News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?

Started by emay, July 20, 2012, 09:35:53 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

gah

Quote from: rowjimmy on December 19, 2012, 09:22:23 AM
Quote from: barnesy305 on December 19, 2012, 09:11:26 AM
My point with that post is that humanity has lost it's humanity. Botton line. Carry on.

The fact that you've noticed suggests that it's not entirely lost.

Exactly. We can change this if enough people speak up and do something as opposed to just being upset for a few days and then moving on to the next news cycle. What gets me though is everyone that thinks this is so terrible, this is beyond words, I can't even comprehend the insanity...blah blah blah. Why not? It's what we've accepted. It happens every few months and it'll happen again in a few months.

My point being inaction won't lead to different outcomes of similar scenarios. 9/11 happens, and we have tighter airport security check ins, undercover sky marshalls, armed pilots, etc...has it helped? Is it effective? I don't know, but I guess since we haven't had something happen so that's something.

But these random mass shootings, they happen, we do nothing about it, but then get upset the next time it happens. And so it's like yeah, why not arm the teachers and put in metal detectors at every school. Seem ridiculous to have metal detectors at a school for 4-9 year olds? Yeah, probably. But it's something, and a few months from now when we've had a few shootouts between teachers and students OR some prevented mass shootings at a school OR some accidents because some students got hold of a gun or something, then we can say, hey yeah, maybe that wasn't a good idea. We should try something different.

Clearly that's not meant to be a serious proposal, although, as evidenced by Texas and Rick Perry to some it might be, I use it simply as an example of the option of DOING something, and then reacting to whether it's working or not. But not doing anything, we're not even having effective discussion, even at the two party political level. In this last election do you even remember gun laws even being brought up? If they were, it certainly was a very minor topic if it was mentioned at all.

Like I said, we as a society have collectively decided through our inaction that this is an acceptable amount of tragedy to deal with. Or we can use the only effective tool we have which is to contact the people that represent us and let them know we expect something, anything, done to address this. It's not hard here's a link to how to find those that represent you:

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

Or we can listen to Huckabee and blame the gays.... :shakehead:

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/huckabee_blames_gays_for_the_newtown_massacre/
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own.

VDB

I'm certainly no Huckabee fan, but it's a bit of a rhetorical stretch to say that he "blames gays for the Newtown massacre" (Salon's headline). He's blaming society's overall moral decadence, as he sees it, and he rattles off a few symptoms of that decline, including among other things our increasing tolerance for homosexuality/gay rights. It's a version of the Jerry Falwell/Fred Phelps schtick -- preacher types righteously thundering that we've lost our way as Christians and turned our backs on a life of godliness, and that's why bad things happen to us. There are no revelations here in terms of exposing Mike Huckabee's philosophy -- we already knew where he (and members of the religious right like him) stood on homosexuality and how tolerance for that is an affront to god's teachings. It's just particularly disgusting to hear people trot out that judgmental, holier-than-thou intolerance within the context of scolding us for being so anti-Jesus and using tragedy to try and frighten us back into more penitent ways.

In a sense, he's making a similar argument you are, GAH (I'm not really trying to be provocative here -- OK, maybe just a little  :wink:) -- that society's values (or lack of them) as a whole are part of the bigger cause here. Y'all are just seeing that depravity manifested in different ways.

But still, yeah, fuck Mike Huckabee.
Is this still Wombat?

Guyute

I was very happy that Monday the Gov. of West Virginia who is 'A' rated by the NRA came out in favor of an assault weapon and high capacity magazine ban.

Data is all you need.  The majority of gun crimes committed in New York which has strict gun regulations are bought in states which do not and then brought to NY. 

Guns shows are exempt from the Federal Background check, WHAT?!?!?!?!

To the peace of mind people, you are far more likely to commit suicide with your gun, kill a friend or family member, or have a family member accidentally kill themselves with your gun than you are to ever use it for protection.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunviolence/gunsinthehome
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20100204/Guns-in-homes-can-increase-risk-of-death-and-firearm-related-violence.aspx
Good decisions come from experience;
Experience comes from bad decisions.

About to open a bottle of Macallan.  There's my foreign policy; I support Scotland.

Buffalo Budd

Quote from: V00D00BR3W on December 19, 2012, 08:12:40 PM
I'm certainly no Huckabee fan, but it's a bit of a rhetorical stretch to say that he "blames gays for the Newtown massacre" (Salon's headline). He's blaming society's overall moral decadence, as he sees it, and he rattles off a few symptoms of that decline, including among other things our increasing tolerance for homosexuality/gay rights. It's a version of the Jerry Falwell/Fred Phelps schtick -- preacher types righteously thundering that we've lost our way as Christians and turned our backs on a life of godliness, and that's why bad things happen to us. There are no revelations here in terms of exposing Mike Huckabee's philosophy -- we already knew where he (and members of the religious right like him) stood on homosexuality and how tolerance for that is an affront to god's teachings. It's just particularly disgusting to hear people trot out that judgmental, holier-than-thou intolerance within the context of scolding us for being so anti-Jesus and using tragedy to try and frighten us back into more penitent ways.

In a sense, he's making a similar argument you are, GAH (I'm not really trying to be provocative here -- OK, maybe just a little  :wink:) -- that society's values (or lack of them) as a whole are part of the bigger cause here. Y'all are just seeing that depravity manifested in different ways.

But still, yeah, fuck Mike Huckabee.


Not that I agree with everything said in Ben Stein's commentary from CBS Sunday morning but I did find his comments interesting.  And he does not cite anything about gay acceptance leading to the moral decay of America.

QuoteThe following was written by Ben Stein and recited by him on CBS Sunday morning commentary.

My confession: I don't like getting pushed around for being a Jew and I don't think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christian. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around period.
I have no Idea where the concept came from that America is explicitly an atheistic country. I can't find it in the Constitution and I don't like it being shoved down my throat..
or maybe I can put it another way. Where did the idea come from that we should worship celebrities and aren't allowed to worship God as we understand him? I guess that's a sign that I'm getting old too. But there are a lot of us wondering where these celebrities came from and where the America we knew went?
In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different;
This is not intended to be joke, it is not funny. It is intended to get you thinking.
In light of recent events. Terrorist attacks, school shootings, ect.. I think it started when Madeleine Murray O'hara(she was murdered. Her body found a few years ago.) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools. And we said ok. Then someone said, "you better not read the bible in school".(The bible says,:Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal and love your neighbor as yourself) and we said ok.
Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self esteem.
(Dr. Spock's son committed suicide) WE said an expert must know what he's talking about and we said ok. Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates and themselves? Probably if we think long enough and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with, WE REAP WHAT WE SOW!
It's funny how simple it is for people to trash God then wonder why the world is going to hell. Funny why we believe what the news papers say but question what the bible says. Funny how you can send jokes through the e-mail and spread them like wildfire; but when you send messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing. Funny how lewd and crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and workplace.
Are you laughing yet?

Everything is connected, because it's all being created by this one consciousness. And we are tiny reflections of the mind that is creating the universe.

mbw


rowjimmy

He makes an interesting point but allow me to simply note:

Religion/god and morality should not be looked upon as one and the same.

Morality can exist without god/religion and history clearly shows that religion/god can certainly swing well outside basic morality.



Now, do we as a nation and a human race need to assess our collective values and the way we instill these values into our young people? Perhaps we do. But is this incident entirely a matter of broken morality? Doubtful. I suspect it has far more to do with a damaged emotional/mental state in an individual and to trot out god and religion in schools and the pros/cons of spanking children is just a straw man in this specific conversation of reducing access to weapons designed for a singular purpose: murder.

The real moral discussion we should be having is why we allow weapons of murder to be sold, unchecked, throughout this land.

twatts

#351
Oh! That! No, no, no, you're not ready to step into The Court of the Crimson King. At this stage in your training an album like that could turn you into an evil scientist.

----------------------

I want super-human will
I want better than average skill
I want a million dollar bill
And I want it all in a Pill

mbw

i still have no idea what his point was.  hit your kids and force them to read the bible in school then you won't kill yourself and your kids won't grow up to be mass murderers?

brilliant.

twatts

Quote from: rowjimmy on December 20, 2012, 08:47:54 AM

The real moral discussion we should be having is why we allow weapons of murder to be sold, unchecked, throughout this land.

I disagree.  The discussion should be about what causes certain people to commit murder and how we can prevent it. 

Guns are just tools.  Certainly it is a weapon and one that can kill with much more ease than say a rock (some cultures still stone people to death).  But you presume guilt for any person who owns such a weapon, and that is itself an "immorality".  Should we persecute Geologists???   :-P

Anyways we don't allow guns to be sold "unchecked".  There are plenty of laws that are designed to prevent certain people from gaining access to certain arms, such as Registration, bans due to age and/or legal status, etc.  Are there loop-holes?  Certainly, and they should be closed.  Should we update and reinstate the Fed Assault Weapons Ban, of course.  Should we seek to change our society and culture to look for non-violent ways to express ourselves?  That's a no-brainer!

But for 99.9% of gun-sales, there is not a murder that immediately follows...  I feel that just banning guns doesn't address this issue, it just makes it harder for people to to get guns - ie getting rids of guns is not synonymous with getting rid of murder.

Terry



Oh! That! No, no, no, you're not ready to step into The Court of the Crimson King. At this stage in your training an album like that could turn you into an evil scientist.

----------------------

I want super-human will
I want better than average skill
I want a million dollar bill
And I want it all in a Pill

mbw

wild leaps of logic and made up statistics.  well done.

sophist

Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on December 20, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
wild leaps of logic and made up statistics.  well done.
also known as Republicanism. 
Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

rowjimmy

I didn't say that was the only discussion.

I said that it's the "moral" discussion.

The practical discussion about mental health should also be in the fore.

I don't presume guilt for the owner of a gun. I never said that.

I did imply that for whatever reason you think you bought a gun, the reason most of them are made is for killing people. (Yes, there exist weapons that are designed and actually used for hunting but you don't hunt with an AR-15. If you do, I refer you to the mental health discussion.)

We do allow these weapons to be sold unchecked via the loopholes to which you referred. Just because some paths to ownership provide delays and hindrances doesn't mean that other legal paths don't exist. The fact that you can buy a gun without a permit or background check at a gun show or a via a private sale is exactly what I meant when I said "unchecked". Blocking one lane of the eight lane interstate doesn't stop all traffic from getting through. Especially when there's a wide open surface road on the other side of the guard rail.

Do I, personally want guns banned? Yes.
Am I realistically advocating that? No.

I think that strict control of sale and possession are reasonable.

I also think that the throw-more-matches-on-the-fire people are fucking nuts.

twatts

Quote from: rowjimmy on December 20, 2012, 09:13:47 AM
I didn't say that was the only discussion.

I said that it's the "moral" discussion.

The practical discussion about mental health should also be in the fore.

I don't presume guilt for the owner of a gun. I never said that.

I did imply that for whatever reason you think you bought a gun, the reason most of them are made is for killing people. (Yes, there exist weapons that are designed and actually used for hunting but you don't hunt with an AR-15. If you do, I refer you to the mental health discussion.)

We do allow these weapons to be sold unchecked via the loopholes to which you referred. Just because some paths to ownership provide delays and hindrances doesn't mean that other legal paths don't exist. The fact that you can buy a gun without a permit or background check at a gun show or a via a private sale is exactly what I meant when I said "unchecked". Blocking one lane of the eight lane interstate doesn't stop all traffic from getting through. Especially when there's a wide open surface road on the other side of the guard rail.

Do I, personally want guns banned? Yes.
Am I realistically advocating that? No.

I think that strict control of sale and possession are reasonable.

I also think that the throw-more-matches-on-the-fire people are fucking nuts.

Oh, I suppose I misunderstood you when you said THE moral discussion rather than A moral discussion.

And you said that we allow "weapons of murder" to be sold.  At first I extrapolated that you meant anyone that would buy one does so to commit murder.  But I suppose you are only trying to label the weapons themselves and not necessarily the owners.   

I think we are looking at the same thing but perhaps from different angles.  I personally DON'T want to see guns banned.  I see no point in starting another "War of XXX" and trying to enforce another Prohibition.  But like I said, I do support closing the loop-holes and adapting laws as times change.

But to reference your analogy, you can close all the lanes on an 8 lane highway, and people will just take a detour, or drive on the shoulder, or take a plane, or walk...

Terry
Oh! That! No, no, no, you're not ready to step into The Court of the Crimson King. At this stage in your training an album like that could turn you into an evil scientist.

----------------------

I want super-human will
I want better than average skill
I want a million dollar bill
And I want it all in a Pill

PIE-GUY

So, I went back and a read a few of the first few pages of this thread... yes, we are all rehashing the same damn arguments.
I've been coming to where I am from the get go
Find that I can groove with the beat when I let go
So put your worries on hold
Get up and groove with the rhythm in your soul

twatts

#359
Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on December 20, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
wild leaps of logic and made up statistics.  well done.

There were 14.4+ million gun background check in the US in 2011.  This doesn't include all sales.  It should be adjusted for purchases by those that have already had a background check, and for adjusted again for denied checks.  It should also be adjusted for sales outside of the jurisdiction of the law (loop-holes at gun-shows, etc).

There were 8500+ murders by firearms in US in 2011.

That comes out to 0.000596, or less that 99.9%.  Yes, I assume that all of those murders were committed with a gun sold in 2011.

Terry


ETA, if we take a guess and say that only HALF of those 14.4+ resulted in a new gun being sold, that still comes out to 0.00119, or 99.88%.
Oh! That! No, no, no, you're not ready to step into The Court of the Crimson King. At this stage in your training an album like that could turn you into an evil scientist.

----------------------

I want super-human will
I want better than average skill
I want a million dollar bill
And I want it all in a Pill