 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 22 - 05:25 PM Co operator is right. It is well done in America that guns have more rights than women and children. 3 truths; It is easier to buy a AR 15 than to rent a car. Gun safety will not take guns away from lawful owners Republican States have the most gun deaths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 21 Oct 22 - 11:44 AM This guy here says he is America. You blamin' him? He tried in his day but nobody who was anybody believed it and they don't believe it still. Paul Robeson |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 21 Oct 22 - 10:37 AM Well done America, you have excelled yourself this time. I suppose as far as you are concerned, if the 15 month old infant was carrying a firearm he/she could have defended his/herself. But who am I to question your view that the odd infant being shot to death here or there should not interfere with your god given right to own bang bangs. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/baby-three-year-old-shot-pennsylvania-b2207208.html?utm_medium=Social&ut |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 14 Dec 21 - 10:47 PM Ebbie, why would it not be tragic for the families of the folks killed from your overpass example? I love terminology nuances. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 14 Dec 21 - 08:32 AM https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/us/sandy-hook-newtown-shooting-victims-profiles/index.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 14 Dec 21 - 06:27 AM Tragic in the news seems to apply to children. The usual adjective regarding shootings is quantitative like "today we had a triple shooting or like yesterday a quadruple shooting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 14 Dec 21 - 05:22 AM (I am apparently still not done with terminology) As Steve Shaw said, way above there, 'tragedy' grates on me. Outcomes clearly are tragic but the event may be more infuriating than anything else. If I go to a highway overpass and start shooting into every vehicle, it is not tragic. It may be sick, may be unhinged or a matter of anger, but it was preventable. The only way it would be tragic would be if a tumor were growing in my brain, say, so that I went from being a balanced, empathetic individual to a horrific killer. What is tragic, to my mind, is something out of one's control. Like from tornadoes or earthquakes or a lightning strike. And to quote Mr. Gump: That's all I have to say about that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 11 Dec 21 - 12:07 PM In the current realm of thread drift; The concept of improper use in military situations has more or less re-disappeared since 9-11. The old saying was if its not on paper it doesn't exist. (paperless) Verbal permission crept into the works with conducting any form of torture with the bomb is ticking excuse. Then drones, then no paper records, then anything goes upfront and behind to cover your ass. Be it the Phillipines and Viet Nam torture was ever present but G W. Bush went further to change laws with attorney Gonzales and change our Geneva Convention response protocols. Improper use only exists in a proportional response scenario at the highest levels (conventional vs Nuclear). A wink and a nod is the primary ethics of today imo Some tortures are gentle like mock burials and some are violent. In real authoritarian regiemes burials are swift and real. Alberto Gonzales is currently the Dean of Belmont University College of Law, in Nashville, Tennessee, where he currently teaches National Security Law. The slippery torture slope for the last 20 years has become steeper and cliff like when it comes to the SOP of barbarism. There is a point where torture is worse than a m4 or ar15 wound. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Doug Chadwick Date: 11 Dec 21 - 10:38 AM What *is* proper use of a bomb? If an aerial bombardment is used on an industrial site, to destroy the enemy's capability to wage war, then this could be seen as the "proper" use. Any human casualties could be seen as collateral damage or, indeed, as part of the enemy's war machine. The ultimate aim is to bring the conflict to a swift end, thus minimising death and destruction. Improper use would be where the aim is to maximise carnage, as in a terrorist attack. The more outrages the act, the greater the publicity. The Manchester Arena bombing is a case where it was clear beforehand that many of the dead and injured would be too young to have any political influence and were thus wholly innocent victims. Because they are so poorly managed and so badly cleared up after the event, I would put land mines firmly into the improper use. DC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 11 Dec 21 - 09:45 AM What *is* proper use of a bomb? Bombing. So not misuse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Dec 21 - 07:54 PM "Ah, but bombing folks with a bomb is not misuse of that bomb." Words fail me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 10 Dec 21 - 02:54 PM SPB-C: Sticking to the subject of guns, you raise a broad question. Also the memory of the Simpson's episode where Homer goes to buy a gun: "What do you mean I have to wait five days? I'm angry NOW!" A gun manufacturer presumably does not know the individual destinies of its products. You can certainly argue that the nature of the weapon can give an idea. But the generic explanation is: "It's for protection." And another from Homer: "Marge, it's a feeling of power. When I'm holding a gun I know what God feels like, when HE'S holding a gun!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 10 Dec 21 - 09:19 AM Ah, but bombing folks with a bomb is not misuse of that bomb. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 10 Dec 21 - 09:03 AM Robomatic - by that argument, if I was to manufacture nail bombs in my kitchen (in case I am being spied on my GCHQ - I have no intention of ever doing that) - does that mean that as long as a sell them rather than use them, and clearly describe their purpose, I would be exempt from prosecution? Surely if you manufacture something, you have a duty to ensure that it is not going to fall into the hands of someone who will misuse it. Also taking the NRA line that the solution of bad guys having guns is selling more guns to good guys is almost a gaurantee that more bad guys will get guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 09 Dec 21 - 08:08 PM I'm short on the details but the NRA even managed to prevent the NIH from collecting or publishing data on gun wounds and deaths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 09 Dec 21 - 07:05 PM I'd finesse the argument somewhat. When a gun manufacturer is taken to court over their gun having been fired and taken a life, they can answer simply that the gun did exactly what it was designed to do. Gun manufacturers have been taken to court over malfunctioning designs. But, it has been difficult to prove that the gun went off without having its trigger pulled. What should be worked on here is that there are ways to make guns technically more safe for their owners by making sure only their owners can fire them. The NRA took a strong stand against such developments being implemented and made available to the public. If the NRA is truly weakened this is the time to get such new age developments (not really 'new' at this stage) into production. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 09 Dec 21 - 06:57 AM Jump in your wayback machine and recall when auto companies first became liable for making an unsafe vehicle and faced damages for their victims; Set your dial to Unsafe at any Speed and see Ralph Nader begin his crusade. Gun Manufactures are just as vulnerable as the auto and airplane industry. It takes a crusader, victims and those taking the bribes to be exposed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 08 Dec 21 - 02:43 PM I thought we were in agreement that it wasn't terrorism, in our opinions? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 08 Dec 21 - 01:49 PM We know that society doesn't move by logic. I also know when a villain digs a hole deep enough leave them alone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Dec 21 - 09:52 AM Your sense of logic seems to have taken the day off. Again, the incident we're talking about is about as far removed from the generally-accepted meaning of terrorism as it's possible to be. I do understand that the death of your dad in a terrorist attack must be a wound that can't heal, but this thread is about the shooting "tragedies" in recent years carried out mostly by deranged people who freely possess guns and who (mostly) are not aligned with terrorist organisations. Of course, we can make the thread about anything we like, but that's how I read it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 08 Dec 21 - 09:31 AM Not sure what other context it would be relevant in, Steve Shaw. And I do think that the problem with guns in America is the Americans, much more than the guns. Lots of countries, Western ones, have well-armed populations. But those people don't think that shooting other people is a viable response to being made uncomfortable, and Americans do. And that is the problem with shootings. Sure, they require guns. But guns are not *sufficient* - only necessary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 07 Dec 21 - 05:58 PM It has fallen on students, teachers, school admin, churchs, concert goers and always late first responders instead of the true difference makers to pass sensible gun laws, which is the Republican party legislatures, for a bit of cash and temporary votes. The NRA is in its death throes but there are other lobbys in waiting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 07 Dec 21 - 09:56 AM A number of years ago, someone managed to get an interview with a young kid in Wash. D.C. who was in jail for shooting someone. He was asked something like..."Whatever happened to 2 guys just fighting when they had a big disagreement?" "Man," he said, (paraphrased) "that's way too much trouble! And besides, YOU might get hurt. If you got a piece, you don't even have to get close to him... *bang*, it's over." "But what if he and his friends come after you?" "You just gotta be smarter than them and get them first!" ============================== Of course it makes little sense, but in many inner cities and in certain cultures...especially when drug sales are an issue,that's a common attitude. "THEY have guns.. I need one to 'protect' myself!" And so it goes..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Dec 21 - 05:05 AM The overwhelming majority of people neither need nor should have access to guns. That's a common feeling shared by millions in most western countries. It doesn't happen in the US because your successive administrations are scared shitless of the gun lobby (which is unelected, of course). Let's be honest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 07 Dec 21 - 04:02 AM Yet again another gun thread. >:-( I feel obligated to put in my two dollars (inflation, eh?) It ain't about guns... it's about mental health, and the access to guns by some people who should not have such access. Such has been addressed here in The Great White Frozen, and criminals still have guns. So, why don't you stop the criminals, and leave law abiding citizens alone? DON'T ANSWER - I'm busy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Dec 21 - 06:30 PM I'm afraid that you misread my post. To be expected, I suppose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 06 Dec 21 - 06:00 PM Somewhat disturbed? Thats an understatement. Over here we live within this grim gun reality like extra inflamed skin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Dec 21 - 05:26 PM The post I responded to is no longer here, Mrrzy. My point was intended to take you up on your apparent defence of gun ownership on the grounds that guns don't kill people, people kill people. The numbers of gun killings in your country, set alongside the stats from other western countries, completely negate that argument. As for terrorism, my view is that a charge of terrorism levelled against a feckless 15-year-old who is not a member of any terrorism setup as far as we know, and who has equally feckless, stupid parents, is highly inappropriate. I'm very sorry about your father, but I'm somewhat disturbed that you feel the need to bring that up in this context. Clear enough? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 06 Dec 21 - 03:14 PM Manslaughter by neglect is against the manufacturer. Vehicular homicide is against the driver. There was a gun case that began with your line of questioning but I don't think you are going that direction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Thompson Date: 06 Dec 21 - 02:24 PM Donuel, has a car maker ever been brought to court and held responsible for someone murdering someone with a car they made? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 06 Dec 21 - 01:44 PM I flew to Alaska in a small plane. I bought a 'survival' rifle, a .22LR with a metal barrel and trigger assembly which could be stored in a plastic floatable stock. Always reported it to the Canadian authorities when crossing borders. One of the agents told me due to its barrel length he had the power to confiscate it. He didn't of course. I figured they designed their regulations to give them that power if they deemed the Yankee in any ways dangerous. In that era they were more concerned that I could pay my way through. Plus this was western Canada, where many of the locals had hunting weapons as well. What is consistently ignored by the reactionary folks is that while they are so often eager to label the rifle as a 'tool' a la Rifleman with Chuck Connors, few of them reflect that the 'tool' matters. It's the idea that if your go-to tool is a hammer, your problems look like nails. If your tool is a firearm, well...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Dec 21 - 11:51 AM The parents are clearly idiots. I suspect we'll be watching the political side of this roll out in coming months. Here are two more folks to work as staff for our bellicose GOP House of Representative junior members. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 06 Dec 21 - 09:20 AM About what, Steve Shaw? That I don't think it was terrorism? I just don't think so. I did not state that it wasn't. And what does my not owning guns have to do with that? I speak more from a my-dad-was-killed-by-terrorists experience than anything else, there. Which you know, I think. If it was an earlier comment, please specify. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 06 Dec 21 - 06:50 AM The price of doing good business and the value of human life have become the same thing. AMMO |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Rain Dog Date: 06 Dec 21 - 05:11 AM I know that guns are allowed in the USA and that quite a few folks want that to continue, but... "A US congressman has faced a barrage of criticism after he posted a Christmas photograph of his family posing with military-style rifles, just days after a deadly school shooting. Kentucky's Republican representative, Thomas Massie, tweeted the photo with the caption: "Merry Christmas! ps. Santa, please bring ammo". The post has been condemned by a host of families affected by gun violence, plus figures on both sides of politics." BBC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Dec 21 - 01:57 PM I can't tell you how wrong I think you are, Mrrzy. Tell me (only if you like), do you have a gun or guns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 05 Dec 21 - 09:59 AM I see a 'trigedy' with more to come. remember... These are just the good ol days, seeing that everything is going to grow gradually worse. :^) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Dec 21 - 09:26 AM Oops, in the plural of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Dec 21 - 09:26 AM Following what Ebbie said, every time I open this thread the word "tragedy" grates with me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 05 Dec 21 - 08:57 AM The kid SAID he had problems, and gave plenty of warnings. He has a mental disease defense. The parents have no such excuse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 05 Dec 21 - 07:45 AM edit Car makers HAVE respondsibilities while gun makers were legislated to be immune. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 05 Dec 21 - 07:03 AM The parents are but one significant color in the rainbow of reasons for tragic shootings. The first reason is $. Its all about the Benjamines. Its the manufacturer profits #1 and secondly the fun of effecting something at a distance as if a person has the psychic power of precision or revenge. Yeah - guns are fun, almost magical, for those who enjoy them. Then there is the psychological training for soldiers regarding the gun...don't get me started... The 2nd ammendment is just a farcical legal excuse for gun makers. The 2nd ammendment is also good for those who depend entirely on guns to feed their family but they are few. It was the NRA $ that gave immunity to the gun makers themselves and who still bear no legal respondsibility like car makers to this day. Involuntary murder is the legal term in the Michigan charges against the parents. I prefer 'unintentional' murder since you may not intend to commit murder yourself but you help in the commission of murder. There is nothing involuntary about it. (they volunteered) The child called his new gun 'my beauty'. "The beauty of a gun in a small man's hands is what what makes them feel big." quote donuel |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Dec 21 - 06:48 AM I think Creep is a bit too polite. People can be creeps as far as their behaviour is concerned, but that does not necessarily make them a murderer as well. I would tend to go for terminology such as murdering s*** which cannot be glorified in any way whatsoever. If people who use guns get used to the idea that they are seen by society as the bottom layer of pond life, then maybe that would make a difference. Also, media needs to stop making excuses for white murderers, that somehow they are just as much a victim of something or other, whereas a black murderer would only be thought of as a murderer, and a Muslims, somehow being classed as terrorist by virtue of nothing except for their race or religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 05 Dec 21 - 05:22 AM THAT should be the headline. (I wasn't finished.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 05 Dec 21 - 05:20 AM I see that way back in 2012 there was talk of holding parents accountable when their child acquires a gun and uses it against children. Obviously, we have learned nothing. There have been HUNDREDS of such events in the USA in 2021 - and the year isn't over yet. I also have beef with terminology. When someone shoots up a school resulting in the deaths of multiple children, we call it a tragedy. OF COURSE, the results are tragic, but it was preventable. The act was STUPID, SICK, done by a CREEP. We need to get it across to our children that infamy is not the same as fame, that shooting unarmed people does not make you a 'gunman'. For the moment, disregard the almost inevitable fact that the creep had 'reasons'- take care of that later. In the meantime, he is a CREEP. I |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stilly River Sage Date: 04 Dec 21 - 12:11 PM The felony murder option has been abused mightily over the years but it does allow participants in an act to be held accountable for an event even if they didn't pull the trigger. It looks like some aspect of it will apply here for the parents who viewed the lead-up to the whole episode in reckless disregard. They were arraigned this morning and as a MSNBC conversation pointed out yesterday, they will probably not be able to get bail bonds since they've already proven they're a flight risk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 04 Dec 21 - 11:34 AM This country has been under fire from the NRA sponsored laws that promote children guns to the point blank legal shooting of people to stand your ground. We need to pull the trigger on reasonable gun laws to give cover to schools and society at large. Our children are in the cross hairs of this fire fight and are caught in the crossfire. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 03 Dec 21 - 06:38 PM Michigan has no law for a mandatory lock box for guns but the prosecutor has brought charges of unintentional manslaughter against the parents who have since diaappeared. The son is charged with first degree murder. The manslaughter charges require proving 3 things of which trying to prove intent is always an uphill challenge. Charging kids as adults has been around for decades as part of a get tough on crime program. The FBI is mad at the prosecuter for not charging parents while in custody and the prosecutor is mad at the school and the families are sad beyond belief. The gun manufacturers and customers feel happy as a ... fill in the blank. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Thompson Date: 03 Dec 21 - 08:58 AM I can't understand the concept of trying a child as an adult. If someone's a child, s/he should only be brought to court as a child. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion's brother Andrew Date: 02 Dec 21 - 06:12 PM There may be no basis for criminal action, but possibly a tort for negligence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 02 Dec 21 - 04:35 PM It depends on State Law. In California the parents could face charges. In Michigan there is no such law, responsible parents or legislature. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 02 Dec 21 - 10:58 AM I am not sure I agree with this kid being charged with terrorism, but I fully back any efforts to charge the *parents* with something. They had ample warning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 02 Dec 21 - 08:21 AM Not reacting, just reporting here. Nothing really I can add that I haven't already said over and over again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 21 - 04:51 AM For those of us who prefer to avoid Facebook like the plague (thus avoiding its plethora of kneejerk reactions), there's a concise report in the Guardian that covers it under the headline "Michigan high school shooting suspect, 15, appears at court hearing." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 02 Dec 21 - 04:20 AM https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=271831755048406&set=a.201905688707680 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 11 Oct 21 - 05:54 PM It may be an editorial matter but the local news reports more shootings than car crashes everyday. They announce it like; A (double, triple or quadruple) shooting has occurred at (such&such), only (some number) has died and the others have non life threatening injuries. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 09 Oct 21 - 04:50 PM A dozen shootings per week - in a local area? Hardly something you want to boast, is it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 07 Oct 21 - 06:13 PM Our local news has almost a dozen shooting stories a week. National news limits shooting stories to schools for the most part. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 05 Oct 21 - 03:25 PM To maximize aryan stock, Liebensborn orphanages were made for the offspring from single girls and married SS soldiers who passed the purity tests and attended screwing camp. Sterilization was more efficient than abortion for the nondesirables. Banning legal abortion in the US will work against Republicans in the end. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 05 Oct 21 - 11:17 AM Um, yeah, that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Oct 21 - 09:37 AM You mean the duty to breed 'good aryan stock' and anyone who was born who didn't come up to spec an the risk of being eradicated? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 05 Oct 21 - 07:47 AM Those are some cynicly dark anti abortion reasons but then again so was the 3rd REICH'S POLICIES ON REPRODUCTION. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Oct 21 - 06:50 AM Surely gun owners need people to breed so that there will be an ongoing supply of schoolkids that they can massacre. And also if children are not born into poverty or needing lifelong intensive care who else are they going to point the finger at, demonise and blame for having to pay taxes and all the evils in the world? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 04 Oct 21 - 07:40 PM The Trump Supream Court by the end of the year, will grant more rights to gun owners/makers than uterus owners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 04 Oct 21 - 05:47 PM Blase'? The kids around here have a game of shooting out windows and glass doors. Even my gas station has been hit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Oct 21 - 02:59 PM Only those that come up on my facebook news feeds. I don't go out of my way looking for them, just share the ones that make the news here - just to stop people getting blase and conflating them with parking offences. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stilly River Sage Date: 02 Oct 21 - 12:41 AM Judge orders Alex Jones to pay damages to Sandy Hook families It was a long time coming, but Alex Jones has to cough up some cash. Far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is responsible for all damages in two lawsuits instigated after he falsely called the Sandy Hook shooting a "giant hoax," a Texas judge ruled this week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 13 Sep 21 - 07:05 PM Like Donuel said... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 13 Sep 21 - 03:43 PM If you are going to chronical the US shootings you will have 50,000+ posts of wounded and dead in a year. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 13 Sep 21 - 04:48 AM and again |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 08 Sep 21 - 11:13 AM The shootings are practically casual today; owe money BANG, stupid driving BANG, mask debate BANG, line at chicken sandwich take out dispute BANG. I'm glad we don't get shot over the phone; "I'm returning your call, what do you want?. Could you possibly have a wrong number? "GET OFF MY PHONE BITCH! BANG". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 06 Sep 21 - 06:21 AM And so it continues - another gun nut who wanted to show how big he is. again and again |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 24 Jun 21 - 11:42 AM I saw the parents who did this for their slain son. Sasha Baron Cohen has humilliated these NRA officials as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 24 Jun 21 - 09:55 AM I read about this. Ha. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 24 Jun 21 - 05:31 AM https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/559893-former-nra-president-gun-rights-advocate-speak-at-fake-high The 3,044 empty chairs represent the high school graduates that were killed by gun violence. NRA officials did not know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 17 Jun 21 - 06:18 PM Lobbying isn't just squauking the loudest . It involves donations aka getting paid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 15 Jun 21 - 03:11 PM The NRA currently lobbies in the traditional sense, they have supported with campaign finance money those congressfolk that pass the know-nothing legislation mentioned above, they have maintained or financed spokespersons on radio and video media with an extremist political agenda, and they have continued to keep as Executive Vice President a nutjob because he is a highly effective and highly quoted super spokesperson. They have joined forces with the 'fear and loathing' elements of the current culture wars. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 14 Jun 21 - 03:20 PM To be fair, the NRA merely lobbied. Congress passed laws prohibiting gun death research. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 14 Jun 21 - 09:59 AM We work for the NIH and this is very old news I posted long ago too, still I'm glad you are informed. Points of view are inherently self centered, like yourself for example. To be fair, me too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 13 Jun 21 - 04:09 PM And Don'l catches up to my post of 07 Jun 21 - 01:40 PM It is somewhat ironic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 13 Jun 21 - 04:04 PM The NRA had laws passed that made it illegal to compile data on gun violence and research into the medical treatment of gunshot wounds by the NIH. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 13 Jun 21 - 01:05 PM again Victim to legal gun ownership. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 13 Jun 21 - 10:14 AM Yes... but simple statistics are not nearly so...umm.. interesting... hmmm? The overriding point is that easy access to guns, legal or illegal, means that they are more likely to be the simplest method of committing suicide or robbery, settling arguments, seeking revenge, ...or just expressing anger, frustration and general mental instability. It may be that the % of the population likely to commit gun violence doesn't change much, but as the population increases, the more instances will occur. Copy-cat killings as violence prone people read about others is probably a factor also... I don't see many interviews with those who do it, as they very often die in the process. BTW...that "Beltway Sniper" thing in Maryland/DC a number of years ago... 2 of the incidents happened within 5 minutes drive of my house. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 13 Jun 21 - 06:59 AM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/man-kills-wife-gun-montgomery-b1864691.html More than 4 times as many gunshot deaths are women victims of domestic violence than are the result of mass shootings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 11 Jun 21 - 03:57 PM I disagree that making guns illegal would be a first step toward changing attitudes. Cart before hearse, I might even add. When has making anything illegal made it less desirable? Prohibition didn't work, eother. Anyway, if attitudes changed, gun laws would be moot. I agree that Murrica glorifies violence, and that it ought not. Sigh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 11 Jun 21 - 03:30 PM Yeah.. lots of IFs. I really love supposed analysis with NO idea how to begin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 11 Jun 21 - 02:16 PM it is down to governments to legislate. But they mind find that gun control is much less hassle. And if film goers don't have the appetite to watch each gun victim going through a protracted slow death and vote with their feet, then it wouldn't be worth the film industry's interest to portray gun violence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 11 Jun 21 - 11:21 AM Sure... would YOU like to take the lead in that effort to alter the entire film and TV industries attitudes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 11 Jun 21 - 06:12 AM And also stop glorifying violence by heroes in action films and tv programmes, or at least fully show the entire impact of someone being killed or wounded in full, from first response, patient transport, hospital response, and the emotional impact of every individual and eye-witness, the impact of crime scene disputation, etc. Then instead of the 10 second suspension of reality, it would add anything between a day and a week of the programme film running time. Then at least violence would no longer be entertaining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Jun 21 - 06:01 PM A major step towards changing attitudes to violence would be to make it illegal to walk around with a gun in your possession. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 10 Jun 21 - 05:46 PM Lots of places have liberal gun laws and lots of guns, but only in Murrica is it considered a right to shoot people for annoying you, rather than a responsibility to make sure nobody gets shot when there is no life on the line. Yes, if guns were harder to get, fewer people would be able to shoot other people for no good reason. But changing the attitude toward violence is way more necessary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 10 Jun 21 - 09:25 AM Thats why arming little kids is not a good idea, although it has been proposed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 09 Jun 21 - 02:56 PM Another one |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 07 Jun 21 - 06:28 PM When a female member of congress was shot at an outside event a few years ago, in the crowd was a young man who was armed, and was reaching for his gun.... before he could draw it, someone grabbed the shooter's arm and he was captured. The young man said that he was mistaken about where HE thought the shot came from, and he was glad he hadn't shot the wrong person. In that Colorado movie theater a few years ago, can you imagine if 7-8 people had been armed and began shooting...maybe at each other in mistaken idea about their target? Good guys with guns can be more dangerous than bad ones. Too many guns... too many disturbed and/or angry people... far too few solutions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Jun 21 - 04:47 PM What you are calling my "predigested arguments brought to the fray" are nothing of the sort. What is happening here is that you've brought a tired old cod-aphorism to "the fray." We've all heard that one a thousand times. You have extremely liberal gun laws and you have extremely high rates of gun deaths. Do try to make the connection. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 07 Jun 21 - 03:16 PM We used to average 30,000 gun fatalities per year which includes everything from suicide to individual murders and not just mass shootings of 4 or more people at a time. At least thats my take on the low numbers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Helen Date: 07 Jun 21 - 03:16 PM I watched the ABC America News yesterday and there were alarming statistics of the number of children injured or killed in the U.S. in gun related incidents. Two children have been fatally shot just this week. What does it take to stop this senseless violence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Raggytash Date: 07 Jun 21 - 03:08 PM Only 283? (in 5 months ........ I've looked at the figures) Well to most sane people that's 283 too many, and that is only the reported number. 19,379 people in 2020 15,292 people in 2019 39,740 people in 2018 Perhaps someone needs to give their head a shake. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 07 Jun 21 - 01:40 PM You bring your predigested arguments to the fray and overlook the elegant simplicity of the statement which is not an argument. It is a statement of fact. People are the killers Guns are the extremely efficient and effective tools. The problem is the willingness of the people to be the one. The problem is also the ready availability of the other. Many problems can't be solved by addressing only one of the above. They HAVE to be dealt with by addressing both. This means there must be accurate data collection. There must be education. There must be regulation. Until all of those are faced and dealt with the problem will not go away. A lot of the other statements only spread heat, not light. The lack of understanding of the aphorism above only underlines the truth: Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns just make it very very easy. An extremely well known and somewhat influential wingnut made an erroneous and dangerous aphorism: "To stop a bad guy with a gun, it takes a good guy with a gun." It completely ignores the likelihood that the gun can change a non-killer into a killer by its availability. I'm thinking abourt an old duffer who had his gun in a movie theater and shot someone who was merely being a pest. It's as simple as observiing that if your only tool is a hammer, your problems take on the appearance of nails. Once the duffer had shot the nuisance guy, it was retroactively a case of self-defense. Because, now, it had to be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Jun 21 - 12:32 PM Well it's bear country, not people country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 07 Jun 21 - 12:06 PM People who live in bear country deserve a special exemption from some sensible gun laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Jun 21 - 11:01 AM Read what again? Guns are made for killing. If guns were made just for irritating people, then bullets would be made from foam rubber or pieces of potato. If guns were intended to hurt and not kill, then bullets would be made from balsawood or dried peas. You put a gun into someone's hand and they can kill from a distance. Unless you were to resort to bows and arrows or slingshots or Russian nerve agents painted on doorknobs, then guns are just about the only means that you can use to kill from a considerable distance. You make it easier for people to kill with guns and your kill numbers will go up astronomically, and your gun kill numbers will go up astronomically. That's what your warpers of the Second Amendment have delivered for your country. Brainless faux-aphorisms about "it's people, not guns", are an excuse for keeping things as they are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 07 Jun 21 - 09:45 AM In the USA this new year alone, guns have injured over 1,000 people but have Killed only 283. By robomoron's arguement it is apparent 'people' are notoriously bad shots. He might even agree that guns need to be 200% more lethal to help 'people' with their murderous intent and btw stop picking on the poor innocent gun! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 07 Jun 21 - 02:13 AM Before rushing to judge that hapless mother, how do we know the neighbours dog wasn't carrying a gun..??? .. it is America... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 06 Jun 21 - 08:37 PM Steve: In all earnestness, maybe you should read it slowly all the way through and think about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Jun 21 - 05:21 PM That is absolute bollocks, robomatic, and is a lameduck excuse for maintaining your country's abhorrent gun indulgence exactly as it is. Maybe you should ditch the denial of your annual gun death statistics, as compared with countries that have sensible gun restrictions... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 06 Jun 21 - 03:28 PM I did not originate this, but I take every opportunity to echo: "Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns just make it very very easy." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 06 Jun 21 - 10:15 AM An example of what we are up against here in the attempts to combat guns... Judge who LOVES 2nd Amendment. Coupled with "states rights", it reminds me of Sisyphus and his stone....but here there are several 'stones', and if one gets moved up a bit, others roll back. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 05 Jun 21 - 11:43 AM It's quite likely that a small child hit in the stomach will face a lifetime of medical repairs. Which means that gun nut just shot herself into bankruptcy and will end up living under a bridge regardless of the criminal repercussions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Rusty Dobro Date: 04 Jun 21 - 03:40 PM Meanwhile, over in the UK, a fifteen-year-old was walking to school in our quiet village when his former best friend got out of a car which he had borrowed/stolen from his father, took from the boot a shotgun which he had borrowed/stolen from his grandad, and shot him in the face at close range. The court case goes on, and so, in some shape or form, does the victim’s life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 04 Jun 21 - 02:47 PM "And I will continue to notify this thread as and when these tragedies continue to happen" You're going to be very busy. Debate will happen either way. It does on the news media I follow almost every day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 04 Jun 21 - 11:51 AM The govenor of California asked he rhetorical question "What is wrong with us" Its time someone answered his question |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Jun 21 - 09:31 AM Bill, And I will continue to notify this thread as and when these tragedies continue to happen. It is only be ensuring debate that the world does not become sanitised about the impact that dogged clinging on the so called liberties has on innocent people's lives. I have debated the subject and provided international comparisons over and over, so now I am just raising and commenting on individual events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 04 Jun 21 - 08:48 AM Helen..I have over the years posted many times about the history of the USA and guns.... and the serious issue of **States Rights** and the problem of amending the Constitution to clarify the 2nd Amendment. I KNOW the rest of the world can barely comprehend how it all works.. and doesn't work. Be assured, most of us are NOT obsessed with guns... but enough are that the problem can not easily be addressed when many members of Congress (guess which party) dodge the question. Every country has some issue that divides it... we just have one of the most visible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Jun 21 - 07:40 AM Because it happened to her own son, hen there will be one positive coming from this: it is unlikely she will want to own a firearm again - but the problem is that for everyone else it is somebody else's child, which doesn't matter to them. Some of the press is already referring to this as an accident. Like she accidently bought a firearm, she accidentally loaded it, she accidently carried it, she accidently took it into her hand, she accidently aimed it across the road and she accidently pulled the trigger. The only accident was that she was a bad shot and instead of killing someone's pet dog she missed and shot her son in the stomach instead. I hope she gets a life sentence. She is a danger to society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 04 Jun 21 - 07:18 AM Same in the UK, Helen, but I fear that the US is a lost cause - way too much money involved in the firearms industry, way too many brainwashed Americans who believe in a flawed interpretation of a badly-worded 2nd Amendment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Helen Date: 04 Jun 21 - 06:22 AM In Australia, it is extremely rare and usually makes headline news if someone shoots someone else, and it is even more rare if it is a mass shooting. One of the biggest mass shooting in Australia in the last century was at Port Douglas in 1996. That's 25 years ago. We have had a couple of terrorist or similar attacks, but apart from rival bikie gangs or drug deals gone wrong, it is very, very rare. When I look at news about shooting events in the USA, it seems to be perceived as commonplace, almost like an accepted norm in society. I don't get it. How can that be socially normal in a highly developed country? Our firearm laws and firearm controls are very strict. It's not easy to buy a firearm. You need a gun licence. The Police control the licences. It is well controlled and socially responsible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Jun 21 - 05:02 AM Because she was carrying a firearm? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 04 Jun 21 - 04:50 AM It isn’t. Where did I say it is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 04 Jun 21 - 04:40 AM why is shooting dogs worse than shooting people or children |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 04 Jun 21 - 03:03 AM OK, why in the name of all that’s holy would anyone shoot a neighbour’s dog that escaped from the owner’s yard? People who live in civilised countries shouldn’t behave like barbarians - here, on the rare occasion a neighbour’s dog escapes their yard, we would use food as a bait to catch it and take it back to the owners. Either that, or call the local authority’s Dog-Warden. Whatever, it’s more evidence of the lunacy of a country that allows any Tom, Dick, or Harriet to own guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 03 Jun 21 - 01:18 PM Gee...*I* started this thread in 2012. Go read the first page and note how --- ummm... much |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 03 Jun 21 - 12:42 PM UT was someone else's puppy that managed to escape through the owners door. The shooter has been charged with discharge of a firearm and the pet owner on leash laws. https://www.newsweek.com/angelia-mia-vargas-shooting-5-year-old-houston-texas-1596763 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Jun 21 - 12:02 PM Even worse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 03 Jun 21 - 10:59 AM Might have been somebody else's pet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Jun 21 - 10:08 AM Why would anyone shoot their pet dog? Don’t they have vetinarians in that God-forsaken shit-hole of a country? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 03 Jun 21 - 09:48 AM Gun sales have surpassed the all time record set during the Obama administration. I prefer RPGs to teeny handguns. They are slower but louder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 03 Jun 21 - 09:26 AM Latest to reach the news here. A mother shot her 5 year old son in the stomach while trying to shoot a pet dog. Maybe if her son followed the NRA line and carried a firearm he could have defended himself from his mother. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Senoufou Date: 01 Nov 20 - 01:13 PM Two nights ago a blooming shooting party was busy in the fields around our village. 'Lamping'. It sounded as if there were about 15 of the clots, and it went on until 2.30am. Killing wildlife for fun. Delightful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 01 Nov 20 - 12:07 PM Knives prepare vegetables, spread sandwich fillings, cut cooked food, only functions of a gun are to kill and wound. Anything can be used as a weapon is it is misused. I gun is used as a weapon when it is used properly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 01 Nov 20 - 11:56 AM Donuel, Guns are designed for the purpose of people killing other people or other living things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: leeneia Date: 01 Nov 20 - 10:33 AM So do knives. The knifing statistics from the UK are very bad and troubling. Europe might be bad too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 30 Oct 20 - 04:43 PM I repeat from last year: Guns don't kill people People kill people Guns just make it very very easy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 30 Oct 20 - 12:51 PM Thats less good news. There are already more guns than people. Stopping gun sales all together would have been better news. These are extra stressful times already. We have a Presidential candidate who is doing the equivalent of giving out squirt guns filled with Covid virus at rallies. No Joe O that was not misinformation unless you take the squirt gun remark literally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 30 Oct 20 - 11:55 AM Walmart is trying to avoid rioters breaking in and stealing thousands of guns. They will still sell to people who ask and have permits. I hope they have their stock well hidden! IF there are riots, I would suspect that there are plenty guns already in the hands of the people most likely to start trouble. (most threads that *I* start don't last this long) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 30 Oct 20 - 11:19 AM Good move. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Oct 20 - 07:09 AM ‘Eventuality’? Feckin’ autocorrect! EVENT!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Oct 20 - 03:25 AM ”Somebody is finally getting the message at Walmart. Walmart removes guns and ammunition displays” Presumably in anticipation of serious and widespread civil unrest in the eventuality of Agent Orange’s defeat in the Presidential Election? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 29 Oct 20 - 07:06 PM Somebody is finally getting the message at Walmart. Walmart removes guns and ammunition displays |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 23 Dec 19 - 10:44 AM Canuckistan is about to 'strengthen' laws re law abiding citizens. I think they should do something about criminals instead. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 22 Dec 19 - 02:26 PM Motive has yet to be established in the shooting at the subsidized housing complex for elderly and disabled, low-income, in Westerly, Rhode Island within the past seven days. What has been established, however, is the dead shooter's past history. When his marriage ended in divorce in or around 2002, the ex-husband was admitted to a mental hospital in Providence, Rhode Island, after threatening to kill his wife and himself. Besides being committed to a mental hospital and having his marriage end in divorce, a family court judge issued a restraining order at the time. As previously reported, the man shot three women in the housing complex, two of them employees/managers. The victim who was killed was one of the complex managers. The other two women remain in hospital, one of them in critical condition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 20 Dec 19 - 01:30 PM From Westerly, Rhode Island: Today it is being reported that the shooter, who killed himself, was a resident at the assisted living affordable-housing complex; and two of the three people who were shot, including the woman who died of her injuries, were housing-facility employees. Thursday shooting in Rhode Islans |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 20 Dec 19 - 11:18 AM "Pro gun" is too general a term. It could mean just in favor of sane uses by hunters..etc. The problem is too many of the wrong types of guns too easily available to the wrong people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 20 Dec 19 - 10:44 AM Lots of dems are pro-gun, too. Much as I'd like to add to the republican-bashing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 19 Dec 19 - 03:03 PM The {Constitution} guarantees the right to defend ourselves with GUNS against senior citizens to Kindegardeners. The rest of it is just silly words. DJT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 19 Dec 19 - 01:57 PM This story is still going on, in a sense. But the shooting, it would appear, has finally stopped at this particular incident. The location is Westerly, Rhode Island. This is a community on the shoreline, very different in the summer than it is in the winter. In the summer there are a lot of "summer-house" part-time residents or visitors. At this time of year, the population is much lower, and many of the year-round residents are elderly. The shooting location is a group home of affordable housing for low-income elderly and disabled. The authorities went after the shooting suspect who has just this moment been reported dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Took a while to find the suspect, though, and the whole area was on lockdown. In the affordable-housing "village," three people were shot, and one has been pronounced dead at hospital. shooting in Rhode Island |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 18 Nov 19 - 02:43 PM "Three people are dead in a shooting at a Walmart in Duncan, Oklahoma, local police said Monday morning." USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! Thanks, Republishits! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 18 Nov 19 - 02:36 PM Unfortunately,at the Republican baseball game, the shooter's aim was way off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 18 Nov 19 - 01:46 PM The unlikely twist of detail is that Republican representatives were shot at their baseball practice and the CA shooting was during Sunday Nite Football on TV. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 18 Nov 19 - 10:09 AM Y'all seem to have forgotten someone did shoot up a bunch of congresspeople at their football game. No bloody gun laws changed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 18 Nov 19 - 09:02 AM "At least 10 people were shot and four of them were killed at a family gathering in Fresno, California, on Sunday evening, authorities said." USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:27 PM Some thoughtful lyrics to be found in Sondheim: Everybody's Got the Right A Little Finger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: leeneia Date: 16 Nov 19 - 01:13 PM I'm against guns myself, mostly. But we need to figure out why certain people (mostly young, white, male and unhappy) are going off the rails. Because if they don't have guns, they start fires, drive cars into crowds, plant bombs... There are probably other crimes I haven't thought of. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 16 Nov 19 - 08:29 AM And the hits just keep coming! Thanks, Republican assholes! At least two people were injured in a shooting in the stands of a high school football game in Pleasantville, New Jersey on Friday, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 15 Nov 19 - 09:44 PM As exhibited above, there is an amount of complexity to the issue that makes simple statements and snap reactions impede our discussion of and mutual understanding of the issue. The other point I'd make, separately from the one above (which I owe to Michael Connelly, writer of the Prey series), is the statement of Wayne LaPierre that “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” This ignores that the gun itself is not neutral in that statement; for it reveals a good guy to be a bad guy all too often. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 15 Nov 19 - 06:52 PM Defiance is the trait I see most clearly in those representing themselves as Second Amendment fundamentalists. That whole “pry it from my cold, dead fingers” stuff is nothing more than coat-trailing, and the oft-repeated assertions that “good guys” need guns to protect others, and themselves, is mere chest-beating. Mr Trump positively radiates defiance, much in the style of a cornered raccoon. It’s not a good look in a head of state whose country is unlikely to be invaded any time soon. School shooters who leave some account of their motives also display defiance — getting back at those who have done them wrong. But the normal response to any display of defiance is hostility and violence. And away you go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 15 Nov 19 - 03:52 PM elaborate? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 15 Nov 19 - 11:35 AM More and more, I am convinced that defiance is far more of a problem than a solution to any concentration of humans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 15 Nov 19 - 10:18 AM and now Santa Clarita. USA! USA! USA! USA! Be sure to phone your Republican Senators and Representatives and tell them what fusking assholes they are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 15 Nov 19 - 06:46 AM The folks here did something that Republican politiians did not. They talked about this. Jeri, yes no mass shootings but there have been gun incidents in the Capitol building and many shootings/killings on the stepss. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 19 - 04:34 AM Apologies if I misread that post, Robo. I must promise myself not to kneejerk when I see those tired words that constituted the first two lines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 15 Nov 19 - 02:48 AM Sounded to me as though Robo was making a case, albeit rather obtusely, for tight gun-control, Steve? And I agree with Jeri. You’d soon see some action in Congress if a gun-nut took a few of them out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 14 Nov 19 - 09:00 PM Well, that's a complete failure to understand what someone wrote. Don, another place immune is Congress. I don't want more mass shootings, but people will tolerate bad things until those bad things hit them where they live. Ivory towers are safe places. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Nov 19 - 08:47 PM That sounds like typical bollocks from a gun carrier. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: robomatic Date: 14 Nov 19 - 08:42 PM Guns don't kill people People kill people Guns just make it very very easy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 14 Nov 19 - 06:46 PM Santa Clarita, yes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 14 Nov 19 - 06:11 PM The list of kinds of locations for mass shootings in the US is long. The ONE PLACE that mass shootings have NOT ocurred is an NRA Convention Perhaps they should not be immune. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 14 Nov 19 - 04:27 PM Another school shooting today in Santa Clarity. Two kids dead. I bet you gun nuts are proud you have laws that allowed that to happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 11 Aug 19 - 12:02 PM It's not *just* whiteness, though that certainly helps. It is the attitude that violence is *justified* for the most minor upsets. I had a conversation with a parent who was teaching their small boy to "stand up to" insults and to punch other children in the face if they (the son) felt offended. I taught my sons to walk away from assholes, to keep their temper even if offended, and to use their words- not their fists, against said assholes. The other parent was horrified. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 10 Aug 19 - 05:14 PM Well... no doubt there is some relation...but the major fact is just that guns were totally tied into US history and growth and became 'the norm' for so many. Once there were a couple hundred million guns... legal and illegal... and an industry which needed to sell even more to survive, it was natural that those with hate & anger issues often turned to violence to..um... 'prove something'... or just to express high testosterone levels. A few years ago in Wash DC, a young black guy in jail was interviewed by some reporter and asked why his community so often settled disagreements with gun. He shrugged and said that one never knew whether he could win in a fair fight... but if you had a gun and were careful, it was just "easier", and you knew that the other guy probably had one, too. Not much of an answer, but when so many attitudes were already that way, it just became a way of life. Now of course, social media and publicity make the idea of using greater firepower to express your anger & hate even more enticing. I see that there are rumblings in Congress to try something again.... I'm not holding my breath. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 09 Aug 19 - 08:14 PM Interesting observations- especially in The Age Of Trump: Why does the United States refuse to pass new gun control laws? It’s the question that people around the world keep asking. According to Dr Jonathan Metzl, a psychiatrist and sociologist at Vanderbilt University, white supremacy is the key to understanding America’s gun debate. In his new book, Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment is Killing America’s Heartland, Metzl argues that the intensity and polarization of the US gun debate makes much more sense when understood in the context of whiteness and white privilege. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/08/racism-gun-control-dying-of-whiteness |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 07 Aug 19 - 07:50 PM Those who posted after me have made some valid & important points. All I knew was that Trump had been greeted by the queen, even if it was a 'limited' way.... and that most Brits were not happy with him being there. I also was aware of his discourteous behavior at the D-day ceremony. I hope he never manages to set foot in the UK again... (and I hope it is because he is in jail!) It is now beyond embarrassing and verging on absolute danger to the USA, the UK and every place in the world he affects. He has only one goal now... to either win again and avoid being prosecuted for his crimes or to be 'pardoned' by his toady VP, Pence. The daily news, in all aspects, is so unpleasant that I only watch it out of an obligation to KNOW... and to tell people in other forums what I know. I am old... but I wish I could live long enough to see history give this travesty the treatment it deserves. He acts like Hitler, and he embraces other dictators who also show those tendencies. I can barely comprehend why he still has followers-- perhaps I don't want to comprehend it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:27 PM Ah, Marty, that was THEN and this is now. If you only knew..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 19 - 01:56 PM Good to hear Trump has been told he is not welcome at the funerals of the shooting victims - maybe that bit of the West is waking up at last Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 07 Aug 19 - 07:07 AM What disturbs me most of all it has never been easier to fact check and learn from history, but people will willfully ignore and dismiss the truth. Actually, having studied drama for a year - I am not so surprised after all as theater is based upon willing suspension of disbelief - and I think for many questioning populism is to much like hard work: not sure what to do about that except for what I am already doing in the Labour Party - maintaining a doorstep dialogue with the community - but I can only reach out to a few thousand - that still leave several million. + plus half of America - not sure how many Putin Supporter to include. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 07 Aug 19 - 06:57 AM It took WW2 across Europe, and ethic cleansing to run its course in the Balkans to counrer populism. What will it take this time? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:23 AM "please do not refer to him as Boris as he is in the end a nasty self-serving piece of work" Can't disagree with this - but..... THere is a danger of us all missing the point here Yes - these people are what they are, but why state the obvious ? They have found a key to power - populism - and that is what we should be concentrating on The Brexit Referendum came five months before Trump and the latter echoed the former in appealing to OUR (the voters') worst weaknesses to take power They did so by openly breaching former practices and using methods that had formerly been unacceptable, both were regarded generally as not possible, yet both were successful. Last year, a late starter unknown returned Yank came from nowhere in the Irish Presidential Election. decided to use the inbuilt Irish hatred of Travellers and, had not the winner, Michael D been been as well known and respected as he was, Ireland would now have a hate mongering no-nothing no-mark as President Trump will be fighting for a second term in the not too distant future and already he is ramping up his racist programme (his "go back to where you came from 'slip' was no accident) Johnson will probably have to face a General Election soon and he has already started his hate/bribe campaign (not as crudely as Trump, but with the same xenophobic message. When Enoch Powell made his 'Rivers of Blood' speech he was banished in disgrace - when Nigel Farage did exactly the same he won the day for the Tories - that is what needs facing, not the obvious characters of these turds As is being said quite eloquently on another other thread, "sticks and stones" Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 07 Aug 19 - 01:47 AM ”Even Trump's best mate in the UK has a Russian name..” And he was born in the US. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 07 Aug 19 - 12:01 AM Even Trump's best mate in the UK has a Russian name... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 06 Aug 19 - 11:38 PM Bill, We do note one parallel between Trump and Johnson (please do not refer to him as Boris as he is in the end a nasty self-serving piece of work) in that Johnson has surrounded himself with a cabinet of 'yes-men' a number of which have a track record of either failure or improper practices which have caused them to previously be dismissed from ministerial office. But, I do not agree that we offered Trump decorum and polite protocol, the majority of decent people in the UK did not even want him to set foot in the UK. That was set up on purely on the whim of a single UK politician who was effectively thrown out of office. In fact our London Mayor made it clear that Trump wasn't wanted by 'correctly' refusing Trump a red carpet when he arrived at Stansted. In terms of the d-day landings commemoration, Trump showed himself as a pathetic nasty piece of excrement by ranting about your House Speaker in front of war graves. On that basis alone, if the worlds Heads or State have any decency whatsoever, they will commemorate the seventy-first anniversary of d-day and not commemorate VE or VJ day until Trump shows proper respect for the war-fallen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Aug 19 - 06:18 PM Well I agree with all that. I especially agree about your electoral college. A 15-14 Trump win in Florida delivers all 29 to Trump. Talismanic. Stupid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 06 Aug 19 - 05:59 PM Steve... I didn't "excoriate" you all for getting Boris... I was merely noting that ringers CAN sneak in is some situations. And I certainly don't suggest in any way that letting Boris in *excuses* us getting Trump. I do understand the significant differences in our political systems and am fully aware of the flaws that allow us to fall into certain traps. It didn't always make such a difference. At one time... even in my experience, there were plenty of decent politicians on both sides,and we had a term "loyal opposition" that I haven't heard recently. Our experiment with 'democracy' has taken some odd turns... but remember.. we did start out carefully avoiding the form of monarchy you had back then. A lot of the Founders ideas worked pretty well, but it was not clear that some aspects had loopholes that no one could anticipate...like the 2nd amendment wording about guns. If there had been any anticipation of assault rifles, no one would have written it to allow ANY citizen to buy those! When moving west, guns were needed to deal with bears and those 'inconvenient' people who were here first. YOU all have been past most of that for centuries. Slavery created many other situations that headed us into awkward paths... including the ridiculous **electoral college**. Yes, it made counting and voting easier when communication and travel were tedious, but it has now 5-6 times invalidated the popular vote. We also are for practical purposes tied to a 2 party system..leading to very odd bedfellows. Finally, this situation of having a president ignore ALL reason and appoint judges and cabinet officials and diplomats with no credentials except loyalty to his Trumpship is beyond anything most of us could have imagined! Yeah... we are in a hole, and it's gonna be a pain climbing out. We made the 1st step by winning back the House, and we **may** manage to impeach and/or vote this travesty out. Millions of us see the problems, and that new ideas will require new methods.... you have any positive suggestions? We really don't need more reminders that we are in pretty deep.. we need encouragement and serious help--- like Britain NOT pretending that Trump deserves decorum and polite protocol! Oh... wait... I think Boris kinda likes Trump.... nuts... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 06 Aug 19 - 10:45 AM I greatly fear, Mrrzy , that you are one hundred per cent correct. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 05 Aug 19 - 08:50 PM Mossback- it already is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Aug 19 - 07:35 PM A lot's been said here since I typed what you railed at, Bill. You are a very measured and reasonable poster. Your reaction to my post, excoriating us for having Johnson as PM, is understandable, but, as has been said, the public here didn't pick him. And complaining that we have him is no excuse for what you have. Your politics is infantile and panders to populism and all your politicians are scared shitless of criticising Israel/guns/oil companies. You have a president who gains strength from what should be fatal weaknesses. And he's a threat to the planet in a way that Boris never will be. Reflect on that if you will. I know it's not your personal fault. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 05 Aug 19 - 06:48 PM Backwoodsman said: "How did the US go from this President, to a batshit-crazy, pussy-grabbing, morally-bankrupt crook? " The part that startled me was that he was laughed at and ridiculed by many stalwart Republicans when he announced..... and then he proceeded to stand onstage with a dozen others and say outrageous stuff and gradually pull ahead! The crazier he became, the more it seemed to fit the mood of the right-wing nuts, and lure just enough of the vaguely moderates with his scare tactics and outright lies! (remember, we KNOW politicians spin their message, but we have little experience of a presidential candidate directly lying about his plans, promises and credentials.) There were also many men, I presume, who envied his behavior toward women. Because we can't read minds or interview every voter, it's hard to show 'exactly' what most found appealing about his BS.... and, as noted, he DID lose the popular vote by 3,000,000. There is well founded suspicion that Russian meddling made just enough difference to get him 30,000 votes, legally or illegally, in 3-4 states. When you couple that with just enough people who refused to vote for a woman... and Hillary in particular... and the stupid outmoded electoral college, it just happened. All the "what's the matter with America?" rants are just attempts to simplify disgust with the result by painting 65,000,000 good people with the same broad brush as a similar number of bad, confused and ignorant ones. There is NO simple answer.... there is history, demographics, media, and a complex country with **states rights** attitude to explain it... and that takes more time than my fingers will type or you will read.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lighter Date: 05 Aug 19 - 06:19 PM Just remember that Clinton got three million more votes. I don't blame the electoral vote. I blame the electors. Part of the point of the "college" is that when the electors meet in their state capitols to certify the election results, part of their responsibility from the beginning has been to ensure that an unfit candidate, con man, or dangerous demagogue is not allowed to take office, regardless of the "electoral vote". In other words, except where they're constrained by state law, individual electors theoretically can vote for anybody they want, or for nobody. In 2016, several Democrats deserted Clinton and voted for Sanders, Colin Powell, or Faith Spotted Eagle. All Republican electors went for Trump. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Aug 19 - 06:06 PM So lets wait for the tirade of nasty drivel from trump in response to such a sensitive, well thought out and empathetic statement. I am sure it won't be able to help itself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 05 Aug 19 - 05:20 PM From the FB Page of Barack Obama... ”Michelle and I grieve with all the families in El Paso and Dayton who endured these latest mass shootings. Even if details are still emerging, there are a few things we already know to be true. First, no other nation on Earth comes close to experiencing the frequency of mass shootings that we see in the United States. No other developed nation tolerates the levels of gun violence that we do. Every time this happens, we’re told that tougher gun laws won’t stop all murders; that they won’t stop every deranged individual from getting a weapon and shooting innocent people in public places. But the evidence shows that they can stop some killings. They can save some families from heartbreak. We are not helpless here. And until all of us stand up and insist on holding public officials accountable for changing our gun laws, these tragedies will keep happening. Second, while the motivations behind these shootings may not yet be fully known, there are indications that the El Paso shooting follows a dangerous trend: troubled individuals who embrace racist ideologies and see themselves obligated to act violently to preserve white supremacy. Like the followers of ISIS and other foreign terrorist organizations, these individuals may act alone, but they’ve been radicalized by white nationalist websites that proliferate on the internet. That means that both law enforcement agencies and internet platforms need to come up with better strategies to reduce the influence of these hate groups. But just as important, all of us have to send a clarion call and behave with the values of tolerance and diversity that should be the hallmark of our democracy. We should soundly reject language coming out of the mouths of any of our leaders that feeds a climate of fear and hatred or normalizes racist sentiments; leaders who demonize those who don’t look like us, or suggest that other people, including immigrants, threaten our way of life, or refer to other people as sub-human, or imply that America belongs to just one certain type of people. Such language isn’t new – it’s been at the root of most human tragedy throughout history, here in America and around the world. It is at the root of slavery and Jim Crow, the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. It has no place in our politics and our public life. And it’s time for the overwhelming majority of Americans of goodwill, of every race and faith and political party, to say as much – clearly and unequivocally.” How did the US go from this President, to a batshit-crazy, pussy-grabbing, morally-bankrupt crook? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 05 Aug 19 - 04:55 PM Yes... it does work like that... but part of my point was that the blatant lies ARE partially a result of so many being too lazy or careless to bother looking for reason and truth and just reading or watching the media outlets that they already agree with.... And lies can be made to sound like such simple answers! Untangling and exposing lies takes much longer than telling the lies. Trump spews out so many so fast that there's no breathing space between them. Doesn't "they're coming to take your guns!" and "we're being invaded by dangerous migrants!" make it a lot easier to make decisions if you're already confused? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lighter Date: 05 Aug 19 - 03:55 PM Part of the problem, Bill, is that what we ID as blatant lies are taken as obvious truths by millions. Last week, for example, the president told a cheering crowd very forcefully that Americans do not pay for his tariffs on Chinese imports: " I just announced another 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of Chinese products that come into our country. And that’s on top of the 25% that we take off $250 billion coming in from China, and don’t let them tell you, the fact is China devalues their currency. They pour money into their system, they pour it in, and because they do that, you’re not paying for those tariffs. China’s paying for those tariffs." Basically doubletalk. The purchaser, not the seller, pays tariffs. Freshman econ. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 05 Aug 19 - 02:51 PM It's an ongoing concern that so few voted, but with so little attention to the candidates platforms and ignorance about the issues, having a 90% voting populace might not be an improvement. Polls are becoming more suspect as phone #s go to mobile phones and compete with texts, videos and games. I wonder how they find a good sample of actual voters to poll. The problems of maintaining a fair, honest government are hugely more complex since people's attention span has been divided between so many distractions and problematic media sources. (there are at any one time in the evening, 5-6 different right-wing cable TV channels available in my area..(the greater Wash.DC area) Fox news is famous, but one is consistently to the right of Fox! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_America_News_Network (and it is NOT a 'pay' channel in my list) They are a study in spin, distortion, lies, rhetorical blather and twisted logic. I look at it now & then to see where Trump is getting some of his latest ideas... He is said to be unhappy with Fox because they have a couple of hosts who actually try to see the truth and don't toe the party line. You see? It really takes time and more effort than many are willing to take to sort the truths from the half-truths from the blatant lies! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 05 Aug 19 - 01:57 PM Things like this tear nations apart, Yup, things like: -racism -xenophobia -ignorance -willful denial of reality -fascism -white supremacy -social Darwinism -Reaganomics All of which are actively promoted by the the Republishit Party in the U.S. Wake up, assholes - you want to know what's coming before it's Hitler/Mussolini redux. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Aug 19 - 01:30 PM Bit of a concern that only about 40% voted in the presidential elections. How does the other 60% break down between too young, non US nationals, voter suppression and voter apathy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 05 Aug 19 - 01:17 PM Each system has potential weak points. The one thing I envy about the UK system is having to possibility for a "vote of confidence" in the middle of a term. The greatest flaw in the US system in the electoral college. The Republicans are totally aware that changing demographics mean they MUST retain the electoral college in order to keep electing Reagans and Bushes and Trumps.... it is possible that they will also need ongoing tampering with elections. Over 40 million young people have turned 18 since 2016, and we shall see how many are taken in by the current batch of lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Aug 19 - 12:56 PM Johnson was elected Prime Minister by approx 0.14 - less than on fifth of 1 percent of the UK population whereas Trump was elected by approx 20% of the American population Just sidetracking on the sidetrack of the issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: keberoxu Date: 05 Aug 19 - 12:54 PM It's going to get worse before it gets better. I know, that's not what anybody wants to hear. But it is more than "one generation will die off in time." Things like this tear nations apart, like a family feud on a giant scale. This continent may well end up having more than one nation where there used to be one nation with continental forty-eight states. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 04 Aug 19 - 10:18 PM Ummm... right. No one would allow anyone as flawed as Trump to gain power..... unless they had a Boris Johnson to offer. ;>) The US still has many good things and ideals, despite the odd crap of letting a stupid anti-immigrant scare and probably Russian meddling allow the worse president we ever had follow one of the best. It's not a good idea to make such broad, sweeping condemnations of a country which has some really sane, decent people working very hard to set things right again. My senators and my local congressman are top notch. If Mitch McConnell were kicked out, you'd see a lot more progress. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Aug 19 - 07:48 PM You live in a rotten country that can ignorantly elect a dangerous idiot for president, that is so undemocratic that a gun lobby, a pro-Israel lobby and a bunch of multinationals, none of whom ever managed to attract a single vote from your electorate, rule the roost and ensure that any politician who opposes them is toast. And your political discourse is infantile. Bastion of democracy? Land of the free? In your dreams, yanks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 04 Aug 19 - 07:23 PM Sadly, all the news media about one shooting seems to push the idea in others who are racist, unhappy or just plain crazy. I'll bet there are guys right now who just wonder what it would 'feel' like to shoot up a crowd... There's no shortage of idiots whose minds are messed up... and with millions of guns easily available, what could we expect to happen? These days just shooting ONE barely makes the local news. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 04 Aug 19 - 03:46 PM And 2 more. Since last night. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 04 Aug 19 - 01:00 PM Same all over the world throughout history... The old fanatics perpetuate bitter sectarian division and conflict by indoctrinating the young next generation with their vengeful hate... It will never stop... .. there's too much wealth to be made from it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gillymor Date: 04 Aug 19 - 12:50 PM michael, of course I wasn't accusing the old bastards of being the triggermen, in their maniacal defense of the anachronistic 2nd amendment they are the enablers. gillymor (old bastard, gun owner and former gun user) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: michaelr Date: 04 Aug 19 - 12:31 PM gillymor - don't hold your breath waiting for those bastards to die off. The El Paso shooter is 21, the Dayton shooter 24, the Gilroy shooter was 19. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 04 Aug 19 - 09:09 AM How many more, Bruce? How many more? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gillymor Date: 04 Aug 19 - 09:04 AM Time will take care of the BBs of the world. It feels like humanity is doing a backstep in this particular epoch while extreme right wingers with notions of American primacy on the world stage and white supremacy at home,a reversion to the values of the 1950's, are making one last desperate stand to protect their selfish, anti-human world view. As they die off we may start to see a saner, more humane world if we survive this onslaught. I may never see it but it's something to hope for and to fight for in whatever way you can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Aug 19 - 08:33 AM When USA has a president that has the guts to call out the gun lobby and take personal responsibility for normalising race hate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 04 Aug 19 - 08:07 AM The killing in El Paso has been linked to an on-line racist manifesto Many of the injuries inflicted on the wounded are described as 'life-thretening' Another incident in Dayton, Ohio has claimed another nine lives When will the BBs of this world ever learn !!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 04 Aug 19 - 05:52 AM Now add El Paso to the toll (20 killed, 26 injured) - Dayton didn't make the news here. Well I am not going to bother to repeat myself - Just reread my post of 29th July. I know that was a very long time ago as far as gun violence is concerned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 02 Aug 19 - 11:06 AM John Wayne and the Western "ideals" do have a lot to answer for. People thought Bush II was a cowboy [admired] but he was really a redneck. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 01 Aug 19 - 09:10 PM If Brucie wants to whine about me, why's he citing someone else's comments? Why he's whining at all is another question -- OH WAIT!!I KNOW! Its all about that poor, downtrodden, persecuted class of Trumpist racists, white supremacists, anti-government, gun-toting clowns & other assorted assholes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Aug 19 - 08:58 PM Bearded - stop being such a tit... [British ornithology joke..] So if a person says I could/want to/will/ kill you in exasperation or jest, you are going to automatically take it so literally you go out and buy an extra truck load of more guns and ammo, then lie in wait for them...!!!??? Bearded tit... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Aug 19 - 07:52 PM Glad you are all ok with Mossback stating that all those who voted for Trump should be exterminated. You deserve each other. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 01 Aug 19 - 06:32 PM Can anyone tell me why this kind of stupidity is allowed to remain on this forum? Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer, Steve. Bruceis Uber Alles. HEIL TRUMP!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Aug 19 - 06:03 PM "As long as we have members of the Left stating they want to kill off those of us that disagree with them, there will be a large portion of the population who feel the need for some form of self-defense." Can anyone tell me why this kind of stupidity is allowed to remain on this forum? Joe? He's your mate after all...? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Aug 19 - 02:47 PM Historically and politically violence in America has come from the right - from the Klan hanging blacks to 114 yeas of bombing peasants with burning petrol Now that Trump has won the backing of The Klan (historically the most violent paramilitary organization in America)that can only become an ongoing issue A WORLDWIDE PHENOMENON US RIGHT WING VIOLENCE TRUMP INCITED VIOLENCE AMERICA'S PROUD HISTORY OF VIOLENT ANTISEMITISM Left wing my arse Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Aug 19 - 01:13 PM ..of.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Aug 19 - 01:11 PM Beardy - yeah... I'm a lefty.. anyone know where I can get a cheap deal on a stockpile of guns and ammo... Obviously I need to defend myself against paranoid righwing nutjobs who are proactively arming themselves to the teeth, so they can defend themselves against me... I might need to get my counter-strike in first before they do...????? The madness or arms races and escalation in a nutshell... It's so much safer to live in the UK... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Aug 19 - 12:54 PM As long as we have members of the Left stating they want to kill off those of us that disagree with them, there will be a large portion of the population who feel the need for some form of self-defense. "From: Mossback - PM Date: 19 Jun 19 - 09:14 PM Getting rid of Trumpshit won't accomplish a thing unless we can get rid of the 62,984,828 fuckwits who originally voted for him and more importantly the utter fuckwits that account for his current 40% - 45% approval rating. Subject: RE: BS: now California has got nutria From: Greg F. - PM Date: 19 Feb 18 - 06:51 PM Uh Hunh. Killer Rodents From Hades. Be better if Califoria expended its resources documenting and eradicating Republicans - that would benefit mankind a great deal more. All in all its just another rat in the wall...... HEY HUMANS!! LEAVE THEM RATS ALONE!! " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 19 - 12:14 PM John P - well you’ve done a great job of grabbing the stick by the wrong end. Did you actually read what I said? From your thin-skinned, defensive piece above, it doesn’t appear you did. I’m on your side. My rant was against people like Bearded Bruce, and the huge number of other ‘from my dead hands’ gun-lunatics, headed up by the Agenda-Driven NRA, who insist that gun-controls will mean more shootings, and whose answer to the gun-violence in the US is ‘More Guns’ - the very same bigoted, violent sizeable minority you bemoan in your own rant. Nowhere have I said that ‘everyone in the US is responsible’ - if you believe that’s what I said, please point me to where I said it. And my point is that the UK and Australia have come up with a ‘concrete answer that is within the realms of possibility’, put it into effect, and the result is encapsulated in the numbers I quoted. We had 31 shooting-deaths (including suicides and accidents) in 2017, you had 39,000, IIRC. Those numbers speak volumes, yet Bruce still insists that the precise opposite would be the result if the kind of controls we have here were introduced in the US. No-one is saying it’s easy but, unless you are happy to accept almost 40,000 shooting-deaths a year, 12,000 of which are murders, something must be done. Hand-wringing and saying “It’s difficult” is about as much use as those ‘thoughts and prayers’ everybody offers when another group of innocent kids is murdered in their classrooms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 01 Aug 19 - 11:27 AM Backwoodsman, most of the people in the United States are victims of this gun insanity. Please believe that we would fix it if we could. Are you mistaking our government for one which pays attention to the safety of it's citizens? What, exactly, are you proposing we do about it? If you can't come up with a concrete answer that is within the realms of possibility, please stop writing as if everyone in the US is responsible and can take effective action. Our country has been taken over by a bigoted, violent minority who have manipulated and perverted the forms of our government in order to ensure their rise to power, and to keep themselves there. And they have all the guns, including the army. Perhaps you could be more selective in your rants against people in the US. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 19 - 09:21 AM Aaahh! Thanks Bill, I wondered if it was something like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 01 Aug 19 - 07:14 AM Steve's lost you, BWM, because the posts of mine he's referring to have mysteriously disappeared - as this one likely will as well. Of, course, Bruce's nonsensical posts remain - Joe must be on watch. Cheers, Bill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 19 - 02:06 AM ”Or maybe Duke Wayne. Well said, Bill.” Sorry, you’ve lost me there Steve! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Jul 19 - 07:49 PM Or maybe Duke Wayne. Well said, Bill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 31 Jul 19 - 03:14 PM Why would we ever have to face our gun issue? We haven't yet, no matter who is massacred by whom. Sandy Hook didn't change anything. And the Gilroy and Las Vegas and so on shooters had all gotten their guns legally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 31 Jul 19 - 02:09 PM I repeat..... But sooner or later, the problem the US has created for itself will have to be faced and dealt with. And I repeat, the answer to the problem of too many guns and too many unsuitable owners is not, and cannot be, ‘More Guns’, no matter what the NRA and small-dick gun-nuts say. That’s all. I’m gone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:42 PM stupity.. yes I know.. Chrome spell check has stopped working again... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:40 PM We could guess, cynical as it may be, that USA Govt relies on the self culling and murderous stupity of it's citizens, to contain population growth...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:31 PM OK, let’s look at the numbers again... ”Mortality All homicides Number of deaths: 19,510 Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.0 Firearm homicides Number of deaths: 14,542 Deaths per 100,000 population: 4.5 Now compare.... UK - total shooting deaths: 31 (deaths per 100,000 population: 0.048) Australia - total shooting deaths: 238 (deaths per 100,000 population: 0.95) What is the big difference between U.K./Australia vs. US? As you apparently don’t have the intellect to understand, or are so indoctrinated by NRA and bullet-head horse-shit, let me tell you - The U.K. and Australia have strong, rigidly enforced gun-laws, and severe penalties for carrying a firearm when in the commission of another crime. To be granted a licence to possess a firearm in the U.K., a person has to go through rigorous police-checks which are periodically re-checked, and has to prove need for that firearm. A very limited number of people can demonstrate that need because there are severe restrictions on what constitutes ‘need’. ‘Self-defence’ is not a legitimate ‘need’. QED. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:26 PM It is possible the USSR could win more Darwin Awards for stupid deaths per annum than the USA.. But I suspect it is a very close run competition...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:19 PM so... guns, drugs, cars, bungee, parkour and freerunning, etc... How many total USA deaths are considered avoidable mortality due to some variety of gross human stupidity...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:19 PM Whenever someone indulges in whataboutism if always leaves me with the impression that they are lost for an answer We'll be talking about driving cars next The statistics speak for themselves - America has a rapidly escalating gun problem which it needs to sort out - not make excuses for SOME COMPARATIVE STATISTICS Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:10 PM And for those who wish to legalize drugs... Mortality: Drug overdose/drug poisoning deaths Deaths per 100,000 population: 21.7 (2017) Drug overdose deaths involving any opioid per 100,000 population: 14.9 (2017) Drug overdose deaths involving heroin per 100,000 population: 4.9 (2017) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:06 PM From CDC Mortality All homicides Number of deaths: 19,510 Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.0 Firearm homicides Number of deaths: 14,542 Deaths per 100,000 population: 4.5 Mortality All suicides Number of deaths: 47,173 Deaths per 100,000 population: 14.5 Cause of death rank: 10 Firearm suicides Number of deaths: 23,854 Deaths per 100,000 population: 7.3 Suffocation suicides Number of deaths: 13,075 Deaths per 100,000 population: 4.0 Poisoning suicides Number of deaths: 6,554 Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.0 Mortality All injury deaths Number of deaths: 243,039 Deaths per 100,000 population: 74.6 All poisoning deaths Number of deaths: 75,354 Deaths per 100,000 population: 23.1 Motor vehicle traffic deaths Number of deaths: 38,659 Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.9 All firearm deaths Number of deaths: 39,773 Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 01:03 PM "MOST of the shooting deaths are suicides, which the Left has been making legal wherever it has been able to. So lets put the money into the euthanasia drug providers' pockets, right?" Well there you go then, a potential new initiative to provide a legitimate social and health care reason for gun ownership. Armed good samaritan angels of mercy assisting suicides for free, or just travel expenses and cost of the bullet... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Jul 19 - 12:36 PM "Most murders are by illegal guns" There are no statistics to back up that claim - only claims REAL STATISICS According to Amnesty, Easy access to firearms – whether legal or illegal – is one of the main drivers of gun violence. MORE HORRIFIC FACTS Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 31 Jul 19 - 12:18 PM it works very well indeed in the U.K. and Australia. UK - 31 shooting deaths in 2017 (pop. 64 million) Australia - 238 shooting deaths in 2016 (pop. 25 million) USA - 39,773 shooting deaths in 2017 (pop. 326 million) But none is so blind as he who will not see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 12:18 PM I'm that odd thing, a lefty who likes guns... I have to make do with youtube videos on historic military weapons. Of course I would jump at the chance to fire a real Thompson submachine gun at a safe and secure target facility... 65th birthday present idea.. if anyone likes me enough... start saving up for it... What does perturb me is the sheer amount of propaganda from Americans on the internet, so much of it in youtube viewers comments, regarding the UK electing a far right government to repeal our gun laws, allowing USA style free for all gun ownership for UK citizens... We have too many right wing nutters slavering to arm up and form UK militias if that ever happens... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 19 - 11:59 AM Most murders are by illegal guns ( those obtained illegally, or in the hands of those forbidden by law to have them). I guess if passing a law against murder does not prevent murders, we must need to pass more laws against guns, right??? Just look at how well that works in California and Chicago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 19 - 11:24 AM A gun amnesty in the USA.. The Govt buying back weapons from private citizens...??? errrrmmmm.. well.. It may have worked to some extent in other more reasonable nations... It seems to me that the least impossible partial solution would be to prevent new guns and ammo being manufactured and sold in America...??? .. and blocking imports of new weapons for civilians... USA Govt would need to spend billions buying up Gun industry and factories, at terms favourable to convince current owners to sell up... Then spend more billions converting the factories and workforce to other products like perhaps consumer goods currently imported from China... Nah.. can't see that happening... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 31 Jul 19 - 11:16 AM True. Putting a loaded gun in your mouth and pulling the trigger really is not a ‘cry for help’! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 31 Jul 19 - 11:00 AM Suicides, too. More attempts succeed with guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 31 Jul 19 - 04:47 AM Two things emerge from stats that surprise me: (1) Accidental gun deaths are less than 500, were popular believe is that this figure is much higher. Is this a myth propagated by NRA to justify their branding? (2) Murders by what should be the only legitimate firearm owning - shotguns (eg for protecting livestock and protecting people from dangerous animals) is less than 300. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Jul 19 - 12:48 PM THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL - US STYLE Tackle this and you can begin to address the problem Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Jul 19 - 12:12 PM Not up to me, Mrrzy. I’m pleased to say I don’t live there. But sooner or later, the problem the US has created for itself will have to be faced and dealt with. And I repeat, the answer to the problem of too many guns and too many unsuitable owners is not, and cannot be, ‘More Guns’, no matter what the NRA and small-dick gun-nuts say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 30 Jul 19 - 10:46 AM You gonna make'm? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Jul 19 - 04:21 AM Having said that in my previous post, I fully understand that it would be an almost impossible task to take 400 million guns away from a nation of fearful, angry gun-owners. But at some point, they have to get it through their terrified heads that ‘More Guns’ is not, and cannot be, the answer to the problem of too many guns and too many unsuitable owners too ready to use them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Jul 19 - 03:43 AM From what's happening in the US, it seems to me that the best method of control is that anybody who wishes to own one is automatically disqualified from doing so. Here in the West of Ireland we are blessed with the presence of an American Journalist who HIT THE HEADLINES WAY BACK and, having been black-listed from several newspapers for her behaviour, disappeared from the scene for a while. Some five years later, following an incident where a Traveller was found to be trespassing, the farmer, shot him, wounding him severely, beat him with a fence post and then, went indoors, reloaded, and executed the badly wounded man The case was dismissed as it was deemed that the farmer was acting in self defence. Mary Ellen Synon, in an interview on Kerry Radio, declared that "It was not just the right, but the duty of all rural property owners to carry arms to protect themselves against such intrusions. JIm Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Jul 19 - 03:38 AM ”Nobody disputes (I don't think) tjat more people are killed annually with knives than guns.” Well I dispute it, and so do the statistics! Guns are overwhelmingly the most common means of committing murder in the USA. In the UK in 2017, there were 31 shooting deaths in a population of c. 64 million. In the US, there were 12,128 in a population of c. 326 million. In the UK, we aren’t allowed to possess handguns or assault-type rifles. In the US, it’s “Ma-a-ah Right, aa-a-awdained ba-a-ah Aa-a-awl-ma-a-ahty Ga-a-ad in the 2nd Amendment!”, or some such horse-shit. It really isn’t difficult to do the maths and understand the correlation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 29 Jul 19 - 10:33 PM Nobody disputes (I don't think) tjat more people are killed annually with knives than guns. But with a knife one person at one time can't kill anywhere nearly as many peple as one person with a gun, especially an assault rifle. And the correct use of a knife is usually cooking or eating, while the correct use of an assault rifle is killing large numbers of people at one time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 19 - 07:06 PM The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ranks California first in the nation for having the strongest gun laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 19 - 07:02 PM California has every gun control the Democrats are pushing at the federal level. California has confiscatory red flag laws, universal background checks, an “assault weapons” ban, a ten-day waiting period on gun purchases, a requirement that would-be gun buyers first secure a firearm safety certificate from the state, a limit on the number of guns a person may purchase in a month, a minimum purchase age of 21 years for long guns and handguns, a “good cause” requirement for concealed carry permit issuance, and numerous ammunition controls. Moreover, the Gilroy Garlic Festival was a gun-free zone. Does it matter that the majority of the left has been pushing that laws one does not agree with are optional? Or that the truth is, 4 times as many people are killed each year by knives than "Assault Rifles", more people are killed with blunt objects than "Assault Rifles", but people don't want to have that conversation. It's time that we we begin to discuss the mental health aspect behind all this much more. It's time that we go back to teach our children to value human life so that this never happens again. You can't tell me that the violence surrounding video games, and movies has not had a negative impact on our society. It absolutely has and it's time we make the changes needed on that front. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 29 Jul 19 - 04:45 PM My poem, from WalkaboutsVerse, "Monopoly on Weaponry" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 29 Jul 19 - 04:40 PM We could grant Trump that it might be difficult to get guns out of the hands of angry people. But it would not be difficult at all to refrain from getting them angry enough to start shooting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 29 Jul 19 - 01:50 PM See.. in the UK we can get worked up angry with other folks without reaching for our guns... btw.. I actually like guns, would collect them if I had the £££$$, .. and I'd hope I'd be a sensible owner... [we already have one legal owned shotgun death in the close family...] However, I accept why UK law of the land says no, and agree to abide by it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 19 - 01:39 PM SRS, YOU STATE: Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stilly River Sage - PM Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:34 AM Calling names means you have no useful answer, BB. -------------------------------------------------- But I notice your ignoring Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback - PM Date: 29 Jul 19 - 09:12 AM Do take it up with President Trumpshit, the Republican Party and the NRA, eh? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Which I was replying to. You seem very selective in whom you apply your rules to. Will you tell Mossback HE has no useful answer, or just select out those you disagree with to make meaningless comments about? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 29 Jul 19 - 12:05 PM Those 400 million guns in civilian hands over there are doing a great job of making people’s dicks feel bigger, but they didn’t help the ones shot at the GarlicFest, did they? And they didn’t put the shooter off doing what he set out to do, did they? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: punkfolkrocker Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:42 AM Sadly, these days most folks reaction to this news report may most likely be... " oh.. another mass shooting in America... But wait.. a what... ???? a GARLIC FESTIVAL ..!!!??? WTF.. a garlic festival...??? eh...??? Did you hear that just now on the news.. yes.. that's right.. a garlic festival.. oh.. yeah, there was a bit of a mass shooting at it.. BUT wtf is a garlic festival...??? Americans are so weird..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mrrzy Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:40 AM Hey, we (the populace) voted for the other person. Fat lot of good that did us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stilly River Sage Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:34 AM Calling names means you have no useful answer, BB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:31 AM PRC- Peoples Republic of California |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 19 - 11:30 AM Mossback, " U.S. citizens are IN FAVOR of reasonable gun control." As opposed to the unreasonably strict and ineffective gun control PRESENTLY in place in the PRC? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 29 Jul 19 - 09:22 AM It is down to you decent Americans to do something about it. All I can do is observe and comment, which I will do very time something like this happens. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Mossback Date: 29 Jul 19 - 09:12 AM Do take it up with President Trumpshit, the Republican Party and the NRA, eh? The majority of U.S. citizens are IN FAVOR of reasonable gun control. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 29 Jul 19 - 08:51 AM Well, looks like you've done it again - Gilroy Garlic festival. I bet you are all proud that you have gun laws that allow ownership of weapons that are used to murder 6 year-old kids. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 24 May 16 - 12:25 AM Woo Hoo Fed Ex just dropped off my internet purchase of the gold plated TRUMP AR 15 with Trump on the stock and no safety. (its really a Brown and Wesson) A nice detail is the word trump inside the scope with the U serving as the cross hairs. They also sell a sideways gold plated 9mm for blacks.(buy 11 and get 1 free) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 23 May 16 - 12:34 PM Gun owners are twice as likely to shoot themselves dead as they are to kill anyone else Well, then its way past time for them to get busy & go for it. A self-correcting problem? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 22 May 16 - 06:19 PM The pride, the fun, the autonomic adrenaline, the psychological warm blanket effect, the camaraderie, the might makes right and the feeling of power like having the last word that demands respect, are all too much for the part time or avid gun owner to sacrifice. Yes you who brags of gun prowess and collection, you are too chicken shit to trade your personal fun for the lives of little children, cops and more likely than not your own family members. You are an intentionally blind selfish person. you are evil unknown to your self |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 22 May 16 - 10:43 AM Two stories I read on the same day. The US healthcare system may be brutally feudal but they've got equal access to euthanasia: http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/80219738/elderly-american-man-says-he-killed-his-wife-because-they-couldnt-afford-medicine And most "shooting tragedies" are not homicides. Gun owners are twice as likely to shoot themselves dead as they are to kill anyone else: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160519220528.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 Mar 13 - 08:39 AM It hasn't always been difficult or illegal to own guns in the UK. At the time the US Constitution was adopted the law was essentially the same back here, and for well over a century. But aside from sporting toffs and farmers with shotguns, very few people were too. Interested in having guns, and there was no significant opposition as the law giot toughened up. After the Dunblane massacre the popular demand for a heavy clampdown of all handguns was of course irresistible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Mar 13 - 08:34 AM Illegal guns will always be a problem, but a simple syatem could be used to keep track of all legal guns. 1. Close the gun show loophole and have proper background checks on every purchaser, with a waiting period of say 48 hours, during which the gun can be registered and test fired. 2. With a database containing the ballistic signature of every licensed gun, at least the innocent could be eliminated from enquiries, and with backgrounds checked before the gun is released, obvious nutjobs could be weeded out. This would significantly reduce both the work of detection and the capture of anyone who kills with a legal gun. 3. Compulsory gunsafe for all licensed weapons, making it more difficult for them to be stolen. Of all of these, I think the ballistics record the most useful. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 28 Mar 13 - 02:53 AM You're right, of course, McG, but I think the lack of desire (which I referred to in my earlier post) derives, to a great extent, from the fact that it's very difficult to be allowed to own a gun (impossible nowadays to legally own handguns or automatics) and so there's no mindset that gun ownership is either desirable or 'normal'. In fact, I'd suggest that most British people would regard anyone who had the kind of gun-mania that many Americans seem to suffer from, as having a serious psychological defect. Making guns illegal, of itself, won't cure anything in a nation that's so obsessed with firearm-ownership,but it would have to be accompanied by a programme of removing existing guns - I guess by a firearms amnesty with financial compensation initially, but eventually by the imposition of heavy penalties for non-surrender of guns. The registered weapons should be relatively easy to track down, the big problem would be with guns held illegally (including illegally-held weapons in the hands of individuals who have no criminal record). But the real answer is to achieve a change to the mindset of Americans that you're only safe if you have a gun. It's a symptom of a national paranoia, and you, I and every other British 'Catter know that it's simply not true. And, good idea though it is, requiring attendance of gun-owners at regular training as part of this ludicrous, non-existent 'militia' would have them howling like banshees and running for the hills! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:08 PM 'The general public in the UK are not permitted to own firearms. ' That is true - but in itself it isn't the really significant difference, which is that the general public in the UK have no desire to own firearms. Unfortunately that doesn't appear to be the case for a very sizeable proportion of the US public, and while that is true, making them illegal wouldn't solve the problem. That means that it would be more sensible for them to go ahead with stuff like cutting out crazy weapons like assault rifles, and blocking loophole like sales at gun fairs etc. And an idea that came up earlier in this thread would make sense too - follow up on the US Constitution gun amendment, and oblige gun owners to take part in regular training in a 'well regulated militia', as a prerequisite for owning a gun. Their patriotic duty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:37 AM The NRA keeps telling everyone who will listen that crime rates are falling... What they don't want to talk about is that every year 100,000 Americans are shot with guns... No, not all die but that stat seems to hold up year after year after year... In the words of the late Waylon Jennings, "We need a change"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:18 AM Thanks For that, Don. Unfortunately, with a few exceptions such as Bill and Bobert, it will go straight over the heads of the majority of our American friends, with their unfeasibly large gonads, unbelievably small penises, and amazing abilities of selective deafness and illiteracy, None are so blind as they who will not see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Mar 13 - 07:25 AM Posted too soon. All murder cases here remain open and cold case squads are in the process of mopping up the minute number which are still unsolved using the latest DNA technology. The chances of getting away with murder here are significantly less than in most other countries, including the USA. From 2000 to date, 30 murders remain unsolved in the UK (Northern Ireland troubles killings excluded, though that wouldn't be a large number post good friday agreement in Dec 1998). Each year 6,000 killers get away with murder in America. That's according to a study of FBI records. The study found the rate of solved homicides since 1980 nationwide is 63%. Those are the total murders of all types. When you look at gun murders, the information is given as percentage cleared, without actual numbers. Victim Killed by Handgun ........ 68 Victim Killed by Shotgun ........ 84 Victim Killed by Rifle .......... 86 Victim Killed by Other Guns ..... 60 By any standards, this is not a high clearance rate. In the course of researching this I came acoss an article which expresses what we have been saying very succinctly. I think it's worth posting here, without further comment. ""The New Yorker December 16, 2012 Guns and the Limits of Shame Posted by Jon Lee Anderson What does it take for a society to be sickened by its own behavior and to change its attitudes? That can be asked about questions of power and political repression—and also about distinctive national pathologies. When did a majority of South African Boers realize that Apartheid was reprehensible? How about whites in the American South? When will the Japanese force their whalers to stop, finally realizing that their persistence has caused widespread international revulsion and opprobrium? When will the British realize that public drunkenness—a practice now internationally associated with them as a nation—is something to be embarrassed about? When will we Americans realize that our society is an unacceptably violent one, that this is how the rest of the world sees us, and that much of that violence is associated with guns? Will it be the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School? Where is our threshold for self-awareness? A few years ago, the British found their own threshold— with guns—after an event not unlike the heartbreaking tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut. On March 13, 1995, in the small Scottish town of Dunblane, a forty-three-year-old man, Thomas Hamilton walked into a primary school with four handguns and opened fire, methodically killing sixteen children and one adult teacher before killing himself. The unprecedented massacre of children led, within two years, to legislation that imposed a total ban on the private ownership of handguns in the United Kingdom. Today, no one in the United Kingdom can privately own a handgun or a semiautomatic weapon. (There are exceptions made for some historic and antique weapons, and the ban does not encompass Northern Ireland.) There was not much hand wringing or heated debate over this legislation. It was discussed, and enacted, with overwhelming public support, in response to the mood of national shame and grief over the killings. There is still violence in Britain. In recent years, there has been a disquieting upsurge of violence amongst teen-agers in large British cities. Much of it is gang related, and almost all of it involves knives. Knives are not hard to obtain, but kill far fewer people than guns do. After the movie-theatre shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the Guardian did the math, comparing gun homicides in the U.S. to England and Wales in one year: 9,146 to forty-one. Even taking into account the difference in population, the rates of gun homicide per a hundred thousand people are 2.97 versus .07. In China, where private gun ownership is also banned, but where social alienation is clearly becoming a larger problem, there have been a distressing number of recent attacks by deranged knife-wielding men on schoolchildren. On Friday, in fact, as Evan Osnos writes, in an incident with uncanny similarities to the Newtown massacre, a young man walked into the Chenpeng Village Primary School near the city of Xinyang, south of Beijing, and attacked the schoolchildren with a knife as they arrived at school. Twenty-two children were injured before the assailant, said to be a thirty-four-year-old man, was subdued and arrested by police—but there were no deaths. If he had been using a gun, the likelihood is that most of those children would now be dead. A heated debate on new gun-control legislation has been sparked off by the Sandy Hook massacre. But if past patterns are anything to go by, it's unlikely that anything will change yet in the United States. What will it require for a majority of Americans to realize that they have a national problem that needs to be urgently addressed? We have lost four Presidents to gunmen in our short history as a nation, and very nearly lost several more. Last year, Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford's promising political career was cut short by a gunman who shot her in the head, killed six others and wounded thirteen more. Gifford spends her days now in therapy attempting to recover basic abilities like speech and eyesight, both of which were severely affected by her wounds. But Americans seem to take the shooting of their politicians in stride. Would even another, much larger school massacre bring about change? If the numbers are on a truly epic scale—an American scale—perhaps enough people will finally say "enough." If someone murdered a hundred schoolchildren in a single day with guns, would a majority of Americans agree to true restrictions on them? What is our national threshold for shame? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Mar 13 - 06:11 AM ""Americans have been shooting each other for a long, long, time, Backwoodsman, they're not going to stop on based the British example. If there even is a British example--there is some feeling that murders there are under-reported because you don't have a comprehensive, centralized reporting system. I wouldn't know if that was accurate or not, but there is an old adage that runs, "If you're going to count them, first you've got to find them." "" Don't know where you got that Stim, but it is pure undiluted bullshit. The Police National Computer is comprehensive nationwide. The murder identification and detection rate in the UK is extremely effectiv and few murders remain unsolved. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Mar 13 - 06:02 AM I wish I had an undertaker's business over there. The lunatic American obsession with firearms, the refusal to understand or accept there's a better way of life without guns, and steadfast reliance on the wilful mis-interpretation of an amendment to your Constitution, made 200 years ago and in a time where things were far, far different to the way they are today, certainly is good for business. Those guys must be cracking the champagne now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Mar 13 - 02:40 AM More obfuscation, Stim. There's a huge difference between 75 and 33,000 that can't be explained away by 'some feeling' (by whom?) that there's an element of under-reporting (which is debateable). All i can say is that i dont have a gun, nor feel the need to own one for any reason whatsoever, whether it be to protect myself from 'The Bad Guys' or 'Mad-Dog Killers' or just to make my prick twitch, and I can go to bed knowing that I wont be confronted by an armed 'home invader', or walk our streets in peace and without the fear that some small-dick is going to pull a gun on me. That's how it is here. As long as you and your ilk are in denial and steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that other nations have got it right and the US has got it wrong, you're fucked. Enjoy your ride to Hell. Maybe you're already there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 26 Mar 13 - 09:58 PM Americans have been shooting each other for a long, long, time, Backwoodsman, they're not going to stop on based the British example. If there even is a British example--there is some feeling that murders there are under-reported because you don't have a comprehensive, centralized reporting system. I wouldn't know if that was accurate or not, but there is an old adage that runs, "If you're going to count them, first you've got to find them." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 26 Mar 13 - 04:31 PM Yes, violence at sporting events appals me too, Bill, and it was by attending a baseball game in Houston and feeling the friendly atmosphere there that I came to realise how horrible a "certain section" of our crowds can be. But the government, the police, the game's controlling body, and the clubs themselves have taken, and are continuing to take, action to reduce the incidence of violent outbreaks and, in the UK at least, things are far better now than they were some years ago. I'm not anti-American, I admire much about your country, your people, your way of life, and I've enjoyed immensely the five spells I've spent there on business. But I believe the wilful denial of common sense, the refusal to accept that, on the gun question, Americans can be wrong, and the false-reasoning and obfuscation of the lead-heads demeans an otherwise great nation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Mar 13 - 03:01 PM Yes, rational America is about a frustrated as one can be to read the polls where 90% of Americans are for strict back-ground checks at the very least, 70% for assault weapon bans, 60% for bans on high capacity clips yet... ...out supposed representative Congress ain't gonna do squat!!! Yep, that is maddening... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 26 Mar 13 - 02:37 PM Yep... I have to agree with most of your frustrations at seeing the idiocy displayed by the "testosterone-fuelled crap." (I have used similar phrases myself). I often wonder what would happen if some nut got in and shot up Congress...or heaven forbid, the NRA headquarters! Sadly, I'd bet it would just be CALLED a 'nut job' and lead to more security... for Congress & the NRA, not for me. Don't feel too smug, however... testosterone is not confined to the USA. I am appalled at the violence displayed among fans at or near some football matches in the UK and Europe and by your own idiots. IF history had been different, those guys would have coveted guns over there...(who knows...maybe they do). Over here, we do have 'more' legitimate uses for guns in certain areas and by certain people....it's just that, so far, the testosterone-fuelled fools have gotten a free ride by claiming the same rights as legitimate hunters and farmers who need 'some' guns for predator control, etc. What is encouraging is that there are many in the news media who are not letting the issue die this time. Every day, the regular news is interspersed with various reports and stories highlighting the problem. It is making 'some' headway among politicians who see the |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 26 Mar 13 - 02:09 PM I guess what I'm saying is that I'm so BLOODY frustrated that, every time we Brits demonstrate, from our ACTUAL EXPERIENCE, to Americans that guns are not necessary for a peaceful, fear-free life, we face the same old bullshit excuses and denials from the lead-heads, small-dicks and over-the-hill ex-servicemen. It's appalling that those idiots care more about their dick-enhancers than they do about your nation's kids. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 26 Mar 13 - 01:04 PM Yes Bill, I know YOU understand it, I wasn't thinking of you when I posted, but I get sick and tired of seeing Americans on TV, weeping and wailing every time a bunch of kids are shot, emoting at vigils, etc., then, when some UK-er gives them the answer, they can't or won't face it and they come out with dumbfuck drivel like "I don't see any lessons there. I have been reading that violent crime is increasing on your islands, and have also read about a person called Gary George who murdered and tortured one Andrew Nall, as another of your citizens, Christine Holleran, stood by. One is inclined to think that you are on the same path, though perhaps you don't realize it." Complete hogwash. And quoting one single incident in order to justify the argument is.....ludicrous. The UK's shooting rate has been steady at between 50 (fifty!) and 100 (one hundred!) for the past twenty-odd years, and a large percentage of those are gang-on-gang shootings related to drug turf-wars (and those arseholes are welcome to blow each other to hell AFAIC). Criminals such as burglars (home-invaders, to use your quaint expression) don't carry guns here because, if they did and get caught, the jail-time they would get is very much heavier - even though they haven't actually shot anyone, just being armed is regarded as extremely serious, and only slightly less serious than actual murder. And I get sick to the back teeth of hearing about "the bad guys", and the "mad-dog killers" that people keep drivelling on about needing to protect themselves from. It's testosterone-fuelled crap. Bad guys and mad-dog killers are only those things because they have easy access to guns! Take the fucking guns away and they're just Wimpy Joes with no more power to do harm than anyone else who doesn't have a gun. I've travelled all over England and Scotland, to cities, rural areas and wild country - I've never seen a gun (except in the hands of farmers, the Armed Forces or Police Officers) and I've never, ever had any reason to fear that I've been in danger from someone with a gun. I wish I could say that's the case when I've travelled in the USA, but it's far from it. I wish the lead-heads would wake up over there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 26 Mar 13 - 10:51 AM *sigh* Backwoodsman.... they DO understand it. Some simply don't care. But the largest group is those who rationalize keeping their guns by asserting that "we have all the laws we need to find & punish abusers of the right to have guns, but those laws are just not being enforced!" They assert then that: "Because there ARE so many bad guys with guns now, us good guys need guns to protect our families!" Those patently stupid arguments are made at the highest levels of the NRA and by their tame members of congress! Many of us KNOW they are stupid, but the path to reverse the situation is almost non-existant.... as if one takes a rocky path along a mountain ledge and sees it crumbling away behind them. *I* don't know why, after all the explanations I and others have posted about the history of the US and the political, cultural & sociological development in the last 300 years, that many in the UK continue to ask us why we don't just 'write new laws' or 'vote for sane politicans'. Many of us TRY to do just that. We are getting close to one little step to ease one area of the problem....universal background checks for anyone seeking to acquire a gun. **Maybe** one day we'll get a Congress and courts who will pass even stronger laws....and then you know what? We'll have millions of VERY angry gun nuts who have been stockpiling weapons to contend with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 26 Mar 13 - 09:09 AM The general public in the UK are not permitted to own firearms. Therefore, virtually no-one has a gun. People who don't have guns can't shoot people. Therefore, the UK shootings rate is tiny in comparison with the US. QED. it's so fucking simple, a child of five can understand it. So why can't adult Americans (who were smart enough to get men to the moon) understand it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 25 Mar 13 - 11:26 PM Our murder rate and shooting rate are at all time lows as well, and they seem to be that way in much of the world. This has been mentioned numerous times in this thread. In case it is not clear, I am not in favor of any murders or killings of any sort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Mar 13 - 09:45 PM You could be right, and violence might rise in time, Stim. But the murder rate for London was the lowest for 42 years in 2012, six of them involving guns, so you also could be wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 25 Mar 13 - 04:44 PM New York Mayor Michael Bloomburg is going to spend $12M of his personal money to run ads in districts where representatives live to try to get some pressure on these folks... Wayne LaPierre, the head of the NRA, is blasting Bloomburg saying he's trying to buy gun control??? Buy it with $12M??? Hahahahaha... The NRA has $400M in the bank... $400M > $12M... LaPierre needs a math refresher... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 25 Mar 13 - 04:36 PM I'm sure that, as demographics and society change over time, the UK and other countries will have increasing issues with violence. There are always those who will disregard gun laws and acquire illegal weapons, whether for planned criminal activities, internal disputes among immigrants or just to make money selling them. Even if there IS some increase, the strict laws and fewer guns will keep the UK relatively much safer & saner than what we must deal with in the US. Sadly, I can't see any easy way for us to get out of this situation-- there are simply too many guns already in private hands. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 25 Mar 13 - 03:26 PM I don't see any lessons there. I have been reading that violent crime is increasing on your islands, and have also read about a person called Gary George who murdered and tortured one Andrew Nall, as another of your citizens, Christine Holleran, stood by. One is inclined to think that you are on the same path, though perhaps you don't realize it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Mar 13 - 02:46 PM ? Gun deaths in USA in 2012, 33,000 Gun deaths in UK in 2012, 51... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 25 Mar 13 - 02:32 PM Curious to know, McGrath, what you think the details of that warning might be. Enquiring minds, and all... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Mar 13 - 01:56 PM Trying to see a silver lining, the American example is probably an excellent warning against other countries following it. Rather like the American system of health provision. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 25 Mar 13 - 12:58 PM Another very tragic shooting children shooting babies and it never ends biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 25 Mar 13 - 12:26 PM It has been suggested, sardonically(I think), that the gun mfgs actually encourage the random shootings in order to boost sales. At least one rampage killer claimed to have done it because he believed Obama wanted to take his guns away, and that is one of the standard NRA lines. And so it goes... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 24 Mar 13 - 07:30 PM And... the NRA, and Wayne LaPierre, are not the top of the ladder. The gun manufacturers and importers, who wish to remain as invisible as possible, drive the agenda. The gun manufacturers have a problem: unlike someone who sells soap or beans, their products don't wear out, and don't 'need' replenishing often. They depend on new customers and multiple sales to former customers. The very idea of restrictions like background checks and limits on type and capacity of weapons scares them.... it simply means far fewer sales! Right now they are making money hand-over-fist as those who desire guns are stocking up....just in case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 24 Mar 13 - 06:32 PM I've given up posting links, McGrath, but the NRA is run from the top down, and politics are extremely right wing. They use the huge amount of money and power at their disposal to make people represent their wishes, not the other way around. If you google some thing like, "Who funds the NRA?" or a similarly provacative question, you will find many interesting things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 24 Mar 13 - 04:34 PM ""So the minority who make sure that the NRA is extreme are more powerful than the majority who don't? How does it come about the tail wags the dog?"" Because the tail has all the mon-n-n-ney, and the dog isn't in any position to watch how it's spent, facing in the wrong direction. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Mar 13 - 12:31 PM So if most gun owners would like moderate restrictions, why don't they make the NRA represent their wishes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 24 Mar 13 - 10:58 AM More 'reasons' why " ...a majority of citizens, and even of gun owners who don't like the NRA lobby..." can't get something done. 1)That majority is only about being unhappy with the NRA. Many of those are also majorities in various conservative causes, and can't bring themselves to vote for candidates they dislike on other issues. 2)Many of those who dislike the NRA at the moment are also gun owners who don't want any restrictions on their own guns.... they just favor 'moderate' restrictions, while the NRA is trying to avoid any restrictions. 3)As Stim indicates, money, in the form of advertising and campaign contributions, flows to candidates who support the wider range of conservative causes. Religion, abortion, 'states rights', etc., are often linked with gun laws in much propaganda.... the NRA knows how to piggy-back their agenda on other causes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Mar 13 - 10:55 AM Presumably the money which is wielded by the gun lobby comes from people who spend a lot on guns. The gun firms then proceed to spend a fraction of the profit they make from gun sales on finncing lobbying against gun laws. Since there are more people who don't spend a lot of guns, that means that in principle there should be a lot more money available to outspend the gun lobby. Presumably the people who see preventing sensible gun laws as their priority (I mean the kind of things that gnu favours) must be a great deal more dedicated to their cause than the ones who see preventing school massacres as a higher priority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 24 Mar 13 - 10:00 AM "any more"? Did we ever. Bobert? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 24 Mar 13 - 09:37 AM McG, We don't have a representative form of government any more... We have an oligarchy... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 24 Mar 13 - 09:23 AM Money and power are in the hands of the minority, McGrath. For the time being, there is neither money or politcal power for the other side. There is always a rise in public sentiment when something terrible occurs, but no one has succeeded in mobilizing those sentiments into the kind of action that you think is needed, though people continue to try. As for you, Gnu--talk is cheap, and Mudcat is mostly talk. Change isn't either easy or certain... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 23 Mar 13 - 06:26 PM Well, gosh. "I still don't get it, if there really is a majority of citizens, and even of gun owners who don't like the NRA lobby, why do they lie down and let an embarrassing minority walk all over them?" Ya kinda would wonder. I have said on a LOT of gun threads that Mudcat has the people with the brains and the resources to get the job done. Seriously... NO prpb! That was met with, "Ya can't fight em." Wish I was a Yank for a while and I could muster what is required to get the job done if I could rely on the human resources within Mudcat... except, of course, for those that ween about poor gun laws and then excuse themselves that standing up to be counted is useless and sit back down on their asses. Odd... I get shit upon for my defense of responsible gun oownership and also for my endorsement of good gun laws. No wonder I seldom open gun threads any more. The gun nuts and the anti gun nuts are fuckin nuts. Seriously... none of you nuts can figure out such a simple problem and get the job done because yer nuts. I have PROOF... people are being shoy in the streets! What's so hard to understand? Have fun with it. I'll check back someday if I hear a shot ring out near one of you. Hope you don't make the headlines as an innocent bystander while being a guilty bystander in the war on the illegal use of guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Mar 13 - 04:34 PM I still don't get it, if there really is a majority of citizens, and even of gun owners who don't like the NRA lobby, why do they lie down and let an embarrassing minority walk all over them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 23 Mar 13 - 04:24 PM Well, I said "gun owners" not NRA members. Most gun owners are not NRA members. Even so, I have read that a lot of NRA members don't like the direction the organization has taken. And, actually, a lot of membership associations, both professional and amateur, end up being dominated by corporate and business interests. Associations typically try to attract support for their objectives from corporations and other enterprises that provide goods and services for their members. Support being another word for money. They give their "sponsors" access to their leadership (including their lobbyists), they give them seats on their plenaries, the give them space at their conferences and meetings, and they even give memberships to their employees. It isn't long before the "sponsors" start calling the shots. It's the famous Golden Rule--"he who has the gold makes the rules." And, just in case you didn't realize it, when people talk about Washington being dominated by "special interest groups", they mean the associations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Mar 13 - 02:02 PM So the minority who make sure that the NRA is extreme are more powerful than the majority who don't? How does it come about the tail wags the dog? It doesn't seem to happen with other hobby enthusiasts. You don't get CAMRA campaigning for the right to drink and drive, for example. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 23 Mar 13 - 01:33 PM I've seen pictures since the Sandy Hook of gun shops where the only thing left on the shelves is the dust... Not one gun left... Not one bullet left... The NRA and gun shop owners love murder... And if it's kids getting murdered, it's even better for them... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 23 Mar 13 - 12:08 PM I like the picture of Wayne LaPierre in the Guardian a lot, McGrath. The thing that you probably don't understand, and most people don't, is that the NRA lobbying is purely and simply about money. Most Americans don't either have or want guns. Most of the ones who have them don't have problems with gun control legislation(though you wouldn't know it). However, the gun manufacturers makes a ton of money marketing assault rifles, and even more on the ammo. They are the ones behind the NRA efforts, not the NRA membership. They pump millions of dollars into to organization to support it's efforts. The gun manufacturers look at the large percentage of Americans who don't have guns as an untapped market, and they recognize that fear sells guns. To draw a fairly tasteless parallel, every time there's a killing, they make a killing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 23 Mar 13 - 10:04 AM There are two major problems with having a saner Congress, Bill... The worst gerrymandering since maybe forever by the Republicans to hold the House of Representatives no matter how badly they are beaten by the popular vote as they were in the last election... The Senate rules that give more power to the minority than the majority... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 23 Mar 13 - 09:41 AM Our only real hope is to someday elect a congress with enough members who are more dedicated to principle and reason than to the financial support of the NRA and related groups. I'm not holding my breath, as I don't look good in blue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Mar 13 - 09:24 AM Gun control fight enters round two after NRA victory on assault weapons Very strange people. Maybe a very strange people? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 22 Mar 13 - 06:43 PM Indeed. But not about gun control for me. I don't care to explin. It'll just get shit upon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 22 Mar 13 - 05:12 PM Yes Stim, the photo of John Lennon's blood stained eyeglasses do make a powerful statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 22 Mar 13 - 04:09 PM I was not prepared to see that photo, bobad. A very, very, powerful image. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 22 Mar 13 - 10:59 AM Population of USA in 1980- 227,224,681 Population of USA in Jul 2012-313,914,040 wow... they're gaining anyway! Maybe we need more guns with large magazines! (he said with tongue firmly buried in cheek, lest anyone take it seriously) A more important statistic would be the many more millions whose lives have been affected by the losses embedded in that 1,057,000... and counting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 22 Mar 13 - 09:39 AM Over 1,057,000 people have been killed by guns in the U.S.A. since John Lennon was shot and killed on December8, 1980. Yoko Ono |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 03 Feb 13 - 09:42 PM Yup... talkin' blues would work jes' fine... (as Pogo would say) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 03 Feb 13 - 07:22 PM Thank you Bill and gnu. I'll give it a shot--heh heh. Talkin' blues. Need a day or two. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 03 Feb 13 - 05:53 PM NRA's "enemy list" Almost makes ya nostalgic for old tricky Dick Nixon, don't it?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Feb 13 - 05:51 PM From: GUEST,999 - PM Date: 03 Feb 13 - 03:24 PM I love it! Man... you got a song there... flesh it out. Brings a bunch of images and idea's into my head. No shit... if you don't work on it, I'll be sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 03 Feb 13 - 04:41 PM The stats ain't quite that pure, Bobert. I think there might be more than a bit of equine effluence mixed in there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Feb 13 - 04:08 PM Hey, I know a big name to put with it... ..Bruce "The Badman" Murdock!!! As for the NRA and this round... They'll probably win the round but will take some shots and we'll more than likely get tighter background checks and the gun show loophole plugged up but equally important funding restored to the CDC for it study on the effects of gun violence... I know the NRA loves to brag about _____________ (pick any ridiculously high number) are saved by all these guns and, of course, they have a shit load of highly paid bloggers that do nothing 40 hours a week but clog up every search engine extolling those stats as if they are real but... ... those stats are pure USDA 100% Choice Bullshit... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 03 Feb 13 - 03:34 PM Catchy, 9... needs a chorus and a big name to put it on Yooooo-Tooob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 03 Feb 13 - 03:24 PM I'm writing to the NRA For the work they've done to keep us free They'll stand behind us any day When automatics start to spray But there's one thing I'd like to see And that's them standing in front of me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 03 Feb 13 - 02:56 PM Dear NRA... And you brag about list all those prominent, exemplary citizens and organizations as problems and enemies to be watched with concern and fought against? Where is your list of sane, reasonable people whose advice and counsel we should be following? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 03 Feb 13 - 10:14 AM That was me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 03 Feb 13 - 10:13 AM It may provide a hit list but half the fuckers can't read. Evens up the odds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 03 Feb 13 - 09:58 AM Also provides a 'hit list' for pro-gun extremists. You gotta problem wid dat??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 03 Feb 13 - 09:32 AM Also provides a 'hit list' for pro-gun extremists. Is there a comparable list of organisations, corporation and prominent individuals who take an anti gun control standpoint? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 03 Feb 13 - 08:53 AM bobad, the NRA put a helluva lotta work into compiling that list. Lets us know who out friends are. I think I'll send them a thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Feb 13 - 07:32 AM The NRA's "enemy list" Mudcat didn't make it.....c'mon guys, we gotta do better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 01 Feb 13 - 11:41 PM Since you make up a lot of stuff, Donuel, I was a bit dubious about your shooting deaths/traffic fatalities claim--However Bloomberg had an article in December that said that the two would converge in 2013. It is true that traffic fatalities have taken a huge drop over the past few years-from around 43,000 in 2005 to 32,000--and, as we have discussed before, shooting related deaths have stayed constant. However, most of the "shooting deaths" are suicides, and by most, I mean by about 2 to 1, and, given that murder and suicide are very,very different, it is a bit deceptive to lump them together. For almost every purpose other than "the gun debate" they are dealt with as separate issues. At any rate, the decline in traffic deaths is most likely related to the shrinking economy, because, what with the price of gas being what it is, most of us drive a lot less theses days. If the economy perks up, we're likely to hit the roads again, and those numbers will pop back up, because if there is anything we Americans love more than guns, it's cars. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 01 Feb 13 - 05:27 PM "The NRA is arguing (among many, many other things) that the decline in gun homicides over the years proves that no new measures are needed" Sorry but that nra premise is false, untrue and a lie. This year we have more shooting deaths than auto accident fatalities. The rates are up, in case you haven't noticed. a republican congressman who carries water for the nra has made it illegal for our national institutes of health to copile and research gun death data that could ever be used to encourage gun control. This law is not water tight but it discourages scientists from doing work in the gun area since it would mean the grant money would be challenged right off the bat. The DAT&firearms is likewise bound by similar barbed haywire laws that prevents even basic knowledge and meaningful statistics to be gathered, sice it could be used to encourage gun control. machavellian ain't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 01 Feb 13 - 04:26 PM According to the NRA, a half million new dues-paying members have signed up since Newtown. True or false? Sane or mad? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 01 Feb 13 - 02:32 PM "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Feb 13 - 02:02 PM ""So we've got to ditch the First Admendment, the Second, and so maybe we ought to take a look a the Third, if anybody can remember what it is..."" The NRA have already abolished the first and completely misinterpreted the 2nd. Still when they've made real the largely mythical Wild West and turned the USA into a place of equal danger for all, they can always plead the 5th. They don't need to know any of the others. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 01 Feb 13 - 12:12 PM "cold comfort" Yes indeed! Succinctly put. And "The Media" can't seem to just report that X-Y-Z events happened.... they have to milk the details, interview the victims families and ask them "how they **feel**"....as if that will help. Certain events are big enough and iconic enough to need follow-ups in order to remind us what the situation is,... like Sandy Hook.. but my local news has the policy: "If it bleeds, it leads", and any local shooting or car crash requires a reporter and camera crew and interviews with the neighbors...etc. I don't know how I would balance the need for relevant news coverage of significant events with the tendency to run manic, overblown hype designed to feed the morbid curiosity of the drooling public. I do know it would be toned down if I were in charge. Ah well, god gave me 100 channels and a remote control. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 01 Feb 13 - 12:46 AM As to the "copycat" factor--that pretty much implicates the media, doesn't it? Without the elaborate media coverage, they wouldn't know what to copy, would they? So we've got to ditch the First Admendment, the Second, and so maybe we ought to take a look a the Third, if anybody can remember what it is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 01 Feb 13 - 12:25 AM An interesting article, BillD. I think it is important to note that the dramatic decline in murders since 1993 (or whatever year the peak was), came after an equally dramatic increase in murders leading up to 1993-there was a "crack epidemic", and of course, we were at the at the end of the Reagan-Bush era, so you can sort the causes out however you want. Now, murder rates have fallen to where they were in the early 1960's, which is about where they had been for decades. Actually, it appears that when the regular murders spiked, the "mass murders" remained at the normal rate, which is where they are now. The regular murders are back at their normal level now--wo when you look back twenty years, there's been a sharp decline, but if you look farther back, they are about the same as they've been for a long time. That's what is called "cold comfort'... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 31 Jan 13 - 10:30 PM "... confiscated guns should be replaced by musical instruments.." Not bassoons... looks too muck like bazookas. Maybe harmonicas... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: freda underhill Date: 31 Jan 13 - 05:34 PM I've previously published info from the Australian Bureau of Statistics which demonstrated a greatly reduced murder rate after the gun buy-backs in Australia. Here is a recent article on the impact of gun buy backs in Australia. Shooters in Australia are becoming politicised and we now have a Shooters and Fishers party in NSW which holds the balance of power. They have negotiated with government that licensed shooters can hunt in national parks, putting at risk the lives of bushwalkers and native animals. Here is an article about the head of the NSW Game Council,who was suspended last week for trespass and illegal and cruel hunting practises All confiscated guns should be replaced by musical instruments, and ten free lessons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 31 Jan 13 - 05:22 PM So, it seems that the NRA is using the "There are already __________ (pick your own number) gun laws on the books" defense... That's no defesnse... If all these laws are on the books then they are junk laws 'cause they ain't doin' squat... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 31 Jan 13 - 04:59 PM I tend to agree with Ebbie and Bill, but the influence on society may be far more subtle and not directly related to violent behavior. Consider: Japanese "graphic novels" (i.e., expensive comic books with more pictures and less talk than when they cost 1/10 the price) are relentlessly, horrendously violent in comparison with ours - and incredibly popular. Yet the Japanese murder rate is minuscule (they don't have guns, but they could find other ways to kill one other if they really wanted to.) There have been numerous studies carried out since the '60s. Kids and grownups are shown violent films, etc., then their behavior is monitored in various ways. One experiment staged a fistfight a minute or two after exposure. In that one, it was discovered that people who'd watched the violent videos were actually more passive in a sense than those who hadn't: those who hadn't tried more often to stop the fight, while those whose brains were filled with violent images tended just to watch. Tests with kids showed that watching violent cartoons seemed to have no overt effect. Watching violent actors made them more aggressive - but aggression is often defined as yelling or pushing, not getting truly violent like punching or kicking or even fighting. If I recall correctly, there was a '70s study of men who preferred sadistic pornography over the other kind. Turns out they weren't notably more violent or aggressive than anybody else. IIRC. I don't know about long-term studies. You'd think that watching 20,000 acts of murder and violence on TV alone by the time you're 18 (as was estimated in the '70s - it's probably more now) would have *some* kind of effect. But what? And on whom? ...if on anyone at all. Somebody must know more about this topic than I do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 31 Jan 13 - 04:21 PM Violent games DO give kids a different perspective on what is fun, fair and 'normal'. It is hard to believe that blasting away dozens of 'pretend' enemies doesn't nudge the consciousness of someone who already has issues with adjustment to society. Of course, it is VERY hard to assert any direct, causal link..."after all, people have free will, and ought to know you just can't do that stuff in real life!".... right... Yes, 'Dungeons and Dragons' is a lot calmer in general... my son played it a lot, but his group never even tried to inject violent aspects into it. My view is that the creators of those 'games' have a lot to answer for. I really doubt that anyone ever called or wrote the early video game designers and said: "Hey, why don't you make a game where people get shot and chopped up with lots of blood & body parts!"...same with movie/TV program writers. They learned that a 'little' mayhem soon gets bland, and each tried to offer more mayhem in order to compete.... much like nudity grew gradually from those fairly tame early Playboys. There's no easy way to 'draw a line' on any form of entertainment, just as there's no easy way to pin down when guns crossed the line... but it's easy to see that they ARE way over the line of sanity now! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 31 Jan 13 - 03:43 PM I am not all certain that video games and violent movies are without blame. We believe in advertising and rely on it, don't we? Do you remember 'Dungeons and Dragons'? I don't know if it is still around, although I would guess that its graphics are mild compared with today's games. More than 20 years ago I had a co-worker who spent hours in its bowels. We would see him practicing his moves, silent and absorbed in them. Two years or so after that, he told a couple of friends of his how to get into his grandfather's apartment, that his grandfather had money stashed there. The 'friends' shot and killed the old man. To this day I believe that my co-worker had lost contact with reality. This young man was Native Alaskan and allowing or causing harm to an elder was totally against his beliefs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 31 Jan 13 - 02:09 PM I have been searching for ideas, scenarios or facts that will give the most traction and pathos to a poster I am making about the gun issue. No real response to my suggestions so far and I havent seen/found good examples here of late. Any pointers from you* *the universal collective you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jan 13 - 01:13 PM Or is it because they want angry fools to deluge Congress with one-line emails saying, "Touch my gun and you're out of office, Commie fascist"? Yes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 31 Jan 13 - 12:39 PM The NRA is arguing (among many, many other things) that the decline in gun homicides over the years proves that no new measures are needed, because Americans are shooting each other less anyway. They might argue just as cogently that gun laws already in place are responsible for the decline and that more controls will cause an even greater decline. Maybe without laws that NRA lobbied against long ago, the toll would have been higher. The statistics are evidently true. They do not, however, have a crystal-clear meaning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 31 Jan 13 - 12:13 PM Well... I have no problems with facts and accuracy-- but which ones one chooses from long lists and how they are presented can be crucial. It goes to the old remarks about "lying with statistics" You note that the overall number of *homicides* has decreased... and that is a genuine fact. However, when you look at types of homicides and overall totals in various categories as a % of population and related to urban vs. rural and other categories, it is hard to be very optomistic. Take a look at these statistics. It requires some careful investigation to sort out the relevance, but they are not pleasant in their implications. The author says what I have suspected for awhile now: "Levin said mass killers are often copycat killers who feed on the public outrage over domestic killing. "The copycat phenomenon is real and, unfortunately, these things come in clusters," Levin said. If that IS true, then there can be little doubt that disturbed individuals who have easy access to guns will continue to USE guns to express their frustration with family,life and society. Because a significant % of these commit suicide or expect to die in the process, it is even difficult to analyze motives. I see the pressures of society and the bombardment of already shaky minds with violent games and stories of others "going out in a blaze of [glory]?" as a recipe for more mass shooting as long as the means is easily available. That obviously affects MY opinion about how to address the overall problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 31 Jan 13 - 12:03 PM As they say, the NRA has shifted from being primarily a gun owner's agency interested in the outdoors, gun safety and creating good memories, to being a marketing tool for gun manufacturers. Maybe that is where we need to look. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 30 Jan 13 - 12:06 PM You're right, BillD, I am one of those people who is obsessive about factual details. The thing is, though you may not notice it, it doesn't matter which side someone is one, if they've got the facts twisted or confused, I go to pains to find the right ones. Whether its PDQ or Bobert, whether it's about gun deaths or Leslie Caron. I'm just like that. Given that (I tend to use "Given that" as a transition, too), I think that there is a big disconnect between the rather abundant information that we have about our problems with violence, and the rather partisan solutions that are thrown around. I am particularly put off by the "waving a bloody shirt" posture, claiming that something needs to be done immediately, even if it doesn't actually solve the problem. The thing is, all though there have been many "gun control" measures enacted into law, and although there has been a remarkable decline in homicides since say, 1993, the shirt-wavers behave as if things are worse than ever(both sides), and the public perception is that it what we tend to call a "zero sum game", so people cry and wring their hands when the opportunity arises, and then go back to whatever they were doing. Sorry if you feel that I've mis-represented your position. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 13 - 11:14 AM Yes, Lighter... there IS a lot of pressure on various members of congress who treat 'keeping their jobs' as a higher goal than 'doing the right thing'. In doing so, they probably convince themselves, in a roundabout way, that they ARE doing the right thing. Hard position to overcome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 30 Jan 13 - 10:46 AM Er...is it because the NRA desperately wants stricter laws but is too scared of it's heat-packin' membership to say so? So, by using reverse psychology, they can finally get Congress to act and dues-paying NRA members to resign in droves? Or is it because they want angry fools to deluge Congress with one-line emails saying, "Touch my gun and you're out of office, Commie fascist"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 13 - 10:46 AM ?? Ok, Stim... I am confused. You say you are not a gun rights person... fine. But you spend a lot of time criticizing others who are also not gun rights people....seemingly over fine points of data. You did summarize MY position incorrectly, as if I was the one being careless in my analysis. You accuse others like this: "... prefer to offer high profile bandaids and to point their fingers at the NRA ..." Now... what 'bandaids' do you mean? And what counts as a worthy step towards a solution? The NRA (excuse the emphasis) IS a problem, as they try to derail ANY solutions that alter their cozy status quo. They are not the only problem... but they are the face of many of the underlying problems. I and others have listed many of those underlying problems, from long standing cultural ones to detailed technical ones on weapon type & design. In some sense, any single proposal to confront any single item IS a 'bandaid'... but if you cut your hand deeply and can't get 'real' help immediately, a bandaid is better than nothing! (weak metaphor? maybe..but I hope you see the point). One of the problems with tackling this issue is that there are so many people denying that it needs to be tackled. They don't even want to supply bandaids! One thing that is really needed is to keep the issue alive and keep the pressure on those who are in denial, for whatever reasons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 30 Jan 13 - 10:17 AM The NRA have deliberately made themselves into a cartoonish WWF-style bad guy in all this. Have you ever wondered why? Why did Wayne LaPierre, who has an in house PR staff who prepare all his talking points and strategies, make the rounds saying all the wrong things after the Newtown shootings? Keep in mind that, all appearances aside, he is not a stupid man, and he has a very large, well-paid staff of people who are not stupid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 13 - 09:18 AM Yeah, I agree Stimz... Seems that rather than put some common sense gun controls in place the NRAers want to pollute, yes pollute, the discussion with bad stats and fear and not much more... Today the NRA will their smoke and mirrors show to Capitol Hill... Why they are invited is well beyond comprehension... We all know what they have to say because they have had the microphone going back 3 or 4 decades... I wish that the Senate would invite the CDC people who were in midst of completing a study on the correlation between having a gun in the house and being shot by a gun but the NRA ***stopped*** that study years ago by telling their puppets in Congress that they wanted the study stopped... Yes, have the CDC people testify... But that won't happen because, well, we all know (wink, wink)... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 29 Jan 13 - 10:43 PM You're not listening to me, BillD. I am not a "gun rights" person. I am tired of people who know damned well where most of the murders occur, and who commits most of the murders, and who are the victims of most of the murders, and prefer to offer high profile bandaids and to point their fingers at the NRA instead. And that is the name of that tune. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 09:07 PM Damn, PeeDee! You shoot skeet with a rifle? Ever kill any innocent bystanders with those high-angle shots? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:28 PM Stim said: "We are concerned here, at least according to BillD, with what are now called "Rampage Shootings", ..." Where did you get that? I never defined the issue narrowly like that! That is only one concern! Making up your own data now? In some urban areas, a large % of deaths are gang/drug related. So what? Many of those gang members are using guns for other purpose than to shoot each other. They use guns to rob stores and people on the street, even when the don't shoot them! Making guns harder to obtain for gangs is a good idea, don't you think? Many gangs GET guns thru straw purchasers who but guns at shows, then resell them. They prefer handguns with large clips for holdups and some of those AR-15s and similar for serious disputes among themselves. What average citizen needs either one? Stim... you are arguing from what sounds like a standard premise of "we have a right to them, and we NEED them because 'they' have them." That position is full of holes, but the idea seems to be that if enough people repeat a mantra, it becomes true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:27 PM "in the cities"... (((yawn))) More rigging the stats... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:22 PM Almost 60% of gun homicides in cities of 100,000 or more in population are gang-related. More than 95% of gun homicides are by some form of weapon other than a rifle. Almost always a handgun. So, what does Obama and the Feinstein do first? Go after everything else. Clever, eh? Why? Because it would be dirty and dangerous to go after the gang thugs. Cost money, too. Much easier to take the custom-balanced skeet shooting rifle away from the local real estate agent. Real gutsy move, eh? And Bobert: knock off the "talking points" crap and talk. You are starting to sound as lame as Greg F'ing Moron, and that is real lame. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:16 PM Yes, Stimz... It's all about a lot of things that need to be done... Tinkering ain't goin' to fix squat... What we are going to get this tie around is tinkering... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:11 PM Just to connect the dots--This much touted "ban on assault rifles" isn't really going to change much of anything, because there aren't really that many people killed with rifles of any sort. And a big chunk of the our murders are gang-related, meaning that they are connected to organized crime--which, by it's very definition, isn't likely to respond to gun laws (actually, tight gun restrictions, like drug laws, create great opportunities for gangs). I can't speak for PDQ, but my point here is that these "solutions" some of y'all are getting excercised about are empty gestures, with marginal benefits at best, because they don't even address the facts that we have. Furthermore, and, for me, this is the kicker, BillD himself says "There are myriad, complex, interrelated problems!!" which means that he knows that simple "solutions" like banning certain rifles and limiting clip size, and even tighter registration and enforcement aren't really going to do much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:05 PM Yup, Don... The NRA/pdq folk want to make the narrative about gang killings... The underlying thread with that narrative is that gang members deserve to die... There is no other way to interpret why these people are intent on making gun control all about gangs... Problem is that if you take the number of people killed by gangs then you still have one heck of a lot of folks who aren't... Might of fact, the number of other folks that get killed dwarf the gang war arguments... That is reality... So let's just reject the NRA/pdq argument... It is not relevant to the discussion... Just a smoke screen... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 29 Jan 13 - 07:48 PM > No, it is what absolutely everybody does. > To pick "facts" and stats that do not support one's own argument would be a form of mental illness. A popular and serious misconception. That intelligent people believe it is an indictment of our educational system. Research isn't about scoring points. It's about getting as close to the truth (and to the big picture) as possible. Real researchers gather and report all the relevant facts, whether they tend to support their preconceptions or not. They at least try to make sense of them without personal bias. (Doing otherwise reminds me of the old saying, "My mind's made up, so don't confuse me with facts.") Cherry-picking your favorite stats and suppressing the rest brings nobody closer to valid conclusions or helpful decisions. Of course, advertisers, politicians, and propagandists pick their stats all the time. Because they're trying to snow you, not trying to solve problems in the best informed manner. And, as we all know, "Figures can't lie, but liars can figure." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:55 PM And in your math, that's 90%, right PeeDee? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:52 PM If people accept those numbers as close enough, it means that 13 times as many people are killed by street gangs than by "rampage shooters". We have also shown that rifles are used in fewer than 5% of gun homicides. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:50 PM I really don't get the NRA/pdq argument??? It's okay for gangs to kill folks is the underlying message here... Kinda racist, ain't it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:45 PM Dammit!! That should conclude:- One twelfth of total gun deaths and one quarter of gun homicides are all that can honestly be laid at the door of gangs. The number of those killed in random mas shootings is tiny, BUT the total number of gun homicides is huge. How can Americans accept this carnage as simply the price of doing business? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:36 PM 2006 - 2010, 774 mass gun murders and 10,000 gang killings out of a total gun related deaths over that four years of approximately 120,000, of wich more than 40,000 were homicides. So annually, 30,000 gun deaths, 10,000 gun murders, 2,500 gang related and 194 mass shootings, usually at schools and perpetrated by current or ex students. Kind of puts the difference between gang and rampage more in perspective:- One twelfth and |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:30 PM Thanks for the self-serviing quotes, PeeDee. Still no documentation, however. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:26 PM "Cherry picking stats is dishonest..." No, it is what absolutely everybody does. To pick "facts" and stats that do not support one's own argument would be a form of mental illness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:09 PM Doug Sovern, CBS San Francisco, January 14, 2013 Two groups are at war with each other on the streets of Oakland, after the murder of woman last summer, and the subsequent feud is responsible for "90 percent" of the violence in the city since then, Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan said Monday. City officials held a news conference Monday to discuss the alarming wave of shootings in the city over the weekend. Four people were killed Friday and 11 more were wounded since then. Oakland Mayor Jean Quan, Police Chief Jordan and City Administrator Deanna Santana joined other local leaders in East Oakland to address a disturbing string of shootings in a city that has been plagued by violence and a soaring murder rate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:02 PM Cherry picking stats is dishonest... Of course the NRAers want to put as many murders on gangs as possible and if you go into the worst of the worst neighborhoods, yeah, you find a disproportionate number of gang related murders... Problem is that those worst of the worst neighborhoods in no way represent America... We have a sleeping little rural town 5 minutes from here... It's Marshville, NC and rural and the home of Randy Travis... Nice little town... Not a lot of fpolks live there but, in spite of the few people who live there there were 6 murders there in the last year... Not one gang related... If you fly over America and look down from the airplane you see thousands and thousands of Marshvilles... Sand Hook is probably a lot like Marshville... So, please people... If you are going to use statistics or testimonials, use them honestly... Not too much to ask... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Jan 13 - 05:35 PM PDQ, you and I have been through the 90% stuff before. Your response was, "Pick a number." I do not believe what you said because I think it's bullshit. Back it up from somewhere besides a NRA site and I'll apologize. PS Where's my CD? Obama won. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 05:27 PM Who gives a crap what they SAY, Pee Dee? What can they document? Advice it would do you well to adopt, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 29 Jan 13 - 04:11 PM The mayor of Oakland, California, says that 90% of recent murders in her city are gang-related. The chief of police for Chicago said something similar. About 90% of gun homicides there are gang-related. Guess each is a talk show host working for the Tea Party? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 29 Jan 13 - 03:29 PM According to the Department of Justice, Donnuel, there are about 2,000 gang related murders a year. In Los Angeles and Chicago, they account for about half of the murders each year.National Gang Center Surveys. Most of those killings would have involved a gun. To my mind, that is not "very small". We are concerned here, at least according to BillD, with what are now called "Rampage Shootings", and which seem to occur about one every two weeks. USA Today Homicides and Mass Murders 2006-2010. The thing is, according to the USAToday numbers (which look to have come from "Mother Jones") there were 774 victims of Rampage murders during that time. According to the Justice Department, there were a bit more than 10,000 gang related murdered during that time. So, anybody, which is the bigger problem? And before you answer, remember that the "race card" is already on the table. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 12:10 PM I prefer the right wing shows that limit themselves to 5 lies per minute. I didn't realize there were any. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Donuel Date: 29 Jan 13 - 11:44 AM The percentage of gang related deaths by guns is very small. The claim that gangs are the big problem is made by race baiters and right wing talk shows that average 18 lies per minute. I prefer the right wing shows that limit themselves to 5 lies per minute. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 29 Jan 13 - 11:20 AM This is making the rounds on facebook: by Mary Cathryn Ricker, President of the St. Paul Federation of Teachers, Local 28, Licensed to Teach So I guess the NRA says the answer to stop school shootings is more guns, joining the smattering of elected officials who recently have promoted the idea of arming teachers and principals. This approach is wrong. If a place like Ft. Hood, TX which has some of our planet's most deadly weapons carried by some of our planet's most deadly professional soldiers, can be reduced to carnage by a single armed assassin, then what makes The NRA think that arming a nation of just-right-book loving, denim jumper wearing, wooden apple bead necklace creating, white board marker toting school teachers (and the rest of us) will be effective? You want to arm me? Good. Then arm me with a school psychologist at my school who has time to do more than test and sit in meetings about testing. Arm me with enough counselors so we can build skills to prevent violence, have meaningful discussions with students about their future and not merely frantically adjust student schedules like a Jenga game. Arm me with social workers who can thoughtfully attend to a student's and her family's needs so I. Can. Teach. Arm me with enough school nurses so that they are accessible to every child and can work as a team with me rather than operate their offices as de facto urgent care centers. Arm me with more days on the calendar for teaching and learning and fewer days for standardized testing. Arm me with class sizes that allow my colleagues and I to know both our students and their families well. Arm my colleagues and me with the time it takes to improve together and the time it takes to give great feedback to students about their work and progress. Until you arm me to the hilt with what it will take to meet the needs of an increasingly vulnerable student population, I respectfully request you keep your opinions on schools and our safety to yourself NRA. Knock it off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 11:15 AM Yeah, Bobert, Obama has a nasty habit of negotiating with himself and when he does so, he always loses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Jan 13 - 10:37 AM The new gun laws ain't gonna change shit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 13 - 10:35 AM Nice song, B-Bad... Unfortunately, the Obama narrative has already changed in less than the time it takes for paint to dry... He's not talking about assault weapons or high capacity clips anymore but only background checks and more $$$ for mental health... I think the NRA was somewhat willing to give on the back-ground checks so I think Obama and the NRA are on the same page now which means the can has been kicked down the road and the mass shootings won't end and we'll be revisiting real gun control down the road... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 29 Jan 13 - 10:29 AM The NRA is totally wedded to the "slippery slope" theory of governmental action. Allow 'them' to limit ONE type of gun, and tomorrow they'll be in your kids' bedroom closet, looking for pellet guns and slingshots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 29 Jan 13 - 10:15 AM Did I say that? Did I say that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jan 13 - 08:51 AM Damn, Lighter, you mean to tell us that the National Rifle Assassination would LIE ??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 29 Jan 13 - 07:52 AM I post as a non-member because I keep losing my cookie. But never mind that. You've all heard how the first thing Hitler did was impose gun control and take away Germans' guns so they couldn't overthrow him? You've read the bumper stickers quoting Hitler in 1933 saying "This is a great day for Germany, because we have finally outlawed guns," etc., etc., a quotation which has been shown to be bogus. But according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Germany For non-Jewish Germans, Hitler actually *relaxed* the draconian gun laws put in place by the Treaty of Versailles and again by the Weimar Republic. True, by the Act of 1938, Jews were forbidden to possess firearms, but at the same time they were being stripped of their citizenship and everything else, including their dogs. (That is not a joke.) What, after 1938, individual German Jews might have done with pistols and rifles against the Nazis is an entirely different question, but the Wehrmacht made short work of the entire trained and organized Polish army in 1939. Any claim that Hitler kept his hold on power by confiscating the firearms would appear to be 100% untrue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 28 Jan 13 - 11:15 PM "·.. first figure out what the problem really is,..." Well...gee. How long do I have? There are myriad, complex, interrelated problems!! And who is going to evaluate my proposed list of them once I write the 800 page book outlining them? You? While I work out the 'problems' and submit my ideas, there are people dying! Suppose you have a dog digging up your flower beds. You can analyze the history of man's relation to canines and study the behavior of dogs in urban environments and the relative distance of garden plots to the dogs enclosures in the area..... or, you can fence the garden and enforce tighter laws about dogs running free! Problems with gun deaths? Easy... There are daily tragedies from too many of the wrong people having too many of the wrong kind of weapons! Solutions? Reduce the totals of either or both! How? Well... you want simple, or do you want feasible? I can list a number of each.. as can a dozen other posters to this thread. The solutions are totally enmeshed in cultural, financial & political webs which defy most attempts to cut thru them.... but someone has to make a start. (yeah, I underlined that... see below) Now... I use underscores and quotation marks to try to make writing sound like speaking and emphasize what I think needs 'extra' oomph, like a politician making a speech. You may, at your convenience, ignore them or copy & paste them into a word processing program, where those caps & italics, etc., will disappear. I will continue to compose my posts to express my opinions... just as some continue to post as a non-member for some reason. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 28 Jan 13 - 10:15 PM You can't move from sympathy, regrets, and comforting thoughts to solutions. You have to to first figure out what the problem really is, and, after that, you may begin to speculate as to what to do about it. I doesn't matter how upset you are, it doesn't matter how many caps or italics you use. You can underscore and paste question marks all over everything, but that doesn't mean that you have an answer. It doesn't even mean you're asking the right questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 28 Jan 13 - 01:00 PM Stim... please re-read the opening post. My entire point was to shed light on the entire spectrum of shooting tragedies. I began with a comparison of attacks with guns to a another senseless attack with a knife. Since then, there have been 'about' a thousand MORE tragedies involving guns in the US. EACH is sad and involves altered lives of friends & loved ones. None was as extremely disturbing as the loss of so many children and those trying to protect them. No one will forget the enormity of the loss at Sandy Hook school, but no one should ignore the central issue that between 5-15 or so die every day thru gun violence. Some of these are 'merely' results of drug gangs, and some are 'merely' accidents.... but they all have one thing in common: they involve the use of firearms by people who should not have access to firearms. You simply cannot think about these tragedies without asking "WHY?"... and thus we discuss & debate how to be fair, reasonable and practical in attempting to control and alleviate the problem. Some who enter the discussion have owned and dealt with firearms all their adult lives, and consider themselves to be sane and reasonable and careful... which they no doubt are... but they also tend to define possible solutions to the carnage in ways that do not affect their 'rights'. There have been many comments on those rights... in the origin of them, the value of them and the future of them. Of course there are differences of opinion when a topic is this complex and emotional.... and no matter WHAT is done, (or not done) some will not be satisfied. All I can say about remembering "... the tragedy that took place." is that it is ALWAYS there. No amount of debating how to prevent tragedies will erase those memories.... but *I* began this thread with a hope that we could move beyond sympathy, regret and comforting thoughts to solutions..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 27 Jan 13 - 09:45 PM It's got a nice, driving beat, kind of reminiscent of "Heart", and it doesn't make you cringe, like all those 9-11 songs. It isn't much like a Phil Ochs song. Phil wasn't just a songwriter, he was a journalist, and a polemical one, at that. This song is an exhoration, and his message seems to be that everyone knows what needs to be done, and it's up to us to do it. I don't know why this particular event happened. I am not even sure that the accounts that we've seen and heard are accurate. I know that they are far from complete. I also know that everybody, BillD included, has jumped very quickly from discussing the incident itself to which ever side of the "gun control" issue they happen to favor. Much to his credit, John Flynn has moved us back to the tragedy that took place. Good on you, John. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 27 Jan 13 - 08:26 PM A powerful song written in the political folk tradition of Phil Ochs and others in response to the Newtown massacre by John Flynn: You Can't Tell. With thanks to my Facebook friend Ron Olesko. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Jan 13 - 07:46 PM I agree with the Founding Fathers... Anyone who wants a single shot, muzzle loader and willing to show up for militia training oughtta be able to own one... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 13 - 07:41 PM thanks.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 22 Jan 13 - 07:20 PM Bravo Bill D. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 13 - 05:17 PM au contraire, mon ami Stim I HAVE made many suggestions in many, many threads on the subject, and I have told personal stories of friends who had guns... and the one gun *I* sort of owned 47 years ago..(a 5 shot .22 revolver which I test fired ONCE). Do you not consider my suggestion of treating guns like cars and requiring regular renewal of licenses as a suggestion? How about my advocacy of databases of ALL guns and their owners in order to trace the routes of guns used in crimes? Those and more IN ADDITION to being all FOR classes, mental health screenings, etc. I have NOT advocated 'only gun control'. I certainly have specifically not suggested trying to take all or most guns away from almost everyone. I even realize that in a country as large and physically diverse as the US there is more 'reasonable' need for guns in some areas than for a place like, for instance, The UK. As for "politically easy" I suggest that it is easier for a politician to stalwartly quote the ambiguous 2nd amendment and defend the staus quo than to actually look for reasonable, workable, and FAIR solutions..... and one reason why that is easier is that you get more donations that way. (I also advocate revision of the 2nd amendment to reflect the world as it is today with slightly 'different' guns available. But I am not stupid enough to expect THAT!) I have tried for 10 years here to be practical about my suggestions... but to my mind, NOT limiting types of weapons and clips and ammo and sales laws is totally IMpractical if we want to make a dent in the problem. (and.. any comment on my remark about feeling better about reducing deaths from 12,000 to mere 8,000?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 22 Jan 13 - 04:13 PM Three injured in a Texas community college, as the Texas legislature is voting to allow students to carry concealed weapons. Cool. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 22 Jan 13 - 03:11 PM CTVNews.ca Staff A 16-year-old boy was fatally shot at a home in Dorval, Que., on Monday, Jan. 21, 2013. Teenager shot dead in Dorval, Que. Police interviewed the boy overnight Monday but released few details about the case. As of Tuesday morning, the investigation was not being called a homicide, but the case had been transferred to the major crimes unit. It appears the two boys were home alone when the shooting took place around 5:30 p.m. Monday. Immediately after the incident, the 12-year-old boy called 911 to report that his brother had been shot. Then he called his mother, who rushed home. Soon afterward, however, she had to be taken to hospital to be treated for shock. According to some reports, the boys found the loaded gun in a closet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Jan 13 - 02:38 PM The NRA did not have a reason to get into politics until the era of FDR. Not quite, PeeDee- the NRA (of which I wasonce a member) didn't go brain-dead until the late 1960's, early 1970's. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jan 13 - 02:32 PM Hey... Got us another college shooting in Texas. No accurate reports yet but some folks got shot up. Todays' shooting has been brought to you by the State of Texas. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 22 Jan 13 - 01:27 PM BillD-I said,"It is politically easier to advocate gun control than it is to advocate actions that will really address the problem of violence." because it is. I didn't make that choice. Politicians have made it. The news media, at least to a fair degree, has made it, and, people like you have made it. I am going to pick on you a bit here, and please excuse me, because I know you do care. You just happen to be here, and you've given me some examples to wor with...so... Basically, it comes down to the fact that whenever certain kinds of shooting crimes take place, you offer gun control as the essential cure for the problem. You, yourself, only have a made a superficial assessment of anything else beyond the availability of guns--I quote you, "I am quite willing to see society do everything it can to deal with mental health and attitudes and hobbies/habits that encourage and glorify violence! That would address problems in general- even those where no guns are involved." Basically, it's all on the mentally ill and hobbyists! You don't seem to have developed either a comprehensive picture of the problem and you haven't suggested a solution, beyond the gun control. So it is you, not me that has chosen the easier response. Here is a list ofEvery Gun Death Since Sandy Hook. There have been more than 1100. Most of the shootings aren't much like either the Sandy Hook or the New Mexico shootings. Were their lives less important? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 22 Jan 13 - 12:21 PM And here is a breaking story about one of the charming folks who write those state gun laws... note source and date |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 11:23 AM PDQ the NRA lost me when they continued to support the gun show lobby. That just made ever sportsmen's life harder. If they only worked to stop nonsense do nothing laws then I would have continued to support them . They went overboard, fighting against BG checks and gun show revisions etc. That is where they went wrong IMHO |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 13 - 11:17 AM Stim... I know the old joke. I have used it myself- but I don't think it applies here. " It is politically easier to advocate gun control than it is to advocate actions that will really address the problem of violence." Reply: Who said it has to be either-or? I am quite willing to see society do everything it can to deal with mental health and attitudes and hobbies/habits that encourage and glorify violence! That would address problems in general- even those where no guns are involved. But I submit that it would not make a serious dent in GUN violence as longs as so many AR-15 types and handguns with extended magazines are easily available. My own metaphor: No amount of traffic signs stating speed limits or cameras clocking speed or patrol cars with radar will seriously stop folks 'in a hurry' or kids who HAVE a car that will run over 100MPH from wanting to drive fast. Many localities simply treat speed limits and enforcement as a revenue producing activity... though it no doubt does somewhat lower traffic accidents. "Somewhat" in the case of our level of gun violence is cold comfort. You seldom know exactly who did NOT die from a gunshot... you only read of those who did. Would we be 'pleased' that 12,000 per year slowly dropped to 8,000? Friends & relatives of those 8,000 might see it differently. Countries which have 90% fewer gun deaths per capita that the US are not 'happy' at their statistics... but they KNOW that the biggest element that keeps that % down is much less ACCESS to guns! Do remember... those other countries DO have crazy people in similar percentages, and some of those mentally ill..or just plain criminal... DO acquire & use guns. Guns are just too much lure for those who have the desire to cause violence! In many countries, it is quite difficult to get one. In the USA, they can beg, buy or steal one with relative ease. So... please do encourage and advocate mental health and better laws... but in 300,000,000 people, there will always be those who are missed by 'programs' and who are simply ticking bombs. (The kid in New Mexico has told authorities he "has had had homicidal, suicidal thoughts".... his family had an AR-15 and other guns in the house. He had 'never been in trouble before'.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:54 AM The law state 7 rounds in the magazine, does that include the on in the chamber which is 8 ? No one can answer that question, even the sheriff |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:44 AM I am talking about NY Bobster, Joe Biden at least had people who knew firearms. I agree with his plan, it was well thought out. Our Governor in this state just got his buddies together behind closed doors and made nonsense. The only think it will accomplish is to make a law abiding person a criminal for having a clip that doesn't comply since no one even the sheriff knows what the hell they are talking about in the new law |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:42 AM "...what happened was a bunch of NYC lawmakers got together in secret and push through some knee jerk laws that help nothing." Without the National Rifle Association, these people whould go un-challenged. Is that what you want? The NRA did not have a reason to get into politics until the era of FDR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:39 AM So what??? I guess if you follow the NRA logic nothing can be done because it would be too hard to enforce... That's exactly what the NRA want us all to believe... I don't buy it, Ol'ster... Not at all... I mean, if we have some meaningful federal legislation then whatever is legal where you live will be legal elsewhere unless that jurisdiction has superseded the federal legislation with even stricter limitations but... ...ain't that kinda their business??? No different than a guy throwing a party for his friends and telling them to leave their guns at home... I believe that if communities don't want ordinary folks owning guns that is their business and if you don't like it just don't go there... Ain't the end of the world... Kinda like the inauguration yesterday... A million people attended and other than the security people there were no guns... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:37 AM what happened was a bunch of NYC lawmakers got together in secret and push through some knee jerk laws that help nothing. You would think they would at least have some people who have knowledge of firearms advise them .. NO let claim victory and pat ourselves on the back. You wonder why the NRA has such power, because knee jerk reactions push people to them. I can't stand the NRA but I understand why they have such political clout because of the nonsense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:27 AM I live next to the PA border, my gun is legal in PA as I have a full conceal carry permit in that state also. Also many of my friends have a NY carry permit and live in PA. So when they go over the border they have to what, throw away their clips? nuts actually. My sheriff friend said a nightmare to enforce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:17 AM It will be illegal to own a clip that hold more than 7 rounds but if we are going to a range we can have a clip with full rounds ... @#$#@! idiots |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:12 AM Yes, the NRA goes out of it's way to puff itself up as the Meanest MFer on the block... It has served them well... When ever someone meantions gun control they already have the narrative in place that nothin will change because they are so big and bad... We need to bust up their PR ballgame and show them for what they are... A bunch of loudmouth, boorish wimps who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag in a real fist fight... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:11 AM NY new law, so I have to carry 7, ok but by April I have to modify my clips to only hold 7 ok, well I am gun smith so ya I can do that myself. But when I go to the range I am allowed 14 rounds in my clip. How the fuck does that work? Next I paid and was given a life time carry permit. That is, can only be taken away if I commit a crime. Now I have to renew my lifetime carry permit every 5 years ... just to give the gov some more cash. See what happens when idiots make gun laws. The sheriff is swamped with calls about how the hell do I do this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 22 Jan 13 - 10:03 AM The NRA bullshits about its membership numbers. Washington has allowed lobby groups to infringe the general rights of citizens--25,000 registered lobbyists in your nation's capital. Money buying influence. WTF do y'all expect? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Jan 13 - 09:48 AM The gun allows wimpy people to be Rambo and therefore capable of violence... Back when I was growing up it was the fist fight... If you thought you were Mr. Toughie then have at it... After a few of them most kids figured out that "it ain't all about you" and chose to try to get along... These days there is no reason to get along when if someone pisses you off you can just pull a little trigger thing and you are Mr. Toughie... I've told this story a couple times but it is well worth re-telling... Back when my son was about 5 years old, he, his mother and I were enjoying a nice meal in a somewhat nice restaurant when about 8 or so Rambo-wantabbes came in with handguns strapped to their legs like in some western movie... I had heard about this happening but until you are sitting in that restaurant and it happens to you you can't understand just how disconcerting it is... I mean, where is my right to peacefully enjoy a meal out with my family... The NRA doesn't get it that the rest of us have rights, also... I mean, the NRA is hung up on 7 or 8 words out of the thousands in the Constitution... I think that in order to own a gun you sould have to memorize the short paragraph known as the "Preamble to the U.S. Constitution" where the Founding Fathers laid out their vision for America then maybe these boorish bozos would get the "our rights, too" provisions of the document... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 22 Jan 13 - 02:42 AM "It is obvious that **controlling** sales, manufacture, registration and distribution of guns is a daunting task.... but I submit that it is FAR easier than managing 'human personalities' and monitoring the behavior of several hundred people." This kind of reminds me of the joke that ends, "Because the light is much better over here." It is politically easier to advocate gun control than it is to advocate actions that will really address the problem of violence. Given that, I am going to throw the cards on the table and say that there are a other reasons for being concerned about the aggressive dissemination of assault weapons--not the least of which is that there is a vocal, angry fringe element in this country who feel threatened by cultural and economic changes and who believe they are entitled to take what every action is necessary to stop them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 21 Jan 13 - 03:16 PM OF COURSE we need to pay attention to gangs.. and to mental health... and to criminal background checks! Who has a clear plan to reduce the totals of gangs & crazy people? If guns were not so easily available to gangs... and to crazy people.. and to 'plain' criminals, innocent bystanders and quiet families would not see so many homicides. It is obvious that **controlling** sales, manufacture, registration and distribution of guns is a daunting task.... but I submit that it is FAR easier than managing 'human personalities' and monitoring the behavior of several hundred people. Lordy.. we regulate, license and inspect vehicles in every state! Why not use the same basic rules to keep track of items that most of us do not NEED? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 21 Jan 13 - 03:11 PM I don't hold PDQ responsible for the gun carnage, or in fact, any carnage. I think that he has pretty much the same concerns that I(and most of the rest of us) do. From what has subsequently been revealed, it seems that the New Mexico shootings did not involve either drugs or illegal immigrants. If this is true, he was simply mistaken, not "wrong". Gangs, drugs, and illegal immigrants are significant factors in all kinds of crime, and we have to confront that. The ugly truth of the day is that the murder and crime rates among certain minority populations, in certain geographic areas, can be 10 or even 20 times that in the mainstream. Uglier still is the fact that leaders in these communities choose not to confront the problem, and the politicians who rely on them for support find it easier to point their fingers in other directions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 21 Jan 13 - 02:05 PM No problem from my perspective, pdq. If innocent people didn't get caught in the crossfire, I'd give the bastards guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:52 PM Another website says that over 60% of gun homocides in cities with a population over 100,000 are gang-related. Pick a figure you like. The one I posted was suggested about the current mass homocide problem in Chicago. I misstated in the post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:52 PM "About 90% of all gun murders in the US are gang-related." I agree. There a gang called the NRA that refuses to listen to any reason whatever and is unwilling to let go of the past. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:40 PM However, sooner or later the USA will have to start talking about gangs and their influence on various illegal activities. A good place to start would be the legal gun trade and the points at which it becomes illegal. That would include the machinations of the CIA too. Subsequently, I don't see it happening anytime soon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:25 PM pdq, your figure may not be accurate. "The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the United States (www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls). These estimates suggest that gang-related homicides typically accounted for around 12 percent of all homicides annually." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:12 PM About 90% of all gun murders in the US are gang-related. If people really want to reduce the body count they need to start talking about the gangs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 21 Jan 13 - 01:06 PM Subtlety: it's never been your long suit, Ron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 13 - 10:30 PM Hope I'm not too subtle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 13 - 10:29 PM Right, pdq. I understand the 7 year old shot his 5 year old brother since the brother belonged to a different gang. too. Your desperate defense of the US being awash in handguns is totally despicable. You ought to go down on your knees and ask the Lord to forgive you. You really need it. Your kind is directly responsible for the handgun carnage in the US. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 20 Jan 13 - 10:20 PM The math and simple logic tell you that no matter who did it, the easy availability of 'serious'guns like assault rifles make it more likely that they will fall into the wrong hands. If there are 100 'legally' owned the odds are less of them getting stolen or ILLEGALLY sold, than if there are 50,000 legally owned. If there were detailed records of who purchased each one and who sold it to whom, and jail time for misuse and/or illegal sales, there might not be a story like this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:43 PM It is likely that the Albuquerque shooting that left 5 dead was both gang-related and done by an illegal alien. There were several guns but the news media focus on the 'military style' rifle. Anyone want to guess whether these guns are legally owned? The news media, as usual, will tell the real story days later after their 'first impression news' has been fixed in people's minds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:31 PM Let's see if I can pull this off??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:29 PM Sorry, Bill, but I did... Seems these event happen every day somewhere... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:26 PM Did everyone miss MY posting of the same story at 5:26? I'm never sure when the subsequent posts just go off in other directions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:23 PM Yup, those killing wouldn't have happened with sane gun laws... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 20 Jan 13 - 08:11 PM Go to the top of the page for the story. http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/teenage-gunman-fatally-shoots-5-in-us-home-suspect-in-custody-1.1121909#commentsForm-362335 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Jan 13 - 07:56 PM Yes... A big 5 straight up... No "good time" early release... I will guarantee that such legislation would cut the shootings in the country by half in the first year while not depriving one single good guy his right to own his Glock... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 20 Jan 13 - 07:51 PM No parole. Might help. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Jan 13 - 07:08 PM I don't think it's inane to require handguns be registered, tracked and folks who own them have to prove they have some proficiency in handling them... This wouldn't impact the good guys all that much... People say, "Well, the bad guys won't cooperate"... Great, as part of the law let it be known that by such-a-such date you either comply or face 5 years in prison if you are caught with a handgun and hadn't complied... Don't think this would work??? I do... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 20 Jan 13 - 06:50 PM Yesterday was "Gun Appreciation Day" in the US. Here's a List of People Injured or Killed by Guns on 'Gun Appreciation Day' casualties of gun appreciation day |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 20 Jan 13 - 06:23 PM All part of the plan, Dan. Inane gun laws meant to antagonize honest people so they won't support ANY gun laws. More fuel for the gun nuts that donate $$$ to the NRA... more $ for the NRA... more $ for the bank accounts of politicians. All while people die. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 20 Jan 13 - 06:12 PM Well my cop friends just told me I have to carry only seven rounds in the glock and leave the other seven empty. Well if I had to shoot seven times I wouldn't need the thing anyway cause I would be dead .. The gun laws are nuts ... now I agree with the law for the long guns. The only reason I can see that people want the assault rifle is because of its large large magazine capacity ... But like I said the NY law on handguns makes no sense since you are only singling out people who are licensed and the state said you are a good guy go ahead and carry. Since no one in the state is allowed a handgun without the license it makes little sense . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 20 Jan 13 - 05:26 PM It never ends With the inauguration this weekend, and 'only' 5 deaths, this one may not get much notice.... like most of the 700+ that have died since Sandy Hook. " A teenage boy faces murder and other charges in the shooting deaths of a man, a woman and three children in a home on the outskirts of Albuquerque, New Mexico, authorities said Sunday. ... Williamson said each victim had been shot multiple times. Several guns were found inside the home, including a "military-style" rifle he said had been used in the crime." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Jan 13 - 08:45 AM As to the pistol and a handgun being different??? Nah, they are both handguns... I think that folks think of the pistol as having a cylinder like the guns in the cowboy movies but it is still a handgun... These days most folks have no interest in that kind of weapon because it's old technology... Everything is relative: "My very first pistol was a cap and ball Colt Shoot fast as lightnin' but load a might slow Loads a might slow, I soon found out It'll get you into trouble but won't get you out So then I went and bought me a Colt 45 Called a Peacemaker but I never knew why Never knew why, didn't understand Mama says "The pistol is the devil's right hand" B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 18 Jan 13 - 08:09 AM None whatsoever. It's designed to reinforce the paranoia and illogical pants-shitting fear of shadows that has been bred and ingrained into many (most?) Americans over the years. It must be a bloody awful way to live your life, I thank God I live in a country where guns are rare and we don't live in fear of your 'Mad Dog Killers' or 'The Bad Guys'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,olddude Date: 18 Jan 13 - 08:03 AM I agree with Lighter |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 18 Jan 13 - 07:38 AM The allegedly "conservative" position seems to be, "If you can't stop all mass shootings by lunatics, or even some individual shootings, don't even try - because if you do, Big Brother will break into our homes to confiscate our legal firearms as America sinks into nightmare dictatorship." Make sense? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 17 Jan 13 - 09:55 PM " before making such a brilliant statement" "that is often the case" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 17 Jan 13 - 09:53 PM "handguns and pistols are different". Sure they are. Perhaps you'd like to consult a dictionary before such a brilliant statement. Mine says a pistol is a type of handgun. Dictionaries can be surprisingly helpful if one actually wants to make sense. But of course, perhaps that's not the goal of the poster. On Mudcat it seems that often the case. An amazing number of people are far more interested in heat than light. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Jan 13 - 02:21 PM In some ways, ammunition IS a major part of the problem. There are enough guns of various types out there that we could search forever and not 'take away' a significant percent..... but unless they can get new ammo to replace what they use, (and some of these guys cannot bear to give up 'practicing'), it could lead to higher prices and reduced supply. (and no... most of these guys could NOT 'load their own' for most types) There is no single, simple way to reduce the horrible statistics.... not even with a guard at every school. **IF** every school had gates & guards, crazy fools who just want to kill will find other targets and locations... buses, playgrounds, more malls, theaters, stadiums...etc. It would be a huge 'live' version of Whack-a-mole!... and there will never be a shortage of crazy fools who can beg, borrow or steal weapons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Jan 13 - 12:51 PM Ammunition is not the problem. It's easy enough to remove a projectile (rifle bullet) and reverse it, reset it and it'll keep its course for 200 yards. The damage from it is incredible. So even with standard load cartridges, there's no real way to limit killing by dickin' around with ammunition laws. Other than a total mind readjustment of way too many gun owners, the only other option is gun laws that have teeth AND are enforced, both necessary if one hopes to reduce the death rate caused by people who have guns so readily available to them. imo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 17 Jan 13 - 12:34 PM and Bobster, ya ain't going to bring down a elk or moose or bear with a .22 that's why a ott six or a .308 is so good. Ya can load it up for Alaska brown bear or you can load it down for deer or use standard round for Elk. Can't limit Ammo, won't work unless it is Teflon cop killer bullets or explosive tips etc but they don't sell them and you really can't make them.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 17 Jan 13 - 11:51 AM Bobster no one should own a handgun unless they meet New York standards. Now if they can pass all that shit, go ahead cause it is a good guy packing. I wish the feds would pass that law. Like I said we have to have the same BG tests and the same skills as a state police officer. And they will not give you a conceal carry permit unless you do have just cause. That one is not easy at all to get. I have one .. but they don't issue many. Hunting with a handgun takes a lot of skill. Many sportsman like myself hunted deer with a handgun since in my county up until last year, you could only use a shotgun or handgun if you had a license. Now semi auto handguns, designed only for defense is correct, however it is the weapon of choice for competitive shooters. There is a long history of semi auto sports shooting. The US government started competitions after WWI and would actually give medals for citizen skills .. How things have changed. Although you don't think so, I am on your side and so is most sportsmen. WE don't want bad guys getting these things. Now for the AR, I don't understand why anyone wants one. A semi auto AR or AK is like having a pocket watch with no dial. If a collector wants one get a real one with a Class III FFL. Then you can go out and get a ma duece. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Jan 13 - 11:03 AM "Well regulated militia" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:26 PM 900 Americans have been murdered in the 30 days since Sandy Hook... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:24 PM The National Rifle Association leadership seems to bullshit about the number of members it has. People keep flinging around the 4 million figure. I doubt it's even as high as 2/3rds of that. I do not know why the US government even allows them into the conversation given their track record. I wish Washington would wake up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 09:21 PM The problem with that is that for every bad guy who gets killed another 99 good guys (or not so bad) get killed, too... If I had it my way there would be no semi-automatic handguns in the world... Their only use is killing other people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Jan 13 - 09:14 PM As an aside, many gang deaths are included in Canada's figure. Most of us don't give a shit about that. The more they kill each other the better it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:46 PM Yup, brucie... That's it... Obama and gun control people understand this fully well... We all know the problems... It's just that we need to get the pump primed... Like I said, "first step, long journey"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:42 PM BTW, when it comes to ammo... Back in the holler in the Va. mountains we had trouble with deer... My rifle is a .410/.022 over under "survival" rifle and the P-Vine would occasionally get real pissed at a deer in her garden... I used the cheapie .022 ammo from Walmart and could usually kill Mr. Deer with a single round... No hollow point... No nutin'... Just a chuck of lead... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:42 PM So lemme see if I have this right. One failed attempt with a shoe bomb and we all take our shoes off at the airport. Ten thousand handgun deaths and nothing should change. I get it now. Right. Uh huh. Yeah. Yeppers. Clear as a fucking bell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:37 PM No, I get it 100% Gn-ze... Semi-automatic handguns are what are killing 99% of Americans... I am terribly disappointed that we aren't talking about them... I think that we need to get something on the books just as starting point... Seein' as people are locked in on military style rifles then this is possibly the only 1st step in a long journey... Please understand that you and I are on the same page... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:31 PM Posted again without comment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:17 PM Bobert..."If this be "greandstanding", then perhaps the poster can tell us just why anybody outside the police and the military needs a pistol." Yeah... I, as the poster, can tell you EXACTLY what I have said all along... THEY DO NOT NEED A HANDGUN! (Handguns and pistols are different. Technical point but worth understanding for the purpose of dicussion). Why do NONE of you read my posts? Not even Bobert? Damn, man... yer one of the good guys and even YOU don't read my posts. THAT was my complaint just now and it's my complaint immediately again based on you misinterpretation of what I SAID... in MANY posts in MANY threads. I am on your side but your side just don't seem to wanna DO anything or listen to ANYONE... including me. Haven't seen any evidence otherwise yet. So, again, when yer bleedin, it's yer own fault. I gotta take a nap. I shant be awakened by gunfire. We still have some good gun laws in Canada... for a while... >;-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:16 PM Ahhhhh, hollow points!!! Yes, good ol' hollow points designed to kill people... Why are they legal ammo, Ol-ster??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:12 PM No Bob, he used hollow point in the handgun, which most handguns today are designed to use exclusively ... guns like the glock are not safe to use hardball ammo. And yes it expands and kills, that is why it is called deadly force. In the AR in Nam they use exclusively like in the current conflicts full metal jacketed which are metal piercing. Not because it causes less damage but because it shoots through troop transports and cinder blocks and body armor. Hollow points are useless in the military. The reporting of ammo is new people who don't know weapons. It is not the ammo, it is the weapon the ammo goes in. Example. Swat teams use hollow point .308 rounds in their sniper guns. The .308 hollow point is probably the most used deer round there is besides the .3006 ... Now is the .308 a military ammo yup is it a sportman ammo yup ... difference is, the weapon it is used in |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:08 PM 48 year old guy died today in Richomnd from being accidentally shot by his 4 year old nephew... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:03 PM Posted without comment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:57 PM It's not the caliber, Ol'ster... What has been reported is that the kind of ammo used at Sandy Hook is described as the type of ammunition that is "designed" to inflict the most damage after it makes contact... That tells me that there must be another kind of ammo that doesn't do as much damage... Now I've heard this several times from several news sources... The point is that if there is an ammunition that is out there that is all but guaranteed to kill no matter where the bullet enters the body then I don't want that ammo on the street... I recall my buddies talking about the M-16's ammo in Nam and that's what they described... Sounds like a special class of ammo to me... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:54 PM and what is the difference, those weapons have a number of high capacity drum clips, 100 rounds each. also easy to make fully auto since that is what it was designed to do, single shot, three round burst, or fully auto. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:52 PM Bob the .223 ammo is as common as grass. Many people just use the .222 ammo in the AR ... fires the same .. like a .32 special deer rifle can use 3030 cartridge also. the .223 is typically a hard ball or full metal jacketed round but you can get the .222 in hollow points if you so wish. That is a varmint round for woodchucks etc. Nothing special about the AR round or the AK round .. common rounds for hunting also.. The weapons however are designed for military use via its rate of fire and its setup. Not designed for hunting at all but bolt action hunting rifles can and do use the same rounds in a number of bolt action sports guns, 30 cal is a standard deer round. 222 is a standard varmint round |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:42 PM George H. W. Bush is credited with inventing "The Elitist" who has served as a reliable boogie man for right wing... I find it interesting that the NRA's first ad pulled out "The Elitist" for another round of kicking by wacko-nation... Next up??? Obama's daughters??? These people a sickos... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:36 PM If this be "greandstanding", then perhaps the poster can tell us just why anybody outside the police and the military needs a pistol. The few times a homeowner drives a would-be criminal away with a pistol may make good press-- (we've seen some colorful stories on this thread which seem to fit snugly the macho image fondly cultivated by some guys) --but they are swamped hugely by the times people are shot by relatives or people they know--not to mention the mass shootings which seem to increase yearly. It's time to make it less easy for people--whether wacko or not--- to reach for a pistol to solve arguments. It actually should be just as macho to solve problems with fists or knives--and the body count will sink dramatically. And spare us the drivel about "only outlaws will have guns". Wrong. You can keep your rifles (not semi-automatic or automatic) and the police and military will still be armed to the teeth--which I'm sure is a great comfort to you. If the police are not up to your standards, the public can make them improve. Of course you can also forget about hiding in the threadbare 2nd Amendment, which, as I noted earlier, was never intended for an "every man his own militia" approach a la the NRA--and is now hugely outdated for the purpose it was in fact designed---which never did work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:27 PM Well, then how did the shooter at Sandy Hook have this ammo if his mother bought everything legally, Ol-ster??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:19 PM Yup a simple metal file. On heavy machine guns it is the missing outside plate .. that any lathe could make |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:14 PM Bad guys have unlimited access to.... FILES! Yeah! That`s it! Ban files so they can`t use them to modify repeaters to... oh fer fuck sake! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:02 PM and ammo has nothing to do with it actually. It is the rate of fire and that is why I support the assault weapon ban ... why cause if I want one I would get a fully auto one with a Class III FFL license but I don't want one for any reason. People can still buy new if they want just get the right license and get checked out first. Ya see bad guys wont do that |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 06:58 PM bob the ammo you speak of is already banned. You cannot buy incendiary ammo or explosive tipped or tracer. Full metal jacketed rounds are common place and are used by target shooters Impossible to ban them |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 05:49 PM Yo, Ol-ster... If I am not mistaken there is both military and non-military style ammunition... It has been reported that the reason there were so many deaths from the shootings at Sandy Hook was because of the more dangerous form of ammo... No??? I think I'm correct on this... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 16 Jan 13 - 05:42 PM Bobert... "If we have 20,000 gun laws on the books and still have 100,000 Americans shot every year then we have 20,000 wrong laws... Other countries have right laws and they work... Why don't we copy folks who are successful rather than throw up our hands over and over and say, "Geeze, it won't work"??? How do we know??? We haven't ever tried real "gun control"... The laws always get screwed with loopholes, bad language no teeth and so we end up the murder capital of the developed world..." Gee golly gosh... I wondered if anyone ever said that in any other gun threads before or in THIS GUN THREAD?! Reading these threads tires me out. Am I the only one that is tired? = am I the only one that reads all this absolute bullshit and greandstanding by a bunch of people who have their heads stuck up their arse or in the sand? Once again, YOU are the problem. Get educated. Get on board and DO something about it. Anyone wants to ask me to explain that can read THOUSANDS of posts an MANT gun threads. If yer too lazy, when you get shot, you fucking deserve it you moron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 04:30 PM "capacity applies only to criminals" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 03:40 PM "capacity for a handgun is meaningless". Not so. The more felonies someone is charged with, the less likely he can plea bargain the sentence away. Remember how they got Al Capone. And if the limit discourages even one person from not buying a handgun, it's worth it. You still haven't told us why you feel it's necessary for life as we know it that anybody outside law enforcement and the military should have a handgun. So the more red tape the better. My sympathy for the poor gun owners is a bit limited. As is, probably, the sympathy of Newtown parents for said owners. D'ya think? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Jan 13 - 03:25 PM There was a time when major news organizations didn't consider the ravings of lunatics newsworthy - unless they held public office. However, as news keeps morphing into interactive entertainment ("Tweet us what *you* think, and we'll read it on the air!"), that rule falls by the wayside. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 16 Jan 13 - 03:16 PM The whole freakin' world that had television was watching the moon landing, Lighter, but there are conspiracy theorists who purport to believe that was staged on some back lot in beautiful, downtown Burbank. When people are determined to cast aspersions and whip up suspicion, no amount of common sense or consensus will stop them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Jan 13 - 02:54 PM On the "Newtown Hoax": http://news.yahoo.com/why-sandy-hook-massacre-spawned-conspiracy-theories-184323398.html I must be pretty stupid, 'cause I think it happened pretty much like CNN, Fox, MSNBC, and Washington say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 16 Jan 13 - 02:42 PM *In New York*, olddude. In other states, things are different, and the subject legislation has to fit 50 different state jurisdictions and -- how many territories is it now? I thought getting things done in Canada was complicated, with 10 provinces and three territories. You guys have us beat all to hell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 02:22 PM There is no private transfer of a handgun in this state. a registered handgun can only be sold to a licensed person that has a handgun permit. So what I am saying in NY magazine capacity for a handgun is meaningless because the only people who are suppose to posses one even in their hone must be licensed and registered or its a felony. So all of that new law in regard to handguns and capacity applies only to criminals who don't care anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 02:14 PM Because it is a non issue in NY. Look if you cannot own a handgun in this state unless the FBI approves, a judge, the sheriff, the chief of police, handgun training .. photographed, fingerprinted and full BG check with mental health checked also. If you pass all of that, what the hell difference does it make if you carry 7 or 14 rounds. So you have to go through the same shit as the state police do .. so why care. A person carrying legally has to pass the same thing as every cop in this state |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 01:49 PM New owners of handguns in NY state will only be permitted a 7-round magazine, rather than 10. That sounds like it does have a meaning. Why is this not a good thing, which every reasonable person should advocate? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 01:19 PM Ron I said that in the state of NY because you cannot own a handgun in this state unless you are licensed and to get a license is very complex so it is meaningless for New York state. Obama was talking federal and the ban on clips over 10 rounds was in place before on new firearms. apples and oranges. Bobster ya can't ban military ammo. A 30 caliber is an 3006 used for deer hunting. The Ak 47 fires a 30 cal round. The AR fires a .223 with is nothing more that .222 standard varmit hunting round .. besides ya can reload these anywhere |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 01:08 PM Well, the proposals are out there... It really boils down to some very reasonable ideas that aren't rocket surgery... 1. Ban military style assault rifles... 2. Close the gun show loophole... 3. Restrict magazine capacity... 4. Modernize the data base for background checks... 5. Lift the ban on funding gun violence research... Horrors, right??? Not really... Here's what didn't get proposed: 1. Registration of all handguns... 2. Certification that gun owners understand how to use them... 3. Ban on military style ammunition... I mean, let's get real here... We should be able to accomplish what Obama has proposed... I'll be composing letters tonight to my two senators and my congressman... Will you??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 12:31 PM "no issue with anything..." But you did earlier say you had a problem with permissable magazines being reduced from 10 to 7 bullets. Exactly why? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 16 Jan 13 - 12:24 PM I have no issue with anything I just heard on the press conference. Been saying the same thing myself for years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 16 Jan 13 - 12:13 PM "If over 60% of UK citizens wanted ANYTHING, our politicians would be lining up to keep their jobs, so WHAT are you doing WRONG?" I lost a very long post last night answering this in detail. I may try to reproduce it today. Short version- our political system, which has its good sides, makes it very hard to change some things. You in the UK have no idea what we struggle against! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:33 AM New NY state law reduces permissable size of gun magazines from 10 to 7 rounds. It seems a reasonable request to ask the Mudcat gun enthusiasts just why this is such a terrible and unfair burden for them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:18 AM So exactly why do you need a modern pistol with a capacity for over 7 bullets? Nobody outside of police or military could conceivably need such a thing. But, to the NRA and their gun-nut followers, it's not about need. It's about want. They want them in the same manner that a four-year-old wants the latest toy advertised on television, for pretty much the same reasons, and they pitch pretty much the same sorts of tantrums when someone tries to tell them they can't have it. What I don't get is this: Federal migratory waterfowl laws limit the capacity of repeating shotguns in the field to three rounds. Most pump-action or automatic shotguns have an actual capacity of five shells, but removable plugs are inserted to reduce that capacity to three for duck hunting. Nobody complains about it. It's like someone has decided ducks have more right to a reasonable chance of survival than humans. If you want to hunt mallards, you only get three shots before you have to reload, but if you want to hunt movie-goers, kindergartners, or Democratic politicians you can use as big a magazine as you can get your hands on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:17 AM Public-spirited NRA brings constructive reason to the conversation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8crdWLgfDk Not. Like Obama is *preventing schools* from hiring guards, while he's careful to send his kids to a place that has them. He doesn't care about your kids, does he? He wants to take your Constitutional firearms, doesn't he? Would a real American do that? That's the NRA level of problem-solving. Their solution is to whip up hatred for the President and anybody who disagrees with them. I'm writing my Congressmen to express my outrage: not at Obama but at the NRA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:07 AM Why even 10 round clips??? If six shots was all that Wyatt Erpp needed then, hey, limit the clips to 6 rounds... BTW, if you ain't hit Bambi or that paper target at the shooting range with the first six shots then you ain't gonna hit 'um... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 09:23 AM "modern pistol magazine" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Jan 13 - 09:19 AM "Many modern pistols have high capacity magazines." So exactly why do you need a modern pistol with a capacity for over 7 bullets? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Jan 13 - 09:18 AM SATIRE WARNING. The Lincoln "assassination" is known to have taken place in a theater *while a play was actually in progress.* The alleged gunman - killed without trial by Government agents - was a well-known stage actor. Get the picture? And who benefited? Vice President Andrew (aka "Lyndon") Johnson and a very healthy (and wealthy) Abraham Lincoln, living the high life under an assumed name on the French Riviera. Without his wife. Use your heads, people. ALL CLEAR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:40 AM The CBC eight-o'clock news this morning had an item on the NRA attack advertisement targeting (pun intended) President Obama's family. "When the president's children are at school, they are protected by armed guards," intoned the voice. "But President Obama doesn't think your children deserve the same level of protection" or words to that effect. Interesting, especially when considered in light of the NRA catchphrase that guns don't kill people; people kill people. By the same token, then, guns don't protect people; people protect people. So is the NRA suggesting a Secret Service detachment in every American school? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jan 13 - 07:44 AM ""I appreciate his examination of the events very much--He has four articles at his memoryholeblog.com, the first of which is here:"" Suspending the usual US capacity for paranoia, what do we actually have here? One young man gets inside the school and begins his mass murder spree. He is armed with an Assault type weapon and two semi auto handguns. Outside the police are arriving and find two men running from the school. They arrest both men almost immediately and neither is armed. Since there is no record of guns being found in the area, we can assume that the two men were not shooters. The simplest explanation is that, whatever the reason for their presence, they were simply exercising self preservation and running away from gunfire as most sensible people would, and the fact that they haven't featured in further action shows that they were released because the police were satisfied that they were innocent of involvement. But this oh so self important conspiracy theorist, not only has a theory for this case, but links it with many unrelated others in order to weave a complex and extremely silly "Government did it" theory. It is fairly obvious where his "memory hole" is situated. Anyone who thinks this guy is playing with a complete 52 card deck is as daft as he is. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:19 PM SATIRE ALERT. > Most people are shot by people they know, not criminals, not wackos Because the criminals and wackos are deterred, like the NRA says. ALL CLEAR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:46 PM Statistical fact: You are more apt to be shot if there is a gun in your house then if there isn't... The NRA stopped the funding for that study but the estimates run from 22 times safer to 43 times safer... Don T is 100% correct... Most people are shot by people they know, not criminals, not wackos... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:40 PM Lighter linked to an article above about James F. Tracy, who, very unfortunately, has been characterized as some sort of mentally imbalanced shooting denier, when, in fact, he is a serious and clearheaded academic who has begun to examine the sloppy, incomplete, and often inept media coverage of the Newtown shootings. As someone who tried hard to figure out what was going on as events unfolded, and was confused, annoyed, and ultimately frustrated by the the unanswered questions and contradictory reports, I appreciate his examination of the events very much--He has four articles at his memoryholeblog.com, the first of which is here: Unanswered Questions about Sandy Hook Shootings He is scheduled to be on Anderson Cooper tonight, as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:30 PM ""It is a conservative minority who are holding the rest of the country hostage!! Most Americans.. even the ones who own some guns strictly for hunting..etc.. do NOT support the radical NRA positions. Over 60% now WANT stricter laws."" If over 60% of UK citizens wanted ANYTHING, our politicians would be lining up to keep their jobs, so WHAT are you doing WRONG? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:30 PM Its an excellent point 20,000 gun laws that don't work, so why don't we figure out why they don't work. Well one thing it is like saying the speed limit is 65 MPH .. but if you drive a yellow car it doesn't apply .. that is what we have now |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:26 PM ""We can reduce gun violence by going after insane people and street gangs."" NO! YOU CAN'T! You just don't want to admit it. Examine the total number of gun casualties in the US and you will be forced to admit to yourselves that the majority are nothing to do with nutjobs or criminals. You are far more likely to be shot by a friend, relative or acquaintance, than by a mugger or a drug pusher. Read your own scientific and medical press for a change, instead of blindly and mindlessly accepting the triple distilled crap dished out by the NRA and the arms manufacturers. You are a nation of willing and complaisant victims! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:16 PM Gun laws? these people don't even have any geography. Bachman, talked about the shot heard 'round the world when speaking in Concord, NH. I just heard the former head of the RNC, Michael Steele refer to Newtown,Ma. in a discussion about gun laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:12 PM If we have 20,000 gun laws on the books and still have 100,000 Americans shot every year then we have 20,000 wrong laws... Other countries have right laws and they work... Why don't we copy folks who are successful rather than throw up our hands over and over and say, "Geeze, it won't work"??? How do we know??? We haven't ever tried real "gun control"... The laws always get screwed with loopholes, bad language no teeth and so we end up the murder capital of the developed world... We can and should do better... I don't want to hear the old worn-out arguments about how many laws are on the books (blah, blah, blah) or how many millions of people are safer because of all these guns (blah, blah, blah) ort any of the other out0right BS lies that the NRA has been peddling for the last 4-5 decades... They are lies... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:03 PM PDQ makes some good point in this regard. We have over 20,000 gun laws and still the loopholes remain. I have no problem with gun shows by licensed FFL dealers , they are required BG checks. Sadly the guy next to them that is not a licensed dealer doesn't have to do any BG checks, thats the problem. There is no way of knowing if more laws help or hurt, however, new laws for the sake of claiming victory and getting some votes do nothing to make anyone safer. Much of the new NY gun law falls into the category since we already had much of it in place. some of the new stuff isn't that bad ... some is just political pat on the back but does nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:55 PM > strictest handgun laws in the country and it has done nothing to stop the killings by the criminals ... We don't know how many more killings there'd have been without the laws - depending on whom you mean by "the criminals." > Well, those we are worried about could care less about 'legally', as many of them INTEND to do illegal stuff anyway! It's true that professional criminals have no problem getting guns, but the lone nuts we're mostly talking about are less likely to have the necessary "connections." And the professional criminals mainly use the guns on each other. Fact: there's no way to know how many additional shootings strict gun laws have already prevented. Maybe none, maybe some, maybe a lot. Fact: there's no way absolutely to prevent all mass shootings by armed maniacs. (It's somewhat surprising that there are statistically so few - a handful out of 300 million people. So far.) Fact: there's no reason besides politics - and fear of the NRA in particular - why the gun-show exception should not be addressed. Likely: some pointless new laws will be passed just so it looks like somebody is doing something. Not impossible: some helpful new laws will be passed somewhere, and some old ones will be better enforced. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:39 PM "However no addressing the gun show as of yet that negates everything on BG checks" I live in Nevada and we may have more major gun shows than any other state. As far as I know, over 95% of those selling at these shows are lisenced dealers and do the background checks as required by law. Most newspapers and outfits like craigslist ban gun ads. That is the best we can do. The radio suggests that the New York spokesmen are tauting their new law as banning gun ownership by insane people and felons. What PR crap. That was already the case before the new laws passed. Can't these people win without lying through their teeth. {ans: no} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:30 PM Well said Bill that is true. Bobster I am talking the entire state. Have a look at the gun violence in Buffalo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:20 PM New york has the strictest gun laws on the books and has the lowest per capita gun death of any major city in the country... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:18 PM " So to get one, the FBI has to say ok, A judge has to say ok.... etc.. No... to get one you go to Virginia, or to your friendly neighborhood fence. Oh... you mean LEGALLY. Well, those we are worried about could care less about 'legally', as many of them INTEND to do illegal stuff anyway! It's fine to HAVE the laws.. to prosecute those they catch, but as long as many, many guns are out there- legally or illegally-- guns WILL be obtained by "various means". You cannot have 300 million firearms in a country and ensure that they are ONLY in sane hands!@! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:08 PM strictest handgun laws in the country and it has done nothing to stop the killings by the criminals ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 05:59 PM I did not see a thing about private long gun transfers and required BG checks. so in essence, the laws they just passed are 90% ineffective. In regards to handguns in this state. Like I said it is illegal to own one with a license. So to get one, the FBI has to say ok, A judge has to say ok, the sheriff has to say ok, the chief of police has to say ok, you have to present your safety course card and no mental health history. Photographed and fingerprinted. If you get a permit, then it is legal. So if someone has done that what is the difference if I carry 7 rounds or 14 rounds in my glock as I have the same permit as the state police do ... makes little sense. Now in regard to assult weapons yes it makes sense. However no addressing the gun show as of yet that negates everything on BG checks |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Jan 13 - 05:48 PM Today New York just passed even more laws Here they are. Most we already had however I don't have too much of an issue with them except the magazine part. Many modern pistols have high capacity magazine and in this state you cannot own a pistol unless you already went through all the shit so it doesn't do any good at all. That I take issue with in this state. but again how about saying no gun shows in New york state. Nope won't address that. Soooo all the new laws ... don't mean anything if you can negate them all via gun show New York Sttate |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:33 PM 'Bout says it all, b-bad... Now here is the graph I'd like to see in addition to that one: all shootings... That one would be 5 times larger... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:31 PM And the kooks keep coming - from that mystical region where far right and far left join and throb: http://www.christianpost.com/news/professor-claims-newtown-shooting-was-likely-staged-87934/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:28 PM 31 Days Later – U.S. gun deaths since Newtown |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Jan 13 - 03:42 PM I am pretty tired of the "you guys" and " American blind stupidity " generalizations from over the pond... It is a conservative minority who are holding the rest of the country hostage!! Most Americans.. even the ones who own some guns strictly for hunting..etc.. do NOT support the radical NRA positions. Over 60% now WANT stricter laws. We are quite aware that there are FAR too many radicals and guns! We are also aware that getting all the stupid forms of weapons back would be a HUGE problem. We must start from where we are, and Pres. Obama and Joe Biden are RIGHT NOW working on ways to take executive action that right-wing idiots in Congress can't block. All the "you stupid idiots" posts from abroad are not only not helpful, they obscure the real debate... please consider useful ideas, or get away from the broad-brush characterizations! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Jan 13 - 03:41 PM The United States has about 340,000,000 people if we were to be honest about the number of illegal aliens. That is the same population as the Arab World, an informal region of 21 countries. Claims that we do not have the right to own personal weapons is absurd. The shear number proves that they are legal. We have about 270,000,000 guns now and the number grow faster whenevr there is a movement to ban them, as we see now. We can reduce gun violence by going after insane people and street gangs. The last 5 or 6 high-profile mass murders were all by insane people. The vast majority of gun murders are by members of street gangs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 15 Jan 13 - 02:37 PM If you guys feel that it is ok for your children to be slaughtered, as long as you can keep your toys, in the end it is none of our business. But on that note, I would advice any families who think about visiting US, that they should think twice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Jan 13 - 02:30 PM 9... "Check the video at about 2:27." That is horrible. Not that she was firing a "gun from the hip" (I know she didn't actually do that... it's just a saying to kinda describe what she did) but because she POINTED the gun DIRECTLY at the cameraman. NO training at all. Many of the people in those clips had NO proper training and what is REALLY sad is that they were being "taught" by people who should KNOW how to do it right in the first place. It is SO sad that Harper is destroying our good gun laws because of the few bad gun laws. So VERY sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 15 Jan 13 - 01:26 PM "This is especially important to watch if you are from the UK, because it will help you to stop thinking about the gun, and start thinking about the person behind it. It will also help you to understand the American sense of humor." For the love of God! If the person hasn't got a gun, he can't shoot anyone! That's why our per-capita shooting-rate is a fraction of yours - because very few of us have a gun. We have plenty of wackos, but hardly any guns. Why do you brainwashed, paranoid, fear-possessed numb-nuts find that so difficult to understand? Think with your brains, not your balls. No apologies for the rant - American blind stupidity over guns would even make the Pope swear in public. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jan 13 - 01:09 PM ""This is especially important to watch if you are from the UK, because it will help you to stop thinking about the gun, and start thinking about the person behind it."" And the NRA and other pro gun idiots want these cretinous subhumans to be legally entitled to continue their idiocy. No wonder you feel that you need to explain the American sense of humour to Brits. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 15 Jan 13 - 12:40 PM For lots more of Alex Jones and his huge following, see my post of Jan. 10, 9:34. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Jan 13 - 11:28 AM Well.. it seems you can still watch the interview with Jones scroll down 900 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Jan 13 - 11:25 AM If you want a clear, eloquent view on what it means to lose a child and opinions on what should be done, watch Rachael Maddow's interview (3 segments on right hand column) with the parents of one of the kids who died at Sandy Hook. They are sane, careful and honest.... and they plead with everyone not to stop talking about the issue. Making reasonable decisions will not be easy in a polarized country, but with all the recent events, we MUST NOT let the debate trail off into nothingness---like the NRA would prefer. Also... the Current TV channel, which is living on borrowed time after being sold to Al-Jazera, has had several interviews(on The Young Turks show) with Alex Jones, a radio host who is about twice as vehement as Wayne LaPierre. Jones specifically asserts that guns are necessary to defend against tyrannical government, and expounds on several conspiracy theories... (expounds is the gentle word... Jones raves and threatens) Google Alex Jones and be astounded. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:57 AM Keriste: the blind leading the blind. Check the video at about 2:27. I don't understand: what happened to 'tightly snug the rifle into your shoulder'? Yeah, I want people like these living next door with guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:49 AM If you liked the "boy with a gun" YouTube, above, you will really enjoy this.Gun Accident Compilation This is especially important to watch if you are from the UK, because it will help you to stop thinking about the gun, and start thinking about the person behind it. It will also help you to understand the American sense of humor. Cheers! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:46 AM No problem... What I would like would be for all handguns to have to not only be registered but the owners have to produce a certificate that shows that that owner is proficient in using the handgun they own... This is where the NRA can be helpful if they want to... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Jan 13 - 09:51 AM Sorry, Bobert. I misread/misunderstood you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:47 AM Nah, brucie... I'm not talking about just assault rifles... If you re-read my last post I didn't mention them... The murder weapon of choice is the pistol and 9 mm Glocks can kill a lot of folks real fast... "Mama said the pistol was the devil's right hand..."... Steve Earle B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 15 Jan 13 - 06:15 AM CNN reports that the firearms industry is...get ready...the only industry in America *explicitly protected by law from being sued for negligence.* According to the chief of the NRA, the law was passed (I wish I knew just when) "merely to protect against frivolous lawsuits." If you sue your doctor, or your municipality, a judge decides whether the suit has enough substance to go to trial; if he decides it's frivolous (i.e., baseless), he throws the suit out. In the case of an arms manufacturer, no suit will even go to a judge. In the words of Mr. Spock, "Fascinating." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jan 13 - 05:27 AM ""For your viewing entertainment. THAT is why homes shouldn't have guns. There was an adult in the room with the kid."" The mindset of Joe public is beautifully illustrated by the first post in the comment section under that clip. ""Obviously fake"" That epitomises the level of intelligence applied to assessing evidence about the dangers of guns in the US. Bottom line:- They kill many times more innocent citizens than criminals. One reason that Americans still love them is that most of those who wouldn't are dead. Don T. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Jan 13 - 12:07 AM The kid in that link was in a room with an adult. Someone in that house owned the pistol that was supposed to be stored safely. As we can see, Plan A didn't work. Personally, I do not give a shit who keeps what in their house. You want to keep guns around, go ahead. But remember that while you have that 'right' so does your neighbour, and maybe the dumb fuck living next door is going to teach his kid all he knows about firearms, just as we saw in the video. Let's hope your child isn't over playing with the Lone Ranger's child. Pistol like that could sure mess up the orthodontist's work. Gnu, I know how to use firearms safely. I still don't want them around the house. That's it, that's all. And Bobert, what we all are writing is what this thread is about. You think the thread should focus on assault rifles, fine by me. But most people are shit with pistols, and those people concern me just as much. In fact, if some idiot shoots me by accident he'd best shoot me real good because the minute I get better he'll require a proctologist to retrieve his firearm: pistol, assault rifle or whatever. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Jan 13 - 08:21 PM Well, between homes not having guns and every house having one I'd go with no guns... But that really isn't the issue here... What is at issue is what kinds of guns, are they locked, does the owner have any skills with his gun, the number of bullets it can fire without having to reload and who the heck are you??? You a nutball who has beat up yer wife??? A convicted murderer??? A wacko??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 14 Jan 13 - 08:13 PM 9.... homes shouldn't have guns? I never thought I would read a post like that from you. I am gobsmacked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Jan 13 - 07:39 PM Interesting that a private organization can tell congress what to do. Dontcha all think you should be just a bit concerned? For your viewing entertainment. THAT is why homes shouldn't have guns. There was an adult in the room with the kid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 14 Jan 13 - 07:26 PM Too profound for for the NRA apparently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 14 Jan 13 - 07:22 PM ...from GUEST,999 link: "... gun accidents are most likely to occur in homes with guns" Profound, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Jan 13 - 06:40 PM Thanks for the link, brucie... This information was trying to make it in to the national conversation back in the 90s but has been squashed by the NRA... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 14 Jan 13 - 06:32 PM There is a solution. Retrain the mindset for violence in the U.S. by not glorifying gun violence in movies, video games, T.V., and removing some of those military statues that are emblematic of America's "values". Educate children to non-violent settling of disputes, bring home the soldiers and the contractors from the Mid East, stop the drones, show alternative ways of dealing with disagreements on a political, national, and international level and do what Dennis Kucinich has suggested for years, let there be a Department of Peace in the White House cabinet. Of course there are things that can be done. We must defeat the LaPierre's of the world through encouraging compassion, education and alternative methods to warfare. Call out the gun lobbyists that bombard either Party. The media must show more of the horror of these shootings. Accept that gun violence is an American disease as was demonstrated by the Center For Disease Control in Atlanta. Stop associating the gun with an extension of the penis. Gun ownership is not sexy. Stop rationalizing on behalf of gun ownership. Accept the fact that gun owners are part of the problem by not supporting background checks, licensing, training, and and buying semi-automatics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Jan 13 - 09:41 AM Maybe the CDC has been shut up, but these folks haven't. Be patient: it takes two seconds to load (the link that is). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Jan 13 - 09:09 AM Heard the end of piece this morning on NPR about Congress stepping in and ending a study that the CDC was conducting on the number of folks shot by guns where there was a gun in the house verses homes where there wasn't a gun in the house... Apparently the NRA got that pushed thru Congress??? Hmmmmmm??? What are we trying ti hide here??? And why??? Never mind... I already know the answers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:30 PM Continued. Hamilton, Madison and Jay, the 3 main figures behind the passage of the Constitution, felt a Bill of Rights was not necessary. Their stubbornness on this almost defeated passage. Madison, for instance stated that in Federalist #46 he had written that any oppressive federal army would be opposed by a "militia amounting to near half a million citizens with arms in their hands." His assertion did not mollify opponents--they, led by Jefferson, held that the "strong state military units would serve as a forceful deterrent against any desire of a president or Congress to subjugate the people with a large national army." (Chadwick p. 59.) Here the obvious origin of the 2nd Amendment becomes clear: Virginia, for instance, in its bill of rights, stated that "the people have the right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural defense of a free state." It is thus blazingly clear to anyone who does even a modicum of research that the militia was both to substitute for a standing army and provide defense against an overreaching federal government. That is the reason for the 2nd Amendment. It is not just the right to "keep and bear arms" but the obligation to be part of the "well-regulated" militia which was to provide defense against enemies from without and within. It was emphatically not the" every man his own militia" attitude which the NRA and other pro-gun-rights groups now endorse. It is also clear that history was not kind to the idea that a militia could substitute for a standing army--the idea was a disaster from the start. And it seems we really have done OK with a standing army for quite a while--without any general seeking to make himself dictator. So the 2nd Amendment has long since lost any value it might have had. It's not really surprising that the intellectual giants who grace Mudcat and defend the 2nd Amendment are clueless--or too lazy to read-- about the reasons for the 2nd Amendment. Though it is somewhat baffling that 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices were recently so pig-ignorant about its background. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:01 PM More on the background behind the 2nd Amendment. As I noted earlier, the 2nd Amendment did not spring out of a vacuum. Not only was the militia ("well-regulated militia") supposed to substitute for a standing army, but this was obvious to all interested parties at the time. Not only was there a fear that a standing army might produce a general who wanted to make himself dictator, but there had in fact already been an instance in which the standing army at the end of the Revolution did threaten to bend Congress to its will. At Newburgh officers of the Continental Army threatened to mutiny--many had not been paid for years and the army was to be disbanded, without, they thought, any reliable provision for them--or the enlisted ranks, who if anything were even worse off. "The soldiers were so famished that when local vendors peddled produce at their huts, they often plundered" them. (Washington, by Ron Chernow, p 431.) "Many doubted they would receive years of back pay owed to them or that Congress would redeem its 1780 pledge to provide veterans with half pay for life". Congress did in the end grant the officers payment equivalent to 5 years of full pay. (My question here would be if this pay was in hard currency or Continentals.) At any rate, as usual in such cases, the 2nd Amendment was based on earlier provisions by the states. In Massachusetts, not only could every man be armed but in fact they "had to be to protect the colony from invasion; local communities paid for guns for men too poor to purchase them. Virginia also mandated ownership of firearms." Triumvirate, by Bruce Chadwick p. 58 (book on the passage of the Constitution). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 13 Jan 13 - 02:23 PM I've seen everything now. A friend posted on facebook a story about the battle at Wounded Knee. And that it illustrates that we should never give up our second amendment rights. That "Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 13 Jan 13 - 09:07 AM A press briefing is a poor time to exhibit that kind of humor. Was there a guard or wasn't there? Not that it much matters, because crazed killers don't care about guards. Most of them expect to die anyway, and, as Bobert says, they're at least as likely to get the drop on the guard as the other way round, because the nut is already loaded and locked. You're unlikely to deter a lunatic with a high-power weapon. Given enough cases, sure, a guard might get the guy before he can kill anybody, or as many as he wants. But in other cases the guard will be killed too (unless he's on duty with an automatic at the ready, just waiting for somebody to look suspicious). And in some cases the guard will kill innocent bystanders because gunfights are chaos. Unlike in the movies. Frankly, I think that a teacher with a concealed-carry permit would be marginally more effective than an armed guard, because at least he (or she) wouldn't announce his presence with a uniform. But really: do we want people packing guns in schools and churches on the 1 in 10,000 chance that a crazed killer is going to show up? Guns that could be taken away from them by a crazed student? (Which might be more likely than the arrival of a calculating, outside killer. Who knows?) We could probably save more lives nationally with 10,000 more traffic cops. Drunk drivers are a lot more easily halted or deterred. As for guns being locked up, the alternative is not to have them locked up. Like Adam Lanza's mom, allegedly. It's fascinating that the NRA's only remedy (guards, cops, and armed teachers) is also the only one that would bring in 100,000 more gun sales. Closing the gun-show loophole on background checks wouldn't, and the NRA - official lobby of the firearms industry - is agin it. Coincidence, I'm sure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 12 Jan 13 - 11:19 PM The sheriff has got a sense of humor, Lighter. The last snow fall in that area was in 1949. I looked it up. As per Virginia Tech, PDQ, the shooter shot two people in a dorm room, two and a half hours before he did the other shootings, and campus police and college administrators were aware of it, but didn't issue any warnings, cancel classes, put the campus in lockdown, or ask for any outside assistance. Maybe one of the resident know-it-alls can tell me why, because I just don't get it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 12 Jan 13 - 08:26 PM These young people who are carrying out these wacko events are better skilled in shootouts because of a life time of playing video games than the average university cop... As I have pointed out before, these people know of the others... These events are the like their grand finales and they want to be remembered as "da man" who really pulled off the biggie... That why many are better prepared than the one before them... This, to these wackos, is a game... Now, enter retired cop or rent-a-cop and guess what??? It's like moving up notch in the video game... This is going to backfire and armed guards are going to be routinely killed to go along with the "event" and "extra credit" awarded in wacko world... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 12 Jan 13 - 08:15 PM "And, NRA, did I mention there were two armed guards on duty at Columbine and nineteen at Virginia Tech? (According to CNN.)" I understood that the guards at Virginia Tech had guns available but they were always locked up. A supervison had to be called, drive to the school, open the locker, and have each guard sign for a weapon. Obviously, it was over by then. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 12 Jan 13 - 07:52 PM Maybe there's some meaning of "snowed in" we don't know about: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/taft-high-school-armed-guard_n_2450710.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 12 Jan 13 - 06:25 PM What school are you talking about, Lighter? Surely not Taft Union High School. It's out in the desert, in S California. It barely even rains there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 12 Jan 13 - 05:41 PM Here's another aspect that hasn't been discussed... Noise pollution... Just today we were serenaded for 4 hours with a bunch of jerks less that 200 yards from where we were trying to do some garden work with their AR-15s... Yup, them boys had a real good time... Shot up hundreds and hundreds of rounds... Ruined what was going to be a real nice quiet day... Finally around noon, the P-Vine called the cops and they went over and talked with these guys... The cops called us and said that were shooting safely and there was nothing they could do but I guess that these folks either ran out of bullets or the sight of the cops was enough to spook them because that ended the shooting... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 12 Jan 13 - 04:57 PM Ironically the school had an armed guard. But he couldn't make it to work that day because of snow. And, NRA, did I mention there were two armed guards on duty at Columbine and nineteen at Virginia Tech? (According to CNN.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 12 Jan 13 - 04:32 PM Submitted for your consideration--on this past, Thursday, in Taft, California, a teacher at Taft Union High School persuaded an armed student who had already shot one person to surrender his weapon and himself. This as a response to those who feel that armed teachers are the only viable solution. Teacher talks shooter into giving up |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 12 Jan 13 - 10:48 AM "They bicker on the rifle range Blame takes aim Last chance Last chance lost" ... exerpt from Joni Mitchell's "Last Chance Lost" biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 12 Jan 13 - 10:36 AM "I have reached the conclusion that there IS an answer. Give guns to everyone" Here's a sensible one - take the fucking stupid guns AWAY from everyone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 12 Jan 13 - 09:01 AM ""What you have, instead, is a guy who get's pissed off because he thinks that someone cut him off in traffic and rather than be the hero he becomes yet another whacked out murderer..."" Or worse still, he wastes a pipe smoker because he thought the guy had pulled a gun. Somebody did the world a favour! The only tragedy is that he too did it with a gun. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:58 PM That guest was me. Fawkin' mem'ry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:54 PM I have reached the conclusion that there IS an answer. Give guns to everyone. I mean everyone! Infants, youngsters, teenagers, young adults, adults, middle-aged people and oldsters. Hell, even folks my age and beyond. BUT, make it real difficult to get bullets. Load yer own or that's it for you. Ten years from now the problem will disappear. Bullets will become collectors' items. Then, will it be worth it to shoot Aunt Agnes? Or, what will this do to my stock portfolio? I am not going to say, "I rest my case" or "No more need be said" or anything that arrogant. Youse bes smart folks. Figure it out. No need to turn that over to the NRA or the librauuls. Jus' DO it. Billy Bob (aka William Robert). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 11 Jan 13 - 08:21 PM They may.. or they may not... limit AR-15 types.... But by the time they do, there will be 50,000 more sold,,,, Horses & barn doors come to mind... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 11 Jan 13 - 07:51 PM Yeah, Don... This is what scares me... You have a lot of folks out there lookin' for a vigilante/stand-your-ground situation so they can luck into being "da' guy" who saves the minstrel in distress and shoots the bad guy and gets an award from the Fraternal Order of Something-or another.... It doesn't work that way... What you have, instead, is a guy who get's pissed off because he thinks that someone cut him off in traffic and rather than be the hero he becomes yet another whacked out murderer... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 11 Jan 13 - 07:36 PM " "I went to the movies with my pistol in my pocket the whole time I was praying that somebody would try to pull a Batman!"" Ah well! One less homicidal lunatic to worry about. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:24 AM http://www.wikihow.com/Get-a-Class-3-Firearms-License |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:10 AM what Joe Biden and the NRA is discussing is exactly what I been saying forever. 1) getting rid of gun shows 2) background checks for private transfer 3) Assault weapons I doubt they will get the assault weapons ban but I hope they get the other two cause if they do, it will make a hell of a lot of difference. one argument to use on Assault weapons is .. if you want one go get a class III FFL license otherwise no... if a person can pass that test I have no problem with them at all .. then they can get a machine gun if they want. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: frogprince Date: 11 Jan 13 - 12:11 AM "I went to the movies with my pistol in my pocket the whole time I was praying that somebody would try to pull a Batman!" Had he said "...with a pistol in my pocket, for fear that someone would ...", I might have just waivered in my feeling about his best judgement. But the "..praying that someone would..." is another entire step in attitude. If he "got one", would he have mounted the head on his wall as a trophy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 10 Jan 13 - 10:22 PM Gn-ze, I am sorry but I don't believe that the Republicans are goin' to allow any meaningful legislation... It's a good *political move for Obama 'cause it's gonna make the Republicans less electable in 2014 but... ... I hope I am wrong but... ... I have seen the way things work in our whack'd out congress so... ... don't hold yer breath... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 10 Jan 13 - 10:19 PM Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 10 Jan 13 - 12:55 PM From the Huffington Post: A producer behind a popular gun enthusiast YouTube channel was found dead with a single gunshot wound to the head at his business last week. Police in Georgia are investigating the apparent homicide of Keith Ratliff, a 32-year-old Franklin County resident. Authorities found multiple weapons at the scene of the crime, some manufactured by Ratliff himself, WSBTV reports. Investigators have not identified a motive. Ratliff was known as an outspoken gun advocate. In a message posted to Twitter on Aug 11, 2012, he wrote: "I went to the movies with my pistol in my pocket the whole time I was praying that somebody would try to pull a Batman!" Huffington Post Article YouTube Gun Advocate Shot in Head |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:36 PM I don't see any posts by Stim???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:29 PM Ummmm ... I read it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 10 Jan 13 - 05:38 PM Of course, it'll be another fuckin' post people don't read. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 10 Jan 13 - 05:37 PM Stim just posted two links. The guy loved guns and had many in his office. Didn't do him a damned bit of good. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 10 Jan 13 - 05:32 PM Bobert... I say you "are on the same page" because you, one of the people I most respect in this whole debate, are still on the same page as you were all along when you say the NRA cannot be beat and the laws cannot be ammended and new laws cannot be made. They can and they will be beaten. Good guns CAN happen. And NOW is the time. SDon't say that past efforts that failed precude future efforts. Get on the NOW page, my friend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 10 Jan 13 - 12:55 PM From the Huffington Post: A producer behind a popular gun enthusiast YouTube channel was found dead with a single gunshot wound to the head at his business last week. Police in Georgia are investigating the apparent homicide of Keith Ratliff, a 32-year-old Franklin County resident. Authorities found multiple weapons at the scene of the crime, some manufactured by Ratliff himself, WSBTV reports. Investigators have not identified a motive. Ratliff was known as an outspoken gun advocate. In a message posted to Twitter on Aug 11, 2012, he wrote: "I went to the movies with my pistol in my pocket the whole time I was praying that somebody would try to pull a Batman!" Huffington Post Article YouTube Gun Advocate Shot in Head |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:44 AM "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." Kierkegaard |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:34 AM Rush Limbaugh is ranting that Obama is about to sign an executive order to "take guns away from people" in violation of the Second Amendment. Since Limbaugh is a big boy and must know the difference between confiscating people's guns and regulating certain new sales, I assume that he must also know he's lying. Or as we say, "Growing his ratings." As for the Piers Morgan issue, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y Alex Jones now has 100,000 signatures on his petition to get Morgan deported for daring to advocate gun control. Those people obviously prefer the Second Amendment to the First, which is another reason we should be worried. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:42 AM Last night in Mt. Holly, NC, a drunk woman was arrested for shooting at passing cars... She didn't hit anyone but this is another part of the discussion... In Virginia, as well as other states, it's perfectly legal to carry your gun into a bar where there's a lot of drinkin' and arguing over dumb stuff... Hello!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:33 AM Hey, gnu: The story from Welland concerns a man whose house was firebombed; he shot at several men who were throwing Molotov cocktails and had already set fire to his house and garage to drive them off so he could start fighting the fires. I think the judge's rationale was "appropriate use of force." That story sounds outlandish, but something very like it happened to my family about 1962. It was Hallowe'en, which could get very drunk out in our eastern Ontario village back then, and in the shank of the evening the local youth decided it would be very amusing to build a huge bonfire in the middle of Main Street, which was a stretch of the highway from Ottawa to Prescott. At first, kids with pickups brought stuff like bales of straw and old lumber. But they were building the pile right in front of our house, so they started wrenching the pickets off our fence and then somebody spotted our old boat upturned on two sawhorses in the garden. They were hauling the boat into the street when our Dad stepped out on the front stoop with a .303-calibre rifle and shouted at them to cease and desist. There were no police in Manotick back then. The nearest law-enforcement office was an Ontario Provincial Police station 20 miles away in Osgoode, which also had the nearest fire station. Dad shouted again, and raised the rifle under the porch light. Then he worked the bolt. Snickety-snack. The vandals started backing away, then began to run. In seconds, there was nothing but a heap of trash in the middle of Main Street. We kids watched the whole thing from the bedroom window. I was eight years old and did not understand what was going on, but my elder brother did, and he was terrified. Dad never told us if there was any ammunition in the five-round magazine, but I believe it was loaded; he would never have taken it out there if he wasn't prepared to use it. That winter, our parents began planning to move the family to the city. Manotick was developing big-city problems, said Dad, but still had only country ways to deal with them. Driving off vandals with a rifle was not his idea of middle-class life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:11 PM I don't get what you are saying, gn-ze??? I mean, yeah, I know what is going down with the NRA... They control the discussion... Nothin' new here... What am I supposed to do about that??? I have written my congress-people... I write letter to the Charlotte Observer... I mean, I get it that we're fucked... Don't blame me for that... I'm doin' what I can... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:57 PM "We are on the same page here..." No, we are not on the same page... you are. And until you turn the page, you are gonna have to read the same old headlines. THAT is my point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:40 PM Settle down, gn-ze... We are on the same page here... The point is that the NRA wants you to buy an AR-15 or a Glock... Those are the big ticket items that makes the NRA richer... My point is the same as yours... Do what ya' gotta do with what you got... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:33 PM Bobert... "But I don't need an AR15 to protect myself..." Why do you keep saying things like that in response to my posts? That had absolutely nothing to do with my post or my arguement(s). If ain't NObody gonna listen to common sense, I'll take my rifle and bullets and go home (fer ye ferriners, that's a play on words regarding a child's game called baseball). Kinda like... I gotta take a seventh inning stretch an have a piss an get another beer... watch my seat. If we get a run... cheer for me, eh? That's what I gotta do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:39 PM Yup, sold out here in NC, as well... The NRA loves mass murderers... The NRA is in the murder business... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:35 PM AR-15 sales have gone through the roof. Most stores around here have sold out. And the gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank. Again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:28 PM I'm all for that, Gn-ze... I keep my gun right where I can get to it fast and would have no problems using it if I had to... But I don't need an AR15 to protect myself... I assume that if I had to use my gun to protect myself in my home against a guy with an AR15 that my shotgun would win out because I don't have to aim it all that much to take out someone in close range... And, unlike the folks who say they need an AR15 to protect themselves from the government, that is delusional... If the gov-mint wants to get you they can do it against yer AR15 without workin' up a sweat... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 03:53 PM No comments on my post? Figures. Maybe if I tried to really dumb it down? Here goes. If you tell me I cannot defend my property or my family against any predator with a gun, well, fuck you. And, that IS what you are telling me NOW. Until YOU compromise with GOOD gun laws that protect ALL of us, fuck you. Come take my gun if ya got the balls... better bring a bigger gun when you do and ya had better know how to use it on accounta they don't call me deadeye fer nuthin. If any of youse don't understand you can substitute "law" for "gun" in any of that, you have no crediability in true debate. Good gun laws or NO gun laws. THAT is the line drawn NOW... IF, and only IF you anti gun nuts can understand and support that and stop weening about the NRA. Fuck the NRA. They are a pittance in the real actions that can solve this problem. Can't you see that YOU are the problem when you will not allow a man to defend his property and his family? Don't matter who the predator is... criminals or criminal governments. It don't get any dumber than that. I hope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:57 AM They don't do manners, courtesy, civility or anything else that might make them look like anything but the thugs and bullies that they are... Here's another viewpoint that I've talked about a couple times... Back 15 years ago in Virginia all these small penis/big gun guys got together regularity, strapped on their guns and then would converge on a restaurant in a show of force... Now, I'm sitting there with my 9 year old son and wife and, all of a sudden, not only do I not want to be in the company of so many boorish, loud assholes with guns strapped on, but I don't even want to pay for the meal... Until you are in the middle of one of these small penis/big gun circle jerks you really can't have a clue how these people are completely disrespecting your rights to go into a public restaurant and have a peaceful meal... That's the part that we aren't talkling about... It's the rights of the folks who just want to hang at a mall, see a movie, attend school or have a friggin' meal... I'm sorry, NRA, but your policies and power to inflict those policies on the country violate my rights!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:39 AM Saw some spokesman (not La Pierre) for the NRA on MSNBC yesterday. He sneered his way through the show, not even trying to hide his contempt for the moderator or the woman taking the opposing position. Is The NRA so powerful that it doesn't have to do public relations? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:37 AM The fact that Jones owns 50 firearms is really comforting, isn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:22 AM I saw the clip on MSNBC last night and, yes, this is exactly the kinda of hothead we don't want armed... BTW, in the Aurora shooting case a tape was played of a phone call from one of the folks in the theater to the police... You can hear the gunshots in the tape... Holmes was able to get off 30 rounds in 27 seconds... For those of you who believe that these semi-automatic rifles aren't assault rifles please tell us again why not... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM Has anyone posted this clip yet from the Piers Morgan show? It takes about 2 minutes for Alex Jones to turn into a ranting lunatic. The gun lobby has GOT to find a better spokesman than this fool. All by himself he's proof that we need to something about guns AND mental health in this country. Alex Jones on Piers Morgan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:48 AM Finally! Man who shot at attackers to defend home is acquitted Legal experts say case could have implications for self-defence law in Canada THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA - An Ontario man who says he has been cleared of charges stemming from an attack on his home says he is proud of the precedent the case sets with regards to Canadians' right to armed selfdefence. Ian Thomson says a judge in Welland acquitted him on Thursday of firear ms-related charges in connection from a 2010 incident in which he fired three warning shots at a group of men who set his Ontario home ablaze with firebombs. Some experts say the ruling by Justice Tory Colvin could have wide-ranging implications for self-defence law in Canada. Thomson described the 2 1 2 -year legal battle as a 'horrible ordeal.' 'I fir mly believe they wanted to make an example of me, and to put the fear into every Canadian firearm owner that you are not allowed to defend yourself with a firear m,' he said. In August 2010, Thomson was sleeping in his Port Colborne, Ont., home when he awoke to the sound of Molotov cocktails exploding. Looking outside he saw part of his house and his porch ablaze, and four masked men outside. A for mer firear ms instructor, he quickly unlocked his gun safe, loaded a .38-calibre revolver and stepped outside. Thomson fired three war ning shots, which caused the men to flee, before dousing the flames with a g arden hose and calling 911. When police arrived he was taken into custody, and his collection of firear ms - assor ted handguns worth over $10,000 - and ammunition were seized and impounded. Soon thereafter, Crown attorneys charged Thomson with careless use of a firear m. These charges were later dropped, and he was charged with two counts of unsafe storage. Canada's leading firear ms lawyer Ed Burlew represented Thomson, and said the decision is a significant victory for Canadian gun owners. 'We all have a fundamental right to protect out property and our families,' he said. 'You've got to be able to defend yourself without fear of prosecution, and I think that's well established now.' Crown prosecutors argued Thomson had fallen afoul of safe storage regulations because, on the night of the incident, Thomson had a box of .38 Special ammunition in his bedside table. The judge ruled this was irrelevant, Burlew said, since Thomson's guns were all securely locked away in a gun safe. The four men who attacked Thomson were all sentenced to between two and four years in jail. Unless the Crown decides to appeal the case, Thomson's collection of guns must be returned to him within 30 days. Thomson said he came under intense pressure from police to enter a plea and accept a weapons prohibition, but refused due to his belief he was innocent. 'I would not cut a deal because I did not break the law,' he said. 'And - to use a pun - I stuck to my guns.' Thomson said he racked up about $60,000 in legal costs during the trial, but said much of that was donated by members of the National Firearms Association, the Canadian Sports Shooting Association (CSSA) and readers of the popular pro-firear ms online message board CanadianGunNutz.com. Many messages of support for Thomson were posted on the Internet by gun owners following the decision. 'This case is extremely significant and Mr. Thomson's victory is a victory for common sense and freedom for all Canadians,' the CSSA said in a statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:23 PM What happened is that America became an armed nation... It wasn't like that in the 50s... Yeah, people had hunting rifles and shotguns but pistols were rare... Might of fact, even though I had been shooting with an NRA shoot club since I was about 9 or 10 I never really saw a pistol until one of the instructors in the club brought in a muzzle loader dueling pistol and let each of us fire it once... That was the first real pistol I saw outside of seeing cops holsters... "Mama said the pistol was the devil's right hand"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 07 Jan 13 - 04:05 PM makes me wonder what happened. In the 1950's there were virtually no restriction on firearms except fully auto. Hell you could carry a loaded firearm nearly everywhere without a license. You could buy a .45 colt WWII surplus for 40 bucks out of a magazine and have it delivered to your door ... yet ...no problems. nothing like what we see today ... So what happened? I can't help but wonder why society went to hell in a hand basket |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 07 Jan 13 - 03:51 PM Thank you, Jonathan Swift. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Jan 13 - 03:19 PM After all, it's just a modest proposal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 07 Jan 13 - 11:13 AM SATIRE ALERT: Since people, not guns, kill people, I think we should reduce the number of people, not guns. Guns can help. Also, people, not WMDs, kill people. So we may need more WMDs. And fewer people. WMDs can help. SATIRE ALL-CLEAR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM BTW, just for some perspective: Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence annual budget.....$7M NRA's annual budget.....................................$250M But there's more... Money spent to influence national elections: Brady + all other gun control groups.....................$3M NRA......................................................$53M B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 08:05 AM Telling folks that are for gun control to just ignore the NRA isn't all that helpful since the NRA pretty much has controlled the entire conversation going back a long time... I think of the NRA more like cancer and if you ignore it then you lose... No, as much as we'd like to ignore them the reality is that we're going to have to out-frame, out-debate, out-punch and out-think the NRA if we are going to get any meaningful legislation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:21 AM Maybe you could take a leaf out of the TeaPublicans' book, and start a series of ads going along the lines of: "The NRA is killing your kids, how long will you sit on you thumbs and let 'em do it? Blacken them in the way the TEA Party tried to blacken Obama until the US public is mad enough to stand up and demand stronger laws. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 06 Jan 13 - 10:21 AM Ignore the NRA. Stop telling people why they cannot ignore the NRA; of course they can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 06 Jan 13 - 09:38 AM It's difficult to ignore the NRA because of the millions of people who have been pumped up with it's propaganda and are the foot soldiers of the NRA shouting everyone down who stands up for gun control... Some of them posting here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 06 Jan 13 - 07:00 AM Ignore the National Rifle Association. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 05 Jan 13 - 07:07 PM Applause from the peanut gallery, Bobert! Finally! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 05 Jan 13 - 07:00 PM The WaPo reports today that the Biden Commission is looking at a very comprehensive bill that deals with lots of issues including registration, a ban of semi-automatic military style rifles, a ban on large clips, close the gun show loophole, better background checks and greater emphasis on mental health... Details will be coming out over the next few days... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 05 Jan 13 - 06:42 PM I requested that no more posts be addressed to me, but... I do make sense... Ya CAN'T make bad gun laws. Ya can't get a bill passed if it contains bad gun laws. It will NOT happen in the US. In Canada, it happened because we have a different form of government BUT the good gun laws have been repealed here BECAUSE the legislation included BAD gun laws and the new government used that to repeal the GOOD gun laws too (except in Quebec... say what ya want about them Q-becers but THEY got balls). WHY won't anyone listen to me? It's SO simple. FINE... some of youse have GOOD gun laws. We don't and look what happened. Good combined with bad gun laws are being proposed in the US and they will NEVER see the light of day. NEVER! Youse just don't seem to understand the situation. It's plain and simple as the nose on your face. It's NOT about the will... it's about the way. And what bothers me most is the Yanks that say the problems "cannot" be solved. It makes me livid. Almost as livid as those who say NO guns are acceptable... that is innane... insane!... on a number of levels. If that is all there is to say... that is all there is to say.... the NRA wins. Game over. Sad. BTW... PM Harper has just given the go ahead for Canuck companies to sell any fuckin weapon they want to the Columbians... ya gotta love that free trade agreement he signed without Parliament approval, eh? But, we get fresh fruit all winter so it balances out, eh? Oh, yeah... they can now sell assault pistols and rifles wherever they want, near as I know. Fact is, ya gotta do it right and not piss and moan that ya CAN'T. TIA... I don't think of YOU that way. PLEASE don't use my name again. Bicker among yourselves while the NRA laughs at you and people die. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 04 Jan 13 - 04:28 PM You are exactly right, TIA... I mean, if you follow the NRA logic then ordinary people should be able to own bombs, attack helicopters, tanks, nuclear missiles, etc. B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 Jan 13 - 11:07 AM PS I do recognize a legitimate need for guns for certain restricted and regulated uses; e.g. a geologist mapping on Kodiak Island, or deer hunting for subsistence or even sport. But these needs can certainly be met with something well short of preparing everyone to shoot FBI agents when they become disenchanted with the government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 Jan 13 - 10:32 AM We have armed police. We have an armed National Guard. If we have armed citizens who own those arms in order to "protect us from tyrannical government", we are expecting them (intending them!) to be used against fellow Americans. In fact, we are expecting them (intending them!) to be used against first responders and "the troops". Aren't we constantly exhorted to support the troops and honor the first responders? Why the fuck are we arming people so they can shoot them?... And incidentally go nuts every once in a while and shoot just plain folks (and kids). But that is apparently an acceptable risk in the service of being sure we are armed so that we can shoot the first responders and shoot the troops at some future point. Seems to me that Timothy McVeigh's *only* mistake as a member of "a well regulate militia" (ha!) was that he used a bomb rather than a gun to attack the federal building. Because attacking the feds with a gun is *exactly* the reason we have a Second Amendment. Right? Does this not sound crazy to *everybody*!??!?!?!? And don't think for a minute that my only actions related to this are pissing and moaning. I have been actively working on violence and weapons related issues since the 1970s. Some may disagree with me, but nobody can claim that I am just talking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 04 Jan 13 - 09:59 AM I think this thread has grown too long for genuine discussion, as people are now merely re-stating their positions or yelling at other contributors because they are tired of re-stating their positions. Could we move on, please? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 04 Jan 13 - 09:13 AM Crazies ain't stupid, they buy them at gun shows... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jan 13 - 05:29 AM ""That makes NO sense whatsoever."" Of course it makes sense Gnu. If you fire and miss, that animal is a small blue streak in the distance. You won't get a second shot at it unless you are the kind of idiot who takes the chance of wounding an animal and leaving it to bleed to death. You'll have plenty of time to reload, because it'll be some time before the wildlife settles down. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:43 PM and me, well I am going to get my FFL class III license. If I apply I will get it in a heartbeat with my background. Then I can own a full auto machine gun ... a full auto .45 cause I reload my own. Do I need it, no .. but I do like shooting the things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:36 PM Crazies usually don't buy guns from legit FFL dealers, they steal them from dumb fucks that don't know how to secure their weapons at home, or they buy them in a want ad from the paper. You see like I said, personal transfer of a long gun (not handgun) is legal everywhere without BG checks ... or gun shows .. again no BG checks. In many states however a personal sale of a handgun is ok also without BG checks. Pennsylvania being one of them. Many of these fuckers would never be able to buy a legit firearm from a dealer. The laws vary so much state by state that it is impossible to control. Hence a defined Federal standard would help a lot. I have no problem with firearm registration. I have my handguns all registered in this state .. but it would do nothing but add more nonsense if the personal transfer and gun shows are not closed. And Gnu, I have written to every one of my reps for years and it still sits there wide open. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:20 PM "Bolt action single shot rifles, because if you miss a deer with the first shot, you ain't going to need a second." That makes NO sense whatsoever. NObody reads my posts! NObody on either side gives a shit as far as understanding how to fix the problems. It's been said ad infinitum by me and by others but youse all just don't listen. Bolt action??? Look up Mauser. I tried to explain that stuff to youse BEFORE but you just don't READ my posts and you just don't understand why the NRA is kicking your asses. READ this WHOLE thread and all the other gun threads. I am tired of repeating myself. I have been doing so for years and none of you pissers and moaners have gotten fuck all done in all those years because you just won't listen or get off yer asses and get the job done. Don't address me herein anymore and don't ask me to repeat myself. Read my past posts on this thread and SO many others. It's all there if you want to read it... if you really care. If not, lay down like sheep and let the NRA mow you down. Your call. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:49 PM Me, too... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:27 PM I pretty much agree with your position DonT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:09 PM I think Gnu and I are in broad agreement on this issue. Those who hunt and eat what they kill need rifles to do so. Bolt action single shot rifles, because if you miss a deer with the first shot, you ain't going to need a second. Farmers who have to deal with vermin (varmints, call them what you will) need a shotgun, but not a multi shot pump action (that's for police officers). People who transport valuable items like diamonds may have a case to carry a handgun. All of the above should be issued with licences when, and only when, they have demonstrated their ability in a properly conducted firearms training course. Joe public doesn't need the means to kill a neighbour who comes to his door to borrow a cup of sugar. And nobody needs a military style semi auto for any purpose other than the murder of fellow human beings. Survivalists, with their paranoid delusions about the apocalypse, should be locked up for the protection of the public. Don T. P.S Sorry Jeri, I stayed out as long as I could in good conscience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 06:26 PM Jeeze gnu, I wasn't trying to imply anything I was just trying to get your position on who you think should be allowed to own guns in the US since you obviously don't believe in banning them all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 03 Jan 13 - 06:03 PM Let's get this straight. People who make bombs kill people. The gun nuts keep twisting the language around. People who shoot guns often kill people. Many kill themselves. The weapon is one of the worst inventions in the depraved minds of mankind. There is no excuse for semi-automatic weapons for any reason. LaPierre and Scott Walker want to arm school teachers. That is insane. You don't put out a fire with more fire. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:53 PM bobad... sweet Jaysus man! That is not what was discussed or what was said. IT'S NOT! It was said, "NOBODY." other than militias. Your question is WAY off the point I was making. I just can't do this again. Not tonight, anyway. NObody listens. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:41 PM gnu, who other than hunters and livestock farmers in the US would need to have guns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:31 PM No, we don't have the power... The folks who have corrupted our system do... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:23 PM Militias...okay... "Nobody else needs guns." (Yet again.) Ya just fouled yerselves up again. THAT attitude won't never get yas or any of us NOwhere with the problem. NObody listens. None of yas. Youse are the biggest part of this terrible problem. You feed the ammo to the NRA and shoot yerselves in the foot too. 800 posts and youse antis still don't get it? You are the majority... you have the power... and you piss it away with an inane approach to solving the problems. And then you piss and moan? Sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 09:33 AM And... ...800... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 09:32 AM And there is something about "well regulated" that kinda gets lost in the NRA noise machine... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:53 AM Of course it was tongue in cheek. These well regulated militias are the police and National Guard! Nobody else needs guns. Certainly not the Michigan Militia (of OK City infamy). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:42 AM "This militia could be very useful...maybe after things like Sandy and Katrina...maybe for patrolling public places like malls, theatres and schools." Like many people outside the US, I'm astonished at the sort of mentality that can even contemplate, this. To begin with, how would it stop guns falling into the wrong hands, as in this instance? And would you really welcome - or even tolerate - armed militias wandering around your streets and schools? Would that make you feel safe? What kind of a society are you? Also, I thought that you had the National Guard for this sort of thing - and they, themselves, perpetrated a massacre at Kent State. You really are a weird lot! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Howard Jones Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:23 AM Could someone please explain to me how carrying guns "so they can protect themselves from government if they feel they are getting out of control" is compatible with a democracy? Or, given that the US federal government commands one of the most powerful military forces in the world, what difference these people think their little cache of weapons might make? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:07 AM "Then some of them blew up a federal office building and spoiled it for everyone." Hold on . . . I thought people carried guns so they can protect themselves from government if they feel they are getting out of control? If so, then the atrocity of Oklahoma is merely an extension of these rights, and although we all agree this was a mindless slaughter, the pro-gun lobby can't really start whining about American citizens with bombs because they are exercising their rights under the second amendment to be armed. Anyway, according to the pro gun-folk, bombs don't kill people. People kill people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 03 Jan 13 - 02:17 AM Seems like we used to have lots of those militias, TIA. Then some of them blew up a federal office building and spoiled it for everyone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 02 Jan 13 - 03:37 PM I clicked that link... stopped watching after a while and now I have a script error box that I cannot delete. Ithink it's innocuous but I guess I will have to reboot to get rid of it unless someone knows a quick fix? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 02 Jan 13 - 01:08 PM Let's make all gun owners (of any type of gun) belong to a well regulated milita. Strict constructionists cannot possibly object to that. This militia could be very useful...maybe after things like Sandy and Katrina...maybe for patrolling public places like malls, theatres and schools. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 02 Jan 13 - 12:59 PM That's why the NRA pops the corks every time some wacko kills a bunch of people, Bill... More murder = more $$$... Actually, the NRA is in the murder business... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 02 Jan 13 - 12:18 PM Unfortunately, this latest tragedy and the natural uproar over it served to trigger MORE sales of guns... and AR-15s are sold out in most places. Congress 'may' pass some sort of law, but those who own guns are smugly happy with their arsenals.... I just don't know what might be done. But I DO know that all those hypocritical and superficial ideas about "improved mental health" and "enforcement of existing laws" will get the same bland lip service they always have. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 02 Jan 13 - 10:25 AM The NRA wants to put this 100% on mental health issues and 0% on the the types of guns that are raking them in million$$$... Here's an idea... Take all the profits from gun sales and use them to fund the community mental health services that have been cut, cut and cut some more going back every year since the 1980s... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 01 Jan 13 - 12:37 PM "Neanderthals". Perhaps better labeled "troglodytes"--don't want to be unfair to Neanderthals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 01 Jan 13 - 12:30 PM This attitude is depressingly widespread, and confirms the obvious conclusion that we are not likely to get reasonable gun laws soon. Probably our best bet is that Kennedy will read some history and realize the actual purpose of the 2nd Amendment--so the next 5-4 will be the other way. Then we'll hear unlimited outrage by the Neandethals--again--that the Court is "making law, not just interpreting it." But if you are truly a strict constructionist, as the NRA et al. allege to be, the intent of the Founding Fathers is very clear--and clearly outdated. Unless you really do think national defense by militia is better than national defense by a standing army. Too bad the militia approach was an almost unmitigated disaster right from the start. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 31 Dec 12 - 02:42 PM Here's what one idiot sent to the local paper: I do not own any guns — particularly any of the so-called "assault" weapons — but I am so angry over the media's continuous attention to the premise that the particular type of firearm used in the tragic Newtown shootings is the root of the problem. It is not the type of weapon used, but the fact that a deranged person was able to get a weapon with ammunition and use it. What arguments would you be hearing today on TV or the radio if the shooter had used a commonly found pump-action shotgun and a common handgun? He may have killed a few less children, but would that tragedy be any less a tragedy if only 15 children had been brutally murdered?" "but would that tragedy be any less a tragedy if only 15 children had been brutally murdered?" Well in a word - Yes. Guns are tools. Saws cut boards in half. Hammers pound nails into boards. The weapons used that day are designed for only one thing. To kill a large amount of people in a short time. And tragically - that Friday they worked very well indeed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 31 Dec 12 - 07:50 AM This video makes the point of why more people arming themselves with guns for protection not a good idea: http://www.upworthy.com/the-nra-thinks-more-guns-are-the-answer-bless-their-hearts-then-watch-this?g=2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 30 Dec 12 - 09:45 PM What Don said... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 30 Dec 12 - 08:59 PM Don, if I don't see you around tomorrow, I hope you have a great New Year: good health, good heart and good time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 30 Dec 12 - 08:46 PM Don, thank you. Gnu, not anything that has to actually burn. (More for the other guys.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Dec 12 - 08:42 PM ""It never makes anything better and makes a lot of stuff worse, because those usually involved don't WANT to make anything better. They just want to play verbal light sabers with the other obnoxious kids."" Thank you Jeri, for getting at my and probably several others' motives so completely wrong. Perhaps it is time to look elsewhere. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:56 PM Jeri... "I have to admit I'm fond of anything smoked." Hmmm... minds me of another Mudcatter... or three. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:28 PM The bloviating is worth beans. The anger is worth beans. It never makes anything better and makes a lot of stuff worse, because those usually involved don't WANT to make anything better. They just want to play verbal light sabers with the other obnoxious kids. Seriously, I don't think many normal people want to come to a forum to fight about things that make them mad with people who make them mad, and know they don't have the slightest chance of making anything happen other than creating more "mad". Beans. I never really like them all that much, but then people started talking about them in threads on Mudcat, and I had to go get beans. I've found nothing that can beat Bush's Smokehouse Grillin' Beans. I have to admit I'm fond of anything smoked. Beans, bacon, cheese. Got some smoked mozzarella and portobello mushrooms yesterday, and now I have to come up with an idea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:15 PM The next round of discussions will come after Biden's Committee makes recommendations to Obama... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:13 PM Don... I believe Kendall has said it. The fact that we discuss beans and leave all the bullshit fighting aside for at least a moment is a testement to the fact that we respect the victims and want this endless, self-aggrandising bullshit threadssssss to stop. We all need good gun laws. We all need to get together and get the job done. Maybe part of that job is baking some beans and having a good fart. Taking a break from the bullshit? We can't seem to break bread... maybe we can break wind together? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:12 PM Thanks, gnu. Don, not one of us does not decry the murders of those children. I didn't think another 600 posts of the same things everyone has said--done in bigger letters--would change anyone's position or disposition. However, my apologies for sidelining this thread. Anyone wishing to talk about beans is welcome to a thread I'll start entitled Beans: what do you know? For those who wish to argue here, my apologies for side-tracking the fight--have at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 30 Dec 12 - 05:50 PM La Belle and the Maritimes have always had maple slurpup, Charmion. AND molasses on accounta we have always sailed. Re Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From:gnu - PM Date: 28 Dec 12 - 04:06 PM Nope. NO Libby's beans at the grocery stores here, 9. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,kendall Date: 30 Dec 12 - 03:39 PM Don, everything that can be said about that horror in Newtown has been said in every way, and I'm glad this thread has become more civilized. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Dec 12 - 02:22 PM Is this an indication of the worth of US children? A hill of beans? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,kendall Date: 30 Dec 12 - 12:42 PM I've tried many brands of baked beans, and Atlantic brand is the best of the lot. They are so good I never bake beans myself anymore. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 30 Dec 12 - 09:49 AM The sweet v. sour war is also being fought right here in the South 'cept it ain't about beans as much as it is about BBQ... Ya' see, in North Carolina, especially in the eastern part, people like their BBQ sauce real vinegar & pepper-ie but you go 300-400 miles west toward Memphis, Tn. and it's tomato & sugar-ie... The in-betweens stay at each others throats over the two styles and it's Southern tradition to argue over which is best and why... Some of the finest arguments I have ever heard occur at these BBQ cook-offs... BTW, it's a good thing that folks don't bring their AR15s to these cook-offs... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 30 Dec 12 - 09:37 AM I recall my gran making warm milk with a spoon of black strap molasses in it. I got that after the teaspoon of cod liver oil in cold weather months. To this day I like the taste of both. Et tu, Janie? Beans without sweetener is just beans, but now you mention it the baked beans I had in Jacksonville were not sweetened all that much--well, not as much as you'd find here. As for hot sauces added to beans, there's hot then there's hot. I kinda hang around the 7/10 area of heat added to foods. That's just a bit before the tongue blisters I guess. However, I don't much care for tasteless sauces, so if it's just hot it won't cut it for this old boy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 30 Dec 12 - 12:24 AM For hot stuff in beans, I favour piri-piri sauce. Why do no'theners put sweet stuff in beans? That's a darned good question, and I wish I had an answer to it. My best guess is that back in the day (say, circa 1820), molasses was just about the only flavouring material reliably available throughout the winter in New Englander, the Maritime provinces and Quebec. Sulfurated molasses was also the primary source of iron -- not that those folks knew why that mattered. Anyway, we still make beans pretty well just as our great-great-grandcestors did, except of course for the tomato. Everybody back then knew they were poison. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Dec 12 - 10:08 PM I tried my best, Janie, butt.... Good beans, though... But not window blowin' out good... I thinks some Pete's "Hot Sauce" and I'd give 'um another shot... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:47 PM Nor blown out. At least, not before I left for work early the next morning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:46 PM bobert et beans at my house, but no windows got shot out because of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:39 PM Wes Ginny hillbillies??? Hmmmmmm??? I can relate... Redneck??? Hmmmmmm??? I can relate... Face it... A lot of us been a lot of things that people would stereotype... None of us are all the pure and, geeze, a lot of us have a good amount of hillbilly or redneck in us... I mean, even these pointy headed, Volvo drivin', latte sipping "elitists"... LOL... And the best thing about it??? Vice versa... People is people and, for the most part, they are hybrids... But no matter that 'cause this thread is about something that can end people being people real fast: guns... People *with guns* kill people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:33 PM You are moving to a beautiful and remote part of the southern Appalachians, Elmore. Apparently near Murphy, NC but on the Georgia side of the line. When my ex and I first laid our plans to move to NC we thought we were headed to Murphy so ex could study with a traditionally trained Cherokee healer. That person was married to a physician/pharmacist who up and jumped to a job as a researcher for a pharmaceutical company in the Raleigh/Durham area just as we were packing, so we made a hard turn toward the east instead, and landed on the northeast Piedmont, near Durham and Chapel Hill. You still won't be a short drive but much closer than New Hampshire. Not a bad drive at all from where Bobert lives, and also Chance and Suzette (Fortunato on Mudcat.) Stay in touch! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:26 PM Janie, Peace. I'm pretty sure our views on this subject are similar. Regards, Elmore. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:19 PM We cross-posted Elmore. Now, if ya'll really wanna get me revved up, start talking about rednecks or West Virginia hillbillies:>) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:03 PM For the sake of clarity, Elmore, I understand that 3 of the 4 bombings linked to Rudolph occurred in the Atlanta area and so it is inaccurate to say they had nothing to do with Georgia. But Rudolph had nothing to do with Georgia wasn't raised there and doesn't appear to have lived there. There is no evidence that his "Christian Identity" politics and philosophy of hate are uniquely linked to Georgia or to the South. Sadly, those who hold to these "fringe" ideas and who are prepared to commit violence because of their beliefs are likely thinly but uniformly distributed throughout the population. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:01 PM For the love of God, Janie I was only making a little lame joke. Granted, this is a serious topic, but it's been talked to death. My wicked stepson, who lives in Towns County, our future home pointed a woodsy area out to me and told me it was where Rudolph was captured. I'm not even sure if we were in N.C or Ga.
, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 08:43 PM Please tell me you don't add sweetener to your pea soup, gnu. Beans, fine. Sweetener, not! If we are gonna get into stereotyping, I'll have my stab. What is wrong with youse northerners that you add sweetener to beans or cornbread recipes, instead of to iced-tea? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 08:37 PM I live in North Carolina, Elmore. I won't go into details but have reason to think Rudolph may have stolen a kayak from our campsite in the NC mountains several years before his apprehension. Rudolph's crime and his attitude have little or nothing to do with being a southerner, and nothing at all to do with Georgia. This is a national issue and problem, not a regional one. It also is not a rural vs. urban issue. More rural households are probably likely to own hunting rifles than urban households, but I would guess the percentage of urban households with a handgun is at least equal to rural households with a handgun and possibly higher, though I couldn't find the correct search terms to see if that info. is available on line. And in terms of mass gun killings in the past decade+, neither the south as a region, nor southerners as the shooters stand out. http://www.newsmax.com/US/mass-shootings-us-colorado/2012/07/20/id/445971 Personally, I'd be a lot more worried about personal safety living in any urban area than I would be living in any more rural area, no matter the region of the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 29 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM Janie... thanks. Ya know... this thread drift reminds me of a troll protest thread years back. Kinda folkie in a way. Kinda heart warming for me. People deciding to talk about beans rather than the same old shit about guns that has been flogged ad infinitum herein. Not that such a discussion is not important "each and every time" it is brought up.... but, more to the fact that when such threads become about the posters moreso than the subject... well, beans to that. I had a request for a "French Canuck" pea soup recipe a day or so ago. Yellow split pea recipe. Sent MY recipe back. But, I didn't add this... sometimes, I throw in some beans. Sometimes I get really crazy and throw in a LOT. I mean, if yer gonna fart anyway... ? Beans in pea soup you ask??? Yeah! I am a wild and crazy guy. Try it... you'll like it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 29 Dec 12 - 08:11 PM Janie: Southern New Hampshire is a suburb of Boston, and we really are moving to Eric Rudolph country. Leaving Mudcat for a couple of hours to watch Ellis Paul. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 08:00 PM And this brings us around to Judge Roy Bean. Yep! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 07:58 PM As best I can tell, your rural New Hampshire preacher is no more or no less likely to be "packing" than is a Georgia preacher. Cut the stereotyping, please. It adds nothing and only reveals your ignorance and prejudice toward southerners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 29 Dec 12 - 07:54 PM There's a 6 month waiting period while the culture shock wears off....then after that all the bullets must be blessed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 29 Dec 12 - 07:39 PM Well, hail yeah, El-mo-rowa... Ye'd bedder be packin' sum heat 'cause the praecherman sho is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 29 Dec 12 - 07:35 PM Moving from Southern New Hampshire to the North Georgia Mountains. Am I legally required to carry a gun in church? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 29 Dec 12 - 05:19 PM I absolutely agree -- Crosby's molasses is best! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 05:10 PM Think about it. Heinz Beans ... it's not tomato sauce, its ketchup, catsup or whatever you call that syrupy goo. Let's face it, Heinz is part of the corporate oligarchy. gnu ... Graves do make good canned beans and yes the price is very reasonable. Molasses .. if your going to make your own beans you must use Crosby's Molasses.It's a family owned business right here in Saint John, New Brunswick .. where a good quality molasses is much more important than some damned gun. check it out ... Crosbys biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 04:51 PM I'd rather saddles blaze than guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 29 Dec 12 - 04:43 PM Think about it. The National Rifle Association lists everything in society - including violent films and novels and lyrics - that might contribute to gun deaths except for one class of things: guns and their accessories. These protectors of our sacred liberties (which include life, by the way)seem to be more eager to violate the First Amendment than to revise the Second. Think about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 04:36 PM Many thanks, Janie. Makes a guy lonesome for Mel Brooks and Blazing Saddles. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 29 Dec 12 - 03:56 PM This one's for Bruce and gnu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 29 Dec 12 - 12:08 PM Navy beans are the small white oval ones also known as Great Northern beans, pea beans, and in French, haricots blancs. Molasses is treacle. A cup (American) is 8 fluid ounces or a hair less than 250 ml. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 29 Dec 12 - 11:10 AM OK, I'm a tough, brave guy so I'll risk the ridicule and ask, WTF are 'navy beans', and where in hell's name do I find 'molasses' (whatever that is!). And how big should the cup be - quantities by weight are much easier to understand? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 29 Dec 12 - 11:01 AM I was afraid to open this thread to see so many late posts... but I see it's 'bean' co-opted for useful purposes. However, I worry.... if all you bean eaters ever get together, we'll have to pay guards equipped with gas masks and armed with Beano & Lysol spray to keep the place safe! I wonder if it would lead to Constitutional Amendment 2.5 and required permits.) ☺ (I used to work at a Stokley-Van Camp's cannery in Kansas, where thousands of cases of various bean products were produced every year. I know how dangerous those |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 10:37 AM Thank you :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 29 Dec 12 - 10:35 AM First time I saw a can of Heinz beans I looked at that tomato sauce and thought, There's something hurt bad in there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 29 Dec 12 - 10:09 AM Yes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:53 AM Wow, thank you. I will try that out this week. One last question, Charmion: navy beans? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:47 AM Slow-cooker beans do not have to be soaked, but they do have to cook a very long time. To a pound of beans, put four and a half cups of water, a chopped onion, 1/3 cup molasses, 1/4 cup brown sugar, a tablespoon of Dijon mustard, and four ounces of diced salt pork, plus the garlic, diced tomato and thyme. Cook on Low for 13 to 14 hours, then taste; you may wish to add half a teaspoon of salt. The secret to good beans is the sweet/sour balance, achieved in this recipe by the vinegar in the Dijon mustard and the acid from the tomatoes against the molasses and sugar. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:21 AM achmelvich, that fiddle player sure gets a workout. Thanks for the link. Charmion, when you do the beans in a slow cooker, do you first soak them over night? (I like that Dijon mustard tip, many thanks.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:07 AM I'd much rather discuss beans than gun violence any day. Heinz beans are okay if that's all there is, but I find them bland and too sweet. For best beans, it's hard beat the batch you make yourself. A slow-cooker can make the most ham-fisted son if a seacook into a Master of Beans. Dijon mustard -- that's the secret. With a good dose of garlic, some thyme, and a couple of fresh Roma tomatoes along with the canonical blackstrap molasses and salt pork. And beans, of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Midchuck Date: 29 Dec 12 - 09:01 AM We can probably close this thread now. The idea was that no more "assault weapons" (a term that was never defined with any specificity, but appears to mean semi-automatic shoulder weapons designed to look like military assault rifles, but are not really since they have no full-auto capability) should be sold. This has been accomplished. There was such a run on them that every gun store is sold out. Q. E. D. Peter |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,achmelvich Date: 29 Dec 12 - 04:39 AM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZiPCJrd0_4 i love a friendly thread drift. and love this song which starts 'i was walking down the high road and this guy stops me - 'i'm just in from new zealand and i'm looking for mushy peas......' and then develops into the best page on t'internet. beautiful song from the great joe strummer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 28 Dec 12 - 04:06 PM Libby's, Clarke's, Grave's... we got em all here... wait... hmmm... I gotta check on Libby's next time I am at the stores. I have been known to make mistakes. But, I ALWAYS apologize... >;-) I have a whack of Clarke's with maple slurpup on accounta Mum likes it and when it's on sale... I have a SHITLOAD of Grave's with pork and molasses... comes on sale here for 50p a tin in late summer (six packs). I got about 150 tins. HGey... they are nearly three times the price I paid when they are regular price and the Bank of Nova Scotion won't give Jesus a dime of interest on his gold. Myrrhcy me, it just makes Friggincense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 28 Dec 12 - 03:45 PM Backwoodsman, you were in some beautiful country. I lived about 80 km NNE of Jasper for 10 years. Worked a few MVCs with their EMS and Fire Department. The problem with Banff and Jasper is that while being scenic they are also quite expensive. The Banff-Jasper Highway has a few of the most beautiful spots I've ever seen. I expect you'll recall that gaping big turn in the highway where if ya look up you can see Dall sheep--solid white--on cliffs where there is next to nothing to hold on to. The Penticton/Kelowna area is something else. Great fruit orchards there. You were in some wild bits of the country a little north of there on The Yellowhead (Hwy 16). We also have a few wild areas here in the east. Anyway, if for some reason you decide to return, there's lots more to see. I've been many places in this country (except Yukon, Prince Edward Island and Labrador) and truthfully there isn't an area I can't say good things about. The people are friendly, but I expect you'd get along well regardless of where you are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 28 Dec 12 - 01:51 PM 999 - we only touched the tourist route in the far west of AB, Banff, Lake Louise, Icefields Parkway, the Athabasca Glacier, Jasper etc. it was part of our fly-drive from Vancouver, through the wine country around Penticton and Kelowna, into the Rockies and on through Prince George and Smithers to Prince Rupert, by ferry down the Inside Passage to Port hardy on the Island, Campbell River, Victoria and back to Vancouver. Magnificent scenery and very nice, friendly people everywhere we went. Best holiday we've ever had. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 28 Dec 12 - 01:37 PM Hey Kendall, I apologised first! But no matter, we sorted our differences and the Anglo-Canadian entente is cordiale once again, and that's what's important. :-) Heinz' beans no good then? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 28 Dec 12 - 01:04 PM @Bobert .... good one !! *lol* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 28 Dec 12 - 12:50 PM Well, if not the beans, the aftermath of them, bILL... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 28 Dec 12 - 10:50 AM Well .... there ya go ... another long winded thread here in the 'ol Madcat turns into nothing but a can of beans.... ;) so on the subject of canned beans ... I recommend you bean fans try Bush's Beans. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 28 Dec 12 - 10:42 AM I'm not 100% sure, but half really sure and half pretty darned sure. Looks are pretty fancy beans for a guy eats 'em out the can half the time. I really miss Libby's. Man, now I'm hungry. Back in a bit. So much for my memory. I have the can of Clark's in my hand and they're made in Canada. So it probably was Looks you mentioned years back. Guess those folks was right when they said I don't know beans :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 28 Dec 12 - 10:00 AM Clarks? never heard of them.Are you sure I didn't say Looks? Packed in Whiting Maine? State of Maine used to be my favorite but can't find them anywhere now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 28 Dec 12 - 09:41 AM Dang. I just wrote the best post I ever composed and it went poof! Backwoodsman, there's lots of this place left to see. You get back here and I'll help you as much as I can. Right now we're up to our waists in snow, and if it wasn't for roads we'd all be on skis or snowshoes. You mentioned being here in June which is fortuitous, that being the month that houses our two weeks of summer. I hope you saw The Rockies. I was looking for a good shot of the Nahanni River but got sidetracked in my head by the Fraser River--named for Simon Fraser by a fellow from Westminster, London, England named David Thompson. He was no slouch as an explorer either. Territory that Thompson mapped. I know some of that country fairly well and parts of it can be pretty rough. If you don't mind, where in Alberta did you get to? I lived there for thirty years and have very fond memories if it for the most part. Anyway, I can be a pain when I get going about this country so I'll stop here. Thank you again for, well, you know. Kendall, four years back you suggested Clark's canned beans on a thread that I think alluded to the fall of western civilization. Anyway, since I haven't been able to find Libby's anymore I have switched and while they ain't Libby's, they ain't bad. Been eating the kind with molasses when I have beans. I like them on buttered toast. Don't know what I've done with my trusty bean spoon, but cooking without it is not a hardship save for those around me. Thanks, buddy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 28 Dec 12 - 07:32 AM WOW! here's a guy who is man enough to apologize! Not surprising that he's a Canadian. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 28 Dec 12 - 05:23 AM No problem at all, 999, thank you for your gracious reply. And I'm 100% with you there. I did think you're a US-ian, apologies too for that unfortunate misunderstanding! :-) On a much more pleasant subject, I spent three weeks in your beautiful country in June, BC, a bit of AB, Vancouver Island and Burlington, ON. Retirement holiday - wonderful times! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:55 PM Hear hear, brucie!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:50 PM Backwoodsman, I owe you an apology also. I hope you accept it. I may have got a bit ruffled that you thought I'm an American. I'm Canadian. I hear you loud and clear and in fact agree that no guns at all would be the ideal. I detest the thought of armed citizens walking around thinking they have the wherewithal in skill, training or knowledge to settle situations involving gun violence. And LaPierre is little short of being a shill for the gun industry. His NRA pay per year is about a million, but I still wonder if he gets gifts from arms manufacturers. I don't know now many horrific incidents it will take to drive home the point that the more guns a society has the more killings will occur involving guns. Citizens with their guns didn't help the kids in the Connecticut school, and they sure didn't help the murderer's mom. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:22 PM Not too sure of the 11,000 number, Don... I think it might be closer to 15,000... No matter... 200,000 Americans will have the distinct dis-pleasure of experiencing what it is like to be shot... Most will survive but that's a lot of people getting shot... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:16 PM Bugger! Hit submit in error, (TWICE!). Mudelves please remove last two semi posts. ""Since you have shown that you cannot read simple English statements, a sane person would not waste time on you: There is no reason that anything you post could have any value."" I read very well mate, and remember that English is the language we taught you, before you fucked it up! 11000 gun deaths in the US of A compared to 41 in the UK. If you are claiming that your population is 268.3 times larger than ours, it is you who have difficulty reading and understanding simple English! Unless of course you are admitting to being insane? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:09 PM 11 gun deaths in Japan last year... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 06:04 PM BTW, bb... The fact that the recent school shooting wasn't conducted with an AR15 in no way validates your argument... Guess again... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:43 PM BTW, Eb... Redneck-small-penis-nation decided that the best way to show how manly they were a few years back in Northern Virgina and the entire circle-jerk-crew strapped on guns just like in the old western movies and went around barging into various restaurant just to ***prove*** how tough they were... I had read about them in the paper and how they would empty out the restaurants of other customers... Not until I was in one of these restaurants with my wife and young son did I fully understand I fully understand just how disconcerting it was, told the waiter to box up our stuff and bring a check... I was so pissed that if I had had an AK15 I probably would have shot all of them... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:34 PM This idea that putting guns in schools is beyond stupid, shortsighted and and ill-thought-out... I won't work for the following reasons: 1. Unless you have a team of highly trained armed guards to guard every entrance then a wacko who has done a little homework will just enter the school thru an unguarded entrance... 2. There is an assumption that these wackos don't really know how to use these guns against someone who is trained... That is BS... These wackos have grown up playing video games and have developed all the skills needed to out-shoot a cop wantabee who is packin' a 9mm Glock... 3. There are over 400,000 schools in the US, plus even more preschools, nursrey schools, day car centers... Let's say that it costs $60,000 a year per cop wantabee, do the math... Now, lets throw in some other factors... I was a "food court" today in South Charlotte... If a wacko had wanted to he could have opened fired in there and killed a couple hundred people, half of them being kids... Anyone go to see the local high school football team play??? Think on the bleachers... Couple hundred kids dead... How about church or Sunday school??? Ya'll get my drift here??? The NRA's idea isn't even half-baked... It's stupid and moronic, at best... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:10 PM A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths In part by forbidding almost all forms of firearm ownership, Japan has as few as two gun-related homicides a year. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 27 Dec 12 - 04:30 PM Ah yes, and Benedict Arnold's treason also did not make 1780 rosy for the rebels. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 27 Dec 12 - 04:07 PM It's interesting. Even some of those who see the need for gun regulation have bought onto some of the more sloppy stereotypes of US history and guns. Revolutionary War "won by a bunch of regular guys with guns". Wrong. Uncounted times Washington despaired at having to try to win a war with "a bunch of regular guys with guns." 'Baron" von Steuben (he claimed that title, mostly for employment reasons) was in fact essential in creating a regular army. Washington pushed constantly, with marginal success, to make the "army" as regular as possible. And he realized the idea of national defense through militia was a dead loser. And at the beginning of 1781, with mutinies, unpaid troops and defeats, it did not look good for the rebels--even with the "regular army". Militia would not have done the job. And without the British obsession with New York, combined with the French willingness to leave the West Indies undefended for a while, and the quick march by Washington's army to Virginia--and the inconclusive sea battle off the coast--which did however cut off Cornwallis' resupply or retreat--the outcome would have been different, to say the least. The French, going bankrupt partly due to the American war, were about to seek an honorable withdrawal--independence for the colonies not guaranteed. 1781 was to be the last chance. Without the constellation outlined above, there would have been no American victory that year. Even with it, the expectation was there would be more campaigns after 1781. Only the UK change of government stopped that. When the American cause relied on militia, the militia often failed the cause. The drivel about "guys with guns" winning the Revolution is large part just part of the NRA mythology. The rest of us should know better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:11 PM Since this thread has become so nasty, and the same old opinions just go round and round ad nauseam, I have no more time to waste on childish name calling. I'm outta here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:04 PM 2. Deter — Put police officers in schools, because with just one officer assigned to a school, the probability of a mass murder in that school drops to almost zero One word, Beardie: Columbine. You lose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:03 PM Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From:GUEST,Backwoodsman - PM Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:15 AM I don't believe anyone here has suggested a total ban on guns, even the UK-ers.... Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From:Don(Wyziwyg)T - PM Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:27 AM ... You asked for solutions, we gave you the answer. "GET RID OF THE FUCKING GUNS!"... ********************************************************************* Yeah... right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:02 PM Denial is a river in Africa, Bruce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,achmelvich Date: 27 Dec 12 - 02:51 PM as a 'UKer' i would propose a total ban on gun ownership. here most people are very uncomfortable with the idea of a few of our police being armed. and with good reason -a few years back a guy was killed while carrying a table leg in a plastic bag- the police mistook this for a gun. and more recently jean charles de menezes was murdered by police - a brazilian electrician on his way to work, apparently mistaken for a terrorist suspect. of course, there is a completely different argument in the states - and i feel very sorry for you - but a total ban would surely be an ideal to strive for. incidentally, the landed gentry here are allowed to own shotguns for the pleasure of hunting and shooting our wildlife - disgusting gang of perverts that they are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Dec 12 - 01:01 PM A policeman's opinion: http://www.policeone.com/school-violence/articles/2058168-Active-shooters-in-schools-The-enemy-is-denial "1. Denial — Denial is the enemy and it has no survival value, said Grossman. 2. Deter — Put police officers in schools, because with just one officer assigned to a school, the probability of a mass murder in that school drops to almost zero 3. Detect — We're talking about plain old fashioned police work here. The ultimate achievement for law enforcement is the crime that didn't happen, so giving teachers and administrators regular access to cops is paramount. 4. Delay — Various simple mechanisms can be used by teachers and cops to put time and distance between the killers and the kids. a. Ensure that the school/classroom have just a single point of entry. Simply locking the back door helps create a hard target. b. Conduct your active shooter drills within (and in partnership with) the schools in your city so teachers know how to respond, and know what it looks like when you do your response. 5. Destroy — Police officers and agencies should consider the following: a. Carry off duty. No one would tell a firefighter who has a fire extinguisher in his trunk that he's crazy or paranoid. b. Equip every cop in America with a patrol rifle. One chief of police, upon getting rifles for all his officers once said, "If an active killer strikes in my town, the response time will be measured in feet per second." c. Put smoke grenades in the trunk of every cop car in America. Any infantryman who needs to attack across open terrain or perform a rescue under fire deploys a smoke grenade. A fire extinguisher will do a decent job in some cases, but a smoke grenade is designed to perform the function. d. Have a "go-to-war bag" filled with lots of loaded magazines and supplies for tactical combat casualty care. e. Use helicopters. Somewhere in your county you probably have one or more of the following: medevac, media, private, national guard, coast guard rotors. f. Employ the crew-served, continuous-feed, weapon you already have available to you (a firehouse) by integrating the fire service into your active shooter training. It is virtually impossible for a killer to put well-placed shots on target while also being blasted with water at 300 pounds per square inch. g. Armed citizens can help. Think United 93. Whatever your personal take on gun control, it is all but certain that a killer set on killing is more likely to attack a target where the citizens are unarmed, rather than one where they are likely to encounter an armed citizen response. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:42 PM GUEST999 - sincere apologies, I completely misinterpreted your post and took it to be in support of those who believe that they need guns in order to challenge your government. My bad - pax? And arrogant though you may regard me as being, I'm sufficiently gracious as to admit when I'm mistaken and offer an apology, which I'm happy to do here. However, my argument stands, and I apologise to no-one for making it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:31 PM LOL. It can't be harder than trying to agree with one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:24 PM Trying to argue facts with a Liberal? Is that what's got ya down, Bunkie? Well, what the World needs is a good 5-cent nickel! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:13 PM Subject: RE: BS: So Where Is a Gun Control Petition??? From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:12 PM "Subject: RE: BS: So Where Is a Gun Control Petition??? From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 11:04 AM The only purpose I have ever seen for semi-automatic or automatic guns of any sort (rifle or pistol) is to fire lots of bullets (projectiles) really fast. However, what many folks here are missing is the mindset of people who own guns like that. They DO fear their governments and many are stocking up for self-defense/survival. Someone on another thread said they are full of shite. That may be so, but it is their reality. We know the rule of law seems doomed given the degree of social breakdown that has occurred. So getting law back will have to be step one." Note the fucking time! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:08 PM Guest,Backwoodsman. For some fucking deluded reason you think I agree with that. I don't. I'd like to see no guns of either automatic or semiautomatic, and I'd like all handguns off the street. So before I get further into it, think about that. And as a btw, go fuck yourself you arrogant asshole! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 27 Dec 12 - 12:07 PM #6.Ban "open carry" of all handguns except for police... I don't want to go into a restaurant and have a dozen cowboy wnatabees come in with pistols strapped to their legs..." "Looking at the crime rate of places where open carry is legal, and the crime rate of placeswere carry is prohibited, I do not agree with you." BeardedBruce Bruce, I can only tell you that if I saw one or more 'cowboywannabes' come into a restaurant or mall or Home Depot or wherever I would be out of there as quickly as I could manage. And so would most of the patrons- it would be an excellent way to clear an area. It's bad enough knowing that some of the people have 'concealed carry'; I do NOT want to live in any place that allows civilians/people in with guns of any sort. Back in the old Wild West, you recall, the dictum was to leave the guns at the desk. Men were not allowed to mingle while openly wearing. Of course, the movies showed it differently- anyone get their information from them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 27 Dec 12 - 11:59 AM GUEST999 - the way to deal with a government you don't trust is through the ballot box, that's how civilised societies do it, not by waving guns around and getting a hard-on by talking big about taking on the government by force of arms. So, how many times since the 2nd Amendment was put into the Statute Books has your 'we'll regulated militia' (ha, there's a laugh!) used the arms it considers its right to bear in order to whip your government into line? I'll clue you - it's a number that's less than one. And should your 'well regulated militia' of rednecks, gun-nuts, sexual inadequates and paranoids (interspersed with a few farmers, hunters, target-shooters and retired cops) take up arms against your government, how long do you think they'd last before they got a bloody good kicking from your 'standing army' (along with your Air Force and navy) and started taking up residence in body bags? FFS, get real! It's a ridiculous illusion which has been grabbed and peddled by the gun-nuts and NRA as justification for the proliferation of guns in the US. Anyone who truly believes it really should NOT be granted a permit to possess firearms, on the grounds that they are delusional to the point of being mentally defective. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 27 Dec 12 - 11:23 AM So Bobert, help me out here. Who ARE these racist scum that support your viewpoint? Can you provide me with a list? And which of your many viewpoints do they support? Thanks- Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 27 Dec 12 - 10:30 AM We don't have any laws to keep someone who is not already a felon from getting a gun. I'm a good deal less worried about a criminal with a gun than I am about a "normal" neighbor or person on the freeway who loses their temper and has a gun handy. If, most of the time, it was a felony to buy a gun, people would have to become a felon before opening fire. We'd have have a chance to catch them before they kill. As it is now, we don't find out they're crazy or out of control until they open fire. Also, most people aren't willing to become felons and wouldn't buy a gun in the first place. One of the laws we have in many states that is always enforced is the "shall issue" law about concealed weapons permits - anyone who isn't a felon MUST be given a permit if they ask for one. One law we should have is to have anyone who wants to carry a concealed handgun to prove they need it, they know how and when to use it, and that they aren't very close to the edge of being crazy or just losing control. Until you can guarantee that people who are nearly crazy can't legally get their hands on guns, please stop saying that we have plenty of laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Dec 12 - 10:01 AM " 7. Create a 24 hour waiting period for the purchase of any gun..." That would be a decrease in waiting time here in PG County, MD- and look at the crime rate here. I think the solution is to enforce the laws we have ( ALL OF THEM) and then make new laws AFTER WE SEE WHAT WORKS. As long as it is acceptable to violate laws that we do not like, such as the ones against pot and drugs, there will be people breaking the law and not caring about societal standards. Like the graffiti cleanup in NYC, ENFORCING THE LAWS ( or changing them WITHOPU violating them) would establish a climate of law abiding, and reduce gun violence (WHICH IS ILLEGAL) So how about it, Bobert? Ready to turn in those pot growers and moonshiners? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: MGM·Lion Date: 27 Dec 12 - 10:00 AM Why am I so constantly being reminded, by so may Yooser entries on all these lost-count-of-how-many gun threads currently ongoing, of the yokel [= US hayseed] asked the way to somewhere; who stopped, and scratched his head, and thought for a minute, and scratched his head again; and then delivered himself of the helpful observation: "Well, you can't start from here."? ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Dec 12 - 09:33 AM Bobert, Like the mandatory sentences have "won the war on drugs"? How about execution of all pot smokers, since they willingly violate federal laws? The PRESENT LAWS and penalties ARE NOT ENFORCED- When they are, see if that makes a difference BEFORE you pass new laws that the courts will not enforce. I addressed your comments- YOU do not choose to address mine. The definition in law of "ASSAULT RIFLE" you have already denied as being valid. You must think that the performance of a weapon is caused by the appearance, since THAT is what the previous law went by. And you still keep silent on the racist scum that support your viewpoint. THEY would liove for you to be sure their next lynching victim was not allowed to have a firearm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 27 Dec 12 - 09:07 AM So, bb... You really haven't addressed my proposals other than the usual "it won't work" pablum of the NRA... BTW, I have defined "assault rifle" over and over but rather than accept what I, and millions of others define it as, step right by our sane and reasonable definition and go to existing law... ******************Existing laws are the problem********************** Now back to your "it won't work" defeatism defense: If you put some real teeth in the laws they will work... Slaps on the wrists, I agree, won't work... Mandatory prison term will... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:57 AM Nothing like a rational conversation about guns. "The drivel being touted by some about standing up to a government they distrust should absolutely not be a qualifying 'need or reason', it's just big-mouth bluster, and complete, utter shite." Backwoodsman, you are certainly entitled to that opinion, but you are failing to see that many people who want assault rifles--rifles that fire lots of projectiles really fast--do so because they do NOT trust their government/police. Whether they would even try to fight back against a takeover is another matter, but that is part of their rationale for wanting the weapons in the first place. Which came first, the gun or the need, is up for grabs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:55 AM Bobert, "I mean, there are a lot of very reasonable and sane adults who want to see the following laws enacted: 1. Ban military style assault rifles even though they are sold a semi-automatic..." DEFINE "assault rifle" Since you do not accept the definition that the courts do. please define WHAT YOU MEAN- Black plastic stock and parkerized? "2. Ban high capacity magazines (clips) that hold over 10 rounds.." Since the killings in Conn were done with pistols ( the AR-15 was found IN THE CAR **AFTER** the shootings) I think making sure police never have more than 10 rounds might be good idea ( Glocks- 17 rounds) . "3. Close the gun-show loophole..." OK, then the criminals will meet in the malls to exchange guns. FFL DEALERS have the same paperwork and registration requirements REGARDLESS of where they are selling. "4. Require anyone who owns a pistol to register it and provide a "certificate of proficiency" to own it..." How? If it is already impossible to keep FELONS from having guns illegally, how do you get them to register it? ONLY law abiding citizens are affected by this. You would, in effect, be arming the Klan and disarming the NAACP. "5. Invest what is needed for background checks to work in a timely manner, which it currently doesn't do..." THIS I AGREE WITH. "6. Ban "open carry" of all handguns except for police... I don't want to go into a restaurant and have a dozen cowboy wnatabees come in with pistols strapped to their legs..." Looking at the crime rate of places where open carry is legal, and the crime rate of placeswere carry is prohibited, I do not agree with you. 7. Create a 24 hour waiting period for the purchase of any gun... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:43 AM Don T "Nothing to be done, according to Peedee and Bruce (ought to be a good cartoon series there)." Bullshit! Since you have shown that you cannot read simple English statements, a sane person would not waste time on you: There is no reason that anything you post could have any value. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:31 AM Don T has it right. "Guns do not kill people" They do if you point them at someone and pull the trigger. Guns make it easy for any fool to kill anyone. They make it easy to intimidate and murder and terrorise and maim and . . . ah well, it's been said so many times. No guns = more difficult to kill people. Very difficult to massacre people without a weapon like a gun of any type. Thinking about this whole business, the one thing that keeps coming back to my mind are the actions of Victoria Soto, the 27 year-old teacher who hid her class in the closet and faced the gunman as he came to kill those kids. She stood her ground with the sort of courage most of us pray we could muster in such a situation and she looked that murdering slimeball in the eye and with great presence of mind misdirected him, although she paid with her life, a price she both knew should would have to pay and was willing to pay to save those children. Her bravery and sacrifice gives me hope that out of this adversity comes a triumph of the human spirit, of compassion and intelligence and the understanding that we all live together, and need to look after each other. Victoria Soto's selfless heroism shows that the greatest courage comes from people who don't have guns of any description; we see this in history time and time again. Guns kill people. Gun support enables that to happen. End of. No more of this self-delusional "Guns don't kill people" bollocks. It's the lie that will condemn more innocents to a violent death they don't deserve. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:33 AM BTW. The guns I'm referring to are the ones designed to kill people, especially handguns and semi autos. Hunting rifles and vermin killers like .22s and shotguns are not included. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Dec 12 - 05:27 AM Well, that seems to be that folks! Nothing to be done, according to Peedee and Bruce (ought to be a good cartoon series there). So, load your weapons, lock all your doors and sit back and do NOTHING. You can pass the time by making bets on whether your broken and prohibitively expensive medical system will weed out all the nutjobs before one of them slaughters your kids. I don't give much in the way of odds there, since your medical insurers avoid long term cases like the plague, so make the most of the kiddies while you've got 'em. You asked for solutions, we gave you the answer. "GET RID OF THE FUCKING GUNS!" Don't want to listen? Suit yourselves, but don't expect any sympathy at all the next time some gun happy arsehole massacres a whole school class Our sympathy is reserved for the real victims, the children sacrificed to their parents love affair with guns. I'm out of this, gravely disappointed in the nation which once had pioneer spirit. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:52 AM And 'self-protection' against 'the bad guys' or 'mad-dog killers' isn't a a qualifying need or reason either, it indicates paranoia and should mean automatic disqualification of the applicant from gun ownership on the grounds of mental instability. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:15 AM I don't believe anyone here has suggested a total ban on guns, even the UK-ers. What most on this side of the pond would call for is for gun ownership to be restricted to those who can demonstrate a true need to own a gun - farmers, hunters, target-shooting club members etc., and no automatic, semi-automatic or military-type weapons to be owned by anyone at all. The drivel being touted by some about standing up to a government they distrust should absolutely not be a qualifying 'need or reason', it's just big-mouth bluster, and complete, utter shite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 26 Dec 12 - 07:13 PM Welll... I still don't quite get all that because a LOT of peeps on these threads have said "ban all guns" but... whatever. Ebbie... "what do we do"... you get some GOOD gun laws that deal with ownership and registration BUT you have to do it different in the US that it was done in Canada because GUESS WHAT happened in Canada... we had a GREAT system... cost $2B+ and it's now being trashed because it WASN'T DONE RIGHT. Another Canuck MODEL for the world but we had so many idiot antigun nuts that pushed WAY too far that many Canucks said "I am a Canuck and I won't take that shit." Yanks are even more so. Soooo, ya gotta just "do" good guns laws with common sense. And, yes, providing health care and feeding the poor and education and... all that pie in the sky stuff (pie? WTF? but THAT is another thread). But, ya gotta get a grip on GOOD gun laws as a start. Canada has a great model IF someone with a brain in their head and a vote in Parliament had had the balls to say... hmmm... that part is REALLY stupid and I think we, the government, might be in the opposition soon if we ignore common sense and decency. So, now, anti-decency, Stephen Harper, is destroying all our $2B worth of good gun laws because SOME of those laws were BAD gun laws. It drives me NUTS! Maybe that is why the Canucks that post in these threads seem so pissed off... well... at least ONE that I know of. He keeps saying the same things over and over but it seems nobody, on either side, is listening. Guns do not kill people. People who won't listen to logic and common sense kill people. They kill people like my buddy and his wife that I posted about in a long ago gun thread(sss). One more time... good gun laws are good. Bad gun laws are bad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:59 PM Glad to see that some folks have stopped talking "past" each other, and actually started having a discussion. Finding common ground and building consensus around that common ground is a lot of work. Requires respect for the validity of different points of view and careful reflective listening on the part of all parties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:54 PM No matter... Like I said before, I was giving gn-ze the benefit of the doubt 'cause he's my buddy... It really doesn't matter... The point is that the folks here in Mudville who are in favor of sane gun laws aren't advocating such a radical position... Yo, Eb... Yeah, there are a lot of things we could do to restore civility but that would be an entire different thread... Or several... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:50 PM I for one do not want all guns banned because the minute that happens I will wonder what my government is about to do that I won't like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:45 PM It was for Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:33 PM Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From:GUEST,999 - PM Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:07 PM Name ONE Canadian poster who has said to ban all guns! ********************************************************** Was that for me, 9? Or who? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 26 Dec 12 - 06:10 PM There goes the neighborhood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:47 PM So Beardie, I suppose you want to do away with the laws against murder and rape as well, since its obvious they don't prevent murder. And you didn't speak to the point that the current laws don't work because they're badly drafted and have too many loopholes and aren't uniform across the country. But then, I didn't expect you WOULD. Not when you can resort to bloviation, BS, and changing the subject. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:30 PM OK, back to the bottom line here. If we in the US are such an aggressive people, how do we go about changing that? I should imagine changing a people's nature and expectations is a slow process. I don't think we have that much time. Any suggestions? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:16 PM I don't know of any... I said "maybe"... I donno of any but since gn-ze said that folks are saying it I reckon I could give him the benefit of the doubt that maybe someone has said it... Like I said, "I donno"??? I have said that the only two people I can remember saying it were pdq and beardedbruce... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:07 PM Name ONE Canadian poster who has said to ban all guns! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 05:03 PM Yeah, I've signed a bunch of them petitions... I'm even trying to get anew one going that requires an IQ on the plus side of that of an animal cracker in order to post anything on the inter net... I thought you'd like that one, gn-ze... As for the 24 hour waiting period to purchase a gun??? It's called a cool-down period... You'd be surprised how many people get pissed off, go the gun store, buy a gun and blow someone away all in one afternoon... Heck, if the right wing thinks it's okay to have laws that require a pregnant woman to have such a period then why not pissed off people who want to kill their next door neighbor... Actually, there isn't one radical idea in my list... All pretty much common sense... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:57 PM The major American proponents here in the Mudpit for sane gun control laws have not advocated banning all guns... Maybe a couple UKers of Canadians might have said that but none of my American allies on the subject... Of course we do hear it from the righties (beardedbruce & pdq among others) but they are just saying it because they think it makes the folks on my side look to be unreasonable... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:56 PM 24 Hour waiting period? If a person owns guns and ammo legally and a permit to aquire and the transfer of ownership must take place trhu a registry the 24 hour thing need not apply. GOOD gun laws. LOGICAL gun laws. I am blue in the face from shouting this. Bobert... yer just givin the anti-gun/gun nuts ammo with some of these ideas. Yo, Bobert... ya sign any a them there petitions yet? BTW... ANY of youse sign any a them there petitions yet? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:46 PM Bobert... "no one wants to ban all guns, gn-ze..." Huh? I have read same on every gun thread. I ain't gonna look it up and quote it... THEMssss... for you. It would take TOOOO long. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:42 PM For the one millionth time, no one wants to ban all guns, gn-ze... That's never been talking point or goal of the folks who want saner gun laws... That is NRA propaganda that they use to try to paint sane people as lunatics... Personally, I'm sick of reading "ban all guns"... It's bullshit and we don't need to be repeating NRA propaganda... I mean, there are a lot of very reasonable and sane adults who want to see the following laws enacted: 1. Ban military style assault rifles even though they are sold a semi-automatic... 2. Ban high capacity magazines (clips) that hold over 10 rounds... 3. Close the gun-show loophole... 4. Require anyone who owns a pistol to register it and provide a "certificate of proficiency" to own it... 5. Invest what is needed for background checks to work in a timely manner, which it currently doesn't do... 6. Ban "open carry" of all handguns except for police... I don't want to go into a restaurant and have a dozen cowboy wnatabees come in with pistols strapped to their legs... 7. Create a 24 hour waiting period for the purchase of any gun... These are reasonable... Oh yeah... Before the usual cast of characters step up and say that we just can't enforce those laws let me say this: defeatism is not a debating point... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:25 PM I know I shouldn't but I just can't stop myself. Yo USA!!! Once again. Guns don't kill. People do. Gun laws must address people problems and gun regulation problems with good gun laws. sIx and 9 know about illegal guns in Canada. So do I. I know how thousands and thousands of illegal wepaons (machine pistols, technically) get into the hands of assholes in the USA. They come from Atlantic Canada. I ain't gonna post about how it is done except to say that NObody can stop it. You canNOT ban these guns unless you change your laws and address YOUR people problems. Ban all guns? Yer barkin up the wrong tree and yer pissin on my tree. You ain't gettin anywhere with that shit, thank goodness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:16 PM Bb is confused... He claims that assault rifles are already banned... Then what the heck is this AR15??? A friggin' bb gun??? No, maybe is a slingshot... This is where we end up... An AR15 with a 100 round clip that can be legally purchased at any gun shop in the country, according to bb, is not an "assault rifle" because it is semi-automatic... Let's put a bowl of reality on the table... A perfectly legal AR15 can kill 30 people in 20 seconds... If anyone doesn't consider that an assault rifle then they are delusional and just playing games here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:02 PM I agree with you 999 ... and I think that is a good example of 2 different cultures .... back to what I said about the the aggressive culture in the U.S. and the rather non-aggressive culture of Canada. Here the drug dealers pack a piece (very low keyed about it) for defensive purposes, as opposed to offensive reasons. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:46 PM Some fucking day I'll say something right. I do too, biLL. However, that's got jack shit to do with crap in the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:37 PM " I doubt anyone here knows drug dealers who carry guns." I do ... right here in Saint John biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:35 PM I think it was Be_dubya who mentioned somewhere in this thread about Davie Crocket guns back in the 50's ... interesting, I had one, most of my friends had one ... we gloried in our play time as kids being Davey Crocket killing all the Mexicans, or as John Wayne killing all the Japs ... we watched Bugs Bunny cartoons, the 3 stooges ... many people today consider this a rather violent pass times for kids. I'm Canadian ... but my contemporaries south of the border were indulging in the same activities as kids ... I'm far from violent, I abhor violence ... many of those American kids grew up to protest the Vietnam war, many dodged the draft. What I'm trying to get across is ... I question the idea that today's movies, T.V. programs, heavy metal music, games or whatever influences the current gun rampage in the U.S. ... I may be wrong though ... but I do think (and I'll bring back this issue) that the American culture is one of aggressiveness ... it's a win at all cost type of nation, on the playing field, in the corporation, in it's military, in it's global affairs etc. ... that has some crazy effect on people ... as I said previously you have an aggressive culture and you throw weaponry into the mix .. well you can get the picture biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:31 PM "I can go along with this- but are you sure that most here would? what happens when one of their friends is caught with illegal drugs, and a firearm, and gets that mandatory sentence?" Right now we're just seeing if the turkey will fit in the oven. I doubt anyone here knows drug dealers who carry guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:24 PM And all that with no mention of the Second Amendment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:52 PM "BB, part of the problem is TV, video game and movie stuff that has glorified people with semi and automatic weapons." AGREED. ANY parent allowing their children to play DOOM in any variant should be arrested and the kids taken away from them. I am not sure it should be legal for adults. " I agree that there are mental health issues that need to be addressed, " Yet the focus has been ONLY on making it harder to LEGALLY own guns. "along with laws that are enforced whereby the use of any gun in the commission of a crime is a mandatory 20 year/no parole sentence. If such crime results in death, the sentence is life, no parole, period!" I can go along with this- but are you sure that most here would? what happens when one of their friends is caught with illegal drugs, and a firearm, and gets that mandatory sentence? ANd OBVIOUSLY anyone who ignores current laws, such as those against drugs, should AND IS NOT be allowed to own firearms. (see 1968 law prohibiting firearm possession by felons ( more than one year sentence) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:44 PM Just noticed... Looking at the cities with the highest rate of gun violence I see that ALL have been controlled by Democrats for the last 30-40 years. Seems like and obvious point that if we just get rid of the Democrats, the rates of gun violence will drop. (SARCASM) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:41 PM BB, part of the problem is TV, video game and movie stuff that has glorified people with semi and automatic weapons. I agree that there are mental health issues that need to be addressed, along with laws that are enforced whereby the use of any gun in the commission of a crime is a mandatory 20 year/no parole sentence. If such crime results in death, the sentence is life, no parole, period! People who think banning semi autos or assault rifles is a quick fix best think again. It took about 50 years to get gun crazy; it'll take that long to undo it. Saying that laws don't work means you have some bad judges and maybe more than a few bad cops. I am aware that people would be crazy to relinquish guns they own. But maybe it's time to stop making more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:22 PM sorry It is simple to make a one- shot pistol or shotgun, or a pipe bomb, or explosive, or instrument string garrote to kill people. The problem is to TEACH PEOPLE NOT TO KILL EACH OTHER. Yet No one here will even address that, stating that the removal of guns ( even though not possible, as seen by the murder rates in Washington DC ( whens guns were forbidden), NYC ( strictest gun laws, and the place to go to get ANY weapon you want) Chicago ( note the number of gun crimes IN SPITE of some of the harshest gun laws) ) IS THE SOLUTION THAT WILL WORK. Please note that 9-11 did not involve ANY guns at all. How many died then? Can we outlaw all knives? Broken glass? Flat pieces of metal sharpened on cement? Mixing household chemicals to produce WW 1 chemical weapons? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:14 PM 23,000 US schools have armed security personel now. Columbine had them. Columbine also took place while the "assault weapons" ban was still in place. Nobody is proposing anything that has proven to work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:14 PM Ebbie, Does that address your questions? I DO NOT CLAIM to have an answer- but I can look at the obvious and know that the means that the Left has tried for many years has made the situation worse ( more gun violence and crimes, with more laws restricting gun ownership and less punishment and personnel responsibility. Maybe we need to look at the causes, rather than pass "feel-good" laws that do not work and do NOT deal with mental health issues, alienation, ignorance , and lack of "buy-in" to society and civilization. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 02:08 PM "What are your ideas on this? If you truly think that taking semi-automatic and assault off the legal market will not make a difference, what do you suggest? " 1. ASSAULT RIFLES HAVER BEEN ILLEGAL SINCE 1934. Has THAT made a difference? However, take a look at the crime rate in Switzerland. Not bad for a country with FULLY AUTOMATIC military weapons in nearly every home. 2. I can fire all the rounds from my 11 shot (target) revolver on target faster than I can fire a 1911 Colt semi-automatic (7 rounds) downrange ( and only the first shot would hit the target!) As for taking them off the market, do you know how many are out there? If EVERY legal gun was confiscated, and ONLY police had them, the criminals would be able to get all the guns they would want- by killing police if no other way. It is simple to make a one- shot pistol or shotgun, or a pipe bomb, or explosive, or instrument string garrote to kill people. The problem is to TEACH PEOPLE NOT TO KILL EACH OTHER. Yet No one here will even address that, stating that the removal of guns ( even though not possible, as seen by the murder rates in Washington DC ( whens guns were forbidden), NYC ( strictest gun laws, and the place to go to get ANY weapon you want) Chicago ( note the number of gun crimes IN SPITE of some of the harshest gun laws) The places with the strictest gun laws have the MOST gun violence crimes, and the LEAST harsh punishments. Any thoughts about ENFORCING the laws WE HAVE NOW, and making people responsible for their own actions? It DOES work to disarm law abiding citizens, though. IF that is the intent, so be it- but think back to the South in the 1930s to 1960s- DO YOU WANT TO DISARM everyone NOT IN AUTHORITY? Are you willing to give up other Constitutional rights as well, when SOMEONE decides you would be safer without them? How about when a conservative is in power, and uses these SAME arguments ( "Even one life saved is worth giving up rights") to outlaw abortion ( where EVERY fetus dies)? What right has the woman to kill that life??? "Do you think LaPierre's suggestion of arming teachers and other authority figures is a good one? Is that the picture you have of education?" It is a better idea than passing a law that does not work. NOT what I want to see in education: I would rather see responsible gun training in later grades, to promote gun safety, and can see a reason for SOME armed presence in schools. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 26 Dec 12 - 01:47 PM This is a serious questions for BeardedBruce and pdq and all others who seem at a loss for where to start: What are your ideas on this? If you truly think that taking semi-automatic and assault off the legal market will not make a difference, what do you suggest? Do you think LaPierre's suggestion of arming teachers and other authority figures is a good one? Is that the picture you have of education? Please address this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 26 Dec 12 - 12:26 PM If people want to discuss the facts, they should read the 1968 gun control act first: National Firearms Act (1968) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 12:09 PM What, Greggie, like the federal law making it a crime for felons to possess firearms (1968, I think), or the extreme Federal limitations on automatic weapons since 1934 ? Since these have been asked for here, it is obvious that the laws do NOT produce the effects that people want. Perhaps we need to arrest anyone who calls black Democats "dumb ni**ers" since they have demonstrated, by their hate speech, a tendency toward hate crimes that are already on the books. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 12:04 PM "So, how much of Obama's trillion dollar "stimulus bill" was spent in helping support existing gun laws? Immigration laws? Gang violence abatement laws?" It was $173.48, but that ain't the topic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 26 Dec 12 - 12:00 PM No, the point is, Beardie, that they're crap laws currently and they're not uniform across the country. What we need is realistic, uniform legislation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 26 Dec 12 - 11:53 AM "The NRA is the enabler of death — paranoid, delusional and as venomous as a scorpion. With the weak-kneed acquiescence of our politicians, the National Rifle Association has turned the Second Amendment of the Constitution into a cruel and deadly hoax." Bill Moyers |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 26 Dec 12 - 11:13 AM If you are saying we should enforce the laws we already have, then this may be a breakthrough. So, how much of Obama's trillion dollar "stimulus bill" was spent in helping support existing gun laws? Immigration laws? Gang violence abatement laws? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 11:07 AM Bruce, The point is that such a ban would have no real effect. Fully automatic weapons are already effectively banned. I can fire 11 rounds from my (target) revolver faster than I can fire 7 rounds from a 1911 Colt semi. The crimes that everyone is commenting on WERE IN VIOLATION OF THE EXISTING LAWS. Why does anyone think more laws will make a difference? ANYONE can make a single-shot gun, and use it to obtain a weapon ( from a leaga source, such as a policeman, or a retired policeman) With more than 320 million known guns in the US, how effective would a ban be? Who would turn in the guns - the criminals who are already in violation of the law for possessing them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 26 Dec 12 - 11:03 AM Yeah, of course we should pass a law that says "Ex-cons should not own guns" but, ahhhhh, we already have that law... Problem is that it is a joke when the ex-con can walk into a gun show and buy whatever he wants... This is lunacy on meth... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 26 Dec 12 - 10:37 AM So why do people continue to ignore the elephant in the room? Ban all semi and fully automatic weapons. It doesn't stop the problem, but it sure does slow it down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 26 Dec 12 - 10:34 AM And the shooter at Virginia Tech was certified insane and was therefore not allowed to own a gun. Laws didn't help in that case either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Dec 12 - 10:24 AM Ebbie, As an ex-con, the shooter has been prohibited from ever possessing a firearm, as of the 1968 Gun Act. Sure did a lot of good, right? Let's pass some more laws that do not deal with the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 24 Dec 12 - 04:19 PM Christmas Eve....Time for a song....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwNg4lHFj7I Peace on Earth.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 24 Dec 12 - 03:52 PM Ebbie... beyond reality. SO sad. So... once again... we have all the resources required here at Mudcat to get it going or to find out where to "join up" if it's already going. Who's in charge? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,kendall Date: 24 Dec 12 - 03:49 PM Newtown will bring many more kooks out of the woodwork. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 24 Dec 12 - 03:28 PM I swear, given today's shooting of firefighters, that the nuts out there are vying for the title of 'most shocking and senseless'. And this was no kid but a guy in his 60s.My heart bleeds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 24 Dec 12 - 01:16 PM It's not my opinion we're talking about, Kendall - its reality vs. the delusions of the sorry folks you call the "gun nuts". Their baseless delusions need to be identified as such, and not given the same weight as opinions based on facts. Time to stop coddling the loonies. Their fantasies and lies should be identified for what they are - not just "another opinion". Paranoid scizophrenics have their "opinions" too - doesn't mean those opinions are valid or reflect reality. By the way, Devil can advocate for himself quite nicely without any outside help. Best, and Merry Christmas, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,kendall Date: 24 Dec 12 - 11:38 AM Ok, now give me some proof that your opinion is more valuable than any other. A degree in psychoanalysis will do. Can't you see that I was playing Devil's advocate? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 24 Dec 12 - 11:20 AM "Trying to bait you", Kendall - not my intent at all. There's opinion, and then there's fact and the two are not necessarily equivalent. However, I will honor your implied request and desist from attempting to have a rational discussion with you. Bye Bye. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,kendall Date: 24 Dec 12 - 10:03 AM Greg F I feel like you are trying to bait me and that is irritating. My personal opinion is, these "Bubbas" were probably picked on as kids, never won a fist fight and probably have small peckers.They are also probably cowards, Ok? happy now? That's just MY opinion, nothing more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 24 Dec 12 - 09:40 AM Watched LaPierre on Meet the Press........kept repeating the phrase, "guns are a tool." Actually LaPierre is a tool. First a tool of the gun lobby and also a tool as in dick. It is fair to say Wayne is a complete and total tool. The GOP is lining up solidly against any real regulation changes. How nice. I'm sure they have good reasons. I figure what might be required here for a guy with an AR to break into the Republican caucus or the next GOP convention and shoot a hundred rounds around the place. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 24 Dec 12 - 09:37 AM These people, for the most part, have inferiority complexes and think that if they have a bigger gun then everyone else that that will level the field for them... Real men don't need AR15s... Only washrag wusses... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 24 Dec 12 - 09:37 AM I'm not qualified to label them paranoid, crazy or stupid; perhaps not as a clinician, but I would think your background in law enforcement etc. would enable you to make a pretty accurate evaluation. they have a different opinion from mine, thats all. "That's All"?? Hardly. With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), that's a ridiculous statement. Stalin had a "different opinion" as well, as did Tim McVeigh. Past time to stop excusing ignorance, stupidity, and just plain bloody-mindedness & get on with the job. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 24 Dec 12 - 07:03 AM Greg F I can't speak for others generally, but in this case, these gun nuts are afraid the government is going to take their guns and leave them vulnerable to something that they can't even explain. I'm not qualified to label them paranoid, crazy or stupid; they have a different opinion from mine, thats all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 24 Dec 12 - 04:04 AM "I personally am not afraid of my government, but I know plenty of people who are." Even more reason to demand change. If the will is there, it can be done. In 1976, when I was a young man, I went to live in South Africa and I was appalled when I discovered what apartheid was all about. I got involved in anti-apartheid politics. The realists said: "What's the point? The government, along with the police and the army, has the country in an iron grip and the Afrikaanas will fight to the last man to keep their supremancy. Anyway, it's not your country so why bother?" After a couple of years I was forced to flee the country, leaving my job and most of my possessions. But things DID change. Lots of brave people both inside and outside the country made it happen. Many were imprisoned, tortured and killed but The Rainbow Nation became the reality. The status quo is not an inevitability - just go for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 23 Dec 12 - 11:34 PM Actually, having belatedly read the article in question--which I recommend everybody to do soon--the article makes clear this is old advertising and acknowledges lots of people (Americans implicitly included) might find this advertising macabre-- whether it's from the 30's,, 40s , 50s, or 60's.. It seems to be needlessly looking for trouble to pick a fight with Spiegel on the basis of the article--which in the main is quite accurate, including the assertion that many attitudes were shaped partly by this advertising--along with Disney's Davy Crockett and the general Western TV craze, which also happened in the 50's. Does anybody deny this? It would pay us to get our facts straight, rather than just lashing out, though that is admittedly a favorite Mudcat pursuit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 23 Dec 12 - 11:15 PM Most of those ads are from the 50's and 60's. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 23 Dec 12 - 10:56 PM "1930's era advertising" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 23 Dec 12 - 10:51 PM "1930's-type advertising". That's what you do when you're a really Left-leaning magazine. Anybody to your Right is fair game, including distortion of current attitudes or smearing a whole country. I daresay some Mudcatters might well be capable of attacking the US on exactly the same basis. Having said that, I'm sure there are places in the US where a Winchester is still a very welcome Christmas present. And I have to say I'm not against rifles anywhere near as much as against pistols, AK-47's etc. I'd just like to see all the gun-owners show up for regular drill, to be part of the "well-regulated militia"--as the 2nd Amendment intended. Now if the Spiegel headline had to do with delight of a young boy in getting a real Saturday Night Special for Christmas, we'd have more grounds for complaint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 23 Dec 12 - 08:47 PM On "Meet the Press" David Gregory several times tried to get LaPierre to give a direct answer to questions about what **laws** he would suggest to deal with the current problems. What Gregory got, of course, was an evasive dance and prepared, repetitious talking points which changed the subject and pontificated. I tend to think it's kinda good to have that line of BS put on TV at that kind of length for everyone to see. His base will still toe the line, but more & more folks are seeing his crap for what it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 23 Dec 12 - 08:21 PM We have suffered thru a 3 decade long PR assault on "government" by people who don't want laws and regulations to apply to them... Why??? Because these people are the cheaters, the polluters and the folks who make more $$$ if there isn't a strong government... Bottom line??? It all comes down to money... It's no wonder that so many folks have fallen for the PR and Fox propaganda... It's all store bought PR and propaganda and it was worked just like the cheaters, polluters and crooks PR firms told them it would... Money well spent... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 23 Dec 12 - 08:12 PM I personally am not afraid of my government, but I know plenty of people who are. Question is, Kendall WHY are they afraid of it, to what extent, are they having mental problems, or are they just ignorant? I think that's all relevant. I'm in the U.S. as well, and in the hirearchy of things I'm afraid of, the government doesn't even make the grade. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 23 Dec 12 - 07:48 PM We can do it. That road is rough and rocky, but if enough of us band together and scare congress more than the NRA is scaring them it can be done. It's up to us and no one else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 23 Dec 12 - 07:17 PM So.... Where is the website? Where is the petition? Where are the balls? USA... U Stand Alone. Pony up. If you do, we (many) will stand with with you for good gun laws in your country. Don't say you cannot do it. That is simply un-American... innit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 23 Dec 12 - 07:13 PM Greg F, Don asked who made THEM paranoid. Americans have been suspicious of a standing army from day one. I use the word "WE" because I am an American. I personally am not afraid of my government, but I know plenty of people who are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:38 PM Wayne LaPierre thinking? Now there's a concept that's impossible to grasp. Bullshitting, yes. Bloviating, yes. Pontificating, yes. but thinking? please. But Wayne ain't the problem. Its those 4 million NRA members with cold, dead brains. Question is, when will the rest of us tell that 1.4% of the U.S. population to shove it? Talk about the tail waving the dog...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:26 PM Simple Bobz! There is no connection between his brain cell (singular) and his mouth. If brains were dynamite, he wouldn't have enough to lift his hat in the air. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:21 PM Saw Wayne LaPierre on "Meet the Press" this morning and this got not only doubled down but tripled down on his belief that gun violence has nothing to do with guns in any manner... I just don't get his thinking at all... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:03 PM Kendall, who's this "we" you're talking about? And what is it that they don't trust their government to do or to not do? And which of Don's posts does your comment relate to? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:01 PM Nice one, Bruce! Dreier's right on target (as it were)- way past time to stand up to the NRA bullshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:58 PM Simple, Don; we don't trust our government. I saw a bumper sticker that said, "We are making enemies faster than we can kill them." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:57 PM My point in my post about Der Spiegel is that they're reaching back to 1930s era advertising, which reflected 1930s social attitudes, and attempting to hold the present-day US accountable for them. That approach is as invalid as an American publication trying to hold present-day Germany accountable for the Hitler Youth Movement. The Germans, more than anyone else, should know that the excesses of the past belong in the past. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:40 PM About a year or eighteen months ago somebody posted here that he intended to cycle across the USA, IIRC from West to East across the southern states. Almost the first advice he received was that it would be dangerous to knock on a door to ask to fill up his water bottle, as he would risk being shot dead as a trespasser. What does that say about a country whose citizens are in the main among the most friendly in the Western World? Who made them so paranoid that all strangers are looked on with suspicion? The NRA maybe, in its ceaseless quest to sell more guns for the arms manufacturers? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:30 PM Also. BWL, Der Spiegel is pretty far left--about as far left as Mudcat, probably. Similar attitude toward Israel, very environmentalist, not nationalist in the least. Militarism is anathema. Germany in general had a huge revulsion to Hitlerism and anything remotely conncected. 1945 is often called das Jahre Null---Year Zero--i.e. we are starting completely over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:07 PM Peter Dreier about LaPierre/NRA |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Dec 12 - 06:48 AM Even as a no guns citizen of the UK, I have absolutely no problem with those who kill what they eat, or eat what they kill. We no longer hsve wild animals in the way that the Americas have. What deer we have, for example, are owned by somebody and therefore not to be hunted without permission. We also have no big predators capable of harming humans (though occasionally a herd of cows can inflict serious harm). The only reason for gun ownership, except for farmers and landowners) would be to shoot people and we have agreed that this is not a productive activity, so we don't do it (as a rule). When, as a lad of fourteen, I spent holidays with an uncle in Norfolk, who was kitchen gardener for a large estate, I used to shoot vermin using a double barreled twelve bore. It was a chore and I can't say I ever enjoyed it. Rifles don't generally feature in UK life, since you are almost never in a position where there are no other people within range even of a .22 short. I did shoot targets with my father who was a Bisley competitor, using a Lee Enfield .303, which was fun, but that gun resided at the club. The point of all this is that I am not anti gun. Just anti indiscriminate and uncontrolled guns which are inappropriate for any legal civilian use. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 23 Dec 12 - 05:42 AM I had a BB gun at the age of 12.I shot a pigeon and it was swept away in the falls. That's bothered me ever since. I got a double barrel 16 gauge shotgun at 16. Never shot anything but game. Got a nice 14 point buck on Thanksgiving day 1950. That was near the end of the "Rut" and he was tougher than a woodpeckers beak. I couldn't cut the gravy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 11:35 PM Bee_dubya .... Germany has never been obsessed with guns. Even during the Third Reich era ... though hunting is part of the Bavarian spirit the National Socialist Government would certainly have not wanted the ordinary citizens having a collection of guns in their homes. As per the German youth, aside from promoting antisemitism it was not much unlike the Boy Scout movement, in that both promotes patriotism, and nationalistic pride. BTW, I never saw ads such as those. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: PHJim Date: 22 Dec 12 - 11:25 PM An Opinion On Gun Control |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 11:21 PM Ebbie .... I'm a Canuck. Fourth generation on my father's side, First generation on my mother's side. Spent my childhood summer's up on the shores of Georgian Bay in Ontario. In those days Canada was still pretty much a rural country.Farming, hunting, fishing and even fur trapping was a way of life. As a kid, like every other kid at the time I owned a daisy bb gun. My father was a career officer in the Canadian military. I do recall a couple of my uncles going hunting, though my father always refrained from participating. Besides my bb gun and my father's service revolver there were no other guns in the house. I now live in the province of New Brunswick were hunting is a given right. Many people I know here do hunt, and do own hunting rifles. I have no qualms about them doing so, and I respect their right to hunt. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:57 PM What I meant, gnu, is that as a Canadian, 6's heritage is not of stags and boars being for only 'blue bloods'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:38 PM Oh, and... ...600... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:37 PM Heck, when I was a teenager BB gun wars were cool... Yeah, you'd get a stinger now and then but no one ever had their eye shot out like the adults said would happen... I mean, I recall one particular such BB gun battle/war that lasted well over a week until a big rain storm ended it... It was over a big mound of dirt that had been pushed up by bulldozers clearing for e new housing development... No big deal... Everyone got shot at least once... Me??? I think about three or four times... All good fun... What ain't fun is when people use real guns on one another... That is messed up... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:25 PM sIx is a Canuck, Ebbie. Damn fine Canuck at that. What does that matter along you train of thought? Excuse me for not understanding. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:22 PM While I'd never defend the practice of pitching BB guns at 13-year-olds, I think it's a bit ironic that Der Spiegel, of all the publications in the world, would get so incensed over the subject. After all, during the same decade those ads ran in US magazines, Der Spiegel's homeland was busy enrolling its own 13-year-olds in Hitler Youth Groups. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:04 PM Sorry- it got away from me. I want to complete my thought. I realize the short-sightedness and ignorance of their actions but it was what it was. My further thought: How long has it been since there was untouched wilderness in the UK? (It just occurred to me that I think you are Canadian. Well, never mind.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:02 PM Call it what you will, Bobert, et al. When a match is made in heaven, it's a blessing. Sappy? Yeah. True? Most definitely! Still brings a smile to me eye. Maybe this thread has some redeeming thread drift! Made me smile, anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:01 PM Number 6, I do know what you mean- Americans' approach to a lot of things is often incomprehensible to others. I too grew up with rifles and enjoyed target shooting. I never fired anything but a 22 rifle but my brothers had a 30.06 and a 30.30, and at one time my oldest brother had a pistol. Gun safety was a big deal in our family but I don't remember anyone ever being chided over it; I don't remember anyone ever abusing them. This country's attitude toward hunting is a fairly pragmatic one. We are aware that 'harvesting' deer, for instance, is a means of keeping the herds healthy. I have no idea how Canada or the rest of the world keep unrestrained herds from starving. We are also aware that the average person who is anti-hunting anything is not a vegetarian; he or she just objects to anyone seeing an animal being killed for food. Maybe UKers have been trained to think of deer as belonging only to the 'blue bloods'? I dunno. A good many blue bloods in your country -as well as ours- have for generations gone on hunting safaris- and many a castle and manor sports wall-mounted heads as evidence. Not just for food either; there isn't much demand for lion or tiger dinners. I suppose it is not too big a leap to go from hunting for food and sport to accept that guns are also for protection, not only from wild animals but also from the outlaws amongst us. There is one further impetus that affects Americans - within our grandparents' and great-grandparents' memory this was a wild country. In 1918 my father's family moved to Wisconsin and broke up ground that had never been put to the plow; they routinely and relentlessly eradicated the 'varmints' that threatened their crops and animals. Mind you, I reali |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Dec 12 - 09:10 PM Back in the holler we called 'um "shotgun weddin's"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 22 Dec 12 - 08:58 PM We had a military wedding...well, there were guns there.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Amos Date: 22 Dec 12 - 08:11 PM One English woman liked me so much she insisted I marry her. Skipper, was that because you had gotten her into trouble, or because she was trying to keep you out of it? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ed T Date: 22 Dec 12 - 08:04 PM Does this sound familar to some statemwnts last week? Sound familiar? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 07:49 PM Forget the table, Kendall - as I said in my first post. My question was why you didn't tell the jackass what you thought of the NRA and his and their nonsense. Someone needs to stand up against these idiots - and you had a perfect opportunity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 22 Dec 12 - 07:13 PM The reason I didn't upset the NRA table is because the last guy who did that ended up nailed to a cross. I didn't go to Cabelas for me, I went for someone who lives 90 miles from that store, and it was not for a gun or ammo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 06:57 PM Ebbie ... I'm trying to understand American culture ... I'm trying ... even after seeing those ads up in that Der Spiegel article biLL ... :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 06:50 PM from Der Speigel ... Gee Dad ... A Winchester! I especially like the ad for King Air rifles ... "gives a boy an air of manliness, makes him alert, self confident and resolute ... makes him a leader in the business world" biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:58 PM No parental "negligence" involved, gnu - just criminal stupidity of the type that supports the NRA. (NB: - I'm arecovering, ex-NRA member) If the story is to be believed, mom & dad GAVE him the pistol & sent him off to school. Expect more of the same from these types of "we need more guns in our schools" morons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:38 PM BTW... I had access to a 22 semi pistol when I was that age. I used to sneak it out of the house when I was 12 and hunt in the woods 100m away from our house when I was trapping rabbits for food or selling them for 25p each. I preferred to sell them to a guy in his 80s. He got rabbits and partridge to eat and I got $ towards other groceries for our table. I got 30p for each rabbit shot because a shot rabbit tastes better than a snared rabbit. If my old man had caught me with the pistol, I woulda had me arsed kicked BIG TIME and I knew it. FWIW, I gave up trapping at 15 when I started working 9 hour nightshifts at a gas station. I trapped one rabbit that didn't die as intended and I was so sad and sickened that I pulled every trap and never trapped again. Gave up some good and easy (well, if ya got nothin better to do with yer time, eh?) money. Still took the pistol out... just pretended I was still trapping. Even tho I made a LOT less $, my conscience was better off. When I got my small game license to hunt alone at 16, I never killed another rabbit. I took deer and the old fella got fed in grand style, free of charge. Poacher? What? Me? Nah... it ain't poachin if it's fer food fer an old fella. And, as far as me keepin some, well, I considered my old man an old fella too... specially when he would cook up deer steaks and pancakes with maple slurpup and yer baked beans fer us... he was a GRAND old man then. >;-) Simple days. Now, tragic days. Sad. |
|
Subject: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:15 PM (clapping hands) I'm rich! I'm rich! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:12 PM ELEVEN? And he had access to a pistol? His old man must be stunned or on the whatever! I realize 11 year olds can be very "resourceful" but there is no excuse for the negigence involved. I surely hope charges are laid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 03:44 PM Always bet on stupidity, Bruce. You'll seldom if ever lose your money. Wayne LaPierre must be proud. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 03:34 PM Meanwhile, from FOX on December 19. Just thought I'd bring a little joy to everyone. Eleven-Year-Old Utah Boy Brings Gun to School Allegedly to Protect Against Newtown-Style Shooting Fears of another Newtown-style school shooting allegedly prompted one sixth grader in Utah to bring a gun to school. According to a teacher at West Kearns Elementary School, the boy took a 22-caliber weapon out of his backpack and threatened classmates with it. The 11-year-old told police that his parents gave him the weapon for protection after the tragedy at Sandy Hook. Other parents at the school say they are furious that they weren't notified as soon as the incident took place. John Klaus, a father, said, "There was no lock down. No one was called. Nothing was done. And then we had to hear it from our kids." Ben Horsley, the spokesman for the Granite School District, countered, "Once the teacher knew there was a weapon in the classroom, the student was apprehended within 30 to 45 seconds, and immediately brought down to the office. And the police were on site within 5 to 10 minutes." Police are investigating the boy's parents. In the meantime, he is being held at a juvenile facility. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 22 Dec 12 - 02:33 PM Besides my friends, when a virus comes and turns everyone into zombies. You will thank me , rap and Kendall yup :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 22 Dec 12 - 02:28 PM Amen to everything Don T said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 22 Dec 12 - 02:23 PM Well not exactly half a continent Don. More like half of a half shared with Mexico. After Canada buys Alaska back from Ebbie our land mass should be enough to dominate the whole garden patch! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 22 Dec 12 - 02:06 PM ""Americans abroad; I have seen and heard them being assholes in other countries, and I wonder if the people in those other countries know that these assholes are not typical Americans."" We are very aware of that Kendall. For some reason, many of those of a number of countries who travel, are prone to misbehave. Our own included, as you said. It is because we like and respect the vast majority of USA citizens, that we concern ourselves with what should be none of our business. Nobody enjoys seeing a friend give up the strength of spirit which conquered half a continent. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:40 PM And expressing his opinion and telling them what he thinks of them according to his First Ammendmant rights would make Kendall a non-law abiding citizen how, exactly, Sinsull? Its even more simple than you think; I seem to remember a quotation incorrectly attributed to Edmund Burke about good men doing nothing. And Kendall IS, in my estimation, more than a "good man". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: saulgoldie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:34 PM Well, I know I heard/saw it very recently. But I cannot find it at the moment. However, the speaker had done a careful and thorough research into the history of guns and gun control in the US, and he discovered that the current, um, "discussion" (read: talking points)is not like any that has been before. Even in the "wild wild west" there was considerable gun control. But some cynical people have figured out that the early "reptile brain" is easily manipulated with appeals to fear, whereas the more evolved (evolved!) cortex is much more nuanced. Anyhoo, try this on for size. Instead of an armed officer in each school, how about a teacher in every gun shoppe? Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SINSULL Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:20 PM Because, Greg. Kendall is a law abiding citizen. It's simple. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:06 PM Escuse me for asking, Kendall - buy why didn't you? Would seem to have been the right thing to do, absent upsetting the table. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 22 Dec 12 - 12:53 PM Uh huh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 22 Dec 12 - 12:44 PM Boycott Cabela's. In fact, while we're at it, let's boycott Academy, Gander Mountain, and any other store that sells military style semi-automatic rifles. Shop only at assult-weapons-free sporting goods outlets. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 22 Dec 12 - 12:34 PM I visited Cabelas tody and there was an NRA rep there signing up new victims of their scare tactics. I was reminded of the story of Jesus cleansing the temple. What fun it would have been to upset the table and tell them what I think of them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:46 AM http://news.yahoo.com/fact-checking-nra-press-conference-185542748.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,olddude Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:28 AM my dear friend, no offense taken. I wish there were no need for the damn things ever ... I wish for some real laws that work |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:12 AM I was thinking 1860 myself, the year before the big stupid war... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Don Wise Date: 22 Dec 12 - 10:06 AM From a european standpoint I get the impression that, whilst the NRA may have reached the 21st. century in terms of technology, mentally they're still stuck fast in 1871............. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 22 Dec 12 - 09:27 AM I'm told that I have been a bit grumpy lately, and I'm afraid it's true. An old injury is causing me a lot of pain, and prednisone doesn't help either. So far, I've been able to contain the "Kraken" but he sure does rattle his cage! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 22 Dec 12 - 07:44 AM This discussion has gone round and round with a lot of commenting on the obvious. Let's try something different. A metaphor if you will; Compare our system of law making to an old bus. Many of us want to go on a ride. The problem is, the bus has an old engine that is made of worn out parts (Congress) and it is just not up to a long trip. It needs to be replaced with a new engine, yet too many of us tend to hang onto the old parts which no longer serve our needs. We keep sending the same old people to congress and then wonder why they no longer work.They no longer represent us, they represent special interests such as the National Rifle Assassination. So, what to do? nothing short of a grass roots campaign to clean out congress and get rid of all those worn out parts. That must be done before we can go on that trip we all want to take.Until we do that, we aint going anywhere. Americans abroad; I have seen and heard them being assholes in other countries, and I wonder if the people in those other countries know that these assholes are not typical Americans. They have money to travel, and they are used to having their own way. I've also seen Brits acting the same way in Jamaica and St. Martin. Loud, abusive, calling locals "Spooks" etc. When I travel I try to be an ambassador at large, and as far as I know, I am welcome to return to any place I have been. One English woman liked me so much she insisted I marry her. LOL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 22 Dec 12 - 06:56 AM LOL Eddie1. La Pierre wouldn't really subscribe to that though. It would make the kids easier targets and the arms companies who pay LP's wages would sell less ammo. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 22 Dec 12 - 05:29 AM " Like I said if you decide to carry one of them things you better get cop training thats all I meant" I really didn't mean to insult anyone olddude, as I say I have the greatest respect for you guys, but I can't agree that carrying weapons is the answer to anything. Guns = dead folk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:57 AM There you go Ebbie - that's why we all think so many Americans are insane, thanks to seeing and hearing pricks like LaPierre on our TVs. And the scary bit is that millions of Americans appear to believe him and agree with him (a few of them posting the same sort of bollocks on here). Thanks for that, Eddie, a perfect demonstration of the gun-nuts' perverted thinking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Eddie1 without cookie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:43 AM From NewsThump.com Friday 21 December 2012 NRA calls for end to childhood obesity by putting McDonalds in every school The National Rifle Association has insisted that childhood obesity is only an issue because of the dangerous lack of junk food available to American schoolchildren. In a press conference opposite the White House, NRA spokesperson Wayne LaPierre told gathered reporters that his organisation cared deeply about the children of his country, and would not rest until every single one of them had easy access to a terrible diet. Speaking in sombre tones, he said, "We are at crisis point, and the only way to stop our children being negatively affected by junk food, is to make sure they are surrounded by even more junk food." Eddie1 "If you really think about it, no-one would be able to call a child 'fat' if everyone had a BMI well into the 50s." "Childhood obesity is only an issue because so few children have good access to junk food." NRA statements LaPierre went on, "The liberal left will tell you that removing crappy foods from the equation would solve this crisis, but to that I would say 'nay'." "It is a constitutional and God-given right of every american to have access to burgers the size of your head. We just need to even up the playing field – by filling it completely with fat kids." "So I call on congress today to ensure that every school in our great nation has easy access to cheap, poorly prepared fatty food with a low nutrient value." "Then one day soon we can forget about which of our children is 'fat', as they'll all be exactly the same. Like true, free Americ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 22 Dec 12 - 03:32 AM A lot of people hold simplistic views of Americans. They have no idea of how many different cultures with their own experiences and expectations each area has. The man in Louisiana, the man in Montana, the man in urban New York and the recent immigrant from Indonesia, say, might even have difficulty in making small talk, no matter how well-meaning. True, each of them holds their family dear but how to go about rearing their children and what goals they might want to instill in them might evoke vastly different ideas. And that is just the tip of their differences. Multiply those four individuals by more than 300 million people and you might understand better what is involved in making changes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 10:54 PM No, it ain't us, bILL... It is very much our corrupted government... There is no reason why the American Taliban is exerting so much intolerance and redneckism on us... They don't represent us but we all suffer from their ideological extreme polices that keep us oppressed under their right winged agenda of turnin' America into their own little Talibanish experiment... I'm talking the Ayn Rand/ Tea Party people and the rednecks like the NRA who don't represent Americans... These people are 15% of us but 80% of our policies... You don't think that Americans are frustrated, bILL??? Guess again but lots of Americans get duped over and over and over and vote against their own interests and then go, "Duhhhhhhh???" B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 10:37 PM Hey Bobert ... as gruff and negative as I sound I can still say I haven't met an American I didn't like ... but I have witnessed overseas 4 incidents of Amerikan aggressive behaviour. My wife and I do go down to Maine quite often ... Mainers are wonderful people. 25 years ago my wife and I drove down to new Orleans via Highway 61 in a Jeep CJ ... one of the most memorable trips we ever took ... the people we met in Mississippi were extraordinary, super friendly people. But you can't go blaming everything on the government, remember it's you the American people that put this Amerikan government in the place they are ... it's about time you all got together as a nation and admit you f*&ked up, and admit you do have a negative image world wide and it's time you as a nation changed ... work on getting rid of that Amerikan aggressive violent image ... say no to war, say no to guns, say no to violence ... time to take it to the streets. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 10:20 PM Yes, we have a serious gun problem, bILL, that permeates and eats at the fabric of our American spirit... That ain't all our fault but a systemic failure of our government to control guns because out government is corrupted... But to blame our corrupted government on it's people is unfair... It's about crooks who have used every trick in the book to corral power and manipulate the public with misinformation... We "Amerikans" are victims of the theft of a representative government... With just about every issue the government is out of step with the public... "Amerikans" aren't this wild beast aggressive population... Most are well mannered and people of grace... Don't judge us by the Dick Cheneys of America... Come here and see for yourself... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 09:59 PM Ebbie .... " Have you ever been present when some Europeans quarrel? I have- and in my opinion, most Americans in their disputes are not nearly as insulting or as LOUD" Yes I have ... and more than a few times. Certain cultures like to argue, and argue out loud. But it's no more than an spirited argument, and no crudges are held. I have also witnessed aggressive Amerikans overseas ... not quite as loud but they are firmly aggressive and demanding. Ask any waiter, or hotel staff on Amerikan behaviour. I recall my wife and I in a garden store in Portugal. We were trying to arrive at a solution with the proprietor on the best way of getting a certain large garden ornament shipped to our apartment in Lisbon. During this discussion an elderly Portuguese man came up to me. He said "I know you are not British and I know you are not American". I replied "It's obvious that you know I'm not British, but why not American". He replied "because you are mannerly and not pushy" You may not like it ... but the world does view the U.S. as an aggressive violent nation ... and sadly it is not a false view. I agree with Bill D.'s post above .... his statement "but it will never happen as long as 10s of millions of ALL kinds of guns are allowed & used" ... even if all those guns are outlawed, there are still a kazillion guns out there and you can bet your booty many, many will not let go of those. From today's news ... A man killed two men and one woman Friday in central Pennsylvania, then died in a gunfight with state troopers, authorities said. Three officers were injured." biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:46 PM Leveller, I am not apathetic, I am a realist. i'm also not a moron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:41 PM "Are Americans as a culture more aggressive when it comes to dealing with issues? ." I think that's clear....meaning that there are SO many sub-cultures and variable ways to cope & settle disputes that when you read news reports, you do see violence and gun incidents everyday. But *I* almost never see any such thing... and almost no one I know even own any guns. The trouble arises when the sub-cultures (defined in many ways) that DO treat violence as 'normal' get carried away and interact with us quiet folks... as in robberies or drug deals or just settling disputes in public places. Years ago, there was an TV interview with a kid who'd been arrested. When asked "Why guns when you have a dispute? Why not just fight,,,etc.?" He replied... (paraphrased): "aww, man... that's a hassle, and you get dirty and they might be bigger. With a gun... *blam*,, and it's over." He really had no clear answer about the idea that someone might seek revenge..... but that same mentality existed with some mountain folks many years ago (Hatfields & McCoys) That was a real example of how it's treated sometimes. We (America) still are not too far from a Frontier Mentality. Many people know stories of how their grandfathers (or a couple more generations back) fought Indians or defended against bears. Guns are a direct part of their history...even beyond hunting. ... and it is MY contention that having guns and using guns, even if you have never fired one in anger, becomes a habit and a hobby and a **fascination**. UNdoing this complex culture will likely take as long as getting into it.... but it will never happen as long as 10s of millions of ALL kinds of guns are allowed & used. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:39 PM What my big sis said!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:34 PM Saying - and accepting - that Americans (I do not like the aggressiveness inherent in Amerika) are an aggressive society is a bald -and bleak- statement that has nowhere to go from there. If we are aggressive, what are we supposed to do about it? And if America is aggressive, what does that make other nations, timid? I don't believe it is true on either hand. I agree that we still have more than a trace of the Wild West left in us, the assumption that the good guys have to overcome the bad guys, and probably by force, but most of us are decent, law-abiding folks who cherish their families, their homes and their country. Most of us would not even consider taking a gun to settle a dispute. I would go even further and say that most of us are not as argumentative as some other countries' citizens. Have you ever been present when some Europeans quarrel? I have- and in my opinion, most Americans in their disputes are not nearly as insulting or as LOUD. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:30 PM If we can fix our dysfunctional government, we can... We no longer have a representative government... We have a rigged deck government... Less than 20% of the population controls 50% of our Senate... In Southern and Midwestern states the voting districts are so gerrymandered that if any one of those states has 45% Dems and 55% Repubs, the Repubs will win 80% of the House of Representative seats... This lack of a representative government is behind our failings... Fix them and we can "do anything"... Ignore them and we're going the way of the Roman Empire... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: johncharles Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM America always seems to have been a "can do" culture, you put a man on the moon, surely you will be able to address this issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:27 PM And I agree, Ol'ster... No one should own a gun that he or she has no proficiency... This is where the NRA misses the point... Rather than being a large portion of the problem the NRA could be providing training to everyone and issuing certifications to people to own various guns... Too late now... Most people don't trust the NRA any more... BTW, seein' as handguns main purpose is to shoot people folks who own them should be able to explain why they need a gun that has such a purpose... Yo, bILL, Yes, I would agree that for most of the US's history it has been aggressive but not always... The period following the Spanish American war there was a definite shift toward leaving people alone and only reluctantly entered into WW I... Then afterwards we pushed for the League of Nations as a means of avoiding any future wars... That didn't work out but we still weren't all that aggressive in the 1920s or even into the 1930s... So it's not a given that we are aggressive by nature... After two wars-of-choice we have another opportunity to tone down... The American people right now are busy fighting with one another but that won't last forever and I am optimistic that the US is moving toward a less, rather than more, aggressive period like we did 100 years ago... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,olddude Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:15 PM someone on the thread said that as we age we can't shoot anymore or something like that. Tell that to the 83 year old ex sheriff friend I have. That guy can still darn near out shoot me and has beaten me a few time.. amazing |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,olddude Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:10 PM sugarfoot my friend, I am ex cop same as Kendall, we indeed know when and how and when not to engage. Like I said if you decide to carry one of them things you better get cop training thats all I meant |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 21 Dec 12 - 05:24 PM "It sounds so easy; pass a law.Now tell us how, with so many of our law givers in the pockets of the NRA. If it was that easy we would have done it years ago." Well, thank god Martin Luther King didn't share your apathy. Are you saying that Americans love guns more than they love their children? Sounds like it to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 05:20 PM I disagree Bobert .... aggressive behaviour has been a way of life in Amerika long before some of you Big Five came to be ... in fact many of your Big Five ( 1, 3, 4 and 5 ) can be found in many countries today including my own country Canada ... and I certainly would not say Canada is an aggressive society. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 05:01 PM If we chip away at the Big Five that will have a major impact on our aggressiveness which is more a byproduct than a root cause... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:42 PM I'll add a point 6 to you list Bobert ... and I think it is the most important point in the list ... and this is Amerikans are a very aggressive society, it is the Amerikan way. Add guns or any weaponary to an aggressive society and what is the result? biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:31 PM Like I have said, there is no "silver bullet" that is going to fix everything... We have many forces working here... 1. Yes, we have a miserably failed mental health system to relies on too much out-patient (cheaper) treatment and not enough inpatient treatment... And, to make things worse, states having been cutting budgets from mental health year after year after year... 2. We have way too many extremely dangerous guns in out genral population... It is estimated that there are 3,000,000 military styled assault rifles... And to complicate that the NRA used fear tactics to scare people into thinking they need these weapons because if Obama doesn't take them away from you then the UN will... 3. We have a dysfunctional government with way too many people in Congress who were elected by tin-foil-nation and think it is there job to try to destroy the entire US government, sans the military... And complicating any efforts to bring sanity into the equation we have a licensed purveyor of BIG LIE propaganda in Fox News... 4. We have way too much violence in our movies and games and so we have an entire generation who is so desensitized to violence that they have no real comprehension between the games and real life... And to complicate that their parents aren't much better... 5. We have become a nihilistic, me-me society where it's get yours at all costs and the only time we show compassion is if we think that it might be captured by a device and go viral... To complicate this is that people no longer develop the social skills that the future of the nation depends... Who the fuck cares what Suzie Creamcheeze is wearing... You don't know her... She lives 3000 miles away and you'll never know her... Talk to the kid next to you... These are "Bobert's Big Five"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:16 PM It sounds so easy; pass a law.Now tell us how, with so many of our law givers in the pockets of the NRA. If it was that easy we would have done it years ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:09 PM Bill D. .... "in that it WAS an individual known to have issues" Does not every premeditated violent act against one human to another have issues .... these mass murders don't just snap. Are Americans as a culture more aggressive when it comes to dealing with issues? ... that is a question, just a thought? biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,SINS Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:03 PM You're right Bobert. NYC's gun laws are functioning beautifully. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:43 PM As much as I have read, I'll confess the Bath incident had escaped me. As I read the details, I feel it has only a peripheral relation to the current issues... in that it WAS an individual known to have issues and who concerned folks. The use of carefully planted explosives is a rare path for nuts to take... but of course, explosives and their components should also be restricted and controlled as well as possible. Read here about the Texas gun store guy... and remember, he is LEGION in Texas.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:39 PM whooops .... sorry Bobert and Bobad ... that line is a quote from something Bobad found .... regardless by opinions above on the NRA stands as it is. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:37 PM " The NRA is killing our children! You've got to stop the violence and violence begins with the NRA! " Bobert ..... cool down a bit. The violence cannot be blamed solely on the NRA .... the NRA cannot be the scapegoat for the all the despicable violence in Amerika. The NRA is a result of a very sick society. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:26 PM First of all, this is for SINS: New York has the toughest gun laws of any major city in the country and *lowest* per capita murder rate of any major city in the country... As for the NRA's press conference today??? What would you expect out of them... Their idea is an expensive recipe for disaster... First, who are these people going to be??? Cop wantabees who would otherwise be driving around shopping centers in little SUVs with a decal that reads "Security"??? Uh huh, I see... Second, di it ever occur to anyone that by putting a cop-wantabee in the school it is going to add an extra layers of jollies for the wackos to pull off the incident??? No, didn't think anyone thought of that... As for the hand wringers who say, "Geeze, we can't possibly round up all the assault weapons or big clips, can we?"... Well, no... We can't... But we can round up or give private licenses out for 99% of them... Here's how... Everyone is given 6 months to bring their assault weapons or big clips in for a "buy back" or for spacial permits... After 6 months it's an automatic 5 years in prison for possession of them... It can't be done if we say "It can't be done" but it can be done if was say "We can do this"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:24 PM These words from a protester at LaPierre's press conference - listen up America: "NRA stop killing our children!" the protester shouted as a security guard dragged him from the room. "It's the NRA and the assault weapons that are killing our children! Do not arm teachers! We've got to end the violence! We've got to stop the killing! Stop the killing in our schools, stop the killing in our homes, stop the killing in our streets! The NRA is killing our children! You've got to stop the violence and violence begins with the NRA! They are perpetrators of the crimes that are taking place in our schools and on our streets!" 'NRA has blood on its hands!' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:22 PM Thanks for mentioning the Bath School Disaster, biLL. I grew up there, and, though it was never spoken of, it left a dark shadow over our world. In just the last few years, it has begun to be remembered again. In a lot of ways, it is eerily current. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:12 PM Greg F. .... it does ... read Bill D.'s first post to this thread. as to it being related to the current situations, or conditions as they exist today ... just think about it for a bit .... or, you can forget about it and debate on and on about the same old things. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 21 Dec 12 - 02:33 PM Bill, the Bath School Disaster of 85 years ago has fuck-all to do with the current discussion, the current situation, or conditions as they exist today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 21 Dec 12 - 02:31 PM Of course we have a choice, PeeDee - stop being the usual purveyor of idiotic nonsensicalities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 21 Dec 12 - 02:27 PM "Tell us if we really have a choice." Of course you do - ban private ownership of guns and start to enforce it. Is there really an alternative? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 02:05 PM Why not have armed guards everywhere with German shepherds, metal detectors not only in the schools but in malls, hospitals, sports arenas ... armed checkpoints stratigically situated within urban areas, and even out in the countryside. Have every (legal) citizen of all ages issued flak jackets. Welcome to the armed fortress of Amerika ! Amerika, which I am convinced is now a country with way too many lunatics. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:46 PM "Armed guards in schools, bulletproof backpacks, armed teachers - is that really how you want to live?" Some folks here should visit Los Angeles and report back. Tell us if we really have a choice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:40 PM Armed guards in schools, bulletproof backpacks, armed teachers - is that really how you want to live? Is that the way you want your children to be brought up - in a constant atmosphere of fear? If so, then as a nation you are insane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:35 PM Arming everyone? OMG. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:29 PM I can't believe this tragedy has not been raised here in this thread... Bath School disaster biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:21 PM They (you, all Americans, whoever's in charge)should start treating these people, LaPierre, Gohmert etc like the mentally ill persons that they are and prescribe treatment - I would suggest a few ECT sessions to begin with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:10 PM And by the way... LaPierre did not mention whether he advocates armed guards in every mall... on every level. Or at every high school football game... or on every school bus taking kids home.. And... who besides me has been watching CNN each evening where Piers Morgan has taken this whole debate to new heights? (Including interviews with various members of the far-right gun advocates!) Last night he had a gun shop owner from Texas on (with a Idea: arm teachers! Yep...that's right. Piers Morgan kept his face mostly straight as he asked how this would be done...where would teachers keep these guns..in a drawer? Why, no... ON THEIR PERSON says this guy. Properly holstered and secured, of course.... and naturally, they would be well-trained! My mind recoils at the idea of my 4th grade teacher, Miss Isgrigg, with a Glock strapped to her hip.... This idea-filled gun shop owner agrees with the thoughtful Texas legislator Louis Gohmert about the idea that EVERYONE should be able to go armed EVERYWHERE! Church...store...political rallies... wait... I seem to remember... ah, well |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:07 PM "Habits are haRD TO BREAK. Ask any heroin freak. Or, a smoker." Or gun nut. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:56 PM LaPierre's always been a fuckwit, Jack. And he doesn't have the excuse of Charlton Heston's cold, dead brain. But the problem remains the cold, dead brains of the LaPierre acolytes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:54 PM "Those of us like Kendall, myself and others just protect other people the best we can." Olddude, I have the greatest of respect for you and some of the other guys on this forum, but I have to say this is a fantasy. You might stop an attack on yourself (a US mate of mine did stop a mugger who came up to him in a car park by sticking a gun in his face), but would you really engage in a shoot-out in a crowded place, and be sure you wouldn't hurt an innocent? Might you not be encouraging the insane personal arms race that's happening in your country? From here, it looks likes lunacy. When I'm in the states, it looks like lunacy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:47 PM Wow. Just heard LaPierre's statement on Newtown. One of the most disrespectful, disingenuous and downright nasty statements in the wake of this disaster it could have been possible to make. He's actually advocating having arms in schools for Christ's sake - this is pure insanity. Kids should not be taught in any building with weapons in it, they should be as far removed from violence as is possible. He is teaching your children into people whose only response to violence is more violence, like some fundamentalist Taliban lunatic. Guns in schools? My god, is there really such a lack of will and imagination it's come to that. Do you understand what this sounds like to the rest of the world (I know, you don't care, no foreigner's gonna tell the USA what to do yadda yadda yadda)? These are your children for fucks sake! Wake up! Supporting gun ownership (apart from hunting, sports shooting and serving law enforcement officers) means you are happy to allow this nightmare to continue. You are condemning parents to the grief of loosing a child again in the future, and if your conscience allows for that then you are beyond help. There is no protection against guns apart from giving them up and making them socially unacceptable, end of. Too many guns out there already? Make them the socially unacceptable because they are designed to kill people. Unfuckingbelieveable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:42 PM here it is.. the NRAs 'solution' Entirely predictable and close to useless. If you were a determined, deranged wannabe killer and you knew an armed guard was waiting, at a school, where would you switch your planned attack to? A school bus? A school yard at recess? A local playground? Maybe even just a church, where the praying could begin immediately.... Why, with the NRA guiding the safeguards, the next guy might only manage to shoot 10-12! Yes, I am cynical...and pissed... can you tell? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,SINSULL Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:21 PM New York City has and has always had some of the toughest control laws in the country. You see how well that is working out. I personally believe that nothing can be done to control guns intelligently until reasonable gun owners cut their ties to the NRA and lead the way. The NRA cannot afford to lose their money or their numbers. SINS, who would prefer that you all stop the childish name calling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:03 PM Habits are haRD TO BREAK. Ask any heroin freak. Or, a smoker. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Megan L Date: 21 Dec 12 - 11:59 AM There is no such thing as an old gunslinger. Your eyesight is not what it was, your hand is not as steady, your reaction time is not so fast and your perception is not as accurate. It does not matter what anyone did in their former life things decline as you get older. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: johncharles Date: 21 Dec 12 - 11:34 AM The NRA response is entirely predictable; armed guards in schools. God save America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 21 Dec 12 - 11:16 AM You see the problem my friends is this. There are so many weapons out there now that it is impossible to remove them. You would have to go door to door and that isn't possible either as we have search laws. So what is the best we can do. fix the loopholes. That is about it .. sorry to say but they ain't going away .. Law abiding people would turn them in if a law was passed but no law would ever be passed. However countries like Mexico, that doesn't work. The streets run red from gun violence in a country that No one is allowed any weapon. Unless society changes, people go back to caring about others and looking after your neighbors and raising our kids right. Nothing will change. Fixing the loopholes will help, but sadly it will continue. A cililian carrying a firearm legally is a defacto cop. So unless a person is really qualified and knows that, then they should not. Those of us like Kendall, myself and others just protect other people the best we can. It all sucks but it is what it is |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: saulgoldie Date: 21 Dec 12 - 10:22 AM We do not know for sure if certain mental conditions might cause an individual to shoot someone. We do not know that taking care of mental conditions better than we do would "fix" the problem. We do not know whether or not violent movies, games, or physical or mental abuse will directly lead to an individual shooting someone. We can form correlations and speculate. But correlations, even strong correlations do not prove causality. But they bear further investigation, that is for sure. Then, what we do with the results is subject to prejudice, preconceptions, and politics. What we DO know, is that if there is no gun present, then there can be no gun-related death. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Edthefolkie Date: 21 Dec 12 - 09:54 AM I hesitate, as a mere Brit with no personal armament and no desire to have any, to enter the bear pit, BUT..... The US used to be looked up to by the world. The US sent men to the Moon. The US is still the most powerful nation on Earth. The US has many more church going supposed Christians (remember "Do good to them that despise you"?)than most other countries. And some of the people on this forum are telling me that the US cannot and must not reduce the chances of another disturbed person slaughtering his mother, five other adults, and TWENTY primary school children? I'm sorry guys, but some of you need a reality check. You CAN stop this if you want to. Guns were invented to kill, guns do kill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 21 Dec 12 - 09:28 AM Yes, the sad truth is that because of the number of guns in ordinary folks homes that domestic murder rates are up with a direct correlation between the the numbers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 21 Dec 12 - 09:24 AM statistically the people most likely to kill you are your nearest and dearest Yes, this is why I find the gunners' oft-repeated statement that "we have plenty of laws, but criminals don't pay attention to them" to be fatuous and dangerous. If it were illegal to obtain a gun, someone would have to choose to become a criminal before they pull the trigger, and we might have a chance of stopping them. The way it is now, most people who shoot others don't become criminals until they open fire. It's too late at that point. Also, I think that most people would not choose to become criminals in order to own a gun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:18 AM Well, obviously anyone who kills you is liable to be committing a crime. But most of the time they are going to be law-abiding in general, or at least conviction-free. As has often been pointed out, statisticlly the people most likely to kill you are your nearest and dearest (and vice versa). Even here in England, though it is less likely to involve guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 21 Dec 12 - 08:16 AM " the law prohibiting "assault weapon" was allowed to lapse by W." Since it used meaningless definitions, it should have lapsed. As stated, ASSALT RIFLES are already illegal for all practical purposes. "And the law was flaweed by a failure to adequately characterize just wat an "assault weapon" was. " TRUE- and NO effort has been made by those seeking to reinstate it to define WHAT they are banning. "A more practicable approach would be to maintain a list of specific weapons which would be prohibited, and have each new weapon introduced by any manufacturer categorized. There aren't that many." See 1934 Gun act, and Relic and Curios list. "As far as gun ontrol vs. Psychological approsches--they'tr not mutually exclusive. Both should be investigated." TRUE, but they will pass meaningless laws to support political agendas, and leave the problem unresolved. That has been the consistent history of the US ( under BOTH parties) in regards to many serious problems. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:13 PM Bob... far mor "effective" weapons are made in machine shops, privately, every day by criminals. REAL criminals do not buy "regular" guns with serial numbers made by weapons makers. The loose gun laws in the US make it easy for common street criminals to obtain guns. When we read that 10k+ handgun related deaths occur in USA in one year, we are talking about "legal" guns. That is a problem now... as I understand it (I am also a Canuck). This will only add to that problem. It's sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:11 PM Hey, that guy is my boss... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:55 PM Now you can have your very own...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOoUVeyaY_8 Seems to me a Carpenter had some pretty good ideas, we celebrate His birthday on Dec. 25 But WHO is paying attention around here? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack the Sailor Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:50 PM Bang! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:48 PM And this...automatic shotgun...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4ebtj1jR7c "the development stage" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:43 PM Bill & Bobert: Bill, I was responding to your statement that this kind of tragedy could not be done with a knife...not entirely accurate. More similar stories available. Bobert: have done all the rethinking for many years. But then, while all the gun control yak yak is going on, I wonder if they intend to give out awards? Best gun control law, most effective gun control law, most respected gun control law, While "they are doing that", We have this going on...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqzJlBcCsow |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: dick greenhaus Date: 20 Dec 12 - 01:55 PM BB- the law prohibiting "assault weapon" was allowed to lapse by W. And the law was flaweed by a failure to adequately characterize just wat an "assault weapon" was. A more practicable approach would be to maintain a list of specific weapons which would be prohibited, and have each new weapon introduced by any manufacturer categorized. There aren't that many. As far as gun ontrol vs. Psychological approsches--they'tr not mutually exclusive. Both should be investigated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 20 Dec 12 - 01:43 PM If NRA members and other gun owners were actually forced to show up for drills... Well, Ron - a meeting of the minds after all these years. Whooda thunkit. Show up for drill? With their pot-bellies, booze, and anti-government virulence? Should be a real hoot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Dec 12 - 01:30 PM An interesting aspect of the situation is that for all the smug assurances that the Supreme Court has already spoken on the question of whether there is a strong link between the right to bear arms and the obligation to participate in a "well-regulated" militia, the fact is that the Heller decision was 5-4. Swing vote, as often happens, was Kennedy. I'd think it likely that if a case raising virtually the same issues comes before the Court again, he might well (especially if he reads some history in the interim) influenced by the tragic results of the current gun-rights regime, vote the other way. If NRA members and other gun owners were actually forced to show up for drills, there would be a sea change in the status quo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 20 Dec 12 - 10:40 AM How many generations will it take to remake the culture of an entire country? Overt bigotry against black people finally became socially unacceptable only after we passed strong federal laws making discrimination illegal. I don't know which caused which, but I think it would be interesting to find out what would happen to our culture if most guns were illegal and the "official" word on the subject was that gun ownership without proved need was unacceptable. Thirty years from now, it would be nice if elder politicians with youthful ties to the NRA, in order to keep their seats, had to repeatedly apologize for it and explain how their eyes were finally opened to how they were supporting gun violence. Or that overtly violent movies and games would meet the same response that games about being a slave owner or about cleaning out the ghettos would meet today. The same comparisons can be made about the role of women in our society, and which behaviors and words are acceptable and which are not. Changing the general view of society is possible, and strong federal laws could help with that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 20 Dec 12 - 10:11 AM yeah, Bruce, but what about a Klan member who WASN'T wearing a hood? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Dec 12 - 10:06 AM Now, now, now... Ya'll take a chill pill... Ya'll would get along fine... I'm sure... (...or not...) B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:59 AM "First of all, Greg, I don't want to ruin your holiday season but if you were to sit down with bb and have a discussion with him about anything but his politics you'd find him intelligent and very cordial" Not likely- I would no more sit down with Greggie than you would with a hooded KKK member. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:43 AM But Bruce - you haven't posted any valid facts! Oh, and there's 3 "g's" in Greggie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:27 AM DonT, "Because Bruce, some of us have been paying attention and know that different states act in different ways, some of them not having the laws you mention. So, the need is for laws you don't have now. Federal laws overriding states' laws in the interests of public safety nationwide." I was referring to the requirements for a FFL ( Note the first F is FEDERAL) To transfer firearms OVER STATE LINES requires going through at least one. The definition in Mass. law of an assault weapon included flintlock one-shot Kentucky rifles- making them illegal to transport THROUGH the state even in locked cases. Until there is an agreed upon definition of "assault weapon" any law on such is either redundant with present law, ( outlawing automatic weapons for private owners except with stringent and expensive permits,as of 1934) which should be enforced, or is a broad attempt to ban firearms that are suitable for hunting and target shooting. The fact that a firearm has a bayonet lug ( making it a spear!) or a black plastic stock DOES NOT MAKE IT MORE DANGEROUS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:19 AM Join the club, BB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:16 AM So, Gregie - you must enjoy posting spurious & irrelevent nonsense for the entertainment value alone? 'Cept it isn't entertaining- ... it's just personal attacks and racist lies. I note you have nothing to say about the validity of what I have posted. If you think that facts are irrelevant, that says more about you and the viewpoint you support than it does about me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:00 AM Menatl health is an entire "other issue"... And it is so complex that neither the NRA nor the Congress has the slightest understanding... To have some understanding of just how we have arrived here one has to go back to the early 80s when we collectively decided to spend less on mental health... That meant that a lot of folks who needed inpatient treatment were being pushed out into society for social workers and out-patient mental health professionals to baby-sit, cajole and manage... We've had this discussion before but it might be one worth re-visiting... Several of us here in the Mudpit have or have had hands on experience working with people with mental illness... The problem isn't just the changed cultural and societal views of folks with mental illness but the logical extension of those prejudices and biases that has led us to collectively spend less and less and less on treating mental illness... "Shake it off, son" is not an option... So, if the NRA wants to become an advocate for mental health then I'm all for that... Won't fix shit in terms of mass murders for decades, however, without the things that BillD, myself and others have advocated going back years in terms of sensible gun controls... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 20 Dec 12 - 04:22 AM "No plan of how to begin or proceed." that says it all, BillD. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:30 PM Bob R,,, if you read my first post, 5 days but 480+ posts ago, *I* noted the story from China. "Mold those young minds, and MAYBE..." etc... Sure... I'm all in favor of remolded minds... as soon as you... or someone... figgers out how to DO that molding of minds away from possible murderous violence when they can't even make a dent in school bullying. You have 10s of millions of young minds who need molding... and millions of adults to do it, most of whom were not well 'molded' themselves... or at least have no specific training in the relevant psychology. How many generations will it take to remake the culture of an entire country? Nice idea... but how about taking away the worst of their dangerous toys until we get them 'molded'? Sorry, Bob, but yours is about the 27th suggestion of that type I have seen in the last 5 days... all very general and heartfelt with NO plan of how to begin OR proceed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:06 PM Like you, Bob, I have a history with martial arts... Okinawan karate which involves various knives, bo's, etc... What we have now are a lot of folks who have no skills in much of anything who can kill one shit load of people... I a fight??? Yeah, I am very concerned with a skilled guy with a knife... Things can go badly very fast... We don't have time to fix an entire nation of wackos with no real skills in life, arms, martial arts or anything else... So we have to take some short-cuts for now and work on the larger picture later... We can't afford to allow unskilled whackos to hold us hostage while we rebuild and entire society... Rethink, Bob... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:52 PM Bill Bill Biil....That kid might not have been able to...with a knife...http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/china-knife-attack-school.html I am a knife collector. And have been a Martial Arts practitioner for over 57 years. Started when I was ten...Ju-Jitsu...then went on from there...Balisong, etc. My High School English teacher was a Knife Instructor for the U.S. Army. Looked like he belonged in an accounting office, then there was the other side... God help us if a trained individual goes wacky, or feels now's the time for payback for whatever injustice he thinks might have been done him...trust me... It's good that you are searching for solutions, finding some consolation, trying to understand. What is needed is a more DIRECTED relationship between parent and teacher Hey, Why is Johnny ALONE all the time? No Prom, No dates...You may find that Mommy & Daddy really should not have been, being screwed up all by themselves, or there in name only...and let the kid do what he feels like... What to do? Observe, then act by having the authorities "have a little talk" with him, nothing heavy. Just Hey Johnny...come here for a bit. You will not stop guns. The "nutball control" is more in the form of prevention. Mold those young minds, and MAYBE those young minds will develop into responsible adults who say to themselves, "I don't need a gun..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:07 PM Yeah, the idea has been around a few years... I think Mark Germino even talks about it in one of his songs... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 19 Dec 12 - 07:58 PM "Elliot Spitzer, remember him... He has brought up a couple other ideas... First, control the bullets... Think about it..." ~ B-pert Actually, that was the late Pat Paulsen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 07:27 PM First of all, Greg, I don't want to ruin your holiday season but if you were to sit down with bb and have a discussion with him about anything but his politics you'd find him intelligent and very cordial... I have and I personally like the guy... Elliot Spitzer, remember him... He has brought up a couple other ideas... First, control the bullets... Think about it... Secondly, boycott the parent companies that own the smaller ones that build and push WMD on the American public... Think about it, Part B... Thirdly, yeah, what Bill D says... Each of us have been in the pits on these threads over the years and we agree on just about everything... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 19 Dec 12 - 07:21 PM How can there be any grounds for someone to claim that a requirement to report a theft of anything at all, let alone a gun, can possibly infringe their rights or harm them in any way? Take a look at the news article TIA linked to at 4:06 PM. It sounds like the NRA simply doesn't want local governments, Philadelphia in this case, making any firearms related laws. Pennsylvania law gives the right to regulate firearms to the state, not to counties or municipalities. Even though the law seems innocuous, even by gun-nut standards, the NRA doesn't want cities poking their noses into gun issues at all. The NRA doesn't own nearly as many politicians on the Philadelphia city council as it does at the state legislature in Harrisburg. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 19 Dec 12 - 07:13 PM These people who are buying automatic weapons in anticipation of new gun laws, how will they act if congress passes a law making the purchase and possession of them illegal? Seems like a poor investment to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 19 Dec 12 - 07:08 PM No ak-47's for teachers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:44 PM Yes Bill, read this article I posted yesterday:http://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=148617&messages=474&page=2&desc=yes#3453868 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:30 PM "...firearms enthusiasts are stocking up on assault rifles in anticipation of tighter gun control measures." Why am I not surprised |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:22 PM ""Many here are making demands for new laws that are ALREADY in place. If they have not stopped gun crimes, why do you think making more laws saying the same thing will do any good????"" Because Bruce, some of us have been paying attention and know that different states act in different ways, some of them not having the laws you mention. So, the need is for laws you don't have now. Federal laws overriding states' laws in the interests of public safety nationwide. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:36 PM strange thing is that bb is an intelligent person Well, I'll defer to you Bobert and believe what you have to say .... but thousands wouldn't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:36 PM How can there be any grounds for someone to claim that a requirement to report a theft of anything at all, let alone a gun, can possibly infringe their rights or harm them in any way? What kind of nutty legal system is it. In which any such claim isn't laughed out of court, or penalised as an attempt to waste the court's time? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:27 PM You all know how *I* have argued-- not just on this thread, but for years-- about the various gun laws and the NRA; but now it is important to note how many people with credentials are saying very similar things to what 'ol Bill D is spouting. Lawyers, legislators, news reporters, ...even some gun owners.. are agreeing that we cannot keep on like this. It is sad that it took such a horrible incident to shake the cobwebs out of some heads. If that boy had 'simply' shot his mother... or had gunned down a couple of policemen on a corner, it would probably just get 2-3 days superficial mention and become just another incident in the list.... ...but some folks realize that TODAY there may be dozens of other disturbed kids...or even adults.. out there who are seeing this news and tumbling 'odd' thoughts over in their heads about how to make a splash in their own confused lives. I 'live' my online life 90% in Mudcat, and there are many people here with thoughtful approaches to issues... on all sides of issues. Max says Mudcat will be around for a long time, and my ideas... no matter on serious or frivolous topics... will be here for Google to find... so I WILL reply to what I consider important topics-- especially when I think they need to offset poor reasoning or bad data..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 04:52 PM The starnge thing is that bb is an intelligent person in person but get him in front of a computer and he questions not one source other than liberal or moderate ones... The further right the source the greater the chances are that he'll accept it as 100% true... But never mind bb... He ain't a bad guy... Just has some wiring problems... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 19 Dec 12 - 04:38 PM So, Beardie Brucie - you must enjoy posting spurious & irrelevent nonsense for the entertainment value alone? 'Cept it isn't entertaining- ... it's just BS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 04:34 PM Yes, brucie... My bad... It was 12,000 to 11... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 19 Dec 12 - 04:06 PM But when the SWAT team shows up, all you really have to do is say "oops, it was stolen". http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/harrisburg/34126-16kcguns click |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 19 Dec 12 - 03:49 PM Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From:GUEST,TIA - PM Date: 19 Dec 12 - 11:36 AM My city is being sued by the NRA because they passed a law saying that if your gun is stolen, you must report that theft to the police. NRA objects to that?!?!? Wouldn't that do some little bit to hinder trafficking in illegal guns. Hell, if one of my guns were stolen, reporting it to the police would be the FIRST thing I'd do. "Oops! I forgot to report it was stolen!" doesn't carry much weight when someone uses it in an armed robbery three months down the road and the SWAT team arrives in your front yard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: dick greenhaus Date: 19 Dec 12 - 03:10 PM I fully believe that no one law will solve the problem. Having said that, I'd maintain that Any law or combination of laws can significantly reduce the seriousness of the problem. Which would be a good thing. Re: "Guns don't kill people..." I wonder how many home runs Babe Ruth would have hit if he didn't have access to a bat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Dec 12 - 03:01 PM "11 murders in Japan in 2008 compared to 20,000 in the US" 12,000 in the US. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 12 - 02:36 PM " Do they involve checking on whether the purchaser and everyone in their household is completely trustworthy? Do they involve checking that their are adequate storage facilities where the weapons and amo will be kept locked up? " They should...and if I were in Congress, I'd vote for it... but 1st step is checking the primary purchaser well. If we can even get that, it will be better than what exists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 02:35 PM You'd be better off asking the NRA, McG... They hate 'um... That's why when they found out that the existing database was not up to the task in performing the backgound check in a timely manner and many in Congress were all for fixin' it in the early 2000s they fought keeping the system just the way it is... But you are correct... It in itself is not the end-all-be-all but just one of the pieces... BTW, there were 11 murders in Japan in 2008 compared to 20,000 in the US... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Dec 12 - 02:27 PM What do 'backup checks' amount to anyway? Do they involve checking on whether the purchaser and everyone in their household is completely trustworthy? Do they involve checking that their are adequate storage facilities where the weapons and amo will be kept locked up? Or are they just does this guy have a criminal record and have they ever been sectioned? A right to bear arms, however interpreted, is not the same as a right to sell arms or buy them without the most stringent requirements seen as appropriate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 12 - 01:14 PM "... why do you think making more laws saying the same thing will do any good? *I* do not. Laws saying something a bit different are required....such as.."NO sales at gun shows unless that show has a link to a National database of guns, owners and already completed background checks... and this linkin place and working, and monitored by police or other official not connected to the show...and no sales of military type weapons AT ALL! Including AR-15s, no matter what you want to CALL them." See? There's a law we...at least more of us... can LIVE with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 01:08 PM Law enforcement has consistently been supportive of gun control... And why not??? They pull a guy over an have no idea what he's packin' or if they are badly outmatched... BTW, more cops were gunned down in the last 10 years than in the 50 years before that... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 19 Dec 12 - 12:37 PM Really good question (from Eric Boehlert); "If there was a toy that killed 20 children in 1 day, there'd be no debate about banning it- why is there any hesitation over assault rifles?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 19 Dec 12 - 11:36 AM My city is being sued by the NRA because they passed a law saying that if your gun is stolen, you must report that theft to the police. NRA objects to that?!?!? Wouldn't that do some little bit to hinder trafficking in illegal guns. The arguments that we already have laws on the books is thoroughly bogus. If the laws were adequate, we wouldn't have a mass shooting every other month would we? Oh wait, your going to blame it on law enforcement aren't you...("we just need to enforce the laws blah blah blah). How does law enforcement feel about the adequcy of current laws? Anyone...? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Dec 12 - 11:18 AM Maybe we should pass a law making it illegal to steal guns.... Or better yet, make it illegal to shoot PEOPLE. THAT will solve the problem: Once the law is made, there will be no more shootings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:57 AM There's that, Charmion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:52 AM All it takes to "launder" a legal, documented gun into an illegal, undocumented gun is one theft or robbery, plus transportation to another jurisdiction. No soap required. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:48 AM John, John, John . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:42 AM Laundered guns 9? I guess that's what to do, if you want a clean shot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:24 AM The real question then is where do illegal guns come from. If they were ever legal to begin with how come the paper trail is so hard to determine? At some point they are laundered in order to become black market weapons, no? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:03 AM "As for online sales there is no way these can ever ensure an adequate level of proof. " The online sales can only be FROM an FFL TO an FFL- the FFL puts his license on the line when he fils out the paperwork on the end customer. The FFL is responsible for the checks, and many states require confirmation by the police as well. Records are kept, and subject to government inspection at any time. Many here are making demands for new laws that are ALREADY in place. If they have not stopped gun crimes, why do you think making more laws saying the same thing will do any good???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:01 AM It's called "background checks"... Problem is that the data base is so out-dated that it is by in large ineffectual... Then thrown in the gun show loophole and why even have the laws on the books... BTW, the Republican Party has blocked every effort by Obama to allow the appointment of a head of ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms)... But that's just a sidebar here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:52 AM How can a bloke selling guns over the counter have any way of knowing that someone buying the gun is 'of sound mental state'. The presumption ought to be that they are not unless there is solid proof that they are. And that is not an easy thing to prove for any of us. Just the fact they might never have been sectioned is nowhere near good enough. You'd need references from guaranteed sources at the very least. As for online sales there is no way these can ever ensure an adequate level of proof. It should be the same level of proof as there would be to allow someone to adopt a child. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:47 AM Sorry, McG, but I don't have a clue who wrongman, songwronger or whom ever is... Lotta folks who have the most right winged views to spew hide behind stupid names so they don't have to stand behind their posting... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:12 AM BillD, "These dealers AT gun shows, and those who sell online.... where do THEY get their stocks of weapons? I assume THEY have to licensed and have valid permits to sell the guns TO people at shows. How are those permits allocated and monitored?" 1. The FFL dealers at gun shows are required to comply with the same laws, checks, and paperwork that they have at their place of business. 2. Selling ONLINE requires delivery t, and handling by a FFL who is required to comply with the same laws, checks, and paperwork that they have at their place of business. The " gun show exemption is ONLY for PRIVATE sales between individuals, who must comply with the legal requirements of their state- i.e., they are supposed to determine that the person is a resident of the same state, not a felon, of sound mental state, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:11 AM 'Wrongman' isn't the name of the poster in question Bobert. I know we all tend to use altered names when we respond to posts, but in a long and busy thread like this it's not a bad idea to use the actual name they posted under so as to know what is under discussion. As for Gandhi a much more appropriate comment for the present situation might be when, in response to a question as to what he thought of Modern Civilisation he replied that 'It would be a very good idea' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:08 AM PeeDee- citing Andrew K. Dart's blog as a source? He's even more of a right-wing lunatic, liar and fanatic than you usually resort to. Give us all a rest from the bullshit, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:53 AM Bill D..whwere do you keep it? In my pocket or on my night stand. I raised three girls and not one of them ever touched my shot gun or rifle. I no longer have either weapon since I gave up hunting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:41 AM Yeah, Bill... Let's keep in perspective that, as much as we don't like to admit it, is that the Supreme Court are politicians... Look at Scalia... He thinks he's a rock star... Goes around speaking to right winged groups sounding just like he's running for some office... But never mind that... The NRA narrative is shaping up to be blaming the ineffective mental health workers that are paid by your taxes!!! Horrors!!! Yup, whenever boxed in blame a government worker... Watch the way they fold this out... I'm glad we are having that discussion as well but it's only a small part of the story but the NRA hopes it can create enough subterfuge to survive this latest push to slow down the proliferation of very dangerous weapons... As for my knowledge of Gandhi and non-violence, Wrongman... I'd put my life's experiences up against yours in an over-all understanding of the non-violent movement and can guarantee you that Gandhi would have rephrased his thoughts if he knew that right winged whackos would one day use them against the spirit of his true beliefs... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:41 AM 'When I was on the job I got to fire a Thompson sub machine gun. I was not impressed.' and the lady in question Kendall...? I bet it made an impression! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:37 AM Moncton, NB Times&Transcipt today... Positions shifting on gun control Some U.S. Republicans say gun control should be debated, along with mental health issues THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON - Some Republicans now say they're willing to discuss the politically treacherous issue of gun control, along with mental health issues and violent video games, while President Barack Obama said he supports efforts in Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban in the wake of last week's Connecticut school shooting. Republicans in the House of Representatives discussed the gun issue at their regular closed-door meeting yesterday, and at least some were willing to consider gun control as part of a solution to the kind of violence that killed 26 people, including 20 children six and seven years old. The massacre, one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history, has rattled the usual national dialogue on guns in America, where public opinion had shifted against tougher gun control in recent years and the gun lobby is a powerful political force. Obama has called for 'meaningful action' and met with Cabinet members Monday on how to respond. He has long supported reinstating the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, but was quiet on the issue during his first term. Obama has said he believes the Constitution's Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms. White House spokesman Jay Carney said yesterday that Obama is 'actively supportive' of reinstating an assault weapons ban and would also support legislation to close the gun show 'loophole,' which allows people to buy guns from private dealers without background checks. The president was not expected to take any formal action on guns before the end of the year, given the all-consuming efforts to resolve tax and deficit-reduction talks and nominate new Cabinet secretaries. The most powerful supporter of gun owners, the National Rifle Association, broke its silence yesterday, four days after the school shooting. After a self-imposed media blackout that left many wondering how it would respond to the killings, it said in a statement that its members were 'shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders.' The group also said it wanted to give families time to mourn before making its first public statements. The organization pledged 'to help to make sure this never happens again' and has scheduled a news conference for Friday. As shares in publicly traded gun manufacturers were dropping for a third straight day yesterday, the largest firear ms maker in the United States said it is being put up for sale by its owner, which called last week's school shooting a 'watershed event' in the American debate over gun control. Freedom Group International makes Bushmaster rifles, the weapons thought to have been used in Friday's killings. The New York-based private equity group Cerberus Capital Management - which invests money on behalf of public employees like teachers, among other clients said it will sell its controlling stake in the company, while investors fled other firear ms makers. After yesterday's meeting of Republicans, Congressman Jack Kingston said that nothing should be done immediately. 'Put guns on the table, also put video games on the table, put mental health on the table,' he said. 'There is a time for mourning and a time to sort it out.' Formerly pro-gun Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said 'a thoughtful debate about how to change laws' is coming soon. Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said Monday that the debate must include guns and mental health. And NRA member Sen. Joe Manchin, another Democrat, agreed it's time to begin an honest discussion about gun control and said he wasn't afraid of the political consequences. It's too early to say what could emerge next year in Congress, but the comments are significant. Grassley is senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which probably would take the first action on any gun control legislation. Reid sets the Senate schedule. And Manchin defied the NRA while the politically powerful pro-gun group has remained silent since Friday's massacre. At the state level, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder vetoed legislation that would have allowed concealed weapons in churches, schools and daycare centres. The Republican governor told The Associated Press Monday he was scrutinizing the bill after the massacre in Connecticut. He also drew on his own memories of a fatal shooting in his college dormitory more than three decades ago. Snyder said in a release yesterday that public venues need clear legal authority to ban firear ms 'if they see fit to do so.' In California, proposed legislation would increase the restrictions on purchasing ammunition by requiring buyers to get a permit, undergo a background check and pay a fee. Meanwhile, the U.S. Conference of Mayors wrote Obama and Congress calling for 'stronger gun laws, a reversal of the culture of violence in this country, a commission to examine violence in the nation, and more adequate funding for the mental health system.' Specifically, the mayors asked for: A ban on assault weapons and other high-capacity magazines, like those reportedly used in the school shooting. Strengthening the national background check system for gun purchasers. Strengthening the penalties for straw purchases of guns, in which legal buyers acquire weapons for other people. Reid told the Senate, 'In the coming days and weeks, we will engage in a meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws and culture that allow violence to grow.' His comments mark a shift in his approach to the issue. After a mass shooting in July at a Colorado theatre left 12 people dead, Reid said the Senate's schedule was too busy to have a debate on gun control. And after 32 people were killed in 2007 at Virginia Tech, Reid cautioned against a 'rush to judgment' about new gun laws. In 2010, top NRA official Wayne LaPierre called Reid 'a true champion' of gun rights. Other Republicans said mental health, not guns, was the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Rob Naylor Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:07 AM How many stories can you find of ANYONE who has, with a quickly accessed weapon, successfully protected their home against actual (not 'imagined') danger? I will bet that there are MORE stories of sad mistakes by nervous homeowners I remember having a debate in the letters section of the London Evening Standard back in about 1994. It was about the routine arming of UK police. I pointed out that in that year, of 48,000 New York police officers, 43 had been killed or injured with firearms....but 26 of those were by negligent discharges of their own or colleagues' weapons. Others argued that in the UK, since only a small proportion of police officers were firearms-trained, to a high standard, it was unlikely to be a problem. I believe that was the same week that 3 City of London police officers were wounded when their highly-trained colleague dropped his H&K MP5 onto the canteen table and it went off. I think that in that year, 5 UK police officers were injured by firearms...4 by their own or colleagues' negligent discharges. This year has been unusual in that 3 UK police officers have been shot dead (half of all those shot dead in the last 15 years) by criminals. But it's also seen 3 officers wounded and 1 killed by their own or colleagues' negligent discharges. If such a high proportion of firearms injuries to police officers, who are supposed to be trained to a much higher standard than members of the public would be, are the result of negligent discharges, I'd be absolutely astonished if ready access to weapons at home or in public saved even a fraction of the extra lives it *cost* in accidental shootings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:24 AM The thing that's getting shot with monotonous regularity on this thread, is the breeze. Nobody's really listening to anybody else, most are spouting second hand facts, and others have got the use of a non sequitur down to a fine art. FFS, would someone say something constructive, for a change! Sorry to the few who are talking sense, but you're outnumbered by eejits, by about 99 to 1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:58 PM their ability to tackle problems with cheerfulness and determination' But not it has seemed when it comes to this subject. Perhaps things might change now. It is always a good idea to be hopeful, whatever the odds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:55 PM Just saw an interview with Jeffrey Toobin...senior analyst with CNN about the history of interpreting 2nd amendment. short version: "The courts had found that the first part, the "militia clause," trumped the second part, the "bear arms" clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms—but did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon." Then, in just 2008, the 5-4 divided Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Hellerruled for the 1st time specifically about individuals rights as to guns. Guess which justices were the 5? So, as I posted earlier... and in case you paid it no attention... it was a VOTE by a politically biased few conservatives, pressured by many more of the same, which puts us in this awkward place today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:37 PM "...but you can have a weapon ready about as fast as getting it out of a drawer if one needs that level of security." Needs? If one actually needs that level of security, where do you keep the safe? One in every room like my ex-neighbor?...beside the TV... by the refrigerator? Tapping in numbers takes time...not to mention the time to evaluate whether you need to open it, Rep. Gohmert of Texas wishes that teacher had a gun... I wonder how long it would take a teacher to go to a safe, tap a few 'easy' numbers and get a hand gun to confront a kid with an AR-15... who has already fired 20-30 rounds. How many stories can you find of ANYONE who has, with a quickly accessed weapon, successfully protected their home against actual (not 'imagined') danger? I will bet that there are MORE stories of sad mistakes by nervous homeowners. I'm sorry, Dan... I do understand the IDEA of securing & protecting one's home, but 99% of the time it is just a slogan ABOUT fear & danger, rather than a genuine ongoing need that moves people. And **IF** they can justify having a gun IN the house, ready in the safe, what do they do when they open the door and/or leave the house? Now we are into carry permits and training and similar questions about response time when a possible threat is identified... etc..etc... Since VERY few people actually have occasion to make defenses at home... or even walking down the street.. they have little to guide them except their imagination about what to do in a real situation. Practical, daily, reality in gun use is for police and SERIOUSLY trained people...YOU might be one, and I might approve YOU if I were in charge, but the issue is the thousands to millions who 'just sorta wish' they felt safer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Songwronger Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:26 PM Far out. Enlighten us some more with your unique insights into the mind of Gandhi. You are just so freakin awsome. Must be the dope you smoke. You know, the stuff that your boy Eric Holder runs guns into Mexico so the cartels can ship it to you. So what if a few thousand have to die along the border in violent...I mean "forceful" incidents. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:17 PM Gandhi was talking about personal self defense... Every person who has ever spent any time in a dojo understands that concept... BTW, I disagree with Gandhi's thought that in defending yourself that you are practicing violence... Violence is force "above" that needed for self defense... I was taught to use only the minimum force to defend yourself... Either way, Gandhi wasn't into packin' heat... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Songwronger Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:56 PM Since someone quoted Gandhi earlier, here are some more Gandhi quotes: "He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully." – M.K. Gandhi, Between Cowardice and Violence "I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence." – M.K. Gandhi, The Doctrine of the Sword. "When my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence." – M.K. Gandhi, The Doctrine of the Sword. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:54 PM Give up, Ol'ster... Everyone is convinced that you are a responsible capable gun owner... You ain't the problem... I doubt seriously if you need an AR15 or 30 round clips to defend yourself... But alot of folks out there think they do... They are the problem... And guess what else they believe??? They believe that the government is coming to kill them and that Obama wasn't born in the US... These are the people buying the shit... And these people aren't, exactly, responsible adults... These are the folks we are talkin' about here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:30 PM and a really good gun safe is not just a combo, there is a trick to the numbers they are made kid proof but you can have a weapon ready about as fast as getting it out of a drawer if one needs that level of security. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:20 PM Bill responsible gun owners that are concerned about home invasion still have their weapons secure. First thing, have a nervous little dog. Second if you are going to own a weapon for such purpose, get a gun safe. They have a combo key, you type in the numbers and wham there is your firearm. No kid is going to open it if it is a good one |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:16 PM Fine... Kill deer and boars... Lot's of them... They are pests and edible... Plus, they are over-populated... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:05 PM More and more people are going to become hunters. By necessity. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:52 PM "Why do Americans want to go out shooting bears??" Sometimes it's so they can 'bag a trophy'. Other times it's mostly to render the fat. The hide is a bonus, and the meat will feed sled dogs and people if there's not much whitefish or deer-type creatures. Just in case that was a serious question. In some places, whole communities depend on either rivers--which aren't worth much in day-to-day terms when they're frozen--or barges (need rivers) or planes. Slice it whichever way, and food that isn't hunted and killed is expensive. I lived 'there' for two years, and when tomatoes were selling about four for a dollar down south, they cost a buck a piece up north. Same goes for apples, oranges, bananas, etc. Meat at the Northern Store cost $30-$50 for a small roast, and 2-3 pound chickens were $15-$20 bucks. The inexpensive time which lasted for about three months was when there were winter roads. (That's another story.) Yes, it's easy to go to the supermarket--and much more pleasant because someone else killed supper for us--but I'll tell you, that costs big time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:40 PM Probably buy them from the federal government. The Mexican drug cartels do. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:38 PM Back in the holler in Virgina there was this ol' boy who was about 6'10" and rough as a night in jail and he came up and told me that the former owner allowed him to hunt back in the forest so, hey, me being a purdy tough 6 ft. lightweight said, "Okay"... The guy always gave me the creeps until one day he came outta the woods with a 150 pound bear which really pissed me off so I told him that I didn't appreciate him shootin' bears and that he couldn't come back... For a several seconds I'll admit that I thought that he was either going to shoot me punch on me... He did neither and never came back to the farm to hunt... I mean, there are times when ypou might have to shoot a bear but don't go hunting them... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM Two more thoughts... Last year, before the elections, Wayne LaPierre of the NRA was quoted (and recorded) as asserting that Obama & his administration were "corrupt" and "Liars" who were 'seeking to take away all guns'... why? He didn't offer specific details, but seemed to simply want to hang that label on Obama because he was a Democrat and hadn't bought the full NRA line of BS. also.... gun shows. Lots of people, including gun defenders agree the loopholes are too wide, but I was just thinking: These dealers AT gun shows, and those who sell online.... where do THEY get their stocks of weapons? I assume THEY have to licensed and have valid permits to sell the guns TO people at shows. How are those permits allocated and monitored? Even further... how are importers and stateside manufacturers monitored and regulated? There is a complex system going on to allow multi-millions of weapons of many kinds to flow into dangerous paths.... what are the details? I can do some research, but if anyone has **clear** knowlege, tell me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:26 PM If an armed civilian (and I'm talking genuine civilian, not off-duty cop or out-of-uniform military) tries to take out a well armed shooter, there are four possible outcomes: 1) He's successful. 2) The shooter specifically targets him because he has a gun and, thus, poses a greater threat to the shooter than anyone else in the room. 3) When police arrive, they see he's armed and shoot him, thinking he's one of the bad guys. 4) He misses the shooter and harms or kills an innocent person. If I were a betting man and had a choice of putting $1,000 on Mr. Armed Civilian being a hero against a mass murderer and the Chicago Cubs winning the World Series, I'd go with the Cubs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:17 PM "Garbage bears...are the worst because humans have habituated bears to easy sustenance." My, my. The ursine welfare state. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:09 PM Everyone knows I voted Green. =(:-( P) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:05 PM Here in southeast Alaska I have seen many bears and had close encounters with several. This is bear country; given spawning salmon, ripened berries, forest all around and many freshwater streams running through it, it is up to humans to stay alert. Garbage bears, as Charmion implied, are the worst because humans have habituated bears to easy sustenance. Juneau passed new ordinances a few years ago to address the problem; it is against the law now to not use bear-resistant containers and dumpsters. Offenders pay stiff fines. We do pretty well now, much better than in previous years. I remember one year when 14 bears were shot by Fish and Wildlife management. These days officials dart them, collar them and haul them out-the-road away from civilisation. If or when they come back, they are shot. I realize this is way off-subject. Suffice to say that there are many hunters locally- I don't know what their instruments of choice are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:57 PM "I don't have time for silly.." That is, no time to actually learn something about one of your favorite topics to drivel on about. Or, more succinctly: "Don't bother me with facts--or even ask me to get the facts." Why are we not surprised? It's only a shame that your attitude is widespread--and that you and your fellow intellectual giants vote. (But of course maybe we're lucky enough that you don't vote). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:50 PM If you listen to birther/NRA/tin foil nation that private ownership of guns saves then trillion people every day... They cannot substantiate any of their numbers de joir other than use each other as, ahhhhh, their sources/references... These people, some here, must think that people are absolutely syupid to believe the utter their bullshit... In New York City, for instance, where there is strict gun control the per capital murder ate is way the heck under any large Southern city with nothing in the way of gun control... I mean, it is beyond futile trying to have a conversation when people won't use truth but lies put out by the NRA which makes lot$ of money on gun$ and gun $ale$... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:31 PM More on the use of guns to prevent crime... here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:22 PM Charles Whitman of the "Texas Tower" shootings, was 'eventually' shot by police & citizens after a long, extended effort to get to him... they 'may' have saved a few, though most people were well-hidden by the time they got to him. Th 19 year old kid in the Wichita Holiday Inn shooting that I mentioned earlier (very similar to the Texas Tower thing) was also eventually shot & captured after police managed to get to the room beside the room where he was.,,,he 'only' killed 3 and injured 8. That one, BTW, is missing from this list... which may list only 4 or more deaths) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: CET Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:07 PM ": RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter - PM Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:59 AM How many times in real life has an armed intruder, bent on mass murder, been taken out by an armed civilian (or even a police officer) before he could kill anybody? I'll rephrase that. How many times does it even *appear* that a hero has prevented a mass killing by drawing down faster than the heat-packin' bad guy? Or even managed to *cut short* a shooting spree by nailing the gunman when he wasn't looking? Come on, guys. How many?" Well, here's a few that come to mind: The Fort Hood shooting. Maj Nidal was shot and put out of action by a Military Police woman. The Dawson College shooting in Montreal. The first cops on the scene went in immediately instead of waiting. My recollection is that the shooter killed himself when the police arrived. I don't think he was in the act of killing people when the police burst in but the point is that the police were on the scene, armed and prepared to shoot him. Newtown, Connecticut. The police response seems to have been very rapid and according to accounts I have read, Lanza killed himself whe he heard the police nearby, and he had enough ammunition to kill every student in the school. Once again, armed intervention by the police saved lives. Now if the Guest's point is that there is no recorded instance of a pistol-packing civilian preventing a mass murder by killing the bad guy, he might have a point. I would certainly like to hear about any cases where it did happen. However, he didn't limit his comment to civilians. He specifically mentioned "even a police officer", as if armed intervention by trained and determined people can do no good, which is patent nonsense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:04 PM I live in Rural Maine. Have all my life (up to this point)I've never seen a Bear in the wild, and I've never had any desire to kill one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:58 PM Eliza, bears that hang around human settlements -- knwn here as "garbage bears" because they ransack garbage bins as they hunt for food -- are sufficiently dangerous that they are usually shot when it is establshed that they cannot be successfully relocated. I agree that hunting bears for sport seems wrong, but even here in Ottawa I have met a fair few people who have had scary experiences with bears. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:41 PM I don't want to shoot bears, Eliza. I don't want to shoot any living thing. Unless I have no other choice. I'd shoot the coyotes if I could get paid for it, though. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:28 PM I was misunderstood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:23 PM I don't have time for silly Amerikan history. I'd rather research the history of capital punishment. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:22 PM Why do Americans want to go out shooting bears?? Unless attacked by one and in great danger, it's a wicked and senseless thing to do. Such huge and beautiful wild animals should be observed, photographed and left in peace to live their lives. Killing, killing, so strange and incomprehensible to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: voyager Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:17 PM A few comments/observations on this latest episode of senseless violence, innocent murder, gun control opinions, etc.... "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members" Mahatman Gandhi Violence is as American as Cherry Pie H. Rap Brown/Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin A Guide to Mass Shootings in America - Mother Jones First we will cry and then we will act. voyager |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:02 PM "keys to the car" We are to imply from this that Mr. Krinkle thinks gun owners, by keeping all their guns, could have deterred George W. Bush from idiocy, it seems. And just how do you envision doing this, Mr. Krinkle? Were you and the rest of the "well-regulated militia" going to kidnap Mr. Bush? It seems you've been reading too much Robert Ludlum. Why don't you try reading some history, so you might just possibly have somewhat of a chance of making sense, for a change? And start with some books about the US, 1783 to 1800. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:02 PM "Or a jug of bleach and a jug of ammonia to make nerve gas." That doesn't produce a nerve agent I don't think, Henry. Lung irritant, and it can cause a person to die from asphyxiation. Of course, my memory ain't what it used to be--and likely never was. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:00 PM Most people over estimate their own abilities. while at the same time under estimating the abilities of others. I wonder how many people's last words were, "I can take him anytime" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:42 PM Because, Dan, many feel certain arguments and claims are either not factually correct or are logically flawed. PDQ, for example, continues to ignore the fact that I and others HAVE agreed that some ownership of guns is BOTH allowed AND defensible. And your own reasoning about sports cars is 'correct', but irrelevant. Sports cars have other purposes than going very fast.... and their uses on highways is much more watched and regulated than guns are. One can have their license to drive revoked for a few speeding tickets.... and 'usually', speeding does not kill anyone, whereas firing a weapon outside a legal range is often/usually done with the purpose of injuring others! OF COURSE weapons at home can and should be 'secured', but you KNOW how often they aren't! Those who insist they should be allowed firearms for 'self-defense in the home usually feel that a gun is of little use if they have to unlock a case or closet and load it before 'defending' their home. There is not enough space on the newspaper's front page for the weekly stories of kids who knew where Dad...(or, sadly, Mom) keeps their guns! A few years ago, my ex-neighbor across the street bragged to me that he had a gun 'available' in every room of the house. He had two girls living at home at that time...under 12. I will repeat this as long as others keep claiming that 'safety and enforcement' are all that are required. "As long as a wide range of firearms are allowed to be kept in the home by average citizens, there will continue to be tragedies following burglaries and kids getting a hold of them!" You simply cannot base the rules and logic on what YOUR abilities and practices tells you are reasonable. YOU will take care....too many others will not! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:41 PM Back briefly on techical points. Re don : "forensic checks on a slug" (or csasing). Easy to modify the footprint(s) before and after a crime. Casing are a little harder and require more than simple hand tools. Don't ask - I ain't tellin. Second point. Yes, semi-autos are easily modified to fire on full auto, as stated many times herein. But, if there is no law restricting mags ("clips" do not include all mags) to five rounds, outlawing gas powered repeaters is useless. I can (could when I did) fire a repeater lever action and pump action AND a bolt action if it's sloppy like a Mauser (got one and it's FAST!)accurately at 3 second intervals, at distance and on fast moving four legged animals. This discussion is not about distance and not about fast moving four legged animals which run MUCH differently than two legged animals. I can (could) knock down what I was shooting at every three seconds without a semi which STILL takes three seconds on accounta that is what takes to aim! Mabey some can do it in less time but that ain't yer average shotter. Sorry if that is kinda graphic under the "circumstances" but I find compelled to explain the details to ensure people who advocate gun laws understand these technical points because, as I HOPE I have explained, these technical points make a BIG difference when enacting GOOD gun laws. Common sense, informed decisions HAVE to be part of it. BTW, 9, one of the largest bears ever taken was taken with a 22. But it's easy to be accurate if you can touch it with the barrel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:14 PM Who is picking on them, Ol'ster... We are disagreeing with their assertion that gun control = banning all guns... And 400... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:07 PM Thanks, Dan. I am simply asking people to acknowledge the right to own a guns as a prerequisite to their discussing the "reasonable restrictions." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:01 PM Why is everyone picking on Bearded Bruce, Henry, Kendall , PDQ .. they have strong opposite opinions like everyone else here has strong opinions. We all agree the gun loopholes need plugged. Enforce the 27,000 laws we have. Do what is right to keep the unstable and criminal from getting a hold of them. I know guys that have custom sports cars, go over 200 miles an hour on the race track. Don't mean they are going go 200 miles an hour on the highway. It is all about stability and rational people vs unstable people. If someone owns a weapon and likes to shoot, ok but secure the weapon so you kid can't take it and do this terrible stuff. If you own something that is dangerous, a firearm, a car that can rocket 200 miles an hour .. secure the keys .. likewise the weapon. Plug the loopholes. Make sure the people purchasing are background checked even with private purchases, get a federal carry law, get rid of the gun show law. We all be a hell of a lot safer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:01 PM When I was on the job I got to fire a Thompson sub machine gun. I was not impressed. Back when I was a hunter, I used to hunt with a .45 caliber flintlock. Your first shot is your best. After that you are just throwing lead at a moving target. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Megan L Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:01 PM Given the average age on mudcat I put this thread down to senile dementia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:57 PM When you give people like George Bush the keys to the car, we have plenty to fear. =(:-( D) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:54 PM They won't talk about that, Ron... It doesn't fit their narrative... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:50 PM "Bill of Rights simply enshrined..." right to own guns. Wrong. It did a lot more than that. For the reasons I recently stated, it made it plain the right to bear arms was put there for a reason---to defend the US through a "well-regulated" citizen army and thereby avoid the necessity of a standing army, since at the time many feared a standing army. Now just why are gun owners still afraid of our own army, navy or air force? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:12 PM When the average gun-grabber says "the 2nd Amendment doesn't say you have the right to own guns", they really saying "you have no right to own guns". Both wrong...you persist in arguing points no one has claimed (at least no one here) A speculation about the 'real' mind-set of someone who never even said what you claim is the wildest form of "straw man" fallacy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:08 PM Or a jug of bleach and a jug of ammonia to make nerve gas. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:07 PM As per usual, pdq jimps all over the NRA BS talking point that those of us favoring common sense gun controls want to take everyone's guns away... That is beyond being a silly statement... Its also an outright lie... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:01 PM Or to live up to the plural "bear arms" part, a single-shot .22 short rifle and a rock. There ya go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:59 PM "Nothing left to talk about." There is much left to talk about. This is not about the second amendment. It is about auto and semi-auto weapons, both pistol and rifle. The requirement of the second amendment can be met by restricting everyone to a single-shot .22, short rifle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:58 PM Anyone that can qualify to own a class III Federal firearms license to shoot a fully auto weapon I have no issue with. They are very well checked out and stable collectors. Not a threat. I own many semi auto handguns and rifles. Other than my semi auto shotgun, they are not very good for hunting. Target shooting yes. The AR and AK biggest problem is that in gun shows, unstable folks and criminals can get them with no check. Add a 100 round drum magazine and it gets sketchy for sure. So fix the loophole. I have had lots of fun firing fully auto weapons ... and they belonged to the sheriff's office. I know lots of people who like to shoot and don't hurt anyone |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:51 PM When the average gun-grabber says "the 2nd Amendment doesn't say you have the right to own guns", they really saying "you have no right to own guns". If they start talking about how many rounds a clip should be allowed to hold or how long a waiting period should be, they are talking crap. They have already said you have no right to that gun at all. Nothing left to talk about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:46 PM Yes, raising more responsible and less whacked-out adults-to-be is a noble objective... Until we do, let's just keep them from WMDs, thank you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:32 PM This asshole enjoys shooting semi automatic weapons. Even more fun was shooting an M 60 machine gun. Who made you the big decider for everybody? =(:-( I) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:10 PM The government needs to come down hard on gun sales owners and weapons manufacturers. They don't have the right to supply arms to anyone without the test of those having mental ability to handle one. What asshole needs a privately owned semi-automatic weapon in the U.S.? In fact most people don't need hand guns and are so ignorant because they think they know how to use one in a crisis where they are being threatened by hardened criminals who much more adept at the use of them. Suicide rates are commensurate with the availability of guns. Taking them away would decrease the suicide rate by making that option less easy. All this macho gun talk about "rights" is bullshit. As they are made available by a bloodthirsty Congress, there will be more mass killings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:05 PM MtheGM... If I substitute 'abused' or 'disregarded' or 'restrained' for 'enfringed' in the sentence, I see no change in meaning. The right to own a gun was never questioned. The first Dutch, English, French and Spanish who came to the New World walked off the boats carrying guns. The Bill of Rights simply enshrined the right. Restricting it would be an enfringement. That's my take. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:04 PM I also think teaching your kids to love others, respect others and to work hard would go a long way also |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:47 PM Having read this entire thread, I would make a suggestion. As far as the reference to hunting rifles go, most people do well with bolt action guns. I cannot see a situation in which any hunter would require more than a few rounds, and certainly a five-round clip would suffice for anything in North America. However, restricting hunters to a single gun isn't realistic. What are loosely called varmints can be killed with small caliber bullets like .22s. Fox and coyote require a .222 or .223. Big animals like bear need something on the order of a .308 while thick bush is easier to work in with a shorter rifle like a 30-30 (also good for most deer) which while not good for large bear can certainly scare them away. Canada has many people who hunt. Some do for pleasure, something I have never understood because taking any life shouldn't be fun. I also have never understood why civilians require semi-automatics or automatics. If you're too lazy to keep your five-round clip topped up you're probably too lazy to go get your own meat. In the times I have killed animals for food, either for my own family or the families of others, I have never felt 'good' about doing so. It was a necessity at the time. These days I have no rifles. I don't hunt anymore, although if I needed to I'd still be adept using snare wire or traps. Meat is meat. I have no love of guns or rifles. Rifles are simply tools to me. That's it, that's all. As for the argument that big brother is going to confiscate your weapons, maybe yes, maybe no, but most people would be too chickenshit to fight, anyway. I fail to see what good an automatic would be against drones, body armour or armoured vehicles. So that is, imo, a bullshit argument. I wish the USA good luck ridding the country of assault rifles and as Dan has said, getting control over who can have handguns. Again, I'd suggest law wherein the use of a gun in the commission of a crime is a mandatory 20 year jail term, no parole, and death resulting to innocent people in the commission of a crime be a mandatory life sentence, no parole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:45 PM Sandy Hook Shooting Prompts 'Unprecedented' Run on Guns, Assault Rifles Across the Country Neetzan Zimmerman Gun store owners across the country are reporting record sales in the aftermath of last week's massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. One local proprietor told Huffington Post customers were particularly interested in combat-style assault rifles like the one used by shooter Adam Lanza to commit mass murder. Though it's not unusual to see a spike in the sale of weapons after such incidents, at least one shop owner said the volume of prospective customers this time around was "unprecedented." "We already have tons of customers because of Christmas, hunting season is peaking right now, and not to mention, the election," said Larry Hyatt, owner of the largest independently owned gun store in America. "But this tragedy is pushing sales through the roof. It's like putting gasoline on a fire." Hyatt Gun Shop is notable for being would-be Obama assassin Jerry Blanchard's gun shop of choice. Meanwhile, at least one gun store owner is extending a special discount to teachers who are interested in applying for a conceal-carry permit in Texas. "As we do with veterans, I would offer them a discount," said Crocket Keller, owner of Keller's Riverside Gun Store near Austin. "Our normal rate is $110.00, so I would give them a rate of $90.00. If they are teachers, we would be more than happy to do that." Keller previously made headlines after refusing to allow non-Christian Arabs, Muslims, liberals, and anyone who voted for Obama into his conceal-carry class. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:40 PM Yep. Improvised weapons. Raise your children to be human beings. Combat mental illness. Timothy McVeigh didn't use a gun. The 9-11 terrorists could have been stopped with a gun. We need more responsible folks like olddude carrying guns. =(:-( o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:39 PM 'For MtheGM and others who want to understand the odd phrasing in the 2nd Amendment: an introductory phrase was common at that time' ,..,., Thank you for this link, pdq. But, reading the document, I found that the words in general use, to define what the right under consideration must not be, would be 'abused' or 'disregarded' or 'restrained'. This 2nd amendment seems to be the only one to use 'infringed' in this way. Which leaves me still wondering about its precise semantic connotation here, where its employment appears to be unique. ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:39 PM No one here wants to ban all guns, bb... That is just ya'll's default position whenever anyone brings up one single idea to make gun ownership safer and more responsible... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:37 PM In other countries more civilized than ours, gun ownership is not a right but a privilege or entitlement if you like that is met by the gun owner declaring a legitimate reason to own a gun. Only in the U.S. does the government declare that gun ownership is a right. This is a gross distortion of the Second Amendment and don't tell me that you gun owners who have access or own an automatic weapon are a "well-regulated militia", or that you need that gun for any reason at all. You gun owners should have to prove that you deserve to own a gun, are mentally fit, have the ability to know how it works, be licensed, and not to be able to conceal it for any reason, otherwise you have no RIGHT to that gun or weapon. How does anyone know that you wouldn't go nuts and use it to kill children? Just your word for it? And those who use the words "lock and load" should be investigated for their attitude. It's time we kicked the NRA in the butt, put Wayne LaPierre on trial and stop defending Charlton Heston as if he were a benign old man. What we do have a right to, in this country is a decent education, health care, and welfare when it's needed. Gun owners should not have rights to own them |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:37 PM In 1996, in response to a massacre in Tasmania that killed 35 people, Australia banned automatic and semiautomatic guns including .22 rimfires, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns. They also instituted a buyback program for the newly illegal weapons which saw over 600,000 turned in. In the decade after the law was introduced the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:21 PM ". How many folks are going into a crowded school of movie theater with a single shot or even 9 mm with an 8 round clip thinking they are going to take out the entire joint???" NONE- They will find someone who LEGALLY has guns and use the single shot zip gun on them, and take their weapon, even if it is a police officer. THEN they will go to the theatre and shoot into the crowd- Police carry weapons that hold more than enough ammunition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:17 PM Bobert, "What, just because the AR-15 is semi-automatic makes them some kinda single shot 22??? Plus, how many folks have bought that little $5 booklet at the gun shows that tell you exactly how to make your AR-15 fully automatic???" No, I think that people who want to ban ALL guns should be honest and NOT say ASSAULT RIFLE when they mean "Anything that looks like it might be dangerous" And the USE of that $5 book is a felony, and ALREADY OUTLAWED- HOW MUCH GOOD HAS THAT DONE??? (yelling because this is not the first time I have stated this.) IF IT IS ILLEGAL, why would passing MORE laws make it work any better? How about we enforce the laws we have now, which make felons ( including pot smokers) NOT OWN GUNS! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:12 PM For those who think that gun ownership can be eliminated: "Improvised firearms are not solely the province of the criminal element, however; they are also used by insurgents. During the Japanese occupation of the Philippines during World War II, the paliuntod, a type of improvised shotgun, was commonly used by guerrillas and the joint American and Filipino soldiers who remained behind after Douglas MacArthur's withdrawal. Made of two pieces of pipe that fit snugly together, the paliuntod was a simple, single shot open bolt design. The shell was placed in the breech of the barrel, which was then fitted into the larger diameter receiver. The receiver was capped at the breach end, and had a fixed firing pin placed to strike the primer of the shell. When the barrel was pulled sharply to the rear, the firing pin would strike the primer and fire the gun.[5][6] These improvised firearms are still in use by both criminals and rebels in the Philippines.[18][19]" The US manufactured this type of shotgun and dropped them in Europe during WW II. Two pipes, one nail, one piece of wood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:10 PM You are in la-la land, bb... What, just because the AR-15 is semi-automatic makes them some kinda single shot 22??? Plus, how many folks have bought that little $5 booklet at the gun shows that tell you exactly how to make your AR-15 fully automatic??? Yes, Captn... A weapon will be found... How many folks are going into a crowded school of movie theater with a single shot or even 9 mm with an 8 round clip thinking they are going to take out the entire joint??? And no, Sugarfoot Jack... If I want to I can back a U-Haul rental truck into the parking lot at the Richmond State Fair where they conduct these gun shows, fill it up with AR-15s and AK-47s, thousands of rounds of ammunition, a case of "How to make your A%-15 or AK-47 Fully Automatic" drive off with everything and guess what??? Nothing gets reported to anyone... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,mg Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:08 PM A gun was drawn on the murderer in the Clackamas shopping mall shooting recently. He did not fire for fear of shooting an innocent bystander. But when the gun was noticed, the murderer shot himself. I hzve read, perhaps here, that that is what happens..when they see the law enforcement, they shoot themselves. So perhaps even unloaded guns would have some effect. Count on it...innocent people will be shot by people shooting the killer. It will happen. But it might save 10 lives and cost 1. And I don't think all those other scenarios are likely..50 people being shot because everyone is shooting everyone else. It usually would be clear who the murderer was. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 12:34 PM Bobert, I'll let you know when that happens.As long as the intent is there, a weaPON WILL BE FOUND. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Dec 12 - 11:52 AM Bobert, since "the general public to have more assault rifles in their hands " and they are PROHIBITED NOW, what would additional laws do? An assault rifle is a select-fire (either fully automatic or burst capable) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. It is not to be confused with assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge. Examples of assault rifles include the StG 44, AK-47,[2] M16 rifle, QBZ-95, INSAS, Heckler & Koch G36, and Enfield SA80. Section 922 Section D Bowleg 1-9 (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person - (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year (2) is a fugitive from justice; (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; (5) who, being an alien - (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26))); (6) who (!2) has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; (8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that - (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and (B)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or (9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 18 Dec 12 - 11:41 AM "Now the full tracking of a firearm to the last owner is flawed because of private sales do not require paperwork" Aren't the sellers required to phone the FBI and other agencies to ensure the buyer doesn't have a criminal record and is fit to buy the gun? This is how they know how many guns are sold (legally) in the US. This was reported in a UK broadsheet but I can't find the reference for love nor money; apparently there have been millions of guns sold in 2012 already. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:53 AM Bottom line here is that it looks as if we are going to get some sane gun control policies, like it or not... Bottom line, part 2... There is no reason for the general public to have more assault rifles in their hands today than are in the hands of our current military... Bottom line, part 3... For all you who are sticking with yer "Gun's don't kill people, people kill people" mantra, what are you going to say after sane gun controls take effect and murders and go down??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:48 AM Every weapon sold by every gun manufactured is test fired and the weapons case is stored in a database for law enforcement. That is already done. Now the full tracking of a firearm to the last owner is flawed because of private sales do not require paperwork |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:48 AM "Shall we all agree that we should have laws prohibiting private ownership ( except in very controlled cases ) of AUTOMATIC weapons? " Automatic weapons are banned and have been since 1934, not 1968. For MtheGM and others who want to understand the odd phrasing in the 2nd Amendment: an introductory phrase was common at that time |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:38 AM John P, it was not you who called me a moron, it was some one called the leveller. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:38 AM that was me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:36 AM What we need, Bearded Bruce, is the will and funding to actually enforce and update the federal gun laws with a non-political agency whose mission remains constant through administration changes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:35 AM Well that ad might well be the last for Bushmaster. Here are a few unexpected developments! Read on. In an incredible response to American anger over the Sandy Hook massacre, the owner of the nation's largest gun and ammunition manufacturer — which includes notable brands like Remington and Bushmaster — is putting the company up for sale because of the Sandy Hook shooting that took the lives of 20 children and six adults. Bushmaster has quickly become known as the infamous brand of rifle used in the Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Cerberus Capital Management, which created Freedom Group, now the parent company of Bushmaster, Remington, and Marlin, says it's just not worth the attention and hassle after Sandy Hook. "It is apparent that the Sandy Hook tragedy was a watershed event that has raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level," Cerberus states via a press release: The debate essentially focuses on the balance between public safety and the scope of the Constitutional rights under the Second Amendment. As a Firm, we are investors, not statesmen or policy makers. Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients who are comprised of the pension plans of firemen, teachers, policemen and other municipal workers and unions, endowments, and other institutions and individuals. It is not our role to take positions, or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate. That is the job of our federal and state legislators. There are, however, actions that we as a firm can take. Accordingly, we have determined to immediately engage in a formal process to sell our investment in Freedom Group. "According to Fortune's Dan Primack, Cerberus' sale of Freedom Group is 'not a financial decision,' as the holding company's value is 'artificially low,' and a buyer will be hard to find," Neetzan Zimmerman at Gawker notes: However, it is worth noting that the California State Teachers' Retirement System, one of Cerberus' largest investors, said yesterday that it would review its indirect investment in Freedom Group in light of the Newtown tragedy. Also yesterday, Walmart unexpectedly ceased online sales of the Bushmaster assault rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza, though its unclear how long the moratorium will last. Dick's Sporting Goods, another major retailer of sporting rifles, said in a statement this morning that it would be suspending the sale of semiautomatic rifles in all stores nationwide for an indefinite period of time. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:30 AM There is only one avenue to getting rid of guns. Congress. Those clowns can't even agree on what to fight about. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." We send them to Washington to do our bidding, and we keep sending thje same type of person, so, we are at fault. We get the kind of government we deserve. John P, sorry, I'm wrong again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:08 AM Yowza, bobad. That thing you linked to: it's, um, amazing. I imagine the thinking process that led to that advertisement -- both the copywriter's and the client's -- and my brain goes Tilt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:57 AM I would add some restriction on gun advertising to the list of suggestions. Perhaps a total ban or some form of limitation as we have in Canada on tobacco and alcohol. This kind of ad for the Bushmaster, the weapon used in the recent tragedy, is illustrative of the need for some type of controls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:48 AM U.S Constitution: Article. V. (Bold added) The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. So the Constitution does provide a "bottom up" means of amendment. It's just a matter of getting the legislatures of at least 34 states to say they want to meet somewhere and talk about it. This means of amending the Constitution has never been used. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:42 AM I listed my 'personal' batch of suggestions as a starting point for discussion, knowing full well that enabling many of them thru acts of Congress or in any individual state would be difficult. Of course there is no individual or office in the US that could wave a magic wand and demand compliance. I am not sure exactly how much a president could do on his own, and I suspect Obama is now consulting with legal... and political... experts to work out just what he CAN do legally and with political help. I do know that presidents DO have certain powers to issue emergency orders in some circumstances, but I doubt this would help with any long-term solutions in gun controls. Now... I am glad to see folks weighing in with positive, concrete suggestions... such as test firing all weapons prior to sale and adding their ballistics to a database. I'd be willing to see a price increase on ammo...etc... also(it hasn't stopped tobacco sales, but it has made some TRY to reduce their habit) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:40 AM Olddude, it's your turn. You have several times advocated having more armed people in every crowd. I think your idea is that if someone opens fire, they'd get taken down quicker. I have a very different expectation for that scenario. I'd like you to refute it if you can. Crazy person with gun pulls it out and starts shooting in a crowded shopping mall. Armed Bystander #1 (AB1) sees it and pulls out his gun to take down the shooter. AB2 sees AB1 with a gun in his hand and tries to take him down. AB3 sees AB2 with a gun in his hand and tries to take him down. AB4 sees a whole bunch of people with guns and tries to take them all down. Pretty soon there's eight or ten people with guns blazing away at each other with hundreds of normal people in the cross fire. I could easily see the body count from "friendly" fire reaching 50 or more. Since they're not members of a militia, our armed "defenders" have no way of knowing which are the good guys and which are the bad. What's your proposal for ensuring that the Armed Bystanders are shooting in the right direction and that they don't hit anyone but the bad guy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:36 AM Shall we all agree that we should have laws prohibiting private ownership ( except in very controlled cases ) of AUTOMATIC weapons? And the ASSAULT Rifles should be included? And that those under 21 years of age, with a felony conviction, or with a mental condition should be restricted from having guns? Will that have stopped this massacre? Since these HAVE BEEN THE LAWS SINCE 1968, I fail to see what anyone here wants BESIDES banning all guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:28 AM "John P, you called me a moron, that's why I brought up IQs." Sorry, Kendall, I didn't. You must have me confused with someone else. I have accused you of making knee-jerk responses to a complicated issue. I'm glad to see that you want to get rid of automatic weapons and the influence of the NRA. I couldn't agree more. How do you feel about "shall issue" laws for concealed-carry permits? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: DMcG Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:05 AM They would not. They would see it as a threat, another "Foot in the door" thing. Precisely so, kendall. I'm not intending to tar all gun owner's with this brush, but there seems to be a substantial group whose argument can be summarised thus: It's not a gun issue ... so we won't do anything about that ... it's a mental health issue ... which we won't do anything about either. Not a very encouraging stance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:40 AM Perhaps pass a law stating that gun ownership requires approval and training by the NRA. Let them charge each gun owner a substantial fee, about double the purchase price of the gun. Then allow individual or class-action lawsuits of negligence against the NRA for any crime using said approved gun in any illegal manner. Once a court of law determines that the gun was used illegally or a felon is convicted using said gun the burden of proof in defense falls on the NRA! This law would apply to the approved gun notwithstanding who uses it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:32 AM They would not. They would see it as a threat, another "Foot in the door" thing. No president has the power to change the constitution, and he has so many enemies he would be lucky to survive such an attempt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: DMcG Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:01 AM Bill asked for some new ideas. I only read the first 100 or so posts, so maybe this has been said before. Personally, I'd like to get rid of all the guns, but that's not going to happen any time soon. So, let's pay attention to something the gun supporters are saying, take on their 'people kill people' slogan and say maybe they are partially right, how you deal with the mental health issue is part of the problem. So I suggest you double the price of every bullet and gun and pass the additional revenue into a hypothecated budget for a national mental health fund. Oddly enough, I suspect the gun supporters are unlikely to think that's something they could support either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:56 AM Don, as a non-American who pays attention, I think I can help answer your question. I'm not sure a national referendum, as such, is technically possible in the U.S. The United States is 50 sovereign states, a federal district and some territories, all flying in a formation that is not necessarily close, guided by the Executive Branch of the federal government and the Supreme Court in compliance with the Constitution. That's why they have an Electoral College; the national popular vote for the Presidency is tallied by state and it is the states' weight in the Electoral College that determines which candidate wins. Canada is a federation of provinces under a Westminster-system parliament. We could do it -- in fact, we have done three national referenda, the most recent in 1992 over the proposed Charlottetown Accord -- because the federal government is the boss of us all. Australia and New Zealand -- ditto, with minor variations. I believe the United Kingdom would actually have a hard time doing a binding national referendum. Technically, I think the vote would have to be conducted separately in England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:35 AM Would either of the sensible posters like to answer my question re Obama issuing an executive order for a referendum, not on banning, but on genuinely effective tight control, which would be much more likely to elicit a positive reaction from a majority of voters. Faced with a positive response, politicians would have to be very sure of themselves to ignore it, while Obama no longer needs to care about votes. Does he have the authority to do any such thing? Kendall, or Bill D, any thoughts on this? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:18 AM ""I would create a national database of owners, serial numbers of ALL guns and all those who use weapons in crimes... and perhaps more. This might be the easiest idea to pursue. Perhaps some of it already exists."" Good idea Bill, and I would add to that compulsory test firing of every weapon sold, with cartridge and slug added to the database. I imagine the cops would be overjoyed if they had an automatic means to find murderers by forensic checks on a slug. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:10 AM Let us suppose for one moment that it may be possible to reduce and finally ban completely gun ownership by the public in the USA. Would it be enforcable, and if so, how would it be undertaken? Could there be, for example, a longish period of armistice, where folk hand in their weapons voluntarily; closure of all retail units which sell guns; then house searches, penalties and fines; ban on sales of bullets (or whatever one loads these things with); severe and swingeing sentences for shootings; Government campaigns on TV and the Press to win the hearts and minds of the people, and so on. But would the American people ever submit to this? Looking at this list, I can't see it being embraced by them much. In fact, it might provoke riots! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 06:56 AM As BillD said in his original post,What we need is a grass roots campaign to get rid of all automatic weapons, and every congressman and Senator who is in the pocket of the National rifle assassination. Does anyone not understand what I'm saying? I'm tired of being misunderstood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 18 Dec 12 - 06:14 AM Bill D, you are right on with your ideas. Now, get them past congress. That is the REAL problem. Jack, I quoted some old stats. Do you know the difference between lying and just being mistaken? A liar is one who says something he knows to be false. I am not a liar! I admitted being mistaken. By the way, I don't really expect an apology,pedants never apologize, they don't have to because they are never wrong. John P, you called me a moron, that's why I brought up IQs. Part of being a liberal is the willingness to allow others to have a different opinion. I believe I do that as a matter of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:47 AM SEMANTICS: Incidentally, the word 'infringed' appears to be used in the 2nd Amendment in an odd, perhaps obsolete, sense. What, precisely, do all you upholders of the amendment take it to mean? The intended implication would appear to be that the right should not be disregarded, or contradicted, or set at nought; but in what sense does 'infringe' reference any such actions? ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:33 AM Like clip, like brain, Hen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:58 AM I agree with everyone who disagrees with how the media presents guns. I've been in the military. I had a collection I sold off. A gun should either be locked away or on a person's person. Not left in a car or in a closet. Just like in the military. I enjoyed my AK47 and Ruger Mini 17. Fun to empty out a clip. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:16 AM "If you're not from the U.S., worry about things in your own backyard." The US is my backyard, Henry. Go fuck yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Date: 18 Dec 12 - 12:15 AM Trouble is Henry, You export your back yard to us. Our kids pick up on your gangsta rap , wargame jargon, crime stories... The USA is the dominant culture in the world, and as such it has responsibilities beyond its shores. Lets be honest. Maybe you DO need to shrug and say, we love our freedoms and the price of it apparently is that now and then something terrible like this happens. We ain't perfect. Sorry about that. No more of this bursting into tears and hypocrisy. Its going to happen again in the new year and every year after that. It must be borne. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 18 Dec 12 - 12:02 AM The ignorance of some Mudcatters, like most Americans, about their own history, about the 2nd Amendment, and even about grammar, is discouraging. First let's have the exact wording of the 2nd Amendment: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It shows, among other things, ignorance of grammar, to allege that belonging to a militia was not intended by the 2nd Amendment to be a requirement for bearing arms. The obvious meaing of the Amendment is that "Since a well-regulated militia is essential to defend the US, there is to be no restriction on bearing arms." That is; we need freedom to bear arms in order to serve in the militia which is to defend the US. Yet again, at the time of the Bill of Rights there was a strong fear of a standing army; the militia was to substitute. If you have only a citizen army a general is unlikely to be able to make himself dictator. But we do need an armed force, ran the reasoning, in order to defend against British attempts, probably from Canada, to reverse the Revolution, and to defend our homes against Indian attacks--and probably, in the South, against slave uprisings. So every able-bodied (white) man is to be armed and to be ready to be part of a militia at any time. In fact, there is to be training for these men ("well-regulated")---which turned out to be a pathetic joke, as I've already noted in the thread. Relying on a militia for national defense quickly proved to be a disaster--people like Washington already knew this--but it took quite a while for a standing army to be accepted. However, at this point, unless you are still afraid of British invasion, Indian attacks. slave uprisings or a standing army, therefore, the 2nd Amendment has lost all usefulness. It is in fact at this point a curse---since gun rights groups can and do always wrap themselves in the Constitution--- a tactic which cannot be used anywhere outside the US to turn back gun control efforts. But knowing about the history is the first step to dealing with the 2nd Amendment and its defenders. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Dec 12 - 11:18 PM Leave the guns alone. Combat mental illness. If you're not from the U.S., worry about things in your own backyard. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 17 Dec 12 - 11:01 PM It's me... I'm back because this is just sOOOO inane in many ways but very important (sue me). Sooooo, are youse keen to write Amendment 2a? I posted my proposal. Post yours. What would you write in the next amendment? WE, the peeps, are pissed and we... ??? Is that an odd request? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:56 PM You CAN ban... or severely limit... commercially mass-produced ammo. And for many types, VERY few will be able to melt enuf lead and obtain the powder necessary to amass the huge stock some of these nuts collect. 10) (almost forgot) restrict easy access to casings and black powder |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:23 PM ya can't ban bullets, guys like me make our own, melt down tire lead and reload or swag our own jacketed bullets. Guys who shoot a lot and I do, reload their own. even if you ban that, most people have the equipment and primers and power to last the next 20 years .. that won't work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:21 PM damn near everything you said Bill is already on the books. If you try to buy a weapon and you are a convicted felon, yup the licensed dealer is required to report it ... other than the assault ban which we did have a few years ago there is little new in your suggestion. Why doesn't it work, well private sales are not required to have a BG check and the gun show loophole makes that a reality. Hence it is all negated. Like I said plug the hole in the dam and then the 27,000 laws will make sense that we already have |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:20 PM Perhaps Fox is consulting the NRA about what to say... he said cynically. ------------------------------ Now, let me clarify what my draconian suggestions would NOT include. If you were a farmer in Kansas who kept a .22 rifle to shoot vermin near your barn, you would likely have NO trouble getting your permit okayed. If you were a rancher in Wyoming who sometimes needed and even more powerful rifle to deal with predators... it would probably be routine for YOU to submit forms and be approved. If you live in the West Virginia mountains (as a friend on mine does)and often supplement your diet with venison, of course you may have the *necessary* firearms..(DO buy the permits) If you collect antique firearms and have relevant permits... no problem. If you are a licensed private investigator who sometimes encounters dangerous situations, and are sometimes threatened in the line of your work, it is 'likely' that you can keep your sidearms... if you have complied with all relevant laws. A good proportion of hunters... who do not claim the need to 'hunt' with semi-auto AR-15s and such... are likely to be allowed to continue hunting... birds, deer, etc.... just refer to the rules 1-9. I am NOT....yet... suggesting we deny those uses. I only assert that the definitions of 'need' as to firearms needs to be tightened a lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:06 PM Kendal says, "John P my IQ is 140. whats yours?" I don't know. I don't think it's pertinent to this discussion. Why do you? Is there any chance you could actually respond to the things I said, rather than trying to say you're smarter than me? When I posted a list of laws I would like to see, none of which exist yet, your response was to say they already exist. What's IQ got to do with it? Everything I've seen you write previous to this discussion has made me think you're an intelligent and honorable person. Can you understand how frustrating it is to try to have a rational discussion on a topic, only to have you respond with really old and tired bumper-sticker slogans? "There's plenty of laws on the books, but criminals ignore them" and "guns don't kill people, people kill people". I believe you are really smart, but you don't seem to be bringing your brains to this discussion. How about if you go back and read what I really said, and then really respond to it? Perhaps we could take my points one at a time. Let's start with the fact that a gun in the home is four times more likely to be used on a friend or family member than on an armed intruder. What do you think we should do about that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:55 PM Well, surprise, surprise. FOX news has said its broadcasters/reporters will NOT discuss gun control in the wake of the Newtown murders. Another heroic news organization at work. So, the first amendment ain't but the second amendment is? Gotta love them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:22 PM The last time there was BIG outcry... after the shooting of Gabby Giffords, the NRA did just that... refused to comment and answer questions while everyone bewailed the poor victims. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:19 PM Yeah. Real stalwart defenders of America's freedoms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:01 PM The NRA is not stupid... they know when to lay low & hope things settle down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:31 PM Seems the NRA has been unavailable for comment. Likewise with Republican supporters of the NRA. Wonder why that is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:21 PM And we should use the guillotine on all firearms offenders. =(:-( o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:12 PM Something important for your list, Bill: Limit the amount of ammunition one can buy and legally posess. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:01 PM [Kendall] Jack, I'm still waiting for that apology. What fucking apology? You knowingly repeated a bunch tired and often-refuted NRA propaganda you had been shown to be bollocks a couple of hours before, making no effort whatever to check any of it. You aren't just a liar, you have to rehash other people's lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:00 PM "Should people from other countries mind their own business?" On an international forum? Dream on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:59 PM Henry, The .223 (or 5.56 mm) is legal in my state but it is not allowed for deer hunting in some states. If you are a good shot or get close enough, almost any gun will take down a deer. My grandfather used a 25-20 made in about 1895, but that was a long time ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:58 PM I will add: 8)Any gun store which needs to deny a sale for any reason, must REPORT the attempted buy to authorities. 9)I would create a national database of owners, serial numbers of ALL guns and all those who use weapons in crimes... and perhaps more. This might be the easiest idea to pursue. Perhaps some of it already exists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:50 PM Mister PDQ... I WILL "drag you into" the ongoing debate...by name.. when it is you who is carrying the banner for just accepting the status quo and letting such crucial issues be decided and influenced by outmoded concepts. If you wish to just read from the sidelines, now that you have "said all that needed to be said", quit tossing in your 2 cents worth! ----------------- Olddude said: "Let responsible well trained people have their guns but come up with a way of keeping them out of the hands of criminals and unstable people. " You miss the point that almost anyone can be trained and **considered** responsible until they prove otherwise. Even those who cannot be, or are deranged, or criminals can steal weapons! This boy WAS refused the purchase of a rifle shortly before the shootings. "Oh, never mind, I know where my survivalist mother keeps hers!" I of course, like the idea of closing the loopholes of gun shows and internet sales. But, Dan... what will you do about millions of assault weapons and handguns with large magazines already out there... many already IN the hands of criminals and the unstable! I'm sorry, but what I see in the idea "...Let responsible well trained people have their guns but ..." is.. "Don't take MINE!".. and everyone who HAS those weapons will define themselves as 'responsible' and resist any changes. If ONLY proven responsible folk who actually NEEDED them had guns, I would shrug... but reality is otherwise.... and even IF 75% of everyone agreed with ME, it would be very hard to implement any changes! So... what are MY ideas? (since I am so loud about things?) 1) I would immediately reinstate the ban on sales and imports of assault weapons 2) I would require ALL privately owned such weapons to be turned in to National Guard armories, with a certain buy-back % of their value.. costly, but worth it) (I am not sure what I would recommend be done with the weapons... but armories can be breached.) 3) I would ban the sale of many types of ammunition... you can guess which types. 4) EVERY known possessor of ANY gun permit would be required to RE-register and be reevaluated... and like drivers, be re-checked every few years. ANY misstatement about number & types of weapons owned would be grounds for revocation of their permits and/or jail time! 5) ANYONE caught using an unregistered firearm, whether in a crime or not, would receive a LARGE fine and some jail time. 6) ANYONE who qualified to have a permit for certain firearms would be subject to random inspections to prove that they had current possession and proper safeguards. 7) I would promote and lobby ALL members of Congress to revisit the 2nd amendment and TRY to pass a reasonable version that addresses the stuff that the Founders could not have imagined. ......now, that's a set of ideas... which I shall send to my congressman & senators. Anyone feel like piggybacking on my ideas to YOUR representatives? I won't complain a bit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:40 PM The .223 is a very accurate round. At a long distance. I'd use one to hunt deer. I had a Ruger Mini 14. A good gun. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:39 PM They are not always intended to punish the bad guy. However, thay should also "punish the bad guy" in addition to their educational function, if such there is. Try again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:15 PM "Of course there are plenty of gun owners who will contend that since an AK-47 can be used for hunting, they should have a right to own them. Well, if the government has a right to say you can't hunt moose with a .22 because you're more likely to wound the animal than kill it, it should have the right to say you can't have that AK because you're more likely to use it to shoot your neighbor than a deer." ~ Bee-dubya-ell Quite often, laws, rules and regulations are intended to educate people as to the right thing to do. They are not always intended to punish the bad guy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:04 PM Sorry, PeeDee, but the .223 is a standard military round, has a jacketed bullet, and is considerably more powerful than a standard .22 long rifle cartridge. They are nothing alike. You're just displaying your ignorance, once again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:41 PM The diameter of the slug fired from the Bushmaster was .223 inches, the slug fired from a 22 rifle is .220 (as far as I can tell) so there is very little diference. Neither should be used in hunting deer, boar, similar large game animals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:32 PM There you go again, Lizzie. The voice of sensibility. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:29 PM It's a fundamental tenet of US law that a right, once extended, can only be rescinded or limited if its free exercise denies others the free expression of a more fundamental right. Though the practice of chattel slavery was perfectly legal when the Constitution was framed, it was later determined that the right to own slaves was trumped by those slaves' more fundamental right of freedom. Does the right to bear arms conflict with a more fundamental right? It depends on what arms we're talking about. People have a right to feed themselves and to feel safe in their homes. For many, whether you or I agree or not, owning a gun for purposes of hunting food and personal protection is part and parcel of securing the fundamental right of life itself. On the other hand, owning a firearm which is not likely to be used in securing a fundamental right cannot be considered a fundamental right itself. Most semi-automatic rifles in private ownership are used for non-hunting recreational purposes. Last time I checked, recreation is not a right guaranteed by the Constitution or by subsequent legislation. Life is. When the two come into conflict, even though it's a rare occurrence, Bubba's right to shoot an AK-47 at tree stumps gets trumped by his fellow citizens' right to life. Of course there are plenty of gun owners who will contend that since an AK-47 can be used for hunting, they should have a right to own them. Well, if the government has a right to say you can't hunt moose with a .22 because you're more likely to wound the animal than kill it, it should have the right to say you can't have that AK because you're more likely to use it to shoot your neighbor than a deer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:29 PM "Compassion is a far more powerful weapon than violence. Let us all become weapons of mass compassion" — Carlos Santana |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:29 PM Hmm, dateline on that Columbia Law School article is from almost 2 1/2 years ago. I wonder how people would respond today? No doubt there will be plenty of polling done and it'll be interesting to see where sentiments lie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:26 PM ""Should people from other countries mind their own business? Should Amerika mind its own business?"" Should trolls stay under their friggin' bridge and mind their own business? I think so. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:10 PM A friend of mine said tonight that some of the posters on here sounded like a cruel parody of Mel Gibson in Braveheart. You may kill our children, but you'll never take our guns! Seems to be what some of you are implying. It's an awful high price to pay for the right to bear arms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:08 PM Should people from other countries mind their own business? Should Amerika mind its own business? I think so. =(:-( P) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:02 PM Well, in that case, if President Obama really wants to do something about the situation, what's to stop him from issuing an executive order, not to ban or control guns, but to hold a nationwide referendum asking 1). Should privately owned guns be subject to stricter control, YES or NO? 2). Should gun sale be restricted to gunshop premises where background checks can be made, YES or NO? 3). Should auto and semi auto weapons be banned from private ownership, YES or NO? 4). Should enlarged magazines be banned, YES or NO? 5). Should weapons owned by collectors be rendered permanently inactive, YES or NO? It's hard to see how Congress or the Senate could ignore five resounding Yesses. After all, they want to be re-elected, while Obama doesn't have to worry about votes. Anybody know whether this would be possible?......Not will he do it?, just could he do it? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 04:46 PM From the Columbia Law School website: New York, July 26, 2010—Most Americans believe the Second Amendment gives people the right to keep a gun at home, but they still favor limits on certain weapons, according to a new survey co-authored by Nathaniel Persily, the Charles Keller Beekman Professor of Law and Political Science. "At a base level, Americans believe in the right to bear arms and own a gun," said Persily, who collaborated on the poll with Harvard University Professor Stephen Ansolabehere. Persily, a leading constitutional scholar and political scientist, is also the Director of the Center for Law and Politics at Columbia Law School, and co-edited the book Public Opinion and Constitutional Controversy, which examined the effect court decisions have on public opinion. Some 76 percent of the 1,027 persons surveyed online by Knowledge Networks oppose attempts to ban handgun ownership. Almost as many—72 percent—believe the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to own a gun, while 25 percent say the "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" found in the amendment is confined to forming a militia. "The Supreme Court's recent decisions confirming an individual's right to own a gun, while recognizing the constitutionality of some limits, has broad support among the American public," Persily said. {continued at website} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:32 PM Wellll... back briefly... I got three emails and on PM in response to a PM I sent. Here is my response to two of them, FWIW mmm... just to be clear. Are you saying, for the reasons given, another amendment cannot be made? I would have to think carefully about the words to describe my intent, but, off the top of my head - Amendment 2a : Listen up. In the interests of all of youse, and in the name of common sense, anyone who wants to bear arms gotta take an arms saftety course and pass it and have a background check before you can bear arms or ammo. None a youse can bear arms a) if yer too stupid to pass the test b) if ya got a crimial record or warrants or restraining order(s) c) yer a nutbar d) if yer civil union partner says, "A gun? Fuck NO! That asshole would probably use it to rob a corner store to feed his crack habit." e) if you bought a Built Ford Tough F-150 four wheel drive and and then you found out it was a pussy machine and the fuckers at Ford give you a hard time when you try to get shit fixed during the warranty period. I can't think of any others off the top of my head on accounta a lot of ideas slip off since I lost my hair. MERRY HO HO! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,mg Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:10 PM I have a beautiful MP3 of a Welsh Choir singing All through the night in a medley. You can PM me for a copy. However, it is too large to fit into some mail boxes. SOme it works. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:08 PM "We all know what the problem is; no one knows how to deal with it." Kendall, In its relatively short history of 230 or so years The USA has done many great things and solved many deep problems. Most of us on the outside looking in have difficulty in comprehending why Americans ignore what seems so obvious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,olddude Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:04 PM don't hold your breath Captain, he hasn't yet for anyone. But at least Law Enforcement officers past and present do understand what you are saying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 17 Dec 12 - 02:50 PM We all know what the problem is; no one knows how to deal with it. Commenting on the obvious has become an exercise in futility. Jack, I'm still waiting for that apology. John P my IQ is 140. whats yours? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 17 Dec 12 - 02:40 PM Beautiful sentiments Megan L! Empathy and sympathy for those families is strong despite the bickering and our hearts cry! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 02:11 PM Actually, PeeDee, if you want to deal with fact(heaven forfend), the majority of folks in the US in all surveys and polls DO want decent, functional firearms legislation and oppose the NRA/PDQ hysteria - if that's what you mean by "changing the Second Ammendment". Live with it. No back to your regularly scheduled BS. By the way: when do you predict that the jack-booted storm troopers of the opressive U.S. government are going to begin their fiendish oppression? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Megan L Date: 17 Dec 12 - 01:48 PM I was going to post this on the thread for the children but i see it was destroyed by bickering so I guess it has to go here pity the children deserve better from adults No more lullabies No more lullabies my dear No laughing smile to still my tear No joy as you come through the door For you will come again no more Hush you hush my darling baby Hush you hush my own sweet child All oer the world your mother weeps Your father lonely vigil keeps And wonders when we will ever learn To save the child and love again Hush you hush my darling baby Hush you hush my own sweet child My world stopped but theirs goes on My lovely child forever gone For them the shock will pass away But I will love you every day mhtbl 1845 17/12/2012 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Amos Date: 17 Dec 12 - 01:08 PM 1. The Second Amendment does, in fact, relate gun ownership and militia. It is completely disingenuous to pretend that it simply states one clause, the non-infringement clause, and it is equally short-sighted to pretend that the introductory clause concerning the militia is exclusive. The Amendment as written neither states solely that "No law infringing the right to bear arms" shall occur, and neither does it state that "Militia members shall always be allowed to bear arms" to the exclusion of other purposes. It clearly ties the two things together in a loosely-coupled relationship. Loosely enough that it cannot be interpreted exclusively toward militia membership, as written, but it also makes it clear that state militias is the antecedent consideration, the notion behind the dependent clause. 2. The fact that "there is no medical definition of insanity", succinctly stated by Janie, raises the issue of a shamefully large hole in our culture and science--we have a really piss-poor understanding of the human mind, its workings and malfunctions and its genus. We have a mishmash of approaches, some anchored firmly in material biochemistry, some focused on emotion, some dealing with rational management of logic and data, some focused on loss and trauma as remembered incidents, and some tentatively exploring spiritual aspects of thought. We have hundreds of bits and pieces and no working model of the whole, which surely involves all these things. Now there's something we should be ashamed of. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 01:00 PM "They [the people] don't want the 2nd Amendment changed." That will be determined by the people soon enough I expect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:51 PM The fact that there have been 27 amendments to the Constitution does seem to indicate that the original document can be changed if that is what The People want. They don't want the 2nd Amendment changed. Live with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:47 PM The fact that there have been 27 amendments to the Constitution does seem to indicate that the original document had flaws and oversights that people didn't think of when they put forth the original. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:45 PM We are all pretty much saying the same thing. Let responsible well trained people have their guns but come up with a way of keeping them out of the hands of criminals and unstable people. some easy steps, have a federal registration program and conceal carry law so the states don't have such wide variety of mish mash laws. Get rid of gun shows that negate all existing laws. I would help quite a bit. No need to fight about it |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:44 PM No, PeeDee, you resent your simplistic & dogmatic view being opposed by fact and logic. And Spaw, there'es this proverb about teaching a pig to sing... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:31 PM I stated a few facts in the last day or two. I resent being dragged back into this since I already said what needed to be said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:17 PM Since those are about the same thoughts or at least in the vicinity of mine........... PEEDEE-----Help me out here with a mystery.......well, it ain't much of a mystery but maybe you can give some answer anyway. In the past couple hundred years we have seen fit to make certain adjustments to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution based onchanging times and attitudes. We seem to never do that to the second and I wonder why.............Of all the "rights" given by the Bill of Rights why have we messed with the rest and not seriously done much at all with what today might be the very least important right of all of them? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:12 PM Bill D, Are you capable of arguing the topic without dragging me into your post? I said what I said and you are mangling it for your own purposes. Shame on you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:05 PM Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq - PM Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:41 PM At least half the posters on Mudcat don't believe the 2nd Amendment allow for private ownership of guns. PeeDee... can you READ? No one here...including me... claims that the 2nd Amendment does not allow private gun ownership. And we ALL know that the courts have **interpreted** it that way. Currently, under the laws, it IS legal of buy & own many types of guns. Some of us are merely pointing out the linguistic confusion in the wording of the amendment.... and also asserting that no bunch of "Founders" in their right mind would have written it that way if they had any idea what the future of weapons technology held! It is entirely possible that a different assortment of justices would have held that it meant citizens were allowed to bear arms when acting AS a Militia!, and that appropriate arms would be issued when necessary. We are living in fear because the gun lobby convinced them to rule for almost unlimited gun ownership! It was a VOTE... a pressured, emotionally driven VOTE. And any attempt to seriously amend that amendment would get an even MORE emotional uproar! Money would be thrown in huge quantities! Now.... Obama and many other leaders have made noises about "doing something"... Lord knows what they can do... I suspect that THEY don't know yet.... but I'll bet that you will see versions of MY analysis floated in coming weeks! Why? Because it makes SENSE to re-evaluate the Founders wording, given the state of things today! Limiting assault weapons and large magazines will likely be the first step.....we shall se after that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 17 Dec 12 - 11:56 AM "Guns don't kill people! People kill people!" Well, using that same logic the answer's simple - keep the guns and ban people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 17 Dec 12 - 11:32 AM Some young guy in Arizona just shouted at an inquiring TV reporter, "Guns don't kill people! People kill people!" Maybe he was afraid that the TV man was going to take his guns away. But you know, he has a point. Lock fifty loaded guns inside a warehouse and leave 'em alone for two weeks. Now, lock fifty gun-control advocates in a different warehouse and leave *them* alone for two weeks. Some of those people will have strangled each other, but the harmless guns will have committed no crimes. So it's true. However, it's also true that some people *use* guns to kill more people than they possibly could or would with their bare hands. And anybody who thinks otherwise is in a dream world. Now let's talk about laws. If people, not guns, are the problem (as so many people have been programmed to say), we must need more laws against people. Laws, for example, making it harder for some of them to get guns. Or, if always-innocent guns are more sacrosanct than possibly- dangerous people, maybe we want laws to lock up right away anybody we think might some day use a gun on someone. You know, preventive detention. For anybody who's a little odd. Including some legal gun owners. According to somebody. Or there's the possibility of letting everybody pack a gun - including those same people who kill people. Or the possibility of cops in every school and mall and on every street corner. Lots of armed cops, paid for by your taxes, waiting for the less-than-once-in-a-lifetime chance of stopping an armed nut. Those are the choices, gun guys. Take your pick. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:53 AM Lighter: Rep. Louie Gohmert (Republican, by the way) is a certifiable lunatic - look up more of this Texas jackass' idiotic statements & actions. But he's not the problem. Problem is there are literally millions in the U.S. who are just as idiotic, and think the Gunfight at the OK Corral is the norm and that we're still living in 1880. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:31 AM Very well put, Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:28 AM I'm still waiting for an answer to yesterday's question: How many times has an armed bystander taken out a heavily armed intruder bent on mass murder? Meanwhile, a U.S. Congressman tells CNN that if more people had guns, this problem would disappear. For school principals, he recommends the M-4 assault rifle carried by Friday's shooter. For those who say that gun control doesn't work: we'll never know how many mass killings have already been prevented by in-place gun control laws that make it tough for nuts to get guns. And it makes no difference if no practical measure could have prevented this particular atrocity. (Guns legally owned by mom but stolen, school equipped with security system, "suicide bomber" behind the trigger....) It makes no difference, because the point is to reduce the per capita number of shootings nationally to as close to zero as possible. Any particular case is irrelevant except as one more in an endless series of so-called "wake-up calls." If every school principal had an M-4 in her office, would schools be safer or more dangerous? If 250 million Americans were carrying, would there be fewer or more killings? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Dec 12 - 10:04 AM ""Those who think the 2nd Amendment applies only to a militia have no reason to suggest restrictions since they feel the right to private gun ownership does not exist."" That's the trouble when you only take in half of what people say. The point that was made was that the Founding Fathers were talking about "a well regulated militia" and the right of "The People!" If you believe in the Constitution and establish a well regulated militia, then individual citizens neither need, nor qualify, to keep and bear arms. If, on the other hand, you know better than the men who wrote the bloody thing, let individuals keep and bear arms with all the following at their expense.:- 1). A clearly demonstrated need for a gun, together with the type required (hand gun, hunting rifle etc.)! 2). A certificate of proficiency from a Law Officer training facility, with a requirement for an annual refresher and re-license. 2). No multiple ownership of active weapons beyond 1 shotgun, 1 pistol and 1 hunting rifle, except in very special circumstances. 3). No (absolutely NO automatic or semiautomatic weapons) and absolutely no magazines designed to increase weapons' ammo load. 4). Automatic re-assessment when a legal weapon is discharged, other than when hunting or target shooting. But kill the bloody gun shows once and for all, and regulate the activities of all gun sellers, private or commercial. All of the above to be Federal law, applied nationwide. The good guys still have their guns, and the others shouldn't have them anyway. As for collecters, they should have no problem with their weapons being permanently de-activated, beyond those they might legally own on the basis laid out above. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: johncharles Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:46 AM the agressive and unpleasant nature of some of the exchanges on this thread is very sad john |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:39 AM Atta girl, Liz - said to have had Aspergers, rumoured, could be, might be, & Etc. The usual run of factual information we expect from you. I would imagine these are just insane, paranoid internet rumours.......but I thought I'd mention them anyway... 1. WHY did you "think you'd mention them anyway" knowing them to be shite? 2. N omore insane and paranoid than the majority of what you post - totally in keeping. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Will Fly Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:24 AM Will, I'm very sorry to learn of the sadness of your nephew's death. xx Thanks, Lizzie. It was about 4 years ago now, but it still resonates a little more when sad incidents like this latest hit the news headlines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:23 AM I like the idea of tying gun ownership to militia service because it attaches norms of mission-oriented service and civic obligation to the possession and use of firearms. It also compels participation by gun-owners in a group activity in which they get to know each other, and become known, in the context of weapons-handling. Of course, I'm a veteran and child of a veteran. That is how I was brought up to understand weapons, and I believe this approach is more appropriate for an increasingly urbanized culture than the notions of self-gratification and self-aggrandizement that I infer from most of the anti-gun-control rhetoric I have heard and read. I believe those same values of civic virtue underpin the opinions of commentators like Kendall, who uphold an ideal of American strength rooted in each individual's freedom of independent action. (Please correct me if I have this wrong, Kendall.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:01 AM "Can't be." Why do I think we're playing semantic games? Can't be. That never happens on Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:01 AM ""I would like programs that glorify violence taken off television, and video games that do the same outlawed."" AMEN to that Bruce. They keep telling us that people know the difference between cartoon violence and reality, and that probably works while it's Tom & Jerry, or Sylvester & Tweetie Pie hammering seven barrels of s**t out of one another. But when you get to realistic violence toward apparently real people, it's a small step for the latent sociopath to want to try it for real. Then somebody says a wrong word to him and wallop. Ban the bloody lot say I, and I don't care much if others disagree. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Midchuck Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:56 AM In this case it appears to anybody who studies the situation at the time of the Bill of Rights, that the 2nd Amendment did absolutely intend to tie right to bear arms to the obligation to participate in a militia. The recent Supreme Court decison saying otherwise is dead wrong. Can't be. By definition, the Supreme Court is never wrong. Even when they reverse a prior holding of the Supreme Court. Because there's no avenue of appeal from their decision. I think I remember one of the Justices quoted as saying: "We are not final because we are infallible. We are infallible because we are final." Peter |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:49 AM >>>"We know the mother was the sort of fuckwit who buys three guns and a mountain of ammo. So we know quite a lot. What kind of empathy does that dumb cunt deserve when her paranoic lifestyle got a couple of dozen innocent people killed?"<<< Well, as her son is said to have had Aspergers, perhaps she too had it? It is said she liked shooting for the solitariness of it....She also lived in a country where guns are commonplace and viewed very differently from how we view them over here....She died a terrible death, administered to her by her own son...apparently. Can't you let her rest in peace without anymore hatred surrounding anyone concerned? It's over now. It's time for those grieving to very slowly start to somehow find their way back to life and for compassion to be shown to all those who died in this shocking tragedy. By the way, Adam's father, Peter Lanza, it is 'rumoured', was due to testify in the Libor scandal. It is also rumoured that Robert Holmes, the father of the man who shot so many at the Batman film in Aurora, was also due to give evidence. I would imagine these are just insane, paranoid internet rumours.......but I thought I'd mention them anyway... Will, I'm very sorry to learn of the sadness of your nephew's death. xx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:47 AM "Let us provide in our constitution for its revision at stated periods. What these periods should be nature herself indicates. By the European tables of mortality, of the adults living at any one moment of time, a majority will be dead in about nineteen years. At the end of that period, then, a new majority is come into place; or, in other words, a new generation. Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before. It has then, like them, a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness; consequently, to accommodate to the circumstances in which it finds itself that received from its predecessors; and it is for the peace and good of mankind that a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years should be provided by the constitution, so that it may be handed on with periodical repairs from generation to generation to the end of time, if anything human can so long endure." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:42 I like the idea of issuing musket, ball and a powder horn to aspiring militia men, Lighter, while confiscating their assualt rifles and large capacity magazines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Howard Jones Date: 17 Dec 12 - 08:04 AM Living in a country without a written constitution, I find it difficult to understand why the 2nd Amendment should be so sacrosanct. It's just a law - admittedly a very important one - and laws can and should be changed when they no longer serve their original purpose. The US Constitution has already been amended 27 times, so there's no reason why it shouldn't happen again. The original amendments which make up the Bill of Rights were apparently intended to limit the powers of the federal government. What this suggests is that Americans don't trust their governement - perhaps a reasonable position for a newly emerging country in the late 18th century, but is that still appropriate for a mature modern democracy? A democracy of which Americans are rightly proud, to the extent that they are keen to impose it on others. I should know better, having experienced a much greater culture-shock than I had expected when I first visited the US many years ago. Because we share a (more or less) common language and heritage, and because American culture is so familiar to us, we expect you to have similar attitudes and expectations to us. To realise that intelligent and sensible people, with whom I think I should have much in common, believe it is not only normal but desirable for firearms to part of the domestic furniture is something I find completely baffling. I have no great expectations that anything will come of this latest tragedy, apart from a great many crocodile tears among the real ones. The right to slaughter one's fellow citizens seems to be too deeply embedded in the American psyche. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:42 AM The 2nd Amendment guarantees the right of Americans to own 18th century muzzle-loading muskets and single-shot, flintlock pistols. Beyond that it says nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:32 AM The Supreme Court has held recently that gun ownership need not be required to have connection with a militia. The Supreme Court also held something--in 1856 I believe--that was later totally rejected by the US in general. The Supreme Court is, believe it or not, made up of mortal individuals who can make mistakes. There is also a issue of strict constructionism vs a more evolving approach to the Constitution. In this case it appears to anybody who studies the situation at the time of the Bill of Rights, that the 2nd Amendment did absolutely intend to tie right to bear arms to the obligation to participate in a militia. The recent Supreme Court decison saying otherwise is dead wrong. As I noted earlier in this thread, there were three issues meant to be dealt with by the 2nd Amendment: fear of a British attack, probably from Canada; fear of Indian attacks, and fear of a standing army. Now which of these do you think still applies? And, as "Mr. Dooley" stated earlier--I think at the turn of the 20th century--"th' Supreme Court follows th' election returns". But in fact in the Internet Age, the general population can in fact have an influence it has not until now. We may not have to wait for Obama or successsors to replace members of the Court as they shuffle off this mortal coil. There is already a petition on Facebook to repeal the Second Amendment. Even if this is unsuccessful--and let's not be defeatist about it--there can be other petitions about restricting ownership of pistols. And don't hesitate to write actual letters--their rarity makes each one carry a punch. We can in fact pressure our Senators and Congressmen to do something about this revolting situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:50 AM None of us know anything about the circumstances of the lives of the Lanza family. We know the mother was the sort of fuckwit who buys three guns and a mountain of ammo. So we know quite a lot. What kind of empathy does that dumb cunt deserve when her paranoic lifestyle got a couple of dozen innocent people killed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Will Fly Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:15 AM I'm all for a better mental health system - would be great if there were the public will in this country to fund it. But a better mental health system and/or background checks ain't gonna do it folks. Gotta get rid of some of the guns available to the general population to truly reduce the risks. I have a story to tell on this topic, Janie. My nephew was bipolar all his life - diagnosed as such in early teens - and died in his early 30s. He found no help for his condition from conventional medical treatment and spent much of his later life staying in the house with his mother (my sister), working on his computer (he was brilliant with electronics), and finding medications on the internet which he believed helped him through his problems. He tried to commit suicide with pills on at least two occasions, and he and his mother would regularly go through the kitchen and bathroom cupboard contents together, as a kind of therapy - even joking about it - to get rid of this and that substance. One day my sister came home to find his room trashed - totally wrecked - water pouring in from burst pipes. My nephew was lying on the bed, dead from a rifle bullet through his head. The rifle had been in the closet. This was in Arizona, by the way - Tucson. "Luckily", he used the rifle just on himself and on no-one else. We'll never know if, without the rifle to hand, he'd have still been alive now - or whether it would still have ended in suicide by some other method. How many more years might he have had... We'll also never know whether, in a depressed state, he might have killed others at a later date. Who knows? All I know is that the ready availability of that gun was a tragic factor at that point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:07 AM Whatever the state of mind of a potential killer, in order to commit mass urder on this scale he/she has to have access to a gun. Everyone who owns a handgun, assault rifle, semi-automatic or automatic weapon is a potential murderer (I take the point about the need for shotguns if properly regulated - but even in the UK there are issues here as my son, a police firearms officer, will testify) - look at the statistics of shootings in different countries again, for fuck's sake. Anyway, I'd hate to meet any of you gun-totting, macho apologists when you were having a bad day. Grow a pair instead! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:15 PM I think the guns belonged to the shooter. They were registered to the mother legally. But I think they belonged to the son. She bought them for him. Like moms who buy their kids booze. An enabler. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:31 PM Your post is right on Janie - I've been thinking all day about how to say what you just did but you did it much better than I could have. It is near impossible to predict who might do what this guy did - there are numerous people with similar and worse symptoms who would never do what he did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:29 PM Quoting Pete: "When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:27 PM I know we are on the same page, Spaw. Jack, your comment is remarkable for both it's lack of empathy and for the ignorance. None of us know anything about the circumstances of the lives of the Lanza family. It would be nice and safe to believe that people who commit these terrible acts have big signs flashing above their heads that say "I will commit mass murder eventually", and that their family members are always and simply inept, stupid, uncaring, grossly negligent or otherwise deserving of such an insult as you just basely uttered without basis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:00 PM Why don't the gun wackos ever quote the entire 2nd amendment??? Why do the gun wackos think that folks with guns are all okay until they kill a bunch of folks??? Why do gun wackos think they can just repeat the same old NRA BIG LIES over and over as if the rest of us are f'n morons??? Why don't the gun wackos want one single regulation on guns??? Not one... Why are gun wackos, ahhhhh, wackos??? I'm serious... What make you folks think so messed up??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:59 PM No one thing will do it Janie. Now is the time to get serious on all fronts. And Dorothy......My wife and I lived that exact scenario as older 'Catters will recall. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:56 PM The woman in the article Dorothy linked to took the precaution of securing all the knives in the house so her insanely violent son couldn't get at them. Adam Lanza's mother was so determined to win her Darwin Award she kept three guns and enough ammo for a massacre. Not much similarity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:38 PM Very thoughtful and balanced comments from several people on "Weekend All Things Considered" this evening. http://www.npr.org/2012/12/16/167401103/we-have-to-act-on-gun-violence-but-how. What is clear is that a multifaceted approach is needed. One thing I will say as a mental health professional; The fact that a person is mentally ill does not make that person dangerous. Mentally Ill is also a nebulous term. There are lots of diagnoses that support the medical necessity for treatment. Legally, anyone with a psychiatric diagnosis identified in the DSM or the ICD could presumably be legally deemed "mentally ill." I bet 99% of you could come into my office at some point in your lives because you are experiencing some physical signs and symptoms and/or are either having objective difficulty functioning at school, work or with personal relationships and/or are experiencing subjective emotional distress, and there is a psychiatric diagnosis that can be made that will establish the medical necessity for treatment, be it medication, talk therapy or a combination of the two. A diagnosis does not predict the potential for lethality. There is no medical definition of insanity. There are legal definitions that vary from state to state and that all pertain to criminal justice. There is also no magic formula or esp by which a clinician (or a family member or a work colleague) can discern that an individual is dangerous, imminently or in the long term. I won't take the time to hunt it up now, but on Friday evening, again on NPR, a sociologist/criminologist was interviewed who talked about the profile of a mass killer. When asked why that profile could not be used he responded, appropriately, that there are way too many false positives. To paraphrase him, lots of people have the symptoms, but very few have the disease - meaning the vast majority of people who fit the profile would never commit murder, much less mass murder. I'm all for a better mental health system - would be great if there were the public will in this country to fund it. But a better mental health system and/or background checks ain't gonna do it folks. Gotta get rid of some of the guns available to the general population to truly reduce the risks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:34 PM The term "bear arms" has been taken out of context: Bear arms |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:30 PM While others blither on and on about gun control, this mother tells about her son who could end up another shooter if he does not get the help she knows he needs. Do we spend money for the sake of the children or waste it fighting for useless |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,JIS Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:14 PM The right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, yet we place restrictions on speech that are generally uncontroversial. The framers said nothing about restricting child pornography, but it has been held to not be protected speech. The framers made no exceptions for incitement or fighting words but they have held to not be protected speech. The framers made no exceptions for obscenity, but you still can't play George Carlins 7 Dirty Words sketch on the radio or on television without getting fined and risking your broadcasting license. Yes, the 2nd Amendment gives a right to bear arms, but it does not give a right to bear arms sans any regulations or restrictions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:13 PM Finally, yeah.....I got it now........I guess I thought it was obvious but I guess you needed to state it......which confused me. Easily done..... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Midchuck Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:13 PM Summary from Wickipedia: In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. In dicta, the Court listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government. Of course, a Court with more Justices appointed by a liberal administration could very well turn around on the issue. Peter |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:10 PM Spaw - is that assault rifles or jackasses or wild boars that should be readily available? Or all three? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:52 PM My point was for those who insist that the 2nd Amendment does not allow for individual ownership of guns. If someone does recognize the right to own a gun, then we can proceed to work on what constitutes "reasonable restrictions." Those who think the 2nd Amendment applies only to a militia have no reason to suggest restrictions since they feel the right to private gun ownership does not exist. I have now said the same thing three times. Is it clear yet? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:37 PM PeeDee....Have you got one loose? "Militia" is used in the 2nd as is "bear arms" and "keep" and a few other words. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." I said that for me, I have no desire to repeal the 2nd amendment but I think we can get by with restructuring what it means. I just had some other jackass tell me he needed his assault rifle for wild boar hunting. Now THERE is a real reason to make sure they are readily available! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:36 PM BG!.... "All women have balls. They're just higher up." Fookin PRICELESS LASS! Hahahahahaha! Love it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bat Goddess Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM Henry Krinkle -- All women have balls. They're just higher up. (And Sarah Palin is an exceptionally poor example of "Woman" -- beauty queen with no brains to speak of. Not a lot of walkin' around smarts, either. Just my opinion.) Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:01 PM Once again, about half of all Mudcat posters reject the idea of private gun ownership. They say the 2nd Amendment applies to a militia, hence you and I cannot own a gun as an individual. Why do these people rattle off lists of needed gun laws and restriction? They must first admit that Joe Public has the right to own a gun. It's just common sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:47 PM That is delusional, pdq... With that logic you could say that 1/2 the people don't believe that people should own and drive cars if they aren't allowed to drive a 100 mph in a school zone... I don't give a rat's ass about "private gun ownership"... I own guns... BTW, there is a reason why we don't put loaded guns in the crib with the baby... Get real... Lots of stuff can hurt other people and we regulate those things... Back to cars... Cars can kill people... That's why we have laws about how they are used and who owns them... With your logic everyone should be able to drive anywhere they want in any manner they want... Get real, man... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:41 PM At least half the posters on Mudcat don't believe the 2nd Amendment allow for private ownership of guns. Roughly the same group of people rattle of their personal list of mandatory gun laws and restrictions. If you don't have the right to start with, how can you pass laws to control something you don't have? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:32 PM Yeah, strings is right... This ain't rocket surgery here... *Proficiency certification *Registration *No gun show loopholes *Background checks with updated systems *No assault rifles *No big clips Where's the "Obama is going to take away your gun" in that unless you are someone who clearly shouldn't have a gun??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:54 PM It's a very simple solution. Have gun owners licensed and tested. Restrict automatic weapons. Make it more difficult for people to own guns. Guns should not be owned by everyone and their purpose should be carefully defined. No one needs to pack and carry concealed weapons. Stop trying to be macho with gun ownership. It's not a phallic symbol. Support the Brady Institute and campaign. They are actually doing something about the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:36 PM It was of course a pretty unclear constitutional provision, reflecting the fact that it was cobbled tgether by a committee of squabbling frontier politicians with agendas of their own. Not exactly Holy Writ. But even as it stands the clear element in it that shoots holes through the gun lobbies claims is that it doesn't talk about a right of people to bear arms, it talks about the right of "the people" - and that this a whole different thing, "The people" acting collectively have the right to do all kinds of things that individual people can't do - and the other way round. "The people" cant get married, for example. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:35 PM Kendall... "There are some very sharp minds here, all have an opinion of what's wrong with America, none with a realistic solution." Assuming you are talking about the "gun problem"... NONE? Not even me? Good gun laws. Education. Raising the standard of living. Said it scores of times on many gun threads in this forum. I give up. I just thank God we have so many guns and good ol boys in NA. I explained that more than one thread years ago. I brought it up in an interview with a lewy and two colonels when I was being tested for Royal Military College when I was 18. You can search it if you want. I just can't be arsed with any of this shite anymore and it don't matter on accounta, apparently, nobody thinks I have anything of merit to offer. *I* can't do anything about the problem in the US. I don't live there... so I CAN'T care about it anymore. I can only be sad when I watch TV news. Oh... yeah... shit on the Yanks because they got guns? citizens and military? That is just fuckin laughable! No, I do not agree with what they do around the world militarily in concert with big money. But, I like my standard of living and I like their ideals so I just hope they will do the right things in the long run, on all counnts. If you have a better bet or a better solution(s), put it (them) on the table. Otherwise, I gotta lock and load on accounta you guys scare me more than one crazy killing kids BECAUSE you won't even take the necessary steps to stop these kids from being killed. You all just want to grandstand and shout the other guy down and never get the job done because your egos are in the way... it's shameful. Have fun with it. Rant and rave and point fingers and stand yer ground. BOTH sides. That all youse ever do. And children die while you take the moral high ground. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: jacqui.c Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:30 PM Unfortunately, John, some of the government is paid for by big business, including arms manufacturers and the NRA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:04 PM Ya gets the gubmint ya pays for Cap'n |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 04:23 PM Actually in many cases our militia ran like rabbits when they met the red coats. Without the French we never could have beaten them. Anyway, folks, I have tried in my best American English, and some Anglo Saxon to explain where I'm coming from, and it was like trying to pull a Bobcat off a wool blanket. We need federal regulations to deal with this problem, and that is going to be very hard to do as long as we don't trust our government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 16 Dec 12 - 04:21 PM Sarah Palin. A woman with balls. =(:-( °) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Dec 12 - 04:12 PM > ...with women being urged, more and more,so it seems to me, to behave like the worst kind of man... Urged by other women. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:49 PM As usual. Lizzie is the sensible voice. =(:-( )) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Backwoodsman Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:49 PM Not by me, Sandy, I'll still call her 'mother'. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:41 PM Yeh, I know that Backwoodsman, but that is only a matter of title. The consort of the king is usually called queen but Camilla will perhaps be just addressed as rotweiler. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman sans Cookie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:31 PM Wrong, Sandy! Camilla won't be the Queen if Charles becomes King, she will be the Consort - exactly the same situation as exists with Prince Philip, the Queen's husband and Consort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:19 PM Wow....that is bad...........I greatly would prefer the Toad....... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:06 PM Yeh Spaw and you could look forward to Camilla being your queen! Off with your head! :<) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:00 PM LOL@Kendall.....Hey my friend, I have an idea!!! Let's blame the Brits for this entirely. See, every ruling culture as far back as you care to look had a standing army and of course they used it as that is what happens when you have a large standing army. When the British Empire ruled the world they did so with a giant standing army. Then some of us pesky colonists got it in our head to rebel and the home grown militia served us well. So in the effort to stay away from the standing army which we had proven able to beat with just a militia, those dumbass founders wrote up the goofball amendment which seems to have gotten us all in so much trouble. So you see, if the Brits had not stuck with the standing army tradition AND HAD put down the rebellion as proper army should, all would be okay now. .............'Ceptin' we'd all be talkin' funny and eatin' toad in the hole. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:45 PM Who ever closed that other thread, thanks. What took you so long? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:40 PM MtheGM, I used to think you were one of the more intelligent members here, but your recent statement that people who disagree with my opinion is a pain in the ass is simply not true. Go back and read it again. Look, we need some clarity of thought here. I am NOT defending the gun nuts, and I am not supporting the NRA, or the do nothing government. What I AM< doing is trying to point out what we are up against in the regulations department, and the quandary of how to get around 200 years of a bad habit. You folks who don't live here are only aware of the lack of control we have here, and apparently, you can't understand why that lack is such a problem. Put your minds on a solution and get off the raving about the obvious! If this is not clear enough then you are not as bright as I thought. I got As and Bs in English in high school. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:22 PM I am not alone around here in having a child go off the deep end and then try to access the mental health system. For us things eventually worked out pretty well but that doesn't mean I'm happy with the "system." I'm not. One great thing that did happen was that the kids at school had been trained enough to feel free in reporting his dangerous behaviors which I'm sorry to say we missed. So as a given we need more, better, and easier in the mental health field. We need to start seeing ways to tone back the violence which we have built into the American culture as this also comes into play. This too has much to do with mental health. I saw Rudy Giulani the other night say that "74% of these shootings were mental health related and 25% related to guns." He might be right but that doesn't mean we can just forget about the 25% does it. We are long past the time to address the gun laws but let's get started now. Diane Feinstein is introducing an assault weapons bill on Day One of the new Congress. Already they're lining up with the "slippery slope" argument and assorted other 2nd amendment issues. I love all of you but on this issue we may have to agree to disagree. Let me put it bluntly. Fuck the slippery slope. I am an actual card carrying member of the ACLU and I would never expect enough to happen to ever do away with the 2nd but I'm also sick and tired and really pissed that we not doing a damned thing! I think a later model supreme court might be willing to interpret the amendment differently. The founders were scared to death of having a standing army as they just tend to cost lots of money and get into unneeded trouble. They were right of course.............But do we still need an armed militia? No, but hunting and shooting are (or can be) reasonable sports. Just what sport do you use an AK47 in? Let's make some sensible laws though. Consider joining me in saying "Fuck the Slippery Slope" and let's do away with assault weapons. Then let's close up the gun show loopholes and tighten the federal requirement on background checks and waiting periods. Let's also make gun owners show proof of a locked storage cabinet(s) whenever the make purchases. Other small rules and better enforcement could make a big difference to Giulani's 25%. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:14 PM Street gangs in Canada are arming themselves with handguns and assault rifles mostly smuggled from the USA. Halifax, the city I know best and once considered its streets safe to walk at night now has the second highest per capita murder rate in Canada. In the USA gun control seems to be a state government responsibility and some states have good gun control and some have little or none. Problem is that anyone can purchase in a lax state and transport it legally or otherwise over state lines. Canada has a fairly open border with the USA and enterprising smugglers seem able to bypass customs without any great difficulty. Therefore we in Canada share your gun control problem even though we have much stricter laws here. Part of the answer was given by Bruce when he advocates harsher treatment for crooks using guns. I agree with him but Canadian courts see it otherwise, and lazy prosecuters accept plea bargains allowing the crook to plead guilty to a lesser or a single charge. Con-current sentences, double time credits and early manditory parole mean the crook is back on the street much sooner than he would be in the USA. Kendall, I have the highest respect for you and your opinion, but we in Canada are also greatly affected by your laws and we share the shoes in which you walk! I know that some of our problem is of our own making and but our countries share a large bed the damn bedbugs don't care on which side they feed! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:10 PM The NRA and the gun lobby are, unfortunately, not the deciding element in this issue. The gun manufacturers would start going broke and the NRA would look pretty silly if there weren't a massive demand by Americans for firearms. Think about it: 310 million guns but only 300 million Americans. And the guns are still rolling off the assembly lines. But the reasons - never fully explained - must go a lot deeper than the NRA lobbying Congress and threatening the public with tales of Obama coming with thugs to get their guns. The people want guns, dude! Men and women! Guns 'n guns 'n guns 'n guns. It don't matter for what: they just want 'em! They crave 'em! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:08 PM Well, as expected, lots of spurious reasons from the usual suspects for retaining their personal armouries, so all I can say is this: that any country that loves its guns more than it loves its children (and can I just mention Kent State University here) has no right to consider itself civilised. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:03 PM I think that Charmion's idea (6:49 AM)of requiring all gun owners to be members of the National Guard is a good one. That would ensure that anyone 'packing' has had training in the use of weaponry and counseling in the utilities and ethics thereof and that could only be a good thing. Further, some people might well decide that the requirement is too onerous or restricting and give up their weapons. Most importantly, it would be a start. A start in meaningful dialogue. And just maybe it would be acceptable to the NRA/gun lobby. (Far off topic: I wish people would be more aware of the difference between 'discreet' and 'discrete'. The misuse always sounds dumb.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:37 PM "Lizzie, you know as well as I that Fathers don't have that Mothers instinct." Not always the way. My uncle had WAY more maternal instinct than his ex-wife. Had his daughter been brought up by him, she'd have been a very different person I think, far more thoughtful and intelligent.. He's gay, as is his ex-wife... My Dad was far more protective of me than my mother, who did not have much 'instinct' about me at all, for she was way too busy thinking of herself most of the time, but then, my Mum had many problems for various reasons. Had my Dad not been there, I don't know how I'd have got through it all at times. And, I would argue that the 'Mother's Instinct' is dead and dying,for I now see so many women who seem to not give a toss about their babies and children these days...We've killed off Femininity and Motherhood, with women being urged, more and more,so it seems to me, to behave like the worst kind of man... And now, back to guns... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:30 PM Just an observation. Take it for what it's worth to you: I live in a very rural area in the southeastern US. Pretty much everyone around here owns guns, and shooting them is a favorite weekend activity for many. It's rare to go more than a few minutes, particularly this time of year, without hearing a gunshot or two from someone hunting or target shooting. I was just outside for over an hour catching up on some chores and did not hear a single gunshot during that period. To say that's unusual is a huge understatement. It's actually pretty much unheard of. The gun crowd seems to have declared a moratorium on shooting. The only time I can remember it being this quiet around here was after 09/11. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:28 PM Wether or not "People kill people" or "guns kill people" or "people with guns kill people" it's obvious that semi auto pistols and rifles are very efficient tools for killing a lot of people quickly, especially defenseless children. While they're not the only part of the problem we need to recognize that their use is a large part of it and procede from there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:27 PM "...rather than just consisting of his acting all wounded because we can't make out where exactly he is coming from." ~ MtheGM Truth be known, it is not always easy to tell where anybody is "coming from" all the time. I am a minor player on Mudcat and post an average of twice per day. I have no plans to enlarge my role here, not do I have any authority to become an "enforcer". I am simply pointing out that personal attacks don't win arguments. Besides, they are supposed to be banned on Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:10 PM I thank all you folks who are sending me your support via PMs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:08 PM pdq ~~ In what way did questioning the validity as argument of Kendall's statement that he found opposition to his views 'a pain in the ass' constitute a 'personal attack' on him? I should love to 'discuss the issue' with him -- if I could find anything he had said that was worth discussing, rather than just consisting of his acting all wounded because we can't make out where exactly he is coming from. ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:05 PM Lizzie, you know as well as I that Fathers don't have that Mothers instinct. I'm one of the kids of which you speak. My Father didn't give a shit about anyone but his bottle of booze. We had no male role model and one of my brothers acted up, quit school, raised hell, broke into a store with his no good buddies, but Mother coddled him until he spent a night in jail for decking a cop. If I even mentioned his behavior she got really protective. Now, before I go, let me clarify something. This saying People kill people is absolutely true. Gun violence doesn't start with a gun, it starts in the twisted mind of a person. A gun is only dangerous in the wrong hands, just like a chain saw, butcher knife or car. When I stated that many of the regs that John mentioned were already in place, I was referring to Connecticut where this horror happened. Got that, John P? Now I believe that all assault weapons should be banned just like sub machine guns have been for many years. No one uses a AK 47 or a AR 15 to hunt anything but people. As for hand guns, only law enforcement officers and retired law men who qualify for a concealed permit should be allowed to carry There, that's my opinion, for what it's worth, and that aint much. We still need a realistic solution, but all I see here is opinions of the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:54 PM Thou shalt not contradict the omniscient and immutable Saint Liz of Blather. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:46 PM One or two? too bad thats not the reality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:46 PM What Bee-dub said |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John MacKenzie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:27 PM So it's not going to happen again, is it? I mean this only happened because the guy had psychological problems did it? So how many people with mental problems have access to guns? How many people who have access to guns, have mental problems, and of those, how many KNOW they have problems? It's now becom e such a regular occurence, we now only wonder where it's going to happen next time. It WILL continue to happen, and the reason why is pretty obvious. BTW who would want to invade the US? Do you think they would do it without flattening large parts of the country, and the people first? Just think Baghdad, or Japan, or many other places that have been invaded. After a form of blitzkrieg. One or two men with a pistol ain't gonna deter anybody. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:16 PM 2/3 of a majority to changes is not democracy; 50%+1 is democracy! Decisions made by 50%+1 are also subject to being overturned or repealed when the political winds turn just a few degrees. The Founders put those 2/3 and 3/4 majority provisions into the Constitution to insulate the amendment process from the vagaries of politics and public opinion. If an amendment has enough support to survive the process, it's probably not going to be repealed. It's only happened once. If 50%+1 were the standard for amending the Constitution, the rights of those in the minority would be trampled. The only reason an amendment declaring marriage to be legally defined as between a man and a woman, thus making same sex marriage illegal, has not been brought before Congress is that it probably wouldn't survive the 2/3 and 3/4 majority requirements. If 50%+1 were the rule, it would pass in a heartbeat and there'd be no legal gay marriage anywhere in the US. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 12 - 12:15 PM The personal attacks on kendall are pointless and gutless. If someone is incapable of discussing the issue and must resort to personal attacks, don't post anything. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:51 AM ".....my point is Mothers tend to overlook serious flaws in their kids. Enough of this crap. Come up with some solutions or shut up." That's crap. Mothers are very often the ones who are left to deal with children who have problems, because the fathers walk away... There ya go, kendall, I'm throwing your sexist crap back at you.... I also know 2 fathers who've walked away from their children, or refused to accept anything was wrong at all, leaving their wives to deal with all the trauma that came their way. My best friend's husband not only refused to accept his son had Aspergers, but neither did his entire family, so for many many long and difficult months Kimmy was left to deal with all the problems on her own. She went through hell, but she came out the other side, as did her son, eventually, when she'd finally GOT that side of his family to accept the diagnosis. And as for me mentioning Aspergers here, purely because Adam is now reported to have had it, well, time will tell, I guess. But I'll tell you this, there are a LOT of deeply disturbed kids out there...and the adults have been turning away for way too long, even encouraging it. When my kids were younger I remember asking, in a GAME store, if they had any 'gentle' computer games for children which combined intelligence and adventure, but with no violence. The young man told me I was the first parent who had ever asked him that question, because most parents just bought the latest game, regardless of what was in it. Some of these games are horrifyingly gruesome, dark and gory. They are often made for single players only. Do the research on who the people are who design these games, as well as why so many are for single players only...and you might be surprised.... Our children's heads, worldwide, are filled with images that we NEVER had, unless we had lived through a war and seen horrendous things. Many parents let their children play on these games endlessly to the point where the child ceases to be 'in the real world'...It desensitizes them all. Our TVs are FILLED with violent, dark and sinister dramas and films. Hollywood has a GREAT deal to answer for...as do those who make these films, write the scripts, do the special effects etc... I won't discuss Autism in any way again in this thread, nor link it to what happened here, if people don't want to even see a connection...Previous killers from way back were never linked, because they didn't truly understand how the brain worked back then. I've seen an autism meltdown..and it scared me shitless, for at the time I wasn't truly aware of what I was witnessing. I hear them now and then in the home for adults with severe Aspergers, next door to me. The amount of emotional pain which comes out as terrible anger is traumatic to hear. NONE of us will ever know the reasons behind this tragedy, ever. We can all surmize as much as we may want to, and to be honest, I doubt even Adam could have told you the reason he did this. As to the solution? Well, that lies with the American people, but it also lies with the rest of the world, for whilst people continue to watch violence, buy the DVDs, go to the cinema, buy the computer games and never complain, ever, about any of it, nor how the TV pumps out hatred and violence every single day, all day, it will continue to surround our children, to get into their Souls. Some of those children will eventually implode...... And then, everyone can start going "Oh Fuck!" all over again, just like they did with Columbine. There won't BE a solution, because most people don't give a fuck about anything any longer..so long as it doesn't directly affect them, so this will soon have faded into 'yet another school attack' and life will continue on.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:46 AM Bobad, that's a piece of good news. Thanks for posting it. I hear you, Jeri. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:44 AM I SAY AGAIN GOD DAMN IT LISTEN!! \Your opinion is no better than mine or anyone else. we don't need rehashing opinions we need solutions! John P look up Connecticut's gun laws. That's where this horror took place. And for the last time, I am sometimes mistaken, unlike certain Narcissistic pricks here, but I do not consciously lie, so knock it off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:40 AM It's a good thing they didn't have cars then, and stick an amendment about them in the constitution. They kill more people than guns do. Thatt isn't what they're intended to do, and they're more regulated. People would be zooming around with no licenses, at whatever speed they wanted, without even a tenuous assurance of competency. Can't limit our constitutional right to drive. Bruce, the whole Asperger's thing pissed me off, too. I think the ones who started talking about it were trying to put some distance between the killer and "people like us". "This guy was different, he was inherently flawed, so you don't have to worry." Anybody think these murderss wouldn't have occurred if his mother hadn't had (legally owned) guns, and he hadn't had access to them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:39 AM At least it's a start: WASHINGTON -- In the wake of Friday's mass killing at an elementary school in Connecticut, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Sunday that she plans to introduce an assault weapons ban bill on the first day of the new Congress. "I'm going to introduce in the Senate, and the same bill will be introduced in the House -- a bill to ban assault weapons," Feinstein said on NBC's "Meet the Press," according to a tweet from show producer Betsy Fischer Martin. The shocking murder of 26 children and adults in Newtown, Conn., on Friday has sparked a national discussion on gun control, with mostly Democratic legislators saying laws need to be tightened. President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law in 1994, but the measure expired a decade later. Democrats have tried several times since then to renew the ban, without success. Feinstein called for the ban to be renewed after the mass shooting in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater that killed 12 people and injured 58 others. "Who needs these military-style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?" Feinstein wrote on her campaign website. "These weapons are not for hunting deer -- they're for hunting people." On Sunday Feinstein laid out details of the bill. "It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively," and ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets, Feinstein said. "The purpose of this bill is to get... weapons of war off the streets." Feinstein would not comment on whether President Obama had failed to lead on gun control. "He is going to have a bill to lead on," she said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:15 AM It seems that the constitution of the USA is cast in 1776 stone and nobody has the fortitude to make changes. 2/3 of a majority to changes is not democracy; 50%+1 is democracy! If Obama were to pose a referendum to the people of the USA creating changing gun ownership rights and it were to pass, would he be wrong to declair it into law or would the goverment dare to ignore the democratic wishes of its people? That certainly would show leadership! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:08 AM Kendall, it's time for me to call you out. You got pretty hot earlier when you thought someone was calling you a liar. Here's a hint: if you don't want to be called a liar, don't tell lies. Below is a post I made earlier. Your response was to say, "John, most of the things you listed are in effect and have been for some time." Bullshit. In order to say that, you have to either be a liar or too ignorant to be part of this discussion. Please tell me which of the proposed laws below are in existence, nationwide, and adhered to our government. I'm tired of your crap. If we can't have a reasoned debate on the issue, then you are a waste of time. Your dismissiveness on this subject is harmful to our national dialog. According to the paper this morning, we have a mass shooting in this country every three months. What are you doing about it? Another hint: loudly proclaiming over and over again that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" makes you sound like a spoiled child. Can you refute the statement that people with guns kill way more people than people without guns? For reference, read the next to last paragraph in my post below. Please respond to it in some way that actually answers it. Please note that I still haven't suggested taking any guns away from any responsible gun owners. I'm just asking for a definition of the phrase "responsible gun owner", and for actual action to ensure that all gun owners are responsible. The earlier post: I keep hearing that "no responsible gun owner would do this" or "no responsible gun owner would do that". The problem isn't the responsible gun owners. It's that we let irresponsible people have guns. There are a few things we could do that would allow responsible gun owners to keep their guns, but let the rest of us have a little more confidence that the person next to us on the freeway or behind us in the grocery line isn't both mentally unstable and carrying a gun: A requirement for extensive training for all gun owners. Extensive background checks and a demonstrated need before we give concealed weapons permits. The right to sell a gun should be very difficult to obtain. A fascination with guns should probably be a disqualifier. No automatic firearms of any kind. Any gun that's confiscated gets destroyed. All guns should be securely locked up when not in use. Stolen guns get that way because they aren't adequately secured. Allowing a gun to fall into the hands of your unsupervised child should be a felony. As for the statement that if guns are illegal only criminals will have guns, I would like to point out that if guns are illegal, someone has to become a criminal before they use a gun. The way things are now, many crazy people who shoot others don't become criminals until they open fire. If the criminality happened earlier in the process, we'd have a better chance of keeping it from getting to the shooting stage. Also, most people are law-abiding and wouldn't buy a gun if it was illegal to do so. The problem is the ones who buy them legally and then go crazy or allow their guns to be stolen by other people who go crazy. Besides, if only criminals have guns, it will be easier to tell who they are. There are statistics that show that a gun in the home is four times more likely to be used on a friend, neighbor, or family member than on an armed intruder. It makes me want to quiz people about gun ownership before I visit them. It makes me angry that people are allowed indiscriminate gun ownership anyway. As soon as the gun lobby can convince me that all gun owners are responsible, I'll support the so-called right to bear arms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:03 AM Fuckity hell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:59 AM How many times in real life has an armed intruder, bent on mass murder, been taken out by an armed civilian (or even a police officer) before he could kill anybody? I'll rephrase that. How many times does it even *appear* that a hero has prevented a mass killing by drawing down faster than the heat-packin' bad guy? Or even managed to *cut short* a shooting spree by nailing the gunman when he wasn't looking? Come on, guys. How many? I want to know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:51 AM We have some shocking statistics above, of comparative figures of various nations regarding death by gunshot. The statistic for the US in comparison with the others is almost unbelievable, and an absolute disgrace to that wonderful nation. But Kendall endeavours to prevent any of the rest of us from drawing attention to this situation, because his Kendallship finds it "A pain in the ass"! Really, Kendall; I am astounded. I should really have expected better of you. Best Regards ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:50 AM Well..once again I went to bed after pointing out the awkwardness inherent in the 2nd Amendment. Several have agreed and made the same point in different words. And in his usual clever manner, pdq responded by RE-quoting the amendment and saying this is "the last time he will do so"! As if that clarifies everything. Sadly, that method of debate IS what what the NRA and many gun fanciers fall back on, and as long as they have frightened legislators and Supreme Court judges in their pocket to nod wisely and say: "Yes, that's the way it is.", we will have more headlines. -------------------------------------------- about the crime: The school was LOCKED.. he broke a window and forced his way in. Even teachers having access to weapons somewhere would not have helped. Only an armed guard at the door could have possibly have stopped him. I'll bet a few schools in rich areas WILL hire armed guards. And some malls... and a few theaters... How many libraries, swimming pools, sports stadiums, folk festivals, public parks..... well, you get the idea... will pretend that some sort of 'guard' will prevent similar stories? A deranged person with the right weapons will find someplace to go out in his blaze of righteous glory. "Oh Bill... you are just morbidly hypothesizing." Maybe... I hope so.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:40 AM Amen, Bruce. Well and nicely put. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:11 AM Thank you, Don T. I have been in two situations in my life when guns were pointed at me. In neither would my having a gun have helped in the least. In fact, had I reached for a weapon in either case I'd have been shot. (That's not bullshit; both instances really happened. And they happened in Montreal.) In fact. unless a third party had shot either of those guys just through the earlobe area of the head causing their gun hand to spasm open instead of squeeze shut, I'd have been shot anyway, so intervention wouldn't have helped. (That thing about the earlobe area is likely known to Kendall, Dan, gnu and Rap, but I doubt many others here would be aware of it.) The UKers here have no way to get their heads around the notion of people having guns. I understand that and wish it were the same here, but it isn't. Jaysus, Joseph and Mary does North America have guns. There have been really stupid laws passed in the US about people's right to bear arms, stand your ground being the stupidest, imo. It gives people an excuse to go look for trouble and get personally involved. I would suggest that anyone using a gun in the commission of a crime be sentenced to life in jail, no parole, period. I would also suggest that anyone killing someone in the commission of a crime be similarly sentenced. The people who have gone on rampages -- I notice folks getting into Asperger's stuff needlessly, because anyone who does that kind of shit IS mentally unbalanced to begin with and Asperger's has little to do with it -- certainly has issues. Also, I would like to see a gun law that holds purveyors of assault weapons and handguns to account. Believe me on one thing: if any of my family were involved in a tragedy of this nature, I would spend the rest of my life finding the person(s) ultimately responsible for making the weapons available to a killer, then I would do my best to dispatch him, her or them. I would do so without remorse and without mercy, and I do not much care who thinks what of that. I would like programs that glorify violence taken off television, and video games that do the same outlawed. We have become a violent society in North America. I think a good beginning would be to put major security checks in the way of anyone wanting to procure a weapon that is semiautomatic or automatic, and that goes for handguns, too. Then, people found to be in possession of said weapons without a license to have same given mandatory 20 years sentences, no parole. IMO, killers lose all their rights save one the moment they kill. They retain only the right to a trial. That's it, that's all. Sounds harsh? Compared to 20 dead 6 and 7 year olds, it sounds just about right to me. As a BTW, I think that even mentioning Asperger's in this case does a disservice to all people with mental difficulties and disabilities. The guy who dropped the A bomb on Hiroshima wasn't labelled in that manner. Nor are the various 'legal' killers around the world: SAS, JTF 2, SEALS, HRT, Delta, GSG 9, etc. IMO. And if you want to email me or message about this, do so. Most folks here know how to locate me. I've never made a secret of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:05 AM It seems clear that the NRA and other pro gun lobbyists believe that the occasional massacre of innocents (say two or three a year) is an acceptable price to pay for unrestricted gun ownership. The fact that politicians appear terrified to stand up to the pro gun lobby suggests that they believe this view is shared by a majority of voters. We would be foolish to believe that this hideous tragedy will lead to any changes in gun laws. Apart from anything else guns are big business, just listen to that money talking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:54 AM The 2nd Amendment will not be repealed or amended in our lifetimes. It takes a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress just to propose an amendment. That's difficult, but possible. But that proposed amendment must then be ratified by 3/4 of the states. That means 13 states voting "No" kills the proposal. I can name at leas 15 states in which the chances of a majority of voters voting "Yes" are about the same as your chances of winning the Powerball lottery without buying a ticket. As I said a number of posts back, the only way to solve the problem is by gradually eradicating the pervasive American myth of guns as agents of empowerment. The fact is that guns rarely empower, they usually dominate. If we don't want to be dominated by whatever fool happens to have a gun in his hand, we need to realize that fact, let go of the old myth, and take steps to free ourselves from that fool's ability to dominate us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:44 AM The one big mistake that the Founding Fathers made IMHO, was to assume that future generations would have the plain common sense to react to changing times, by adjust the constitution to allow for those changes. They simply assumed that those who came later would have as much intelligence as they themselves. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gilllymor Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:44 AM Speaking of crap: "There is one thing you can count on; no country will ever invade the USA as long as most of us are armed." That wasn't even true in 1812! It just sounds like another feeble homily to justify an antiquated notion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:28 AM Couple of things... First, what good does it do if Connecticut has stringent gun laws or not if you can go to a gun show in Virginia, back a U-Haul truck up, load it with AR-15s and AK-47s and a $5 book telling you how to covert them into automatic weapons used in war??? What is needed are some uniform federal laws... Second, as for the American people having their say in any gun control laws??? Ain't gonna happen... Because of re-redistricting, mostly by Republicans, we do not have a House or Representatives that represent the overall wished of the American people... Lastly, the NRA and it's mouth-pieces will sandbag with their usual bag of BIG LIEs and half-truths and this shooting, like all of them, will be not bring about meaningful changes... Or any changes, for that matter... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:13 AM Here we go again, commenting on the obvious. We all know that something should be done about guns in the wrong hands, the question is WHAT? Repeating the same old tired opinions is getting to be a pain in the ass. Lizzie, I have a grandson with Autism. He is not a whacko. I was referring to mentally unstable people.Criminally insane. "Only a Mothers certain belief that her child is exceptional keeps her from drowning them at birth." (Lazarus Long) No, I am not suggesting that the shooters Mother should have drowned him at birth, my point is Mothers tend to overlook serious flaws in their kids. Enough of this crap. Come up with some solutions or shut up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:58 AM "Flower power sucks compared to gun powder" I don't agree Gnu. Gandhi freed an entire nation from brutal oppression using non-violent methods, and as Howard Jones pointed out above, after Dunblane and Hungerford here in the UK we tightened gun laws, made the possession of handguns illegal and we are all for the better. "The keyboard is mightier than the gun, to coin a phrase." Too right! "All you foreigners are tyrying to walk a mile in our shoes...they don't fit!" Would it be too much of an affront to your nation(man)hood to take some counsel from a concerned, caring neighbour? For some of us that visit the US frequently, have good friends there and love the place deeply this whole episode is very painful to watch; more so as the writing is writ so large on the wall but too many heads are in the sand. All this "guns don't kill people" bollocks that's being spouted is not doing your nation any favours. Guns are enablers, and they enable people to kill lots of other people quickly. If killing seven-year-olds doesn't disgust you enough to get rid of the guns, I can't think of what will and the future is too bleak to consider. Change the laws, dump the outdated, ludicrous second amendment, (or change it - you're a democracy) and sideline it's adherents to the lunatic fringe where they belong. Please. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:31 AM kendall...it is now coming out that Adam had Aspergers. He was *not* 'Whacko' and your comments above are highly insensitive. As I stated in another thread, had Adam been helped more by people who *truly* understand Aspergers, than maybe, just maybe, what happened last week would *never* have happened. This is not just about Gun Laws and Guns, but it is about the refusal of the Human Species to face up to the fact that Autism is increasing very fast and that it is affecting society in many, many ways. Despite this happening, NO government is looking into the causes of Autism or pouring money in to those people/families who so desperately NEED help in so many ways. Here, John Elder Robison, former special effects designer for the rock band, KISS, (remember the smoking guitars?) explains not only his life as someone with Aspergers, but also his research into the TMS research now being done, which enabled him to feel, REALLY FEEL the emotions of another person, for the first time in his life..... Ingenious Minds - John Elder Robison - Part 1 Ingenious Minds - Part 2 John, on the TMS Research now being done The 'whackos' are the ones who refuse to acknowledge what is going on, thus helping to ensure that more and more of these tragedies will continue to happen, because of their stubborn refusal to see what is right before their eyes....And of course, the Corporate Medical Bastards who are ensuring that they don't 'find a cure' too fast, because they're making a fecking fortune from drugging MILLIONS of children up to the eyeballs with drugs which affect their brains each and every day..... ALL are tragic here...those innocent people who died and a young man who imploded bigtime after 20 years of struggling in a way so many may never even *want* to understand because their minds are happy to continue to call very sensitive, intelligent, creative and confused people as 'whackos'..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:13 AM ""There is one thing you can count on; no country will ever invade the USA as long as most of us are armed."" With respect, Kendall, there isn't the slightest chance of any country invading the USA, whether the US citizenry are armed or not, so that comment is a complete irrelevance (as, I suspect, you are well aware). Also, the 2md amendment said nothing at all about invasion, rather being aimed at a putative tyrannical US government. You've had a string of those in recent years, culminating in the well deserved defeat of the Tea Party lunatics, due my friend to ballots, not bullets. Guns in private hands do not solve problems, they create them. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:49 AM ""I have no use for handguns or assault rifles."" That was precisely the point of the question Bruce, since hand guns are what most US city dwellers have, and assault rifles are the weapon of choice for rural gun nuts, of which the USA has far too many. It is rarely the owner of hunting rifles or shotguns (the kind of weapon you would have used) who runs amuk and slaughters innocents. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:49 AM If I remember correctly, the Second Amendment ties gun-ownership to the maintenance of a "well-regulated militia." So, just spit-balling here, what if the firearms acquisition certificate (or whatever) came with compulsory enrollment in the National Guard? Like the Sedentary Militia of colonial times in Canada, these folks would be required to show up at the armoury on quarter days and go to the range to prove that they are maintaining their weapons-handling skills and safety drills. No physical fitness test or other professional military stuff; just range practice and counting noses. Anybody too frail and infirm to do that much probably should not be handling weapons at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Will Fly Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:08 AM I think that some school personnel are discretely armed where crime is fairly likely. But probably not in Newtown - "one of the safest places in America". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Will Fly Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:06 AM There is one thing you can count on; no country will ever invade the USA as long as most of us are armed. Well... think of 9/11. Modern "invasions" - in the widest sense of the term, the violation of another country's space - happens in more ways than one these days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: mg Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:55 AM A janitor. A nurse. A security person. Perhaps the principal, who died. Sometimes these things go quickly and sometimes there would be enough time if there was access, training etc. I remember doing research at a school that was in a gang infested part of town and finding out that the librarian had been a marine in Vietnam. I think that he would have been more than able and very quick to respond. I think that some school personnel are discretely armed where crime is fairly likely. They probably do not broadcast the fact. There emerge situations where one wishes that they might have been. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:52 AM Apples and Oranges. There is one thing you can count on; no country will ever invade the USA as long as most of us are armed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Will Fly Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:40 AM I tend to avoid adding to threads like this because, in general, they polarise pretty quickly, with the usual opposing people promoting the usual opposing arguments. However, two assertions in the argument strike me: 1. The Kennesaw, Georgia gun law ordinance - where every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition. Quote: "crime rate dropped by half after this law was passed". I simply wonder how having this ordinance in place in Newtown would have made any difference to what took place. A mentally disturbed person - probably intent on killing himself as well as others - wouldn't have given a damn. And who could possibly have stopped him in a classroom at the time? 2. I've heard it said, over and over again, that people must have the ability to own firearms because, if they don't, there will be no protection against all the criminals with their illegal guns. And you'll never get rid of all the illegal handguns. Interesting attitude, that last one. I was watching a documentary on the Space Shuttle last night, about it docking with a space station, the crew carrying out various tasks in space, and then it's re-entering Earth's air and landing safely and precisely. Amazing isn't it, that one of the most intelligent, technically excellent, clever, constructive and ingenious nations on earth can't even begin to make a start about thinking through the problem of getting rid of illegal guns. It just throws up its hands in horror and says, "Oh we can't possibly do that!" Think of all the logistics involved in creating and maintaining a huge army, navy and airforce, planning an invasion, countering terrorism, utilising complex intelligence networks, etc., etc. But you'll never get rid of illegal guns? Why not make a start? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: mg Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:36 AM Half of us will never understand what it is to be young and male, socially inept or socially rejected, especially by girls...we do not know how to educate these young men, we do not know how to integrate them socially..we do not know how to or when to medicate them if absolutely necessary. We do not know how to monitor their drug use. We do not know why so many are ADD and autistic and just plain odd. We need to humbly admit this and look for answers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:35 AM I have a friend who brags that he has an AK 47 that will fire 50 rounds in a matter of seconds. I ripped him a new one. He laughed. Connecticut has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the USA, yet, one paranoid woman and her fucked up son got by them. My question is: How do we keep guns out of the hands of criminals and whackos? I'm still waiting for that apology, Jack. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: mg Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:29 AM they also use kilometers... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:28 AM There are some very sharp minds here, all have an opinion of what's wrong with America, none with a realistic solution. All you foreigners are tyrying to walk a mile in our shoes...they don't fit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 16 Dec 12 - 05:13 AM Harry knew so very much about the Human Mind. Long before others did, Harry knew. He saw inside. He felt the pain. He understood entirely. "It is an early Monday morning. The sun is becoming bright on the land. No one is watching as he comes a-walking. Two bulky suitcases hang from his hands. He heads towards the tower that stands in the campus. He goes through the door, he starts up the stairs. The sound of his footsteps, the sound of his breathing, The sound of the silence when no one was there. I didn't really know him. He was kind of strange. Always sort of sat there. He never seemed to change. He reached the catwalk. He put down his burden. The four sided clock began to chime. Seven AM, the day is beginning. So much to do and so little time. He looks at the city where no one had known him. He looks at the sky where no one looks down. He looks at his life and what it has shown him. He looks for his shadow it cannot be found. He was such a moody child, very hard to touch. Even as a baby he never smiled too much. No, no. No, no. You bug me, she said. You're ugly, she said. Please hug me, I said. But she just sat there With the same flat stare That she saves for me alone When I'm home. When I'm home. Take me home. He laid out the rifles, he loaded the shotgun, He stacked up the cartridges along the wall. He knew he would need them for his conversation. If it went as he planned, then he might use them all. He said Listen you people I've got a question You won't pay attention but I'll ask anyhow. I found a way that will get me an answer. Been waiting to ask you 'til now. Right now! Am I? I am a lover who's never been kissed. Am I? I am a fighter who's not made a fist. Am I? If I'm alive then there's so much I've missed. How do I know I exist? Are you listening to me? Are you listening to me? Am I? The first words he spoke took the town by surprise. One got Mrs. Gibbons above her right eye. It blew her through the window wedged her against the door. Reality poured from her face, staining the floor. He was kind of creepy, Sort of a dunce. I met him at the corner bar. I only dated the poor boy once, That's all. Just once, that was all. Bill Whedon was questioned as he stepped from his car. Tom Scott ran across the street but he never got that far. The police were there in minutes, they set up barricades. He spoke right on over them in a half-mile circle. In a dumb struck city his pointed questions were sprayed. He knocked over Danny Tyson as he ran towards the noise. Just about then the answers started coming. Sweet, sweet joy. Thudding in the clock face, whining off the walls, Reaching up to where he sat, their answering calls. Thirty-seven people got his message so far. Yes, he was reaching them right were they are. They set up an assault team. They asked for volunteers. They had to go and get him, that much was clear. And the word spread about him on the radios and TV's. In appropriately sober tone they asked "Who can it be?" He was a very dull boy, very taciturn. Not much of a joiner, he did not want to learn. No, no. No, no. They're coming to get me, they don't want to let me Stay in the bright light too long. It's getting on noon now, it's going to be soon now. But oh, what a wonderful sound! Mama, won't you nurse me? Rain me down the sweet milk of your kindness. Mama, it's getting worse for me. Won't you please make me warm and mindless? Mama, yes you have cursed me. I never will forgive you for your blindness. I hate you! The wires are all humming for me. And I can hear them coming for me. Soon they'll be here, but there's nothing to fear. Not any more though they've blasted the door. As the copter dropped the gas he shouted "Who cares?". They could hear him laughing as they started up the stairs. As they stormed out on the catwalk, blinking at the sun, With their final fusillade his answer had come. Am I? There is no way that you can hide me. Am I? Though you have put your fire inside me. Am I? You've given me my answer can't you see? I was! I am! and now I will be, I will be, I will be, I will be, I will be, I WILL BE!" Harry Chapin - Sniper - Youtube |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:54 AM A pity that the Second Amendment didn't state in its entirety: "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." It does seem to me that if that is what they meant that is what they would have said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:51 AM Glad I live in AUSTRALIA |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Backwoodsman sans Cookie Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:24 AM I'd hate to live in fear the way our US friends seem to do. I've lived on this Earth for 65 years mg, but I've never needed 'someone with a gun......to take out someone else misusing them', and the reason is perfectly simple - hardly anyone has a gun here. In 65 years I've never seem a gun in private hands, except of course shotguns owned by farmers and wildfowling aficionados. So the possibility of any of us being faced with one of oldude's 'mad dog killers' waving his Glock in our faces is virtually zero, close enough to zero as to be not worth getting our panties bunched over. Kendall's oft-repeated mantra - that guns don't kill people, people kill people - is right, up to a point, that point being that people are considerably less likely to kill people if they can't do it from a distance with a gun. The type of killer who shoots a classroomful of kids isn't a hero, he's not brave, he's a coward who kills at distance so that his victims have no chance to fight back. Take his gun away and he's impotent. There's very little chance that Americans, brainwashed from birth with their 2nd Amendment, are likely to understand or accept the UK view that people are safer when guns are outlawed, so there's no point friends bashing friends over the head with opposing opinions on that score, but I know where I'd rather live, and it's far more comfortable without guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:00 PM Jeri, No offense taken. I think McGrath and Bobert and Kendall caught my intended point. It is of course about context. As well as the militia point, the second ammendment describes flintlocks and even the ammunition that went with the guns. It is the folly of fools to think that it applies to todays assault weapons, anymore than to think that slavery was acceptable either then or now! It is indeed unfortunate that the fools that perpetuated the folly were members of the US Supreme Court! The solution can only be with a demand from the good citizens of the USA to make changes and to tell politicians, judges, founding fathers, and the NRA to "Fuck Off"! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: mg Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:55 PM I have no enchantment with guns. I have no desire to own one. It does not make me feel like more of a man as that is the least of my worries. I wish I had been a nurse or secretary in that school, been properly trained, had access to locked guns, and had taken out the shooter, possibly losing my own life. Perhaps only women should own guns..seems most problems are caused by young men. And Old Guy I appreciate your offer to protect us and especially the young. It is too dangerous a world, even the seemingly luckiest, most prosperous parts of it, to give up our maybe not first..but one of our more immediate lines of defense. Create all sorts of obstacles to weed out the nuts..perhaps put an age limit..test, retest, give drug tests, etc...but the day will come..has come when we need someone with a gun, one of the good gals, to take out someone else misusing them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:46 PM "Oh come on Bruce. How many deer, moose, or rabbit did you shoot with a Sig Sauer 9mm, or a Glock, or an AR 15?" None, Don, but neither is that what I said. I wrote that in response to another poster. The only rifles (never owned a pistol) I ever used were a 22, 303 (British), 308, 30-30 and 30.06. I have no use for handguns or assault rifles. (And I once used an FN that fired 7.62 ammunition, the then NATO weapon from Fabrique Nationale, but it belonged to the Canadian government. The sole purpose of that was killing people, which I never did.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:37 PM Sorry, it really made no sense to me what the two things had in common. You pretty much had to have guns to keep slaves, though. Well, except American Indians had some slaves (more like indentured servants won in wars, I gather), but they kept them from running away somehow. Anyway... The constitution was written after the US War with Britain, which was won by a militia including a bunch of regular guys with guns. That's the frame of reference. So I'm sorry I jumped on you, Sandy. It just didn't seem logical. Lots of thing don't, these days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:35 PM I also have the greatest respect for my friends that disagree with my position. You are not wrong either, as both approaches have not seemed to work as this stuff just continues I can only hope it stops. Bill is a very good and very smart person, so is bobster and the others that disagree with me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:28 PM Welll... I ain't goin anywhere except to bed, Bobert. And, I cannot come dow there an get yer job dunn, even if you had any decent tea (coffee? yeccchhh!). A HUNDRED times again... shit or get off the poSt the lot a yas. Ya wanna get guns off "the street", do it. If youse who wanna ween here spend yer time weenin here don't do it, ya should thank yer lucky stars that yer able ta have guns and yer fellow citizens do have guns on accounta I read in the newspaper every day lately about some government bombin it's own citizens. Ain't gonna happen in the good ol USA... IS IT? There's a tad a good old boy logic ya can't refute. Read a thousand years a yer history and tell me the rich don't subjugate the poor... with the barrel of a gun. Flower power sucks compared to gun powder. Good gun laws are good but bad gun laws are bad. Figure it out, grow a pair and FORCE your governments to do the right thing and enact good gun laws. Use that thing you type twaddle on for better use. The keyboard is mightier than the gun, to coin a phrase. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:26 PM This is the last time I am going to point this out, but "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" is an introduction to the statement that has meaning, that being "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." That was true 230 years ago and was reaffirmed in 2008 by our Supreme Court. If that bothers people, they should look up ways to ammend the Constitution and get started. Good luck. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:11 PM Yup, the 2nd amendment is obsolete... I mean, what if the Founding Fathers have put in an amendment endorsing slavery??? It'd be gone by now... Thomas Jefferson warned us that we'd have to mess with their starting point constitution... Guess the NRA didn't get the memo... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:05 PM As pdq says, we don't need to amend the second amendment. Take another look at it:
Seems to me that's good reason for the courts to ignore the second amendment altogether. Thanks, pdq. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:55 PM From: pdq - PM Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:41 PM Yes, pdq... I know what the courts have decided. You evade my point that **courts** are made up of people, and often people with agendas or prejudices. "prefatory clause" be damned! It is STILL not a clear statement...except possibly when viewed in the 1790s context! So... several judges voted on a linguistic interpretation... that is binding. That doesn't make the reality any easier to reconcile. Some things just don't make sense when viewed objectively. (Imagine, with all the tests available, trying to get tobacco approved by the FDA today! MONEY and addicted people make it VERY slowly being removed. And many dead people from lung cancer & emphysema! Maybe enough dead kids will eat at the acceptance of those AR-15s...hmmm?) The last defense when logic fails is to quote statistics and laws....got any more, pdq? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:52 PM You nailed it Bobert. I can't even picture an automatic flint lock. Judges live in fear that one of their rulings will be overturned and that would prevent them from climbing that success ladder to a higher court. To hell with justice; they are no better than any other politician. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:41 PM Actually, there is relevance to what Sandy has posted and that is... ...historical context... Let's keep in mind that handguns, the weapon of choice by today's murderers, were used only for dueling... Rifles fired single shots and then had to be reloaded which was a time consuming process... This was the Founding Father's world... Not AK-47s in the hands of children... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:40 PM Perfectly valid historical parallel, demonstrating another way in which the Constitution was a pretty flawed document, which badly needed a good few adjustments to be fit for purpose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:33 PM Illegal attempt at cross-topic trolling. Sandy is fined 5 posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:28 PM "Witness the fact that all the Founding Fathers, including the very people who wrote the Constitution, owned guns." Perhaps the fault lies with these founding fathers. Not to throw in a red herring but did not many of them own slaves as well? It is not hard to comprehend how guns could be used to control slaves! Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 49% owned slaves. The slave owners were: Richard Bassett (DE) Jacob Broom (DE) John Dickinson (DE) George Read (DE) William Houstoun (GA) William Few (GA) William Samuel Johnson (CT) Daniel Carroll (MD) Luther Martin (MD) John Francis Mercer (MD) Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer (MD) William Livingston (NJ) William Blount (NC) William Richardson Davie (NC) Alexander Martin (NC) Richard Dobbs Spaight (NC) Pierce Butler (SC) Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (SC) Charles Pinckney (SC) John Rutledge (SC) John Blair (VA) James Madison (VA) George Mason (VA) Edmund Randolph (VA) George Washington (VA) George Wythe (VA) Robert Morris (PA) There are borderline cases among the above. Robert Morris did not personally own slaves but did own a slave ship and invested in plantations using slaves. I've listed him as a slave owner since he was a direct participant in slavery and the slave trade. Some slave owners emancipated their slaves (Richard Bassett and John Dickinson). Other slave owners opposed slavery and supported abolition (Jacob Broom and William Samuel Johnson). Other slave owners opposed the slave trade if not slavery itself. Of the 26 slaveowners, 19 owned multiple slaves and relied on slave labor for their livelihood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:17 PM Only unconstitutional in the eyes of coward justices who, like everyone else, have been bullied by the NRA and their redneck & rabid foot soldiers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:12 PM Bombs don't kill people either. Not on their own - they just lie their on their own doing no harm to anyone. The same goes for canisters of poison gas, or ampoules of anthrax. Totally harmless unless some human being comes into the picture... And 'arms', I would suggest includes all those things. Isn't it great that Americans have the right to stock up on stuff like that, and any laws to stop them doing so would be unconstitutional. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:49 PM Come on down here and do it, gn-ze... I'll go to work for ya'... I'll carry your briefcase... Fetch yer coffee... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:45 PM Kendall... again with the logic? To hell with that. I wanna see anyone step up to the plate and propose a new org... the NRRA? National Rifle Regulations Association? The NFA... National Firearms Association? Come on ALL you anti/gun nuts! DO something. Don't ween... git er dunn! You can start it, here, tonight. Right NOW. Who's willing to step up to the plate and take a swing at the ball? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:35 PM For the thousandth time: We don't need to change the constitution... We just need judges with the courage to interpret the 2nd amendment in it's entirety and not just half of it... Plus, with this polarized country there will be no more amendments to the constitution... As a democracy, you can put a fork in US... We're done... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM ...perhaps it needs to be displayed more clearly: The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., "[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:31 PM The 2nd amendment is obsolete. We have enough gun laws now to paper the Washington monument. They are not working! Bad guys can't read. So, everyone here has an opinion, and you know what they say about opinions. We need answers. Realistic answers. Stiffer penalties? strict controls? The prisons are full now, and every time the subject of building a new jail or prison comes up there is a hoo rah about N.I.M.B.I. and too much money, it will raise taxes.etc. Now, if the "Know it alls" will address this? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:30 PM When a person carries a firearm they are acting in a manner of a police officer. The same rules and training need to be applied across all the states. That would make sense instead of a bunch of loopholes that only arm criminals. Police officers weapons are secure at home. Their kids don't get them and do this stuff because they are trained. Likewise most folks that have carry permits in the states where they are hard to get. Sadly it varies so much and with all the loopholes it is far to easy. Get a federal law. The ATF regulates auto weapons they can on handgun carry also. Close the gun shows ... we would all be safer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:24 PM like I said we can agree to disagree. I am all for arming good and rational people against the mad dog killers out there today to protect others in shopping malls or on the street just minding their own business. However, only if the proper training and background checks are done. Until the 2nd Amendment is changed, I support it as I do all of the Constitution. Keeping a firearm away from a complete law abiding person who has been trained and knows safety and has no BG issues doesn't do anything but help the mad dog killers. Me I am sick of burying our kids by these people. My heart breaks for those families and their loss |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ebbie Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:18 PM Jeri said: "People here go hunting, and they have guns to shoot vermin--in most cases that's some sort of animal they consider dangerous or obnoxious that strays too close to their homes." I don't see a big problem with that. With regulations, hunting rifles and shotguns could be checked out before and during season; surely they are not needed in the home itself. Vermin are most often disposed of with small caliber weapons- like a .22. And a 22 also works as a defensive weapon in the home. Contrary to the movies an injured person doesn't shrug it off when he or she is hit even with a small caliber like that. It just plain doesn't feel good. A 22 can even kill- it's just less likely to be lethal. I don't even see a problem with a gun collector collecting his heart out. As long as he keeps them in the equivalent of a bank safe deposit box. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:17 PM A gun CAN kill a person, despite the logical error the NRA has been peddling for generations. It is one of several causal elements in every gunshot death. If any one of those elements is missing, the death will not occur. It's impossible to sort out which people are likely to kill and which or not - but it is possible to eliminate or at least strictly control guns. Since it's impossible to control the people, maybe we need to control the guns. And yes, pdq, it is true that the 1781 Constitution allows Americans to keep and bear arms. Within the context, it appears that this is for the purpose of maintaining a militia - but this is debatable. Nonetheless, in 21st century urban America, does it make sense for members of a closely-packed population to be armed? Seems like too many people consider the U.S. Constitution to be infallible nowadays, even though they aren't afraid to question the Bible anymore. As for me, I think questioning both of them, is healthy. And even if a 2/3 majority can't be found to change it, I still believe that slavish adherence to the Constitution can be wrong, wrong, wrong. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:07 PM It will still take 2/3rds of congress to amend the constitution. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:06 PM The 2nd Amendment has always meant that. Witness the fact that all the Founding Fathers, including the very people who wrote the Constitution, owned guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:04 PM Although I don't own a firearm, I guess I would say that rifles or shotguns could be considered necessary tools in many rural locations in America - for varmit control or hunting, not for use against human intruders. Still, there were one or two times that I wished I had a rifle in hand when I approached strangers on my property. Having a big, friendly, black dog at my side worked pretty well, though. My next-door neighbors killed a couple of bears on their property last year, and I keep wondering whether that was necessary. The bears really haven't been much of a problem. They raided our garden a couple of times, but I've only seen a bear once in the ten years I've been here - and that was a thrill. And yes, you hear about mountain lions, but I've never seen one. There are also reports of rabid raccoons in the area - that does scare me a bit, and might be the one thing that might make me want a rifle. There are rattlesnakes around, but they haven't been a problem - and I have only seen one snake that might have been a rattler. I think I'd call the rattlesnake removal service if one took up residence around the house. And even though I see some justification in owning firearms in a rural area, I have to say it makes me really nervous. More than once I've encountered people shooting into the area where I'm legally hiking. Now, THAT is disconcerting. But in urban locations, I just can't really see the need for a firearm. There is a certain amount of risk of violent crime anywhere in America, but I really don't think it's all that bad. I worked for thirty years as an unarmed federal investigator, and I took pride in the fact that I never avoided work in any location because I thought it too dangerous. I used my head and stayed away from certain areas at certain times of the day, but I always did my job and knocked on the doors and did my honest best to find the people I needed to get my work done. Other investigators would write off certain areas, but I never did. I met only one situation where people pointed guns at me, and I admit that was a little disconcerting. They were in a remote location, an area where I admit it might be justifiable to have a gun. I have an appointment, but then these people had second thoughts and were afraid I might be the person who had threatened to kill them. So, I had to talk them down. I think if I had shown a firearm, they would have shot me. It's a difficult issue. Gun owners are absolutely correct when they say that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, and would be responsible in a dangerous situation. The trouble is, there is a good percentage of people who have attitudes that would make them irresponsible and dangerous as gun owners. Many of them wanted to be cops, and it was my job to investigate them and weed out the ones who would be irresponsible. One year, I had two Border Patrol Agent applicants who had shot themselves in the buttocks, trying to tuck their guns under their belts. I don't believe those applicants got the job. I had coworkers who carried firearms despite the fact that they were not supposed to - these were people who thought their badges didn't give them enough authority. I had one coworker and a number of applicants who used their firearms to put power behind their road rage. Admittedly, it's a small number of gun owners that are troublesome - but the troublesome ones can be very dangerous if they have a sidearm. I'm sorry that the troublesome ones make it difficult for all gunowners; but it seems to me that the danger presented by the small minority of irresponsible and dangerous gunowners, outweighs the safety brought about by the many responsible people who carry firearms. So for the general good of society, I think that handguns should be outlawed and rifles and shotguns should be strictly regulated. Semi-automatic and automatic firearms (anything with a magazine) should be outlawed altogether. Taking time to load forces a shooter to take time to think before shooting. I know gun owners think otherwise, but the rest of us consider them to be a serious danger to our personal safety. The fact that my neighbors have guns makes me feel nervous, not secure. What guarantees that their bullets are staying on their property. I'm saying this as one who has worked unarmed in law enforcement for a thirty-year career. And by the way, I qualified as an Expert Marksman in the U.S. Army. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:02 PM Kendall... how dare you inject simple logic! Why, that only means another hundred posts to a ANOTHER gun thread that has seemed to become about people who want to vent and have no logic. Oh, they make conjectures and leaps of faith and inferences and state statistics, but when you bring simple logic into the discussion, you confuse them. You must confuse them because they keep trying to prove such logic false based on arguements and statistics which don't prove such logic wrong. LISTEN to Kendall and so many others, readers. A gun CANNOT kill a person. IT IS A FACT. YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THAT. So... ya wanna be a part of getting rid of gun crimes? Get your shit together and do something about it and stop telling legal and responsible gun owners you want to take their guns away (go ahead and say you don't... we don't believe you and WE got guns so fuck off with that shit). Wake up... stop whining... and DO something about it that makes SOME SENSE!... for a CHANGE! Join the legal and responsible gun owners and press for good gun laws. Until you all get a grip... gun nuts and anti-gun nuts, wee children will be shot. It's shameful that you all cut off yer noses to spite yer faces. Stop your bullshit bickering and DO SOMETHING about it. I've said it before. I'll say it once more. If any of you really care, you'll take responsibilty and DO SOMETHING about it. It ain't rocket science. It's just common sense... it's simple logic. You have the wherewithall but have you got a spare minute or the balls to try to do what is right? Put up or shut up, fer fuck sake! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:56 PM The Supreme Court has cowered from the NRA... Not only does the NRA have lots of $$$ but they have other (wink, wink) ways of scaring people... One day the sun will come out and we'll all see that the emperor has no clothes and a future Supreme Court will get it correct, rather than "right"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:41 PM 2nd Amendment Annotations "Prior to the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an 'individual rights' approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals' rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a 'states' rights' approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units. Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints. However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well. In Heller, the Court held that (1) the District of Columbia's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounted to a prohibition on an entire class of 'arms' that Americans overwhelmingly chose for the lawful purpose of self-defense, and thus violated the Second Amendment; and (2) the District's requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock also violated the Second Amendment, because the law made it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense. The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., '[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'" {Bill D wants to turn a prefatory clause into a Santa Clause} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:28 PM If you take a room full of people without guns there is a 0% chance of anyone shooting anyone... Can't say that if half of folks in there have guns... People with guns kill people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:23 PM CIRCULAR REASONING: This fallacy uses a claim as its own grounds. A popular bumper sticker reads: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." This argument is circular—nobody ever claimed guns go around all by themselves shooting people. Of course people kill people. But this "begs the question" as to whether guns make it easier to do so. In fact, circular reasoning is often called "begging the question." Many times we fail to examine our most strongly held beliefs, so that when they are challenged, we resort to circular reasoning as a defense. As Eddie Izzard said: "They say that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many ..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:21 PM BTW, there is another thread specifically about the Newtown incident. This thread is more generic and was started so the ususal suspects in "gun grabbing" could vent without being disrespectful to the Newton victims. I doubt that anyone posting here knows what the Federal gun laws really say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:18 PM "...,private gun ownership is guaranteed by the US Constitution... " That is one interpretation of what the 2nd amendment says! It also says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" The entire POINT was that competent citizens were expected be part of a **militia** when the NEED arose... and they were expected to bring arms, because there were no mass-produced standardized weapons at that time! Those who wrote that amendment had NO idea what would happen after 1865 or so when guns began to be made that would take mass produced ammunition! In 1790, guns were seldom used except to defend home & country or to hunt. Now, that vaguely worded document is interpreted in such a way as to allow any yahoo who is of age and not a felon or 'proven' crazy to stock up on assault rifles! And conservative presidents appoint judges who uphold that silly old idea! The framers would be appalled! We HAVE a militia! And they are ISSUED the guns they need at the appropriate times! Sadly, we also have thousands of wanna-be militias who just 'like' owning big, fancy things that go "BANG". It is a HOBBY! A BELIEF! Not a NEED! They lie to themselves about the reasoning ...until they believe it, so they can pretend to 'tell the truth' to everyone else! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:17 PM I've said this before and I'll repeat it; if I had my way there would be no such thing as a semi auto or full auto firearm. If I could do it, I would make every gun in the world disappear. I am NOT a gun nut, I AM a realist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM leveler, I'll match my IQ to yours or anyone else on this forum. Greg I'm NOT in that category! I've said it may times the NRA is trying to scare people into thinking their right to own a gun is in danger, HELL NO! Guns dont kill people god damn it People kill people! Use your frigging head! No gun gives a shit whether you live or die, that whacko behind it might. I suggest certain people lay off the insults, you know damn well they are not allowed here. If you can't make your point without insulting someone, shut up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM Most parents aren't fit to raise a gerbil. I want a gun to protect myself from their children. =(:-( l) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:45 PM Thank you for reading that article, Howard Jones. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:41 PM If the 2nd Amendment is ended, Stop with the bullshit, PeeDee - no one is talking about "ending the second ammendment". Try to at least hold on to a modicum of reality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Howard Jones Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:32 PM The Kennesaw, Georgia example is interesting. I live in a village of about the same size where householders are prohibited from owning firearms without a stringently-controlled licence (and where handguns are banned outright) and I would guess that our crime rate is probably the same or even less. We haven't had any murders either, so far as I'm aware, and don't seem to think that this is in any way remarkable. There have been a few burglaries, but I'm 100% confident that the burglars won't have carried guns. I realise we are not comparing like with like, and this is a simplistic comparison. Nevertheless the fact remains that it is possible to live safely without having guns, if a society chooses to do so. America seems reluctant to make that choice, even in the most appalling circumstances. And yes, we do understand it's about the 2nd Amendment. However you're no longer a frontier society, you're the richest country in the world, with the most powerful military - you don't need a militia any more to keep the redcoats away. Isn't it time that, as a society, you started to grow up? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:29 PM Same worn out argument about the 2nd amendment... Reality is that the NRA has cherry-picked the 2nd amendment all to hell and back... They refuse to ***allow*** for a full discussion of the entire amendment or the fact that the 2nd amendment is a single sentence... No, all we hear is the same old worn out blah, blah and more blah from the NRA and it's supporters... In other words??? The only discussion we are going to have is our talking points, not anyone elses, and we have the money to shut you up or have you voted out... The NRA way or the highway... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:22 PM If the 2nd Amendment is ended, there will be no reason to give civilian gun safety classes. Logical, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:19 PM ""I owned many when I hunted deer, moose, rabbit, etc. I hope that answers your questions."" Oh come on Bruce. How many deer, moose, or rabbit did you shoot with a Sig Sauer 9mm, or a Glock, or an AR 15? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:15 PM Go to the NRA's site. What they talk about first and foremost is "protecting the second amendment." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:09 PM The statement is about private organizations and that should be obvious. The military and law enforcement play by different rules and you know that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:04 PM No, pdq, the United States military trains more people on the safe and sane use of firearms, followed by the various police academies... The NRA runs a distant 3rd and guess what??? It pisses off more people than it could train who want no part of them... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:02 PM 100% with you on that one, Dorothy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:00 PM This group covers the bases: "September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows Andrea's reminder that guns are only part of the problem: Yesterday's tragedy strikes at our hearts and leaves us - again - shattered with pain for the shear needlessness of it. There are no words that will assuage the victims' families grief. The wounds will remain. It will take a very long time to know how to hold the sadness and the rage and also, eventually, learn to go on living with the loss. We struggle to understand what happened out of our need for an explanation of what has violated all sense of rightness. We need to understand that the gunman and his family are victims too. Perhaps victims of the society we have responsibility for. This tragedy did not come out of nowhere. We need to frame our thoughts as we go forward around the the fact that guns are an expression of the violence we as a culture condone. We do not want to divide over whether we campaign for gun legislation OR focus on the culture that promotes violence which cuts spending for mental health, education, and ending poverty and includes justifications for foreign policy decisions and the support of a war machine that produces and provides weapons to governments as well as homegrown gunmen. It trains young people to kill primarily innocent people in wars that bring no peace and then come home broken in body and mind, changed by what they've seen and done. It promotes as news and entertainment that which normalizes and glorifies violence. It is big business! There are many many forms of violence. Guns and the culture of violence are of a piece. Eliminating the tools of destruction is only part of the solution." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:52 PM I just read an article that said each of the kids--6 or 7 years old--was shot three to eleven times with a rifle. The first person killed was the principal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:34 PM ...from the NRA website: NRA offers America's preeminent shooting, training, education and public service programs that foster the safe, responsible ownership and use of firearms. Some of you folks don't quite "get it", but private gun ownership is guaranteed by the US Constitution and the NRA demands that we keep the traditional standard of "reasonable restrictions" in place. The NRA educates more people about the safe and sane use of firearms than all other US organizations combined. Sorry they ain't perfect, you know, like the Post Office, FEMA or Microsoft. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:16 PM "1. What is a gun designed to do?" Shoot projectiles a long distance with sufficient force to penetrate an object. "2. Why do you own a gun if you're not prepared to use it for the purpose for which it was designed?" I owned many when I hunted deer, moose, rabbit, etc. I hope that answers your questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:15 PM I am fed up of the pathetic guns don't kill people, people do line. fOr the brain dead.... The ownership of guns means that those who have the propensity to kill people makes it easier to kill people, and/or kill more people. So, repeating what I said in another thread. Dear NRA, Are you celebrating your latest wonderful acheivement? You must be proud!!!! WELL???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: theleveller Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:10 PM "gund don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people" Same old shite we get time after time. Listen, moron, just ask yourself two simple questions: 1. What is a gun designed to do? 2. Why do you own a gun if you're not prepared to use it for the purpose for which it was designed? To my mind every single person in the US who owns a gun is responsible for this atrocity. I hope you can live with that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:03 PM Please, Kendall - nobody's talking about "taking your gun" - that's NRA propaganda to whip up hysteria among those that don't know any better. I wouldn't have placed you in that category. And by the way, guns don't kill people - BULLETS kill people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:55 PM It's certainly true that it's no longer about the sportsman--if it ever was. Why would a sportman need a pistol anyway? I understand that in the UK, for target shooting, the weapon is borrowed and returned. A much more civilized approach than ours. The NRA needs its teeth pulled. This can only be done if enough citizens pressure their reps to stand up to that group and its obsession with the 2nd Amendment. We can start by pointing out that the 2nd Amendment has lost any usefulness it ever had--and its theory of national defense via militia was a disaster from the start. Instead of a sensible situation, we have the idiocy in which you can order guns--not just rifles--from a catalogue. ( Jan gets one of these.) What kind of security is that for the general public against nuts with guns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:49 PM We don't want ***your*** gun, Capt'n... That's the knee-jerk reaction any time anyone talks about making a few sensible changes to gun ownership... "Obama is going to take my gun away!"... No, he's not... He might ask you register it and prove you know how to handle it safely... Too much to ask??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:46 PM Jeri, here's a crash course on how to read gnu's fingers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:43 PM John, most of the things you listed are in effect and have been for some time. The problem is bad guys don't give a squat about laws! It's not just a mantra, gund don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people. I don't have the answer, but taking my gun aint it. BY the way, Olddude, I was also a federal lawman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:34 PM I couldn't be arsed to research any of it (I am a Canuck) but surely there must be a group of reasonable people who are trying to get the USA feds to make some good gun laws? If not, why don't youse take up the cause? A website don't cost much... the expertise exists among you... oh... wait... I said this before a couple of times... nevermind... just like NObody did before. Oh... yeah... until you whiners and compaliners get off yer collective asses and DO something, I'll give up my guns when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers on accounta if you lazy, unorganized sods can't get your shit together on something as important as saving 5 year old children from being shot... read my finger. Go ahead... make my day. Jeri... how's THAT or dirty talk? Hehehehee. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:10 PM I was a certified NRA handgun instructor till I told them to shove their membership up their kaboose also years ago. It ain't about the sportsman anymore. It is now about power and money |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:09 PM Greg lawmakers that will do the right thing and not cave in to the NRA pacs sadly I don't think that will happen. We have few lawmakers that look at the good of the people anymore, just those who care about getting elected and the money it costs to run |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:02 PM Yeah, Greg... In essence that's what I did with my NRA membership card, too... In reality, I just ignored them... Today's NRA is not the one I was proud to be part of in the 50s and 60s... Back then the NRA was 100% about safety and responsibility... Today's NRA is 100% about $$$ and political power... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:58 PM We can't Greg, the freedom of speech works for good guys and shits also sadly. I try to ignore his crap. Jack Kendall was a state law enforcement officer. He has forgotten more about firearms and their safe use then you could ever learn. Knock it off cause you are talking about something you know nothing at all about |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:57 PM I dunno, Dan - how the hell do we organize effectively to promote a rational approach & reasonable legislation ??? Been wondering this since I took my NRA life membership card 35 years ago, sent it back to them, and told 'em to shove it up their arse. ASny suggestions appreciated!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:54 PM Huckabee is a complete asshole, Bruce. Always was, always will be. Problem is, there are a several million assholes just like him - ignorant, fundagelical, bain dead demagogic opportunists & their followers. Howinhell do we neutralize THEM??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:52 PM The solution is to take the responsibility of handgun law and control out of the states and into a federal handgun carry law and ownership law. Then we see consistent effective control. Greg is right, some states you are required nothing, others it is very hard .. But again as long as there are gun shows you can keep making laws with a huge loophole that negates all of them. That is what we have now |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:48 PM "(or maybe you just like it when I talk dirty)" Ooooh baby, oooo baby... don't stop! Heheheheee. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:30 PM After reading Huckabee's crap about god being taken out of schools and so 'that's why these things happen' I went looking for this: "Oakland, Calif., April 2, 2012 A gunman kills seven people and wounds three in a shooting rampage at a Christian college in Oakland." I think America has got to 1) publicly destroy the NRA 2) publicly destroy FOX It ain't perfect, but it's a start. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:24 PM There's an interesting article in the Seattle Times today that looks at some facts about guns. It seems to show that gun control works to reduce gun violence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:20 PM A friend of mine in Canada--out west--on the day he first heard about gun registration in this country said, "I wonder what the government is going to do that I won't like." He loaded his own ammunition, kept his handguns and rifles locked up, used them only on a target range. Hell, he didn't even hunt. He collects guns and uses them on the range, that's it. I think in America that people don't trust their government. I can't blame them. They have allowed organizations like the NRA to actively influence politics. I grew up with an unloaded rifle (.22) kept in the shed along with hammers, screw drivers, nails, drills, etc. It was just another tool. Until I was deemed to be responsible enough by my Uncle Bob I was allowed only a single shot rifle and only allowed to use .22 shorts. Later, after demonstrating I could carry the firearm safely and handle it safely I was given the privilege of having a .22 with a five-round magazine. I was also allowed to use a pump .22, but he trained me to count the cartridges being loaded, and god help me if after a few hours of being in the woods looking for rabbits or squirrels and taking the odd shot or two at a stump or dead tree I couldn't tell him exactly how many shots I had left. I lost track once--thought I had seven left but had six (something like that) and that was it for hunting or target shooting for a few months. He was an ex paratrooper and took firearms very seriously, .22 rifle or not. The mindset with guns today is very different than it was in my childhood. It does worry me somewhat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:04 PM Gnu, I was thinking more of troll groupies, and we have a cluster of them... maybe a couple clusters. They're "anybody's". You're a guy who gets pissed off sometimes. (or maybe you just like it when I talk dirty) Automatic weapons aren't much good except when you can't take the time to aim. Semi-automatics are actually pretty effective, because you can adjust your aim without stopping to chamber another round. I can't remember what firing a weapon that isn't at least semi-automatic is like, though. I'm still thinking about this issue, and I likely will be for a while. Civilization often requires us to do things we may not want to do for the good of the many. Many people regard capitalism as evil. I think it can be ok if people voluntarily give up their "right" to make ridiculous amounts of money. I think we have to let common sense be more important than defending our "rights". I don't have any hope that people are willing to do that. Not to pay taxes, not to make stricter gun control laws, not to cut back using fossil fuels, not to do anything inconvenient to them. Jeri Crabbypants |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: John P Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:59 PM I keep hearing that "no responsible gun owner would do this" or "no responsible gun owner would do that". The problem isn't the responsible gun owners. It's that we let irresponsible people have guns. There are a few things we could do that would allow responsible gun owners to keep their guns, but let the rest of us have a little more confidence that the person next to us on the freeway or behind us in the grocery line isn't both mentally unstable and carrying a gun: A requirement for extensive training for all gun owners. Extensive background checks and a demonstrated need before we give concealed weapons permits. The right to sell a gun should be very difficult to obtain. A fascination with guns should probably be a disqualifier. No automatic firearms of any kind. Any gun that's confiscated gets destroyed. All guns should be securely locked up when not in use. Stolen guns get that way because they aren't adequately secured. Allowing a gun to fall into the hands of your unsupervised child should be a felony. As for the statement that if guns are illegal only criminals will have guns, I would like to point out that if guns are illegal, someone has to become a criminal before they use a gun. The way things are now, many crazy people who shoot others don't become criminals until they open fire. If the criminality happened earlier in the process, we'd have a better chance of keeping it from getting to the shooting stage. Also, most people are law-abiding and wouldn't buy a gun if it was illegal to do so. The problem is the ones who buy them legally and then go crazy or allow their guns to be stolen by other people who go crazy. Besides, if only criminals have guns, it will be easier to tell who they are. There are statistics that show that a gun in the home is four times more likely to be used on a friend, neighbor, or family member than on an armed intruder. It makes me want to quiz people about gun ownership before I visit them. It makes me angry that people are allowed indiscriminate gun ownership anyway. As soon as the gun lobby can convince me that all gun owners are responsible, I'll support the so-called right to bear arms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:42 PM Just a reminder... machine pistols and rifles (automatic fire weapons) can be turned into "machine guns" in about five minutes with a file and screwdriver but they are not the weapon of choice for a crazy person with their feet on the ground. And... yes, yet again (sorry)... the weapon of choice for sane citizens is good gun laws. Jeri... "trollfuckers"... excellent term. I may put that on a post-it and stick it on my monitor. Not that I won't but if it stops me just once, that's a good thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:37 PM "And the two handguns were a Glock and a SIG Sauer both 9mm, both semi-automatics that fire up to 5 bullets per second." "Semi-automatic pistols, as opposed to fully automatic pistols, fire a single shot each time you depress the trigger until the gun's magazine is empty." Well, even a realistic rate of one bullet every one or two seconds would do two things: empty a 9-round clip very quickly, and hit nothing (a good idea, in this case). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:14 PM One more point. Consider this,as I said, every Swiss man has a gun. What would our homicide rate be if EVERY American man had a gun? That was my point, and still is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:12 PM Jack Campin, apparently, the stats I had are out of date. I just found some new one at the Guardian web site. To call someone a liar when they were simply mistaken calls for education, NOT name calling. I admit to being wrong, are you man enough to apologize? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:04 PM OK the nuts factor is already through the roof, and I'm probably included. Have fun beating the figurative crap out of each other... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:00 PM They just said 3 guns were found IN the school. I'm beginning to think this will only get better when people who want a gun just because they WANT a gun because they maybe one day might have to shoot someone to save a life start believing that their right to do so is not worth even one child's life. or maybe, just when there's a link between the two things. It's the whole culture of being entitled/having the right to own something whose sole purpose is to kill. ...just in case ...because the person WANTS a gun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:58 PM PeeDee, give up on the automatic(machine gun) Vs. Semi-automatic bullshit- so some folks aren't conversant with firearms design & function. Doesn't really matter to the point under discussion. Its a smokescreen & doesn't advance the rational discussion of solutions to the continued policies of idiocy in the U.S. at the behest of the NRA, those they are able to scare into hysteria, and those with cold, dead brains. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:49 PM Jack, who the hell are you to be calling me a LIAR? I quoted the stats I have at hand, AND I was comparing them to OUR murder rate. I demand an apology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:48 PM Headlines on CNN this morning say that **4** handguns were found in the school... yesterday they said that the boy had 'access' to 5 guns. It seems he had more than he needed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bat Goddess Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:44 PM The weapon found (in the car, I think) was a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle -- which has absolutely no purpose other than combat. Why was it one of the weapons registered to the shooter's mother? And the two handguns were a Glock and a SIG Sauer both 9mm, both semi-automatics that fire up to 5 bullets per second. Expensive, too. All of 'em. And registered to his mother. Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:30 PM RUPERT MURDOCH: 'When Will Politicians Find Courage To Ban Automatic Weapons?' 15DEC2012 Are the Brits here getting their "news" from one of ol' Rupert's outlets? First, only two guns were taken into the school, both handguns. They were concealed (illegal). An AR-15 (or similar) rifle was found in the car but not used. It is NOT an automatic. Last I heard, there were about 16,000 active permits for automatic weapons (aka machine guns) and only one owner of such a permit has ever killed someone since machine guns were banned in 1934. He was a cop who found his wife with another man and shot her, not him. I believe he used his service revolver, not the automitic rifle anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:18 PM Yeah, but Dan, the problem is that there AREN't proper checks and training. And it isn't only the gun show exception - there are states where you can walk in off the street and purchase whatever you want, no questions asked. Until there are rational and universal national requirements ("states rights" be damned) its a lost cause. Best, Greg (responsible firearms owner & hunter) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:43 PM The latest is the guy's mother was NOT a kindergarten teacher. They say she may have substituted, but last I heard, they didn't know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:37 PM We will agree to disagree Janie. Given the nature of the violence lately, am I really that out to lunch. However, being X law enforcement and X everything else I guess I am a bit partial to responsible citizens owning firearms. I have no worries with the proper checks and training. Like I said many times it is the gun show purchases that scare the hell out of me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: dick greenhaus Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:25 PM Just to keep things straight, the Connecticut killer used guns that were purchased legally, by his mother, a kindergarten teacher. Further, I think that any comparison about the danger of a madman with a gun with one with a knife is ludicrous, As is equating the dangers of a homemade zip gun with a AK47. Given the number of guns available in the US, I don't believe that laws aimed at limiting the number of guns available would work, though background checks and elimination of gun-dhow sales without such checks would be a good ideaa, as would having strict penalties on private ales of guns without any records or checks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:09 PM It's a view held by nuts. Can't conceive of anybody slaughtering his mother, 20 children and 5 (?) other adults with such a total disregard for life an obvious rage to REALLY be interested in anything else, especially not gun control. I know this is a heated topic and is bound to get more heated. My not-nice reference to trolls above is more about the ones who obvious don't give a shit about the children or the situation but seem to try to dispassionately provoke those who usually can be provoked. It wasn't about those who are angry, but ones who just want to yank chains. I can see having guns for hunting, but we're rapidly proving that the whole reason for the 2nd amendment doesn't exist anymore. The fact is that the guns ARE out there, and I can't see any good way to make them not be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:56 AM Noreen, in my small corner of the planet that does not seem to be the prevailing opinion. However, the NRA has long promoted an attitude that some gun owners have bought into that reads, "If we let 'em ban any type of gun they'll be coming for our deer rifles directly." I'm a gun owner (though I haven't used one for more than 30 years) and most of the gun owners I've known (with some notable exceptions) have been very responsible and are in favor of limiting public access to certain types of firearms and intensive background checks. Just my experience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:48 AM "..., tell me that this not a widely-held view on your side of the pond??" No..it is not 'widely' held.. but like all such conspiracy theories, some are mentally ready to believe it to fit with their other theories. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:45 AM I'm awake to another day.... and more of the same arguments. "..anyone can make a gun out of anything." First, that is hyperbole... even experts need some basic items. And second, most people would NOT be able to....or want to. Third, most of those who could would need detailed instructions and/or an expert looking over their shoulder. Fourth, those who could and wanted to would need ammunition, and even fewer could make powder and useful shells for their non-standard creations. Finally, if, in a society where there were few **legal** guns they did make illegal ones, and USED gun & ammo in criminal ways, they wouldn't last long! Ok... here I go, venting.. The stupidest argument going is that "if more people were gun owners and trained to use them, all would be safer!" Think about it! How many people do YOU know who would never be competent to own a gun and trustworthy to use one properly? Those people are called victims! Please remember... these gun crimes are **usually** committed by people- usually young males- with mental, family, and societal issues! THEY can be 'trained' to use a gun and legally licensed before they choose to do something stupid! Those who can't pass a usage & mental test..or are too young... can steal one!! Even those who are not likely to intentionally shoot up schools can accidentally shoot their family & friends... and do... every day. And some of you want to argue that MORE guns are the best policy? Quote: "BULLSHIT"! Unquote. It makes NO difference even if you manage to reduce the percentage of idiots and disturbed individuals by psychology, testing, and various other methods... there WILL be more than you can find & deal with- like ants at a picnic. The ants, at least, are doing something natural, antwise. We deal with ants by controlling the ways ants can bother us! We cover our food, eat at a table,etc. We do not attempt to train other ants to fight the first ants... or train all family members to squish ants! So... you don't like my silly metaphor? Let's cut to the chase. With a steady supply of unstable people seemingly guaranteed, we either control the ways they can bother us or we accept more stories like this. By all means... do whatever possible to diagnose & treat mental instabilities for all sorts of reasons! Just don't kid yourselves that YOU.. or any combination of relatively sane, trained gun owners... can seriously control these Let's be honest... guns are in many ways similar to drugs. The more people mess with them, the more addictive they are! Even those of you who are not likely to EVER do anything stupid with them can't quit talking about them... comparing details, firepower, ammo, etc. You flatly do not WANT to lose your guns, and you create complex stories to justify your addiction! For every story where a gun was used wisely in self defense, there are a hundred where a tragedy occurred.... and THAT is a statistic that only needs tweaking to clarify the truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Noreen Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:34 AM I've just read someone on facebook saying that these murders were part of an orchestrated campaign to try and get gun control started in America- 'and once it's started it won't stop'. Please, American friends, tell me that this not a widely-held view on your side of the pond?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:16 AM I couldn't see that, 9. I am realizing, looking at statistics and not going from what I've witnessed, what I've believed, a lot more homes have guns in them that I'd though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:02 AM That's what I said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 11:01 AM Some gun owners have one gun. Some have ten. I don't think they're spread around evenly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:48 AM Howard Jones your post above gives me hope that someday, as a society, we in the USA will outgrow our infatuation with guns. Of course it will take a Herculean effort and a lot more heartache. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:48 AM Jeri, keep in mind that about 1 in 3 homes has guns. "The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: pdq Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:30 AM Kennesaw, Georgia gun law: 1982 ordinance [Sec 34-21][18] (a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore. (b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony. Note: crime rate dropped by half after this law was passed. In 2007, the city was selected by Family Circle magazine as one of the nation's "10 best towns for families". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jeri Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:26 AM I'll leave the stupidity to the troll(s) and trollfuckers. Al, I don't believe most households have guns, but I haven't been in most households. Where I live, it's rural. People here go hunting, and they have guns to shoot vermin--in most cases that's some sort of animal they consider dangerous or obnoxious that strays too close to their homes. Every once in a while, I hear what could only be automatic or semi-automatic gunfire. We have our share of paranoid nut-jobs, but as long as they don't shoot first, I can deal with them. They're killing targets. No one I've talked to in my neighborhood has said they have a handgun. Most of the people I've known in my life haven't own any guns at all. The guns ARE here to say. Anyone who thinks laws will make them go "poof" is delusional. The box is open. There are probably millions of guns in the US, and they aren't going to disappear, but we need better control. I don't know that if he hadn't been able to get his mother's guns, he would have made a bomb, started a fire, or done something else. I don't know... really. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bat Goddess Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:16 AM Why is no background check or investigation to see whether there is a legitimate need for people buying body armor? Seems to me it's an indicator of some sort. If there's no legitimate need (and what, exactly, is a legitimate need?) at the very least the purchaser would bear watching... Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 10:02 AM "The guns are here to stay." You poor, impotent thing. How many dead innocents will satisfy your bloodlust? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:32 AM I have been thinking about the consequences of the fluoridation lately. I'm not sure what trouble it's causing, but I'm sure it is. I'm not impotent, though. The guns are here to stay. That's just a fact. Not far from me is a town where every home owner is required by law to own one. =(:-( 0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:23 AM By the way, Mr. Krinkle, you've seen these black helicopters flying around? You know they're from the UN, don't you. And that fluoride in the water. You know the government put it there, of course. You'd better look into getting your water from another source. You can't be too careful, you know. Just maybe that's the reason for your impotence. You might want to consider that. But it's good to know you're being vigilant and alert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Howard Jones Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:10 AM Historically, people in England had a common-law right to bear arms. Over time, laws were passed restricting this right, most recently as a result of shootings similar to the one we have sadly just witnessed. The difference between here and the US is that there was massive public support for these controls. The history here shows that it is possible for a society to disarm itself, if there is a willingness to do so. Sadly, even in the aftermath of tragedies such as this one, US society doesn't seem to be willing to do this. Of course, there are still guns in circulation here and they are mostly in the hands of criminals. However these seem to be mainly drug dealers and street gangs, who mostly use them against each other. The courts here come down very heavily on armed robbery, so this is unusual and most ordinary criminals don't carry guns. My house may get burgled or I may get mugged in the street, but I don't expect that either of them will be carrying a gun and don't feel a need to arm myself against them. I, and I think most Brits, look at the American fetish with firearms with bewilderment. I can understand its historical roots, but I cannot see how it has a place in a modern civilized society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 15 Dec 12 - 09:08 AM Interesting graphic on the demographics of gun ownership in America: http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/AugustRNS_GunOwnership.jpg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:46 AM "only the government..."' Please lie down, Mr. Krinkle, and tell us how long you've been having this paranoia. I'm sure we can help you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:40 AM Some common sense is what is needed: 1. No one needs an assault rifle except the military... You don't hunt with them... You don't sport shoot with them... You kill people with them... 2. No high capacity ammo clips... If you haven't hit Bambi or the target with the first 10 rounds chances are that you won't with the next 20 or 30 rounds... 3. Restore background checks... 4. Registration of handguns and proficiency certificates required to register them... None of these will "take away your guns" unless you are not qualified to shoot one half-way safely, are nuts or a criminal... Time for sanity... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:40 AM The problem is not the number of guns, but the uniquely American attitude toward them. In the American mythos, the gun is "The Great Problem Solver". Our films, television programs, video games, and popular fiction romanticize the gun's ability to set things right. They tell us that going out in a blaze of glory is an admirable thing to do. So, why should we be surprised when some guy who feels he's been given a raw deal lashes out in precisely the way he's been repeatedly told is heroic? The key to solving gun violence is to send a countermessage that guns don't solve problems. They create them. It's not going to be an easy message to send, if for no other reason than that the current "Guns are cool!" message makes so much money for the mass media. For every film which shows how an act of gun violence destroys lives, there are dozens of others depicting gun-wielders as heroes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:32 AM People behave in the presence of a gun. I've seen it with my own eyes and gun. No brag. Just fact. Mr. Pratt is right. =(:-( l) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:16 AM Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, says that this tragedy is the fault of gun control supporters - that it could have been prevented if more people, including teachers, were armed. WTF??? This kind of shit is precisely wherein the problem lies. Wake up America - only when the worship of gun ownership and glorification of violence are seen as an aberration and people like Larry Pratt are considered to be mentally defective will you start to become a civilized society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:14 AM You want only the government to have guns. How nice for them. And if we don't have guns, the government won't need them anymore, either. Peace on Earth in our time. I think you've hit on something, by Jove! =(:-( O) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:06 AM I've been in the military too. But I didn't come out paranoid--that's not a requirement, you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:45 AM Go turn your gun in. I've been in the military.. I'll keep mine. I know how and when to use it. =(:-( l) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:44 AM OK, Mr Krinkle, (not Kris, I suspect) if mental health is the issue, not guns, why does the US have hugely more gun deaths than most other Western nations?. Other nations have mental health problems--just not the stupidly easy access to guns-- to solve their perceived problems-- that people have here. The Second Amendment, combined with US pathetic ignorance of history, is a curse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:41 AM I've never been to America. i don't get it. Do ORDINARY people - not farmers and hunters, not cops and robbers - own guns? Do most householders have a gun? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:23 AM Agreed Lizzie and well said. That's a first step. Next I would implore everybody to contact their congressman, senator and the president and let them know if they want your support then they have to do something about this. They've got to find a solution. They've got to turn their back on the gun lobby and their tainted money and find some way to prevent or at least make these tragedies less likely to occur. Let's rekindle the national conversation and keep it going. And Krinkle, when you move into your cave have a large boulder placed in it's mouth so no creeps can get into it (or out of it). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stu Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:08 AM It is, imo, contemptibly stupid to believe that gun restrictions will make a difference." IMO it's contemptibly stupid to defend a status quo that allows twenty innocent kids plus others to be slaughtered. You are never going to be able to weed out everyone who has some sort of mental instability (the desire to own a weapon would count as that in my view), and you are never going to stop the suicide alone in their room, you'll never stop the person in a fit of rage that has blinded them to reason. You're never going to be able to assess everyone for 'mental instability' (a relative term if ever there was one, and completely meaningless in the real world), and that needs to be accepted as fact, unless you're interested in introducing some sort of apartheid for people who don't meet some arbitrary criteria. Not nice, not practical, not going to happen. Guns are enablers. They enable people in a variety of ways, and none of them positive. They enable people to kill quickly and from a distance, when they choose. They enable scared and frightened people to believe they are defending themselves or others against the ever-present but invisible threat they perceive to exist 'out there'. They enable the poor sods who corrupt the second amendment in the name of a delusional patriotic ideal that is appallingly self-centred and thoughtless, not the spirit of a militiaman struggling to build a better society for him and his family. Alongside this is the fact that many people in the US (some of my good friends among them) seem to accept the horrors that come from a country awash with guns; they are becoming dulled to the violence endemic in their society: "Tragically, it WILL happen again...in whatever form." Are you fucking kidding? It will if you let it happen, and that statement seems to indicate that you're happy to let that happen. More dead kids? Fuck that. Nutballs? What sort of nutball would make that statement? I am a Brit who loves the US deeply. I love the friendliness and curiosity of the people, their positive attitude to life and their ability to tackle problems with cheerfulness and determination (not like us whinging Brits). They are a wonderful, diverse and intelligent nation who are heading into a very dark place indeed, and they need to pull back now. Forget all this "right to bear arms" crap; you're no less a person for not carrying a weapon, in fact it shows a strength and resolution more befitting of your nation, and no-one doubts you would all fight for your country if it was threatened, but that threat is now your own helplessness in the face of this bloodbath. Ditch the guns. In the end, it is the only way and now is the time. If this isn't the rubicon, what the fuck is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:41 AM It wasn't just 'a gun' that killed those innocent souls in Connecticut yesterday. It is our refusal to admit that we have become a Loaded-Gun-Species, that is now tragically Disconnected, Disinterested, Dysfunctional. We will never put this Right whilst we blame everyone else. EACH of us has The Power To Change This World Around To Goodness. Never before has that Power been needed so greatly. Never before have we needed to Look At Ourselves so Deeply and to admit How Wrong everything has become. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:40 AM We have very vicious criminals. They'll have guns and we won't. Society is in the process of breaking down. Mass murders are only one symptom. Stock up on food and arm yourself. =(:-( l) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: freda underhill Date: 15 Dec 12 - 02:10 AM That's like a catch 22. But it's possible to do gun recalls, we did it here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:59 AM We have armed home invasions, rabid animals, robberies, sex crimes. We need guns. =(:-( l) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: freda underhill Date: 15 Dec 12 - 01:31 AM I think guns are the issue. In Australia we changed our gun laws after the Port Arthur massacre, and there was a huge buy-back. Our strict gun laws have saved thousands or Australian lives - look at the statistics. Much, much lower rate of murders and suicides after the change in legislation and the confiscations. Yes, mentally ill people need health services. But all people need to live in a society where ordinary people don't get access to weapons. Farmers need them on farms, to put animalks out of their misery on occasion, anyone else should just go and lease them in a rifle range if they want to play with them. There is no reason for people to have them in their homes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:32 AM I think mental health is the issue. More resources for the sick. Dealing with them earlier rather than after it's too late. =(:-( I) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 15 Dec 12 - 12:01 AM I agree GUEST,Stim ... but Bill D's purpose to this thread was to vent... we all feel the pain, but this thread is to express our feelings as to what the hell is going on. The China link I posted relates to what Bill D. mentioned in his first post to this thread ... and if you read the CNN article in that thread you will notice the region in China where this incident occured they have for some time now imposed controls (licencing) of the purchase of large knifes. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Stim Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:52 PM Sorry, friends, but I am getting tired of revisiting this same conversation. Everyone says what they always say, and no one does anything. Maybe we should forget the crap about blaming each other. It's an easy way to avoid dealing with the reality. Instead, let's mourn the dead. Every time something like this happens, we need to do something that shows we feel the loss. Maybe there should be an official national day of mourning for each person killed. We could all wear black, lower the speed limits, call off the megabucks lotto, give up steak and dessert, and deal with the grief. And let's take care of the victims. Pay the medical bills, cover all the memorial costs, make sure the survivors get the support they need. Provide for the costs of readjustment, whatever they are. And let's not forget about them a month later, like we always seem to do. I know you're all kind and decent people, but I also know that you, and everybody, runs away from this--no one wants to think about the emptiness that those murders created, and we'd all rather fight about gun control and such things than confront it. The thing is, that more than anyone realizes, these discussions contribute to the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:35 PM Another school tragedy today but this time in China .. knife attack at chinese school wounds 22 children biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Beer Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:34 PM Well said Dorothy. ad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Janie Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:31 PM Dan, I despair when I read your posts on these threads. I like and admire you so much. But you are so "out to lunch" on this issue that it boggles my mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:29 PM Oh I completely agree that the varied gun policies across the states is nuts. Some states very firm control, others no control at all nor even a bg check. Now even if those loose states start tighter controls, there are more guns then people .. And if we did a Mexico and say no guns at all allowed, It won't work. Henry is correct anyone can make a gun out of anything. Likewise explosives, sharp edged weapons. Nothing will stop it we are less safer .. the solution is family and a society that rewards hard work, honesty and compassion and since that is degrading .. no chance of anything getting better. The only thing one can do is protect to the best of their ability those around them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Beer Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:18 PM I have been reading the responses on the different threads related to this tragedy looking for an answer. When BillD posted and said; "I hesitated starting this, but there needs to be a place to share ideas...and just vent". That struck me as a good start. When Pres. Obama said that he would do this or that, I hung my head because I thought that as much as he wished he could prevent this from happening again, they were false promises. Not that he doesn't want to stop it all (as we all do.), but it would take more than 4 years and the next Presidency to make a change. When the news broke my very first thought was, there will be a lot more. What a terrible thing to think. There are a lot of heavy hitters responding to this thread and all I will ask is that we respect one another and as BillD said; "but there needs to be a place to share ideas...and just vent". If were going to vent how about doing it in a respectful manner. Adrien |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: number 6 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 11:01 PM Dorothy Parshall ... well said. In regards to your statement "The USA has some serious work to do on changing the way it looks at the world and at lives of humans, and all animals. It does not seem to place as high a value on life as some of the more civilized countries." I'm posting an article from today's (ironically) Der Speigel regarding the sufferings of U.S. drone operators. excerpts from this article .. ""Did we just kill a kid?" he asked the man sitting next to him. "Yeah, I guess that was a kid," the pilot replied. "Was that a kid?" they wrote into a chat window on the monitor. "Then, someone they didn't know answered, someone sitting in a military command center somewhere in the world who had observed their attack. "No. That was a dog," the person wrote. They reviewed the scene on video. A dog on two legs?" pain continues after war for American drone operators biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:59 PM What BillD says... We are 100% on the same page on gun control... If there could be 110% then it would be 110%... We are living with insane gun policies... Completely insane... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:57 PM Now is the time to take the 'battle' back to the NRA. Now is the time to have Representatives in the House who oppose gun control stand and be recognized for the last time because they will not be reelected. Now is the time to take away the NRA's power as lobbyists and as an organization with political clout. After today, they have NO credibility anymore IF you kick them and keep kicking them. Street fighting 101. America thought President Obama would not win because some big money took out advertisements saying he wouldn't win. America proved itself wrong--or more precisely, proved that money can't buy the whole country. Do NOT let up on this. Your president has said he's willing to lead. For krissake, support him. If you belong to the NRA, withdraw your membership. Tell them--TELL THEM--no more bullshit, no more lies. Stop the American love affair with YouTube crap that glorifies some idiot in camouflage gear and a scope-mounted rifle. TELL your kids that "No, you cannot have the latest video game that teaches you twelve ways to shoot some poor bastard. And if I find it on your computer, you won't HAVE a computer!" Start taking back your country. Start with your kids and your Congress, and don't take NO for an answer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:46 PM "More "NUTBALL control?" Now we're getting somewhere...maybe" Nutball control is sadly lacking in Canada and this debate is ongoing here while the USA reflects on its great loss today! I am all for gun control but this is what a nutball with a knife can do: Nutball |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:41 PM If you look at the link I posted, the number of registered guns in the USA has dropped significantly in recent years. There is some other very significant information there regarding states with gun laws vs those without. Look at where the guns are more prevalent, at where the laws are more restrictive at where the worst events have occurred. There is no significant correlation. It is, imo, contemptibly stupid to believe that gun restrictions will make a difference. It is a waste of time, money and energy. Those who want them will find them, regardless. It is as feckless as restricting illegal drugs. Zero-tolerance did not solve the problem; neither will gun laws. There are guns in Canada; we could conceivably have these types of events; did have the one in Quebec some years ago. But basic attitudes are totally different. There are highly significant historic/sociological differences. The USA has some serious work to do on changing the way it looks at the world and at lives of humans, and all animals. It does not seem to place as high a value on life as some of the more civilized countries. If it did, it would not be killing people in other countries, thereby setting a horrendous example for its young people. It is a militant-minded country that extolls the use of violence in TV, everywhere, and this attitude invades every aspect of life. Just look at "Stand your ground". It is legal to kill people. Boy, am I ever fed up with that stinking attitude. That young man was also a young child once. How 'bout looking at what went wrong in his life, or never went right, that brought him to the point of killing his mother and going on a killing rampage. That is where the answers are, where the time, money and energy could be well spent. How do we help each individual grow into the kind of person who nurtures, rather than kills? Hard to do in a country that extolls violence - but most people manage it. Interesting that no one has mentioned Nickel Mines? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:36 PM Dan... (and Krinkle)- raising kids with 'morals' and "spirituality or compassion for others" is a goal, not a simple formula! The dangerous ones have merely changed- or added to- what they GET upset over! When do you remember us having that society you wish to return to? No society in history has been without the crazy, uncontrolled, testosterone fueled, angry, anxious...etc... young men! Where do you suppose Ghengis Khan got his willing soldiers? He merely put them into situations where their instincts were directed like he wanted! Now the world is more populated & crowded.... so, the total number of unbalanced ones in a society are ALWAYS increasing, and it takes only a few to increase the number of horrific headlines! If we had the BEST morals and teachers and family principles imaginable, we would still have those who fall thru the cracks and do horrible things! We tell kids not to play with matches when they are 2... and usually keep matches out of reach, but keep firearms in the house where kids know about them.... and even if WE don't, someone they know usually has guns! We spend more effort keeping our people safe from contaminated peanut butter than from guns! You will NOT improve the 'moral climate' of families and cure kids of the stresses that make them want to hit & hurt others by repeating that slogan! We try to make toys safer, so kids don't swallow little parts or cut themselves, but as soon as they reach 18 or so and haven't done anything 'seriously' illegal, we let them have guns? You will notice, I have not demanded we "take away everyone's guns". Even I know how hard that would be... but some folks will simply not entertain the IDEA of meaningfully controlling access to handguns, semi-auto or automatic rifles and ammo! We will have more stories like this Wanta read about one *I* knew about? Remembering 8-11 (in Wichita) My ex-wife was in that building when that 19 year old kid took a rifle and shot people on the street! One of his victims was a photographer for the newspaper who was shot dead in his car AS he responded to radio news about the shootings. It 'may' have gotten some national attention at the time, but that was before cable news and internet... but it was quieter, more 'moral' time. who..me? cynical? naawwwww |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:12 PM "In WWII the gas chamber people were not insane, just evil." True, Dan, but what they did was legal because they passed the laws to make it legal. And therein is the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:07 PM The Second Most Powerful Gun Lobby in the Country is Located in Newtown, Conn. Jordan Sargent Today's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. happened in the shadow of the headquarters of one of the biggest gun lobbies in the country: the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which is just three miles away from the school. The NSSF pales in both stature and power to the NRA, but they still actively work to ease laws and regulations for gun owners and supporters. Lydia DePillis of The New Republic reports that the NSSF has spent over $500,000 in 2012 on pro-gun lobbying (compared to the NRA's $2.2 million), most of which went to a D.C. lobbyist. The lion's share of that went to Patrick Rothwell, the group's director of government relations, who served for three years as chief of staff to the House Republican Policy Committee. He spent a lot of time this year working on legislation that would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating chemicals in gun ammunition and fishing equipment, and the organization has backed a slew of concealed-carry bills. DePillis also reports that the NSSF spent $26,000 this campaign season and is frequently consulted by reporters writing facile "he said, she said" stories to give a pro-gun point of view. The foundation takes in $26 million per year and its CEO makes over $300,000 per year. The NSSF's location in Newtown is an incidental coincidence, of course, but an unfortunate one nonetheless in light of today's events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 14 Dec 12 - 10:01 PM I spent so many hours trying to figure this out, there is no solution. I can only now say that I will do my best to make sure that when i am around anyway, I have the ability to make some sort of difference to protect others. Crazy that I even have to think like that but I do now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 14 Dec 12 - 09:58 PM You can make your own gun. Or even a cannon. And your own gunpowder. I think capitalism is a big part of the problem. Kids spend so much time in daycare ,online and watching trash on tv. Nobody raises them. =(:-( I) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 14 Dec 12 - 09:53 PM I suspect my friends that what we are calling insane is more simply evil. In WWII the gas chamber people were not insane, just evil. I really think it is more of the I am a loser so hence I will make them all pay for the fact that I am a loser. I will be famous forever ... go out in a blaze of infamy. As long as those types of people are around, we can't stop it. The availability of weapons, any weapons makes it impossible to police. My friends in other countries can't understand but we who live here can't either. The US is huge, we have cattle farms out west bigger than many European countries. The police cannot be everywhere, we have lots more people and sadly lots more violence. It is the breakdown of the family unit I think. The lack of morals, the lack of spirituality or compassion for others. We have become a self nation. Look after ourselves, not others. He who dies with the most toys wins type of thing. Do anything for fame, or fortune. Heck look at the loser celebs that make sex tapes and release them and instead of outrage, they get stardom. You see like Rome when the moral compass is broken, then the unthinkable becomes standard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 09:44 PM "More "NUTBALL control?" Now we're getting somewhere...maybe" Here's a reality check for you... Right now, control over them is after the fact. Anyone can purchase a gun in many states UNTIL they are shown to be felons or "nutballs".... and if they go to a gun show or the internet, even their "nuttiness" is not questioned! Not only that, but there are SO many guns about that almost any "nutball" can buy one ILLEGALLY or steal one! This boy got guns registered to his mother... then shot HER! Don't you suppose he'd know she had them? Yes...I KNOW the US has the biggest problem! That's why I look for new ideas, not old statistics! Now, Bob R... how you YOU propose we 'control' nutballs? Do you wish to lockup every vaguely disturbed or depressed teen! Many kids seem at odds & not well adjusted, then grow out of it! Remember... they are free & innocent UNTIL they do something that makes headlines. ___________________________ Look at it reasonably.... 1)we are NOT short of nutballs, and in this stressful society, they are a growing problem. 2)Maybe 1/10 of 1% of us needs ANY guns in daily life, and most of those are police and those in wilderness areas who genuinely need them for protection and/or for hunting food.3)The police desperately wish that guns were not so easily available...partly because they- the police- are running scared and tend to shoot innocent people in certain situations! Do NOT give me the line about killing people with large rocks! Or knives.. (READ my opening post!) This kid could not have done that amount of mayhem with a rock or knife. THINK... don't repeat tired slogans and statistics! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:58 PM Reality check Bill D. It's more like this...http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-idUSL2834893820070828 And that info. is nearly 6 years old. When the SEALS got Bin Laden, there was a full page ad in the newspaper advertising the gun company that made the weapon. A "quality product..." Agree with Dorothy. And as a former teacher, I sure would like to see more than just the ABC's in schoolrooms. A closer monitoring of the student and what's in his mind might be useful... When I was 14(guess), I had a friend named John that had a Nazi memorabilia collection. Not your shoebox collector. His GARAGE had the flag, the medals, books, a mini museum. A site even I could not believe at 14, His father had been killed by the Nazis. He knew the salutes, history, accents, and made me wonder what this kid does for fun...And what movie was playing in his head... Then there was the story of a serial killer in India being hunted by the Police. He had killed a LOT of people. They could not get a photo. But somebody did a drawing of him, holding a large rock over his head. His weapon of choice. After crushing their skulls, he would then take their belongings. The solution? Less guns? Are you kidding me? MORE "gun control?"...Don't think so...More "NUTBALL control?" Now we're getting somewhere...maybe Tragically, it WILL happen again...in whatever form. Peace...That which you concentrate on expands, and don't ask why a god wasn't there... look inside, and be the change you would like to see in others...BR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:50 PM True, Dorothy, but high schoolers don't get Glocks, Sig Sauers or AR-15s at the corner store in small-town Canada. They are sophisticated weapons requiring lots of paper work. Procurement of said weapons in the US appears to be much easier. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Jack Campin Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:48 PM Every man in Switzerland has a gun for national defense, yet the murder rate is very low. Why? Because you're lying. I already replied to that claim a couple of hours ago when you posted it in another thread. Switzerland's murder rate is substantially higher than that of Austria, the country to which it is most similar in every other respect except gun ownership. It also has a very high incidence of suicide by gun (though despite frequent claims to the contrary, its overall suicide rate is not all that high, less than double the UK rate and not much higher than the US). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:35 PM 200,000 Americans will be shot this year... Me??? I learned "gun safety" and how to shoot a gun from the NRA... I was in an NRA shoot club... Had the jacket, the patches, the medals... That was a long time ago... 95% of gun owners today wouldn't get along with the NRA people I knew way back then, and vice versa... NRA used to be about gun safety... Now its about pushing as many guns into as many hands as they can... Safety??? What's that??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:30 PM 9... "That implies the .223 was converted to full automatic which is doable with a kit and the know-how." Nope. No "kit" required. A simple file on the bent and Bob's yer assassin. I can show you how to do it in less than five minutes. But, such modifications? To do what he did? Not required. Any marksman can kill anthing he wants to kill with any weapon. It's not about the weapon... it's about the the human who pulls the trigger, whatever trigger, whatever weapon. What IS required is some REALISTIC GUN LAWS damnit! I just weep at the fact that that the gun-nuts oppose the anti-gun nuts and vice versa. Could they all just realize people... CHILDREN!... are dying? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:24 PM "Every man in Switzerland has a gun for national defense, yet the murder rate is very low. Why?" Maybe because it's for "National Defense" rather than personal defense. The reason for carrying a concealed weapon I hear most in the US is for personal protection against, I presume, other people carrying concealed weapons. Now if no one carried concealed weapons.....well you get the picture. I'm Canadian and I have never, ever in my sixty three years known or heard of anyone to carry a concealed weapon, yet even here on Mudcat several American members have said they have permits to carry. This is, frankly, beyond my comprehension. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:17 PM Read those statistics, Kendall... Switzerland is NOT that low! And it is not just 300 years old with a frontier mentality! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Henry Krinkle Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:16 PM Guns are just a tool. Like a hammer or saw. Timothy McVeigh did more damage with diesel fuel and fertilizer. If a resourceful person wants a gun they will make one out of steel pipe. Dorothy is correct. Raising mentally healthy people is the answer. Anybody can have children. Regardless of how fit. We are a nation of spoiled brats. It's all about money and materialism. =(:-( 0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:15 PM We KNOW all those statistics, my friends... we also KNOW that there are 100,000,000 or more weapons- legally and illegally- in this country. We also KNOW that changing "how our children are raised, how people think." is not likely to help with the basic problem very soon. You see, those who will **not** willingly give up **any** guns of **any** type now hold the upper hand. They are willing to absorb a few yearly mass shootings in order to protect their 2nd amendment "rights"... even though the Founders would be appalled at how their seemingly reasonable idea has been perverted! Only a mass, ground roots movement which gradually replaced all the members of Congress who vote the way the NRA donations demand will do any good... .... unless some gun nut uses Congress as his target. Fat chance! We need ideas... not repetition of statistics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: kendall Date: 14 Dec 12 - 08:11 PM I'm willing to turn mine in if you think that will help. \Every man in Switzerland has a gun for national defense, yet the murder rate is very low. Why? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:55 PM You could say that guns don't kill people but to be more precise, politics kills people, especially those politicians that support the gun lobby. Micheal Moore was right in "Bowling for Columbine". There is a connection between the military weapons manufacturers and the tolerance for gun usage in the U.S. The U.S. possesses the most weaponry in the world. There is a climate for this tragedy here not found elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:47 PM Last year for guns Last year: Killed by handguns 48 in Japan 8 in Great Britaij 34 in Switzerland 52 in Canada 58 in Israel 21 in Sweden 10,728 in the U.S. (even more than Mexico) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:42 PM So when do we have an adult conversation about guns??? Oh, that's right... Never... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:41 PM guest:murrbob The U.S. has seven times the gun-related murders per capita of any other Western nation. Guns ARE the problem, especially when they are automatic and semiautomatic weapons. These were certainly not a part of the Founding Fathers writing of the 2nd Amendment! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Stringsinger Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:39 PM A car doesn't kill 28 people. A knife can injure but doesn't kill 28 people. An automatic weapon can kill even more. The NRA has blood on its hands. Gun deaths The United States has by far the highest rate of gun deaths -- murders, suicides and accidents -- among the world's 36 richest nations, a government study found. The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate, at .05 per 100,000. The study, done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is the first comprehensive international look at gun-related deaths. It was published Thursday in the International Journal of Epidemiology. Here are gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994: United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:24 PM What's more, they are also clueless about what they claim to know--the reasons for the 2nd Amendment. Fear of a standing army, and consequent need for a "well-regulated militia" Fear of British or Indian attack I don't believe we've been terribly concerned about either of these for a while now. I wonder when all gun-owners will in fact be required to show up for monthly , weekly, or even annual, drill. Even in the first serious application of the "well-regulated militia" after the Bill of Rights was not exactly a triumph. The drills turned out often to be drinkfests. In fact the "well-regulated militia"---or anything but a standing army-- approach to national defence turned out to be a disaster. They also had the nasty habit of disappearing when their time was up. I understand that even the 8th of January was won mostly by the regular army. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:17 PM "how does a 20 year old..." In small town, Ontario, it was common knowledge - even I knew it! - that you could get a gun at the "corner store", where all the high schoolers hung out. Guns will always be easy to obtain - until we melt them all down - and surely there will still be some around somewhere. What needs to change is how our children are raised, how people think. Such a very few cause such devastation. WHY them? What went wrong in their young lives? What is missing that they need? You can call these "idealistic"; I call it realistic. It is quite obvious that guns are not the problem: This is enlightening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 06:27 PM Seems to me that any decent 'god' would have been IN that school. But that is a different discussion. The right wingnuts will say what they always say... and solve nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 14 Dec 12 - 06:23 PM The right wingnuts are starting to lay blame: Fischer: Lack of prayer in public schools to blame for Conn. shootings Mike Huckabee Says Sandy Hook Shooting Happened Because We 'Removed God From Our Schools' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 06:21 PM You are correct, Bruce, that given how many guns are available... to 'borrow' or steal, as well as to buy, NOTHING can prevent a similar story tomorrow... or next week, or next year. In 20 years? Maybe... if.... and there are so many ifs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 14 Dec 12 - 06:18 PM Canada's "National Post" reported scores of dead. Two of us on their site took them to task for sensationalizing an already horrific event. I do expect the same crap from LaPierre and the NRA. President Obama has vowed to take 'meaningful action' to prevent this kind of thing, but when guns are so easily available I don't see how he can. How the hell did a 20-year-old get two handguns and an AR-15? If a witness statement was reported correctly, that witness said s/he heard what sounded like a hundred shots fired. That implies the .223 was converted to full automatic which is doable with a kit and the know-how. Gun ownership is one issue, gun control is another. As I understand it, none of those kids were over the age of about 10 years. If that ain't enough to make ya cry, I don't know what is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 14 Dec 12 - 06:17 PM This comment from the Atlantic: "Guns don't attack children; psychopaths and sadists do. But guns uniquely allow a psychopath to wreak death and devastation on such a large scale so quickly and easily. America is the only country in which this happens again -- and again and again." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: katlaughing Date: 14 Dec 12 - 05:50 PM I totally agree, Bill. |
|
Subject: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bill D Date: 14 Dec 12 - 05:29 PM I hesitated starting this, but there needs to be a place to share ideas...and just vent. I am alternately saddened, angered, frustrated, confused and coldly analytical about all this. There are facts, data, ideas, opinions enough to fill 27 threads... but here are my first thoughts. When I first saw the news, I went to the CNN website to look for details. Over at one side were these two headlines, one directly above the other: "Gunmen kills 20 children, 6 adults at Connecticut elementary school Fox News - 12 minutes ago Man with knife injures 22 kids at school in China USA TODAY - 7 minutes ago" Note the two different verbs. I also heard that one 'statistic' is that 63% of similar attackers got the weapon(s) from their home or relatives homes. I also note that the mall shootings in Portland Oregon a couple days ago where 'only' 3 innocent victims were shot were not even mentioned here. I also know that there is no shortage in this country of either guns OR disturbed individuals. This is in a world with more & more stresses and instant information about shootings. Thus, I wonder how many tragedies have been... or will be... 'inspired' by OTHER tragedies. I cannot believe that this perpetrator had not read & seen the news of earlier situations. I also am sure that the NRA and those who support it will continue to issue bland statements about how we need to find and deal with dangerous, disturbed people. I submit that many of the dangerous, disturbed people will not be hard to find.... the only question is how many they will kill as they reveal themselves. It is also a good thing that I don't know how to find Wayne LaPierre... |
