Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

There's something I want done, but I don't have any solutions as to ho

Tags:
Last response: in News & Leisure
Share
July 21, 2012 1:41:13 AM

Instead of our politicians wasting millions of dollars on these stupid campaign ads start to do something sensible and meaningful REGULATE GUN CONTROL in our country. No candidate has not mentioned this essential point at all. This is becoming a cancer which is spreading and killing and maiming innocent people everywhere.Screw the NRA and start showing some guts and do something about them with their powerful influence they have on our politicians.STOP THEM NOW!

More about : solutions

July 21, 2012 1:54:15 AM

Check on and report the mentally unstable, red flag them from certain things
July 21, 2012 7:39:17 AM

If they couldn't but guns and carry them around so easily then they wouldn't be such a threat.

http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn

"In the last 60 days, [Holmes] purchased four guns at local metro gun shops and through the internet, he purchased over 6,000 rounds of ammunition," said Mr Coates, who occasionally fought to control his emotion.

The ammunition includes more than 3,000 rounds bought for an assault rifle, 3,000 rounds for two Glock handguns and 300 rounds for a shotgun.

"Also through the internet, he purchased multiple magazines for the .223 calibre assault rifle, including one 100-round drum magazine, which was recovered from the scene," Mr Coates added.

"I'm told by experts that with that drum magazine, he could have gotten off 50 to 60 rounds... within one minute.

"And as far as we know, it was a pretty rapid pace of fire in that theatre.

"My understanding is all weapons he possessed, he possessed legally. All ammunition he possessed, he possessed legally."


New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has long argued for tighter restrictions on fire arms, is challenging the candidates to spell out their positions on gun control.

"Somebody's got to do something about this and this requires, particularly in a presidential year, the candidates for president of the United States to stand up and once for all and say, 'Yes, it's a tragedy'," he said.

Related resources
July 21, 2012 8:18:36 AM

I guess if you own a gun, or have in the past, or planning on getting one, you can see both sides of this issue.
One thing, they still cant enter his house, not because of a gun, but a bomb.
I firmly believe, if guns arent available, bombs will be used.
Nowhere on that list, not one mention of bombs by many MSM sites, only guns, which shows a fixation by them.
They cant stop bombs, a gun wasnt used to take out Syrias top military, it was a bomb.
In Ireland, it isnt guns, in Israel it isnt guns, in the Mid East, its not guns.

Rarely do people go off like this, and in any given day, those whove been rereleased into society kill this many every day.
Take the guns out of the crime ridden, then people may accept a more regulated scenario, but only a few.
The real crime is, this happens every day by criminals, yet this is the example.
There are laws regarding the law abiding on gun ownership, its when things like this happens when it comes to the forefront.
The laws being broken by the lawless goes unimpeded, and the cries are few, except for the cops that see the lawless released time and again.

Understand, this is a right, nothing less
July 21, 2012 2:44:41 PM

Liberal logic 101

Restricting the freedoms of law abiding citizens somehow prevents criminal behavior.
July 21, 2012 3:57:42 PM

musical marv said:
Instead of our politicians wasting millions of dollars on these stupid campaign ads start to do something sensible and meaningful REGULATE GUN CONTROL in our country. No candidate has not mentioned this essential point at all. This is becoming a cancer which is spreading and killing and maiming innocent people everywhere.Screw the NRA and start showing some guts and do something about them with their powerful influence they have on our politicians.STOP THEM NOW!


What would impress me is if they took that campaign money and helped some of the worst case family situations in this country.

If they did that, that would be the politician I would vote for, because he or she would care more for the people than themselves.

The NRA is not the enemy in this situation.

The right to bear arms was simply provided so we the people if the necessity ever arises had the means to take back the government, in the very same fashion America gained it's independence from Britain in the beginning of the US.

Every time something like this happens it's always the gun owners the negativity is directed at, have you ever considered maybe the regulating crowd could be behind these type of events to further their own goals.

As with all possibilities?

It is a possibility, especially if they considered the actions of a senseless slaughter to be acceptable losses to further their own gains, they would be no better than the perpetrators of the crimes.

The gun itself is not the problem, and gun ownership is not the problem, it's the person pulling the triggers intentions.

Why is it when a home owner successfully defends his or her home against an invading criminal, it's news brushed under the rug, even if the homeowner kills more than one assailant.

IMO that's the purpose of the gun to protect yourself and your home and family, in the event it becomes a necessity.

Why do you think Japan was smart enough to not to have their infantry invade US soil, simply because they already knew the weapons across the US would be a blood bath they would surely loose, because American gun owners will not just hand over their guns to an invading army, they'll fight to the death.

Guns are a part of everyday life, some have them, some don't, mostly the ones that don't have them get scared when this senseless slaughter type things happen, and they get scared it will happen to them, so remove all the guns, and the problems go away.

Wrong!

Then you'll have a whole new set of problems you hadn't even considered!

I'm 4ryan6 and I approved this message! :) 

Ryan
July 22, 2012 2:18:08 AM

Reynod said:
If they couldn't but guns and carry them around so easily then they wouldn't be such a threat.

http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn

"In the last 60 days, [Holmes] purchased four guns at local metro gun shops and through the internet, he purchased over 6,000 rounds of ammunition," said Mr Coates, who occasionally fought to control his emotion.

The ammunition includes more than 3,000 rounds bought for an assault rifle, 3,000 rounds for two Glock handguns and 300 rounds for a shotgun.

"Also through the internet, he purchased multiple magazines for the .223 calibre assault rifle, including one 100-round drum magazine, which was recovered from the scene," Mr Coates added.

"I'm told by experts that with that drum magazine, he could have gotten off 50 to 60 rounds... within one minute.

"And as far as we know, it was a pretty rapid pace of fire in that theatre.

"My understanding is all weapons he possessed, he possessed legally. All ammunition he possessed, he possessed legally."


New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has long argued for tighter restrictions on fire arms, is challenging the candidates to spell out their positions on gun control.

"Somebody's got to do something about this and this requires, particularly in a presidential year, the candidates for president of the United States to stand up and once for all and say, 'Yes, it's a tragedy'," he said.
I agree Obama has to start pushing for more gun control asap and not worry so much about his campaign donations he is getting. Also this internet is getting worse by buying all this crap over it including guns and drugs also.
July 22, 2012 6:02:45 AM

Christopher Nolan must be pissed!

(Dark Knight was an awesome movie, saw it on opening day.)
July 22, 2012 7:20:02 AM

Liberal Logic 101

By restricting the freedoms of law abiding citizens, criminals will instantly just go away.
July 22, 2012 11:42:14 PM

Maybe the US gun laws are all about controlling the population growth ?

Letting the fanatics loose with few controls (allowing huge bix magazines, assault rifles and few purchasing controls) allows the population to "cull" itself ... plus it keeps the gun and ammo sales up while the paranoid buy more guns and ammo so they can fee safer at night?

A self perpetuating cycle of stupidity and ignorance.

It looks like the NRA has become so powerful over there that no members of parliament are game to even tackle the issue behind a bit of sad lip service to the victims.

Buy more guns boys.
July 23, 2012 12:21:30 AM

Dont complain if you never had the right.

Glad the bombs were deactivated, or it would have killed many more, but hey, its just a bomb.
Lets put emphasis on guns, and someone who wanted to commit a huge crime, ignore the bomb boys, this is too important.

If youve ever had the right, then give that right up, I do hope things go well forever
July 23, 2012 2:26:20 AM

Personally, I think we should regulate ladders. Far more people in America die from falling off ladders than they do from guns.

Oh yeah, "assault rifles" are already heavily regulated and controlled. Just thought you would like to know Reynod.
July 23, 2012 3:21:35 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Personally, I think we should regulate ladders. Far more people in America die from falling off ladders than they do from guns.

Oh yeah, "assault rifles" are already heavily regulated and controlled. Just thought you would like to know Reynod.
Maybe you would be to funny if one of your family members died from this barrage of bullets this animal shot killing innocent people. Ladders are you kidding me???
July 23, 2012 3:41:11 AM

Cars, water from drowning, boats, sports injuries resulting in deaths.
Drugs, alcohol, tobacco.....
oh, and bombs
If the tenants messed with the door due to all the loud music being played annoying them, that bomb would have taken many lives.
Every component used to build those bombs were legally bought, but nary a word.
July 23, 2012 4:06:55 AM

musical marv said:
Maybe you would be to funny if one of your family members died from this barrage of bullets this animal shot killing innocent people. Ladders are you kidding me???


No marv, you're the ******* clown here. Do your research, then get back to me. m'kay pumpkin?
July 23, 2012 10:05:11 AM

Reynod said:
It looks like the NRA has become so powerful over there that no members of parliament are game to even tackle the issue behind a bit of sad lip service to the victims.


We don't have a parliament, we have a GubbaMent, or you could call it a BubbaClub or (Good Ole Boys Club), which operates on Parlor Tricks! :lol: 

Parlor Tricks? > Parliament? I can see the confusion. ;) 

Seriously:

There are many, many, gun owners in the US that don't have a thing to do with the NRA, or actually could care less it even exists.

You may have the NRA on too high a pedestal.

Reynod said:
Buy more guns boys.


Actually every time something like this happens, and the get the guns flag wavers start waving their flags, we have a run on gun buying in the US, every single time.

And that sir, is the 100% truth!

*********************************************************************************************

The tragedy is a sad event, but somehow, someone, always seems to benefit from it!

Different subject but similar to the war mentality of acceptable losses, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it happens.

What would be your solution to the problem?

And every gun owner just voluntarily handing over their guns is not going to happen.

Door to door search and seizure will start another civil war or revolutionary war, take your pick.

Is there anyway to predict when a perfectly sane individual goes insane, and does something like this in the first place?

Forget that, that's not a fair question, if you knew that answer you'd be the richest person in the world.

No essays please, just short and to the point?

Hope you're having a great day or night, whatever time it is over there! Ry
July 23, 2012 12:45:26 PM

Looking at restricting or banning guns because of this.. well, how many people didn't carry, legally, into that theater because they were worried about breaking the law?

By restricting where guns can go, you open the path to a gun free zone where criminals will target.

I do not understand how restricting firearms, even banning them, will resolve the issue. It will not.

Now, look to Switzerland where everyone has a firearm and is trained in it. You'd think they would have massive shootings. They don't.
July 23, 2012 12:54:49 PM

The NRA is not some faceless entity wielding an invisible hand of power. It is made up of 4.5 million law abiding Americans. We pool our resources in the interest of protecting our God given rights. It is the oldest civil rights organization in America.

The idea of passing any sort of restrictions on law abiding citizens will prevent criminal nutjob type behavior is asinine.

By definition, criminals don't obey laws and restrictions.
July 23, 2012 1:00:19 PM

Make drugs illegal, only criminals possess them.

Make guns illegal, only criminals possess them.

Not the world I want to live in. I like my gun cabinet and it's contents.. that I use for hunting.. responsibly.

Guns aren't the problem, crazy people are - if you think banning guns will keep them out of the hands of people that want to shoot something up.. I have a bridge to sell you.
July 23, 2012 1:30:27 PM

4Ryan6 said:
We don't have a parliament, we have a GubbaMent, or you could call it a BubbaClub or (Good Ole Boys Club), which operates on Parlor Tricks! :lol: 

Parlor Tricks? > Parliament? I can see the confusion. ;) 

Seriously:

There are many, many, gun owners in the US that don't have a thing to do with the NRA, or actually could care less it even exists.

You may have the NRA on too high a pedestal.



Actually every time something like this happens, and the get the guns flag wavers start waving their flags, we have a run on gun buying in the US, every single time.

And that sir, is the 100% truth!

*********************************************************************************************

The tragedy is a sad event, but somehow, someone, always seems to benefit from it!

Different subject but similar to the war mentality of acceptable losses, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it happens.

What would be your solution to the problem?

And every gun owner just voluntarily handing over their guns is not going to happen.

Door to door search and seizure will start another civil war or revolutionary war, take your pick.

Is there anyway to predict when a perfectly sane individual goes insane, and does something like this in the first place?

Forget that, that's not a fair question, if you knew that answer you'd be the richest person in the world.

No essays please, just short and to the point?

Hope you're having a great day or night, whatever time it is over there! Ry



Hi Ry.

Actually your quite right on all counts.

Trying to get the guns off the street now would be just about impossible I guess.

Here we had much fewer guns before the big gun restrictions were imposed so It was much easier.

My family were in a rural area and we had a lot of rifles and now my brother has a couple left, and the rest of us handed ours over years ago.

Here we have no need of them ... its much like Canada ... but hotter ... and flatter ... and we have flies ... and they have bears.

Since so many of your university students seem to be going nuts over there in Colorado maybe the lecturers are to blame for making the exams so hard?
July 23, 2012 1:59:51 PM

65 million gun owners in the US. 4.5 million in the NRA.

Ban all guns, sure. What stops an individual from making pipe bombs from Home Depot or Lowes? Or other explosive devices that would likely hurt more people with a single detonation.

For that matter, what stopped him from bringing in a 30lbs bomb and setting it off?

Guns are not the problem. It is the person who is the problem. I will have to check my local theaters but I think they're a gun free zone - so you can't carry into them. I will need to double check. That means no one in the audience legally is carrying a firearm and able to protect.

Again, these shootings almost always happen in areas where other people wouldn't have firearms. Granted, he did have on ballistic gear to prevent getting shot and was on vicodin to prevent feeling as much pain and whatever else.

I blame prescription drugs over guns.
July 23, 2012 2:16:59 PM

I think we can agree that buying guns and ammo is way too easy.

You can buy drum clips off the internet, with thousands of rounds of ammo with no check on who you are.

I say make it way harder to obtain a gun. Im not sure what exactly the policy would look like but this guy bought all of his weapons online legally.
July 23, 2012 2:37:16 PM

You have to go through a background check when purchasing a gun from a supplier. I would agree that selling a firearm should have to go on the books (as opposed to selling for cash, no one knowing where it goes).

Ever firearm I have purchased I have had to go through a background check. This guy went through his background check and passed.

While you can buy accessories online, you can not simply buy a gun and have it mailed to your house. They still send it to a supplier where you have to pick it up.. and you still have to pass the background check.

Proposing to make it harder.. how so? What additional checks would be necessary?
July 23, 2012 2:47:59 PM

Interesting this happened just a couple weeks before the UN small arms ban/regulation treaty is debated in the Senate.

False flag operation anyone?

Another point. This guy was apparently unemployed. Where did he get the money to purchase all these guns, ammo, and tactical equipment?
July 23, 2012 2:49:43 PM

Probably from the same place he got all the money to go to grad school.
July 23, 2012 3:01:49 PM

Grad student, parents seem to have some money, and he probably took out loans.

I plan on making a large ammo purchase and get a few accessories I want for my firearms before this coming election. Mainly I see ammo and select items disappearing off the shelves come election time.
July 23, 2012 3:40:44 PM

I currently dont own a gun.
Havnt in years.
This isnt something that drives my decision on what I believe is a right to own or carry.
Many friends own, or carry as well of mine. I trust them, respect them.

I have gone hunting, been to many firing ranges, target practice here and there, and someday I may own one again, if I so choose.
I have pests that may require this, and no, the government solution doesnt exist here, as they wont help, and me and my neighbors land is susceptible to the critters destruction.
It would be my last attempt at fixing it, but so far no luck, as now that Im back in Gods country, I like to have as little impact as possible.
Make no mistake, I will defend the right to own and or carry a gun, and if pressed, will buy one.
One wonders how many more people would be alive if people had guns and not used bombs.
An anarchists favorite weapon is a bomb, and is why we saw this guys attempt to use one.
A nut job loses it, takes out people with their car, it happens.
We cant stop this, but we cant responsibly attack one segment of society as an excuse to rid guns out of rightful responsible peoples hands either, no more than we can take peoples cars away.
Road rage happens, intentional accidents with cars happen, people die.
Fires happen, people die.

My earlier link, where the two creeps attacked the internet cafe, they were released within 2 days after the incedent, now, wheres the push against this?
July 23, 2012 6:37:44 PM

I was at the shooting range 3 weeks ago. The guy next to me decided to take his life and used a .44 magnum he had rented. I was standing five feet from him when he did it. Too bad he looked up too much and the bullet went from under his chin up and out through his nose.

When he fell down with the gaping hole in his face, I looked at him and figured I couldn't help him. I went up front to the office and told them what happened. At first I thought the guy was dead because he was convulsing. Instead, the shock from shot messed him up pretty good.
July 23, 2012 6:52:41 PM

musical marv said:
Instead of our politicians wasting millions of dollars on these stupid campaign ads start to do something sensible and meaningful REGULATE GUN CONTROL in our country. No candidate has not mentioned this essential point at all. This is becoming a cancer which is spreading and killing and maiming innocent people everywhere.Screw the NRA and start showing some guts and do something about them with their powerful influence they have on our politicians.STOP THEM NOW!
Oh puh-leez...here we go. :sarcastic: 

I was wondering how long it would take the peanut gallery to start the anti-gun tirades.




July 23, 2012 6:58:21 PM

Screw the NRA? That's like saying "screw the ACLU". The NRA represents the collective voice of 4.5 million gun owners.

Politicians are not brilliant but they are smart enough to NOT piss off 4.5 million voters.
July 23, 2012 7:57:59 PM

wanamingo said:
I think we can agree that buying guns and ammo is way too easy.

You can buy drum clips off the internet, with thousands of rounds of ammo with no check on who you are.

I say make it way harder to obtain a gun. Im not sure what exactly the policy would look like but this guy bought all of his weapons online legally.
It's obvious you do not live in New Jersey.

New Jersey has the following;
Mental Health background screening.
Criminal History background screening.
FBI fingerprint database screening.
Deadbeat Dad screening.
Drug Abuse screening.
Domestic Violence or Spousal Abuse screening.
Affidavit of Character from two non-related persons.
One hand-gun per month waiting period. (Only 3 States have this law; NJ, CA, and MD)

Since any magazine over 15 rounds is banned in New Jersey, I can not buy 100 drum clips from a FFL off the interwebs and have them mailed to my home; they simply will not ship them to a New Jersey address. Many websites that sell gun accessories have restrictions on what can and can not be shipped based on that State's laws. The difficulty or ease of purchasing guns and ammo is relative and varies from State to State.

Fact is, gun laws and gun bans are irrelevant. All of what NJ does is irrelevant when Camden is named the Murder Capital of the United States for several years in a row. But the most important reason gun laws and gun bans are flat out ineffective is because they do not address the basic social, economic and/or cultural factors that cause suicide, murder, robbery, and violent crime.
July 23, 2012 8:05:25 PM

+1 for monster.

Take Chicago this year. The most restrictive gun laws in the country yet 274 people have been shot and killed so far this year in a city where owning a handgun is already illegal.
July 23, 2012 8:15:58 PM

So how would pro-gun owners lower the amount of gun deaths?

According to politifact there are around 100,000 gun deaths each year, you remove suicide and you are still left with ~86,000 people killed by guns each year in the United States.

which is like 225 people every day. So it is a problem that needs to be addressed. The status quo isnt working.
July 23, 2012 8:35:50 PM

wanamingo said:
So how would pro-gun owners lower the amount of gun deaths?

According to politifact there are around 100,000 gun deaths each year, you remove suicide and you are still left with ~86,000 people killed by guns each year in the United States.

which is like 225 people every day. So it is a problem that needs to be addressed. The status quo isnt working.


Your numbers are no where near accurate.

This nicely put together article gets its data directly from the FBI.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun...

According to these stats, it looks like eating at McDonald's is far dangerous and a bigger problem than so called "gun deaths".

http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/15-most-common-caus...
July 23, 2012 8:38:29 PM

Oops sorry that 100,000 people get SHOT every year.

I think I made an error when I carried the 5 and then divided by -0.
July 23, 2012 8:46:09 PM

wanamingo said:
So how would pro-gun owners lower the amount of gun deaths?

According to politifact there are around 100,000 gun deaths each year, you remove suicide and you are still left with ~86,000 people killed by guns each year in the United States.

which is like 225 people every day. So it is a problem that needs to be addressed. The status quo isnt working.


You read the numbers wrong. They do a statistic per 100,000 people. There are around 30,000 deaths per year, over half of which tend to be suicides. Less than 1000 per year in personal defense.

Citing the latest numbers I found from 2008:

9500 gun related deaths in the US.
3500 violence related deaths (stabbing, blunt objects, stranglation)

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

Whereas the UK lists 60,000 stabbings a year, or 160 a day by the math provided in another article.

I think this simply proves that it comes down to the person, not the device.
July 23, 2012 10:36:57 PM

I figured someone would have responded to my comment about the suicide attempt at the range...
July 23, 2012 11:57:20 PM

riser said:
I figured someone would have responded to my comment about the suicide attempt at the range...


I wanted to, but was speechless to be honest. I can't imagine having to experience that.

Something similar happened to a high school friend of mine. He tried to blow his brains out with an Chinese SKS, tilted his head back too far. The bullet went up through his chin, was deflected in his nasal cavity and came out through his left eye.
July 24, 2012 3:03:26 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
+1 for monster.

Take Chicago this year. The most restrictive gun laws in the country yet 274 people have been shot and killed so far this year in a city where owning a handgun is already illegal.
What is the answer than?
July 24, 2012 3:53:21 AM

riser said:
Looking at restricting or banning guns because of this.. well, how many people didn't carry, legally, into that theater because they were worried about breaking the law?

By restricting where guns can go, you open the path to a gun free zone where criminals will target.

I do not understand how restricting firearms, even banning them, will resolve the issue. It will not.

Now, look to Switzerland where everyone has a firearm and is trained in it. You'd think they would have massive shootings. They don't.



The Swiss are much more culturally mature than Americans ?.

I think it is all about the cultural norms that your exposed to while growing up.

Take for instance the view that many of you have regarding home invasions ... you have almost all stated that you would shoot first and ask questions later if your heard loud noises at night and thought someone was breaking in.

Here would probably open the door and give that drunken relative a last beer and just put them to bed ... or yell at the guy and tell him he staggered into the wrong home on his way back from the pub.

Like the Canadians we tend to have a much more relaxed view where in the US you tend to be highly suspicious and paranoid about anything you perceive as impinging upon your personal liberty or free will.

This I find hard to understand as from my perspective the US looks like a free for all 24/7 circus where the performers are shooting kids in the crowd while doing acrobatics on the high wire ... and the lions and the bears are roaming freely through the crowd ... taking bites out of the audience as well.

From where I stand you have so much free will this has caused the country to fall into chaos on so many levels.

You also have some of the best things there too ... but the balance is askew.

The obsession in the US about individual success being more important than community values is at the heart of the matter.




July 24, 2012 3:56:14 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
The NRA is not some faceless entity wielding an invisible hand of power. It is made up of 4.5 million law abiding Americans. We pool our resources in the interest of protecting our God given rights. It is the oldest civil rights organization in America.

The idea of passing any sort of restrictions on law abiding citizens will prevent criminal nutjob type behavior is asinine.

By definition, criminals don't obey laws and restrictions.


So when do the vigilante NRA goon squad plan to start targetting the criminals by driving around in pickups and shooting at them?

It isn't a civil rights group unless it has some kind of positive role to play in society ... frankly they must be viewed in the same light as the fringe religious cults in the absence of any positive outcomes they seem to lack?
July 24, 2012 3:59:10 AM

musical marv said:
What is the answer than?



Sometimes, there is no answer. It's the human condition. Population control? Is that the answer? A controlled Brave New World?

Aldous Huxley would agree with you.
July 24, 2012 4:05:12 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Sometimes, there is no answer. It's the human condition. Population control? Is that the answer? A controlled Brave New World?

Aldous Huxley would agree with you.


Only China currently has the ability to impose "Newspeak" through its control on the internetz and other media (television / papers) and that term was coined by George Orwell in the book 1984 ... probably more of interest to this discussion from my perspective than Huxley.
July 24, 2012 4:52:42 AM

Take people that didnt want to be hemmed in, take people with a make or break it mentality, take people whod rather shoot their governing body, but were kept too poor or werent allowed guns,take people who left their families into a brave new world, thats Americans.
Obviously not all Americans feel this way, but mostly this is who we were.
Society has softened such things, but as a whole, between traditions and that same spirit, it remains largely an American way of life.
It is then therefore no surprise to me to see such things going on, tho it has been handled poorly.
Some are mad that we build more prisons, and act as if it were a money scheme, and those are folks that dont own guns for the most part, as for the gun owners, throw em in n lock em up
July 24, 2012 5:40:52 AM

Hey don't spin me that line JD and expect me to nod and agree.

We were settled by convicts, miners and immigrants ... though 200 years later history rewrote the Aboriginal people back into the script ... better late than never I guess.

The US therefore has no advantage in terms of mongrel pedigree than we do ...
that arguement just doesn't stand up.

Locking up more people won't help either.

P.S. Don't drive in the back of a pickup truck in Texas ... or go to the movies.

July 24, 2012 6:34:48 AM

Were they escaping in the same era?
Were there many Germans, Swedes, Norwegians, Finns, Irish, English, Scots, Italians and Jews?
All together yet apart?
Leaving for the same reasons?
Was the land ready to plant and go?
Was there water readily available?
Animals for an easy hunt?
Or, was it more specialized?
People came with a purpose, other than to be free of their old countries?
Were there over 500 tribes, all differing of natives?
July 24, 2012 11:30:42 AM

riser said:
I was at the shooting range 3 weeks ago. The guy next to me decided to take his life and used a .44 magnum he had rented. I was standing five feet from him when he did it. Too bad he looked up too much and the bullet went from under his chin up and out through his nose.

When he fell down with the gaping hole in his face, I looked at him and figured I couldn't help him. I went up front to the office and told them what happened. At first I thought the guy was dead because he was convulsing. Instead, the shock from shot messed him up pretty good.


Dude what an experience to witness!

I'm at a loss for words riser! Ry
July 24, 2012 12:55:48 PM

Reynod said:
Only China currently has the ability to impose "Newspeak" through its control on the internetz and other media (television / papers) and that term was coined by George Orwell in the book 1984 ... probably more of interest to this discussion from my perspective than Huxley.



Yes but in 1984, Orwell used perpetual war to control the population levels. In Brave New World it was more of scientific method of careful breeding, promoting homosexuality, coupled with mind control.
July 24, 2012 12:56:21 PM

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/jul/02/man-shoots-sel...

That's the write up in it. I had to give 2.5 hours of written and recorded speeches, answer what firearms I was shooting and the whole scenario as I saw it. After about 2 hours they finally reviewed the range footage and let us go. I was the only person who really saw anything.

I could have stuck three fingers side by side into the gaping hole in his face. At first I thought the gun had recoiled and hit him in the face.. but after half a second I realiezd he shot himself. I thought he was dead.. doing his death throes and all but it had to take some brain damage from that shock.

He was having issues with his wife and his mother in law.. Now he's going to be a mute, considered mentally unstable, and still have to deal with the wife and inlaws. If you're going to do it, do it right with a shotgun.

I was close enough that if he put his arm out and I put my arm out, we'd be touching each other. I dislike going to the range alone.. what bothered me the most is that I had just shot the last of my rounds in my firearm. It was sitting there ready to be reloaded when he did it. He could have easily turned and shot someone else first. Three seconds earlier I was walking behind him from a trash can tossing a target and empty box.
!