RSS

Naa, we don’t need reasonable gun control laws. What else would we do for shock value entertainment?

16 Sep

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/16/20522196-gunman-opens-fire-at-navy-yard-in-washington-several-wounded-officials-say?lite

Advertisements
 
22 Comments

Posted by on September 16, 2013 in Uncategorized

 

22 responses to “Naa, we don’t need reasonable gun control laws. What else would we do for shock value entertainment?

  1. GMB

    September 16, 2013 at 8:13 am

    What you define as reasonable, someone else will define as unreasonable. When the Constitution was written, everyone one that had a musket possessed a “military grade fire arm”.

    Please read the 2nd Amendment again, then read the Federalist Papers and what why our founders put the 2nd amendment in, and why it was and still is important.

    It is the last line of defense for the Citizen against a tyrannical government. Now with the feds having over seventy agencys that have armed employees, we are getting close to that tyranny.

    You can give up all the rights you want to if it will make you feel better. I will not allow anyone but myself to take my God given Rights away.

    How many would be dead and wounded had any of them been armed themselves?

    Some gray matter for you.

    Benjamin Franklin: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
    safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” (Nov 11 1755, from the Pennsylvania Assembly’s reply to
    the Governor of Pennsylvania.)

    Thomas Jefferson: “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither
    inclined or determined to commit crimes. Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and
    better for the assassins; they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man
    may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (1764 Letter and speech from T.
    Jefferson quoting with approval an essay by Cesare Beccari)

    John Adams: “Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self
    defense.” (A defense of the Constitution of the US)

    George Washington: “Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the
    people’s liberty teeth (and) keystone… the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable… more than
    99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very
    atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes,
    we need them every hour.” (Address to 1st session of Congress)

    George Mason: “To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them.” (3 Elliot,
    Debates at 380)

     
    • casper

      September 16, 2013 at 5:53 pm

      GMB
      “September 16, 2013 at 8:13 am

      What you define as reasonable, someone else will define as unreasonable.”

      Do you think 5 year olds should be allowed to bring guns to school? Do you think convicted felons should have the right to own guns? Do you think insane people should have the right to own guns? I would consider any laws restricting the above to be reasonable.

      “When the Constitution was written, everyone one that had a musket possessed a “military grade fire arm.”

      A person with a musket couldn’t kill a dozen people or more in 10 minutes. The founding fathers were reasonable men, more or less, I doubt they would have okay with everyone owning a twenty first century “military grade fire arm.”

      That said, I like guns. I own several and the only reason I don’t own more is because I’ve had to watch my expenses of late. My idea of reasonable gun laws:

      Anyone wishing to buy a gun should be required to have completed a gun safety class and a psychological evaluation.
      Anyone wishing to carry concealed weapon should have to qualify on that weapon at a local range.
      Convicted felons should not be allowed to own a gun.

      I doubt any of the above would keep anyone on this blog from owning a gun.

       
      • mitchethekid

        September 16, 2013 at 6:20 pm

        Guns are good, guns are great, gun’s are what we appreciate.
        http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/shots-fired-times-square-bystander-struck-article-1.1456418

        On a lighter note, if anyone needs to have a cap popped it’s this RWNJ http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/alex-jones-globalist-conspiracy-created-navy

         
      • Cluster

        September 17, 2013 at 5:15 am

        Do you think 5 year olds should be allowed to bring guns to school? Do you think convicted felons should have the right to own guns? Do you think insane people should have the right to own guns? I would consider any laws restricting the above to be reasonable.

        Those laws are already in place.

         
      • GMB

        September 18, 2013 at 5:19 am

        “Do you think 5 year olds should be allowed to bring guns to school? Do you think convicted felons should have the right to own guns? Do you think insane people should have the right to own guns? I would consider any laws restricting the above to be reasonable. ”

        I remember as a seven year old participating in shooting contests sponsored by a local public school. I did not have the urge to kill anyone then. I do not know of one state that allows convicted felons to own firearms or of one state that allows insane people the same right.

        Those are non arguments that already have been addressed by laws already on the books.

        Please quit playing the emotion game.

        The end of this matter is the state forbidding the ownership of all firearms by it’s citizens thus insuring the primacy of the state.

        You want a government of the government, by the government, for the government? Or since you are a public school teacher and are paid with tax dollars provided by the citizens you would not mind living in a society where the citizen has no say in how much you are paid? Would you be willing to paid with monies that were taken from the citizens at the point of a government owned “assault rifle”

        The emotion game, it is fun to play. Bonus points if anyone can tell me how the “assault rifle” got it’s name without doing a search on it.

        Hey amy, woof, meow, zzzzt!!!!

        🙂

         
    • Majordomo Pain

      September 17, 2013 at 6:57 am

      We, Ourselves, feel Washington spoke of a clear threat more from Great Britain than from common criminals. How is it that evil is being restrained when as a nation at Peace within its own borders there is more gun murder and gun suicide than anywhere else on Terra?

       
      • Cluster

        September 17, 2013 at 7:59 am

        There are consequences to a free society. And to actually think you could “eliminate all firearms”, is really wrong. That’s simply impossible. What’s more realistic is too take a long hard look at our “fatherless”, violent video game culture. It’s reported that the DC shooter loved violent vidoe games and honestly when you have someone locked up in their room playing very realistic, violent video games all the time, how long will it be before they want to take the next step and play that game in real life??

         
      • mitchethekid

        September 17, 2013 at 9:02 am

        That’s a bit of a stretch. One can correlate anything. Probability and outcome is what really matters. Like tags that come on clothing that say “Don’t wear while ironing”.

         
      • Majordomo Pain

        September 17, 2013 at 8:17 am

        The reality of banning violent video games is equally impossible. While We, Ourselves, find them boring compared to reality, they do serve as entertainment to many. Billions of these games are sold and yet a fraction of he players commit mass murders. We know you could say the same thing about guns, yes? Returning to a system of generations past where strong two parent households would do some good but that is not the solution either to this problem. That path is simply the ultimate goal of your political worldview which clouds your judgement. A great step forward would be to assess the mental health of every American citizen starting at age 6 and from that point until death for the purpose of building a mentally healthier nation. To do that medical records would need to be in the public domain with open access to all. Imagine what a cultural shift you would have when all those barriers were lifted? The stigma associated with disease in general would be replaced with a health care system designed to maximize life and cultivate well being.

         
  2. cluster

    September 16, 2013 at 9:38 am

    Name the law that you would put in place that would prevent this from happening? Then check the federal records because that law may already exist. It’s not the lack of laws per se, as it is the lack of enforcement. You may also want to look at Colorado and take note on maybe how out of touch the “gun grabbers” are.

    I also want to address the post you wrote about the GOP, which was straight from the MSNBC files. Other than being a little surprised as to why you even care about the GOP, I would think that you would be more concerned about the absolute hell that your party is currently inflicting on this country and it’s citizenry. This country is in worse shape than it ever has been, at least in my lifetime. Lowest level of work force participation in 40 years, highest usage of food stamps and welfare in history, full timers losing jobs and having to go to part time, health insurance costs going up, spouses losing coverage, union members losing their plans, GE kicking retirees off their health pensions, racial tensions at an all time high, black unemployment at an all time high, foreign affairs at an all time low, the ME in absolute disarray, the wealth inequality gap growing, etc., etc..

    How about if we forget about the GOP for a minute and discuss what we are going to do about the Democrats. They are the real problem.

     
    • mitchethekid

      September 16, 2013 at 1:48 pm

      Although I watch MSNBC, what I wrote were my own ideas and observations. I suppose if I were a conservative weather channel watcher, it’s always sunny in Philadelphia. Of course I’m concerned about the GOP, I’m on the neighborhood watch team. I think that if you performed a forensic examination of some of the ideas and policies that have led to the malaise that you are experiencing, I think you will find that some of it has the GOP’s fingerprints all over it. Like, oh I don’t know, trickle down economics for example.
      As far as my comments about gun control, I will repeat. Reasonable. I am an advocate for the 1st amendment but I do not think yelling Fire! in a crowded theater is reasonable. The argument presented by GMB was relevant. 200+ yrs ago when the tyranny of the king was still fresh in their minds. Personally, I do not see a similar situation today. The police are armed, is that tyranny? I also do not see any similarity between a musket and an AR 15, other than they both fire projectiles. But muskets were a food gathering tool. Ultimately the problem lies within the human psyche and no amount of external control (other than the complete outlawing of guns and ammo) will resolve this very relevant fact. But to throw up ones hands and declare that there are already laws or to engage in the hysteria of a Wayne La Pierre doesn’t help to reduce the frequency of this expression of wanton insanity. No one needs an assault weapon, unless the only hunting one does is of humans. Some have even promoted the idea that everyone be armed. Yeah, that’s a brilliant idea. “Why did you shoot the guy?” “He was taking my parking space and I was standing my ground”.
      I’m not claiming that I have the answer, I don’t but what I do have is a shared outrage at the ease in which unstable individuals can get (what is essentially) a WMD. In to many states (ironically the ones with the most restrictive voter ID laws, number of out of wedlock births, high school drop outs and highest divorce rates) are also the ones were it’s easier to buy a gun than it is to vote. Case in point this shooter was from (ready for it?) Texas! But I’m getting to the point where I don’t want to argue about gun control. Someone might shoot me.

       
      • Cluster

        September 16, 2013 at 2:12 pm

        First of all, fully automatic weapon bans are already in place, so what more would you like to do? Believe it or it, a law is not going to stop anyone from getting a weapon.

        There are a few states that have voter ID laws where minority participation has actually increased, so that’s another bad argument.

        I read somewhere stand you ground laws have benefited minorities more than others. I will have to check up on that, but it really is just a self defense law.

        And then there is this:

        Like, oh I don’t know, trickle down economics for example.

        In the Ed Schultz piece I posted the other day, he too excoriated “trickle down economics”, then went on to say how the economy is improving and pointed to how high the DOW has been lately. Do you see the connection? First of all the DOW is being pumped up by QE money, but that aside the DOW enriches corporations, pension finds, venture capitalists, etc., ie: mainly people with money, hence – trickle down, that is if you believe a high DOW is good for the economy.

         
      • mitchethekid

        September 16, 2013 at 3:06 pm

        Not necessarily good, but an indicator. After all, you are a free market capitalist, are you not? And I personally like it when the DOW is high. It means my ETF’s are worth more.

         
      • mitchethekid

        September 16, 2013 at 6:11 pm

        There are a few states that have voter ID laws where minority participation has actually increased, so that’s another bad argument.
        Which states mon’amie? The states of misinformation? Do you have a man crush on Big Ed? Of all the hosts that are in the employ of MSNBC, Ed (as much as I like him) is my least favorite. When KO left, I was on the verge of suicide. I cried and sobbed for weeks. Especially when I heard the word Florida. I had to seek counseling. Spent thousands and the therapist had to talk me out of jumping. From a first floor window ledge. And then wanted even more compensation! The bastard…
        So I threw some crumpled up papers at him and exercised my 2nd amendment rights. I shot him. Square in his cognitive therapy paradigm.

         
      • Majordomo Pain

        September 17, 2013 at 6:59 am

        There are only two solutions eliminate all firearms, or arm everyone and live with the consequences of either new American society.

         
  3. mitchethekid

    September 16, 2013 at 9:42 am

    Both parties are a problem. I propose a wild party. And reasonable gun control. More guns are not the solution.

     
    • cluster

      September 16, 2013 at 9:54 am

      The thing is, we can have all the “reasonable gun control” laws that you want, but it wont stop the violence. Drugs are illegal, but that doesn’t stop millions of Americans from getting them and using them. The control laws will only prevent law abiding citizens from having guns, and if that happens, then we will have a real problem.

       
  4. kmg

    September 16, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    Mitch,

    I want to send you an email. How do I contact you?

     
  5. cluster

    September 17, 2013 at 8:54 am

    Just FYI on the DC shootings:

    In the 30 years through March, 78 public mass shootings occurred in the U.S. — incidents in which four or more people were killed at random by a gunman murdering indiscriminately, according to a report issued that month by the Congressional Research Service. These crimes don’t include gang-related killings or domestic disputes where a person slays relatives or other people linked to the murderer. The mass slaughters listed in the report caused the deaths of 547 people. Over the same three decades through 2012, that’s less than a tenth of 1 percent of the 559,347 people the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates were murdered in America.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-17/mass-shootings-fuel-fear-account-for-fraction-of-murders.html

     
    • ricorun

      September 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm

      So Cluster, what were the firearms used in those mass killings? Perhaps more importantly, do you think the death toll would have been the same, or less, if restrictions were applied to the number of bullets in a magazine and/or the ease with which magazines could be exchanged? How about requiring gun manufacturers to integrate fingerprint or retinal identity technology into gun safety mechanisms? And if any of those things occurred, how do you think it would impact those only interested in hunting and/or concealed carry?

       
      • Cluster

        September 17, 2013 at 6:15 pm

        My understanding is that it was a shotgun purchased not long ago. Also not long ago, he was diagnosed with some level of mental illness, not too mention other negative marks on his record. His purchase of the shotgun and the ammunition knowing his background, should have sent up red flags. I don’t disagree completely with limited magazines, but we should be diagnosing the people instead of the inanimate object.

         
      • ricorun

        September 17, 2013 at 6:35 pm

        Shotguns were used in ALL of the 78 public mass shootings of which you speak? Are you serious???

         
 
%d bloggers like this: