Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]


BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)

Bobert 02 Jun 09 - 12:16 PM
Bill D 02 Jun 09 - 11:49 AM
Bobert 02 Jun 09 - 08:24 AM
Bill D 01 Jun 09 - 11:02 PM
katlaughing 01 Jun 09 - 10:30 PM
Kent Davis 01 Jun 09 - 09:38 PM
Bobert 01 Jun 09 - 07:31 PM
Bill D 01 Jun 09 - 02:57 PM
Bobert 01 Jun 09 - 10:43 AM
Bobert 01 Jun 09 - 08:20 AM
katlaughing 01 Jun 09 - 12:45 AM
Bobert 31 May 09 - 03:43 PM
Kent Davis 31 May 09 - 01:46 PM
Bobert 31 May 09 - 07:50 AM
Rapparee 30 May 09 - 10:11 PM
Kent Davis 30 May 09 - 09:47 PM
Bobert 30 May 09 - 12:54 PM
Crow Sister (off with the fairies) 30 May 09 - 11:45 AM
Bobert 30 May 09 - 08:19 AM
Kent Davis 29 May 09 - 07:59 PM
Rapparee 29 May 09 - 12:57 PM
Bobert 29 May 09 - 07:17 AM
Kent Davis 29 May 09 - 01:19 AM
TIA 28 May 09 - 11:55 PM
McGrath of Harlow 28 May 09 - 08:28 PM
Kent Davis 28 May 09 - 07:25 PM
Bobert 27 May 09 - 10:26 PM
Kent Davis 27 May 09 - 09:36 PM
Bill D 27 May 09 - 04:28 PM
GUEST,TIA 27 May 09 - 02:38 PM
Kent Davis 26 May 09 - 07:52 PM
Bill D 26 May 09 - 05:53 PM
Bill D 26 May 09 - 05:45 PM
katlaughing 26 May 09 - 01:02 PM
Bill D 26 May 09 - 12:11 PM
Kent Davis 26 May 09 - 12:07 AM
TIA 25 May 09 - 08:48 PM
McGrath of Harlow 25 May 09 - 07:33 PM
Kent Davis 25 May 09 - 04:52 PM
Bill D 24 May 09 - 10:51 AM
katlaughing 24 May 09 - 01:30 AM
Kent Davis 23 May 09 - 01:17 AM
Bill D 21 May 09 - 11:10 PM
Kent Davis 21 May 09 - 09:44 PM
Bill D 21 May 09 - 11:18 AM
Kent Davis 21 May 09 - 12:36 AM
Kent Davis 02 May 09 - 08:10 PM
GUEST 02 May 09 - 05:36 PM
SPB-Cooperator 02 May 09 - 08:16 AM
SPB-Cooperator 02 May 09 - 08:12 AM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 12:16 PM

Exactly, Bill...

Ya' start out with a very embigiously written ammendment, you ignore the entire first half of it, you highlight the second hald as if it the Holy Grail and then you build upon that misinterpretation with slogan after slogan until you have abasolutely destroyed the meaning of the ammendment...

That is what the NRA had cleverly done...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 11:49 AM

Right this minute, as I type, there is a program on NPR (The Diane Rhem Show) which features a conversation with an author, Matthew Crawford, who began as a philosopher, but turned to mechanical repair because of his frustration with working for people who wanted certain answers and conclusions, forcing him (the author) to reason backwards to find the premises to fit the desired answers. He didn't LIKE doing that...

So...what the $%*&@#$% does that have to do with guns & shootings? Listen to this program, then listen to a representative of the NRA sometime. It is interesting, even if you don't get my view of the relevance.

This radio program will be archived, it says, in about an hour.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 08:24 AM

The problems I have with murderers are murderers, regardless of the tool, is the strikin' evidence that as the percentage of folks with guns increases so do the murder rates... Check out the murder rates in Europe, fir instance, compared to the United States...

What, are American's strangely afflicted with some murder DNA that Europenas aren't???

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 11:02 PM

It feels very strange to read about Dr. George Tiller, because I spent most of my late childhood and early adulthood in Wichita, and have personally been to the Tiller family 'practice' when his father, Dr. Jack Tiller ran it. I did not know in those days that the older Dr. Tiller was, even then, a practicing abortion doctor....but I did later wonder how, in such a very conservative town like Wichita, the 'issue' which aimed guns at it was allowed to wait so long.
   No...I do NOT wonder any more. It was conservative media attention calling them 'murderers' and the same basic folks who argue against abortion that now also argue FOR almost unlimited freedom to own guns. I do suppose that this extremist 'could' have managed to kill Dr. Tiller with a kitchen knife or dynamite, but a handgun is SO much easier to carry into the foyer of a church.....one shot, and the perpetrator was gone, and able to almost get away.

It is impossible to note, follow and comment on all the sad gun incidents that one can read about every day in this country...there are just too many - so many that only the most
graphic and 'interesting' (*sigh*) get national attention.

Those who are committed to the idea of some strict adherence to their interpretation of good 'ol amendment #2 will, of course, wish to claim that the 2 issues are unrelated and that Dr. Tiller's demise was simply because some demented extremist will always find a way.
All I can say in answer is that *if* I am ever on a hit list, I rather my enemies had to face me fairly, without Smith and Wesson to help them....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 10:30 PM

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — A new soldier helping to attract others to the military was shot and killed outside an Army recruiting office Monday and a second soldier was wounded. Police arrested a suspect and confiscated an assault rifle.

A man inside a black vehicle pulled up outside the Army-Navy recruiting office in west Little Rock and opened fire about 10:30 a.m., police spokesman Lt. Terry Hastings said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 09:38 PM

Bobert, my fellow Mountaineer, at least we can agree on one thing. I too "doubt this [more gun regulation]would have prevented this true-believer-wacko from killing this doctor but it might have..."

It might have prevented it, although a willingness to murder is often accompanied by a willingness to violate other laws. If the murderer had no access to guns, he could have killed in other ways.

Tiller could have been, I suppose, attacked with a huge syringe of hypertonic saline, or ripped limb from limb with a powerful suction device, or perhaps stabbed in the back of the head and had his brain torn out.

Murder is murder, whatever tool is used. The New Testament is crystal-clear that no one may take the law into his own hands. See, for example, Romans 13:1-7 and I Peter 2:13-16. Jesus didn't kill Pilate. Paul didn't stab the Emperor Nero. Peter didn't strangle Herod Agrippa. No follower of Christ would have killed Tiller. The one who killed him forfeits the name of Christian, whatever justification he may claim.   

Kent



Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 07:31 PM

Ve3ry "reason"able post, Bill...

That is what is at issue here... reasonability... In the words of Dr. Phil, "How's it working for you???"... In the word of the late and great Waylon Jennings, "We need a change..."

Given the ambiguity of the language in the 2nd Ammendment it is reasonable for reasonable people to have a discussion about gun ownership... This shouldn't be an issue that NRA can frame as off-the-table... It is very much on the table...

And I am sure that Thomas Jefferson would agree...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 02:57 PM

*poking my head back in after a weekend of festival*

I, too, was interested in Rapaire's post of pretty clear quotes from members of the "founding fathers". Those DO show not only the attitude of the times, but also reflect the situation this small, fledgling country found itself in in the mid-to-late 1700s.
Given those parameters, I am not a bit surprised to see the 2nd amendment reading as it does. They actually needed for most able-bodied men (and some of the women) to be able to help defend the community & state, as well as hunt and defend their own family & property. There were few organized police forces and no instant communication to alert what officials they did have.
   It made sense to have firearms, primitive as they were, to pursue freedom & protect a way of life.


Yes...you know what I'm going to say...*smile*:

The situation has changed in 250 years, not only in the status of the 'state', but in the types and power of firearms. Where once they were used primarily for hunting and protection, they are now ubiquitous as items to aid in crime...at many levels... as well as suicides and in accidents. In 1770, there were very few decent hand guns... now they are for sale on many street corners.

Add a dozen paragraphs here about the results of all these changes, then extrapolate why I and others believe the 2nd amendment is well overdue for modification & clarification.

(In 1903, there were few restrictions on operating a motor vehicle, either... and no ideas about seat belts and emissions...times and concerns DO change!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 10:43 AM

BTW, the FBI knows not only about these fringe radical groups but the members of these groups...

So as part of one's right to own a gun one should not be a memeber of any group that condones killing over political idealogies... Killing, except in self defense, is against the law and by allowing people unfettered access to weaponry when they are active participants in such groups is not in in best interest of the safety of all of us...

Here's the kicker... Right now there isn't one state with guts to stand up to the NRA... The District of Columbia enacted hand gun legislation and the gun nuts took it off the books...

I realize that reasonable people have an uphill battle here... That is reality... But every change begins with people having the courage to speak up to power... In this case the power of the NRA and it's many barinwashed followers...

Now my break time is over and it's back to settin' fence posts...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 08:20 AM

Like I've said... It isn't so much the right to own guns that is the problem but the unfettered access to guns... Some folks just don't need easy access to them...

I doubt this would have prevented this true-believer-wacko from killing this doctor but it might have...

But on another level, seems that many of the folks who believe it is perfectly "Christain" to kill abortion doctors also are in the group who belioeve in unfettered access to guns... And capital punishment... Me thinks the pro-live extremists are the kinds of folks who just don't need to own guns... They see themselves as judge, jury and executioners... Very rabid mentally unstable people...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 12:45 AM

Meanwhile...a doctor was murdered in his church by a man wielding a gun:

Scott P. Roeder, 51, of Merriam, Kan., a Kansas City suburb, was arrested on Interstate 35 near Gardner in suburban Johnson County, Kan., about three hours after the shooting. (Dr.)Tiller was shot to death around 10 a.m. inside Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita.

In the rear window of the 1993 blue Ford Taurus that he was driving was a red rose, a symbol often used by abortion opponents. On the rear of his car was a Christian fish symbol with the word "Jesus" inside.

Those who know Roeder said he believed that killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide.

Roeder also was a subscriber to Prayer and Action News, a magazine that advocated the justifiable homicide position, said publisher Dave Leach, an anti-abortion activist from Des Moines, Iowa.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 03:43 PM

Sorry, Kent, but unless I am personally attacked here in Mudville I don't personalize my posts (except in jest) here in Mudville toward other members... My arguements are aimed at pro-gun folks everywhere...

But, yes, you can search my 15,000 or so posts over the last 7 or 8 years and you will find that I will attack/criticize people who are not members, i.e. George Bush, Dick Cheney, et al...

You will also find personalized posts to about the same dozen people who have attacked me first... I belive wholeheartedly in self defense but I don't throw the first punch...

As fir being a redeneck, Kent??? Sorry but I live ion a very redneck community (mountain holler) and I know rednecks, Sir, and don't take this wrong, but you ain't no redneck... Just brainwashed... lol...

B;~)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 31 May 09 - 01:46 PM

To Rapaire,

Thank you for posting that research! The quotes were interesting, informative, and relevant.



To Bobert,

What a relief to learn that you weren't using ad hominem arguments!

I thought you had written, on May 30, "What you read here on this thread from the pro-gun folks is the company fight song that has been pounded into them, lierally, sincemany of them we born or at least old enough to be suseptable to brainwashing..."? I also thought, since I was the only one writing in support of the status quo for 36 posts prior to that comment, that it was directed at me.

How paranoid of me. I hope you'll excuse me. You know how we brainwashed "rednecks too stupid to think for [ourselves]"* are.

*See post of April 29, 6:41 p.m.)

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 07:50 AM

The term "ad hominem" isn't accurate, Kent... But I understand fully why it is used by those who support gun ownership at any cost... Yeah, seems that when all else fails the pro-gunners drag out "ad hominem" as if it is the silver bullet, pun intended, to try to get folks to look at more reasonable as meanies... That dog don't hunt...

There ain't not ad hominem here... I am not speaking from emotion... Nor I am speaking from prejudice... Nor am am attacking anyone personally...

What I am doing is trying to get a discussion going about not only the 2nd ammendment, it's history (as Rap has done with his quotes" and reasonable policy that will make our society safter...

If there is any elememnt of ad hominem that remotely fits is that. yes, I do have in interest in keeping guns out of the hands of people who clearly do not make our society safer... That one part does serve my "self interest" as well as the self interest of our society...

Now back to the quotes that Rap has made... I find most of them do frame the thinking of the Founding Fathers and I don't see any that support the genaral unfettered access to very powerful and deadly arms that are available in today's market...

I stand by my assessment that the NRA has stiffled discussion in the interst of making it's member's more money...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Rapparee
Date: 30 May 09 - 10:11 PM

"And we do each of us, for ourselves respectively, promise and engage to keep a good firelock in proper order, & to furnish ourselves as soon as possible with, & always keep by us, one pound of gunpowder, four pounds of lead, one dozen gunflints, & a pair of bullet moulds, with a cartouch box, or powder horn, and bag for balls."
          --George Mason's plan for the Fairfax County, VA, Militia

"They tell us that we are weak -- unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Three million people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us."
                     --Patrick Henry, 1775

"Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life, secondly to liberty, thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can."
                           -- Sam Adams

"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense."
                         --John Adams

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
                            --Tom Jefferson

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
                               --Patrick Henry (again)

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
                               --Tom Jeffereson, to his nephew

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
                               --Noah Webster, 1787

"Militias, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
                               --Richard Henry Lee, 1788

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon and citizens' firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 and 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."
                         --George Washington, to the 1st Congress


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 30 May 09 - 09:47 PM

Bobert,

That's what I like about you, the way you never stoop to ad hominum attacks.

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 30 May 09 - 12:54 PM

Well, Crow Sister, that is part of the issue... But it's larger than that... Here in the US "sooner or later it all comes down to money" (Bruce Springsteen)...

The gun industry is a multi-billion dollar industry... The NRA is it's marketing agancy... The NRA spends millions of dollar$ every year on advertisement, lawyers and lobbiests... The NRA is so powerfull that our politicans have to cow-tie to them... The NRA can take just about any politican it wants out of the game with its money and its clout...

What you read here on this thread from the pro-gun folks is the company fight song that has been pounded into them, lierally, sincemany of them we born or at least old enough to be suseptable to brainwashing...

But I have to give the NRA credit in that I can't think of any other organization that has been as effective in brainwashing so mnay people on one issue...

I mean, even here in Mudville, where most folks have at least a decent level of intellegnece, the brainwashing has pushed right thru that level of intellegence...

We can't, for instance, get any of the brainwashed to consider the 2nd ammendment wahen taken in its whole... They are completely stuck with the second part of the ammendment because that is the way the NRA ad-men have crammed the issue into theor little brainwashed heads...

Yeah, they is no logic on their side... No motivation to have any discussion... I mean, why should they??? They have ***The NRA*** squarely behind them so life is good for them... Ain't too good for the tens upon thousands of innocent folks that gunned down every year but, ahhhhh, "guns don't kill people, people kill people"... Bullsh*t... Guns in the wrong hands kill people...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 May 09 - 11:45 AM

From my outsiders point of view, America's profound attatchment (I mean we have gun liscences in the UK for farmers and game etc. but most people wouldn't want one) to guns appears bizarre. It surely must source back to some collective primordial insecurity, when the only way the origonal white invaders of America could crush the indigenous peoples, was with firearms.

...just as well people can't shoot on the internet. Or I'd already be smoking in someones shed about ten seconds ago... ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 30 May 09 - 08:19 AM

I don't disagree with the 2nd ammendment at all, Kent... I just interpret the entire ammendment as it was written and not just cherry-pick that part that happens to support my views...

If it were two sentences rather than one then maybe the I'd have a different view that would require a constitutional ammendment but it was written as one sentence meaning that the right to form a militia is tied to a right to bear arms...

The folks who support unlimited and unfettered access to guns seem to forget about the first half of the 2nd ammendment...

As for the licensing, I have no problems with states having the rights to restrict gun ownership to law-abiding folks who not only are required to register them but also pass a gun safety course... But the NRA won't let that happen...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 29 May 09 - 07:59 PM

Bobert,

Should you read my last post again I trust you will notice that it contains no argument at all, for or against anything. It just answers McGrath of Harlow's question. Here's the bottom line:

1. No federal license is required to operate either a car or a gun. You may think there should be. But there isn't.

2. State laws limit the use of both cars and guns. However, state laws do not require a license for the USE of either cars or guns. You may think they should. But they don't.

3. A "driver's license" is actually a license to drive on public property. A COMPARABLE gun license would therefore be a license to shoot on public property. As TIA said, we don't have such licenses. However, for certain purposes and in certain respects, hunting licenses and concealed weapons permits RESEMBLE such licenses.

4. Any federal regulation of guns or cars must comply with the 9th and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Any federal regulation of guns must also comply with the 2nd amendment. You may disagree with those amendments. If you persuade enough people, they can be repealed. But they haven't been.


Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 May 09 - 12:57 PM

Don't people have enough respect for a religious service not to shoot up a Mass?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 29 May 09 - 07:17 AM

Fine... Let anyone who wants to own an unregistered gun and has no skills to use it be required to own enough property so that if the gun is fired the bullet can't trespeass over anyone elses property... That's about what I gleaned from yer last post, Kent...

Actually, this argument was sued several years ago in Loundoun County, Va. when the Ashburn developement was being built in a rural area... Well, the NRA came in with it;s lawyers and they huffed and puffed and wore everyone out with their huffing and puffing until it was decided that the bullet wasn't actaully trespassing until it hit something on someone elses property... Like yer dog, 'er little Suzie riding her tricycle...

I don't buy that logic (or lack thereof) one bit...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 29 May 09 - 01:19 AM

McGrath of Harlow,

Sorry for not responding to your question earlier. It is an excellent question, but the answer turns on some technical points that usually have little importance, but which have great importance if we are comparing and contrasting the licensing of guns and cars.

I figured that, if I answered accurately, I would be mocked (not by you, of course) for "splitting hairs".   

If I understand you correctly, your question assumes that the U.S. government requires us to have a license in order to operate a car. It does not. For most purposes, it might as well, but technically it does not.

Like many country kids, I was operating a car, legally, for years before I got a license. My children are doing the same thing now. How? I drove (and they drive) on our land. I also rode a dirt bike, legally, on a road, when I was 12. How? It was a private road, owned and maintained by those whose land adjoined it. West Virginia required me to get a license before I could operate a car on West Virginia's property, but not on private property.

Each state gets to make the rules about state property. On my property, I make the rules. The basic idea is that the owner gets to make the rules. (Yes, I know there are exceptions. That's why I said it is the BASIC idea.)   

What does that have to do with the comparison between guns and cars? A lot. States get to decide what is allowed on state property. Since cars are almost always used on state property, it is effective to require a license to operate a car on state property. In contrast, since guns are commonly used on private property, it is much less effective to require a license to operate a gun on state property. On the other hand, requiring a license to operate a car (or a gun) on PRIVATE property would be a blow to liberty in general and to property rights in particular.

That's not all. In order to regulate cars, states merely have to comply with their own constitutions and with the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In order to regulate guns, states must comply with their own constitutions, with the 14th amendment, and with the 2nd amendment. In order for the FEDERAL government to regulate guns, it must comply with the 2nd, 9th, and 10th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

This is not an argument against gun control. It is just an answer to your question.

Hope this helps,

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: TIA
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:55 PM

McGrath,
The answer is a resounding "NO".

BTW, excellent question.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 May 09 - 08:28 PM

I repeat my question, because I'm genuinely curious to know the answer.

...in order to be able to legally drive a car, people have to pass a driving test, intended to insure that they are competent and safe.

Does the same apply for guns across the USA?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:25 PM

I'm going to have to start reading my NRA magazine more closely, Bobert. I missed all those new initiatives you report. Thanks for bringing them to our attention. It really elevates the tone of the debate.

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bobert
Date: 27 May 09 - 10:26 PM

Well, if I have it correct, there is no hunting allowed in national parks... So, other than 2 or 3 people killed in them over a 30 year period, why introduce them??? If you take the square miles of any other area in the country abnd compare the murder rates you'll find that the national parks are just about the safest places in the country... Why???... Danged if I know but I'd venture a guess that the fact that gubs are kept out has some bearing...

So, the national park is kinda like a control group... No guns allowed and very low incidents of vilence... Hmmmmmmm???

What next??? The NRA is going to have its minions hold up the federal budget until kindergarteners are allowed to bring heat into the kindergarten... What then??? Court rooms??? Bars??? No, soccer games!!! Yeah, that would be a good goal for the NRA... Get the soccer fans all packing heat... Make the NRA's gun shop owners lotta money and probably make more folks watch soccer on TV (or attend the games) just hopin' to see a good ol' fashion John Wane western shoot out...

(Sheet fire, Bobert!!! Why not have the NRA hold Obama's Supreme Court noinee hostage until FOX can get guns into mental hospital or prisons and have reality shoot-out reality shows... They would make a load of money...)

Danged... Wish I had thought of that... That is genious!!!

I mean, there really isn't and end to logic (or lack there of) when we strictly interpret the 2nd ammendment and don't bother to look at the 1st half of it...

(But, Bobert, when you ignore the first half of the 2nd ammendment isn't that "loose construction"???)

Well, ahhhhh, yeah... Kinda like the NRA's view of "balance"... Balence meaning that we loosly construct the first half of the 2nd ammendment and strictly construct the second half... That's NRA balance!!!

Screw it... Let's just pass out loaded guns to all babies while they are in the crib and in a few years all these arguments will go away...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 27 May 09 - 09:36 PM

Bill D.,

Thanks. I really appreciate that.

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 27 May 09 - 04:28 PM

Oh...my, Kent. Yes, I see what I did, and it shows how reading quickly can confuse the elderly mind. Sorry for not 'getting' the referential order of posts. (I also often load only the last set of posts, which meant I saw only about 5-6).

I shouldn't enter these things when so much is going on RT.

You & I have had some debates, but you have been reasonable & civil.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

and TIA... all my complaints about reasoning on this matter are meant for you now. *grin*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 27 May 09 - 02:38 PM

Kent,
You listed some similarities between guns and cars.
I listed some important differences.
Roll your eyes all you want.
They are important differences.
Not sure what "arguments" of mine you where trying to help me with, but I thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 26 May 09 - 07:52 PM

Bill D.,

I thought I had been pretty clear about why I included the anecdotes, but I guess not. As I mentioned, I was NOT arguing about gun control, since I have already made my position clear.

I was pointing out a problem that occurs when those who support gun control use the kind of arguments that TIA used. The problem is that such arguments sound, to many ordinary Americans, err, let's just say they sound neither wise nor humble. Imply to a life-long hunter, for example, that there is no benign use of a gun and you get little light and much heat.

In contrast, your own approach, with your analogy comparing guns and cars, is reasonable, fruitful, and likely to provke discussion rather than rage.

I'm not sure what you are referring to when you mention hypotheticals in my post. If any are there, I confess I can't see them.

I am not the one who again brought up the issue of the relative safety of cars and knives vs. guns, nor did I bring up the issue of concealability. That was TIA. I responded out of frustration that these issues were AGAIN brought up by a gun control advocate who apparently thought they were very telling arguments, when in fact it merely provokes eye-rolling by those who support the status quo.

I am disappointed you thought I was trying to find a set of "buttons to push". I trust that when you re-read the first and last sentences of my post you will see that this is the very opposite of my intention. I was offering advice on how to make arguments FOR gun control, a position which I oppose, more palatable to libertarians. I thought that was rather civil of me.

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 05:53 PM

Fits right in with the 2nd amendment, huh?

"The right to arm bears".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 05:45 PM

Kat...LOLOL.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:02 PM

BillD, you might enjoy Number 20 in this LineUp at the boston globe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:11 PM

Kent... if unwilling to argue by anecdote, it is also well to avoid irrelevant anecdotes and hypotheticals as examples...


Explaining once again that cars and knives, etc. have caused deaths, and that other concealable small things are not banned really clouds the issue and focuses on minutiae which are not germane. (example... most folks who face home intrusion - like your great-aunt - do not GET the time to go get the gun while the intruder beats on the door.)

I am musing that it may be best to resort to the philosophical principle that we should strive for " the greatest good for the greatest number" rather than just seeing if we can find a set of emotional/legal buttons to push which gets **me** what *I* want.

The argument needs to center on whether easy access (BOTH legal & illegal) to many firearms and powerful ammunition cause more harm than good, and what to do about it if we decide the answer is 'yes'.

Guns remain the choice of criminals and of the mentally ill because it is so easy to compel folks or hurt them while remaining relatively safe themselves. I'd MUCH rather try to dodge a knife or club or hit back than face a .38 from 10 feet away.....and so forth.

It goes on...........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:07 AM

TIA,

I don't suppose you are purposely trying to find the arguments LEAST likely to be convincing to 2nd Amendment advocates. Nevertheless, you have found three of them.

Unconvincing Arguement #1: You write, "Cars have many utterly benign purposes. Guns are always used to shoot things." Do you really mean to imply that shooting things is never benign? When my daughter asked her grandparents to teach her target shooting as a hobby, is that not benign? When my widowed great-aunt (who lived a twenty minute drive from the nearest police station) had an intruder literally breaking down her front door, and she shot through the bottom panel into his legs, driving him away, was that not benign? When my parents buy licenses for buck season, doe season, black powder season, and bow season, and then bring in enough meat to supply themselves and several elderly members of their church with healthy food, while also reducing the over-population of deer, is that not benign?   

Unconvincing Arguement #2: You write, "Cars are also darn hard to conceal." Your point is apparently that, since guns are easy to conceal, they should be tightly regulated or banned. Knives, matches, lighters, books, and condoms are all easy to conceal. Should they be tightly regulated or banned?   

Unconvincing Arguement #3: You write, "I've also never heard of toddlers hitting themselves in the head with their parent's car." Neither have I. Have you ever heard of toddlers being accidentally killed by a car? One of our friends lost her sister when the girl, a toddler, ran directly into the path of her grandparents' car. When I was 13, two young children who were visiting our nearest neighbor were killed when they climbed into their parents' car, somehow set it on fire (playing with matches, most likely), and then were unable to get the doors open. I saw the smoke, but didn't think much of it at first. By the time anyone realized that something was wrong, the children were dead. For all age groups combined, the National Safety Council reports 43,100 accidental motor vehicle deaths in 2007, compared to 830 for firearms: http://www.nsc.org/lrs/injuriesinamerica08.aspx

I'm not trying to argue by anecdote. I've already stated the reasons for my position. At this point, I'm not really trying to change your mind about gun control. I just wanted to point out that even a person as wise and as humble as you sounds neither wise nor humble when making such arguments.

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: TIA
Date: 25 May 09 - 08:48 PM

Cars have many utterly benign purposes. Guns are always used to shoot things.

Cars are also darn hard to conceal.

I've also never heard of toddlers hitting themselves in the head with their parent's car.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 May 09 - 07:33 PM

You missed out the requirement that in order to be able to legally drive a car, people have to pass a driving test, intended to insure that they are competent and safe.

Does the same apply for guns across the USA?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 25 May 09 - 04:52 PM

I agree that there are parallels between guns and cars. Though we do disagree on several matters, perhaps we can agree on these seven points:

1. That guns and cars are tools, used for innocent purposes most of the time.

2. That criminals use cars and guns for criminal purposes.

3. That the problem therefore is not the tools, but the criminals.

4. That the government's basic presumption should be for liberty.

5. That we are nevertheless willing to accept some restrictions on
    the tools.

6. That these restrictions include the following:
a. certain types of tools (Formula One race cars and fully   
    automatic rifles, for example) are disallowed for general use.
b. those who use cars or guns to commit crimes may lose the right
    to those tools.
c. driving or shooting while drunk or high can be punished as
    reckless endangerment.
d. some areas may be generally off-limits (wilderness areas to
    cars, courtrooms to guns, for example) and that accidental or
    incidental trespasses should be treated as misdemeanors, not
    felonies.

7. That, contra the esteemed Mr. Bobert, those who favor the status
   quo are not necessarily "rednecks too stupid to think for
   themselves" who use arguments that "anyone with an IQ above 75
   can parrot", nor are those whose understanding of constitutional
   law matches that of the U.S. Supreme Court necessarily in the
   same league as the "Timothy McVeys of the world... Or the
   survivalist fring groups..."(sic).

What do you think?

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 24 May 09 - 10:51 AM

Yes...I remember the tragedy with the hikers....and the fact that this guy should not have been able to try it again.

In trying to work out in my own head how it should have been handled, I sometimes compare it to autos & drunk/impaired driving.
Some people should not be allowed to drive, even when NOT impaired....when they ARE drunk, it is much worse. But unless they are in prison, it is hard to keep them totally away from cars. Everyday we go onto the roads knowing that someone dangerous might be on the same roads. We take our chances....and most of us just drive normally and take reasonable care. We don't armor our cars like 'some' need to. We don't equip them with James Bond defensive devices....etc. We instead hope that the 'system' has kept a large % of dangerous folks OUT of our concerns: knowing that it is always possible we will be a sad statistic.
   It is not reasonable to ban vehicles...or even limit driving to some tiny % who 'need' cars.....but we can & do limit certain types of vehicles and restrict where they can be driven and are beginning to provide codes and other safeguards to make it harder for unauthorized persons to even start a vehicle.
   What I do not see is much in the way of similar attempts to control firearms, which are not needed be nearly as many folks as need cars.

So, unless *I* am willing and able to take special training in firearms, I will continue to not add to the list of those who have guns and limited ability to use them, and just 'take my chances' that I will NOT encounter an idiot with a gun....as I have for over 50 years as an adult so far.

   I seriously FEAR a law like Texas is proposing, for all those who might carry a gun on campus will, no doubt, carry it off-campus also, and just increase the number of guns in the population and the odds that a few of them will misuse the privilege or 'carry while impaired'...etc.

I still have not read why someone lobbied to be allowed to bring loaded guns into National Parks, and what they think it gains.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 May 09 - 01:30 AM

This seems a good place post a great new song I just found: Less Guns, More Butter by Hot Buttered Rum!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 23 May 09 - 01:17 AM

I'm all for calm behavior to avoid violence. Since I don't even own a handgun, I would also join you, and indeed have also joined you, in not bearing arms. I respect your choice, and not just because I happen to have made the same choice. If I had a handgun, and if I had practiced enough with it, I would make a different choice.

Writing about the Appalachian Trail got me to thinking about the case of Randall Lee Smith. In May, 1981, he killed Susan Ramsey and Robert Mountford, Jr. Ms. Ramsey and Mr. Mountford had been hiking the Appalachian trail in Southwest Virginia. Smith was caught, pled guilty, and was imprisoned. Last May, he tried to kill Sean Farmer and Scott Johnston along the same section of the trail. They were badly hurt but, blessedly, both men survived.

I was especially interested in the case since Scott Johnston is an acquaintance of my wife's family, and since my older daughter, my father-in-law, and I had hiked that same section of trail a few years back.

Let's consider what could be done to prevent crimes such as Smith's. One could regulate guns. Would Smith, who refused to obey the law against murder, have been willing to obey gun regulations?

Even if guns had been completely outlawed, and even if the prohibition were actually effective (unlike, say, the prohibition against marijuana), would that have stopped him from killing? That is doubtful. He stabbed Ms. Ramsey to death.

Could anything have been done to prevent the second set of attacks? Since he was a convicted felon, he was not allowed to have a gun. He had one anyway.   

Could nothing have prevented the second set of attacks? This man had been convicted of two murders. How was able to be back on the Appalachian Trail? Had he escaped from prison? No, he was LET out of prison in '96. By the time of the second set of attacks, he wasn't even on probation. Do you see a problem there? I do, and it is not a lack of gun regulations.

For more information, see http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/161124 and http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/161156 .

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 21 May 09 - 11:10 PM

"..., I would prefer a pistol to a pocket knife. Wouldn't you?"


Not necessarily.... as in any other situation, having a pistol as an item designed to offer me protection would depend on me being well-trained and practiced in its use, and having it available at a moment's notice.
It has always seemed to me that a private citizen, engaged in regular daily activities, (even hiking or camping) is unlikely to be able to access a handgun easily if confronted by a problem. There are studies showing that having a loaded handgun readily accessible creates more problems than it solves.
I 'suspect' that it is the IDEA of being safer and having a possible defense that leads most folks to acquire them. Unless one is really, really mentally prepared to use a gun and practices the relevant techniques, it is as likely that an assailant will get your money..etc..AND your gun (if they realize you have one.)

Yes, I know these are partially speculations, but as I say, there are more stories of folks being injured trying to be a hero than there are of those who managed to BE a hero. (guess which one makes better news and gets reported on most?)

When I was a part-time liquor store clerk many years ago, I was told: "If there is a holdup...give them the money! Don't try anything!" I think that is usually the best advice, unless you are regularly in situations where you might expect trouble and are on constant alert... such as moving money about and/or working in dangerous jobs.

It's not easy to decide, but the decision, to me, is not between a pistol OR a pocket knife, but between resistance or semi-calm behavior designed to avoid violence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 21 May 09 - 09:44 PM

Good question, Bill D. I really don't have an opinion on the Texas proposal because I don't know enough about Texas law. I do know that, in many states, and PERHAPS in all, it is difficult to get a concealed weapon permit and that permit-holders are, as a group, exceptionally well-trained and law-abiding citizens. IF that is the case in Texas, then the Texas law should reduce crime on campus. I would guess that the Texas law applies only to state schools. I would oppose a law forcing private schools to toe that line, as that would be a violation of their property rights.

I don't see a problem with allowing guns in the National Parks. Guns are allowed in National Forests, of course, and if that has been problematic, I've certainly never heard about it, although we live near Wayne National Forest and my parents live near Jefferson National Forest. If my daughters and I were hiking a remote section of the Apppalachian Trail down in the Smokies, I would like to have a weapon of some sort. I don't own a pistol nor do I know how to shoot one, but if I did, and if it were legal, I would prefer a pistol to a pocket knife. Wouldn't you?

Kent

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Bill D
Date: 21 May 09 - 11:18 AM

well, yes.... that does seem like silly over-reaction.


Any opinion, Kent, on the attempt in Texas to allow loaded, concealed handguns to be carried on college campuses?

Or the law just passed as rider to the Credit Card bill, which allows guns to be taken into National Parks?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 21 May 09 - 12:36 AM

There are consequences when the government moves from a focus on punishing actual crime to a focus on the regulating tools.

On May 6, here in Washington County, Ohio, 18-year-old John Kuhn went to school. He had not killed or injured anyone, but he was arrested. He had made no threats, but sheriff's deputies took him from school and confined him in the county jail. He had damaged no property, but he was denied bail initially. He had not disturbed the peace, but he was charged with a felony. He had not outraged public morals nor interfered with the operation of justice but, with just a few days of school left, he was suspended for 10 days. He was cooperative with school authorities, but they are recommending his permanent expulsion from school. He did nothing immoral. He did nothing dangerous. He did not run through the halls brandishing a loaded gun. He did not sneak a weapon into a classroom. He placed no one at risk. He freely admitted what he had done: after practicing marksmanship, he left his unloaded gun in his car. His last days of school are ruined. He can look forward to a lifetime of explaining to prospective employers that he is a felon who never finished school. http://www.mariettatimes.com/page/content.detail/id/512642.html

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: Kent Davis
Date: 02 May 09 - 08:10 PM

Mr. Bobert, Sir,

This is now the fifth post in which I have AGREED WITH YOU that we no longer have a functioning militia and have also AGREED WITH YOU that, therefore, the militia is now NOT a good argument in favor of gun-ownership rights. (see my posts of April 26, 29, and two on the 30th).

As I AGREED WITH YOU on this aspect of the issue, you have responded to the other points I have made by talking about "rednecks too stupid to think for themselves" who use arguments that "anyone with an IQ above 75 can parrot" (April 29).

You have asked me (with a nasty implication) "what constitutes a militia??? Survivalist groups???" (April 30) and accused me of "perfectly" descibing the "Timothy McVeys of the world... Or the survivalist fring groups..." (May 1) in what you apparently thought was my definition of the word "militia". (It was Noah Webster's definition.)

You suggested that I "go to [my] local gun shop and tell 'um [I] need to purchase a few AK-47s 'cause [I am] organizing a 'militia'... See just how long it take the ATF guys to surround [my] house..." (May 1).

It is interesting, considering your responses to my attempts to discuss gun control with you, that you have repeatedly made the accusation that it is the NRA which "does not allow for any deviation toward discussion".

Kent


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the blanks)
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 09 - 05:36 PM

Change laws... Exactly what many of us are trying to do, SPB...

Thanks for your supportive stats...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the bla
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 02 May 09 - 08:16 AM

if people kill people, and not guns, please provide statistics for

(1) Number of murder by bare-hands
(2) Number of mass murders by bare-hand


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yet Another Mass Shooting (fill in the bla
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 02 May 09 - 08:12 AM

2006/7 57 gun related homicides in UK. So in USA if this is pro rata, then their were 285 inthe same year, or more? How many more?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 14 November 2:57 PM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.