BS: Shooting tragedies and guns

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