The right to bear arms
Replies
-
We control them by voting them out, not by holding a gun to their head.0
-
Just popping back in to say the NRA's ludicrous attempts to blame video games for gun violence has caused me to lose all respect for them.
And I used to be a card carrying member (as well as a card carrying Green Party member, tremble with fear, rightwingers! Muahaha!).
Anyway, their attempts to shift the blame is just sad. Guns don't kill people, video games kill people? Really? Will they make that their new slogan?
Sad. You guys running the NRA used to be smarter than that. What the hell happened to you?
Mara, we may disagree on politics... but I
you... My husband is a card carrying member (and even taught rifle for them (I think I said this already)) of the NRA (I think I am by proxy) and even he thinks they are moronic at times. While I think that media can desensitize people to violence or even give them ideas... it still falls under personal responsibility. My husband plays COD and other first person shooters (I'm horrible at them, the most I play is "old school" Bond on easy or multiplayer) and watches Dexter (and I watch Criminal Minds) I am pretty damn sure he isn't thinking about mass shooting anywhere.
While I honestly think that guns should be out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, I don't know how to do that except to make it harder to get for all... But even with that I don't know how I feel about registering a gun... On one hand, I agree with it because it makes it harder to get... meaning quite often you can't just walk in a purchase a gun (of any kind) right off the shelf as you can a loaf of bread... and you MUST have a license to lawfully carry it around in public (which takes time to get as well)... but at the same time I don't want the registers to be used to intimidate or even (God forbid) confiscate the firearms... it pissed me off when a New York paper published every single name and geocoded it on a map with all the registered gun users in two counties.... because they feel that people have a right to know if their neighbors own guns and got away with it because it's "public record"...0 -
We control them by voting them out, not by holding a gun to their head.
Hopefully, it stays that way.0 -
If it came down to an armed revolt, you're either a non-American or a moron if you think any significant amount of our military would turn their guns on American citizens.
The National Guard has turned their guns on Americans. Look up the history of strikes and demonstrations. Police have used violence even more often.
In fact, if we are going to argue that the right to keep and bear arms protects us from fascism we have a much stronger basis for that argument by pointing to police usage in the suppression of demonstrations and speech, since the police are not nearly as well armed as the military.0 -
Just popping back in to say the NRA's ludicrous attempts to blame video games for gun violence has caused me to lose all respect for them.
And I used to be a card carrying member (as well as a card carrying Green Party member, tremble with fear, rightwingers! Muahaha!).
Anyway, their attempts to shift the blame is just sad. Guns don't kill people, video games kill people? Really? Will they make that their new slogan?
Sad. You guys running the NRA used to be smarter than that. What the hell happened to you?
Mara, we may disagree on politics... but I you... My husband is a card carrying member (and even taught rifle for them (I think I said this already)) of the NRA (I think I am by proxy) and even he thinks they are moronic at times. While I think that media can desensitize people to violence or even give them ideas... it still falls under personal responsibility. My husband plays COD and other first person shooters (I'm horrible at them, the most I play is "old school" Bond on easy or multiplayer) and watches Dexter (and I watch Criminal Minds) I am pretty damn sure he isn't thinking about mass shooting anywhere.
While I honestly think that guns should be out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, I don't know how to do that except to make it harder to get for all... But even with that I don't know how I feel about registering a gun... On one hand, I agree with it because it makes it harder to get... meaning quite often you can't just walk in a purchase a gun (of any kind) right off the shelf as you can a loaf of bread... and you MUST have a license to lawfully carry it around in public (which takes time to get as well)... but at the same time I don't want the registers to be used to intimidate or even (God forbid) confiscate the firearms... it pissed me off when a New York paper published every single name and geocoded it on a map with all the registered gun users in two counties.... because they feel that people have a right to know if their neighbors own guns and got away with it because it's "public record"...
I play video games all the time and I have never shot anyone. In fact I prefer pepper spray to getting a concealed carry permit because I know if I shot someone thinking they were attacking me and I misjudged I'd spend the rest of my life feeling so guilty I wouldn't be able to stand it.
I also really like target shooting. If I could afford the ammo I'd do it a lot, and my favorite thing to shoot is an assault rifle. (I'm actually pretty good with it, can't say the same for a pistol!)
And whoever researched and wrote that article publishing gun owner's names is an *kitten*! What an awful thing to do, public record and free speech or not.0 -
I agree Mara... It would have been one thing to use it in a statistical analysis of the area... but to use it that way, in my opinion, was just plain douchey.... and now apparently a Connecticut lawmaker wants to make it mandatory... Nothing says "Hey, come rob my house while I'm gone! I have guns somewhere hidden here" (since the majority of guns used in crimes and mass shootings are stolen guns) like posting who owns the guns and where they live. With a google map to give directions straight to their house...
Seriously, what if there was a woman and her children that were attempting to hide from an estranged abusive spouse and she bought a gun to protect herself and her kids?
I get that it's public record and I know what that means... but I find that to be an abuse of the right. But then I also find it an abuse of that right when some anonymous douchecanoe decides that it's his right to obtain all civil employees and post their names, positition titles, and salaries online in the name of transparency (even though, like previously stated, he himself remains happily and ironically anonymous).0 -
worth noting is that the same paper that published all of those addresses -- so that the people could feel safe around people with guns, I guess? -- then felt like they were endangered by upset gun owners. so they hired armed security.0
-
worth noting is that the same paper that published all of those addresses -- so that the people could feel safe around people with guns, I guess? -- then felt like they were endangered by upset gun owners. so they hired armed security.
What's good for the goose isn't always good for the gander, I guess.0 -
I don't get what you mean. If there's hypocrisy in this, it seems to be on side of "law abiding" gun owners who are making death threats and sending envelopes of mysterious powder, a tiny minority, no doubt. Did the newspaper publish something that says its publishers and employees don't have a right to exercise their second amendment rights in addition to their first amendment rights?0
-
I do indeed find it a bit hypocritical when those that would like to heavily restrict and perhaps even outright ban, as well as, confiscate firearms hire armed guards.... if the police were that good at being able to protect the people then why don't they just call them, if that's what they truly believe. Whether that be politicians or newpaper people.
And while I don't condone threatening people with any type of harm, what did they expect? Seriously? You publish thousands of gun owners names and addresses.... potentially putting households in danger for any reason to further your own agenda... Did they seriously think they weren't going to get some major negative reaction to this? Anyone with even a molecule for a brain could have seen that one coming.
BTW, hire armed guards or not, I don't care... but I am going to think you are a tad hypocritical for it if you are so anti-firearm to do things such as this.0 -
I do indeed find it a bit hypocritical when those that would like to heavily restrict and perhaps even outright ban, as well as, confiscate firearms hire armed guards...
I haven't seen anything saying this newspaper supports banning or confiscating firearms. If you have, please show it to me. Thanks!0 -
Just to be clear, I don't believe the Journal News was wise to use their first amendment rights in the way they did. But that's a different issue than whether they are hypocritical to hire armed guards after receiving death threats.0
-
I do indeed find it a bit hypocritical when those that would like to heavily restrict and perhaps even outright ban, as well as, confiscate firearms hire armed guards...
I haven't seen anything saying this newspaper supports banning or confiscating firearms. If you have, please show it to me. Thanks!
Perhaps the newspaper doesn't (though I am most certianly inferring that they do or some variation), but my comment can be made in a general sense as well....
and I find their article that accompanied the map, HIGHLY contrary (not sure if that's the word I want... but I will go with it until I find a better one) as it quotes quite a few professionals that it would be dangerous to make the information public (without obtaining a records request) and why it would be so... yet they did it anyway... they did it without any concern of the people in those households. If you want to know who owns a gun in your neighborhood or potential neighborhood, then by all means take your happy *kitten* to city hall with a FOIA request form... but then people are too damned lazy to do so... just like they are too damned lazy to find out if their house is on a floodplain or if it has had permits on that addition that makes the house bigger than the listing says it is...0 -
By the way, I am using "you" in a general sense.... even if I am replying to a qoute.... unless I type the user name out... then it ends when I leave a space between paragraphs... just to be clear as I know I can look accusatory.0
-
If you want to know who owns a gun in your neighborhood or potential neighborhood, then by all means take your happy *kitten* to city hall with a FOIA request form... but then people are too damned lazy to do so... just like they are too damned lazy to find out if their house is on a floodplain or if it has had permits on that addition that makes the house bigger than the listing says it is...
The information that is publicly available in New York state is not who owns a gun but who has a pistol permit. Long gun information is not available, period. And I'm sure there is not a one-to-one correspondence between who has a pistol permit and who has a pistol. There are both unpermitted pistols and permit holders with no pistol.
In my opinion, that makes the data published less useful and therefore less worthy of publishing.0 -
I do indeed find it a bit hypocritical when those that would like to heavily restrict and perhaps even outright ban, as well as, confiscate firearms hire armed guards...
I haven't seen anything saying this newspaper supports banning or confiscating firearms. If you have, please show it to me. Thanks!
Perhaps the newspaper doesn't (though I am most certianly inferring that they do or some variation), but my comment can be made in a general sense as well....
I'm not following you. Surely only the newspaper's actions are important in determining whether they are hypocritical. If person A calls for a total gun ban, then it says absolutely about person B's good faith when person B responds to death threats by hiring an armed guard. I have no idea what "general sense" you are talking about.0 -
I do indeed find it a bit hypocritical when those that would like to heavily restrict and perhaps even outright ban, as well as, confiscate firearms hire armed guards...
I haven't seen anything saying this newspaper supports banning or confiscating firearms. If you have, please show it to me. Thanks!
their editorials and past stances are heavily anti gun and pro restriction. and I say this as a journalist.0 -
Anti-gun and pro-restriction to the point of saying that someone receiving death threats shouldn't have the option of arming themselves? I've seen nothing like that in their editorials. The closest I've seen is a call for reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that lapsed in 2004. As long as their armed guards don't have assault weapons, I don't see the hypocrisy.
Unless one fallaciously assumes that anyone calling for any changes in gun laws is calling for a ban on all private ownership of guns.0 -
there were no death threats. police investigated the email that concerned her, and they said they "did not constitute an offense” and did not contain an actual threat.
and their position has always been very strict gun control, with the reasoning that the police are there to protect us. so, if that's the case, hiring a private, gun-toting security guard shouldn't be necessary.0 -
FBMandy55 is referring to Kitty Werthmann, an Austrian-American who leads the South Dakota "Eagle Forum." The Eagle Forum is a right wing American political group that fights against twentieth-century progress like equal rights for women. She is not a "Holocaust Survivor," as that term is usually used since she wasn't ever sent to a concentration camp. This is typical of the stuff she spouts at "tea party" gatherings."What I am about to tell you is something you’ve probably never heard or read in history books,” she likes to tell audiences.
"I am a witness to history. I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We voted him in."
If you remember the plot of the Sound of Music, the Von Trapp family escaped over the Alps rather than submit to the Nazis. Kitty wasn’t so lucky. Her family chose to stay in her native Austria. She was 10 years old, but bright and aware. And she was watching.
“We elected him by a landslide – 98 percent of the vote,” she recalls. She wasn’t old enough to vote in 1938 – approaching her 11th birthday. But she remembers. “Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.”
Not so.
http://www.tennesseesonsofliberty.com/2013/01/kitty-werthmann-survived-hitler-and.html
She was a witness to history but she either has a bad memory or has a 10-year-old's understanding of what she lived through.
Austria was set to hold a referendum on union with Hitler's Germany, which probably would have been rejected. Rather than let that happen, the Austrian Nazi party staged a coup d'etat and Hitler "just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force," meeting no resistance. After the invasion, the Nazis held a sham election which they claimed to win by 99.7%.
Werthmann's speech is typical right wing hyperbole. The things that brought Hitler to power just happen to be the same things Phylis Schlafly and her Eagle Forum oppose.
Ah...thanks for providing the background! I figured it had to be something of the sort, but not being in the US, this charming lady and her misrepresentation of history are unfamiliar to me.
I thank you, too, treetop. I was curious where this could have come from. All makes sense now.0 -
having a gun may have saved this woman and her children's lives.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/story?id=181648120 -
having a gun may have saved this woman and her children's lives.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/story?id=18164812
He will turn around and sue her.0 -
having a gun may have saved this woman and her children's lives.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/story?id=18164812
He will turn around and sue her.
In Georgia? Extremely unlikely. The guy got what he deserved.0 -
having a gun may have saved this woman and her children's lives.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/story?id=18164812
He will turn around and sue her.
In Georgia? Extremely unlikely. The guy got what he deserved.
Oh that is true. This is not California!0 -
As long as we're playing argument by anecdote . . . this idiot could have killed someone.Dropped gun fires at Silverdale store; no injuries
Published 12:36 pm, Sunday, January 6, 2013
SILVERDALE, Wash. (AP) — A gun went off inside a Kitsap County store after a man dropped it, but no one was injured.
The Kitsap Sun reports (http://is.gd/xPrA51 ) that a 58-year-old Poulsbo man told deputies he had removed the .38-caliber, two-shot Derringer pistol from a holster on his belt before he entered the Cost Plus World Market in Silverdale on Saturday afternoon.
He put the gun in a coat pocket, but when he was in the middle of the store, he bent over — and the pistol fell out and discharged. . . .
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Dropped-gun-fires-at-Silverdale-store-no-injuries-4171173.php#ixzz2HPpQgtap0 -
Nothing I have ever read says that the benefit of having a gun in my home for self-defense is worth the greater risk of homicide, suicide, or death by accidental discharge.For example, Kellermann et al. (13, 14) examined the relation between gun ownership and injury outcomes. After they controlled for a number of potentially confounding factors, the presence of a gun in the home was associated with a nearly fivefold risk of suicide (adjusted odds ratio = 4.8) (13) and an almost threefold risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio = 2.7) (14). Other case-control studies have also found an increased risk of suicide for those with firearms in the home, with relative risks ranging from 2.1 to 4.4 (15–19).
. . . .
The findings of this study add to the body of research showing an association between guns in the home and risk of a violent death. Those persons with guns in the home were at significantly greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a suicide in the home relative to other causes of death. This finding was particularly the case for males, who in general have higher rates of completed suicide than females do. The findings showing an increased risk of homicide in homes with guns are also consistent with previous research (14, 20, 23, 24), although, when compared with suicide, are not as strong. Studies that have examined the risk of either violent victimization or perpetration at the individual level show relative risks between 1.4 and 2.7 (14, 20, 23, 24). Our findings are also in this range.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full0 -
Nothing I have ever read says that the benefit of having a gun in my home for self-defense is worth the greater risk of homicide, suicide, or death by accidental discharge.For example, Kellermann et al. (13, 14) examined the relation between gun ownership and injury outcomes. After they controlled for a number of potentially confounding factors, the presence of a gun in the home was associated with a nearly fivefold risk of suicide (adjusted odds ratio = 4.8) (13) and an almost threefold risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio = 2.7) (14). Other case-control studies have also found an increased risk of suicide for those with firearms in the home, with relative risks ranging from 2.1 to 4.4 (15–19).
. . . .
The findings of this study add to the body of research showing an association between guns in the home and risk of a violent death. Those persons with guns in the home were at significantly greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a suicide in the home relative to other causes of death. This finding was particularly the case for males, who in general have higher rates of completed suicide than females do. The findings showing an increased risk of homicide in homes with guns are also consistent with previous research (14, 20, 23, 24), although, when compared with suicide, are not as strong. Studies that have examined the risk of either violent victimization or perpetration at the individual level show relative risks between 1.4 and 2.7 (14, 20, 23, 24). Our findings are also in this range.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full
correlation != causation0 -
As discussed in the link.0
-
As discussed in the link.
I read it, all I saw is two things:
There's an association between gun deaths and having a gun in the home
Suicides are more often successful if you have a gun in the home
If they were able to prove that violent deaths are caused by gun ownership, they would've said so.0 -
How about another school shooting:
http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/01/10/taft-union-high-school-shooting-california-shooter-suspect-custody/0
