calgal08
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,519
Jun 27, 2014 15:43:46 GMT
|
Post by calgal08 on Jul 24, 2015 17:34:47 GMT
Last night I took youngest ds to the movies. There was only about 20 people in the entire theater. We sat near the back and a guy sat in the row behind us. He had something under his sweatshirt. I was on high alert the entire movie. Turns out, he'd smuggled in his own food (and lots of it), but I'd convinced myself it was a gun and even when I realized it was a sandwich, candy, etc. I still couldn't settle.
So very sad.
|
|
happymomma
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,078
Aug 6, 2014 23:57:56 GMT
|
Post by happymomma on Jul 24, 2015 17:37:26 GMT
Honest question: can someone please define what these other countries who are not having shootings (and from the vibe I get here, no other avenues of this sort of tragedy, making them much safer than the USA) are doing differently in regards to gun control? I don't know the legalities of these other safer countries. We do have measures in place here, but they are obviously not working. What different laws do the other countries have that we don't? And how are these countries being successful in getting everyone to follow them? Because if everyone here followed the existing laws, we wouldn't have these problems. I always see calls for stricter gun laws, but no solution on how to make sure people are following the ones we already have in place. Yet other places say they don't have killings or as many. What are they doing different, specifically? It goes back further than that. A fundamental difference is that you have this right in your constitution to bear arms. We don't. Guns just aren't part of our psyche. Largely speaking we don't want them. They're not commonly owned so no one feels they need one because everyone else has one. Its so different in a way I thinking that its hard to explain. I can totally understand that. So, is it fair to say that it isn't gun control laws that are making the difference but rather the values and culture? I've long though that the way we embrace arguing, violence as a resolution to problems and lack of morals and values here is a huge contributing factor to our gun crime. Also, enforcement of the laws already in place and getting people to obey them seems to be a real problem. We can make a bazillion new laws but if the existing ones are not being followed for whatever reasons, I'm not sure how new ones will help. And boy, do we need help.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 24, 2015 17:50:11 GMT
right-- so, what I said-- fix the laws we already have. no? why do you think adding more laws would work if you think the ones we already have are ineffective? Trying to throw more gun laws at this issue (whatever 'this issue' is; it's a hugely general statement and I'm not sure what 'the issue' we're referring to is) is bound to be ineffective, with this outlook.
You (general you) can't keep putting a Band-Aid fix on something if you don't fix the REAL root cause of the issue (which gets into a whole host of other things, like mental health care, etc. etc.) , if you're saying the issue is people who shouldn't have them (due to mental health issues, past criminal activity, etc.) can get them.
Unless you think the actual problem is that people have access to guns. period. Then, adding more gun laws to stop people from getting them at all would be going after the root cause- except, the 2nd amendment says that's not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 24, 2015 17:55:31 GMT
Amendments have been revoked before. But even if that never happens, the idea that the only possible interpretation of the 2nd is to allow Billy Joe Jim Bob to carry around his prosthetic penis so he can "protect" the public is asinine.
|
|
|
Post by genny on Jul 24, 2015 18:04:16 GMT
This is all over my FB feed today. The shooter is from our area and reports show he was denied the purchase of a gun in a neighboring county in 2006. The article tells more about his history here. I am seeing a lot of people on my FB saying "I can't believe it, I worked with him years ago - he was a great guy" and things of that nature. It's just tragic - no motive is being reported yet. I wonder if we'll ever know. I hope he left something behind to give investigators some insight into what the hell he was thinking, although nothing can be consolation to the families of those lost and injured. www.wtvm.com/story/29624090/breaking-phenix-city-man-idd-as-louisiana-movie-theater-shooter
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 18:14:41 GMT
It's already been shown that the laws don't matter one whit to a criminal. They laugh in the face of your laws, laws and more laws. There is no surprise here, except for my surprise that you think this would actually work.
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,969
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 24, 2015 18:19:10 GMT
Amendments have been revoked before. But even if that never happens, the idea that the only possible interpretation of the 2nd is to allow Billy Joe Jim Bob to carry around his prosthetic penis so he can "protect" the public is asinine. prosthetic penis? really? that aside, I don't think it is so asinine: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DAright now there are lots of Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect our unarmed "armed" forces. My former FIL was in a diner years ago when armed robbers busted in. They managed to punch a waitress in the face before he stood up and showed his gun. The guys ran out. This was in NY in the 80s. My niece was in a store in Florida when it was held up. She ended up losing a few rings and her phone. But she and another woman in the store were being ushered to a back room when a stranger pulled out his gun and shot one of the assholes. They ran and apparently tossed what they stole, but the guy that got shot ended up dying from his wound. There's no telling what would have happened otherwise. I can share at least four more stories where people I know were directly affected by someone "good" having a gun when a bad guy came around. Most of the time just having the gun prevented any type of damage - a woman pumped her shotgun by the door where someone was trying to break in - guy runs off. Stories like that. But there are plenty of people that have been heroes because they stepped up with their gun. I don't know anyone personally that was hurt by a gun. I did know a woman that was killed when an illegal immigrant, who had been deported twice, ran a stop sign going about 80 mph on a 40 mph road. I did know a gay woman that was drowned because her coworker wanted to date her but she rejected him. I did know a gay guy that was murdered because Marines thought it would be funny to beat a skinny black "fag" to death. I did know a woman that was killed because a drunk driver, who was driving without a license, decided his fun was more important than her life. 50% of these murders were executed using hands and 50% were by car. Like I said on a previous thread, my personal experiences are going to mold my opinions. I'm glad that average Joes, Billy Bobs or not, can carry guns. I believe that most people are good and if armed good people outnumber armed bad people, a lot of this BS would end.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 18:21:20 GMT
The article linked said his family got an order of protection from him in 2008, so he's had a long history of being mentally ill and (possibly) violent. I don't know what the answer is when people are clearly in a very bad way but stay just this side of the law until one day, suddenly, they don't. There are so many people who never assault other people but are mentally ill their entire lives. How can society differentiate? Even with gun law reform, I don't know how we could a) get all the guns that are already out there and easily accessible, and b) correctly identify and block those who should never have a gun. I'm just thinking out loud.
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,447
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jul 24, 2015 18:26:10 GMT
Amendments have been revoked before. But even if that never happens, the idea that the only possible interpretation of the 2nd is to allow Billy Joe Jim Bob to carry around his prosthetic penis so he can "protect" the public is asinine. prosthetic penis? really? that aside, I don't think it is so asinine: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DAright now there are lots of Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect our unarmed "armed" forces. My former FIL was in a diner years ago when armed robbers busted in. They managed to punch a waitress in the face before he stood up and showed his gun. The guys ran out. This was in NY in the 80s. My niece was in a store in Florida when it was held up. She ended up losing a few rings and her phone. But she and another woman in the store were being ushered to a back room when a stranger pulled out his gun and shot one of the assholes. They ran and apparently tossed what they stole, but the guy that got shot ended up dying from his wound. There's no telling what would have happened otherwise. I can share at least four more stories where people I know were directly affected by someone "good" having a gun when a bad guy came around. Most of the time just having the gun prevented any type of damage - a woman pumped her shotgun by the door where someone was trying to break in - guy runs off. Stories like that. But there are plenty of people that have been heroes because they stepped up with their gun. I don't know anyone personally that was hurt by a gun. I did know a woman that was killed when an illegal immigrant, who had been deported twice, ran a stop sign going about 80 mph on a 40 mph road. I did know a gay woman that was drowned because her coworker wanted to date her but she rejected him. I did know a gay guy that was murdered because Marines thought it would be funny to beat a skinny black "fag" to death. I did know a woman that was killed because a drunk driver, who was driving without a license, decided his fun was more important than her life. 50% of these murders were executed using hands and 50% were by car. Like I said on a previous thread, my personal experiences are going to mold my opinions. I'm glad that average Joes, Billy Bobs or not, can carry guns. I believe that most people are good and if armed good people outnumber armed bad people, a lot of this BS would end. Did you see the thread I started about one of these so-called protectors accidentally discharging his gun? What if he would have shot an innocent bystander? What kind of training does he have to qualify him for something like this?
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,447
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jul 24, 2015 18:28:22 GMT
right-- so, what I said-- fix the laws we already have. no? why do you think adding more laws would work if you think the ones we already have are ineffective? Trying to throw more gun laws at this issue (whatever 'this issue' is; it's a hugely general statement and I'm not sure what 'the issue' we're referring to is) is bound to be ineffective, with this outlook. You (general you) can't keep putting a Band-Aid fix on something if you don't fix the REAL root cause of the issue (which gets into a whole host of other things, like mental health care, etc. etc.) , if you're saying the issue is people who shouldn't have them (due to mental health issues, past criminal activity, etc.) can get them. Unless you think the actual problem is that people have access to guns. period. Then, adding more gun laws to stop people from getting them at all would be going after the root cause- except, the 2nd amendment says that's not going to happen. I think we need to scrap all of the existing laws and start over-- close the loopholes and YES--make it harder (but not impossible) to own a gun.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,011
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Jul 24, 2015 18:28:55 GMT
There is going to come a day, probably not too long from now, when we won't even bother posting about these mass shootings anymore because they've become so common place. Three in the last 5 weeks. Way to go America. Personally, I would like to see all those saying it's about lack of mental health services, voluntarily and without complaint, pony up the additional tax dollars necessary to reopen the closed facilities and start lobbying your Congress members and state reps to begin amending the laws which make it so difficult for family members to get help for their mentally ill relatives. If you can't find it in your conscience to consider that gun control might make a difference, at least do something that isn't just obstructive.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 24, 2015 18:51:59 GMT
I have lost two relatives to gun "accidents."
And yes, if you'd seen the idiots who pushed so hard for open carry here in Texas, you'd know there's a whole lot of compensating going on.
We had an incident here in Houston in the past year or so where a citizen with a concealed carry permit took it upon himself to open fire on some guys who were robbing a GameStop. He fired several rounds in a retail strip mall type area and killed at least one of the thieves.
Of course lots of people cheered his bravery, and no charges were brought against him, but the fact is that he thought it was OK to risk killing innocent bystanders to keep someone from stealing some PlayStations. I'm sorry, but that shows an incredible lack of judgment and IMO should be grounds for having his CHL revoked. I don't want some civilian shooting the place up and hitting me or my kid to prevent a property crime. That's not bravery; it's stupidity of the highest order and should be illegal.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 18:53:39 GMT
right now there are lots of Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect our unarmed "armed" forces. Vigilante Justice never works and only makes the problem twice as bad.
|
|
Nanner
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,987
Jun 25, 2014 23:13:23 GMT
|
Post by Nanner on Jul 24, 2015 18:55:10 GMT
President Obama was interviewed by a BBC journalist on our prime time news last night. He said his biggest regret/frustration of his presidency so far is that (paraphrasing) "despite all the mass shootings, America still doesn't have the common sense gun safety laws to stop events like this" I genuinely wonder what it will take for things to change when the two sides of the argument seem so far apart. It must be soul destroying and frightening to see and hear about this happening so frequently. It blows my mind that these things keep happening yet so few people seem to want to change it. And that's terrifying. This bullshit has to stop but it never will because guns are more important than people. Owning a gun will seemingly always win over the life and safety of the American population. And that's also terrifying. So yes, I'm judging the gun culture in the States right now. And harshly. I completely agree.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 19:02:37 GMT
This is a false statement. I've seen it on the internet for years. The first part of the sentence has nothing to do with the second part. Part one does not equal part two. My right to own a weapon for personal use does not equal you getting shot. (Unless you break into my house and I feel you intend to do me bodily harm, then all bets are off.)
Look at D.C. and Chicago. The strictest gun laws are there. Also the most murders. Why? Criminals don't obey laws, and people can't defend themselves. It is ridiculous to (after a shooting incident) inflict more laws (which only law-abiding citizens will follow) on people who did not commit the crimes. Law-abiding citizens are not the population that needs to be addressed. You need to address the CRIMINALS. Get to them. Clearly laws are not the way to get to them.
You wanna go live in D.C. or Chicago? You'd love it there. Really strict gun laws!
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 19:07:41 GMT
right now there are lots of Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect our unarmed "armed" forces. Vigilante Justice never works and only makes the problem twice as bad. Sitting ducks for the...win?
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,969
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 24, 2015 19:15:31 GMT
right now there are lots of Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect our unarmed "armed" forces. Vigilante Justice never works and only makes the problem twice as bad. Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means.
|
|
|
Post by beebee on Jul 24, 2015 19:18:35 GMT
I have lost two relatives to gun "accidents." And yes, if you'd seen the idiots who pushed so hard for open carry here in Texas, you'd know there's a whole lot of compensating going on. We had an incident here in Houston in the past year or so where a citizen with a concealed carry permit took it upon himself to open fire on some guys who were robbing a GameStop. He fired several rounds in a retail strip mall type area and killed at least one of the thieves. Of course lots of people cheered his bravery, and no charges were brought against him, but the fact is that he thought it was OK to risk killing innocent bystanders to keep someone from stealing some PlayStations. I'm sorry, but that shows an incredible lack of judgment and IMO should be grounds for having his CHL revoked. I don't want some civilian shooting the place up and hitting me or my kid to prevent a property crime. That's not bravery; it's stupidity of the highest order and should be illegal. So how did they know at the time of the robbery it was just a property crime? If I was behind the counter being robbed for property, I would be scared to death that they would pull out a gun and kill us as they left.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:20:43 GMT
Vigilante Justice never works and only makes the problem twice as bad. Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means. The definition of vigilante justice is:- the actions of a single person or group of people who claim to enforce the law but lack the legal authority to do so. How would you define someone/group of armed people protecting others when they have no authority to do so?
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,969
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 24, 2015 19:21:45 GMT
Yeah, too many "property" crimes end up going sour quickly. I don't trust anyone who is threatening to shoot me (or a clerk) unless he is given money from the register to actually leave once he gets what he wants. I'm supposed to believe he's an honest man while he's holding up a store?
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,969
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 24, 2015 19:24:02 GMT
Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means. The definition of vigilante justice is:- the actions of a single person or group of people who claim to enforce the law but lack the legal authority to do so. How would you define someone/group of armed people protecting others when they have no authority to do so? Hmm, I was taught the definition is something like this: a person who is not a police officer but who tries to catch and punish criminals. Vigilantes take it upon themselves to PUNISH criminals. They are there for retribution. The guys I mentioned aren't there for retribution but for prevention.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 19:27:11 GMT
Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means. The definition of vigilante justice is:- the actions of a single person or group of people who claim to enforce the law but lack the legal authority to do so. How would you define someone/group of armed people protecting others when they have no authority to do so? Exactly what authority do you think someone needs to defend another? I would defend the life of anyone around me, and lawyer up later, rather than just let them be murdered when I could have done something to stop it.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:28:53 GMT
Yeah, too many "property" crimes end up going sour quickly. I don't trust anyone who is threatening to shoot me (or a clerk) unless he is given money from the register to actually leave once he gets what he wants. I'm supposed to believe he's an honest man while he's holding up a store? I work in banking and have been present for four bank robberies. When someone tries to be a hero, things are MUCH more likely to go bad and quickly. Three of the four went off without anyone besides the teller even knowing what was happening. In two of those cases, guns were shown at the teller window. In the fourth case, some yahoo customer saw the robber putting his gun away and decided to intervene. We're lucky he didn't get us killed. The only saving grace was the teller had already tripped the alarm and the police arrived just as the robber was getting up from the tackle and waving his gun around. Give them what they want, get them out of there, lock the doors, and alert the authorities (if they haven't already been). It's safer for everyone. Most robberies are not like what you see on TV.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:30:28 GMT
President Obama was interviewed by a BBC journalist on our prime time news last night. He said his biggest regret/frustration of his presidency so far is that (paraphrasing) "despite all the mass shootings, America still doesn't have the common sense gun safety laws to stop events like this" I genuinely wonder what it will take for things to change when the two sides of the argument seem so far apart. It must be soul destroying and frightening to see and hear about this happening so frequently. Would new laws stop crazy? I'm sorry to say "no".
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:30:42 GMT
The definition of vigilante justice is:- the actions of a single person or group of people who claim to enforce the law but lack the legal authority to do so. How would you define someone/group of armed people protecting others when they have no authority to do so? Exactly what authority do you think someone needs to defend another?They are not above the law, what legal standing will they have if they shoot, seriously injure or kill someone by 'accident'? I guess I don't understand how they are helping in this situation.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:32:21 GMT
I think we need to scrap all of the existing laws and start over-- close the loopholes and YES--make it harder (but not impossible) to own a gun. That it seems is the only way to go realistically, but I don't think it would work unless all the states are singing from the same hymn book. The laws need to be the same across the whole country. One of the main things that needs looking at is to make it illegal to sell a gun on without a paper trail. I find it unbelievable that someone who has the legal right to own a gun can sell it on to any Tom,Dick or Harry without some record being kept that he has done so. But then you come into the registration of guns to owners and from what I've read that seems to be unacceptable to some. Then you're back to square one again!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:35:21 GMT
President Obama was interviewed by a BBC journalist on our prime time news last night. He said his biggest regret/frustration of his presidency so far is that (paraphrasing) "despite all the mass shootings, America still doesn't have the common sense gun safety laws to stop events like this" I genuinely wonder what it will take for things to change when the two sides of the argument seem so far apart. It must be soul destroying and frightening to see and hear about this happening so frequently. Would new laws stop crazy? I'm sorry to say "no". So explain Australia. They haven't had any mass shootings since they changed their gun laws. I am pretty certain that everyone didn't magically become mentally healthy at the same time.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 19:40:21 GMT
Exactly what authority do you think someone needs to defend another? They are not above the law, what legal standing will they have if they shoot, seriously injure or kill someone by 'accident'? I guess I don't understand how they are helping in this situation. Didn't say anyone was above the law. As far as legal standing every situation is different.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 13:39:37 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 19:41:20 GMT
Vigilante Justice never works and only makes the problem twice as bad. Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means. It would mean that if the Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect your unarmed "armed" forces were forced to take action against an attacker. Or are they just going to stand there like dummies and " frighten" the attackers away? If so what is the point of them being there!
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Jul 24, 2015 19:42:18 GMT
Is this really just about mental illness? Does gun control play no role in any of this? It's certainly both. People with mental illness of any degree deserve medical treatment. And we need to keep guns out of the hands of someone who is suffering with severe mental illness.
|
|