No announcement yet.


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Madness

    Bob D,

    I agree with you, I have attended NRA-sponsored gun safety programs. I have owned a rifle since I was twelve! And, I do agree that we hear a lot more about NRA backing the whole issue of "guns", more so than anything else. But, have you ever seen a commercial regarding keeping guns safe, locked up, and/or expressing a concern with any member or any owner who displays a temper, is overly aggitated, or even a commercial or program of responsible "reporting" or "awareness" of people who have or may have access to firearms and what safety step to take???? Does the NRA or even your local gun or sportsman club ever had any discussion or training about "access" and the responsible "security" that should be practiced?

    Franki and everyone else,

    Yes, the mother was reported to be a gun enthusiast and the the two hand guns used in this killing spree; and the .223 assault-style rifle were hers and NOT the shooter's. Does that make a difference in the final analysis? Twenty children and seven adults are dead, at the hands of an obviously insane and sick individual. I wonder if she, the owner and the one with the responsibility of keeping them safely locked away, had any last second thoughts? An hour or so ago, I read that many of these little children were shot three times! Makes me sick, when we argue the point that they could have just as easily been dispatched with a fire bomb or a knife!

    I'm not for taking away the "Right" or attempting to taking away any "gun" from any private citizen who is responsible. I am for an extreme effort to educate, to warn, to even chide if we must, that weapons must be secure and kept from those who are not stable and those who are not responsible. Should there really be any question about this?

    How many of you can admit to NEVER knowing or having been confronted by a person who owns a weapon, and who may own one with total legality? Hey, I'm not out there on the frontier, or even in the back country. I don't often visit the range. Yet even I have run into a few people who think that gun ownership gives them authority, even I have seen first hand the comments from gun owners who have no problem whatsoever in making their case with that authority behind it.

    A week ago I was in the Doctor's office and picked up a copy of one of the popular "Gun" sports magazines. It was full of political rhetoric and devisivenes and tactical weapons and gear advertisements. When did the interest become so absorbed in anti-government thought and imagining enemies in every direction? What does someone who is unstable make of this? Reminds me of the old fart, I knew when I was a kid... kept a loaded Mauser, in every single corner of his house... the living room, the dining room, and the kitchen! The guy was clearly NUTS, and he saw "the enemy" everywhere with "commies" on every block. I'm wondering how well he might fit in today, only it isn't "commies", it's our own government.

    Again, I'm not against guns, or ownership. But I think we all deserve a safe future for our loved ones and ourselves. Everyone needs to look around a bit closer. Firearms are a "right" only for those who are responsible, and temperment and misbehaviour needs to be flashing some kind of warning. And if you have strange behaving relatives or neighbors, we ought to be able to start connecting-the-dots and taking safety measures.

    Of course WE don't all share that opinion. But when will we question our "fear" to a point that puts the safety of our community first and moves us to protect our right to keep and bear arms for the good and safety of all? In other words, WE must protect and we MUST keep our firearms secure from the hands of those without the ability or willingness to be responsible citizens.



    • #17
      Re: Madness

      Does that make a difference in the final analysis?
      It would if as I and others stated she had secured the guns properly.

      If you have kids in your home no matter how well behaved or disciplined you just can't trust that they or their friends won't get curious and go after them. They are kids and they are still learning right from wrong, they are going to get into stuff, sneak a cigarette or two, drink a beer, and do other stuff, its part of learning and growing up. If you say you never did some things like this I would be hard pressed to believe it. I think every kid gets into something once or twice when growing up, if you don't then you lived in a bubble for 18 years.

      Still, we'd (or I would anyway) like to believe that by the time they are old enough to know what a gun is that they have been taught not to go near them and how dangerous they are. If you own a gun and have kids and have not sat them down and given them the 'talk' about guns then YOU are the problem, and I mean you in general, not you CWS. And I know you know all this, I'm just thinking out loud so to speak and making my opinion known. No gun club or NRA pamphlet is going to take the place of a parent talking to their child. And frankly, I doubt a parent or school would allow the NRA to conduct such an event, as they (parents or school board) would try to twist it and say it is something that it is not.
      "It's a table saw, do you know where your fingers are?" Bob D. 2006


      • #18
        Re: Madness

        CWS, the whole tragic event makes me sick too! I think we can all agree that only law abiding citizens should own guns and properly secure them from children and thieves, unfortunately in the real world this does not and will not happen. People drive drunk and without a license, they come into posession of guns illegally. There are folks who own guns legally and do not secure them properly. We agree, now what do you propose we do to change all that? You can't change stupid, or lazy, or criminal. We can pass stricker laws and still have dopes who disregard them and put others in jeopardy. We will still have criminals carrying guns.

        I have been confronted by people carrying illegal guns, and it did not feel good. I have been confronted by people with pit bulls that could tear a person to pieces and I would rather depend on a licensed gun than a pocket knife for personal protection. We have morons who own dangerous pets that could, and have easily kill a person, and I think we have the right to protect ourselves. I am not speaking out of fear or fantasy.

        The situation of irresponsible gun ownership, criminal gun ownership and crazies who commit horrendous crimes needs to be examined and discussed rationally, responsibly and practically. What do you propose to do to eliminate a reoccurance??? I agree we should not be at the mercy of violence in which a gun is the weapon of choice but realistically how do you change that ? Again, we can't be everywhere and force people who own guns legally to be more responsible, we clearly can't stop the criminals, and I'm positive we can neither predict or prevent the menatally ill. We are all saddened, upset, looking for solutions, suggesting fixes that just won't happen. We can't stop the rapists, pedophiles, murderers, drunk drivers, scumbags who won't stop driving while texting. I think we could reduce a lot of those things but not without public executions, so accept the horror there will be more to come.


        • #19
          Re: Madness

          When did the interest become so absorbed in anti-government
          thought and imagining enemies in every direction?
          Just as with TV, its about ratings and sales. Whatever angle or slant sells more issues
          is the one the writers will take or their article will be rewritten to take.

          If the conspiracy theory motivates people to buy the magazines and the products in them
          then that's what the editors will deliver. We let the tail wag the dog in todays society, the
          media (print/video/radio) being the tail of course.

          The whole Doomsday Scenario/Judgment Day/Armageddon thing has been played on the
          public for centuries in one form or another by different groups seeking to maintain control
          of the population.
          "It's a table saw, do you know where your fingers are?" Bob D. 2006


          • #20
            Re: Madness

            Maybe the zombie apocalypse is a metaphor.
            Attached Files


            • #21
              Re: Madness


              While I don't disagree with your summation, the one underlying thing that I rarely agree with is your fairly constant theme that "we can't" and that "nothing can be done".

              Perhaps it's just the way we grew up or the way we have found ourselves constrained, I simply don't know where our difference lays. But, I've always been a believer of "we can"... IF there is a willingness, then surely there will be a way. The problem, especially with the "gun issue", is that there is NO willingness. Everyone, on both sides of the issue almost immediately gets there temper up.

              I've said many times, and so I'll say it again.... I AM NOT AGAINST RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE OWNING GUNS!

              Okay, can we agree to that. Can the NRA and every gun owner agree to that single thought? And if we could ever possibly agree to that one common thought, then at least we might start down the road to curbing this kind of violence.

              Then we might well say, let's start a program, nationally that states the "Safety" and "Security" issues surrounding gun ownership. We teach responisibility and the dangers of cigarettes, so why can 't we do it with guns? Nobody has taken cigarettes away, or stopped people from buying and selling. We have curbed selling to minors and here in NY (and perhaps other states), we even fine a person or owner who sells cigarettes to minors.

              We all know what it takes to purchase a gun from a legitimate store, but I don't have to drive very far to make a gun purchase that is a lot less demanding of my identity and background. But a gun doesn't do anyone much good without ammunition, and I certainly have no problem with buying ammunition, they don't even ask my name or want to see ID. Even at 68 years old, I can buy ammunition a lot easier than I can buy a six-pack of beer!

              And, why should it enflame me should I be asked to present my "permit" and ID when I might want to buy ammunition?

              But let's face it, the LAW would not have prevented this tragedy. So really there's not much point of trying to make "control" an issue, at least for those properly licensed. More to the point, and to my point particularly, is that we need more "ownership" control, keeping the weapons secure and keeping all those in the household acquinted with their safety where appropriate.

              As I mentioned before, I got my first rifle (a single-shot 22) when I was 12, I also had a pellet pistol. My Dad was not interested in any part of having a firearm in the house, he'd had enough of that in the war. When I was 14, he pulled a Japanese army rifle out of the closet and gave it to me. (I would later find out it was a 7.7mm Arisaka 99.) Told me it was mine now and maybe I would find it interesting. Most of what I learned about guns was on my own and from a few friends and the old "Army guy" down the road. "Guns" were an important part of being a boy back then, but my father never taught me.

              I don't hunt, and I get no joy from killing anything. But I like guns and today have more than just one. My son grew up in a home where the weapon was there but not present, at least to him. When he was teen he knew about gun safety and use, but in his life, our family life, none of us felt the need to participate in my particular interest and that is how it remains and that is pretty much how it will remain with my grandson's too, unless they express the desire, we simply won't go there.

              My point is that "security and responsiblity" needs to be a prime responsibility of ownership. We don't need to take anything away, we do need to make all gun owners "responsible"... and we need everyone to "protect our Right" by ensuring that the wrong people don't have access. We need to do that openly and we need to do that with enthusiasm and with cooperation of everyone in the "chain".



              • #22
                Re: Madness

                Good post Bob. I see it as a combination of what can sell, and what is plausible.I don't fear or prepare for a zombie apocalypse, but I am somewhat prepared for a loss of power and temporary interruption in other services including food delivery. Most of us live relatively uneventful lives in terms of serious natural disaster or violence, but for those who had been touched by such events they are all too real.
                Advertising is a business and the folks at the top know how to manipulate the masses, they play on fear and either start or expand popular trends. I can't live at the ready for a home invasion or terrorist attack while out shopping. I can try and take some steps to protect my home and family. Getting back to this very sad and tragic event, I fail to see how anything that society is willing to undertake will prevent such future occurances. We can't make life bulletproof! I would love to see better mental health screening, more responsible gun ownership, stricker punishment for criminals, and anything else that would make our society a better place to raise a family.


                • #23
                  Re: Madness

                  CWS, you and I and other "reasonable, caring, sane" folks can agree with what you said, but the answer to your question unfortunately is "NO". We are dealing with selfish, lazy, uncaring screwups who will not change. Why do we have to pass laws making driving while texting illegal? People know it's a serious distraction that leads to more deaths than this tragic events we are discussing.

                  I won't bore you with countless other examples of laws and rules that should be unnecessary, if people could act responsibly.How wonderful it would be if gun owners properly secured their weapons, if mentally disturbed people were properly diagnosed and treated, if criminals respected our laws and pursuit of happiness? We can dream, but I am not hopeful we can change enough laws to correct the nature of man and his many flaws.

                  I keep thinking back to our economy as an example of what is, rather than what should be. We have entitlement programs and other government spending far beyond what the massive debt should allow. There are tough decisions needed and painful cuts necessary to take place in ordeer to "fix" the problem, and yet no proactive steps are being taken. Heck, we can't fix a problem of debt vs spending, so how can we expect to fix the determination of the mentally ill and evil?


                  • #24
                    Irrational people

                    Then, the question becomes; What is rational? A Govt could deem "noncompliants" like you as irrational.

                    The second amendment right is something that should be fought to be kept, in order to keep Govt in check if need be.

                    Unfortunately, When tragedies like this happen people are more willing to give up their freedoms.

                    One example is the NDAA signed by Obama; The right to arrest and hold you indefinitely, and not being able to defend yourself! A clear constitutional violation!


                    • #25
                      Re: Irrational people

                      All i know is it felt very good holding my 6 year old grand daughter after her Christmas's dancing program last night
                      I love my guns
                      i don't need automatic weapons


                      • #26
                        Re: Irrational people

                        You can't legislate Evil...


                        • #27
                          Re: Irrational people


                          I'm sorry, I can't keep up with all these accusations. As I understand it, the NDAA (National Defence Authorization Act) is primarily a finance bill which was created in 2005 under the Bush administration. It does get updated each and every year since that time. So, which year and what amendment or change are you referring to? I certainly can't and won't offer an opinion until I know what you're talking about and I certainly don't want to take the time to read through each and every year's entire text.

                          I do understand that there are provision within that bill regarding arrest and detention. It is also understood that this and other portions of that bill are under review and thus are NOT in effect until such rulings are handed down. Much of this is directed an terrorism, and specifically foriegn terrorist. But I could be wrong, I spend most of my time trying to enjoy life and come up with answers for Franki's continueing concerns for the economy... I just I just haven't the time to keep up with all the Bills, and certainly not the all the accusations made against Obama.



                          ps, If I recall correctly, the deeds that you are referrring to were authorized under the Bush adminstration as part of the HomeLand Security details and the Patriot Act. As I recall there were several incidents in which "citizens" were retained. Probably the most high-profile case was Jose' Padilla who was arrested in 2002 (that was Bush, not Obama) see

                          It is my understanding that it is the 2012 Act that you are probably referring to, so please read: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                          The "detention" issues that you refer to are under review. As I see it, they are basically pretty close to what the Bush Administration had already put into force and acted upon. I have ceased to be amazed at how a suppesed educated citizen can be so swayed in thier thinking when the Right-wing press issues their pronouncements. It's always a rush to accusation of the Obama administration, and never a "Oh wait, George did that!; when so many times we find that it was Republican exercises, that seemed to be really okay at the time.

                          We must also understand that this particular issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of this thread and is about as remote from it as the Taliban or the Mexican drug cartels. BUT, let us understand that at NO time has an enemy POW been empowered with the Rights of the American citizen. As a POW, whatever Rights are afforded to you are detailed by the Geneva Convention and at least up until my training in the 60's, the United States of America was not a co-signer of all of the provisions. Up until that time, we praticed a civilized treatment of prisoners and warfare that aligned, but was not held to the infinite articles of that "Convention". In other words, we still maintained chemical weapons, we conducted field operations as the situation allowed, and we often dispatched the enemy as the situation warranted. I should also add that any combattant, acting against the United States forfeits his or her Rights, if they ever had any, with regards to our Constitution. We generally do NOT check citizenship credentials when taking prisoners or in the targetting of confirmed enemy activities.

                          This subject is ended for me on this thread... Thanks!



                          • #28
                            Re: Irrational people

                            President Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Bill Into Law | American Civil Liberties Union
                            I think the point being made is germane to the discussion. Something terrible has happened and the response by some is to do whatever it takes to prevent a repeat, even if that means losing certain freedoms. The problem with that line of thinking is that even with the loss of those freedoms we are still at risk.
                            CWS, I appreciate you informative posts, however I have yet to see an answer that satisfies my concern of debt vs spending. I know it's exhausting but I wish you would respond to my comments regarding what we would like to see change as opposed to what we can expect to change. Thanks, Frank


                            • #29
                              Re: Madness

                              I have an idea that might stop some of these senseless killings, pass a law that makes it illegal to mention the name of the shooter. There will be no mention of the shooters' proper name in print, on tv, nowhere, absolutely no publicity, no historic record! Let any account of his or her life die with the victims. Only law enforcement shall have access to specif details. Just an idea since I can't imagine anything else of substance being done to prevent reoccurrences.


                              • #30
                                Re: Madness

                                Cw, This is a done deal signed into law. Admittedly also supported by many Republicans.
                                Obama signed this into law and then falsely announced "this will not affect American citizens", anyone who reads this bill (not a lengthy read) knows they can arrest you under the guise of being a "suspected terrorist"!

                                You are thinking of the Patriot act under bush which was for a limited time period after 911. Obama recently made the patriot act a permanent bill. So spying on american citizens is now an every day activity.

                                I have noting to hide in my life but I hate the idea of giving up our basic freedoms.

                                Check out this youtube video (below)or just google NDAA

                                Last edited by johncameron; 12-16-2012, 08:27 PM.