My thoughts on the Tucson, AZ shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, a standard of training and certification must be a pre-requisite, especially if you intend to own a firearm within city limits (I guess organizing by county would make sense).

If it ever gets to the point where the government starts kicking down doors to confiscate them, I'm sure you'll be motivated to use them anyway so one way or another the authorities will find out.
 
claylc said:
I'll make a deal, don't you try to tell me what I MUST accept based upon your pet peeves, and in return I will extend the same courtesy to you. Peddle that YOU ARE GUILTY of other peoples behaviour elsewhere. While the social environment plays a factor, especially in a person's formative years, a rational being will weigh the factors in any decision and behave appropriately. If society at large is at fault in this specific case, then it is that society failed to give that guy the intellectual training required for sound judgement. As a "loner", I can say authoritatively that being pummeled with negative "vibes" from acquaintances is demoralizing, and difficult to overcome, leading to a desire for revenge. I don't get mad, I get EVEN, and sometimes I EVEN make a profit...

Lonnie Courtney Clay
Click to expand...

Denying hard evidence to excuse collective responsibility is sad, especially when I'm only placing the facts in front of you to make an informed decision. Here is an expert which confirms this type of mentality .
Individualist impulses

Daniel Webster, a director at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, says American individualism explains why the immediate response to shootings like the Tucson tragedy or the Virginia Tech massacre is not to look for legislative remedies.

"An important thing to understand about American culture is that we tend to place responsibility and focus on individual behaviour rather than think about laws and regulations to affect behaviour," he told the BBC.
Mr Webster says that it is common for people simply not to ask why guns are so prevalent or why mentally unstable people can so easily access them.

Instead, he says, their attention focuses on what was wrong with the individual shooter. Did he have a troubled past or a mental illness?
"Our responses tend to be ones in which we punish the offender and try to enable individuals to protect themselves. But we are reluctant to act collectively to make our communities and our country safer," he said.
Click to expand...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12158148
 
perseus said:
Denying hard evidence to excuse collective responsibility is sad, especially when I'm only placing the facts in front of you to make an informed decision. Here is an expert which confirms this type of mentality .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12158148
Click to expand...

"collectively" - there you go, your so called expect is a collectivist. If he had used the word cooperatively, then I would be inclined to read his prattle, as it is, I have better things to do with my time today.

So far as that chart goes, you are engaging in what is known as "cherry picking the data." Give me a map of the U.S.A. similar to a weather map with shadings to denote death frequency and WHERE the gun deaths are occurring. I will make a bet that they are predominantly in areas where gun control laws are most severe...

Lonnie Courtney Clay
 
MontyB said:
Much of the Western world had fairly liberal views on firearms ownership until the 1950's at which point they noticed that people were going nuts and shooting lots of other people so in order to prevent this they enacted various laws to restrict weapons

Coincidently there is a certain level of irony in someone needing a weapon to protect themselves calling the person that doesn't a pansy ass.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct...as a matter of fact I think that was one of the first policies Hitler put into law.

Bringing up any of the countries in Africa reguarding gun control (or the lack there of) is an unfair comparison. I'm not sure where others stand here, but just because I support civilians owning guns does not mean it should be a trade market where anyone can get their hands on anything. There ALWAYS needs to be a balance in life - having zero guns is stupid and having guns all over the place without any regulations is just as stupid.

There is always going to be a nut job. Always. They are not going to have trouble finding a weapon if they want one and I personally would like to be able to protect myself against them. It's my right as a human being.

As for your throwback comment of me being a pansy ass because I feel like I need to own a gun to protect myself...I'm '5"2 and 8 months pregnant. It takes me like five minutes to figure out how to get out of bed right now so I doubt I could really kick some guy's ass if he wanted to hurt me. And when I have this baby, even if I DID get any training what exactly am I going to do to protect myself while having to protect a baby too?

If that isn't enough for you, yes, I'm a girly-girl who would rather get a pedi done than go to a class to be able to kick my husband's ass with a black belt in karate. (Even if I did have professional training my husband is 6ft over 200lbs and fast and I highly doubt I could take him in any given situation. He wanted me to learn a few "hand-on hand" moves with him in case I would need to protect myself and I can promise you if a guy the same size as him and as fast as him wanted to hurt me I'd be in a really bad position if I was just relying on my body to protect myself. So if that makes me a pansy ass...well then, let me just go get my gun and make sure it's loaded, I'll embrace being THAT kind of pansy ass.



Food for thought:

‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ — Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography" p. 446

If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you,it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." — The Dalai Lama (05/15/01, The Seattle Times)

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave the people." – George Mason 1788
 
pixiedustboo said:
Yes, you are correct...as a matter of fact I think that was one of the first policies Hitler put into law.

Bringing up any of the countries in Africa reguarding gun control (or the lack there of) is an unfair comparison. I'm not sure where others stand here, but just because I support civilians owning guns does not mean it should be a trade market where anyone can get their hands on anything. There ALWAYS needs to be a balance in life - having zero guns is stupid and having guns all over the place without any regulations is just as stupid.

There is always going to be a nut job. Always. They are not going to have trouble finding a weapon if they want one and I personally would like to be able to protect myself against them. It's my right as a human being.

As for your throwback comment of me being a pansy ass because I feel like I need to own a gun to protect myself...I'm '5"2 and 8 months pregnant. It takes me like five minutes to figure out how to get out of bed right now so I doubt I could really kick some guy's ass if he wanted to hurt me. And when I have this baby, even if I DID get any training what exactly am I going to do to protect myself while having to protect a baby too?

If that isn't enough for you, yes, I'm a girly-girl who would rather get a pedi done than go to a class to be able to kick my husband's ass with a black belt in karate. (Even if I did have professional training my husband is 6ft over 200lbs and fast and I highly doubt I could take him in any given situation. He wanted me to learn a few "hand-on hand" moves with him in case I would need to protect myself and I can promise you if a guy the same size as him and as fast as him wanted to hurt me I'd be in a really bad position if I was just relying on my body to protect myself. So if that makes me a pansy ass...well then, let me just go get my gun and make sure it's loaded, I'll embrace being THAT kind of pansy ass.



Food for thought:

‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ — Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography" p. 446

If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you,it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." — The Dalai Lama (05/15/01, The Seattle Times)

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave the people." – George Mason 1788
Click to expand...

Woot Godwins law I win.

So what in any of this discussion has led you to believe anyone here is arguing for a firearms ban?

There seems to be a perception with gun fanatics that anything short of total freedom equals a total ban and this tends to lead to ludicrous statements about Hitler and Mao.

Tell me what are the probabilities that if you gave up your firearms you will be murdered, raped, robbed or mugged my guess based on living there for a few years and the experiences of family and friends both armed and non-armed is that your risk level is next to none and in fact from a sample group of about 150 people not one of them anything like this happen to them in their 25-75 years on the planet.

There were a couple that were broken into and one or two who had cars stolen or lockers broken into but as they were not there at the time chances are a gun would not have helped.

Firearms are great fun and yes there is the occasional time where they are even useful but I am prepared to bet that in the vast majority of cases they are worthless for defense unless you already have the upper hand, certainly it would be a huge mistake to believe a ban would solve anything but clearly a better level character checking is needed than what you already have.
 
I don't want to be grouped into a statistic of "you probably won't get hurt."

As for more of a control based nature than we already have on weapons, how exactly is that going to help? We do a lot more checking and more safety based judgments on someone that is going to be owning a firearm (pistol for example) than we do for driver licenses. You pass a quick drivers course and you are now in charge of a vehicle that could kill a great deal of people. Or - for instance, those with DUI's. What's the magic number before you get your driving privileges taken away again? I think it's 3. If I am not mistaken the minute someone is charged with any kind of assault charge (even family based), they no longer qualify for possession of a pistol. At least I believe that is the law in Michigan.

You want to be safe from a bullet, but what about that car that got on the ramp the wrong way because some teenage idiot wasn't paying attention or some deadbeat drunk is hallucinating?

Where does the government intervention stop and start, where should that line be? Why the HELL isn't the law involved with breeding for example? There are some people out there that are just plain stupid and shouldn't be raising children. There are some people out there that have multiple abortions because they just aren't careful about using protection....


I mean really...where do we start having common sense as a people and stop having the "law" tell us what is right and what is wrong.
 
If you live near a lot of people, government intervention will obviously get greater.
Live in the middle of bumble f*** nowhere and no one will care what you own.

I don't think equating the right to have children to right to bear arms works at any level.
 
A Can of Man said:
If you live near a lot of people, government intervention will obviously get greater.
Live in the middle of bumble f*** nowhere and no one will care what you own.

I don't think equating the right to have children to right to bear arms works at any level.
Click to expand...

The government licenses people when danger to other life is involved do they not?

Driving
Owning Firearms
Hunting
Etc...

All of those pose a danger to other human life. Why is upbringing a child or abortion any different?
 
If you fail at raising a child, you lose custody.
But they'll give you a chance.

If you commit a crime and go to prison, they'll lock you up, where your ability to reproduce will be, for the duration of the confinement, suspended.

Not every firearm requires a license (depending on state).
Hunting license has more to do with preventing over hunting. Same deal as fishing licenses/permits.

Abortion is legal because of women who died trying to do it illegally.

Like I said, the low regulation life already exists.
But cities have always been highly regulated by its very nature.
 
5.56X45mm said:
Today is a horrible day in Tucson, Arizona. One Federal Judge killed, one nine year old child killed, a Congresswoman from the House of Representatives fighting for her life, and many other victims injured and more possibly killed. The actions taken by the subject go against everything American. It goes against our Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Keep and Bear Arms, Freedom of Assembly, and our Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.


I pray for the victims, I pray for the swift but proper application of justice, I pray for those that lost their lives today that they find peace, and I pray that We the People of these United State of America show our compassion in love and our strength in justice to this vile scum and to those all across the world. May we judge the criminal for his actions and not the innocent law abiding public. May our legal system prevail in administering proper justice and not stripping our fellow citizens of their rights.


In the end, I ask that we lower our flags, place the mourning bands on our badges, and pray for those hurt by today's event. Let us pray for the swift but correct application of justice to the person responsible for this heinous crime. Lastly, let us show the world our compassion by standing together with our fellow Americans and support them in their times of need.
Click to expand...


Read the above and tell me where it says this is a debate about gun control?

Please stick to the original intent of the first poster who started this thread.

Any more comments about gun control or anything not related to the topic of this thread will be sanctioned.
 
tomtom22 said:
Read the above and tell me where it says this is a debate about gun control?

Please stick to the original intent of the first poster who started this thread.

Any more comments about gun control or anything not related to the topic of this thread will be sanctioned.
Click to expand...
Here's a good example why this forum is so damn dead all of the time. Between that and the "this is your last warning" before you get spanked comments people don't want to waste their time here.

It's sad because this forum could be awesome if things weren't so censored on every level imaginable.

Considering I'll probably be banned after this post if anyone wants to keep in touch my email is slp.beanie@gmail.com.
 
tomtom22 said:
To pixiedustpoo:

How appropriate do you think it would be if a discussion about gun control were injected into one of your threads, for example here:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/life-update-t85531.html
or here:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/grandparents-t80400.html
or here:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/more-school-t78566.html

Not very appropriate, don't you agree?
That's why we have rules about not going OFF TOPIC.
Click to expand...
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know, this place is crawling with rules and crawling with moderators who practically get boners making sure those rules get enforced.

There are going to be topics where the original topic goes into a tangent. If you want to be so damn picky then go ahead and start locking the threads once they go off topic and quit threatening to do it.

Would you like to know what is going to happen then? This place will stay as slow as it has been for the past year or so.

I would really love to be able to post here and have some conversations and sharing of opinions without one of you moderators jumping down my throat for "name calling" or reading yet another person has gotten a temporary ban or gotten in trouble for sharing their opinions in a non care bear way. I miss being on the forums, but I'm just totally sick of this place and all of the "rules."



***Redleg, I realize keeping this place clean with so many potential members, SPAMing and other things can get out of control if you don't keep a hand on things, but in my opinion you need to tell these guys to let up a little or this place is just going to stay dead.
 
^^^Amen, Pixie.


On the topic of the shooting, did anyone else watch the Democratic Convention.....er memorial service.....tonight? I kept waiting for the balloons to drop and someone to start handing out big "We're Number 1!!!" foam fingers. It was disgusting.
 
Umm while I agree with the points being made how about we move them to a thread of their own rather than take this thread further off track?

In this particular case I don't agree with the "MOD's" assessment but rather than fighting a losing battle here we could just as easily open a new thread about "our opinions on the causes of the Arizona shootings" and move on with life?
 
I feel sad about the shooting incident- nothing short of a despicable act. This guy is nothing better than the terrorists running around in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What I cannot understand, for the love of God, is why someone like that nutcase Fred Phelps would want to do something like that. I understand the "freedom of speech" concept that Americans hold so dearly too (please do not take it as offensive), but I think this moron has just taken it a wee bit too far...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top