"Stop the gun madness ... Guns do kill people".

62 posts / 0 new

Gene Robinson is one of many people that are tired of seeing the death total in this country caused by guns. He says that after the initial talk following a tragedy like Newtown, things go back to "normal":

“Normal,” however, is tragically unacceptable. In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans. Most of the deaths were suicides; a few were accidental. About a third of them — 11,078 — were homicides. That’s almost twice the number of Americans who have been killed in a decade of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In Britain, by comparison, the number of gun homicides in 2010 was 58. Here we’d consider that a rounding error.

Stop the gun madness

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

Comments

If you think the gun death toll in this country is bad....you should see Afghanistan...if you are going to take away the guns from Americans then start by taking them away from the Pentagon first.

But wait, you might say, If the Pentagon doesn't have any guns then ruthless people would invade, steal all of our property, and force us all to live in austerity....gee we couldn't have that now could we?

And now just extrapolate from that what is happening to the majority of Americans by those few who now owns about 98% of the wealth in this country...the ones that control the Pentagon and the politicians and the news media...and 98% of the people. The first things that totalitarians want is to take away all weapons from the people they want to control. Any criminal will tell you that they would much prefer his/her potential victims were easy prey...unarmed. All a totalitarian government has to do is sufficiently frighten the people into accepting their totalitarian subjugation....giving up their freedoms...giving up their weapons...giving up their democracy (and an entrenched and corrupt two party system owned by the 1% is not a real democracy). One way of frightening the people is to create false flag operations...like 9/11 and like, perhaps, staging lone-nut gunmen in theaters or classrooms. Even heard of The Manchurian Candidate? Ever heard of MKULTRA? I don't know what it's called now....but you don't thing that all really disappeared do you...they have honed their skills over the years...from using LSD and other drugs and hypnotism to, perhaps, using psychotropic drugs and targeted propaganda...maybe even hypnotism (maybe Fox news is involved here).

But having said that...I have to say that last night and early this morning was kind of scarey...all of that gun fire in my neighborhood. I was cringing with the idea that those bullets going up would come back down, through my roof. Never has a New Years celebration been so scarey with gun fire. Sounded like a lot of large caliber gun fire as well. Maybe it was because so many people went out and bought assault rifles before they were banned. And maybe all of that gunfire is a sign of rebellion and perhaps a warning of what could happen if our government continues to side with the 1% and not the 99%. Fiscal Cliff, my A$$! And now that one is allegedly over...they are now hitting us with at least 3 more to come. The damn rich people will, no doubt, manage to wiggle out of paying the taxes leaving the rest of us to suffer. Nope, we need more guns...unfortunately! ☮

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Demand A Plan - over 800 mayors and a million supporters demand that Congress comes up with a plan to end gun violence

***

"Why is it easier to obtain a firearm in the U.S. than it is to receive mental health care?"

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

banning firearms will not stop gun violence, it will stop law abiding citizens from defending themselves.

300,000 people die from being fat yet i hear no out rage over forks, spoons or even fast food.

more people are killed in homes by the kitchen knife than they are with firearms.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote firearm owner:more people are killed in homes by the kitchen knife than they are with firearms.

I know Gun Nuts are passionate but they are not entitled to their own alternative reality.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-...

Firearms ARE BY FAR the weapon most used in homicides.... 8583 vs 1694 for 2011.

Try getting your info from reliable sources.

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm
Quote firearm owner:

banning firearms will not stop gun violence,

Who the hell is talking about banning ALL firearms????

Do you often debate your own strawmen?

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm

that is all homicides which include post office workers killing their co workers.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

no one is talking about banning all fire arms just the fire arms people like. so let me be clear banning semi automatic fire arns will not stop fire arms violence.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

the united kindom has few fire arm deaths but five times as much violent crime than the U.S. does so they traded self defense in order to be victims.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote Pierpont:
Quote firearm owner:more people are killed in homes by the kitchen knife than they are with firearms.

I know Gun Nuts are passionate but they are not entitled to their own alternative reality.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-...

Firearms ARE BY FAR the weapon most used in homicides.... 8583 vs 1694 for 2011.

Try getting your info from reliable sources.

That's all quite true but if you incorporate a worst case/best case trend analysis of the "Firearm, type not stated" catagory into the data, you are still, at least, twice as likely to be killed with a knife or cutting instrument, than you are to be killed with an "assault" rifle.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

Blah, blah, blah. Guns, 2nd Amendment, etc.

Why do the Republicans only come out with these threats of civil war when a Democrat is in office? "We're going to use our guns to protect our rights if the government tries to take 'em." No, you're not, Republicans. The right-wing actually cheered on Cheney/Bush when they passed the USAPATRIOT Act. How much more blatant does the government need to be?

Under the PATRIOT Act, the government is allowed to invade anyone's home without a warrant, set up surveillance cameras and microphones, and never even tell a judge that they've done it. And in case the surveillance equipment is discovered, the homeowner can be prosecuted for telling someone, even a defense attorney. Republicans in Congress were fanatical about passing this.

As if that law wasn't bad enough, Cheney/Bush also gave us the Military Commissions Act which allows military death squads to render judgement of detainees in the field, confine suspects indefinitely without charge or trial, even if the suspect is an American citizen. Anyone who spoke out against these laws was immediately denounced by Republicans as un-American or some kind of terrorist sympathizer.

The corporate-owned media justify it to Republican voters as "necessary to protect freedom" so they all go along with it. There were no right-wing calls to arms against the Bush government overstretching its authority. This nonsense only happens when it's a black man... who is actually not trying to take anyone's guns.

All this bellicose grandstanding about 1776 and "cold, dead hands" is obnoxious beyond words. If any right-wing gun-lovers were ever going to fight the American government, they would have by now. But they won't because they support all of the things that actually take our rights. Republican voters cheer on more prisons, more armed guards everywhere, more corporate deregulation, more money for the war machine, more and more government expansion while at the same time complaining that the government is too big and is encroaching on individual rights.

And there is no solution to this because they are unwilling to learn the error of their ways. Pride and party loyalty make them ignorant of their own self-destruction, and they're bringing the rest of us down with them. What can anyone do except keep trying to help them understand?

JTaylor's picture
JTaylor
Joined:
Mar. 19, 2012 2:04 pm

It depends on which selective biased source one gets his info from. And I would suspect that government sources can also have a bias to them. Bureaucrats are not apolitical. Statistics can be manipulated to prove or disprove anything.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 9:27 am

Gun laws save lives – in states w background checks, 38% fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

Vt. gun show to require checks on all buyers

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

background checks are a federal law for fire arms sales even private to private at gun shows or not.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote firearm owner:

the united kindom has few fire arm deaths but five times as much violent crime than the U.S. does so they traded self defense in order to be victims.

Well, the U.K. has the highest crime rate of any country in Europe...and lousy safety nets compared to many.

U.S. 3,466 crimes per 100,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

The U.K. 2,034 crimes per 100,000

Non-gun totting France 504 crimes per 100,000

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Euro...

Maybe a move to non-gun totting France is in order for the Brits as well as Americans.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote polycarp2:
Quote firearm owner:

the united kindom has few fire arm deaths but five times as much violent crime than the U.S. does so they traded self defense in order to be victims.

Well, the U.K. has the highest crime rate of any country in Europe...and lousy safety nets compared to many.

U.S. 3,466 crimes per 100,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

The U.K. 2,034 crimes per 100,000

Non-gun totting France 504 crimes per 100,000

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Euro...

Maybe a move to non-gun totting France is in order for the Brits as well as Americans.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

Wait, so a rightwinger makes a bold claim that turns out to be complete bullshit? I don't believe it. Say it ain't so.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

i said violent crime where the u.s. rates better thsn france.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

the problem is it is not bs i said violent crime where the u.s. rates some place around 400 per 100,000. france is around 500 per 100,000 and england is 2000 or so per 100,000.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

"We must be concerned not only with who murdered them, but about the system, the way of life, the philosophy which produced the murderers". - Martin Luther King, Jr.

American homicide rates go way beyond the guns or no guns debate. A sick society readily perpetuates and accepts killings abroad. It should come as no surprise that it turns its love affair with violence against one another as well.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

the dailymail article supports what i said the violent crime rate in the U.S. is 466 to 100,000 which is lower than france.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u...

http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/

The international data show that country-to-country comparisons are inherently difficult to make — and, as the NRC said, provide “contradictory evidence.” For instance, Latin American countries with high levels of firearm homicide show low levels of gun ownership. Honduras has a gun ownership rate of 6.2 per 100 people and a gun homicide rate of 68.43 per 100,000 people, and Colombia has a gun rate of 5.9 and firearm homicide rate of 27.09, as shown in this chart produced by the Washington Post using the same data we have cited here.

But among advanced countries, the U.S. homicide rate stands out. “We seem to be an average country in terms of violence and aggression,” says Harvard’s Hemenway. “What we have is huge homicide rates compared to anybody else.”

Says Wintemute: “The difference is that in this country violence involves firearms and firearms change the outcome.”

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote firearm owner:

the dailymail article supports what i said the violent crime rate in the U.S. is 466 to 100,000 which is lower than france.

Isn't the dailymail one of those propaganda sites? I would be surprised to find if the US isn't number one among developed nations in all types of crimes and other social maladies.

Dr. Econ's picture
Dr. Econ
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote firearm owner:

the dailymail article supports what i said the violent crime rate in the U.S. is 466 to 100,000 which is lower than france.

Actually, the low crime rate in France includes all crimes...not just violent ones. Burglaries, car thefts, etc.

Americans are a violent people. We seem to have a love affair with it in everything from movies and video games, music and drones to homicides and executions. Bombing rather defenseless civilians is our national specialty.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote firearm owner:

background checks are a federal law for fire arms sales even private to private at gun shows or not.

They are NOT universal ... recent stats i heard stated about 40% of gun sales occur at gun shows, person to person, or on internet and are not currently subject to background checks.

Not only that, the NRA so-called leaders block efforts to enforce existing laws.

I guess someone needs a new set of talking points, the one that crack came from is full of holes ... must have been written on a used target.

***

from the linked article:

Hours before President Barack Obama's official swearing-in to a second term, top Democrats predicted a victory for the broadest component of the White House's push to change the nation's gun laws.

During an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Sen. Chuck Schumer, N.Y., called legislation to institute universal background checks for gun buyers "the sweet spot."

"In terms of actually making us safer and having a good chance of passing, this is it," Schumer said on Sunday.

"I think you're going to see [the very likelihood] in the next week or two a proposal that has broad support for universal background checks," he added.

Democrats optimistic on 'broad' support for universal gun background checks

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

background checks are required for all handgun sales private to private gun show or internet. internet sales even long guns require that they are sent to the closest FFL for you to pick it up after you pay the transfer fees. long guns and shotguns do not fall under the background check in some states others they do. i can only assume that you want to have back ground checks for long guns, shotguns as well as hand guns. I have no problem with that as the state I live in already requires back ground checks for all weapon sales even long guns.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

Please God, keep this issue alive for another 18 months.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 5:12 am

Happy people do not kill people. All of this is just a symptom of the unhappiness in society. When people lose everything then they are unhappy and they "lose it." People need to be able to survive and that is being taken from them so a few rich pigs can live high on the hog. We should not stand for this and seize the wealth and power of the few. Then people will be happy except for the former rich pigs but they have a mental illness anyway and we can make some rehab centers for them. Better to exchange the unhappiness of the masses with the happiness of a few rich.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

didn't russia try that? how did it work out for the common man in communist russia?

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote firearm owner:

didn't russia try that? how did it work out for the common man in communist russia?

When was Russia.... or the USSR ever communist?

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

from 1922 to 1991 but you will probably say that even though they claimed to be communists they were not really communists, they were marxist socialists, however since marx wrote the communist manfesto they were communists. just like the poor bastards in north korea, cuba, and venezuela how is communism working out for them? from what i have seen not very well. unless you think food shortages and government death squads are a good thing.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote firearm owner:

from 1922 to 1991 but you will probably say that even though they claimed to be communists they were not really communists, they were marxist socialists,...

Well... they weren't "marxist (sic) socialists either... You should probably stick with what you're trying to say... and not predict what others will say...

Quote firearm owner:however since marx wrote the communist manfesto they were communists.

Such thinking explains much of what you write....

Quote firearm owner:just like the poor bastards in north korea, cuba, and venezuela how is communism working out for them? from what i have seen not very well.

You don't get out much do you?

Quote firearm owner: unless you think food shortages and government death squads are a good thing.

With all due respect... you should probably restrict yourself to commenting about guns...

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Guns do kill people. They wouldn't do much good as a detterant or for self defense if they didn't. Guns were invented and that's pretty much the end of a chapter in history. They'll never go away, especially in a nation whose independence was founded on them.

Now as far as self defense goes, I can personally see where having a couple of dobermans at home and taking one with you on a stroll through the park would be very effective as well. A woman with a doberman is probably going to be much safer from a rapist or mugger than a woman with a hand gun in her purse. However, a nation full of dobermans and pit bulls probably won't deter an invading army where as a well armed populace just might. The questions and the reasoning on all sides of the debate are infinite. I'm beginning to feel as though we are all chasing our tails on this subject.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

what did i say that was wrong or incorrect, cuba, venezuela, ussr and north korea all have had or currently have government run death squads that keep the communist ruler in charge.

the USSR stated that their government was a marxist socialist government. lenin might have injected his name into that calling it a marxist leninist socialist government. lenin killed millions of his own people just because he did not like their politics. lenin was part of the communist party of russia and the social democratic labour party.

I get out and travel the world all the time. some times armed and doing my job and some times just out exploring.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

Mr. firearm owner, Chavez was elected in a democratic election. So you are wrong there and probably don't know much about him. Go to GregPalast.com, download and watch his free video on Chavez.

Have you ever read "Das Kapital"? Probably not which means you don't know much about Marx either.

Apparently you think that there are "magic people" who deserve to own most of the wealth in the world? Ever occur to you that they might just be crooks? I know a lot of people who might like to sell you a bridge.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

its easy to win elections when the population knows that if you vote against him you will be killed.

i have read marx not about his life but about communism socialism and capitalism. he was a communist for sure.

no i do not believe there are magic people who deserve to own most of the wealth. i do believe that if you work hard make good decission that allow you to make millions or hundreds of millions you should be allowed to keep what you earned.

are there crooks out there that make lots of money sure are, does that make all rich people crooks? nope.

i believe socialism and communism have always failed because far to many people are lazy takers. once the takers out number the producers the society is done. the sad thing is tge U.S. is awfully close to that point brought to us by progressive ideas

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

First we have to define "rich people". You do know that Thom has a website and campaign for "no billionaires"? I don't think that human beings are capable of owning that much wealth. In fact I would limit the maximum size of an estate to a few million dollars. Maybe such people are mentally ill just like heroin junkies but money is their fix.

http://nobillionaires.com/

When you use the term "work hard" that shows that you do not know what it is like to actually make big money. You must just dream that it will somehow happen to you or you will win the lottery and join the ranks of the rich. Try the term "work smart". We used to say that in the tech industry because "working hard" does not necessarily get you anywhere.

My gardener "works hard" so should I imagine Bill Gates working millions of times harder for his wealth? That would be hilarious because he would have looked like a blur. Gates would probably tell you he became an "accidental billionaire" and that he was in the right place at the right time. And don't forget when he started making money, his dad, a corporate attorney probably recommended the right people to manage his income.

Back to the subject of guns, when I heard Thom going off about allowing guns on campus I jumped on the board and posted a link to Lone Star College's regulations regarding such and weapons ARE banned on campus. Apparently Thom would rather ignore that fact as inconvenient. I also jumped on the chat board and posted the link there too. But Thom continued on with his disinfo.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

so because i said work hard you think i am poor or have not made big money, that is interesting.

it all depends on the work that you do. hard manual labor is different from hard mental labor but either way both individuals work hard.

I believe that no matter how much money you make be it billions or even trillions you should be allowed to keep it and spend it as you see fit. forced government confiscation will not stop some people from being rich and some from being super poor.

the same being said for banning firearms. bans will not accomplish the goal of lower gun violence.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am
Quote firearm owner:

background checks are a federal law for fire arms sales even private to private at gun shows or not.

You've posted bad info here before. Have a CREDIBLE source for your claim?

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm
Quote firearm owner:I believe that no matter how much money you make be it billions or even trillions you should be allowed to keep it and spend it as you see fit. forced government confiscation will not stop some people from being rich and some from being super poor.
Your ignorance of the Constitution can't be equated with a knowledgeable opinion. Read Article 1 sec 8.

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm
Quote firearm owner:i believe socialism and communism have always failed because far to many people are lazy takers. once the takers out number the producers the society is done. the sad thing is tge U.S. is awfully close to that point brought to us by progressive ideas

And will capitalism fail when most of its rewards go to speculators who are encouraged by a tax code that rewards unproductive activities? How about when one party steals from our children to fund irresponsible tax cuts we can't afford?

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm

i do not see investing and living off your investments as unproductive, neither do the companies that are able to expand and hire more workers with that money.

the U.S. government receives its money through tax policy if they choose to lower taxes to the individual they than have to cuy spending to off set the revinue loss in theory in reality lower taxes raises revinue because more people have more mobey to spend which drives expansion.

firearm owner
Joined:
Jan. 18, 2013 9:52 am

Yes, but the vast majority of gun deaths are gang-related and suicides. You make it sound like post office workers are perpetrating the majority of the killings. That is not true.

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm
Quote firearm owner:.

i believe socialism and communism have always failed because far to many people are lazy takers. once the takers out number the producers the society is done. the sad thing is tge U.S. is awfully close to that point brought to us by progressive ideas

You've got it backwards. True socialism and communism is sharing in the work load as well as in the benefits. Capitalism is where you get far too many lazy takers. They take from labor without actually producing a thing.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

Guard dogs are a liability issue just as much if not more than firearms. Once you 'release the hounds' you may not have as much control as you think. That is why many organizations are moving away from guard dogs. Look at the issues resulting from all the pitbull ownership and that should clarify.

You are correct regarding the national defense issue. However, if I have guns and you don't, I can shoot your guard dog and then you are defenseless again.

I certainly do NOT want to see another mass shooting. I'm a firearms owner, instructor, competitor and student - and I hunt. I think we need to discuss the issues regarding these shootings with cooler heads and less emotion. Here is an opinion from someone I have a lot of respect for - Bruce Schneier - as I do IT Security for a living.

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/0...

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm

I'm not sure about socialism or communism. I forget which but one of these requires dictatorship before we all get equal rights, IIRC. Ever hear the expression 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely'? I am VERY much opposed to corporations running our country and our politics. However, unlike some, I don't think either the Dems or the Republicans are truly and alternative. I think we have enough resources and wealth on the planet to provide for everyone - no exceptions. However, at this point, because of the corporate influence and corruption, I'm even more convinced I want my 'black rifles'. Look at the situation - the Dollar is being inflated ad nauseum, we're being listened to by the NSA continuously, we've lost our right to a trail by jury by way of the NDAA. Convince me I'm not under a tyrannical govt already. Convince me we aren't headed for a currency crisis that may make surviving a hurricane look like child's play. BTW: I'm not picking on anyone here, ok? - just concerned and want to speak my mind (yay 2nd amendment!).

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm

captbebops, I hear you. However, consider this - folks who make more than billions. I think that is the real focus. Don't be distracted by the small fish. We want the Rockefellers and the Rothchilds. We want the JP Morgans that setup the Fed Reserve Bank. We don't want to fund the 'too big to fail bankers'. If the bankers screw up, they deserve to lose their house, job, health care and retirement, just like the tragic folks in this country that have suffered those injustices. I believe Sam Adams said it best - "There are two ways to oppress a people, one is thru the sword and the other is thru DEBT." I think it is arguable we are being oppressed, don't you?

However, think of money like you are thinking about guns and perhaps you see the irony. Money has been used as a weapon too - or at least currency - specifically thru counterfeiting and hyper inflation. Hitler tried to do this with Jew/Gypsy counterfeiters in WWII. The British counterfeited the Colonial Dollar into hyper inflation in an attempt to destroy the American Revolution. At this point, I'm afraid of my Govt and I believe, my Govt should be afraid of US.

Do you own gold or silver? Do you collect coins? Are you aware our Govt is talking about severely taxing precious metals because Gold/Silver are the only true safeguards against inflation? - well, at least with regards to 'Money'. Yeah, you probably do. Did you know that in 1933 the Govt - the US Govt, yes - outlawed the ownership of gold bullion? Its true - I cannot believe it myself but is is true. The only way you could own precious metals was to buy jewelry until Nixon took us off the last vestiges of the Gold standard in 1971. I have a little gold/silver and I'm not moving it offshore like some of the truly wealthy bastards out there. Do you want to be left holding useless paper if there is a currency crisis? Do you want to be unarmed if we suffer a currency crisis? I don't. I want the biggest, baddest black rifle so when I peer around the stone wall and warn someone to stay back or I'll shoot, they won't have to use their imagination.

I am intrigued by Thom's ideas of firearms insurance and training (to insure proficiency and safety). I'm not sure about registration of guns - partly because it has lead to confiscation and then huge genocides. So, perhaps Thom isn't totally off the mark.

Meanwhile, I think the medication of our young people is a significant part of the problem that I don't hear enough talk about.

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm
Quote firearm owner:

i do not see investing and living off your investments as unproductive, neither do the companies that are able to expand and hire more workers with that money.

Gee, you learned your Capitalism 101 lesson well. But not all "investments" are productive. Most all stock market trades are secondary... between speculators of those stocks. Companies may or may not benefit.

the U.S. government receives its money through tax policy if they choose to lower taxes to the individual they than have to cuy spending to off set the revinue loss in theory in reality lower taxes raises revenue because more people have more mobey to spend which drives expansion.

Nice theory... only if that were true where was the robust economy of the Bush era when taxes were slashed? Oops... sorry about that collapsed economy. And where has it been for the last few years when taxes were dropped BELOW the irresponsible Bush tax rates... to include lower payroll taxes? Oops again... proving lower taxes alone are no magic bullet.

The only certain result of such irresponsible tax cuts is LOWER REVENUE... and the Bush tax cuts were SO irresponsible that in constant dollars... individual income tax revenue has been BELOW FY2000 levels now for the past 12 years. I'm sure those you get your info from consider that a "revenue boom" and that we don't have a revenue problem.

Have some other amusing theory you want to peddle?

http://reinventing-america.blogspot.com/2012/09/where-oh-where-is-bushs-...

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 2:19 pm

Well yes guns do kill people. However, most of those homicides were from gang violence as I understand it. That means, outlaws doing illegal things - not law abiding citizens.

Also, I think if someone is intent on killing themselves, I can think of better, less messy, less painful ways of doing that - so did Dr. Kevorkian. But if they are determined to commit suicide, I think they are going to find a way regardless of access to a firearm.

Meanwhile, the Newtown style shooting is VERY rare - odds are less than getting hit by lightning you will experience something similar. It is not normal - it stirs emotions but it is not normal. Furthermore, I can't tell from the TV coverage or newspaper articles whether Lanza actually used the AR15, can you? I can tell you from having fired an AR, it doesn't make 'a popping sound' - its a LOUD boom. And what is the deal with the controversy regarding the Medical Examiner interview, only pistols found in the school and the AR being found in the trunk of Lanza's car?

Truth is, over the last 20 years, the homicide rate in the US has been coming down (see link below) - and the last 10-12 years of that time, firearms laws have become less restrictive (not overlooking law enforcement investigation techniques having become better too).

http://www.wired.com/geekmom/2012/12/sandy-hook-safe/

But, we HAVE gone from about 33 states with concealed carry to nearly 50 in those 10-12 years (see link below). Illinois being the only hold out and Chicago taking one of the top spots for # of gun homicides in a major US city. BTW: Chicago has a local ordinance banning all firearms possession/ownership in the Citly limits - Chicago is in Illinois - AND I have talked with someone who was actually robbed at gun point there.

http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html

I agree there are people out there like Adam Lanza that shouldn't have access to ANY firearm. However, wasn't he disuaded or denied when he showed up at a local gun shop in CT wanting to buy a rifle (because of the required background check)? That is what I've read. How would further registration, or a different background check have helped with that? Perhaps if required in all 50 states? Perhaps. However, the Columbine shooters both got their guns from someone else - AKA a 'straw purchase'. This means an individual w/o criminal record or history of mental illness purchased the guns legally and then resold the guns to the two shooters. I hear the story is the same for the guy that shot the first responders last month (at least they are going after the woman that bought the shooter those firearms - as it should be). The shooter was a convicted felon not allowed to own firearms but got them anyway, regardless of the background check and laws in place.

Being a firearms competitor I can tell you, the amount of time to reload a Glock or AR15 by anyone with minimal practice is less than 1 second, perhaps, if fumbled, 2 seconds. Are we really going to spend the significant sums of $ (in this economy) and time to make law abiding gunowners felons in their own homes because of less than 1-2 seconds? What is to prevent someone showing up with six 10-round magazines instead of two 30-round mags and perpetrating the same violence?

So, how do we keep those that should NOT have access to firearms from getting firearms? THAT is the real issue and question that should be asked. Banning guns won't solve the problem. Restricting magazine capacity won't prevent someone from simply building a bomb or arson or poisoning the koolaid or showing up with more magazines.

To me, it seems there is a SoP that thinks that there should be absolutely no death or crime in this world. It is admirable to think this and work towards it, but I think it a bit naive. Fixing the economy would probably do more to reduce crime/violence but I'm not so blind as to think we can create a perfect society, without any crime or murder - ever - even if everyone was doing better financially or we banned all semi automatic firearms and magazines.

Meanwhile, I can go track down some of the numbers and examples of instances I've read or people I KNOW that have prevented possible death or serious injury by presenting a firearm and warning they would shoot an attacker/intruder - or even ended up having to shoot. It happens every day folks - every day. Suzanna Hupp is a good example of firearms restrictions just plain not working (see link). I don't want to watch my parents shot to death by some madman while I have left my pistol in the car because of the law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanna_Hupp

But, we don't want to talk about guns being used to SAVE people lives, do we? Nope, that seems to go by the wayside - doesn't even get airplay. That is impossible, isn't it?

Wake up folks. They don't want you to have a means to defend yourself and your rights. I don't care if we are talking crappy power grid outages that last more that a few weeks or something like the LA Riots, the New York Blackout, etc. We are talking an event where law enforcement and/or the national guard won't be there for you. You'll be on your own. Won't happen to you? - yes, the odds (like I said) are less than getting hit by lightning but if it is happening to you, you won't care about statistics, you'll want to be armed.

One last comment. 200 years ago we fought the British with 'state of the art' kentucky rifles (one of which killed a British general at 300 yards and changed the result of the battle of Saratoga - see link). The rifle was used to achieve our freedom from oppression and TYRANNY (its not about Hunting folks). I don't consider the British to be an authority on personal freedom and I can say that having British ancestry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Murphy_(sniper)

Thom talks about required firearms training for proficiency and safety. Awesome, I love training and that is not because I'm a trainer, I don't make much $ doing firearms instruction, I want law abiding firearms owners competent and safe - you do too I bet. Thom also talks about firearms insurance - also a good idea if instituted properly. I'm not sure I'm completely on-board with Thom's talk about required registration of all firearms BUT, these options sound like more reasonable, potentially effective options than banning firearms from law abiding citizens. AND the only instances I see registration of all firearms having any real effect is on gang violence. Here again, criminals, by definition, do not follow the law so will it really make a difference?

Thanks for the platform for discussion. I'm interested to hear your comments.

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm

Less smarmy, more real debate of the issues please. We all need to be respectful while describing our positions and opinions. Facts are good. Loose the bad attitudes please.

Has anyone brought up the over-medication of our young people in reference to these shootings? Have folks seen the data in the link below? Is this bogus? Some of the data describe shootings that happened in Europe.

http://ssristories.com/index.php

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm

Not true in all states. In the state I currently reside, I am required to register ALL my handguns but, once you've purchased a long gun from an dealer/FFL, you can sell it to another individual privately - no background check requirement - a bill of sale is not even required.

However, I'm not sure about other states - some may require all firearms transactions require a background check.

A dealer/FFL IS required to do a background check (gun show or otherwise) and fill out a yellow form on all firearms purchases - that is a requirement of being a dealer/FFL. They must also keep very detailed, accurate records on all firearms they sell and the ATF can show up and demand to check those records at any time.

No offense to anyone - this is just accurate info.

Bosco1232
Joined:
Jan. 21, 2013 10:24 pm

Currently Chatting

The Ferguson Effect On Our Great Grand Children

A few weeks ago, Congressman Paul Ryan released his latest proposal for tackling America’s poverty epidemic. Unfortunately, the plan does very little to combat poverty in our country, and instead, continues the devastating austerity policies that Ryan himself helped to create. Thanks to those policies, entire communities across America are underwater, and struggling to survive in tough economic times.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system