendment.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: pdq
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:44 PM

"Unfortunately we in America are under assault from more than just random violence."

Last time I saw the statistics, only 14% of murder victims were completely unknown to the killer. The spouse is always the first suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:45 PM

Minds will change when it is the folks on the right who are getting assassinated but not until then... Assassination of progressives is one of REDNECK NATION's favorite sports...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: pdq
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:51 PM

Bobert just stepped over the line so far it isn't funny.

Besides, all the famous assassinations I can think of were done by anarchist or Lefties.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 09:55 PM

No, it isn't funny, pdq, but you wouldn't understand this because it wasn't your side who had all it's leaders assassinated... It was your side that was poppin' the corks...

No, I didn't step over any lines here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 07:53 AM

Songwronger, what is the source of that info?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 07:59 AM

I've said it before but it bears repeating: If I could wave a magic wand and make all guns disappear I would do it in a heartbeat.

Then what? knives? what would you chop celery with?
Baseball bats? Try kicking a home run.
Pointed sticks?
Strong men with big hands?

One of the few things that Bush did that I agreed with was to sign a bill that would authorize all formed law enforcement officers who retired with honor to carry concealed. There would be tens of thousands of unpaid cops on the streets now, but it never went anywhere.

Opinions please.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 08:13 AM

Besides, all the famous assassinations I can think of were done by anarchist or Lefties.. MLK?

My God Songwronger a little perspective and reason please.


"The Department of Justice provided guns to drug gangs that then used them to kill U.S. law enforcement officers."

It was NOT deliberately arming the drug lords. It was an attempted sting operation to try to catch the higher ups. So they screwed up. It is not as if they sold the guns to people who could not have got them otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: olddude
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 09:36 AM

People tend to agree with you completely when you are pointing a .44 Mag at them ... It is the great peacemaker.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 09:37 AM

"If I could wave a magic wand and make all guns disappear I would do it in a heartbeat.
Then what? knives? what would you chop celery with?
Baseball bats? Try kicking a home run.
Pointed sticks?
Strong men with big hands?"



Then what after banning guns? Then nothing I guess, same as most places.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 09:45 AM

Yup- MLK, Bobby Kennedy, JFK, Lincoln, the 3 girls in Birmingham, Emmett Till, Medgar Evers, Theodore Roosevelt (attempt)etc.etc.

Al done by "lefties"? Jesus, man, if you HAVE a brain, USE it!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:09 PM

Something that I've never heard stated in just this way:

It's actually meaningless to allow the right to carry in any given setting unless the carrier has the recognized right to point and fire at his discretion in that setting. (Apart from those carrying under the immediate command of military or paramilitary superiors).

Abridged, as used in the 2nd amendment, means simply reduced or diminished. Any "reasonable regulation" of ownership or carrying of firearms is in fact a reduction of the absolute freedom to carry.

So why aren't a few more of our fervent 2nd amendment advocates forthrightly standing up for the right of any American citizen to carry, and fire at his or her discretion, in any gradeschool or Sundayschool classroom, public office, or on any public transportation? Are the majority of them allowing mere sanity to undermine their most valued principles?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:11 PM

Well organize militia.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:16 PM

To clarify, Jack, I'm speaking of those who hold that the meaning of the amendment would be the same without that clause.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:18 PM

Well obviously if they hold that meaning they are making up a meaning to suit themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: olddude
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:24 PM

Now a flame thrower, that would get everyone on the same page also. One of the Navy Seals once said "all problems in life can be solved by the use of a well placed explosive"

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:31 PM

"
Now a flame thrower, that would get everyone on the same page also."

Only if you use it to singe their arse hairs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Right to carry' anyone?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 12:36 PM

Oops, I thought this was the teenage sex thread.