BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 01:54 PM

I just don't think from living in this state [NY]it makes much difference is all

But it WOULD make a difference, Oldster, if guns weren't freely available in the Jackass States to be brought into NY.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 01:39 PM

Congresswoman Giffords owned a 9 mm Glock and said she was a pretty good shot.
New York Times, Nov. 11.

Doesn't help politicians who have to rub shoulders with the public, but useful to discourage home invaders, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 01:23 PM

for many year, no firearm of any type was allowed in Washington DC. I know it has recently been challenged in the court so I do not know the current law. However, the murder rate from gun violence in Washington DC is appalling. No ban of any type works

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 01:15 PM

and bobster, a sawed off shotgun, remove the plug, you now have 5 rounds .. each round has 9 .38 cal pellets .. that is 45 rounds into the crowd going straight through at close range .. it would have been far worse my friend.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 12:56 PM

But Bobster we already have that in NY state. You can't own a handgun you have to register it and first have a permit from a judge. Most people cannot get one. Hence most people do not have one legally. It is so hard to get and expensive. But our rate of handgun violence keeps going up. I complete agree on the sensible laws .. I just don't think from living in this state it makes much difference is all

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 12:40 PM

Sorry, Ol'ster but if the only guns out there were rifles and shotguns there would indeed be one heck of a lot less murders because they are conspicuously visible... Had this shooter taken a shotgun to that Safeway there wouldn't 6 people dead...

BTW, handguns were rare when the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution... They were used for dueling and not much else...

BTW, Part 2... The Founding Fathers also provided us with a Constitution that could be amended as our country grew and evolved...

BTW, Part 3... If the only way to bring sanity into the mix is to amend it again then so be it if it brings sane gun regulations...

Sane gun regulations:

1. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to first go thru a certified gun safety course...

2. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to also prove that they can handle it, aim it and hit a specfied target...

3. Semi-automatics should be for law enforcement only...

4. Automatics should be illegal with the exception of the military... Period...

5. A waiting period sufficient to allow the ATF to conduct a full background check should be in place before the purchaser can take delivery of a gun...

6. All guns should be registered and have ballistic fingerprints on file...

7. No one, other that law enforcement, should be allowed to carry a gun of any kind into any public areas, including resturants and bars, with the exception of shooting ranges...

And that's just for starters...

I mean, let's get real here... There is a reason that 30,000 people are killed every year with guns... 9 guns for every 10 people??? Do the math...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 12:36 PM

Ebbie's link raises a very important point.

Even with specific military training, friendly fire casualties have plagued every armed conflict.

War/Campaign: Percent Casualties (U.S. Military only)*
World War II: 21%
Korea: 18%
Vietnam: 39%
Persian Gulf: 52%
Panama: .08%
Haiti: 0%
Iraq: 41%
Afghanistan: 13%

(http://www.americanwarlibrary.com/ff/ff.htm)

I suspect that with lesser-trained civilians, in a non-war-zone setting, gun battles would involve much much higher rates of innocent casualties.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 12:22 PM

That is a good argument Ebbie my friend for my reasonable comment. A reasonable man or woman would call the police, I would you would, who the heck wants to engage in such action. You can only use the amount of force needed to thwart off an attack. You cannot start the attack, provoke it or anything else. The guy deserved to be in jail. He is part of the problem. I had a guy come to my home ranting about why his daughter wasn't picked as a cheerleader (my wife is the coach) He was aggressive, violent and wanted a confrontation. I asked him to leave he wouldn't. I went in and called the police. Now could I have engaged him with all the years of training ... yea .. why would I want to do that ... a reasonable person does not go looking for such nor engages in stuff like that but walks away. All the time he was ranting at me, I was watching his hands. I didn't heated. My thought was, I really do not want to hurt this man. Talking was going to do no good. The police finally cooled him down. I did not press charges.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 12:05 PM

Here's a novel thought: Human beings are strange. We very often do not do the *best* thing, we go with a reaction that, on hindsight, escalates rather than eliminates a problem.

I keep thinking of an incident a couple of months ago in this apartment house I manage. If the 'perpertrator' had done the best thing, the outcome would have been far different.

A tenant here wanted to eject a visitor of his and the visitor refused to leave. Rather than call on neighboring tenants to help or to call the police he elected to beat the visitor into a bloody mess that made the man literally unrecognizable.

End result: the visitor was taken to hospital by ambulance, the perp was taken to jail where he was charged with felony assault (later reduced to a misdemeanor). He now has a record, he lost his tenancy here even though he pleaded abjectly for another chance (As I told him on the telephone, no way would I want to live next to a man who 'loses it' that bad, and if he didn't lose it, he's even more dangerous).

Mind you, the visitor is a known bad ass, a guy with a long history of violence. As the police told me, This time he was a victim but he is often the perpertrator.

My (longwinded) point is that if a gun had been present, there is little doubt in my mind that it would have been used.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:54 AM

All the FOX and shock radio people are doubling down and are yelling that liberals want conservatives dead.

HUH???

Can't really blame the shit-spouters, I suppose- that's how they make their money.

However, anyone that would BELIEVE that shit should be incarcerated.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:48 AM

I sound terrible when I read my words but all I am trying to say is good people need to think about this stuff. At least get some exercise by taking a marshal arts course, what does that hurt. At least you have some sense that should trouble find you maybe you can do something about it. I know I am too close because of my background, but learning stuff doesn't make a bad person. Heck my family is a family of marksmen and blackbelts and have been for generations. No one cares for for others more than my family or does more of others. Learning to be cautious and spotting potential situations doesn't make you a bad person, it makes you a smart person. Learning to defend yourself should the unthinkable occur also doesn't hurt anything. Our society is losing its grip lately for many reasons. We need to change as a people ...

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:41 AM

btw

My prediction that this terrible and expected tragedy is creating a deeper divide in this small community and the nation at large is coming true.

All the FOX and shock radio people are doubling down and are yelling that liberals want conservatives dead. Media liberals are saying that conservatives are more strident than ever.

At least all the people at home who have a conscience, have reflected and can share a sense of grief and see the sign ahead is both a reminder and a warning of the future ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:39 AM

Lets agree to disagree, the sad fact is some defective person killed a lot of innocent people and sadly this seems to be more of the norm lately. We as a society are rolling down hill. WE are losing our sense of morals and decency and that of the value of life that our fathers and grandfathers cherished I think. It all starts in the home and how people raise their kids and what values they assign. Fix that and maybe less of this occurs

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:31 AM

Don
it is illegal in my state to display a handgun, it MUST be concealed. Like I said in NY you don't get the license without a serious investigation into your background. In fact, you need three recommendations outside of the the FBI and approval of your local police. At least that is the way it is in my county. The permit is not issued by the local Sheriff alone, it is first approved by the county JUDGE and you need a reason that is legit .. not just, gee I am afraid. NY maybe overkill for many, makes sense to me however

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: pdq
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:29 AM

"...Take away all the guns, wow, they go to Mexico and come back with an arsenal"

Are you sure? Ever been to Mexico with a gun?

A gringo can be sentenced to prison time in Mexico for having a few spent cartridges under the the seat of his pickup truck.

Private gun ownership in Mexico is completely banned as it is in Japan and many other countries. Only members of elite families, their security guards and the various police agencies have legal guns in Mexico.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:27 AM

That is the problem PDQ, When the 10 round law was in effect, nothing changed, in fact the violence only continued to climb. Would I get upset if they ban the 30 round clips and go back to the 10 round only. no ... but it won't make any difference in the violence.

When I taught marshal arts, I would tell the students, ya got three choices, you can run (the very best choice of all). You can stand there and be injured or killed, or you can stop them. I think two of the three are very good . The best thing, avoid being in a situation where the odds are trouble will find you. Who walks around a bad area of a city at night, most sane people don't. But in situations like this that should not have occurred, what do you do? that is what I want people to think about as this stuff keeps going on the rise lately

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:27 AM

When you say "no line can be drawn, there is nothing you can do, thats the way it is", you are a failed human being, you are devoid of hope with no imagination or courage to change a single gun attitude. Your thinking is trapped in a box.

Today we can change the numbers of victims. Tommorow we could change a single mind. After that we could change attitudes.
While you can cage a devil for only a short time and evil will never go extinct, lines can be drawn, have been drawn and need to be made indelible.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:18 AM

For me a gun is a tool of last resort. Last resort means that a billion other choices should come first.

I think a gun is viewed as immediately accesible and neccesary to many people. IF a person ENJOYS their gun being seen, they are already what I call gun sick. IF they have multiple guns the odds of gun sickness grows. Like a drug if they plan ahead to be sure they have some on hand wherever they go, they are in stage five gun sickness.

Gun sickness knows no demographic or socio economic boundary.
IT is often something people catch after they have one.
I don't claim to know a percentage of people who are gun sick but it probably follows the same lines as other dependancy problems.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:12 AM

Interesting bit of history here. It brings to my mind a scene in which armed people in a crowd take care of a problem.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41018893/ns/slatecom/

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: pdq
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:10 AM

The Tucson shooter walked into a well-respected sporting goods store when he wanted to but the gun

He showed his ID and filled out the required forms for the FBI background check.

He was cleared and was allowed to purchase the gun and take it home.

About the aftermarket clips, they may be unnecessary but there is no place to draw the line. You may think 6-round clips are OK and 33-round clips are not, but what about the differece between 17-round and 19-round clips.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:08 AM

And I am no more safer when someone owns just a shotgun as I am if that same person owns a handgun. With the exception he is less likely to always have the weapon on him, However, A defective person will simply use his shotgun. Take away all the guns, wow, they go to Mexico and come back with an arsenal or they build their own. Yup I know a lot of people who have (very skilled craftsmen I may add). Get rid of all ammo, well I reload my own, most serious shooters do. Unless people change, nothing changes. Hence figure out how you will handle your personal security. Cops cannot be everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 11:04 AM

What I am saying is a total gun ban, like the total drug ban does nothing.

Agree, absolutely, Oldster. And would be impossible to enforce, as most any law enforcement personnell will admit. We lost the "War On Drugs" before it was declared.

Speaking of enforcement- seems to be an American delusion that all you need to do is pass a law to solve a problem. Eight times out of ten times the resources necessary for adequate enforcement are seldom if ever considered, and nine times out of ten the required personnel, equipment & budget are never allocated.

Then people complain the law isn't being enforced.

Go figure.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:47 AM

I agree, I have been pushing for a national carry law for years and that is something that makes sense. Maybe we are talking different things here. What I am saying is a total gun ban, like the total drug ban does nothing. Restricting certain types of weapons, sure we have done that for years. Passing more laws that no one enforces however changes nothing. A consistent handgun ownership law at the national level, you got my support for that. You and I both agree NY sets the bar pretty darn high (as it should be for conceal carry. I actually think NY has a pretty darn good system before allowing a private citizen that much responsibility.

Now as far as some of the characterization I read about gun owners on this thread. It is border line bigot. I can assure you gun owners range from every walk of life. We are not hot headed, simple "country folk" who shoot critters for our meals. We are from every walk of life and I will bet my bottom dollar in your family your dad or grand dad owned guns also. So you characterize yourself when you say that.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: DMcG
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:35 AM

No restriction on the weapon could stop this guy intent on doing such a terrible thing
If you mean no restriction could make it impossible, then you are right. On the other hand, we might think making it much harder or less likely would be a good thing, even if we can't achieve perfection.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:23 AM

No restriction on the weapon could stop this guy intent on doing such a terrible thing

The restriction that could have stopped him is if Arizona hasd reasonable firearms laws that would have prevented this mentak case from getting a firearm in the first place. A simple, reasonable background check - as done in NY & many other states, for example.

Ron Davies is absolutely correct on this one - (yeah, I know, shock, horror)- its long past time for a NATIONAL law, setting minimum standards & procedures, that State laws could exceed if they wished, that would keep basic controls uniform from state to state (God Forbid! Creeping Communism!!!) - this uniformity ALONE would eliminate many of the loopholes & absurdities of the current system (or non-system).

However..........................ain't gonna happen.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:22 AM

At our Safeway magazine section there are 4 different magazines that are devoted to the semi automatic handgun. Then there are the rifle and assault gun magazines.

I have been known over the years to take these gun magazines and distribute them all over the magazine shelves covering up all the other magazines to make a point of the number of garish gun magazines they carry. The last time I did this all the magazines visible were gun magazines with the exception of one pregnancy magazine. For me it was a carthartic example of conceptual art.
Crazy huh? Not as crazy as those who only feel secure carrying a gun everywhere they go.

There are 9 guns for every 10 Americans. There are 30,000 US citizens shot every year. 3,000 people are shot to death intentionally yearly. Of those, 1000 are suicides and the rest are "accidents". 80 US citizens are shot daily.

Yesterday Mexic only had 50 people shot todeath and of those 15 were beheaded in a macho narco display complete with a written poster.
The US beats them by a mile when it comes to gun deaths.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:20 AM

And that was the very best approach. It all depends on the distance from the shooter.

By the way, had the guy came in with a shotgun instead, the carnage would have been 5 times that. Again, how is a ban going to do anything to stop the mind of a homicidal killer? The problem need to be addressed in some other way, somehow finding these folks and somehow getting them help before hand .. who knows, I sure don't. I hate the fact that his college teacher on TV said she told her office mate, "that guy scares me, he is the kind that walks in with a gun"

Now after hearing that, I cringed .. but then again what does one do.

only questions

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: EBarnacle
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:14 AM

I find it significant that, although there were apparently many people in the crowd who were armed, not one of them fired at the assailant. He was taken down by "peaceful means."

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:14 AM

Completely agree with you Bobart, I hate the things and see no reason for them. I see no reason for a 30 round magazine in a glock either.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:01 AM

Ron,
If you happen to have 30 hunting buddies who happen to all be feelin poorly in bed cuz of some tainted stew they had at the Rotary new years dinner, and you're out huntin and come across a group of 30 deer down by the crik bend, you're gonna want to have that Gock 9 with an extended 33 shot clip. Its down right neighborly to give a fresh venison to a friend, even if they are feelin really nauseous when they have to go dress the deer in their drive way.

It might take you three trips in yer Ford 350 to deliver all them deer but without that extended clip you would only have got one or two

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:42 AM

But to get back on the basic topic, at least in some respects, it now appears that the Westboro "Baptist" Church intends on showing up at Christina Taylor Green's funeral. It is hard to get me angry, but those people (for lack of an uncensorable alternative) manage it every time. Their justification? She was Catholic.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:33 AM

I'm talking about semi-automatic pistols. It's hard to believe hunters cannot get along without these.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:28 AM

Well, I certainly hope, but doubt very much, that this incident will lead to a rational discussion/debate on the 2nd amendment... The right skips over the first half of it like it was a radiation pit in order to justify their right to own whatever guns they want to own, regardless of their skills/training in using them safely...

There are plenty of personal protection guns that will do just fine for that home intruder that ain't 31 shot 9mm semi-automatics or AK-47s, which BTW yer gun dealer will be more than happy to sell you a $5 book on how to make fully automatic...

I mean, let's get real here... No one hunts with or sports shoots fully automatic AKs... This is a military weapon used in war... People don't need to be owning these to protect themselves...

But no.... We'll get the same NRA ***NOISE*** blasted at US just like every time these things happen... It will happen right here in the Mud Pit... It is already happening on blogs all over the internet...

Bottom line from the right: We're right, yer wrong so shut the heck up!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:17 AM

One other point people are missing. It all depends on caliber of the round. Had he used a .44 mag wheel gun (max load) only 6 shots could indeed hit 18 people. Why, that round goes through and hits the next and the next and the next. No restriction on the weapon could stop this guy intent on doing such a terrible thing

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:03 AM

We circle back to the same point. Not everyone should be allowed to carry a handgun- absolutely agree. Those who can have to be highly trained and a full background check (including mental health) agree. Change the gun show law (agree)

And a person intent on killing will find a way (IE throw a homemade explosive) use whatever means they come up with. That I am sure we will agree. Banning anything won't stop this. Doesn't work with drugs at all. Politics although odorous won't cause this .. defective people who want to kill will continue to kill ... Now what would you do to protect yourself in the unlikely event you get into a situation like this, or you are on the street and attacked. That is my point, forget carry, that is the most personal of all decisions and I respect the people who don't. So think about how you would protect yourself and loved ones if you were confronted by such an act or a single robbery with knife .. etc..

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 08:50 AM

Ron
the reasons, well all guns kill, semi-auto or wheel gun a bullet is a bullet. A wheel gun is safer, you are less likely for an accidental discharge but having no semi-auto's would change nothing. Now before everyone goes off. Most duck hunters and bird hunters today use a seni auto shotgun for very good reasons. They are much faster and more accurate.   A semi auto handgun is more accurate. The wheel gun requires the round to spin and no matter how good the gun the cylinders all have some degree of misalignment and flash- as opposed to eject and load as in a semi. One can hold the target far better with a semi auto. Recoil as bob stated depends on the caliber with any gun but a semi auto is back on target far faster. Now should people be required more training on them ... YUP . In addition the trigger pull of a semi which determines accuracy is much lower, 2-3 lbs vs 10 again providing far more accuracy.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 08:28 AM

"I suspect that the ACLU would be very surprised to learn that they were being given credit for this."

I'd be very surprised if they didn't. In some ways this is an example of democracy at work ... if you are a leftest (or whatever) organization with a mandate that you want signed into law and the current government hears your cause and does the deed (maybe not for the exact reason of your intent) that is democracy at work, regardless.

It was a win win democratic situation .... even if you strongly dislike and disagree the 'win' side of the right wing government. They heard your mandate and it was signed into law.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 07:57 AM

Genie, what apparently got pdq's back up was the point that you said a "30-round chamber" when it should have been 30-round magazine. The chamber is the part of the weapon in which the cartridge actually ignites, propelling the bullet down the barrel, while the magazine (or clip) is the removable item that holds rounds ready to go into the chamber. Everyone know what you meant, and it is of no importance to anyone who wasn't looking for an issue on which to ridicule somebody.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 07:55 AM

There are a few things we all should be able to agree on.   One should be that no private citizen "needs" a semi-automatic pistol. Given that Arizona, as I understand, allows concealed weapons without a permit--and that won't change any time soon--, it sounds like we should be moving to national laws to restrict the type of weapon available to people outside the police.

If anybody thinks private citizens should in fact be able to buy semi-automatic pistols, let's have the exact reasons.



Also, believe it or not, things have changed in the US since the 2nd Amendment was passed. A "well-regulated militia" was needed in the 18th century since there was a deep fear of a standing army, and it was not clear that Britain would not try to take the colonies back.   We seem to have gotten over both those fears.

And even the Supreme Court makes mistakes--and can change.    How many Mudcatters think the Dred Scott decision was right?

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Genie
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 02:47 AM

ETA:
Whatever you call Loughner's weapon or how you phrase its capacity, Loughner's weapon allowed him to shoot off 30 - no, 31 - bullets without reloading, and when he paused to reload he was immediately taken down by unarmed people in the crowd.   The point is that had his weapon not had the capacity to shoot so many bullets without reloading, fewer people would have been shot.

Yes, the kind of weapon does make a difference.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Genie
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 02:39 AM

PDQ, that's the info I heard reported on the news -- the 30-round capacity being repeated more than once.   If I sound like an idiot to you, too bad.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 11:20 PM

According to that flaming leftist rag, the Wall St. Journal, today, the shooter raged against government, and believes that government controls people too much.

Now what group is currently stoking hate and fear of government in their followers, with extremely militant, sometimes military, rhetoric?

Clue:   not the Obama admininistration.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: artbrooks
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 10:56 PM

I suspect that the ACLU would be very surprised to learn that they were being given credit for this.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: number 6
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 10:23 PM

Bobert ... burn out ... my cousin was a phsycologist at that time ... after all that crap he went into home renovations and stuck that out until he retired.

Brave New World ... familiar with that ... both left and right IMHO will use any any control possible to keep the populace under control ... I personally lean far left to the politcal spectrum due to the social well being of society ... but I also do not trust (and I keep my guard up) any government, regardless of their politcal affiliations.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: number 6
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 10:15 PM

A point of interest regarding this subject of outsourcing of the mentally ill ... in the 1970s in Canada the movement towards deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill, that is moving them out of asylums and other facilities, and releasing them into the community was initiated by our federal government while the Liberals where in power under the leadership of Pierre Trudeau ... this left wing government would be considered communist by your U.S. standards. The reason's used where for humane treatment of the mentally ill, but regardless of politcal affiliation the real reason was to save $money$.

right vs left ... in many ways they are not that different.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 10:10 PM

Hey, bILL... Ya' gotta remember that I was not only a social worker at the time working in "Adult Service" (meaning mental health clients) but also a "liberal"... So maybe my take is a little different from other folks, I donno??? But in spite of movies, I don't recall any "liberal"
push for deinstitutionlism... Might of fact, I don't think that any of my many, many "liberal" friends and band mates ever really brought the subject up until after it happened...

Once it happened it was pure Hell for us social workers... I mean, it killed off quite a few of us... Talk about burn out??? Sheet fire... Sadly, the social workers who I used to work with and are just lookin' to retirement pulled back shortly after I quit... Pulling back is the "operative" word here... People do what they can but when faced with an impossible task they pull back... Human nature...

BTW, I don't buy that everyone feeds off their counterpart... Yes, given the right circumstances, that is correct... They call that war... But war is obsolete... The only folks trying to keep them going are the folks on the right... The reactionaries... The Palins... The Becks... They want endless war because in times of war it is a lot easier to corral the peons... And, after all, corralin' the peons is what ****control**** is all about... See A. Huxley's "Brave New World" for details...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: number 6
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 09:53 PM

Bobert ... "BTW, I quit a year later and looked for something else to do with my life" ... same thing happened with my cousin .... he did just as you did.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: pdq
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 09:51 PM

You are on the right track, biLL.

The ACLU wanted people who could dress and feed themselves to be freed from the mental institutions.

In the late 1960 the halfway house industry took over much of the responsibility from the mental institutions.

The ACLU had their victory but they did not really realize the total consequences of their actions.

Reagan never had a Republican majority in the state legislature while he was governor nor in the federal ligislature while he was president. He is hated by the Left because he is the only man who took the country right. The only one of 44 presidents.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: number 6
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 09:49 PM

come on Bobert, put the bong down for a moment and think this out .... he took his clue from a leftist organization as a good excuse to sign the bill and save some $cash$ ... in doing so he feels he has done a lefty act of good deed at the same tiem. And everyone at the time has gone out and seen the flick "Cuckoo's Nest" and are (feel they are) fully aware of the condition of confinment of the mentally ill.

Geez man ... don't you see it .... everyone feeds off of each other ... the left and the right. It's all part of the big machine.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 09:48 PM

Ya got that one right, bILL..

I remember when the Title XX money was cut down to nuthin' by Reagan like it was yesterday!!! I still have a cartoon I did depicting the average social worker as a bus driver/maid/nurse/pharmacist/cop/secretary... I still have it... It's not so funny but it sho nuff set social work back 30 years...

BTW, I quit a year later and looked for something else to do with my life...

B~