And yes, a little government would be good but it doesn’t stay little, does it?
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Removing the need for a driving test would not remove the need for common sense.
In fact it may actually improve the exercise of common sense.
Relying so much on institutions to test us we fail to test ourselves.
[/quote]
What about the folks who don’t think they need to test themselves?[/quote]
That is where strong members of our community like yourself should step in and call them out on it, no?
Say one of these who didn’t think they need to test themselves lived in your street and you saw him driving recklessly. There must be ways as a small community we deal with these people. Don’t employ them, don’t buy in their business, isolate socially, I don’t have the answer to be honest but the driving test from the government does not protect me very well:
Take the old ladies here in Florida who have passed their driving test: the government has given them permission to continue to drive. I say common sense says they should test every year past a certain age.
Take the teenagers that have just barely begun to get hands on experience in driving and feel they can use their cell phones; that is utter failure in common sense.
A government test has given them the green light to behave this way and bolsters
a false sense of self confidence.
So in a way you are testing, passing and breeding retards.
Yet that does not happen and they are the drivers I consider most dangerous.
[/quote]
You have some very good points. And years ago that’s the way things worked. We didn’t need the federal government constantly intruding in our lives. On the other hand we are a much larger society than we were 100 years ago. I’m sure there is a middle ground.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
And yes, a little government would be good but it doesn’t stay little, does it?[/quote]
That is a fact!
[quote]ZEB wrote:
You have some very good points. And years ago that’s the way things worked. We didn’t need the federal government constantly intruding in our lives. On the other hand we are a much larger society than we were 100 years ago. I’m sure there is a middle ground.[/quote]
I agree.
A sense of strong community would never work in a bit city.
It is very easy to hide if you want to do be an outlaw.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Even if screening someone worked what would the test be? And just because someone has a history is that a reason to deny them the right to protect themselves?
If it does not produce 100% accuracy then there is no point because it will just cost money while not achieving its stated goal.
Rather than taking guns away we should hand them out to everyone.[/quote]
This x1000. It is also, quite frankly, ridiculously easy to lie your way through a psych eval (well, at least one that would be more likely than not administered by a government employee). This psych eval would just be a last minute wall trying to stop a flood of mental problems. The tide of metal health problems must be stopped far before this point if tragedies along these lines are to be prevented. I believe in a certain level of gun control, but I do not believe a further ban (so long as automatics are banned) will prevent these tragedies.
Edit:
In regards to why these shooting are becoming more common, I believe it is a combination of factors. Our society is quickly becoming strikingly less personal-our “friends” are now counted in the hundreds on facebook, but I cannot adequately state the loneliness felt by many of my generation when it comes to those they can truly count on. This lack of personal interaction can quickly dissociate somebody from the social fabric that binds our society, resulting in the detached energy that could result in these actions. Furthermore, we live in a country that glorifies violence. Blood, guts, murder in a movie/video game? PG-13. Without fail. Finally, I do firmly believe the notoriety these killers receive encourages others. I would 100% support a movement to never reveal the killer’s names: simply refer to them as “the killer” or another anonymous pseudonym. No more press coverage for these monsters. Someone with similar aspirations is not going to be disgusted with the crimes they hear-they will vicariously live through the coverage in that moment. The media coverage of the killer’s life needs to end. At the end of the day, I don’t believe any one thing will end these tragedies, but perhaps a combination of actions can prevent them to some degree.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
The point was not to actually give them up, but the exercise in thinking of realizing that this stuff will happen no matter what and not to focus on the tool used. Gun control pushers HONESTLY believe this. Like you get rid of guns and all the sudden we have this fairy tale world with no death, no violence, and no kids harmed. I just said oh certainly I’d give it up if I thought all the roses in the world would come out and nothing bad would happen because guns cause bad. Maybe I’m going too far, but it really seems as if many people honestly believe this.
You and I KNOW that’s not the case. We realize sick people will do sick things whether guns are illegal, legal, whatever. It’s not stopping them. Essentially most of these people almost wholeheartedly believe that these tragedies are prevented without guns. This is simply not based in reality in my thinking. [/quote]
I understand but you’re missing my point. I fear government. History tells me I have good reason.
Historically, the more centralized and powerful government gets the more the graph spikes toward tyranny. It’s happened over and over and over and over and over and over again. Only a fool would trust that it won’t happen again. I don’t want to be a fool. Do you?[/quote]
history shmistory.
[quote]theBird wrote:
I know you Americans truly love your guns, but I personally feel that banning the ownership of guns or having some type of gun control law would prevent or at least reduce the number of shootings you have.
tweet[/quote]
The shootings happened in Connecticut, heavy gun control laws in that state. Seems it didn’t stop anything from happening. Statistically, gun control laws increase gun crime. Take the Swiss, highest guns per capita in the world, much lower killings than UK.
Here is an article on the Swiss and gun control.
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Elementary School teacher in Isreal.
“Protect Our Children” – They’re doing it right.[/quote]
I like that! talk about a hot teacher… I wonder how many school shootings they have? America would never allow teachers to carry guns at school thogh, even if it would probably prevent a lot of these shootings. [/quote]
If you want to prevent these kind of events, you don’t need to give weapons to teachers. Nor to confiscate everyone’s weapons.
You just need to make sure that schools are really “gun-free” zones.
If you can do it with airports, it should not be that hard to do it with schools.
[/quote]
You know how much security there is at airports to make them “gun-feee”? A LOT. You know how many more schools there are in America than airports? A LOT. The kind of security it takes to realistically make every school a “gun free” is simply unaffordable and not going to happen. [/quote]
Hate to make this point, but airports aren’t gun free. Travelers have guns, security has guns, police have guns, Air Marshals have guns.
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
The point was not to actually give them up, but the exercise in thinking of realizing that this stuff will happen no matter what and not to focus on the tool used. Gun control pushers HONESTLY believe this. Like you get rid of guns and all the sudden we have this fairy tale world with no death, no violence, and no kids harmed. I just said oh certainly I’d give it up if I thought all the roses in the world would come out and nothing bad would happen because guns cause bad. Maybe I’m going too far, but it really seems as if many people honestly believe this.
You and I KNOW that’s not the case. We realize sick people will do sick things whether guns are illegal, legal, whatever. It’s not stopping them. Essentially most of these people almost wholeheartedly believe that these tragedies are prevented without guns. This is simply not based in reality in my thinking. [/quote]
I understand but you’re missing my point. I fear government. History tells me I have good reason.
Historically, the more centralized and powerful government gets the more the graph spikes toward tyranny. It’s happened over and over and over and over and over and over again. Only a fool would trust that it won’t happen again. I don’t want to be a fool. Do you?[/quote]
This doesn’t really have anything to do with what I posted though I fully agree the less government the better. I was making a bigger argument. We are arguing for the exact same thing here.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.[/quote]
This is the perfect storm sadly for gun control paranoia. It seems as if no politician is willing to stick up right now.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.[/quote]
This is the perfect storm sadly for gun control paranoia. It seems as if no politician is willing to stick up for guns right now. My only hope is that the legislation isn’t THAT bad right now or that as this tempers down some level of sanity on the issue might return for people who are on the side of gun owners. The air is thick right now though, I just wonder how many of my firearms are soon to be illegal? [/quote]
JP, if I’m not mistaken, is implying the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy to whack federal witnesses and that the kid was framed by trained assassins.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.[/quote]
This is the perfect storm sadly for gun control paranoia. It seems as if no politician is willing to stick up for guns right now. My only hope is that the legislation isn’t THAT bad right now or that as this tempers down some level of sanity on the issue might return for people who are on the side of gun owners. The air is thick right now though, I just wonder how many of my firearms are soon to be illegal? [/quote]
JP, if I’m not mistaken, is implying the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy to whack federal witnesses and that the kid was framed by trained assassins.
[/quote]
I realize that. I’m not ready to go down that road yet. I’m still a pretty big Occam’s Razor type guy though I won’t disagree that things might be getting a bit fishy.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…You’re telling me you wouldn’t give up your guns to stop Friday’s shooting? To stop the Aurora one? To stop Virgina Tech?..
[/quote]
I would not give them up. It doesn’t matter what scenario you cook up.[/quote]
The point was not to actually give them up, but the exercise in thinking of realizing that this stuff will happen no matter what and not to focus on the tool used. Gun control pushers HONESTLY believe this. Like you get rid of guns and all the sudden we have this fairy tale world with no death, no violence, and no kids harmed. I just said oh certainly I’d give it up if I thought all the roses in the world would come out and nothing bad would happen because guns cause bad. Maybe I’m going too far, but it really seems as if many people honestly believe this.
You and I KNOW that’s not the case. We realize sick people will do sick things whether guns are illegal, legal, whatever. It’s not stopping them. Essentially most of these people almost wholeheartedly believe that these tragedies are prevented without guns. This is simply not based in reality in my thinking. [/quote]
I understand but you’re missing my point. I fear government. History tells me I have good reason.
Historically, the more centralized and powerful government gets the more the graph spikes toward tyranny. It’s happened over and over and over and over and over and over again. Only a fool would trust that it won’t happen again. I don’t want to be a fool. Do you?[/quote]
No Push, H factor is now playing the part of libertarian. I know it’s hard to keep track the same thing happened to me when I used to take him seriously. It’s not easy keeping up with the poser.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.[/quote]
This is the perfect storm sadly for gun control paranoia. It seems as if no politician is willing to stick up for guns right now. My only hope is that the legislation isn’t THAT bad right now or that as this tempers down some level of sanity on the issue might return for people who are on the side of gun owners. The air is thick right now though, I just wonder how many of my firearms are soon to be illegal? [/quote]
JP, if I’m not mistaken, is implying the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy to whack federal witnesses and that the kid was framed by trained assassins.
[/quote]
Multi-tasking at its most nefarious.
Meanwhile, the media has barely even aired the recent attempts that have been stopped by legal gun-owners:
Ogden Utah, 2005
Pearl Mississippi, 1997
Grundy Virginia, 2002
Houston, 2009
Aurora church shooting, 2012
Portland, just the other day. These are just a few off the top of my head.
More violent crime has been stopped by legal guns than has been committed with illegal guns, yet we’ve been brain-washed into thinking gun ownership is bad.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
This shooting is just too perfect for gun-control advocates. Kids killed = maximum emotional response. Stolen legally-owned guns = nobody should have guns because they could be stolen and used for mass killing. Mother was concerned about financial and societal collapse = prepper conspiracy nuts’ kids go postal.
.223, .223, .223, .223 even though the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle. Shooter was wearing a mask and was not witnessed shooting himself. Multiple shooters reported initially by eyewitnesses, but only one in the official report.
Shooter had a nervous medical condition that inhibited pain response. Same medical condition also adversely affects motor function, yet he was able to fire a weapon so well that he managed to kill 26/27 (with a pistol!!), and the one injured was probably a ricochet (she was shot in the foot). We have trained/experienced LEO and Mil that couldn’t pull that off and you’re telling me a 20yo nerd did it?
Lanza’s dad and Holmes’ dad are both set to testify in the LIBOR scandal… Holmes’ case looks the same way with the multiple shooters initially reported, wearing the same black tactical getup, apparent mental disorder, etc…
Every bit of this stinks.[/quote]
This is the perfect storm sadly for gun control paranoia. It seems as if no politician is willing to stick up for guns right now. My only hope is that the legislation isn’t THAT bad right now or that as this tempers down some level of sanity on the issue might return for people who are on the side of gun owners. The air is thick right now though, I just wonder how many of my firearms are soon to be illegal? [/quote]
JP, if I’m not mistaken, is implying the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy to whack federal witnesses and that the kid was framed by trained assassins.
[/quote]
I realize that. I’m not ready to go down that road yet. I’m still a pretty big Occam’s Razor type guy though I won’t disagree that things might be getting a bit fishy. [/quote]
A federal judge was killed 72 hours after ruling against our dear leader’s policies and was mentioned as a side note. That’s a bit fishy.
This is not a bit fishy.
Gun control works. Just ask Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler.
There are two types of people who would seek to disarm you; those who wish to enslave you, and those who wish to kill you.
There is one type who would see you exercise your right to decide whether to arm yourself or not; that one will fight with you or for you. Your choice.