Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Portland shooting  (Read 18119 times)

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #60 on: June 13, 2014, 06:57:14 pm »

But white tailed dear are so cute!

And taste even better! ;)

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #62 on: June 13, 2014, 08:36:10 pm »

Why? There are presidential elections every four years, and congressional every two years. Plenty of opportunity for candidates to get an aha! moment when reading opinions of know-nothing outsiders and realize that would be a perfect opportunity for them to get elected. After all, it is clear as day that a vast majority of Americans favor a ban on guns, so if any Joe Schmoe wants to be elected, all he is to do is to run on that platform, and victory is guaranteed, no brainer.

And even if there were a national referendum, it would be in vain, as the wise men in black capes would overturn it as unconstitutional. As is already happening with state referendums on gay marriage, where peoples' will is overturned by a few wise men in black capes.

The value of a referendum is that:
- it gives the right of people to express themselves directly on a single clearly defined point and therefore gives a clear view of the desire of the majority
- it removes all the influence of the lobbies.

You don't think it would make sense on such a topic?

Cheers,
Bernard

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #63 on: June 13, 2014, 08:57:09 pm »

Referendums are suitable for countries whose populations can conformably fit into a local cafe for voting.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #64 on: June 13, 2014, 08:58:42 pm »

Got Google, Isaac?  I wouldn't invest even 10 seconds on that pointless errand.
So you are not able to show any notable difference between militaries in WW2 that links to your speculations. Oh well.

Difference? I'll give you one: American boys won. What better difference would you want?

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #65 on: June 13, 2014, 09:14:39 pm »

Right... I see the Patriot Act and its PRISM follow ups as far overdoing the level of control the best KGB generals ever dreamed of achieving, but good for you if you feel that guns are protecting you from state tyranny. ;)

But back to the original point, how about a referendum on gun free ownership? Wouldn't that be the best way to shut up know nothing outsiders regarding what the Americans truly want?

Cheers,
Bernard


I totally agree with you that PRISM and the Patriot Act are tyrannical actions! Our president used our Internal Revenue Service (tax collecting branch of the government) to suppress his political opponents during a presidential election. The American people have not revolted yet since British rule, and I hope they never will need to again. The option remains, however. It is a looming reminder to the government that they may at any time overstep their bounds too far and be forceably removed. Imagine if we did not have the right to keep and bear arms; the government would have zero reservations and be in full dictatorial mode by now.
Logged

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #66 on: June 13, 2014, 09:16:23 pm »

Indeed. What we need is a total ban on... media coverage of such events (other than generic info). No purp name, no picture, no interview with relatives, friends and neighbors.

Instead, a total coverage of victims, with their names, pictures, interviews and eulogies. That would nip in the bud any idiot who plans to "immortalize" himself, when he realizes all he is going to achieve is make his victims famous, while he is disappearing into a total darkness. But, alas, that won't happen either.

Yes, a total coverage of victims would be justice and ethical media response. But I agree, it won't happen. American media consumers demand blood and gore and violence.
Logged

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #67 on: June 13, 2014, 09:30:30 pm »

I understand some of you would like to see confiscation of our privately owned firearms and privately owned property to "protect society." I again would remind you there are 200-300 MILLION firearms in private ownership circulation in the USA. Confiscating even a fraction of them will never be possible; there are simply too many. The only effect a ban would have would be to ensure that some law abiding citizens had no guns, while criminals had all the access to all the firearms they desire. This is further compounded by the fact that firearms are very durable and capable of excellent operation for 1-2 centuries or more. Throughout the world fighters are still using 100+ year old british and french rifles; take a look at virtually any third world country. 

Case in point; Chicago. Virtual total small arms ban for years, with the highest small arms violent crime rate in the country.

The difference between American citizenry and most other countries is that we the citizens hold the power and grant the power to the government to administer within boundaries of our constitution. If we, collectively, feel our government is out of bounds we can vote it out, and if that fails we can force it out with our firearms.

In most other countries, power is forever 100% inherent in the government itself or worse yet, the monarchy. Non-arming of its citizenry forever ensures the government has no ultimate responsibility to its people. Serfdom.
Logged

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #68 on: June 14, 2014, 04:00:22 am »

I totally agree with you that PRISM and the Patriot Act are tyrannical actions! Our president used our Internal Revenue Service (tax collecting branch of the government) to suppress his political opponents during a presidential election. The American people have not revolted yet since British rule, and I hope they never will need to again. The option remains, however. It is a looming reminder to the government that they may at any time overstep their bounds too far and be forceably removed. Imagine if we did not have the right to keep and bear arms; the government would have zero reservations and be in full dictatorial mode by now.

So isn't the answer to go and shoot a few government officials then? It's all very well mumbling on about the right to carry arms to prevent tyranny and yet not do anything about it when tyranny threatens.
Logged

Jim Pascoe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1131
    • http://www.jimpascoe.co.uk
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #69 on: June 14, 2014, 04:18:15 am »

I'm sort of reluctant to contribute here because we had a similar thread a year or so back after the last internationally reported US mass shooting.

But I feel to all those who point out the difficulty in ridding the US of firearms, and claiming that the criminals would still end up with the guns - that you are missing the point.  Obviously the killers who carry out these mass shootings are breaking the law.  But from what I can tell they are not known criminals before carrying out their awful acts.  They are previously ordinary people who for their own reasons (not usually financial gain) decide to take a lawfully held firearm and murder a whole lot of people.
Now if the US outlawed private gun ownership - or made it much more difficult to own a gun as here in the UK, then would not most law-abiding citizens give up their guns?
Gangs and the like will always be able to access guns - they do here too, but by making guns less readily available would of course deter the would-be mad gunman.  It is the mere fact that so many homes have a gun readily to hand that makes anyone who just loses their rag to pick up a gun and go and use it.
Gang related crime is usually aimed at other gang members anyway, and if somebody breaks into your house to steal your laptop, do you really want to get into a gunfight over it?

The vast majority of criminals in the UK don't have guns - they don't need them because the people they are committing crimes against don't have them either.  Hey, even most police don't have guns (and they don't want them mostly). If you have a gun you are more likely to get shot - surely anybody knows that.

The logical continuation of gun ownership and ability to protect yourself is to enable all citizens to carry a weapon on their person.  Then you're back to the Wild West. Hell when I think about it a lot of people I know are lethal enough behind the wheel of a car, let alone giving them a loaded gun.

Jim
Logged

Jim Pascoe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1131
    • http://www.jimpascoe.co.uk
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #70 on: June 14, 2014, 04:25:44 am »


The difference between American citizenry and most other countries is that we the citizens hold the power and grant the power to the government to administer within boundaries of our constitution. If we, collectively, feel our government is out of bounds we can vote it out, and if that fails we can force it out with our firearms.

In most other countries, power is forever 100% inherent in the government itself or worse yet, the monarchy. Non-arming of its citizenry forever ensures the government has no ultimate responsibility to its people. Serfdom.

The citizens of any country have that power - I think it's called a coup.  Do you honestly think here in England where we have no firearms if enough people wanted to overthrow the government we could not?  However we do have elections - called democracy, where we can vote out governments if we wish.  Our Monarchy has no power in fact.
And I thought the USA was a leading democracy - shame your government has to live with the ever-present threat of an armed insurrection by it's citizens!

Jim
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #71 on: June 14, 2014, 11:02:26 am »

And I thought the USA was a leading democracy…

Flawed democracy - "So, which countries do we rate as the most democratic in the world? This group includes the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) along with New Zealand, Australia, Switzerland, Canada and tiny Luxembourg. (The US comes in at 19th.)"  (UK 14th)

Why America doesn't work
Logged

Ben Rubinstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1822
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #72 on: June 14, 2014, 02:30:25 pm »

http://www.dilbert.com/blog/entry/school_shootings/

Interesting take. I rather like it. Science and data rather than pushing political agendas.
Logged

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #73 on: June 14, 2014, 04:47:40 pm »

So isn't the answer to go and shoot a few government officials then? It's all very well mumbling on about the right to carry arms to prevent tyranny and yet not do anything about it when tyranny threatens.

No, not at all. Those who would infringe upon our constitutionally protected civil RIGHTS secretly desire we are a blood thirsty bunch to justify your paranoia and your desire to deny us our rights. In your ideal world, gun owners would be uncontrollable violent animals to justify your prejudices.

There is still hope that democracy will prevail. I think and hope we are far from violent civil uprising, and god forbid that ever happens.
Logged

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #74 on: June 14, 2014, 04:51:35 pm »

The citizens of any country have that power - I think it's called a coup.  Do you honestly think here in England where we have no firearms if enough people wanted to overthrow the government we could not?  However we do have elections - called democracy, where we can vote out governments if we wish.  Our Monarchy has no power in fact.
And I thought the USA was a leading democracy - shame your government has to live with the ever-present threat of an armed insurrection by it's citizens!

Jim

That our government has to live with the ever-present threat of an armed insurrection by it's citizens is a GOOD THING. It is a very, very good thing. Generally people such as yourself view the national government as a benevolent institution which must not be questioned. I concur it may be a remnant of serfdom ingrained into your culture. In the US, the government is a necessary evil, at best a trained monkey that needs to be closely controlled and monitored by its citizens.

Your lack of firearms would make government overthrow much more difficult, but not impossible. I agree with that.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 05:04:38 pm by Ligament »
Logged

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #75 on: June 14, 2014, 04:54:16 pm »

No, not at all. Those who would infringe upon our constitutionally protected civil RIGHTS secretly desire we are a blood thirsty bunch to justify your paranoia and your desire to deny us our rights. In your ideal world, gun owners would be uncontrollable violent animals to justify your prejudices.

There is still hope that democracy will prevail. I think and hope we are far from violent civil uprising, and god forbid that ever happens.

I rather think you are deranged which is as good a reason to curb gun ownership as any.
Logged

Ligament

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #76 on: June 14, 2014, 05:16:44 pm »

I rather think you are deranged which is as good a reason to curb gun ownership as any.

Your ad hominem rebuttal is illustrative. I'll cease posting on this thread given the direction it is moving.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 05:19:29 pm by Ligament »
Logged

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #77 on: June 14, 2014, 05:25:39 pm »

Your ad hominem rebuttal is illustrative.

Not really, it simply illustrates the utter contempt I have for one that who willfully misstates my position, but I have come to expect such desperation of the gun lobby.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #78 on: June 14, 2014, 05:33:05 pm »

I rather think you are deranged...

And... there goes our (so far) civilized debate😞

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
Re: Portland shooting
« Reply #79 on: June 14, 2014, 05:38:59 pm »

And... there goes our (so far) civilized debate😞

Maybe, but I'm not over fond of being informed that I'm paranoid and so on. How about you?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Up