Exactly. What's your opinion?We know the story. The shooter is a man, usually a young man, often with a history of mental illness. Sometimes in a rage over a lost job, sometimes just completely unhinged. In the wake of the Newtown shootings, the air was full of experts discussing the importance of psychological counseling. “We need to look at what drives a crazy person to do these kind of actions,” said Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, one of the highest-ranking Republicans in the House.Every country has a sizable contingent of mentally ill citizens. We’re the one that gives them the technological power to play god.This is all about guns — access to guns and the ever-increasing firepower of guns. Over the past few years we’ve seen one shooting after another in which the killer was wielding weapons holding 30, 50, 100 bullets. I’m tired of hearing fellow citizens argue that you need that kind of firepower because it’s a pain to reload when you’re shooting clay pigeons. Or that the founding fathers specifically wanted to make sure Americans retained their right to carry rifles capable of mowing down dozens of people in a couple of minutes.
Please leave a comment.
Jeepers, I think all you people that hate guns and are so fucking miserable that we have gun rights should move to England or Australia or North Korea.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
It is rather silly to implicitly indicate that some forms of small arms ("traditional hunting weapons" or the shotguns used to shoot "clay pigeons") are in any significant manner less dangerous than an "assault rifle". It is absolutely illogical to assert that, simply because high capacity semiautomatics have such a grotesquely destructive potential in the wrong (civilian) hands, that other forms of portable weaponry ("hunting rifles" and "shotguns") are proliferated for any less deadly purpose. We certainly need to restrict the possession of militaristic weapons to State agents, but in doing so, we must not forget the danger inherent in ANY firearm.
DeleteThe U.S. is also in desperate need of a mental health system. Most States (from the Victorian times up until the 1960-1990s) had established a department devoted to the care of the deranged, and although State mental health systems had major flaws, they kept mental defectives off the street corner and out of the prison system. The funding for such programs was gradually abolished, in accordance with the Welfare State goals of the "Great Society" agenda of the 1960s. No alternative system has been established to suit the needs of the mentally disturbed, who now line the streets of our cities, crowd our prisons, and left untreated and unsupervised kill our children.
E.N.'s chosen a new name? Same old wackiness.
DeleteI believe that some have accused "E.N." of being Laci. You in turn now label me as the "Evil" one. Wrong time zone. It's 6 pm in Pyongyang (presumably where he resides). Creeps like him crawl out around 10pm and linger until about 6am before retreating back into the basement to hibernate.
DeleteThen why do you use his arguments and his writing style, "Black Cap"?
DeleteHave I argued for some sort of dictatorship? No, I argued for gun control. By your logic Mikeb, "Jadegold", "Grung_E_Gene", and doggone use his arguments.
DeleteBut then again, since "E.N." is Laci (as your side claims) then you are accusing me of being a second rate British lawyer?
Never let an event pass without shoving your agenda, Gail Collins. If you knew shit about clay pigeons, you'd know that those are typically shot with shotguns, most often with the double-barrel variety. Before Democommie races in to foam at the mouth, yes, sometimes exhibition shooters use pump-action or semiautomatic shotguns to shoot multiple clays in a row. The point is that the AR-15 has different uses.
ReplyDeleteWhat would those be? Hunting is one. Wild hogs run in packs and can be dangerous. They're also an invasive species that damages both farmland and the wilds.
Another use is home defense. Home invaders also sometimes run in packs. Sometimes, criminals attack homes in the country that are a long way from the local law enforcement.
But remember how your side always insists that the Second Amendment is about raising and training a militia? The AR-15 is modelled after the weapon that we issue to our soliders and Marines. People who know how to operate this weapon form a ready core of volunteers.
Then there's the extreme but genuine concern that the government will overstep its bounds into tyranny. This is not something that I expect to happen, but few expect to see their societies fall into that evil.
Those are all reasons that gun owners in this country have AR-15s. You used the words, need and want. That's not what this is about. The real question is one of rights. The vast majority of gun owners did nothing wrong on Friday and do nothing wrong every day. You're welcome to your lack of perspective, but that as far as the welcome goes.
Get ready for a new AWB, that's all I can say.
ReplyDeleteDid Democrats win control of the House?
DeleteI expect it will do the same as before, which is to say, nothing at all
DeleteWill a new AWB (the legislative success of which is rather unlikely at this moment) include the confiscation of existing weapons? That would make it effective. Connecticut had an AWB, but allowed owners to register their weapons and keep them.
DeleteAnswer me this, you gun control advocates: What's the point of citizen following the law if they are denied rights anyway?
DeleteThink about that before answering. One of the reasons for society is the protection of our rights. If those rights are taken away, society becomes a useless burden. The result is either disaffected citizens or sheep. When you take away the whole point of being civilized, you shouldn't be surprised when a good many cease to be civilized.
Black Cap: Unlikely
DeleteThe formation of government in necessitated in order to guarantee life, liberty, and property for the common man against infringement by their fellow citizen. No rights would exist without the government, as if there where no collectivization of resources necessary for the creation and maintenance of a civilized society, there would be no police officers, firefighters, social workers, and soldiers to create an environment in which human beings may have a quality life. You must at all times consider yourself a creation of the State, which has (directly or indirectly) endowed the ordinary citizen (or subject) with a secure and productive life, the opportunity to gain property worth defending, and the very freedoms which we take for granted.
DeleteThe purpose of citizens obeying the legal statutes enacted by their rulers (who are entrusted with their welfare) is the protection of life,liberty and property against other persons who are subject to the rule of law. The mass proliferation of small arms and the implementation of such by criminal parties, presents a violation of liberty which a State seeks to guarantee. Therefore State action (gun control) is manifest to the preservation of life, liberty and property, and the government is compelled to act.
You claim that our proposals would result in a lack of freedom for the common man, which is distinctive of incarcerative punishment, and due to a lack of distinction between punitive conditions which are imposed as a result of the violation of legal statutes, that such a proposed situation (gun control for instance) would bear no disincentives against the violation of laws.
I propose two solutions:
1. The (obvious) continued or renewed implementation of capital punishment, as such always provides a disincentive against criminal action.
2. The creation of a peaceable society is necessary to guarantee rights. If the manifest purpose of the creation of a civilized society is the creation of rights, then the implementation of increased social control (necessary to guarantee rights) provides more freedom to law abiding citizens than it serves to detract from criminals.
Perhaps he thinks of himself as a chickadee.
DeleteBlack Cap, who quotes E.N. verbatim,
DeleteI reject your solutions and your totalitarian formulation of society. What's your next move?
What parts of my above post do you reject? Explain why.
DeleteAll of it, for reasons that I've told you many times. I'll repeat this: Society is made up of individuals. It exists to protect their rights. Subjugation is done for the benefit of tyrants and must be fought. Life without rights is no life at all.
DeleteBased on his response it is implied that Greg opposes:
Delete1. The responsibility of the government to protect it's citizens.
2. Capital Punishment (the death penalty)
3. The concept that individuals have the right to make demands from their government. (such as demands for things like clean water, corporate regulation, and police protection)
4. The concept that government has the duty to provide for the welfare of it's people.
5. Any "law and order" policy
6. The incarceration of criminals (he apparently believes that dangerous people, including those who have been convicted of crimes to run free)
7. All reasonable regulation of weaponry (he implicitly believes in a right to nuclear weapons)
8. Policies which lead to the arrest and incarceration of criminals who infringe on your right to property (he implicitly believes that thieves should be able to take as they please and be subject to no legal repercussions)
9. An legally enforceable right to life.
10. All forms of government
He seemingly believes in only one right: the right of the mighty to dominate the weak unimpeded by any State.
Chickadee, you're a bird. Stop trying to be an ass. As I've told you many times before, I oppose tyrannical government. That's the kind that you discussed in your earlier comment. If you want to talk about democratic societies with protections for individual liberties, I'll particpate. But that's a different subject.
DeleteIn today's news the AWB is getting some favorable remarks from Republicans with NRA "A" ratings. It's coming.
Delete