week4paug.net

Where's the stage? Spurious Generalities => Politiw00kchat => Topic started by: emay on July 20, 2012, 09:35:53 AM

Title: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 09:35:53 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 10:09:44 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 10:12:56 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

You're joking right?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on July 20, 2012, 10:23:39 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

You're joking right?

I'm guessing no.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 10:27:55 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

Dude had on a bullet-proof vest - you may not have stopped him before he stopped you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 10:30:18 AM
I'm a responsible and competent gun owner. When I carry (licensed), it's for the protection of myself, my wife and innocents in my midst. It's neither illegal nor, in my view, immoral, so, yeah... no joke.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 10:34:36 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

Dude had on a bullet-proof vest - you may not have stopped him before he stopped you.

Maybe not, but it would have been worth a try. Also, the standard idea is two shots to center mass, one to the head.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 10:36:26 AM
Also, the theaters I frequent all sell beer, so, no weapons are allowed.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 10:37:46 AM
Also, the theaters I frequent all sell beer, so, no weapons are allowed.

I guess they aren't exempted under the 51% rule?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 10:44:39 AM
I'm a responsible and competent gun owner. When I carry (licensed), it's for the protection of myself, my wife and innocents in my midst. It's neither illegal nor, in my view, immoral, so, yeah... no joke.

Do you bring your gun to phish shows?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 10:53:23 AM
I'm a responsible and competent gun owner. When I carry (licensed), it's for the protection of myself, my wife and innocents in my midst. It's neither illegal nor, in my view, immoral, so, yeah... no joke.

Do you bring your gun to phish shows?

That would be illegal. And hippies are peaceful anyway.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 10:54:35 AM
Good for paranoia:
(http://images.ddccdn.com/images/pills/custom/pill13102-1/chlorpromazine-hydrochloride.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on July 20, 2012, 10:55:15 AM
protection

Do you bring your gun to phish shows?

Duh!!!  Who doesn't bring a gun to a PH show??? 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on July 20, 2012, 10:56:21 AM
I can't even fathom bringing a weapon to the movies.

Nor can I imagine bringing a 3-month old baby to a midnight showing of Batman, yet there she is listed amongst the casualties.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 11:06:55 AM
Good for paranoia:
(http://images.ddccdn.com/images/pills/custom/pill13102-1/chlorpromazine-hydrochloride.jpg)

When does "paranoia" become "readiness"? Interested to hear your opinion on that threshold. People get attacked, shot at, robbed every day. Real talk.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 11:08:22 AM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 11:10:34 AM
Good for paranoia:
(http://images.ddccdn.com/images/pills/custom/pill13102-1/chlorpromazine-hydrochloride.jpg)

When does "paranoia" become "readiness"? Interested to hear your opinion on that threshold. People get attacked, shot at, robbed every day. Real talk.

You're joking right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agvzE91Xfek
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 11:13:15 AM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

 :clap:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 11:13:42 AM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

Fair enough, and it's a noble position to take. I happen to take another one and I feel quite comfortable about it. I consider myself far from being part of the problem.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 20, 2012, 11:13:51 AM
my conviction that people should not carry guns

You live in the wrong state for that. We have some of the most liberal open carry laws of anywhere in the world. Anywhere but a school, church, or bar is fair game so long as the weapon isn't concealed in any way. No license or anything necessary.

Whether that's a good or bad thing is something I'm not decided on.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 11:21:35 AM
my conviction that people should not carry guns

You live in the wrong state for that. We have some of the most liberal open carry laws of anywhere in the world. Anywhere but a school, church, or bar is fair game so long as the weapon isn't concealed in any way. No license or anything necessary.

Whether that's a good or bad thing is something I'm not decided on.

There are other places where you can legally carry open, unlicensed (Louisiana comes to mind, if I'm not mistaken)*. Except, if you were to open carry in the French Quarter, e.g., they could try to hit you with something like disturbing the peace, effectively putting the kibosh on your open carrying. So I've heard it said.

* Thank you Google -- here's a map (http://www.opencarry.org/opencarry.html) for the curious
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on July 20, 2012, 11:29:53 AM
The only thing that may be better than the 7/1/97 ghost...  at least until tomorrow...

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/michelle-jenneke-australian-hurdler-dancing-sensation-042218109--oly.html

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 11:39:09 AM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

Dude had on a bullet-proof vest - you may not have stopped him before he stopped you.

Maybe not, but it would have been worth a try. Also, the standard idea is two shots to center mass, one to the head.

That and the canister of tear gas would probably deter my ability to make a straight head shot. It is almost like the dude was planning on someone having a gun and he took measures to ensure he would be successful in his attack. Straight up psycho shit. I cannot fathom the idea of running into a random public place and tryin to kill as many people as possible...maybe one of those kids was to grow up and be the modern Hitler and this guy took him out early. That argument goes the other way as well, maybe one could have been the next Einstein...but this stuff keeps occurring and its pretty scary shit.

Were on the brink of a zombie Apocalypse people, you should never leave your house with your keys wallet and concealed weapon, duh.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 20, 2012, 11:44:45 AM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

People aren't allowed to buy drugs (well, some drugs anyway) either; are they any less available for the people who want them?

I agree with you that the relatively infrequent acts of the deranged shouldn't influence people's behavior. But I also don't believe that if you limit the rights of responsible gun owners (which, as your statement implies, make up the overwhelming majority of cases) we would be inherently safer. If people feel they need to protect themselves from these rare and senseless acts by owning a gun, I personally don't see why they should not be able to do that.

(full disclosure: I do not own a gun and have no desire to, but when I began having a family, I at least understood why some people would want to. YMMV)

ETA: forgot to mention, I don't see how gun ownership is a threat to world peace. I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: natronzero on July 20, 2012, 11:49:30 AM
The idea that people around me in a movie theater might be carrying a weapon doesn't make me feel even the slightest bit safer, regardless of whether they're trained and licensed, and regardless of how responsible and competent they may consider themselves.

For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

Edit: For the record, I'm all for defending one's safety at home by whatever means necessary.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 11:53:20 AM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

People aren't allowed to buy drugs (well, some drugs anyway) either; are they any less available for the people who want them?

I agree with you that the relatively infrequent acts of the deranged shouldn't influence people's behavior. But I also don't believe that if you limit the rights of responsible gun owners (which, as your statement implies, make up the overwhelming majority of cases) we would be inherently safer. If people feel they need to protect themselves from these rare and senseless acts by owning a gun, I personally don't see why they should not be able to do that.

(full disclosure: I do not own a gun and have no desire to, but when I began having a family, I at least understood why some people would want to. YMMV)

I see what your saying. As not being a father or having a family myself, I find there is not need to have a gun. Looking at it from the prospective of having a family, the only way I would see myself owning a gun is if I lived in a very bad neighborhood and would have it just for a threat of some kind of robbery or home invasion, which does tend to happen a lot here in Baltimore. I have had two teachers and a lot of friends be victim to something like this.
 I have actually been held up at gunpoint and the dude got in my car and tried to steal my car, luckily I was in a shitty neighborhood and got my keys out and ran up to a car right next to me and was freaked out asking for help, the dude that I asked for help had a gun as well haha and walked up to homeboy in my car and flashed it at him asking if he had a problem. The guy ended up taking off running, maybe it wasnt loaded or something but def could have ended up in a shoot out.

Back to my point, the only time I would have a gun is to protect my household. I doubt I would ever carry it outside my house to protect myself. I would be too worried about hitting innocent bystanders or just starting a gun duel that would cause even more altercation. I usually tend to go the route of pacifism myself.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 20, 2012, 12:05:20 PM
For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

I don't know of any examples, but the thinking behind concealed carry is that events like this are much less likely to happen if the potential shooter has to wonder if his own life is in danger by someone(s) intervening. The counterargument would probably be that a person doing something like this isn't exactly concerned for his own safety so he couldn't care less whether or not anyone else was packing. It's up to you which side of the argument you choose to subscribe to.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on July 20, 2012, 12:06:39 PM

Watching Americans discussing gun control is fucked.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 12:11:05 PM

Watching Americans discussing gun control is fucked.

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard

You're crazy. What that theater needed was MORE people with guns.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 12:14:53 PM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

People aren't allowed to buy drugs (well, some drugs anyway) either; are they any less available for the people who want them?

I agree with you that the relatively infrequent acts of the deranged shouldn't influence people's behavior. But I also don't believe that if you limit the rights of responsible gun owners (which, as your statement implies, make up the overwhelming majority of cases) we would be inherently safer. If people feel they need to protect themselves from these rare and senseless acts by owning a gun, I personally don't see why they should not be able to do that.

(full disclosure: I do not own a gun and have no desire to, but when I began having a family, I at least understood why some people would want to. YMMV)

ETA: forgot to mention, I don't see how gun ownership is a threat to world peace. I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.

I didn't take RJ's point had anything to do with outlawing guns - simply that he chooses not to own a gun because world peace starts at home. Don't want to put words in his mouth, but that's how I feel, so there it is.

I first shot a .22 rifle at age 7. I believe children need to be taught to respect guns and how to use them safely. I don't believe we can outlaw guns at this point. It's far too late for that. I do believe we need to regulate them and do our best to eliminate automatic assault rifles and the like, but we cannot outlaw guns altogether at this point. It will never work.

But, I, like RJ, do not own a gun because I, like RJ, believe world peace starts at home.

As a child I was not allowed to own any toy guns... even a hot-pink water pistol would have been off limits in my house. But, again, I learned to shoot a real gun at age 7. I learned that guns are not toys. If I ever have kids, I will teach the same lessons.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 12:17:23 PM
For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

I don't know of any examples, but the thinking behind concealed carry is that events like this are much less likely to happen if the potential shooter has to wonder if his own life is in danger by someone(s) intervening. The counterargument would probably be that a person doing something like this isn't exactly concerned for his own safety so he couldn't care less whether or not anyone else was packing. It's up to you which side of the argument you choose to subscribe to.

This sounds like the argument for the death penalty all over again.... by the way, Texas leads the WORLD in executions... yet our gun violence has continued to grow.  This argument that the threat of death will deter violent criminals is simply false.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 12:17:27 PM
The idea that people around me in a movie theater might be carrying a weapon doesn't make me feel even the slightest bit safer, regardless of whether they're trained and licensed, and regardless of how responsible and competent they may consider themselves.

The idea behind concealed carry is that other people don't know you're carrying, therefore the fact that you are carrying should/would have no impact on how safe they themselves are feeling. I carry for my own peace of mind, not someone else's. Although, if you did know me and found my competency in the area to be a comfort to you, I'd thank you for the vote of confidence.

For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

Sure. Here's an example from April of this year. Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store. (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx)

There have been lots of studies that look at the relationship between gun laws and crime, and also the incidence of defense-related uses of firearms versus gun homicides. I'm not here to proselytize, so people can easily look those up if they want.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 12:26:18 PM
For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

I don't know of any examples, but the thinking behind concealed carry is that events like this are much less likely to happen if the potential shooter has to wonder if his own life is in danger by someone(s) intervening. The counterargument would probably be that a person doing something like this isn't exactly concerned for his own safety so he couldn't care less whether or not anyone else was packing. It's up to you which side of the argument you choose to subscribe to.

This sounds like the argument for the death penalty all over again.... by the way, Texas leads the WORLD in executions... yet our gun violence has continued to grow.  This argument that the threat of death will deter violent criminals is simply false.

I think the better argument to make is not about deterrence but self-defense. There are crazy people out there who are going to do what they're going to do. Me simply being one more person licensed to carry concealed isn't going to stop that. It's more about being in a position to defend myself or others should the unthinkable happen. But still... we've had a rash of break-ins near where I live recently. Let's say someone busts into my house one night looking to grab an Xbox. Let's say I fear for my and my wife's safety and shoot the intruder. If that helps get the word out to these punks that it's not worth your life to go around breaking into houses, great.


I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.

Thank you, Jimbo, I'd like to think the same. And I knew I could count on the libertarian to have my side on this one.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 20, 2012, 12:29:30 PM
I didn't take RJ's point had anything to do with outlawing guns - simply that he chooses not to own a gun because world peace starts at home. Don't want to put words in his mouth, but that's how I feel, so there it is.

I thought that's what "people should not carry guns" meant, but on closer inspection I see your reading may be much closer to his intent. Apologies if I misinterpreted.

As a child I was not allowed to own any toy guns... even a hot-pink water pistol would have been off limits in my house.

Really? I woulda thought your musical pushing mom would have been thrilled had you brought home a hot pink anything. :wink:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 12:37:38 PM
For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

I don't know of any examples, but the thinking behind concealed carry is that events like this are much less likely to happen if the potential shooter has to wonder if his own life is in danger by someone(s) intervening. The counterargument would probably be that a person doing something like this isn't exactly concerned for his own safety so he couldn't care less whether or not anyone else was packing. It's up to you which side of the argument you choose to subscribe to.

This sounds like the argument for the death penalty all over again.... by the way, Texas leads the WORLD in executions... yet our gun violence has continued to grow.  This argument that the threat of death will deter violent criminals is simply false.

I think the better argument to make is not about deterrence but self-defense. There are crazy people out there who are going to do what they're going to do. Me simply being one more person licensed to carry concealed isn't going to stop that. It's more about being in a position to defend myself or others should the unthinkable happen. But still... we've had a rash of break-ins near where I live recently. Let's say someone busts into my house one night looking to grab an Xbox. Let's say I fear for my and my wife's safety and shoot the intruder. If that helps get the word out to these punks that it's not worth your life to go around breaking into houses, great.


I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.

Thank you, Jimbo, I'd like to think the same. And I knew I could count on the libertarian to have my side on this one.

Defending your own home and bringing a concealed weapon to a movie theater are two different things, imo. The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner. Even the most well-trained and careful gun-owners have accidents. Statistically, I'd bet those accidents are at least as likely as being in a theater when some crazy a-hole bursts in with a gun.

You are far more likely to die in a car crash than at the hands of a criminal with a gun. Carrying a concealed weapon in your car will not save you from that car crash death. I drive every day. I choose to live my life without any guns in my possession because I think having a gun in my home has more potential for harm than good. 

Plus, I believe world peace starts at home.

"The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind."


 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 12:46:47 PM
For argument's sake, are there many/any real-life examples of heroic civilians who happened to be packing at the time preventing or mitigating a massacre like this? I'm not necessarily saying it's never happened, I'm just unaware of any examples.

I don't know of any examples, but the thinking behind concealed carry is that events like this are much less likely to happen if the potential shooter has to wonder if his own life is in danger by someone(s) intervening. The counterargument would probably be that a person doing something like this isn't exactly concerned for his own safety so he couldn't care less whether or not anyone else was packing. It's up to you which side of the argument you choose to subscribe to.

This sounds like the argument for the death penalty all over again.... by the way, Texas leads the WORLD in executions... yet our gun violence has continued to grow.  This argument that the threat of death will deter violent criminals is simply false.

I think the better argument to make is not about deterrence but self-defense. There are crazy people out there who are going to do what they're going to do. Me simply being one more person licensed to carry concealed isn't going to stop that. It's more about being in a position to defend myself or others should the unthinkable happen. But still... we've had a rash of break-ins near where I live recently. Let's say someone busts into my house one night looking to grab an Xbox. Let's say I fear for my and my wife's safety and shoot the intruder. If that helps get the word out to these punks that it's not worth your life to go around breaking into houses, great.


I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.

Thank you, Jimbo, I'd like to think the same. And I knew I could count on the libertarian to have my side on this one.

Defending your own home and bringing a concealed weapon to a movie theater are two different things, imo. The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner. Even the most well-trained and careful gun-owners have accidents. Statistically, I'd bet those accidents are at least as likely as being in a theater when some crazy a-hole bursts in with a gun.

You are far more likely to die in a car crash than at the hands of a criminal with a gun. Carrying a concealed weapon in your car will not save you from that car crash death. I drive every day. I choose to live my life without any guns in my possession because I think having a gun in my home has more potential for harm than good. 

Plus, I believe world peace starts at home.

"The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind."

If you go the movies once a month, and this sort of incident happened lets say once a year, the chances of you being in that theater when it happened would be 1 in 72.23 million. If I owned a gun (which I don't and never will) I'd probably take my chances and leave the gun at home, but that's just me.

ETA: Actually, that calculation was based on if you went once a year, if you go once a month, so 12 movies a year, your chances would be approx one in 6 million. Doesn't change much though.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 20, 2012, 12:51:23 PM
If you have a gun at home, it will more likely be used on someone in your family than a criminal.

I find it also interesting that Europe has much stricter gun laws than we do, and a lot less gun violence.

Anyway, I agree with the comment that for practical reasons, guns will never be outlawed here. I can live with that. I can live with VDB as a responsible, licensed (presumably knowledgable) person having a gun. I will never own one.

I have a hard time with those who are against banning assault rifles, armor piercing bullets, "military" type weapons (like the large clip used in AZ last year), and allowing people to buy weapons at gun shows without background checks - all based on the 2nd amendment. We clearly need some common sense regulation, something that the NRA doesn't get in their zealous ideology. They passed a law in FLA making it illegal for a pediatrician to ASK a parent if there were guns in the house (apparently gun ownership > free speech to them). Fortunately, it got overturned by the court.

would any of that changed what happened last night? doubt it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 01:00:30 PM
Defending your own home and bringing a concealed weapon to a movie theater are two different things, imo.

In your home, you're not defending the walls and the floorboards. You're defending the human beings therein. I believe that an individual has a right to self-defense whether in his own home or outside it. And I believe that a firearm is an acceptable instrument for that end.


The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner.

I disagree. I believe they are both infinitesimally small, except I have control over one and not the other. I'll put my faith in myself and not the crazy, unpredictable, violent people out there.

You are far more likely to die in a car crash than at the hands of a criminal with a gun. Carrying a concealed weapon in your car will not save you from that car crash death. I drive every day.

You're right, and sometimes other drivers scare the shit out of me. That's why I'm always careful and attentive when I drive. But I'm not sure what that has to do with anything -- there is risk all around us, so you do what you can to mitigate those risks, best you can.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 01:09:13 PM
I refuse to allow the acts of a demented few shake my conviction that people should not carry guns. World Peace has to begin at home.

People aren't allowed to buy drugs (well, some drugs anyway) either; are they any less available for the people who want them?

I agree with you that the relatively infrequent acts of the deranged shouldn't influence people's behavior. But I also don't believe that if you limit the rights of responsible gun owners (which, as your statement implies, make up the overwhelming majority of cases) we would be inherently safer. If people feel they need to protect themselves from these rare and senseless acts by owning a gun, I personally don't see why they should not be able to do that.

(full disclosure: I do not own a gun and have no desire to, but when I began having a family, I at least understood why some people would want to. YMMV)

ETA: forgot to mention, I don't see how gun ownership is a threat to world peace. I'd imagine our friend VDB, for example, has never fired his gun at another person. Does the fact that he simply owns a gun make the world more violent? I don't think so.

I didn't take RJ's point had anything to do with outlawing guns - simply that he chooses not to own a gun because world peace starts at home. Don't want to put words in his mouth, but that's how I feel, so there it is.

I first shot a .22 rifle at age 7. I believe children need to be taught to respect guns and how to use them safely. I don't believe we can outlaw guns at this point. It's far too late for that. I do believe we need to regulate them and do our best to eliminate automatic assault rifles and the like, but we cannot outlaw guns altogether at this point. It will never work.

But, I, like RJ, do not own a gun because I, like RJ, believe world peace starts at home.

As a child I was not allowed to own any toy guns... even a hot-pink water pistol would have been off limits in my house. But, again, I learned to shoot a real gun at age 7. I learned that guns are not toys. If I ever have kids, I will teach the same lessons.


Right.

Outside of hunting (which I do not have a problem with although I don't do it myself) the only reason to carry a gun is to shoot a person.

If no one carried a gun, then no one would be shot.

Is that an idealist notion? Yes.

Is it realistic? Not today. But wouldn't you like to see that world?

Of course you would.

However, we don't get to a point where no one feels they need a gun if more people decide to carry guns.

I'm doing my part.

Are you?

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 01:10:10 PM

The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner.

I disagree. I believe they are both infinitesimally small, except I have control over one and not the other. I'll put my faith in myself and not the crazy, unpredictable, violent people out there.


I guess it's all relative. You do realize though that carrying a gun into a movie theater makes you, in some folks eyes, "the crazy, unpredictable, and violent people out there", right?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 01:12:17 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db0Y4qIZ4PA
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 01:13:01 PM
The thing is... this shouldn't be a gun control discussion at all.

This should be a Health Care discussion.

If nutjobs had free and easy access to mental health care from an early age, they probably would be less likely to arrive at the kick-a-door-down-and-shoot-up-a-movie-theater stage.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 01:15:03 PM
The thing is... this shouldn't be a gun control discussion at all.

This should be a Health Care discussion.

If nutjobs had free and easy access to mental health care from an early age, they probably would be less likely to arrive at the kick-a-door-down-and-shoot-up-a-movie-theater stage.

And thank Reagan for closing all the mental hospitals.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 20, 2012, 01:36:19 PM


If nutjobs had free and easy access to mental health care from an early age, they probably would be less likely to arrive at the kick-a-door-down-and-shoot-up-a-movie-theater stage.

In an ideal world, this would be the case. However, I think a lot of people that we would assume need mental health care of any sort don't see themselves as heaving a mental health issue and wouldn't pursue the care they need.

/.02
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 01:39:45 PM
I find it also interesting that Europe has much stricter gun laws than we do, and a lot less gun violence.

It's an interesting comparison. There are far and away more guns per capita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country) in the U.S. than any other country. Europe has fewer guns, which I believe is a part of European nations also having lower firearms-related death rates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). (By the way, the U.S. does not top that last list.) Just eyeballing the two lists, some European countries' gun-death rates are lower than the U.S.'s roughly to the same degree as their ownership rates are lower. Others (like France) don't see movement proportionately -- France has roughly 30% the guns per capita as us, but 60% the gun deaths per capita as us. So it's a mixed bag.


If no one carried a gun, then no one would be shot.

Is that an idealist notion? Yes.

Is it realistic? Not today. But wouldn't you like to see that world?

Of course you would.

However, we don't get to a point where no one feels they need a gun if more people decide to carry guns.

I'm doing my part.

Are you?

I have to point out that, the people who are going to be willing to lay down their guns in the name of world peace are the ones we don't need to be most concerned about. It's the bad guys, who are not going to be so willing. And, as you point out, that ship has sailed and now they have them. So I'd rather crazy people and not-crazy people have guns as opposed to just crazy people.


You do realize though that carrying a gun into a movie theater makes you, in some folks eyes, "the crazy, unpredictable, and violent people out there", right?

They can think that, if they want. I know better.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 01:39:57 PM


If nutjobs had free and easy access to mental health care from an early age, they probably would be less likely to arrive at the kick-a-door-down-and-shoot-up-a-movie-theater stage.

In an ideal world, this would be the case. However, I think a lot of people that we would assume need mental health care of any sort don't see themselves as heaving a mental health issue and wouldn't pursue the care they need.

/.02

There's always someone who will slip through even the best net. But if you don't start fishing you'll never catch a thing.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 01:41:51 PM
If no one carried a gun, then no one would be shot.

Is that an idealist notion? Yes.

Is it realistic? Not today. But wouldn't you like to see that world?

Of course you would.

However, we don't get to a point where no one feels they need a gun if more people decide to carry guns.

I'm doing my part.

Are you?

I have to point out that, the people who are going to be willing to lay down their guns in the name of world peace are the ones we don't need to be most concerned about. It's the bad guys, who are not going to be so willing. And, as you point out, that ship has sailed and now they have them. So I'd rather crazy people and not-crazy people have guns as opposed to just crazy people.



So now that the bucket has a few leaks we should put more holes in it?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 01:45:38 PM
If no one carried a gun, then no one would be shot.

Is that an idealist notion? Yes.

Is it realistic? Not today. But wouldn't you like to see that world?

Of course you would.

However, we don't get to a point where no one feels they need a gun if more people decide to carry guns.

I'm doing my part.

Are you?

I have to point out that, the people who are going to be willing to lay down their guns in the name of world peace are the ones we don't need to be most concerned about. It's the bad guys, who are not going to be so willing. And, as you point out, that ship has sailed and now they have them. So I'd rather crazy people and not-crazy people have guns as opposed to just crazy people.



So now that the bucket has a few leaks we should put more holes in it?

What I'm saying is, I don't consider myself and safe, responsible people like me to be more holes in the bucket. I'm sorry that some may disagree. I promise I'm not here to shoot any of you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 01:54:13 PM
If no one carried a gun, then no one would be shot.

Is that an idealist notion? Yes.

Is it realistic? Not today. But wouldn't you like to see that world?

Of course you would.

However, we don't get to a point where no one feels they need a gun if more people decide to carry guns.

I'm doing my part.

Are you?

I have to point out that, the people who are going to be willing to lay down their guns in the name of world peace are the ones we don't need to be most concerned about. It's the bad guys, who are not going to be so willing. And, as you point out, that ship has sailed and now they have them. So I'd rather crazy people and not-crazy people have guns as opposed to just crazy people.



So now that the bucket has a few leaks we should put more holes in it?

What I'm saying is, I don't consider myself and safe, responsible people like me to be more holes in the bucket. I'm sorry that some may disagree. I promise I'm not here to shoot any of you.

When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

Not acceptable, imo.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 01:56:13 PM

The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner.

I disagree. I believe they are both infinitesimally small, except I have control over one and not the other. I'll put my faith in myself and not the crazy, unpredictable, violent people out there.


But my point is that even you or people like you who are very safe and sane can have accidents. Saying "I have control" does not remove the chance of an accident... that's what an accident is.

Putting something fragile on a high shelf is riskier than putting it on a low shelf, even if the people around that fragile thing are "very careful." Accidents happen. One thing is certain... If you don't have a gun with you at the movie theater, you won't have an accident involving a gun you have with you at a movie theater. Seems pretty simple.

I'm just making a rational argument that the likelihood of that gun causing an accidental injury or death is roughly the same as the likelihood of that gun preventing an injury or death. Therefore, you are carrying the gun because of how it makes you feel... you must have a small pe... wait, let's not get into personal attacks...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 02:01:34 PM
When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

... and only in cases of defending an innocent person's life or physical safety. Justifiable self defense. Initiated not by me but by the bad guy.

I have to ask bluntly: Whose side are you on in a scenario like that?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 02:03:00 PM

The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner.

I disagree. I believe they are both infinitesimally small, except I have control over one and not the other. I'll put my faith in myself and not the crazy, unpredictable, violent people out there.


But my point is that even you or people like you who are very safe and sane can have accidents. Saying "I have control" does not remove the chance of an accident... that's what an accident is.

Putting something fragile on a high shelf is riskier than putting it on a low shelf, even if the people around that fragile thing are "very careful." Accidents happen. One thing is certain... If you don't have a gun with you at the movie theater, you won't have an accident involving a gun you have with you at a movie theater. Seems pretty simple.

I'm just making a rational argument that the likelihood of that gun causing an accidental injury or death is roughly the same as the likelihood of that gun preventing an injury or death. Therefore, you are carrying the gun because of how it makes you feel... you must have a small pe... wait, let's not get into personal attacks...

I actually lost my penis in an unfortunate gun accident. Thanks for bringing that up.  :cry:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 02:04:00 PM

The likelihood that you will need your gun in a movie theater is so infinitesimally small that I firmly believe you are more likely to have an accidental problem by carrying it than you are to save a life with it. Maybe it's a wash, but I wouldn't give the advantage to the defensive gun owner.

I disagree. I believe they are both infinitesimally small, except I have control over one and not the other. I'll put my faith in myself and not the crazy, unpredictable, violent people out there.


But my point is that even you or people like you who are very safe and sane can have accidents. Saying "I have control" does not remove the chance of an accident... that's what an accident is.

Putting something fragile on a high shelf is riskier than putting it on a low shelf, even if the people around that fragile thing are "very careful." Accidents happen. One thing is certain... If you don't have a gun with you at the movie theater, you won't have an accident involving a gun you have with you at a movie theater. Seems pretty simple.

I'm just making a rational argument that the likelihood of that gun causing an accidental injury or death is roughly the same as the likelihood of that gun preventing an injury or death. Therefore, you are carrying the gun because of how it makes you feel... you must have a small pe... wait, let's not get into personal attacks...

I actually lost my penis in an unfortunate gun accident. Thanks for bringing that up.  :cry:

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard  Thank you for that... this thread needed a little levity!!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 02:05:46 PM
When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

... and only in cases of defending an innocent person's life or physical safety. Justifiable self defense. Initiated not by me but by the bad guy.

I have to ask bluntly: Whose side are you on in a scenario like that?

Personally, im no vigilantly. If someone was on a shooting rampage and I had a gun, I would throw it to someone that would wanna go out there and take this dude out...I would be hiding or GTFO! Im also a selfish asshole too, so I guess that explains it. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 02:08:30 PM
When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

... and only in cases of defending an innocent person's life or physical safety. Justifiable self defense. Initiated not by me but by the bad guy.

I have to ask bluntly: Whose side are you on in a scenario like that?

I used to have this debate all the time in college - I am morally opposed to killing another human being even in self defense. Put myself in the actual situation and my instincts for survival may overtake my moral compass... I have no way of knowing. Carrying a gun, however, means I've already made the immoral choice of sacrificing another human life in defense of my own. I won't do that.

That's how I see it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 20, 2012, 02:12:58 PM
What I'm saying is, I don't consider myself and safe, responsible people like me to be more holes in the bucket. I'm sorry that some may disagree. I promise I'm not here to shoot any of you.

Well sure you say that now, but what about when I tell you that I think the 06-28-00 Gin sucks?

When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

Not acceptable, imo.

Unless he's going out with the intention of killing someone, that most certainly is not the purpose. The purpose is to protect from others who intend to kill. Owning a gun and wanting peace are not mutually exclusive. I think most gun owners buy a gun sincerely hoping there will never be a need to use it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 20, 2012, 02:14:26 PM
Aside from self defense, the shooting sports are just plain fun. Shooting clays is a great way to spend an afternoon. Target shooting can be pretty fun as well. When you start aiming at things that have a more visceral response to being shot, you run into problems. Gun ownership for me is a recreational thing. It's a fun pastime if you're into that sort of thing. For home defense, I keep a baseball bat next to my bed. It would be much more satisfying to club an intruder over the head than to shoot him, imo.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 02:17:58 PM
When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

... and only in cases of defending an innocent person's life or physical safety. Justifiable self defense. Initiated not by me but by the bad guy.

I have to ask bluntly: Whose side are you on in a scenario like that?

I used to have this debate all the time in college - I am morally opposed to killing another human being even in self defense. Put myself in the actual situation and my instincts for survival may overtake my moral compass... I have no way of knowing. Carrying a gun, however, means I've already made the immoral choice of sacrificing another human life in defense of my own. I won't do that.

That's how I see it.

Well stated.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 20, 2012, 02:19:16 PM
While I can appreciate the open dialogue this tragedy has produced, the weapon of choice here isn't the real issue in my eyes. What if he had thrown a Molotov cocktail instead of using guns? Gas and lighters can be bought by anyone and he would have fucked up a bunch of people. Or how about a pipe bomb? That's easy as shit to make. My point is that humans have the ability to be violent as fuck no matter what the weapon and I don't see that ever going away.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 20, 2012, 02:25:13 PM
I don't know, but I don't think any of us are complaining about recreation, ie hunting and target shooting.

I get your point, VDB, but I would imagine it takes a lot of training to maintain ones cool under fire and make sure you shoot the right guy. For instance, what would have happened if another gun owner was there last night and there was a shoot out - a third guy with a gun arrives on the scene, sees the "defender" 1st and takes him out.  the cops come, and take that guy out. What if someone tackled the shooter, grabbed his gun, and someone else with a gun came, saw a dude with the gun and shot the wrong guy?Far fetched? I think not.
More than one boyfriend has been shot and killed visiting his girlfriend because dad thought there was a potential break in.

there was a story that came out after the Giffords shooting that a gun owner came to the scene late, saw something suspicous but because he had appropriate training he did not shoot  (unfortunately I forget the details). If he did shoot, it would have been at the wrong person.

anyway, like I said and like RJ and barnsey said, I don't think gun control laws would have prevented this. the guy is batshit crazy and we live in a violent society.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 02:25:33 PM
Hunter S Thompson's fun with guns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEImAIM4L4
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 20, 2012, 02:30:10 PM
These conversations come up every time something like this happens. The outcomes are quite similar:
A) Nothing happens
B) We say the person is crazy and then do nothing to ensure this doesn't happen again
C) Blame the movies, music, and other environmental elements that "made this person act in this way"
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 20, 2012, 02:40:23 PM
These conversations come up every time something like this happens. The outcomes are quite similar:
A) Nothing happens
B) We say the person is crazy and then do nothing to ensure this doesn't happen again
C) Blame the movies, music, and other environmental elements that "made this person act in this way"

I don't really think anything can be done honestly.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 02:41:25 PM
These conversations come up every time something like this happens. The outcomes are quite similar:
A) Nothing happens
B) We say the person is crazy and then do nothing to ensure this doesn't happen again
C) Blame the movies, music, and other environmental elements that "made this person act in this way"

I don't really think anything can be done honestly.

More people can carry guns to prevent this from happening.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 03:00:37 PM
When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

Not acceptable, imo.

Unless he's going out with the intention of killing someone, that most certainly is not the purpose. The purpose is to protect from others who intend to kill. Owning a gun and wanting peace are not mutually exclusive. I think most gun owners buy a gun sincerely hoping there will never be a need to use it.

I think PG answers your point as well as I could...

When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

... and only in cases of defending an innocent person's life or physical safety. Justifiable self defense. Initiated not by me but by the bad guy.

I have to ask bluntly: Whose side are you on in a scenario like that?

I used to have this debate all the time in college - I am morally opposed to killing another human being even in self defense. Put myself in the actual situation and my instincts for survival may overtake my moral compass... I have no way of knowing. Carrying a gun, however, means I've already made the immoral choice of sacrificing another human life in defense of my own. I won't do that.

That's how I see it.

Well stated.

Agreed.

You're not carrying a concealed weapon with the intent to intimidate. You're carrying the concealed weapon with the intent of pulling it out and shooting someone when, in your opinion, they need to be shot, and killed. After all, you aren't shooting to maim.

Also, the standard idea is two shots to center mass, one to the head.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 03:09:49 PM
What I'm saying is, I don't consider myself and safe, responsible people like me to be more holes in the bucket. I'm sorry that some may disagree. I promise I'm not here to shoot any of you.

Well sure you say that now, but what about when I tell you that I think the 06-28-00 Gin sucks?

When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

Not acceptable, imo.

Unless he's going out with the intention of killing someone, that most certainly is not the purpose. The purpose is to protect from others who intend to kill. Owning a gun and wanting peace are not mutually exclusive. I think most gun owners buy a gun sincerely hoping there will never be a need to use it.

Again, this argument is emotional not rational. You carry the gun because of how it makes you feel. The rational argument, as laid forth by one of the greatest rational minds of any era, goes like this:

 “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.”

It really is that simple.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 03:10:24 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 03:10:42 PM
What I'm saying is, I don't consider myself and safe, responsible people like me to be more holes in the bucket. I'm sorry that some may disagree. I promise I'm not here to shoot any of you.

Well sure you say that now, but what about when I tell you that I think the 06-28-00 Gin sucks?

I was hoping to find a screen grab of when Joe Pesci pulls out his gun after Ray Liotta tells him "You're a real funny guy!"

When you strap on that gun, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: To kill a human being.

Not acceptable, imo.

Unless he's going out with the intention of killing someone, that most certainly is not the purpose. The purpose is to protect from others who intend to kill. Owning a gun and wanting peace are not mutually exclusive. I think most gun owners buy a gun sincerely hoping there will never be a need to use it.

Took the words outta my mouth.

I used to have this debate all the time in college - I am morally opposed to killing another human being even in self defense. Put myself in the actual situation and my instincts for survival may overtake my moral compass... I have no way of knowing. Carrying a gun, however, means I've already made the immoral choice of sacrificing another human life in defense of my own. I won't do that.

That's how I see it.

Well stated.


I can appreciate that you both (and others) have this position, and I'm not trying to talk anyone out of that. But me personally, I'm not willing to lay down my own life to preserve the bad guy's. If someone has made the decision to take an innocent life, they have forfeited any right to object that their own be taken in order to save the other. And luckily, the laws agree with me on that and would not punish me if I acted in justifiable self-defense.

I get your point, VDB, but I would imagine it takes a lot of training to maintain ones cool under fire and make sure you shoot the right guy. For instance, what would have happened if another gun owner was there last night and there was a shoot out - a third guy with a gun arrives on the scene, sees the "defender" 1st and takes him out.  the cops come, and take that guy out. What if someone tackled the shooter, grabbed his gun, and someone else with a gun came, saw a dude with the gun and shot the wrong guy?Far fetched? I think not.

You're right, only people who've been in shootouts (myself not included) know how they'd react in one. For my part, I've had more training than any of y'all realize, since you don't know what I used to do for a living. I believe I'm better-equipped than the average gun owner to handle a bad situation, which I hope I never have to, anyway.

And as to the other scenarios you describe -- yeah, a fucked-up situation could yield additional fucked-up situations. No doubt about that. But also, a gun owner could make a fucked-up situation a little less fucked up. That happens too.

Remember the old lady in Atlanta who got killed by the cops after she fired on them after they kicked in her door, trying to serve a warrant at the wrong address? That kind of shit happens, too. Neither party was acting maliciously (assuming the cops on the scene weren't the ones responsible for the address fuck-up), and both believed they were doing what they needed to do. (And the city ended up settling with the lady's family for millions.)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 03:19:49 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 20, 2012, 03:21:47 PM
BTW, the NYTimes is now reporting that this idiot in Colorado was wearing full body armor... your little handgun would barely have slowed him down.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 03:28:41 PM
BTW, the NYTimes is now reporting that this idiot in Colorado was wearing full body armor... your little handgun would barely have slowed him down.

Probably would've given him something specific to aim at... for a second.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on July 20, 2012, 03:29:16 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.

Conversely, when I was in Rio last summer, there was a cop on every corner with an automatic weapon, finger on the trigger and ready for anything.  That said, crime is a MAJOR problem in that city.  It has been said that the drug dealers run that place.  Our travel agent said the government is paying them off to disappear when world cup comes in 2014.  This was confirmed by the cab driver we had down there. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 03:30:07 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.

So did that change the English folks mind and they go buy guns after that incident? Or did the cops start carrying guns after that? I guess I'm not understanding the point of your story.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 03:36:00 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.

So did that change the English folks mind and they go buy guns after that incident? Or did the cops start carrying guns after that? I guess I'm not understanding the point of your story.

I was agreeing with you that individuals making the decision to arm themselves for protection is a commentary on their society (in a addition to, apparently, my johnson).

The bit about the massacre there was a side anecdote about how unfortunate it was, in that case, that the English standard of not arming their police officers carried its own unintended consequence.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 03:50:26 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.

So did that change the English folks mind and they go buy guns after that incident? Or did the cops start carrying guns after that? I guess I'm not understanding the point of your story.

I was agreeing with you that individuals making the decision to arm themselves for protection is a commentary on their society (in a addition to, apparently, my johnson).

The bit about the massacre there was a side anecdote about how unfortunate it was, in that case, that the English standard of not arming their police officers carried its own unintended consequence.

Right. So that's what I'm asking. In their telling you of that incident, what was their reaction? In what way did it change their behavior? Did they feel the need to arm themselves because of it? Or did state they wished the police had been carrying weapons? Or wished they would start carrying weapons now? Surely, you must have been curious into their reaction to such an incident.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 03:59:53 PM
Rather than say anything offensive, I'll just state that it's a sad commentary on the state of our society when people feel the need to carry a gun to the movie theater in order to feel safe.

I met some English people in South Africa, and we got to talking about guns in America. The notion of Americans owning and carrying guns just blew their minds. You don't really have guns in England (except some criminals, naturally), or enough gun violence for average people to feel compelled to own them, I guess. Even typical policemen don't carry guns there, which itself tells you just how low the incidence of gun ownership and violence is. Yet, these English folks were relating a recent story of some lunatic showing up somewhere and shooting up the joint, and even though there were cops on the scene, they were powerless to stop it. They had to call in the special gun-toting squad. In the meantime, more people died.

So yes, I agree it is a commentary on the state of society.

So did that change the English folks mind and they go buy guns after that incident? Or did the cops start carrying guns after that? I guess I'm not understanding the point of your story.

I was agreeing with you that individuals making the decision to arm themselves for protection is a commentary on their society (in a addition to, apparently, my johnson).

The bit about the massacre there was a side anecdote about how unfortunate it was, in that case, that the English standard of not arming their police officers carried its own unintended consequence.

Right. So that's what I'm asking. In their telling you of that incident, what was their reaction? In what way did it change their behavior? Did they feel the need to arm themselves because of it? Or did state they wished the police had been carrying weapons? Or wished they would start carrying weapons now? Surely, you must have been curious into their reaction to such an incident.

There was a lot of drinking taking place during this conversation... but I remember them agreeing that it was sad and unfortunate that the cops on the scene had to wait 15 minutes for armed backup to arrive.

The wife was adamantly not interested in owning a gun, but I think the husband was mildly more open to it.

Our South African ranger, on the other hand, was keenly interested in getting himself a handgun. He relayed that most of the gun owners in South Africa (from his perspective anyway) consisted of thugs and ne'er-do-wells. (According to that list I linked to earlier, South Africa apparently has the most gun deaths per capita in the world, over seven times the U.S. rate.)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 20, 2012, 04:44:26 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 20, 2012, 04:45:15 PM
guns, lol.

strapping up before going to the movies, LOL.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 05:04:35 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.

It's amazing to me the degree to which responsible, law-abiding gun owners are made to be the villains here. Do you understand that carrying a firearm for self-defense is precisely about protecting human life -- yours, your family's, innocent people around you -- from dangerous people who don't care about human life?

Everyone is free to make their own decisions about firearms and owning and carrying them, and I've been very particular about respecting those opposing viewpoints here.

I'm just alarmed at the extent to which it appears some people equate the peaceful carrying of a firearm for protection with the kind of violence in society that said carrying is in response to. I just don't get it guys, I'm sorry.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 05:32:22 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.

It's amazing to me the degree to which responsible, law-abiding gun owners are made to be the villains here. Do you understand that carrying a firearm for self-defense is precisely about protecting human life -- yours, your family's, innocent people around you -- from dangerous people who don't care about human life?

Everyone is free to make their own decisions about firearms and owning and carrying them, and I've been very particular about respecting those opposing viewpoints here.

I'm just alarmed at the extent to which it appears some people equate the peaceful carrying of a firearm for protection with the kind of violence in society that said carrying is in response to. I just don't get it guys, I'm sorry.

Of course you don't.


You do realize though that carrying a gun into a movie theater makes you, in some folks eyes, "the crazy, unpredictable, and violent people out there", right?

They can think that, if they want. I know better.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 20, 2012, 05:40:21 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.

It's amazing to me the degree to which responsible, law-abiding gun owners are made to be the villains here. Do you understand that carrying a firearm for self-defense is precisely about protecting human life -- yours, your family's, innocent people around you -- from dangerous people who don't care about human life?

Everyone is free to make their own decisions about firearms and owning and carrying them, and I've been very particular about respecting those opposing viewpoints here.

I'm just alarmed at the extent to which it appears some people equate the peaceful carrying of a firearm for protection with the kind of violence in society that said carrying is in response to. I just don't get it guys, I'm sorry.
Carrying a firearm is not peaceful.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 20, 2012, 05:43:01 PM
to me it's all about where you draw the line. The law in many states that allow you to respond to any threat with deadly force is just plain fucking ridiculous. Bar fights or other situations that would have been merely fistfights at the worst have turned into shoot outs.
VDB you may have been very well trained, my guess is that most gun owners are not; nor have they served time in the military or in law enforcement.

I know people have died in bar fights without guns involved. But having a gun in those kinds of situations just makes it more likely - ask Trayvon Martin.

 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 05:46:05 PM
^^^ It's true. It doesn't really fall into my idea of non-violence.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on July 20, 2012, 06:00:33 PM
http://www.theonion.com/articles/sadly-nation-knows-exactly-how-colorado-shootings,28857/

Quote
...According to the nation's citizenry, calls for a mature, thoughtful debate about the role of guns in American society started right on time, and should persist throughout the next week or so. However, the populace noted, the debate will soon spiral out of control and ultimately lead to nothing of any substance, a fact Americans everywhere acknowledged they felt "absolutely horrible" to be aware of...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 06:51:30 PM
sls, that's why it's illegal in just about every state to carry a gun into a bar, permit or no. So, I hope I'm not being asked to defend the idea of shooting someone over a fistfight, because I won't. Even though, as you note, people can and do die from no more than a punch to the head.

APD & GAH, I'm sorry you see my choosing to exercise my legal right to defend myself and my wife as being on par with the violent, degenerate tendencies of those who attack innocent people out in public. I'm sure if you knew me in real life you'd recognize the sliver of daylight that separates me from those folks.

Keller, we've actually accomplished a lot in this thread. We've established that I'm a menace to society and all good citizens should arm themselves to protect against my morally bankrupt, bloodthirsty ways.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 20, 2012, 07:01:52 PM
sls, that's why it's illegal in just about every state to carry a gun into a bar, permit or no. So, I hope I'm not being asked to defend the idea of shooting someone over a fistfight, because I won't. Even though, as you note, people can and do die from no more than a punch to the head.

APD & GAH, I'm sorry you see my choosing to exercise my legal right to defend myself and my wife as being on par with the violent, degenerate tendencies of those who attack innocent people out in public. I'm sure if you knew me in real life you'd recognize the sliver of daylight that separates me from those folks.

Keller, we've actually accomplished a lot in this thread. We've established that I'm a menace to society and all good citizens should arm themselves to protect against my morally bankrupt, bloodthirsty ways.
Whoa man, I never threw you in that category. I just don't believe guns have a place unless you're law enforcement (and I'd even debate the validity of that).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 20, 2012, 07:42:21 PM
sls, that's why it's illegal in just about every state to carry a gun into a bar, permit or no. So, I hope I'm not being asked to defend the idea of shooting someone over a fistfight, because I won't. Even though, as you note, people can and do die from no more than a punch to the head.

APD & GAH, I'm sorry you see my choosing to exercise my legal right to defend myself and my wife as being on par with the violent, degenerate tendencies of those who attack innocent people out in public. I'm sure if you knew me in real life you'd recognize the sliver of daylight that separates me from those folks.

Keller, we've actually accomplished a lot in this thread. We've established that I'm a menace to society and all good citizens should arm themselves to protect against my morally bankrupt, bloodthirsty ways.

So you admit it. Finally. Ok, back to your regularly scheduled pauging everybody.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 20, 2012, 07:44:07 PM
sls, that's why it's illegal in just about every state to carry a gun into a bar, permit or no. So, I hope I'm not being asked to defend the idea of shooting someone over a fistfight, because I won't. Even though, as you note, people can and do die from no more than a punch to the head.

APD & GAH, I'm sorry you see my choosing to exercise my legal right to defend myself and my wife as being on par with the violent, degenerate tendencies of those who attack innocent people out in public. I'm sure if you knew me in real life you'd recognize the sliver of daylight that separates me from those folks.

Keller, we've actually accomplished a lot in this thread. We've established that I'm a menace to society and all good citizens should arm themselves to protect against my morally bankrupt, bloodthirsty ways.
no - I realize you're not gonna blow someone away because he pushed you. what I'm saying is that my belief (and I may be wrong) is most people who carry aren't always as responsible as you, people can lose their temper and if they have a gun on them ...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on July 20, 2012, 08:31:10 PM
I live in a small, yet incredibly violent, city.  We're consistently on the top of the "most violent cities per capita" lists, and our murder rate per capita is always in the top 3 nationwide.  Armed robberies happen more often than you can count.  And if there's one thing I've learned about this topic from living in a place like this, it's that carrying a gun is only going to get you killed.  If you're sitting at a red light and some thug comes up to the window and sticks a gun in your face, give him what he wants.  If you go for your gun, odds are your day is gonna end with a sopranos-style cut to black.  If you just cooperate, odds are your day will end peacefully -- albeit, without your wallet or car. 

Random acts of horrendous violence like what happened in CO are so incredibly rare.  The overwhelming, vast majority of the time, when you're encountered by a gunman, all they want is your stuff.  Bringing another gun into that situation is just going to turn it into a "who can shoot first" contest that wasn't needed in the first place.

I have no problems with keeping a gun in your own home for peace of mind (although, I disagree if there's kids in the home).  And I have no problem with target shooting or hunting.  I own two guns, personally, and I use them for target shooting (it's the one "sport" that I'm good at  :hereitisyousentimentalbastard ).  But, carrying one is only going to fuel the exact problem I want to avoid in the first place. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on July 20, 2012, 08:54:54 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.


Curious to see how this fits my situation:


I own three guns.  None of them are really any good for self defense:  I keep the bullets, bolts/chambers, and the guns all in different areas of the house; the most important part (the bullets and the bolts/chambers) locked up.  They are for hunting and the occasional shooting sport.  The most powerful is a 30-06 cal bolt action, rifle, not exactly a fast or dexterous choice for self defense.  The only handgun I own is a .22 cal.  I've never carried it in public, and have no desire to do so.  I don't feel myself trained well enough to wield it in a tense situation; and lets face it- it's a .22.   


I have contemplated buying a more powerful handgun, one that has the stopping power to down a bear.  You don't spend the amount of time I do walking around alone in the woods of Montana and Idaho without having the thought cross your mind.  I've also spent a lot of time weighing the pros and cons of wielding a gun in the woods.  That is one of the reasons that my first line of defense in case of bear attack is pepper spray and lots of noise to let them know I'm coming.  But there are other threats too; wolves, mountain lions, moose.  The pepper spray would probably work with any of those animals as well, but it's hard to tell. 

My main concern is having the gun available as a back up.  Like I said, the pepper spray is the first line of defense; it has been shown to be pretty effective in situations where a single bear is acting aggressively in a defensive manner.  But what about situations where the bear may be compromised (such as a sick bear that is not thinking right), or situations where the use of pepper spray is compromised (the bear is upwind from you in a strong wind, you forgot to check and see if the nozzle is clogged, the spray doesn't work right [these things go for $40 a pop and only provide 7-10 seconds of spray, not something most people can afford to test all the time]), or situations where there are multiple aggressive bears (as happens near the wild-urban interface where bears have become habituated to people and act unnaturally, or a sow with yearling cubs)?  What about other animals, such as wolves that do hunt in packs?  Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but long stretches of time alone walking in unfamiliar wild places gives you a lot of time to think out scenarios. 

So, long story short, guns and self defense aren't always about people. 


In case you think I'm blowing smoke up your asses, here are two pictures of fresh tracks I have encountered on survey.  The first is a set of mountain lion tracks in my survey unit I encountered in 2010.  The second is a set of bear tracks I encountered at the end of last month.  Both of these tracks were fresh enough to tell me that the animal was most likely still in the immediate area when I encountered them. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 20, 2012, 09:18:31 PM
^^
I hear ya
when a coyote walked within a short distance of my wife in our back yard last year, the thought of buying a gun crossed my mind. Oddly enough, this morning, right after I came back from running, I looked out my window and a coyote was cutting through the yard. I wouldn't want to have to deal with one of those guys if he was pissed off.

eta - they say the bullets this guy bought (legally) were the kind that can go through 3 people. all his weapons were bought legally. so - even if you concede that it's OK to carry a concealed firearm into a movie theater, I'll argue that a)if someone would have tried to stop this dude, the "do gooder" would have bought the farm, and b) there is no reason that anyone would need piercing bullets or an assault weapon for, as VDB puts it, "peaceful" use of a firearm.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 20, 2012, 09:19:37 PM
I'm going to make a very short statement here, and it's one that illustrates my gun views perfectly:
"You don't need a fucking gun".
Period.
I don't care about the Constitution, I don't care about self defense, I don't care about hunting, and I don't care about sport shooting; I care about human life.

You don't need a fucking gun.


Curious to see how this fits my situation:


I own three guns.  None of them are really any good for self defense:  I keep the bullets, bolts/chambers, and the guns all in different areas of the house; the most important part (the bullets and the bolts/chambers) locked up.  They are for hunting and the occasional shooting sport.  The most powerful is a 30-06 cal bolt action, rifle, not exactly a fast or dexterous choice for self defense.  The only handgun I own is a .22 cal.  I've never carried it in public, and have no desire to do so.  I don't feel myself trained well enough to wield it in a tense situation; and lets face it- it's a .22.   


I have contemplated buying a more powerful handgun, one that has the stopping power to down a bear.  You don't spend the amount of time I do walking around alone in the woods of Montana and Idaho without having the thought cross your mind.  I've also spent a lot of time weighing the pros and cons of wielding a gun in the woods.  That is one of the reasons that my first line of defense in case of bear attack is pepper spray and lots of noise to let them know I'm coming.  But there are other threats too; wolves, mountain lions, moose.  The pepper spray would probably work with any of those animals as well, but it's hard to tell. 

My main concern is having the gun available as a back up.  Like I said, the pepper spray is the first line of defense; it has been shown to be pretty effective in situations where a single bear is acting aggressively in a defensive manner.  But what about situations where the bear may be compromised (such as a sick bear that is not thinking right), or situations where the use of pepper spray is compromised (the bear is upwind from you in a strong wind, you forgot to check and see if the nozzle is clogged, the spray doesn't work right [these things go for $40 a pop and only provide 7-10 seconds of spray, not something most people can afford to test all the time]), or situations where there are multiple aggressive bears (as happens near the wild-urban interface where bears have become habituated to people and act unnaturally, or a sow with yearling cubs)?  What about other animals, such as wolves that do hunt in packs?  Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but long stretches of time alone walking in unfamiliar wild places gives you a lot of time to think out scenarios. 

So, long story short, guns and self defense aren't always about people. 


In case you think I'm blowing smoke up your asses, here are two pictures of fresh tracks I have encountered on survey.  The first is a set of mountain lion tracks in my survey unit I encountered in 2010.  The second is a set of bear tracks I encountered at the end of last month.  Both of these tracks were fresh enough to tell me that the animal was most likely still in the immediate area when I encountered them. 
You know, you did actually do a decent bit to change my view here a little. I guess I wasn't really aware that there were handguns powerful enough to take down a bear. Although I lumped all guns together  earlier (as I tend to do when emotions are peaking), I was really more concerned with handguns and assault rifles. When I said "I don't care about hunting" I was out of line. I myself don't care about hunting, but I really have no problem with properly educated people hunting, target shooting, or anything you may need a gun for protection against (non-human of course).

So I apologize for some of those comments, they were off base.

All of That being said, I don't believe it's EVER okay to just carry a gun around in public, etc. I care about 0% what the Constitution has to say on this matter.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 20, 2012, 11:38:09 PM
eta - they say the bullets this guy bought (legally) were the kind that can go through 3 people. all his weapons were bought legally. so - even if you concede that it's OK to carry a concealed firearm into a movie theater, I'll argue that a)if someone would have tried to stop this dude, the "do gooder" would have bought the farm, and b) there is no reason that anyone would need piercing bullets or an assault weapon for, as VDB puts it, "peaceful" use of a firearm.

Different calibers and bullet configurations have different penetrating powers than others, but certainly, having something that can penetrate three people sounds excessive to me and a recipe for bad news. That sounds more like an assault/military-type round  -- entirely inappropriate for private citizens -- rather than a defensive round, which would be a hollow point so that the round a) has maximum stopping power and b) is itself less likely to pass through the target and hit something on the other side. Part of firearms education 101 is that you are responsible for your shot during its entire flight, so if you hit an innocent bystander on the other side of the bad guy, you're in big trouble, even if you took out the bad guy first. (Trust me, these are the kind of things that the responsible gun owner is supposed to be intrinsically aware of, if that offers any comfort whatsoever.)

I live in a small, yet incredibly violent, city.  We're consistently on the top of the "most violent cities per capita" lists, and our murder rate per capita is always in the top 3 nationwide.  Armed robberies happen more often than you can count.  And if there's one thing I've learned about this topic from living in a place like this, it's that carrying a gun is only going to get you killed.  If you're sitting at a red light and some thug comes up to the window and sticks a gun in your face, give him what he wants.  If you go for your gun, odds are your day is gonna end with a sopranos-style cut to black.  If you just cooperate, odds are your day will end peacefully -- albeit, without your wallet or car. 

Random acts of horrendous violence like what happened in CO are so incredibly rare.  The overwhelming, vast majority of the time, when you're encountered by a gunman, all they want is your stuff.  Bringing another gun into that situation is just going to turn it into a "who can shoot first" contest that wasn't needed in the first place.

Just in case there was any confusion, let me point out that I firmly believe that simply carrying a gun is not license to draw it and use it at any or every possible opportunity. You have to be smart about things. If you're completely stuck in a situation and the only option is compliance, lest you escalate matters and make them worse for yourself or those around you, then yes, you comply and live to see another day, obviously. Again, the idea here I keep reminding y'all about is to help protect innocent life, not endanger it. Producing a gun, much less firing it (only 10% of episodes of defensive gun "use" involve having to ultimately fire it) is something to be done only at the utmost extent of necessity.

But here's some food for thought. Realize that the guy who's willing to pull a gun or knife on you for those $5 in your wallet doesn't give a shit about your life. He would kill you or your wife or your friend stone-cold over those $5 if he thought he could get away with it. And if he's willing to risk your life for a few bucks, do you think you're the only one? So let's say you are carrying, get stuck up, and have an opportunity to defend yourself with force to end this armed attack. Some may say, just give the guy your wallet and be done with it. On the other hand, something I often think about is, who's to say that the next robbery this fucker attempts will go so peacefully? Maybe the next person tries to run or resist, and gets killed by the bad guy. You as the prior victim may have been in the position to stop him before he could go victimize other people and potentially devastate other families. As someone who takes seriously not only the privilege but the responsibility my state's carry laws grant me, that's something never far from my mind as I think about these things. It's not vigilantism; it's caring for my fellow innocent man and wanting to be available, in whatever small way, as ballast against the vicious lunatics out there who don't give a flying fuck about him or his welfare.

APD, regarding disarming cops, you know that if that happened it'd be open season on them. Because there's no way we'd be able to disarm everyone else, as I'm sure you'd acknowledge. Like guns or not, they need that instrument of force available not only as a deterrent but also as a defensive option for their own safety and that of people who may need their protection from time to time.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 20, 2012, 11:58:33 PM
A few more like you and all those judges will be able to retire and jury duty will be a thing of the past. Good thing we've all elected folks like you to make those life and death decisions for others.


If you seriously have the arrogance to say that you have the right to determine that someone should die then I have a serious problem with you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 21, 2012, 12:02:24 AM
Wow, a lot to respond to; I'll try to keep it brief (uh-huh):

I have a hard time with those who are against banning assault rifles, armor piercing bullets, "military" type weapons (like the large clip used in AZ last year), and allowing people to buy weapons at gun shows without background checks - all based on the 2nd amendment. We clearly need some common sense regulation, something that the NRA doesn't get in their zealous ideology. They passed a law in FLA making it illegal for a pediatrician to ASK a parent if there were guns in the house (apparently gun ownership > free speech to them). Fortunately, it got overturned by the court.

On your first point, I guess the issue I might take is what/who defines what an assault rifle is? I don't know shit about guns, but I've heard the term "assault rifle" had been stretched rather aggressively to include anything loaded semi-automatically. It doesn't seem fair to me that the definition of the thing you're banning can change with each executive. I'm with you that there is absolutely no point in owning a military weapon, but I also don't see the point of owning a car with 870HP that can go 250mph (oh yeah, I don't know shit about cars either). I guess my point is that I don't think it is reasonable to start drawing arbitrary distinctions on what people can and can't have (see prohibition of weed vs. alcohol). Next thing you know they'll try to start banning the size of sodas I can drink. (What's that?) I also realize my free market solution to gun control probably won't go over well but hey, at least I'm consistent!!

But that's not to say I oppose all regulation. I agree the NRA makes this debate far more difficult than it needs to be (although I'd suggest gun control advocates also at least have a hand in the blame). In Philly a couple years ago, the city passed 5 laws to tighten gun control and the NRA opposed every one of them. One was to require gun owners to report a missing handgun within 48hrs (I think). Now that seems like a pretty reasonable regulation to me: it's easy to understand and comply for the gun owner and it would prevent straw purchases from turning legal guns into illegal ones. But the NRA couldn't have that because I mean, c'mon, who can keep track of all their handguns amiright?!? That FL case was equally as disingenuous on the part of the NRA. Unfortunately, like most debates, the more an issue is dominated by special interests the greater chance they will crowd out effective understanding and decision making.

Unless he's going out with the intention of killing someone, that most certainly is not the purpose. The purpose is to protect from others who intend to kill. Owning a gun and wanting peace are not mutually exclusive. I think most gun owners buy a gun sincerely hoping there will never be a need to use it.

Again, this argument is emotional not rational. You carry the gun because of how it makes you feel. The rational argument, as laid forth by one of the greatest rational minds of any era, goes like this:

 “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.”

It really is that simple.

I agree with you that it is an emotional decision to carry a gun, in this case providing the owner with a sense of safety (either real or inflated). But I disagree that it is an irrational decision. Some people would say it's irrational not to arm yourself because of your commitment to non-violence. I am not taking sides in that debate, just pointing out that a dismissing an argument as emotional vs. rational is in itself completely subjective.

I don't care about the Constitution

Ahh, the liberal credo. While it pains me to hear this (and even more to know that you mean it), I respect your honesty. Some people (certain presidents come to mind) pay lip service to the Constitution while trampling it's tenets. You just freely take a leak right on the muthafucka.

Wait, have you done the draft order yet? Nevermind, I agree with everything you said :wink:

I'm just alarmed at the extent to which it appears some people equate the peaceful carrying of a firearm for protection with the kind of violence in society that said carrying is in response to. I just don't get it guys, I'm sorry.

This'd. That sliver of daylight line cracked me up too.

There's been a lot of anecdotal evidence and personal appeals today, but nothing real concrete so here's something I found interesting:  in the last 2 decades there have been 16 shootings around the world that killed 289 people (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/mass-shooting-incidents-last-two-decades) (not counting the shooters because fuck 'em). In 2009, there were 16,800 homicides, 11,500 of which were from firearms (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm). So every psychotic rampage in the world in the last 20 yrs equals just 2.5% of the gun deaths in the US in a single year. And you might say "Well why the fuck would you need to carry a gun to a movie theater if it never happens?" But I see it the other way: to me, these shootings are still so exceedingly rare (although clearly on the uptick in the second decade), so I don't see why the default response to them always seems to be "guns are evil." Or worse, "people who LIKE guns are evil."

Oh yeah, am I seriously the only one who sees the irony in everyone telling me my economic views are naive when you guys are throwing around "world peace starts at home"? Yes, we know, we've all heard Imagine. :wink:

Lastly, everybody recognizes that it's fucked up that we live in a world where this shit can happen. It's only through communication and dialogue that people can learn and grow. I'm glad I have a place to discuss such fucked up shit with such thoughtful people of all viewpoints.

+ks all around
 :beers:


tl; dwrite
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 12:24:23 AM
A few more like you and all those judges will be able to retire and jury duty will be a thing of the past. Good thing we've all elected folks like you to make those life and death decisions for others.


If you seriously have the arrogance to say that you have the right to determine that someone should die then I have a serious problem with you.

Yes, its "arrogance" for me to believe that I can exercise my legal right to defend myself from armed attackers who are prepared to take my own life... "Arrogance"? Jesus Christ man, it's self-preservation. I'm just honestly flabbergasted at the full extent to which this is apparently a controversial aim to uphold. And furthermore at the extent to which people are eager to impugn my motives when they are in fact nothing more or less than the desire to look out for my own safety, or my wife's, and not wishing to be made a victim of at the hands of someone who is willing to dispatch an innocent life without without a moment's thought, in pursuit of whatever criminal gains he has in mind.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on July 21, 2012, 12:28:57 AM
A few more like you and all those judges will be able to retire and jury duty will be a thing of the past. Good thing we've all elected folks like you to make those life and death decisions for others.


If you seriously have the arrogance to say that you have the right to determine that someone should die then I have a serious problem with you.

Yes, its "arrogance" for me to believe that I can exercise my legal right to defend myself from armed attackers who are prepared to take my own life... "Arrogance"? Jesus Christ man, it's self-preservation. I'm just honestly flabbergasted at the full extent to which this is apparently a controversial aim to uphold. And furthermore at the extent to which people are eager to impugn my motives when they are in fact nothing more or less than the desire to look out for my own safety, or my wife's, and not wishing to be made a victim of at the hands of someone who is willing to dispatch an innocent life without without a moment's thought, in pursuit of whatever criminal gains he has in mind.

I'm not jumping into this argument, but I think RJ is saying that you're making the judgement call about that person's motives. and then potentially shooting them.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 21, 2012, 12:37:10 AM
A few more like you and all those judges will be able to retire and jury duty will be a thing of the past. Good thing we've all elected folks like you to make those life and death decisions for others.


If you seriously have the arrogance to say that you have the right to determine that someone should die then I have a serious problem with you.

Yes, its "arrogance" for me to believe that I can exercise my legal right to defend myself from armed attackers who are prepared to take my own life... "Arrogance"? Jesus Christ man, it's self-preservation. I'm just honestly flabbergasted at the full extent to which this is apparently a controversial aim to uphold. And furthermore at the extent to which people are eager to impugn my motives when they are in fact nothing more or less than the desire to look out for my own safety, or my wife's, and not wishing to be made a victim of at the hands of someone who is willing to dispatch an innocent life without without a moment's thought, in pursuit of whatever criminal gains he has in mind.

I'm not jumping into this argument, but I think RJ is saying that you're making the judgement call about that person's motives. and then potentially shooting them.
As usual, Keller gets it.
It seems like you are getting really upset, VDB. I'm sorry you are upset, but this probably isn't going to help matters any...
In my book, as unfortunate as it is, you have no more of right to take the life of your would be attacker than he has to take your life.
It's why I don't believe in the death penalty either, but that's a completely different discussion.
I'm happy to be the liberal piece of shit you are cursing me for being right now btw ;)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on July 21, 2012, 12:53:13 AM

Watching Americans discussing gun control is fucked.



Don't see why it is so surprising. 

You should know by now, in your studies of our strange tribe, that there is nothing that can't be solved in the U.S. without righteous indignation, gross speculation, self proclaimed moral certainty, and the right these uncertainties give us to stick to our guns when faced with the opportunity to lay new intellectual groundwork.

Why the hell would we want to leave firearms out of all that fun?   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 21, 2012, 09:31:07 AM
eta - they say the bullets this guy bought (legally) were the kind that can go through 3 people. all his weapons were bought legally. so - even if you concede that it's OK to carry a concealed firearm into a movie theater, I'll argue that a)if someone would have tried to stop this dude, the "do gooder" would have bought the farm, and b) there is no reason that anyone would need piercing bullets or an assault weapon for, as VDB puts it, "peaceful" use of a firearm.

Different calibers and bullet configurations have different penetrating powers than others, but certainly, having something that can penetrate three people sounds excessive to me and a recipe for bad news. That sounds more like an assault/military-type round  -- entirely inappropriate for private citizens -- rather than a defensive round, which would be a hollow point so that the round a) has maximum stopping power and b) is itself less likely to pass through the target and hit something on the other side. Part of firearms education 101 is that you are responsible for your shot during its entire flight, so if you hit an innocent bystander on the other side of the bad guy, you're in big trouble, even if you took out the bad guy first. (Trust me, these are the kind of things that the responsible gun owner is supposed to be intrinsically aware of, if that offers any comfort whatsoever.)

I live in a small, yet incredibly violent, city.  We're consistently on the top of the "most violent cities per capita" lists, and our murder rate per capita is always in the top 3 nationwide.  Armed robberies happen more often than you can count.  And if there's one thing I've learned about this topic from living in a place like this, it's that carrying a gun is only going to get you killed.  If you're sitting at a red light and some thug comes up to the window and sticks a gun in your face, give him what he wants.  If you go for your gun, odds are your day is gonna end with a sopranos-style cut to black.  If you just cooperate, odds are your day will end peacefully -- albeit, without your wallet or car. 

Random acts of horrendous violence like what happened in CO are so incredibly rare.  The overwhelming, vast majority of the time, when you're encountered by a gunman, all they want is your stuff.  Bringing another gun into that situation is just going to turn it into a "who can shoot first" contest that wasn't needed in the first place.

Just in case there was any confusion, let me point out that I firmly believe that simply carrying a gun is not license to draw it and use it at any or every possible opportunity. You have to be smart about things. If you're completely stuck in a situation and the only option is compliance, lest you escalate matters and make them worse for yourself or those around you, then yes, you comply and live to see another day, obviously. Again, the idea here I keep reminding y'all about is to help protect innocent life, not endanger it. Producing a gun, much less firing it (only 10% of episodes of defensive gun "use" involve having to ultimately fire it) is something to be done only at the utmost extent of necessity.

But here's some food for thought. Realize that the guy who's willing to pull a gun or knife on you for those $5 in your wallet doesn't give a shit about your life. He would kill you or your wife or your friend stone-cold over those $5 if he thought he could get away with it. And if he's willing to risk your life for a few bucks, do you think you're the only one? So let's say you are carrying, get stuck up, and have an opportunity to defend yourself with force to end this armed attack. Some may say, just give the guy your wallet and be done with it. On the other hand, something I often think about is, who's to say that the next robbery this fucker attempts will go so peacefully? Maybe the next person tries to run or resist, and gets killed by the bad guy. You as the prior victim may have been in the position to stop him before he could go victimize other people and potentially devastate other families. As someone who takes seriously not only the privilege but the responsibility my state's carry laws grant me, that's something never far from my mind as I think about these things. It's not vigilantism; it's caring for my fellow innocent man and wanting to be available, in whatever small way, as ballast against the vicious lunatics out there who don't give a flying fuck about him or his welfare.

APD, regarding disarming cops, you know that if that happened it'd be open season on them. Because there's no way we'd be able to disarm everyone else, as I'm sure you'd acknowledge. Like guns or not, they need that instrument of force available not only as a deterrent but also as a defensive option for their own safety and that of people who may need their protection from time to time.

It's not? Let me look that up for you:

Vigilante - a private individual who undertakes law enforcement without legal authority
- a self-appointed doer of justice
- One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's own hands.

As a sidenote, I just left this 7-11, and this fucking bum asked me for change. I'm not particularly a fan of that as I'm sure others aren't either. So I grabbed a baseball bat out of my trunk beat him senseless and tossed him in a trash dump. I mean, come on, I don't want him bothering my neighbors with that kind of shit either. Besides, next time he might have pulled a knife on someone, I just felt like it was my civic responsibility to clean up that kind of filth from my immediate surrounding for the greater good.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 21, 2012, 09:35:41 AM
That desperate individual who is resorting to snatching purses at knifepoint may be the same guy who saves a life on a better day.  You can't know.

The cycle of senseless killing won't be ended with more killing.

Its like spanking your kid because he hit his brother. Only 10000x worse.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 21, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
Wow, a lot to respond to; I'll try to keep it brief (uh-huh):

I have a hard time with those who are against banning assault rifles, armor piercing bullets, "military" type weapons (like the large clip used in AZ last year), and allowing people to buy weapons at gun shows without background checks - all based on the 2nd amendment. We clearly need some common sense regulation, something that the NRA doesn't get in their zealous ideology. They passed a law in FLA making it illegal for a pediatrician to ASK a parent if there were guns in the house (apparently gun ownership > free speech to them). Fortunately, it got overturned by the court.

On your first point, I guess the issue I might take is what/who defines what an assault rifle is? I don't know shit about guns, but I've heard the term "assault rifle" had been stretched rather aggressively to include anything loaded semi-automatically. It doesn't seem fair to me that the definition of the thing you're banning can change with each executive. I'm with you that there is absolutely no point in owning a military weapon, but I also don't see the point of owning a car with 870HP that can go 250mph (oh yeah, I don't know shit about cars either). I guess my point is that I don't think it is reasonable to start drawing arbitrary distinctions on what people can and can't have (see prohibition of weed vs. alcohol). Next thing you know they'll try to start banning the size of sodas I can drink. (What's that?) I also realize my free market solution to gun control probably won't go over well but hey, at least I'm consistent!!


I like your car analogy - I use it myself.
certain cars are street legal. certain cars are not. arbitrary decision? probably. reasonable? yes.
even street cars are regulated for safety. again, no one would argue those.

I realize that the dude that did this is one crazy MF who went to great lengths to do what he did. But we shouldn't make it easier for him by having all this shit available. Would he have murdered a bunch of people anyway? maybe.

Another example is the Giffords shooting. The guy had a 30 round clip. Bought the gun and ammo that day, iirc - little planning involved.
Dallas Green, whose granddaughter died that day, said - I'm a hunter. I own a gun. I don't understand why anyone would need a 30 round clip (except for mass murder)

common sense legislation limiting ammo would not have prevented what happened that day. The guy could have bought a gun and multiple smaller clips. maybe the time it took to change would have been enough for someone to tackle him - who knows. Common sense (yes, call it arbitrary) regulation could have saved some lives that day.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 10:36:54 AM
 :frustrated: I'm running out of ways to state my case here, but let me try some more, because we clearly still are not talking about the same thing.

I thought I was being clear about what kind of hypothetical situations the right of self defense applies to, but maybe not.

Keller, if someone is coming at you with a knife, I believe it is quite reasonable at that instant to determine that his motives are to kill or maim you, and you are then authorized to exercise your legal right to defend your own life. If anyone truly still wants to debate that point with me, we are just not going to agree, and luckily for me and others who believe in self defense, the law does.

APD, I just flatly disagree, which is obviously the crux of the difference between our positions here -- I do believe that a person shouldn't be morally bound to just stand idle and let an attacker kill him, or someone around him. I believe the attacker, demonstrating his lack of respect for innocent life, can make no objection (nor should others attempt to make on his behalf, in my opinion) to a person using defensive force in order to prevent the brutality he is inflicting or is about to inflict.

GAH, I guess I was not thorough enough in that hypothetical because I was trying to make a separate point. I'm not talking about simply walking around, indiscriminately taking out sketchy-looking dudes because I think they may be up to no good down the line. (Seriously, is that what you think I'm into? Do you seriously think I'm that deranged? I mean, I used to like super hero comics as a kid, but... that was a long time ago.) In any situation in which the right of self defense applies, there must be a real threat of death or severe bodily harm, and that threat must be imminent or upon you. So, a person slashing at you with a knife counts. Or other such obvious examples. So, what I was trying to say was, in a situation in which justifiable self defense is employed, you are not only protecting your own self/your wife/whomever from that attacker at that instant, but as a convenient side effect (not primary objective) you may also be preventing said attacker from preying on other innocents down the line. My position is, when and only when safe and viable, I would rather respond to an imminent threat to my safety by taking steps to protect myself, rather than simply puckering my poo hole and hoping I get out of it alive.

Guys, here's a hypothetical: Let's say my wife and I are at the store. She walks out into the parking lot ahead of me. I come out and round the corner to find someone attacking her with a knife. I gather that many of you would claim that in that situation I shouldn't be allowed to use my firearm to end the attack and save her life. Well, the law clearly says I do have that right, and morally I have no compunction whatsoever with following through on that. In fact, I believe it would be a moral failing on my part not to take action to save her.

It's interesting, because for all the moral indignation being directed at me, I detect very little toward the attacker in the various scenarios we've outlined. Do you fellas believe there is any difference between the ill-motived aggressor in a senseless attack, and the person who believes he may take necessary steps to defend himself? I'm sensing that you think there's no difference, or perhaps that the latter (e.g. me) is actually worse. And that's just very strange and unfair.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 21, 2012, 11:07:23 AM
If you go into a movie theater, and you noticed someone with a gun on them, is your first thought, whoa, I'm glad there's someone with a gun here, you know, just in case someone else with a gun flips out and tries to kill me. Or WHOA, who the fuck brings a gun to the movies?!? Holy shit, someone call the cops because there's a fucking psychopath here with a fucking gun?!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 21, 2012, 11:16:43 AM
:frustrated: I'm running out of ways to state my case here...
APD, I just flatly disagree, which is obviously the crux of the difference between our positions here -- I do believe that a person shouldn't be morally bound to just stand idle and let an attacker kill him, or someone around him. I believe the attacker, demonstrating his lack of respect for innocent life, can make no objection (nor should others attempt to make on his behalf, in my opinion) to a person using defensive force in order to prevent the brutality he is inflicting or is about to inflict.
You're running out of ways to state your case because you're running into resistance with your argument. Most red-blooded flag waiving Americans are all to happy to arm themselves needlessly to the teeth and pull the trigger if a cat jumps the wrong way on their property.
As for your response to my statement, you basically just restated that you're superior because you "aren't the one who started it". Give me a break, that whole scenario stopped working for me in 6th grade.
What's far more concerning is that I'M in the minority on my stance here.
I wish it wasn't so hard to immigrate to Canada. Seriously. This country is absolutely fucked ideologically.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 21, 2012, 11:45:33 AM
a "liberal" with a slightly different view -
I don't like guns.
except for target shooting, hunting, and the kind of thing nab was talking about, I am against carrying guns in public.
I think firearms should be regulated much more tightly then they are
but - if someone is attacking you (or your family) with what a reasonable person might assume lethal intent (gun, knife, club), I see nothing wrong in doing whatever you can to defend yourself.

that does NOT mean people should be able to arm themselves to the teeth, defending against a govt plot, the helicopters coming from the sky, or whatever. I also am strongly against the use of lethal force in a situation where non lethal force will suffice. A gun in the wrong hands might confuse that situation, though, which scares me.

in my world, the chance of me getting attacked are low enough that if I did carry a gun, it would be more likely to be used against me or incorrectly than to save my life. And, when I did live in a high crime area (inner city Brooklyn for 4 years) me responding to a bad situation with a gun would be more likely to result in me being dead then if I just gave up my $ (as per ytowndan). fortunately, the only crimes I was a victim of back then were non violent (robberies, break ins, etc)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 11:57:36 AM
GAH, that's why it's called concealed carry. People aren't supposed to see the firearm, and therefore won't have the reaction you describe. I have never once seen a random person in public and noticed, yup, that guy's got a gun right there. And I'm sure that by sheer odds, I've been around plenty of people who were carrying.

APD, I don't mind running into resistance. That's perfectly fine, and I'm not expecting to convert anyone here. I'm OK disagreeing with people. What I'm being frustrated in is my attempts to bridge what I perceive to be a large divide between why my actual motives and thinking around the concepts and scenarios described here are, and what seems to be the outside perception of my motives and behaviors -- which apparently includes such things as whacking panhandlers for sport, walking into movie theaters with a gun on my hip, shooting people who look at me the wrong way at a bar, compensating for my diminutive trouser snake, etc.

And then, there's the as-yet-unanswered question of whether people here simply don't believe in owning or carrying firearms -- perfectly an acceptible stance to take -- or whether they don't acknowledge the difference between bad people and good people, and don't believe that good people have a compelling reason to protect themselves from the actions of bad people.

And please don't try to reduce life-or-death scenarios to a grade-school "he started it" spat. This is entirely different. If someone starts slashing me or my wife with a knife, yes, he really did f'in start it, and therefore I'm severely disinclined to heed arguments that I should yield my own life (or my wife's) to an attacker because his is somehow worth more than mine in that moment.

sls, thank you for that allowance. It is precisely what self-defense laws are designed to authorize. That's it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 21, 2012, 12:14:58 PM
I'm not arguing your right to defend yourself. So we (you and I) can put that to the side.

But do you not see your elevated sense of paranoia towards your fellow man, and irrational fears (i.e. the inability to leave your house to see a movie without being armed) as being abnormal? Because to me, it sounds like the sort of thing you should talk to a professional about, almost like PTSD. And if not, and that's just something more people than I care to know are walking around with similar beliefs, then I'm with matt and APD and others in thinking, damn, this country is fuuuuucked up. Rather than believe in the good in your fellow man, your baseline is that everyone but you, as stated before (I'll have faith in myself), is inherently evil. Nothing wrong with that, if it's your viewpoint. I just think it's a sad way to live.

/judgemental dickhead
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 21, 2012, 12:18:34 PM
I find interesting that you don't address me directly. Is it because your "the law says blah blah" position doesn't stand up to the moral questions that I raise?

The law may say you can shoot and kill a guy with a knife but I SER one killer and one dead guy with a knife. Put a gun in his hand, and maybe he's killed a few more people before you shoot him. I still see two killers.

You have no moral right to serve as judge and executioner an thats your intent when you strap on a gun.

The law is wrong.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 21, 2012, 12:33:15 PM
I also don't debate your right to defend yourself - NON LETHALLY.
Death is death, just because you were attacked doesn't make you better for pulling the trigger.
Also, those incidents (as mentioned above) are so incredibly low that even if you do believe you have the right to mortally wound someone, it still does not necessitate carrying a gun.

Time to get emotional again:

I guess you're right though, I shouldn't reduce it to a "grade school 'he started' it spat". If someone starts something with you, you should be able to pull that trigger, man! They can take my gun when they pry it "from my cold, dead hands". Guess we can have your guns now, cocksucker. What a piece of shit that guy is too.
Fuck this, arguing the point is stupid.
Keep your gun it's your GOD GIVEN RIGHT!!!!
YAY 'MERICA.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 21, 2012, 12:33:39 PM
Like RJ said, the law says you can defend yourself with your gun in many cases... That does not make it right.

The law also allows the Boy Scouts of America to discriminate against gays... And the BSA is in compliance with the law. That does not make them right.

I've said it before and I'll say it again... By carrying a gun with the intent to have there for self defense, you are saying that you value your own human life over another persons human life. I can't make that leap. I find that position morally reprehensible.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 21, 2012, 12:37:07 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 21, 2012, 12:39:29 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.
Maybe it needs to get personal.
That being said, you're right on the non constructive part.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 21, 2012, 12:40:03 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.

Get Bent!

USA! USA! USA!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 21, 2012, 12:43:50 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.

Get Bent!

USA! USA! USA!

+k
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 21, 2012, 12:47:21 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.

Get Bent!

USA! USA! USA!

+k
Lol! Was literally typing the same thing when you posted... also 24 hr'd. :/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 21, 2012, 12:49:06 PM
This argument is going to go nowhere and on the verge of getting personal and nonconstructive.

Get Bent!

USA! USA! USA!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU_xmrmcoZI
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 12:51:36 PM
GAH, there's obviously a line somewhere between preparedness and paranoia, and different people have their own definitions of where that line falls. By far, most people are good and intend no harm to others; I have no quarrel with that statement. But facts demonstrate that there are, from time to time, people who don't have such pure regard for their fellow man, and sometimes their behaviors have terrible consequences on the lives of innocent people and their loved ones.

I promise you I'm not walking around in a constant paranoid fit, looking over my should with an itchy trigger finger. Nor are any of the other people I know who have concealed carry permits. You might be surprised. Maybe it's a cultural thing -- I know polite, mild-mannered, perfectly calm people down here, including women, who have their permit. There are millions of people nationwide with concealed carry permits, and I bet some of them fit the description you've applied to me, and still others haven't. And I bet that we've all met some pretty whacked-out, paranoid people who don't have a concealed carry permit.

No, I don't think of it like paranoia or a complete lack of faith in the goodness of every stranger I see. It's more like insurance. Think of all the insurance policies people carry, that cover them for all kinds of very unlikely yet very devastating hypothetical scenarios. You hope you never have to cash in that policy. But it's nice to know it's there if you need it. That's pretty much the extent of my relationship with carrying a firearm.

rowjimmy, judges and juries would be cold comfort for my grieving widow or family, assuming they were able to catch my assailant and put him on trial.

I'm raising moral questions as well, upon which we clearly don't see eye to eye:

1. Say one individual attacks another or presents the imminent threat of mortal violence. Only one individual is likely to emerge from that encounter alive. Would it be better for the attacker to emerge alive and his innocent victim dead, or for the victim to emerge alive after having used necessary defensive force to preserve his own life? I see a moral question here and you know what my answer is.

2. Say, as in the scenario I described earlier, I find my wife (or another innocent person) coming under violent attack from an assailant and I have the choice of either saving the victim's life by dispatching the assailant, or allowing the attack to continue to its likely devastating conclusion. I see a moral issue here as well, and you know what I believe would be my obligation.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 12:57:08 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again... By carrying a gun with the intent to have there for self defense, you are saying that you value your own human life over another persons human life. I can't make that leap. I find that position morally reprehensible.

PG, I value my own life over that of a person who is attempting to take mine from me, yes. I do not find that position to be morally reprehensible. That is all self-evident based on the views I have on self-defense.

I understand and respect the contrasting view you have on the matter, and I do not find your position to be morally reprehensible, either.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 21, 2012, 01:32:04 PM
This is a dead end so I'm gonna wrap it here before I get annoyed.


Last word from me: Killing is not a right. It is always a wrong. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 21, 2012, 02:26:48 PM
I, too, have taken this about as far as I can take it; anyone who needs to get caught up on my positions can read through this hugely entertaining thread.

Mind if I redirect the focus back to the CO incident?

This right-wing douchebag at my gym, whom I know I've complained about before, was watching news coverage there yesterday and, as I was leaving, he turned and, unprompted, simply said "Well, you can kiss your guns goodbye." And then, "Obama blah blah blah" as I kept walking toward the door.

As fucking if. The only thing that has happened to gun ownership under Obama is that it's gone up. He has been great for the gun industry, even though they won't admit that in public. Has Obama ever said or done anything to seriously suggest he's about to go around snatching up people's firearms? I'm not aware of a thing. This is legit paranoia, and it's fairly pervasive on the mid-to-far right. Is Obama just waiting for his second term to unleash his great communist plan to steal our guns and bibles? Incredibly unlikely.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 21, 2012, 02:39:53 PM
I, too, have taken this about as far as I can take it; anyone who needs to get caught up on my positions can read through this hugely entertaining thread.

Mind if I redirect the focus back to the CO incident?

This right-wing douchebag at my gym, whom I know I've complained about before, was watching news coverage there yesterday and, as I was leaving, he turned and, unprompted, simply said "Well, you can kiss your guns goodbye." And then, "Obama blah blah blah" as I kept walking toward the door.

As fucking if. The only thing that has happened to gun ownership under Obama is that it's gone up. He has been great for the gun industry, even though they won't admit that in public. Has Obama ever said or done anything to seriously suggest he's about to go around snatching up people's firearms? I'm not aware of a thing. This is legit paranoia, and it's fairly pervasive on the mid-to-far right. Is Obama just waiting for his second term to unleash his great communist plan to steal our guns and bibles? Incredibly unlikely.

No, that's just ignorance.

Paranoia:
- a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.
- a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 21, 2012, 03:24:44 PM
Wow, a lot to respond to; I'll try to keep it brief (uh-huh):

I have a hard time with those who are against banning assault rifles, armor piercing bullets, "military" type weapons (like the large clip used in AZ last year), and allowing people to buy weapons at gun shows without background checks - all based on the 2nd amendment. We clearly need some common sense regulation, something that the NRA doesn't get in their zealous ideology. They passed a law in FLA making it illegal for a pediatrician to ASK a parent if there were guns in the house (apparently gun ownership > free speech to them). Fortunately, it got overturned by the court.

On your first point, I guess the issue I might take is what/who defines what an assault rifle is? I don't know shit about guns, but I've heard the term "assault rifle" had been stretched rather aggressively to include anything loaded semi-automatically. It doesn't seem fair to me that the definition of the thing you're banning can change with each executive. I'm with you that there is absolutely no point in owning a military weapon, but I also don't see the point of owning a car with 870HP that can go 250mph (oh yeah, I don't know shit about cars either). I guess my point is that I don't think it is reasonable to start drawing arbitrary distinctions on what people can and can't have (see prohibition of weed vs. alcohol). Next thing you know they'll try to start banning the size of sodas I can drink. (What's that?) I also realize my free market solution to gun control probably won't go over well but hey, at least I'm consistent!!


I like your car analogy - I use it myself.
certain cars are street legal. certain cars are not. arbitrary decision? probably. reasonable? yes.
even street cars are regulated for safety. again, no one would argue those.

Sure, but under certain controlled circumstances people who have the required amount of training can go through proper channels to get licensed for these cars and register them and use them. Should a former convict be allowed to walk around with an AK47? No, and I think even the most ardent NRA supporter (which again, I am not) would concede there should be some restrictions. But when you start enforcing a blanket ban on arbitrary definitions, it seems like foolish regulation to me. YMMV

This entire debate (if you can call it that) has hinged on counterfactuals and hypotheticals and the occasional "I remember this story a couple yrs ago..." with very little facts. That makes sense, when you are dealing with such a hot button issue it usually is, to borrow Pie Guy's phrasing, emotional rather than rational. But I still haven't seen anyone admit that while they may not agree with VDB's point of view, they recognize the difference in the moral judgment he is making and that he is completely justified in making it. And if you want to say well no, he is wrong in his beliefs, than I would suggest you are no better than a pro-lifer who condemns support of abortion rights as morally reprehensible.

But back to those pesky facts I just mentioned, here's another point I found interesting: according to Gallup, 1-in-3 Americans now owns a gun (http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx). Let's suppose every firearm homocide in 2009 (11,500 as I mentioned earlier) was at the hand of a distinct registered and law abiding gun owner (although that assumption might be just a tad conservative). Well that means there are 99,988,500 other legal gun owners who haven't strapped on their guns with the intention of killing another person. Well fuck, that doesn't fit the narrative very well; let's imagine the 11,500 murders were at the hands of people with concealed carry permits; you know, those gun toting dickbags who start threatening people for taking too long in the concession line at the movies. As of 2010, there were 6 million concealed carry permits (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life/t/record-numbers-licensed-pack-heat/#.UAr81TESTw4). That means 99.8% of those violence obsessed, paranoid vigilantes didn't kill anybody? What kind of pussy ass vigilante shit is that?!?!?!

C'mon. Let's get serious for a second. If you hate guns, that's great. If you think anyone who chooses to carry a gun is a radical lunatic, good for you. If you want to selectively adhere to the Constitution, ok I guess. That's your prerogative. But don't sit here and act like anyone is worse off because they don't abide by your finely tuned moral code. That really defeats the point of this debate, IMO.

Finally,

Last word from me: Killing is not a right. It is always a wrong. 

I agree with this, and the fact is, so do the overwhelming amount of legal gun owners.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 21, 2012, 03:46:40 PM

This entire debate (if you can call it that) has hinged on counterfactuals and hypotheticals and the occasional "I remember this story a couple yrs ago..." with very little facts. That makes sense, when you are dealing with such a hot button issue it usually is, to borrow Pie Guy's phrasing, emotional rather than rational. But I still haven't seen anyone admit that while they may not agree with VDB's point of view, they recognize the difference in the moral judgment he is making and that he is completely justified in making it. And if you want to say well no, he is wrong in his beliefs, than I would suggest you are no better than a pro-lifer who condemns support of abortion rights as morally reprehensible.



I actually was going to say something along these lines. Just like the abortion debate, or the Boy Scouts debate, there is the law and then there is the moral decision. I happen to think abortion falls into a moral grey area and fundamentally believe the law is right to protect it as a woman's right to choose. I think the BSA are morally reprehensible in their decision to discriminate, but the law is right in allowing the to do so. I think carrying a gun for self defense is morally reprehensible, but, again, the law is right on this one, too. I will argue for almost any regulation, but. Don't think we should nor will we outlaw guns in this country. Never.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: birdman on July 21, 2012, 04:51:43 PM
Sorry pie but the BSA receive federal funding. They should not be allowed to discriminate.
That is all.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 21, 2012, 05:03:09 PM
Sorry pie but the BSA receive federal funding. They should not be allowed to discriminate.
That is all.

They should not receive federal funding.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 21, 2012, 05:59:56 PM
I can't believe no one has mentioned this, but I think the most important reason to ever own a gun is for blasting zombies.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 21, 2012, 06:12:18 PM
Um yeah, if you strap on a gun every time you see a movie I honestly question your sanity.  At the very least you don't live in the same world that I do, where such a thought never even has entered my mind.  This tragedy certainly doesn't encourage me to think that I need to start carrying either.  I don't carry an RPG launcher in my car just in case someone tries to sideswipe or rear end me. 

Society has to be built on some basic level of trust, without it we are just a bunch of fucking animals like that piece of shit who shot those people, and I for one refuse to sink to that level.   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 21, 2012, 06:24:51 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 21, 2012, 06:50:02 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 21, 2012, 07:07:31 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...

none of you guys will have to worry about breaking that law.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 21, 2012, 07:10:22 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...

How the fuck am I supposed to fight off zombies with a blade only half the size of my junk?!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on July 21, 2012, 07:15:37 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...

However, you ARE allowed to use them on close blood relatives.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 21, 2012, 07:19:14 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...

However, you ARE allowed to use them on close blood relatives.

hey-oooooooooooooo!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 21, 2012, 07:25:09 PM
Did they ever outlaw swords, or did people just stop carrying them? Because if they haven't been outlawed I might go trade my guns for a big ass claymore to wear on my hip. I feel like that would deter anyone who might attack me (cause nobody wants to attack the nutbar who carries a sword around)

Most blades are regulated by length, in Virginia I believe it is 6 inches. Bring on the jokes...

However, you ARE allowed to use them on close blood relatives.

hey-oooooooooooooo!

Boom. Roasted.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 21, 2012, 07:34:40 PM
Wow intense story,
Quote
Gunman kills 12 in Denver shooting at Batman movie
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-shooting-denverbre86j0am-20120720,0,6584688.story

Cant even go see a midnight showing of a popular movie without being scared for your life now. Seems like these shootings happen almost once a year...scary stuff.

Yeah, fuck that shit. There are lunatics out there. Sad but true.

Hate to sound cynical, but this is one reason why, when I go to sit in a dark room packed with a couple hundred strangers, I have my gun on me. Imagine if someone in the front row was carrying, there might be fewer grieving families today.

/soapbox

(Yeah, sorry, I know... politiw00k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

Dude had on a bullet-proof vest - you may not have stopped him before he stopped you.

Maybe not, but it would have been worth a try. Also, the standard idea is two shots to center mass, one to the head.

That and the canister of tear gas would probably deter my ability to make a straight head shot. It is almost like the dude was planning on someone having a gun and he took measures to ensure he would be successful in his attack. Straight up psycho shit. I cannot fathom the idea of running into a random public place and tryin to kill as many people as possible...maybe one of those kids was to grow up and be the modern Hitler and this guy took him out early. That argument goes the other way as well, maybe one could have been the next Einstein...but this stuff keeps occurring and its pretty scary shit.

Were on the brink of a zombie Apocalypse people, you should never leave your house with your keys wallet and concealed weapon, duh.
Zombie apocalypse was brought up earlier.

But back to the CO incident.
This dude was top of his class and was in grad school for neuroscience. His mom is a psychiatric nurse as well and when she was asked to comment on the situation she said "I think you have the right guy" :| that screams a big WTF to me. Since they are both very smart and very aware of behavior science and his mom even KNEW he was crazy, and nothing was done about it.

This right here is an example of pure ignorance. I guess.
His elaborate bomb rigged apartment is pretty crazy too. Like there was really no hope in stopping this guy to begin with.
But I would feel a lot safer if people like this guy couldnt purchase high powered rifles...or even a gun for that matter. How would the person selling it to him know? Thats something beyond me.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 21, 2012, 07:46:45 PM
Interesting article on gun control after Columbine and what they think will happen after this shooting

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/gun-control-polls-aurora-shooting_n_1690169.html
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 22, 2012, 02:51:50 AM
I always revisit the documentary "Bowling for Columbine" during situations like this.
Michael Moore interviews a Canadian political leader who says their main basis for creating a good society is proper daycare, proper healthcare, and proper assistance for their parents when they get elderly.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on July 22, 2012, 03:41:46 PM
Quote

Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons

Last edited Sun Jul 22, 2012, 12:25 PM USA/ET - Edit history (3)

I'd like to preface this long tweet by saying that my passion comes from my deepest sympathy and shared sorrow with yesterday's victims and with the utmost respect for the people and the police/fire/medical/political forces of Aurora and all who seek to comfort and aid these victims.

This morning, I made a comment about how I do not understand people who support public ownership of assault style weapons like the AR-15 used in the Colorado massacre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

That comment, has of course, inspired a lot of feedback. There have been many tweets of agreement and sympathy but many, many more that have been challenging at the least, hostile and vitriolic at the worst.

Clearly, the angry, threatened and threatening, hostile comments are coming from gun owners and gun advocates. Despite these massacres recurring and despite the 100,000 Americans that die every year due to domestic gun violence - these people see no value to even considering some kind of control as to what kinds of weapons are put in civilian hands.

Many of them cite patriotism as their reason - true patriots support the Constitution adamantly and wholly. Constitution says citizens have the right to bear arms in order to maintain organized militias. I'm no constitutional scholar so here it is from the document itself:

As passed by the Congress:
"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."
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
"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."

So the patriots are correct, gun ownership is in the constitution - if you're in a well-regulated militia. Let's see what no less a statesman than Alexander Hamilton had to say about a militia:

"A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss."

Or from Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Definition of MILITIA
1
a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2
: the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service

The advocates of guns who claim patriotism and the rights of the 2nd Amendment - are they in well-regulated militias? For the vast majority - the answer is no.

Then I get messages from seemingly decent and intelligent people who offer things like: @BrooklynAvi: Guns should only be banned if violent crimes committed with tomatoes means we should ban tomatoes. OR @nysportsguys1: Drunk drivers kill, should we ban fast cars?

I'm hoping that right after they hit send, they take a deep breath and realize that those arguments are completely specious. I believe tomatoes and cars have purposes other than killing. What purpose does an AR-15 serve to a sportsman that a more standard hunting rifle does not serve? Let's see - does it fire more rounds without reload? Yes. Does it fire farther and more accurately? Yes. Does it accommodate a more lethal payload? Yes. So basically, the purpose of an assault style weapon is to kill more stuff, more fully, faster and from further away. To achieve maximum lethality. Hardly the primary purpose of tomatoes and sports cars.

Then there are the tweets from the extreme right - these are the folk who believe our government has been corrupted and stolen and that the forces of evil are at play, planning to take over this nation and these folk are going to fight back and take a stand. And any moron like me who doesn't see it should...
a. be labeled a moron
b. shut the fuck up
c. be removed

And amazingly, I have some minor agreement with these folks. I believe there are evil forces at play in our government. But I call them corporatists. I call them absolutists. I call them the kind of ideologues from both sides, but mostly from the far right who swear allegiance to unelected officials that regardless of national need or global conditions, are never to levy a tax. That they are never to compromise or seek solutions with the other side. That are to obstruct every possible act of governance, even the ones they support or initiate. Whose political and social goal is to marginalize the other side, vilify and isolate them with the hope that they will surrender, go away or die out.

These people believe that the US government is eventually going to go street by street and enslave our citizens. Now as long as that is only happening to liberals, homosexuals and democrats - no problem. But if they try it with anyone else - it's going to be arms-ageddon and these committed, God-fearing, brave souls will then use their military-esque arsenal to show the forces of our corrupt government whats-what. These people think they meet the definition of a "militia". They don't. At least not the constitutional one. And, if it should actually come to such an unthinkable reality, these people believe they would win. That's why they have to "take our country back". From who? From anyone who doesn't think like them or see the world like them. They hold the only truth, everyone else is dangerous. Ever meet a terrorist that doesn't believe that? Just asking.

Then there are the folks who write that if everyone in Colorado had a weapon, this maniac would have been stopped. Perhaps. But I do believe that the element of surprise, tear gas and head to toe kevlar protection might have given him a distinct edge. Not only that, but a crowd of people firing away in a chaotic arena without training or planning - I tend to think that scenario could produce even more victims.

Lastly, there are these well-intended realists that say that people like this evil animal would get these weapons even if we regulated them. And they may be right. But he wouldn't have strolled down the road to Kmart and picked them up. Regulated, he would have had to go to illegal sources - sources that could possibly be traced, watched, overseen. Or he would have to go deeper online and those transactions could be monitored. "Hm, some guy in Aurora is buying guns, tons of ammo and kevlar - plus bomb-making ingredients and tear gas. Maybe we should check that out."

But that won't happen as long as all that activity is legal and unrestricted.

I have been reading on and off as advocates for these weapons make their excuses all day long. Guns don't kill - people do. Well if that's correct, I go with @BrooklynAvi, let them kill with tomatoes. Let them bring baseball bats, knives, even machetes --- a mob can deal with that.

There is no excuse for the propagation of these weapons. They are not guaranteed or protected by our constitution. If they were, then we could all run out and purchase a tank, a grenade launcher, a bazooka, a SCUD missile and a nuclear warhead. We could stockpile napalm and chemical weapons and bomb-making materials in our cellars under our guise of being a militia.

These weapons are military weapons. They belong in accountable hands, controlled hands and trained hands. They should not be in the hands of private citizens to be used against police, neighborhood intruders or people who don't agree with you. These are the weapons that maniacs acquire to wreak murder and mayhem on innocents. They are not the same as handguns to help homeowners protect themselves from intruders. They are not the same as hunting rifles or sporting rifles. These weapons are designed for harm and death on big scales.

SO WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THEM? WHY DO YOU NOT, AT LEAST, AGREE TO SIT WITH REASONABLE PEOPLE FROM BOTH SIDES AND ASK HARD QUESTIONS AND LOOK AT HARD STATISTICS AND POSSIBLY MAKE SOME COMPROMISES FOR THE GREATER GOOD? SO THAT MOTHERS AND FATHERS AND CHILDREN ARE NOT SLAUGHTERED QUITE SO EASILY BY THESE MONSTERS? HOW CAN IT HURT TO STOP DEFENDING THESE THINGS AND AT LEAST CONSIDER HOW WE CAN ALL WORK TO TRY TO PREVENT ANOTHER DAY LIKE YESTERDAY?

We will not prevent every tragedy. We cannot stop every maniac. But we certainly have done ourselves no good by allowing these particular weapons to be acquired freely by just about anyone.

I'll say it plainly - if someone wants these weapons, they intend to use them. And if they are willing to force others to "pry it from my cold, dead hand", then they are probably planning on using them on people.

So, sorry those of you who tell me I'm an actor, or a has-been or an idiot or a commie or a liberal and that I should shut up. You can not watch my stuff, you can unfollow and you can call me all the names you like. I may even share some of them with my global audience so everyone can get a little taste of who you are.

But this is not the time for reasonable people, on both sides of this issue, to be silent. We owe it to the people whose lives were ended and ruined yesterday to insist on a real discussion and hopefully on some real action.

In conclusion, whoever you are and wherever you stand on this issue, I hope you have the joy of family with you today. Hold onto them and love them as best you can. Tell them what they mean to you. Yesterday, a whole bunch of them went to the movies and tonight their families are without them. Every day is precious. Every life is precious. Take care. Be well. Be safe. God bless.

Jason Alexander

the number is changed new.

Correction all: the 100,000 guns deaths should be 100,000 incidents of death or injury with guns per annum. My bad. Number still sucks." http://twitter.com/ijasonalexander/status/226879330377146369
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: McGrupp on July 22, 2012, 03:46:26 PM
 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 22, 2012, 04:17:50 PM
Quote

Lastly, there are these well-intended realists that say that people like this evil animal would get these weapons even if we regulated them. And they may be right. But he wouldn't have strolled down the road to Kmart and picked them up. Regulated, he would have had to go to illegal sources - sources that could possibly be traced, watched, overseen.


Isn't the point of regulation to trace, watch, and oversee firearms transactions? I would imagine it's much more difficult to trace illegal sources of firearms..

That said, I agree with him that there's a big distinction between guns that are useful for civilian purposes and ARs
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on July 22, 2012, 04:59:41 PM
Quote

Lastly, there are these well-intended realists that say that people like this evil animal would get these weapons even if we regulated them. And they may be right. But he wouldn't have strolled down the road to Kmart and picked them up. Regulated, he would have had to go to illegal sources - sources that could possibly be traced, watched, overseen.


Isn't the point of regulation to trace, watch, and oversee firearms transactions? I would imagine it's much more difficult to trace illegal sources of firearms..

That said, I agree with him that there's a big distinction between guns that are useful for civilian purposes and ARs

yeah, I caught that confusion too, pretty sure Eric Holder agrees as well (see: fast and furious).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 22, 2012, 09:06:25 PM
Quote

Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons
...

KOKO...KOKO...KOKO...


Also, LOL at the plea to look at "hard statistics" when the only one he mentions in the entire emotion filled rant he has to amend because he overstated it by a factor of 10.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on July 22, 2012, 10:03:51 PM
Quote

Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons
...

KOKO...KOKO...KOKO...


Also, LOL at the plea to look at "hard statistics" when the only one he mentions in the entire emotion filled rant he has to amend because he overstated it by a factor of 10.


Not so sure if an actor's emotional plea that: ordinary citizens do not require access to assault weapons, tear gas, or military type hardware - must necessarily be qualified with "hard statistics". That's the beauty of common sense and rational thought.     
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 22, 2012, 10:55:29 PM
Quote

Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons
...

KOKO...KOKO...KOKO...


Also, LOL at the plea to look at "hard statistics" when the only one he mentions in the entire emotion filled rant he has to amend because he overstated it by a factor of 10.


Not so sure if an actor's emotional plea that: ordinary citizens do not require access to assault weapons, tear gas, or military type hardware - must necessarily be qualified with "hard statistics". That's the beauty of common sense and rational thought.   

Yeah, but if it's not supported in the data it's no longer rational thought. Now it's irrational thought.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 22, 2012, 11:07:30 PM
Le sigh, if we can't even agree that it makes no freaking sense to allow citizens to buy assault weapons then there really is no hope for us.

Enjoy your societal collapse.   :frustrated:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on July 22, 2012, 11:35:13 PM
Quote

Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons
...

KOKO...KOKO...KOKO...


Also, LOL at the plea to look at "hard statistics" when the only one he mentions in the entire emotion filled rant he has to amend because he overstated it by a factor of 10.


Not so sure if an actor's emotional plea that: ordinary citizens do not require access to assault weapons, tear gas, or military type hardware - must necessarily be qualified with "hard statistics". That's the beauty of common sense and rational thought.   

Yeah, but if it's not supported in the data it's no longer rational thought. Now it's irrational thought.

A couple factoids then. Assault weapons are rarely used in the commission of crime. In fact, the statistic is so negligible that it is not measurable without a margin of error greater than the conclusion, according to the Justice Department.

According to wiki: The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence examined the impact of the Assault Weapons Ban in its 2004 report, On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act. Examining 1.4 million guns involved in crime, it determined that since the law was enacted, "assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime — a drop of 66% from the pre-ban rate."

A slight reduction, yes, but would the crimes have been committed anyway with regular guns. And if so, of those crimes committed with assault weapons, would the fatalities have been less if they had been carried out with small magazine weapons. Again, these statistics become increasingly difficult to measure as they are extrapolated. As for the 1994 Clinton ban. A) it left those weapons sold prior to the ban be grandfathered and B) gun companies found ways around the law selling semi with easy DIY fixes to auto.       

Regrettably, one thing that is certain since expiration of the ban following the sunset clause, is that, at present, Mexico is flooded with these very American assault weapons, helping fuel violent cartels and responsible for a disconcertingly tragic amount of civilian casualties. And that is not to mention the destabilizing effect it is having on a state that neighbors you. This has been backed up by numerous studies....again, just ask Eric Holder (who I think is as useless as his predecessor, if that is even possible).       

However, regardless of the Mexican argument and the 1.8% drop out of 1.4 million gun crimes during the ban, you know what? I still don't think the citizenry of a modern society should have access to military style hardware. Last I checked, this is not Yemen or Afghanistan. Christ, even during the days of the wild west you had to check your weapons with the Sheriff before riding into town.         
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 22, 2012, 11:36:39 PM
the right to bear arms does not = the right to a fucking arsenal.

I think Jason said it pretty well, data or no data.

common sense.
the gun lobby should get some.

eta- several years ago someone had the common sense to say that the right to free speech does not include the right to yellifire in a crowded theater.
the same logic, imo, should be extended to weapons.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 23, 2012, 12:06:00 AM
the right to bear arms does not = the right to a fucking arsenal.

I think Jason said it pretty well, data or no data.

common sense.
the gun lobby should get some.

eta- several years ago someone had the common sense to say that the right to free speech does not include the right to yellifire in a crowded theater.
the same logic, imo, should be extended to weapons.

Look, I obviously understand where you all are coming from and I'm not disagreeing that there is no legitimate reason for civilians to legally own instruments of war. And believe me, this isn't a position I take easily; remember, I am a recently converted liberty nutjob. But, to echo your free speech point, sls, just as I feel compelled to defend the free speech rights of the despicable Westboro Baptist Church, I find myself defending the 2nd amendment more in recent years than I ever cared to in the past. An unfortunate side effect of liberty is you have to defend it even when it is hard.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 23, 2012, 12:41:45 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on July 23, 2012, 01:16:41 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Speaking of which, I'm surprised those assholes haven't gone to Colorado yet.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on July 23, 2012, 01:59:27 AM
I have little faith that that debates about gun control will break free of Argumentum ad Populum in my lifetime. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 23, 2012, 08:39:03 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 23, 2012, 08:40:48 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKlkD-D20OI
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 23, 2012, 09:24:19 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 23, 2012, 09:32:02 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 23, 2012, 09:36:44 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?

Just an aside, driving twice the speed limit constitutes "driving with intent to kill" (in VA at least)


carry on.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 23, 2012, 10:03:48 AM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

Dying in a car ACCIDENT is not the same as being murdered by an assault rifle.

What about when someone is intentionally driving like a maniac? How bout when someone gets behind the wheel after too many drinks? Is that an accident or a murder? Does your distinction make it any easier on the families of the victims?

No, it doesn't.

I'm done with this nonsense.

America is fucked up.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 23, 2012, 10:40:30 AM
I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 23, 2012, 10:49:51 AM
I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.

Wrong again. Guns are for our pleasure. Haven't you ever gone to a shooting range just to blow off some steam? Gone in the woods to destroy watermelons? I just wish I had a rocket launcher. Or maybe a tank. I'd probably need a special parking permit since I only have street parking, fucking city, always trying to make a buck off me. Why won't the gov't just get off my back. I'm just trying to have some good times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4smSRz8BYk

USA! USA! USA!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 23, 2012, 10:51:08 AM
I was done with this thread, and really tried to stay quiet.
VEHICLES ARE NOT MADE WITH THE INTENT TO KILL.
Virtually anything COULD kill someone, guns are made with the intent to kill.
That distinction is beyond vital in this discussion.

Wrong again. Guns are for our pleasure. Haven't you ever gone to a shooting range just to blow off some steam? Gone in the woods to destroy watermelons? I just wish I had a rocket launcher. Or maybe a tank. I'd probably need a special parking permit since I only have street parking, fucking city, always trying to make a buck off me. Why won't the gov't just get off my back. I'm just trying to have some good times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4smSRz8BYk

USA! USA! USA!
If I could +100k for this, I would.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on July 23, 2012, 12:31:52 PM
the right to bear arms does not = the right to a fucking arsenal.

I think Jason said it pretty well, data or no data.

common sense.
the gun lobby should get some.

eta- several years ago someone had the common sense to say that the right to free speech does not include the right to yellifire in a crowded theater.
the same logic, imo, should be extended to weapons.

Look, I obviously understand where you all are coming from and I'm not disagreeing that there is no legitimate reason for civilians to legally own instruments of war. And believe me, this isn't a position I take easily; remember, I am a recently converted liberty nutjob. But, to echo your free speech point, sls, just as I feel compelled to defend the free speech rights of the despicable Westboro Baptist Church, I find myself defending the 2nd amendment more in recent years than I ever cared to in the past. An unfortunate side effect of liberty is you have to defend it even when it is hard.

But then let's not misconstrue the argument. Many of us here are not asking for an outright ban on weapons. We wish simply to qualify the second amendment; laws being living things that evolve over time alongside our own re-interpretations of humanity and its existence. That being said, to be governed and receive the benefits of governance, such as security, property rights etc.. (Lockian), we must relinquish some of our liberties. Now, if you are a pure libertarian wishing for a return to the state of nature, then the relinquishing of any right is a problem. However, for most of us, anarchy is not a whole lot of fun.

Ultimately, why I take issue with an armed citizenry such as yours, is that if the country were to go through a traumatic upheaval, such as another Great Depression, would the state fall into anarchic armed pockets, fracturing to a point where a central government is no longer able to regain the control necessary for its ensuing stabilization. Now, such an apocalyptic event will hardly occur in our lifetimes, but revolution is an eternal renewing process of the state, much like forest fires restart nature's cycle of life. However, if the destruction is complete, the renewal is inevitably much harder. Should you doubt this happenstance, there are many countries that have born witness to a citizenry that has turned its arms on each other, places where reconciliation is no longer possible, at least not for the foreseeable future. Algeria, Afghanistan, Angola and that's just the A's. Lest it be forgotten, the 2nd most powerful nation in the world today nearly tore itself to pieces 60 years ago, a blink of one's eye in the context of human history. Secondly, can you imagine the potential for destruction and death if the Greeks were presently armed to the teeth.           

While I am one who believes in Jefferson's quote: "when the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty" - I would still rather see the fear come from the ballot box, as opposed to light infantry weapons.     

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 23, 2012, 12:52:14 PM
Go to tell the victim's families that defending the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons is analagous to defending unpopular/hate speech.

Is that what I did? Huh, that's weird, I must have missed that. I do remember defending the right of the millions of people who have bought an AR-15 and, you know, not opened fire on a crowded movie theater. If you don't see the difference, so be it.

Lemme ask you, Hicks, what do you tell the families of the 93 people who died yesterday (on average) in an auto accident? That their suffering is somehow not as important as the people who die at the hands of a lunatic? Because if not, than you're just another car apologist. :roll:

I guess my reading comprehension has gone downhill because I'm pretty sure you did compare defending the right to free speech to the right to buy an assault weapon.  And yeah I do see those two things as vastly different. 

In any event, all of those weapons out there that were designed with the explicit purpose of killing people are just timebombs waiting to go off in my opinion.  All of those people that own them haven't used them to take an innocent life. . .  until they do.  Seems to me it is pretty presumptious to think that it will continue to be the case for all of them.  With resources dwindling, you know like WATER, and the continuing economic clusterfuck of a nearly third world wealth distribution, the chances that someone snaps and does shit like the other night is increasing.  Not to mention the lack of access to mental healthcare. 

As for auto accidents, as someone who drives 30 miles roundtrip on the freeway to work everyday and has been involved in a high speed freeway accident that could have easily been fatal it's something I think about all the time and to be honest it terrifies me on a nearly daily basis.  I do my best to stay alert and hope that the car next to me doesn't do anything stupid.  I'm well aware that it's a bet that doesn't have the best odds, but I need to feed my family and with good jobs scarce and my house underwater, the opportunities to change my life circumstances are somewhat limited.  It sucks that I and many people like me have to spend so much time in our cars, but unfortunately American life has been structured as such that it is difficult to avoid.   

That right there is the difference.  No one needs an automatic weapon to survive, unlike a car, and even if they think they do I would argue that they are delusional.  Why all of these weapons are legal when they are merely one emotional meltdown away from another unnecessary massacre is something I will never understand. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 23, 2012, 10:01:03 PM
the sad fact is that if Ronald Reagan getting shot didn't change the attitude of the NRA or the GOP, then nothing will.

I guess I'll go out and by that RPG. I have a lot of land to worry about and you never know who might try to break in.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 23, 2012, 10:06:33 PM
the sad fact is that if Ronald Reagan getting shot didn't change the attitude of the NRA or the GOP, then nothing will.

I guess I'll go out and by that RPG. I have a lot of land to worry about and you never know who might try to break in.

With that much land I'm sure you have lots of deer getting all up in your business? RPG is a good way to keep them under control.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 23, 2012, 10:46:06 PM
true - but you need to be careful. don't want to ruin the venison steaks
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 23, 2012, 10:47:00 PM
true - but you need to be careful. don't want to ruin the venison steaks

Think of how much you'll save on meat tenderizer by hunting with an RPG
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 24, 2012, 12:14:51 AM
But then let's not misconstrue the argument. Many of us here are not asking for an outright ban on weapons. We wish simply to qualify the second amendment; laws being living things that evolve over time alongside our own re-interpretations of humanity and its existence. That being said, to be governed and receive the benefits of governance, such as security, property rights etc.. (Lockian), we must relinquish some of our liberties. Now, if you are a pure libertarian wishing for a return to the state of nature, then the relinquishing of any right is a problem. However, for most of us, anarchy is not a whole lot of fun.

Really? You weren't getting that "guns are evil" vibe? :wink:

Again, if I wasn't clear let me reiterate that I don't think people need military style weapons, I just don't believe the gov't has the authority to place an embargo on them. That'd be as crazy as, I don't know, making everybody buy a contract from a private comp...

And I'm no an anarchist, but I don't believe it's a good idea to relinquish any liberties, especially if you're getting such a shitty ROI. The gov't derives its legitimacy from the people's inherent rights, so taking one of those rights away cannot be a benefit. I guess the fundamental difference between our views is that society has been conditioned to trust gov't in the last 100 yrs and overwhelmingly people do. I, for better or worse, do not share this sentiment.

Ultimately, why I take issue with an armed citizenry such as yours, is that if the country were to go through a traumatic upheaval, such as another Great Depression, would the state fall into anarchic armed pockets, fracturing to a point where a central government is no longer able to regain the control necessary for its ensuing stabilization. Now, such an apocalyptic event will hardly occur in our lifetimes, but revolution is an eternal renewing process of the state, much like forest fires restart nature's cycle of life. However, if the destruction is complete, the renewal is inevitably much harder. Should you doubt this happenstance, there are many countries that have born witness to a citizenry that has turned its arms on each other, places where reconciliation is no longer possible, at least not for the foreseeable future. Algeria, Afghanistan, Angola and that's just the A's. Lest it be forgotten, the 2nd most powerful nation in the world today nearly tore itself to pieces 60 years ago, a blink of one's eye in the context of human history. Secondly, can you imagine the potential for destruction and death if the Greeks were presently armed to the teeth.           

While I am one who believes in Jefferson's quote: "when the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty" - I would still rather see the fear come from the ballot box, as opposed to light infantry weapons.   

How about "That gov't is best which governs least"? (fun fact: not actually Jefferson)

Your point (and Hicks made a similar one) about Greece and the dangers of an armed populus during an economic calamity is well taken. And look, I think we're on the brink of a devastating monetary collapse, so I don't take what you say lightly. But I am simply not convinced that we should take an event that is (thankfully) still so exceedingly rare and generalize that anyone who owns an AR-15 is out for blood. And, since one of the things we all seemed to agree on earlier was that the individual decision to own or not own a gun (assuming you act within the law) was a moral one, I have to conclude that it is not acceptable since I'm never cool with legislating people's morality.

I guess my reading comprehension has gone downhill because I'm pretty sure you did compare defending the right to free speech to the right to buy an assault weapon.  And yeah I do see those two things as vastly different. 

What I meant was I never "defended the right of mentally unstable people to buy assault weapons." But in case it wasn't clear, I am not opposing controlling and licensing firearm sales (e.g., waiting periods, background checks) as the states see fit. And I think that's different than what you said I did. That's all.

As for auto accidents, as someone who drives 30 miles roundtrip on the freeway to work everyday and has been involved in a high speed freeway accident that could have easily been fatal it's something I think about all the time and to be honest it terrifies me on a nearly daily basis.  I do my best to stay alert and hope that the car next to me doesn't do anything stupid.  I'm well aware that it's a bet that doesn't have the best odds, but I need to feed my family and with good jobs scarce and my house underwater, the opportunities to change my life circumstances are somewhat limited.  It sucks that I and many people like me have to spend so much time in our cars, but unfortunately American life has been structured as such that it is difficult to avoid.   

That right there is the difference.  No one needs an automatic weapon to survive, unlike a car, and even if they think they do I would argue that they are delusional.  Why all of these weapons are legal when they are merely one emotional meltdown away from another unnecessary massacre is something I will never understand.

The point of my car analogy was that I don't understand why anyone needs to own a machine gun, or a fast car, or a wallet chain that you can jumprope with, but I don't think that my disdain for these things should preclude others from having them (provided they don't, you know, kill me with them). Yes, the intent of each of these products is very different but does that really matter if the result is the same?

Is it naive to think of guns as just any other consumable good (cough…healthcare…cough)? Maybe. But I'd suggest it's not nearly as naive as the idea that we should make policy decisions on an event that occurs with de minimus frequency. Obviously, one shooting is too many, I just haven't seen any evidence that we need do something (or would even be able to) prevent an event so uncommon.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 24, 2012, 07:14:36 AM

How about "That gov't is best which governs least"? (fun fact: not actually Jefferson).

that rang a bell from my distant past, so had to look it up.
supposedly his next statement was that I believe That govt is best is one that does not govern at all.

attractive in theory. in practice, for any group larger than 2 people...

(biting my tongue on a later comment in your post)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 24, 2012, 07:59:29 PM

How about "That gov't is best which governs least"? (fun fact: not actually Jefferson).

that rang a bell from my distant past, so had to look it up.
supposedly his next statement was that I believe That govt is best is one that does not govern at all.

attractive in theory. in practice, for any group larger than 2 people...

I agree that no gov't is unrealistic, but I don't believe the first part of the quote is wholly impractical. I believe gov't does serve a vital function in our society, I'd just like to see its influence greatly reduced.

(biting my tongue on a later comment in your post)

Something to do with your chosen profession, I assume?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 24, 2012, 08:56:49 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on July 24, 2012, 10:30:29 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 24, 2012, 11:55:36 PM
the gun was in his pocket - to bad it wasn't pointed at something other than his buttock

from Michael Moore - not exactly what you would have thought (or I would have thought). Some interesting points.
and no - he doesn't call for an immediate ban of all guns

Quote
It's the Guns – But We All Know, It's Not Really the Guns... a note from Michael Moore

Tuesday, July 24th, 2012

ALERT: Michael Moore will appear this evening on CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight to discuss the Aurora, Colorado theater shooting and where we go from here. Tune in at 9:00 PM ET/6:00 PM PT (replay 12:00 Midnight ET/9:00 PM PT and 3:00 AM ET/12:00 Midnight PT).

Friends,

Since Cain went nuts and whacked Abel, there have always been those humans who, for one reason or another, go temporarily or permanently insane and commit unspeakable acts of violence. There was the Roman Emperor Tiberius, who during the first century A.D. enjoyed throwing victims off a cliff on the Mediterranean island of Capri. Gilles de Rais, a French knight and ally of Joan of Arc during the middle ages, went cuckoo-for-Cocoa Puffs one day and ended up murdering hundreds of children. Just a few decades later Vlad the Impaler, the inspiration for Dracula, was killing people in Transylvania in numberless horrifying ways.

In modern times, nearly every nation has had a psychopath or two commit a mass murder, regardless of how strict their gun laws are – the crazed white supremacist in Norway one year ago Sunday, the schoolyard butcher in Dunblane, Scotland, the École Polytechnique killer in Montreal, the mass murderer in Erfurt, Germany … the list seems endless.

And now the Aurora shooter last Friday. There have always been insane people, and there always will be.

But here's the difference between the rest of the world and us: We have TWO Auroras that take place every single day of every single year! At least 24 Americans every day (8-9,000 a year) are killed by people with guns – and that doesn't count the ones accidentally killed by guns or who commit suicide with a gun. Count them and you can triple that number to over 25,000.

That means the United States is responsible for over 80% of all the gun deaths in the 23 richest countries combined. Considering that the people of those countries, as human beings, are no better or worse than any of us, well, then, why us?

Both conservatives and liberals in America operate with firmly held beliefs as to "the why" of this problem. And the reason neither can find their way out of the box toward a real solution is because, in fact, they're both half right.

The right believes that the Founding Fathers, through some sort of divine decree, have guaranteed them the absolute right to own as many guns as they desire. And they will ceaselessly remind you that a gun cannot fire itself – that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Of course, they know they're being intellectually dishonest (if I can use that word) when they say that about the Second Amendment because they know the men who wrote the constitution just wanted to make sure a militia could be quickly called up from amongst the farmers and merchants should the Brits decide to return and wreak some havoc.

But they are half right when they say "Guns don't kill people." I would just alter that slogan slightly to speak the real truth: "Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people."

Because we're the only ones in the first world who do this en masse. And you'll hear all stripes of Americans come up with a host of reasons so that they don't have to deal with what's really behind all this murder and mayhem.

They'll say it's the violent movies and video games that are responsible. Last time I checked, the movies and video games in Japan are more violent than ours – and yet usually fewer than 20 people a year are killed there with guns – and in 2006 the number was two!

Others will say it's the number of broken homes that lead to all this killing. I hate to break this to you, but there are almost as many single-parent homes in the U.K. as there are here – and yet, in Great Britain, there are usually fewer than 40 gun murders a year.

People like me will say this is all the result of the U.S. having a history and a culture of men with guns, "cowboys and Indians," "shoot first and ask questions later." And while it is true that the mass genocide of the Native Americans set a pretty ugly model to found a country on, I think it's safe to say we're not the only ones with a violent past or a penchant for genocide. Hello, Germany! That's right I'm talking about you and your history, from the Huns to the Nazis, just loving a good slaughter (as did the Japanese, and the British who ruled the world for hundreds of years – and they didn't achieve that through planting daisies). And yet in Germany, a nation of 80 million people, there are only around 200 gun murders a year.

So those countries (and many others) are just like us – except for the fact that more people here believe in God and go to church than any other Western nation.

My liberal compatriots will tell you if we just had less guns, there would be less gun deaths. And, mathematically, that would be true. If you have less arsenic in the water supply, it will kill less people. Less of anything bad – calories, smoking, reality TV – will kill far fewer people. And if we had strong gun laws that prohibited automatic and semi-automatic weapons and banned the sale of large magazines that can hold a gazillion bullets, well, then shooters like the man in Aurora would not be able to shoot so many people in just a few minutes.

But this, too, has a problem. There are plenty of guns in Canada (mostly hunting rifles) – and yet the annual gun murder count in Canada is around 200 deaths. In fact, because of its proximity, Canada's culture is very similar to ours – the kids play the same violent video games, watch the same movies and TV shows, and yet they don't grow up wanting to kill each other. Switzerland has the third-highest number of guns per capita on earth, but still a low murder rate.

So – why us?

I posed this question a decade ago in my film 'Bowling for Columbine,' and this week, I have had little to say because I feel I said what I had to say ten years ago – and it doesn't seem to have done a whole lot of good other than to now look like it was actually a crystal ball posing as a movie.

This is what I said then, and it is what I will say again today:

1. We Americans are incredibly good killers. We believe in killing as a way of accomplishing our goals. Three-quarters of our states execute criminals, even though the states with the lower murder rates are generally the states with no death penalty.

Our killing is not just historical (the slaughter of Indians and slaves and each other in a "civil" war). It is our current way of resolving whatever it is we're afraid of. It's invasion as foreign policy. Sure there's Iraq and Afghanistan – but we've been invaders since we "conquered the wild west" and now we're hooked so bad we don't even know where to invade (bin Laden wasn't hiding in Afghanistan, he was in Pakistan) or what to invade for (Saddam had zero weapons of mass destruction and nothing to do with 9/11). We send our lower classes off to do the killing, and the rest of us who don't have a loved one over there don't spend a single minute of any given day thinking about the carnage. And now we send in remote pilotless planes to kill, planes that are being controlled by faceless men in a lush, air conditioned studio in suburban Las Vegas. It is madness.

2. We are an easily frightened people and it is easy to manipulate us with fear. What are we so afraid of that we need to have 300 million guns in our homes? Who do we think is going to hurt us? Why are most of these guns in white suburban and rural homes? Maybe we should fix our race problem and our poverty problem (again, #1 in the industrialized world) and then maybe there would be fewer frustrated, frightened, angry people reaching for the gun in the drawer. Maybe we would take better care of each other (here's a good example of what I mean).

Those are my thoughts about Aurora and the violent country I am a citizen of. Like I said, I spelled it all out here if you'd like to watch it or share it for free with others. All we're lacking here, my friends, is the courage and the resolve. I'm in if you are.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@MichaelMoore.com
@MMFlint
MichaelMoore.com

P.S. Don't forget to watch Piers tonight on CNN. I just taped it and it was a very good show.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 25, 2012, 09:48:54 AM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 25, 2012, 11:10:55 AM
Quote
Maryland concealed carry permit rules to relax next month

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/breaking/bs-md-gun-carry-permits-20120724,0,3373461.story

Good lord, this is the exact opposite of what Baltimore and MD needs.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 25, 2012, 01:13:47 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

maybe administer an IQ test along with the background check?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: JPhishman on July 25, 2012, 01:15:53 PM
I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 25, 2012, 01:23:28 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

maybe administer an IQ test along with the background check?

Just what I was going to say (of course, tongue in cheek)... No doubt something like that or a psychological screening requirement would be proposed with only the noblest of intentions, but would you have any luck putting it in place? I highly doubt it.


I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

Careful... we don't want to re-open this can of worms, do we??
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 01:24:49 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

maybe administer an IQ test along with the background check?

Maybe add in a psych eval too. And maybe have a loaner gun for a few weeks with rubber bullets only, you know just to see how they do with them at home, kind of like adopting a pet.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: JPhishman on July 25, 2012, 01:27:48 PM
Sorry, been off the grid for the past week. I just read this whole thread and had to voice my opinion. Surely everyone here loves their families and would do anything to protect them, but that conflicts with some of the moral statements I see here. Just wondering where the solution lies for those folks...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 25, 2012, 01:29:41 PM
I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.

We were just pointing out that it's kinda nuts that:

A. Automatic weapons designed to take out large numbers of people quickly are legal .

B.  Some people feel it's necessary to have a gun on them at all times.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 25, 2012, 01:30:30 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

maybe administer an IQ test along with the background check?

Maybe add in a psych eval too. And maybe have a loaner gun for a few weeks with rubber bullets only, you know just to see how they do with them at home, kind of like adopting a pet.

Definitely. Simunition is fun as hell to mess around with anyway.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 25, 2012, 01:31:26 PM
I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.


A number of people in this thread have expressed their belief that taking a human life for any reason is wrong and thus choose to not own firearms.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 01:33:14 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: JPhishman on July 25, 2012, 01:36:31 PM
I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.

We were just pointing out that it's kinda nuts that:

A. Automatic weapons designed to take out large numbers of people quickly are legal .

B.  Some people feel it's necessary to have a gun on them at all times.

Fwiw I agree on both of those points.

However,

RJ and PG both stated that it is wrong to make the decision to end one's life and arrogant to feel you have the right to do so IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. While I respect their decision to practice pacifism, I want to know what their alternative to self defense is.


ETA: normally I wouldn't take the time to even participate in this discussion, but I am currently in the jury assembly room of multnomah county court and have a bit a idle time on my hands.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 25, 2012, 01:41:59 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

The difference is those are all things that people do to themselves and not others.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 01:45:58 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

All your question have to do with what one chooses to do to themselves. Last I checked the statistic for someone dying of Heart disease due to someone injecting them with double cheeseburgers was zero. Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 01:48:29 PM
Also, bigtime lollerz at hippies not being violent. As a general statement likely true, but I'm fairly certain there's more violence, or the potential for violence, in a phish lot than a movie theater. (just had to state that after reading back over some of this thread.

LOL!
 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: McGrupp on July 25, 2012, 01:49:08 PM
Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 25, 2012, 01:50:17 PM
Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.

Take the drink with you dude!




Wait, you're still not drinking right?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 25, 2012, 01:51:06 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: McGrupp on July 25, 2012, 01:52:55 PM
Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.

Take the drink with you dude!




Wait, you're still not drinking right?

13 days without a drop!

It's kinda... not that much fun.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 02:04:41 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: McGrupp on July 25, 2012, 02:06:36 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.

Streets! Ain't nobody got time for that!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on July 25, 2012, 02:24:21 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.

Streets! Ain't nobody got time for that!

Sweet Brown knows that I'm talking bout! What What!  :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 25, 2012, 08:49:09 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

this was a ser question posed to jimbo, btw.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 09:50:43 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

this was a ser question posed to jimbo, btw.

MBW, don't you know me well enough by now to know that I respond to all questions, serious and otherwise, whether you want me to or not? But I have 3 kids and a wife and I just upgraded to Mountain Lion so I have things to do and sometimes these things just take time. But, since you asked...

No, of course those weapons are not acceptable for civilians because they are used to defend from armies, not intruders. And civilians are not responsible for protecting themselves from invading armies, that is job of the federal gov't (one of the few legitimate ones, IMO). But if a person thinks they need an AR-15 to protect their home and their family and (once again) they are not using it to mass murder people, I believe they are well within their rights to have one. And in case I haven't been clear enough - do I understand or think it's desirable for people to have these weapons? No, and I would never own one for the potential for danger that you all have so adamantly spoken about. But I also recognize that people should decide for themselves what their level of acceptance is when it comes to the unalienable right of protecting yourself. And I do think that guns go much further in preventing violence than anyone opposed to legal gun ownership would care to admit.

And now a serious question to you: do we really have such an epidemic of "assault weapon" violence in this country that we need to be so fearful of guns? Are there legions of people terrorizing the public with their evil "assault weapons"? Or are these atrocities simply extremely infrequent acts by deranged individuals who would likely find another way to terrorize people whether "assault weapons" were legal or not?

Do I like defending the fact that people feel the need to carry weapons with them to feel safe? Absolutely not. But I firmly believe we are all safer when liberty is protected, so that is what I do.

I'll get to Hicks/GAH's point once I get this stupid baby to sleep.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on July 25, 2012, 10:38:41 PM
That's the thing though nobody needs a sub-machine gun to defend their home, a rifle or a handgun should be plenty for any sane person.  In terms of the amount of people you can kill per unit time an AR-15 isn't that far off from a rocket launcher, hell it may even be more efficient since you have to reload less frequently.   

As to your second point, if we don't need to be fearful then we don't need guns to defend ourselves. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 25, 2012, 10:40:23 PM
MBW, don't you know me well enough by now to know that I respond to all questions, serious and otherwise, whether you want me to or not? But I have 3 kids and a wife and I just upgraded to Mountain Lion so I have things to do and sometimes these things just take time. But, since you asked...

dont give me your excuses. this question was posed hours ago and this delay is unacceptable   :-P

No, of course those weapons are not acceptable for civilians because they are used to defend from armies, not intruders. And civilians are not responsible for protecting themselves from invading armies, that is job of the federal gov't (one of the few legitimate ones, IMO). But if a person thinks they need an AR-15 to protect their home and their family and (once again) they are not using it to mass murder people, I believe they are well within their rights to have one.

where do you draw the line with what should be used to defend armies and what should be used to defend a home?  what if a whole bunch of people are trying to kill your family.  why can't you toss a grenade at these fuckers?  what if someone is attacking your house from a plane, can't a god fearing responsible american shoot a rocket at it? and i thought were were supposed to have militia in case we need to overthrow our govenment?  what kind of rag tag militia doesn't have a tank?
the 2nd amendment only mentions "arms."  as far as i can tell a rocket launcher is a type of armament.  who are you to say i can't have one?

i say everyone should and can own guns, as long as they are the same single-shot, lead ball, muzzle loaded flintlock rifles which existed in 1791 when the 2nd amendment was adopted.

And now a serious question to you: do we really have such an epidemic of "assault weapon" violence in this country that we need to be so fearful of guns? Are there legions of people terrorizing the public with their evil "assault weapons"? Or are these atrocities simply extremely infrequent acts by deranged individuals who would likely find another way to terrorize people whether "assault weapons" were legal or not?

yes, we do.  assault weapon and otherwise.  10,000 or so firearm murders isn't enough?  these are everyday acts and not infrequent.
not to mention how many others are shot at, hit but but not killed, or otherwise intimidated with a gun. (52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000).  how about the 17,352 gun deaths by suicide in 2007?  scary stuff indeed.

now, these may not be at the hands of these 'responsible gun owners,' but where do gang bangers and other such criminals get guns?
they buy them from gun shows from responsible gun sellers who don't care who they are selling to, they have straw men easily buy them for them if they cannot, from licensed gun dealers in shady alleys, or stolen from other responsible owners who don't have them stored safely.

i cant find the number of assault weapons you said have been sold that are out there, but i guarantee a large percentage of them are not stored safely in some "responsible" nut-jobs' doomsday/revolution/race-war gun closet.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 25, 2012, 10:49:27 PM
but i guarantee a large percentage of them are not stored safely in some "responsible" nut-jobs' doomsday/revolution/race-war gun closet.

Don't knock my zombpocalypse gun closet. I read enough Walking Dead to know that that shit is invaluable when your undead neighbor Tom starts trying to eat you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 25, 2012, 10:50:18 PM
as for your major theoretical point - nobody likes to be told what to do.
but, people are assholes. All of us, at one time or other, are total fucking assholes that can potentially do bad things to other people. Unfortunately, there need to be rules to protect us from the assholes.

Personally, I think I know how fast I can drive my car on the interstate, and have never been in a car accident on the highway by going 80mph or faster. But, there are rules for a reason, I get it, and I comply (most of the time)
I work in a highly regulated industry. We need regulation. Some of the regulations suck and need to be changed. That doesn't mean we should get rid of all regulations, but should work to change the bad ones.

Specifically, for this debate, I agree that assault weapons attacks are rare, and maybe "only" 10 lives per year will be saved. maybe less. But if I was related to one of those 10 people, I'd be much happier if they were alive than if they were dead.
Like everything, there is a "risk:benefit" ratio. The risk of assault weapons is fairly obvious. I haven't heard of a benefit to assault weapons other than the govt has no right to judge if I should have one or not.

Sorry, that doesn't cut it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 25, 2012, 11:05:58 PM
and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on July 25, 2012, 11:08:51 PM
Let me be devil's advocate for a sec. (I mean that seriously, because I haven't decided 100% whether I care if people have legal access to military-style "assault" weapons or not.)

Clearly there are more of these weapons out there in people's hands than are used in crimes during any given year or other time period. The majority of assault weapon owners don't use them for mass murder. They may be collectors or enjoy the act of shooting them at a range (not so rare a thing).

So if most people can and do own these and do not commit havoc, what is the threshold of violent incidents that would compel us to outlaw something because a small number of dumbfucks ruined it for everyone? Before you respond, think of other "dangerous objects" that can harm other people and upon which society has had to make judgments: fast cars, pocket knives, fireworks, mortgage derivatives...

It comes down to people (i.e. their reps) deciding how much risk to accept in exchange for the freedom to do (or own) certain things. An open debate, to be sure.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on July 25, 2012, 11:14:34 PM
yep
everyone has their own line, it moves over time, gets crossed, etc.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 25, 2012, 11:29:26 PM
and just so runawayjimbo doesn't accuse me of going a whole thread about guns without posting something from michael moore, i give you......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipujWRYUjS4
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 26, 2012, 09:20:52 AM
and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.

I got smoted too (too many bad jokes?)

People need to re-lax
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 26, 2012, 09:54:54 AM
and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.

I got smoted too (too many bad jokes?)

People need to re-lax

Wasn't me (I'm a lover, not a fighter), but I made you guys whole anyway. MBW for FINALLY getting a MM clip in here (took you long enough :wink:) and phil because he's so cute he thinks the Redskins are actually gonna be good this year. I mean, he's already gonna suffer such crushing disappointment, why you gotta smite him on top of that?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 26, 2012, 10:44:06 AM
Thx, Jimbo. Was kind of kidding (unless we can trade in our karma points for swag) but appreciate the love. And hail to the redskins.

In other news, this is a thing that people can buy:

http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/zombiemax/

Might stock up on these for my zombie defense/paranoia closet. I mean, the bullets have green tips which I think means they home in on zombies?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on July 27, 2012, 07:59:20 AM
(http://cdn.iwastesomuchtime.com/7262012112757iwsmt.jpeg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on August 05, 2012, 09:49:47 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 05, 2012, 10:08:47 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 01:09:15 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.



If only idealism solved sociological problems, then the only people without power would be those who lack ideas and the means to broadcast those ideas. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 06, 2012, 08:42:27 AM
Guns certainly don't solve sociological problems.
Guns are a sociological problem.

So... do you support the furthering of a problem or not?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 06, 2012, 09:22:28 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.

I'm not sikh.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 06, 2012, 09:29:10 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.

I'm not sikh.

I kid, I kid.  :-P
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 10:18:38 AM
Guns certainly don't solve sociological problems.
Guns are a sociological problem.

So... do you support the furthering of a problem or not?



Gun violence is a symptom of deeper sociological, and at times personal, psychological, problem.  I don't believe that simple access to guns is the motivator of these problems, by rather that they stem from issues involving inequality; namely financial,cultural, and medical inequality. 

So it depends on what you mean by "the problem".  I believe that prohibition, of most anything, is a poor way to treat a symptom of a problem.  Then again, we are all adults, and there have been instances where partial prohibition of certain dangerous entities, such as alcohol to those under
21, has done more good than harm.  In this light, I can support partial prohibition ( ex. 100 round clips or automatic weapons, pick your poison) as part of a solution that keeps the populace safe while still respecting the integrity of those who don't use guns for harmful purposes.   

So no, I don't support the furthering of a problem.  I advocate systemic changes that address cultural inequality as a solution to solving the deeper sociological problems that precipitate gun violence. 
   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 06, 2012, 10:39:54 AM
Countering idealism with cynicism is not moving toward any kind of a solution.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 10:47:07 AM
Countering idealism with cynicism is not moving toward any kind of a solution.



I don't see my response as cynical.  I shifted the focus of the problem from gun violence, which I believe to be symptomatic, to what I believe the real problem is, cultural equality. 

If you want to argue about the finer points of that solution, I'm all ears, but if you really read what I wrote, it is more properly translated as answering idealism with more idealism.   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 06, 2012, 01:04:46 PM
Countering idealism with cynicism is not moving toward any kind of a solution.



I don't see my response as cynical.  I shifted the focus of the problem from gun violence, which I believe to be symptomatic, to what I believe the real problem is, cultural equality. 

If you want to argue about the finer points of that solution, I'm all ears, but if you really read what I wrote, it is more properly translated as answering idealism with more idealism.   

I was referencing this:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.



If only idealism solved sociological problems, then the only people without power would be those who lack ideas and the means to broadcast those ideas.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on August 06, 2012, 01:15:41 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.



If only idealism solved sociological problems, then the only people without power would be those who lack ideas and the means to broadcast those ideas.

without idealism, among other things, women would still be second class citizens and blacks would be slaves.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 06, 2012, 03:24:42 PM
lots of damage was done to people and property in the ghettos in Eastern Europe without guns.
As much as I believe in gun control, this guy would have used Molotov Cocktails or something like that. I say that only because we shouldn't kid ourselves into thinking that less guns would have prevented this.
we need to figure out a way to stop this kind of hatred - although it has been going on since time began.

that all said, it sure would be nice if there were less guns.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 03:33:22 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.



If only idealism solved sociological problems, then the only people without power would be those who lack ideas and the means to broadcast those ideas.

without idealism, among other things, women would still be second class citizens and blacks would be slaves.

It's that "among other things" that is the sticky mess.  I agree, there can't be a construct (ex. equality) created without an idea (ex. "We need equality to function as a true democracy"), but the work is in realizing the construct and not in simply dreaming it.  In the case of voting rights for women, the 19th amendment to the United States Constitution is not a product of idealism alone, but of negotiation, bill writing, politics, and the time in which it was created. 

Having an idea for a great invention is not the same as inventing something great. 

Countering idealism with cynicism is not moving toward any kind of a solution.



I don't see my response as cynical.  I shifted the focus of the problem from gun violence, which I believe to be symptomatic, to what I believe the real problem is, cultural equality. 

If you want to argue about the finer points of that solution, I'm all ears, but if you really read what I wrote, it is more properly translated as answering idealism with more idealism.   

I was referencing this:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/7-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-at-wisconsin-sikh-temple/2012/08/05/70692158-df2b-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html

brand new mass shooting!

If only vdb lived in wisconsin, none of this would've happened.



If only idealism solved sociological problems, then the only people without power would be those who lack ideas and the means to broadcast those ideas.



See my comment to SF above. 





So now that we've ironed out where we all stand on idealism, we could discuss some of the generalities that might lead to a productive conversation about gun violence and how to address it in our society.


I am generally a proponent of the idea often summed up as "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".  As I stated earlier, I believe that gun violence is a sociological problem that stems from cultural inequality.  Cultural inequality is both quantifiable (ex. statistics that gauge wealth inequality) and intangible (ex. religion means X to me).  I also believe that comprehensive, systemic, change in society that results in the betterment of that society is usually most effective when it modifies both the tangible (ex. legislative control over gun availability) and intangible (ex. cultural feelings about gun use in America).  I don't believe that complete prohibition of firearms for civilians addresses the intangible aspects of gun violence, and as such, will be a failed prohibition. 

So, I advocate for partial prohibition.  More importantly, I advocate for systems (a law is and example of a system, as well as academic doctrine or the scientific method, the list goes on) that help to alleviate cultural inequality in our society.  I do so because I see this as the root of the gun violence problem. 




Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 06, 2012, 03:48:38 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?

So are we discussing guns or the violence of our culture?

Two different, although related, topics.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 04:15:40 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?





Couldn't you apply the same logic to anything that is potentially dangerous?  "If we get rid of bees it may not eliminate the danger of being stung (because hornets sting as well), but keeping them sure isn't reducing stings either."

 I don't see how the existence of gun violence is in and of itself an argument for total prohibition. 





So are we discussing guns or the violence of our culture?

Two different, although related, topics.


I'm not talking specifically about the violence of our culture, though that can certainly be understood as another symptom of cultural inequality, certainly of the same sort that produces the more specific gun related variety. 


I'm talking about systemic change that eliminates the need for gun violence.  To me that is a more practical approach than prohibition.  It starts mainly with education that can lead to informed dialog. 


Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 06, 2012, 04:29:09 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?





Couldn't you apply the same logic to anything that is potentially dangerous?  "If we get rid of bees it may not eliminate the danger of being stung (because hornets sting as well), but keeping them sure isn't reducing stings either."

 I don't see how the existence of gun violence is in and of itself an argument for total prohibition. 





So are we discussing guns or the violence of our culture?

Two different, although related, topics.


I'm not talking specifically about the violence of our culture, though that can certainly be understood as another symptom of cultural inequality, certainly of the same sort that produces the more specific gun related variety. 


I'm talking about systemic change that eliminates the need for gun violence.  To me that is a more practical approach than prohibition.  It starts mainly with education that can lead to informed dialog.

That doesn't sound practical at all. It's sound naively idealistic. Educating an entire nation vs changing a law, and you think the former seems easier to do?

Also, and completely serious question here, if the existence of gun violence can't be used as an argument for better gun control laws, what can?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on August 06, 2012, 04:42:14 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?





Couldn't you apply the same logic to anything that is potentially dangerous?  "If we get rid of bees it may not eliminate the danger of being stung (because hornets sting as well), but keeping them sure isn't reducing stings either."


I support getting rid of bees AND hornets!

I know you may think I am making smart ass comments, but I hate those things. 



Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on August 06, 2012, 05:06:31 PM
lots of damage was done to people and property in the ghettos in Eastern Europe without guns.
As much as I believe in gun control, this guy would have used Molotov Cocktails or something like that. I say that only because we shouldn't kid ourselves into thinking that less guns would have prevented this.
we need to figure out a way to stop this kind of hatred - although it has been going on since time began.

that all said, it sure would be nice if there were less guns.

This is the real issue in my eyes, our race is violent regardless of what weapon is used. We always have been and unfortunately it looks like we always will be.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on August 06, 2012, 05:31:01 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?





Couldn't you apply the same logic to anything that is potentially dangerous?  "If we get rid of bees it may not eliminate the danger of being stung (because hornets sting as well), but keeping them sure isn't reducing stings either."

 I don't see how the existence of gun violence is in and of itself an argument for total prohibition. 





So are we discussing guns or the violence of our culture?

Two different, although related, topics.


I'm not talking specifically about the violence of our culture, though that can certainly be understood as another symptom of cultural inequality, certainly of the same sort that produces the more specific gun related variety. 


I'm talking about systemic change that eliminates the need for gun violence.  To me that is a more practical approach than prohibition.  It starts mainly with education that can lead to informed dialog.

That doesn't sound practical at all. It's sound naively idealistic. Educating an entire nation vs changing a law, and you think the former seems easier to do?

Also, and completely serious question here, if the existence of gun violence can't be used as an argument for better gun control laws, what can?



First, the bolded part:

My argument was that the existence of gun violence alone is not criteria for total prohibition, not partial prohibition.


As far as naive idealism and social change are concerned, I don't find it naive to advocate for systemic change to effect historical change.  There is a wide gulf between the legality of something and the cultural acceptance of that idea. 

Take racial segregation for instance.  Which has precipitated more racial integration, the outlawing of segregation or decreasing acceptance for public racism in late 20th century America?   

The right answer is both.


That is why I argue for partial prohibition and systemic change.  I fail to see what is idealistic about that; from my perspective it is cultural/historical due process. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on August 06, 2012, 05:36:56 PM
Getting rid of guns might not end violence but keeping them sure isn't helping things, is it?





Couldn't you apply the same logic to anything that is potentially dangerous?  "If we get rid of bees it may not eliminate the danger of being stung (because hornets sting as well), but keeping them sure isn't reducing stings either."


I support getting rid of bees AND hornets!

I know you may think I am making smart ass comments, but I hate those things.

We need the Bees...  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crop_plants_pollinated_by_bees

More than the smart-ass comments...   :-P

T
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on August 06, 2012, 05:42:26 PM
Bees dont kill people, histamines do. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on August 06, 2012, 07:48:54 PM
Bees dont kill people, histamines do.

Lulz. Also, a white-supremicist killing a bunch of Sikhs over 9/11 is like a guy killing a tabby kitten because a lion mauled his brother.

The only thing worse than murderers are stupid murderers.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on August 07, 2012, 01:34:59 AM
Lulz. Also, a white-supremicist killing a bunch of Sikhs over 9/11 is like a guy killing a tabby kitten because a lion mauled his brother.

yeah, this crossed my mind
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 07, 2012, 07:41:15 AM
Bees dont kill people, histamines do.

Lulz. Also, a white-supremicist killing a bunch of Sikhs over 9/11 is like a guy killing a tabby kitten because a lion mauled his brother.

The only thing worse than murderers are stupid murderers.

[hillbilly voice]But they're brown... Surely they're like cousins of them terrorisms or somethin'.[/hillbilly voice]
 :roll:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 11, 2012, 10:41:48 PM
thought this was a very good (if unoriginal) column
Quote
Monday, Aug. 20, 2012
The Case for Gun Control
By Fareed Zakaria
Update Appended: August 10, 2012

After the ghastly act of terrorism against a Sikh temple in Wisconsin on Aug. 5, Americans are pondering how to stop gun violence. We have decided that it is, in the words of New York Times columnist David Brooks, a problem of psychology, not sociology. We are trying to fathom the evil ideology of Wade Michael Page. Only several weeks ago, we were all trying to understand the twisted psychology of James Holmes, the man who killed 12 innocents at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. Before that it was the mania of Jared Loughner, who shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords last year.

Certainly we should try to identify such people and help treat and track them. But aside from the immense difficulty of such a task--there are millions of fanatical, crazy people, and very few turn into mass murderers--it misses the real problem.

Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

(Cover Story: How Guns Won.)

There are 88.8 firearms per 100 people in the U.S. In second place is Yemen, with 54.8, then Switzerland with 45.7 and Finland with 45.3. No other country has a rate above 40. The U.S. handgun-ownership rate is 70% higher than that of the country with the next highest rate.

The effect of the increasing ease with which Americans can buy ever more deadly weapons is also obvious. Over the past few decades, crime has been declining, except in one category. In the decade since 2000, violent-crime rates have fallen by 20%, aggravated assault by 21%, motor-vehicle theft by 44.5% and nonfirearm homicides by 22%. But the number of firearm homicides is essentially unchanged. What can explain this anomaly except easier access to guns?

Confronted with this blindingly obvious causal connection, otherwise intelligent people close their eyes. Denouncing any effort to control guns, George Will explained on ABC News that he had "a tragic view of life, which is that ... however meticulously you draft whatever statute you wind up passing, the world is going to remain a broken place, and things like this are going to happen." I don't recall Will responding to, say, the 9/11 attacks--or any other law-and-order issue for that matter--with a "things happen" sentiment.

The other argument against any serious gun control is that it's unconstitutional, an attempt to undo American history. In fact, something close to the opposite is true.

On Friday, August 10, Fareed Zakaria issued the following statement about this article: "Media reporters have pointed out that paragraphs in my TIME column this week bear close similarities to paragraphs in Jill Lepore's essay in the April 22nd issue of The New Yorker. They are right. I made a terrible mistake. It is a serious lapse and one that is entirely my fault. I apologize unreservedly to her, to my editors at TIME, and to my readers."

TIME has since issued its own statement: "TIME accepts Fareed's apology, but what he did violates our own standards for our columnists, which is that their work must not only be factual but original; their views must not only be their own but their words as well. As a result, we are suspending Fareed's column for a month, pending further review."

Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, documents the actual history in Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. Guns were regulated in the U.S. from the earliest years of the Republic. Laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. Other states soon followed: Indiana in 1820, Tennessee and Virginia in 1838, Alabama in 1839 and Ohio in 1859. Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas (Texas!) explained in 1893, the "mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man."

(See photos of the Batman movie theater shooting.)

Congress passed the first set of federal laws regulating, licensing and taxing guns in 1934. The act was challenged and went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1939. Franklin Delano Roosevelt's solicitor general, Robert H. Jackson, said the Second Amendment grants people a right that "is not one which may be utilized for private purposes but only one which exists where the arms are borne in the militia or some other military organization provided for by law and intended for the protection of the state." The court agreed unanimously.

Things started to change in the 1970s as various right-wing groups coalesced to challenge gun control, overturning laws in state legislatures, Congress and the courts. But Chief Justice Warren Burger, a conservative appointed by Richard Nixon, described the new interpretation of the Second Amendment in an interview after his tenure as "one of the greatest pieces of fraud--I repeat the word fraud--on the American public by special-interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

So when people throw up their hands and say we can't do anything about guns, tell them they're being un-American--and unintelligent.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 13, 2012, 11:02:37 AM
Yeah, that's the one he just got in trouble for. Still...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 13, 2012, 12:23:08 PM
Quote
Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

If Fareed is going to use facts and figures to bolster his argument, he should at least be truthful. The U.S. has the 12th-highest firearms-related death rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). Still high, but not "off the chart compared with every other country on the planet." And those deaths aren't all murders (the topic of the column) -- it breaks down to about 40% homicides, 56% suicides and 4% accidents.

I know, I know, this isn't going to change anyone's mind -- but if we are going to talk statistics we might as well be accurate.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on August 13, 2012, 12:34:27 PM
Quote
Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

If Fareed is going to use facts and figures to bolster his argument, he should at least be truthful. The U.S. has the 12th-highest firearms-related death rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). Still high, but not "off the chart compared with every other country on the planet." And those deaths aren't all murders (the topic of the column) -- it breaks down to about 40% homicides, 56% suicides and 4% accidents.

I know, I know, this isn't going to change anyone's mind -- but if we are going to talk statistics we might as well be accurate.

I don't know the real numbers but violence and death rate are not the same thing.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 13, 2012, 12:52:23 PM
Quote
Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

If Fareed is going to use facts and figures to bolster his argument, he should at least be truthful. The U.S. has the 12th-highest firearms-related death rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). Still high, but not "off the chart compared with every other country on the planet." And those deaths aren't all murders (the topic of the column) -- it breaks down to about 40% homicides, 56% suicides and 4% accidents.

I know, I know, this isn't going to change anyone's mind -- but if we are going to talk statistics we might as well be accurate.

I don't know the real numbers but violence and death rate are not the same thing.

You also just quoted wikipedia, and if you look at where the stats comes from, it's four different sources, and years looked at anywhere from 1993 to 2009, depends which country you're looking at. But I agree, we're not that bad compared to those ahead of us, i.e. South Africa, Colombia, El Salvador, Jamaica, Honduras, Guatemala, Swaziland, Brazil, Estonia, Panama, and Mexico. As long as we count third world countries, we're doing ok.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 13, 2012, 01:00:28 PM
Quote
Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

If Fareed is going to use facts and figures to bolster his argument, he should at least be truthful. The U.S. has the 12th-highest firearms-related death rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). Still high, but not "off the chart compared with every other country on the planet." And those deaths aren't all murders (the topic of the column) -- it breaks down to about 40% homicides, 56% suicides and 4% accidents.

I know, I know, this isn't going to change anyone's mind -- but if we are going to talk statistics we might as well be accurate.

I don't know the real numbers but violence and death rate are not the same thing.

That's correct -- and so at a minimum it's a good idea to look at homicide rate as opposed to overall gun death rate (in a conversation about murders, obviously). Past that, you can look at total number of non-fatal gun injuries and other incidents in which guns were used (e.g. armed robbery) but didn't result in injury. I'm not sure how the various countries of the world would break down in that regard. I don't have any particular reason to think people in other countries are much better or worse than anyone else when it comes to firing a gun and killing someone vs. not killing them.

But anyway, Zakaria opened that paragraph with a line about gun violence and then immediately dove into some stats about homicides, so I assume he was focusing on homicides. On that list I cited, the U.S. ranks 12th either way, but the list was missing some pieces of information that conceivably could push it a little higher or lower.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on August 13, 2012, 01:01:14 PM
As long as we count third world countries, we're doing ok.

I think I just found myself a new personal mantra.   8-)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 13, 2012, 01:45:21 PM
Quote
Gun violence in America is off the chart compared with every other country on the planet. The gun-homicide rate per capita in the U.S. is 30 times that of Britain and Australia, 10 times that of India and four times that of Switzerland. When confronted with such a large deviation, a scholar would ask, Does America have some potential cause for this that is also off the chart? I doubt that anyone seriously thinks we have 30 times as many crazy people as Britain or Australia. But we do have many, many more guns.

If Fareed is going to use facts and figures to bolster his argument, he should at least be truthful. The U.S. has the 12th-highest firearms-related death rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). Still high, but not "off the chart compared with every other country on the planet." And those deaths aren't all murders (the topic of the column) -- it breaks down to about 40% homicides, 56% suicides and 4% accidents.

I know, I know, this isn't going to change anyone's mind -- but if we are going to talk statistics we might as well be accurate.

I don't know the real numbers but violence and death rate are not the same thing.

You also just quoted wikipedia, and if you look at where the stats comes from, it's four different sources, and years looked at anywhere from 1993 to 2009, depends which country you're looking at. But I agree, we're not that bad compared to those ahead of us, i.e. South Africa, Colombia, El Salvador, Jamaica, Honduras, Guatemala, Swaziland, Brazil, Estonia, Panama, and Mexico. As long as we count third world countries, we're doing ok.

Yes, these stats are kind of messy. Yes, the countries topping the list aren't exactly paradigms of utopian progress.

But Zakaria made a hyperbolic statement about the U.S. being the absolute worst, and then dove into specific figures to try and back that up. Except his hyperbolic statement was merely that.

That's all I was bothering to point out.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on August 14, 2012, 10:37:04 AM
Thinking about picking up one of these bad boys for home defense

(http://uncrate.com/p/2012/08/nerf-hail-fire.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on August 14, 2012, 01:27:41 PM
I've been searching from some protection, but then I found this shirt and realized that is all I need.

(http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/c/0/0/24/2/AAAADB6DgR0AAAAAACQj1g.jpg?v=1231256660000)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 14, 2012, 02:04:02 PM
I've been searching from some protection, but then I found this shirt and realized that is all I need.

(http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/c/0/0/24/2/AAAADB6DgR0AAAAAACQj1g.jpg?v=1231256660000)

That's what one of the psycho killers was wearing. I forget which one.

As for the nerf gun, I'd got for a little more protection. I got a sweet old school super soaker, still in the box, never used I could get you. Ammo's easy to find as long as you got a tap, toilet, or shower. pm me if interested. (sidenote, you can also fill it with wine, put down some plastic, and have a good role playing night with your significant other - good times)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on August 15, 2012, 02:43:19 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/security-guard-shot-in-arm-in-downtown-dc/2012/08/15/6306fbea-e6f4-11e1-9739-eef99c5fb285_story.html

Quote
Security guard for Family Research Council shot in arm in Washington; suspect in custody

WASHINGTON — An armed man walked into the Washington headquarters of a conservative Christian lobbying group Wednesday morning and was confronted by a security guard, whom he shot in the arm before the guard and others wrestled him to the ground, authorities said.

The man was taken into custody by the FBI and was being interviewed. Authorities did not identify the man or disclose where he was being interviewed.

Police and FBI officials said it’s too early to know the circumstances of the shooting, which occurred around 10:45 a.m. at the headquarters of the Family Research Council, or whether it was connected to the group’s activities.

“We don’t know enough yet about him ... or mentally what he’s thinking,” said James McJunkin, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office.

The Family Research Council confirmed in a statement that the security guard was employed by the group.

“Our first concern is with our colleague who was shot today,” the group’s president, Tony Perkins, said in a statement.

The Family Research Council advocates conservative positions on social issues and strongly opposes gay marriage and abortion.

Perkins was an outspoken defender of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s public stand against same-sex marriage, which made the fast-food chain a flashpoint in the nation’s culture wars. The Cathy family foundation has funded the Family Research Council.

“He’s taking a bold stand,” Perkins said after Cathy’s comments were reported. “Chick-fil-A is a Bible-based, Christian-based business who treats their employees well. They have been attacked in the past about their stand. But they refuse to budge on this matter, and I commend them for what they are doing.”
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on August 15, 2012, 02:51:53 PM
I've been searching from some protection, but then I found this shirt and realized that is all I need.

(http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/c/0/0/24/2/AAAADB6DgR0AAAAAACQj1g.jpg?v=1231256660000)

That's what one of the psycho killers was wearing. I forget which one.

As for the nerf gun, I'd got for a little more protection. I got a sweet old school super soaker, still in the box, never used I could get you. Ammo's easy to find as long as you got a tap, toilet, or shower. pm me if interested. (sidenote, you can also fill it with wine, put down some plastic, and have a good role playing night with your significant other - good times)


Spoken from experience I'm sure.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 15, 2012, 03:15:56 PM
Thinking about picking up one of these bad boys for home defense

(http://uncrate.com/p/2012/08/nerf-hail-fire.jpg)

Anyone who needs multiple high-capacity magazines for their Nerf gun clearly is up to no good.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on August 16, 2012, 11:23:07 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/security-guard-shot-in-arm-in-downtown-dc/2012/08/15/6306fbea-e6f4-11e1-9739-eef99c5fb285_story.html

Quote
Security guard for Family Research Council shot in arm in Washington; suspect in custody

WASHINGTON — An armed man walked into the Washington headquarters of a conservative Christian lobbying group Wednesday morning and was confronted by a security guard, whom he shot in the arm before the guard and others wrestled him to the ground, authorities said.

The man was taken into custody by the FBI and was being interviewed. Authorities did not identify the man or disclose where he was being interviewed.

Police and FBI officials said it’s too early to know the circumstances of the shooting, which occurred around 10:45 a.m. at the headquarters of the Family Research Council, or whether it was connected to the group’s activities.

“We don’t know enough yet about him ... or mentally what he’s thinking,” said James McJunkin, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office.

The Family Research Council confirmed in a statement that the security guard was employed by the group.

“Our first concern is with our colleague who was shot today,” the group’s president, Tony Perkins, said in a statement.

The Family Research Council advocates conservative positions on social issues and strongly opposes gay marriage and abortion.

Perkins was an outspoken defender of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s public stand against same-sex marriage, which made the fast-food chain a flashpoint in the nation’s culture wars. The Cathy family foundation has funded the Family Research Council.

“He’s taking a bold stand,” Perkins said after Cathy’s comments were reported. “Chick-fil-A is a Bible-based, Christian-based business who treats their employees well. They have been attacked in the past about their stand. But they refuse to budge on this matter, and I commend them for what they are doing.”

Here's some more info.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/us/dc-shooting-blame/index.html

Again, this just shows that people are losing their fucking minds.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on August 24, 2012, 10:28:29 AM
Details still coming in

Quote
Several People Shot Near Empire State Building, NYPD Says

A gunman shot as many as eight people before being killed by New York City police near the Empire State Building in Manhattan, said Detective Martin Speechley.

Emergency personnel arrived soon after a call about the shooting came in about 9 a.m., prompting police to close Fifth Avenue near 34th Street and diverting morning traffic in busy Midtown, according to television reports on WABC 7.

Several victims were taken away on stretchers to Bellevue Hospital Center and St. Luke’s Hospital, the television station reported, and ABC helicopter images showed a body under a sheet in front on the Empire State Building’s entrance.

A New York Police Department spokesman confirmed the events in a telephone interview, and hung up before giving a name. The FBI is on scene, said Peter Donald, spokesman for the bureau’s office.

The New York shootings follow a series of mass killings, including one on July 20 near Denver, when a masked gunman opened fire at a midnight showing of “The Dark Knight Rises” in a suburban Aurora theater, killing 12 and injuring 58. James Holmes, a former graduate student in neuroscience at the University of Colorado in Denver, faces multiple murder charges.

In Oak Creek, Wisconsin, a gunman killed six people at a Sikh temple Aug. 5 before being wounded by police and taking his own life.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on August 24, 2012, 11:20:57 AM
this onion article was published yesterday....

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-celebrates-full-week-without-deadly-mass-sh,29293/

today's update is priceless


(http://www.imgjoe.com/x/nevermind.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: qop24 on August 24, 2012, 12:23:48 PM
Gotta love how the cops did more damage here than the shooter...I thought that more guns at a firefight meant less damage and faster resolution?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on August 24, 2012, 12:27:32 PM
Gotta love how the cops did more damage here than the shooter...I thought that more guns at a firefight meant less damage and faster resolution?

No, no, you're thinking of civilians with guns. The more civilians with guns at a firefight the less damage and faster resolution.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: qop24 on August 24, 2012, 12:30:35 PM
Gotta love how the cops did more damage here than the shooter...I thought that more guns at a firefight meant less damage and faster resolution?

No, no, you're thinking of civilians with guns. The more civilians with guns at a firefight the less damage and faster resolution.

Good call. Bloomberg needs to get rid of the NYPD and hire Blackwater then. That'll teach people a thing or two about using guns in public areas (literally).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 30, 2012, 06:15:41 PM
wow
Quote
GOP calls for broader gun rights, unlimited clips
 
   
TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — Republicans have strengthened the pro-gun-rights portion of their party platform, including a new call for unlimited bullet capacities in guns, in a defiant response to criticism that followed recent mass shootings at a Colorado cinema and an Arizona congresswoman’s gathering.

The 2012 platform, approved this week by GOP convention-goers who nominated Mitt Romney for president, also endorses ‘‘stand your ground’’ rights for gun owners. That legal concept, which says gun bearers don’t have to retreat if they feel threatened in a public place, drew national attention after February’s fatal shooting of an unarmed Florida teenager by a neighborhood watch volunteer.

Republicans traditionally embrace gun rights in their quadrennial party platforms. The one approved this week went farther than those of 2004 and 2008.

Gun control advocates see it as an audacious answer to calls for firearms restrictions after a gunman killed 12 people in Colorado last month, and another gunman killed six people in Tucson, Ariz., early last year. Gabrielle Giffords, then a Democratic congresswoman holding an outdoor meeting, was gravely wounded in the Tucson assault.

‘‘Gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens,’’ the 2008 Republican platform said. This year’s platform adds: ‘‘We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines.’’

The shooters in Colorado and Arizona used large-capacity weapons capable of firing many rounds quickly.

The 2004 GOP platform said ‘‘law-abiding citizens’’ should have the right ‘‘to own firearms in their homes for self-defense.’’ This year’s platform supports ‘‘the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law-abiding citizen has a legal right to be.’’

It calls for federal laws ‘‘that would expand the exercise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents.’’

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said that, by making these changes, Republican leaders have ‘‘put themselves farther out of touch with their constituents.’’

His group supports bans on large-capacity weapons, which it says are ‘‘designed to shoot a lot of people quickly and efficiently.’’

David Keene, president of the National Rifle Association, told the NRA News that the 2008 GOP platform ‘‘was perhaps the most gun-friendly platform that any party had ever adopted,’’ and ‘‘this year’s Republican platform is even stronger in terms of dedicating a major party to the protection of the Second Amendment.’’

Presidential nominees, not to mention the general public, often ignore party platforms. Top Republicans in Tampa, however, implored the public to study the 50-page platform document.

‘‘We invite Americans to consider this platform, a call for dramatic change in government,’’ Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell said in his convention speech Tuesday.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on August 31, 2012, 11:32:46 AM
Quote
Supermarket employee with AK-47 kills two co-workers and self at Pathmark in Old Bridge, New Jersey

An employee of a Pathmark supermarket in Old Bridge, N.J. returned to work at 4 a.m. with an assault rifle and a handgun and killed two co-workers in an unprovoked attack before killing himself early Friday, officials said.



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/supermarket-employee-ak-47-kills-co-workers-pathmark-old-bridge-new-jersey-gunman-kills-2-nj-supermarket-article-1.1148744#ixzz258dscu8T
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 14, 2012, 12:06:25 PM
Quote
Two Gunmen at Newtown, Conn., Elementary School Shooting, One Dead

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-connecticut-elementary-school-gunman-dead/story?id=17973836#.UMtalKxU31B

This is straight evil.

Portland mall shooting and now this... :shakehead:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 14, 2012, 12:54:11 PM
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/121214/sandy-hook-elementary-school-shooting-connecticu

wow 27 dead wtf
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on December 14, 2012, 01:06:00 PM
Its hard to even put my thoughts into words.  Just insane that people do this.  And to kids?   :frustrated:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on December 14, 2012, 01:08:38 PM
Its hard to even put my thoughts into words.  Just insane that people do this.  And to kids?   :frustrated:


You did better than I could.    :| 

I agree.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 14, 2012, 01:10:27 PM
Ho lee fuck. What the hell is wrong with people. That is the most disturbing thing I can even imagine.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: iamhydroJen on December 14, 2012, 01:37:23 PM
I saw this flash across the TV screen while I was in a meeting.  I am in shock and feel like crying.  How could someone do this to innocent children?  How sick do you have to be to do something like this?  My head and heart hurt for all of the people involved in this disgusting display of human brutality  :cry:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Undermind on December 14, 2012, 01:52:16 PM
My stomach is in knots thinking about what the parents were feeling as they were unsure if their kids were dead, hurt, or alive.  I just can't imagine this happening...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: pcr3 on December 14, 2012, 02:13:50 PM
My stomach is in knots thinking about what the parents were feeling as they were unsure if their kids were dead, hurt, or alive.  I just can't imagine this happening...

Me too, Undermind.  I'm home for the day with my daughter, and I can't seem to shut off the TV.  And I vacillate between fighting back tears and fighting back vomit.  I will never understand this.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: birdman on December 14, 2012, 02:13:52 PM
If those children and teachers were carrying concealed firearms this would have never happened. Thanks Obama and liberals for allowing this tragedy to happen.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 14, 2012, 02:27:21 PM
If those children and teachers were carrying concealed firearms this would have never happened. Thanks Obama and liberals for allowing this tragedy to happen.

Well, that's just ridiculous. The kids can get them on the streets. But I agree, the teachers, like pilots, should be taught and allowed to carry concealed weapons while at school.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 14, 2012, 02:53:19 PM
MORE GUNS!!!!

It's the only answer!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: DoW on December 14, 2012, 03:10:20 PM
this is too disturbing for words.
I can't even imagien the thought of having a child in that school and not knowing.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatapiper on December 14, 2012, 04:15:36 PM
this is too disturbing for words.
I can't even imagien the thought of having a child in that school and not knowing.

Completely devastating, with my son smack in the middle of the targeted age group this resonates all too well with me. I cannot even imagine what these parents and the community are going through. I feel like I can barely Keep my composure as more details come out on the radio.  To make matters worse is the timing of it all.   Not that this would be easier to bear at any other time but it's hard not to think about the excitement all of these kids had about the coming weeks ahead. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: susep on December 14, 2012, 04:25:07 PM
I work at a bank, we have security turrets at the entrances, that's what schools will need.  arming teachers w/ guns isn't a solution.
I have a son in pre-K, this event has hit us hard today.  thoughts and condolences to the victims, their families and, the survivors who will be traumatized for years to come.

edit - a big Fuck You to the douche bag reporters interviewing children.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: shoreline99 on December 14, 2012, 04:31:38 PM
I have a friend whose two kids attend the school and another friend whose cousin is a teacher there, all of whom were uninjured. I know an awful lot of people who live in that area, still waiting to hear back from a bunch of them. So sad, what a tragedy.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: DoW on December 14, 2012, 04:34:32 PM
I have a friend whose two kids attend the school and another friend whose cousin is a teacher there, all of whom were uninjured. I know an awful lot of people who live in that area, still waiting to hear back from a bunch of them. So sad, what a tragedy.
I was wondering if you knew anyone in that area.
glad you have heard some confirmations of no injuries.
this story is just so unreal.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatapiper on December 14, 2012, 05:03:16 PM
I have a friend whose two kids attend the school and another friend whose cousin is a teacher there, all of whom were uninjured. I know an awful lot of people who live in that area, still waiting to hear back from a bunch of them. So sad, what a tragedy.
I was wondering if you knew anyone in that area.
glad you have heard some confirmations of no injuries.
this story is just so unreal.

Sadly the mother of the shooter is probably better off now than if she had survived, not sure how she could live with herself thereafter
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: birdman on December 14, 2012, 05:08:12 PM
If those children and teachers were carrying concealed firearms this would have never happened. Thanks Obama and liberals for allowing this tragedy to happen.

Well, that's just ridiculous. The kids can get them on the streets. But I agree, the teachers, like pilots, should be taught and allowed to carry concealed weapons while at school.
I really don't think teachers should have guns. My wife is a first grade teacher. She doesn't need a gun (like EVER). Then I might get shot. Lord knows I might deserve it.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: shoreline99 on December 14, 2012, 05:30:03 PM
I have a friend whose two kids attend the school and another friend whose cousin is a teacher there, all of whom were uninjured. I know an awful lot of people who live in that area, still waiting to hear back from a bunch of them. So sad, what a tragedy.
I was wondering if you knew anyone in that area.
glad you have heard some confirmations of no injuries.
this story is just so unreal.

Just found out the 7-year old niece of one of my clients that attends Sandy Hook stayed home sick from school today. I've taken classes at that firehouse. I just can't fathom how you could kill a kindergartener (let alone an entire class, or anyone for that matter) in cold blood at point blank range. My mind is reeling.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 14, 2012, 06:28:25 PM
If those children and teachers were carrying concealed firearms this would have never happened. Thanks Obama and liberals for allowing this tragedy to happen.

Well, that's just ridiculous. The kids can get them on the streets. But I agree, the teachers, like pilots, should be taught and allowed to carry concealed weapons while at school.
I really don't think teachers should have guns. My wife is a first grade teacher. She doesn't need a gun (like EVER). Then I might get shot. Lord knows I might deserve it.

i'm really hoping GAH was kidding.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on December 14, 2012, 06:32:44 PM
edit - a big Fuck You to the douche bag reporters interviewing children.

^^^
saw this too....wtf.



(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/537505_518344698199071_1432841063_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 14, 2012, 06:57:04 PM
too fucked up for words.

eliminating guns would not have prevented this - just ask any NRA lobbyist
 :roll:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Undermind on December 14, 2012, 08:28:53 PM
This is pretty much on point imo...  I don't think this country will ever pass meaningful gun control laws because the majority don't want to and the NRA is lining the pockets of too many politicians.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/opinion/why-we-let-the-school-shootings-continue.html?_r=0
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 14, 2012, 09:32:52 PM
depending upon where you live, I think the majority may want gun control laws.

unfortunately, some people think their right to own a gun is more important than the life of some innocent kid
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 14, 2012, 10:19:32 PM
Fuck all of this.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: pcr3 on December 14, 2012, 10:38:30 PM
Fuck all of this.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 14, 2012, 11:03:54 PM
To say this hit close to home puts it mildly.  I live a couple towns away, my kids schools were put on lockdown.  It was a half day though and they didn't inform the parents.  All everyone knew was that there kids were late and the initial reports were that a second shooter had got away and they were searching for him.   I just drove to the school was my solution.

Today was also the 20th anniversary of Wayne Lo and the Simons Rock shooting.  I grew up in that area, was my senior year in high school and my parents and a friend that worked there in security. 

Just crazy shit.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 14, 2012, 11:20:00 PM
I've already proven that I'm probably the only nerd into musicals on this board so I assume none of you are familiar with Sondheim's musical Assassins. Anyway, I'm sitting around listening to the Beatles White Album right now. I'm on side four. Almost done. Yet this song from Assassins is just sticking in my head above the Beatles.

Here's the part that's got me:


Quote
A gun kills many men before it's done,
Hundreds,
Long before you shoot the gun:

Men in the mines
And in the steel mills,
Men at machines,
Who died for what?

Something to buy --
A watch, a shoe, a gun,
A thing to make the bosses richer,
But
A gun claims many men before it's done...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on December 14, 2012, 11:57:14 PM
Completely at a loss here.  Scares the shit out of me the world our kids are growing up in.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on December 14, 2012, 11:57:56 PM
edit - a big Fuck You to the douche bag reporters interviewing children.

(http://i.imgur.com/zanjK.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Undermind on December 15, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
To say this hit close to home puts it mildly.  I live a couple towns away, my kids schools were put on lockdown.  It was a half day though and they didn't inform the parents.  All everyone knew was that there kids were late and the initial reports were that a second shooter had got away and they were searching for him.   I just drove to the school was my solution.

Today was also the 20th anniversary of Wayne Lo and the Simons Rock shooting.  I grew up in that area, was my senior year in high school and my parents and a friend that worked there in security. 

Just crazy shit.
Wow man!  I just can't imagine the thoughts going through your head.  Just horrendous.  Glad you and yours are ok.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: DoW on December 15, 2012, 01:51:54 AM
copying and pasting from a shared FB post.
what happened today still hasn't sunk in.

This is Victoria Soto, and although I didn't know her, she is my hero. I don't know too much about her, but I know a lot of people who do know her and she's amazing. Victoria was a Stratford high graduate and only 27. She was killed today after she hid her first graders in closets and cabinets and told the shooter they were in the gym. He killed her and not one of her children were harmed. I have never been more proud to be from Stratford or to be a teacher. God bless Victoria, her family and friends, and all of those who were involved today in anyway. Victoria is a true hero.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 15, 2012, 09:40:00 AM
In all seriousness, the Onion nailed it today...

http://www.theonion.com/articles/fuck-everything-nation-reports,30743/ (http://www.theonion.com/articles/fuck-everything-nation-reports,30743/)

Quote
Fuck Everything, Nation Reports

WASHINGTON—Following the fatal shooting this morning at a Connecticut elementary school that left at least 27 dead, including 20 small children, sources across the nation shook their heads, stifled a sob in their voices, and reported fuck everything. Just fuck it all to hell.

All of it, sources added.

“I’m sorry, but fuck it, I can’t handle this—I just can’t handle it anymore,” said Deborah McEllis, who added that “no, no, no, no, no, this isn’t happening, this can’t be real.” “Seriously, what the hell is this? What’s even going on anymore? Why do things like this keep happening?”

Continued McEllis, before covering her face with her hands, “Why?”

Despairing sources confirmed that the gunman, armed with a semiautomatic assault rifle—a fucking combat rifle, Jesus—walked into a classroom full of goddamned children where his mother was a teacher and, good God, if this is what the world is becoming, then how about we just pack it in and fucking give up, because this is no way to live.

I mean, honestly, all 315 million Americans confirmed.

“Well, I suppose we have to try to pick up the pieces and make some sort of sense of this tragedy and—you know what? Fuck it, I can’t do this,” said Connecticut resident Michael Zaleski, his remarks understandable given the circumstances, because, holy shit, what else can one say? “I’m sorry, but I can’t fucking do this. Can you? Can anyone?”

Witnesses said the gunman fired at least 100 rounds during his deadly rampage, which, according to children in the school—goddamnit, how? How? Twenty children. Dead. In a fucking school.

No. No, no, no.

“I just feel so [why does it even matter what this person said when no words can bring 20 dead kids back to life?]” said some person who, just like everyone else, is completely unable to process or handle any of this. “It’s awful. Just too awful to bear.”

Americans reported feelings of overwhelming disgust with whatever abhorrent bastard did this and with the world at large for ever allowing it to happen, as well as with politicians, with the NRA, and above all with their own pathetic goddamn selves, sitting in front of a fucking computer instead of doing fucking anything to help anyone—Christ, as if that were even fucking possible, as if anyone could change what happened, as if the same fucking bullshit isn’t going to keep happening again and again and fucking again before people finally decide it’s time to change the way we live, so what’s the point? What the hell is the goddamned point?

“I…” said Tom Miller, 27, after reading an article about the tragedy online. “I just…”

“…” he added.

At press time…screw it, there’s nothing else to say.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on December 15, 2012, 12:22:44 PM
Add me to the fuck all this camp.

Expecting our politicians to address this ASAP. Shit needs to change like yesterday.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 15, 2012, 12:26:07 PM
Morgan Freeman's statement about these random shootings....

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you kn
ow the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem."
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 15, 2012, 02:10:02 PM
Morgan Freeman is a wise man
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on December 15, 2012, 02:18:32 PM
Morgan Freeman is a wise man
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 15, 2012, 02:32:59 PM
Morgan Freeman is a wise man

First black president, after all.
(http://ionetheurbandaily.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/morgan-freeman-deep-impact.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on December 16, 2012, 11:36:12 AM
Morgan Freeman's statement about these random shootings....

Snopes'd

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

Quote
We haven't found any source documenting the attribution of these words to actor Morgan Freeman, so most likely the quote is something that originated elsewhere and was later attributed to Morgan Freeman to lend it a sense of gravitas.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 16, 2012, 12:11:18 PM
Morgan Freeman's statement about these random shootings....

Snopes'd

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

Quote
We haven't found any source documenting the attribution of these words to actor Morgan Freeman, so most likely the quote is something that originated elsewhere and was later attributed to Morgan Freeman to lend it a sense of gravitas.

(http://marketingideas101.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/marketing-ideas-quotes-lincoln.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on December 16, 2012, 01:40:03 PM
 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 16, 2012, 08:38:13 PM
Damn just had dinner with my dad this evening and he said he went to that elementary school for 2 years before moving back to Albany, NY. Freaky. Said he was really torn up when he saw the footage of the school and of the community...still cant get over this situation.
And another guy was found today with 47 guns and plans to shoot up an elementary school near him!? This shit has gotta stop.

I know runawayjimbo would rather point of fallacies on about the situation but this shit is getting pretty serious. Theres too many mental ill people with guns out there. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on December 17, 2012, 02:50:19 AM
I know runawayjimbo would rather point of fallacies on about the situation but this shit is getting pretty serious. Theres too many mental ill people with guns out there.

Yeah, I'd much rather nitpick people's words instead of having a thorough debate about a complex issue. That totally sounds like me.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 17, 2012, 09:29:26 AM
I know runawayjimbo would rather point of fallacies on about the situation but this shit is getting pretty serious. Theres too many mental ill people with guns out there.

Yeah, I'd much rather nitpick people's words instead of having a thorough debate about a complex issue. That totally sounds like me.

I know you do man, thats why I am surprised to see you didnt post something that will actually open up a discussion.

Its interesting, the GOP said they will not make a statement on this other than that it is a tragedy and that they will let the President speak for them/America. I guess the "guns dont kill people, people kill people" wouldnt resonate well with the general public this time? At this point I dont think there is much to say, there needs to be something done, not said, to bring these acts of violence down,.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 17, 2012, 09:32:39 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?

(http://i.imgur.com/FCxhF.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 17, 2012, 10:49:19 AM
Holy schnikeys... This tragic event turned Joe Scarborough around on guns. I'm at a loss for words.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/joe-scarborough-newtown-shooting_n_2315100.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/joe-scarborough-newtown-shooting_n_2315100.html)

Quote
Joe Scarborough said on Monday that the massacre in Newtown had forced him to rethink his "long-held" belief about gun rights.

In a lengthy monologue, Scarborough talked about how shaken up he had been by the killing of 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday. He noted that his children's ages averaged that of some of the murdered victims.

"From this day forward, nothing can ever be the same again," he said. "... Let this be our true landmark ... politicians can no longer be allowed to defend the status quo."

He said that he was a "conservative Republican" who had been solidly aligned with the NRA during his time in Congress, and had previously held libertarian views on the Second Amendment. But he added that Friday "changed everything":

    "I knew that day that the ideologies of my past career were no longer relevant to the future that I want, that I demand for my children. Friday changed everything. It must change everything. We all must begin anew and demand that Washington's old way of doing business is no longer acceptable. Entertainment moguls don't have an absolute right to glorify murder while spreading mayhem in young minds across America. And our Bill of Rights does not guarantee gun manufacturers the absolute right to sell military-style, high-caliber, semi-automatic combat assault rifles with high-capacity magazines to whoever the hell they want.

    It is time for Congress to put children before deadly dogmas. It's time for politicians to start focusing more on protecting our schoolyards than putting together their next fundraiser. It's time for Washington to stop trying to win endless wars overseas when we're losing the war at home ... For the sake of my four children and yours, I choose life and I choose change."
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 17, 2012, 11:03:25 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?

(http://i.imgur.com/FCxhF.jpg)

To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 17, 2012, 11:05:26 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?

(http://i.imgur.com/FCxhF.jpg)

To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 17, 2012, 11:09:34 AM
Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

lulz.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 17, 2012, 11:15:28 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 17, 2012, 11:39:40 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry

No. But it's an important distinction.
Our city is the blue dot surrounded by red(necked) counties.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 17, 2012, 11:42:00 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry

No. But it's an important distinction.
Our city is the blue dot surrounded by red(necked) counties.

LOL!  I know, that's why I'm not at all surprised that your local paper is advertising a Tactical Christmas...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 17, 2012, 11:54:21 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry

No. But it's an important distinction.
Our city is the blue dot surrounded by red(necked) counties.

Sounds familiar... Austin is a blue oasis in a desert of red. Every time our idiot governor starts spouting nonsense about Texas seceding from the union we joke that South Austin will be like West Berlin. They're gonna have to fly in supplies.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 17, 2012, 01:56:05 PM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry

No. But it's an important distinction.
Our city is the blue dot surrounded by red(necked) counties.

Sounds familiar... Austin is a blue oasis in a desert of red. Every time our idiot governor starts spouting nonsense about Texas seceding from the union we joke that South Austin will be like West Berlin. They're gonna have to fly in supplies.

God Bless Texas.

Quote
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) told Fox News Sunday that he believed more guns are the answer to violence in schools.

"I wish to god she had had an M4 in her office," he said of Sandy Hook Elementary School principal Dawn Hochsprung, who was killed in the shooting.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: shoreline99 on December 18, 2012, 10:30:18 AM
Found out yesterday that a guy who works in an engineering office that we deal with lost a daughter in the shooting. This really sucks, and it's amazing how small this area really is. Many of the stories I keep hearing are just tragic. And brave.  :shakehead:

And the kid I mentioned that stayed home? She was in Ms. Soto's class.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: susep on December 18, 2012, 11:16:31 AM
"I knew that day that the ideologies of my past career were no longer relevant to the future that I want, that I demand for my children. Friday changed everything. It must change everything. We all must begin anew and demand that Washington's old way of doing business is no longer acceptable. Entertainment moguls don't have an absolute right to glorify murder while spreading mayhem in young minds across America. And our Bill of Rights does not guarantee gun manufacturers the absolute right to sell military-style, high-caliber, semi-automatic combat assault rifles with high-capacity magazines to whoever the hell they want.   
It is time for Congress to put children before deadly dogmas. It's time for politicians to start focusing more on protecting our schoolyards than putting together their next fundraiser. It's time for Washington to stop trying to win endless wars overseas when we're losing the war at home ... For the sake of my four children and yours, I choose life and I choose change."
[/quote]

 :clap:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 18, 2012, 11:35:00 AM
Local paper is, of course, covering this tragedy.
Notice the ad running adjacent?


To be fair, you are in Spotslyvania County...

T

To be clear, I do NOT live in Spotsylvania, or any county.

Also, I'll be having a word with my friend, neighbor, and the publisher of this fishwrap later this week.

I seemed to have touched a nerve! 

Terry

No. But it's an important distinction.
Our city is the blue dot surrounded by red(necked) counties.
That's the seriously fucked part of this whole thing... it's a party debate.
No, it's not. Our kids are dying.
FUCK THE 2nd AMENDMENT. Completely.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 18, 2012, 06:23:09 PM
I honestly don't see anything being done to change gun control laws. Or do you all believe that this was the tipping point? That for some reason, after the tragedy part is over, that THIS time the pain the country feels is enough to convince the 85 million gun owners and all powerful NRA that hey, maybe we should makes some compromises here. The NRA has been silent (on it's facebook, website, twitter, etc) since this occurred. No, I only see any changes being made if it's by their suggestion. Certainly not from the cowardly politicians that need the financial support.

We as a collective society have deemed this a reasonable amount of sacrifice to continue to allow the general public to be holders of military style assault rifles. Like someone said to me the other day, 85 millions gun owners didn't kill someone today, so uhhh, yeah, there's that.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 18, 2012, 06:33:57 PM
I honestly don't see anything being done to change gun control laws. Or do you all believe that this was the tipping point? That for some reason, after the tragedy part is over, that THIS time the pain the country feels is enough to convince the 85 million gun owners and all powerful NRA that hey, maybe we should makes some compromises here. The NRA has been silent (on it's facebook, website, twitter, etc) since this occurred. No, I only see any changes being made if it's by their suggestion. Certainly not from the cowardly politicians that need the financial support.

We as a collective society have deemed this a reasonable amount of sacrifice to continue to allow the general public to be holders of military style assault rifles. Like someone said to me the other day, 85 millions gun owners didn't kill someone today, so uhhh, yeah, there's that.
If you are right (as I suspect you are), then I guess it's time for the end. Bring on the big fucking meteor, or whatever else wipes this bullshit off the planet. We don't deserve it if that's our collective attitude.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 18, 2012, 06:42:04 PM
I honestly don't see anything being done to change gun control laws. Or do you all believe that this was the tipping point? That for some reason, after the tragedy part is over, that THIS time the pain the country feels is enough to convince the 85 million gun owners and all powerful NRA that hey, maybe we should makes some compromises here. The NRA has been silent (on it's facebook, website, twitter, etc) since this occurred. No, I only see any changes being made if it's by their suggestion. Certainly not from the cowardly politicians that need the financial support.

We as a collective society have deemed this a reasonable amount of sacrifice to continue to allow the general public to be holders of military style assault rifles. Like someone said to me the other day, 85 millions gun owners didn't kill someone today, so uhhh, yeah, there's that.
If you are right (as I suspect you are), then I guess it's time for the end. Bring on the big fucking meteor, or whatever else wipes this bullshit off the planet. We don't deserve it if that's our collective attitude.

I don't think we'll be that lucky to have it end that quickly. No, it'd be a slow multi-generational messy, destructive, painful ignorance fueled demise. Or we can get our heads out of our asses and wake the fuck up. Either way.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 18, 2012, 06:53:47 PM
Oddly enough, within a short span of time, Gov Perry implied that he was in favor of arming teachers, stressing that the decision should be based upon local control (shootouts in school - I might try to go back)

and, the NRA broke it's silence saying that they will anounce "meaningful contributions" at a press conference on Friday.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on December 18, 2012, 07:03:23 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 18, 2012, 09:39:32 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: barnesy305 on December 18, 2012, 09:40:24 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 18, 2012, 09:44:56 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 18, 2012, 09:56:00 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Yeah, it doesnt say 22 dead, says 22 wounded. Those people/kids still have full lives to live after this event, traumatic as it is, they can still grow up to live a full live with all the joys and struggles that are involved in the journey of life.
The 26 people that are dead from someone running into a school with a gun, had their lives cut short, some very short, on Dec. 14th. If asian dude had a gun then it would probably read 22 dead and more wounded.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 18, 2012, 11:14:40 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???  Sure, in China they have more stringent gun control...  They also have all kinds of other stringent rules pertianing to almost every aspect of life.  Are we ready to go to that extreme to make sure 20+ children get stabbed instead of shot??? 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 18, 2012, 11:49:31 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???  Sure, in China they have more stringent gun control...  They also have all kinds of other stringent rules pertianing to almost every aspect of life.  Are we ready to go to that extreme to make sure 20+ children get stabbed instead of shot??? 

Terry

Nobody said that, the point was just being made that gun control does seemingly work.
You can have gun control without Communism.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 18, 2012, 11:57:15 PM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???  Sure, in China they have more stringent gun control...  They also have all kinds of other stringent rules pertianing to almost every aspect of life.  Are we ready to go to that extreme to make sure 20+ children get stabbed instead of shot??? 

Terry

Nobody said that, the point was just being made that gun control does seemingly work.
You can have gun control without Communism.

Exactly.
Leave the straw men on the fields.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 19, 2012, 01:13:35 AM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???  Sure, in China they have more stringent gun control...  They also have all kinds of other stringent rules pertianing to almost every aspect of life.  Are we ready to go to that extreme to make sure 20+ children get stabbed instead of shot??? 

Terry

With all due respect, the USA has more people in prison than China. Not more per capita...straight up more people...and half of the us prison population is in for drug offenses... Essentially thought crimes.

I hate it when Americans get preachy about China and their lack of freedom. It's fucking bullshit. Our two party system is nominally better than their one party system. Our freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. At the same time, Williamson County, Texas will put you in prison for 6 months and fuck up your ability to have a career in many many fields for a single joint. 

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 19, 2012, 06:44:52 AM
this rambles, but I needed to get it off my chest.

Newtown occurred on the 20th anniversary of the Simon's Rock College shooting and nothing has changed.  He used an assault weapon he mail ordered. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bard_College_at_Simon%27s_Rock#1992_shooting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bard_College_at_Simon%27s_Rock#1992_shooting)

I grew up the same distance from Simon's Rock as I live near Newtown.  I  spent a lot of time in Gt. Barrington and had a family friend who worked there.  Now (not people I really know, but still too close to home) a member of my company's son is dead, another lost his wife, another their niece, and another's wife has to live with going through that horror.

I grew up shooting, my parents didn't have guns, but they were a part of my community.  I have shot all kinds of weapons and enjoy it.  Yet what I have never been able to understand is why anyone needs an assault weapon and oversized magazines.  This fuck reloaded twice, twice!!!!!!   26 people are dead, some shot as many as 11 times, everyone shot more than once, everyone at a distance.

We know people in the ER at Danbury Hospital.  The quote was now we know what 9/11 was like.  We told to be prepared for mass casualties, 3 showed up and then nothing.  After about 30 minutes we knew that meant it was bad, real bad.

I now need someone to explain how they can defend our gun laws to me.   1 shoe bomber and I take my shoes off at the airport.  Simon's Rock, Columbine, Aurora, Oregon, Wisconsin, how many people have to die for this right?   Not a ban, but be reasonable, I have a freedom to speech and can't walk into a theater and yell fire.

Please find someone who can defend this wide open access to weapons using and Amendment which was written when we had no truly formed national army, a musket was the weapon of choice, and we need people to have the right so we could call them to defend the country.  Find me anyone who can defend this using logic and reason, I would love the debate.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 19, 2012, 07:17:15 AM
Well said.

This gets right to the heart of the absurdity, imo: "1 shoe bomber and I take my shoes off at the airport."
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: 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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 19, 2012, 09:22:23 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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 09:31:24 AM
Fucking people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html

Shits fucked up but... Noticed that nobody is dead?

That's not really the point as far as I'm concerned.

I thing that it is a point worth noting.
Gun control kept him from toting in a semi-automatic rifle...

Beyond that, the common thread here is that mental illness, its stigma and inadequate treatment are the overriding culprits.

Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???  Sure, in China they have more stringent gun control...  They also have all kinds of other stringent rules pertianing to almost every aspect of life.  Are we ready to go to that extreme to make sure 20+ children get stabbed instead of shot??? 

Terry

Nobody said that, the point was just being made that gun control does seemingly work.
You can have gun control without Communism.

Exactly.
Leave the straw men on the fields.

So we're not prepared...  Fair enough...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 09:33:56 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.

Agreed, and the fact that so many people view this whole thing as horrific speaks to our Humanity...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 09:41:19 AM


With all due respect, the USA has more people in prison than China. Not more per capita...straight up more people...and half of the us prison population is in for drug offenses... Essentially thought crimes.

I hate it when Americans get preachy about China and their lack of freedom. It's fucking bullshit. Our two party system is nominally better than their one party system. Our freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. At the same time, Williamson County, Texas will put you in prison for 6 months and fuck up your ability to have a career in many many fields for a single joint.

1.  China execute thousands of people a year for crimes similar to that which will get you 6mo. in Texas.  They have fewer people in jail b/c they just shoot all their criminals.

2.  Drug Prohibition is a different topic all together and the policies of such should have its own debate in a separate topic...  At which point I'll probably agree with much of what you have to say...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatthecello42 on December 19, 2012, 09:44:35 AM
You can eliminate all civilian possession of guns, or mandate that all qualified individuals carry a gun. Either extreme could potentially be effective, and neither extreme could ever be implemented in a 100% absolute fashion. For some people, having a gun gives them peace of mind because supposedly it will allow them to have control over a situation and a way to defend themselves. For other people, peace of mind can be increased by knowing that the chance of being killed by a gun is already relatively small (less than the chance of getting killed by a vehicle). And following that line of thinking, if we regulate the hell out of guns and reduce the hell out of the number of guns owned by civilians, the corresponding chance of getting killed by a gun will be significantly reduced. Therefore, more guns or less guns can increase a person’s peace of mind depending on who you are.  Personally, I'm in the less guns camp.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 10:01:24 AM
if we regulate the hell out of guns and reduce the hell out of the number of guns owned by civilians

This is exactly what we do now.  We do regulate the hell out of guns.  And there is nothing really encouraging gun-ownership anymore, at least via the State.  If anything encouragement comes from peers and culture... 


Personally, I'm in the less guns camp.

I am too, but how do you get the genie back in the bottle. 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatthecello42 on December 19, 2012, 10:13:02 AM
if we regulate the hell out of guns and reduce the hell out of the number of guns owned by civilians

This is exactly what we do now.  We do regulate the hell out of guns.  And there is nothing really encouraging gun-ownership anymore, at least via the State.  If anything encouragement comes from peers and culture... 


Personally, I'm in the less guns camp.

I am too, but how do you get the genie back in the bottle. 

Terry

I say do here what they did in Australia:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html)

Quote
After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn't Had a Similar Massacre Since.  At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.

Obviously, it's a very different country.  But it's an example.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 19, 2012, 10:20:42 AM


With all due respect, the USA has more people in prison than China. Not more per capita...straight up more people...and half of the us prison population is in for drug offenses... Essentially thought crimes.

I hate it when Americans get preachy about China and their lack of freedom. It's fucking bullshit. Our two party system is nominally better than their one party system. Our freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. At the same time, Williamson County, Texas will put you in prison for 6 months and fuck up your ability to have a career in many many fields for a single joint.

1.  China execute thousands of people a year for crimes similar to that which will get you 6mo. in Texas.  They have fewer people in jail b/c they just shoot all their criminals.

2.  Drug Prohibition is a different topic all together and the policies of such should have its own debate in a separate topic...  At which point I'll probably agree with much of what you have to say...

Terry

China executes 5,000-10,000 people per year - yes that's a big number and I'm not defending it. The vast majority of those are violent offenders. It's still about 1 in a million people getting executed.

I'm not saying China has it's hands clean. I'm just saying people talk about China like it's this land of no freedom whatsoever. There has never been a time in China's thousands of years of history where the people had greater freedom than now. That's the truth. A billion and half people live with great security that they can eat and drink and fall in love and raise families.

They have a single political party. We have two very similar political parties. Our perceived notion of self-government based on the fact that we get to vote is not that much better than the communist party of China. Our political leaders take their cues from the corporations who pay their way into office, not from our votes. I bring up the drug issue because we have over a million people in prison for what I see as essentially a thought crime. But we are only a generation or two removed from McCarthyism, Jim Crow, etc. and only a few more generations removed from the genocide of Native Americans and slavery.

The People Republic of China was founded in 1949. Since 1980 they have made HUGE changes in how they govern and the freedom they allow their people to have.


Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???


I guess my answer is "yes."
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 10:39:10 AM


With all due respect, the USA has more people in prison than China. Not more per capita...straight up more people...and half of the us prison population is in for drug offenses... Essentially thought crimes.

I hate it when Americans get preachy about China and their lack of freedom. It's fucking bullshit. Our two party system is nominally better than their one party system. Our freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. At the same time, Williamson County, Texas will put you in prison for 6 months and fuck up your ability to have a career in many many fields for a single joint.

1.  China execute thousands of people a year for crimes similar to that which will get you 6mo. in Texas.  They have fewer people in jail b/c they just shoot all their criminals.

2.  Drug Prohibition is a different topic all together and the policies of such should have its own debate in a separate topic...  At which point I'll probably agree with much of what you have to say...

Terry

China executes 5,000-10,000 people per year - yes that's a big number and I'm not defending it. The vast majority of those are violent offenders. It's still about 1 in a million people getting executed.

I'm not saying China has it's hands clean. I'm just saying people talk about China like it's this land of no freedom whatsoever. There has never been a time in China's thousands of years of history where the people had greater freedom than now. That's the truth. A billion and half people live with great security that they can eat and drink and fall in love and raise families.

They have a single political party. We have two very similar political parties. Our perceived notion of self-government based on the fact that we get to vote is not that much better than the communist party of China. Our political leaders take their cues from the corporations who pay their way into office, not from our votes. I bring up the drug issue because we have over a million people in prison for what I see as essentially a thought crime. But we are only a generation or two removed from McCarthyism, Jim Crow, etc. and only a few more generations removed from the genocide of Native Americans and slavery.

The People Republic of China was founded in 1949. Since 1980 they have made HUGE changes in how they govern and the freedom they allow their people to have.


Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???


I guess my answer is "yes."

So you're essentially saying we need further restrict our freedom and then we will have the freedom now enjoyed by the Chinese???  That's great logic...

I'm stunned that people are so willing to trade their Rights for Security when they get scared about something.  So much so that we are willing to look at China as a model?

I'm willing to concede that gun control is effective and essential.  I'm not pro-gun by any means.  But I think there are better examples out there - pick the UK or Japan, but not China...

Terry

 

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 10:43:14 AM

I say do here what they did in Australia:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html)

Quote
After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn't Had a Similar Massacre Since.  At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.

Obviously, it's a very different country.  But it's an example.

Its a great example indeed!  I'll just note that the US already has similar laws in the books as far as sale and registration.  The only difference is that we allow for weapons to be bought for "self-defense".

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 19, 2012, 10:44:59 AM


With all due respect, the USA has more people in prison than China. Not more per capita...straight up more people...and half of the us prison population is in for drug offenses... Essentially thought crimes.

I hate it when Americans get preachy about China and their lack of freedom. It's fucking bullshit. Our two party system is nominally better than their one party system. Our freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. At the same time, Williamson County, Texas will put you in prison for 6 months and fuck up your ability to have a career in many many fields for a single joint.

1.  China execute thousands of people a year for crimes similar to that which will get you 6mo. in Texas.  They have fewer people in jail b/c they just shoot all their criminals.

2.  Drug Prohibition is a different topic all together and the policies of such should have its own debate in a separate topic...  At which point I'll probably agree with much of what you have to say...

Terry

China executes 5,000-10,000 people per year - yes that's a big number and I'm not defending it. The vast majority of those are violent offenders. It's still about 1 in a million people getting executed.

I'm not saying China has it's hands clean. I'm just saying people talk about China like it's this land of no freedom whatsoever. There has never been a time in China's thousands of years of history where the people had greater freedom than now. That's the truth. A billion and half people live with great security that they can eat and drink and fall in love and raise families.

They have a single political party. We have two very similar political parties. Our perceived notion of self-government based on the fact that we get to vote is not that much better than the communist party of China. Our political leaders take their cues from the corporations who pay their way into office, not from our votes. I bring up the drug issue because we have over a million people in prison for what I see as essentially a thought crime. But we are only a generation or two removed from McCarthyism, Jim Crow, etc. and only a few more generations removed from the genocide of Native Americans and slavery.

The People Republic of China was founded in 1949. Since 1980 they have made HUGE changes in how they govern and the freedom they allow their people to have.


Are we really prepared to debate the policies of the two gov'ts in the USA and China respectively???


I guess my answer is "yes."

So you're essentially saying we need further restrict our freedom and then we will have the freedom now enjoyed by the Chinese???  That's great logic...

I'm stunned that people are so willing to trade their Rights for Security when they get scared about something.  So much so that we are willing to look at China as a model?

I'm willing to concede that gun control is effective and essential.  I'm not pro-gun by any means.  But I think there are better examples out there - pick the UK or Japan, but not China...

Terry

I hear ya. And I'm not really willing to trade my right to free speech for anything at all... I don't think I have a right to own a gun. I think that's a privilege (2nd amendment be damned). Also, the only reason China came up is because they had a person go crazy at a school in a very similar fashion as we did... but that person had no access to guns so he only injured 20 people.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 10:57:51 AM

I hear ya. And I'm not really willing to trade my right to free speech for anything at all... I don't think I have a right to own a gun. I think that's a privilege (2nd amendment be damned). Also, the only reason China came up is because they had a person go crazy at a school in a very similar fashion as we did... but that person had no access to guns so he only injured 20 people.

And going back and re-reading the comments above, I can see that no one is really arguing that we need to emulate China...  I just don't think that China is a good example of how gun-control should work.  If you want to talk about a forced (by arms nonetheless) gov't ban of civilian weaponry, then they are perhaps a good example.

IMO, the 2nd is less about the right to own a gun, but more about the right to be able to defend yourself, even from our own gov't.  That is why I cant support a Chinese type model.   The Chinese Gov't couldn't care less about human rights, they banned guns because having armed civilians threatens their hold on power. 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 19, 2012, 11:55:30 AM
This may just be how the media are portraying things (and by "media" I mean NPR, since that's basically all I have time to consume these days), but it could be that, in the wake of this latest rampage, some people are starting to come around on the possibility of stricter gun control. Maybe it was the particular horror of seeing children killed, or maybe it's a cumulative effect working, I don't know. This could just be hollow talk out of deference to the tragedy, but you're seeing Republicans and conservative Democrats like Joe Manchin say things (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/dealmaker-sen-joe-manchin-says-bring-nra-congress-121819222.html) about gun control that you wouldn't otherwise expect them to.

After Congress let the assault weapons ban expire in 2004, I angrily wrote my reps, accusing Congress of political cowardice. (That's right.) I see no problem with designating certain firearms as being clearly police- or military-grade, and thus should be kept out of the hands of the (potentially unhinged, violent) public. Some people believe that the 2nd Amendment exists to allow us to overthrow the government if we need to ... well, we're so far behind the government in the arms race that I don't think being allowed to have assault weapons will make much difference. I say renew the ban.

As to high-capacity magazines... Let me preface by saying I don't own any, and if they were outlawed tomorrow, I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep. But these often get lumped in with assault weapons, etc. during conversations like this, and sometimes wind up getting scrutinized disproportionate to the actual menace they pose. For those who aren't aware how this works, a handgun magazine can be ejected with the simple press of the thumb; a person can have spare magazines already filled and queued up in his belt. An empty magazine can be ejected and replaced in literally one second. So, while I'm certainly sensitive to arguments for why high-capacity magazines may be "unnecessary" for your average civilian to possess (like I said, I won't really care if they go away), I also don't believe that banning them will necessarily have the effect of slowing down shooting sprees in progress that some people probably think it would.

Oddly enough, within a short span of time, Gov Perry implied that he was in favor of arming teachers, stressing that the decision should be based upon local control (shootouts in school - I might try to go back)

GAH joked about it earlier, but there actually is a school district in Texas where some teachers are allowed to carry firearms in school (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/texas-school-guardian-plan-allows-teachers-guns-174238129.html).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 19, 2012, 12:05:49 PM

Gov Perry

GAH joked about it earlier, but there actually is a school district in Texas where some teachers are allowed to carry firearms in school (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/texas-school-guardian-plan-allows-teachers-guns-174238129.html).

Just arm the students...   :roll:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/student-brings-gun-to-school_n_2324143.html

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 19, 2012, 01:31:51 PM
MD officials starting to look into assault rifle bans and gun control laws already

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/politics/O-Malley-to-push-bills-on-weapons-school-safety/-/9379266/17819062/-/item/1/-/dw5r9n/-/index.html
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on December 19, 2012, 01:41:52 PM
And the President too

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/national/Obama-Gun-proposals-due-by-January/-/9379440/17827950/-/g3db0d/-/index.html
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 19, 2012, 05:15:33 PM
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/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB 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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 19, 2012, 10:52:23 PM
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
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on December 20, 2012, 08:29:49 AM
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.

Quote
The 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?

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 08:47:49 AM
Fuck Ben Stein.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 20, 2012, 08:47:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 08:47:59 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f87siGRmwYc
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 08:59:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:01:23 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



Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
wild leaps of logic and made up statistics.  well done.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: sophist on December 20, 2012, 09:13:14 AM
wild leaps of logic and made up statistics.  well done.
also known as Republicanism. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: 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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:22:39 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
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 20, 2012, 09:25:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:30:47 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%.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:31:50 AM
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.

So what are you saying?  That we've all pretty much cemented our opinions and won't be swayed???   :-P

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 09:48:38 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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans? 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:57:03 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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

I don't know.  You tell us.  Do you own research and tell us again how MY statistics are "made up"...  I stated that 99.9% of gun sales are not immediately followed by murder, and I can back that up.  Let's see you do the same...

We could massage the numbers all day, I'm happy to do so.  You'll find that an overwhelming amount of gun-sales never result in any person getting hurt.

And tell us, what makes one gun "legitimate" and another (I suppose) "illegitimate"?  People buy AR-15 style semi-automatic hunting rifles all the time and use them for such.  The .223 round is common and not even the largest used in hunting.  http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire/model-r-15/model-r-15.aspx

You could say something about high-capacity magazines, but Bloomberg showed us people will just buy (2) small cokes instead of (1) large one... 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 20, 2012, 10:00:50 AM
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.

So what are you saying?  That we've all pretty much cemented our opinions and won't be swayed???   :-P

Terry

I don't know - somehow this last incident in CT has swayed a bunch of Republican pundits.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 10:02:32 AM
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.

So what are you saying?  That we've all pretty much cemented our opinions and won't be swayed???   :-P

Terry

I don't know - somehow this last incident in CT has swayed a bunch of Republican pundits.

Politicians kiss babies...  It doesn't mean they love them...

Terry


ETA  I do think Congress will do something, reenacting the Fed Assault Weapons Ban or something similar...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 10:12:14 AM
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%.

see, you were wrong.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 10:12:57 AM
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%.

see, you were wrong.

LOL!  Cheers!

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 10:56:57 AM
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.

So what are you saying?  That we've all pretty much cemented our opinions and won't be swayed???   :-P

Terry

I don't know - somehow this last incident in CT has swayed a bunch of Republican pundits.

It should also be noted, the NRA has/will be announcing some changes in their stance as well. Coincidence? I don't know, but LaPierre will be on Meet the Press Sunday.

Quote
NBC's "Meet the Press" has landed an exclusive interview with National Rifle Association CEO and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, the network announced today.

LaPierre's Sunday appearance will follow what the NRA has described as a "major" press conference on Friday, at which the organization plans to make “meaningful contributions" to ensure that the tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn., "never happens again."

Amid increased calls for gun control legislation, LaPierre will address "what he thinks should be done to curb the threat of violence in America," NBC said.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 11:02:25 AM
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.

So what are you saying?  That we've all pretty much cemented our opinions and won't be swayed???   :-P

Terry

I don't know - somehow this last incident in CT has swayed a bunch of Republican pundits.

It should also be noted, the NRA has/will be announcing some changes in their stance as well. Coincidence? I don't know, but LaPierre will be on Meet the Press Sunday.

Quote
NBC's "Meet the Press" has landed an exclusive interview with National Rifle Association CEO and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, the network announced today.

LaPierre's Sunday appearance will follow what the NRA has described as a "major" press conference on Friday, at which the organization plans to make “meaningful contributions" to ensure that the tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn., "never happens again."

Amid increased calls for gun control legislation, LaPierre will address "what he thinks should be done to curb the threat of violence in America," NBC said.

highly dubious. it will just be some more Ben Stein B.S.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Bobafett on December 20, 2012, 11:21:01 AM
I love guns.  I hate the killing innocent people.

 I live in one of the most lax gun law areas of the country outside of Alaska.  You don't need concealed carry permits, you can buy guns and walk out of the store with one that day, AR-15s are very popular for "Varmit" hunting.

 I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 11:34:25 AM
I love guns.  I hate the killing innocent people.

 I live in one of the most lax gun law areas of the country outside of Alaska.  You don't need concealed carry permits, you can buy guns and walk out of the store with one that day, AR-15s are very popular for "Varmit" hunting.

 I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.

From the rhetoric in this thread about how lax gun laws allow murderers to easily obtain guns and commit their vile offenses, you'd think there were mass-murders in WY all the time...

Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed, but instead is more of a result of mental illness???

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 11:43:43 AM
Fuck Ben Stein.

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard

I found his statement to be hilarious actually. Clearly not his intent, but still...fuck that guy. He proves his own point as in whytf should I give a shit what he says or thinks.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Bobafett on December 20, 2012, 12:01:02 PM
I love guns.  I hate the killing innocent people.

 I live in one of the most lax gun law areas of the country outside of Alaska.  You don't need concealed carry permits, you can buy guns and walk out of the store with one that day, AR-15s are very popular for "Varmit" hunting.

 I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.

From the rhetoric in this thread about how lax gun laws allow murderers to easily obtain guns and commit their vile offenses, you'd think there were mass-murders in WY all the time...

Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed, but instead is more of a result of mental illness???

Terry

that is a valid argument, imo.

 I took my truck to the shop this morning and this crusty old fuck got into a conversation with me on this subject.  He is concerned about the "rag heads" and what they will do if you move towards very strict gun controls.  "at least I have a chance when someone pulls a gun on me.  If they put a bomb in one of these cars, the only chance i have is that my foot will still be attached to my leg!" 

I don't think there is an easy solution to this plague that affects our society.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 12:12:22 PM
I love guns.  I hate the killing innocent people.

 I live in one of the most lax gun law areas of the country outside of Alaska.  You don't need concealed carry permits, you can buy guns and walk out of the store with one that day, AR-15s are very popular for "Varmit" hunting.

 I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.

From the rhetoric in this thread about how lax gun laws allow murderers to easily obtain guns and commit their vile offenses....

they don't?  how do these people get guns then?


Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed.....

did you read what you just wrote?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 12:17:47 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.

I wasn't trying to make an argument regarding where society's values are or should be. While I might have an opinion regarding that, it's not the point I was trying to make. (Unlike that comment from Huckabee or Stein where their opinion IS the point they're trying to make).

I was simply stating that if you're offended by what happened yet choose the route of inaction, you are contributing to the policies or lack thereof that make this type of incident possible. Not that if you don't do anything, you're not allowed to be upset by it, but we could debate all day on here and come up with a working solution the 20 or so of us can live with, but it doesn't make a difference. If you feel strongly about something, let those that represent you know. Societal change starts at the individual level.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 12:18:35 PM

Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed.....

did you read what you just wrote?

I was a bit confused by this as well.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on December 20, 2012, 12:42:20 PM
I can't stand Ann Curry who apparently sparked this whole thing, but I'm doing it.

26 random acts of kindness in memory of the 26 fallen in Newtown, ct. I'm already on my fourth act... Giving blood as we speak.

Facebook.com/26acts

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 20, 2012, 01:05:31 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.

I wasn't trying to make an argument regarding where society's values are or should be. While I might have an opinion regarding that, it's not the point I was trying to make. (Unlike that comment from Huckabee or Stein where their opinion IS the point they're trying to make).

I was simply stating that if you're offended by what happened yet choose the route of inaction, you are contributing to the policies or lack thereof that make this type of incident possible. Not that if you don't do anything, you're not allowed to be upset by it, but we could debate all day on here and come up with a working solution the 20 or so of us can live with, but it doesn't make a difference. If you feel strongly about something, let those that represent you know. Societal change starts at the individual level.


I gotcha. All very valid.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 01:11:09 PM
I love guns.  I hate the killing innocent people.

 I live in one of the most lax gun law areas of the country outside of Alaska.  You don't need concealed carry permits, you can buy guns and walk out of the store with one that day, AR-15s are very popular for "Varmit" hunting.

 I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.

From the rhetoric in this thread about how lax gun laws allow murderers to easily obtain guns and commit their vile offenses....

they don't?  how do these people get guns then?

"Those people" obtain guns like you or I do - they are NOT criminals and they buy them legally.  Then they commit a criminal act.

Or they buy them illegally, which (by definition) is illegal.


Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed.....

did you read what you just wrote?

LOL!  Ok I concede that sounds really bad in retrospect!  But really, if all it took were in inordinate number of guns in a population to make murder by guns rise, then we should see a huge amount of murder in WY.  But there isn't.  Is it because of a smaller population?  More of a gun culture?  Perhaps.  Or maybe its b/c the fact that you have large numbers of guns that are easily accessible doesn't mean the number of murders automatically rises.

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 20, 2012, 01:16:59 PM
Terry, are you really unable to conceive of the possibility that gun violence may be related to a combination of accessible guns AND mental illness?
Are you also aware of the fact that some people are just assholes but not necessarily mentally ill and they too sometimes use guns to hurt people?

Addressing a single element of the problem will not fix anything.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 01:23:56 PM
Terry, are you really unable to conceive of the possibility that gun violence may be related to a combination of accessible guns AND mental illness?
Are you also aware of the fact that some people are just assholes but not necessarily mentally ill and they too sometimes use guns to hurt people?

Addressing a single element of the problem will not fix anything.

I understand all those things - you are right, without guns there is no gun violence.  But other than a few posts, this whole thread has been about further gun control. 

Short of banning all guns (and driving them to the black market), how are you going to stop the a$$holes or the mentally ill persons that bought a gun last year from shooting up something next year? 

How about if we make murder illegal?  Done.  How about we limit who can buy guns, excluding former felons, minors, etc.  Done.  How about we institute waiting periods and background checks.  Done.

What else would you suggest we do?  B/c you're right.  Focusing on one issue, like the availability of guns, doesn't address the issue in whole.  I'll be happy to talk about how we need to increase funding for and availability of State Mental Health Services. 

Terry


Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 20, 2012, 01:32:50 PM
How about we limit who can buy guns, excluding former felons, minors, etc.  Done.  How about we institute waiting periods and background checks.  Done.

Everybody knows these laws are ridiculously full of holes. so I'd say that shit is not remotely "Done".


Anyway, has anyone linked this article from the Washington Post?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

I'd like to quote one section in particular:
Quote
9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.
Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg)


“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”

This shows a correlation between gun control legislation and reduced deaths. Not a significat one but I'd say that this is likely because the laws do not go far enough.


Also, this:
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/mass-shooting-legally.jpg)


I'll be happy to talk about how we need to increase funding for and availability of State Mental Health Services. 

Terry

No one is dismissing that. I think we all agree on that.
But you're the one who keeps dismissing expanding the discussion to gun control.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 01:44:26 PM
A novel idea I heard elsewhere was some form of gun insurance. Actually, here's an article on it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/breakingviews/2012/12/18/congress_should_push_for_mandatory_gun_insurance.html

Quote
Moreover, the market should be efficient at weighing the risks. Insurers specialize in figuring out the odds of something going wrong and charging the appropriate amount.
...
So a shotgun owner who has hunted for years without incident could be charged far less than a first-time owner purchasing a semi-automatic. In other words, people would be financially discouraged from purchasing the most risky firearms and encouraged to attend gun safety classes and use trigger locks. And the insurance could provide some restitution for those hurt by guns.

Yeah, the idea of throwing your hands in the air and saying we've "Done" all we can doesn't really make sense to me. There's other options than just saying  ban all guns, which btw terry, I don't think anyone on here has proposed (but I could be wrong, don't feel like reading the entire thread again)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 01:58:40 PM
How about we limit who can buy guns, excluding former felons, minors, etc.  Done.  How about we institute waiting periods and background checks.  Done.

Everybody knows these laws are ridiculously full of holes. so I'd say that shit is not remotely "Done".


Which is why I mentioned earlier that those hole needs to be plugged:

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!

And here:
I do support closing the loop-holes and adapting laws as times change.



Anyway, has anyone linked this article from the Washington Post?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

I'd like to quote one section in particular:
Quote
9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.
Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg)


“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”

This shows a correlation between gun control legislation and reduced deaths. Not a significat one but I'd say that this is likely because the laws do not go far enough.

Let's not confuse firearm deaths with murder by firearms.  Child locks will not prevent someone that owns a gun from taking it off and murdering someone.  BTW that's a great article...

Also, this:
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/mass-shooting-legally.jpg)

Doesn't this just demonstrate that perfect normal people (who can buy a gun legally - someone like you or I) sometimes commit criminal acts with guns? 

I'll be happy to talk about how we need to increase funding for and availability of State Mental Health Services. 


No one is dismissing that. I think we all agree on that.
But you're the one who keeps dismissing expanding the discussion to gun control.

Point out a specific facet of gun control we need to change and we can talk about it.

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 02:11:38 PM
A novel idea I heard elsewhere was some form of gun insurance. Actually, here's an article on it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/breakingviews/2012/12/18/congress_should_push_for_mandatory_gun_insurance.html


I've also seen talk about making the manufacturers liable...  That would increase their own margins making guns more expensive, and limit the number of big-bangers produced (since they would have a higher level of liability)...  Why sell a gun that you might have to pay for in the future???  They'd all start selling nerf-guns fairly quickly...

Terry
 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 02:26:06 PM
A novel idea I heard elsewhere was some form of gun insurance. Actually, here's an article on it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/breakingviews/2012/12/18/congress_should_push_for_mandatory_gun_insurance.html


I've also seen talk about making the manufacturers liable...  That would increase their own margins making guns more expensive, and limit the number of big-bangers produced (since they would have a higher level of liability)...  Why sell a gun that you might have to pay for in the future???  They'd all start selling nerf-guns fairly quickly...

Terry
 

Why would they have to pay for it in the future?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 02:35:24 PM
A novel idea I heard elsewhere was some form of gun insurance. Actually, here's an article on it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/breakingviews/2012/12/18/congress_should_push_for_mandatory_gun_insurance.html


I've also seen talk about making the manufacturers liable...  That would increase their own margins making guns more expensive, and limit the number of big-bangers produced (since they would have a higher level of liability)...  Why sell a gun that you might have to pay for in the future???  They'd all start selling nerf-guns fairly quickly...

Terry
 

Why would they have to pay for it in the future?

What do you mean, that's what "liability" means...  If manufacturer's were liable for future uses of the gun, they would be more reluctant to sell them presently.  If a manufacturer feels that a certain type of gun is more likely to produce results that force the company to pay, they will quit making that gun.   

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 02:41:50 PM
Quote
9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.
Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg)


“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”


Interestingly enough, CT is one of those Yellow/Slashed States... 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 03:17:49 PM
A novel idea I heard elsewhere was some form of gun insurance. Actually, here's an article on it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/breakingviews/2012/12/18/congress_should_push_for_mandatory_gun_insurance.html


I've also seen talk about making the manufacturers liable...  That would increase their own margins making guns more expensive, and limit the number of big-bangers produced (since they would have a higher level of liability)...  Why sell a gun that you might have to pay for in the future???  They'd all start selling nerf-guns fairly quickly...

Terry
 

Why would they have to pay for it in the future?

What do you mean, that's what "liability" means...  If manufacturer's were liable for future uses of the gun, they would be more reluctant to sell them presently.  If a manufacturer feels that a certain type of gun is more likely to produce results that force the company to pay, they will quit making that gun.   

Terry

That's my point. What are those "results" that you're talking about? The gun not being used for its intended purpose?

I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 03:40:07 PM

That's my point. What are those "results" that you're talking about? The gun not being used for its intended purpose?

Yeah, that's what I mean.  Specifically, damage to personal property and injury.  Shooting a deer doesn't carry an liability, shooting up a house or person does. 


I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

Perhaps we can find a model in the Tobacco Law Suits.  Why should health insurers pay for all the "damages"?  Why not make the manufacturer's pay for some of it, even if owning and using tobacco is entirely voluntary by a third party, namely the individual citizen. 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 04:01:38 PM

That's my point. What are those "results" that you're talking about? The gun not being used for its intended purpose?

Yeah, that's what I mean.  Specifically, damage to personal property and injury.  Shooting a deer doesn't carry an liability, shooting up a house or person does. 


I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

Perhaps we can find a model in the Tobacco Law Suits.  Why should health insurers pay for all the "damages"?  Why not make the manufacturer's pay for some of it, even if owning and using tobacco is entirely voluntary by a third party, namely the individual citizen. 

Terry

So we're saying the same thing. This is a good idea. You should run for office.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 04:23:41 PM
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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

"The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides."

"Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Also, pretty straight forward op ed piece from Fareed Zakaria from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html?tid=pm_pop
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 20, 2012, 04:31:10 PM
I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range? And as you yourself pointed out, Terry, the vast majority of all the people who would like to own that gun are not going to wind up committing heinous, terrible acts with it. But they will have to end up underwriting the recompense paid out to the victims of the lunatics who would use that firearm for evil deeds.

If there are certain guns that are so dangerous that their prices must be jacked way up to cover the inevitable liability, why not just ban the gun outright? How is it fair to keep it available only for the very wealthy -- are they inherently less likely to snap and want to use it to commit mayhem?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 20, 2012, 04:33:01 PM
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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

"The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides."

"Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Also, pretty straight forward op ed piece from Fareed Zakaria from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Zakaria is very on point here. As a matter of fact, I stole this and posted it on my Facebook, thanks GAH.
You can argue all you want, but the facts are pretty irrefutable.
I know there will be whining and complaining from many of the steadfast gun rights people, but I don't give a fuck.

I own 15+ guns, both pistols and rifles.  I am all for gun reform to keep horrible shit like this happening.
You, sir deserve a +k.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 04:39:02 PM
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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

"The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides."

"Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Also, pretty straight forward op ed piece from Fareed Zakaria from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Thanks!  Based on those numbers (32,000) vs. the 7.2mil BackGround Checks (half of the actual 14.4mil number), we're still talking about 0.05% of gun sales from last year assumed to have committed 100% of those deaths...  We assume that to favor YOUR numbers...  In order to favor mine, I could say that some of the guns used to commit those crimes were bought the year before...

And Fareed's solution is to get rid of the guns.  I imagine his solution to the drug problem would be to get rid of drugs.  Tell us again Fareed...  how is the War on Drugs going??? 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 04:41:12 PM
I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range? And as you yourself pointed out, Terry, the vast majority of all the people who would like to own that gun are not going to wind up committing heinous, terrible acts with it. But they will have to end up underwriting the recompense paid out to the victims of the lunatics who would use that firearm for evil deeds.

If there are certain guns that are so dangerous that their prices must be jacked way up to cover the inevitable liability, why not just ban the gun outright? How is it fair to keep it available only for the very wealthy -- are they inherently less likely to snap and want to use it to commit mayhem?

Why would you ban a gun that people NEED. Your comment about how is it fair to price people out of buying something to "add to their collection" or "blast tree stumps" both sound like "wants" not needs. If a dangerous gun is necessary, let those that need it, be able to get it.

(But I certainly wouldn't disagree with banning it altogether)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 04:43:33 PM

What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range? And as you yourself pointed out, Terry, the vast majority of all the people who would like to own that gun are not going to wind up committing heinous, terrible acts with it. But they will have to end up underwriting the recompense paid out to the victims of the lunatics who would use that firearm for evil deeds.

If there are certain guns that are so dangerous that their prices must be jacked way up to cover the inevitable liability, why not just ban the gun outright? How is it fair to keep it available only for the very wealthy -- are they inherently less likely to snap and want to use it to commit mayhem?

That's a valid point...  But guns are a "luxury" and most Americans have no real issue raising "taxes" or "fees" on luxury items...  No one seemed to mind when we paid for Tobacco Abstinence Education with Tobacco Tax Dollars...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 20, 2012, 04:45:45 PM
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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

"The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides."

"Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Also, pretty straight forward op ed piece from Fareed Zakaria from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Thanks!  Based on those numbers (32,000) vs. the 7.2mil BackGround Checks (half of the actual 14.4mil number), we're still talking about 0.05% of gun sales from last year assumed to have committed 100% of those deaths...  We assume that to favor YOUR numbers...  In order to favor mine, I could say that some of the guns used to commit those crimes were bought the year before...

And Fareed's solution is to get rid of the guns.  I imagine his solution to the drug problem would be to get rid of drugs.  Tell us again Fareed...  how is the War on Drugs going???

Terry

Yes, that was his solution. He also spelled out how it worked for other countries, so your correlation to the war on drugs is pretty insignificant. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 04:46:39 PM
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%.

how many were used in a violent crime that didn't end in murder?    how many in suicides?  how many were rifles with a legitimate use besides the killing of humans?

"The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides."

"Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Also, pretty straight forward op ed piece from Fareed Zakaria from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Thanks!  Based on those numbers (32,000) vs. the 7.2mil BackGround Checks (half of the actual 14.4mil number), we're still talking about 0.05% of gun sales from last year assumed to have committed 100% of those deaths...  We assume that to favor YOUR numbers...  In order to favor mine, I could say that some of the guns used to commit those crimes were bought the year before...

And Fareed's solution is to get rid of the guns.  I imagine his solution to the drug problem would be to get rid of drugs.  Tell us again Fareed...  how is the War on Drugs going??? 

Terry

Dude. Smoke a bowl, have a beer or do whatever you need to do to relax.

I'm not sure how this:
"Instead, why not have government do something much simpler and that has proven successful: limit access to guns."

Turned into "get rid of the guns"

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 05:48:13 PM
What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range?

Oh God, the horror!!  That's a world I don't want to live in!



*ironic crosspost coming soon.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 20, 2012, 05:51:01 PM
I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range? And as you yourself pointed out, Terry, the vast majority of all the people who would like to own that gun are not going to wind up committing heinous, terrible acts with it. But they will have to end up underwriting the recompense paid out to the victims of the lunatics who would use that firearm for evil deeds.

If there are certain guns that are so dangerous that their prices must be jacked way up to cover the inevitable liability, why not just ban the gun outright? How is it fair to keep it available only for the very wealthy -- are they inherently less likely to snap and want to use it to commit mayhem?

Why would you ban a gun that people NEED. Your comment about how is it fair to price people out of buying something to "add to their collection" or "blast tree stumps" both sound like "wants" not needs. If a dangerous gun is necessary, let those that need it, be able to get it.

(But I certainly wouldn't disagree with banning it altogether)

If what we're saying is it's OK to own a gun if you "need" it, but not if you merely "want" it, then shouldn't we instead talk about tightening access to guns on the basis of "need", e.g., threats made against you or demonstrable risks you face, rather than simply how big your bank account is? Because the latter will easily keep guns out of the hands of lower-means people who may need them, but won't do anything to keep them out of the hands of wealthy folks who simply want them.

(I'm not advocating for this particular kind of access control, just pointing out that the gun insurance/liability approach introduces a prevailing factor -- money -- that doesn't really have much to do with the real issues relevant in this discussion as concern gun ownership, use, and harmful outcomes. Unless we're just talking about covering your ass in a lawsuit/"compensating" victims' families with money, which I think is a rather sad and cynical way of achieving balance on the issue.)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 20, 2012, 06:13:08 PM
I agree, you're right. The manufacturers being held liable would limit the number of "big-bangers" produced and sold, but for those that are in the market for such an item because that's the only thing that will get the job done, they'd be willing to pay that larger amount. It wouldn't have to cut into their profits as they'd make up for in price point what they lose in volume.

ETA: so I don't think they'd "quit making the gun", they'd just make less of them, mark it up to make up the difference and cover the liability. We'd have less fo the "big bangers" and only in the hands of those that really "need" them.

Isn't that a "win" for all players???  Manufacturers will still be able to pull in their profit and fewer guns on the street...  All without passing legislation further limiting a law-abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, ie "gun control".

What about the people who would like to own that gun (to add to their collection, or to blast tree stumps on their private property, or whatever) but can't afford it because some actuary had it effectively priced it out of their range? And as you yourself pointed out, Terry, the vast majority of all the people who would like to own that gun are not going to wind up committing heinous, terrible acts with it. But they will have to end up underwriting the recompense paid out to the victims of the lunatics who would use that firearm for evil deeds.

If there are certain guns that are so dangerous that their prices must be jacked way up to cover the inevitable liability, why not just ban the gun outright? How is it fair to keep it available only for the very wealthy -- are they inherently less likely to snap and want to use it to commit mayhem?

Why would you ban a gun that people NEED. Your comment about how is it fair to price people out of buying something to "add to their collection" or "blast tree stumps" both sound like "wants" not needs. If a dangerous gun is necessary, let those that need it, be able to get it.

(But I certainly wouldn't disagree with banning it altogether)

If what we're saying is it's OK to own a gun if you "need" it, but not if you merely "want" it, then shouldn't we instead talk about tightening access to guns on the basis of "need", e.g., threats made against you or demonstrable risks you face, rather than simply how big your bank account is? Because the latter will easily keep guns out of the hands of lower-means people who may need them, but won't do anything to keep them out of the hands of wealthy folks who simply want them.

(I'm not advocating for this particular kind of access control, just pointing out that the gun insurance/liability approach introduces a prevailing factor -- money -- that doesn't really have much to do with the real issues relevant in this discussion as concern gun ownership, use, and harmful outcomes. Unless we're just talking about covering your ass in a lawsuit/"compensating" victims' families with money, which I think is a rather sad and cynical way of achieving balance on the issue.)

You made a jump from military style assault rifles to all guns. I have a piece of shit hyundai. I pay less insurance for that than a 21 year old kid driving a porsche, but more than a soccer mom driving a volvo wagon (sorry pg). No one is saying you can't have a car if you can't afford to buy a Porsche. But if you so choose to, or need or want that for whatever reason, then yes you should pay more for it. Money is indeed a prevailing factor in most other aspects of life. I don't see we should create a level playing field for gun ownership.

eta: as for the compensating families being a cynical viewpoint, it is. But it also require the leap and admission that wait a second, sometimes these things are being used for purposes that they weren't intended. Maybe we should try and regulate that.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 20, 2012, 08:27:59 PM
OK, so if we are just talking about military-style assault weapons falling into this category, then if they are that dangerous then why not just ban their sale outright? (I agreed to doing as much a few pages back.)

This effective "danger tax" seems like a compromise that should please neither the anti-gun camp (because it doesn't halt the manufacture and sale of these dangerous weapons) nor the pro-gun faction (because it acknowledges their legality but means-tests access to them).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 09:29:43 PM
do whatever you need to do to relax.

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?

That was good advise.  THanks!

As for the percentage I keep throwing out, I am just pointing out the the hugely vast number of gun sold in the US are not used to commit harm upon other people.  So much so that the 32,000 you point out (which is horrible in itself) is LESS than deaths by many other means, like death in vehicle accidents.

If the incident in CT had involved a motorist purposely killing 26 people by running them over with an SUV, would you be calling for the ban or limitation on SUVs???  I doubt it.  None of would be...

I'm just trying to present guns as just another tool that can be used safely, and I'm trying to persuade you that these horrific incidents shouldn't make us all leap at the chance to throw away a Right we all have (if we don't actually "enjoy" it).

Terry


ETA,  I try to avoid these threads, and now you see why!!!  LOL!!!




Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: susep on December 20, 2012, 09:38:14 PM
I wonder how the framers would change the 2nd Amendment if they could have foreseen the chaos of their creation?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 09:53:11 PM
do whatever you need to do to relax.

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?

That was good advise.  THanks!

As for the percentage I keep throwing out, I am just pointing out the the hugely vast number of gun sold in the US are not used to commit harm upon other people.  So much so that the 32,000 you point out (which is horrible in itself) is LESS than deaths by many other means, like death in vehicle accidents.

here is some more data regarding firearms use in crimes in 2011

murder - 8,538
robbery - 122,300
assault - 136,371

suicide - 19,182

If the incident in CT had involved a motorist purposely killing 26 people by running them over with an SUV, would you be calling for the ban or limitation on SUVs???  I doubt it.  None of would be...

well, that didn't happen and no we wouldn't.  of the many reasons i could list the main reason is that cars exist for many purposes.  the gun has one.  to kill.   another silly leap of logic.


I wonder how the framers would change the 2nd Amendment if they could have foreseen the chaos of their creation?

well it is certainly time to take a look at it ourselves.  the 2nd amendment is completely outdated, its uses in current society are completely irrational, and it is time for a major overhaul.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 20, 2012, 10:43:39 PM
And I get pulled back in...


do whatever you need to do to relax.

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?

That was good advise.  THanks!

As for the percentage I keep throwing out, I am just pointing out the the hugely vast number of gun sold in the US are not used to commit harm upon other people.  So much so that the 32,000 you point out (which is horrible in itself) is LESS than deaths by many other means, like death in vehicle accidents.

here is some more data regarding firearms use in crimes in 2011

murder - 8,538
robbery - 122,300
assault - 136,371

suicide - 19,182

And its all tragic. 
If the incident in CT had involved a motorist purposely killing 26 people by running them over with an SUV, would you be calling for the ban or limitation on SUVs???  I doubt it.  None of would be...

well, that didn't happen and no we wouldn't.  of the many reasons i could list the main reason is that cars exist for many purposes.  the gun has one.  to kill.   another silly leap of logic.

Which is why I tried to say "none of [us] would be".  Absolutely it's silly.  And we didn't think people would use airplanes as weapons and run them into building either, did we???  But I suppose that's another topic...  And again the analogy is silly; we will never ban air-flight...

And my use of a gun doesn't necessarily result in murder, as we've shown both in my percentage and you post stating that guns can also be used as an Intimidation Device, or a device to wound...  But you didn't note how it is also a Deterrent - you didn't list how many home invasions were stopped with the use of a gun in a defensive situation, or how many rapes were stopped, or muggings, etc.  Its a weapon, sure.  We all know what weapons are for...   

I wonder how the framers would change the 2nd Amendment if they could have foreseen the chaos of their creation?

well it is certainly time to take a look at it ourselves.  the 2nd amendment is completely outdated, its uses in current society are completely irrational, and it is time for a major overhaul.

I don't think its outdated at all.  I think the Framers saw the importance of being able to defend your Rights as such to make it the 2nd Amendment, and not say the 1xth... 

And its quite another leap, but I wonder how we would feel about this if we lived in Syria and were actually fighting the Gov't???  Its totally left-field topic, though...  And belongs in the What-If Section, and not here...

As I've stated before in this thread, I'll support Gun Control to a point.  But as you can plainly see, I can't support a Ban. 

Have to go into the office for a while, then back to work on PH Transfers...  Got 7/25/91 Upgrade lined up!

Peace!  And don't try to rope me back in.

Terry

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 20, 2012, 11:22:17 PM
And I get pulled back in...


do whatever you need to do to relax.

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?

That was good advise.  THanks!

As for the percentage I keep throwing out, I am just pointing out the the hugely vast number of gun sold in the US are not used to commit harm upon other people.  So much so that the 32,000 you point out (which is horrible in itself) is LESS than deaths by many other means, like death in vehicle accidents.

here is some more data regarding firearms use in crimes in 2011

murder - 8,538
robbery - 122,300
assault - 136,371

suicide - 19,182

And its all tragic. 
If the incident in CT had involved a motorist purposely killing 26 people by running them over with an SUV, would you be calling for the ban or limitation on SUVs???  I doubt it.  None of would be...

well, that didn't happen and no we wouldn't.  of the many reasons i could list the main reason is that cars exist for many purposes.  the gun has one.  to kill.   another silly leap of logic.

Which is why I tried to say "none of [us] would be".  Absolutely it's silly.  And we didn't think people would use airplanes as weapons and run them into building either, did we???  But I suppose that's another topic...  And again the analogy is silly; we will never ban air-flight...

And my use of a gun doesn't necessarily result in murder, as we've shown both in my percentage and you post stating that guns can also be used as an Intimidation Device, or a device to wound...  But you didn't note how it is also a Deterrent - you didn't list how many home invasions were stopped with the use of a gun in a defensive situation, or how many rapes were stopped, or muggings, etc.  Its a weapon, sure.  We all know what weapons are for...   

I wonder how the framers would change the 2nd Amendment if they could have foreseen the chaos of their creation?

well it is certainly time to take a look at it ourselves.  the 2nd amendment is completely outdated, its uses in current society are completely irrational, and it is time for a major overhaul.

I don't think its outdated at all.  I think the Framers saw the importance of being able to defend your Rights as such to make it the 2nd Amendment, and not say the 1xth...

"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"

this was written in a time were there was no actual official federal army to defend against foreign enemies, rather there were state and local militias that worked together when need be.  in fact most of the founders were opposed to the whole idea of a federal army.  that didn't even become official official until WWII. so, we have a well regulated militia now.  if you would like to try and overthrow them ...good luck.

furthermore the definition of 'arms' has changed radically since.  at the time of this being written muskets and the brand new pistol were single fire and very inaccurate.  we all know what guns are capable of today.  a line needs to be drawn, and we are real late in drawing it.

i'd say just those two reasons alone makes it pretty outdated.

personal safety?  people with guns in their home are far more likely to be victims of a gunshot whether accidental or intentional.


Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 20, 2012, 11:31:06 PM
Certainly, it's fair to say the framers could not have envisioned where firearms technology would be today. That's the problem with codifying something technology-centric into an enduring document like a constitution.

Now, I'm no constitutional scholar, but it sure seems that language in the Constitution is about as vague and broad as language in legislation tends to be specific and meticulous. I wonder if the framers didn't do this on purpose, believing that it is the legislature's role to hash out the particulars on an issue, and by leaving things broad that would allow room for legislatures and the judiciary to create and interpret laws according to the prevailing needs or wishes of the population, rather than locking everything in too tightly by a constitution that obviously will just get older and older.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on December 21, 2012, 12:45:29 AM
I seriously thought I had heard it all, that there was no pro-gun argument that hasn't been said a million times.  Then, along comes a freshman Texas politician to prove me wrong.

Enjoy!

Quote
Incoming Texas State Rep. Kyle Kacal says guns don’t kill people—ping-pong kills people.

"I've heard of people being killed playing ping-pong—ping-pongs are more dangerous than guns," he says. "Flat-screen TVs are injuring more kids today than anything."

Read more (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/texas-lawmaker-ping-pongs-deadlier-guns-211551404--politics.html)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on December 21, 2012, 12:53:47 AM
I wonder if the framers didn't do this on purpose, believing that it is the legislature's role to hash out the particulars on an issue, and by leaving things broad that would allow room for legislatures and the judiciary to create and interpret laws according to the prevailing needs or wishes of the population, rather than locking everything in too tightly by a constitution that obviously will just get older and older.

You don't have to wonder; this is a general purpose of constitutional/charter law.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 21, 2012, 12:54:25 AM
I seriously thought I had heard it all, that there was no pro-gun argument that hasn't been said a million times.  Then, along comes a freshman Texas politician to prove me wrong.

Enjoy!

Quote
Incoming Texas State Rep. Kyle Kacal says guns don’t kill people—ping-pong kills people.

"I've heard of people being killed playing ping-pong—ping-pongs are more dangerous than guns," he says. "Flat-screen TVs are injuring more kids today than anything."

Read more (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/texas-lawmaker-ping-pongs-deadlier-guns-211551404--politics.html)

twatts is actually a texas state rep?!? 

 :wink:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 21, 2012, 01:03:02 AM
do whatever you need to do to relax.

Also, who gives a fuck what the % is that you seem to be so hung up on. You seem to be missing the more important # of 32,000 deaths. You're ok with that high a number of deaths by firearms?

That was good advise.  THanks!

As for the percentage I keep throwing out, I am just pointing out the the hugely vast number of gun sold in the US are not used to commit harm upon other people.  So much so that the 32,000 you point out (which is horrible in itself) is LESS than deaths by many other means, like death in vehicle accidents.

If the incident in CT had involved a motorist purposely killing 26 people by running them over with an SUV, would you be calling for the ban or limitation on SUVs???  I doubt it.  None of would be...

I'm just trying to present guns as just another tool that can be used safely, and I'm trying to persuade you that these horrific incidents shouldn't make us all leap at the chance to throw away a Right we all have (if we don't actually "enjoy" it).

Terry


ETA,  I try to avoid these threads, and now you see why!!!  LOL!!!

I understand you are trying to use the percentages to make your point, but I would counter with how many lives are worth that freedom?     Are 20 children in 1 day too many?  What is that number, because this is a situation where to me the percentages aren't what is important.

As I stated earlier, I don't support a ban on all guns, but I do support a ban on assault rifles, high capacity magazines, and armor piercing bullets.  None of which are needed to hunt.

Many or our rights have limits, our speech is limited, our right to assemble is limited, freedom of the press is limited.  Why is it that so many are against what seem like reasonable controls on firearms.    What I stated above plus a background check for every weapons sale.    That's it, I don't want to go beyond that.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: shoreline99 on December 21, 2012, 04:05:26 AM
Pretty ironic that this arrived on my desk yesterday. It had been back ordered, waiting for the second edition printing.

http://www.dhs.gov/bips-07-primer-design-safe-school-projects-case-terrorist-attacks-and-school-shootings-2nd-edition
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 21, 2012, 10:01:08 AM
Memo to the "Arm Everyone Nuts"

Quote
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No.
Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings


Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 21, 2012, 11:54:31 AM
I can't believe that on the 1 week anniversary of this tragedy the NRA came out and made that statement.  Blaming everything else, not even discussing assault weapons.

Political supporters were already proposing a discussion and a ban, they are about to see how fast long time supporters run from them.   Americans are too galvanized right now to tolerate a statement like that.    At least  show that you understand what happened.  The NRA does so much to train people on safety and prevent the average American from hurting themselves that you would think they would at least have the discussion. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: shoreline99 on December 21, 2012, 12:55:29 PM
I can't believe that on the 1 week anniversary of this tragedy the NRA came out and made that statement.  Blaming everything else, not even discussing assault weapons.

Political supporters were already proposing a discussion and a ban, they are about to see how fast long time supporters run from them.   Americans are too galvanized right now to tolerate a statement like that.    At least  show that you understand what happened.  The NRA does so much to train people on safety and prevent the average American from hurting themselves that you would think they would at least have the discussion.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 21, 2012, 01:04:37 PM
I just read the statement and barfed my lunch.

i don't know why I expected otherwise.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 21, 2012, 01:37:17 PM
I'm sure you guys have seen it pointed out that there were two armed guards at Columbine High, right?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on December 21, 2012, 01:57:20 PM

MOAR Guns!

If you're really weighing someone's right to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump against the "relatively small percentage" of children who are "actually" shot in classrooms... well I don't know what to tell you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 21, 2012, 03:01:13 PM
There was a shooting in PA during the NRA statement, 4 dead, 3 wounded.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/21/16069042-four-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-incident-in-pennsylvania-three-troopers-injured?lite (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/21/16069042-four-killed-including-gunman-in-shooting-incident-in-pennsylvania-three-troopers-injured?lite)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 21, 2012, 03:08:30 PM
I can't believe that on the 1 week anniversary of this tragedy the NRA came out and made that statement.  Blaming everything else, not even discussing assault weapons.

you really cant believe that?  they held heir annual conference in Littleton 10 days after Columbine.

and this:

MOAR Guns!

If you're really weighing someone's right to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump against the "relatively small percentage" of children who are "actually" shot in classrooms... well I don't know what to tell you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on December 21, 2012, 03:10:07 PM

MOAR Guns!

If you're really weighing someone's right to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump against the "relatively small percentage" of children who are "actually" shot in classrooms... well I don't know what to tell you.

Ser.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on December 21, 2012, 03:13:11 PM

I've never shot an assault rifle, so now I'm wondering if it's really safe to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 21, 2012, 03:16:18 PM

I've never shot an assault rifle, so now I'm wondering if it's really safe to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump.
We don't think about stuff like that! Shoot first, ask questions later!
'Merica!

Fuck the NRA.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 21, 2012, 03:17:41 PM
The best way to prevent forest fires is more forest fires.

It was like asking an addict how to solve the drug problem.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatapiper on December 21, 2012, 03:40:50 PM
Instead of paying for more armed security guards why don't we tighten regulations, give a nice tax credit for those who do not own a gun and tax those heavily who do.   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on December 21, 2012, 03:51:35 PM
Damn, I go away for a couple days and miss all the fun. +k to twatts for making all my points for me though. Some of my favorites:

The Chinese Gov't couldn't care less about human rights, they banned guns because having armed civilians threatens their hold on power. 

ie getting rids of guns is not synonymous with getting rid of murder.

You could say something about high-capacity magazines, but Bloomberg showed us people will just buy (2) small cokes instead of (1) large one... 

Pretty much any reference to the soda ban is an automatic +k

Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed.....

FYP

"Those people" obtain guns like you or I do - they are NOT criminals and they buy them legally.  Then they commit a criminal act.

Or they buy them illegally, which (by definition) is illegal.

Perhaps we can find a model in the Tobacco Law Suits.  Why should health insurers pay for all the "damages"?  Why not make the manufacturer's pay for some of it, even if owning and using tobacco is entirely voluntary by a third party, namely the individual citizen.

The difference, however, is that the tobacco manufacturer liability lied not in the fact that they were selling a dangerous product but that they willfully knew and concealed this information from the public. I'm not sure you could make the same case against the gun manufacturers for liability without that willful deceit, especially where their product is used in a criminal act (e.g., should baseball bat makers be held accountable if a maniac beats someone to death with a Louisville Slugger?).

But most of all, this:

Fuck the NRA.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 21, 2012, 05:36:57 PM

MOAR Guns!

If you're really weighing someone's right to shoot clips of ammo into a tree stump against the "relatively small percentage" of children who are "actually" shot in classrooms... well I don't know what to tell you.

 :roll:

Way to completely misinterpret (or misrepresent) my point, Matt.

I was specifically addressing a proposal put forth here that would have left assault weapons legal but would have nevertheless penalized the vast majority of (safe, law-abiding, non-murdering) owners by having them pay more in order to pick up the tab, in effect, for the evil deeds of the criminals.

And, if you were paying attention, you would have noted that my conclusion was that, instead, the further manufacture and sale of assault weapons should simply be once again outlawed, in my opinion.

As for the NRA, it's sad that they are unwilling to give up any ground whatsoever, but I can't say I'm too surprised by LaPierre's statement. Of course the NRA is going to continue to resist any and all forms of gun control, and instead propose the answer that they did. These positions are fundamental to the NRA's core beliefs.

But did you notice that in the Mother Jones article RJ posted earlier that purported to debunk the myth of the hero armed civilian, several of the case studies stated that credit for stopping or subduing the shooters lay not with civilians but armed guards or otherwise trained law enforcement/military personnel? So, is having armed guards at places (like schools) where these incidents might occur a good idea or not?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on December 21, 2012, 05:57:22 PM

It was a broader statement not directed at anyone, apologies if you felt singled out or misrepresented.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 21, 2012, 06:19:47 PM

It was a broader statement not directed at anyone, apologies if you felt singled out or misrepresented.

Well, you did use the pronoun "you" and then referenced the stump remark, which I made, so I simply applied deductive reasoning. But I appreciate the clarification.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on December 21, 2012, 06:49:18 PM

Well, if you think that your right to own guns is more important than trying to prevent mass shootings, then yes, I don't know what to tell you.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on December 21, 2012, 08:32:08 PM
Or maybe murder by firearms has little to do with existence of guns or how easily they are accessed.....

FYP


WRONG. there are direct correlations between the amount of guns in the hands of a public and shooting deaths/murders. Ample studies have highlighted these trends and many countries' legislative agendas have borne them out, seemingly balanced against a concept of individual freedom. And, while each has its own particular set of circumstances and environments it must address, prescient examples are abound. That said, I am aware that statements on this board require statistical support, so I suggest you start with Harvard University's School of Public Health study on Homicide's, with links/bibliographies to the review journals used in ascertaining its conclusions. In a law class of mine, we addressed this issue years ago and the numbers are striking, regardless of other societal conditions. 

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

One of the many interesting factoids I took from this class, was an Israeli (iirc) policy whereby if you wish to purchase a gun, you must first leave a deposit for said gun prior to taking its possession. Then, at the end of a certain period, lets say a week, you are to return to pay the remaining amount on the gun as well as collect it. What they discovered was that close to 80% of potential gun owners changed their mind over wanting a gun during this "cooling off period" and simply went back to pick up their deposit. Extrapolate what you wish from this. 

Using supply side economics, there are certain givens that permit us to address the proliferation of weapons within a populace. They may similarly be applied to other issues that inevitably cause harm no matter which side the legislation falls you lean. Let us take drugs. If we were to not only legalize all drugs tomorrow morning but make them free, one would inevitably wind up with more drug addicts. But you would now spend less money on police, jails, lawyers, judges etc... Additionally, crime fueled by the need to purchase drugs would also plummet. Concerning this argument, one then has to weigh which side's toll is more enviable. 

If you are one who believes you will eventually have to take up arms against your government, or defend yourself in a collapsed society, then very little of this matters to you. In fact, you're calculating that the ten of thousands of lives lost a year to wanton proliferation of high powered weapons are a worthwhile tradeoff to the eventual Hellscape you will have to battle in. Or you could be someone who just wants to blow the fuck out of shit on his property, in which case you're still making the same calculation, but in this case as opposed to your existential fear, it is your personal fun at stake. The question is then: towards whom should the laws be writ? For a present, the laws concerning guns in the US are written for a very small segment of the population. Most hunters generally do not require an AR-15 to go about their business, although they are great at killing those pesky prairie dogs.           

Within the majority of developed nations, legislation seeks to temper itself with that which causes the least amount of societal dislocation or harm. Regrettably, legislation devoid of political power wrangling does not exist, however, the aforementioned impetus is rarely completely discarded. In the US, irrefutable evidence entwined with economic realities now seem to be putting the final nails into the prohibition of narcotics argument, that which was solely driven by politics for close to a century. We are now left to question when firearm legislation will join suit.   


An aside:

Gun Legislation
 
Concerning the United States, one need look no further than the UK, they with comparative demographics: education/wealth/governance/population size. In '87 and '96, the Brits bore witness to emotionally charged rampages that in turn ushered in some of the strictest gun laws found in the Western world. Do read on:

Quote
The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world with 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2009 compared to the United States' 3.0 (over 40 times higher) and to Germany's 0.21 (3 times higher).

With the exception of Northern Ireland, it has been public policy that police officers in the United Kingdom should not generally be armed with firearms. Despite police being unarmed, shooting fatalities of members of the police are extremely rare; there were three in England and Wales in the eleven-year period from 2000/01 to 2010/11. About 7,000 police officers have received firearms training.Standard police firearms include semi-automatic carbines, and pistols, such as the Heckler & Koch MP5SF, and Glock 17.

Britain has had few firearms rampage incidents in modern times. During the latter half of the 20th century there were only two incidents in which people holding licensed firearms went on shooting sprees and killed on a large scale, the Hungerford massacre of 1987 and the Dunblane school massacre of 1996; each led to strong public and political demands to restrict firearm use, and tightening of laws. The result has been among the strictest firearms laws in the world.

After Hungerford, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 criminalised most semi-automatic long-barrelled weapons; it was generally supported by the Labour opposition although some Labour backbenchers thought it inadequate. After the second incident, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 criminalised private possession of most handguns having a calibre over .22; the Snowdrop Campaign continued to press for a wider ban, and in 1997 the incoming Labour government introduced the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, which extended this to most handguns with a calibre of .22 (there are exceptions for some antique handguns and black-powder revolvers.) The Cumbria shootings in 2010 led to 13 fatalities and 11 injured when Derrick Bird shot and killed three people connected to himself, and 12 others in an apparently random shooting spree before turning the gun on himself. Bird held legal permits for three shotguns and a rifle.

Aside from special temporary exemptions for major events such as the 2012 Olympics, pistol shooting for sporting purposes has been effectively banned since 1997. As a result, the GB pistol squad has to practice abroad.

Single-barrelled, double-barrelled shotguns, or those with a lever-action or, pump-action, or semi-automatic and fixed magazine capacity, of no more than two cartridges are permitted on a Shotgun Certificate. Shotguns with a detachable magazine or larger fixed magazine are permitted on a Section 1 Firearms Certificate. Certain types of shotgun ammunition, such as rifled slugs and larger shot sizes can only be bought following the grant of an FAC (firearms certificate). There is no limit on the amount of guns or ammunition that a SGC (shotgun certificate) holder can acquire or possess at one time.

A 2006 study using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) statistical analysis found no measurable effect detectable from the 1997 firearms legislation but in subsequent years firearm homicides declined. In 2012 the Home Office reported that, "in 2010/11, firearms were involved in 11,227 recorded offences in England and Wales, the seventh consecutive annual fall". Firearms statistics in England and Wales include airguns and imitations guns, which make up a high proportion of these recorded offences.

Except for Northern Ireland, fully automatic (submachine-guns, etc.) and self-loading (semi-automatic) weapons of calibre larger than .22 rimfire are totally banned, pistols are limited to .22 calibre in short barrel, while calibres up to .357 magnum are allowed in long barrel pistols (of total length at least 60 cm). All other rifles and their ammunition are permitted with good reason, which may include target shooting, hunting, and historic and black powder weapons, but not self-defence.

A firearms certificate issued by the police is required for all weapons and ammunition except air weapons of modest power (of muzzle energy not over 12 ft·lbf for rifles, and 6 ft·lbf for pistols).


Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 21, 2012, 09:49:36 PM
I realize that the cause of these killings are multifactorial. Also, the 2nd Amendment exists and there is a lot of pro gun sentiment in this country. And, the vast, vast majority of gun owners hasn't commited a crime and has no intention of doing so.
I still have a problem with "military" or "assault" weapons (agree - definition is arbitrary"
the 2nd amendment gives us the right to bear arms - it doesn't say any arms we want, all arms, or certain kinds of arms. We can argue all day long but it is obviously open to interpretation.
As far as facts go, here is some data

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/targets-in-mass-shootings-500px1.jpg)

other than Columbine, it seems as if the assault ban had a beneficial effect on mass murders.

common sense, that is all I ask for
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on December 21, 2012, 10:11:43 PM
Unfortunately, horrific as they are, mass murder killings are only a drop in the bucket in relation to the tens of thousands being mowed down in more discriminate fire. Sadly, mass killings move the emotional needle and thus politicians and law making, yet the American war zone that is claiming young black men essentially flies under the radar.     
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 21, 2012, 10:35:09 PM
true
which ties in with poverty, and, I suspect, the drug wars
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Superfreakie on December 22, 2012, 12:10:47 AM
true
which ties in with poverty, and, I suspect, the drug wars

I should have been careful with my comment, as in no way do I wish to belittle the suffering of any victims of gun violence or violence in general. I'm sure the stat concerning the amount of women killed by spouses/bf with guns would be equally horrifying.   :cry: 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 22, 2012, 08:44:33 AM
true - and kids killing themselves with their parents guns, or being shot accidentally.

I think we all know / heard of a kid who got his parents gun with the end result a tragedy.

preventable, those things should be locked up.

the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that parents ask about guns (in the same way they ask about seatbelts and bike helmets) and encourage them to be locked as it is obviously a public health problem. In FLA, an NRA sponsored bill was signed into law making that conversation illegal and punishable by fine, saying that it infringed on gun owners right to privacy. Fortunately, the courts overturned it. Shows you how fucked up the NRA is.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 22, 2012, 08:47:22 AM
As an aside... 

I really shouldn't post when I'm drunk...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on December 22, 2012, 09:06:40 AM
As an aside... 

I really shouldn't post when I'm drunk...

Terry

So which one was the hunting rifle?  :-)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 22, 2012, 09:51:53 AM
As an aside... 

I really shouldn't post when I'm drunk...

Terry
Are you drunk already?
 :police:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 22, 2012, 01:44:30 PM
As an aside... 

I really shouldn't post when I'm drunk...

Terry

So which one was the hunting rifle?  :-)

Both... 

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 22, 2012, 03:35:16 PM

Well, if you think that your right to own guns is more important than trying to prevent mass shootings, then yes, I don't know what to tell you.

I could drive to my nearest police station and hand in my firearms (I don't own any assault weapons, by the way), and it wouldn't make a lick of difference in terms of stopping or enabling potential future mass shootings.

And I've not said anything else to indicate that I hold complete, unencumbered gun-ownership rights to be more sacred than preventing mass shootings. (To the contrary).

So I really don't know what your point is.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 22, 2012, 04:01:19 PM

Well, if you think that your right to own guns is more important than trying to prevent mass shootings, then yes, I don't know what to tell you.

I could drive to my nearest police station and hand in my firearms (I don't own any assault weapons, by the way), and it wouldn't make a lick of difference in terms of stopping or enabling potential future mass shootings.

And I've not said anything else to indicate that I hold complete, unencumbered gun-ownership rights to be more sacred than preventing mass shootings. (To the contrary).

So I really don't know what your point is.

Pretty sure his point is/was that he was not addressing you directly until you decided to jump in the path of his comments.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 23, 2012, 09:00:28 AM
So Matt said, until the follow up comment with the emphasized "you" indicated otherwise. I thought that was pretty clear in context.

Anyway, we don't need to continue sitting here antagonizing one another. Merry Christmas. Peace on earth.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 23, 2012, 10:06:19 AM
Anyway, we don't need to continue sitting here antagonizing one another.

actually, yes, we do.
this is the interweb, after all

flame on
 :samurai:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 23, 2012, 11:33:36 AM
Anyway, we don't need to continue sitting here antagonizing one another.

actually, yes, we do.
this is the interweb, after all

flame on
 :samurai:

Pipe down Gramps!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 23, 2012, 02:10:00 PM
awww
you're taking all my fun away.
Now all there left is to get drunk and watch football.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on December 23, 2012, 02:27:50 PM
awww
you're taking all my fun away.
Now all there left is to get drunk and watch football.

Was there ever anything else?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 23, 2012, 02:36:17 PM
you got a point there

time for another beer
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 26, 2012, 10:36:43 PM
So Matt said, until the follow up comment with the emphasized "you" indicated otherwise. I thought that was pretty clear in context.

Anyway, we don't need to continue sitting here antagonizing one another. Merry Christmas. Peace on earth.

Not if the NRA has anything to say about it.


also,
gramps... :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 28, 2012, 10:48:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZrFVtmRXrw

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on December 29, 2012, 12:49:48 AM
Trying to remember if I have the order right, but I believe Patrick Moynihan proposed a $1000 per bullet tax first and then this came out.  Interesting concept.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 15, 2013, 10:55:25 PM
not one folks, but two...two more shootings today at colleges!

http://gawker.com/5976236/another-school-shooting-reported-as-president-obama-prepares-to-unveil-gun-control-proposals?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on January 16, 2013, 01:53:49 PM
better go out to get more guns so we can prevent all of these shootings.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on January 16, 2013, 10:57:10 PM
better go out to get more guns so we can prevent all of these shootings.

You can bet there will be a run on assault weapons as some people fear a renewed ban. For all their bitching, conservatives fail to admit that the Obama presidency has actually been a very good thing for the gun industry (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/obama-guns_n_1985826.html).

So what does everyone think of Obama's actions/proposals (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/?hpt=hp_t2)? I've already said what I think about the usefulness of limiting magazine capacity, which apparently Obama wants to cap at 10 rounds.

Oh, and you gotta love "fair and balanced" Fox News and the very first sentence of its story (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/assault-weapons-ban-gets-new-look-decade-after-expiration-controversial-old-ban/#ixzz2ICYrQmKZ) on the proposed assault weapons ban:

Quote
It has been two decades since then-President Clinton scored a headline-making political victory in banning assault weapons – and one decade since Congress let it lapse.

I guess we don't have to wonder whether FN regards an assault weapons ban as being anything more than a mere "political" victory for those who'd support it...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on January 16, 2013, 11:11:34 PM
better go out to get more guns so we can prevent all of these shootings.

You can bet there will be a run on assault weapons as some people fear a renewed ban. For all their bitching, conservatives fail to admit that the Obama presidency has actually been a very good thing for the gun industry (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/obama-guns_n_1985826.html).

So what does everyone think of Obama's actions/proposals (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/?hpt=hp_t2)? I've already said what I think about the usefulness of limiting magazine capacity, which apparently Obama wants to cap at 10 rounds.


I don't remember what you said about limiting capacity...  But I will reiterate my view:  people in NYC now buy 2 small cokes instead of 1 large coke...

I like all 23 of his Orders.  They all make perfect sense...  But they are just a bunch of bullet points...  Let's see the action in action...

I really like the "nominate and confirm an ATF d00d" Order; we haven't had one in 6 years...   WTF?!?


Oh, and you gotta love "fair and balanced" Fox News and the very first sentence of its story (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/assault-weapons-ban-gets-new-look-decade-after-expiration-controversial-old-ban/#ixzz2ICYrQmKZ) on the proposed assault weapons ban:

Quote
It has been two decades since then-President Clinton scored a headline-making political victory in banning assault weapons – and one decade since Congress let it lapse.

I guess we don't have to wonder whether FN regards an assault weapons ban as being anything more than a mere "political" victory for those who'd support it...

We know they are always going to take cynical RW slant on anything he OB does - I wouldn't be surprised if Fox called him out for environmental damage when he took a dump...  But that's beside the point...  Let's look at what the AWB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban) did - and how the industry learned to work around it.   

I, for one, am surprised that in none of the 23 does OB address the loophole in private gun sales or sales at gun shows (essentially private)...  I think we need to hammer out a way that Law Enforcement can easily monitor private gun sales without hindering the ability to buy a gun "conveniently" for the law-abiding citizen...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on January 17, 2013, 01:53:28 AM
The thing I really take issue with is the conversation we're having on magazines.  Nobody, particularly in the mainstream media, is really having the proper debate when it comes to this aspect.  Banning high-capacity magazines is a great thing.  But, as it's been pointed out over and over, it only takes a split second to pop a fresh clip into these guns.  Will this slow them down?  Technically, but not by much.  It certainly won't slow the shooter down enough for people to run for safety.  What we need to do is have a serious conversation about banning detachable magazines on all firearms.  You want a semi-auto firearm?  OK.  But it has to have a fixed magazine that holds no more than "x" rounds.  This would make these nutjobs have to manually feed the rounds into the gun in between bursts of ten or seven rounds (whatever the limit would be). 

If we really want to have "common sense" regulation, let's start by entertaining the idea of laws that actually make sense.  If our intention is to enact legislation that will slow down these killers, banning a high-capacity magazine is nothing more than a good start.  If we really want to give these victims enough time to have a real chance of escaping, we need to ban high-capacity magazines as well as detachable magazines. 

Just my thoughts. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on January 17, 2013, 10:15:18 AM
I don't remember what you said about limiting capacity...  But I will reiterate my view:  people in NYC now buy 2 small cokes instead of 1 large coke...

Yep.

Dan, I will agree that the concept you're discussing would theoretically have more impact on slowing down shooting sprees than simply banning the magazines. (Except for instances where a person walks in with multiple guns in his belt as opposed to multiple magazines.) But as a practical matter, there are so many millions of detachable magazines, and firearms that accept them, already in circulation that I don't think you could any more easily bring about a society with nothing but fixed-magazine guns than you could a society with no guns at all.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on January 17, 2013, 10:21:06 AM

I, for one, am surprised that in none of the 23 does OB address the loophole in private gun sales or sales at gun shows (essentially private)...  I think we need to hammer out a way that Law Enforcement can easily monitor private gun sales without hindering the ability to buy a gun "conveniently" for the law-abiding citizen...

Terry

private sales seem kind of iffy to me in general. I get that they serve a purpose but you never know the history of what you're buying and could end up buying a stolen gun (which would result in a felony charge for both you and the seller and all the headache that comes along with that). I'd way rather just go to the store and have them run a background check than buy a used gun out of the back of Billy Bob's truck.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on January 17, 2013, 10:43:42 AM

I, for one, am surprised that in none of the 23 does OB address the loophole in private gun sales or sales at gun shows (essentially private)...  I think we need to hammer out a way that Law Enforcement can easily monitor private gun sales without hindering the ability to buy a gun "conveniently" for the law-abiding citizen...

Terry

private sales seem kind of iffy to me in general. I get that they serve a purpose but you never know the history of what you're buying and could end up buying a stolen gun (which would result in a felony charge for both you and the seller and all the headache that comes along with that). I'd way rather just go to the store and have them run a background check than buy a used gun out of the back of Billy Bob's truck.

I'm not entirely sure what kind of gun registration system is in place now, but do you have the same fear when you buy a used car from a private buyer?  Or do we rely on the Car Registration and Title process to take care of those issues for us?

I'd like to see private sales go away entirely and mandate that all sales are done through a licensed 3rd party (at no cost to the buyer or seller) so that the appropriate checks can be done...  Imagine CarMax as a Gun Store...  "GunMax"...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on January 18, 2013, 02:45:58 AM
I don't remember what you said about limiting capacity...  But I will reiterate my view:  people in NYC now buy 2 small cokes instead of 1 large coke...

Yep.

Dan, I will agree that the concept you're discussing would theoretically have more impact on slowing down shooting sprees than simply banning the magazines. (Except for instances where a person walks in with multiple guns in his belt as opposed to multiple magazines.) But as a practical matter, there are so many millions of detachable magazines, and firearms that accept them, already in circulation that I don't think you could any more easily bring about a society with nothing but fixed-magazine guns than you could a society with no guns at all.

You're correct on both points.  If someone has enough money, they can just stockpile the guns instead of magazines.  And there are a shit load of detachable magazines and guns that accept them already in circulation.  But, while talking about what to do with magazines, proposing that we simply limit their size is lazy and futile.  We first need to look at detachable vs. fixed magazines, then we can argue over the number of bullets that they can hold.

I wasn't trying to say that all we need to do is ban detachable mags and everything will be all puppies and rainbows.  It's just one piece of the overall conversation that I believe we're ignoring.  That was really my point.   
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 21, 2013, 09:47:04 AM
15 year old murders entire family.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/albuquerque-shooting-2013-new-mexico-teenager_n_2516424.html

i wonder where he got the guns? i'm betting from his super safe home that was loaded with them for extra safety.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on January 21, 2013, 09:49:38 AM
15 year old murders entire family.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/albuquerque-shooting-2013-new-mexico-teenager_n_2516424.html

i wonder where he got the guns? i'm betting from his super safe home that was loaded with them for extra safety.

I'm pretty sure it was a hunting accident.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on January 21, 2013, 10:05:34 AM
15 year old murders entire family.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/albuquerque-shooting-2013-new-mexico-teenager_n_2516424.html

i wonder where he got the guns? i'm betting from his super safe home that was loaded with them for extra safety.

...laughs the person that said I LOLed about "dead slaves in unmarked graves"...  Ahh...  the irony...   :-P

If you want to point out stupid gun-owners, laugh at the Dixie Gunshow this past weekend in Raleigh...  The jokes write themselves...   :evil:

Terry

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 21, 2013, 10:10:54 AM
15 year old murders entire family.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/albuquerque-shooting-2013-new-mexico-teenager_n_2516424.html

i wonder where he got the guns? i'm betting from his super safe home that was loaded with them for extra safety.

...laughs the person that said I LOLed about "dead slaves in unmarked graves"...  Ahh...  the irony...   :-P

sorry, you got the wrong guy.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on January 21, 2013, 10:11:32 AM
15 year old murders entire family.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/albuquerque-shooting-2013-new-mexico-teenager_n_2516424.html

i wonder where he got the guns? i'm betting from his super safe home that was loaded with them for extra safety.

...laughs the person that said I LOLed about "dead slaves in unmarked graves"...  Ahh...  the irony...   :-P

sorry, you got the wrong guy.

Did I?  My bad...

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 30, 2013, 03:44:24 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on January 30, 2013, 03:50:35 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

Someone left this comment and I thought it was funny:

Quote
A shooting a day takes your gun rights away.

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 30, 2013, 07:20:05 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

That is weird. It's just too bad Democrats don't have the stones to pass the assault weapons ban (http://bloom.bg/XFptKW) or else tragedies like this could easily be avoided.

Also, I hope they throw the book at this goddamn punk.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/01/29/hyannis-5-year-old-threatened-with-suspension-for-making-gun-out-of-legos/

Quote
Hyannis 5-Year-Old Threatened With Suspension For Making Gun Out Of Legos

HYANNIS (CBS) – A mother says her 5-year-old boy was threatened with suspension after he made a gun out of Legos during an after school program.

Sheila Cruz received a written warning recently about her son from the after school staff at the Hyannis West Elementary School because he had been using toys inappropriately.

While Cruz thought her son Joseph Cardosa was just being a kid, she said school administrators called his actions a threat.

“I was given a book and they told me he’s going to be suspended if he does it again and to sign here,” Cruz told WBZ NewsRadio 1030 Tuesday. “I just couldn’t believe it. He’s 5-years-old.”

Joseph’s parents called the school principal but were given the same warning.
 
“‘I said listen, he’s a 5-year-old, I think maybe a redirection would be more appropriate. I understand what’s going on with this whole thing in schools and everything else but couldn’t they have given him a warning?’ ” Cruz said.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 30, 2013, 07:40:30 PM
little girl who sang at the inauguration was gunned down today.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/30/us-usa-crime-chicago-idUSBRE90T1IH20130130

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on January 30, 2013, 08:31:33 PM
we live in a fucking sick society.

those people in Hyannis are doing more to help the gun lobby than LaPierre
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 30, 2013, 09:19:47 PM
those people in Hyannis are doing more to help the gun lobby than LaPierre

Don't forget about the PA school district that called a 5 yr old a terrorist and suspended her for 10 days for saying she was going to shoot two other girls with her Hello Kitty bubble gun (http://news.yahoo.com/pa-kindergartner-suspended-bubble-gun-remark-035057936.html). Or the not one (http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-56861358343267/) but two (http://m.nbcwashington.com/nbcwashington/pm_107901/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=ohMfyKT7) cases of 5-6 yo boys in MD who were suspended for making gun gestures with their fingers while playing cops and robbers.

Of course, neither side has the market on stupidity cornered: dickbag extraordinaire Lamar Alexander today said "video games are a bigger problem than guns (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/280211-sen-alexander-says-video-games-are-bigger-problem-than-guns)."
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on January 30, 2013, 11:18:31 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

With Arizona's lax gun laws I don't see how the suspect could have possibly gotten away.   Maybe they need to start requiring each and every person to carry a gun. 

You know what they say, you can lead a horse to readily available assault weapons, but you can't make him take out an armed lunatic. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 30, 2013, 11:34:55 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

With Arizona's lax gun laws I don't see how the suspect could have possibly gotten away.   Maybe they need to start requiring each and every person to carry a gun. 

You know what they say, you can lead a horse to readily available assault weapons, but you can't make him take out an armed lunatic.

speaking of armed lunatics, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml#Intro), 1 in 4 Americans suffer from a mental disorder.  1 in 17 suffer from a serious mental illness.  With about 30-50% US households having at least one gun in the house, that's a lot of armed lunatics.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 30, 2013, 11:51:35 PM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

With Arizona's lax gun laws I don't see how the suspect could have possibly gotten away.   Maybe they need to start requiring each and every person to carry a gun. 

You know what they say, you can lead a horse to readily available assault weapons, but you can't make him take out an armed lunatic.

speaking of armed lunatics, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml#Intro), 1 in 4 Americans suffer from a mental disorder.  1 in 17 suffer from a serious mental illness.  With about 30-50% US households having at least one gun in the house, that's a lot of armed lunatics.

Wow, that's a lot of Americans suffering from mental illness you just shit on by assuming they are inherently more prone to violence than the general population. And the whole lunatic thing.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 31, 2013, 12:14:28 AM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

With Arizona's lax gun laws I don't see how the suspect could have possibly gotten away.   Maybe they need to start requiring each and every person to carry a gun. 

You know what they say, you can lead a horse to readily available assault weapons, but you can't make him take out an armed lunatic.

speaking of armed lunatics, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml#Intro), 1 in 4 Americans suffer from a mental disorder.  1 in 17 suffer from a serious mental illness.  With about 30-50% US households having at least one gun in the house, that's a lot of armed lunatics.

Wow, that's a lot of Americans suffering from mental illness you just shit on by assuming they are inherently more prone to violence than the general population. And the whole lunatic thing.

i didn't shit on anyone.  obviously the lunatic thing was a joke, relax dude.  i forgot i was the first one to bring up metal illness in relation to gun violence.   :roll:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on January 31, 2013, 01:05:51 AM
With all the shootings today, I think we forgot this one.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/)

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on January 31, 2013, 11:17:04 AM
guy shoots up office building:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57566719-504083/arizona-office-shooting-update-3-injured-multiple-rounds-fired-in-shooting-attack-report-says/

the weird thing is, just yesterday the guy was a responsible gun owner.

With Arizona's lax gun laws I don't see how the suspect could have possibly gotten away.   Maybe they need to start requiring each and every person to carry a gun. 

You know what they say, you can lead a horse to readily available assault weapons, but you can't make him take out an armed lunatic.

speaking of armed lunatics, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml#Intro), 1 in 4 Americans suffer from a mental disorder.  1 in 17 suffer from a serious mental illness.  With about 30-50% US households having at least one gun in the house, that's a lot of armed lunatics.

Wow, that's a lot of Americans suffering from mental illness you just shit on by assuming they are inherently more prone to violence than the general population. And the whole lunatic thing.

 :roll:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: EdBanky on January 31, 2013, 01:20:18 PM

Also, I hope they throw the book at this goddamn punk.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/01/29/hyannis-5-year-old-threatened-with-suspension-for-making-gun-out-of-legos/

Quote
Hyannis 5-Year-Old Threatened With Suspension For Making Gun Out Of Legos

HYANNIS (CBS) – A mother says her 5-year-old boy was threatened with suspension after he made a gun out of Legos during an after school program.

Sheila Cruz received a written warning recently about her son from the after school staff at the Hyannis West Elementary School because he had been using toys inappropriately.

While Cruz thought her son Joseph Cardosa was just being a kid, she said school administrators called his actions a threat.

“I was given a book and they told me he’s going to be suspended if he does it again and to sign here,” Cruz told WBZ NewsRadio 1030 Tuesday. “I just couldn’t believe it. He’s 5-years-old.”

Joseph’s parents called the school principal but were given the same warning.
 
“‘I said listen, he’s a 5-year-old, I think maybe a redirection would be more appropriate. I understand what’s going on with this whole thing in schools and everything else but couldn’t they have given him a warning?’ ” Cruz said.
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: sophist on January 31, 2013, 01:28:47 PM

Also, I hope they throw the book at this goddamn punk.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/01/29/hyannis-5-year-old-threatened-with-suspension-for-making-gun-out-of-legos/

Quote
Hyannis 5-Year-Old Threatened With Suspension For Making Gun Out Of Legos

HYANNIS (CBS) – A mother says her 5-year-old boy was threatened with suspension after he made a gun out of Legos during an after school program.

Sheila Cruz received a written warning recently about her son from the after school staff at the Hyannis West Elementary School because he had been using toys inappropriately.

While Cruz thought her son Joseph Cardosa was just being a kid, she said school administrators called his actions a threat.

“I was given a book and they told me he’s going to be suspended if he does it again and to sign here,” Cruz told WBZ NewsRadio 1030 Tuesday. “I just couldn’t believe it. He’s 5-years-old.”

Joseph’s parents called the school principal but were given the same warning.
 
“‘I said listen, he’s a 5-year-old, I think maybe a redirection would be more appropriate. I understand what’s going on with this whole thing in schools and everything else but couldn’t they have given him a warning?’ ” Cruz said.
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

You and Gumbo should totes hang out...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on January 31, 2013, 01:47:27 PM
.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on January 31, 2013, 01:50:17 PM
 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 31, 2013, 02:32:35 PM
(http://week4paug.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=20014.0;attach=26509;image)

armed lunatic.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on January 31, 2013, 02:39:16 PM
(http://week4paug.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=20014.0;attach=26509;image)

armed lunatic.

Gonna have to suspend his account for a few days...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 31, 2013, 03:50:52 PM
With all the shootings today, I think we forgot this one.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/)

sorry to steal his thunder, but a 14 yrs old girl was shot in the head at school today in atlanta

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/31/breaking_shooting_at_an_atlanta_middle_school/

eta: the good news is the gunman was a horrible shot and the victim is doing fine.
probably could have done more damage with a spoon.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO, BAN ALL THE SPOONS?!?? :crazy:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: sophist on January 31, 2013, 04:01:08 PM
That is about 10 minutes from where I work, and it's right by Lakewood Ampitheatre.  So fucked up. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Hicks on January 31, 2013, 05:43:53 PM
With all the shootings today, I think we forgot this one.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566577/suspected-alabama-gunman-holed-up-with-boy-in-bunker-after-school-bus-shooting/)

sorry to steal his thunder, but a 14 yrs old girl was shot in the head at school today in atlanta

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/31/breaking_shooting_at_an_atlanta_middle_school/

eta: the good news is the gunman was a horrible shot and the victim is doing fine.
probably could have done more damage with a spoon.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO, BAN ALL THE SPOONS?!?? :crazy:

Clearly there aren't enough guns in Alabama and Georgia, otherwise these incidents would have never happened.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 31, 2013, 08:01:03 PM
i didn't shit on anyone.  obviously the lunatic thing was a joke, relax dude.  i forgot i was the first one to bring up metal illness in relation to gun violence.   :roll:

I realized you were joking. I too can use sarcasm (see my lunatic comment). My point was simply that gross generalizations have very little merit in the way of making good policy.

My wife was a special ed teacher and she had several kids with Aspergers. She's kept in touch with a couple of the parents of these kids and they were none too pleased that their child was basically being painted as a serial killer when it was speculated that Adam Lanza may have had it (I don't know if that was ever proved or just something the media read on Twitter and ran with it). I agree, we should have more of a discussion on helping people with mental illness in this country, but not because they are an inherent danger to society.

I found this topical today: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/01/31/mental-health-gun-violence_n_2583986.html?utm_hp_ref=business

I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

You must be much younger than me: teachers used to laugh at us when we would shoot those things at each other at recess.

Clearly there aren't enough guns in Alabama and Georgia, otherwise these incidents would have never happened.

That's funny. Hey by the way, why wasn't this shooting more deadly (http://shar.es/CDEbp)?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 31, 2013, 08:19:23 PM
That's funny. Hey by the way, why wasn't this shooting more deadly (http://shar.es/CDEbp)?

dunno, pretty hard to tell from that vague headline.
did the security guard blow the kid away or something?
is there an anti-security guard contingent i'm not aware of?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on January 31, 2013, 08:22:21 PM
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

Not sure if everyone remembers the multiple lead refill pencils with a separate sharpened lead that pushed the next one up.
My friends and I used to use those as blow guns, shooting those damn things at eachother.  I don't remember even getting in troruble for that shit.
Old man'd  :shakehead:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 31, 2013, 08:29:00 PM
re: kids getting in trouble for innocent gun-esque play

its so absurd that some school administrators get a little jumpy right after 20 little kids get holes blown through them.
relax folks, no biggie!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 31, 2013, 09:58:51 PM
That's funny. Hey by the way, why wasn't this shooting more deadly (http://shar.es/CDEbp)?

dunno, pretty hard to tell from that vague headline.
did the security guard blow the kid away or something?
is there an anti-security guard contingent i'm not aware of?

I guess my point is if you guys want to belittle the other side with strawmen, you might not want to use cases where their stated position (in this case putting armed guards in schools) could be strengthened by the incident in question. The NRA will hold this up as a model for how to keep our children safe. I understand that is incomprehensible to you, but it might not be to millions of parents who see two vastly different outcomes between two unspeakable tragedies.

re: kids getting in trouble for innocent gun-esque play

its so absurd that some school administrators get a little jumpy right after 20 little kids get holes blown through them.
relax folks, no biggie!

LOL @ suspending 5-6 yr olds as "a little jumpy"

But hey, what harm has ever come from a little irrational, fear-based policy? Nope, nothing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment) ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_act) with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARP). Ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_drugs).
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on January 31, 2013, 10:02:49 PM
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

Not sure if everyone remembers the multiple lead refill pencils with a separate sharpened lead that pushed the next one up.
My friends and I used to use those as blow guns, shooting those damn things at eachother.  I don't remember even getting in troruble for that shit.
Old man'd  :shakehead:

heh, I totally remember those, and doing that.

They sucked as pencils, and were only slightly better as blow-guns/spit-wad-cannons

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: UncleEbinezer on February 01, 2013, 09:29:46 AM
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

Not sure if everyone remembers the multiple lead refill pencils with a separate sharpened lead that pushed the next one up.
My friends and I used to use those as blow guns, shooting those damn things at eachother.  I don't remember even getting in troruble for that shit.
Old man'd  :shakehead:

heh, I totally remember those, and doing that.

They sucked as pencils, and were only slightly better as blow-guns/spit-wad-cannons

Bic pens worked well too.  But yeah those pencils were awesome!

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on February 01, 2013, 11:07:39 AM

LOL @ suspending 5-6 yr olds as "a little jumpy"

But hey, what harm has ever come from a little irrational, fear-based policy? Nope, nothing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment) ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_act) with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARP). Ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_drugs).

you came a little to close to Godwin's law on that one.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on February 02, 2013, 02:54:13 AM
I was suspended from school for four days back in the 5th grade for having a homemade "pen-shooter". Basically this little contraption could shoot an ink cartridge about 5ft. It was actually a pretty fantastic deal. My parents were more angry with the school and I got 4 days off to watch Boy Meets World "Shawn goes on Tour".

Not sure if everyone remembers the multiple lead refill pencils with a separate sharpened lead that pushed the next one up.
My friends and I used to use those as blow guns, shooting those damn things at eachother.  I don't remember even getting in troruble for that shit.
Old man'd  :shakehead:

heh, I totally remember those, and doing that.

They sucked as pencils, and were only slightly better as blow-guns/spit-wad-cannons

Bic pens worked well too.  But yeah those pencils were awesome!

PENS?! They didn't let us use pens until like 4th grade. They were afraid of our mistakes, I guess
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on February 03, 2013, 03:26:32 PM
Serial killer Navy Seal Sniper shot dead at gun range. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/03/sniper-chris-kyle-shot-dead)

you think with all those trained, responsible gun owners around this would have never happened.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on February 03, 2013, 11:38:06 PM
Serial killer Navy Seal Sniper shot dead at gun range. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/03/sniper-chris-kyle-shot-dead)

you think with all those trained, responsible gun owners around this would have never happened.

It's just too bad Texas isn't more like Chicago, what with its strict gun control and its virtually zero gun violence.

(if we're only gonna make fictional arguments, I might as well play along)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on February 03, 2013, 11:45:50 PM
Serial killer Navy Seal Sniper shot dead at gun range. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/03/sniper-chris-kyle-shot-dead)

you think with all those trained, responsible gun owners around this would have never happened.

It's just too bad Texas isn't more like Chicago, what with its strict gun control and its virtually zero gun violence.

(if we're only gonna make fictional arguments, I might as well play along)

hey now i never said anything about the good people of texas.  i was referring to it happening at a gun range.
completely agreed the it makes little sense to try and ban guns in a single city or even state.
now, a full scale federal ban.....that i can get behind.
i will even compromise.  a handgun ban only.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on March 19, 2013, 10:54:09 PM
Harry Reid is a spineless douche bag
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on March 19, 2013, 11:25:41 PM
Harry Reid is a spineless douche bag

Would you rather a gun reform bill without the assault weapon ban pass or one including it fail? Would you rather make Ds in pro-gun districts vote for a bill that will fail (possibly putting your majority at risk) or have the bill fail on Ds voting no?

I agree wholeheartedly with your statement, though.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on March 20, 2013, 09:03:12 AM
Reid did say an assault weapons ban could be offered as an amendment. So if the votes are there, the amendment will pass; if not, it won't, but like Jimbo implies, the rest could still get through.

Seems to me we should applaud a pragmatic approach to dealing with divided government for the sake of actually accomplishing something, even if incrementally. Aren't we always complaining about how congress can't get shit done? What good would it do us for the parties to simply dig their heels in and stand 100% firm on immovable principle in every respect? For example, say, the House constantly passing the same budget they know has zero chance of clearing the Senate or the president's desk.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on March 30, 2013, 06:26:19 PM
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0433b30576/cold-dead-hand-with-jim-carrey
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on March 31, 2013, 12:29:01 AM
Harry Reid is a spineless douche bag

QUOTED FOR TRUTH!!!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on April 10, 2013, 11:05:36 PM
Oh no, the NRA is going to give politicians for applying common sense to laws and doing what 87% of Americans are in favor of.  How will background checks help?  It's not like 9/10 guns used in street crimes were brought in by straw buyers.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/10/17694499-nra-threatens-to-punish-lawmakers-on-gun-control-vote-despite-deal?lite
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on April 11, 2013, 09:55:50 AM
Oh no, the NRA is going to give politicians for applying common sense to laws and doing what 87% of Americans are in favor of.  How will background checks help?  It's not like 9/10 guns used in street crimes were brought in by straw buyers.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/10/17694499-nra-threatens-to-punish-lawmakers-on-gun-control-vote-despite-deal?lite


Quote
Separately Wednesday, Sens. Patrick Leahy and Susan Collins announced they'd reached an agreement with the NRA on gun trafficking language that will be included in the overall gun bill.

Oh I'm sorry, when did the fucking NRA become a member of the Senate?

The NRA is no longer a citizens-advocacy group. It is a gun-industry lobbying organization, full stop. The problem is, its citizen members don't realize this, and whatever the NRA says their members' position needs to be on a gun issue, they will follow it unblinkingly.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Guyute on April 17, 2013, 11:03:08 PM
Today is proof we have politicians and not leaders.  87% of the country, 83% of Republicans, are in favor of background checks and we can't get this done?  How the F**K do they expect to ever do anything?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on November 04, 2013, 11:07:45 PM
Fuck

Garden State Plaza mall shooting: Shots fired in New Jersey's Garden State Plaza in Paramus by man wearing full body armor near Nordstrom: reports (http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1506720#bmb=1)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on November 05, 2013, 08:35:29 AM
once again, an armed public isn't going to stop a guy in full body armor
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on November 05, 2013, 09:15:10 AM
once again, an armed public isn't going to stop a guy in full body armor

NJ has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.

Thankfully, the incident ended with only one fatality: the shooter.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/05/us/new-jersey-mall-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 04, 2013, 05:06:53 PM
Stand Your ground?
Defending your castle?

I think not

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/us/one-man-lost-and-impaired-the-other-fearful-and-armed.html?ref=us
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 04, 2013, 08:20:21 PM
Stand Your ground?
Defending your castle?

I think not

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/us/one-man-lost-and-impaired-the-other-fearful-and-armed.html?ref=us
But that's just one guy!
I mean if guns were illegal, it would have happened anyway... oh wait.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 04, 2013, 08:31:10 PM
blowing away old men with alzheimers!  fuck yeah guns!!    :beerbang:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on December 04, 2013, 11:07:50 PM
This shit actually happened today in Des Moines.
Some whack job decides that because he has guns and tons of ammo, that it would be a good idea to just start popping rounds through neighborhood homes, and passing cars.
It ended when he also thought it would be a good idea to get into a firefight with the police.
Story can be found here:

ht tp://whotv.co m/2013/12/04/breaking-news-man-shooting-at-cars/

Fuck guns.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on December 04, 2013, 11:25:39 PM
blowing away old men with alzheimers!  fuck yeah guns!!    :beerbang:

Have you been to Detroit???   :-P

T
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on December 05, 2013, 12:26:39 AM
blowing away old men with alzheimers!  fuck yeah guns!!    :beerbang:

It's like taking obamacares death panels into your own hands.

USA! USA!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 14, 2014, 11:01:48 AM
I'm glad the good guys, like retired police officers, carry around their guns to protect us from people texting at the movies:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: nab on January 14, 2014, 12:39:46 PM
I'm glad the good guys, like retired police officers, carry around their guns to protect us from people texting at the movies:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/


Not to make light of an obvious tragedy, but there is enough low hanging fruit in this situation to keep the comedians and wonks busy for quite a while.     
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on January 14, 2014, 12:48:57 PM
It's just too bad that in this country someone's right to carry a gun outweighs someone else's right to live

But the again, life is not guaranteed by the constitution
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on January 14, 2014, 03:12:33 PM
It's just too bad that in this country someone's right to carry a gun outweighs someone else's right to live

But the again, life is not guaranteed by the constitution

C'mon, sls. I know this is one of your hot button issues, but that's not at all what is happening here.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 14, 2014, 03:43:16 PM
couple middle school kids shot up today during gym.
one kid shot twice in the face.

http://www.boston.com/news/education/2014/01/14/police-shooting-middle-school-new-mexico/mYmkGBWpqwvaGiYiWEf6WM/story.html
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on January 14, 2014, 09:24:25 PM
It's just too bad that in this country someone's right to carry a gun outweighs someone else's right to live

But the again, life is not guaranteed by the constitution

C'mon, sls. I know this is one of your hot button issues, but that's not at all what is happening here.
actually, it is

the gun lobby says "It's all about treating mental illness" or "the only protection from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" or "stand your ground"

I know that the vast, vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, but this was a retired cop.

sorry, but in many things the fuck ups ruin it for the "rest of us"
except guns.
they're fucking sacred in this country

last month in FLA some guy with Alzheimer's got lost, rang someone's doorbell, wouldn't leave, so he got shot.
stand your ground.

the gun mentality in parts of this country defies logic and decency

ETA- the fact that this shooter may wind up in jail doesn't change anything. The guy is still dead. The "stand your ground" mentality that "if I think I'm in mortal danger I'm justified to shoot" is just gonna result in more dead people and more trials.
the people running the gun lobby are mentally deranged. If they want to try and promote safe gun ownership with any credebility, they need to use common sense and come down against these episodes, large magazines, etc.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 17, 2014, 11:13:10 AM
Girl, 4, fatally shoots cousin, 4, while playing at grandpa's Detroit home (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/17/22337466-girl-4-fatally-shoots-cousin-4-while-playing-at-grandpas-detroit-home?lite)

Good thing Gramps had that gun around to keep his family safe.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 19, 2014, 05:31:26 PM
(http://www.aaanything.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/abandon_thread_people_in_the_hole.gif)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: aphineday on January 19, 2014, 05:41:44 PM
(http://www.aaanything.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/abandon_thread_people_in_the_hole.gif)
It's probably for the best.
When (anyone, but especially kids) die, tact goes out the window in my book.

ETA: After thinking through my super emotional post, I decided to remove it.
I'm not going to change anyone's mind with that, but someone has to stand up to stupid people.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on February 13, 2014, 03:27:05 PM
(https://scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/t1/1654100_789388631088704_1186713433_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: whatthecello42 on February 24, 2014, 02:18:31 AM
Quote
Family Research Council's Executive Vice President William (Jerry) Boykin says the Son of God will be armed with an AR-15 assault rifle at the Second Coming.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/jesus-return-earth-ar-15-assault-rifle-article-1.1620805 (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/jesus-return-earth-ar-15-assault-rifle-article-1.1620805)

Quote
That's what former U.S. Lieutenant General William G. "Jerry" Boykin thinks, according to a speech he gave on behalf of the conservative Family Research Council at the WallBuilders' Pro-Family Legislators Conference, in which he describes his vision of the Second Coming of Christ, that he believes will be led by a blood-stained, gun-toting Jesus armed to the teeth with an AR-15 assault rifle.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/20/general-boykin-gun-jesus_n_4826089.html?utm_hp_ref=religion (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/20/general-boykin-gun-jesus_n_4826089.html?utm_hp_ref=religion)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: pcr3 on March 14, 2014, 05:08:12 PM
I'm glad the good guys, like retired police officers, carry around their guns to protect us from people texting at the movies:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/

but no one was there to protect us from him texting at the movies...

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-florida-movie-theater-shooting-suspect-sent-text-message-20140313,0,7787069.story#axzz2vyOHLDIx
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: pcr3 on April 04, 2014, 04:58:30 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5950304/ns/health-pet_health/t/puppy-shoots-florida-man-deputies-say/#.Uz8bm_ldX97
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on April 15, 2014, 01:17:59 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on April 15, 2014, 02:16:36 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on April 15, 2014, 02:19:50 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...

attributed to Reuters, not sure where it was found.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: kellerb on April 15, 2014, 03:06:44 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...

attributed to Reuters, not sure where it was found.

It says Florida Department of Law Enforcement....
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on April 15, 2014, 03:46:46 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...

attributed to Reuters, not sure where it was found.

It says Florida Department of Law Enforcement....

I think that's the source of the data, but Reuters created the graph.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on April 15, 2014, 03:49:34 PM
check this out...

http://usvsth3m.com/post/82779802419/creator-defends-graph-that-appears-to-erroneously-show (http://usvsth3m.com/post/82779802419/creator-defends-graph-that-appears-to-erroneously-show)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on April 15, 2014, 10:40:55 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...
actually, the word that comes to mind is sad
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on April 15, 2014, 10:55:19 PM
I don't know why, but this shit cracks me up... What's wrong with this chart???

(http://i.imgur.com/ehAbvK7.jpg)

I take it you got that one from FOX...

Hilarious...
actually, the word that comes to mind is sad

Meh, maybe you're not as cynical as me...   

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on April 15, 2014, 10:59:29 PM
check this out...

http://usvsth3m.com/post/82779802419/creator-defends-graph-that-appears-to-erroneously-show (http://usvsth3m.com/post/82779802419/creator-defends-graph-that-appears-to-erroneously-show)

I don't really see the problem with the chart. Sure, if you are just giving it a passing glance on FB, I guess it could be confusing. But if you stop to look at the data and interpret it, it's pretty clear, IMO.

The two criticisms in the link make no sense to me:

Quote
1.  The X axis has been moved to the top, signifying that the whole graph is inverted.

Same as the chart in question. What this critique should say is "the x-axis labels are at the top." But the x-axis of the FL chart is clearly on top.

Quote
2. The design is clearly meant to signify dripping blood, and it is intuitive that more blood represents a larger death toll.

Yeah, the FL chart does that too.

Also, we really have to get dirty money out of politics, amiright?

http://nyti.ms/1iWQUvF

Quote
Bloomberg Plans a $50 Million Challenge to the N.R.A.

Michael R. Bloomberg, making his first major political investment since leaving office, plans to spend $50 million this year building a nationwide grass-roots network to motivate voters who feel strongly about curbing gun violence, an organization he hopes can eventually outmuscle the National Rifle Association.

Mr. Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, said gun control advocates need to learn from the N.R.A. and punish those politicians who fail to support their agenda — even Democrats whose positions otherwise align with his own.

“They say, ‘We don’t care. We’re going to go after you,’ ” he said of the N.R.A. “ ‘If you don’t vote with us we’re going to go after your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. And we’re never going to stop.’ ”

He added: “We’ve got to make them afraid of us.”

The considerable advantages that gun rights advocates enjoy — in intensity, organization and political clout — will not be easy to overcome. Indeed, Mr. Bloomberg has already spent millions of dollars trying to persuade members of Congress to support enhanced background check laws with virtually nothing to show for it.

What is more, for many gun owners, the issue is a deeply personal one that energizes them politically, said Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, who dismissed the mayor’s plans.

“He’s got the money to waste,” Mr. Pratt said. “So I guess he’s free to do so. But frankly, I think he’s going to find out why his side keeps losing.”

The N.R.A. had no comment.

Mr. Bloomberg’s blueprint reimagines the way gun control advocates have traditionally confronted the issue. Rather than relying so heavily on television ad campaigns, Mr. Bloomberg will put a large portion of his resources into the often-unseen field operations that have been effective for groups like the N.R.A. in driving single-issue, like-minded voters to the polls.

Women, and mothers in particular, will be the focus of the organizing and outreach, a path that he and his advisers have modeled after groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

The plans call for a restructuring of the gun control groups he funds, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. They will be brought under one new umbrella group called Everytown for Gun Safety.

The strategy will focus not on sweeping federal restrictions to ban certain weapons, but instead will seek to expand the background check system for gun buyers both at the state and national levels.

The $50 million could be significant: In recent years, the N.R.A. has spent only $20 million annually on political activities. The political groups affiliated with the billionaire Koch brothers, who are seeking to help Republicans take over the Senate, have spent about $30 million in the last six months.

The group will zero in on 15 target states, from places like Colorado and Washington State, where gun control initiatives have advanced recently, to territory that is likely to be more hostile like Texas, Montana and Indiana. They have set a goal of signing up one million new supporters this year on top of the 1.5 million they already have.

Previous efforts by Mr. Bloomberg to push gun control have touched off tensions with national Democratic leaders, because he has run negative ads against incumbent Democrats whom he views as insufficiently supportive of gun control. The Democratic leaders argue that Mr. Bloomberg threatens to hand control of the Senate to Republicans, which they say would doom any hope of passing gun control legislation.

Mr. Bloomberg dismissed those fears, saying he was concerned only with the long term.

“You can tell me all you want that the Republicans would be worse in the Senate than the Democrats,” he said. “Maybe they would. But that’s not what we’re talking about here.”

Underscoring his desire to work with both parties, Mr. Bloomberg is bringing on a new advisory board with prominent Republican and Democratic figures. Tom Ridge, the former Pennsylvania governor and Homeland Security secretary under President George W. Bush; Eli Broad, the philanthropist; Warren Buffett, the investor; and Michael G. Mullen, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under both Mr. Bush and President Obama, will all be board members.

Mr. Bloomberg acknowledged that his new efforts would require a dedication not just of money but also of time — two things he now has in abundance.

“You’ve got to work at it piece by piece,” he added. “One mom and another mom. You’ve got to wear them down until they finally say, ‘Enough.’ ”

He was also dismissive of skeptics who might question whether he could ever build an organization that rivaled the N.R.A. And he seemed unaware of, or unwilling to acknowledge, the ways in which his own persona — of a billionaire, Big Gulp-banning former mayor of New York — could undercut his efforts, especially in rural, conservative states.

“I don’t know what your perception is of our reputation, and mine, the name Bloomberg around the country,” he said. But every place he goes, he added, “You’re a rock star. People yelling out of cabs, ‘Hey, way to go!’ ”

His financial commitment to reducing gun violence could grow. When asked how much he was willing to spend, he tossed out the $50 million figure out as if he were describing the tip he left on a restaurant check.

“I put $50 million this year, last year into coal, $53 million into oceans,” he said with a shrug, describing his clean energy and sustainable fishing initiatives. “Certainly a number like that, $50 million. Let’s see what happens.”

The key to whether they can be effective, the mayor and his advisers said, will be turning out female voters, the sought-after swing bloc that has been pivotal in recent elections.

“Right now, women, when they go to the polls, they vote on abortion, they vote on jobs, they vote on health care,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action. “We want one of those things to be gun violence prevention.”

Mr. Bloomberg was introspective as he spoke, and seemed both restless and wistful. When he sat down for the interview, it was a few days before his 50th college reunion. His mortality has started dawning on him, at 72. And he admitted he was a bit taken aback by how many of his former classmates had been appearing in the “in memoriam” pages of his school newsletter.

But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on April 16, 2014, 12:32:16 AM
Also, we really have to get dirty money out of politics, amiright?

Yep!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: twatts on April 16, 2014, 08:10:45 AM
Also, we really have to get dirty money out of politics, amiright?

Yep!

But rich evil people that would destroy America have Rights too!   :-P

Terry
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on April 23, 2014, 06:01:04 PM
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/04/23/306228730/georgia-law-oks-guns-in-schools-churches
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on June 04, 2014, 09:32:39 PM
@CBCAlerts: N.B. RCMP says unknown number of people shot in #Moncton and manhunt underway in north end of city for man armed with guns: CP.

Thoughts with BuffaloBudd as this unfolds in his neck of the woods.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on June 04, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
@CBCAlerts: N.B. RCMP says unknown number of people shot in #Moncton and manhunt underway in north end of city for man armed with guns: CP.

Thoughts with BuffaloBudd as this unfolds in his neck of the woods.

Still on the loose, got a few close friends living right in that area, definitely thinking of them right now.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on June 08, 2014, 02:17:39 AM
I really hope "ammosexual" works its way into the public lexicon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ogl9M798NJU#t=0
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: antelope19 on June 10, 2014, 03:08:44 PM
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tasneemnashrulla/a-company-has-designed-a-bulletproof-blanket-to-protect-kids?bffbnews
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on August 19, 2014, 02:25:45 PM
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tasneemnashrulla/a-company-has-designed-a-bulletproof-blanket-to-protect-kids?bffbnews

this kid could have used one.

Fearing intruder, Tampa grandmother shoots grandson, 7 (http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/bn9/2014/8/19/fearing_intruder_tam.html)


remember folks, guns make your home safer.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 20, 2014, 08:51:39 PM
gotta have a gun to defend my home
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on August 27, 2014, 08:19:12 AM
Giving a 9 year girl a fully automatic Uzi? What could go wrong?

Arizona gun range instructor accidentally shot dead showing girl, 9, how to fire Uzi (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/9-year-old-girl-accidentally-shoots-dead-gun-instructor-uzi-police-article-1.1917858)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 27, 2014, 08:34:23 AM
Shame about that guy's death, for sure, but imagine that poor girl. Nine years old and this has just happened.
A lifetime of therapy awaits (hopefully.)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 27, 2014, 02:27:33 PM
Quote
The little girl’s parents were using cell phones to film the tutorial when tragedy struck around 10 a.m. Monday, Sam Scarmardo, the manager at the Arizona Last Stop gun range, told the Daily News.


her parents must be so proud...

 :shakehead:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mehead on August 27, 2014, 02:29:40 PM
So fucked up in so many ways
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on August 27, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
Quote
The little girl’s parents were using cell phones to film the tutorial when tragedy struck around 10 a.m. Monday, Sam Scarmardo, the manager at the Arizona Last Stop gun range, told the Daily News.


her parents must be so proud...

 :shakehead:

Is it just me or is this an awful name for a gun range?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 31, 2014, 07:34:08 PM
good thing this lady had a concealed weapon to keep her and her toddler safe at the walmart.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/31/374114767/toddler-fatally-shoots-his-mother-at-idaho-wal-mart
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on December 31, 2014, 07:46:14 PM
good thing this lady had a concealed weapon to keep her and her toddler safe at the walmart.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/31/374114767/toddler-fatally-shoots-his-mother-at-idaho-wal-mart

Fuck yeah!  Freedumb!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on December 31, 2014, 07:57:12 PM
good thing this lady had a concealed weapon to keep her and her toddler safe at the walmart.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/31/374114767/toddler-fatally-shoots-his-mother-at-idaho-wal-mart

Fuck yeah!  Freedumb!

"Sheriff spokesman Stu Miller says...."It's a tragedy. Accidental. Probably could have been prevented through some safety and security measures," Miller told Boise State Public Radio."

like not having a loaded gun, apparently without even the safety on, within arms reach of your two year old?  those kind of safety measures?
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on January 01, 2015, 09:10:51 AM
at least carrying a loaded weapon in her purse preventing someone from mugging her

 :shakehead:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on January 03, 2015, 01:38:03 PM
good thing this lady had a concealed weapon to keep her and her toddler safe at the walmart.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/31/374114767/toddler-fatally-shoots-his-mother-at-idaho-wal-mart

Fuck yeah!  Freedumb!

"Sheriff spokesman Stu Miller says...."It's a tragedy. Accidental. Probably could have been prevented through some safety and security measures," Miller told Boise State Public Radio."

like not having a loaded gun, apparently without even the safety on, within arms reach of your two year old?  those kind of safety measures?

Obviously he means that Infant Gun-Safety Training would have empowered the child to shoot someone more deserving.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on February 02, 2015, 10:51:04 PM
here'a another story of someone protecting his family with a gun

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/01/us/new-mexico-toddler-shoots-parents/index.html

Quote
3-year-old boy shoots father, pregnant mother in New Mexico
(CNN)A 3-year-old boy shot his father and pregnant mother over the weekend inside a hotel room in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Police say the boy removed a handgun from his mother's purse Saturday and fired one shot, striking his father in the lower backside.

The bullet apparently exited through the father's hip and hit the mother in the right shoulder. She is eight months pregnant, said Officer Simon Drobik of the Albuquerque Police Department.

The father was treated and released from the hospital while the mother was hospitalized in stable condition. The condition of her unborn child is unknown.

The boy and his 2-year-old sister, who was also in the hotel room, are under the care of the Children's Youth and Families department. They were not injured in the incident.

Drobik says the case has been sent to Albuquerque District Attorney's Office, which will determine whether the parents will be charged with criminal negligence.

Police did not identify the family.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on June 18, 2015, 01:04:50 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/17/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/

Quote
(CNN)Several people were killed in a shooting at an historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, a source close to the investigation told CNN.

The shooter is still at large.

The shooting took place Wednesday evening at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the oldest AME church in the South.

Police haven't said how many people have been shot. But the source who spoke to CNN said several bodies were in the church that were yet to be identified.

"It's really bad. It's a very bad scene," local pastor Thomas Dixon said.

"Apparently the person just entered the church and opened fire. That part has not been fully articulated on what happened yet ... they are still looking for the suspect."

Search on for suspect

Police said the suspect in the shooting is a clean-shaven white man in his 20s, with a slender build. He was wearing a gray sweatshirt, blue jeans and boots.

Soon afterward, news cameras showed officers taking a man matching that description into custody, but police said they were still looking for the shooter.

The department asked anyone with information to call 911 dispatchers
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on June 18, 2015, 10:12:06 AM
A horrible act of terrorism.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on June 18, 2015, 05:31:38 PM
A horrible act of terrorism.

Wait, he was Muslim? I thought it was a scrawny white dude?

Fuck that racist piece of trash.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on June 18, 2015, 11:07:14 PM
A horrible act of terrorism.

Wait, he was Muslim? I thought it was a scrawny white dude?

Fuck that racist piece of trash.

Fox & Friends this morning floated the thesis that this Confederate-flag-waving, apartheid-loving mental case wasn't probably motivated by racism but was instead bent on attacking Christianity. FN's resident "the persecution is real!" mouth breather Todd Starnes even gets front-page real estate at FN.com right now with this piece of base-rousing conjecture (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/06/18/security-expert-my-fear-is-that-more-churches-will-be-targeted.html). Hmmm... let's see, perhaps until new evidence suggests otherwise it might be prudent to, I don't know, go with the most likely theory or none at all?

Leave it to fucking Fox News to hijack a deadly mass shooting at an all-black church to promote one of their hysterical pet causes.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on June 19, 2015, 01:07:52 AM
I'm really gonna miss Jon Stewart. Once again nailed it... "Sorry for the no jokes."

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on June 19, 2015, 08:03:36 AM
A horrible act of terrorism.

Wait, he was Muslim? I thought it was a scrawny white dude?

I'm going to respect you enough to assume you were being sarcastic but I am going to elaborate because I'm calmer than yesterday when I wrote that.

ter·ror·ism
/ˈterəˌrizəm/
noun
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.


Obviously he's a racist. That's the motivator for this act of terrorism. This kid was a White Power radical. He is reported to have stated the desire to start a civil war.[1] (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/us/on-facebook-dylann-roof-charleston-suspect-wears-symbols-of-white-supremacy.html) It has been reported that he deliberately left a survivor and gave her this message: “You rape our women and you’re taking over our country. And you have to go." That's the terrorism. That's the intimidation. That's the message that engenders fear.

More from the Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/us/charleston-shooting-terrorism-or-hate-crime.html
Quote
Samuel Sinyangwe, a civil rights activist who has helped chronicle violence against African-Americans, wrote on Twitter: “#CharlestonShooting terrorist wore an Apartheid flag on his jacket. If a Muslim man wore an ISIS flag, he wouldn’t get past mall security.”

...

Civil rights advocates said the Charleston attack not only fit the dictionary definition of terrorism but reflected a history of attempts by the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups to terrorize African-Americans.

“The first antiterrorism law in U.S. history was the Klan Control Act, so really, this has been the definition of terrorism,” William Jelani Cobb, a writer and director of the Africana Studies Institute at the University of Connecticut.

Fuck that racist piece of trash.

Yep.


I'm really gonna miss Jon Stewart. Once again nailed it... "Sorry for the no jokes."



A thousand times this.
Here's the link:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/kb2h42/charleston-church-shooting
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on June 19, 2015, 09:28:24 AM
Yes, I was going for (and whiffed badly, apparently) sarcasm.

Also, not to take away from this unspeakable tragedy, but it defies logic that the police were able to apprehend this sick fuck without issue, but when a black guy picks up a toy guy in a Walmart or a 12-yo is playing with one on a playground the police have no choice but to shoot them on the spot. Fuck.

VDB, I almost gave out my first smite for linking a Todd Starnes joint, but upon further review I'm the asshole for clicking it. That dude is THE WORST.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: susep on June 19, 2015, 09:39:47 AM
Also, not to take away from this unspeakable tragedy, but it defies logic that the police were able to apprehend this sick fuck without issue, but when a black guy picks up a toy guy in a Walmart or a 12-yo is playing with one on a playground the police have no choice but to shoot them on the spot. Fuck.

qft, seriously fucked up.  this dude looks like a 12 yo. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on June 19, 2015, 09:54:52 AM
Also, not to take away from this unspeakable tragedy, but it defies logic that the police were able to apprehend this sick fuck without issue, but when a black guy picks up a toy guy in a Walmart or a 12-yo is playing with one on a playground the police have no choice but to shoot them on the spot. Fuck.

qft, seriously fucked up.  this dude looks like a 12 yo.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: susep on June 19, 2015, 10:18:59 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-19/four-blunt-points-about-guns-and-the-charleston-massacre
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on June 19, 2015, 12:32:29 PM
^^
very good piece. tighter gun control (which I am strongly in favor of ) will certainly not solve these problems alone

Yes, I was going for (and whiffed badly, apparently) sarcasm.

Also, not to take away from this unspeakable tragedy, but it defies logic that the police were able to apprehend this sick fuck without issue, but when a black guy picks up a toy guy in a Walmart or a 12-yo is playing with one on a playground the police have no choice but to shoot them on the spot. Fuck.
.

the attempt at sarcasm wasn't that bad. Technically, RJ is correct. This was terrorism, much like many hate / racist crimes, etc.

unfortunately, in the current American vernacular, terrorist = Muslim / Arab.
This guy, and McVeigh, and many others, are just as much terrorists as Bin Laden and his friends, something that gets lost in the feeble minds of Fox New (attack against Christianity, WTF are they thinking)
 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on June 19, 2015, 03:19:49 PM
lulz...

(http://i.imgur.com/Uma3MwP.jpg)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on June 21, 2015, 10:32:50 PM
welcome to the puerto rican day parade in chicago

https://youtu.be/l9qRl7L-B4I
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on August 26, 2015, 11:24:50 AM
Dear God. Shooting of a reporter and cameraman in Roanoke. And the mother fucking asshole posted the whole thing to Twitter and FB.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/law-enforcement-investigating-incident-at-bridgewater-plaza/34923086

Your account can be suspended on Twitter for threatening violence, but this motherfucker posts video of a murder and it autoplays in my feed. Fuck. This.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on August 26, 2015, 11:27:37 AM
fuck this shit.  :shakehead:

didnt realize they had a image and stuff of the guy, at first it sounded like it was some kind of sniper attack or something but this is totally diff. Fuck.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 26, 2015, 11:30:57 AM
Adam was a former student of a friend of mine down in Salem, VA.

This shit sucks.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on August 26, 2015, 11:38:01 AM
woah looks like they found him and hes on the run in a mustang now

http://uproxx.com/webculture/2015/08/vester-flanagan-brice-williams/

his account has been suspended on twitter.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on August 26, 2015, 11:49:01 AM
don't go to that guy's facebook/twitter pages or watch the video as that just gives him what he wants. Fuck this piece of shit
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mehead on August 26, 2015, 12:00:34 PM
reporting now that the suspect has shot himself

fucked up
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 26, 2015, 12:09:09 PM
Now they're saying he's barely alive.

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on August 26, 2015, 12:25:47 PM
I wish these articles about it would stop including still frames and stuff from his videos shit is disturbing.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 26, 2015, 12:44:13 PM
Adam was a former student of a friend of mine down in Salem, VA.

This shit sucks.

Motherfuck. Deep condolences RJ.
Senseless.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on August 26, 2015, 02:22:01 PM
And now they say the shooter has died.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 26, 2015, 10:22:48 PM
I don't get why people do shit like this.

vibes to the families
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on December 08, 2015, 08:15:18 PM
It's a good thing the bystander was armed

http://tucson.com/news/blogs/police-beat/witness-shoots-suspected-beer-thief/article_b5841f92-9c72-11e5-92e8-238a6a0693b0.html

Quote
A man suspected of robbery sustained life-threatening injures after being shot during a beer skip on the north side of Tucson.

Around 2:30 p.m. Sunday at a Circle K on West Grant and North Oracle roads, an adult male entered the convenience store and shoplifted a few beer items, said Sgt. Pete Dugan, a Tucson Police spokesman.

Multiple witnesses to the shoplifting followed the man, who was on foot, out of the store and on to the streets heading west.

The man confronted one of the witnesses, who was riding a bicycle, at a Burger King in the 400 block of West Grant Road.

The witness had called police to report the theft and was following him to find out where he was headed, police said.

The suspect picked up a large piece of wood he found in the area and raised it above his head. The witness, who was armed, shot the man and then alerted authorities, said Dugan.



The witness remained at the scene until police arrived.

Officers rendered first aid before the wounded man was taken to Banner University Medical Center.

Detectives are investigating the incident, said Dugan. No one has been charged.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on December 08, 2015, 08:52:59 PM
Betcha he wouldn't have followed the perp otherwise. Sure seems like ill-advised escalation when there isn't anyone else's safety or life on the line.

Also, I'd never heard the term "beer skip" before.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on January 05, 2016, 02:23:37 PM
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/04/live-updates-what-president-doing-keep-guns-out-wrong-hands (https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/04/live-updates-what-president-doing-keep-guns-out-wrong-hands)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on January 05, 2016, 04:00:54 PM
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/04/live-updates-what-president-doing-keep-guns-out-wrong-hands (https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/04/live-updates-what-president-doing-keep-guns-out-wrong-hands)

me watching fox news tonight.

(http://i.imgur.com/DKJhx9l.gif)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on February 21, 2016, 01:46:43 AM
https://www.rt.com/usa/333151-michigan-random-shooting-victims/

An eight-year-old was one of the victims. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on February 21, 2016, 06:33:42 AM
https://www.rt.com/usa/333151-michigan-random-shooting-victims/

An eight-year-old was one of the victims.

The well regulated militia strikes again!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on February 21, 2016, 12:55:10 PM
https://www.rt.com/usa/333151-michigan-random-shooting-victims/

An eight-year-old was one of the victims.

The well regulated militia strikes again!

This is why we can't have Uber.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on June 12, 2016, 12:24:26 PM
Fuck assault rifles. That is all.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on June 12, 2016, 02:14:41 PM
Fuck assault rifles. That is all.

QFT


Just a couple hours ago

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-gay-pride-la-weapons-20160612-snap-story.html

Quote
Man with weapons, explosives arrested, was going to L.A. gay pride parade, police say
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: gah on June 13, 2016, 03:36:04 PM
kind of a cross post between election stuff and the orlando shooting, but worth seeing the way both leading candidates responded:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/06/13/trump-just-faced-his-first-big-leadership-test-he-failed-miserably/?tid=pm_pop_b

trump,  :shakehead:
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on June 14, 2016, 09:55:20 AM
This really took me by surprise.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/a-map-of-all-mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-since-jan-1-2016-1.2684432 (http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/a-map-of-all-mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-since-jan-1-2016-1.2684432)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on June 15, 2016, 09:28:55 AM
Another John Oliver piece from back when he was on the Daly show.
Pretty awesome...

https://www.facebook.com/METalInternational/videos/10151578316252446/ (https://www.facebook.com/METalInternational/videos/10151578316252446/)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 07, 2016, 10:43:07 PM
FUCK
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 07, 2016, 10:47:28 PM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 07, 2016, 10:50:52 PM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.

I don't know what that means but it's cynical as fuck, dude.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 07, 2016, 11:03:42 PM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.

I don't know what that means but it's cynical as fuck, dude.

It means a dude was lynched in Atlanta

http://m.ajc.com/news/news/local/police-body-found-in-piedmont-park-a-suicide-victi/nrtJq/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 07, 2016, 11:36:43 PM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.

I don't know what that means but it's cynical as fuck, dude.

It means a dude was lynched in Atlanta

http://m.ajc.com/news/news/local/police-body-found-in-piedmont-park-a-suicide-victi/nrtJq/

Quote
the scene was consistent with a suicide

Quote
Everything we have seen suggests that there was no foul play involved


Up to 10 DPD officers shot, 3 dead BTW.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 07, 2016, 11:42:36 PM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.

I don't know what that means but it's cynical as fuck, dude.

It means a dude was lynched in Atlanta

http://m.ajc.com/news/news/local/police-body-found-in-piedmont-park-a-suicide-victi/nrtJq/

Quote
the scene was consistent with a suicide

Quote
Everything we have seen suggests that there was no foul play involved


Up to 10 DPD officers shot, 3 dead BTW.

Black dudes always hang themselves from trees in the south.  But i mean, if the cops say so...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 07, 2016, 11:47:56 PM
Sniper situation in Dallas is fucked. I'm on the side of peace always. Apparently they've got the shooter trapped in a building in a standoff right now.

Fucking guns. Too many fucking guns. 

Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on July 08, 2016, 01:58:58 AM
Fucking guns. Too many fucking guns.

Yep.  Something really needs to be done...but it won't, of course. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 08, 2016, 08:16:38 AM
FUCK

Yep.  A lynching thrown in for good measure too.

I don't know what that means but it's cynical as fuck, dude.

It means a dude was lynched in Atlanta

http://m.ajc.com/news/news/local/police-body-found-in-piedmont-park-a-suicide-victi/nrtJq/

Quote
the scene was consistent with a suicide

Quote
Everything we have seen suggests that there was no foul play involved


Up to 10 DPD officers shot, 3 dead BTW.

Black dudes always hang themselves from trees in the south.  But i mean, if the cops say so...

Yup. And when a black dude dies in the south, it's obviously because they are all sister-fucking, dumb as rocks, lynching mother fuckers down there. But I mean, if Daily Kos says so...
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 08, 2016, 08:44:35 AM
https://youtu.be/eBGc5h1yWHQ
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on July 08, 2016, 09:23:06 AM

The 2nd amendment and gun lobby are bullshit obstacles to a very serious problem.  Figure it out.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 08, 2016, 09:30:04 AM

The 2nd amendment and gun lobby are bullshit obstacles to a very serious problem.  Figure it out.

no offense, but you have fairly similar access to guns up there in Canadia with nowhere near the gun violence problem. Our issues are much deeper than the 2nd amendment.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on July 08, 2016, 09:36:41 AM

The 2nd amendment and gun lobby are bullshit obstacles to a very serious problem.  Figure it out.

no offense, but you have fairly similar access to guns up there in Canadia with nowhere near the gun violence problem. Our issues are much deeper than the 2nd amendment.

While I agree with you PG in part on this, Canadians have much stricter gun laws in that we can't obtain assault rifles. Registered gun owners can't carry hand guns around unless they are going straight to the gun range (as in can't even stop to grab a coffee or fill the tank with gas on the way). Every gun has to be under lock and key at your residence when not in use. There are quite a few safeguards put in place.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mattstick on July 08, 2016, 09:51:52 AM

Maybe, but you'll never know if these are deeper problems until you cut off easy access to firearms.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 08, 2016, 09:53:37 AM
Still, the problems we're facing are so much deeper than the 2nd Amendment. Yes, we should enact much much stricter gun regulations. Not arguing against that at all. In fact I will always argue FOR that.

But there will never be a time that our police officers are not armed. Far more urgent than gun control laws is a need to train cops NOT TO USE those weapons quite so readily. It's insane.

Marvin Gaye sang about "trigger happy policing" in 1971. This is not a new issue.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 08, 2016, 10:05:10 AM
selling my gun today. Everything that has happened over the past few days has been too much and my girlfriend is pretty uncomfortable with it being in the house at this point, and quite frankly I don't blame her. I bought it for skeet shooting (which I used it for like 5 or 6 times tops), I don't hunt, and it's a pretty lousy home defense weapon so it's gone. Here's to there being one less gun owner out there.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 08, 2016, 10:20:28 AM

The 2nd amendment and gun lobby are bullshit obstacles to a very serious problem.  Figure it out.

no offense, but you have fairly similar access to guns up there in Canadia with nowhere near the gun violence problem. Our issues are much deeper than the 2nd amendment.

What he said.

Far more urgent than gun control laws is a need to train cops NOT TO USE those weapons quite so readily. It's insane.

Marvin Gaye sang about "trigger happy policing" in 1971. This is not a new issue.

Him too.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on July 08, 2016, 10:26:16 AM
Still, the problems we're facing are so much deeper than the 2nd Amendment. Yes, we should enact much much stricter gun regulations. Not arguing against that at all. In fact I will always argue FOR that.

But there will never be a time that our police officers are not armed. Far more urgent than gun control laws is a need to train cops NOT TO USE those weapons quite so readily. It's insane.

Marvin Gaye sang about "trigger happy policing" in 1971. This is not a new issue.


I agree 100% PG. I will also point out that I was totally dumbfounded that one of these victims happened to have a pistol in his pocket. That just seems so foreign to me. I get it, 2nd amendment and all that, but I just don't see the point. It would be unnerving to me every time I'm out, some dude who loses his shit could have the option of pulling a gun on me or my family. It just doesn't compute.
None of this is to say the officer handled that situation properly, trust me.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 08, 2016, 10:40:03 AM
Wait, so more people carrying around guns isnt making us safer? Its actually doing the opposite?



TIME TO WAKE UP


Didnt see any NRA reps go rush to defend those two African Americans rights to carry guns when one even had a carry permit....backwards ass system
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 08, 2016, 10:46:22 AM
Well, yeah - carrying a weapon with you in the car or wherever is strange to me, too. I can't imagine doing it. I know many people in Texas who do, though... and they will tell you that when they get pulled over they do EXACTLY what Philando Castile did. They tell the officer immediately that they have a licensed firearm in the car. It's what you're SUPPOSED to do.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 08, 2016, 10:51:58 AM
Yeah and his right to bear arms (and a complete dumbass of a cop) pretty much contributed to his death.

Thought this article was interesting

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/alton-sterling-philando-castile-2nd-amendment-guns/490301/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 08, 2016, 11:08:03 AM
Wait, so more people carrying around guns isnt making us safer? Its actually doing the opposite?

Well, not really: the gun homocide rate has been cut in half over the past 20 years and is the lowest since 1963

(https://mises.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/homicide_51yr.JPG?itok=-_z6lBiI)

Didnt see any NRA reps go rush to defend those two African Americans rights to carry guns when one even had a carry permit....backwards ass system

Yup, that's totally fucked. Although they did have Shaneen Allen's back (http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/04/gov_christie_grants_pardon_to_pistol-packing_pa_mo.html), but no excuse for failing to speak out against the two most recent shameful episodes.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 08, 2016, 11:10:52 AM
Access to guns increases their use; this is a statisticaly proven fact.
Also demonstrable is the influence of NRA campaign financing on political inaction with respect to gun control.


There is no question that racism is a contributor to the problem.
White people need to get the fuck over themselves.

If you deem another human as less than yourself, then you are lessening yourself and all of us in the process.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on July 08, 2016, 11:16:33 AM
I honestly can't understand how a political aversion can sway your opinion on a matter such as this.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/08/conservative-media-misread-data-to-declare-gun/193961 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/08/conservative-media-misread-data-to-declare-gun/193961)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 08, 2016, 11:18:27 AM
Wait, so more people carrying around guns isnt making us safer? Its actually doing the opposite?

Well, not really: the gun homocide rate has been cut in half over the past 20 years and is the lowest since 1963

(https://mises.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/homicide_51yr.JPG?itok=-_z6lBiI)

Didnt see any NRA reps go rush to defend those two African Americans rights to carry guns when one even had a carry permit....backwards ass system

Yup, that's totally fucked. Although they did have Shaneen Allen's back (http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/04/gov_christie_grants_pardon_to_pistol-packing_pa_mo.html), but no excuse for failing to speak out against the two most recent shameful episodes.

Yeah so that graph shows a drop in homicides right around when Clintons ban on assault riffles was taking place.....which means less guns were prob around in 96 and on which means less homicides. I think a lot of people give credit to better policing too, more cops with in car computers and easier to target areas of high crime. Which worked in the 90s and maybe early 2000's but try to tell an Afircan American community today that they will get better police to fix this.

and glad they protected one gun owning citizen they are really doing God's work. I would be very shocked to see them stand up for them now since they are dead, but they havent even acknowledged that the rights they are so quick to protect contributed to this man's death.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: runawayjimbo on July 08, 2016, 11:44:44 AM
Yeah so that graph shows a drop in homicides right around when Clintons ban on assault riffles was taking place.....which means less guns were prob around in 96 and on which means less homicides.

Not really. See here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/):

Quote
Did the law have an effect on crime or gun violence? While gun violence did fall in the 1990s, this was likely due to other factors. Here's the UPenn study again: "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence."

One reason is that assault weapons were never a huge factor in gun violence to begin with. They were  used in only 2 percent to 8 percent of gun crimes. Large-capacity magazines were more important — used in as many as a quarter of gun crimes. But, again, the 1994 law left more than 24 million magazines untouched, so the impact was blunted.

Here's a pretty good rundown of *some* of the factors for the decrease including, as you mentioned, more/better policing, a fact that seems incomprehensible right now given the recent actions of a (relatively) few bad cops.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/03/weve-had-a-massive-decline-in-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/?tid=sm_tw
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: sophist on July 08, 2016, 12:25:18 PM
The man at Piedmont Park that was found hanging in a tree is about 7 miles from our apartment, and it didn't make national news but an African American man was also gunned down about 300 yards from my home.  Pretty much 2 blocks over.  In one of the safest neighborhoods in Atlanta.  This coupled with Dallas and MN are just sickening to us (my wife and I).  We have a lot of concern that even more will happen this weekend.  This is a lot of unrest here. 

We talked about moving this morning, and I looked at the immigration policy for moving to Canada.  I would have never thought of it years ago, but things are just so bad to me.  We had a very serious conversation about this.  I def think we'll investigate more.  And if it is actually feasible, we want to do it.  We want kids.  But just not in a country that does this every fucking week without actually working to fix anything.  Everything is broken here.   And its not going to get better.  Our two choices for president are two of the worst people on this earth.  No third party candidate will ever win.  Never mind being great again, I'd take decent.  It's been a while since we have even had that. 
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: emay on July 08, 2016, 12:34:38 PM
Kinda with you there, just last week there was a gunman in the office building next to mine in downtown Denver.
First reports said there was an active shooter running around 16th st mall (the walking tourist mall downtown) and there were multiple victims
we had a lockdown on our building no one could leave

Ended up being 1 dude that ran into the building next door, never opened fire anywhere outside, and ran into his wifes office and shot her multiple times and then barricaded himself inside and shot himself later. It was a targeted attack on his wife for filing a divorce with him.

The amount of fear that was around the office and just downtown from the lockdown, from false reports, was frightening. Scary world we live in.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 08, 2016, 01:13:42 PM
Yup. And when a black dude dies in the south, it's obviously because they are all sister-fucking, dumb as rocks, lynching mother fuckers down there. But I mean, if Daily Kos says so...

I have no idea what you just typed but good luck with that.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on July 08, 2016, 01:49:21 PM
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/US-Capitol-on-Lockdown-Everyone-Asked-to-Shelter-in-Place-386007501.html (http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/US-Capitol-on-Lockdown-Everyone-Asked-to-Shelter-in-Place-386007501.html)
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 08, 2016, 02:57:40 PM
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/US-Capitol-on-Lockdown-Everyone-Asked-to-Shelter-in-Place-386007501.html (http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/US-Capitol-on-Lockdown-Everyone-Asked-to-Shelter-in-Place-386007501.html)

False alarm. Happens
all the time here in D.C.
They don't fuck around.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 08, 2016, 11:42:02 PM
So, they blew up the Dallas shooter with a bomb, huh.
That's a new one.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: phil on July 08, 2016, 11:50:57 PM
A lot of people in my area, in reaction to all the events of the past few days have been throwing around the argument that "this is how civil wars start"...as someone who's studied the civil war extensively (my (too-poor-to-be-slave-owning-but-still-very-hillbilly) ancestors lost that war pretty hard) it seems like if this erupts into a war it'll be much much much much much worse due to the non-geographical nature of the divide between the "two" sides
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: mbw on July 09, 2016, 07:40:01 AM
http://usuncut.com/news/nypd-cop-road-rage-killing/
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: ytowndan on July 09, 2016, 06:42:15 PM
Jesus.  Wtf.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: PIE-GUY on July 31, 2016, 03:19:29 PM
My ravings today, should you care to read them.

https://www.facebook.com/dave.anderso/posts/10154009986091645 (https://www.facebook.com/dave.anderso/posts/10154009986091645)

Quote
On August 1, 1966 “mass shooting” first entered the American vocabulary after a troubled man gunned down 46 people from the observation deck of the University of Texas Tower, killing 14.
On August 1, 2016, exactly 50 years later, guns may legally be carried by civilians onto Texas college campuses, including UT, for the first time.
I struggle to express exactly how I feel about this stuff. I learned to shoot a rifle at age seven. I am not anti-gun, per se. I do not own, nor do I intend to buy, a gun. That’s my choice. But, I know and love (and absolutely trust) many gun owners. I don't want the government to take those guns away.
All that said, the "Don't tread on me,” pro-gun lobby that not only refuses to allow common sense gun laws to pass but actually pushes the envelope of where and when it is appropriate to allow guns is now treading on ME.
They argue that more guns in the hands of good guys will make us safer. The problem with the “good guy with a gun” argument is that it defies simple logic. I call it the “fragile vase on the top shelf” theory. Of course, kids are taught not to play ball in the house. Theoretically, that means the vase is safe. But the potential energy of a vase on the top shelf is greater than that of a similar vase on the bottom shelf. When the kids, inevitably, play ball in the house and knock over the vase, the damage is relative to where that vase sits. The bottom-shelf vase gets chipped while the top-shelf vase shatters into unrecognizable bits.
To put guns into an environment filled with people adds potential energy to the equation. It's really that simple. Fewer guns equals fewer gun deaths.
One of the common sense gun laws that persists in most states (there are idiotic exceptions) is the ban on guns in bars. Guns and alcohol don't mix. Why? Alcohol is the kids playing ball in the house. Fists are the bottom-shelf vase. Guns are the top-shelf vase. Common sense dictates that guns in bars have the potential to shatter lives unnecessarily.
College campuses have long been havens for young adults experimenting with alcohol and drugs. Students push the boundaries of alcohol especially because they have not yet learned what those boundaries are. This brings with it all sorts of issues like campus rape and drunk driving. Adding guns to that environment increases the potential for disaster.
But let's get back to the “mass shooting” problem. That's what the gun lobby wants you to think good guys with guns are going to protect you from, after all. I argue that the only thing that can protect us from senseless violence is LOVE. To a gun-totin’ disciple of the NRA that may sound crazy but it's the absolute truth.
What's my proof? I'll point to one example, but there are thousands of examples of love conquering hate all around the world. They don't often make headlines because “crisis” sells a lot more fast food than “crisis averted.”
My example is Antoinette Tuff, a compassionate, unarmed, citizen who kept her school from becoming another Sandy Hook Elementary. How? With love. She told the AK-47-wielding 20 year-old that she loved him and understood what he was going through. The incident ended without a single injury. Read about Antoinette here: http://cnn.it/2aCHvPQ.
The bottom line for me will always be:
Love over hate.
Compassion over violence.
Common sense over well-funded lobbies.
I don't want the government to take away guns or overwrite the 2nd Amendment. I want common sense gun laws. We don't need guns on campus. We don't need guns in bars. We don't need guns in our city hall (yes this is a thing in Texas). We don't need semi-automatic assault rifles designed to kill every person in the room in a matter of seconds.
It's common sense. It's logic.
Talk about it.
Write your lawmakers.
Vote!
Shine a light!
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: rowjimmy on July 31, 2016, 03:42:49 PM
Nicely put.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: slslbs on August 16, 2016, 06:32:09 AM
Nicely put.
Title: Re: Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?
Post by: VDB on August 17, 2016, 01:25:43 PM
Nicely put.